HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025 05.05 City Council Work Session Agenda 04 �,?ACHf� City of Apache Junction, Arizona Meeting location:
+� City Council Chambers
1U Z at City Hall
Agenda 300 E.Superstition Blvd.
\gilONr Apache Junction,AZ
- City Council Work Session 85119
apachejunctionaz.gov
Ph:(480)982-8002
Doors are open to the public at least 15 minutes prior to the
posted meeting start time.
Monday, May 5,2025 7:00 PM City Council Chambers
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. ROLL CALL
C. AGENDA ITEMS
1. 25-214 Presentation and discussion by ADOT representatives on the status of
the North-South Segment 1 Corridor Study (SR 505).
Sponsors. Rudy Esquivias
Attachments: North-South Presentation Updated
2. 25-175 Presentation and discussion on special event processes and potential
ordinance updates.
Sponsors: Liz Langenbach and Riley King
Attachments: Staff Memo-Special Event Ordinances
Special Event Ordinance Council Presentation (002)
3. 25-188 Presentation and discussion on Resolution No. 25-08, authorizing the
City of Apache Junction to enter into an intergovernmental agreement
with the Arizona Department of Water Resources to contribute to the
maintenance of the Arizona Continuously Operating Reference Station
(AZCORS) program, and authorizing the City Manager to fulfill all the
duties required under the agreement.
Sponsors: JC Kliner
Attachments: AZCORS IGA Memo
Resolution No.25-08
ADWR IGA AZCORS PROGRAM
Res25-08 ADWR IGA Presentation
City of Apache Junction,Arizona Page 1 Printed on 51112025
City Council Work Session Agenda May 5,2025
4. 25-193 Presentation and discussion on the preparation of the five (5)year
update of the Development Fee Study: Land Use Assumptions,
Infrastructure Improvements Plan, and Development Fees as well as
an update to Volume II, Chapter 7 Development Fee Ordinance. Staff
is recommending the approval of the professional services agreement
with TischlerBise for a lump sum not to exceed amount of$67,440.00.
Sponsors: Sidney Urias
Attachments: Development Fees staff memo 05052025.pdf
TischlerBise PSA 04152025.pdf
Apache Junction AZ Proposal.pdf
Development Fee Update Presentation CCWS 05052025.pdf
D. ADJOURNMENT
Copies of this agenda and additional information on any of the items listed above may be obtained from
the City Clerk's office located at 300 E Superstition Blvd,Apache Junction,AZ 85119, Monday through
Thursday from 7:00a-6:00p, excluding holidays.
The City of Apache Junction invites and welcomes people of all abilities to use our programs, sites and
facilities. Specific requests may be made by contacting the Human Resources Office at(480)474-2617
or TDD(480) 983-0095.
The Apache Junction City Council may vote to go into Executive Session for legal advice on any item
listed on this agenda pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3);this notice is given pursuant to A.R.S. §
38-431.02 to the members of the City Council and the public.
City of Apache Junction,Arizona Page 2 Printed on 51112025
►P�"E�c�, City of Apache Junction, Arizona 300 E Superstition
Boulevard
o Agenda Item Cover Sheet Apache Junction,AZ
U =i 85119
Agenda Item No. 1.
�Piz oN* File ID: 25-214
Sponsor: Rudy Esquivias Agenda Date: 5/5/2025
Index: In Control: City Council Work Session
Presentation and discussion by ADOT representatives on the status of the North-South
Segment 1 Corridor Study (SR 505).
City of Apache Junction,Arizona Page 1 Printed on 51112025
North = South Corri
• • Study
US 60 to Aroizona Farms Road
( Segment 1 )
Tier 2 Environmental Study and Design Concept Report (DCR)
Apache Junction City Council Meeting I May 5, 2025
ARIZnNA
- DEPARTMENT OF -
TRANSPORTATION
Mesa ApacheJunction .
60 560
0
Gold Canyon
o
0
Florence North =South Corridor
— — a
%W
Queen Creek �1e lunctir so
- -
a Background
San Tan
y `oQ�t ;J
GNa River Valle 779
Indian
Community
•Arizona Farms Rd . Corridorspans more than 50 miles between
�AP6 i
ce US 60 and 1 - 10
Coolidge
7 In Aug. 2021 ADOT selected a 1 , 500-foot wide
aICrnde sa North -South corridor throu h a Tier 1
g
Environmental Impact Statement ( EIS)/DCR
...............
*..................Eloy process
Arizona City
i--10
Picacho
• The North -South Corridor Study split into two
- North-South Segment 1 US 60 to Arizona Farms Road r CAP Luna separate Tier 2 studies
Norte-Sur Segmento 1-US 60 a Arizona Farms Road
- North-South Segment 2 Arizona Farms Road to 1-10 near Eloy/
Norte-Sur Segmento 2-Arizona Farms Road a 1-10 cerca de Eloy
M rana
a
cv
ro� T *ier
* Segment 1 :
US 60 to Arizona
Syr ` Wd(dnynn
t3 Farms Road
fiorpRa
p
® 2` • 20 miles
4410, flaen<e
Queen Creek Moon
o �' SR 24 not
Sony 79 component of this
Nwh•SwhSegment study. Will be further
y
,,omCiit AdwmFjrmsW evaluated as a p a rt
a .of a future stud
_ y
Nwh•South Segment I
US 60 to ArQona Farms Road
(u:ar
North-South Segment 2 (Separate StW
An=m F arms Road to I.10 near Eby
Marano
Study Goals
� Identify alternatives for narrowing the corridor segment, from a
1 ,500-foot corridor to a proposed 400-foot freeway alignment.
Q Identify proposed interchange locations and develop
interchange design concepts.
Develop a Tier 2 EIS and DCR.
.�; Determine the Selected Alternative.
40
Preliminary Purpose and Need
• Improve access to future activity centers
• Improve regional mobility
* Improve north-to-south connectivity
• Integrate the region's transportation network
• Address existing and future population and employment
growth
soy
Baseline Road
Preliminary Western A:ignment Baseline Elliot
Elliot Rd I Center or Eastern o \ Baseline
Alignments: _ I Alignment \ to Elliot
o
US 60 to Roberts Road
n 1 1
Western I '_
v �` Alignment
• Identifiedpreliminarybuild Ray Rd � �� Eastern
alternatives with two 24 Constraint � Alignment
Areas
alignment alternatives in
Germann Rd
two areas:
Western Alignment ` Inset
o Baseline Road to Elliot Germann to Ocotillo Germann
1 1 to Ocotillo
Ocotillo Rd � � 1
Road , ,
Western 1 1
o Germann Road to Queen Creek 1,500a,)
Alignment `
Ocotillo Road Combs Rd Corri 1
Eastern 1
� 1
o South of Skyline Drive Alignment
Skyline Drive J 1 1
Roberts Rdl
�,kt
Preliminar y Alig nments ,
Roberts Road to Arizona Farms Road
Skyline Drive ' Skyline Drive ' Skyline Drive '
Western Alignment
d t t t Robers o d Center Alignment d
� � � � � � Eastern Alignment
Roberts Rd I Arizona Farms Roberts Rd I I Roberts to Roberts Rd I I
II Arizona Farms I Roberts to
I Arizona Farms
Bella Vista Rd Bella Vista Rd Bella Vista Rd
Constraint Constraint Constraint
Areas �a; Areas Areas
�a
Judd Rd ��`\\o I I Judd Rd �a�to I Judd Rd
I I 1,500-foot
I } / II I /
I I 1,500-foot t
:IL,500-foot
Corridor Orr
or
Ma marRd Ma ma Rd dor Ma ma,Rd
I
1 I.
Arizona Farms Rd Arizona Farms Rd A Arizona Farms Rd
o/a�s L 1,500-foot study corridor
LD
tiny > Future US 60 Connection
C 9
Connection to Existing US 60 Alignment
0
�a �
• Direct connection between US 60 `��
and SR 505 Apache Junction US 60 connection
to Old West Hwy
Baseline Rd `\ per previous DCR
• Possible connection concepts. I
a. Existing US 60 east of Mountain 10c
View Rd to remain (with access g p I `,� Gold Canyon
Traffic interchange to provide I
connection to existing US 60
points and traffic signals) {IocationTBD)
140
b. New traffic interchange and
roadway connection at Houston I
Ave to connect to US 60
C. Connect Old West Highway to
the existing US 60 at Goldfield
I �
Road I
d. US 60/Goldfield Road
interchange to remain
I l
Traff*lc Interchanges
02 8 A padre Junction
Potential locations 60
o Houston Ave •`\\Elliton Ave
� • ot,Rd Gold Canyon
o Elliott Rd \
, � • Ray Rd
o Ray Rd 60
o SR 24 -r:
�, •Germann Rd Florence
o Germann Rd Junction 60
o Ocotillo Rd Queen Creek ® . Ocotillo Rd
� o
r •Combs/Riggs Rd o Combs Rd/Riggs Rd '`` `oQ �
a North-South ' ,.%%' `
o Skyline Dr Segment 1 San Tank • Skyline Dr
o Bella vista Rd valley • Bell a,Vista Rd 79
o u d d Rd • Potential Interchange
Locations •Judd Rd
o AZ Farms Rd Arizona Farms Rd
Study
We Are Here
L 1w
ernative 1'%
Draft Environmental
Alt LStudy and Initial Final Environmental
•ta Collection DevelopmentI Design Concept Study, and DCR and
Evaluation
• Report (DCR) Record of Decision
Public Public Public
Information Information Hearing
Meetings Meetings
Publication of the . Two
Notice of Intent Years
(Begin Environmental Process)
Anticipated completion
2023 2025 in 2027
*Schedule subject to change
Thursday, May 15 15 :30 — 7:30 p. m.
• Apache Junction Multi-Generational Center
( MGC)
Upcoming • 1035 N Idaho Rd ., Apache Junction
Publ 'ic
Meeteings Tuesday, May 20 15 :30 — 7:30 p.m.
Poston Butte High School
• 32375 N Gantzel Rd ., San Tan Valley
Thursday, May 22 16 — 7 p. m .
• Virtual Public Meeting
Public can provide comments on current
study phase through June 1 0, 2025
Public meetings (in-person or virtual)
Publ 'ic Online comments:
Comment 10 www.northsouth-segment1 .com
Persiod � Email: info@northsouth-segment1 .com
Ca11: 602-474-3990
Mail: ADOT NSCS Segment 1 c/o HDR, Inc.
20 E. Thomas Rd., Suite 2500
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Questions?
►P�"E�c�, City of Apache Junction, Arizona 300 E Superstition
Boulevard
� 0 Agenda Item Cover Sheet Apache Junction,AZ
85119
Agenda Item No.2.
'+PizoN* File ID: 25-175
Sponsor: Liz Langenbach and Riley King Agenda Date: 5/5/2025
Index: In Control: City Council Work Session
Presentation and discussion on special event processes and potential ordinance updates.
City of Apache Junction,Arizona Page 1 Printed on 51112025
fI�
f
City op A ache Junction_ yf
Home of the Superstition Mountains
DATE: APRIL 2, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
THROUGH: BRYANT POWELL, CITY MANAGER
FROM: LIZ LANGENBACH, DIRECTOR PARKS&RECREATION
SUBJECT: SPECIAL EVENT PROCESS REVIEW AND ORDINANCE UPDATES
The City's parks and recreation department has taken the lead in working with multiple departments and
entities to improve special event processes city-wide. Over the past two years,the following efforts have
been made to improve the safety and consistency in events ran throughout the city:
1. Inter-departmental Special Event Task Force created to review and support public and private
city-wide special events
2. Special Event applications and processes have been updated
3. A Special Event Handbook has been created to streamline the process for event-planners
4. The city-wide Special Event Liaison role has been added to Parks and Rec Management Analyst,
Riley King's, position so that event-planners have one point of contact for assistance
The Special Event Task force has identified items within current special event ordinances to be updated
and re-considered, as well as items needing to be included. Staff will share the current event
processes in place, current event ordinances, and gauge interest from city council to bring these back
for potential changes.
This item will be discussed and brought back at a future date for Direction to Staff.
SPECIAL EVENT ORDINANCE
AND PROCESS
PARKS & RECREATION
May 5, 2025
SPECIAL EVENT TASK FORCE
Comprised of Public Works, Parks and Rec, Police Department, City Clerks Office, Superstition
Fire and Medical district
EVENT APPLICATION
An overview of the event that helps the task force make decisions on what assistance and
safety measures are need for each event - submitted by the
APPLICATION REVIEW
Once application gets submitted each department on the task force looks it over and
submits questions or feedback. Once all questions are answered then departments give
their approval with their requirements for event to be held.
kr 1 7 !Tk W,
EVENT HANDBOOK
Created to help the event organizer walk through the application and review process.
MANAGEMENT ANALYST- SPECIAL EVENT LIAISON
Meet with new event organizers to help walk them through the process and help answer
any questions
CURRENT ORDINANCE
The current ordinance lives under
Business license code .
ARTICLE 8 - 8 : REQUIREMENTS
FOR COMMUNITY AND
CIVIC EVENTS
WHY ARE SPECIAL EVENT ORDINANCES IMPORTANT?.
• Public Safety
• Protect Public Spaces
• Enhance Event Quality and Organization
• Minimize Public Impact
• Reduce Risk and Liabilities
• Manage Traffic and Road Closures
• Clear and Consistent Process
OTHER CITIES WHO HAVE A SPECIAL
EVENT PERM ITS /ORDI NANCE
ORDINANCE/ PERMIT PERMIT ONLY
• Avondale is Tempe Casa Grande
• Buckeye • Scottsdale Maricopa
• M esa • Oro Valley Queen Creek- currenty
• Goodyear working on ordinance
• Marana
• Gilbert
NEXT STEPS
1 ,0 Return to a later meeting for Direction to Staff
• Bring back Market Cities research
• Staff will identify needs and gaps
2 . If directed , bring back draft code changes
3 . Public hearing this summer to adopt
new/ revised ordinances
QUESTIONS ?
►P�"E�c�, City of Apache Junction, Arizona 300 E Superstition
Boulevard
o Agenda Item Cover Sheet Apache Junction,AZ
U =i 85119
Agenda Item No. 3.
Piz File ID: 25-188
Sponsor: JC Kliner Agenda Date: 5/5/2025
Index: In Control: City Council Work Session
Presentation and discussion on Resolution No. 25-08, authorizing the City of Apache Junction
to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the Arizona Department of Water Resources
to contribute to the maintenance of the Arizona Continuously Operating Reference Station
(AZCORS) program, and authorizing the City Manager to fulfill all the duties required under the
agreement.
City of Apache Junction,Arizona Page 1 Printed on 51112025
City of Apache Junction
7f
Home of the Superstition Mountains
DATE: MAY 5, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: JOSEPH C KLINER, GIS ADMINISTRATOR
THROUGH: BRYANT POWELL, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONTRIBUTION TO THE MAINTENANCE OF THE ARIZONA CONTINUOUSLY
OPERATING REFERENCE STATION "AZCORS" PROGRAM
A continuously operating reference station "CORS" is a permanent site that users can
access to receive highly accurate real-time coordinate information over the internet.
The equipment at one of these sites consists of a mounting pole, GPS receiver, GPS
antenna, cellular router and other associated electronics. Arizona Department of
Water Resources "ADWR" manages and operates the AZCORS program that consists of
36 State-managed sites and 15 sites managed and operated by EarthScope and the
National Parks Service for a total of 51 CORS sites.
Staff has been utilizing AZCORS since 2020 and it is a critical component of Apache
Junction's GIS data collecting efforts. Over the last year ADWR has worked to construct
new AZCORS sites and replace outdated equipment to improve network stability for its
users. This Intergovernmental Agreement "IGA" with ADWR provides that the City will
contribute $5000 annually to support the AZCORS program. With that the City will have
access to the AZCORS network and receive technical support on data related issues.
Staff respectfully request that the council approve Resolution No. 25-08, authorizing the
City Manager to sign the IGA with Arizona Department of Water Resources.
RESOLUTION NO. 25-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF
APACHE JUNCTION TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL
AGREEMENT TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE MAINTENANCE OF THE
ARIZONA CONTINUOUSLY OPERATING REFERENCE STATION
(AZCORS) PROGRAM WITH THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER
RESOURCES (ADWR) .
WHEREAS, AZCORS is a network of 51 reference stations (36
State-managed and 15 managed by others) providing highly precise
coordinate information that is a critical component to the
City' s mapping efforts . The equipment consists of a mounting
pole, GPS receiver, GPS antenna, cellular router and other
associated electronics .
WHEREAS, the city will contribute annually to support the
operation and maintenance of the AZCORS program. In return ADWR
shall provide access to the AZCORS network and technical support
with data related issues .
WHEREAS, pursuant to A.R. S . § 11-952 (A) , public entities
may enter into intergovernmental agreements with other
municipalities and governmental entities (the "Parties") for
joint or cooperative activities; and
WHEREAS, the Parties have crafted the attached written
agreement in the form of an intergovernmental agreement which
formalizes the arrangement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA, AS FOLLOWS :
1) The mayor and city council approve the form of the
intergovernmental agreement for contribution to the
maintenance of the AZCORS program set forth in Attachment
A; and the mayor is hereby authorized to sign the agreement
on behalf of the city.
2) The city manager and/or his designee is authorized and
directed to take all steps necessary to carry out the
purpose and intent of this resolution and to fulfill all
the duties required under the agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 25-08
PAGE 1 OF 2
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF
20
SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS DAY OF
20
WALTER "'CHIP" WILSON
Mayor
ATTEST:
EVIE MCKINNEY
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
RICHARD J. STERN
City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 25-08
PAGE 2 OF 2
ATTACHMENT A
Contribution to the Maintenance of the Arizona Continuously
Operating Reference Station Program
APACHE JUNCTION Inter overnmental A reement
Arizona
By and Between the Arizona Department of Water Resources and the City of Apache Junction
1. Purpose
The purpose of the Intergovernmental Agreement ("IGA" or"Agreement") is to facilitate
maintenance of Continuously Operating Reference Station sites between the Arizona
Department of Water Resources and the City of Apache Junction.
2. Parties and Definitions
a. The parties to this agreement are the Arizona Department of Water Resources
("ADWR") and the City of Apache Junction("Apache Junction") (collectively,the
"Parties").
b. "AZCORS" shall mean Continuously Operating Reference Stations
C. "GNSS" shall mean global navigation satellite system.
3. Scope
a. This IGA shall cover all issues relating to Apache Junction's cooperative efforts in
supporting the AZCORS network.
b. This Agreement is fully integrated and governed by the four corners of this IGA.
4. Effective Date
This IGA will become effective upon the completed execution hereof.
5. Duration
a. This IGA shall have a duration of five (5) years with no option to extend the term
by amendment. A new IGA must be entered into prior to the expiration of the
current term.
b. The option to enter into a new IGA must be exercised no later than thirty (30)
calendar days before the expiration of the original term.
Page 1 of 4
IGA No: 2025-3205 ADWR and Apache Junction
6. Duties
6.1 Apache Junction
a. Apache Junction shall pay ADWR$5,000 to contribute to the operation and
maintenance of the AZCORS Network.
6.2ADWR
a. ADWR shall provide AZCORS data through the AZCORS Network.
b. ADWR shall provide technical assistance and support with AZCORS data
related issues.
7. Non-Discrimination
The Parties shall comply with Arizona State Executive Orders Nos. 2023-09, 2023-01,
2009-09 and 75-5, and any and all other applicable federal and state laws, rules and
regulations, including, but not limited to,the Americans with Disabilities Act.
8. Indemnification
Each Parry (as Indemnitor) agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other Parry
(as Indemnitee) from and against any and all claims, losses, liability, costs or expenses
(including reasonable attorney's fees) (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Claims")
arising out of bodily injury of any person (including death) or property damage, but only
to the extent that such Claims which result in vicarious/derivative liability to the
Indemnitee are caused by the act, omission, negligence, misconduct, or other fault of the
Indemnitor, its officers, officials, agents, employees, or volunteers. ADWR, through the
State of Arizona, is self-insured per A.R.S. § 41-621.
9. Waiver
Waiver of any of the terms of this IGA shall not be valid unless it is in writing and signed
by all Parties. Failure of either Parry to enforce the provisions of this IGA or require
performance by the other Party of any of the provisions shall not be construed as a waiver
of such provision or affect the right of each Party to thereafter enforce the provisions of
this IGA. Waiver of any breach of obligation under this IGA shall not be a waiver of any
other subsequent breach of obligation under the IGA.
Page 2 of 4
IGA No: 2025-3205 ADWR and Apache Junction
10. Termination
a. Either Parry may terminate the IGA with or without cause.
b. If a Parry wishes to terminate the IGA before the expiration of the IGA, a thirty
(30) calendar day written notice shall be given to the other Party.
C. This IGA may be cancelled pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-511, the terms of which are
incorporated herein.
11. Severability
If any provision of this IGA is determined to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the
remaining provisions of the IGA remain in full force and effect.
12. Limitations
Nothing in this IGA shall be construed as limiting or expanding the statutory
responsibilities of the Parties.
13. Construction
This IGA is the result of negotiations between the Parties and has been reviewed by each
of the parties hereto and their respective counsel. Accordingly, this IGA shall be deemed
to be the product of all of the Parties hereto, and no ambiguity shall be construed in favor
of or against any one of the Parties hereto.
14. Conflict of Interest
This Agreement is subject to cancellation by the State under A.R.S. § 38-511.
15. Choice of Law
This contract shall be governed and interpreted by the laws of the State of Arizona.
16. Other Agreements
a. This IGA in no way restricts either Party from participating in similar activities
with other public or private agencies, organizations, and individuals.
Page 3 of 4
IGA No: 2025-3205 ADWR and Apache Junction
b. Apache Junction may voluntarily contribute to the cost of managing and operating
the AZCORS program.
SIGNATURES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties executed this Agreement as follows.
Arizona Department of Water Resources City of Apache Junction
By: By:
Thomas Buschatzke Bryant Powell
Director City Manager
Arizona Department of Water Resources City of Apache Junction
Date: Date:
DETERMINATION OF COUNSEL: This Agreement has been reviewed by the undersigned who
has determined that it is in the appropriate form and is within the power and authority granted
under the laws of the State of Arizona to the City of Apache Junction.
Date:
Richard J. Stern, City Attorney
DETERMINATION OF COUNSEL: This Agreement has been reviewed by the undersigned who
has determined that it is in the appropriate form and is within the power and authority granted
under the laws of the State of Arizona to the Arizona Department of Water Resources.
Date:
Anthony Proano, Deputy Counsel
Page 4 of 4
IGA No: 2025-3205 ADWR and Apache Junction
IGA w4'
ith ADWR
kjt *inn ? 5rmOS
City of Apache Junction
City Council Work Session
May 5th , 2025
- Wldl�
Cont *inuously O Stat *ions ( CORS )
• Permanent site that transmits real-time coordinate information over the internet
• Equipment consists of a mounting pole,, GPS receiver, antenna, cellular router and
other associated electronics
AZPG
Ar *izona CORS Networ AZCORS
• Arizona Department of Water Resources mans es and o eratesg p
the AZCORS Network AZDS
•
FERN
• AZCORS consists of 42 State-managed sites 12 managed and • •
operated by and 3 by the National Parks Service . .
p .. . . •
• Staff has been utilizing these sites since 2020 GNPS.
•
�' AZCS
CORS Site @ B • • •
AZST
Usery MountainAZGC
-�,
F _ •_ - Q •
Regional Park • AZOR
PIMA SAGU
_ • tr
.
$i-
3
Pool 14
AZVA
AZAM
'S
Xplanation
AZDA
AZCORS Highways
Netw
. AZCORS
,...,..
AZCORS
NIPS
HydrologyDivision
1 1 I 1 1 Miles d O4 025
North American Datum 1983
Intergovernmental Agreement with ADWR
• Voluntary contribution of $5000 annually to support the AZCORS program
• The City will continue to have access to the AZCORS network and will receive technical support on
data related issues
Benefit
• Access to accurate coordinate information in real-time is critical to the City's mapping efforts
Use Case — Asset covered under sidewalk, able to locate while contractor still on site
• Participating in the program will help build new CORS sites in Arizona (6 new sites went live last
month) and replace outdated equipment improving network stability for its users — Less down time
�:• The IGA with ADWR ( Resolution 25-08) will be on the May 20thconsent agenda
J
r -✓
f
o n
r
r _ ,'• III ol
It
40
-
.� __ ��- T �1�; `��' J- < rTa.s1 = 't r - I 'I J1I� . '•-�` i'1•'-�l �•a 1' lbr �' - `
►P�"E�c�, City of Apache Junction, Arizona 300 E Superstition
Boulevard
o Agenda Item Cover Sheet Apache Junction,AZ
U =i 85119
Agenda Item No.4.
'Piz oN* File ID: 25-193
Sponsor: Sidney Urias Agenda Date: 5/5/2025
Index: In Control: City Council Work Session
Presentation and discussion on the preparation of the five (5)year update of the Development
Fee Study: Land Use Assumptions, Infrastructure Improvements Plan, and Development Fees
as well as an update to Volume II, Chapter 7 Development Fee Ordinance. Staff is
recommending the approval of the professional services agreement with TischlerBise for a
lump sum not to exceed amount of$67,440.00.
City of Apache Junction,Arizona Page 1 Printed on 51112025
O� p,PACHE�Gti
n
z City of Apache Junction
qR/ZONP' Development Services Department `'`
Council Memo
Development Fee Study
DATE: May 5, 2025
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Bryant Powell, City Manager
Matt Busby, Assistant City Manager
FROM: Sidney Urias, Deputy Director, Development Services Department
SUBJECT: Updating Development Fees
Background:
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-463.05(D)(3), the city is required to update development fees, land use
assumptions and the infrastructure improvement plan every five years. Because the last fee
study was completed in October 2022, it is time again to begin the process for completion by
2027.
The approval process is exempt from formal procurement under Apache Junction City Code,
Vol. I, § 3-7-7, since the services are legal and financial, and to maintain systematic and code
consistency.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends council authorize the mayor to execute the professional services agreement
with TischlerBise for a lump sum not to exceed $67,440.00.
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH TISCHLERBISE, INC.,
FOR LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PLAN
AND DEVELOPMENT FEE STUDY
THIS AGREEMENT is made as of the day of 2025 (the
"Effective Date") by and between the CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, an Arizona
municipal corporation ("City"), and TISCHLERBISE, a Maryland corporation
("Consultant"), both of which may be hereinafter referred to collectively as the
"Parties" or individually as a "Party", for Land Use Assumptions, Infrastructure
Improvement Plan and Development Fee Study.
RECITALS
A. City desires to retain a consultant to complete a comprehensive land
use assumptions, infrastructure Improvement plan and development fee study
and to make payment for the same in accordance with the terms and conditions
set forth in this Agreement, including all attachments and addenda which are
appended hereto by mutual agreement of the Parties.
B. The Arizona legislature codified the legal I financial unfunded mandate
under A.R.S. § 9-463.05, et seq., for cities and towns to adopt land use
assumptions, infrastructure improvement plan and a development fee study
every five years, or otherwise face a reduction in state shared revenue.
C. The procurement process under this Agreement is exempt from the
requirements set forth in A,J.C.C., Vol. I, § 3-7-7, including but not limited to,
legal and financial services, as well as sole source procurements (for
consistency In applications).
D. The Parties have set forth below contemplated services Consultant will
provide City, including payment terms for such services and products.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the Recitals noted above, the
mutual covenants and conditions below, and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged,
the Parties agree as follows:
1. CONSULTANT'S DUTIES: Consultant agrees to perform the
professional services detailed in Exhibit A.
2. COMPENSATION: In accordance with the terms and conditions of
this Agreement, City shall compensate Consultant for professional services In
an amount not to exceed Sixty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Forty Dollars and
Zero Cents ($67,440.00) in accordance with the price sheet set forth in Exhibit
B.
3. CONSULTANT BILLING: Consultant shall bill City on a time and
expense basis in a total amount not to exceed Section 2 above. City shall pay
such billings within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of receipt.
4. TERMIRENEWAL: The term of this Agreement starts on July 1, 2025
and ends on June 30, 2026.
5. CITY'S STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE: City shall furnish
Consultant with all data, information and other supporting services specified In
Exhibit A.
6, CONSULTANT'S STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE: While performing
the services, Consultant shall exercise the reasonable professional care and
skill customarily exercised by reputable members of Consultant's profession
practicing in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area, and shall use reasonable diligence
and best judgment while exercising its professional skill and expertise.
Consultant shall be responsible for all errors and omissions Consultant commits
in the performance of this Agreement.
7. NOTICES: All notices to the a Party required under this Agreement
shall be in writing and sent by first class certified mail, postage prepaid, return
receipt requested, addressed to the following:
If to City: City of Apache Junction
Sidney Urias, Deputy Director of Development Services
300 East Superstition Boulevard
Apache Junction, AZ 85119
sufia;Aa ach unctionaz.gov
If to Consultant: Carson Bise
TischlerBise, Inc.
4701 Sangamore Road, Suite S240
Bethesda, MD 20818
carson(&tischlerbise,com
8. INSURANCE: Consultant, at its own expense, shall purchase and
maintain the herein stipulated minimum insurance with companies duly licensed,
possessing a current A.M. Best, Inc. Rating of 8++6, or approved unlicensed in
the State of Arizona with policies and forms satisfactory to City.
All insurance required herein shall be maintained in full force and effect until all
work or service required to be performed under the terms of the Agreement is
satisfactorily completed and formally accepted; failure to do so may, at the sole
discretion of City, constitute a material breach of this Agreement,
2
Consultant's insurance shall be primary insurance as respects the City, and any
insurance or self-insurance maintained by City shall not contribute to it.
Any failure to comply with the claim reporting provisions of the insurance
policies or any breach of an insurance policy warranty shall not affect coverage
afforded under the insurance policies to protect City.
The insurance policies, except Workers' Compensation, shall contain a waiver
of transfer rights of recovery (subrogation) against City, its agents, officers,
officials and employees for any claims arising out of Contractor's acts, errors,
mistakes,omissions, work or service.
The Insurance policies may provide coverage which contains deductibles or
self-insured retentions. Such deductible and/or self-insured retentions shall not
be applicable with respect to the coverage provided to City under such policies.
Consultant shall be solely responsible for the deductible and/or self retention
and City, at its option, may require Consultant to secure payment of such
deductibles or self-insured retentions by a surety bond or an irrevocable and
unconditional letter of credit.
City reserves the right to request and to receive, within ten (10) working days,
certified copies of any or all of the herein required insurance policies and/or
endorsements. City shall not be obligated, however,to review same or to advise
Consultant of any deficiencies in such policies and endorsements, and such
receipt shall not relieve Consultant from, or be deemed a waiver of, City's right
to Insist on strict fulfillment of Consultant's obligations under this Agreement
The insurance policies, except Workers' Compensation and Professional
Liability, required by this Agreement, shall name City, its agents, officers,
officials and employees as Additional Insureds.
REQUIRED COVERAGE
Commercial General Uab Litt'
Consultant shall maintain Commercial General Liability insurance with a limit of
not less than $1,000,000 for each occurrence with a $2,000,000
Products/Completed Operations Aggregate and a $2,000,000 General
Aggregate limit. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form
property damage, personal injury, products and completed operations and
blanket contractual coverage including, but not limited to, the liability assumed
under the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, which coverage will be
at least as broad as that on Insurance Service Office, Inc. Policy Form No. CG
00011093, or the equivalent thereof.
3
Such policy shall contain a severability of interest provision, and shall not
contain a sunset provision or commutation clause, nor any provision which
would serve to limit third party action over claims.
The Commercial General Liability additional insured endorsement shall be at
least as broad as the Insurance Service Office, Inc.'s Additional Insured, Form
B. CG 20101185, or the equivalent thereof, and shall include coverage for
Consultant's operations and products and completed operations.
If required by this Agreement, if Consultant sublets any part of the work,
services or operations, Consultant shall purchase and maintain, at all times
during prosecution of the work, services or operations under this Agreement, an
Owner and Consultant's Protective Liability insurance policy for bodily injury
and property damage, including death, which may arise in the prosecution of
Consultant's work, service or operations under this Agreement. Coverage shall
be on an occurrence basis with a limit not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence,
and the policy shall be Issued by the same insurance company that issues
Consultant's Commercial General Liability insurance.
Automobile Liability
Consultant shall maintain Commercial/Business Automobile Liability insurance
with a combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of not less
than $1,000,000 each occurrence with respect to Consultant's owned, hired,
and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of Consultant's
work. Coverage will be at least as broad as coverage code 1, "any auto",
(Insurance Service Office, Inc. Policy Form CA 00011293, or the equivalent
thereof). Such insurance shall include coverage for loading and off loading
hazards. If hazardous substances, materials or wastes are to be transported,
MCS 90 endorsement shall be included and $5,000,000 per accident limits for
bodily injury and property damage shall apply.
Workers' Compensation
Consultant shall carry Workers' Compensation insurance to cover obligations
Imposed by federal and state statutes having jurisdiction of Consultant's
employees engaged in the performance of the work or services; and,
Employer's Liability insurance of not less than $100,000 for each accident,
$100,000 disease for each employee, and $500,000 disease policy limit.
By execution of this Agreement, Consultant certifies as follows:
"I am aware and understand the provisions of A.R.S. § 23-901 e1 seq.
which requires every employer to be insured against liability for
workers' compensation or to undertake self-Insurance in
accordance with the provisions of this chapter, and I will comply with
4
such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of
this Agreement."
If Consultant has no employees for whom workers' compensation Insurance is
required, Consultant shall submit a declaration or affidavit to City so stating and
covenanting to obtain such insurance if and when Consultant employs any
employees subject to coverage.
In case any work is subcontracted, Consultant will require subcontractors to
provide Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability insurance to at least
the same extent as required of Consultant.
Professional Liability
Consultant retained by City to provide the work or service required by this
Agreement will maintain Professional Liability insurance covering acts, errors,
mistakes and omissions arising out of the work or services performed by
Consultant, or any person employed by Consultant, with a limit of not less than
$1,000,000 each claim.
Certificates ofJnsurance
Prior to commencing work or services under this Agreement, Consultant shall
furnish City with Certificates of Insurance, or formal endorsements as required
by the Agreement, issued by Consultant's insurer(s), as evidence that policies
providing the required coverages, conditions and limits required by this
Agreement are in full force and effect. The form of the certificates of insurance
and endorsements shall be subject to the approval of the Apache Junction City
Attorney's Office, shall comply with the terms of this Agreement, and shall be
issued and delivered to City Attorney, City of Apache Junction, 300 East
Superstition Boulevard, Apache Junction, AZ 85119.
In the event any insurance policies required by this Agreement are written on a
"claims made" basis, coverage shall extend for two (2) years past completion
and acceptance of Consultant's work or services and as evidenced by annual
Certificates of Insurance.
If a policy does expire during the life of the Agreement, a renewal certificate
must be sent to City thirty (30) calendar days prior to the expiration date.
All Certificates of Insurance shall be identified with bid serial number and title.
Policies or certificates and completed forms of City's Additional Insured
Endorsement(or a substantially equivalent insurance company form acceptable
to the City Attorney) evidencing the coverage required by this section shall be
filed with the City and shall include the City as an additional insured. The policy
5
or policies shall be in the usual form of a public liability insurance, but shall also
include the following provision:
"Solely as respects work done by or on behalf of the named insured
for the City of Apache Junction, it is agreed that the City of Apache
Junction and its officers and employees are added as additional
insureds under this policy."
Insurance required herein shall not expire, be canceled, or materially changed
without thirty (30) calendar days' prior written notice to City.
9. APPLICABLE LAW AND VENUE; The terms and conditions of this
Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of
the State of Arizona. Any action at law or in equity brought by either party for
the purpose of enforcing a right or rights provided for in this Agreement, shall
be tried in a court of competent Jurisdiction in Pinal County, State of Arizona.
The parties hereby waive all provisions of law providing for a change of venue in
such proceeding to any other county. In the event either party shall bring suit to
enforce any term of this Agreement or to recover any damages for and on
account of the breach of any term or condition in this Agreement, it is mutually
agreed that the prevailing party in such action shall recover all costs including:
all litigation and appeal expenses, collection expenses, reasonable attorney
fees, necessary witness fees and court costs to be determined by the court in
such action.
10. FORCE MAJEURE: Neither City nor Consultant, as the case may be,
shall be considered not to have performed its obligations under this Agreement
in the event of enforced delay (an "Enforced Delay") due to causes beyond its
control and without its fault or negligence or failure to comply with applicable
laws, including, but not restricted to, acts of God, fires, floods, epidemics,
pandemics and related executive orders, quarantine, restrictions, embargoes,
labor disputes, and unusually severe weather or the delays of subcontractors or
materialmen due to such causes, acts of a public enemy, war, terrorism or act of
terror (including but not limited to bio-terrorism or eco-terrorism), nuclear
radiation, blockade, insurrection, riot, labor strike or interruption, extortion,
sabotage, or similar occurrence or any exercise of the power of eminent domain
of any governmental body on behalf of any public entity, or a declaration of
moratorium or similar hiatus (whether permanent or temporary) by any public
entity directly affecting the obligations under this Agreement. In no event will
Enforced Delay include any delay resulting from unavailability for any reason of
labor shortages, or the unavailability for any reason of particular Consultants,
subcontractors, vendors or investors desired by Consultant in connection with
the obligations under this Agreement. Consultant agrees that Consultant alone
will bear all risks of delay which are not Enforced Delay. In the event of the
occurrence of any such Enforced Delay, the time or times for performance of the
obligations of the Party claiming delay shall be extended for a period of the
Enforced Delay; provided, however, that the Party seeking the benefit of the
6
provisions of this Section shall, within thirty (30) calendar days after such Party
knows or should know of any such Enforced Delay, first notify the other Party of
the specific delay in writing and claim the right to an extension for the period of
the Enforced Delay; and provided further that in no event shall a period of
Enforced Delay exceed ninety (90)calendar days.
11. TERMINATION: This Agreement may be terminated by either Party
for any reason upon thirty (30) days written notice. If this Agreement is
terminated, City shall be reimbursed from Consultant the amount paid for any
undelivered and/or unaccepted products or services. Upon termination, City
agrees to pay for all delivered, accepted, and properly invoiced services that
were provided up to the announced Termination Date.
12. INDEMNIFICATION: To the fullest extent permitted by law,
Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its elected and
appointed officers, officials, agents, and employees from and against any and all
liability including but not limited to demands, claims, actions, fees, costs and
expenses, including reasonable attorney and expert witness fees, arising from,
or alleged to have arisen from, relating to, arising out of, or alleged to have
resulted from the acts, errors, mistakes, omissions, Work or services of
Consultant, its agents, employees, or any tier of Consultant's subcontractors in
the performance of this Agreement, but only to the extent caused by the
negligence, recklessness or intentional wrongful conduct of Consultant or its
subcontractors in the performance of the Work under this Agreement or any
subcontract. Consultant's duty to defend, hold harmless and indemnify City, its
special districts, elected and appointed officers, officials, agents, and
employees shall arise in connection with any claim, damage, loss or expense
that is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, death, or injury to,
Impairment or destruction of property including loss of use resulting therefrom,
caused by an Consultant's acts, errors, mistakes, omissions, work or services in
the performance of this Agreement including any employee of Consultant, any
tier of Consultant's subcontractor or any other person for whose acts, errors,
mistakes, omissions, Work or services Consultant may be legally liable, but only
to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness or intentional wrongful
conduct of Consultant or any tier of Consultant's subcontractors or any other
person for whose acts, errors, mistakes, omissions, Work or services
Consultant may be legally liable in the performance of the Work under this
Agreement or subcontract, The amount and type of insurance coverage
requirements set forth herein will in no way be construed as limiting the scope
of the indemnity in this paragraph. The rights and obligations under this Section
shall survive termination of this Agreement.
13. JAXE$. Consultant shall pay all license, sales, consumer,
transaction privilege, use and other similar taxes for services provided by
Consultant which are legally enacted at the time the obligations under this
Agreement are performed.
7
14. PERMITS & FEES: Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement,
Consultant shall secure and pay for all applicable permits, government fees,
licenses and inspections necessary for the proper execution and completion of
services which are customarily secured after execution of the Agreement.
Consultant shall give all notices and comply with all laws, ordinances, rules,
regulations and lawful orders of any public authority bearing on the
performance of the obligations. Consultant represents and warrants that any
license necessary to perform the services under this Agreement is current and
valid. Consultant understands that the activity described herein constitutes
"doing business in the City of Apache Junction" and Consultant agrees to obtain
a business license pursuant to Chapter 8 of the Apache Junction City Code, Vol.
I, and keep such license current during the term of this Agreement. Consultant
also acknowledges that the tax provision of the Apache Junction Tax Code,
Chapter BA, may also apply and if so, shall obtain a transaction privilege license
and/or other licenses as may be required by all applicable laws. Further,
Consultant agrees to pay all applicable privilege and use taxes that are
applicable to the activities, products and services provided under this
Agreement.
15. RECORDS: Records of Consultant's labor, payroll, and other costs
pertaining to this Agreement shall be kept on a generally recognized accounting
basis and made available to City for inspection on request. Consultant shall
maintain records for a period of at least two (2) years after termination of this
Agreement, and shall make such records available during that retention period
for examination or audit by City personnel during regular business hours.
16. RIGHT OF CITY TO CONTRACT WITH OTHERS: Nothing in this
Agreement shall imply City is obligated to obtain the services described herein
with only this particular Consultant.
17. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: City and Consultant agree and
understand that the relationship between both Parties is that of an independent
contractor.
18. WAIVER OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS: The failure of City or
Consultant to insist in any one or more instances on performance of any of the
terms or conditions of this Agreement or to exercise any right or privilege
contained herein shall not be considered as thereafter waiving such terms,
conditions, rights or privileges, and they shall remain in full force and effect.
19. COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS: Consultant
understands and acknowledges the applicability of the American with
Disabilities Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and the Drug
Free Workplace Act of 1989 to the services performed under this Agreement.
As required by A.R.S. § 41-4401, Consultant hereby warrants its compliance
with all federal immigration laws and regulations that relate to its employees and
8
A.R.S. § 23-214(A). Consultant further warrants that after hiring an employee,
Consultant will verify the employment eligibility of the employee through the E-
Verify program. If Consultant uses any subcontractors in performance of
services, subcontractors shall warrant their compliance with all federal
immigration laws and regulations that relate to its employees and A.R.S. § 23-
214(A), and subcontractors shall further warrant that after hiring an employee,
such subcontractor verifies the employment eligibility of the employee through
the E-Verify program. A breach of this warranty shall be deemed a material
breach of the Agreement that is subject to penalties up to and including
termination of this Agreement. Consultant Is subject to a penalty of $100 per
day for the first violation, $600 per day for the second violation, and $1,000 per
day for the third violation. City at its option may terminate this Agreement after
the third violation. Consultant shall not be deemed in material breach of this
Agreement if the Consultant and/or subcontractors establish compliance with
the employment verification provisions of Sections 274A and 2748 of the federal
Immigration and Nationality Act and the E-Verify requirements contained in
A.R.S. § 23-214(A). City retains the legal right to inspect the papers of any
Consultant or subcontractor employee who works under this Agreement to
ensure that the Consultant or subcontractor is complying with the warranty.
Any inspection will be conducted after reasonable notice and at reasonable
times. If state law is amended, the Parties may modify this paragraph consistent
with state law.
20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement and any attachments
represent the entire agreement between City and Consultant and supersede all
prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either express or implied,
written or oral. It Is mutually understood and agreed that no alteration or
variation of the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be valid unless
made in writing and signed by the Parties hereto. Written and signed
amendments shall automatically become part of the Supporting Documents, and
shall supersede any inconsistent provision therein; provided, however, that any
apparent inconsistency shall be resolved, if possible, by construing the
provisions as mutually complementary and supplementary.
21. SEVERABILITY: City and Consultant each believe that the execution,
delivery and performance of this Agreement are in compliance with all
applicable laws. However, in the unlikely event that any provision of this
Agreement is declared void or unenforceable (or is construed as requiring City
to do any act in violation of any applicable laws, including any constitutional
provision, law, regulation, or city code), such provision shall be deemed severed
from this Agreement and this Agreement shall otherwise remain in full force and
effect; provided that this Agreement shall retroactively be deemed reformed to
the extent reasonably possible in such a manner so that the reformed agreement
(and any related agreements effective as of the same date) provide essentially
the same rights and benefits (economic and otherwise) to the Parties as if such
severance and reformation were not required. Unless prohibited by applicable
9
laws, the Parties further shall perform all acts and execute, acknowledge and/or
deliver all amendments, instruments and consents necessary to accomplish and
to give effect to the purposes of this Agreement, as reformed.
22. SUCCESSORS. ASSIGNMENT & DELEGATION: City and Consultant
each bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns and legal
representatives to the other Party hereto and to the partners, successors,
assigns and legal representatives of such other Party in respect to all
covenants, agreements and obligations contained in this Agreement. Neither
Party to the Agreement shall assign the Agreement or sublet it as a whole or
delegate the duties hereunder, without the written consent of the other, nor
shall Consultant assign any monies due or to become due to it without the
previous written consent of City.
23. ACCURACY OF WORK: Acceptance of services or work by City
shall not relieve Consultant of the responsibility for subsequent correction of
any such errors and the clarification of any ambiguities. Consultant shall make
all necessary revisions or corrections resulting from errors and omissions on
the part of Consultant without additional compensation.
24. TIME IS Of THE ESSENCE: Time is of the essence with respect to
all provisions in this Agreement. Any delay in performance by either Party shall
constitute a material breach of this Agreement.
25. 8 O CO R CT WIT O ULTANTS WHO ENGAGE
IN BOYCOTT OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL: The Parties acknowledge A.R.S. §§ 35-
393 through 35-393.03, as amended, which forbids public entities from
contracting with Consultants who engage in boycotts of the State of Israel.
Should Consultant under this Agreement engage In any such boycott against the
State of Israel, this Agreement shall be deemed automatically terminated by
operation of law. Any such boycott is a material breach of contract.
26. CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO A.R.S. 4 35-394. In accordance
with Arizona Revised Statutes § 35-394, Consultant hereby certifies and agrees
that Consultant does not currently and shall not for the duration of this
Agreement use: 1) the forced labor of ethnic Uyghurs in the People's Republic of
China; 2) any services or goods produced by the forced labor of ethnic Uyghurs
in the People's Republic of China; and/or 3) any suppliers, contractors or
subcontractors that use the forced labor or any services or goods produced by
the forced labor of ethnic Uyghurs in the People's Republic of China. If
Consultant becomes aware during the term of this Agreement that Consultant is
not in compliance with this Section, then Consultant shall notify the City within
five (5) business days after becoming aware of such noncompliance. If
Consultant does not provide the City with written certification that Consultant
has remedied such noncompliance within one hundred eighty (180) days after
notifying the City of such noncompliance, this Agreement shall terminate, except
10
that if the Agreement termination date occurs before the end of such one
hundred eighty(180) day remedy period, this Agreement shall terminate on such
contract termination date.
27. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: This Agreement is subject to, and may
be terminated by City in accordance with, the provisions of A.R.S. §38-511.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Consultant and City have executed this
Agreement as of the date first set forth above.
CONSULTANT:
TISCHLERBISE, INC.
a Maryl rporation
By: _ L. Carson Oise
Its: President
CJTY:
CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA,
an Arizona municipal corporation
By: Walter"Chip"Wilson
Its: Mayor
ATTEST:
Yvette McKinney,City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
�-4-151.25-
R. Joel Stern
City Attorney
11
STATE OF )
) ss.
COUNTY OF VQnAocmeo
/!
The foregoing was subscribed and sworn to before me this )5
day of Aor, f , 20-d, by L. Carson Bise as President of TischierBise,
Inc., a Maryland Corporation.
Nqfary Public
My Commission Expires:
J✓I •i�•
*'-::Ij
1�
STATE OF ARIZONA ) Y' r .': '3•� r
) ss.
COUNTY OF PINAL )
The foregoing was subscribed and sworn to before me this _
day of , 20_, by Walter "Chip" Wilson, as Mayor of the City of
Apache Junction, Arizona, an Arizona municipal corporation.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
12
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION /DATA ACQUISITION
During this task, Consultant shall meet with City staff to establish lines of
communication, review and discuss project goals and expectations related to
the project, review (and revise if necessary) the project schedule, request data
and documentation related to new proposed development, and discuss City
staffs role in the project. The objectives of this initial discussion are outlined
below:
• Obtain and review current demographics and other land use information
• Review and refine work plan and schedule discussions on current fee
categories and current/future funding arrangements
• Assess additional information needs and required staff support
• Identify and collect data and documents relevant to the analysis
• identify any relevant policy issues with one (1) on-site visit to meet with
City project management team/City staff as appropriate.
• Deliverables: data request memorandum.
TASK 2: PREPARE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
TischlerBise will prepare annual projections of population, employment,
housing, commercial, industrial, and other nonresidential square footage data
for ten (10)year for all other development fee categories. This will be based on
discussions with City staff and review of published information. Consultant shall
prepare a memorandum discussing the recommended land use projections
(Land Use Assumptions Document)that will serve as the basis for the
Infrastructure Improvement Plan ("IIP") and development impact fee schedule.
Consultant shall prepare a plan that includes projections of changes in land
uses, densities, intensities and population for a specific service area. A map of
the area(s) to which the land use assumptions apply will also be included in this
task. Meetings and discussions with staff will be held as part of Task 1, as well
as conference calls as needed. Deliverables: Consultant shall prepare a draft
technical memorandum discussing the recommended Land Use Assumptions.
After review and sign-off by the City, a final memorandum will be issued, which
will become part of the final Development Fee Report.
TASK 3:ASCERTAIN DEMAND FACTORS AND LEVELS-OF-SERVICE FOR
"NECESSARY PUBLIC SERVICES"
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 9.463.05, et seq., communities in Arizona may assess
development fees for"necessary public services"which have a useful life of
more than three years and that are owned and operated on behalf of the City
and within the incorporated boundary. There are several important subtasks
under the law that are outlined below:
1
• Proportionate Share-Determine the proportionate share of the cost of
"necessary public services," based on service units needed to provide
such services to new development.
• Determine Existing Levels-of-Service-The costs for the"necessary
public services" required to serve new development are based on the
same level-of-service being provided to existing development in the
service area. Consultant shall determine the existing level-of-service by
conducting onsite Interviews, evaluating the appropriate studies, and
analyzing relevant local data. These onsite interviews will also include
discussions about and defining of the infrastructure components to be
included in the IIP and development fees.
• Determine Service Areas-Specify the area(s)within the City's
boundaries in which development will be served by the "necessary public
services"or facility expansions and that a substantial nexus exists
between the necessary public services or facility expansions and the
development being served as prescribed in the flP. The above subtasks
will enable Consultant to ensure that three important development fee
requirements are met, collectively referred to as rational nexus
requirements: demonstration of impact, benefit, and rough
proportionality. Meetings will include two(2)with City staff to discuss
capital facility needs and levels-of-service. As a no charge option,
Consultant can meet with a Stakeholder Group if the City desires.
Deliverables: See Task 7.
TASK 4: IDENTIFY CAPITAL NEEDS AND COSTS
This task will determine the relevant capital needs and costs due to growth. 1)
Long-Range Capital Need-Consultant shall focus on relevant documents such
as the relevant planning documents and master plans, the current Capital
Improvements Plan, and other mapping and data that is available. Discussions
will aim not only to understand the specific costs, but also to assess the size and
scope of projects and whether capital facility needs are due to normal
replacement, catch-up, or new demand; 2) Service Units-Consultant shall
define the standardized measures of consumption, use, or generation
attributable to an individual unit of development for each category of"necessary
public services"or facility expansions; 3) Review Cost Estimates-Consultant
shall review the costs of infrastructure improvements, real property,financing,
engineering, and architectural services associated with the "necessary public
services"to be included In the IlP and development fees;4) Financing Costs-
Consultant shall identify projected interest charges and other financial costs
which are to be used for repayment of principal and interest of debt used to
finance construction of"necessary public services" identified in the IIP. 5)
Identify Ineligible Costs-TischlerBise will identify costs that are not eligible for
inclusion in the lIP and development fees. Ineligible costs include projects not
included in the IIP; repair, maintenance, or operation of existing facilities;
projects which serve existing development in order to meet stricter regulatory
requirements; projects which provide a higher level-of-service to existing
2
development; and administrative, maintenance, and operating costs. As part of
calculating the fee, costs for Infrastructure improvements, real property,
financing, engineering, and architectural services will be considered.
Consultant shall consider all of these components in developing an equitable
allocation of costs. There will be two(2) meetings with City staff. Deliverables:
See Task 7.
TASK 5: DETERMINE NEED FOR"CREDITS"TO BE APPLIED AGAINST CAPITAL
COSTS
A consideration of"credits" is integral to the development of a legally valid
impact fee methodology. There is considerable confusion among those who are
not immersed in impact fee law about the definition of a credit and why It may be
required. There are two types of"credits"that are included in the calculation of
Impact fees, each with specific, distinct characteristics.The first is a credit due
to possible double payment situations. This could occur when a property owner
will make future contributions toward the capital costs of a public facility
covered by an impact fee. The second is a credit toward the payment of an
impact fee for the required dedication of public sites and improvements
provided by the developer and for which the impact fee is imposed. Both types
of credits will be considered and addressed in the development fee study.
Deliverables: Memoranda as appropriate. See Task 10.
TASK 6: DISCUSS PRELIMINARY METHODOLOGIES AND POLICY OPTIONS
The requirement that development fees be based on an IIP does not equate to a
requirement that only the plan-based methodology can be used in the
calculations. The IIP can reflect the past capacity investments in infrastructure
that will be repaid by new development with development fee revenue. Likewise,
the City can plan to provide new development the same level-of-service being
currently provided to existing development. Consultant shall evaluate different
allocation methodologies for each IIP and development fee component to
determine which methodology is the most appropriate measure of the demand
created by new development. These methodologies include: Cost Recovery
Methodology-This methodology is best suited for infrastructure which has
already been built and has excess capacity available to be utilized for new
development. Incremental Expansion Methodology-Under this approach, new
development will receive the current level-of-service being provided to existing
development by the existing inventory of infrastructure. Plan-Based
Methodoloav-This methodology primarily evaluates the CIP for new
development's proportionate share of planned capital projects. It is important to
note, however, that CIPs are often fiscally constrained and may not reflect the
true requirements of new development. Consultant shall therefore also evaluate
master plans for different categories of infrastructure. This comprehensive
approach and consideration of alternative methodologies will allow
maximization of the development fees. Consultant shall prepare draft levels-of-
service tables and methodology recommendations for each infrastructure
category and component. Consultant shall discuss this information with City
3
staff to ensure understanding and acceptance. Policy alternatives will be
discussed as appropriate. This should help ensure"sign-off"and prevent time
delays in finalizing the analysis. There shall be one (1) meeting with City staff
and elected officials (if desired) to discuss and explain the preliminary findings,
assumptions, and results. As a no charge option, Consultant shall meet with a
Stakeholder Group if the City desires. Deliverables: Consultant shall prepare a
"story board"for staff review and comment detailing proposed levels-of-service,
cost estimates, service areas, credits and recommended calculation
methodologies.
TASK 7: PREPARE DRAFT IIP
In this task, Consultant shall prepare an IIP using generally accepted
engineering and planning practices for each "necessary public service"for
which a development fee can be assessed. Development of the IIP will include
the following subtasks:
• Reserve Capacity-The IIP will identify infrastructure capacity to be
reserved to serve future development.
• Description of Existing Necessary Public Services in the Service Area(s) -
The IIP will include a description of the existing "necessary public
services" in the service area(s) and the costs to upgrade, update,
improve, expand, correct, or replace those services to meet existing
needs and usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental, and
regulatory standards.
• Analysis of Total Capacity-The IIP will identify the current usage and
commitments for usage of capacity of the existing "necessary public
services."
• Description of"Necessary Public Services"Attributable to New
Development-The IIP will describe all parts of the "necessary public
services" of facility expansions and their costs necessitated by and
attributable to development in the service area(s) based on the approved
land use assumptions. Cost forecasts will include the costs of
infrastructure improvements, real property, financing, engineering, and
architectural services.
• Equivalency/Conversion Table-The IIP will include a table establishing
the specific level or quantity of use, consumption, or generation of a
service unit for each category of"necessary public services" or facility
expansions. The table will include the ratio of a service unit to various
types of residential, commercial, and industrial land uses.
• Pro acted Service Units-The IIP will include the total number of projected
service units necessitated by and attributable to new development in the
service area(s), based on the approved land use assumptions.
• injected Demand for Necessary Public Services-The IIP will include a
ten-year projection of the demand for"necessary public services", or
facility expansions required by new service units.
• Forecast of Non-Development Fee Revenues from New Service Units-
The IIP will forecast revenues other than development fees generated by
4
new service units, such as state-shared revenue, highway user revenue,
federal revenue, ad valorem property taxes, construction contracting or
similar excise taxes attributable to development based on the approved
land use assumptions. This subtask will include a plan to include these
contributions in determining the extent of the burden created by new
development. These subtasks will result in a written plan that identifles
each "necessary public service"or facility expansion that is to be the
subject of a development fee and complies with the requirements of State
law. Deliverables: Draft Infrastructure Improvement Plan.
TASK 8: CONDUCT FUNDING AND CASH FLOW ANALYSIS; ESTIMATE
ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS
To prepare a meaningful IIP, it is important to evaluate the anticipated
funding sources. In this task, Consultant shall prepare a ten-year cash flow
analysis.This calculation will allow the City to better understand the revenue
potential of the development fees and the amount which would be needed if
the fees were discounted. It will also provide a good understanding of the
cash flow needed to cover the infrastructure costs for new development. The
cash flow analysis will indicate whether additional funds might be needed or
whether the IIP might need to be altered. This could also affect the total
credits calculated in the previous task. Therefore, it is likely that several
Iterations will be conducted in order to refine the cash flow analysis
reflecting the capital improvement needs. Development fee revenues can
only be spent on capital projects that add capacity. Operating and
maintenance costs associated with these capital improvements will have to
be funded from other revenue sources, most likely from the General Fund. To
estimate the annual operational and maintenance costs of the projected
infrastructure, Consultant shall utilize several data sources, including:
• Most recently adopted operating budget.
• Most recently adopted CIP.
• Capital project/program submittal sheets from departments.
DeliverAbJgr See Task 10.
TASK 9: COMPLETE DEVELOPMENT FEE METHODOLOGY AND
CALCULATIONS
The completion of the previous task will enable the development fee
methodology and calculations to be finalized. Consultant shall calculate the
maximum justifiable fee for commercial, residential, and industrial
development that can be charged and conform to fee requirements.
Deliverables: Draft Development Fee Report.
TASK 10: PREPARE FINAL LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, IIP AND
DEVELOPMENT FEE REPORT, PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
Consultant shall prepare a written report for the City that summarizes the
need for development fees for the "necessary public services" category and
the relevant methodologies employed, as well as documentation for all
5
assumptions and cost factors. The report will include at a minimum the
following information:
• Executive Summary.
• A detailed description of the methodologies used during the study and
detailed description of all level-of-service standards and cost factors
used and accompanying rationale.
• An HP spanning a maximum ten-year planning horizon (15-year for
utilities), listing projects, costs, timing, and financing.
• A detailed schedule of all proposed fees listed by land use type and
activity.
• Other information which adequately explains and justifies the resulting
recommended fee schedule.
• A ten-year cash flow analysis of development fees and estimate of
operating costs. There shall be one (1) presentation/work session with
the City Council to present and discuss final and Use Assumptions,
Development Fee Report and IIP as part of the legislatively required
adoption process. Deliver bles: Final Land Use Assumptions, IIP and
Development Fee Report and presentation materials for meetings
6
FEE SCHEDULF,
Fees-Infrastructure Improvement Plan and Land Use Assumptions
Project Team Member Bise Herlands Griffin Total
Hourly Rate $210 $190 $190 Hours Cost
Task 1: Project Initiation!Data 8 0 0 8 $1,680
Acquisision
Task 2:Prepare Land Use Assumptions 8 2 24 34 $6,620
Task 3:Ascertain Demand Factors and 16 4 24 44 $6,680
Levels-of-Service for Necessary Public
Services
Task 4:Identify Capital Needs and Costs 16 4 40 60 $11,720
Task 5:Determine Need for Credits 8 2 12 22 $4,340
Task 6: Discuss Preliminary 8 0 16 24 $4,720
Methodologies and Policy Options
Task 7: Prepare IIP 8 4 40 52 $10,040
Task 8: Conduct Funding and Cash Flow 4 2 12 18 $3,500
Analysis
Task 9: Complete Development Fee 4 2 16 22 $4,260
Methodology and Fee Calculations
Task 10: Prepare Final Land Use 24 4 32 60 $11,880
Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee
Report, Public Presentations
Total Cost: 104 24 216 344 $67,440
7
11
TischlerBise
FISCAL ECONOMIC PLANNING
IV is .
s
ALO
Proposal for
Land Use Assumptions,
Infrastructure Improvement
Plan and Development
Fee Study
Apache Junction, Arizona
April 5, 2025
Table of Contents
Section 1 : Cover Letter 1
Section 2: Qualifications 2
Section 3: Project Approach 11
Section 4: Project Schedule 19
Section 5: Pricing 22
TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
nnp_.Wpp"��_
Section 1 : Cover Letter
April 5, 2025
Ms. Kelsey Schattnik, Principal Planner
City of Apache Junction
300 E. Superstition Boulevard
Apache Junction, AZ 85119
RE:Proposal for Land Use Assumptions, Infrastructure Improvement Plan, and Development Fee
Report
Dear Kelsey,
TischlerBise is pleased to submit the enclosed qualifications to prepare an Infrastructure Improvement Plan
and Land Use Assumptions for the City. There are several points we would like to note that make our
qualifications unique:
■ Depth of Experience. Our qualified team of eight professionals bring an unparalleled depth of
experience to this assignment. We have prepared over 1,100 development fee studies across
the country— more than any other firm. We are innovators in the field, pioneering approaches
for credits, impact fees by size of housing unit, and distance-related/tiered impact fees.
■ Technical Knowledge of Land Use Planning and Local Government Finance.The TischlerBise
team will apply years of development fee experience within the context of overall City financial
needs, land use, and economic development policies. This will lead to a work product that is both
defensible and that promotes equity.
■ Arizona Experience. TischlerBise has prepared more development fees in the State of Arizona
than any other firm.
■ Consensus Builders. Our seasoned Project Team has actively participated in legislative body
meetings and citizen committees to educate stakeholders regarding the technical process of impact
fee calculations as well as the economic effect of implementation.
We look forward to the possibility of renewing our relationship with the City and are committed to providing
cost-effective, high-quality support for this assignment.
Sincerely,
L. Carson Bise II, AICP, President
TischlerBise
4701 Sangamore Road S240
301.320.6900 x12
carson@tischlerbise.com
TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
nnp-.gapppp��-
Section 2: Qualifications
Firm Overview
TischlerBise, Inc., was founded in 1977 as Tischler, Montasser&Associates. The firm became Tischler&
Associates, Inc., in 1980 and TischlerBise, Inc., in 2005. The firm is a Subchapter (S) corporation, is
incorporated in Washington, D.C.,and is headquartered in Bethesda,Maryland,with a secondary office
in Boise, Idaho. The firm employs ten fiscal/economic professionals and one administrative support
professional.
TischlerBise specializes in fiscal/economic impact analysis, impact fees, market feasibility, utility rates
studies, infrastructure financing studies and related revenue strategies. Our firm has been providing
consulting services to public agencies for forty years. In this time, we have prepared over 1,000
fiscal/economic impact evaluations and over 1,100 impact fee/infrastructure financing studies —
more than any other firm.Through our detailed approach, proven methodology,and comprehensive product
we have established TischlerBise as the leading national expert on revenue enhancement and cost of
growth strategies.
Arizona Experience
TischlerBise has unsurpassed experience preparing development fees and infrastructure improvements
plans in the State of Arizona, particularly under Arizona's new development fee legislation, SB 1525. We
have completed or are currently engaged with the following Arizona communities to conduct SB
1525-related updates and analyses since 2013:
■ Apache Junction# 0 Oro Valley
■ Avondale# 0 Payson#
■ Buckeye# ■ Peoria
■ Casa Grande# 0 Pinetop-Lakeside#
■ Cave Creek ■ Queen Creek
■ Coolidge# ■ Safford
■ Eloy# 0 Sedona#
■ Flagstaff# 0 Show Low
■ Florence 0 Sierra Vista#
■ Fountain Hills 0 San Luis#
■ Gilbert 0 Somerton#
■ Glendale# 0 Surprise#
■ Goodyear ■ Tempe#
■ Kingman ■ Tucson
■ Maricopa# 0 Wellton
■ Nogales ■ Yuma#
#Indicates multiple SB 1525 engagements
TischlerBise 2
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
no P_.gMMPPPW�IIIII`_
Project Team Qualifications
To successfully complete this assignment, the consultant must possess specific, detailed and customized
knowledge of not only the technical analysis, but the context of the development fee structures and
implementation in achieving the City's fiscal, economic, transportation and land use policy goals. Our
proposed Project Team of Carson Bise,AICP, Julie Herlands,AICP, and Benjamin Griffin has unsurpassed
experience performing projects requiring the same expertise as that needed to serve the City of Apache
Junction. Our Project Team brings 60 years of development fee calculation, capital improvement planning,
infrastructure/utility finance, demographic and market analysis, and development fee implementation
experience to the City's assignment. In summary, all three members of Team are considered national
thought leaders in the areas of impact fees, exactions, infrastructure finance, impact fee program
administration, and implementation. The organizational chart below shows our project team for this
assignment.
Carson
Project Manager
. _
Projectnjamin Griffin Julie Herlands, AlCP
Analyst
Assurance
Carson Bise, AICP, President of TischlerBise, will serve as Project Manager and coordinate our Project
Team's interaction with the City to ensure that all work is completed properly, on time, and within budget.
He will work closely with Julie Herlands and Benjamin Griffin, developing and reviewing all aspects of the
project and providing policy direction for the project. Mr. Bise was the Project Manager of our previous
engagements with the City of Apache Junction.
Julie Herlands,AICP,Vice President of TischlerBise,will provide analytical support to the impact fee study
as well as quality assurance, assisting Mr. Bise in reviewing all work products generated throughout the
assignment. Most recently, Mr. Bise and Ms. Herlands have collaborated on the following Arizona
development fee projects: Glendale, Maricopa, Oro Valley, Payson, Pinetop-Lakeside, and Tucson.
Benjamin Griffin, Senior Fiscal/Economic Analyst, is an accomplished development fee Project Manager
in the State of Arizona, and will provide analytical support to the study and will be responsible for much of
the technical requirements of the project. Most importantly, Mr. Griffin, in conjunction with Mr. Bise, will
ensure constant collaboration and communication between City staff and our team through frequent
progress memorandums, conference calls, and in-person meetings. Most recently, Mr. Bise and Mr.
Griffin have collaborated on the following Arizona development fee projects: Apache Junction,
Avondale, Buckeye, Casa Grande, Coolidge, Eloy, Flagstaff, Fountain Hills, Kingman, Pinal County,
Sedona, Sierra Vista, Somerton, Surprise, Tempe, and Yuma.
5 TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
no P_.Mapppp��_
L. Carson Bise, 11, AICP, President
Mr. Bise has 30 years of fiscal, economic and planning experience, and has conducted fiscal and
infrastructure finance evaluations in 40 states. Mr. Bise is a leading national figure in the calculation of
impact fees, having completed over 350 impact fee studies. Mr. Bise has also written and lectured
extensively on fiscal impact analysis and infrastructure financing. His most recent publications are Next
Generation Transportation Impact Fees(co-author)and Fiscal lmpactAnalysis:Methodologies for Planners
published by the American Planning Association, a chapter on fiscal impact analysis in the book Planning
and Urban Design Standards also published by the American Planning Association, and the ICMA IQ
Report, Fiscal Impact Analysis:How Today's Decisions Affect Tomorrow's Budgets. Mr. Bise was also the
principal author of the fiscal impact analysis component for the Atlanta Regional Commission's Smart
Growth Toolkit and is featured in the recently released AICP CD-ROM Training Package entitled The
Economics of Density. Mr. Bise is a past Board of Director for the Growth and Infrastructure Finance
Consortium and recently Chaired the American Planning Association's Paying for Growth Task
Force. He was also recently named an Affiliate of the National Center for Smart Growth Research &
Education.
ARIZONA IMPACT FEE AND INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STRATEGY EXPERIENCE
■ Apache Junction, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Avondale, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Buckeye, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Camp Verde, Arizona—Impact Fee Study
■ Coolidge, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Glendale, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Eloy, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Flagstaff, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Florence, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Gilbert, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Goodyear, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Maricopa, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Payson, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Pinetop-Lakeside, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Safford, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ San Luis, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Sedona, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Sierra Vista, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Somerton, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Surprise, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Tempe, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Wellton, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Yuma, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
EDUCATION
M.B.A., Economics, Shenandoah University
B.S., Geography/Urban Planning, East Tennessee State University
TischlerB1se 6
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
B.S., Political Science/Urban Studies, East Tennessee State University
PUBLICATIONS
■ "Next Generation Transportation Impact Fees," American Planning Association, Planners Advisory
Service.
■ "Fiscal Impact Analysis: Methodologies for Planners,"American Planning Association.
■ "Planning and Urban Design Standards,"American Planning Association, Contributing Author on Fiscal
Impact Analysis.
■ "Fiscal Impact Analysis: How Today's Decisions Affect Tomorrow's Budgets," ICMA Press.
■ "Are Subsidies Worth It?" Economic Development News &Views.
■ "Smart Growth and Fiscal Realities," ICMA Getting Smart! Newsletter.
■ "The Economics of Density," AICP Training Series, 2005, Training CD-ROM (American Planning
Association).
Julie Herlands, AICP, Vice President
Julie Herlands is Vice President of TischlerBise and has 17 years of planning, fiscal, and economic
development experience. Prior to joining TischlerBise, Ms. Herlands worked in the public sector in Fairfax
County, Virginia for the Office of Community Revitalization and for the private sector for the International
Economic Development Council (IEDC) in their Advisory Services and Research Department. For IEDC,
she conducted several consulting projects including economic and market feasibility analyses and
economic development assessments and plans. Her economic, fiscal impact, and impact fee/infrastructure
finance experience includes a wide range of assignments in over 15 states. She is a frequent presenter at
national and regional conferences including serving as co-organizer and co-presenter at a half-day AICP
Training Workshop entitled Fiscal Impact Assessment at the American Planning Association National
Planning Conference. A session on impact fees and cash proffers presented at the APA National
Conference is available through the APA training series, Best of Contemporary Community Planning. She
is currently the Immediate Past Chair of the Economic Development Division of the APA and
recently chaired the APA Task Force on Planning and Economic Development.
ARIZONA IMPACT FEE AND INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STRATEGY EXPERIENCE
■ Apache Junction Water Company, Arizona— Water System Connection Fees
■ Apache Junction, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Cave Creek, Arizona Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Glendale, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, UP and Development Fee Study
■ Peoria, Arizona—Development Impact Fees
■ Prescott, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Queen Creek, Arizona—Development Impact Fees
■ Show Low, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Sedona, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, UP and Development Fee Study
EDUCATION
Masters of Community Planning, University of Maryland
Bachelor of Arts, Political Science, University of Buffalo
7 Tisch re BI ise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
no P_..Mapppp��_
PUBLICATIONS
■ "Should Impact Fees Be Reduced in a Recession?", Economic Development Now, August 10, 2009
(International Economic Development Council)
■ "Agreements, Fees, and CIP", The Best of Contemporary Community Planning, 2005, Training CD-
ROM (APA and Lincoln Institute of Land Policy)
Benjamin Griffin, Senior Fiscal/Economic Analyst
Benjamin Griffin is a Senior Fiscal and Economic Analyst at TischlerBise and has 10 years of experience,
specializing in development fees, fiscal impact analysis and economic development planning. Prior to
joining TischlerBise, Mr. Griffin worked on real estate and economic development projects for the New
Orleans Business Alliance. During this time, he conducted field surveys to determine the economic health
of key retail corridors, researched real estate development projects, and analyzed economic development
initiatives. Prior to his real estate and economic development experience, Mr. Griffin worked with the New
Orleans Redevelopment Authority, where he gained experience in performance-based funding sources,
title clearance, and GIS. This position provided practical experience with issues concerning the
redevelopment process, title clearance of properties received and acquired through various means, and
analysis of property data for redevelopment projects. Mr. Griffin also possesses professional experience
with the Jefferson Parish Planning Department, where he worked in the Current Planning Division.
ARIZONA IMPACT FEE AND INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STRATEGY EXPERIENCE
■ Apache Junction, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Avondale, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, UP and Development Fee Study
■ Buckeye, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Casa Grande, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Flagstaff, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, UP and Development Fee Study
■ Fountain Hills, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Kingman, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Maricopa, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Pinetop-Lakeside, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, UP and Development Fee Study
■ San Luis, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, UP and Development Fee Study
■ Sedona, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Sierra Vista, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, UP and Development Fee Study
■ Somerton, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Surprise, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, UP and Development Fee Study
■ Tempe, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, UP and Development Fee Study
■ Yuma, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
■ Pinal County, Arizona—Development Fee Study
EDUCATION
Master of Urban and Regional Planning, Economic Development, University of New Orleans
Bachelor of Business Administration, Finance, University of Mississippi
TischlerBise g
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
Project Examples/References
The following project descriptions demonstrate our team's recent and vast experience with assignments
similar to the scope of services required by the City of Apache Junction.
City of Buckeye, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, UP and Development Fee Study
Project Contact: Scott Zipprich, City Engineer
Address: 530 East Monroe Avenue Buckeye, AZ 85326
Phone: (623)349-6217
E-mail: szipprich@buckeyeaz.gov
TischlerBise Staff: Carson Bise, AICP, and Benjamin Griffin
Contract Period: March 2017 to April 2019
TischlerBise recently completed an update to the City's SB1525 compliant development fees we completed
in 2013. This study includes an update to parks and recreation, library, street, police, fire, water, and
wastewater development fees. Due to Buckeye's acquisition of Global Water, and the complexity of
existing development agreements related to this acquisition, Buckeye accelerated its update
process. To account for development agreements related to water and wastewater service throughout
Buckeye, which often vary within individual Community Master Plan Areas and 208 Areas, TischlerBise
and Buckeye staff designed a GIS-based development fee schedule to accurately assess fees at the
parcel level. Buckeye's current (four) water and wastewater service areas are projected to increase to
approximately ten to twenty service areas for each type of infrastructure—Buckeye's water and wastewater
development agreements do not usually have similar geographic boundaries.
City of Glendale, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
Project Contact: Don Bessler, Chief Capital Improvement Officer
Address: 5850 West Glendale Avenue Glendale, AZ 85301
Phone: (623)930-2909
E-mail: DBessler@glendaleaz.com
TischlerBise Staff: Carson Bise, AICP, Julie Herlands, AICP, and Benjamin Griffin
Contract Period: March 2018 to September 2019
Following upon our 2012 assignment, TischlerBise was retained to update our previous SB1525 compliant
IIP and Development Fee Study. This study includes an update to parks and recreation, library, police,fire,
water, wastewater and transportation development fees (this is the fifth time the City has engaged
TischlerBise). The scope of this work effort included developing land use assumptions for the service
areas where development fees were to be assessed, determining eligible infrastructure projects under the
new definition of"necessary public services," and calculating Infrastructure Improvement Plans. As part of
this update, TischlerBise is examining the feasibility of implementing a tiered transportation development
fee structure that is designed to encourage development in the downtown area, yet still make the City
competitive for economic development opportunities in the West Service Area.
Town of Florence,Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
Project Contact: Lisa Garcia, Assistant City Manager
9 TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
no P_.ampppp��_
Address: 775 North Main Street Florence, AZ 85132
Phone: (520)868-7552
E-mail: lisa.garcia@florenceaz.gov
TischlerBise Staff: Carson Bise, AICP
Contract Period: September 2017 to October 2018
TischlerBise was retained by the Town of Florence to review and update their Land Use Assumptions, IIP
and Development Fee Study for fire/rescue, parks, trails, water, sewer and transportation. As part of this
update, TischlerBise recommended a reduction in the number of service areas to make administration of
the fee program easier for the Town, while still complying with SB1525.
City of Tempe, Arizona—Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study
Project Contact: Tom Duensing, Financial Services Director
Address: 20 East 61h Street Tempe, AZ 85281
Phone: (480)350-8505
E-mail: Thomas_Duensing@tempe.gov
TischlerBise Staff: Carson Bise, AICP, and Benjamin Griffin
Contract Period: August 2020 to Present
The City of Tempe hired TischlerBise in 2013 and 2016 to prepare SB1525 compliant Land Use
Assumptions, Infrastructure Improvements Plan and Development Fee Study for Police, Libraries, Streets,
Fire and Parks. As part of this effort, TischlerBise prepared several iterations of the fees (e.g., plan-based
versus incremental expansion) for the City's consideration. A primary consideration as part of this
assignment was the City's ability to fund the operating expenses associated with various planned facilities.
TischlerBise also prepared the residential fees using a progressive fee structure (e.g., fees vary by size of
house), which helps with housing equity and affordability issues. TischlerBise was recently retained to
update the City's non-utility development fees.
TischlerBise 10
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
00P_.gaPPPW�IIIII`_
Section 3: Project Approach
Overview
Development fees are simple in concept, but complex in delivery. Generally, the jurisdiction imposing the
fee must: (1) identify the purpose of the fee, (2) identify the use to which the fee is to be put, (3) show a
reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of development project, (4)show a reasonable
relationship between the facility to be constructed and the type of development, and (5) account for and
spend the fees collected only for the purpose(s) used in calculating the fee.
Reduced to its simplest terms,the process of calculating development fees involves the following two steps:
1. Determine the cost of development-related improvements, and
2. Allocate those costs equitably to various types of development.
There is, however, a fair degree of latitude granted in constructing the actual fees, as long as the outcome
is"proportionate and equitable." Fee construction is both an art and a science, and it is in this convergence
that TischlerBise excels in delivering products to clients.
Any one of several legitimate methods may be used to calculate development fees for the City. Each
method has advantages, and to some extent they are interchangeable because they all allocate facility
costs in proportion to the needs created by development.
In practice, the calculation of development fees can become quite complicated because of the many
variables involved in defining the relationship between development and the need for capital facilities. The
following discussion outlines how TischlerBise will approach and add value to this portion of the City's
assignment.
Growth Projections and Demographic Trends. Projecting future residential and nonresidential
development is more difficult now than in the past because of changing demographics and lifestyle choices.
Changes in the retail sector combined with the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the retail
and office markets are also a concern. TischlerBise's extensive national experience conducting
market analysis and real estate feasibility studies is invaluable in determining the appropriate
development projections used in the UP and development fee calculations. This includes both the
amount of development and the geographic location. Depending on the methodology employed, overly
optimistic development projections can increase the City's financial exposure, if projected development fee
revenue is less than expected.
Fiscal Sustainability and the Evaluation of Credits. State law requires a forecast of non-development
fee revenues from new service units. The IIP needs to forecast revenues generated by new service units
other than development fees, such as state-shared revenue, highway user revenue, federal revenue, ad
valorem property taxes, construction contracting, or similar excise taxes based on the approved land use
assumptions. This needs to include a plan to include these contributions in determining the extent of the
burden created by new development.
To avoid potential double payment situations, municipalities must also consider infrastructure provided by
community facility districts that may exist. The existence of these "special districts" may affect the
determination service areas and must be documented in the land use assumptions. It is important that
11 TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
no P-.m
development fees clearly differentiate between "project-level improvements" that might be provided by a
private developers or community facilities districts, and the "system improvements" that will be funded, at
least in part, by development fees. Community facilities districts might also affect the need for "revenue
credits" as discussed in section 9-463.05.B.14 of Arizona's enabling legislation.
Improved Infrastructure Improvement Pan Flexibility. Many of our Arizona clients elected for plan-based
approaches for their IIPs. An unintended consequence of these decisions is a relative lack of flexibility with
the individual IIPs as they relate to changes in the market and other conditions. As part of our Round 2
SB1525 assignments we prepared IIPs that incorporate a hybrid approach. Using transportation as an
example, we can project the number of lane miles needed to maintain current levels of service (in this
example, let's assume 10.4 lane miles). However, rather than use a purely plan-based approach, the
solution is to identify improvements that exceed 10.4 lane miles (let's assume 22 lane miles). Rather than
being tied to a defined plan, the City can respond to the market and funding arrangements at the time
(federal or state money may be identified in the future for one or more projects making them development
fee ineligible) and select projects over the 10-year time horizon that equal the required 10.4 lane miles.
Public Outreach. The importance of public outreach when considering development fees should not be
overlooked. Based upon our team's experience with development fees in Arizona, we anticipate this study
may attract controversy. Therefore, it is important to build a coalition of support early in the process, to
educate and inform the public and other key stakeholders about the purpose of the various components of
the study, and to explain how it will benefit both key constituents (developers)and the public. It is critical to
develop a communications strategy that will offset and correct any misinformation that might proliferate,
and to provide a clear and compelling logic for public adoption of an IIP and development fee program. Our
seasoned project team has actively participated in legislative body meetings and citizen committees to
educate stakeholders regarding the technical process of developing an IIP and the development fee
calculations. We will work with staff to create appropriate collateral and other materials as part of this
assignment.
Implementation/Ongoing Support. The Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Study is just
the beginning of the relationship between TischlerBise and our clients. That is the primary reason the
majority of our annual development fee work is from existing clients through sole source procurement.After
the fee study is complete, TischlerBise can prepare implementation materials and provide training to City
staff to ensure it is prepared to implement the development impact fee program in a manner that is efficient
and consistent with Arizona and national case law. Implementation materials include an administrative
manual and forms which will track the City's development fee ordinance with cross references between the
ordinance, forms, and administrative manual. Finally, TischlerBise understands that it is impossible to
forecast every conceivable development proposal within the fee structure.Therefore,TischlerBise routinely
prepares specific development fee amounts for specific projects at no charge to our clients.
Work Scope
The following work scope is designed to meet the requirement of SB1525, as well as national case law.
This scope of work assumes the following infrastructure categories: Library, Police, Parks and Recreation,
and Streets.
TischlerBise 12
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION / DATA ACQUISITION
During this task, we will meet with City staff to establish lines of communication, review and discuss project
goals and expectations related to the project, review(and revise if necessary)the project schedule, request
data and documentation related to new proposed development, and discuss City staff's role in the project.
The objectives of this initial discussion are outlined below:
■ Obtain and review current demographics and other land use information
■ Review and refine work plan and schedule
■ Discuss current fee categories and current/future funding arrangements
■ Assess additional information needs and required staff support
■ Identify and collect data and documents relevant to the analysis
■ Identify any relevant policy issues
Meetings:One (1)on-site visit to meet with City project management team/City staff as appropriate.
Deliverables: Data request memorandum.
TASK 2: PREPARE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
TischlerBise will prepare annual projections of population, employment, housing, commercial, industrial,
and other nonresidential square footage data for ten (10) year for all other development fee categories.
This will be based on discussions with City staff and review of published information. The Consultant will
prepare a memorandum discussing the recommended land use projections (Land Use Assumptions
Document) that will serve as the basis for the IIP and development impact fee schedule. TischlerBise will
prepare a plan that includes projections of changes in land uses, densities, intensities, and population for
a specific service area. A map of the area(s)to which the land use assumptions apply will also be included
in this task.
Meetings:Discussions with Development Services staff will be held as part of Task 1,as well as conference
calls as needed.
Deliverables:TischlerBise will prepare a draft technical memorandum discussing the recommended Land
Use Assumptions. After review and sign-off by the City, a final memorandum will be issued, which will
become part of the final Development Fee Report.
TASK 3: ASCERTAIN DEMAND FACTORS AND LEVELS-OF-SERVICE FOR "NECESSARY PUBLIC
SERVICES"
Communities in Arizona may assess development fees for"necessary public services"which have a useful
life of more than three years and that are owned and operated on behalf of the City and within the
incorporated boundary.
There are several important subtasks that are outlined below:
■ Proportionate Share — Determine the proportionate share of the cost of "necessary public
services," based on service units needed to provide such services to new development.
13 TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
no P_..Mapppp��_
■ Determine Existing Levels-of-Service—The costs for the"necessary public services" required to
serve new development are based on the same level-of-service being provided to existing
development in the service area. We will determine the existing level-of-service by conducting
onsite interviews, evaluating the appropriate studies, and analyzing relevant local data. These
onsite interviews will also include discussions about and defining of the infrastructure components
to be included in the IIP and development fees.
■ Determine Service Areas—Specify the area(s)within the City's boundaries in which development
will be served by the"necessary public services"or facility expansions and that a substantial nexus
exists between the necessary public services or facility expansions and the development being
served as prescribed in the IIP.
The above subtasks will enable us to ensure that three important development fee requirements are met,
collectively referred to as rational nexus requirements:demonstration of impact, benefit,and proportionality.
Meetings:Two (2) meetings with City staff to discuss capital facility needs and levels-of-service. As a no
charge option, TischlerBise can meet with a Stakeholder Group if the City desires.
Deliverables:See Task 7.
TASK 4: IDENTIFY CAPITAL NEEDS AND COSTS
This task will determine the relevant capital needs and costs due to growth.
1) Long-Range Capital Need—TischlerBise will focus on relevant documents such as the relevant
planning documents and master plans, the current Capital Improvements Plan, and other
mapping and data that is available. Discussions will aim not only to understand the specific costs,
but also to assess the size and scope of projects and whether capital facility needs are due to
normal replacement, catch-up, or new demand.
2) Service Units — TischlerBise will define the standardized measures of consumption, use, or
generation attributable to an individual unit of development for each category of "necessary
public services" or facility expansions.
3) Review Cost Estimates—TischlerBise will review the costs of infrastructure improvements, real
property,financing,engineering,and architectural services associated with the"necessary public
services"to be included in the IIP and development fees.
4) Financing Costs—TischlerBise will identify projected interest charges and other financial costs
which are to be used for repayment of principal and interest of debt used to finance construction
of"necessary public services" identified in the IIP.
5) Identify Ineligible Costs—TischlerBise will identify costs that are not eligible for inclusion in the
IIP and development fees. Ineligible costs include projects not included in the IIP; repair,
maintenance, or operation of existing facilities; projects which serve existing development in
order to meet stricter regulatory requirements; projects which provide a higher level-of-service
to existing development; and administrative, maintenance, and operating costs.
As part of calculating the fee, costs for infrastructure improvements, real property, financing, engineering,
and architectural services will be considered. TischlerBise will consider all of these components in
developing an equitable allocation of costs.
TischlerBise 14
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
Meetings: Two (2) meetings with City staff.
Deliverables:See Task 7.
TASK 5: DETERMINE NEED FOR "CREDITS" TO BE APPLIED AGAINST CAPITAL COSTS
A consideration of"credits" is integral to the development of a legally valid impact fee methodology. There
is considerable confusion among those who are not immersed in impact fee law about the definition of a
credit and why it may be required.
There are two types of"credits"that are included in the calculation of impact fees,each with specific, distinct
characteristics. The first is a credit due to possible double payment situations. This could occur when a
property owner will make future contributions toward the capital costs of a public facility covered by an
impact fee. The second is a credit toward the payment of an impact fee for the required dedication of public
sites and improvements provided by the developer and for which the impact fee is imposed. Both types of
credits will be considered and addressed in the development fee study.
Deliverables: Memoranda as appropriate. See Task 10.
TASK 6: DISCUSS PRELIMINARY METHODOLOGIES AND POLICY OPTIONS
The requirement that development fees be based on an IIP does not equate to a requirement that only the
plan-based methodology can be used in the calculations. The IIP can reflect the past capacity investments
in infrastructure that will be repaid by new development with development fee revenue. Likewise, the City
can plan to provide new development the same level-of-service being currently provided to existing
development.
TischlerBise will evaluate different allocation methodologies for each IIP and development fee component
to determine which methodology is the most appropriate measure of the demand created by new
development. These methodologies include:
Cost Recovery Methodology—This methodology is best suited for infrastructure which has already been
built and has excess capacity available to be utilized for new development.
Incremental Expansion Methodology — Under this approach, new development will receive the current
level-of-service being provided to existing development by the existing inventory of infrastructure.
Plan-Based Methodology — This methodology primarily evaluates the CIP for new development's
proportionate share of planned capital projects. It is important to note, however, that CIP's are often fiscally
constrained and may not reflect the true requirements of new development. TischlerBise will therefore also
evaluate master plans for different categories of infrastructure.
This comprehensive approach and consideration of alternative methodologies will allow maximization of
the development fees. TischlerBise to prepare draft levels-of-service tables and methodology
recommendations for each infrastructure category and component. We will discuss this information with
City staff to ensure understanding and acceptance. Policy alternatives will be discussed as appropriate.
This should help ensure "sign-off'and prevent time delays in finalizing the analysis.
15 TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
no P-.m pppp��_
Meetings: One (1) meeting with City staff and elected officials (if desired) to discuss and explain the
preliminary findings, assumptions, and results. As a no charge option, TischlerBise can meet with a
Stakeholder Group if the City desires.
Deliverables: TischlerBise will prepare a "story board" for staff review and comment detailing proposed
levels-of-service, cost estimates, service areas, credits and recommended calculation methodologies.
TASK 7: PREPARE DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PLAN (IIP)
In this task, TischlerBise's qualified professionals will prepare an IIP using generally accepted engineering
and planning practices for each "necessary public service"for which a development fee can be assessed.
Development of the IIP will include the following subtasks:
■ Reserve Capacity — The IIP will identify infrastructure capacity to be reserved to serve future
development.
■ Description of Existing Necessary Public Services in the Service Area(s)—The IIP will include
a description of the existing "necessary public services" in the service area(s) and the costs to
upgrade, update, improve, expand, correct, or replace those services to meet existing needs and
usage and stricter safety, efficiency, environmental, and regulatory standards.
■ Analysis of Total Capacity— The IIP will identify the current usage and commitments for usage
of capacity of the existing "necessary public services."
■ Description of "Necessary Public Services" Attributable to New Development— The IIP will
describe all parts of the "necessary public services" of facility expansions and their costs
necessitated by and attributable to development in the service area(s) based on the approved land
use assumptions. Cost forecasts will include the costs of infrastructure improvements, real
property, financing, engineering, and architectural services.
■ Equivalency/Conversion Table — The IIP will include a table establishing the specific level or
quantity of use, consumption, or generation of a service unit for each category of"necessary public
services" or facility expansions. The table will include the ratio of a service unit to various types of
residential, commercial, and industrial land uses.
■ Projected Service Units — The IIP will include the total number of projected service units
necessitated by and attributable to new development in the service area(s), based on the approved
land use assumptions.
■ Projected Demand for Necessary Public Services—The IIP will include a ten-year projection of
the demand for"necessary public services", or facility expansions required by new service units.
■ Forecast of Non-Development Fee Revenues from New Service Units — The IIP will forecast
revenues other than development fees generated by new service units, such as state-shared
revenue, highway user revenue, federal revenue, ad valorem property taxes, construction
contracting or similar excise taxes attributable to development based on the approved land use
assumptions. This subtask will include a plan to include these contributions in determining the
extent of the burden created by new development.
TischlerBise 16
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
These subtasks will result in a written plan that identifies each "necessary public service" or facility
expansion that is to be the subject of a development fee and complies with the requirements of State law.
Meetings: None.
Deliverables: Draft Infrastructure Improvement Plan.
TASK 8: CONDUCT FUNDING AND CASH FLOW ANALYSIS; ESTIMATE ANNUAL OPERATING
COSTS
To prepare a meaningful IIP, it is important to evaluate the anticipated funding sources. In this task,
TischlerBise will prepare a ten-year cash flow analysis. This calculation will allow the City to better
understand the revenue potential of the development fees and the amount which would be needed if the
fees were discounted. It will also provide a good understanding of the cash flow needed to cover the
infrastructure costs for new development. The cash flow analysis will indicate whether additional funds
might be needed or whether the IIP might need to be altered. This could also affect the total credits
calculated in the previous task. Therefore, it is likely that several iterations will be conducted in order to
refine the cash flow analysis reflecting the capital improvement needs. Development fee revenues can only
be spent on capital projects that add capacity. Operating and maintenance costs associated with these
capital improvements will have to be funded from other revenue sources, mostly likely from the General
Fund. To estimate the annual operational and maintenance costs of the projected infrastructure,
TischlerBise will utilize several data sources, including:
■ Most recently adopted operating budget.
■ Most recently adopted CIP.
■ Capital project/program submittal sheets from departments.
Meetings: None.
Deliverables:See Task 10.
TASK 9: COMPLETE DEVELOPMENT FEE METHODOLOGY AND CALCULATIONS
The completion of the previous task will enable the development fee methodology and calculations to be
finalized. TischlerBise will calculate the maximum justifiable fee for commercial, residential, and industrial
development that can be charged and conform to fee requirements.
Meetings: None.
Deliverables: Draft Development Fee Report.
TASK 10: PREPARE FINAL LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, IIP AND DEVELOPMENT FEE REPORT,
PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
TischlerBise will prepare a written report for the City that summarizes the need for development fees for
the "necessary public services" category and the relevant methodologies employed, as well as
documentation for all assumptions and cost factors. The report will include at a minimum the following
information:
■ Executive Summary.
■ A detailed description of the methodologies used during the study.
17 TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
no P_.awpppp��_
■ A detailed description of all level-of-service standards and cost factors used and accompanying
rationale.
■ An IIP spanning a maximum ten-year planning horizon (15-year for utilities), listing projects, costs,
timing, and financing.
■ A detailed schedule of all proposed fees listed by land use type and activity.
■ Other information which adequately explains and justifies the resulting recommended fee schedule.
■ A ten-year cash flow analysis of development fees and estimate of operating costs.
Meetings:One (1) presentation/work session with the City Council to present and discuss final and Use
Assumptions, Development Fee Report and IIP as part of the legislatively required adoption process.
Deliverables: Final Land Use Assumptions, IIP and Development Fee Report and presentation materials
for meetings.
TischlerBise 18
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
Section 4: Project Schedule
Project Schedule
The table below indicates our proposed schedule for this assignment. This schedule assumes all draft work
products needed to start the adoption process are completed by month 6.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE-LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, IIP AND DEVELOPMENT FEE STUDY
Tasks Anticipated Dates Meetings* Meetings/Deliverables
Task 1:Project Initiation/Data Acquisition Month 1 1* Data Request Memorandum
Task 2:Prepare Land Use Assumptions Months 1 and 2 1* Technical Memorandum Discussing
Recommended Land Use Assumptions
Task 3:Ascertain Demand Factors and Levels-of- Months 2 through 4 1* See Task 7
Service for Necessary Public Services
Task 4:Identify Capital Needs and Costs Months 2 through 4 2 See Task 7
Task 5:Determine Need for Credits Month 4 0 See Task 0
Task 6:DiscLISSPrelimi nary Met hod ologies and Policy Month 0 Storyboard Presentation on Fee
Options Methodologies
Task 7:Prepare Infrastructure Improvement Plan(IIP) Months 4 and 5 2 Draft/Final Infrastructure Improvement
Plan
Task 8:Conduct Funding and Cash Flow Analysis Month 5 0 See Task 10
Task 9:Complete Development Fee Methodology and Months 5 and 6 0 Draftl HIPand Development Fee Report
Fee Calculations
Task 10:Prepare Final Land Use Assumptions,IIP and Months 5 and 6 1 Final IIP and Development Fee Report
Development Fee Report,Public Presentations
*In several cases it is assumed meetings are held with multiple departments overone(1)trip.
Accessibility
TischlerBise will attend pre-scheduled meetings with the City in person (or video conference if desired)
deploying staff from our main office in Maryland. TischlerBise staff regularly travel to our national client
base without incident and frequently utilize regional trips to add additional (uncontracted) trips to clients.
TischlerBise's regular and repeat work in Arizona affirms our flexibility and ability to accommodate
schedules. Our Project Team will be available via email and phone throughout the study, and our
accessibility and availability will continue throughout the term of the Agreement. We encourage you to
consult our references regarding our superior accessibility and availability.
Internal Communications
An essential component of these efforts is frequent, ongoing, and meaningful communication between the
consultant team and staff. TischlerBise is known for its hands-on approach, with face-to-face meetings,
frequent conference calls, and ongoing email communications as an integral part of our work scope. The
specific strategy is to use the Work Scope and Schedule to manage the project. It is recommended the City
identify a staff Project Manager who serves as a point person between the consultant team and City. It is
19 TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
no P_..Mapppp��_
also recommended that a staff working group/technical committee be identified to provide feedback
throughout the study process. This enables effective and efficient processes as well as keeps relevant staff
apprised of the study's progress and content. TischlerBise also recommends periodic briefings with City
Administration.
Project Management Approach
TischlerBise utilizes a project management process which ensures our projects are completed on time and
within budget, and, most importantly, they yield results that match our clients' expectations. Our project
management plan employs the following principles to mitigate potential risk and result in successful
projects:
• Risk: Lack of Understanding of Project Goals, Objectives, and Desired Outcomes
O Mitigation: We begin by defining the project to be completed. Based on discussions that
occur as part of our Project Initiation task, Carson Bise, along with Mr. Griffin will identify the
final project goals and objectives in collaboration with City staff, list potential challenges to the
process, and develop a plan to ensure successful outcomes and effective communication.
• Risk: Schedule Delays
O Mitigation: We will plan the project schedule from the outset. As part of the Project
Initiation task, Mr. Bise will work with City staff to create an agreed-upon timetable to meet the
project schedule. Prior to beginning the project, Mr. Bise will assign roles that will ensure that
the project schedule is met on time and within budget.
• Risk: Technical Complications
o Mitigation: We will actively manage the project process. Mr. Bise, Ms. Herlands, and Mr.
Griffin have a long history of strong project management skills that are supported by past
project successes (we encourage you to contact our references in this regard). Mr. Bise will
manage the work in progress, provide guidance and oversight to staff, and be accountable to
the City meeting the schedule, budget, and technical requirements of the project.
• Risk: Quality Control
O Mitigation: We will review all project deliverables and communication through a formal
quality assurance process that requires review at the peer level, project manager level, and
executive officer level. Prior to the delivery of work product to the City, deliverables will go
through a structured quality assurance process involving up to three levels of review and
utilizing a checklist tool. The first level involves a peer-to-peer review of work products and
computer models. Next, Mr. Bise, assisted by Ms. Herlands will be responsible for a second
set of reviews comparing the work product to the completed quality checklist form.
• Risk: Loss of Project Staff
O Mitigation: Our Project Team for this assignment include two of the firm's principals
and one senior consultant. The fact that our project team includes the firm's President and
Vice President, as well as a senior member of our staff with a vested interest in continuing
with a firm, the need to replace a member of our proposed Project Team is highly unlikely. If
TischlerBise 20
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
the need to replace a team member does arise, TischlerBise is the largest impact fee
consulting firm in the country, and can immediately bring in Colin McAweeney, who is our
Western Region Manager, who heads our Boise office.
• Risk: Cost Overruns
o Mitigation: The studies will be conducted under a fixed fee arrangement.We typically do
not utilize change orders in our work efforts. The potential for a change in budget could occur
if the goals, objectives, and expectations as agreed upon in the scope and project
management processes shift significantly. The use of the above proactive project
management elements is structured to avoid budgetary issues.
21 Tisch re BI ise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
no P-.m pppp��-
Section 5: Pricing
The table below summarizes our estimated consultant costs for the tasks reflected in our proposed scope
of work. This proposal is fixed fee and includes all project expenses. We have estimated these expenses
based on past project experience and do not expect the City to reimburse us for any costs we incur above
these estimates. TischlerBise invoices monthly, based on the percentage complete for each task.
PROPOSED FEE-INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
Project Team Member: Bise Herlands Griffin Total
Hourly Rate* $210 $190 $190 Hours Cost
Task 1:Project Initiation/Data Acquisition 8 0 0 8 $1,680
Task 2:Prepare Land UseAssumptions 8 2 24 34 $6,620
Task 3:Ascertain Demand Factors and Levels-of-Service for Necessary Public Services 16 4 24 44 $8,680
Task 4:Identify Capital Needs and Costs 16 4 40 60 $11,720
Task 5:Determine Need for Credits 8 2 12 22 $4,340
Task 6:Discuss Preliminary Methodologies and Policy Options 8 0 16 24 $4,720
Task 7:Prepare Infrastructure Improvement Plan(IIP) 8 4 40 52 $10,040
Task 8:Conduct Funding and Cash Flow Analysis 4 2 12 18 $3,500
Task 9:Complete Development Fee Methodology and FeeCalculations 4 2 16 22 $4,260
Task 10:Prepare Final Land Use Assumptions,lIP and Development Fee Report,Public Presentations 1 24 4 32 1 60 $11,880
Total Cost: 104 24 216 1 344 $67,440
"Hourly rates are inclusive of all costs.
TischlerBise 22
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
Tischler ise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
Principal Office
4701 Sangamore Road, Suite S240
Bethesda, MD 20816
301.320.6900 x12 (w)
carson@tischlerbise.com
Boise Office
999 W. Main Street#100
Boise, Idaho 83701
l
1
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DEVELOPMENT FE ,ES . UPDATE
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
MAY 5, 2025
Background
• State statutes ( § 9 -463 . 05 ) require that the Development
Fee Study : Land Use Assumptions and Infrastructure Plan
( 11P ) be updated every 5 years
• The project also includes an update to Volume II , Chapter 7
Development Fee Ordinance
What are Development Fees .?
• One-time fees imposed for new development
• Used to fund infrastructure and services impacted by
growth :
➢ Parks & Recreation
➢ Streets
➢ Police
➢ Li b ra ry
• Ensure that "growth pays for growth " rather than
burdening existing taxpayers
Why now .?
• Current fee structure is outdated ( last updated in 2022 )
• Costs of infrastructure has significantly increased
throughout the last few years
• Significant development changes since last update
• Risk of underfunding critical infrastructure
Key Impacts of Outdated Fees
• Taxpayers subsidize new development
• Developers may not pay their fair share
• Inadequate revenue for roads and public services
Fee Update Study
Analysis :
• Review existing fee structure
• Analyze infrastructure needs and costs
• Benchmark fees against peer cities
Benefits :
• Objectivity
• Expertise in finance, planning and law
• Stakeholder engagement and transparency
Goals of the Update
• Align fees with actual costs
• Ensure fairness and consistency
• Support sustainable, planned growth
• Comply with legal requirements
• Enhance capital planning and budgeting
accuracy
Estimated Timeline & Cost
• Data collection and stakeholder engagement
• Analysis and recommendations
• Public Hearings
• Council review and adoption
• Mandatory waiting periods per ARS § 9 -463 , 05
Estimated time of completion : October 2026
Cost :
$ 671440
'0
Recommendation
Staff recommends that City Council approve the
contract with TischlerBise and authorize
initiation of the development fee update process
Questions .?
CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROLL CALL Date:
Work Studys S Regular Special Audge RpJI Dy
5:710� E:$�w S:�I'Ol E:9:1! S�%oo 7%1v
CITY COUNCIL: Present Ab/excu Present Ab/excu Present Ab/excu
MAYOR WILSON ✓ _V
VICE MAYOR SCHROEDER ✓
COUNCILMEMBER CROSS
COUNCILMEMBER HECK V
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON /
COUNCILMEMBER NESSER V
COUNCILMEMBER SOLLER _
TOTAL I(r u
CITY STAFF: Present Ab/excu Present Ab/excu Present Ab/excu
City Manager Bryant Powell V V V
Assistant City Manager Matt Busby ✓ d V
Econ Director Ryan Kaup ✓ r/
Mrkt Comm Director Kayla Fulmer 1/ ✓
Management Analyst Rob Wisler ✓ ✓ t/ +,
City Clerk Evie McKinney (/ ✓ ✓
Deputy City Clerk Amy Greening
City Attorney Joel Stern ✓ ✓
Public Safety Director Michael Pooley V I/
Public Safety Assistant Johnny John
Dev Services Director Rudy Esquivias I/ ✓
Dev Sery Deputy Dir Sidney Urias 1/ �/ ✓
Building&Safety Mgr AdrianAlegria ✓
Senior Planner Kelsey Schattnik
Planner Erica Hernandez
Planner Nick Leftwich
Water District Director Mike Loggins
PW Director Ted Wolff
City Engineer Emile Schmid
PW Project Engineer Raquel Schatz
Municipal Judge Thomas McDermott
Finance Director Angelie Hawley I/
Library Director Pam Harrison I/
Park& Rec Director Liz Langenbach ✓ /� a
HR Director Anna McCray ✓
IT Director Dough -rthgen
Su 1l►van s
I i j2 i fill e�
City Council
VOTE — ROLL CALL
ITEM # 3 MEETING OF
MOTION BY: r I SECONDED BY:
T
NOTES:
y2 � DJuf/ 1/1/L l �iYt � �
YES YES ABSTAINED
CITY COUNCIL:
COUNCILMEMBER SOLLER
COUNCILMEMBER NESSER ,V
COUNCILMEMBER CROSS V
COUNCILMEMBERJOHNSON
VICE MAYOR SCHROEDER of
COUNCILMEMBER HECK
MAYOR WILSON
TOTAL
UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED
TOTAL
Vote Sheet 3
S
S:/5—Templates&Forms/Vote Call—City Council
City Council
VOTE - ROLL CALL
ITEM # ' a r a) MEETING OF ZD
MOTION BY: jo J SECONDED BY: 6 �S
NOTES:
N �-O
YES NO ABSTAINED
CITY COUNCIL:
COUNCILMEMBER CROSS V
COUNCILMEMBER SOLLER
COUNCILMEMBER HECK
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON
VICE MAYOR SCHROEDER
COUNCILMEMBER NESSER
MAYOR WILSON
TOTAL 00
UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED
TOTAL
SHEET 4
S:/5—Templates&Forms/Vote Call—City Council
Date:---,, (� CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION y
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
Please fill out completely and return to the City Clerk PRIOR to the conclusion of the City Manager's Report portion of the agenda.
I would like to speak on Agenda Item #:
I would like to speak on a Non-Agenda matter regarding: i
Do you wish to speak before Council on this item? Yes l/ No Only If Necessary
I am in favor of the proposed Item. I am opposed to the proposed Item.
RV\14 n L��
First Name Last Name
(PRINT)
kT {
1 \ 15 Q 6
r
Ad ress City Zip Code
Telephone Email address
This information will be used by staff for follow-up, if necessary. Speakers shall make comments directly to the Mayor and City Council
when called up to speak at the podium.
Note: Call to the Public comments have a three minute limit and Public Hearing comments have a five minute limit.
Consent for Minor to be Audio and/or Video Recorded:
I, , as the parent/guardian of (minor(s)), a minor(s), agree to allow said
minor(s) to appear and/or participate in the City of Apache Junction City Council Meeting. I further understand that this activity may be
audio and/or video recorded and I hereby consent to the minor being audio and/or video recorded during his/her participation with the
likelihood that their image will appear on cable TV and the internet video stream showing their participation. A.R.S. 's 1-602 (A)(9)_
Signature of Par t/Guardian Date
Ac e. v e d R�
�eg��a►� Cou��l ���.
I am expressing serious concerns regarding the proposed solar development projects and the associated
disposition of approximately 9,000 acres of public land currently managed by the State of Arizona. The
environmental, ecological, and public trust implications of these proposals warrant careful scrutiny and
robust public engagement.
Solar photovoltaic panels installed in Arizona are subject to extreme surface temperatures, often reaching
approximately 149°F. These conditions substantially exceed the optimal operational range of solar panels,
typically between 59°F and 95°F. Deployment of solar facilities under such conditions poses a direct
threat to local wildlife,particularly birds and bats native to the region, which may become disoriented by
the reflective surfaces of the panels, mistaking them for bodies of water. This confusion could result in
substantial and irreversible harm to these vulnerable species.
Furthermore, the maintenance of large-scale solar installations requires significant water resources.
Industry estimates indicate that approximately 20 gallons of water per megawatt-hour(MWh) are
necessary for routine panel cleaning. Given Arizona's ongoing water scarcity challenges, the additional
demand associated with these facilities will place further strain on already limited water supplies.
Of additional concern is the proposed development of battery storage facilities, which may require
millions of gallons of water daily for manufacturing and operational purposes. The specific sources of this
water have not been disclosed. Large-scale battery production facilities, or gigafactories, have substantial
water footprints, and there is currently no effective recycling method for lithium-ion batteries at scale.
This raises critical questions about the long-term environmental stewardship and waste management
strategies associated with these projects.
Equally troubling is the proposed conveyance of approximately 9,000 acres of public land—an area
equivalent to 6,000 to 7,000 football fields. The state has traditionally refrained from selling or disposing
of public land to individual,but only to developers or companies. Therefore,this proposed action
demands full transparency regarding the parties who stand to benefit financially, as well as a thorough
analysis of how this action aligns with the public interest and the states mission.
This will so place this solar and storage project over an underground aquifer and if any of these batteries
leak it will be devastating to the environment and the people all the way to Tuson.
Given the magnitude of the potential impacts, I respectfully urge the State and other relevant authorities
to halt the building of this plant.
THIS PROJECT NEEDS TO BE HALTED IMMEDIATELY
Please come to the Pinal County Zoning Board meeting to oppose this construction. We need your voice.
Donna Carr
i_�
Date: 42 S CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
Please fill out completely and return to the City Clerk PRIOR to the conclusion of the City Manager's Report portion of the agenda.
I would like to speak on Agenda Item #:
I would like to speak on a Non-Agenda matter regarding:
Do you wish to speak before Council on this item? Yes No Only If Necessary
am in favor of the proposed Item. I am opposed to the proposed Item.
I f
1'1-e c, ,.e e e [L
First Name Last Name
(PRINT)
13 � 7
Address City Zip Code
S03" 7 G `-I
Telephone Email address
This information will be used by staff for follow-up, if necessary. Speakers shall make comments directly to the Mayor and City Council
when called up to speak at the podium.
Note: Call to the Public comments have a three minute limit and Public Hearing comments have a five minute limit.
Consent for Minor to be Audio and/or Video Recorded:
I, , as the parent/guardian of (minor(s)), a minor(s), agree to allow said
minor(s) to appear and/or participate in the City of Apache Junction City Council Meeting. I further understand that this activity may be
audio and/or video recorded and I hereby consent to the minor being audio and/or video recorded during his/her participation with the
likelihood that their image will appear on cable TV and the internet video stream showing their participation. A.R.S. § 1-602 (A)(9)_
Signature of Parent/Guardian Date
Date:-, r� CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
Please fill out completely and return to the City Clerk PRIOR to the conclusion of the City Manager's Report portion of the agenda.
would like to speak on Agenda Item #:
I would like to speak on a Non-Agenda matter regarding:
Do you wish to speak before Council on this item? Yes No Only If Necessary
I am in favor of the proposed Item. I am opposed to the proposed Item.
First Name Last Name
(PRINT)
3
Address f City Zip Code
3;
elk
Telephone Email address
This information will be used by staff for follow-up, if necessary. Speakers shall make comments directly to the Mayor and City Council
when called up to speak at the podium.
Note: Call to the Public comments have a three minute limit and Public Hearing comments have a five minute limit.
Consent for Minor to be Audio and/or Video Recorded:
1, , as the parent/guardian of (minor(s)), a minor(s), agree to allow said
minor(s) to appear and/or participate in the City of Apache Junction City Council Meeting. I further understand that this activity may be
audio and/or video recorded and I hereby consent to the minor being audio and/or video recorded during his/her participation with the
likelihood that their image will appear on cable TV and the internet video stream showing their participation. A.R.S. � 1-602 (A)(9)_
Signature of Parent/Guardian Date
CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION
Mayor's Script
,I Regular Meeting
Tuesday, May 6, 2025
A. CALL TO ORDER
I would like to call this City of Apache Junction Council Meeting of May 6, 2025, to order
and ask everyone to put their cell phones on silent.
B. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The in oc n will be led by qlul� & the pledge by Councilmember
C. ROLL CALL
Roll call
D. CONSENT AGENDA
As a reminder—All items under the Consent Agenda will be approved with one motion. If
a Councilmember wishes to remove an item for further discussion, the request will be
made prior to approving the consent agenda and will be moved to New Business.
1. Consideration of acceptance of agenda.
2. Consideration of approval of minutes of the regular meeting of April 15, 2025.
3. Consideration of approval of a Telecommunications License Agreement between
Flying Bull Internet, LLC (dba Novos Fiber) and the City of Apache Junction.
Do I have a motion on the consent agenda? Wait for Motion and 2nd
Roll Call
E. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
4. Proclamation designating May 2025, as "Building Safety Month."
Adrian to accept
5. Proclamation designating the week of May 4 through May 10, 2025, as
"Professional Municipal Clerks Week"
Evie to accept
6. Proclamation designating May 17, 2025, as "Kids to Parks Day."
Liz to accept
F. REGIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL UPDATES
7. Regional intergovernmental meeting updates from Council.
G. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
8. City Manager's Report Bryant to report
9. Presentation and update on the Youth Advisory Council. Bryant to report
10. Economic Development update with director, Ryan Kaup. Ryan to report
11.Announcement of Current Events. Eli to report
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
I. OLD BUSINESS
J. NEW BUSINESS
K. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF
12. Direction to staff for a text amendment of the City Code regarding fortune telling
businesses.
Nick to report
Do I have a motion on the Council Direction to Staff??
Wait for Motion and 2nd
Roll Call
L. SELECTION OF MEETING DATES, TIMES, LOCATIONS AND PURPOSES
M. CALL TO PUBLIC
I would like to remind everyone that the Call to the Public is a courtesy and not
required by law.
It is a time for the public to express requests, communications, comments and
suggestions.
Request to speak forms must be completed and handed to the city clerk before the
end of the city manager's report.
All issues shall be presented in a professional manner without personal attacks.
Under the open meeting law the COUNCIL CANNOT ENGAGE IN DISCUSSION on the
issues presented, but may respond to criticism and may direct staff to follow up
with the speaker directly and/or place this matter on a future agenda for council
discussion.
There is a three-minute limit for each speaker.
Does Council have any requests of staff to follow up on?
N. ADJOURNMENT— I adjourn this meeting.
PI
5.06.2025
Consent Agenda Item Nos 1-3
1 MOVE THAT the consent agenda be accepted as presented.
Item No. 12 — Council Direction To Staff
MOVE THAT direction to staff be given to review and consider updates to the Apache
Junction City Code, Volume 1, Chapter 8: Business: regulations concerning fortune
telling businesses and the permit fees prescribed for them.
c
f Public Works Department
Wt Ole-Al�IA6;c%
Home of the Superstition Mountains
Mtn
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 6, 2025
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Through: Bryant Powell, City Manager
Ted Wolff, Public Works Director
From: Emile Schmid, P.E., City Engineer
Subject: Consideration of approval of a Telecommunications License Agreement between
Flying Bull Internet, LLC (dba Novos Fiber) and the City of Apache Junction
The City of Apache Junction owns public streets and alley rights-of-way ("ROW") within the
corporate limits of the city that are designated for use by utility providers for installation,
operation and repair of public utilities pursuant to licenses or other agreements with the city.
This standard license agreement between Flying Bull Internet, LLC (dba Novos Fiber) and the
City of Apache Junction will allow Novos Fiber to install and maintain their telecommunication
facilities within city ROW per the agreement which outlines the telecommunications rights,
duties and fees.
The Public Works Department is respectfully requesting City Council to approve this
Telecommunications License Agreement between Flying Bull Internet, LLC (dba Novos Fiber)
and the City of Apache Junction for the installation and maintenance of telecommunications
facilities, and to authorize the City Engineer to sign the agreement on behalf of the city.
575 E. Baseline Avenue, Apache Junction, AZ 85119
Tel (480) 982-1055
5.06.2025
Consent Agenda Item Nos 1-3
1 MOVE THAT the consent agenda be accepted as presented,
AND
Authorize City Engineer Emile Schmidt to execute the agreement with Flying Bull
Internet, LLC, as listed under Item #3.