The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1981 09.16 City Council Regular Agenda I U ¢b'� <° ?; Z 'IP/Z0NP COity o GApache 09unction DATE: MEMORANDUM TO: Director of Public Works FROM: Operations Supervisor REGARDING: Test Section Results Attached please find the results of the test section on 16th Avenue, between Ironwood and San Marcos. DD/cc 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 'oh. 7'mb*7-81 16th AVENUE TEST SECTION 16th Avenue between Ironwood and San Marcos 1st Section - San Marcos west 1/3 towards Ironwood. Ripped - water only - rolled two hours - three men - one blade - one water truck - one roller 2nd Section - Middle section Bladed dry - one man - one blade - thirty minutes 3rd Section - last 1/3 west Ripped - water and enzymes - rolled two hours - three men - one blade - one water truck - one roller * Only enough to make 70% strength on enzymes. A"` 16th AVENUE TEST SECTION 16th Avenue between Ironwood and San Marcos Cost Per Section Section 1 - Dry Section Blade .5 hours at $40.00 an hour $ 20.00 TOTAL COST $ 20.00 Section 2 - Water Only Section Blade 2 hours at $40.00 an hour $ 80.00 Water truck 2 hours at $30.00 an hour 60.00 Roller and Operator 2 hours at $14. 69 an hour 29.38 TOTAL COST $ 169.38 Section 3 - Water And Enzymes Blade 2 hours at $40.00 an hour $ 80.00 Water truck 2 hours at $30.00 an hour 60.00 Roller and Operator 2 hours at $14. 69 an hour 29.86 Enzymes 3.5 gallons at $9.40 a gallon 32.90 TOTAL COST $ 202.76 7-27-81 0 U N Rf 'Li 0 0 0 H TEST SECTION Section 1 i Section 2 Section 3 16th Water 16th Dry Water & Enz. 16th I 4 4 O U N ro G 0 0 0 H 7-27-81 Aim. 16th AVENUE TEST SECTION 16th Avenue between Ironwood and San Marcos BEFORE STARTING PROJECT —r i 9 ^t i ::";',"• S; €` jr Fn t t, s y i .,ra r_ „�,� ''g'T' rfi'I K H� e.e iP.,„,z 7 iiiL 7FP.2 7 Section 1 - To be ripped, watered Section 2 - To be bladed dry. bladed and rolled. :. 4 ' ;`' r : art + � '+ .«�" Section 3 - To be ripped, enzymes bladed and rolled. `r $ I 7.2 /' 7-81 16th AVENUE TEST SECTION 16th Avenue between Ironwood and San Marcos AFTER COMPLETION • • X^r f Section 1 - Water Section 2 - Dry Section 3 - Enzymes AM Ilk Oink. 16th AVENUE TEST SECTION 16th Avenue between Ironwood and San Marcos JULY 28, 1981 Section 1: The watered section shows little wear. Section 1 has more dust than Section 3, but less than Section 2. Section 2: Dry section is starting to pothole and some wash boarding is evident. Quite dusty. Section 3: Enzymes and water shows the least wear and dust of the three sections. JULY 29, 1981 Section 1: Still in excellent graded condition with some dust. Section 2: Potholes and wash-boarding more than the other sections and is quite dusty. Section 3: In appearance the only noticable difference is the dust. It is a little less dusty than Section 1, and there is a very noticable difference in it and Section 2. 7-29-81 Amok 16th AVENUE TEST SECTION 16th Avenue between Ironwood and San Marcos Truck Traveling At 20 MPH 4 �. • }. } `ems x �r 3,%`� ��Y, • • ,t ^.,u$u, .,� < • .i. I / 2 Section 1 - Watered Section 2 - Dry FY. • • ` qq k �l $ ~ s # v Section 1 - Watered and Enzymes. to � J 16th AVENUE TEST SECTION 16th Avenue between Ironwood and San Marcos JULY 31, 1981 Section 1: Road is dusty and starting to wash-board. Section 2: Road is very dusty and is considerably wash-boarding. Section 3: Dusty but still in good bladed condition. Pictures taken of all sections on August 4, 1981 Section 1 : Wash-boarding and dusty. Section 2: Very wash-boardy and dusty. Section 3: Dusty but still smooth. /IN /11S 8-04-81 16th AVENUE TEST SECTION 16th Avenue between Ironwood and San Marcos AUGUST 4, 1981 r ya r „ u�' s� - Tom. _ . 3 . _ 1 i $74:0 J Section 1 - Watered Section 2 - Dry #_ .. . . ,i -.--�r .-..,..... - ro :r,:: ''''''.�_ ti- ,....14,E Section 3 - Watered and S da.- Enzymes. 1 16th AVENUE TEST SECTION 16th Avenue between Ironwood and San Marcos AUGUST 10, 1981 All sections have been changed due to the rain. Test results should be terminated at this point, in order to get an accurate report. Therefore, I will postpone reporting, until I can see what the results the rain has had on the enzymes. AUGUST 20, 1981 Section 3: This section shows some wash-board effect when you leave Ironwood entering the test section. This is understandable because of vehicle stops and acceler- ations when one street enters another. Once you pass the first few feet the road smooths out showing ex- cellent compaction. It does have dust, but of the three sections it is the smoothest and the least dusty. Section 2: This section is very dusty and has a bad wash-board effect. Out of the three it .is worst in every situation. Section 1 : This section also shows the wash-board effect when entering section from San Marcos. The effect re- mains throughout the test section, although, it is not as bad as Section 2. Over All Evaluation. Section 1 is good for one week, possibly one and a half weeks before needing some touch-up work. Section 2 is good for a half week before needing some touch-up work. Section 3 is still in decent shape. ( 5-6 weeks) 8-20-81 16th AVENUE TEST SECTION 16th Avenue between Ironwood and San Marcos AUGUST 20, 1981 r .y • , .; • rx s. R y.. 1. 4 4/ Section 1 - Watered Section 2 - Dry allftwr Section 3 - Watered and Enzymes. 1 IMP. AsIlk 1iz qR/ZONP `Oity o (94pache 09unction DATE: September 15, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: Director of Public Works FROM: Operations Supervisor REGARDING: Test Section Results Attached please find the results of the test section on Southern Avenue. The results are not final yet because the test is not complete. DD/cc 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 Au. .r SOUTHERN TEST SECTION Section #1 Calcium Chloride Section #2 Waste Oil Section #3 PDOK Section #4 Enzymes Test sections were each ripped, bladed and rolled. The section consist of 1/4 mile on Southern Avenue between Idaho Road and Winchester. It was divided into four sections each one being 330' long. They are to be ripped to a depth of six (6) inches before applying the test material. The test began August 27, 1981 at 7:15 a.m. AUGUST 27, 1981 PICTURES OF COMPLETED SECTIONS Section #1 - Calcium Chloride Section #2 - Waste Oil x— ___ xx \ i I . .I SZI e R, Section #3 - PDOK Section #4 - Enzymes • ...1r • 1 9 1 i COST PER SECTION Water and Enzymes Enzymes 8.5 gallons at 9.40 a gallon $ 79.90 Roller and operator 2 hours at 18.90 37.80 Blade and operator 2 hours at 40.00 80.00 Water truck and operator 2 hours at 30.00 60.00 Total $ 257. 70 *Cost per mile $4,123.20 PDOK PDOK 616 gallons and sprayer truck $ 733.53 Roller and operator 2 hours at 18.90 37.80 Blade and operator 2 hours at 40. 00 80.00 Total $ 851.33 *Cost per mile $13,621.28 Waste Oil Waste Oil 616 gallons and sprayer truck $ 336.67 Roller and operator 2 hours at 18.90 37.80 Blade and operator 2 hours at 40.00 80.00 Total $ 454.47 *Cost per mile $7,271.52 Calcium Chloride and Water Calcium Chloride 3600 pounds at 24.80 per 100 lbs. $ 892.80 Roller and operator 2 hours at 18.90 37.80 Blade and operator 2 hours at 40.00 80.00 Water truck and operator 2 hours at 30.00 60.00 Total $1,070.60 *Cost per mile $17,129.60 *If a stable road bed is already established 1/3 of this amount can be used. The cost then would be $5,709.87. SOUTHERN TEST SECTION AUGUST 27, 1981 Section I The calcium chloride is easily applied and looks damp even when dry. It has a very hard film on top of the surface. It gives the appearance of brown concrete. Section II The waste oil takes some time to soak into the surface. After it soaked in, it was rolled again. Automobiles are showing lit- tle effect on it. Section III This section took the longest to apply. We put the PDOK down at 9:45 but were unable to roll it until 2.30 in the afternoon. The maximum depth of penetration was one inch. Section IV The enzymes are easily applied. It shows good soil stabiliza- tion at this time. Both Section I and IV shows maximum pene- tration. eN SOUTHERN TEST SECTION SEPTEMBER 1, 1981 Section I Of the four sections this sections shows the least wear and also the least amount of dust. On a scale of one to ten, one being very little, it would be a one. Section II This section is starting to pot hole from the traffic. On the same scale it would be a three. Section III Of the four sections this section shows the greatest wear. The PDOK is for dust control and shows no soil stabilization. On the same scale it would be a three due to the amount of pot holes in it. Section IV Of the four test sections this section shows the most dust. It would be a five plus on the scale. SEPTEMBER 1, 1981 PICTURES OF THE SECTIONS Section #1 - Calcium Chloride �� `� %- MTV' 4� `.� i r 10,-.. w Note the damp look six days �• -. after the application. Also no dust. ".3 cr4.4 • Section ##2 - Waste Oil • n nor Note the light colored places in the surface, these are pot `b+ holes starting. der? 20 eN 00'1 I SEPTEMBEK 1, 1981 PICTURES OF THE SECTIONS Section #3 - PDOK i 4 t r-�' T • • '" 3 ` `� ' Note the light places the same *,r." I p '4 % '; � as Section II. "Sy�r.g� r s •-•r'0 . L1 erg- Y`": tx y -;naK" r 3 , Via, i- st ij 3 Section !4 - Enzymes z4: ® " nk �: '� = Note the dust behind the truck. iC. " . ATM.. 4 €.. ,- Ammik Aft. SOUTHERN TEST SECTION SEPTEMBER 8, 1981 All sections are progressively showing wear and dust. Section I is show- ing very little wear and only a trace of dust. The others are showing wear at a fast pace. With section four showing the greatest amount of dust by far and section three the greatest amount of wear. If they were rated by dust control, at this time it would be: 1. Calcium Chloride 2. Waste Oil 3. PDOK 4. Enzymes Rated by wear: 1. Calcium Chloride 2. Enzymes 3. Waste Oil 4. PDOK SOUTHERN TEST SECTION SEPTEMBER 14, 1981 All sections have been watered for a few days. This was done by the contractors working at the Junior High School without my per- mission. This has greatly effected the study of the test. It has the greatest effect on sections two, three and four. Most of the PDOK has been broken up and carried off. At this time calcium chloride and waste oil are the best ilk /IS SEPTEMB.... 14, 1981 PICTURES OF THE SECTIt,.4S Section #r`1 - Calcium Chloride Section #2 - Waste Oil ir1P.,0_..1.:. i --.,P-.4.',...'-..'.,,:,:.,,',4 `' n A ., j n 1 1 �.��'= y y { /i 9 y 'rr' S' +o •` '> 1 y "?'}*, .r• t1j ''T,,yT✓ •lye, +' • '.. !. - 4.y ra- `Q: k. r z� • I.' _., w y fi .,. .,,Or. lttie .-4,- i r"w;. Iiv k • 1 i I g - -- I Section #3 - PDOK Section #4 - Enzymes ...UN•v , :-.' .,,....o., _, , . ' ' -.- 1 "wwilltravver.*..... ,J , r b 3. �f-d"'p' ` F t ? ; ; mot >;' ec y r ,fit, .�3t. . . .it us .� .. . .,>. , oink PADS SPRINTS HOta.OWNTi S ASSOCIATION APACFP: JUNCTION, A i'T PTA 85220 September 12, 191 City of d ache Junction Idaho Ave. ;,cache Junction, Arizona, 85220 ?tt^t tiding De-rt. •ir. Leo Nrn ier De'tr i r. ;ra:'ier: The honeow-ors in the ?also Spxz'in;s suba ision ,ire very upeet ,*ith the trash blotting frouid from constr+;otton sites, vainly Morin* fiarrItrnstiln. Many residents have called 14'. ilorvak, and talked to him in person, n'rt Vfze only told ho is too busy to pick up tray . '•onsequentl;;, coriiont r s, r co:LhrE paper, --)ester cups, etc are li.ttorinm, our area. erhap2 when ar. Morvak, or others, are given a building permit, they should ho told they are responsible .'or their litter and t hat they are requested to pro lido a litter wagon to "police" up their construction areas. They should also be rentnded that we to have a litter 1 tw. !o )ul:1 lilt: this matter given your is etc;:i?eta attention. Yotir very truly fl it:11711%ft, eres1lent o, ors p s4.ociation fob t ta. r ll rke, Mayor N. Hill, V 1ce.&yor T. Daaiano, ounci t / Tiuriso s Cornet ' . venan&el, Scttn7 r'i ty 1*anaaer !'o"':a:T :onst►raiot i.on File e AN ilk._ i► i� e V ,, t , \\\,,, AiRizoo• (=Oity o f Cipache unction September 10, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGER 41A , FROM: ,ALA-a,--JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: FOUR CORNERS REGIONAL COMMISSION Attached is the Four Corners Regional Commission (FCRC) quarterly report approval by letter, dated September 2, 1981 , for the period of June through August. Your attention should be directed to comments made by FCRC with regard to amendment and the final report date for submission of all reports to that organization. For your information, the FCRC will be out of existence after September 30, 1981 . However, an interim non-profit corporation will manage the affairs until all projects are concluded. JWG rin Attch. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 `c V CUR1y�S D.,astA.. rid o� cd' * �o *=* �¢o� �E+ )= OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-2350 ALAMO S E ,SUITE 303,ALBUQUERQUE NEW MEXICO 87106 rE" 0 AREA CODE (505) 766-2990 %NaL com cO September 2, 1981 Mr. Joseph W. Gero Director of Planning City of Apache Junction P.O. Box K 1001 North Idaho Road Apache Junction, Arizona 85220 SUBJECT: APACHE JUNCTION GENERAL PLAN SELECTED ELEMENTS FCRC No. 101-811-082-2 Dear Mr. Gero: The Fifth Progress Report on this project has been reviewed and accepted. Scheduled payment of $2,500 was processed to day; you should receive your check in approximately four weeks. We have noted your request for a time extension and reporting amendment to the Grant agreement. A formal amendment will not be necessary. Under the provisions of OMB Circular A-102 you are allowed 90 days following the expiration of the Grant to submit all required reports . Should you wish to circulate the draft reports in December, you have approval from this office to do so. We will not require, however, that you submit a formal progress report at that time. After local circulation of the draft reports in December, we feel that submission of an overall draft final report should be made to this office no later than February 12, 1982. This will allow us to review and approve the reports for final sub- mission by your requested date of March 12, 1982. Thank you for your attention to this project. Yours truly, i.. Dick Meyer Program Officer DM:sg Enclosure cc- Federal Cochairman' s Office State Alternate � .`.t �/ ]r / 5t1i / III SCOPE OF W0m` .\ The Grantee is following the proposed Scope of Wotk far this DrnjeLt, | � / \ . / \ IV. BUDuGFT | . � \ Expendrtuies arewItnzu Grant lim.ta±ione. � v �PROGRESS ^_ Progiei�s i,a satisfactory | | VII. XI-Ir0DM[NTS \ | The Grantee is authorized by informal agzeemeut to delay aubouso»oo of the draft final zr--port | to no later tuau rebzuazy 12, 1982 The rzoal BeDnzt would then be due by March lZ , 1982, ' but in ro ca-so later than march 31, 1983' . . FE-VIIINLD AND ACCEPTED BY: CONCURRED WITH. ��---' �-&rou��-- Dzrecu/r ozok /1eyers - pfoqrum officer Da to nia u uiggs - Exm ve slg i | i / / ! CRC EVALUATION OI PROGRESS/FINAL REPORTS ; , ' -,. , tp. ECTTON T Date : 9/07/81l Project Name : APACHE JUNCTION GENERAIL PLAN Monitor • Dick Meyers_ Project Number' 101-811-082-2 State (s) :Artzona DISTRIBUTION : (please list number of copies sent) FCC Monitor Other Pt= _ .Alternate (s) Program Evaluator Other 1 1/ CONSTRUCTION START: i—` PLANNED '• —� ACTUAL : --' t 1 OI AL AMOUN1 OF GRANT $ 53 000 . 00 NUMBER OF PROGRESS REPORTS --� ( F Draft of Final + Final Report III of Report Report Report Repol: t i Report Report j Draft 1 Final -- �_ IV o r k #, 1 # 2 # 3 �'? 5 t' finali 12oport I . REPORTS : Date Due. . , . , 0 . , . > , 9/1/80 12/1/8 3/1 /81611/81 9/1 /8.I _.___..... __-12/01/81 _12/)1/811 Date Received a o 0 0 0 4 . , 0 9/11/8072/8/80 2/28/83 6/01./8l 9/02/81 -- _ 1' Date Evaluated, . , . , . , _ , 9/16/80L2/12/S' 2/26/.. 16/05/8t9/02/8] �_�- -L___ -- *Report Delayed „ . II , PA\MFNTS : Amount due upon execution $ 30 , 000 00 Amount due upon acceptance of report 5 , 000 5 000 5,000 $3, 000 $2 , Son $2., .(0- Amount due upon receipt — f of I anal $ 2 , 500 . 00 eP .. 16, qR/ZOO' C4ac/ e 09unctian .�. CITY COUNCIL u REGULAR MEETING ..\ . AGENDA SEPTEMBER 16, 1981 7:00 P.M. 6:00 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION —INVOCATION 4 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE r/ROLL CALL ✓(1) ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA -2) ACCEPTANCE OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1981 6) ACCEPTANCE OF THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 4, 1981 ✓AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS L./ CALL TO THE PUBLIC V CITY MANAGER'S REPORT PUBLIC HEARINGS 1/ `T' PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 109, (PZ-15-81) , ARMSBY OLD BUSINESS LAS( APPOINTMENT OF PERSONNEL BOARD (tabled item) NEW BUSINESS L/(5) PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 111, AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 84, HEALTH COMMISSION (FIRST READING) ,,,-(7) PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 112, PROVIDING FOR CHANGES IN PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE CITY CODE (FIRST READING) 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 c *` v'U) PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 113, CREATION OF PERSONNEL BOARD (FIRST READING) t- (9) INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT — PINAL COUNTY SHERIFF C.i,i(10) EXECUTIVE SESSION, OCTOBER 7, 1981 V— /�'�/ %3v [, '") INFORMATION AND REPORTS (COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS) Asimik REQUESTS OF COUNCIL (12) ADJOURNMENT ROLL CALL ROLL CALL IPRESENT ! ABSENT MAYOR CLARKE t j r VICE-MAYOR HILL ✓ }. COUNCILMAN SHARKS �/ f COUNCILMAN STEELSMITH vy • COUNCILMAN HUDSON COUNCILMAN DAMIANO COUNCILMAN EIDSON f TOTAL • STAFF PRESENT CITY MANAGER CITY CLERK DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFTEY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY ATTORNEY OTHER ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF f'' ,6 MOTION BY: \\I 'N SECONDED BY: J C- YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN HUDSON v` COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILVI STEELSMITH COUNCILMAN DAfMIANO ✓ COUNCILIAN EIDSON f VICE 'MAYOR HILL ✓ MAYOR CLARF ►� UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO , 1 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED, oak Aar, CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 2, 1981 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on September 2, 1981, at the Apache Junction Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Clarke called the meeting to order at 7 00 p m INVOCATION Councilman Shanks led the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Hill led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmen Present Councilman Steelsmith, Councilman Shanks, Councilman Damiano, Councilman Eidson, Councilman Hudson, Vice Mayor Hill , Mayor Clarke Staff Present• City Manager, G Ray Lee Director of Administrative Services/ City Clerk, Marlis J Davis Director of Public Safety, Bill McDaniel Director of Planning, Joe Gero Director of Public Works, Rich Broman Others Present Ms Midge Conway 902 South Ocotillo Drive Apache Junction, Arizona 85220 Ms Jackie Trevino 55 South Outpost Road Apache Junction, Arizona 85220 Mr Jerry Burgess 349 South Saguaro Apache Junction, Arizona 85220 Ms Priscilla Gardner 5640 East Shiprock Apache Junction, Arizona 85220 Mr. Greg Johnson PRC Toups 4131 North 24th Street Phoenix, Arizona 85016 ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT TIE AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. Councilman Damiano seconded the motion VOTE• Unanimous 0114 The motion carried ACCEPTANCE OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1981 ) Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 19, 1981, BE AND HEREBY ARE, ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. /IN Councilman Eidson seconded the motion VOTE. Unanimous The motion carried AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Clarke presented a Certificate of Appreciation to Ms Priscilla Gardner, advisory member of the Airport Commission, as a token of appreciation Mayor Clarke stated "Over many months Ms Gardner has assisted the Airport Commission in many ways to gather airport information and in meeting with persons interested in airport development and industrial development Her enthusiasm and energy is to be an example of active participation. Priscilla Gardner we appreciate your efforts Thank you very much " Joe Gero, Director of Planning, introduced Mr. Greg Johnson, Assistant to Mr John Stansel , who gave an outline on the proposed future Master Plan for the City Hall Complex It was outlined in five year increments, for twenty years. Councilman Damiano asked that Director of Planning, Joe Gero, reiterate that this is long-range planning only Joe Gero stated that there were no funds available at the present for this extensive plan, and this is extremely long-range. He also stated that once the City has a Master Plan, as the Council sees fit and as the opportunitites arise, we may find sources to build one or more of the particular projects at a time, and when it is completed the projects will all relate, and follow government standards. Councilman Damiano asked that Director of Planning, Joe Gero, explain to the public the $54,000.00 grant Joe Gero stated that the Master Plan project costs approximately $4,000.00 This was an obligation of the City to perform /.11N this as part of the Four Corners Grant If the City does not have plans for projects, they cannot compete for grants to help with these projects CALL TO THE PUBLIC Ms Midge Conway suggested setting up a liaison committee to contact neighbors around the City to find out their problems and suggestions. This �1,..,,x• ..«;:.- 4n,, � >: committee could meet once a month to relate their findings. She felt that citizens would be more apt to talk to their neighbors than to a City Council member, and this would help attitudes toward the City of Apache Junction Ms Jackie Trevino, a former employee of the City submitted a complaint regarding the Personnel Policy enforcement Mr Jerry Burgess, a former councilman, stated that he was and is dis- appointed that the Councilmen do not take an active part in writing the Personnel Policy Mr Burgess also stated that according to Ordinance 12, the City Manager and all City employees must live within the City limits, stating it should be enforced Councilman Eidson stated that the Councilmen have been lax regarding the Personnel Policy, but will improve on it in the future REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE TWO SEPTEMBER 2, 1981 /1 /44,4 Councilman Hudson stated that the Attorney had advised not to speak on the subject, but he did want to state that whenthe new Ordinance is finished, he would like the Policy to be circulated among Personnel Departments in other companies to add any suggestions. Councilman Shanks stated that last year a Committee was appointed to review the Personnel Policy, and that she has been the only one to submit recommendations. Councilman Steelsmith stated that mistakes can be made, and rN problems cannot be found until they are tested. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager, Ray Lee, called upon the Acting Director of Finance, Rosemary Montgomery, to give the monthly Financial Report FINANCIAL REPORT - AUGUST 1981 "This evening I would like to bring you a financial report indicating the state of the City's finances at the close of the second month of the fiscal year 1981-82 The audit by Haymore and Busby is in its conclusion and I have tentatively scheduled the audit report to be presented on your agenda for the September 16th Council meeting. My following report this evening reflects expenditures, revenues and encumbrances for the month of August It states bank balances as of August 31, 1981. DURING THE MONTH OF AUGUST, THE CITY EXPENDED FROM THE GENERAL FUND $128,721 85 RECEIVED REVENUES OF $143,751 52 ENCUMBRANCES ON THE GENERAL FUND ARE $ 13,692 00 BANK BALANCE IS $ 62,053 04 I will recommend to the City Manager that $40,000 00 from this account be placed in a 30 day certificate THE GENERAL FUND SAVINGS ACCOUNT EARNING 51% INTEREST HAS A BALANCE OF $ 427 19 A COURT BONDS HOLDING ACCOUNT HAS A CHECKING ACCOUNT BALANCE OF $1,728.00 A HIGHWAY USERS CHECKING, WHICH INCIDENTALLY, IS EARMARKED FOR ROAD MAINTAINENCE AND IMPROVEMENT EXPENDED $ 8,350 30 RECEIVED REVENUES OF $16,972 87 ENCUMBRANCES ON HIGHWAY USERS ARE $ 9,768.00 BANK BALANCE OF $26,860 00 [_ THE HIGHWAY USERS SAVINGS DRAWING 51% INTEREST HAS A BALANCE OF $ 553.44 THE PUBLIC WORKS RESERVE FUND HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED FROM A CHECKING ACCOUNT TO A 51% INTEREST BEARING SAVINGS ACCOUNT. THIS ACCOUNT IS THE HOLDING FUND FOR THE SWIMMING POOL DONATIONS EXPENDITURES ARE $ 0 REVENUES $ 383 20 ENCUMBRANCES $ 0 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE THREE SEPTEMBER 2, 1981 BANK BALANCE OF $1,958.05 THE GRANTS IN TRUST CHECKING ACCOUNT EXPENDITURES $ 0 TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO IDLE FUNDS DEPOSIT OF $10,000.00 REVENUES OF $ 7,591 10 /r', {- OBLIGATION OF $ 2,900.00 BANK BALANCE OF $12,672 66 It is my recommendation that $10,000 00 from this account also be placed in the Idle Funds Deposit drawing a high interest rate THE FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING ACCOUNT EXPENDED $ 4,885 34 TRANSFER TO IDLE FUNDS $15,000 00 CREDITS OF $ 1,166.46 ENCUMBRANCES OF $ 1,031 00 BANK BALANCE OF $10,486.78 THE PAYROLL ACCOUNT EXPENDED $57,091 56 TRANSFER OF FUNDS C PAYROLL TO $57,091 56 BANK BALANCE OF $36,355 36 Presently the City's Idle Funds Deposit is in a 30 day certificate invested with the Copper State Bank. The City has $175,000.00 drawing 18 27% interest. "111%, It will earn $2,664 38 for this 30 day period This certificate will fall due on September 20th and on this date $225,000 00 will be placed through a bid process in a 30 day certificate. The City remains free of bonding or indebtedness other than normal operating expense Mayor Clarke called a ten minute recess The meeting reconvened at 7 54 p m PUBLIC HEARINGS None. OLD BUSINESS APPOINTMENT OF PERMANENT PERSONNEL BOARD Councilman Hudson MOVED THAT BE IT II RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AN D CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA, THAT ITEM NO 3, APPOINTMENT OF THE PERSONNEL BOARD BE AND HEREBY IS, REMOVED FROM THE TABLE FOR ACTION REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE FOUR : ... . . .. SEPTEMBER 2 1981 Councilman Shanks seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. Councilman Hudson MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE FOLLOWING PERSONS BE AND HEREBY ARE, APPOINTED TO THE I� PERSONNEL BOARD. JEAN CLIFT, MILDRED CONWAY, TERMS TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 2, 1982, AND MARVIN HALBERT, SUSAN STAGGS,GARY COLLINS, TERMS TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 2, 1983 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PREVIOUSLY APPOINTED INTERIM PERSONNEL BOARD BE AND HEREBY IS, DISSOLVED Councilman Steelsmith seconded the motion VOTE In Favor Councilman Steelsmith, Councilman Eidson, Councilman Hudson Opposed Councilman Damiano, Councilman Shanks, Vice Mayor Hill Abstained• Mayor Clarke (possible conflict) The motion failed APPOINTMENT OF THE CHARTER GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE Councilman Steelsmith MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT MR JACK TANDY, MS LILLIAN CASTRO, MS. ELEANOR LEWIS, MR. HARRY r POLOMSKY, MR JERRY MICHAELS, MR. DICK RABIDUE, MS MILDRED CONWAY, MR ROBERT LAPLANT, MS. BERTHA ROGERS, MS. ROSALINE DEBNAM, MR TOM SANSONI, MR ROBERT ( SCHAUSTER, MR SAM GARDOM, MR JOHN SCHMIDT, MR. CLARENCE ZEHNLE, MR. FRANK JIMENEZ, MS PEGGY BALJO, MR DALE BURFIEND BE AND HEREBY ARE, APPOINTED TO SERVE ON THE CHARTER GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE ADVANTAGES OR DISADVANTAGES OF THE CHARTER FORM OF GOVERNMENT IN APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT A REPORT BE RENDERED NO LATER THAN MARCH 17, 1982. Vice Mayor Hill seconded the motion /^ VOTE In Favor Councilman Hudson, Councilman Steelsmith, Councilman Damiano, Councilman Eidson, Vice Mayor Hill , Mayor Clarke Opposed Councilman Shanks The motion carried. Councilman Hudson called a point of order stating the item appointing the Personnel Board needs to be tabled, changed or approved. City Attorney, Arnold Hirsch suggested that the item be tabled, or an Executive Session called at that time to change the motion Councilman Shanks MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, TO TABLE ITEM NO 3, APPOINTMENT OF THE PERSONNEL BOARD, AND DISOLVING THE INTERIM PERSONNEL BOARD BE TABLED UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Councilman Steelsmith seconded the motion. VOTE In Favor. Councilman Shanks, Councilman Steelsmith, Councilman Damiano, Councilman Eidson, Vice Mayor Hill , Mayor Clarke REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE FIVE SEPTEMBER 2, 1981 0 1 Opposed: Councilman Hudson The motion carried NEW BUSINESS ACCEPTANCE OF RESIGNATION OF AIRPORT COMMISSION MEMBER Dr. Dave Robinson sent a letter to Mayor Clarke expressing a desire to resign from the Airport Commission Councilman Shanks MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE RESIGNATION OF DR DAVE ROBINSON FROM THE AIRPORT COMMISSION BE AND HEREBY IS, ACCEPTED WITH REGRET Vice Mayor Hill seconded the motion Councilman Damiano requested that he read the letter from Dr Robinson. Dear Mayor Clarke This is to let you know that I am forced to resign from my position as a member of the Apache Junction Airport Board of Commissioners I find that my duties as an actively practicing Optometrist, plus other outside interests have become too pressing With this in mind, I feel that I will not have adequate time to devote to the Airport Commission. Please let it be known that I have very much been honored to have spent time on the Commission, and appreciate all the hard work being done by the Commission members, as well as the City It is with regret that I feel it necessary to tender my resignation Thank you and all City Council members for your past and present consideration, and with kindest regards, I am Sincerely, D H Robinson, O.D. VOTE. Unanimous The motion carried REQUESTS FOR FUNDS - CHAMBER OF COMMERCE City Manager, Ray Lee briefed the Council and public on this request The City of Apache Junction has a budgeted ._w=.�.�_• ,� ,- amount for advertising. The City has also appointed the Chamber of Commerce as the advertising arm for the City Council Funds may be earmarked for this, for whatever amount the City Council feels is appropriate for Civic Advertising Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED THAT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $500 00 BE PROVIDED TO THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FROM CIVIC ADVERTISING ACCOUNT NO. 001-100-512-01-22 TO HELP DEFRAY EXPENSES IN PROVIDING A STATE FAIR BOOTH Councilman Eidson seconded the motion Councilman Damiano stated that he felt it proper for the Chamber of Commerce to represent the City of Apache Junction at the State Fair. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE SIX SEPTEMBER 2, 1981 Amok Aft. The motion carried EXECUTIVE SESSION SEPTEMBER 16, 1981 Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6 00 P M , SEPTEMBER 16, 1981, AT CITY HALL FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING LEGAL AND PERSONNEL MATTERS Vice Mayor Hill seconded the motion VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. INFORMATION AND REPORTS (COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS) Councilman Steelsmith gave a brief report on the Planning and Zoning Commission, and a report on the last meeting Mayor Clarke stated that he did attend the Library Board meeting, but for only a few minutes as he had another meeting to attend. Mayor Clarke announced the resignation from the Planning and Zoning Commission by Pat Smith Councilman Hudson read her resignation letter Dear Sir This is to notfy you on my resignation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. The reason is that my work has taken me out of the area for extended periods of time and I can see no alternative as being very few May I suggest as a possible replacement Mr Halbert Sayer, 1503 South Delaware Street , 982-1502 Thank you, Pat Smith Councilman Steelsmith MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE RESIGNATION OF PAT SMITH FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET. Vice Mayor Hill seconded the motion VOTE Unanimous The motion carried Councilman Steelsmith MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT MARK MCPHERSON BE APPOINTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE EXPIRED TERM OF PAT SMITH DUE TO HER RESIGNATION, THE TERM OF OFFICE TO EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1983 Vice Mayor Hill seconded the motion. VOTE: In Favor Councilman Shanks, Councilman Steelsmith, Councilman Damiano, Councilman Eidson, Vice Mayor Hill , Mayor Clarke Opposed Councilman Hudson The motion carried. Mayor Clarke asked Mr. McPherson if he had any comments to make REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE SEVEN SEPTEMBER 2, 1981 AANN Mr McPherson stated that he has lived in Apache Junction approximately 31 years, and has been atending the Council and Planning and Zoning Commission meetings and he will do his best for the Planning and Zoning Commission Ms Priscilla Gardner thanked the City Council for the Certificate of Appreciation. Ms Gardner added her comments regarding Board and Commission members living outside City limits. She expressed her disapproval that they could not be members of Boards and Commissions, as some people a few miles outside the limits have a great interest in the City of Apache Junction also and would like to participate in City activities such as Board and Commissions, but are not allowed to do so Mayor Clarke requested that the City Clerk notify the members of the Airport Commission and Industrial Development Authority of a joint meeting on Tuesday, September 15, 1981, at 7 00 p m Councilman Hudson expressed his appreciation of input by citizens, and Mr Burgess for his remarks on Ordinance 12, employees living within City limits. He stated his opinion that this Ordinance should be enforced Councilman Hudson MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE CITY MANAGER ENFORCE THE ORDINANCE 12 ESPECIALLY THE SECTION DEALING WITH CITY EMPLOYEES LIVING WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. Vice Mayor Hill seconded the motion Councilman Eidson requested of the City Attorney, Arnold Hirsch, whether or not the Council could legally require City personnel to live within the City City Attorney, Arnold Hirsch, replied (` that the matter is presently under study, and will be presented to the Council when it is prepared Mayor Clarke stated that he was informed by the City Attorney that the employee residential problem is a nation-wide issue, and is in courts in a number of states. Mayor Clarke recommended that the Council postpone the issue until it is settled as to whether or not this is the Counci's legal right to enforce Councilman Hudson read a portion of Ordinance No. 12, concerning the above issue, Article 3, Section 3-1-3 Residence in the City at the time of appointment of a Manager shall not be required as a condition of the appointment, but within 120 days after reporting for work the Manager must become a resident of the City. He stated that he is not specifically pointing out the City Manager but also other City employees Councilman Steelsmith requested tabling the motion until the matter can be further discussed with the City Attorney. VOTE In Favor Councilman Hudson, Vice Mayor Hill , Mayor Clarke Opposed Councilman Steelsmith, Councilman Eidson, Councilman Shanks, Councilman Damiano The motion failed. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Mayor Clarke adjourned the meeting at 8:27 p.m REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE EIGHT SEPTEMBER 2, 1981 OPIN APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 1981, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. WENDELL J. CLARKE Mayor ATTEST. MARLIS J. DAVIS, CMC City Clerk L REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE NINE SEPTEMBER 2, 1981 ..riO,Mfc`.h.1$u.'+'a •.Y-'._t.a.jn i ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # Y MEETING OF ///6 MOTION BY: 7 SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILMAN SIhLSf1ITH --- COUNCILMAN DAMIANO v/ COUNCILJ'WI EIDSON / COUNCILMAN HUDSON VICE i'1AYOR HILL MAYOR CLARKE v UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL a :: ..,.. _ ..•x- - .-�..... u-, -_z,!'.:.Y� a.do-.. dWWrzsi"l.,ay.rva rr. ITEM NO . 2 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1981, BE AND HEREBY ARE, ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING SEPTEMBER 4, 1981 The special meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on September 4, 1981, at the Apache Junction Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law CALL TO ORDER Mayor Clarke called the meeting to order at 7.00 p.m. ROLL CALL Councilmen Present Councilman Steelsmith, Councilman Shanks, Councilman Damiano, Councilman Eidson, Councilman Hudson, Vice Mayor Hill, Mayor Clarke Staff Present Director of Administrative Services/ City Clerk, Marlis J Davis Director of Public Safety, Bill McDaniel Director of Planning, Joe Gero Director of Public Works, Rich Broman PERSONNEL MATTER Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT MR G. RAY LEE, CITY MANAGER BE HEREBY TERMINATED, EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 5, 1981. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT HE BE SUSPENDED FOR T';I"TY CAYS PRIOR TO OCTOBER 5, 1981. ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIO"S Or CHAPTER THREE IN THE CODE OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION Vice Mayor Hill seconded the motion Councilman Damiano stated; "Whoever heard of a City Manager that anyone ever fell in love with? When Mr Ray Lee arrived in Apache Junction, the community image was that of mobile a good parks and entertained by kazoo bands, which was g o d enough g to get us on national TV Mr Lee has elevated our City to a much higher level by establishing almost everything that you see about you tonight He is personally responsible for securing this land, these buildings in the current form and the placement of almost every single thing you see, the trees, the grass, the flora, the pictures, the dias, the seats in which you sit, and the City services which you receive While Mr. Lee was engaged in all these extravagant events, he managed to earn thousands of dollars on idle funds At the same time managed to provide our City with a balanced budget for the next five years. Also to include, there has never been any deficit spending in our City. If I were looking for an easy job, me personally, I'd apply for this position as my predecessor has done most of the work. To my fellow Councilmembers, I would like to say that Mr Lee may have offended some of your constituants, or your friends, but in doing so he increased the firmness of the foundation on which you now stand Since I feel that I am a part of the foundation that Mr Lee has built, my vote is of no revelance but my super-conscience goes with him My God, we ought to wake up some day We do represent all the citizens of this City, as their public servant, not a select few or special interests. Thank you Mr. Mayor " VOTE In Favor Councilman Hudson, Councilman Eidson, Councilman Steelsmith, Vice Mayor Hill , Mayor Clarke Opposed: Councilman Damiano, Councilman Shanks The motion carried ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Mayor Clarke adjourned the meeting at 7:13 p.m APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 1981, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA • WENDELL J. CLARKE Mayor ATTEST• MARLIS J. DAVIS, CMC City Clerk it SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL PAGE TWO SEPTEMBER 4, 1981 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEf1 # MEETING OF / /6 '0 MOT I ON BY: }Y.S SECONDED BY: Gz YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILT'AN STEELSMITH COUNCILf1AN DAMII\NO ►� COUNCILMAN 1AN EIDSON ✓7 COUNCILMAN HUDSON V/ COUNCILMAN SHANKS / VICE MAYOR HILL ✓ MYOR CLARLI -/ UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO . 3 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 4, 1981, BE AND HEREBY ARE, ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. ///; PUBLIC HEARING 1 , THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO , 109, PZ-15-81 . THE APPLICANT IS ARMSBY 2, WOULD THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PLEASE BRIEF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PUBLIC ON THIS PETITION , 3, IF THE APPLICANT OR SPOKESMAN FOR THE PETITION IS PRESENT, WOULD THEY PLEASE PRESENT INFORMATION THEY HAVE REGARDING THIS PETITION AT THIS TIME , 4, IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE PETITION? (RECONGNIZE ONE AT A TIME) 5, IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OF THE PETITION? (RECONGNIZE ONE AT A TIME) 6 , ANY REBUTTAL ( IF CONTROVERSY - OR NEED - CHAIRMAN 'S JUDGEMENT) A . APPLICANT B . IN FAVOR C . OPPOSED Aft. Amii, Nv p,CHE jG ._. if Cam►► gRiZUNP (Oily o &4puche 2unctian .. September 9, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH. BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGERIs!),1 , FROM: y1( ',` .) JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT. REQUEST FOR AGENDA ITEM SEPTEMBER 16, 1981 PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OCTOBER 7, 1981 SECOND READING AND CONSIDERATION PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO, 109 (PZ-15-81 ) Background: The applicant, Ruth Armsby, has applied to rezone her property per the attached map from General Rural (GR) to Single Residence (CR-2) . The original application sought rezoning to CR-1 , but it was determined that the property owner would not have enough area for two lots. Therefore, the applicant requested the application be amended. The petition requirements are met as follows: Total property owners: 12 Exempt properties: 9 Required signatures: 2 of 3 for 66% Required area: 66% This case was advertised on August 23, 1981 . The total site area after right-of-way equals 0.80 acres. Development Coordinating Committee Comments: �4� Apprc•:or for Afjcnd . City Engineer See attached, Date I}en fi Director of Public Works No objection r;r;;-R.-Id n,, 9/47c1 . Zoning Administrator No objection Director of Public Safety No objection S``` nn.1 isc c "o - -- ....... Fire Chief No objection (------Fu,',- I;r.-l-;;,g Old Business ... New Business 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 REQUEST FOR AGENDA ITEM September 9, 1981 Page Two Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting, September 8, 1981 , after public hearing unanimously voted (9-0) to recommend to the .•. City Council the approval of the requested rezoning for the following reasons: 1 . The proposed residential uses are the best use of the land considering surrounding zoning and development. 2. Considering the size limitation and uses of CR-2, the pro- posed rezoning is compatible with adjacent CR-1 zoning. 3. The split of land into two lots can be accomplished without violating any requirements of the CR-2 zoning district. Recommended motion: Please see attached. Attached are relevant materials. PLEASE REMEMBER TO MAKE A STATEMENT OF REASONS WITH THE MOTION. JWG:rin Attch. RECOMMENDED MOTION ORDINANCE NO 109 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT IN ZONING CASE PZ-15-81 , APPLICATION OF ARMSBY ALSO KNOWN AS ORDINANCE NO. 109 , AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, PINAL COUNTY, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDI- NANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-15-81 FROM GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO SINGLE RESIDENCE (CR-2) REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PRO- VIDING PENALTIES. BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF THIS MOTION ARE OPTIONAL CHOICES a Those reasons as set forth by the Planning and Zoning Commission which are hereby adopted by reference b. (Council may wish to use only some of the Commission reasons. If this is the case, you will have to read those specific reasons ) c. (Council may wish to use all new reasons or other reasons in addition to the above. If this is the case, you will have to read them and you are requested to write them out for the City Clerk ) • ORDINANCE NO 109 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, PINAL COUNTY, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSI- FICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-15-81 FROM GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO SINGLE RESIDENCE (CR-2) REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVER- ABILITY; AND PROVIDING PENALTIES. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT SECTION I IN GENERAL The Zoning District classification on the Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Map for the parcel of land described as the West ' of the Northeast 4 of the Northeast ' of the Northeast ' of the Northwest 4 of Section 22, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian located in Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona, and being approximately 1.25 acres be and hereby is amended by changing the Zoning District classification from General Rural (GR) to Single Residence (CR-2). SECTION II REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the Code adopted herein by reference, are hereby repealed. SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, sub-section, sentence, phrase, clause, or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the Code adopted herein by reference is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof SECTION IV PENALTY CLAUSE Any person found guilty of violating any provisions of this Ordinance shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $1,000 or imprisonment for a period of six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues shall be a separate offense punishable as hereinabove described. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, this day of , 1981 Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: i t Attorney v p PZ-I5-81 ARMSBY (PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 109) fr 1 REQUESTED REZONING FROM GR TO CR-2. CR- I CR- I :..:-4...; :t. ...„0.., � E SUPERSTITION BLVD — o \\\',\ Q 0cc ��. 4.1 G R ( z e \ CC Om "\3\\ 0 Z E CHOLLA ST z D .66:+ G R Q G R G 0 z Z 0 100 200 30 N 0 feet nT•!h_ N4:. .. .- .. V V ATERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM DATE: August 20, 1981 TO: Planning Director THRU: Director of Public Work FROM: City Engineer R C-113 SUBJECT: Rezoning Case PZ-15-81 Anik My comments on the proposed rezoning are as follows: 1. Gross acreage of 1.25 acres is reduced to a net of 0 80 acres by deducting right-of-way easements. 2. Please note that an additional seventeen feet of right- of-way is required under the street classification plan to be added to Superstition Boulevard. 3. It is suggested that the applicant may wish to request abandonment of Conestoga Road. This office will supply any additional information required. No guarantee of approval of any abandonment is expressed or implied. 4. The parcel is not located within any Flood Hazard Zone on the Federal Emergency Management Agency map. 5. No objection to the rezoning; however, it should be pointed out that Superstition Boulevard will experience increasing traffic volumes in the future. Residential zoning along a section-line arterial may not be appropriate in the long run. A C July 23, 1981 Re: PZ-15-81 (Armsby) Having been informed of the City Zoning Administrator's interpretation of the City Zoning Ordinance that lot size is to be calculated as the "net" lot area (i .e. , excluding easements) , I am requesting that my original application be amended to an application for rezoning to the CR-2 zoning classification. Ruth Armsby Amok xc: Leo Frazier Planning File O C APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES FOR APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA Cash Receipt No f 0 Amount g,c4 Date 1/((,Case Number .4-, 1: TO APACHE JUNCTION CITY COUNCIL I hereby request a change of zoning classification, an amendment to the zoning regulations, or approval of a Special Permit as Follows (list the present zon- ing classification & then the proposed classification, using separate parcel numbers if more than one change of zoning is proposed) ; Parcel 1 Fran �'r,U c i,a.� /'S e..4 e R / To l_. 12 — Parcel 2 Parcel 3 Parcel 4 - Parcel 5 The legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned by this application is as follows (if more space is needed, attach separate sheet) C l.u % AIE-% E '' AF //y /VLU % c_ ca - //V The size (to nearest tenth of an acre) & general location of the subject property is as follows (give direction & distance ram.nearest mapped street)) ACK'E — - 3 57 A. —Jc.cher`•Y'T/o,t) Elu0/ (Please answer the following questions in the space provided or submit a separate signed statement if additional space is needed ) /11IN 1 Why is the property in question not reasonably suited f r uses pe 'tted under . present zoning districting?. )/t- c v• e2 u—j .e2 42:4L, 2 A±e there any known changes in land use, street arrangement, or other physical conditions that have altered the character of your property, or adjoining property, since the present zoning was adopted? Please explain "Yes" answer rrt.nwews-.+ri.+:.,.._..', •.c:uNtth ir+s".'t:. C�y_, �/� ham' `7 Y2✓f- %�-rL6=-c-c._-G-t'EC�-s� 3 If your requested change is to provide additional commercial or industrial zon- ing, is there a demonstrable need for this zoning in order to serve the camninity or neighborhood, as the case may be? Explain ///9 4 Other reasons for the subject request �� ,l4t,e„ a � � � e Page 1 of 2 pages 4 ON Describe existing & proposed future use of subject property, buildings and (- structures. ‘....-.242-t...e._... .c.A..).--,4--4.-,--e--A7 -ece . ye._..6_14 lc, ./) G 4_,,,,, ....02 Z/7/5.1 et."-.-•,1;.'. r le' /*..old''71,41(....7 1. ,j41Zye.'Z•••••• IhP-./1*"..7.71,C.1 l , „Ay_zr 4.4,_ '�, c N2, . / J.� 1 . , ,[�v1..4- , iG�u-�.err(.,. 0 /� fa !, S or`t(l ton -stat e8ts or p`sir to s ap�p`Iicatiari ,141 Y uPP ub submi' same in erson to. Apache Junction Zoning Administrator's Office, Apache Junction, Arizona Note. The land owner(s) must sign belay or else the appli- cant must submit a letter signed by the owner authorizing hum to apply for this v of zoning) �, 0, Bog /�'-1-3 ame of applicant or repres ative) (Addres ) (Phone 9",,/-/7.„7 c6... try 9,522.2.-/9S/r..4.4 (Name of applicant or representative) (Address) (Phone) COr.7-)...,..,7- „ &-: , / 2-462 _.,� ..- .&' Arm t & Addr of per�biY to wham petition & notices'shod be maile, j45 Signature of applicant_....?---.1-7 6)--r 9z��,(Date)" *Note Plans are required when application is filed for following Special Use Permits under Section 2302; Area &Neighborhood Plans, Article 32, Indus- trial CI-2, Article 18, Trailer Courts, Article 20, Section 2001-c. DO NOT FILL OUT FOLLOWING (for office records only) eilliN LEGAL PUBLICATION Date filed Applicant Zoning Case Census Division & Tract No Application received by Remarks ._......_, ..... ,�..A.,: Page 2 of 2 pages ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY : YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN DAc1IANO COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN HUDSON COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILMAN STEELSMITH VICE MAYOR HILL MAYOR CLARKE UNANI"^,OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL Awl /'\ ITEM NO . 4 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO. 109 FOR THE FIRST READING . r ... .}�AX YH ✓G ...... ti CC„ „,.., F► jr 3§4 °V[.�% 0 U 5 a { yl G "IP/zONP `6ity o ' C4pache 09unction September 10, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER FROM: CITY CLERK SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR AGENDA ITEM PLACEMENT - - - APPOINTMENT OF PERMANENT PERSONNEL BOARD At the regular meeting of the City Council on September 2, 1981, the City Council tabled the appointments to the Personnel Board. Since Ordinance No. 113, if passed will not go into effect for 30 days, it respectfully requested that this item (1) remain tabled until the Ordinance is in effect or (2) that the term of office start effective 30 days from this date. I have attached the talent bank applications that were received since the last City Council meeting. If you have questions, please call me. :::::::: Agenda ��r :✓ c2Z,4-2,77---O Date - ) Item #' MAR DAVIS, C MC /1/( / .__ C' y Clerk Second Illcd:ng -------------- ......:..._ �P•ibl:c Hearing MJD/l vc V Old Business Now Business 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982.8002 PQp,ChE ✓ (---- \\.........., q,p/zpNA • Vity 0 c94pacAeunction TALENT BANK APPLICATION FOR a Car r5 'OnNr;,e...\ - •Q D_,,, OMMI SS I ON/COMMITTEE DATE:,_• e,,,,Ifzi,s LI , ipli ME- .\ �1'�({�s i 6__ e ,a.,, r•+ * TELEPHONE: �° (office) ADDRESS: \� ZIP CODE• Ck. S '•. t OCCUPATIONC:i � �� .jl' 1 Q C. (if retired, please indicate former occupatC \ _ ;c; ve on or profession) EDUCATION' l ie rz\'•. E`�k.:y, 1 - 1 4�,`i'S Qyr , U,. I , is:44 \ l '% 1S ^c .e:�f PROFESSIONAL AND/OR COMUNITY ACTIVITIES: �,''1G1,�,.t 4 - )„hv e,0�d ,cs.� • <i r..ikkP - `^!\''L Y. r IArv,. LA* 3 Yl -- �i' q_+L' V i 5 D<w Q 1Y 4. t- 7 - •Srl;c.ier f .N*,-1r4L! • U'LLA5;c;ax.c ‘',)uft Co c IN /ft44 ADDITIONAL PERTINENT INFORMATION/REFERENCES'. (1,01,1L,,Otmin ,,... 00ANZq • \\\- 0'9Ak.fia �,��rl slit — \•11,p?(►,41�n+ys� So�q t ,� � n.; r k��yv 5 Gtf+,1rti gill (1 o' n Zc5ov� — tY candidate to a Council Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and phone number will be available to the press and the public. Ftori time to time, requests are received from State and County legislators for recommendations of citizens to serve on State and County Commissions. If the City Council recommends your name be submitted, you will be contacted before this action is taken. If appointed to a Board/Commis.,ion/Committee, I understand that I must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Apache Junction and thlt I cannot be absent from the city for over 30 days at one time unless . lithorized by the Mayoi and Council. . , dirt.) Revised 6/19/S 1 L;a it/.�re of App cant 1C31 NCRTH IDAHO ROAD • A?ACHE JJNCT'CN AR'ZCNA 65220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 (I,FP,C H E ✓, Y i'' \\........., (Oily o &Apache 09unction TALENT BANK APPLICATION A.•. FOR TE 2s o n n a L BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE DATE: VSc/oTarn6g,2/$) NAME: Al! 1 L r e.•F.t> --I-. e a 1(-16-2 TELEPHONE: (home) ..- ZIP CODE: g S"1..1.._. 'p0Cg & INN 1c. 6L.i 4^s A„1/ r "t- R E J EX , `J`S l OCCUPATION. �d , eAL S� itvYe s �� rt-Ossotz �,,,rz.6enaIDS--- o)D s.d,¢.S ('f retired, please indicate f rmer occupation or profession) /I Cmito0-41•gaLM4cric/ha .. if7 wTFa IS nb(iYJEG,AR•�/-1M�C41eKM oLP• ��"L fL�I khlVCQ,S/'1'y ytiAr14661M1EN1 EDUCATIC`l:se Neot ( t$ htitzs+ems }, s Ialts►d.e m J...aL speclaL71' r-- Sch.dt- }SIC oo S4hooL aoig4NEK.n CaoKCDur`� f4s�+ y1F 1 .VOL L'44 11, t4-4,11s, k"Mi4 'r Rs1 ! (f` v1.16 rYr41 ca�tS.7 : c�.aD Aal. 111.nlucosr31f , T PROFESSIONA 1�IND/e CO:LuUNITY ACTIVIIIE 24- J/Ad ,7a 7 ,42J EX4 E2►g ►+Grc i b 5 Q S D\t►E j- 'Fur rt.0 1 s'Iti,in. `4- river '{d-6•E m vC A"I' o L •(-1 5 • 111hhin44 eV ›pr, ;hir �arr+ rn) SS1D 4 e 17 ({ 04 A-/� �i-N h Ag S14L7o] ram' Z 4 , ADDITIONAL PERTINENT INFORMATION/REFERENCES• DI, L� Ga 3 N6,e-s (orcnooLS /Y1,l5. Oci cE �S,o/�n o t oR4T-E arn l aC, L. I it 1-De. C. t4er1IG4L C°D. ---/- d L. O ,'1 i A L Co, rf,6 r*+2 4 81r� -�, d � 4 n O� -Yr).c/-f,!o sf h 1-1 8 C Sao �^Y)J c�� i4 n � �'►'I ,G E. As a candidate to a Council Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and phone number will be available to the press and the public From time to time, requests are received from State and County legislators for recommendations of citizens to serve on State and County Commissions. If the City Council recommends your name be submitted, you will be contacted before this action is taken. If appointed to a Board/Commission/Committee, I understand that I must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Apache Junction and that I cannot be absent from the city for over 30 days at one time unless authorized by the Mayor and Council. Revised 6/19/SI Sip,nztur- of Applicant 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION A2IZCNA 85220 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-80C2 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN HUDSON COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCI Li'IAN STEELSMITH COUNCILMAN DAMIANO VICE N\YOR HILL ' 11`YOR CLARKE_. . . UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM ft MEETING OF MOTION BY : SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN HUDSON COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILM4N STEELSMITH COUNCILJ'1AN DAMIANO COUNCILMAN EIDSON VICE MAYOR HILL MAYOR CLARKE UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL vs ACHE ✓ �4, CI t.y1...6�.,. F• 4 U ' '��Y.� 91.'�pA " Z gRIZON u/igj a� 73Uc/Le 2121etian TALENT BANK APPLICATION FOR r o c Y1C� 1. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE DATE: & , ' l0 j9 f NA:E: _ \S) TELEPHONE• / (ho-'a) cc (office) ADDRESS: & �� ZIP CODE• 2•0 OCCUPATION* AC CSC �i i C� F 1' SboW nOt) 11CC (if retired, please indicate former occupation or profession) EDUCATIO`+ 11,� clnn� - Cie ( - U 1,(Doone0. 5 trtyv Corps, ' k.F. (U . PROFESSIONAL AND/OR COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES• CCgCsc n t K C it 1 ) 'WO E` 19 a) O c- but - 1(�5k bCY.p. 0 A We►Yl �}Ey C•,� eCS ,Uym -\ rSC)01A3 S xs50a ADDITIONAL PERTINENT INFORMATION/REFERENCES. *(1L)-{. ( kPd W i h NOTE• As a candidate to a Council Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and phone number will be available to the press and the public. From time to time, requests are received from State and County legislators for recommendations of citizens to serve on State and County Commissions. If the City Council recommends your name be submitted, you will be contacted before this action is taken. If appointed to a Board/Commission/Committee, I understand that I must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Apache Junction and that I cannot be absent from the city for over 30 days at one time unless authorized by the Ma)or and Council. Ck61 rit (-XL. Revised 6/19/31 Signature of Applicant IC01 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZCNA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 /a << PQACNF G*;t4 41•*:4ItT 0 1.: ;� Z g411Z00' Way o &472ache zznction TALENT BANK APPLICATION FOR BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE DATE: /‘ -Q NAME: .6 TELEPHONE: " ? (office) ADDRESS. CODE: OCCUPATION. ___ 2LS -7" (if retired, please indicate former occupation or profession) EDUCATION: //' .rAGCr�'C� .n.. 1 PROFESSIONAL AND/OR COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES. £e4.(2 0.e, / g /4 !, 4.-(71-t2 ADDITIONAL PERTINENT I .O.1100N REFEREN ES: / 24Ze. _,/11 , N TE: As a c5ndidate to a Council Board, Commission or Commitfe" a your name, address, and phone number will be available to the press and the public. From time to time, requests are received from State and County legislators for recommendations of citizens to serve on State and County Commissions. If the City Council recommends your name be submitted, you will be contacted before this action is taken. If appointed to a Board/Commission/Committee, I understand that I must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Apache Junction and that I cannot be absent from the city for over 30 days at one time unless authorized by the Mayor and Council ��y � Revised 6/19/81 Sigiatu Imo"re of Applicant 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE (602)982-8002 PQACNF ✓ -N. ? rid. ;)? , �+ 'ciP/ZOE Vity o �puche 9112-1ction TALENT BANK APPLICATION FOR i•�5G/1/2/ ----4 BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE DATE: ,..5, 77 /5 /5 / NA1E: W,f-6'�-/.� ,/,1 R ifvf-',/�S TELEPHONE: (home) (office) ADDRESS. ‘/( CODE. 8.I OCCUPATION. /Z?,/lrc- /e//1-A (if retired, please indicate former occupation or profession) EDUCATION: A/ /�f7 5C_/loo/ p • PROFESSIONAL AND/OR COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES' ._./ ,0//c'&?off OS',et e Sfi lid s/ eS� /,?,,,y'S A-5.44 ADDITIONAL PERTINENT INFORMATION/REFERENCES: ,P/moo 5, 4v,44-S 4.?, 4p iC0A,f- , /I/ 4/o/,• J/,4/1 Siv/9i1's��/ C'/� 2)�/_// -})/-1/y1/ NOTE. As a candidate to a Council Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and phone number will be available to the press and the public From time to time, requests are received from State and County legislators for recommendations of citizens to serve on State and County Commissions. If the City Council recommends your name be submitted, you will be contacted before this action is taken. If appointed to a Board/Commission/Committee, I understand that I must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Apache Junction and that I cannot be absent from the city for over 30 days at one time unless authorized by the Mayor and Council. ...... ...t.4774,„, -:-.--.). 05.,...4-Lie.,..;,.._, Revised 6/19/31 Signature2 f Applicant 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JJNCTION ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 ITEM NO , 5 STEP 1 NO ACTION (NO MOTION IS NECESSARY TO HAVE THIS ITEM REMAIN TABLED. ) STEP 2 ACTION BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE ITEM PERTAINING TO THE APPOINTMENT OF THE PERSONNEL BOARD BE AND HEREBY IS, REMOVED FROM THE TABLE, 3 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE FOLLOWING PERSONS BE AND HEREBY ARE, APPOINTED TO THE PERSONNEL BOARD: , TERMS TO EXPIRE OCTOBER 16, 1982; AND , AND , TERMS TO EXPIRE OCTOBER 16, 1983. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PREVIOUSLY APPOINTED INTERIM PERSONNEL BOARD BE AND HEREBY IS, DISSOLVED , QACx HE✓G U r� Z '41PizONP `Oity o� &4pache 09ZLnction September 2, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THRU: CITY MANAGER FROM: CITY CLERK SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM PLACEMENT ORDINANCE NO. 111 , AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 84, HEALTH COMMISSION When the Ordinances were forwarded to the League of Cities and Towns for codification it was brought to my attention that Ordinance No. 84 provides for 7 members, however terms were set for only five members. It is respectfully requested that the City Council adopt this Ordinance correcting this oversight. If you have any questions please contact me. • Am. 062,4 .--4():0-1..,"2---J Mar . Davis MC • y Clerk MJD:iw Approver for Agenda Date Item # First Reading 7//6- -L/ ..(s_'_...... Second Re:'dincj P_bl,c t;c r:„g Old Business t New Business 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 ormiN ORDINANCE NO. 111 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 84, ESTABLISHING A HEALTH COMMISSION, SECTION 2-10-2 MEMBERSHIP AND TERMS OF OFFICE, PRO- VIDING FOR REPEAL OF ANY CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. /111N BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION THAT: SECTION I IN GENERAL Section 2-10-2 MEMBERSHIP AND TERMS OF OFFICE Paragraph B be amended to read as follows B. The appointments shall be for three (3) years each with the terms of members so staggered that the term of office of no appoint- ments of members shall be for two (2) members with terms beginning upon their appointment and expiring one year from that date, three (3) members with terms beginning upon their appointment and expiring two (2) years from that date, two (2) members with terms beginning upon their appointment and expiring three (3) years from that date of appointment Thereafter, they shall all serve for a term of three (3) years or until their successors are duly appointed and qualified Honorary members shall serve for a term not to exceed one (1) year. SECTION II REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES All Ordinances and parts of Ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the Code adopted herein by reference are hereby repealed. iSECTION III SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and City Council this day of , 1981 WENDELL J. CLARKE i Mayor ATTEST MARLIS J. DAVIS City Clerk AP RO ED AS TO FORM- ' F fades CITY ATTORNEY ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILMAN STEELSMITH COUNCI L1AN DAM IMO COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN HUDSON VICE ►MAYOR HILL MAYOR CLARKE UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO . 6 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO . 111, FOR THE FIRST READING . x� �'lle to(.._ . .....kk "";'`:'ii --r-- .. 44)/Z'0Os COity 4 C pache cOunction September 2, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THRU: CITY MANAGER .- - = FROM: CITY CLERK SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM PLACEMENT - - - ORDINANCE NO. 112, PROVIDING FOR CHANGES IN PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE CITY CODE. Last year the legislation was changed allowing cities and towns to impose higher fees and imprisonment penalties for City Code violations. Our most recent Odinances carrying penalties have been passed with this higher fee and imprisonment. As these are sent to the League of Arizona Cities and Towns for codifiation, penalty, severability and conflicting ordinance paragraphs are left off because Ordinance No. 7, in the front of the Code, carries these paragraphs applicable to the entire document. It is respectfully requested that the Council adopt this Ordinance ook in order that our City Code may reflect the new fee and imprison- ment penalty paragraphs. 4-1,..4‘..392244:' Mar . Davis, CMC C. y Clerk MJD:iw Approver for Agenda /---P ___w, (Date/ Item7# Firs'i:CCJtnr /7LCL .. ! , Seconu e.:ding Pt.b!'c Hr.,aring . Oid Business .✓ New Business 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 Aft. Amok ORDINANCE NO. 112 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 7, SECTION 2, REGARDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA THAT. SECTION I IN GENERAL Section 2, of Ordinance number 7, be amended to read as follows "Any person found guilty of violating any provision of this code shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) or by imprisonment for a period not to exceed six (6) months, or both such fine and imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues shall be separate offense punishable as herein above described." SECTION II REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES All Ordinances and parts of Ordinances in conflict with the pro- visions of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference, are hereby repealed. SECTION III SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference, is ( for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision Il of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, this day of , 1981 /OG\ WENDELL J. CLARKE Mayor ATTEST: MARLIS J. DAVIS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM / /44.41.44 CITY ATTORNEY ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN STEELSMITH COUNCILMAN DAf 1I/\NO COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN HUDSON COUNCILMAN SHANKS VICE t'AYOR HILL rVOR CLARKE • UNANIIOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL AM be, AO\ Alma. - 3•-ropec,4,1Z.4,ttoVri,rniVA.,s4F*0" ." /Oak ITEM NO . 7 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO . 112 FOR THE FIRST READING . (:§PkC F V 4.44err„krnmAiti4 ;,�, c ' r y'z 4RiZ0N1'• `6ity o C4pache 09unction September 9, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THRU: CITY MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUBJECT: CREATION OF PERSONNEL BOARD It is respectfully requested that you consider passage of this Ordinance to officially create a Personnel Board. If you have any questions please contact me. ' 12—,_9,--e,--z--; M . DAV irector of Administrative Services MJD/lvc Approver for Agenda ). Date Item # First Reading `1L'4I /. T Second Reading _ _ ...._ _ Pub!,c l-`carrng ______ Old Business —VNew Business 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 ORDINANCE NO. 113 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF THE CITY CODE BY ADDING ARTICLE 2-11 PERSONNEL BOARD, PROVIDING FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD, ESTABLISHING POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND PROVIDING FOR SEVER- ABILITY 0 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I IN GENERAL That Chapter 2 of the City Code be amended by adding the following: ARTICLE 2-11 Personnel Board SECTION 2-11-1 Creation 2-11-2 Membership and Terms of Office 2-11-3 Salaries and Personal Expenses 2-11-4 Officers 2-11-5 Meetings 2-11-6 Vacancies 2-11-7 Removal of Members 2-11-8 Duties Section 2-11-1 Creation ni.K�44WiJIi�ii}IK s7,l.i°✓�1'-i:M_^.Y"'+:u.iR.Y.wa+-�. The Personnel Board of the City of Apache Junction is hereby created Section 2-11-2 Membership and Terms of Office A. The Personnel Board shall consist of 5 members who shall be appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council. B. The initial appointments of members shall be as follows. 1 Two members with terms beginning upon their appointment and expiring one year from date of appointment. 2. Three members with terms to expire two years from their ^ appointment. Thereafter Board members will serve for stag- gered terms of Three (3) years or until successors are duly appointment. C. All members shall be residents of the City of Apache Junction. Section 2-11-3 Salaries and Personnel Expenses The members of the Personnel Board shall receive no salaries or other remuneration for their services in such capacity, and shall not be entitled to personal expenses incurred by them in the a dis- charge of their official duties, except to the extent and purposes and amount such expenses are first authorized and approved in advance by the City Council. Section 2-11-4 Officers The Board shall elect a Chairman, Vice Chairman and Secretary from their members to serve for a period of one (1) year The Vice Chairman shall preside at meetings in the absence of the Chairman Section 2-11-5 Meetings The Board shall meet when business is to be transacted or at least one time a year Special meetings may be called as required. A quorum shall consist of three (3) members for the transaction of all business ink ORDINANCE NO. 113 PAGE 2 Section 2-11-6 Vacancies Vacancies shall be filled by the City Council in accordance with Section 2-11-2 for the unexpired term of vacancy. Section 2-11-7 Removal of Members Members of the Board serve at the pleasure of the Council and may be removed by the Mayor with the concurrence of the Council. A Amok member shall not be absent from Personnel Board meetings for more than three (3) consecutive times without a reasonable excuse. After the ab- sence of three (3) consecutive meetings the remaining members of the Personnel Board shall vote to retain or recommend to the City Council that the absent member be relieved of his duties of the Board. Section 2-11-8 Duties The Board shall hear grievances and appeals from personnel in accordance with the rules outlined in the Personnel Policies of the City of Apache Junction. The Board through the Personnel Director may recommend amendments to the personnel policies. SECTION II REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the Code adopted herein by reference are hereby repealed. SECTION III SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the Code adopted herein by reference, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision Il of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA THIS DAY OF , 1981. WENDELL J. CLARKE Mayor ATTEST MARLIS J. DAVIS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM. City lttorney / ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM /I MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCI LT'AN D1f1IANO COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN HUDSON COUNCIIIIAmI SHANKS COUNCILMAN STEELSMITH VICE MAYOR HILL MAYOR CLARKE UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL Adak ITEM NO , 8 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO . 113 FOR THE FIRST READING . PQALHE✓G '� "` O 'y0 U ,,;;j{'l if Z DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY "41P/ZONP (Oily o 04pac e cOunctZOn W E McDANIEL September 10, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: W. E. McDaniel, Director of Public Safety i,l14,., . REFERENCE: Intergovernmental Agreement for Mutual Aid in Law Enforcement Attached are copies of the Intergovernmental Agreement for Mutual Aid in Law Enforcement which has been discussed at several meetings with chief law enforcement officers throughout Pinal County. On Tuesday, September 8, 1981, the Board of Supervisors of Pinal County approved this agreement. We respectfully request that the City Council pass a resolution approving this intergovernmental agreement. Attachment 1001 NORTH IDAHO RD.•POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220•TELEPHONE(602)982-8260 1 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR 2 MUTUAL AID IN LAW ENFORCEMENT 3 4 5 WHEREAS, THE COUNTY OF PINAL, THE PINAL COUNTY SHERIFF'S 6 OFFICE, THE CITY OF COOLIDGE, THE CITY OF CASA GRANDE, THE CITY 7 OF APACHE JUNCTION, and THE TOWN OF FLORENCE desire to enter 8 into this mutual aid agreement with respect to law enforcement 9 as authorized by Arizona Revised Statutes 1978, as amended, ARS 10 §13-3872 and pursuant to the provisions of ARS Title 11, Chapter 11 7, Article 3; and Title 15, Chapter 7, Article 2; and 12 WHEREAS, in addition to all other law enforcement opera- 19 tions and obligations the parties hereto desire to include 14 within the applicability of this Agreement all present and future 15 joint metropolitan law enforcement operations of a particular 16 nature. 17 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto in consideration of 18 the matters and things hereinafter set forth hereby agree as 19 follows. 20 SECTION 1. Definitions. 21 (a) "Party" means each of the governmental entities 22 named in the preamble hereinabove or such entities acting by 23 their respective law enforcement agencies if the context so 24 requires. 25 (b) "Requesting Party" means any party requesting law 26 enforcement assistance from any other Party. 27 (c) "Assisting Party" means any Party rendering law 28 enforcement assistance to a requesting Party. 29 (d) "Chief Law Enforcement Officer" means that person 30 who is a "department or agency head with peace officer juris- 31 diction, or his duly authorized representative having the 32 primary responsibility for law enforcement within the 1 jurisdiction or territory," as such phrase is used in A. R. S. 2 §13-3871, whether designated by appointment or election. 3 SECTION 2. Purpose ^ 4 The purpose of this Agreement is to obtain maximum effi- 5 ciency in cooperative law enforcement operations through mutual 6 aid and assistance within each Party's jurisdiction pursuant to 1 the prior conSdPt herein given by the Chief Leis Enforcc.,,ert 8 ' Officer and Governing Body of that Party 9 SECTION 3. Consent to Extension of Peace Officer Authority 10 The respective Chief Law Enforcement Officers of each of 11 the Parties hereby severally consent that the authority as a 12 peace officer of the officers and employees of each and every 13 other Party hereto within the jurisdiction or territory of such 14 other Party hereby is extended into the jurisdiction or terri- 15 tory of such consenting Chief Law Enforcement Officer either 16 (a) when requested by such Chief Law Enforcement 17 Officer or 18 (b) upon perception by any such officer or 19 employee of a situation or circumstance 20 within the jurisdiction or territory of 21 the consenting Chief Law Enforcement 22 Officer which apparently requires 23 immediate law enforcement action which 24 such officer or employee is otherwise -.«.o....•_. «;:_.,..._<... tea..» 25 authorized to take. The assisting 26 agency whose officer or employee is 27 performing such voluntary assistance 28 shall notify the agency within whose 29 territory or jurisdiction the voluntary 30 assistance is being rendered. 31 32 In all instances of assistance, whether requested or voluntary, 2. 1 the assisting Party shall render any such assistance as it can 2 give consistent with its own law enforcement needs at the time. 3 SECTION 4. Request Procedure 4 All requests for assistance made by any Parties shall be OIN 5 made by the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the requesting 6 Party. Each Assisting Party shall acknowledge and act upon each 71 c.licrl 1P_quest only by order of 1.tr Chef Law F'i orceme t Officer 81 SECTION 5 Control in Pssistance Operations. 9 A Requesting Party shall have and exercise joint control 10 in consultation with any Assisting Party to assign personnel to 11 places where they are needed; however, the commanding officer for 12 any Assisting Party shall be responsible for exercising exclusive 13 control over his forces in response to the jointly agreed to 14 general directions of the Requesting and Assisting Parties. 15 SECTION 6 Responsibility for Damages. 16 Each Party shall be responsible and liable for damages 17 caused by its personnel during the course of rendering mutual 18 law enforcement assistance, and otherwise as provided by law. 19 SECTION 7 Provision of Equipment. 20 In rendering mutual law enforcement assistance, each 21 Requesting Party and Assisting Party shall be responsible for 22 the provision and maintenance of its own equipment. 23 SECTION 8. Reports. 24 After occurrences wherein mutual law enforcement assist- 25 ance was required and given, all participating Parties shall make 26 an interchange of all reports arising out of such operation; 27 provided, however, that nothing in this Section shall purport to 28 waive, limit or remove the duties of confidentiality imposed or 29 allowed by law as to any such reports or the contents thereof. 30 SECTION 9. Priority of Assistance Upon Request by Requesting Party. 31 32 When any participating Party requests assistance, they 3. 0 :ter i 1 11 shall call on any participating agency that the Requesting Party 21 feels would be most beneficial considering the nature of the 31 assistance. 41 SECTION 10 Manner of Financing 51 Each Party hereto shall within its lawful methods of 61 financing, establish and provide in its annual budget for payment 7 . of the cobs ane expense. of pe.formanca of its Obl2Ci1�aO,,s I V S„ undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. 9 SECTION 11. Duration. 10 This Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties and 11 their successors for an indefinite term. The effective date of 12 this Agreement shall be the date of its execution by all Parties. 13 Each year thereafter shall be defined as a "contract year." 14 Each "contract year" will commence upon the anniversary of the 15 effective date of this Agreement. This Agreement shall auto- 16 matically continue in full force and effect from one "contract 171 year" to the next However, any Party can terminate their 181 participation in this Agreement effective upon the giving of 19 written notice to each other Party. 20 SECTION 12. Termination; disposition of Property Thereupon. 21 22 Upon termination of this Agreement all property not 23 owned by the termination Party which is in its custody or 241 possession shall be forthwith returned to the Party owning the r,,.,y,,,,.• :," .,, .;„ :,,,..� :. 251 same or to whom possession should be given 1 26i SECTION 13. Miscellaneous. 27 � (a) Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as 28 either limiting or extending the lawful 3urisdiction of any 29 Party hereto other than as expressly set forth herein. 30 (b) Appropriate officials of the Parties may promulgate 31 such written operational procedure in implementation of this 32 Agreement as to them appear desirable, provided that such are 4. 1 acceptable to such other Parties as they affect. 2 3 CONSENTS BY CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS �� 4 5 6 ' Final County Sheriff Apache Junction Chief of Police I 81 Coolidge Chief of Police Florence Town Marshal 9 10 Casa Grande Chief of Police 11 12 PARTIES TO THIS AGREEMENT 13 14 CITY OF COOLIDGE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION .+-c;r4.�r,.)ai�l.N';sY�hJf�iAyY'::.•,r.:..iLAwJ:+.. 15 By 16 By City Manager City Manager 17 78 Mayor Mayor 19 ATTEST. ATTEST. 20 /01N 21 Clerk Clerk 22 CITY OF CASA GRANDE TOWN OF FLORENCE 23 24 By 25 City Manager Mayor . �..•, :�«.:--.- , ... a.K r.. ATTEST 26 27 Mayor 28 ATTEST- Clerk 29 / PINAL COUNTY BOARD OF 30 Clerk SUPERVISORS 31 By Chairman 32 ATTEST- Clerk 5. OWN °IN • 1 STATE OF ARIZONA ) ss 2 County of Pinal ) 3 z 4 I, , a Notary Public do 5 hereby certify that the attached Intergovernmental Agreement 6 for Mutual Aid in Law Enforcement is a true and exact copy of 7 the original 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and 9 seal done at , Arizona, this day of 10 1981. 11 12 Notary Public 13 _. �•+..a,+ ssss:+� ,:1-11,.- . -.. 14 My Commission Expires: 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # 1 MEETING OF ///(0.v / oit MOTION BY: 144I SECONDED BY : N YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILr1AN EIDSON ✓, COUNC I L1'1AN HUDSON COUfNJCILMAN SHANKS ✓ COUNCIL°1AN STEELSMITH COUNC I Lf 1AN DAMIANO '/ VICE.N'1YOR HILL M YOfL CIARKE_ UNANI!..OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO , 9 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE PINAL COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT FOR MUTUAL AID IN LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH THE CITY OF CASA GRANDE; CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AND THE TOWN OF FLORENCE BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED FOR AN INDEFINITE TERM EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 16, 1981 . ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES M ITEM # MEETING OF 7-/ , MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: Al N YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILMAN S I±LSLIITH COUNCI L AN 1IANO �D�' COUNCIUTAN EIDSON COUNCIU1AN HUDSON VICE MAYOR HILL MAYOR CL RKE UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL \J\ . ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM #�( MEETING OF l MOTION BY: S SECONDED BY ; YES/ NO ABSTAINED COUfdCILr'IAN HUDSON COUNCILMAN AN SHANKS COUNCILMAN SI E.LSMITH ✓ COUNCILMAN DAfMIANO COUNCILMAN EIDSON ►/ VICE !1AYOR HILL ✓ MAYOR CLARKE V UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL Amok roll% .... . .. , ..,._.. .,;,. ti �_ ';L .. 'AgL++ ...,.-b; yerR4M+w�Xd��.*t.r,F i - ...-. - •, N RNA c d. �. _,...;•+.. .M.Nvw+aw.+/s+,1?nv�s(t....Yie..N1c::.rrr« '!,7'Y`#.N'N+ k4",k-i0",41["~. •e'4 !a000.&- atiere g#24°C6;• ,-a,',,^_�tr.. - ,. . :, .. >.,:. ..,,i,.it:rr+r'wr;,a:'�•.ry+w�uavK4M++}�AteaA+kr"�'aaert fi.,daa+ ,w�aanaaa a..„aestizxtna.t.,r:.•...'`:.•w-c r.:-,,.::c u.+ , ...,..-. ....-:.-. ti ' ITEM NO . 10 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT AN EXECUTIVEo,SSSION BE HELD IN THE CITY HALL OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ON OCTOBER 7, 1981, AT 6: 00 P. M. FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING PERSONNEL AND LEGAL MATTERS . ... SPQACM 1 i kh n ��w. U r` '9R/ZOO' `Oily o7Y (94pache 09unction DATE: September 4, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: The City Manager WM , FROM: The Director of Public Works REGARDING: Petition For Street Improvements - Broadway Avenue (From Tomahawk Road to Goldfield Road) As requested by the City Manager, attached is an order of chronolog- ical events pertaining to accommodating Mr. Glen Warners request to create an improvement district on Broadway Avenue from Tomahawk Road to Goldfield Raod. Also attached is a copy of the cover letter and petition as sent to Mr. Warner on July 21, 1981. At this time, this department has not been contacted by Mr. Warner regarding the status of the petition. Therefore, no further action by the city is pending. Should anyone have questions pertaining to the material provided, please advise. RWB/cc 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 4111., CHRONOLOGICAL EVENTS 5-15-81 Contacted Mr. Glen Warner at request of Mayor Seeman to dis- cuss the process of creating a street improvement district. (Requested he submit a letter to city) . 5-18-81 Began gathering additional improvement district data. 5-29-81 Request submitted by Mr. Warner. 6-02-81 Mr. Warner requested city to look at washes on Broadway Avenue with him (co-ordinated by Operations Supervisor) . 6-16-81 City Engineer performed a street funding survey with other cities. 6-22-81 Returned call to Mr. Warner regarding status of petition pre- paration. 7-07-81 Met with consultants to discuss ID petition preparation. 7-09-81 Routing of improvement district data to City Attorney's office. 7-10-81 Memorandum to Mayor Clark followed by discussion with City Manager pertaining to improvement districts. 7-14-81 Received petition packet from consultant (Dibble and Associates) . 7-21-81 Cover letter and petition sent to Mr. Warner. 7-22-81 Mr. Warner called to relate he would be going out of town and did not know when he would be back. (No further contact to date) ACHE ✓G � ... •'1f i o .`Y"t 3 tiai-. rek '9R/Z0N41 ity (94pache 09unction July 21, 1981 Mr. Glen Warner 280 E. Broadway Avenue Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Dear Mr. Warner: In response to your request, the City has had prepared a petition for creating an improvement district for Broadway Avenue from Tomahawk Road to Goldfield Road, as we had previously discussed. Attached hereto are four copies of the petition forms contain- ing a cover letter, estimated assessments, discription of pro- perties, owners names and addresses, and an assessment diagram. Upon your return of these petitions to the City with not less than 51% to 55% of the signatures favoring the improvement, the City will then submit the petitions to the Council for their further action. Along with this letter I am attaching information sheets that will help you to discribe the project and procedures to the property owners. After you have perused these attachments, please call this office for any clarification that is necessary before proceeding to obtain the required signatures. If we can be of any further assistance, please don't hesitate to give us a call. Sincerely, Richard W. Broman Director of Public Works cc: City Council City Manager City Engineer RWB/cc 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION STREET IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PROCEDURES BIDS 8. The request for construction bids is advertised publicly. Sealed con- RECEIVED struction bids are received and publicly opened, at the office of the City Clerk. The bids are checked and the contract is awarded by the City Council to the lowest responsible bidder providing his bid does not exceed the official Engineer's Estimate for construction. Notice of the award is published. 9. Following the publication of the notice of the contract award, the PROTEST property owners have a fifteen-day period during which they may file PERIOD with the City Clerk notice of objections to or defects in the proceed- ings. Defects are waived if such objections are not filed in accordance with State Statues. If the City Council decides that an objection is well taken, the proceedings are abandoned, otherwise the project will proceed. 10. The contract must be executed within five days after the expiration of CONSTRUCTION the period for filing such notice of defects and objections or within CONTRACT five days after objections are rejected. Construction must begin with- in ten days after the contract has been executed. 11 . Construction is completed and final acceptance is made by the City Council, upon the recommendation of the City Engineer. Actual quan- CONSTRUCTION tities of work and final costs are determined and audited. 12. The total cost is distributed among all parcels of property by the Engineering Department in accordance with benefits derived and notice MAIL FINAL of final assessments due are mailed to the property owners with the ASSESSMENTS date of the public hearing on assessments and information regarding methods of making payments 13. The property owners have approximately thirty days in which they may choose to pay all or part of their assessment. At the expira- PAYMENT tion of this thirty-day period, the balance due on all outstanding assessments may be paid over a ten-year period at an interest on the unpaid balance as currently established by the city. July 1981 / Sheet 3 of 3 CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE PAVING IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. BROADWAY AVENUE TOMAHAWK ROAD TO GOLDFIELD ROAD July 14, 1981 ITEM UNIT — NO. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE PRICE 1. Grading Under Pavement 19,500 S.Y. $ 2.50 $ 48,750 2. Asphalt Concrete* 16,500 S.Y. 3.25 53,625 3. Aggregate Base Course** 16,500 S.Y. 3.25 53,625 4. 78" Pipe Culvert 62 L.F. 90.00 5,580 5. 72" Pipe Culvert 60 L.F. 80.00 4,800 6. 66: Pipe Culvert 182 L.F. 70.00 12,740 7. 54" Pipe Culvert 60 L.F. 60.00 3,600 8. 42" Pipe Culvert 180 L.F. 50.00 9,000 9. Headwalls 9 Each 2,000.00 18,000 10. Traffic Control 1 Job 21,938.00 21 ,938 SUBTOTAL $ 231,658 25% Incidentals 57,914 ...•. TOTAL $ 289,572 Pavement Section * 2" A.C. = 0. 11 Ton x $28 = $3.08/S.Y. USE: $3. 25/S.Y. ** 9" A.B.C. = 0.46 Ton x $ 8 = $3.22/S.Y. USE: $3.25/S.Y. - ESTIMATED BOND AMORTIZATIONS. - Lot Size 2.5-acre 1 .25-acre Assessments $9075 I $4538 - YEARLY ASSESSMENT FOR 10 YEARS - Bond Rate 8% 10% 12% I 8% 10% 12% $1352 $1477 $1606 I $676 $739 $803 July 1981 ociee L I of o • CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION STREET IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PROCEDURES PETITIONS 1. Petitions are prepared by the Department of Public Works when paving PREPARED improvements are requested by property owners. rr 2. After petitions have been signed by property owners representing a PETITIONS majority of the equivalent/total frontage contained within the limits PRESENTED of the proposed district and have been presented to the Department of Public Works, the City Council will be asked to authorize the prepara- tion of plans and detailed cost estimates. DESIGN 3. Field surveys, plans, specifications, Ordinance of Intention and Official Engineer's Estimate are prepared. 4. The Ordinance of Intention based on the approved plans and the ORDINANCE OF Official Engineer's Estimate is passed by the City Council. INTENTION S. All property owners within the district are notifi'ed by mail or by personal contact of the proposed project and their estimated share of OTIFICATION & the cost. Applications are furnished for driveway connections to the DRIVE & WALK proposed construction. The property owners are also informed that a APPLICATION fifteen-day period for filing of any written protest will be provided after notices have been posted along the site of the proposed Amok improvement. 6. The Ordinance of Intention is published in a weekly newspaper. PUBLICATION Notices of the passage of the Ordinance are posted along the line of & POSTING the improvement. 7. Once the district has been posted, the property owners have a fifteen day period during which they may file a written protest with the City PROTEST Clerk. The protest must be filed in accordance with State Statues. PERIOD The City Engineer's Office, telephone 982-8002, will be glad to provide detailed information. Unless formal protests are received from property owners representing a majority of the total/equivalent frontage contained within the limits of the district, the city will proceed with the resolution ordering the work and the notice inviting bids. Should protest be sufficient to stop the work the district will be accessed for admini- strative and engineering costs incurred by the city. July 1981 ..utas�.V>?!.'...a•... ..vsa...,z....s. - .- _ _ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ - REQUEST FOR PAVING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. City of Apache Junction Public Works Department Telephone No.. 982-8002 TO THE CITY OF APACHE JUNTION We, the undersigned, desire that the City of Apache Junction ' consider a paving improvement project consisting of. Plant mix asphalt and installation of culverts on Broadway Avenue from Tomahawk Road to Goldfield Road. Curbs and sidewalks are not included Project to be completed I� according to City of Apache Junction standards and ordinances. The cost of the improvements are to be assessed to property according to the benefits derived within the Improvement District area between 330 feet north and 330 feet south of Broadway Avenue from 330 feet west of Tomahawk Road to 330 feet east of Goldfield Road 4nw.a'rn++^�f We understand that if the project is approved, we will have an opportunity to pay for it in cash at completion of construction, or in equal annual installments over a ten-year period at the current applicable interest rate per year on the unpaid balance. TOTAL DISTRICT FRONTAGE 10,529.5' TOTAL ESTIMATE. $289,572 (This estimate is based on recent construction value and the project - moving to construction without &lefty, Ott . petit loin •should be returned within sixty days) NOTE• Signatures may be affixed in the appropriate block on the attached sheets. Figures in frontage column indicate legal/equivalent frontage in district. i ` es _ ci r 01- 6;r';r 1-101k1 1'F`71 f-ION i 011 PU1-31 IC 1 ,,1-11'.f\/1.:Icii- ' rs Cs F!MATED ASS :ShsLIN ;S 1 of 4 NO, OWNER'S N4l;;c & tDONCSSI OCSCRIP1101•:OC 1�!{O,"LRl'YI LOT LI_K J`Pn ,F. /e;t ''!;d i 1 J Mary Currie SW SW SW Sl•! Sec. 22 111 62 I 4_ 1 330' 1$9075 5722 N 25th Drive 8E 2 5 AC SIGN/t I UI:E ^► Phoenix, AZ 85017 r� 2 I Stanley A Peterson SE SW SW SW Sec 22 111 63 I n 1330' S9075 1337 N. 91st P1 8E 2 50 AC Mesa, AZ 85207 3 ` Erwin Hill W2-SW SE SW SW OF Sec 22 648 I 4 165' I$4538 2650 W Union Hills Dr 1N 8E 1 AC 1 Space 336 -- I Phoenix,, AZ 85027 Canell Donald J. SE SW SC SW SW OF Sec 22 - 64C 4 U24' EQ $3410 P 0. Box 1106 1N 8E 62 AC Apache Junction, AZ 85220 5 Ronald K Walton NE SW SE SW SW Sec 22 1N 64A I 4 1 41' EQ Ic1128 1832 C. Broadway 8E 62 AC Aoache Junction, AZ 85220 ` 6 I Louis F Paton SE SE SI•! SW Sec 22 111 6 I I I Box 1541 8E 2.50 AC Phoenix, AZ 85007 C/0 Lerner Sonya SW SW SE SW Sec 22 1N 8E 6 6 iL Q' 1I59915 520 N Kings Rd , 28 2.50 AC Los Angeles, CA 90048 Charles F Donohue SE SW SE SW Sec 22 iN 8C 67 4 1 330' S9075 4214 H Tuckey Ln 2 50 AC Phoenix, AZ 85019 C/0 Frieda Rickena W-132' OF SW SE SE SW ' 1 4 J 13?' _ 1,$26211 Sugar Island SR-Box 51 Sec 22 1N 8E lAC Sault St Marie, MI 49783 • 10--1 Glenn E Warner SW SE SE SW Less W-132' & ._69A 4 17 ' Fajc4813 _.,,j•. 2280 E. Broadway , Less N-75' Sec 22 1N 8C Apache Junction, AZ 85220 1 20 AC 1 J Glenn E Warner I N-75' OF SW SE SE SW less 698 4 23' EQ .S633 2280 E Broadway W-132' Sec. 22 1N 8E .341 AC— Apache Junction, AZ 85220 2j Richard C Spurgeon SE SC SC SW Sec 22 1N 8E 70 J 4 330' —I$9075—_ 10/19 E University Dr ? 5 AC Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Chester Wilkins 112 SW SW SW SE OF Sec. 22 ' 5 (( ' ++ 4538 1N 8E 1 /5 AC _6)A L L165. �J _ 4 Ilowar d L Logsdon F' SW SI1 SW SE OF Sec 2/ C18 I. 5 5165' 15453° —I 2470 C 8roadt.ay 1.N 8C 1 21., Al " Apache Junction, AZ £'5??0 F " ! '' ', I- Robe)t I Garner SE Si' SI! SF Sec 1 66 1 5 1 .37 1 $(0f)/5 1050 1. f;tlr Pi 1'L / 5 AL 11,,i3F Olr r: _ir! 1 1MI:, ( i 'IC 1 ? PETITION fOi PU,31_IC 1o',,- CS MAIL') I4JJ(_J:)1.11 /J l $ 2 of 4 r. NO. 01"NERS !t'!'f la ADDRLSS1 DESCRIPTION or 15?C"rRTY LOT UI_K Samuel R ing W-210' OF S-165' 0f SI' SE 671 J. 5 [I157' [(Q)S4318 205 [1 6th SW SE OF Sec 22 1N 8E S1Gi+/1(UI?C ^ Cheney, WA 99004 17 Peter A. Bun ggraff 11-165' OF SW SC SW SC OF 67D I 5_I 51' EQ_ S1458 5670 Collins Road Sec 22 iN 8E Exc E-121 ' Atena, MT 59601 Id Martin W Peterson E-121' OF S-165' OF SW SE 67C I 5 91' FQ,J ?503 2690 East Broadway S[•1• SE OF Sec 22 114 8E Apache Junction, AZ 85220 12J Faith Fellowship Church E-171' OF N-165' OF SW 'SE 67A 5-1.312+E I_,5, ?5____ I 726 S Solana SW SC OF Sec 22 1N 8E II Apache Junction, AZ 85220 46 AC ( 1 i 2IIJ William E Petersdorf W-90 25' OF S'2 SE SE SW SE 685 1 Si1.,,.2.5.:,LQ1S18,0 391 Brush Rd OF Sec 22 1N 8E Less R/W Miles, MI 49120 !i v •T.k'u,',c4.v' -'Y."V'4Mi"+%'+.'fi::1.:.•e.— r -�. Z1 I Alan L Drysdale I1-90 25' OF N'2 SE SE SW SE _Ind 5 L22'_ _ 5§3 .....- - 724 S Starr Lane OF Sec 22 1N 8E Apache Junction, Al 85220 �{ 221 Leo R Lee Jr Parcel 75.25'x165 00 IN S2 63L56_.�`'FS15:�11__ 1121-244 S W SP 39 SE SE SW SC Sec. 22 1N 8E Bothell, WA 98011 IJ Alan L Drysdale E-75^25' OF H-165 50' OF —E_8D _ 5 199 E0-1 5523 724 S. Starr Lane N'i SC SE SW SE OF Sec 22 Apache Junction, AZ 85220 — 1N 8C 'ON Al fred J Hyde S'i SE SE SW SE OF Sec '22 �68B 15 199' EQ 152723 2760 E Broadway Ave 1N 8E Exc [•1-165 5' E-33' Apache Junction, AZ 85220 ?5J John Dedei tol i s E-165' OF N'i SE SE SW SE OF __EGA_ 5 _33'LQ_ tAQ&_____ 52 N Grand St Sec 22 1N 8E Exc E-33' Cobl eski 1 1, NY 12043 For R/W '6J Marie Mabel Radabaugh S'i SW SW SE SE OF Sec 22 69A 1 5r L2481CQ r56820 339 East Maple St 1N 8E Granville, OH 43023 LZ_J Ross F Lueck N'2 SW SW SE SE 01 Sec 22 6961 5 _8?1CQrj 57255 _ P 0 Box 1214 1N 81- Less R/W ( 125 AC to Apache Junction, AZ 85220 R/W) 1 125 AC `r '8 Clifford A Pfeifer r SE SW SL SC Sec. 7? 1N 8E 70 I 5 330' I59075 2948 E Broadway 2.75 AC Apache Junction, AZ 85220 29� John Lynn Young SW Sr SC SC Sec 2? 1N 81 71 I 5 .1130' 590/5 8062 San Lazaio Cii 2.5 AC ( Buena Pail , CA 90610, Ilan ry Ay Norris• �— SI SI SF SI Sec 7? 1N RI . /_7 I 5 y! 330' $90/� 10909 [ Je'fei n 4d ? 5 AL. i, , ,1 1,, (rt.;_. -. „ ,,, 0,7 An„.:, ,,, ,,,.,, . , „,,„ r ? �r -,. 11r i , 1. 1 ,r: I\ 7 L.1, r ' c I PETITION IOi / FOR PULL IC I. „ 'r?U; , i. r•r i,' I J ES7 !i iA(CD /ISSL,:Si,;L1'11 S Page 3 of 4 NO lOWNL-1;'S r,'�rr,�_ Cr �'nc.;Ess UCSCf:I rr ��:=_'_'�:= _.�i' �-<<, ‘1‘:';”. -_,r..I:__ PTIU, OF 1 i'C.^i_h•I Y LOT I L'1_r. ''_. LI -_,. I. lit,_)`I`1 1 . .. -- 31 1 George 0. Gewitt NE NE NE NE OF Sec 27 114 1 __I 18 I 310' I$9075 4823 Alex Drive 8E 2 5 AC SICG1•:f I URL ON San Jose, CA 95130 —- — I 32 J Theodore Bracke E':, NW NL NE NE OF Sec 27 28 a 18 T 165' $4538 3077 East Broadway 1N 8E 1 25 AC Apache Junction, AZ 85220 33 Edward Ber nade W12 NW NL NE NE OF Sec 77 2A 18 165' $4538 P 0 Box 4486 1N 8E 1 25 AC — �~ �- - Sylmar, CA 91342 .14_ J Leonard L. Contreras NE NW NF NE Sec 27 1N __18 8E 3 1330' L.$9075~ 1322 E. Elton Ave 2 5 AC Mesa, AZ 85204 35 I C/O E Bevilockway NW NW NE NE OF Sec 27 114 ,,_4_. L- 18-_1 330' 19075 3020 Clementine Dr . 8E 2 5 AC Tempe, AZ 85282 6 I Robert L Garner NE NE NW NE Sec 1N 8E _5 __L_18�� 330'-�I C9075~�� 1060 E 8th P1 2 5 AC Mesa, AZ 85201 ,7 Robert V Cook E'2 NW NL 11t•1 NE OF Sec 2/ 6A ( 18 TT 5' I5 53 ~. r 2687 E Broadway 1N 8E 1 25 AC Apache Junction, AZ 85220 �- ---- • 3d Katieh Merryman t•P2 NW NE NW NE OF Sec 27 6B -I 18 11G5' ___J54538 Rt 1 Box 1170 111 8E 1 25 AC ^ Zillah, WA 98953 ad Lee R. Foster NE NW NW NE OF Sec 27 1N , 7 �1_ 18.,�330' _.1 ~� 2215 N. l l th Ave 8E 2.5 AC ..__ Phoenix, AZ 85000 • 401 Gerald L. Breed E1/2 NW NW NW NE OF Sec 27 8A 1818 ( 165' _ J S4538 ",, ,,.-, 6699 Riverside Dr 1N 8E 1 25 AC Chino, CA 91710 . _ __ _ __ __ I( aJ C/0 Karen Tash I W'2, NW NW NW NE OF Se( . 27 _;3G I . 18 1165' . $4538 837 S Cortez Rd 1N SE 1 25 AC -j Apache Junction, AZ 85220 ^� I ;I Margaret Barwick F-264' OF N'1 N', NL NC NW 1D I 19 198' EQ I $5445 .1 3612 N Cosbey St Sec 27 1N 8E 1 AC Baldwin Park, CA 91706 a3 Robert Hornduckle F-264' OF S', N'1 NE NE NW— 1B 19 166' I - Si Rt. 7 Box 2041-13 Sec 27 1N 8C 1 AC •----�-19_{- _I_Q _. Apache Junction, A7 85220 M_J'..Robert Ilor ndur.l.le --M'—` F-137' Of Id-396' Of 11)'CL_ MIC+��19,•_I •1 ;)' .._. � 53630 _ Rt 7 box 2041-13 NL Ni! Of Src 2/ 1N ill 1 AC i Apache Junction, Al 85270 ;.,« .: ;•'i5_? Gar I1 1ldvid • ---- 'I;-)64 01 1,2 1'I NI 1::r `'r•c i IA ( 19 1 'i,,' ;c�•�I,`I 2041 1 Droi i'iy )7 114 r1 ) AC 01144 r .z..-a.r......,...•..--•- .,. ....,.�.W......_ l•' 1 ,i• or i„ JI,1,; 1 L- l'•_ • PE-1 I '1Oi I c};; I'U-'•r_IC; 11•;1': ' LS rli,;/7L:U fl'35r;ib!1 1\'I5 4 of 4 No 10.''NFT?..S ,;A► 1= c �:ca;?I.�:,�acscr;, > >;:or rig t:> �� _._� -__5, _ ��L „E f TIc c.'rl?rl LOT (iL1, ' rlU !i. t ` i_•'i:1,)_ 46_1 Raymond flat gal it N'_ NE NW lIE NW Sec 27 1N _ 1N I _ 19 I c?_243' rgjc6o 10250 [leach Blvd Apt 134 8L 1 25 AC ;16A11, U1.L Stanton, CA 90680 47 Charles T Nerrmans S', NC NW NE NW Sec 27 1N 3J 1 19 532' EQ LS2255 976 S. Cowman 8E 1 25 AC Apache Junction, Al 85220 . 48 Leslie Andreotti N'; NW NW NC NW OF Sec 27 3a 1 19 248' EQ L56820 1505 Griffith P1 1N 8E 1 25 AC — Tracy, CA 95376 49 I Steve J Cavender S', NW NW NE NW or Sec 27 _3131- 12L3' EQ [12283 2661 E Bramble Ave iN 8E 1.25 AC Mesa, A7 85204 50 1 Frank l'lickoleski NE NC NW NW less NW NE NW NU 4A 19 I 206' CQ 155665 1985 East Broadway Sec 27 1N 8E 2AC Apache Junction, AL 85220 51 Frank ilicloleski NW NE NE NW NW Sec. 2/ 1N� J_ 19 124' CO[S3410 1985 East Broadway 8E 50 AC Apache Junction, AZ 85220 T_ �i2 j i-rederick DeSimone NE NW NL NW NW OF Sec 27 ��1 j24' E0 h_4J.p___ 25 Gladstone St 1N 8E 625 AC East Boston, MA 07128 53 I Fredel ickDeSimone NW NW NE NW NIL OF Sec 27 4E L 19 1 124' CQ 153410 �1 25 Gladstone St 1N bE 625 AC East Boston, HA 02128 54 Frederick DeSimone S', NW NE NW NW OF Sec 27 46 J 19 182' EQ F2255 25 Gladstone St 1N 8E 1 25 AC East Goston, MA 02128 55 Daniel B Liemandt N'= E', NW NW NW Sec. 27 1N 6C� 19_ 330' J S9075 _J 15 S 1st St , A 210 8E 2.5 AC _ _ . „,_.w,.,. „.,. �. •-. Minneapolis, MN 55401 ad Dawn Nehl s I•,2 NW NW NW Sec. 27 1N 7 I 19 �30' I $9075 612 N Signal Butte 8E 5AC Apache Junction, AZ 85220 �I la 1 I I ¢ I O I I ICI I t l l Id I I I l i ! I 1 1 0 I I 0 1 i i I I� I i ' ' ,( I 101.00 Si I I MI ar I 11.,.a0 Srar O I 1 101%00 S.r 1 I 101100/r I II 1 1C1100 a.r. ! .a.a[U 1rI 10 I I I10■S00 Ir ' I + /� L- —� L-----J =T=x�r I ..lava, _J 1 L i II 5 r -iin \ 5 � _I- I i 1 1 I S 1 1 i I I I, 11 x:a Sf =•2=5 =T 205 1 F 0. I N.a0 s.r N•so SI :d .s 110 Sr I. l IGI IO Y v' ISOr! ! I 1$ 1 x1T moo s.r. i0e 1 s r NII IL I r /r 1=0 a.r I ;i0 sr ^ — l I I I i L .ao ar o ,.10 srJO .••sc sr 'T1 L — _itiI _ . -- _ s -JN L_ - • ILt I I 1. SC...._--. IC., CITY L1111T LINE I l • • 1 1p, 1 I r .c ' IT Lt®Liir zT r1 I-1 'a.uo s.r In 1a Sr p.;aai 1=• n,ne s a..;c s.r ¢ 1 I 1 1 13 O I I g I 1 .r 1 1 1 I I 28g I i 2S i ( '3� / I MJ•.10 Sr A,.10 S F I o e S o o a F 1 1 I 11 1^'/ 1 I I 101.100 I r I I roe 100 s r I 1 10.100 a r /I I 1 i l 1 1 I IG 1 19 I I✓I J) s II C) r l 1 / 1 1 1 l• 1 —J L �BROADWAY p-- _T_! 1 _T—_ I I ;OOr in,•sasrlw:ersd.:'s_:.c1esr I a. aoa.r'_I Lti _I...I L— J L__ , I 1 I 1 1 1 1 i t I l T� � r / 1 I ;1. ! 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I I II 1 I SI (DI 0 I , 39 I`I I 39 3T 1 I O I¢I I 3s ! ! O ^^' ip 1 33 O I I O ,Wi I 1 I S0•SO 1• a.•sO IL I I we w0 s.r Ia la.,.ao:r s.•.ao Sri I ae.000 S.F. l.0 I we e00 if I I 101.e00 SY. I.JI I5.,.a0 Sr a�•10 s F I I 101 100 a.r I I i I I I 1< I I IN 1 I I ic' I I I o. I I ( -14 L----_J L--__ JN� L_____J L —J6 L_____J L--- —_1'"j L_= --J L------�,1 ;•• EGEND 0 aSTRiCTl11004117' BROADWAY AVENUE osTeKr eouucaer . ravC11EMT 111117s CITY CF I.PACME .UNCTION 1101Pvlar COOCSE11T TOMAHAWK ROAD TO GOLDFIELD ROAD PAVING IMPROVEMENT D STRICT NO ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM Jul.'14.1,11 1 CO'OIULnOS 1.10 4E15 is.r' I 51,1 i I y i • i I • 1 PEA rr 4 ..' "' 1. , A.„O U i ..143.c ' ��; � St � Z "41RIZON1)• `pity o &4pache 02unction September 9, 1981 .. MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGER 1— FROM: i'LL;Y7JOE GERO, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SUBJECT: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION "MINUTES" Attached are the approved "Minutes" of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of August 11 , 1981 . Please have the original "Minutes" inserted into the "Minutes Book." JWG:rin Attch. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA AUGUST 11, 1981 7:00 P M In Attendance Absent Guests 'male George Baljo, Chairman Pat Smith Mayor Clarke Mildred Baker, Vice Chairman Ilene Taylor Councilman Hudson Ron Kell (Vacation) Councilman Damiano Roger Hall Richard Oltman Dale Burfiend, Board Member John Hutchens (Vacation) Rich Broman, Staff Harry Polomskey Dick Bryant, Staff Hank Steelsmith, Liaison Joe Gero, Executive Secretary Becky Nendza, Recording Secretary Chuck Newcomer, Staff Synopsis 1 Approval of "Minutes" dated July 14, 1981 2 Pinal County Housing Authority Application 3. Street Name Amendments 4. Street Sign Report 5 Dr Downs - Airport Study 6. Committee Reports 7 Land Use Plan Program 8 Information and Reports 1 Chairman called the meeting to order at 7 05 p m and asked the Recording Secretary to call the roll. 2 Ms Nendza called the roll, determining six (6) members present as indicated above. 3. Chairman announced there were no public hearing cases for the evening and the meeting would be a business meeting He recognized Mayor Clarke and other guests comprising the audience, as listed above. He then proceeded by requesting a motion to accept the "Minutes" dated July 14, 1981. 4. Kell/Hall M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the "Minutes" dated July 14, 1981, be accepted, as written." The motion passed 3-0-3, with Mr Baljo, Mr Hutchens, and Mr Polomskey voting "present" since they did not attend the July 14 meeting. 5 Chairman announced "Rules of Conduct" have been revised and changes will be presented and discussed at the next meeting. He presented changes in the agenda and wel- comed Councilman Steelsmith as Liaison to the Planning and Zoning Commission The first item of business was the Pinal County Housing Authority application Staff was called on to brief the commission. 6 Mr Gero deferred to Councilman Hudson, who was present as a member of the county housing authority. Ask Planning and Zoning Commission "Minutes" August 11, 1981 Page Two 7 Councilman Hudson described the public housing program and gave some examples of how the city could benefit by its function locally However, a Housing Assistance Plan (HAP) was found to be required, Apache Junction has no such plan and, therefore, does not currently qualify for this program. Pinal County Housing Authority has applied for twenty-five houses to be built under this program in the vicinity of Apache Junction. No more than twelve houses would be built in a cluster• six three-bedroom houses, nineteen one-bedroom houses He explained that his purpose was to obtain a recom- mendation from the city concerning its views of this project. Questions were invited. Various members of the commission requested affirmation that such a project would benefit the city and how the city would benefit Mr. Hudson answered and explained that the commission is only being asked to provide a recom- mendation for the city regarding its position in the matter of Pinal County's application, in favor/opposed/ neutral 8 Dale Burfiend introduced himself and spoke in favor of the matter. 9 Chairman called for a recommendation 10. Hutchens/Baker M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Com- mission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that recommendation be made in favor of the Pinal County Housing Authority application, as written, in the ( Apache Junction area." The motion passed 5-0-1, with Mr Hall abstaining 11 Chairman called for staff to brief the commission on the next agenda item, "Street Name Amendments." 12 Mr Gero explained that it is the Zoning Administrator's re- sponsibility to recommend to the Planning and Zoning Commission street name changes, when needed. Certain Adak alignments in the city are referred to by names which are established through use, and the Zoning Administrator recommends these names be adopted officially, also, in- correct prefixes and suffixes are used on existing streets, there are roadway alignments needing to be named that have no recommended names He suggested the commission take this issue under con- , sideration and present recommendations for these street names at the next meeting. 13. Chairman requested staff to prepare a list of suggested street names. The item was tabled until the next regular meeting of the commission. He called upon the City Engineer to brief the commission on the next agenda item, "Street Signs." 14 Mr Bryant presented a list of recommended alterations in the present street sign system two new signs, fifteen changes, and eleven deletions He responded to concern over the Royal Palm Boulevard/Broadway Avenue intersection at Route 60 15 Mr Kell asked if any changes to the approved Street Naming Map would result from this. 16 Mr Gero explained that the purpose is to promote compliance with the street names the City Council has adopted, per the map In addition, direction is sought in submitting to the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) the proposed .4114, Planning and Zoning Commission "Minutes" August 11, 1981 Page Three 16 Mr Gero (Cont'd.) alterations involving their signs within the city. 17. Chairman called for a motion. 18 Kell/Hutchens M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning /1./\ Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that approval of the street sign changes, as presented by the city engineer, be recommended " The motion passed unanimously 19. Chairman asked that the commission be briefed on the next agenda item, "Airport Study." 20. Dr. Downs introduced himself as an ex-officio member of the Airport Commission, and he read a memorandum asking several questions concerning the annexation of land for the proposed airport. 21 Chairman following lengthy discussion and concerns regarding the legal aspects of the Airport Commission request, was advised by Mayor Clarke that the matter should be submitted directly to the Council if legal opinion was to be requested Being made aware of this, Dr Downs withdrew the request. The chairman recessed » ,µme_ �,,,,„:_K., �„ the meeting for five minutes The meeting was reconvened and the subcommittee chairman was requested to brief the commission on their activities 22 Mr Kell summarized the activities of the Equine Committee. 1) has defined the issue and 2) has developed a study process in order to establish a position to recommend to the Council concerning the use of horses in the city, Rules Committee has drafted "Commission Rules" and the final draft is presented to the commission for approval at the next regular meeting. The need for a housing committee was explored and a subcommittee of four people was formed to prepare a recommendation to Council Mr Baljo, Mrs. Baker, Mrs Taylor, Mr. Hall Manufactured Housing Committee was suggested to be dissolved and reappointed at a more convenient time. 23 Chairman asked staff to brief the commission on the next agenda item, "Land Use Plan " 24 Mr. Gero presented, as requested by the commission at the last meeting, a strategy for preparing a Land Use Plan recommendation It was suggested that the commission decide if other agencies were to be involved and, if so, which agencies, and a committee be formed with the commission indicating who should be its members. The strategy schedule was explained and the areas needing to be studied were presented 25 Chairman invited questions and comments 26 Councilman Hudson stressed the importance of working within a schedule and meeting prescribed deadlines when working with a grant agency bk Planning and Zoning Commission "Minutes" August 11, 1981 Page Four 27. Mr. Kell expressed concern about the short period of time remaining to complete this project 28 Mr. Gero responded that this must take priority since it is the basis for other like projects He suggested meeting once each week, except for those weeks in which the commission regularly meets. 29. Chairman assigned the entire Planning and Zoning Commission as members of the Land Use Plan Committee with staff members serving as assigned by the Executive Secre- tary and City Manager. 30 Mr. Kell asked if a motion was in order to accept the schedule as presented by Mr. Gero. 31 Chairman indicated that he would appoint a Land Use Plan Committee and the committee would determine the schedule The committee meetings would be held on Tuesday evenings at 7.00 p.m 32 Mr Gero distributed miscellaneous materials of information to the commission members and explained their con- tents. 33. Chairman called for a motion to adjourn 34 Baker/Hutchens M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the meeting of August 11, 1981, be adjourned " 35 Chairman adjourned the meeting at 10 10 p m , there being no objection Respectfully submitted, V Joseph 4. Gero Amok Executive Secretary Approved- !;c 'ts I' George 'aljo Chairman . The CableTelevision 0 Information Center • L_ . ,, , „. L • .,_..,..... , . . , . .. , . ., , . • ._ ` , _.. , , . , . . , , , ., , .. . .. . ,,, , . . - - ‘ A SUGGESTED PROCEDURE: An Approach to Local Authorization of • Cable Television it • .. - arse. "�*5��rx, df 1}�'�" �y��"#�• � - - • t awl yYt.: .. • t aj 4 xA "` , l'~' ' r"y -s '' y�i7w 411 SJ' S � �M ma X. �1 x • �a?•* �*ate ` 2100 M STREET,N W •WASHINGTON.D C 20037•(202)872-8888 s - ; ''nr-W f: t .%*i6 Lt M Y yy A SUGGESTED PROCEDURE: An Approach to Local Authorization of Cable Television ..., i . -_, :, -,1 ....., or- ofik,„- ilk ;i,,,w, .,,,,,,,• ...c.. 0 2 AW y CABLE TELEVISION INFORMATION CENTER ,., . The Urban Institute ‘: 2100 Vi Street, N .W., Washington, D .C. 20037 :Yt^4 \ d ± \ \ • < \ PREFACE This doc ument was prepared by the Cable Television Informaion Center under grants from the Ford Foundation and the John and Mary R. Markle Foundation to The Urban Institute The primary function of the center's publications program is to provide policy makers in local and state governments with the information and anti � ly tical tools required to arrive at optimum policies and procedures fo r the development of cable television in the public interest. � . - 4 } 1 % :ter+r'.�'::,- •r ., r. - - The CableTelevision • } . Information Center . - A SUGGESTED PROCEDURE: • An Approach to Local Authorization of Cable Television _ e_' Y + t fi .k R S ir a fir £ ;,, s • .�t fx � i • wY•sn• x a. , 0 w - va _ { a•'YtYtiy r 2100 M STREET,N W •WASHINGTON D C.20037. 202 872-8888 `� J-. 5 INTRODUCTION This guide suggests essential steps and issues which help ensure that well- informed decisions are made by those responsible for developing broadband communications systems for a community The following discussion has two functions first, it is a checklist in determining how a cable system should be established in compliance with federal regulation, and second, it is a guide to areas where assistance may be needed to assure a thoughtful process Its objective is to set forth for public officials a general view of a process by which issues may be considered, local legislation written, an operator selected and the system constructed. The principal recommendation is that local officials take the initiative to decide the kind of cable system they want, rather than wait to decide be- tween the alternatives others present. This guide begins with a short discussion of federal guidelines and their impact on this process. This is followed by a suggested procedure, examined in each of the five phases of cable development. organization, study, legisla- tion, applicant selection and supervision-enforcement. For each phase there is a list of issues or questions which must be resolved prior to that stage of cable development and the procedure for dealing with them The following is an outline of a suggested procedure A Suggested Procedure I ORGANIZING PHASE Ai^ A Develop Basic Understanding of Cable Issues B Select Mechanism for Study II STUDY PHASE A. Establish Study Procedures B Identify Issues for Study III LEGISLATION PHASE A. Identify Legal Restrictions on Local Regulation, Federal,State and Local Limitations B Establish Procedure for Writing and Enacting Ordinance with Public Participation C Draft Proposed Ordinance D Enact an Ordinance IV APPLICANT SELECTION PROCESS A. Decide How to Select Franchisee B Prepare Application Form C Develop Public Proceeding that will Afford Due Process D. After Franchisee has been Selected, Determine What Tasks Remain before System Construction Begins V SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT PHASE A Determine Responsibility for Supervision and Enforcement B. Develop Process for Operation of the Supervisory Body I ARBITRATE DAY TO DAY DISPUTES 2 REVIEW OVERALL SYSTEM OPERATION 3 GUARANTEE COMPLIANCE WITH RESPECT TO OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL i 'r 6 Federal Regulation of Cable and Its Impact on the Local Process Cable television, because it is a link in interstate communications, falls within the regulatory power of the Federal Communications Commission. The commission has set national policies and regulations which provide a framework for regulation However, the most fundamental aspects of cable regulation, such as who will operate a system and what the boundaries of a service area will be, are questions determined by local governments. A local process must take into account the procedural require- ments and standards set by the FCC for local regulation. Specifically, the FCC order issuing the federal guidelines states that before a cable system commences operation with a broadcast signal, it must obtain a certificate of compliance from the Commission The appli- cation for such a certificate must contain (Section 76 31 (a)(1) a copy of the franchise and a detailed statement showing that the franchise author- ity has considered in a public proceeding the system operator's legal, character, financial, technical, and other qualifications, and the adequacy and feasibility of construction arrangements We expect that franchising authorities will publicly invite applications, that all applications will be placed on public file, that notice of such filings will be given, that where appropriate a public hearing will be held to afford all interested persons an opportunity to testify on the qualifications of the applicants, and that the franchising authority will issue a public report setting forth the basis for its action Such public participation in the franchising process is necessary to assure that the needs and desires of all segments of the community are carefully considered. A Suggested Procedure ORGANIZING PHASE A franchising authority has two organizing tasks to develop a basic understanding of cable issues, and to select a mechanism to gather the information on which to base cable decisions. A. Develop Basic Understanding of Cable Issues Public officials will need to learn the basic dimensions of cable, what it is and how it works. They should understand the federal, state and local regulatory framework and give thought to the political, social, educational, economic and cultural implications for the community. At this point in cable's development it is still possible to shape the technology to serve the public. To have a responsible influence public officials will want to understand cable communications and the issues that bear on the decisions they will be required to make B. Select Mechanism for Study Consideration should be given to creating or identifying a mechanism to gather information on which to base well-informed cable decisions. Among the concerns involved are the study's intent and the talent needed to accomplish the study 1 STUDY INTENT The local franchising authority has responsibility for two critical decisions the kind of system to be built, and who will operate it. Mechanisms such as 7 committees vary from those delegated responsibility for both functions to those limited to a very specialized area Information gathering options include a full-scale feasability study, a survey of the options available to the municipality or an in-depth study of selected issues The study's scope is determined by the level of information considered necessary to make decisions, tempered by re- source and time limitations 2 TALENT NEEDED Before selecting a study format, the community should examine the kinds of talent needed for the study and its availability. Technical skills essential to the understanding and development of a cable system fall into three basic areas legal, engineering and financial. In addition, public administrative and urban analytical skills are essential in examining potential municipal use of a cable system. All sectors of the community may be considered as resources for talent• government (elected officials and professional staff), school system (board members, administrators, teachers), university community, business and legal community, religious community, civic organizations Any talent needs, including consultants, which cannot be met on a volunteer basis should be detailed for budgetary requirements 3. TYPES OF COMMITTEE STRUCTURES a. Local Governing Body Study Committee Local legislators have four basic areas of responsibility in regulating cable television general investigation of the issues, passage of ordinances, selection of ownership, and supervision and enforcement of regulations applying to the system. : To fulfill these obligations, policy makers must obtain the necessary infor- mation on which to base decisions in each area. The data can be gathered and evaluated by a committee of the whole, a standing committee, or a specifically appointed ad hoc committee. The governing body may want a special study prepared by its professional staff or can consider commission- ing a study. b. Internal Municipal Studies It is a common practice for governmental units to undertake self-con- tained studies of current issues Some Jurisdictions have research services which carry out studies on a regular basis, in others, the study may be done by a committee representative of city departments or under the direction of a single department—often the planning department or the office of the chief executive. The purpose is to provide city officials with sufficient information to make decisions in the best interest of the municipality The study can also serve to educate these officials and to collect information on possible munic- ipal uses of the cable system c Public Study Commission Study commissions offer considerable flexibility because they can include members of the public to augment the skills available within the local gov- :; ernment Such a committee's membership includes elected officials and pro- fessional city staff together with educators, members of the business and legal communities, and representatives of community and civic groups • r,` • 9 -• 8 The purpose of the commission's appointment can range from a full feasi- bility study to a survey of the community's sense about the utilization of cable television d. Regional Commissions Because cable television is a communications medium with the capacity to interconnect with systems of adjacent governmental units, groups of neigh- boring communities often decide to evaluate cable communications issues from a regional perspective. The mechanism used for such an approach is generally one of the following. i An Existing Structure Many communities belong to regional planning commissions or area councils of government—convenient structures for comprehensive area cable studies. Using an existing mechanism provides the immediate bene- fits of a regional perspective to local issues, and perhaps additional re- sources. Typically, this type of structure can be used only to study and plan cable systems, because the mechanism rarely has the legal authority to pass legislation or grant a franchise ii A Structure Created Expressly for Cable Communications Study Group. Recently, some governmental units have joined together for the specific purpose of developing a regional plan for cable television. This usually has been effected by each participating municipality approving enabling legislation designating the city's representative(s) on the committee, allocating funds and defining the commission's • purpose Study/Franchise Authority In other instances, the intergovern- mental cooperative venture could be expanded to grant a franchise, subject to the veto of each participating city However, many state constitutional, statutory, and home-rule provisions preclude this type of action 4. FUNDING Budgets for cable committees vary greatly depending upon the scope of their responsibility, the expertise of their personnel, and the time available. The budget should, of course, be established by the committee in conjunction with the authorizing authority. Factors to be considered when determining costs include professional and clerical support staff, outside consultancy, and public information materials. The franchising authority need not be considered the sole source of funds The federal government or local and national foundations may also be sources. In the future, funds may be available through state planning or development departments The selection of a study structure in a community marks the completion of the organizing stage. Using this process, the franchising authority will have assessed its interest in terms of cable and created a procedure for obtaining the information necessary for its decisions on the development of cable television. II. STUDY PHASE Because of the varied problems in municipalities and the different conceivable possible approaches, it is impossible to establish a complete list of cable issues to be studied. The committee should follow a procedure designed to maximize resources ti and cover the broadest range of issues. The following study phase presents an ap- proach to administrative problems and a list of substantive questions. These ques- tions by no means exhaust the issues surrounding local involvement in cable develop- ment, they serve only to indicate the scope of the issues. A. Establish Study Procedures A study will not proceed easily or automatically. Its intent will be realized only if its scope and rationale are carefully determined, its budgetary and personnel requirements precisely established, and timing or duration carefully fixed Before embarking on any study the cable committee should define with its authorizing body * The reason for carrying out the study * How the study will be utilized * How the public will participate (public hearings) * Budget and staff for the study * Deadlines for the study A useful procedure for coordinating a study to consider issues such as the ones identified below in B might include the following steps. * Breaking down issues into manageable areas * Establishment of study groups (subcommittees) * Determination of need and use of consultants * Establishment of study timetables * Public participation (workplan for public involvement, calendar and mecha- nism for involvement of advocate groups and general public, community education materials, publicity, circulation of final report) B Identify Issues for Study 1. WHAT KINDS OF SERVICES SHOULD A CABLE SYSTEM PROVIDE IN A COMMUNITY? * What kinds of services does cable technology now permit? * What are the technological developments that will affect the availability of future services as a cable system develops? * What services does the community desire? * What is the likely cost of supplying public services? * What possible sources of revenue (subscriber or non-subscriber) could sup- port public services? 2 WHAT FEATURES OF SYSTEM DESIGN INFLUENCE CABLE COM- MUNICATIONS SERVICES AND WHAT ARE THE RELATED COSTS? * What channel capacity will the community need? * What level of two-way capacity will the community require and when will increased two-way capabilities be needed? * How many program origination facilities will be required? Where should they be located * Should the community consider channels designated for special purposes? * What costs do these issues of system design entail for the cable system and for the community? 10 3 HOW SHOULD THE SYSTEM BE DEVELOPED TO SERVE IDENTIFIABLE COMMUNITIES AND GROUPS? * What are the socio-economic trends in the community? * Do the service requirements dictate specific areas of service? * How will possible service plans influence existing communities and rede- velopment plans? * What differences exist between a system designed for general residential subscribers and one designed to serve commercial and institutional users? How are their needs compatible? * What aspects of the system's design need to be considered with regard to service areas and their use as a mechanism for centralization and decentral- ization? * Is the system required to be technologically compatible for interconnec- tion with others? * What problems does any particular area of the city present in terms of construction and the time needed to extend service? 4. WHAT WILL BE THE FORM OF OWNERSHIP? * Will there be one form or several, depending on the number of service areas? * Will these include municipal, commercial, subscriber-owned, community nonprofit? * What are the issues raised by encouraging local and minority participa- tion? * What impact would form of operation have on the economy and commu- nity in terms of revenues, employment and financing construction? 5. IF THE SYSTEM IS NOT OWNED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, WHAT PROCEDURES WILL BE NECESSARY FOR REGULATION? * Who has been given responsibility for writing the ordinance? * What kind of application form should be used? * How will the applicants be selected? * What enforcement and compliance procedures for rate review should exist for complaints from both channel users and subscribers? 6. IF THE SYSTEM IS OWNED BY THE MUNICIPALITY, WHAT REGULATORY PROCEDURES WILL BE NECESSARY? * Will an ordinance be adopted to govern the municipality's own operation of the system? * Will a city department operate the system? If so, how will problems related to government control of a communications system be resolved? If not, how will the system be operated? 7 THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE ORDINANCE OUTLINE PRESENTED IN THE LEGISLATIVE PHASE MUST BE EXAMINED The completion of the study phase should give the local franchising author- ity sufficient information on which to base its decision concerning cable televi- sion Once a direction has been clearly established, it is important to develop 11 sound legislation which will protect the rights of the franchising authority not only during the applicant selection process, but in the system's development and use. Ill. LEGISLATION PHASE In terms of impact, this phase of the process is the most vital. In the legislative process the franchising authority makes and formalizes its decisions about cable television All provisions it considers necessary and important to its cable system must be embodied in this ordinance Requirements omitted from the ordinance, despite assurances to the contrary, con seldom be implemented In the development of its legislation, the community might take the following measures A. Identify Legal Restrictions on Local Regulation, Federal and State and Local Limitations B. Establish Procedural Mechanism for Writing and Enacting the Ordinance With Public Participation C. Draft Proposed Ordinance The contents of the ordinance are, of course, a matter for local decision, but it might be organized as indicated 1. PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE AND NATURE OF THE GRANT— THE JURISDICTIONAL BASIS FOR THE FRANCHISING AUTHORITY'S POWER 2 SHORT TITLE 3 DEFINITIONS 4 PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE LENGTH, RENEWAL AND TRANSFER OF CERTIFICATE OR FRANCHISE a. Length of Franchise b Renewal c. Transfers, Assignments 5 FRANCHISE TERRITORY—EXTENSION OF SERVICE 6 SYSTEM DESIGN a. Channel Capacity b Channel Uses c Access Programming Facilities d. Specialized Services—Point to Point Service e Two-Way Provisions and Subscriber Privacy f Interconnection g Underground and Aboveground Installation Requirements 7. TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 8 LOCAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK a. Procedure for Day-to-Day Regulation b. Functions to be Regulated i Construction Timetables, Provision Of Service Upon Consumer Demand 12 --644 u Legislation of Specialized Services iii. Maintenance and Alteration After Construction 10 iv Rates v Franchise Fees vi Employment Requirements vii. Consumer Complaints viii Use of Streets, Pole Attachments c Method for Resolving Disputes d. Records and Reports, Notice of Documents Filed With Other Agencies e Sanctions, Penalties, Enforcement f Indemnification, Insurance, Liability for Damages g Foreclosure, Receivership D Enact an Ordinance At this point, the franchise authority formally makes its decisions about the development of its cable television system and the purpose it will serve. A strong, well written ordinance protects the franchising authority and assists the applicants in preparing relevant applications It serves as the basis for the applicant selection process. IV APPLICANT SELECTION PHASE The ordinance defines the relationship between the franchising authority and the cable operator At the same time, the ordinance should prescribe the method for choosing the franchisee The skilled use of a comprehensive application form in an open public proceeding can help ensure the selection of an appropriate operator for the system. This selection process can be bypassed only if the franchising authority has decided to develop a cable system under municipal ownership. In the development of the applicant selection process, local officials must address a number of issues A. Decide How to Select Franchisee 1 THE FRANCHISING AUTHORITY The franchising authority may wish to retain control throughout the entire application selection process and make the final decision on the franchise. 2. DESIGNATED AUTHORITY The franchising authority may want to designate a citizens committee, city council subcommittee, or some other body to make recommendations regard- ing qualified applicants who should be considered to receive the franchise. Only rarely may a mayor, city council, or board of commissioners delegate its legisla- tive authority to such an appointed group B. Prepare An Application Form A detailed statement of the information which the franchise applicants will be required to furnish should be developed and used by each applicant. The more specific the requirements, the easier the selection unit's task of evaluating the 411) application 13 The application form must require information concerning the applicant's legal, character, financial, technical, and other qualifications Additionally, the franchis- ing authority must receive information relevant to the applicant's plans to provide adequate and feasible construction arrangements The application form should reflect these and all other qualifications required by the ordinance. If the franchising authority has decided to place particular emphasis on some areas of the application, it should make that decision known to all applicants and require explicit information relevant to those areas of emphasis C. Develop Public Proceeding that Will Afford Due Process The FCC requires that a franchising authority consider a franchisee's qualifica- tions to operate the system in a "full public proceeding" that will ensure that all interests in the community are carefully considered To achieve fairness the com- mission has stated that the selection process under ordinary circumstances should include: 1. PUBLICLY INVITED APPLICATIONS 2 APPLICATIONS PLACED ON PUBLIC FILES 3 NOTICE GIVEN TO THE COMMUNITY OF FILINGS 4 AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO TESTIFY ON THE APPLICANT'S QUALIFICATIONS (In this respect the commission has suggested that an appropriate means of offering this opportunity would be a public hearing) 5. A PUBLIC REPORT BY THE FRANCHISING AUTHORITY SETTING FORTH THE BASIS OF ITS ACTION D. After Franchisee has been Selected, Determine What Tasks Remain Before System Construction Begins 1. WAIVER If any of the franchise requirements are inconsistent with the FCC's rules, . the franchising authority should ensure that the applicant will seek a waiver from the commission 2 CERTIFICATION The franchising authority should make certain that all the necessary steps for FCC certification are completed and the application for certification is filed promptly Once the franchising process is complete, many municipalities have considered their responsibilities ended However, to ensure full use and development of a cable system, the city must continue to participate V. SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT PHASE The franchising authority should establish an efficient method of monitoring the construction and operation of the cable system and enforcing the ordinance and franchise requirements, proceeding as indicated below However, the authority should be certain the issues considered here are first clearly specified in its ordi- nance A Determine Responsibility for Supervision and Enforcement 41) A regulatory body created for the express purpose of monitoring all facets of the cable system 14 * The city council or some established government committee * The office of a city official, i e , mayor, city manager, or new department B Develop Process for Operation of the Supervisory Body 1 DAY-TO-DAY ISSUES a. Consumer Complaints b Disputes among City, Operator, and Consumers c Fair Employment Practices d. Development, Management and Control of the Government Channel e. Development of the Other Access Channels f Rates g. Construction Timetables and Standards 2 OVERALL OPERATION OF THE SYSTEM a Review of Finances for Rate Adjustment b Modernization of Technical Aspects c Ensuring Adherence to Amendments to Federal and State Regulations 3. TRANSACTIONS CONCERNING OWNERSHIP OR CONTROL OF FACILITIES a. Franchise Transfer and Transfer of Control of Ownership b Franchise Renewal c Franchise Revocation d. Orderly Enforcement of Buy-Back or Lease-Back Provisions e Receivership and Foreclosure Provisions CONCLUSION • The above process, intended to be general in its description, rapidly becomes complex when each of the issues that are raised is translated into specifics by local communities In approaching the consideration of cable the franchising authority should attempt to establish its own schedule for considering the many problems raised, rather than reacting to specific franchise applicants. Many issues will be politically and socially sensitive Federal regulations are complex and continually under modification New technology is constantly changing the state of the art To appropriately consider the dynamic and exciting future that cable promises, a com- munity will want to focus on two goals * A system that meets present needs, yet is flexible enough to take advantage of future developments * Regulations that conform to federal requirements yet permit a community to control the development of the system so that it can accommodate changes in technology CABLE TELEVISION INFORMATION CENTER MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP--POLITICAL, PHILOSOPHICAL AND PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS There are no universal hard facts or accepted truths on municipal ownership of cable. Except where private operators are unwilling to invest, one is hard pressed to point to an inevitable or even logical decision for (or against) muni- cipal ownership. Instead, there tend to be arguments and philosophies represented by individuals in separate camps. Actual consideration of public ownership of cable communications systems re- quires a city to consider a number of complex issues. Although not an exhaustive list, the following are some of the issues that should be thought out: • Fundamentally, what does the city want and expect from a cable sys- tem, now and in the future? Is the goal to make money for the city? Will the emphasis be on the service dimensions of the system? Are lower rates an objective? Will the system be viewed as an essential public utility or as a legitimate private business? • Are there mechanisms at the disposal of the city for financing the cable system both in terms of initial capital outlays and continuing capital improvements during the life of the system? • Will the city have the necessary resources--high quality manpower as well as capital--to operate the system in the best interest of the public? • If local programming is produced, how will the city deal with issues and charges of government control of speech and press, government con- trol of private interprise? • What can be achieved by public ownership that cannot be achieved by regulation? 2 PERSPECTIVES ON PUBLIC OWNERSHIP The question of public ownership has been the focus of substantial atten- tion, discussion and debate in the last few years by the cable industry, muni- Adak,. cipalities, public interest groups, and numerous others. There has been little thorough, objective, and analytical consideration of municipal ownership of cable, nor has there been any detailed evaluation of existing municipal cable operations. At this point, the arguments pro and con are philosophical and poli- tical in nature, with very little data or facts to support them. ARGUMENTS OF THE PROPONENTS • (1) Because it is tied more directly to the community, a municipality will probably emphasize the public service nature of cable communica- tions by (a) building and maintaining a system of the highest possible quality and flexibility; (b) attempting to achieve maximum penetration, as close as possible to 100 percent of all households; (c) airing con- troversial programs aimed at informing the citizenry and protecting their rights; (d) being more responsive to users' needs and complaints by striving to make timely repairs and reasonable program changes as dictated by public demand. • (2) Financially, ownership may produce more public revenues than the municipality could realize under franchise agreements. • (3) It is possible to view cable communications as an essential munici- pal service in the nature of a public utility. This conception carries with it the use of cable for essential municipal services (police and fire surveillance, traffic control, education, meter reading, etc. ,) with the television and entertainment portions of cable communications system view as ancillary. • (4) Municipal ownership assures local control of the cash flow as opposed to the frequent private industry practice of financing one system out of the profits from another. ARGUMENTS OF THE OPPONENTS • (1) It is contrary to the American system of free enterprise for government to own what is almost universally regarded as a private business. 3 • (2) Public ownership increases the possibility of abuses of personal freedoms of speech, press, and privacy, as guaranteed by the U. S. Constitution. A cable system is a mass medium of communications and is likely to be the only cable system in town. If operated by the government, it is analogous to government control of the only newspaper in town, and at least philosophically violative of the First Amendment. • (3) Government may not be able to handle the complexities of managing an intricate communications system--and public benefits may be lost without capable management. • (4) Cable is an expensive proposition; as a nonessential, nonutility, use of public funds for cable investment must rank lower on the list of pressing priorities for revenues that each city faces (such as health, education, housing, employment and welfare). • (5) Public ownership of the high business of cable television in- creases the possibilities of abuses of public trust and public funds. Local governments fail to comprehend the unknowns of the new genera- tion of cable which necessitates speculation and risk. Cost over- runs can spell disaster, not only to the public treasury, but also to local programming. PERSPECTIVES ON PRIVATE OWNERSHIP Private ownership of cable television is the conventional pattern that exists in most places in the country. The private owner might be a local cor- poration formed solely for cable, an existing corporation involved in some other local enterprise, or a multiple system operator (MS0) , operating in hun- dreds of communities. In theory, private corporations are committed to maximizing profits and would have few incentives to provide free public services. In practice, for several reasons, this is not always the case. • Some public services, such as educational programming, may enhance the value of cable service and increase the system's subscriber penetration. To the extent this is accurate, a profit-seeking corporation will have an incentive to provide such services. • Some service choices are unaffected by the kind of ownership incentives involved. "Free" production facilities for schools, for example, may mean higher subscriber rates, no matter who owns the system. //////// • While business incentives do lean toward decisions that maximize profits, few corporations ignore the value of a public image. A vigorous program of local public service may be written off as a cost of doing business or as a marketing expense, but the service is provided anyway. Presumably, these incentives could be enhanced if the city were to fran- chise local corporations with a stake in the community, such as an existing local enterprise, or perhaps a minority group corporation. On the other hand, a nationally based corporation with more resources for technical development of new services might be in a better position to offer services which pay for themselves. Looking at the problem from the city's point of view--desiring the maximi- zation of public services--there are two additional dimensions to the problem which should be considered: • Corporate incentives cannot be developed in a vacuum. Regarding the specific form of private ownership chosen, a major factor in its performance will necessarily be the quality of local regula- tion. If the city over-regulates the franchisee and imposes its policy choices so heavily that the cable operators energies are concentrated solely upon survival, the result might be unsatis- factory for all parties. On the other hand, if the city fails to develop an effective regulatory program, or devotes too few re- .... sources to its regulatory responsibilities, the result can be entertainment enterprise whose public value is never realized. • Some functions of the delivery of public cable services need not be left in the hands of a private corporation. A citizen's board or commission is sometimes constituted to manage access to the cable system and promote the public character of its services. The division of authority and responsibility for the manifold functions of service delivery, public and private, may eliminate some of the conflicts of interest and incentive inherent in cable television's difficult mixture of public and private enterprise. These arguments are included to provide a flavor of the nature of public debate on municipal ownership of cable. They are so general that they cannot be answered conclusively, but they tend to obscure some of the important issues involved in the municipal ownership decision. The issues involved in the city's ownership decision can be grouped into three major areas: financial, management and safeguarding the public interest. ... 5 The financial implications of the city's choice can be evaluated with some degree of predictibility and specificity before the decision. Management and public interest issues are much more difficult to evaluate on more than a philo- sophical level. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION Sources of Funds. Prior to making the decision it is very important that the city determines what it will cost to enter the cable television business. Gener- ally the cost of entering the business, both from the standpoint of construction and the first few years of operation, is fairly high. Low initial operating rev- enues normally result in a negative cash flow in early years. That, coupled with a heavy initial investment, generally makes the early years very expensive. Sources of funds available to the city for cable ownership might include: (a) existing surplus revenues (if any) ; (b) general obligation bonds; (c) rev- enue bonds; and (d) any other sources permitted by the state. A city normally does not have the financing opportunities private operators have. Normally, substantial amounts of the needed capital for privately owned systems are contributed by equity investors who do not receive interest for the loan of their funds, preferring instead to see the value of their ownership shares increase. The equity investor's willingness to defer collecting on his investment lowers the fixed costs of the system, thereby giving the operation somewhat better odds of surviving. In the absence of such local revenues, the city will probably have to issue bonds to finance cable. If the city is empowered to issue bonds, it may be able to attract funds at much lower interest costs (given the tax-exempt status of municipal bonds) than would generally be the case with a private operator. With lower cost for capital, the city could anticipate positive cash flows from its system sooner than from a privately-owned system. Moreover, net revenues would be larger, since the city does not pay federal income taxes. This surplus might be applied to system improvement, lower subscriber costs, or other public purposes. / Although these arguments have merit, there are other considerations that mitigate against them: • (1) Municipalities may be required to begin debt service within a year or eighteen months after the revenue bond issue. Since citi- zens are not required to be subscribers, there is no guarantee that the system will generate sufficient revenues to cover debt service in the first years of operation. • (2) Federal tax laws generate a strong subsidy to private industry through tax credits for operating losses and depreciation. Thus, a private cable system operator is buffered against the enormous early negative cash flows typical of the cable industry. A muni- cipally owned system, since it pays no federal income taxes, is not similarly protected, and the city should expect to make up major operating losses in its cable system operation for the first five to seven years. • (3) Frequently local authorities are required by the terms of the bond contract to raise subscriber rates without recourse by the public whenever the service is threatened with operating deficits. This can sometimes result in a politically untenable position for a local governing body. • (4) Reserve funds, sinking funds and replacement fund requirements in many municipal Revenue Bond laws often tie up large sums of money that could otherwise be utilized in the system. During the life of the system, improvements must be made so that the system does not become obsolete. Adjustments may become necessary to improve signal p strength or raise channel capacity. Operating funds may not be sufficient for the purpose, and the municipally owned system may have to go into debt again to make the needed changes. If additional funds are needed, what will be the source? Will the city have to use general tax°funds9 Will other bond issues be necessary? Taxes which might be necessary to meet new fiscal demands generated by cable may come amid a growing dissatisfaction with increased taxation, including commu- nity sentiment which may not support the notion that municipal ownership is the best long-run strategy for developing cable television potential for local pur- poses. The short-run costs may be sufficient to cause considerable political backlash when private organizations are ready to bear these costs. / ' ..► 7 Other disadvantages include the following: • The risk inherent in urban cable television may cause the bond market to reject revenue bonds not backed by the city's taxing power. • The risk inherent in urban cable television may affect the city's ,— bond rating. • Financing the system with 100 percent debt increases interest cost, and overall cash needs. Sources of funding for modern cable systems may be difficult to come by. Even if funding is available, the city must be aware of the many difficulties associated with cable finance. USES OF FUNDS Most arguments favoring municipal ownership focus primarily upon the allo- cation of the surplus (or profits) generated by the system. Many municipal officials see cable as a way to relieve a city's financial problems through the production of revenues over a long period of time. There is also the issue of whether that surplus could be used for other municipal purposes. This issue must be answered by both the city and the state. The surplus could, of course, be used to improve the system substantially, and to lower rates charged to subscribers. Even if there is no legal problem re- lating to the usage of cable surplus, the terms of the bond contract with the underwriters may restrict the city's discretion in the use of funds from sub— scriber revenues. MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS Will the system operate better or worse under municipal than under private ownership? Some claim the municipality will monitor technological improvements and make them more often and more readily than private operators. The rationale is that the municipality's first concern is the public interest and that, as 8 the most direct link to the populace it will respond to subscribers' demands to maintain a high quality system. Of course, the ability of the municipality (or a private operator) to make capital improvements largely depends on the availability of funds. Opponents of municipal ownership claim that municipalities are less likely than private com- panies to make changes because municipalities must use public funds or perhaps a limited bonding authority to make substantial improvements. In the face of an ever present need for revenues for other priorities, the city will have to jus- tify expenditures for cable improvement to the public. Motivation to make improvements, is another factor. Municipalities may keep track of technology if their cable operation does not hinge on making prof- its. Private operators have been criticized for building, then not maintaining their systems adequately. Although the city may find it easier to meet the public interest demand for peak efficiency itself than to enforce it against a private operator, the complexities of cable management--marketing, financial accounting, advertising, competition, contracting, labor, copyright, legal problems, weather problems, maintenance, insurance--demand high quality mana- gerial and technical talent which the city may find difficult to attract (de- pending on civil service rules, salary scales, etc. We do not believe that there are any clear advantages and disadvantages that can be attributed to either private or public ownership in terms of system management. The city officials will simply have to decide how they feel about each of the following types of questions: • Will municipal ownership instill a commitment to system improve- ment and modernization"' • Will municipal ownership promote management at least as effective as management under private ownership? • Will municipal ownership contribute to more innovative and imagin- ative programming and facilitate the development of public services more than will private ownership? •�a //////// These questions obviously have no conclusive answers. The management ques- tion may simply be one of which ownership form do you trust to operate the system best--public ownership motivated by the public interest or private ownership motivated by profit (within a regulatory framework) ? Amk SAFEGUARDING THE PUBLIC INTEREST The FCC rules for cable were not constructed with municipal ownership of cable television in mind. The rules envision a relationship between the operator, the city, and the FCC that is flexible yet protects the public interest; the FCC sets broad guidelines and procedural requirements; the city acts as local watchdog to oversee the system operator's actions. In the commission's view, the interested parties include existing tele- vision and radio stations, the cable operator, the cable subscribers, and chan- nel users. Municipal ownership presents the possibility that three of these interests--operator, subscriber and channel user--will exist in the same entity; an entity which is also responsible for regulation of cable. The city government has several interests in either a commercial or a city-owned system. Initially, the city has responsibility for regulation-- developing a plan for wiring the city, insuring reasonable construction time- tables, providing a procedure to set subscriber rates and deal with consumer complaints. In addition, the city selects an operator and sets a time period for the franchise. City operation would not alter these responsibilities except for the proce- dure of selecting an applicant. With private ownership, the city could still have an interest in cable as a user of government and education channels. The city government could also be a subscriber if it decided public buildings should be wired. In addition, under any form of ownership, the city would be interested Amok 10 in the system's design and its ability to meet current and future city needs. A city-owned system would merge the number of functions in which the city has in- terests, thereby creating possible conflicts. The implications of combining regulation and the regulated enterprise should be evaluated carefully in order not to endanger the public interest. Currently, the FCC rules carefully set out the number of television and radio stations an operator may carry over the cable system. They also restrict a system's use of distant programming if local television stations already carry that programming. City ownership would not change requirements but might pose a possibility that the city's competitive interests as an operator could con- flict with the interest of local broadcast stations. A possible advantage of public ownership is that its control of the system would be stronger than if the system were privately owned. If the city were not the operator, the number of access channels, the capacity of the system, rules governing use of the access channels, and perhaps even the programming equipment would be decisions of the commercial operator under current regulation. Municipal ~ ownership places these decisions with the city, limited only by the federal channel minimums and access guidelines. With municipal ownership, the city would have a wide choice of options regarding rates and subsidies. Should subscribers pay charges or should all members of the community receive services, paid out of gen- eral tax revenues' Should distinctions be made between necessary and convenient services (e.g. , traffic surveillance vs. health delivery) ' Should the city sub- sidize certain classes of subscribers (low income or senior citizens) ' Should advertising be sold on origination channels' Could or should innovative usage of cable allow for a transfer of other city funds to the system to be used to handle other city services in other ways (e.g. , cable could become the primary means of delivering educational or public health services)? Could commercial leasing of channels support or defray the costs? 11 However, the bearing of responsibility for operation of a cable system sub- jects city officials to other possible hazards. Suppose a group uses profane lanaguage on a channel during a production of a play. While the private operator may receive letters and some public ridicule, the municipal owner is more likely to be deluged with demands that such conduct not be repeated and that offenders be punished. It is also conceivable that the quality of reception over the cable could be a major political issue in an election campaign. Government ownership of an important medium of communications raises issues of constitutional freedoms. Direct actions which discriminate among those who seek to use the access channels is a foreboding prospect no matter who owns the system. But its implications may be more serious if the government is the owner. Similarly, two-way cable communications to the home carries with it the possibility of electronic invasion of a subscriber's privacy. Government control of such access may protect rights to privacy or may conceivably endanger them. Both privately-owned and city-owned cable can breach the public trust. The question again becomes the philosphical one of who you trust to safeguard the ..0■0. public interest. ALTERNATIVES TO STRICT MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP It may be that except for finance, the points made above are problems of operation rather than ownership of cable systems. The owner of the system does not necessarily have to manage and control it. The city might, for example, purchase the system and contract its operations to a private corporation. The city might also arrange for technical operation and maintenance by one governmental agency, and management of programming and other nontechnical matters by another or possibly by a university or some nongovernmental agency. Another intriguing possibility is the use of industrial revenue bonds. In this approach some of the best features of public and private ownership tend to 12 be merged through the creation of a nonprofit organization that can issue tax_ exempt bonds. This organization then leases out the operation to a private cable operator who continues to be able to benefit from federal tax laws, but also gets far cheaper financing of his capital requirements. What the private operator gives up in this arrangement is his autonomy, as he will be guided by members of the nonprofit organization that are appointed by the municipality, and regulated by the city government. There are almost as many organizational combinations as the mind can fathom. The point is that these are options which probably should be considered. In view of the "high risk" characteristics of the cable industry itself, and some of the philosophical and political situations described, financial viability will in all likelihood be the principal turning point in any decision on this option, especially as certain cost/effectiveness features are discussed. y ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOR'DVlION AERONAUTICS DIVISION BRUCE BABBITT 205 South 17th Avenue Phoenix, Arizonr 85007 Governor (602) 261-7778 WILLIAM A ORDWAY Director Siren, N 1 II RA Assist-rnt Director August 25, 1981 I Mr. Thomas Binzak FAA Western REgion AWE 230 Flight Standards Division P.O. Box 92007, Worldway Postal Center Los Angeles, CA 90009 Re: Apache Junction Airport Airspace Analysis AFE 01022 Dear Mr. Binzak: This is to confirm our strong support of Apache Junction in the development of their proposed airport. Not only will an airport in this area directly benefit Apache Junction, it will also benefit Pinal and Maricopa Counties, and the State of Arizona. It is particularly needed to provide a. relief function to Sky Harbor, and to the other primary reliever airports in the urban area. Whereas we realize the Air Force may have to modify some operations in the area of Williams, we feel confident that they can do so with minor adjust- ments, in a manner that will allow the airspace to be safely used by both the military and civilian aircraft. In other cases, such as is presently occurring at Libby AAF, the U.S. Army is developing positive plans to work with the civil aviation contingent. Additionally, any impact from the proposed Apache Junction Airport would be less titan that presented by the existing Falcon Field, and comparable to that presented by Chandler Municipal. Very truly yours, SONNY NAJERA Assistant Director SN:AFS•hp cc . Rich Broman, Apache Junction o • .. .10„. a oil HIGHWAYS • AERONAUTICS MOTOR VEHICLE • PUBLIC TRANSIT • ADM,NISTRATIVE SERVICES • TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PQACHF✓ = , r j;- o DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 4P/Z00' cOity o c4 Iac/e cOunctian W E McDANIEL September 4, 1981 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Director of Public Safety W~"~ Thru: City Manager Iv-- Subject: Departmental Report - August 1981 Attached you will find our departmental report for August, 1981. We have experienced an increase in the numbers of Accidents, Burglaries, Agg. Assaults, Motor Vehicle Thefts and Larceny Theft. Much of this is due to increases of activity through and within the City as the vacation period winds down. Further, we have been told that the Winter visitors are already beginning to return to such parks as Rock Shadows and others. Animal Control, also, experienced an increase over July. The following is a breakdown of activity at Animal Control: Complaints: 102 Impound Fees: $129.00 License Fees: 190.00 Total August $ 319.00 Deposited to General Fund Total from July 4538.00 oink Total to Date $4857.00 Deposited to General Fund 1-1-81 thru 8-31-81 Impounded Adopted Reclaimed Dogs 93 18 13 Cats 61 5 0 Destroyed In Pound at End of Month Dogs 45 28 Cats 71 3 1001 NORTH IDAHO RD •POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220•TELEPHONE(602)982-8260 Aft. 4 Ink Escaped Dog Licenses Sold to Date Dogs 0 819 (13 Void including 2 No fee) Cats 0 Citations Issued Dog Running at Large: 2 Unlicensed Dog: 2 p .... AYALtG JUNI.LLJ4 YULLI.G DtrAlliMc U Departmental Activity JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC TOTAL ACCIDENTS * 961 10 20 14 10 6 10 5 13 88 * 961 Accident-No Injury S 1 1 1 2 1 2 0 0 8 962 1^-41ent-Injury AL 1 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 5 963 Accident-Fatality 962 6 13 13 5 18 4 2 6 67 P Persons Injured P 9 27 36 8 31 5 3 11 130 . Killyd S 1 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 S opeed Related AL 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1 5 AL Alcohol Related 963 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 P 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TRAFFIC CITATIONS SPEED 59 51 108 72 75 39 68 83 555 ALCOHOL 10 9 9 21 27 13 11 13 113 OTHER 83 105 97 105 101 65 90 102 748 INDEX CRIMES MURDER 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 RAPt 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ROBBERY 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 BURGLARY 18 20 12 11 12 3 8 11 95 AG. ASSAULT 1 1 1 0 0 2 1 4 10 MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 1 2 1 1 0 3 1 2 11 LARCENY 57 69 52 32 27 32 26 38 333 ARSON 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 t ' C. R T HITS FELONY 5 1 2 0 1 1 0 2 12 NTenr JrAvno 27 13 11 11 11 23 13 10 119 1` i 1 j ; y y 1 1 1 ,C { AM i• AO Ilk = e/eCVN r�CfPv/3Clc B/ZG/L'( Survey of Apache Junction's streets, roads is.. ?._, v" l aid officials in determining future needs .., 'APACHE JUNCTION — Streets — evaluations are being entered into a $100,000 in the 1981-82 budget year but whether paved or dirt — are getting a lot computer now will get$221,983,Broman said. of attention in Apache Junction The next stage, costing $3,500, will be a Primarily, the study is being conducted :The Phoenix architecture, engineering determination of the costs and procedures to establish a base to start from and planning firm of Wadsworth, Jensen the city would face in maintaining and "If you don't plan in advance, it's a hit- and Associates is evaluating 64 miles of upgrading paved streets. or-miss thing—sometimes you're going to paved streets in the city for$12,000. In the third stage, the study will set be right, but sometimes you're going to :On a lesser scale, the Public Works priorities that will not be specific to street waste money,"Broman said Department is conducting its own study of improvements Drainage improvement and As far as the dirt-road study is 45 miles of dirt roads traffic-signal placements will be consid- concerned, Broman said it came about !Although the dirt-road study entails ered.This stage will cost$2,500 simultaneously with Mayor Wendell testing different methods of grading the The final stage, which will cost $1,500, Clarke's suggestion this summer that the road with water and with a water-chemical will study alternatives in financing city start a mile-a-month program. In this mixture, the paved streets are receiving a This stage will determine, Broman said, program, the mayor proposed that dirt much more comprehensive analysis. "how we are going to budget maintenance roads be improved by oiling. -Most of the paved streets are chip sealed and finance improvements." — an oil-and-gravel mixture — because 3 sections tested that is how Maricopa County paved them Financingalternatives before Apache Junction was incorporated The Public Works Department first Possible financing alternatives include tested three sections of a road, using only Streets `urbanizing' creating improvement districts, having grading, grading with water and grading , developers pay for their own street with a water-enzyme mixture. The last But, according to Richard Broman, improvements, floating a bond issue and treatment endured the longest, Broman director of public works, the streets in using regular city budgetary cash through said. Apache Junction started to "urbanize" the Highway Users Fund. Another dirt road is being tested with even before incorporation and a need for The study was started this summer. four alternative methods better roads arose Broman said he expects it to be completed Grading is a part of each test However, T'als4- on Broadway is up to 4,500 in the next 90 to 120 days on one patch of road, a calcium-chloride vehit,._. a day on one end and 3,400 "Ultimately," Broman said, "I think solution is being mixed with water. vehicles per day at another point. we're going to wind up with what they call Waste oil, a more penetrating oil and a Broman said the paved-street study will an asphalted-concrete road." stronger enzyme mixture than used in the ekplore these needs. It encompasses four Although not all streets can be improved first test, are the other methods being stages. at once, the public-works director said, used. The first stage is costing the city$4,500. "We'll end up replacing all roads with Broman expects the test to run at least It entails a field study of the streets and either an overlay or complete reconstruc- 30 days. soil foundations under them tion . as funds become available." Depending on what method seems the Different kinds of pavement cracks are He said the new state-highway-funding most effective,Broman said,perhaps fewer being studied.Rutting,corrugations,ravel- legislation will help Apache Junction. dirt roads could be done more often. ing, pot holes and deficient drainage also Previously, the city was only going to be Because most of the dirt roads have less are being evaluated allocated $2 5 million over the next 10 traffic, Broman said, "In my opinion, we The number of lanes, width of the years. should try to maintain existing roads streets, accident rates and surface condi- before we do a lot of improvements of the lions are included in the analysis. dirt roads" Once this information is compiled,it will More money p He envisions a five-year plan of paved- be fed into a computer and collated under Now,however,Broman said the city will and dirt-road maintenance and improve- further categories, such as what kind and be getting$10 million. went,updated each year. how many drainage structures and how "It was what Apache Junction needed,it "Surely, we'll do as many roads as we may traffic signals a particular street has was a shot in the arm,"he said can,"he said. The study is in the first stage, and The city only had been expecting to get —Christia Johnson i E✓ ' ix?A H U ' ;trj a Z gRIZOW*' `Orly o C4pache 09unctian 0 ., September 1, 1981 TO. Director of Public Works 7 6/ FROM: Building Official RE: Building Permit Activity - Month of August, 1981 Attached you will find an activity report for the Building Permit activity for the month of August . This report also contains a running calendar year- to-date total . LF: sw Attach. Activity Report 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 BUILDING DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY CALENDAR YEAR. 1981 MONTH OF CLASSIFICATION AUGUST YEAR TO DATE ( Number of Building Permits Issued 50 652 Total of Permit Fees Assessed 4, 974. 00 33 , 692 . 57 Total of Plan Reviews Assessed 2 , 706 . 76 17 , 595 . 79 Total Pre-Inspection Fees Assessed Total Incoming 7 , 680 . 76 51 , 288 . 36 ( Cost of Proposed Work 1 , 290 , 045 . 32 11 , 964, 856 . 70 Number of Inspections Made in Connection with Bldg . Permits 262 1 , 895 9/1/81 sjw CITY COUNCIL MOTIONS MEETING OF September 2, 1981 ACTION MOTION AGENCY DISPOSITION THAT THE AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. (motion carried. ) -0- ,.. THAT THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST Signed and 19, 1981 , BE AND HEREBY ARE, ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. filed. (motion carried. ) C.C. THAT THE ITEM #3 APPOINTMENT OF PERMANENT PERSONNEL BOARD BE AND HEREBY IS, REMOVED FROM THE TABLE FOR ACTION. (motion carried. ) -0- THAT THE FOLLOWING PERSONS BE AND HEREBY ARE, APPOINTED TO THE PERSONNEL BOARD: JEAN CLIFT, On agenda of MILDRED CONWAY , TERMS TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 2, 1982, Sept. 16, 1981 AND MARVIN HALBERT, SUSAN STAGS, GARY COLLINS, TERMS TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 2, 1983. C.C. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PREVIOUSLY APPOINTED INTERIM PERSONNEL BOARD BE AND HEREBY IS, DISSOLVED. (motion failed. ) THAT MR. JACK TANDY, MS. LILLIAN CASTRO, MS. ELEANOR Oaths are LEWIS, MR. HARRY POLOMSKY, MR. JERRY MICHAELS, MR. being signed, DICK RABIDUE, MS. MILDRED CONWAY, MR. ROBERT LAPLANT, first meeting MS. BERTHA ROGERS, MS. ROSALINE, DEBNAM, MR. TOM was set and SANSONI , MR. ROBERT SCHAUSTER, MR. SAM GARDOM, MR. held on 9-9-81 JOHN SCHMIDT, MR. CLARENCE ZEHNLE, MR. FRANK JIMENEZ, MS. PEGGY BALJO, MR. DALE BURFIEND, BE AND HEREBY ARE, APPOINTED TO SERVE ON THE CHARTER GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE ADVANTAGES OR DISADVANTAGES OF THE CHARTER FORM OF GOVERNMENT IN APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT A REPORT BE RENDERED NO LATER THAN MARCH 17, 1982. (motion carried. ) C.C. THAT THE RESIGNATION OF DR. DAVE ROBINSON FROM THE Letter Prepared AIRPORT COMMISSION BE AND HEREBY IS, ACCEPTED WITH REGRET. (motion carried. ) C.C. THAT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $500.00 BE PROVIDED TO Letter and THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FROM CIVIC ADVERTISING check request ACCOUNT NO. 001-100-512-01-22 TO HELP DEFRAY EXPENSE C.C./ prepared. IN PROVIDING A STATE FAIR BOOTH. (motion carried. ) Finance THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6.00 P.M. , SEPTEMBER 16 , 1981 , AT CITY HALL FOR THE PURPOSE OF C.C. Posted 9/4/ 81 DISCUSSING LEGAL AND PERSONNEL MATTERS. (motion carried. ) THE THE RESIGNATION OF PAT SMITH FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET. Letter Prepared (motion carried. ) C.C. Aft. .■.. CITY COUNCIL MOTIONS MEETING OF September 2, 1981 ACTION MOTION AGENCY DISPOSITION THAT MARK MCPHIERSON BE APPOINTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE EXPIRED TERM OF PAT Letter sent SMITH DUE TO HER RESIGNATION, THE TER OF OFFICE TO 9��81 .. EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1983. (motion carried. ) C.C. THAT THE CITY MANAGER ENFORCE THE ORDINANCE 12 ESPECIALLY THE SECTION DEALING WITH CITY EMPLOYEES LIVING WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. (motion failed) -0- —0__ CITY COUNCIL REQUESTS MEETING September 2, 1981 ACTION REQUEST AGENCY DISPOSITION THAT THE CITY CLERK NOTIFY THE MEMBERS OF THE AIRPOR— Meeting posted COMMISSION AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF A 9-8-81 , Letter JOINT MEETING ON TUESDAY , SEPTEMBER 15, 1981 , AT 7:00 P.M. City Clerk sent 9-9-81 ^ THAT IT BE RESEARCHED BY THE CITY ATTORNEYS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT CITY EMPLOYEES MUST LIVE WITHIN THE Attorney CITY LIMITS. City Attorney researching r CITY COUNCIL REQUESTS ACTION NOT COMPLETED MEETING ACTION DATE REQUEST AGENCY STATUS 6-17-81 THAT 90 DAYS PRIOR TO AWARDING THE INSURANCE CONTRACT NEXT YEAR AN ADVERTISEMENT BE RUN IN THE PAPER SOLICITING BIDS FROM ALL INSURANCE COMPANIES THAT So noted by the MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN PROVIDING LIABILITY INSURANCE City Clerk's AM ph. FOR THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION. C.C. Office. • .., :.:.., .. ;:, '<,;,�4 a9p'�.r.,..i.w,. .. ..Ya„nam.+,.+*K..mi�nKa„»rvnW.r.., rv�r,;Ka�a7i�'i�fp'Y3at d•.,•+iAw +'.e ',�.t.al.+v . kacS x.,,scs�va,' 'kx?,;ai*-.�.'7ri;r;F. . -...::♦.;. �!::� ,._,.:, :'lifKy^r.F"•ti+'.iil+i.�f WwtdprFw' ,. ,., .. vt,✓.it?6Mc6�...Ye +;ard:liV='v'�i+.ria:.�-5w' >,e�-s.:a.e>v-.s...:1er:+'u..',,.�.::.n> • ITEM NO , 11 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT P .M,