Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-07 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 7, 2006 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on November 7, 2006, at the Apache Junction City Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Coleman called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. INVOCATION Councilmember Insalaco gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Eck led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present:Mayor Coleman Vice Mayor Eck Councilmember Dietz Councilmember Insalaco Councilmember Severs Councilmember Sippel Councilmember Waldron Staff Present: Others Present: City Manager George Hoffman Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney Joel Stern Public Safety Director Glenn Walp City Engineer Giao Pham Interim Evidence Technician Jim Stevens Public Information Officer Jay Swart Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias Assistant Planner Mike Heuchert REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 1 OF 40 Parks Superintendent Nick Blake Assistant Planner Yanet Ochoa Asst. to the City Manager Janine Solley ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA )Vice Mayor Eck MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED, AND THAT APPROVAL BE GIVEN FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AND APACHE JUNCTION MAIN STREET PROGRAM, INC., FOR FY 2006-07 IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000; AND THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT; AND THAT APPROVAL BE GIVEN FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AND APACHE JUNCTION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR FY 2006-07 IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,155; AND THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT. Councilmember Dietz SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS None. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Mr. Steven White, 105 N. Delaware, Apache Junction, addressed the council regarding licensing requirements.He has come before the city council challenging the city in dissent of governmental affairs and policies for 3 years now.He is a veteran standing up for his constitutional rights.The issue that keeps hanging over his head are the licensing requirements for business licenses, vendor licenses, and transaction privilege licenses that the city is applying to artistic self- expression.He contends artistic self-expression is fully protected by the first amendment.The sale of artistic REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 2 OF 40 expression by the original artist that created it is also fully protected by the first amendment.He went into a public meeting last Monday regarding zoning requirements for the artists to establish a community art show outside the downtown area.They thought it would help draw tourists and promote opportunities for local artists.They are trying to create community participation in the arts.The meeting blew up in their faces and they were threatened by government officials.The same government official has intimidated them before at one of their free family community art shows last spring.Senior citizens and young families were complaining to him about a spooky man hiding behind trees with a camera.He was taking pictures of the artists in the park; this is what the policies have led to. It is about the complete and total elimination of artists from our community for years to come, or we open the doors of opportunity for community participation and we encourage artists in our community to draw tourists and have artists in front of businesses downtown to draw tourists there.There are 5 restaurants downtown that want them there and it ties into the city's development plan.He walked out of the meeting scared and rattled and he was not able to sleep for 3 days.It is what happens when a couple of veterans speak out in dissent of governmental policies. Mr. Ernest Imbeault, 2835 W. Cody Street, Apache Junction, addressed the council regarding artists being able to work in the city.He came to the city 6 years ago to live.He went out and started doing his artistic work with the permission of landowners and on public property and he was run off of every one of them.He was told he had to have a license.He followed the ladies to the office in the old buildings and he started filling out the application.A gentleman came out and asked what he was filling it out for, and when told it was to perform ' and display his artwork on public property, told him the city does not allow that.He took an oath to uphold the constitution and protect the people of America 50 years ago and he honored that oath for 21 years.Now he is retired and he has come to a town that he loves but he is told he is not allowed to do what he does for a living.He does Native American art.He was harassed, threatened, and had his signs taken.His art was called crap by city officials.He was approached by policemen and most of them were doing their job; they were polite and professional, who told him he was not allowed to do this and to REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 3 OF 40 pack up.He always did.He never threatened anybody or threatened lawsuits, but he has been threatened many times.He is still an old soldier, and he will stand up for peoples' rights, his rights, and he will fight back.They have had the free community art show and he saw the kids and old people have a great time.There were no riots and nothing bad was going on. A lot of tourists stopped.They cleaned a 5 acre spot on Tomahawk and State Route 88.Most tourists go to the museum and Tortilla Flats down State Route 88.The place was a dump out there.He, his fiancée, and his friend's wife went out and picked up over 100 bags of garbage.They took down tons of dead brush.They were then told they could not set up there.The artists would have brought tourists into the city.The reason why America became so great is because we have people from all over the world and they get together once a month to share their culture and tell their stories; only then is there a community. It is not housing developments.They are only walls. Mr. Chip Wilson, 128 S. Starr, Apache Junction, addressed the council to invite the council and staff to the dedication of a hitching post at Prospector Park on November 18 at 3 p.m.It is being dedicated to Annabelle Richards who has worked for the community for many years.They will have a pot luck dinner afterwards.They will also be having a dedication to Ovid Bond whose health is not very well.It will be at Cloud View in Pinal County. B. Tony Ziccardi, 3700 S. Ironwood Drive #147, Apache Junction, addressed the council regarding the disposition of firearms.He stated he is in favor of firearms being taken off the street and destroyed for personal reasons and for anyone who has been duly authorized to go into a building to face someone who has a firearm or has to go into a domestic situation where someone has a firearm or stop someone late at night for a traffic violation and face a firearm.He realizes that all firearms are not taken under these circumstances; a lot of them are taken under benign situations such as arms recovered from burglars who have taken them from their rightful owners.Every rightful owner who has identified their weapon and given the local authorities the proper identification and serial numbers has a right to get their weapons back.Anyone that could not identify them and the weapons have been confiscated should have those weapons put into the pile to be destroyed.He does not believe that anyone has REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 4 OF 40 the right to have these weapons for put up for resale and have them go back on the street so that other human beings have to face these firearms.They could be transported across state lines to be used in felonies and commissions of crimes.He believes that anybody that has a conscious and thinks about it knows that firearms should not be put back on the street. Firearms that have been confiscated should not be handed back to people on the street or be given to dealers for resale.They should also not be sold by police departments.Anybody that has had a weapon pointed at them understands what he is talking about.He does not know a lot about what has happened with these firearms, how the program came about, who put it together, and what was done with the firearms other than he understands they have been destroyed.He is glad of that.He believes the persons in charge of this should be heard from and state why they had to take that position. Mr. Louis Babin, 2191 S. Belair, Apache Junction, announced that he is running for a seat on the council.He added he hoped there is a process that is not too expensive for Apache Junction where the police department can look through the firearms and see if there are any collectible or extremely rare and expensive firearms.He was thinking they could use red pull ties for those firearms with destroyed serial numbers or are of no value and green pull ties on firearms that may have some value if it does not cost the city more to have that program than it does to get the firearms divided up.He thinks only 10% to 15% of the firearms would be collectible.He has seen $10,000 to $15,000 English shotguns exist and he has seen them at the gun shows. There are some expensive and valuable firearms.Some people keep them just to say that they have them.Melting firearms down seems political to him.It sends a message about getting back at the guns.They are just a machine used for hunting and law enforcement purposes, and those are good purposes.He encouraged everyone to get out and vote in Apache Junction. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CURRENT EVENTS Councilmember Waldron reminded everyone that this Saturday is the Veterans Day Parade starting at 9:30 a.m. at the Focal Point.It will run for about an hour and will be followed by a ceremony at Veterans Memorial Park staring at 11:00 a.m.They will have a flyover of an F-117 stealth fighter at 11:11 a.m. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 5 OF 40 out of Holloman Air Force Base.He invited everyone to the parade and the park afterwards.They will have music and food for everyone. Councilmember Insalaco stated he and City Engineer Giao Pham went to Casa Grande for the Central Arizona Association of Governments meeting.They met with representatives of the governor's office.They discussed a new funding mechanism to prepare for growth, new job centers, and a change in the Pinal County Engineering District.Representatives of the governor's office were encouraged to attend city and county meetings.The state and various departments need to look into the Pinal County growth issues in the areas of transportation, open spaces, social issues, and affordable housing.Salt River Project and Arizona Public Service were also there.They requested the Arizona Department of Transportation be prioritized into a more balanced system instead of just freeways and highways, which include transit and toll roads.There are certain places in California where they have their choice of taking a toll road or not.This is just an idea that is being kicked around by the Arizona Department of Transportation. Councilmember Severs stated the Habitat for Humanity project is underway.There are 18 beautiful homes being built on Ironwood and Greasewood.He introduced one of the new homeowners. Mayor Coleman announced that the girls' volleyball team is playing in the first round of the state championships tonight against Queen Creek.It is the first time they have made the playoffs in 9 years.This Friday, the football team will be playing in the first round of the playoffs at home, and that is the first time in the last 24 years that they have been in the upper bracket of the seedings and have a first round home game. He invited everyone in the community to come and support them. They will be playing Flagstaff High School. Mayor Coleman announced that he is a grandfather for the second time in 5 weeks.This one's name is Lauren. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager George Hoffman gave a brief status report on the downtown area.The AJ Town Centre LLC, the landowner, has been very successful in assembling dozens of smaller properties into REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 6 OF 40 a single ownership.Many vertical developers will not spend the considerable time and energy to assemble small parcels.The importance of the landowner's work is significant.The city council provided zoning so that the potential for a downtown can exist.The landowner has indicated that they are going to begin marketing parcels for sale.It seems likely that some of those parcels will be purchased by vertical developers, those who wish to build projects, who may in turn wish to negotiate development agreements with the city.While the landowner and the city have explored having a development agreement, both are challenged by the fact that the landowner is not going to be the vertical developer.It was difficult for them to indicate what would be built, when it would be built or who the actual developer would be.The city has done development agreements before.When the city negotiated with Wal-Mart for the repayment of infrastructure, we knew who we were dealing with, when it would be built, what it was going to cost and what the dollar benefit would be to the public.A similar approach applied with the Earnhardt agreement.They look forward to similar discussions with developers for the downtown and will continue to assist the landowner as we advance this project. PUBLIC HEARINGS ORDINANCE NO. 1281, PZ-11-06, REZONING BY DENNIS MANFRED FOR THE PROPERTY AT 489 N. GOLD DRIVE FROM GR TO CR-1/MH FOR A PROPOSED PROPERTY SPLIT INTO 2 LOTS IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY WITH 2 MANUFACTURED HOMES AND A PRIVATE ACCESS WAY ). )Assistant Planner Mike Heuchert briefed the council on the item.He stated this is approximately one acre.The general plan designates the area as medium density residential.Most of the surrounding parcels are one acre and some have been split.It is an older area of town and some of them have more than one dwelling unit on them.Most of them are zoned GR with one parcel to the north which is CR-5. An aerial from 2004 shows the parcel in the middle and there are quite a few structures on the property.The current zoning ordinance only allows one structure on the property.Two previous property owners have applied for legal non -conforming REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 7 OF 40 status to have additional structures.Both asked for different things and both were denied.The current property owner had done a lot to clean up the property, including removing all the buildings except for one shed and has placed a new double -wide mobile home that is ground set on the property.He cleared off the property with the city providing dumpsters to take the garbage.He is proposing to do a lot split if the rezoning is approved.The new mobile home is on the rear parcel and he would like to split it down the middle and place a mobile home on the front lot.He would like to provide a 28' utility and access way easement.The conditions of approval include his going through the land split process, providing a utility and access easement for both properties, a new mobile home in similar condition to the one currently on the rear lot to be provided for the front lot, applying for permits for the storage shed, complying with the landscape and screening requirements, applying for all permits, recording the access way with that document including that the maintenance costs of the access way must be split between both properties so that one person is not paying all the costs, the addressing must be on Gold Drive, and both properties must use the access way for ingress and egress. A driveway cannot be made on the back side of the property. Mayor Coleman requested the applicant address the council. Mr. Dennis Manfred, 489 N. Gold, stated the property is a little over an acre.The reason for this split is the wash that divides the parcel.Without this kind of split portions would be unusable. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing and reopened the item to council discussion. Vice Mayor Eck commented he would like to repeat his comment from the work session that he wished the previous landowner had been given the same opportunity that Mr. Manfred was. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion with no further comments and called for a motion. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 8 OF 40 Councilmember Insalaco MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1281 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember Waldron SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Councilmember Insalaco MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1281, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilmember Waldron SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 06-53, DECLARING AS A PUBLIC RECORD VOLUME II, CHAPTER 7 ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDELINES AND POLICIES MANUAL/ORDINANCE NO. 1282, REPEALING THE APACHE JUNCTION ENGINEERING GUIDELINES AS ENACTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 932 AND RESOLUTION NO. 95-19 AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE VOLUME II, CHAPTER 7 ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDELINES AND POLICIES MANUAL )City Attorney Joel Stern briefed the council on the items.He stated these two items will save the city thousands of dollars in publication costs. If approved, they will create a new standard for the city in 3 different areas of the city.The resolution declares this 300 plus page document a public record.The ordinance essentially adopts it by reference.By passing it this way, only the REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 9 OF 40 ordinance has to be published and not the entire document.The city engineer is here to answer any technical questions. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the items.There being no one wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing and reopened the item to council discussion.There being no discussion, he called for a motion. Councilmember Dietz MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 06-53, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING AS A PUBLIC RECORD THAT CERTAIN DOCUMENT FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK ENTITLED "APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, VOLUME II LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,CHAPTER 7 ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDELINES AND POLICIES MANUAL,BE APPROVED. Councilmember Waldron SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. Councilmember Waldron MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1282 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember Sippel SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Councilmember Waldron MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1282, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 10 OF 40 Councilmember Dietz SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS DISPOSITION OF FIREARMS BY POLICE DEPARTMENT )Vice Mayor Eck briefed the council on the item.He brought it to the council's attention after hearing about the guns that were destroyed.He is not criticizing the chief for doing his job.This was an awakening that there was no set policy.The chief estimates that we get about 70 to 80 firearms a year and there was about 1,200 destroyed.He estimates there was about 17 years of guns destroyed, and he does not know why they were not destroyed earlier.The chief has one speed and that is full throttle, and he thinks he does a very good job at what he does.They have a difference of opinion on this issue.He told Mr. Ziccardi that if he thought this was a safety issue, he would not propose the resale of guns.He sees this as a pro -gun or not issue.He asked the city attorney if the city could legally sell the guns and if there was any liability and he was assured there was no liability.There is no known case of a resale gun ever being involved in a crime.However, he wanted to know how the street cops felt who deal with the bad guys.He did not want to talk to the city police officers as he thought that would be uncomfortable for them.He called Mesa and talked to the Fraternal Order of Police president.He said they lobbied Mesa's council to create an ordinance as did their executive director.They felt that the ordinance protects what would normally be used in a crime as compared to a gun that usually is not.While doing his research, he found there was actually no difference in buying a used firearm from a licensed dealer than buying a new one.There is a 28 question transaction that has to be filled out whenever a weapon is bought, new or used, and REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 11 OF 40 if any lies are written, it is a felony.This is then run through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms before that gun can be purchased.He is talking about the future and does not want to dwell on the past.That was a decision that was made and all it did was bring awareness.He had a short discussion with a National Rifle Association legislative person who represents Arizona and lives in California.There was some misinformation, as they were trying to make it appear that the council was keeping this as a work session item only and not having a public hearing.He explained that they had a work session and the city attorney was trying to determine how to create the public session.He was then apparently made the poster child for the National Rifle Association and he was not looking to be that.He apologized to his colleagues as they got several irate phone calls from members of the National Rifle Association and he honestly underestimated the National Rifle Association.He looks upon it as an Apache Junction issue. Apparently when you talk about guns, you need to be prepared. He was talking about our policy.He read the Mesa policy. According to their policy, any guns worth under $100 would be destroyed.That would include Saturday night specials and the more common guns you find in the stores.They list assault- style firearms such as SKSs, which are not illegal but are repeaters, and AK -47s and AR -15s would not be offered at auction and would be destroyed.Weapons that are determined to be inappropriate for auction by the chief of police or his designee would also be destroyed.Firearms used in the commission of a crime, including suicide, that resulted in serious injury or death, would not be offered at auction and will be destroyed. Firearms with illegible or no serial numbers will be destroyed. The procedures for the auction of the firearms shall be approved by the city council.He called and talked to officers and their attorney who actually worked on this ordinance.They did a ton of research to come up with this ordinance.This is the one he is the most comfortable with. Councilmember Waldron commented he has been around weapons all his life as a hunter and had 23 years in law enforcement and the military.His first inclination was that if it was seized by the police department, it should be destroyed.However, he was contacted by a number of people, from Apache Junction and out of state, the latter not carrying much weight with him, and the majority of them were in REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 12 OF 40 favor of something other than destruction.Council was provided with policies from various cities in the valley.The Mesa policy is probably the most comprehensive and well thought out policy there is because it covers some items that he was concerned about, such as weapons that were used in a crime against a person.He does not think those weapons should be returned to the street.The argument has been that it was not the gun's fault; that is true.Nonetheless, it was used in a crime.Weapons are built for one reason and one reason only. The argument is that you do not destroy cars.Cars are not meant to kill, they are meant to drive.Mesa has the policy that covers the vast majority of situations that will arise. They use a recommended appraiser that the industry recognizes as creditable.They also leave off the list assault weapons; there is no reason to have those on the street.He changed his viewpoint when he reread that policy.He likes the Mesa policy. Councilmember Severs stated he has a lot of different feelings about this.He agrees with what both of his colleagues have said.The Mesa ordinance has a few things that he does not agree with.One of the biggest controversial issues is •that supposedly some of the weapons that were destroyed were antiques or collectibles.There were World War II swords.The policy states that firearms that do not have legible serial numbers will be destroyed.If there is a gun that is 300 years old, they may not be able to read the serial number.He would like to have exceptions considered; if they are collectibles they should not be destroyed.Some weapons such as shotguns can be bought for $95 or $98.Most single shot shotguns are used for hunting.They are not used for crimes. Being sold at auction they could easily sell for $150 to $200. He thinks there are a few small items that could be changed in this, but the biggest one is the collectibles and the antiques. It is a shame if it did happen.He likes to find good in any situation.In the 51 calls he got from National Rifle Association people from Pennsylvania, North Carolina and all over the United States, a lot of those started out negative.He told the people he supported the chief in what he did, that he did his job and does it very well.He may have done something differently than others would have done, but he did it.The good that he found is that there is no policy on this and it could happen in the future.The public awareness that has been brought up on this will insure it will not happen again.Other REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 13 OF 40 cities that do not have policies may consider this as well.The good is that he did something that created public awareness and hopefully they will create a policy tonight to protect the antiques and collectible items. Councilmember Sippel stated he is looking for meaningful dialogue tonight.They know what has happened, what has happened has happened, and they cannot go and get those weapons back.There are lots of people coming up and he is excited about that, but he is looking for guidance from them.He is not looking for that they should not have done it and why they did it.They have been getting those phone calls and letters and they know how they feel on the issue. They want to look forward, move forward and direct staff to create a policy so that it does not happen again.It is a wonderful time because the people can be heard on what they would like to see in a policy made for the community.It is what he hopes happens tonight. Councilmember Insalaco stated he agreed with Councilmember Severs except that if it gets down to a rifle that was an antique or very valuable and it did not have a legible serial number, he would like to leave it up to the chief or his staff to determine if it is an antique or if it should be sold.They will not see a serial number on a gun that is 300 years old; it will be worn off. Councilmember Dietz commented he believes there is a provision in there that leaves it to the discretion of the committee. Vice Mayor Eck read Item 4 which stated that weapons of historical significance may be transferred to an appropriate museum and Item 5B says other weapons which are determined to be inappropriate for offering at auction by the chief or his designee may be destroyed.He reads the latter as if the chief sees it with no serial number but recognizes it as a gun of historical value; he thinks it is covered. Mayor Coleman commented he quit counting the phone calls at 24 calls.He got them from as far away as Virginia Beach, Virginia.He got a letter today REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 14 OF 40 from a gentleman in Gilbert, who destroys their weapons.He thought it was interesting that this man would like to tell them how to do it here but he does not think he has approached Mayor Berman.They were all angry, no matter which side of the issue they were on.He did receive some like the gentleman who spoke earlier about putting the guns back on the street.He is not sure there is a huge difference in the crime rates for those cities that dispose of them as Mesa does by selling and destruction or those that destroy them all.He does not think there is.It might mean something symbolically.In looking at the different ordinances proposed, he found that the one the National Rifle Association sent to them was the ordinance from Mesa.It seems to make a lot of sense.He commends the chief for trying to clean up the evidence room.To him, that was the mess.He appreciates him coming in and doing this; he is the first one who has come in and tried to take care of that and get things back in order.It was obviously not happening before that.He does not mind looking at what Mesa does on this issue. He commented he has received several request to speak forms on this issue and he will call on them.They will see if anyone has anything new to add to those that asked to come up.He requested they summarize their comments in 3 minutes. Mr. Jeff Serdy, 741 E. Kachina Avenue, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He commented it is a waste that the other guns got destroyed.He added they could build a new evidence building with the money they could have gotten rather than throw it all away.He is glad they are leaning towards what Mesa is doing and are not quoting cities like New York, San Francisco and Boston.He lives in this city, not there, and we have more sense than those people.He was going to counter if a bunch of negative things were going to be said.About destroying the guns, they make new guns every day.They will not destroy them all; it is a nationwide policy.This city will not set nationwide policy, only city policy.There is a background check, it is not like there is an auction with gangsters and a paddle.They go through proper forms and it will actually help solve crimes because it gets into the system that way.He thinks altered serial numbers have to be destroyed; that is required by Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.Anything that is sawed off to a short length or the number altered, that gun must be destroyed. Before 1968, guns were not required to have serial numbers. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 15 OF 40 They will encounter many that do not have serial numbers.There are other things, like the antique swords and cars.They may need to be incorporated into the policy.The policy states the chief has the authority to override or make these decisions. The chief has shown that he is anti -gun ownership.There should be checks and balances on that.The next chief of police may be even more anti -gun.He asked who would watch that because he may decide to destroy 9 out of 10.They might want to form a panel to decide what will be saved and what will not. Mr. Landis Aden, 6102 E. Inglewood Street, Mesa, addressed the council.He stated he represented the Arizona State Rifle and Pistol Association.It is the National Rifle Association affiliate for Arizona.They worked with Mesa to implement that policy a few years ago.It has some flaws, it is not perfect, but it was a step forward. They would support moving forward in that direction.For many years weapons, especially hunting weapons like shotguns, did not have a serial number.The federal and state law regarding mutilated or ground off serial numbers requires destruction. Another aspect is the semi -automatic firearms ban expired and it is now legal to have them.They will be approaching Mesa about changing that policy.That ban lasted 10 years and had no impact whatsoever other than driving up prices.They have seen a quote around the country about weapons being put back out on the street.Basically, reselling firearms to law-abiding, honest citizens is not putting them back on the street.The average citizen is not a criminal, never has been and never will be.He would support the resale policy either through FFLs, as wholesalers, or through a public auction.The facility exists to do background checks right on the spot.Another aspect of Arizona law is the concealed weapons permit.That is a de facto background check and one can buy a firearm on the spot.Arizona does not have a waiting period, it has an instacheck process. He encouraged them to move forward on a good, rational policy and possibly correct some of the flaws that Mesa has.They might want to look at an enhanced policy for returning lost and stolen firearms to the public.His group is here as a resource; for firearms questions please contact him or other officers in his association or the National Rifle Association in Sacramento. Mr. Steve Flynn, 305 N. Acacia, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He believes all firearms are appropriate.If they are REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 16 OF 40 in working order, they should be considered for sale.Even the cheap weapons, if in working order, should be sold.The poor have a right to have firearms as well.He believes there is nothing wrong with an AK -47.He thinks it is a wonderful tool for self defense.It is a misnomer to call it an assault weapon as most citizens that own them have ones that are not machine guns.They have to have an option for a machine gun or semi- automatic fire.He stated he must be one of those people on the street who is not trustworthy to be armed.He thinks it is wasteful and immoral to melt these things down.It is legal, but it is a slippery slope.He asked if the next thing would be the confiscation of firearms like in the Katrina aftermath.He hopes not.A lot of people forget in Arizona that they have two militias through Article 16.One is the National Guard, which he was part of, and the irregular or inactive militia.He is a part of that now and he is in uniform.It means they could be armed or not and they do not have to be active.They do not go to any meetings.It is important to know that these weapons might be needed later on.People think this country can never be invaded again.He thinks there are a lot of weapons out there, but he feels the more weapons, the better.As a teacher, he cannot stand the National Education Association, so he will also trash the International Association for the Chiefs of Police.They are an international organization and they love gun control.They do not trust citizens with these assault weapons and are frosty towards carrying a concealed weapon. They network with gun control advocates against carrying a concealed weapon for assault weapons.They like to melt these weapons down.He thinks it is wasteful to melt these weapons down. The thinks the gun control advocates should pay for it if they insist on that.They should put their money where their mouths are.Owning a firearm is a right mandated by God.It is not just in the constitution.The Arizona Constitution is rock solid.He added they would be doing the right thing if they did this. Mr. Jimmy Eidson, 1309 W. 15th Avenue, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He stated they know what the chief's discretion is.He thinks the earlier speaker was right, they need to build in something that will cover that aspect, or the council will not know what will happen over there.If the man in charge is anti -gun for the community, he will most likely use that authority when the time comes.The biggest gripe he has on REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 17 OF 40 the guns being melted down is that it has taken tax money out of his pocket.He will have to pay tax out of his pocket to make up the difference that the couple hundred thousand dollars would have made in the general fund.Sooner or later it will happen. It has already been stated that there is no way they can keep the guns out of the hands of people who will kill kids and policemen.It will have no effect on that whatsoever.They can just go down the street and buy a gun from the same dealer if they want to.He is afraid that, sooner or later, the government will want all their guns.He has a 100% service- connected disability from the marines.He did not get that by standing there unarmed with a punk standing across from him with a firearm.He is afraid it will come down to that sooner or later; he hopes this is not the start of that latter for Apache Junction.It sounds like they are on the right track, but he does not like at the discretion of any one person.It would depend on how that person thinks and acts.He encouraged them to keep an eye on it and not let anyone take the money out of his pocket for tax money.He knows that is where it is going to come from.He has guns and he will always have guns.He does not go out and shoot, but if someone wants to kick his door down, he better watch out, because he can handle a gun and he will. Mr. Steven White, 105 N. Delaware, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He thinks the council is on the right track.He thanked the chief of police for the wonderful work that he does. It was not his problem; he was doing what he thought was best when there was no firm policy for him to follow.He is a gun owner but feels they are on the right track.He would like to throw something else in, as he likes his constitutional rights. He asked if they could take some of the money generated from the sale of those weapons that have been determined could be sold and put it into social policies that provided, for instance, after school art programs for kids and free family community art shows.This would put some goodness and beauty back into the world.He wants to live in a community that spends as much time talking about art as they do talking about guns. Mr. Wayne Standage, 1920 E. 20th Avenue, Apache Junction addressed the council.He is a fourth generation Arizonan with at least 3 decades in law enforcement from this valley to Harquahala Valley.He has worked on gang enforcement, narcotics REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 18 OF 40 and others.He has been shot at, faced people with guns, and he has no problem with the policy they are currently trying to develop.He believes they are on the right track for what they need to do.Guns should go back if they have not been used for violent crimes.He requested that special weapons be looked at. He has an SKS with a very low serial number, one of the first ones made.It puts it into a different category than just being an SKS.Things like that need to be looked at before a weapon like this is destroyed as it is a valuable weapon. Mrs. Deborah Weller, 471 W. 21st Avenue, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She stated she is a business owner and a gun owner.She knows that having her 9MM on her hip in her store has prevented a robbery at least one time.The policy that Mesa has is a good policy.The only caveat she has with it is in regards to their policy on historical weapons.There are only so many places in museums for historical items.They probably only display about 10% to 20% of what they have. Otherwise, it is put in a locker somewhere.Some museums will not even accept weapons.They may have to search to find one. She has a friend whose father is liquidating his collection in Washington and he is trying to find places for his weapons.He has the equivalent of a small museum himself.The historical weapons should be offered to museums first but she thinks there should be no reason why they should not be offered to a collector through a licensed firearms dealer.The policy is very reasonable otherwise.She has no problem with getting rid of the $100 Saturday night specials. Councilmember Sippel thanked those who altered their comments to help them move forward in this process.He was excited about hearing what Mr. Landis had to say about his organization.He believes he gave his card to the city clerk and he hopes that he and or his organization will be included in the motion so they can work out some of the kinks that have arisen in the Mesa policy.He thanked them all for their input. Councilmember Severs stated he would like to hear from one more person tonight.He asked for Chief Walp to come up and give his opinion.He has been defending him for a long time and now it is Chief Walp's turn to say something. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 19 OF 40 Public Safety Director Glenn Walp addressed the council.He thanked him for the opportunity to make some comments.There are three branches of government: legislative, executive and judicial.The council is legislative, he is part of the executive; he executes the law. Whatever decision they make, that is the law he will enforce. Theirs is not an easy job, but he respects their position regardless of his position on the issue.No matter what anyone else's position is on this matter tonight, he also respects their position.He holds them in high esteem; this is democracy in action.He appreciates that and he appreciates their positions on this issue, notwithstanding that they may disagree. Contrary to statements made earlier tonight, what was done in this city is not new.It has been here for decades.He graduated from the state police academy in 1966 and that was the policy then by many agencies all over the country.As crime and violence increased in the 80's and 90's, law enforcement took a different perspective.His position is in solid line with the International Association of Chiefs of Police.They are not a legislative body, they are an association.They represent law enforcement all over the world.Their position is simple.They would recommend a mandatory destruction of firearms.They state that the recirculation of these firearms back into the general population increases the availability of firearms which could be used again to kill or injure additional police officers or citizens.They would recommend and encourage all law enforcement agencies to adopt a mandatory destruction policy of all firearms that come into its possession which are unregistered, found or unclaimed property, used in the commission of any crime, surrendered by any person or purchased for use by that agency, and that they be destroyed in such a fashion as to render them permanently unusable as firearms. They have a caveat regarding the museum pieces as they have spoken about.That is the policy he stands on.He did not create one in his living room a few months ago.It is who he is, what he has been doing all his life, and it is not new. When he did his research, 70t of the agencies he researched do the same thing.Phoenix destroys 200 to 300 every month. Tucson uses big street rollers to crush them.Chandler, Scottsdale, Tempe, and Glendale all do it.It is nothing unique.He speculated to make a law that would allow them to sell the firearms would put them in the minority.There is nothing wrong with that.He stated he wanted to clear up a few REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 20 OF 40 misconceptions.Mr. Jim Stevens spent 6 months of laborious work tearing through this with National Crime Information Center checks, tracking down people, and giving back guns where he could find the people.One of the problems, for those back in the 80's, was that some people had already died or moved away. He could not track them down.In the last week he has given back 7 weapons from new cases in the city.There were no samurai swords; there were no samurai swords in World War II. They were all cheap, flea market swords; they were tagged for destruction by the individual that came before Jim.There were five cap and balls rifles; four .50 caliber and one .45 caliber. They were all cheap reproductions.Four were taken from criminals, one from a suicide.They were not at Custer's last stand and did not blaze the trail for Arizona.He heard talk that the city could have made $150,000 to $250,000.They saw a list but not the weapons.Many of them were sawed off.Many of them did not have cylinders or were rusted junk.The serial numbers were removed.As an earlier gentleman indicated, they must be destroyed.They figured out, based upon the time frame that they had these weapons, what they would have collected in one year.They estimated that in one year, under the normal processes of getting rid of the weapons, if they had sold what they had in this pile they would have made $1,000 to $2,000 per year.There is a statement made that if the weapon is bought from a federally licensed dealer it does not have to be worried about.That is not true.He went to the Executive Gang Enforcements Symposium last week and met Mr. Emory Hurley, Assistant U.S. Attorney for the State of Arizona.They have been spearheading through Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms a project called Project Safe Neighborhoods, a project to get the guns off the streets.Two of the major problems they have encountered are straw purchases, which is gang dealers hiring people who have good records to go in and buy the weapons.One case is where one person hired eight people to go in and buy twelve weapons at one time to give back to gang dealers who pay a very high price.They had a major case in Prescott Valley recently.They also do identity thefts.They use that to purchase.The concept that if you buy from a federally licensed dealer that it is totally clean and always will be clean is not exactly true.It is considered the major problem in that arena at this point.The chief legal counsel for Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms will not sell one weapon except to those people to get it back.They destroy every one.His comment was they do not REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 21 OF 40 have enough money in their coffers to pay one suit of the millions of dollars if someone gets shot and killed or injured with a weapon that they sell.Comments were made about hunting weapons.Hunting weapons can kill.We know that many young children were destroyed in Columbine with a shotgun.He added that 99.9% of the weapons that were destroyed here were either taken from a criminal during a crime or from drug dealers and so forth in the city.Some key words in the Mesa policy are those involved in a crime, but he is not sure of their interpretation of the phrase against a person.What he got from that is if it is involved in a crime, they do not sell it.The argument that if someone is hurt or injured with the weapon that the city may sell, that the person would just have gotten another weapon anyway, is very hollow when one is looking into the eyes of the victim's family and their young child or family member is rotting in the ground.One mistake with one gun one time will result in millions of dollars in a lawsuit.He respectfully disagrees if they think they are protected from a civil lawsuit. It is a reason the federal government does not sell weapons. The choice is theirs, and it is not an easy choice.He asked as they make that final decision, from his perspective not as Glenn Walp, that they think about America and its safety, the safety of its streets and our town, of its families and its children. Any weapon that they may sell in that time, with just one incident occurring, one person being injured by that, is not worth it to him.It is not a matter of money; it is a matter of integrity, security, safety and the love of our country, families and children.Ten young children died in schools this year by a weapon.God forbid that a weapon they sell would be used in such a case.He respects their decision but he simply stated from a professional law enforcement perspective choose well. Vice Mayor Eck commented he respects the chief and it certainly sounds bad when one talks about families and all that.He feels that if these are going to federally licensed firearms dealers, then for someone else to buy the gun would be a felony.He does not understand the difference between going to a dealer and going to Wal-Mart. They can get the guns there.The one gun that stood out to him, being a hunter, was the Wesley 300 and he does not know what condition it was in, but he could not afford one.They are expensive guns.He was wondering on the language for item 4, REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 22 OF 40 the weapons having a historical significance being transferred to appropriate museums, if they could add or sold at auction. The other concern was about assault -style firearms and it lists what they are.He would like to change the language to modified or illegal firearms will not be offered at auction and will be destroyed.He would like to see all the money go back to the police department. Councilmember Severs commented the one item that states that firearms should be in working condition in order to be considered for bid strikes him as funny as a lot of antiques and collectibles may not be working.A gun that does not work is not a danger to anyone. He wants to protect anything that may be a collectible or antique.It is part of our history. Councilmember Insalaco stated there are probably a lot of antique guns that they do not even make ammunition for. Councilmember Severs stated that is correct.To him, they are not very dangerous. Councilmember Sippel asked if they were giving direction tonight. Vice Mayor Eck commented he was planning on it but to go from where we are at to something that mirrors Mesa's ordinance is a huge step.He thinks they are good taking that step and if they have to do some revisions, they need to check to see how the new ordinance would apply the next time that they process guns.The language changes he suggested would address a couple things without adding too much to revising the whole ordinance.They are two minor issues.He has spoken with Landis and he has gotten a lot of information from him on this.He would like to see historical guns go to a museum or be sold at auction.Any firearm that has been modified or is an illegal firearm would not be offered at auction; it would be destroyed. Councilmember Waldron commented he would like to see the direction include that they explore the liability issue.It causes him some concern.They REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 23 OF 40 as a council cannot put the city in a position to lose millions of dollars in a lawsuit.It needs to be explored carefully so that they are not putting themselves in a situation where they will jeopardize the citizens. Vice Mayor Eck agreed.He felt comfortable with what the attorney gave us.That was his first question to the Mesa attorney who worked on this.A National Rifle Association attorney sent them something also. He asked the city attorney if he had received something of a response to liability from them. City Attorney Joel Stern stated they sent a copy of the Mesa ordinance which they fully endorsed. Vice Mayor Eck commented it was prior to that by a few weeks.He is fine with their checking on the liability.That was one of his biggest concerns. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Vice Mayor Eck MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF REGARDING FIREARMS DESTRUCTION POLICY:THAT WE MIRROR MESA'S CURRENT ORDINANCE ON FIREARMS DISPOSAL POLICY FOR FIREARMS SEIZED BY OUR APACHE JUNCTION POLICE DEPARTMENT.HE WOULD LIKE TO REVISE SECTION 2 ITEM 4, WEAPONS HAVING HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE MAY BE TRANSFERRED TO APPROPRIATE MUSEUMS OR SOLD AT AUCTION, AND ALSO NUMBER 5A TO STATE THAT MODIFIED OR ILLEGAL FIREARMS WILL NOT BE OFFERED AT AUCTION AND WILL BE DESTROYED; AND THAT THE MONEY RECOUPED FROM THE SALE OF THESE GUNS BE TURNED BACK TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR IN TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT; AND ALSO THAT WE FURTHER EXPLORE ALL LIABILITY ISSUES BY TAKING THIS ACTION. Mayor Coleman asked if he needed a date to bring it back. Vice Mayor Eck asked if they could do it the first meeting in December. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 24 OF 40 There was general discussion on when to bring this item back. ,Vice Mayor Eck AMENDED HIS MOTION TO ADD AT THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY. Councilmember Severs SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. Mayor Coleman called for a ten minute recess. Mayor Coleman reconvened the meeting. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT THAT WOULD ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL HOUSING UNIT ON A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF HOUSING CARETAKERS )Councilmember Severs briefed the council on the item.He stated it was brought to his attention several times about a month ago by De'etta Fountain.She and her husband are very ill.They have a small travel trailer on their property and they would like their granddaughter to move in there to help take care of her.In doing research, the county has a conditional use permit application where they would pay a fee, fill out the application and if certain criteria are met, someone would be able to move into a secondary structure to take care of the people in the main residence or someone could be moved into the secondary structure for that person to be taken care of.It has been looked at a few times in the past, and they have already had discussion on this.He would like to see people be able to do this.If they can do it right now for the care of horses or livestock, he thinks they should be able to do it to take care of our elderly.One of the criteria that would have to be met REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 25 OF 40 is having a doctor's note that would have to be filled out annually stating there are medical reasons that this is needed. He would also like to add a financial note to this as well.A lot of our elderly are living on a very fixed and slim income. It is sometimes difficult to have an apartment or anything nice. He would like to see that happen if it can be done. Councilmember Waldron commented it looks like the county application is pretty thorough.He thinks this direction should be that they basically mimic this application.It gets all the information that is required. Councilmember Severs commented he does not exactly want to mimic the county application as it does not allow for any financial purposes. Councilmember Waldron asked that he explain financial purposes. Councilmember Severs stated his mother, for example, gets $600 per month for a total income. Her apartment rent is $595 per month.She does not have enough money for anything else. Councilmember Waldron commented he thought this was designed for medical care. Councilmember Severs stated that is what he is saying.He would like to modify this a little bit and make it for medical or financial purposes; they would be able to help a few more people who desperately need help.He does not think that it needs to be decided tonight, but he would like to see direction to look into it. Councilmember Sippel commented he is not against that, but tonight it was just for the purpose of housing caretakers.He does not know if that is something that needs to come on again for a different direction. Councilmember Severs stated this is for a caretaker suite or a secondary structure to be placed on a property. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 26 OF 40 City Attorney Joel Stern stated they have the option of having planning staff and legal staff take a look at this particular ordinance or policy that the county has done.They could then come back with recommendations on how it would fit into our code.There might be some inconsistencies that it creates within the code.They would also take into consideration all the comments made tonight and from the work session. Councilmember Sippel commented he is not saying he is against this, but they may need to be two separate issues and not be rolled into the same one. Councilmember Severs stated it is definitely an option. Councilmember Dietz commented he thinks he likes Joel's suggestion to come back and look at the different options, where they stand and what can work and what cannot. Vice Mayor Eck commented he is concerned about creating something that will not be used very much; they need to see how many conditional use permits are pulled when they do. Councilmember Severs commented Rudy stated this comes up quite often.It may be a bigger issue than they know. Vice Mayor Eck commented his concern is that if he had R-143 and they are talking about travel trailers. Councilmember Severs stated they are talking about secondary structures, whether it be a trailer, travel trailer or a secondary structure that has been built.The county allows for the latter, also. Councilmember Waldron commented he has a concern for something other than medical purposes.He feels it is a slippery slope.His mother is 83- years -old and lives on her own.When she gets to that point, he REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 27 OF 40 would move her into his house.He agrees with the medical purposes part of it, and he understands the need to take care of a relative, but he is hard pressed to believe why they would allow and under what conditions they would allow a separate unit to be built on a property simply for taking care of an elderly relative.Certainly they need the care, but he feels they may be opening a Pandora's box on that one.His neighbor built on a mother-in-law portion to his house and it was within the setback.He thought this was designed for medical care, and that is how he looked at it. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated that previous councils had wrestled with these issues and their inability to monitor the temporary use made them decide not to go ahead with any changes. Vice Mayor Eck commented he thinks what he is trying to get at is if there is that much of a demand; he does not know every ordinance in this county.He asked if they do a conditional use permit every year and do they have to check every year to make sure that they are medically or financially necessary. Councilmember Severs commented it is not a new application every year with the county.The application is filled out, but they have to present documentation every year, whether it be a doctor's note or, in his suggestion, a financial statement. Councilmember Dietz commented that is how they could curb this from getting into a rental situation.They would need an affidavit or something from a medical office. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated the county procedure addressed medical issues only and not a financial hardship. Councilmember Dietz commented it is for medical. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated that her experience in working with nonprofit REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 28 OF 40 organizations was that it was expensive for them to obtain awaited financial statements and it would be even more difficult for a single individual to do the same thing and for staff to interpret the statements. Councilmember Dietz stated when it was discussed previously he thought that getting a doctor's note stating that these people needed 24 -hour care and needed a caretaker or someone to take care of them is getting the city away from the problem of turning it into a rental 2 or 3 years down the road. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated that would be covered under the procedure used by Pinal County. Councilmember Dietz commented that covers us on that end as far as it not being turned into a rental somewhere down the road. Councilmember Insalaco commented the city attorney made a suggestion, and it is not that he wants to put more work on staff as they are busy enough, but instead of doing something halfway and to make sure they get something concrete, he suggested they have staff and the city manager look at it and then bring it back to them on the entire thing.They have the resources. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Councilmember Severs stated it is a difficult motion to make because they have two people in the community that are waiting for an answer to see if they can legally have someone live on their place and take care of them. He would like to see staff look at this, get all the answers and draft something that is good.If they take the time to do it right, they might be hurting this couple that need help.He asked for suggestions on helping them.He asked if they could give them a temporary approval and allow them to have live-in care while they work on this. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 29 OF 40 City Attorney Joel Stern commented if he is talking about putting something in place in the zoning code that means changing the zoning code.It would have to go through planning and zoning and then the council.It would be unusual to just come up with something for a temporary zoning and say it is temporary until they find a bigger fix.He would not recommend it.They should take some time to study it, talk to the county to see what they do and what kind of problems they came up with.They might want to amend theirs but have not gotten around to it due to some issues coming up.He understands the urgency of it.He could set a deadline for staff to bring it back, but it would have to be a prioritization thing for the whole council.To have a temporary fix for a zoning code is very unusual. City Manager George Hoffman stated they may be going in two directions.In the one direction they have a model out there and it is a shorter term process to talk to the county and to work on that.If they are getting into the financial model, he is not getting a clear read on that issue.It suggests a whole much wider scope of reflection, consideration and research.He asked if they would be setting up something like financial qualification as they do in grants and who sees which documents.It is a significant and substantial research effort.They would be happy to do it if they want staff to go that way.It is a longer process.The county application is a discreet, clear model they can respond to. Councilmember Severs asked how long it would take if they used that model and did the research with the county. City Attorney stated they have to consider the planning and zoning commission, the legal publications, and the council public hearings, it would be at least three months, probably more like a four month minimum. Councilmember Severs added there will be a lack of meetings due to the holidays. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 30 OF 40 City Attorney Joel Stern stated it would be at least 6 months if he wanted the full participation of the public. Councilmember Severs commented there is 3 to 6 months of investigating to do while this couple that is sick and looking for someone to take care of them in a trailer that is already sitting on their property.He thought there should be some way that they could offer some kind of an exception until this is worked out.There should be something they can do to help these people. City Attorney Joel Stern stated it is a zoning change; they have to go through the ordinance change.That is how the zoning code is changed. Planning and zoning must act on it pursuant to city code.There is no way around that. Vice Mayor Eck asked if they could buy a horse and have a caretaker. Councilmember Severs stated they put a horse on their property right now and the nurse or their daughter could live on that property tomorrow legally. Mayor Coleman stated that may be the temporary fix. Vice Mayor Eck commented that is what he was getting at.They might want to buy a horse if that is the code.He could see no possibility of speeding it up. Councilmember Dietz commented as much as they would like to, he does not see how they can pick something they would want to do and have it done tomorrow to accommodate them. Councilmember Severs commented they must be able to make an exception.This is a guideline. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 31 OF 40 Mayor Coleman commented he does not think he wants to start making exceptions to our ordinances or fixing tickets or anything like that.He does not think it is something that should be done.He does not think it is good public policy and he is not willing to consider it.He is willing to consider what they have on the agenda tonight.He closed the discussion and called for a motion. Councilmember Severs MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF REGARDING A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT THAT WOULD ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL HOUSING UNIT ON A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF HOUSING CARETAKERS FOR MEDICAL PURPOSES:THAT STAFF LOOK INTO THE SITUATION, LOOK INTO THE COUNTY APPLICATION AND HOW THEY DO IT; AND ALSO LOOK AT PROS AND CONS ON WHETHER IT WOULD WORK OR NOT WORK IF WE COULD REGULATE IF IT BE FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE, IF THERE IS A NEED FOR IT FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE; AND BRING BACK WHATEVER FINDINGS THEY COULD BY THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY. City Manager George Hoffman stated they are to come back to council first.If they want to proceed they would then go on to planning and zoning and that route. Councilmember Severs stated that is correct. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he understands he wants to see some language for a proposed ordinance amendment. Councilmember Severs stated he just wants to see the research and see how big of a need there is for this. City Manager George Hoffman asked for clarification on how big a need there is for this.He asked if he was talking about polling the community. Councilmember Severs commented he just wants to have them talk to staff and determine how many people have come in and applied.He wants to know if REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 32 OF 40 this is something that is a great need in the community or is it just one person who came up with this idea. City Manager George Hoffman commented that what he wants is just an internal checking with the professionals and not doing community research. Councilmember Severs stated that is correct. Vice Mayor Eck SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. SAGUARO CACTUS AND NATIVE PLANTS PROTECTION ORDINANCE )Councilmember Dietz briefed the council on the item.He stated they discussed a little while ago saving the saguaro cactus and other native plants in the area.He thought they had it covered when they redid the grading ordinance, but evidently not.He had found out that the saguaro is protected by the state, but it is not because of the little incident we had a couple of weeks ago.If you own your own property, you can fill out a notice of intent and send it to the state and bulldoze every saguaro or what have you on your property.He does not feel that is right; it is a prized plant for the state.There are organizations that will come out and remove all of them at no charge.Scottsdale and Tucson both have good ordinances that protects these cacti and native plants.The state laws would not supersede ours; it would be whichever one is the most strict.If they want to protect the saguaros and native plants in the city, they would not be able to blade them over when they do these massive blading and grading.He would like staff to look at these two ordinances and come up with one for the city that will protect them. Mayor Coleman asked if Proposition 207 would apply to something like this. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 33 OF 40 City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is a political issue that he did not think the council should talk about on election night.There might be people waiting in line to vote still. Vice Mayor Eck commented what Councilmember Dietz said was a major learning curve.He also thought that when they did that blading ordinance that they were protecting the native vegetation. Councilmember Dietz commented he thought it was both wildlife and plants. Vice Mayor Eck agreed. City Attorney Joel Stern stated back in 1999 Kate Morris was involved in changing Article 15 for residential zones.The plant protection act came up and they did come up with a few options.That kind of died with the redo of Article 15. Vice Mayor Eck commented there was something that Glen Van Nimwegen said. Councilmember Dietz commented he has a copy of those minutes.It was suggested that it be moved into the city's planning and zoning, but it was never done. Vice Mayor Eck commented the association out of Tucson, Tucson Cactus, notified him that they do not want to be part of an ordinance.He was using a lot of their information as they have a lot of knowledge. Councilmember Dietz commented he was just bringing up the fact that there are organizations that will do it.The Phoenix chapter called and he talked to them at length.They have over 90 people here. Vice Mayor Eck commented one of the gentlemen from Phoenix stated he tries to work with developers rather than force them.The other part is the REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 34 OF 40 ordinance has to have some teeth or it cannot be regulated.The other ordinance suggested was Oro Valley. Councilmember Sippel commented he thought they were great ideas. City Manager George Hoffman stated the superintendent of our parks division is here and he is also a registered landscape architect.He asked Nick Blake if he had anything to add before they consider making a motion. Parks Superintendent Nick Blake commented he wanted to clarify some points that have been stated.The Tucson group will not come in and move the big stuff for free.They come in and get the small stuff that normally gets bulldozed down.If they are talking about moving a saguaro or a palo verde with a 6" caliper, they will not move those for free.It is small stuff they can come in and hand dig over a weekend.State law requires them to file a notice of intent to clear the land and how big the parcel is determines how long the notice goes for.During that time period the state notifies salvage companies that are registered with them.They let them know that there are some plants that are about to be destroyed and they can go get them if they want them for free. They get to box them up and haul them off.He talked to someone from one company that is the major salvager in the Phoenix area and was told that they actively look for those situations where they can come in and haul stuff off.If that notice expires and no salvage company has come in to claim those trees and plants, that developer can knock down anything that is there.If there is a 30' saguaro that no one wanted to come and get, it can be knocked down and it is completely legal.Their option is how much beyond that they want to go.The Scottsdale level is the requirement of a plant study to be done by a professional group who then determines what plants are salvageable and requiring their removal. Councilmember Dietz commented that would be up to the research staff does after looking at the 3 ordinances and seeing what is available.They will then bring it back to council and we will see where we go from there.He believes that something needs to be done. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 35 OF 40 Councilmember Severs commented he was confused.He thought the saguaro was the state tree and that it was protected.He thought it was illegal to destroy one. Parks Superintendent Nick Blake stated it is illegal to knock it down without adequate notice.That is what the law says. Vice Mayor Eck commented it is unfortunate that the state does not even come out and look at them. Parks Superintendent Nick Blake stated most times they do not. City Attorney Joel Stern stated the city code prohibits the destruction of saguaros on city property and state land. Councilmember Severs commented they need to create an ordinance that will help save the cacti. City Attorney Joel Stern stated they are talking about the ones on private property. Scottsdale does it and Tucson has a very restrictive one.He thinks Pima County also has one. Parks Superintendent Nick Blake stated Mesa has one for their desert uplands area. Vice Mayor Eck commented he knew Mesa had one because it went into effect on a Monday and a developer by Crismon bladed on the Sunday before.They were furious. City Manager George Hoffman commented they would be looking at the ordinances of Scottsdale, Tucson and Oro Valley. Councilmember Insalaco asked if he would have to get a tag from the state to transport it if REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 36 OF 40 the vice mayor had a saguaro on his property and he wanted to get rid of it and give it to him. Parks Superintendent Nick Blake stated he would if he takes it off his property and takes it over to yours. Councilmember Insalaco commented he had a friend putting in a pool many years ago in Globe and he had 2 saguaros and 4 or 5 barrel cacti.He had to get tags from the state and put them in his truck before he could move them. Councilmember Severs asked if he had to pay for those. Councilmember Insalaco stated he did, although it was not much. Parks Superintendent Nick Blake stated he believed they are six dollars. Councilmember Severs stated they do not need a tag or have pay to bulldoze them. he had to pay for those. he did, although it was not much. Parks Superintendent Nick Blake commented not once they have been given adequate notice and that time has elapsed. Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell asked if there is a relationship between how big it is and being able to salvage the cactus and the cost. Parks Superintendent Nick Blake stated that is what the professionals do.They come out and they do a survey and look at the saguaro.It is sad to say that if there is a saguaro 50' tall, it cannot be salvaged. Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell asked why. Parks Superintendent Nick Blake stated they come up and they bolt them to a cradle.When REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 37 OF 40 they pull those up they have to tip them back.If the saguaro is too tall, it just breaks off. Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell stated it is a detriment to be bigger. Parks Superintendent Nick Blake stated the companies that salvage them have their own height limits.Some will not move them if they are over 20' to 25'; the highest he has heard of them being moved is 30'.The number of arms will also affect that.Some of them are rotted at the base, and when the salvager comes in and digs at the base, he knows it will snap off at the base.It pays to have the professionals come in and do a survey as Scottsdale requires.The city just did one at the library recently to survey the existing plants there as a result of the construction that will take place shortly.He believes they paid $650 for 1.35 acres and $1,200 for a 3 -acre parcel.It is basically $400 to $480 per acre to have the study done. Vice Mayor Eck commented it is worth it. Councilmember Dietz agreed. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Councilmember Dietz MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF REGARDING SAGUARO CACTUS AND NATIVE PLANT PROTECTION ORDINANCE:THAT STAFF RESEARCH SCOTTSDALE, TUCSON, ORO VALLEY, PIMA IF THEY HAVE IT, WHOEVER, AND COME UP WITH SOME LANGUAGE AS FAR AS DRAFTING AN ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY TO PROTECT THESE PLANTS. Vice Mayor Eck SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 38 OF 40 SELECTION OF MEETING DATES, TIMES, LOCATIONS, AND PURPOSES Councilmember Dietz stated the work session of November 20 and the regular meeting of November 21 have been cancelled due to the Thanksgiving Day holiday, and he MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M. AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M. BE HELD ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2006, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, RESPECTIVELY; AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M. BE HELD ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2006, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM. Councilmember Severs SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. ADJOURNMENT )Mayor Coleman adjourned the meeting at 9:28 p.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1. Acceptance of Agenda. 2. Acceptance of Minutes of Special Meeting of October 6, 2006. 3. Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 17, 2006. 4. Consideration and possible approval of proposed economic development agreement with Apache Junction Main Street Program, Inc. for FY 2006-07 in the amount of $40,000. 5. Consideration and possible approval of proposed economic development agreement with Apache Junction Community Development Corporation for FY 2006-07 in the amount of $7,155.00. ACCEPTED THIS 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2006, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 39 OF 40 SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2006. ATTEST: KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk DOUGLAS ,COLEMAN Mayor CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, held on the 7th day of November, 2006.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 15th day of November, 2006. KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 7, 2006 PAGE 40 OF 40