Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-09-15 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 15,1998 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona,was held on September 15,1998,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 7:00 p.m. INVOCATION Pastor David Forrester gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Surra led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present:Mayor Coleman Vice Mayor Surra Council member Dietz Councilmember Urich Councilmember Insalaco Councilmember Eck Council member Durbala Staff Present:City Manager Curtis Shook Assistant City Manager George Hoffman City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney Joel Stern Public Safety Director Robert Warner Others Present:Long Range Planner Kate Morris ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA )Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED;AND THAT WE RECOGNIZE THE OUTSTANDING SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY BY THE FOLLOWING CITY EMPLOYEES:CITY ENGINEER GORDON HAWS;LONG RANGE PLANNER KATE MORRIS;AND THAT THE AWARD OF BID FOR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT VEHICLES FOR ONE CHEVROLET 1.5 TON CAB/CHASSIS TRUCK AT $22,689.53,INCLUDING TAX,AND TWO CHEVROLET ISUZU ONE TON CAB TRUCKS AT $21,858.80 EACH,INCLUDING TAX,THROUGH STATE CONTRACT,BE AWARDED TO CHAPMAN CHEVROLET IN THE AMOUNT OF $66,407.13;AND THAT APPROVAL BE GIVEN TO ACCEPT REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 1 OF 43 THE COSTS FORWARDED TO PINAL COUNTY FOR STREET LIGHT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS FOR COLLECTION DURING FISCAL YEAR 1998-99. Councilmember Insalaco SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. Mayor Coleman recognized Mr.Al Pope on his 94th birthday and thanked him for his attendance at almost every meeting. AWARDS.PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS Maxine Leather,the executive director of the Central Arizona Association of Governments,presented the annual report to the council.She thanked the city for its continued support. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Ms.Lois Potts,481 S.Olmo Circle,addressed the council regarding a petition from owners and residents of the Sierra Entrada Garden Homes tract.They are requesting permanent closure of one block of San Marcos Drive where it ends behind the ABCO grocery store.They would like to prevent traffic from future developments from going through their tract.They claim it will endanger their children,disrupt their quality of life and have negative impact upon potential property values.She stated she had signatures from 54 households out of 83 households,plus 32 vacant lots.In addition,she ran a petition against the apartment complex but was unaware it had to go to the city;she had sent it to the Department of Commerce. Ms.Stephanie Jordan,14225 N.River Ridge Road,P.O.Box 2988,Florence 85032,introduced herself to the council and audience as a candidate for the Clerk of the Superior Court for Pinal County. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Curtis Shook announced the next quarterly city clean up will be held November 16-20,1998.He stated they would be holding a neighborhood meeting with the Sierra Entrada neighborhood and the Apache Ho neighborhood at the request of Englewood Development.The meeting would be on September 28 at 6:00 p.m.in the Sierra Entrada clubhouse. PUBLIC HEARINGS PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.1061/PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO.98-27/CASE NO.PZ-97-19/ REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 2 OF 43 SD-97-10/REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED SUNRISE SHADOWS SUBDIVISION ) )Councilmember Dietz declared a conflict of interest on this item as he had voted on it while he was a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Long Range Planner Kate Morris briefed the council on the item.The applicant is requesting to change the zoning from R1-43 which is one acre miminum parcel size to CR-3 which is 7,000 sq.ft.minimum lots within a platted subdivision.The preliminary plat meets the minimum square footage requirements,and the lots meet the minimum width. This will be a hard zoning request,not a planned development. Mayor Coleman asked what the minimum width requirement is. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated it is 60 feet.She asked if the council would like to break this up and take any questions on the zoning first,and later proceed with the preliminary plat. General discussion by the council showed a consensus that they wished to take this one at a time. Long Range Planner Kate Morris commented the ordinance has no suggested conditions of approval from the commission,though the council may include some. Councilmember Urich asked how the commission voted on the item. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated the vote was unanimous on the rezoning.The rezoning was voted upon in May and the preliminary plat was done later. Councilmember Urich stated she was not sure as the information in front of her showed the vote to be 5-2. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated the vote was on the preliminary plat. Mayor Coleman asked the applicant to address the council. Mr.Jason Morris,3200 N.Central, Phoenix,addressed the council representing the applicant.He requested to address both the rezoning and preliminary plat at this time as his comments touch on both.He added Mr.Kevin Howell,the project engineer,was in attendance to answer any questions on drainage.He commented this parcel is REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 3 OF 43 approximately 15 acres and is located at San Marcos and 12th Avenue,with travel trailer parks north and west of it.A vacant lot is east of it with higher density developments east of that.The new Lennar subdivision is south of it,it is also CR-3.The plan has taken over a year with suggestions from staff,the commission and neighbors being taken into consideration.There are several site constraints that impact this site and have caused it to develop slowly.It will be necessary to provide street improvements on San Marcos and 12th Avenue.These costs will be spread over the entire lot count.There is also a drainage impact on this site.They hired a drainage engineer to take the flows that are alre4dy established from the development to the north and match it to the existing development to the south.This project has a density of 3.3 dwelling units per acre which is at the low end of the general plan requirements.Staff advised them that a range in lot sizes was desired, therefore,some of the lots are in excess of 16,000 sq.ft.They were also concerned with 12th Avenue,as some Lennar homes already front this street and it is not a residential street,but a collector street.As a result,they created a landscape buffer and a perimeter wall with input from the Lennar neighborhood.There are some lots where the backyards front 12th Avenue,but there is at least 100'separating those lots from the ones across the street. The homes will be of quality design,and the open spaces will be turfed and landscaped.He requested the council to support the planning staff and commission in recommending approval of this project. Councilmember Durbala asked why there were no recreational spots on the property. Mr.Jason Morris stated one of their earlier plats had amenities and a different open space layout.They were told by staff to go with a straight subdivision,and that does not require the open space or amenity package they had provided.Instead,they opted for larger lots. Councilmember Durbala asked if there would be a way for them to put in a small basketball court or ramada area for these residents. Mr.Jason Morris stated this should be discussed with the engineer to determine where the high and dry areas would be. Councilmember Durbala commented they would be bringing a lot of kids into the area and they would have no place to go. Councilmember Eck asked him to repeat what the reasoning was for the houses not to front 12th Avenue. Mr.Jason Morris stated it was for public safety as it is not a residential street.They will be widening the REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 4 OF 43 street and fully improving that street,and by its character i t is not a street where homes should be fronting it. Councilmember Eck questioned the public safety issue since the street would be widened. Mr.Jason Morris commented an increase in speed typically accompanies the widening of a street.I t is not best for planning or public safety to have homes fronting on a street of that character.This street will serve these two neighborhoods and traffic from other areas.Additional traffic should not be backing in and out.In addition,if they created homes fronting onto 12th Avenue,they would have backyards next to front yards in their own community.These are much closer than the homes would be on 12th Avenue. Councilmember Eck suggested redoing the plat to where those homes are back to back. Mr.Jason Morris stated that would not be possible as there would be no access to the front of those homes. Councilmember Eck stated they could move the road north and the homes south. Mr.Jason Morris stated that would be inefficient as the roadway would be next to the property line.There would be a single lotting pattern serving those streets.It would be a difficult traffic pattern to work out. City Attorney Joel Stern requested that the council limit the discussion to the rezoning at this time,and to reserve these issues for the site plan that is the next item. Mr.Jason Morris agreed they are to be discussing the rezoning which is in accordance with the general plan and he urged the council's support of the rezoning. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item. Mr.Howard Parks,10930 E.Sunnydale Drive,Sun Lakes,addressed the council.He owns the parcel in question and he gave a history on the property and surrounding properties since his purchase.They have always supported all the development in the area and are a charter member of the sewer district.They have paid the taxes for 21 years and the monthly fee to the sewer district and it does not seem fair to him that the property just south of them was rezoned with this same zoning and they are now objecting to his rezoning his property to that zoning and wish i t REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 5 OF 43 to be kept open space.He believes this is a quality development and it is in compliance with the general plan. Ms.Sandra Browning,879 W.12th Avenue,Apache Junction,addressed the council.She commented she is not against a development going in across the street,however,she is concerned with the drainage.There is a drainage ditch down 12th Avenue that goes behind the brick wall of these homes.She has additional concern about the arroyos going through their properties now.She is concerned for the safety of the children,as they will have to keep them out of their arroyos and out of the drainage ditch up by the brick wall.She queried if any councilmember or staff had seen the flooding going across the street during the heavy rains; she advised it was a serious problem.Small children could fall into the drainage area and drown.She commented when they bought their property they were pleased that the zoning called for acre to acre -and -a -half properties as it keeps the look of Apache Junction.She would still like to see that size of lot for the property under discussion.She asked if the city had approved their drainage proposal,as she knew that Lennar had to keep the their drainage flow as close as possible to the natural flow.She commented this subdivision is changing the natural flow with a lot of ninety degree angles. She attended the meeting for the neighborhood,but at the end of the meeting she was even more concerned about the drainage.She added several of her neighbors had submitted letters of protest against this property and she has not heard that mentioned.They had signed a letter and upon taking it into the city they learned petitions had to be signed and notarized. Mr.Sean McNulty,1243 W.12th Avenue,Apache Junction,addressed the council.He stated the builder and developer have been working with them on a lot of the issues.He is also concerned with the drainage.He reiterated that Lennar could not disturb the natural flow,they could only enhance it.Therefore,Lennar put river rock in the arroyos and they made a giant collection area.He was hoping this subdivision would do something like that,too,but they are redirecting the flow at ninety degree angles.He questioned whether it would withstand a 100 year flood.He is also concerned about the traffic on 12th Avenue.If this street is to be turned into a main arterial,homes should not have been built on this street facing it.Speeding vehicles go by and run over children's toys and kill animals.They use this street to get to Ironwood and then onto the freeway.Complaints to the police department have not brought any response other than having the radar trailer set up.He commented on other cities going to larger lots than what they have had in the past;they have stopped allowing smaller lots as they have become problems in the city.He requested the city to look again at the widening of 12th Avenue and the problems that could result. Mr.Jerry Dean,825 W.12th Avenue, Apache Junction,addressed the council.He is concerned with the drainage,as all the additional asphalt will cause more water to come into their area.It cannot seep through the dirt anymore.The area that will receive the most REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 6 OF 43 flooding will not have a culvert to drain through.Instead,the developer stated they would enlarge the depth of the area to the main arroyo and place culverts at that point,allowing the water to run underneath the road.The water does not run that way at this time.They believe this will take care of the five year plan.He believes their plan will cause flooding. Mr.Kevin Howell,the project engineer for this project,7373 N.16th Street,Phoenix,addressed the council.He stated they have left the eastern wash in the existing condition and alignment.The only realignment of it will be to bring it underneath the street due to the street being widened.The wash currently travels down the centerline of the street.The culverts will extend over and bring it into Arroyo Verde.The water has not been redirected from the other areas.Some retention has been added on the low end of the site for the large open space. The drainage was based upon a 50 year storm of 24 hour duration per the city's guideline.Gordon Haws,the city engineer,visited on site about the western wash and talked about what would affect that wash.The public works department had found some clogged pipes and has cleaned those out on Broadway. The neighbor affected at the western wash has agreed to have her side of the wash regraded and have it gunited by the developer so the rocks would not move so much.No pipe will be put under that street as it will not accommodate the outfall.Pipes will be extended at other locations.The neighbors have expressed interest on the traffic issue and the developer concurs with them. The developer has agreed to place speed bumps or any other measure requested by the city engineer that he deems reasonable and prudent.They will do what they can to control and lower the traffic speeds. Mayor Coleman closed the public hearing on this item.He requested Mr.Morris to address the concerns presented. Mr.Jason Morris stated the one acre property and rural character of Apache Junction is not an issue as there is higher density property north and the same density south of this location.A fifteen acre piece between the two is not the place for that type of development.The zoning is not in conformance with the general plan.Mr. Howell would be the one to address the drainage issues.He reiterated the zoning would bring this property into conformance with the general plan.They are also requesting approval of the preliminary plat.That plat would have been reviewed by the planning staff,the public works and the engineering departments to make sure all the guidelines are followed.Upon the approval of that plat,the applicant will then make specific plans.Due to the length of time involved and two engineers already overseeing it,a good amount of the final plat for the drainage issue has been accomplished.They are proposing what will be a solution for this location.They will still have to come back to the council with the final plat,and the drainage issues will be accommodated by then.He added they would be willing to provide a tot lot or play area for the community. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 7 OF 43 Mayor Coleman suggested dropping the lots along 12th Avenue and making it a drainage area and tot lot area.I t would leave some open space and still give the developer more lots than he has now. Mr.Jason Morris stated that was a very good point but they would not be in conformance with the general plan and they would not be close to the development across the street. Mayor Coleman agreed that they would not be close to the development across the street. Councilmember Urich thanked the citizens who came forward to give their opinions.She added she felt uncomfortable with the rezoning and suggested it be continued until they had received additional information. Mayor Coleman asked what additional information she required. Councilmember Urich wanted more information on the drainage and some of the other issues the constituents brought up. Councilmember Durbala commented the drainage is part of the plat processing,not part of the rezoning.The issue being discussed at this time is the rezoning.The next section will discuss the plat issues. Vice Mayor Surra stated she had no problem moving on the zoning issue as that concerns the type of density on this property.It has nothing to do with the plat.They are two separate issues. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion with no further questions on the rezoning and called for a motion. Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.1061 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Vice Mayor Surra SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:6-0-1 (Councilmember Dietz abstained from voting.) The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 8 OF 43 City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.1061,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Vice Mayor Surra SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:5-1-1 (Councilmember Urich voted in opposition,Councilmember Dietz abstained from voting.) Mayor Coleman opened the discussion on Resolution No.98-27,the preliminary plat for the subdivision. Councilmember Dietz declared a conflict of interest. Long Range Planner Kate Morris briefed the council on the preliminary plat.She commented they had received 3 protest petitions on the forms and a number of letters of concern.All of them are from residents of Arroyo Verde.The main concerns were drainage, traffic impact,and the safety of the residents along 12th Avenue in relation to the drainage proposed.One requested keeping the density as i t is now. There are 5 conditions for approval in the resolution,and all of them are normal stipulations except for condition four which requires single story homes only to be built on Lots 1-4 and 38-50. Councilmember Eck asked if the Lennar subdivision had to be rezoned in order to be built. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated it carried the CR-3 zoning already.It only had to go through the platting process. had to have a 60'minimum. stated that was for lot width. Mayor Coleman asked if the frontage Long Range Planner Kate Morris Mayor Coleman stated he sees lots near the entryways with widths of only 52'. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated those would be on the curve. Mayor Coleman agreed and that another in the area is 54'. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 9 OF 43 Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated because of safety concerns for traffic movement the setbacks are measured from the setback line,and that is very common on the corner lots that have a "dog ear". Mayor Coleman stated the setback was shown for the three north of that lot but not on that one. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated that is very common on one's that are on an "eyebrow"such as this one. I t is not easily scaled.There is a 20'x 20'visibility triangle required for safety in turning movements. Councilmember Eck questioned Lot 40 being shown at 45'but it does not have the "dog ear"as the other lots do. Mayor Coleman commented that was the back of the lot. Long Range Planner Kate Morris explained how the width is calculated on those odd shaped lots. Councilmember Insalaco questioned when they would have developers come in that do not consider Apache Junction as every other place.He would like to see bigger lots with less homes on them.There are people who will buy these big lots with the bigger and better homes.He does not see why the city should have to follow all the other surrounding areas and have these walled in,small lot communities.He would prefer to see 35 houses on this property rather than the 50 they are showing. He commented they would not then have all the little squares throughout the city and the change in Apache Junction.It also would not make the city look like all the others.He added he is fed up with this type of development. Mayor Coleman requested the applicant to address the council. Mr.Jason Morris thanked the council for their support of the rezoning.He commented the quality of the house and its construction is not a part of the lot size.He believes their plat takes into account the general plan and the surrounding characteristics of the property.It works around the drainage issues.He requested the council have faith in the city's professional staff.He commented they should deny the final plat if they are not in conformance with all the regulations and guidelines or how somehow deficient at that time. Councilmember Eck asked if they were doing anything on the north for the drainage issue on this property. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 10 OF 43 Mr.Kevin Howell commented the existing drainage by the trailer court currently runs just into their area close to some of their units on the north.It then curves into the site.The developer will open up the throat of the tract there and allow the water to continue straight ahead instead of turning the ninety degrees that i t is turning up there.It will take it away from running at the rear of the trailers that are adjacent to it. City Manager Curtis Shook asked if he was talking about on -site improvements. Mr.Kevin Howell stated that was correct. City Manager Curtis Shook believed Councilmember Eck was talking about off -site improvements. Mr.Kevin Howell stated a small culvert was recently cleaned out on Broadway that is immediately north of their location.It had not been in service for awhile and the street had been ponding.They will not be doing anything in that area.He understands that the city has a project in the works to do improvements on Broadway.He has had meetings with the city's engineer regarding repercussions if the drainage pattern was changed upstream. Councilmember Eck asked if the developer would make an improvement up there if they were asked to do it. Mr.Kevin Howell stated they are already doing a lot of improvement on San Marcos,and he believes they think that the city should be responsible for the improvements on Broadway. Vice Mayor Surra stated she wanted to assure Mr.Morris that the council has faith in the staff to perform their jobs in a very efficient and quality manner.However,i t is the council's job to hear and respond,as they are charged with protecting the citizens out here.They have a vision about the appearance of the city and that is what they are trying to address.The council has some concerns about all the walls going up and the confined appearances within the city.These are the things the council is charged with addressing. Mayor Coleman commented if problems occur along 12th Avenue,the council will be receiving those phone calls,not the staff or the developer.Therefore,the council tries to make sure everything is done right up front. City Manager Curtis Shook asked for clarification purposes that they had stated they would not make off -site improvements north of the site. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 11 OF 43 Mr.Kevin Howell stated they believed that Broadway would be the city's responsibility. City Manager Curtis Shook asked if they were saying they would not make any improvements if they were asked. Mr.Kevin Howell stated they would not make any improvements for off site north of the property. City Manager Curtis Shook asked i f that was firm. Mr.Kevin Howell stated it was firm. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item. Mr.Howard Parks,10930 E.Sunnydale Drive,Sun Lakes,stated he had nothing further to add from his previous comments. Ms.Sandra Browning,879 W.12th Avenue,stated she thought their letters of protest were part of the rezoning issue and that is what they had been meant for.They were not against the preliminary plat.She added there is no way of knowing the quality of the homes until after they are built.She is concerned as they do not even have a homebuilder yet,and does not see how they could guarantee the quality of the homes without one.She mentioned the drainage is a very big concern of the neighborhood,along with a concern for the traffic.She commented there are cars going 50 to 60 miles per hour down their street now and she fears someone will get hurt.Speed bumps were mentioned,but the neighborhood is not entirely behind that.She is concerned about the additional load on the schools and the quality of education the children will receive.She added the utility companies cannot handle the customers that they have right now.She claimed she cannot get cold water in the summer time now at her house.She would like to see the bigger communities slowed down,and would not like to see any more walled communities or crackerbox houses.The city was known for its view,beauty and rural area,but it is quickly losing it.She would like to see less subdivisions and keep the area rural. Mr.Sean McNulty,1243 W.12th Avenue,Apache Junction,addressed the council.He commented the developer and the landowners have had several meetings and they have worked together.The developer agreed to one story buildings along the one street and along the trailer park.He believes the landowner should be able to put his land to its best use,but i t is up to the city council to make sure that the use addresses the landowner and the community.He commented the developer is saying he is building a similar subdivision to the Lennar subdivision,but the Lennar subdivision is not walled in. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 12 OF 43 Mayor Coleman corrected him,stating there are walls on 16th Avenue. Mr.Sean McNulty corrected his statement to i t is not a completely walled in community.He lives on the north side where it is not walled.He requested this issue be postponed until the builder,developer,residents and staff can sit down and resolve the issue of 12th Avenue.He commented 12th Avenue is a danger zone now,and widening it will create a major problem.There are homes from San Marcos to Ironwood with numerous people out walking dogs and various children playing along the street.He is also concerned about there being an impact on the schools. Mr.Scott Speier,843 W.12th Avenue,Apache Junction,addressed the council.He commented the zoning recommended allows for two story buildings,though they were able to get some recommended restrictions on them.He does not believe the lot sizes are compatible for two story houses,and there are no others in the area.He would prefer it to be restricted to all single story housing and see some park areas for the children to play in. Mayor Coleman closed the public hearing on the item. Councilmember Insalaco stated the council cannot tell someone what to do with their property.They can only try to control it.The land belongs to people and the council can only try for a win -win situation.He added the quality of homes is just as good in the city as is being built elsewhere.There are cookie cutter homes all over the valley;they are even in Gold Canyon. Mr.Morris requested to address the issue the city manager broached regarding the drainage issue.He commented the developer would be willing to work with the city as they have worked with the city in the past.They would like a better definition to know what they are being asked to do before we agree to do it.They are interested in sitting down with the city to find out how they can be of help. Councilmember Eck commented the drainage is of major concern to the council and for everybody involved.He added he heard an answer from an engineer tonight that is totally unacceptable for a final plat.He believes when they take over a development,they are responsible for off -site onto on -site.He would like to see larger lots,but they could have come in with a planned development with lots less than 5,000 sq.ft.The east is the only surrounding area that is undeveloped;everything else is either the same lot size or smaller.He reminded everyone that the city is the only one with a school development fee on all new homes;all new homes must pay $1300 in school development fees.He added all two story homes have been relocated after a discussion on them. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 13 OF 43 Mr.Jason Morris stated they have agreed to a stipulation that there be single story homes along the perimeter where they would impact any adjoining land uses,even though there has never been any such stipulation in any other cases in the city. Vice Mayor Surra suggested continuing this for vote due to all the feelings they are hearing tonight. This would allow the city staff and the developer to address some of these issues on a new plat. Mayor Coleman asked if that would need to be date certain. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that would be correct. Vice Mayor Surra stated she was bringing this up for discussion at this time. Councilmember Durbala stated he could make his decision now.He thought they had heard everything they are probably going to hear.He reminded them this is the preliminary plat and it would still have to go through the process.There can be changes going on from here on.He suggested putting certain criteria in the resolution that must be met.He cannot see delaying this just to have them come back with something entirely different.No one appears to say exactly what they want to have done.He would like to see some recreation areas added.He cannot see having the houses facing 12th Avenue as that would add even more traffic to the street due to the driveways.There will always be new traffic problems in each neighborhood as the area develops.There should be no problem with the drainage if it is done right with the city engineer's approval. City Attorney Joel Stern commented that if this preliminary plat is approved tonight,the final plat would only need to be in substantial compliance with the preliminary plat. Councilmember Urich stated she did not feel comfortable with the preliminary plat. Councilmember Durbala asked if it would make any difference in the plat if they put stipulations on the resolution. City Attorney Joel Stern stated they would have to follow the stipulations in the final plat,but the council would not know how it was going to go. Mayor Coleman commented they would not know if the developer was agreeable,as in his suggestion that they drop REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 14 OF 43 all of the lots on 12th Avenue.This would give an opportunity for staff to work through some of the issues. City Attorney Joel Stern suggested they ask the applicant a few more questions before they vote on this.They might want to speak on those issues. Councilmember Durbala stated he would like to see a half basketball court rather than a tot lot in the community.He added if the community takes care of the drainage,he sees to problem with it.He also does not see a problem with the traffic.He would like to see a little more open space.He suggested deleting the 12th Avenue access and making two openings on San Marcos to alleviate some of the traffic problems. Mr.Jason Morris stated he was not sure the planning department would approve that.It would create a cul-de- sac.He added they are interested in providing recreational opportunities for the community. Mayor Coleman asked if they would be willing to give up three or four lots for a recreation area. Mr.Bill Dikes,5552 Kachina Drive, Scottsdale,stated they would be prepared to give up one lot and put in half court basketball to comply with the councilmember's request. City Attorney Joel Stern reminded them that if this is approved tonight and the applicants agree to the stipulations,there is nothing before the council that states exactly where it is going to be or the dimensions.Even if it is agreed to tonight,they could still come back and say they substantially comply with what was seen. Councilmember Durbala commented they have had that problem before. City Attorney Joel Stern agreed that they did have that problem before.The experience was not a very good experience.The dispute came down to which lots were going to be gotten rid of.The better way to handle this would be to continue the item and bring it back with a revised preliminary plat showing exactly what the council wants to have. Vice Mayor Surra reminded the council of an instance where they did not continue an item and tried to rewrite the amendments on the fly. Councilmember Durbala agreed that this should be continued to allow the developer,staff and city manager get REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 15 OF 43 together to work on what they believe the council wants and bring it back at a later date that would be sufficient time for the developer. Councilmember Eck would like to see some commitment to the drainage off -site north of the property. Vice Mayor Surra suggested staff could push that point. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly advised that the meetings in October are on the 6th and the 19th.The 19th is substituting for the 20th due to the league conference. Councilmember Durbala asked if the 19th agenda had been filled up yet. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated that is uncertain at this time. City Attorney Joel Stern commented it would depend on how much this was changed as to whether or not it would have to go back to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Vice Mayor Surra asked what kind of alterations would require this to go back before the Planning & Zoning Commission. City Attorney Joel Stern stated it would be defined as a substantial change in the plat. Councilmember Durbala stated they are asking them to make the changes from the council point of view.He could not understand why this would have to go through the Planning & Zoning Commission again. City Attorney Joel Stern stated if there are no significant changes to what the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended a new hearing will not be needed. Vice Mayor Surra asked what would be substantial. City Manager Curtis Shook commented he believes the kinds of things the council has talked about would not be significant. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 16 OF 43 Vice Mayor Surra stated it would not raise the density,it may lower the density.If they gave away one lot,they would still have 35 lots at 7,000 sq.ft.or better,plus the larger lots. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated it would depend upon the degree of change.A 34 lot subdivision which would require significantly different sizes and would be a different proposal would possibly need to be heard by the commission.This is not a planned development so open space could be given direction.The Homeowners Association Maintained Open Space Guidelines developed by the parks and recreation department has been working very well in that area.She commented the off -site drainage issue north of Broadway should involve a degree of guidance. Vice Mayor Surra was concerned about the time frame if this had to go back to the commission. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated she did not think it would have to go back to the commission as the things discussed were not drastic. City Attorney Joel Stern suggested setting it date specific. Vice Mayor Surra MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO AN AGENDA ITEM ON OCTOBER 19 TO ALLOW FOR STAFF AND THE DEVELOPER TO COME TOGETHER AND LOOK AT A FEW MORE AMENITIES AS DISCUSSED FROM THIS DIAS. Councilmember Durbala SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:5-1-1 (Councilmember Insalaco voted in opposition,Councilmember Dietz abstained from voting.) The motion carried. minute break. meeting. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO.98-25/DECLARING THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT A PUBLIC RECORD ON FILE WITH THE CITY CLERK -AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 8 OF THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE ADDING A NEW ARTICLE 8-12 RELATING TO THE LICENSING OF SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESS OPERATORS,MANAGERS,EMPLOYEES AND ADULT REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 17 OF 43 Mayor Coleman Mayor Coleman called for a ten reconvened the SERVICE PROVIDERS )Mayor Coleman:"I'll call upon Mr.Stern,our city attorney." City Attorney Joel Stern:"Thank you Mr.Honorable Mayor,members of the city council.The next four matters are really related to each other,however they are separate public hearings,so we need to go through them as if,well,since they are public hearings,let's do it the way its listed.The sexually oriented business regulations that I have seen from the earlier draft is quite different from this one.Just a little history.Before I came on board I believe this sexually oriented business regulatory ordinance was already in the process,and I think the former city attorney drafted a similar ordinance.And it got stalled.I don't know the reasons why it got stalled,however,after I started in August of last year, one of my main missions was to get this thing going,because I had participated in a similar ordinance from the City of Riverside that had been adopted back in 1995.Starting with the resolution in your packets,the reason we are doing it this way,rather than having the document being noticed,is the cost of the notification in the paper is incredible.This document that you all have before you is approximately 30 pages or more.I'm sorry,i t is 29,i t is 30 pages long.If it had been done as an ordinance,as a standing alone ordinance,it would be probably a little more,maybe 2 or 3 pages more.So the cost of publishing it probably would be at least five, maybe six thousand dollars.Maybe a little more,according to the city clerk. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"Try twenty grand." City Attorney Joel Stern:"Twenty grand,okay.What,the point of doing this by resolution.What this resolution does is basically it declares the 30 page document a public record. The next item is the ordinance that enacts the amendments.Attached to the final version to the resolution will be the 30 page document.The document encompasses different regulatory items for different individuals,such as the sexually oriented business operators,managers,adult services providers and employees.Going to the first section -deals with findings.I t is very important that the findings are set forth in this manner so that at the time of any challenge that the city would be able to justify why such an ordinance was put in place in the first place.And as you can probably see,these are extensive findings.And these are done because of other cases where there are no findings.And those cities that had no findings regretted it,and a lot of the cities changed their ordinance set-up and included findings specifically on this.Along with the findings,the studies are mentioned,and every councilmember has received a copy,to my knowledge,of every study that I was able to obtain from different jurisdictions,as well as different entities." Councilmember Durbala:"Could we go over some of the reasonings,such as what the studies actually were consisting of as far as the secondary effects?" REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 18 OF 43 City Attorney Joel Stern:"Sure. The bottom line of this,of the whole regulatory ordinance,and keep in mind this is not a zoning ordinance on adult uses.That's already been taken care of in our zoning ordinance.In the City of Apache Junction there are three zones in which adult uses can be allowed,and that's the two industrial zones and then there is the commercial zone.That is not the issue tonight. Tonight is the regulatory ordinance for these kinds of businesses.The whole, the whole key to this thing is the studies.When reading the studies,this city will be able to identify that there are certain problems in other cities that show that sexually oriented businesses have a secondary effect on the surrounding properties,on the surrounding property owners,and the zones in which they are in,and the entire city.And those are usually negative secondary effects.And that,those kind of things,like prostitution,the spread of sexually transmitted diseases,the frequences of crime such as prostitution,drug dealing and other related police type of issues,occur frequently in the larger cities that have a densely populated area that has a lot of these adult uses.Especially when they are close together.Usually the typical ordinances would be,for zoning purposes,you only could be,you only could have one adult use next to another one,but they have to be 1,000 feet apart.Also,an adult use cannot be close,closer than 1,000 feet to a church,a park,or a residential zone.Our current zoning ordinance,the distance requirement is 1,000 feet,under Article 17.Also in the findings are,essentially,the intent that the city council finds certain things that are drawn from these studies.And just as examples,there are the legitimazation of distribution of obscene material,the intent to permit the operation or maintenance of the buildings for adult uses.I mean,there are, there are,there is more than I want to talk about.Everybody can read,and I ,I could go through each one,but there is quite a few.In fact,A through T mentions those types of intentions.Getting to the actual amendments,first you have the list of the,the new Article 8-12,and that would list all the different sections that we have for the regulations.Once again,the legislative purpose is the first section,because that will bolster our justification for passing such an ordinance and applying it to sexually oriented businesses.Also in the findings were case,were case laws,that,or case law that we're asking,or,you,you have all seen some of those,too,I believe.And I will be going into further detail on some of those cases.Not all of them but the most important ones.In fact,after I go through that, you probably would feel that you just went through one year of law school. Because some of those,some of those issues are very,very detailed constitutional law issues.And,hopefully,everybody will be with me during my little sermon on constitutional law,first amendment rights about sexually oriented businesses.The definitions are very important.These definitions in the next section were taken from different cities as well as compared to new state law that came into effect in the recent months.The next few sections are pretty self-explanatory:license required under 8-12-3; exemptions under 8-12-4,and keep in mind these exemptions,there are specific reasons that each exemption is in there,and usually its because state law mandates it or a supreme court ruling mandates it and that's why it's there. 8-12-5 deals with the actual applications and the processing which the REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 19 OF 43 application will be taken in by the city clerk and,essentially,the zoning administrator,the police chief,and I believe that's it,will look over the license or the permit,the license application and determine if it's within the city's purview to go ahead and adopt or to grant such licenses.There's also a large degree of information that each licensee must provide,and I'm talking about each licensee meaning the,the sexually oriented business operator,the business manager,the employee and the sexually oriented business services provider.Usually the services provider,that means usually an entertainer.There's also investigations section.There is also granting, denial,revocation,and suspension and appeal.That's very important because there have been some case law that,where there is no appeal section. Basically,the ordinance would be held unconstitutional.There's an expiration and renewals section,a fees section,nontransferability.This is a very important section because if,for example,one operator were to get,to obtain a license for the business,and we've already done all the background, criminal history background checks on the owners of the business,and all of a sudden they want to transfer the license,if this wasn't in here,8-12-10, they would basically be able to just transfer over their license to somebody else who we have not done a criminal history background check on.So that gives us an extra regulatory hammer.There's also operational requirements, there's numerous ones including the age of the persons who can be in there, the keeping of a log,and numerous other ones.Another,a new one that you had not seen,from my January version,was an hours provision,and that's on page 29,which basically it's between 1 a.m.and 8 a.m.Mondays through Saturdays or between 1 a.m.and 12 noon on Sundays.We're going to talk about some case law regarding the hours,but for our purposes this was just amended. Title 11 of the Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated was just amended that included these hours provisions.And that wasn't there before,so that helps us.That helps us basically in any constitutional challenge.Also,anyone who wants to get a license will have to do so within 180 calendar days after the effective date of this article.We are still on the same item by the way. Okay.I would like to go through the case law at this time which deals with sexually oriented businesses and the secondary effects,the operational requirements,and some other things.Starting out with Young versus American Mini Theatres,Incorporated,427 U.S.50 (1976)U.S.Supreme Court case.It was a 5 to 4 decision by the supremes.It was a Detroit ordinance that defined adult theater in terms of the content of the films exhibited, prohibit,and also prohibited locating within 1,000 feet of any other uses and 500 feet from a residential zone.It's basically the court said the definition was not vague on adult theaters,the same definition that we're using or very,very similar.There's no first amendment violation as to places available for adult theaters,and the city could legitimately use the content of these materials as the basis for placing them in a different classification from other motion pictures.The ordinance was viewpoint,not content neutral,and kind of,the same kind of speech at issue was on the borderline between pornograpy and artistic expression.It was therefore entitled to less protection than other speech.The ordinance's purpose was to avoid the secondary effect of adult theaters,not to suppress offensive speech.The secondary effect leading case is Renton,the City of Renton REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 20 OF 43 versus Playtime Theaters,Incorporated,United States Supreme Court 475 U.S. 41 (1986)decision.It was a 6-3 decision supporting the City of Renton's ordinance.The City of Renton is a suburb of Seattle,Washington,at a population of about 32,000 people.The ordinance prohibited adult motion picture theaters from locating 1,000 feet from any residential zone,church, park,school.That sounds familiar,doesn't it?Playtime is the defendant, bought two,or actually was originally the plaintiff,Playtime bought two existing adult theaters and then sued immediately because they knew there was going to be a problem with the city.The court ruled the ordinance was a time placed manner regulation and was viewpoint content neutral to preserve the quality of urban life,not to suppress speech.The City of Renton relied on a Washington Supreme Court case opinion which reviewed studies of adult entertainment in Seattle.Renton did not do its own study,just like we are not doing our own study.However,the court said the first amendment does not require the city to conduct its own studies,or produce evidence independent of that already generated in other cities.So that saves us quite a bit of money and time,as well as other cities.The court also stated that the local governments may have special licensing procedures for different kinds of speech activities.We're talking about expressive types of speech in dancing and other types of speech.The bottom line,the city can treat adult uses differently in zoning ordinances since municipalities have a substantial reason to protect against secondary effects of these types of businesses. FW/PBS Incorporated versus City of Dallas,United States Supreme Court Case 493 U.S.215 (1990)case,the City of Dallas had an ordinance that basically regulated the same kinds of sexually oriented businesses.The case came down, it struck down part of the ordinance and upheld some of it.The part that was struck down was related to the time in which the issuance of licenses could take place.There was no specific time line.The court held that was a prior restraint.A prior restraint is when the government official is given unfettered discretion to grant or deny a license to speak or show expression. In our case we've got that covered because we do give a specific time period and also we are giving out a temporary license if we don't meet that time deadline.So the status quo is preserved;they can go ahead and operate their business.If it later comes back that there is a problem in the investigation,then we can revoke the license.Also,the case put forth the proposition that there must be possibility of current judicial review in the event the license is erroneously denied.We also allow for the applicant to immediately seek judicial review.That is,that is in the ordinance.The court,however,reviewed and approved the SOB definitions bookstores,video stores,movie theaters,escort agencies,sexual encounter centers which are in our ordinance,for the most part.Florence versus Glen Theaters, Incorporated,United States Supreme Court 111 S Supreme Court 2456 (1991). This involved an ordinance that upheld,or I'm sorry,an ordinance was upheld that required nude dancers to wear pasties and g-strings in a bar.It was a 5-4 first amendment,or,I'm sorry,5-4 supreme court decision.The first amendment was applicable but not,but it was very marginal.Nude dancing is expressive speech,the purpose is to protect societal order and morality. That's what the ordinace was designed for,and the court upheld that. Worthham versus City of Tucson,128 Arizona 137 (1981)case.An Arizona Court REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 21 OF 43 of Appeals case,basically,I'm sorry,Supreme Court case struck down a provision of the City of Tucson adult entertainment regulations,which permitted officials to deny licenses if the official is the only person who decided that the applicant had knowingly misstated facts.Key versus Kitsap County;this is a federal court 9th Circuit decision.The 9th Circuit does apply to the State of Arizona because the it is the court of appeal of the federal circuits,and that's one that Arizona is guided by.It's a 1986 decision.Basically the federal court struck down a county provision that permitted a five day delay in issuing a license to dancers since no investigations were required by the ordinance.It also upheld erotic,the definition of erotic dance studio and also it required various disclosures from owners and dancers and provisions requiring aliases from dancers.Also very important,it upheld a ten foot distance requirement from dancers to customers,which they had to be two feet above the floor level.And also of very importance for us is that it also approved a no tipping requirement, meaning the,if you're in,if it's a dance hall,the customer cannot tip,they cannot tip the entertainer.City of Colorado Springs versus 2354 Incorporated,Colorado Supreme Court case from 1995 held that a ten day time period for obtaining zoning was reasonable for issuance and it upheld an appeal period also.Cox versus New Hampshire,312 U.S.Supreme Court 569 (1941)case,the city may charge a fee,now there is a fee in this case,$500 for the businesses and I believe $250 for the dancers and the managers,the city may charge a fee if it's reasonably related to costs of providing services.So the fee recoups the cost in providing the service,then it's not considered a tax,and that's what we have in situation,is a fee for recouping the service.State versus Jones 177 Arizona 94,this is a 1994 Court of Appeals case.This was a Mesa ordinance that required a special use permit for any establishment featuring bottomless and topless dancers,go-go dancers, exotic strippers or similar entertainers.The go-go dancer was defined as a topless or bottomless dancer,an exotic dancer was someone who aroused sexual passions,a stripper was considered someone who removed all or part of their clothing.The court struck down this ordinance as being vague.These definitions just were not good enough,especially the similar entertainer definition.There was no definition for that.State versus Western 168 Arizona 169 (1991)case,Arizona Supreme Court case,struck down a Scottsdale ordinance that was intended to regulate strip tease dancers.Basically the language was a person who appears in various degrees of undress and employs bodily motions included,but not limited to,torso gyrations,bumps and grinds,gesticulations,while exhibiting his or her body in various degrees of undress.That was declared vague and therefore unconstitutional.Matney versus Kenosha,United States Court of Appeals case from the 7th Circuit, although i t is not binding to us,it is persuasive authority.This court upheld a county ordinance requiring that coin -generated machines be used in SOB's,have at least one side open to the public lighted so that there is an unobstructed view at a machine.City of Las Vegas versus Foley,U.S.Court of Appeals case,9th Circuit once again,747 F 2d 1294 (1984)case,this case the court of appeals said it was inappropriate to allow city officials to be deposed on their subjective motions for enacting an SOB ordinance.That means if this case,or this ordinance,gets overturned,or,and there's a challenge, REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 22 OF 43 or actually if there's a challenge to this case,you,as legislators,cannot be deposed on your motives for passing this ordinance.Lakeland Lounge versus City of Jackson,973 F 2d 1255,5th Circuit Mississippi,1992 case,this basically just another case saying the secondary effects are upheld;it was a zoning case involving light industrial and it basically he quoted Renton. Marsoner versus Pima County,166 Arizona 486 (1991)case;Arizona Supreme Court,this case involves the county authority for controlling sexually oriented businesses.The supreme court upheld the county's authority under Title 11,which basically is argument that,well,we have the same authority, or we have very similar authority.And the new law actually strengthens the argument under this case for the county authority.Spokane Arcade versus City of Spokane,75 F 3d 663 9th Circuit Court of Appeal upheld a City of Spokane ordinance requiring that the interior of adult arcade booths be visible to employees and adjacent public rooms,and that at least one employee be situated in that room whenever the customer was present.So that really helps us out because we have the same requirement.The court upheld the ordinance, it was constitutional since provisions therein did not prohibit adult entertainment businesses from engaging in protected speech,allowed market competition,but merely the providing the cost of doing so will have to increase.Mitchel versus Commission of Adult Entertainment,10 F 3d 123 (1993)Court of Appeal case;upheld the adult bookstore hour restrictions. This is an interesting case because,originally,before the ordinance had been passed,the hours was 10 a.m.to 3 a.m.Monday through Saturday,10 a.m.to 2 a.m.Sunday,open Christmas Eve.Well,the city,the county came in,changed the hours severely,basically,10 a.m.to 10 p.m.Monday through Saturday, Sunday closed and their twelve state holidays to be closed.And the court argued,hey,there's 36 hours of exposure to sexually oriented material,and that was upheld.And our hours are very similar.I forget what they are exactly,I think it's 10 a.m.to one in the morning,but they are very well within the purview of this case and the state law helps it.Bookcellar versus Phoenix,Court of Appeal 150 Arizona 42 (1986)case;this upheld a zoning ordinance precluding adult uses within 500 feet of residential zones.HangOn versus City of Arlington,65 F 3d 1248 5th Circuit (1995)case;federal court upheld the provisions prohibiting touching between nude performers and customers in adult caberets.Any questions on any of those cases?" Vice Mayor Surra:"I will tell you, though,between your definitions that were so clearly defined and some of the case law that you so pleasantly provided for us,I am no longer the naive woman my husband married." City Attorney Joel Stern:"Okay." Vice Mayor Surra:"I have grown up." City Attorney Joel Stern:"I have no further questions on,or,I have no further statements on Resolution 98-25. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 23 OF 43 Are there any questions regarding the substitute provisions?And i t is a public hearing." Mayor Coleman:"Okay.Yeah,no,I was just glad Councilman Dietz didn't have a conflict of interest on this." this one." hearing and we'll open i t would like to address the anybody who would like to public hearing,is there" Mayor." Councilmember Dietz:"I'm all in Mayor Coleman:"This is a public up to the public at this time.Is there anyone who council on Item 8A on the agenda?Again,is there address the council?Seeing none,we'll close the City Attorney Joel Stern:"Mr. Mayor Coleman:"Yes." City Attorney Joel Stern:"Before we go ahead with the motion,i t is recommended that another public hearing be scheduled for each of these items so that the public has an opportunity,and i t has been some time since we have seen this ordinance,so,I would suggest that another public hearing be,be allowed.So I would suggest that we continue this to date certain." everything again?" I do not.No." Honor." Durbala." Mayor Coleman:"Do you have to read City Attorney Joel Stern:"No,no, Councilmember Durbala:"Your Mayor Coleman:"Councilman Councilmember Durbala:"If nobody else has anything I'd like to make a motion that THIS COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL." Vice Mayor Surra:"Could we discuss the idea of continuance before you move?" City Attorney Joel Stern:"Sure." REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 24 OF 43 Councilmember Durbala:"We were just going with the date 'cause he told me about something else that was coming up that he wanted to make sure that I didn't put on top of another agenda item." Vice Mayor Surra:"I,I believe,I believe this has been really gone into quite thoroughly over the last couple of years.Even though this particular document did not have,have a,in its exact form than presented prior to you,this public hearing,the people of the City of Apache Junction I think invested in us the charge to guard their health and welfare and safety and this encompasses all the things that were brought up in prior public hearings and,and I think that to have another one is just a waste of all of our time.That's just my personal opinion and I bring it up for discussion,of course." Mayor Coleman:"Anybody else?" Councilmember Durbala:"Well,I ,I know that there were a number of people that I had mentioned that this may go to a second public hearing because that's what the city attorney had requested,and I know that's why they did not show up for this one.They wanted to show up and give their personal opinions on that,including some religious people and some of the preachers in the community and some of the outstanding community members would have liked to had an opportunity to say something on this one way or another." Vice Mayor Surra:"Perhaps you should not have anticipated the way the council was going to behave." Councilmember Durbala:"I was not anticipating the way the council was going.What I was saying was when we had previously discussed this,we,I ,myself,discussed this with the city attorney,as you know I've been the one from the very forefront that brought this out,'cause I wanted to make sure,I asked the city attorney if this would be advisable to have another public hearing on it.And he gave me the number of reasons as to why he,we might be able to have another public hearing.And that was to make sure that we have public input on this as well. Pass this right now with no public input on anything,I don't.It's up to you,it's up to the four of us here." Councilmember Eck:"You think that they're against this?Do you think they're against passing this?" Councilmember Durbala:"No,I don't think they would be against it,but I think they would like to make their comments concerning some of this stuff.If you want to go ahead and make the motion I would be glad to." REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 25 OF 43 Vice Mayor Surra:"We have their comments from previous hearings." Councilmember Durbala:"We had some of their comments in the past,yes,we have." Vice Mayor Surra:" And I think we have then remained faithful to what they charged us to do." Councilmember Durbala:"Okay. Then." Councilmember Urich:"I would feel more comfortable going with the advice of our city attorney.If he feels that a second public hearing would be necessary,I would like to go with that." City Attorney Joel Stern:"Mr. Mayor,Vice Mayor,the recommendation is just to cover ourselves because this is such a sensitive and litigid;this is litigated very often.I'm not even going to try to pronounce that word" City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: "Litigous." City Attorney Joel Stern:"Thank you,it,it,it would be better if there was a second public hearing,however, I don't think its required but we might be on a better argument before a judge saying well,we had x number of public hearings on this matter.We did allow as many people as we could,and there are 3 members of the press here today. I don't know when any article's gonna go out but,if it is continued,there may be some people who would have read those articles and might actually show up." continuing i t if you'll read that again." not a problem." kidding." Mayor Coleman:"I wouldn't mind City Attorney Joel Stern:"That's Mayor Coleman:"No,I'm just Councilmember Eck:"I don't mind continuing i t as long as Joe stays off the phone and doesn't call every preacher in town." Councilmember Durbala:"Actually, R.E.,there will only be four or five that wanted to make some comments and that's." REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 26 OF 43 City Attorney Joel Stern:"This would be part of your evidence that you can use,especially if you continue it to a specified public hearing today." Mayor Coleman:"Councilman Durbala." Councilmember Durbala:"Well,i f nobody has a problem,then I MOVE THAT WE CONTINUE THIS FOR A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING ON TUESDAY,NOVEMBER THE THIRD OF THIS THIS.The reason is that on October the 19th we have already over." Councilmember Insalaco:"That's too much." Vice Mayor Surra:"Right.And you for sure want to get i t in so that Christmas Eve they can be open." said before,the reason." before the first of the year." honor." Roll call." "Councilmember Urich." "Councilmember Insalaco." "Councilmember Eck." REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 27 OF 43 Councilmember Durbala:"No.As I Vice Mayor Surra:"And get i t in Mayor Coleman:"Is there a second?" Councilmember Urich:"Second,your Mayor Coleman:"Moved and seconded. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Urich:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Insalaco:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Eck:"Yes." Mayor Surra." "Councilmember Durbala." "Councilmember Dietz." "Mayor Coleman." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"Vice Vice Mayor Surra:"No." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Durbala:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Dietz:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Mayor Coleman:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"Six in favor,one opposed,the motion carries your honor." Mayor Coleman:"Thank you." PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.1058/ADOPTION OF SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESS REGULATIONS ) )Mayor Coleman:"And again I'll call upon Mr.Stern." City Attorney Joel Stern:"Mr. Mayor,members of the city council,this is the official ordinance that will be adopting by reference the amendments that I talked about in the first public hearing in 8A.The reason for this,once again,is that the city does not have to publish thirty pages of the amendments.I t is really to avoid the cost of the publication,and it is allowed under A.R.S.9-802.So,I really don't have any other comments on this particular ordinance.This would be the ordinance that would."(tape changeover) Mayor Coleman:"Okay,this is a public hearing,we'll open it up to the public at this time.Is there anyone who would like to address the council on item 86 on the agenda.Again,is there anyone who would like to address the council.Hearing none,we'll close the public hearing.Is there any further discussion or questions from members of the council.Hearing none,I'll call for a motion." Councilmember Durbala:"Your honor." REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 28 OF 43 Mayor Coleman:"Councilman Durbala." Councilmember Durbala:"I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO.1058 BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER THE 3RD,1998,FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE DECISION." honor." Roll call." "Councilmember Dietz." "Councilmember Durbala." "Councilmember Urich." "Councilmember Eck." Mayor Surra." "Councilmember Insalaco." "Mayor Coleman." REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 29 OF 43 Mayor Coleman:"Is there a second?" Councilmember Insalaco:"Second." Councilmember Urich:"Second,your Mayor Coleman:"Moved and seconded. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Dietz:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Durbala:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Urich:"Yes. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Eck:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"Vice Vice Mayor Surra:"No." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Insalaco:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Mayor Coleman:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"Six in favor,one opposed,the motion carries,your honor." Mayor Coleman:"Let's move on to Item 9." PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.938/REQUIRING FINGERPRINTING OF DESIGNATED LICENSEES FOR CRIMINAL HISTORY BACKGROUND CHECKS ) )Mayor Coleman:"Mr.Stern." City Attorney Joel Stern:"Mr. Mayor,members of the city council,Ordinance 938 basically goes along with the sexaully oriented business ordinance in that any licensees that we want to check their criminal history on,we would have to get their fingerprints before we could do that,then submit the fingerprints to the Department of Public Safety.In exchange for that,the Arizona Department of Public Safety will allow us to access criminal history background information that's on computer.And that's through the FBI as well as the Arizona system.What this ordinance does,basically allows us to,or,actually,it sets forth who can be fingerprinted and also the law supporting the fingerprint requirements under Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated Section 41-1750." Mayor Coleman:"Any questions from members of the council." Council member Durbala:"Your honor, can the attorney go right into the next one and tie these two together?" City Attorney Joel Stern:"No,they are separate,they are separate public hearings." Mayor Coleman:"Councilmember Dietz." Councilmember Dietz:"Joel,do you think that this one should be put off till November 3rd also since its pretty much separate from the other ordinances?This is just putting through for the fingerprints and background checks.I don't know if this is something that really." City Attorney Joel Stern:"I think it would be a better policy to adopt everything at the same time.To keep it consistent." Mayor Coleman:"Any other questions?Okay,this is a public hearing,we'll open it up to the public. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 30 OF 43 Is there anyone who would like to address the council on Item 9 on the agenda? Again,is there anyone who would like to address the council on the fingerprinting of designated licensees?Hearing none,we'll close the public hearing.Any further discussion from members of the council?Hearing none, I'll call for a motion." Councilmember Durbala:"Your honor." Mayor Coleman:"Councilmember Durbala." Councilmember Durbala:"I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO.938 BE POSTPONED UNTIL NOVEMBER THE 3RD,1998." honor." Durbala." Roll call." "Councilmember Insalaco." Mayor Surra." "Councilmember Eck." "Councilmember Dietz." "Councilmember Urich." "Councilmember Durbala." REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 31 OF 43 Councilmember Dietz:"Second." Mayor Coleman:"Moved and seconded. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Insalaco:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"Vice Vice Mayor Surra:"No." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Eck:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Dietz:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Urich:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Durbala:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: "Mayor Coleman." Mayor Coleman:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"Six in favor,one opposed,the motion carries,your honor." Councilmember Urich:"Joe,did you have a public hearing on that one.I didn't hear it." Councilmember Durbala:"Did I say." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"It would have to be because its an ordinance." Councilmember Durbala:"It has to be cause its already has a public hearing scheduled,so it would be one." Councilmember Urich:"Okay.Okay." Mayor Coleman:"Okay,let's move on to Item No.10." PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.1060/AUTHORIZING CITY TO ENTER AGREEMENT WITH STATE TO RECEIVE CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORD INFORMATION Stern." Mayor Coleman:"Again,Mr. City Attorney Joel Stern:"Mr. Mayor,members of the city council,finally,this is the ordinance that authorizes the city to enter into a user agreement with the Department of Public Safety.Basically this sets up the procedure wherein the fingerprints will be given to the Department of Public Safety and then the city will be allowed to access the criminal history information.There will be an adjustment in this regarding the person who will be able to received the information from the,from DPS,or from the criminal history background information.And its going to be the city clerk,and I will provide that next time.And I will attempt to,I will highlight i t for you,but the one that gets passed will not have highlight on it. Mayor Coleman:"I guess my question would be are there any other safeguards that,that the information will not be misused or the ability to access and receive criminal history records won't be misused?" there is statutory REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 32 OF 43 City Attorney Joel Stern:"Well, authority that basically sets forth the penal clauses for THE CITY COUNCIL misusing the information,and that's under Title 41 under the same section, 1750,I think it's "I",but I might be mistaken.But i t is under that same section and i t sets forth,that it's confidential information,and i t also requires that the city enforce any confidential regulations that is has in force for similar confidential information throughout the city.And that only the person,the only person that can get it would be the identified person or persons,and they could not divulge it to anyone else." Mayor Coleman:"Which would be the city clerk." City Attorney Joel Stern:"Yes. Now you could,the city council as the legislative body,may change that i f they don't feel that's appropriate they can say,well,no,we would rather have someone else get that information.But,that's,the city clerk may have an opinion on that." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"If that were to happen,if somebody else received the information,they could not share it with me." Mayor Coleman:"And your the one dealing with the licenses." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"And I would have to cancel the license as far as that process." Mayor Coleman:"I understand." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"It becomes difficult." Mayor Coleman:"Yeah.Any other questions from members of the council?This is a public hearing,we'll open it up to the public.Is there anyone who would like to address the council on Item No.10 on the agenda?Hearing none,I'll close the public hearing.Any further discussion from members of the council?Hearing none,I'll call for a motion." Councilmember Durbala:"Your honor." Mayor Coleman:"Councilmember Durbala." Councilmember Durbala:"I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO.1060 BE POSTPONED WITH PUBLIC HEARING FOR NOVEMBER THE 3RD, 1998;I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT I WOULD LIKE THESE,HOPEFULLY,ALL TO COME AT THE VERY FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA AT THAT MEETING.Can it be done?" REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 33 OF 43 Vice Mayor Surra:"I don't think that lit can.You can't put public hearings first on the agenda.Isn't there a format?" City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"What you mean is the first under public hearings." Councilmember Durbala:"Under the very first ones under the public hearings.They go right after the city manager's comments.So." "Okay." to Order." to Order,then." Public,there's a." first possible vote of a public hearing." want lit to be the first public hearing." four of them." part of your motion?" Roll call." REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 34 OF 43 City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Mayor Coleman:"Not before the Call Vice Mayor Surra:"No,it doesn't." Councilmember Durbala:"Well,Call Vice Mayor Surra:"Call to the Councilmember Durbala:"At the very City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"You Councilmember Durbala:"Yes.All City Attorney Joel Stern:"That's Councilmember Durbala:"Yes." Mayor Coleman:"Is there a second?" Councilmember Urich:"Second." Councilmember Insalaco:"Second." Mayor Coleman:"Moved and seconded. "Councilmember Eck." "Councilmember Urich." "Councilmember Durbala." "Councilmember Dietz." "Councilmember Insalaco." Mayor Surra." "Mayor Coleman." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Eck:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Urich:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Durbala:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Dietz:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly: Councilmember Insalaco:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"Vice Vice:Mayor Surra:"No." City Clerk Kathleen 'Connelly: Mayor Coleman:"Yes." City Clerk Kathleen Connelly:"Six in favor,one opposed,the motion carries,your honor." Mayor Coleman:"Thank you.We'll move to Item No.11 under New Business." OLD BUSINESS. None. NEW BUSINESS. APPOINTMENT TO FILL VACANCY ON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AND/OR VACANCIES ON OTHER CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 35 OF 43 )City Clerk Kathleen Connelly briefed the council on this item.She commented the council had interviewed the latest applicants for the planning and zoning commission last night.Mr. Waldron expressed interest for only that board,whereas Ms.Nesser expressed interest in several other boards.In addition those listed,there are currently three vacancies on the parks and recreation commission.Mr.Little will be traveling for awhile,Ms.Cranmer was hired by the city and Ms.Moyle has moved out of the city.She added other applicants had been contacted earlier today and they had advised what other boards they would be interested in.Applicant Susie Harshfied stated she wished to be removed from consideration for all boards,including the planning and zoning commission. Vice Mayor Surra commented Ms. Nesser was involved in the Boys and Girls Club and other youth activities throughout the city,and she wondered if she would be interested in a parks and recreation commission position. Ms.Theresa Nesser stated she did not recall there being a vacancy. Vice Mayor Surra advised there had not been one at the time,but there are vacancies now and she asked if she would like to amend her areas of interest. Ms.Theresa Nesser stated her primary interest is the planning and zoning commission,but she would be interested in any board available. Vice Mayor Surra asked Mr.Waldron if he would be interested in the parks and recreation commission. Mr.David Waldron stated he was only interested in the planning and zoning commission. Mayor Coleman called for any council discussion. There was general discussion as to whether all the positions needed to be filled tonight or if some could be brought back. Councilmember Eck asked what boards Brian Milkey was interested in. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated he was interested in the Industrial Development Authority,the Board of Adjustment and the Parks & Recreation Commission. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 36 OF 43 Councilmember Eck asked when the term expires on the Parks & Recreation Commission. There was general discussion as to the expiration dates on the Parks & Recreation Commission. Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT BRIAN MILKEY BE APPOINTED TO THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE JUNE 30,2003. MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion THERESA A. 30,2001. carried. Councilmember Eck SECONDED THE Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT NESSER BE APPOINTED TO THE LIBRARY BOARD FOR MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. A TERM TO EXPIRE JUNE Councilmember Insalaco SECONDED THE Councilmember Dietz NOMINATED DAVID WALDRON FOR THE VACANCY ON PLANNING AND ZONING TO EXPIRE JUNE 30,2001. Councilmember Durbala SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. Councilmember Durbala asked when the vacancy on the Board of Adjustment was last advertised. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated she believed it was during the last round of advertisements. Councilmember Durbala asked if anyone new had applied. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 37 OF 43 City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated there were no new applicants.The board only met once in 1997 and they have met once so far this year. Councilmember Durbala thought they had met three times on three issues in 1998 so far. City Attorney Joel Stern stated they have met once on a small lot issue about two months ago. Mayor Coleman MOVED THAT BRIAN MILKEY BE APPOINTED TO THE PARKS & RECREATION BOARD WITH A TERM TO EXPIRE 6- 30-2001. Councilmember Eck SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. Vice Mayor Surra NOMINATED MR. RICHARD ANDERSON FOR PARKS & RECREATION FOR THE YEAR 6-30-99. Councilmember Dietz SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. Councilmember Eck NOMINATED THERESA NESSER TO THE PARKS & RECREATION BOARD WITH A TERM TO EXPIRE 6-30-2000. Vice Mayor Surra SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. There was general discussion about whether the applicants would be interested in any other boards and if the others should be left open until new applicants had expressed an interest in those boards. Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT WE MAKE A REVIEW AND BRING UP TO DATE ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WITH THE ONES THAT WERE ADDED TODAY,BE PRESENTED TO US AS ANOTHER AGENDA ITEM,AND THAT WE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 38 OF 43 READVERTISE FOR ANY OF THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT STILL HAVE VACANCIES AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT GETTING THOSE FILLED AT A LATER DATE. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly mentioned there are plans to take talent bank applications to neighborhood meetings. Councilmember Dietz SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF ON PROPOSED LEGISLATION OR ACTION METHOD OF POSTING PROPERTIES WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF APPLICATIONS FOR REZONING, VARIANCES.CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS,ETC.) )Councilmember Durbala commented he had discussed this with city staff and other councilmembers,and after hearing the presentation on this at the work session last night he had changed his mind into looking at this.He would like to see council ask staff to bring something back to them before any decision is made insofar as the developers checking with the individual property owners.He suggested a year voluntary program and then to take it from there.Regarding the method of posting,staff has already discussed this in a meeting and they are working on that.He would like to reserve his final decision until staff comes back with more information. Mayor Coleman asked if they were going to have the applicant responsible for the posting. City Manager Curtis Shook stated they had discussed getting things posted until the requisite language could be put in place putting that responsibility on the developer. Mayor Coleman commented he would like to explore a program similar to Glendale and which Mesa is also considering. Councilmember Durbala stated Mesa has been considering it and doing it on a voluntary program for some time.We will have to tailor this for our community as Glendale is landlocked.Their ordinance can be used as a tool. Vice Mayor Surra asked what the developers were volunteering for. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 39 OF 43 Councilmember Durbala stated it is a volunteer program to start with by the developers to work all the kinks out, and it appears most of them have worked that way to start with. Vice Mayor Surra asked if that was to volunteer to take the onus of directing the signage or the mailings. Councilmember Durbala stated he is talking about the signage and the community meetings. Vice Mayor Surra added they had been talking about that the cost of all that should be borne by the developer;they will never get a yes if that is voluntary. Councilmember Durbala agreed the cost should be borne by the developer,but it will have to be started until they come up with an ordinance.The signage and the meetings are two different issues. Vice Mayor Surra stated that will have to be made clear in the motion. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Councilmember Ed( MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF REGARDING -THE:METHOD OF POSTING PROPERTIES WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF APPLICATIONS FOR REZONING VARIANCES, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS;ETC.:THAT STAFF ADMINISTRATIVELY IMPLEMENT A NEW SIGNAGE POLICY: FOR LARGER NOTIFICATION SIGNS AND THAT STAFF BRINGAMCK'TO THE COUNCIL ATOLICY STATEMENT REQUIRING DEVELOPER ,MEETINGS14ITH:SURROUNDINGi NEIGHBORHOODSTRIOR ITO PRELIMINARY HEARINGS BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. Vice Mayor Surra SECONDED THE MOTION. Councilmember Durbala asked that the motion be AMENDED TO INCLUDE THAT IT BE ON A VOLUNTARY BASIS TO START WITH. Vice Mayor Surra stated this is what staff will bring to us. City Manager Curtis Shook stated this would be something:that would be:discussed at the pOint'in time when a policy was brought before the council. second to the amendment. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 40 OF 43 Mayor Coleman asked if there was a Councilmember Durbala stated he asked for an amendment but it died for lack of a second. VOTE:Unanimous.(For original motion.) The motion carried. SELECTION OF MEETING DATES,TIMES,LOCATIONS,AND PURPOSES City Clerk Kathleen Connelly asked if there would still be a concern for the executive session on October 5th due to all of the sexually oriented businesses items being continued to November 3rd. City Attorney Joel Stern stated the only concern was that there be another water board meeting that could be lengthy.He is not sure it would matter at this point. City Manager Curtis Shook requested that October 5th be reserved for a water board executive session instead of a council executive session.He believes the 5th should be excluded from their motion. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly commented they can always ask for the executive session and then cancel it. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M.AND WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M.BE HELD ON MONDAY,OCTOBER 5,1998,IF NEEDED,IN THE CITY CONFERENCE CENTER AND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS RESPECTIVELY; AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M.,TUESDAY,OCTOBER 6,1998, IN THE CITY CONFERENCE CENTER. Councilmember Urich SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. INFORMATION AND REPORTS Councilmember Durbala commented he attended the Rural Economic Development Conference down in Sierra Vista and found it very interesting.They discussed a clearing house program for grants,the establishment of a TRW plant there REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 41 OF 43 that produces over $700,000 in sales tax and over $11,000,000 in payroll revenue per year and it only cost the city $50,000 per year for ten years,the availability of grants to assist in building these projects,and the commerce department program that will help build the infrastructure for industrial plants.The city has to put in the sewer and water lines.He added Curtis Shook's team took first place in the chamber golf tournament,his team took third place on his flight and R.E.Eck's team took third place in their Councilmember Eck commended the police department for their work on an assault at the football game last Friday.It appeared to them that they saved a young man's life,removing some individuals from another man they were beating up. The squad cars were there instantly and he was impressed with the service and protection he witnessed. Vice Mayor Surra commented she watched the first televised Apache Junction High School football game over the local access channel.She thought it was very well done,especially as it was produced by the local students and their teachers,though the color commentators could have been more colorful. ADJOURNMENT )Mayor Coleman adjourned the meeting at 10:20 p.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1.Acceptance of Agenda. 2.Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 1,1998. 3.Recognition of Outstanding Service to the Community by City Employees. Employees receiving recognition are:Gordon Hawes and Kate Morris, Development Services Department. 4.Approval and authorization for the Public Works Department to purchase two (2)one -ton dump trucks adn one 1.5 -ton truck from State contract. 5.Approval to accept cost forwarded to Final County for street light district assessments for collection during Fiscal Year 1998-99. ACCEPTED THIS 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER ,1998,BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER ,1998. DOUGLA Mayor REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 42 OF 43 ATTEST: KATHLEEN CON City Clerk ,/ / 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 15th day of September,1998.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 29th day of September,1998. City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 15,1998 PAGE 43 OF 43