Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-05-20 City Council Regular MinutesThe regular meeting of t Arizona,was held on May 20,1 Chambers pursuant to the notic CALL TO ORDER Mayor Coleman called the INVOCATION Mayor Coleman gave the I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Richmond led ROLL CALL Council members Present: Staff Present: Others Present: ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MAY 20,1997 he City Council of the City of Apache Junction, 997,at the Apache Junction City Council e required by law. meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. nvocati on. the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Coleman Vice Mayor Richmond Councilmember Surra Councilmember Urich Councilmember Durbala Councilmember Hendricks (Councilmember Barker was absent.) City Manager Curtis Shook Asst.City Manager George Hoffman City Clerk Kathleen Connelly Interim City Attorney Bill Farrell Public Safety Director Robert Galloway City Engineer Gordon Grandy Parks & Recreation Director Jeff Bell Public Works Director Doug Dobson Development Services Director Larry Harmer Building Official Dennis Dixon Long Range Planner Kate Morris Assistant Planner Paul Michaud REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 1 OF 26 ) )Mayor Coleman stated it had been requested that Item No.4 be postponed until June 3 and Item No.5 be pulled from the consent agenda. Councilmember 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:LIBRARY DIRECTOR PAM LOUI;PARKS & RECREATION DIRECTOR JEFF BELL;LIBRARY EMPLOYEE GAIL GRAHAM- FISEL;YOUTH SERVICES LIBRARIAN LIZ BURKS;POLICE OFFICER JOE SHIKANY;AND THAT THE BID FOR THE AWARD FOR THE CITY PAGE BE GIVEN TO THE INDEPENDENT FOR THE 1997 CITY PAGE,MAY AND JUNE,IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,197 PER PAGE;AND THAT WE REMOVE FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 4 UNTIL JUNE 3 AND ITEM 5 TO FOLLOW AFTER THE CITY MANAGER'S REPORT. Councilmember Durbala SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. AWARDS,PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS Mr.Edward Braunger,the general manager of Apache Junction Greyhound Park, presented a check for $10,000 to the Parks & Recreation Department on behalf of the Phoenix Greyhound Racing Foundation and the Apache Greyhound Track. Parks & Recreation Director Jeff Bell accepted the check on behalf of his department. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Mr.John Insalaco,1570 S.Buena Vista,addressed the council regarding postponing the appointments to the boards and commission scheduled for this evening to a later date when the new council could make the appointments.He stated he considered it shenanigans if the present council appointed people to these boards at this time. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Curtis Shook stated there is a work shop meeting on June 2,a regular city council meeting on June 3 and on June 4 Jack DeBolske from the League of Cities and Towns will address the council regarding the council/manager form of government,the Arizona state laws regarding conflict of interest,the open meeting laws and other things pertaining to the council. He added these meetings are open to the public. CONSENT AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 2 OF 26 CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT TO FILL THE CURRENT VACANCIES ON THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AND THE HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION )Mayor Coleman stated he concurred with what Mr.Insalaco had stated.He believed the process and the timing would be better if the item were postponed until after the new council were seated.Mayor Coleman MOVED TO BRING THESE APPOINTMENTS BACK TO THE COUNCIL AT THE SECOND REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE,WHICH WOULD BE JUNE 17. Councilmember Durbala SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:3-3 (Vice Mayor Richmond and Councilmembers Hendricks and Surra voted in opposition.) The motion failed. Mayor Coleman stated he would abstain from the discussion and voting on this issue because he felt that the timing of the process was wrong,and he handed the gavel to Vice Mayor Richmond. Vice Mayor Richmond asked if there were any other motions. Councilmember Durbala asked if he could ask candidate Celia Bachman additional questions. Vice Mayor Richmond called Celia Bachman to the podium to answer the questions. Ms Celia Bachman,201 E.Southern Ave.,addressed the council. Councilmember Durbala asked if she had represented the city and other private entities in zoning cases in court. Ms Celia Bachman stated she had represented private litigants in zoning matters.She was part of a firm that did a lot of work before the zoning board and that had been counsel to a city, special taxing districts,clerk of the court and she had done a lot of other municipal work.She has personally represented government entities.She is not admitted to practice in Arizona at this time.If she were admitted to the state bar,she has enough experience to give legal opinions on zoning matters. Councilmember Durbala asked if she were familiar with most of our zoning laws. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 3 OF 26 Ms Celia Bachman stated she has attended over 5 months of zoning meetings,work sessions and city council meetings.She is very interested in the zoning process here and the zoning challeges that face the city.She has read the zoning code,the municipal code and relevant state statutes.She understands that she would not be taking a legal role in this position for the city,but only as an advisory role for the benefit of the city council.She believes she is good at spotting issues and in drafting language.She added she would not substitute her,judgement for that of the city attorney here. Councilmember Durbala asked how long she had lived in Arizona. Ms Celia Bachman stated she has not lived continuously in Arizona due to some out-of-state traveling for periods of time,but she has been here more or less for approximately two years. Councilmember Durbala asked how long she had been in Apache Junction. Ms Celia Bachman stated all of that time had been in Apache Junction.Since coming back and deciding she wanted to live in Apache Junction,she has started following what is going on in the city. Councilmember Durbala MOVED TO APPOINT CELIA H.BACHMAN TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE ON JUNE 30,1999. Councilmember Surra SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:'3-2-1 (Vice Mayor Richmond and Councilmember Hendricks voted in opposition,Mayor Coleman abstained.) The motion carried. Councilmember Surra MOVED THAT RUTH H.WATERS BE ACCEPTED FOR A POSITION ON OUR HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION. Councilmember Urich SECONDED THE MOTION. City Clerk Kathy Connelly stated the current term expires at the end of June,and asked if the intention was to have this term expire on June 30,2000. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 4 OF 26 Councilmember Surra stated when the commission met they decided they wanted the term to end in June of 2000. VOTE:5-0-1 (Mayor Coleman abstained.) Mayor Coleman stated he did not have any problems with the people up for appointment,he just did not agree with the process. PUBLIC HEARINGS PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.994/PZ-97-05 )Development Services Director Larry Harmer briefed the council on this item.This .9 acre property is located at the northeast corner of West Mockingbird and North Cedar.It is curently zoned general rural,and the owner is requesting to be rezoned to CR- 1 with the manufactured home overlay to allow single family residences on 20,000 sq.ft.lot sizes.The applicant wants to split the property into 2 lots and have manufactured homes on each.Other properties in the area have been split into 3 lots,so this would be larger than the average.There was one letter of concern from the property owner at the southwest corner of Cedar and Mockingbird who thought they were being included in the rezoning,but they are not.He misinterpreted the 300'notification area as including his property.A follow-up letter was sent to that individual.The Planning & Zoning Commission has recommended unanimous approval with no specific conditions. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak,he closed the public hearing and opened the item to discussion by the council.There being no discussion,he called for a motion. Vice Mayor Richmond MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.994 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember Hendricks SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. City Clerk Kathy Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Vice Mayor Richmond MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.994,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 5 OF 26 Councilmember Hendricks SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.995/PZ-96-23 )Long Range Planner Kate Morris briefed the council on this item.This property is located on the northwest corner of Ironwood and Baseline.This proposal exceeds the open space requirement and has adequate parking.The one significant variation on the allowances is that the applicant has requested that the maximum height for the hotel to be 31',caused by the decorative elevation of the building.The bulk of the mass is at 27'.There were a number of requirements in the city engineer's memo which have been included as stipulation 4.The rezoning is effective for a total of 24 months;if no building permit is issued,the property may revert back to the previous zoning. Councilmember Durbala asked about an area being a drainage area. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated that area is the on -site retention for the bulk of the property. Councilmember Durbala asked if it would be grass,shrubbery or rock -based. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated it would be landscaped but there is no landscaping plan at this time. The requirements call for rock -based,vegetated sides. Councilmember Hendricks asked if this was just a zoning change and not the actual development. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated it is just a zoning change,they still have to do the building permit application. Councilmember Hendricks stated they then do not have to go through the landscaping of the property at this time. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated that was correct. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 6 OF 26 Ms Betty Duprest,3400 S.Ironwood Dr.,addressed the council.She stated the people in the area have no objection to the restaurant and hotel,but they would like to have a traffic signal at Baseline and Ironwood.It has a history of serious and fatal traffic accidents and with the additional traffic from the businesses they feel it warrants some type of traffic signal. City Engineer Gordon Grandy stated with the frequency of the accidents at the intersection,the police department,public works department and engineering department have already considered temporary improvements for that intersection.They have looked at supplemental plates on the stop signs to warn people that Ironwood is a thru street,they are considering a possibility of a beacon light at the intersection which would flash red for Baseline and amber for Ironwood,and they anticipate putting a traffic signal at the intersection sometime in the future.He is hoping the impact fees will substantiate putting up more traffic signals in the community and this may be one of the locations.They will be putting in the underground conduits and the traffic pole boxes when the hotel starts going in.He would not commit to a firm date for a traffic signal at this time. hearing and called for any further further discussion by the council, ORDINANCE NO.995 BE READ BY TITLE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. ordinance by title only. Mayor Coleman closed the public discussion by the council.There being no he called for a motion. Councilmember Urich MOVED THAT ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE Vice Mayor Richmond SECONDED THE City Clerk Kathy Connelly read the Councilmember Urich MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.995,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Vice Mayor Richmond SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 7 OF 26 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.996/PZ-97-06 )Long Range Planner Kate Morris briefed the council on this item.This is the project initially referred to as the Careage project.It is now called Merrill Gardens.The Merrill Group will be the actual operators of the facility and they came into the project a few months ago.It is now a joint venture between Careage,as the developer, and Merrill,as the operators.It is located on South Ironwood.This is the second planned development considered for this property.They are requesting to make it three separate properties to be developed in phases for financing reasons.There is some concern over an access point near 20th Avenue and Renaissance Avenue about delivery trucks and emergency vehicles coming through the Renaissance Point subdivision when there may be small children in the street.The Renaissance Point property owners thought this was a nursing home,not an independent and assisted living community.As a result of the concern,the applicant has moved the second access to a more acceptable area. Phase III is undecided as to what type of structure it may be,as it will depend on whether more apartments or casitas are in demand at that time. Phase I and Phase II landlock Phase III,so there is a stipulation for access easement for that section.In the past,developers have amended previous ordinances;this is a new ordinance.She briefed the council on the stipulations. Vice Mayor Richmond asked if the 31' high building would be lowered into the ground as the previous plat designated. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated the area will be depressed slightly through grading. Mr.Bob Pofpisil,the vice president of construction for Careage,P.O.Box 330,Seattle,addressed the council.He stated -he could not add anything,commended Kate Morris for her job,and would try to answer any questions. Mayor Coleman asked if the building would be recessed into the ground in some way. Mr.Bob Pofpisil stated they are retaining the same elevations as before. Councilmember Hendricks asked when they would break ground for this project. Mr.Bob Pofpisil stated as soon as they have the council's approval.He has about one more week of coordination with the working drawings they plan on submitting for plan review. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 8 OF 26 Development Services Director Larry Harmer stated that on the exhibit that shows the phasing there is an error on Ironwood that will have to be corrected.They only show 33'of right-of-way instead of the full dedication the city is receiving. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak,he closed the ,public hearing and opened the item to further discussion by the council. There being no further discussion,he called for a motion. Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.996 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Vice Mayor Richmond SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. City Clerk Kathy Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.996,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Vice Mayor Richmond SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.990/AMENDING CHAPTER 6 -ANIMALS )Chief of Police Robert Galloway briefed the council on this item.He went over the two-year history of the people involved and the modifications of this ordinance.They had been concerned about revising the definitions,commercial and personal kennel permits,dog limits on properties,dogs in open truck beds,the removal of fecal matter,license and impound fees for potbellied pigs. Mayor Coleman interrupted to ask if the removal of fecal matter applied only to dogs. Chief of Police Robert Galloway stated it applied only to dogs.He went on to state the revisions included REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 9 OF 26 service animal fees,a dangerous dog article,and staff also corrected some housekeeping measures.He stated 6-7 animal ordinance committee members are in the audience. Mayor Coleman asked if the ordinance included horses. Chief of Police Robert Galloway stated horses are only included in the definition area.Horses have never been an issue. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item.He stated a number of requests had been received,he asked that everyone be brief and that they would enforce the 5 minute maximum if some went that long. Ms Debra Smith,1253 S.Acacia, addressed the council.She requested more thought going into this ordinance as it will hurt the people who are responsible dog owners.She is concerned with temperment,and with these rules she would not be able to have the dogs that she wants,which are protective but are not dangerous.She would like to see something that everyone agrees on that punishes the irresponsible dog owners and does not hurt the responsible ones. Mr.Scott Wilhide,1651 S.Cedar #5, addressed the council.He works at the only pet store in town and believes the rules will destroy the business.He intends to buy the business and keep it in Apache Junction,and he would be unable to sell unweaned animals.He sells a lot of feeder foods for exotic snakes and birds.These rules would hurt his business. Councilmember Surra stated she could not recall there being any revisions on those animals.She stated that has been the ordinance all along on pet stores.She asked if he wanted that section changed. Mr.Scott Wilhide stated he would like that section changed. Ms Deby Richards,55 W.14th Avenue, addressed the council.She is not a breeder but has three dogs.She stated she would one day like to have a show dog but she would not be able to under this ordinance.She has a Rottweiler and states the dangerous dogs come from people who breed them to have puppies and are not responsible breeders.Her dog is friendly and would never be considered dangerous.She is more worried about her Boston Terrier,as small dogs are usually the ones that bite.She stated the breeders who research their breeding and only have one litter a year are the responsible breeders who do not produce the dangerous dogs,and REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 10 OF 26 she added the Internal Revenue Services designates those people as hobby breeders,not a commercial business.In Apache Junction it would have to be a business with this new ordinance. Mr.Mike Alltop,1059 S.Hilton Rd., addressed the council.He stated he was one of the committee members who helped draft the original ordinance,and he does not see much of it in this ordinance anymore.He felt it was good until staff got hold of it.One of the main concerns was the public input.There had been two public forums,one videotaped,and apparently council did not get to watch that videotape,as the concerns voiced there are not in the ordinance.He stated he doubted anyone from the committee would endorse this ordinance. Mayor Coleman asked if he was speaking for the committee. Mr.Mike Alltop stated he was speaking for himself.He added it was a good draft with a lot of good things in it,but there a lot of things that got changed.There were many meetings putting together the definitions,but the ordinance definitions do not look anything like the ones proposed by the committee.He gave as an example the definition on swine or pigs.He is concerned about the definition of unsanitary premises. Vice Mayor Richmond asked him which definition was unsanitary premises. Mr.Mike Alltop stated it was letter X.He was also concerned about the section on dogs killing,wounding or chasing animals,livestock or fowl,giving as an example allowing anyone to kill a dog seen chewing a rabbit by the side of the road without knowing if that dog had actually killed the rabbit.He is also concerned that there have been no additional public forums on the revised ordinance put together by staff.There were no articles in the paper about the public hearing coming up on this.He stated he believes there is a lot of good material in this ordinance but it still needs to be cleaned up,and it should not be done piecemeal.This should not be rushed,it should be passed in its entirety after having another public forum to make any additional changes. Mayor Coleman stated he would like to see an ordinance they could accept that would not have people calling him late at night,but he is not sure that one exists.He added he thought they could do better than this. Ms Phyllis Scalf,2435 N.82nd St., Mesa,addressed the council.She had been a committee member and had attended all the sessions.They had made various recommendations on the ordinance, such as the definition of kennel.They had defined it as an enclosure,rather REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 11 OF 26 than having dogs on a for profit basis.A commercial kennel was defined as a money -making proposition,where people expect to make their livelihood,such as puppy mills and boarding kennels.Those were to be in commercial and industrial areas.Commercial kennels,as in this ordinance,should not include the dog owner who has a litter of puppies occasionally.The committee had recommended that the part of the code authorizing personal kennels be repealed.She stated that under this revision dog owners could have their dogs as pets,show their dogs,and still be restricted from having a litter of puppies,unless they had been declared as a business and were in a commercial area.Responsible breeders have puppies in an effort to better their breed and are concerned about them for their lifetime.These are not the dogs that typically end up in the shelter.She is concerned that with the present ordinance the city could end up a haven for puppy mills,where they breed for profit to wholesale the puppies,not caring where they go as long as the puppy is sold.She believes sound,healthy,purebred dogs will not be available in the city if the ordinance is adopted.It will exclude the responsible breeder,the role models and the experts.She stated this should be deleted. She added the public and the council have not have adequate time to review the draft,having only received the copies on May 15.She requested staff be directed to hone the rough edges and resubmit a draft for review by the public and the new council. Mr.Robert Sanders,1956 W.Decatur St.,Mesa,addressed the council.He is the president of the Lost Dutchman Kennel Club of Apache Junction.He stated he is speaking on behalf of the members of his club who are Apache Junction residents.He commended the work that had been done on the ordinance up to this point;it is a good draft.He stated last night's work session showed that this ordinance needs polishing. He is concerned with the breed specific sections and the dog fecal matter section,giving an example of how the latter section should read to be able to be enforced.He suggested enforcement of laws already on the books should take care of most of the problems.He is also concerned about limiting the amount of dogs per owner.He does not feel the ordinance should be passed by a council that for the most part will not feel the public repercussions of something passed today.He feels it may be a feeling of revenge,with two councilmembers having voiced disgust and contempt for the citizens,with one calling the citizens scum,and another stating no responsible dog owners live in Apache Junction. Ms Nancy Koerner,1026 N.Goldfield, relinquished her time to John Pein. Mr.John Pein,6326 E.20th Ave., addressed the council.He was a committee member and commended the chief on the time he put into the ordinance.He stated the committee thought they put out a good product,but it has changed a lot.He added while he was happy to serve on the committee,he does not want his name associated with the ordinance.He is concerned about the section that appears to be breed REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 12 OF 26 specific.In regards to the sections covering dangerous dogs,vicious dogs, wild animals and potentially dangerous dogs,he asked what a potentially dangerous dog is.He was glad to hear the mayor clarify that the ordinance does not deal with horses in any way.He suggested clarifying the definition of manure,as it is used interchangeably with fecal matter.He stated the committee did not talk about unsanitary premises.He stated the definition of a vicious dog does not make sense to him.He reminded them the committee did not want anything to do with the personal kennel permit,but it is back and the city wants to charge for it.He is offended as the city does not charge for some other permits that can lead to potentially dangerous situations.He questioned the arbitrary number for the kennel permits.He thanked Mr. Farrell for his legal advice at the work session last night on the amount of dogs allowed on a property being determined by the size of the property as not being looked at with favor by the courts.He suggested a survey of how many houses having five or more dogs would produce results that would show very few homes in that category.He asked where the support was for this number. current number limit is three. would be an arbitrary number. to loosen up the ordinance. Mayor Coleman reminded him that the Mr.John Pein stated any number Mayor Coleman stated they are trying Mr.John Pein stated people should not be given a license to kill a dog because they see it chasing a goat down the street.He stated it is apparently okay to have a dangerous dog if you have $100,000 of insurance,and questioned if that is the value of a life or is it another arbitrary number.He stated there is no way the definition of a .,potentially dangerous dog could be ruled upon.He added during one of the meetings he had asked the chief how big this problem was,and the chief had told him that from a police environment 95% of the people are good guys,and the other 5% create the problems.He noted that this ordinance is for approximately that 5%.He suggested what brought this about were barking dogs which cannot be controlled.He requested this be looked at with common sense. He is concerned about taking away a person's right to do something with their property. Mr.Jerry Jackson,1843 W.15th Lane,addressed the council.He stated he had reviewed the latest revision to the ordinance and compared it with the cities of Phoenix,Mesa,Chandler, Scottsdale,and the State of Washington,and he believes it is a very good ordinance.He stated he believed it would be a model for other cities.He thanked everyone for their work and urged the council to vote tonight in support of the ordinance. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 13 OF 26 Mr.Tom Hunter,11145 E.Broadway, addressed the council.He is a member of the Lost Dutchman Kennel Club.He stated he also has reviewed other cities animal ordinances and disagrees with Mr.Jackson.He had the Maricopa County ordinance,the Maricopa County Health Code,the ordinances of Chandler,Phoenix,Mesa,Scottsdale,Gilbert and Fountain Hills with him.He stated they are not even close to this ordinance. He read the definition of a kennel according to Maricopa County and added there is no reference to it being commercial.In regards to fees,the kennel operator must pay a $75 fee unless all the dogs are licensed,in which case there is no fee or permit required.He believes the way the city ordinance is written one would have to have a kennel permit to have a litter of puppies. This would prevent a person who has spent $10,000 showing a dog from having a litter of puppies once every three years.He stated according to this ordinance,anyone wanting to have a litter of puppies would have to have a commercial license and then be properly zoned.If they were not properly zoned and wanted to do this,they would have to move.He stated they are just showing their dogs and are not in it for profit.He then gave them the definition of a kennel from the Maricopa County Health Code,which states five or more dogs are kept under controlled conditions.He added none of the other cities have a limit on dogs. Councilmember Durbala stated the Maricopa County dog ordinance covers the dogs for all of the other cities he had mentioned,which he had found out when he did his own research.They all refer back to the county established numbers. Mr.Tom Hunter stated he has the copy with him and there is no dog limit. Councilmember Durbala repeated most of the cities refer back to the county standards for dog kennels and everything else. Mr.Tom Hunter read the definition of a commercial establishment from the Maricopa County Health Code.He stated it is an organization that is profit -making and no members of their kennel club are in it for profit.They have individual kennels,but none are commercial.If this ordinance is passed,they would all have to move and it would close the only dog kennel club in Apache Junction. Ms.Carmen D.Jackson,1843 W.15th Lane,addressed the council.She stated she had been on the committee and it was a hard job.She stated the people who had been on the committee had a right to speak tonight,whereas the other people who were not had been given plenty of opportunities to come forth.She stated this ordinance draft had taken too long and you cannot please everyone.She urged the council to vote on the ordinance. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 14 OF 26 Ms Phyllis Scalf stated she wanted to clarify how many dogs one can own in Maricopa County.A kennel permit is required if you own five or more dogs,but if the dogs are licensed individually,there is no limit to the amount of dogs a person can own. Councilmember Durbala stated he was referring to the kennels.He added it is a blanket coverage,they all use the Maricopa County animal control system for the metropolitan area.He stated Fountain Hills is the only one who does not fall under that jurisdiction.All of the others refer back to the county animal control ordinance. Ms Phyllis Scalf stated he was correct,the county ordinance is the model ordinance.She just wanted to make sure there was no confusion on the amount of dogs one is allowed to own in Maricopa County. Councilmember Durbala stated there is no confusion,they had been talking about kennels. Ms Phyllis Scalf stated the kennel permit in Maricopa County simply gives one the privilege of not having to license all of their dogs.They are all licensed under the permit instead of individually. Councilmember Durbala stated that is what the greyhound breeders do. Ms Phyllis Scalf stated that was correct and those breeders are commercial breeders. Ms Diane Perkins,1740 S.Buena Vista Dr.,addressed the council.She stated she had lived here two years and this is the first she had heard of these meetings going on.She received a flyer at 11:00 this morning advising her of the hearing.She would like to know why the residents are not told of the meetings and where they are posted. She added it was not in the Independent today as she called and asked them. She believes as a homeowner she has a right to know what is or is not being passed. Mayor Coleman asked the Independent if they would like to address the issue. Ms Maurreen Skowran,Independent reporter,stated she has only been there for a week:she cannot answer for previous events but she is here now to cover the meetings. Ms Diane Perkins asked where the council puts their bulletins. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 15 OF 26 Ms Maurreen Skowran stated they have had articles in the paper on the planning and zoning meetings and the city council meeting covering what had been discussed at meetings already held and they always state when the next meeting is,but they may not have the information as to what will be discussed at the upcoming meeting. Ms Diane Perkins stated she had never seen i t in the paper. Ms Maurreen Skowran stated she would be glad to show her where she can find it in the future. Ms Diane Perkins asked why there was no warning and why people were not told of these meetings. Councilmember Durbala stated they are posted on the board right outside this building. Ms Diane Perkins stated she would have to walk up every week to read the door. Councilmember Durbala stated she could call the city clerk's office and they would give her the information over the phone. Councilmember Hendricks added the meetings are always held the first and third Tuesdays of every month. Councilmember Durbala stated they would love to have as many citizens as this room could fill or larger at all of their meetings. Mayor Coleman closed the public hearing and added the council appreciated all of their comments and concerns. Vice Mayor Richmond apologized for stating or making it sound like she stated that the city had totally irresponsible dog owners.She believes she stated that a lot of them were or possibly the majority of them were.She added that if there are only 5% of irresponsible pet owners within the city limits,why should the city have had to put down 967 dogs last year.If this is done on a yearly basis,she would have to disagree with the 5%.She stated it costs the city $40 per dog to euthanize them. Mayor Coleman called for a ten minute break. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 16 OF 26 Mrs.Midge Conway called for a point of order.She did not believe they could take a recess before a vote was taken,and requested they check with the city attorney. Interim City Attorney Bill Farrell stated the meeting could be recessed. Mayor Coleman stated they would recess but asked everyone to be aware they would have council discussion and a possible vote after the break. Mayor Coleman reconvened the meeting.He added the city attorney had stated it would have been improper to recess had there had been a motion on the floor and they had adjourned to go outside to deliberate.He then opened the item to council discussion. Vice Mayor Richmond stated she had something she believed should be considered.She added it is obvious this ordinance needs to be redrafted.She stated the real problem appears to be the number of dogs.She would like to leave the 3 dog limit intact,and have three different permits available.Permit #1 would be like the personal kennel permit,allowing up to 5 sterilized dogs in an appropriately fenced yard with a fee of $25.Permit #2,for the show dog people,would allow up to 5 unsterilized dogs in an appropriately fenced yard with a fee of $75.Permit #3 would have no limit on the number of dogs but each dog would have to have a 20'X 20'inside or 20'X 40'outside pen with secure sides,tops and bottoms attached,with a fee of $75.Permit #3 would also require a conditional use permit.This way anyone who wants to have several dogs can have them.If the permit holder proves to be unreliable,the conditional use permit could be suspended. Councilmember Surra MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.990 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Vice Mayor Richmond SECONDED THE MOTION.She asked Councilmember Surra which Ordinance No.990 she was making the motion on. Councilmember Surra stated it is the revised 16 page ordinance. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. City Clerk Kathy Connelly read the ordinance by title only. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 17 OF 26 Councilmember Surra MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.990,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE DENIED AT THIS TIME AND THAT WE DIRECT STAFF TO REDRAFT AN ORDINANCE THAT CAN BE BROUGHT TO PUBLIC HEARINGS SINCE WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF CITY PAGES THAT ARE COMING UP,THEY CAN BE GIVEN A LITTLE BIT MORE PLAY THERE FOR ADVERTISING FOR FOLKS INPUT INTO REDRAFTING THESE PARTICULAR AREAS,AND I THINK THAT IS IN RESPONSE TO THE PERCEPTION THAT THE CITIZENS THAT HAVE COME HERE TONIGHT FEEL THAT THIS DID NOT REFLECT THEIR 'INPUT ORIGINALLY FROM THE COMMITTEE NOR WAS THERE ENOUGH TIME FOR THEM TO •REVIEW.I WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD HAVE THIS REDRAFT,THEN,AFTER ALL OF THOSE INFOSESSIONS THAT WE WOULD PUT TOGETHER,SO THAT WE COULD HAVE THIS COME BACK TO US BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR. Councilmember Durbala SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:4-2 (Vice Mayor Richmond and Councilmember Hendricks voted in opposition.) The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.997/AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 4 -FEES )Chief of Police Robert Galloway briefed the council on the item.This amendment would include service animals but would charge no fees.In addition,it removes the fee schedule on potbellied pigs from Chapter 6 and places it in Chapter 4,and it makes the license fees for potbellied pigs identical to those for dogs. Councilmember Durbala asked if these were compatible with the county. Chief of Police Robert Galloway stated he did not know.They are working on an intergovernmental agreement with the county on animal control so he may be able to find out soon. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak,he opened the item to further discussion by the council. Vice Mayor Richmond MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.997 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember Hendricks SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 18 OF 26 The motion carried. City Clerk Kathy Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Vice Mayor Richmond MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.997,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilmember Hendricks SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS. None. NEW BUSINESS. CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION FOR FY 1997-98 HUMAN SERVICES FUNDING )Mrs.Jennie Bennett,vice chairperson of the Health & Human Services Commission,briefed the council on this item.She stated they met to review the funding requests several times and to interview the applicants.The city had received 9 applications.Two applicants,Central Arizona Shelter Services and the East Valley Addiction Council,were declined an interview based on the determinations set up by the city code.She stated she and another commission member were present to answer any questions on their recommendations. Councilmember Durbala stated he had a problem with the commission not recommending funding for the Boys & Girls Club until the organization becomes more established and has a track record of providing programs that are more fiscally effective.He asked if they qualified under the ordinance for being non-profit. Mrs.Jennie Bennett stated she believed they qualified for non-profit but the members felt they did not give enough qualifications to receive consideration and they were not reaching enough children. Councilmember Durbala stated the original proposal was 16 or 18. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 19 OF 26 Mrs.Jennie Bennett stated that was correct. Councilmember Durbala asked if they had stated this program was just getting off the ground and that the schools were allowing them to use the buildings.They are supposed to be working out ,a bus schedule with the school district. Mrs.Jennie Bennett stated they listened to their proposal and they did not feel like the number of people they were going to serve justified giving them the money they were asking for. Councilmember Durbala stated he was disappointed as none of the other applicants are directed at the youth of the community.He added the food bank may reach some of them,but then the senior center is receiving $17,000 to transport seniors to have meals at the senior center.He read that it is to continue the meals program and provide them with transportation. Mrs.Jennie Bennett stated the money is specified to provide food for the seniors. Councilmember Durbala stated a number of the city leaders have been pushing to get the Boys & Girls Club off the ground,they are receiving money for their building and have received some money for their programs,yet the commission cannot understand that this is one way to keep crime down.He stated the Boys & Girls Club as a nationwide organization has an excellent track record.He added he participated in the club as a child and he cannot see how the city cannot come up with any kind of funding for them at this time. Mayor Coleman stated he appreciated the work that the commission had done,and he knows it is not an easy task when they ask for more than the limited funds.He stated he had called the club as he was concerned when they had not been funded.The club representative stated to him that based on their presentation to the commission she was not suprised they had received no funding.The executive director had resigned that week and they had no copy of the proposal given to the city.They had to call the city for a copy.They have a plan of where to use the money.They indicated the United Way had pledged to give them $2,500 and if the city could match that it would be appreciated.He stated he could not fault the commission given the guidelines they had to work with,but commended them for their stand. Mrs.Jennie Bennett stated they had agreed unanimously to allocate the funds for food,clothing,shelter, medicine,mental and physical health services,which is how they felt they distributed it for this year. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 20 OF 26 Councilmember Durbala agreed that the funds they were requesting is a little steep for just 16 kids,so he could see why they would not fund them. Mrs.Jennie Bennett stated it worked out to something like $800 to $1,300 per child,depending on whether you were working with the actual numbers or projected number of children,which seemed like a lot of money to spend per child.She added she would personally like to see the Boys & Girls Club funded but they did not have that much money to spread. Mayor Coleman proposed giving the Boys & Girls Club $2,500 without taking any money away from the other applicants,which would raise the total amount to $76,500. Councilmember Durbala agreed with that. Councilmember Surra stated as a liaison to this commission she had attended all the meetings,and she felt the commission did a thorough examination.It was the criteria that did not meet the expectations of the commissioners that determined the club would not be funded.However,she has no problem giving the club the money as long as they are not breaking precedent.She added the intention should not be to question the commission's judgement as they are the ones who donated their time to make these recommendations.She stated it pleased her that the mayor recommended not taking the funding away from their recommendations and making it a council's recommendation to add to their recommendation. Councilmember Urich stated as a liaison to the commission and having served on the commission prior to being a councilmember she is aware of how thick the packets are that the commissioners must study,and that it takes hours to review,plus there are interviews. These commissioners take their job seriously.It is not an easy process and the council needs to depend on the recommendations of all of our boards and commissions. Mayor Coleman thanked the commission for their time and service,then he called for a motion. Councilmember Surra MOVED THAT WE ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMISSION ON HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES FOR THE ORIGINAL $74,000 ALLOTMENT TO BE DISBURSED ON ALL OF THE APPLICANTS THAT PASSED THE STAGES OF INTERVIEW:AND THAT WE,IN ADDITION TO THAT,ADD $2,500 AS A MATCHING FUND TO THE UNITED WAY'S ALLOCATION TO THE BOYS'& GIRLS'CLUB TO HELP THEM GET SOME PROGRAMS OFF THE GROUND,AND GIVE THEM MAYBE SOME MORE MONEY TO WORK WITH MORE STUDENTS SO THAT WE CAN GET SOME KIND OF AN IDEA OF WHAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO ATTRACT IN OUR COMMUNITY. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 21 OF 26 Councilmember Urich SECONDED THE MOTION. City Clerk Kathy Connelly asked how this funding (Boys & Girls Club)was listed to be spent in the contract. The council in general agreed it should be used for the programs. City Clerk Kathy Connelly asked if it was to be for the staff costs of the programs or the material cost of the programs. Councilmember Surra stated it could not go into administrative costs. City Clerk Kathy Connelly asked at what time the contracts were to be returned to the council. Councilmember Surra stated they should come back at final budget adoption. VOTE:Unanimous.(Councilmember Durbala added it was not his intent to insult the commissioner,just to bring out his opinion on a couple of items.) The motion carried. CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE APPROVAL OF AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROJECT )City Engineer Gordon Grandy briefed the council on this item.He stated this is the photography needed to produce the large mosaic photographs hanging in the offices which are redone annually.The mylar slicks to make reproducable copies of each quadrant are also included.Alternative A covers the state lands,and for after the flight when the work is stored at their business until the city purchases the digitized information.The entire cost will be disbursed over a three-year period,but they need to work with the state land department to work out a schedule.In future years they propose to accomodate the funding by putting the monies into the non -departmental budget line item or into the contingency account in the next fiscal year's budget. City Clerk Kathy Connelly stated she had checked with the finance director today and his suggestion,since this is forward -looking,is to use non -departmental funds. Councilmember Surra MOVED TO AWARD PROJECT ENG 97-02 BASE BID,PLUS ALTERNATIVE A,TO KENNEY AERIAL MAPPING IN REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 22 OF 26 THE AMOUNT OF $99,531.00 WITH $13,960 OUT OF FISCAL YEAR 96/97 AND AUTHORIZATION TO EXPEND AN ADDITIONAL $85,571 DURING THE NEXT THREE YEARS AND THAT THE ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURE BE PAID FROM THE NON -DEPARTMENTAL ACCOUNT. Vice Mayor Richmond SECONDED THE MOTION. •VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. CONSIDERATION OF BUILDING DIVISION ISSUES ) )Development Services Director Larry Harmer briefed the council on the item.He stated it might be wiser to see what the state is going to do on the the issue of water heater replacements before changing any policy.He stated in regards to reroofing, the permits and inspections have increased as much as three times over the 2-3 years.Staff has not been increased and the workload is already heavy.The best option would be either Option 3 or Option 4 for his department.Option 3 is fairly common and requires no permit or inspection for a certain amount of repair or maintenance.Option 4 would be needed for a more complete refinishing of a roof and require a permit only when there are structural changes into the roof truss system.They would be easier to enforce and track.Regarding extended work hours,the evening hours during the week are the most workable for serving the general public.Most people do not want to come in on the weekend.It appears that no other communities do Saturday hours,and they are unsure on their status with evening hours.He stated they may not be able to issue permits over the counter,as there may be a need for engineering or fire district input on certain permits.They would be able to take in permit requests and applications,issue permits on things previously received and reviewed,and they may be able to issue some technical information.The hours would have to be in a split shift scenario,and the council needs to give direction on the specific day and hours or direct staff to come up with an extra hour rendition of the office.They would need to pre -advertise or give notice to the public so they know it is available.It should then be reviewed after a period of 3 or 4 months.He suggested starting it in the fall to coincide with their heaviest use of permits,and for them to report back after ninety days with the type of response they have had. City Clerk Kathy Connelly stated there are some situations in reroofing where an insurance company may require a building inspection.She added council may want to leave some permissive language in there where if the homeowner wants an inspection for insurance purposes or to inspect the quality of the construction,that the homeowner be able to get that at a nominal fee. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 23 OF 26 Development Services Director Larry Harmer stated there are home inspection services separate from ICBO that some insurance companies will accept,others will not.He suggested if an ICB0 inspection is required,they would do it at a nominal fee,the same as a certified home inspector would charge. Vice Mayor Richmond asked if he knew what that fee would be. Development Services Director Larry Harmer stated they range from $35 to $125.He would study what would be reasonable using the time involved with inspection and paperwork required. Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF REGARDING ORDINANCE CHANGES ON REPLACEMENT AND REROOFING PERMIT OPTIONS:CONSIDER ALL REROOFING/MAINTENANCE WILL REQUIRE A PERMIT ONLY WHEN STRUCTURAL CHANGES TO THE ROOF SYSTEM IS CONTEMPLATED,AND IF A HOMEOWNER OR INSURANCE COMPANY NEEDS AN INSPECTION IT WILL BE DONE FOR A SMALL NOMINAL FEE TO BE BASED ON STUDIES.He also MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF REGARDING EXTENDING THE BUILDING DIVISION HOURS:TO START A PILOT PROGRAM FOR A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS, STARTING IN AUGUST;AND ADVERTISE IT IN THE CITY PAGE;AND PREFERABLY TO HAVE THIS ON THURSDAY EVENINGS,AND THE HOURS OF THE OFFICE WILL BE OPEN FROM 8 A.M.TO 7 P.M. to go that long with it if it does not start in August or September it is the they can figure out if it will be any g Harmer stated they could do incremental individual ones after that. Mayor Coleman asked if they wanted work. Councilmember Durbala stated if you busiest time of the year,and that way ood. Development Service Director Larry reports after three months,and Councilmember Durbala MOVED TO DO INCREMENTAL REPORTS AFTER THREE MONTHS AND HAVE A MAXIMUM OF SIX MONTHS PILOT PROGRAM,COMING BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL TO EXTEND THIS PERMANENTLY. Mayor Coleman asked about the water heaters. Councilmember Durbala stated he wanted the water heaters left out at this time. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 24 OF 26 Councilmember Surra SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF ON PROPOSED LEGISLATION OR ACTIONS None. SELECTION OF MEETING DATES,TIMES,LOCATIONS,AND PURPOSES Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M.,AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M.,BE HELD ON MONDAY,JUNE 2,1997,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,JUNE 3,1997,IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM. Councilmember Hendricks SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. INFORMATION AND REPORTS Councilmember Surra stated she attended the school board meeting on May 8 that had -a presentation by 4th grade class.The students have put their class on a web site,and they have done all the work themselves.They are the first school in the state to have a page on the internet.It was done through a competition and they have been named a finalist.They called their project "The Mystery and Majesty of the Superstition Mountains",which was entered for the Cyberfair under natural attractions.She urged everyone to see it,and commended Principal Mary Petroff for encouraging the project. ADJOURNMENT )Mayor Coleman adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1.Acceptance of agenda. 2.Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 5,1997. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 25 OF 26 3.Recognition of Outstanding Service to the Community by City Employees. 4.Approval for Settlement Agreement in Litigation known as Arcaro v.City of Apache Junction.(Postponed from 4/15/97 and 5/06/97 meetings.) 5.Consideration of appointments to fill current vacancies on the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Health & Human Services Commission. 6.Approval of Award of Bid for City page. ACCEPTED THIS 3RD COUNCIL OF THE CITY SIGNED AND ATTESTED ATTEST: DAY OF OF APACHE TO THIS THLEEN CONNEC9r 1 4 City Clerk JUNE ,1997,BY THE MAYOR AND CITY JUNCTION,ARIZONA. 3RD DAY OF JUNE ,1997. .1) 01 0 1 4 4 -^- ---DOUGLAS OLEMAN 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 20th day of May,1997.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 27th day of May,1997. THEEEN—CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 20,1997 PAGE 26 OF 26