HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-01-18 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 18,1994
The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction,
Arizona,was held on January 18,1994,at the Apache Junction City Council
Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Perkins called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m.
INVOCATION
Councilman Coleman gave the Invocation.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilwoman Richmond led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Councilmen Present:Mayor Perkins
Vice Mayor Barker
Councilwoman Richmond
Councilman Hendricks
Councilman Perkins
Councilman Coleman
Councilman Cox
Staff Present:
Others Present:
City Manager Michael R.Lee
City Clerk Kathleen Connelly
City Attorney Glenn Gimbut
City Engineer Gordon Grandy
Public Works Supt.Doug Dobson
Planning Division Manager/Acting Director of
Development Services Jim Nakagawa
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
Parks & Rec.Director Jeff Bell
Housing & Grants Coord.John Flumerfelt
Frank Kennemur,2946 E.Tepee St.,Apache
Junction
Jimmy Eidson,944 W.Third Ave.,Apache Junction
William Cams,629 E.10th Ave.,Apache Junction
W.Dean Thorpe,1615 N.Delaware Dr.,Apache
Junction
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 1 OF 23
ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA
)Councilman Coleman MOVED THAT THE
CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED;AND
THAT THE BID FOR PROJECT NO.PW 93-16,USED BUCKET TRUCK,BE AWARDED TO
INTERNATIONAL EQUIPMENT AND PARTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $19,949.99:AND
THAT RESOLUTION NO.94-02,A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,CONCERNING ITS DECISION TO WITHDRAW FROM THE
WILLIAMS AIR FORCE BASE I.G.A.GROUP AND EXPRESSING ITS SUPPORT FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REUSE PLAN,BE APPROVED.
Vice Mayor Barker SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
AWARDS,PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Perkins recognized the members of the Library Teen Advisory Board
and presented them with certificates of appreciation.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC
Frank Kennemur addressed the Council regarding the idea of a pad tax and
requested that the Council take action to adopt a pad tax at the rate of $8
per space per month.
Jimmy Eidson addressed the Council on the process to be used to fill the
Police Chief's position and recommended against use of a consultant and asked
that efforts be made to fill the position on an in-house basis.
William Cams addressed the Council regarding the need for a city-wide
unified trash collection system and a requirement that single-family rental
units have mandatory trash pick-up.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Mike Lee reported on recent pavement projects that have
been completed which totaled 1.7 -miles;16th Avenue from Cedar to Hale St.,
Cortez Rd.from Superstition Blvd.to Tepee St.,Royal Palm Rd.from 4th Ave.
to Junction St.,Wickiup from Superstition to the trailer park entrance,and
Baseline Rd.from Meridian to the C.A.P.project;a 375 foot turn lane at
Ironwood and Baseline;and the pavement of San Marcos from Tepee to Lost
Dutchman Blvd.will be started this week.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 2 OF 23
Mr.Lee commended Mr.Doug Dobson and Mr.Gordon Grandy for finding ways
to stretch our dollars on those projects.
Mr.Lee briefed the Council on the recruitment process for the new chief
of police as contained in his memo in the agenda packet.
The Council asked some questions and Mr.Lee answered them.However,
the City Attorney reminded everyone that this item was on the agenda as a
report and not for discussion.He suggested that this be discussed at a work
session or included on the agenda for discussion later.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION
FOR THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR LOST
DUTCHMAN DAYS
)City Clerk Kathy Connelly briefed
the Council on this item.
Ms.Carol Doty,Executive Director
of the Chamber of Commerce,stated that beer and possibly wine coolers will be
served and she described the three locations at the event.She stated that it
was possible that Rotary Club will come before the Council on February .1 with
applications for a Special Event Liquor License for these same locations,at
which time the Chamber would like to cancel this request.She explained that
if Rotary Club applied for these licenses,the Chamber's insurance costs would
be either null or very little.She requested that this request be approved in
case the other does not come through.
Councilwoman Richmond MOVED THAT THE
SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATIONS FOR THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR THE
1994 LOST DUTCHMAN DAYS,BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT
OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL.
Vice Mayor Barker SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
PERSON TRANSFER LIQUOR LICENSE FOR
JAKE'S -O -MINE
)City Clerk Kathy Connelly briefed
the Council on this item.She added that a letter from an attorney was
received requesting that the Council vacate the public hearing because the
applicant had resigned.She stated that we can only assume that the attorney
is representing the corporation;that he was requested to be present tonight
but he indicated he would not be present;that this was checked with the State
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 3 OF 23
Dept.of Liquor Licenses and Control and they indicated that it was the
Council's discretion whether or not to continue on with the public hearing and
make a recommendation on this license,or to honor the request for vacating
it;that as of this morning,the State had no correspondence indicating that
this license was being withdrawn and would be refiled under another applicant.
City Attorney Glenn Gimbut stated
that another option was to conduct part of the hearing to hear people who
wished to speak and continue it to another day.
Ms.Connelly added that the only
problem with that was that the Council has to respond to the State one way or
the other.
Vice Mayor Barker asked if vacating
this simply makes it a moot issue at this time.
Ms.Connelly answered yes but that
does not mean that if the corporation decided to proceed with this person,
they cannot come back or that they cannot continue to file absent of
recommendation from the City.
Councilman Coleman asked if the
State would act on this,if they did not have a recommendation from the
Council.
Ms.Connelly answered that if the
Council made a recommendation,the State would act upon that and proceed with
their hearing;if they do not hear from us,they can still proceed with their
hearing with the assumption that the City is not responding.But something
should be done tonight.
Mayor Perkins opened the hearing to
the public,there being no one wishing to speak on this item,she called for a
motion.
Vice Mayor Barker asked if the
Council decided to vacate this request with the condition that the State also
receive the request to vacate it,will this settle until such time that they
wanted to make another request from the City.
Ms.Connelly answered that she could
not answer for the State on that.
Vice Mayor Barker asked if the
Council decided to vacate,the State has no obligation to act upon that
decision;and if we have an obligation,would a decision to vacate not be an
answer to that.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 4 OF 23
Ms.Connelly replied that the State
ordinarily would respond to a recommendation for approval or denial,but she
was not aware that the State had an obligation to respond to a recommendation
to vacate the license;that is not an authority that is vested in the Council
but in the State.
Councilman Coleman asked if the
Council recommended denial on this application,this would cost this business
anything;if they are going to have to go through the same process again.
Ms.Connelly answered that they have
already paid their fees because they are paid up front to the State.
Mr.Gimbut stated that the State has
full power to do what it wished to do;if we recommend denial,they can vote
to approve it and vice versa;that if the Council recommended denial of the
application,the applicant still has the power to withdraw his application
with the State and so he also has the power to file other applications;the
impact on the applicant would be whatever track record is left with the State
which may or may not be a favorable one at this time.
Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT THE
APPLICATION FOR A PERSON TRANSFER,SERIES 6 LIQUOR LICENSE,SUBMITTED BY
RICHARD C.OLSON FOR JAKE'S -O -MINE,BE RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL TO THE ARIZONA
DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL.OUR REASONS FOR THE RECOMMENDATION
OF DENIAL ARE AS FOLLOWS:THE RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL BY THE CITY DEPARTMENT
OF PUBLIC SAFETY AS INDICATED IN THEIR MEMORANDUM DATED DECEMBER 27,1993,AND
FURTHER THAT THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY
SERVED BY THE ISSUANCE OF THIS LICENSE;AND FURTHER,THAT WE HAVE BEEN
REQUESTED TO VACATE THIS HEARING IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Councilman Coleman SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
BINGO LICENSE APPLICATION FOR HUFF'S
MOBILE HOME PARK
)City Clerk Kathy Connelly briefed
the Council on this item.
Mayor Perkins opened the hearing to
the public;there being no one wishing to speak,she closed the public
hearing.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 5 OF 23
Councilman Coleman MOVED THAT THE
BINGO LICENSE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY MRS.EDITH CLINKINGBEARD FOR HUFF'S
MOBILE HOME PARK BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE,BINGO LICENSING AUTHORITY.
Vice Mayor Barker SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO.882,PZ-9-93,(TERRY/PENNY
SECOR AND GERALD/LORENA BUCKLEY)
)Planning Division Mgr.Jim
Nakagawa briefed the Council on this item.He stated that the Planning &
Zoning Commission recommended approval of this rezoning and the Planning
Division concurs with that recommendation.
hearing.
Mayor Perkins opened the public
Mr.Paul Connolly,1935 S.Cactus,
who represented the applicants,offered to answer any questions from the
Council.
Mayor Perkins asked if the Council
had any questions.There being no one wishing to ask any questions,she asked
for a motion.
Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT
ORDINANCE NO.882 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE
ORDINANCE BE WAIVED.
Councilman Hendricks SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
City Clerk Kathy Connelly read,"AN
ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,
ARIZONA,AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING
THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP,CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,CHANGING THE ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN CASE PZ-9-93 FROM CR-3 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES/
CONVENTIONAL HOMES ONLY)TO CR-4/PD (MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENCES BY PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT);REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;AND PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY."
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 6 OF 23
Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT
ORDINANCE NO.882 AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED.
Councilwoman Richmond SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
Mayor Perkins recessed the meeting
at 8:00 p.m.She reconvened the meeting at 8:15 p.m.
ORDINANCE NO.868,AMENDING THE APACHE
JUNCTION CITY CODE CHAPTER 5 MAGISTRATE
COURT
)City Attorney Glenn Gimbut
briefed the Council on this item.He explained that there was a difference of
opinion on some issues between him and Mr.Withey and Mr.Wininger of the
Superior Court,which according to the Arizona League of Cities and Towns,are
a matter of State-wide concern.He explained to the Council the options
available in taking an action and stated that this ordinance did not have to
be adopted until a new judge comes on board,but it was up to the Council's
discretion.
Councilman Coleman asked if there is
an opinion forthcoming from the League.
City Attorney Glenn Gimbut explained
that there would be a response within the next two weeks;that Mr.DeBolske of
the League indicated that in his opinion we do not deviate from Revised
Administrative Order No.83-11 in the language of our ordinance.
Councilman Coleman asked if what is
in the ordinance is the language of that administrative order.
City Attorney Glenn Gimbut answered
yes with the exception of Mr.Wininger's recommendation,to allow the option
that if the Council and the Presiding Magistrate both come to an agreement for
a system that would deviate from our personnel rules to apply to court
employees,such an agreement could be made.He stated he has provided for
that option because he thinks it is an excellent suggestion of a way to
resolve possible problems.
Councilman Coleman asked Mr.Gimbut
to show that to him in the ordinance.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 7 OF 23
Mr.Gimbut read it in the ordinance
and explained that it makes this agreement run alongside of appointments of
presiding judges and it would apply six weeks after a judge is appointed for a
term of office,again making things run in the court as the newly appointed
judge wanted.
Councilman Coleman asked for
clarification.
Mr.Gimbut explained that what it
says is that both the judge and the Council have to get together and if either
one of them does not decide to come to an agreement,then the City personnel
policies would control the court's personnel in accordance with Revised
Administrative Order No.83-11.
Mayor Perkins opened the public
hearing;there being no one wishing to speak on this item,she called for a
motion.
Vice Mayor Barker MOVED TO CONTINUE
THIS ITEM UNTIL WE HEAR FROM THE LEAGUE OF CITIES AS TO THE OTHER CITIES STAND
ON THIS,SO THAT WHEN WE FINALLY PASS IT,WE DO NOT HAVE TO GO BACK AGAIN AND
AGAIN.
Councilman Coleman SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING NEEDS )
)John Flumerfelt briefed the
Council on this item.
Mayor Perkins opened the public
hearing.
City Engineer Gordon Grandy asked if
there were some street improvements in 1991.
Mr.Flumerfelt answered that it was
the public facilities that were done with the 1987 grant.
Vice Mayor Barker asked if as we
remodel the Library,there will be anything further that can be done with the
Senior Center using this kind of grant because it was built with that.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 8'0F 23
Mr.Flumerfelt answered explaining
that it was possible.He stated that if there was a need,we could certainly
look into that.
Vice Mayor Barker replied she did
not believe it was actually an immediate need because she was not sure what
the time line for the expansion of the Library was at this time.
Councilman Hendricks asked Mr.
Flumerfelt if he said that the regional money available is $7.9 million
dollars.
Mr.Flumerfelt answered the $7.9
million dollars is available from the State to the four different rural
regions.He explained there is a formula by which our portion of that comes
up to $1.69 million dollars.
Planning Division Mgr.Jim Nakagawa
stated he believed these grants also handled State special projects.
Mr.Flumerfelt explained that there
is $1.4 million dollars that is not allocated into the rural regions but the
State likes to keep it in there for their own criteria,but it was also
available to us and we would have to apply directly to the State for those
funds.
Councilman Hendricks asked if
hooking up the sewer system for local low-income people would be a good reason
for applying.
Mr.Flumerfelt answered that i t
could be possible.
City Manager Mike Lee further
explained that CMG,which is the method of distribution,divide the grants up
into equal shares to each community that is a member of CAAG,but those
communities have to apply and be eligible and meet certain criteria.He added
that some of the smaller communities'either do not have enough use for the
money or do not have enough staff to utilize the money,so it is turned back
in and' that gives us the opportunity to get more than we normally would.
Mr.Lee also indicated that there
are two fees on the sewer hookups;one is the sconnection fee which helps
reimburse the district for the capital cost of installing the lines,treatment
plant and so forth,and the other fee is more of a direct cost to the
homeowner to actually make the connection from the line to his property.He
asked if both fees would be eligible.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 9 OF 23
Mr.Flumerfelt explained that would
be eligible as long as they are presented as a housing rehabilitation
activity.
Mr.Lee added that these are hundred
percent grants which means that it would be a hundred percent pay to the
homeowner if he is low or moderate income person.
Mr.Flumerfelt answered yes and
explained that since the sewer is a special project,that would also apply to
people who have recently applied for grant money.He added that this grant is
not done yet so about the sewer hookups people should look at their own
resources first before considering this grant available.He stated he needed
housing rehabilitation contractors who were licensed,bonded and insured for
this program in spending the monies we currently have available.
Mayor Perkins opened the public
hearing.
Mr.W.Dean Thorpe,1615 N.Delaware
Dr.,spoke opposing this item.He stated that the rehabilitation of five to
seven single family homes with $7.9 million dollars was ridiculous and
overpriced.
City Manager Mike Lee that the $7.9
million dollars is not coming to Apache Junction;that covers the entire CAAG
region which includes Pinal and Gila counties and all of the communities in
them;that about $150,000 might be allocated to the City.
Mr.Flumerfelt clarified that CMG
has looked at the base application cap of about $130,000 per applicant,but we
can apply for multiples of that and he was looking at the administrative
•capacity of $260,000 into the community.
Councilman Coleman asked Mr.
Flumerfelt what are "eligible areas"as stated in his memo.
Mr.Flumerfelt answered it is any
particular area where i t is determined that 51% of the population or
households are receiving 80% percent of the medium income and the low -moderate
income.
Councilman Coleman asked how that
information is obtained.
Mr.Flumerfelt answered it is
obtained from the 1990 census and also from special surveys that can be done.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 10 OF 23
Mayor Perkins closed the public
hearing there being no one else wishing to speak on this item.
(No action was required from the
Council on this item.)
RESOLUTION NO.94-03,SUBMISSION OF APPLI-
CATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993 (SECOND ROUND)
OF HOME FUNDING AND HOUSING TRUST FUNDING )
)Housing & Grants Coordinator John
Flumerfelt briefed the Council on this item.
Mayor Perkins opened the public
hearing.
Mr.W.Dean Thorpe,1615 N.Delaware
Dr.,spoke opposing this item.
Mayor Perkins closed the public
hearing there being no one else wishing to speak on this item.
Councilwoman Richmond MOVED THAT
RESOLUTION NO.94-03,AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF APPLICATION FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1993 FEDERAL HOME FUNDS AND STATE HOUSING TRUST FUNDS,BE APPROVED.
Vice Mayor Barker SECONDED THE
MOTION.
Mayor Perkins asked if people who
benefit from the housing rehabilitation program have to be American citizens.
Mr.Flumerfelt answered that is not
part of the guidelines;the qualifying criteria is income eligibility,
evidence of other assets,that people have lived in their home for at least a
year,and that they are owners of record.
VOTE:In favor:
Opposed:
The motion carried.
Vice Mayor Barker,Councilman Coleman,
Councilman Perkins,Councilwoman Richmond,
Councilman Cox,Councilman Hendricks.
Mayor Perkins.She explained that if those
people are not American citizens and they are
not required to be,that is very unfair to the
American tax payers.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 11 OF 23
RESOLUTION NO.94-01 AND ORDINANCE NO.885
APACHE JUNCTION TOWING SERVICE POLICIES )
)City Clerk Kathy Connelly briefed
the Council on this item.
Vice Mayor Barker asked if Ms.
Connelly has compiled all of the towing policies within the ten pages.
Ms.Connelly answered yes.
Vice Mayor Barker asked if those ten
pages would become the towing policies.
Ms.Connelly answered yes with
whatever other changes they wished to make.She stated that the
Administrative Code would be incorporated in our policies by reference but
that would periodically change because that document belongs to the State of
Arizona.She explained that these policies could be brought back for final
adoption with the verbiage that the Council wants in there so that there is no
question as to interpretations in the future.
Councilman Hendricks asked how many
different tow policies we have.
Ms.Connelly answered there was one
which was originally adopted by the Council in 1987 and the two changes to
that are highlighted in pink in the copy labeled as original policies.
Councilman Hendricks asked if there
were any changes in there not approved by the Council.
Ms.Connelly answered yes and
indicated that those changes are highlighted in orange.
Councilman Hendricks asked how did
that happen.
Ms.Connelly answered that the City
Attorney might have a suggestion as to how it happened.
City Attorney Glenn Gimbut stated
that he had a speculation on that.He explained that the Council made the
change that there will be two tow companies and an alternate;that he received
a request from the Chief of Police as to how to go about choosing who would be
the regular companies and who would be the alternate presuming that all three
complied with all of the city ordinances;that since the towing policies did
not address that,he indicated to the Chief that by administrative order he
could set his own objective criteria to make those distinctions and choices;
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 12 OF 23
and that a staff member from the police department gave some ideas as to what
some objective criteria might be.
Mr.Gimbut continued stating that
his thinking at that time was that this would be an administrative order of
the department,but it seems that some of the things he remembers talking
about to somebody seem to have been included in this document,which might
have been some misunderstandings and miscommunications.
Councilman Hendricks pointed out
these additions were never approved by the Council when they were supposed to
be approved before they are published or given out to the public.
Mr.Gimbut replied that was done
before they were to be part of the permanent towing policies.
Councilman Hendricks asked why these
policies were given to the public before the Council's approval.
Mr.Gimbut answered he did not know;
that he has talked to Lt.Francis who also does not know.
department head was present to answer
present,he asked:Mr'.Lee if he could
could not answer how that happened.
Councilman Hendricks asked if the
those questions.Since he was not
answer those questions.
City Manager Mike Lee answered he
Councilman Hendricks asked if this
happens a lot and if they had to review all the policies and procedures,to
see how many had the same kind of discrepancies.
City Clerk Kathy Connelly suggested
that in the future the title page of these policies would indicate dates and
new ordinances as they are subsequently changed by the Council and the
ordinance number and the changes be footnoted on the individual page.She
added that since this is a document of public record,that all copies be
distributed through the City Clerk's office.
Vice Mayor Barker pointed out that
the resolution would do that.
Ms.Connelly answered that some
people go to the department to request the copies.
Vice Mayor Barker replied that the
resolution says that this document is filed with the City Clerk so it sounds
very specific to her.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 13 OF 23
Councilman Perkins commented on
Section 17 of the proposed changes.He was concerned that the alternative of
cancelling one call and making another one would delay the removal of the
vehicle from the roadway which represented a public hazard.He requested that
it be included in the policies that the investigating police officer has the
right to declare it a public hazard and oversee this.
Vice Mayor Barker indicated that on
copy "B"of the policies,there was a section stating that "unless vehicles
are blocking the roadway in which case the police officer has the
responsibility to move the vehicle immediately."She asked if that could be
included in Section 17.
Ms.Connelly replied she did not
change that portion of the policies.
Vice Mayor Barker asked if there was
a place in there for the person whose vehicle is to be towed to be able to ask
for a company.
Ms.Connelly confirmed that.
Councilwoman Richmond asked if the
police officer on the scene would not check with the driver of the vehicle to
see whether the driver wanted the rotation tow or a private tow.
Councilman Perkins replied that
there are situations where the driver of the vehicle may not be with the
vehicle because of medical reasons,so the police officer needs to have the
authority to have the vehicle moved right away.
Lt.Steven Francis of the police
department expressed concerns about Section 2 regarding the three options
available for towing away a vehicle.He agreed with Councilman Perkins and
gave an example where these options create problems.
•Vice Mayor Barker replied that those
options are part of the original policies and asked the Lieutenant if that
should be deleted or if there was other wording that would give people the
choice of a closer tow company.
Lt.Francis stated that they try to
be reasonable so if people want to use a tow company that is close they will
let them do that;but when lives can be in danger because of the accident
itself,they cannot do that.
Vice Mayor Barker pointed out that
the original policies appear to have problems which should be changed or
reworded.She suggested to have this item at a work session so that all the
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 14 OF 23
problems can be ironed out and that staff put it back together again and bring
it back.
Ms.Connelly commented that it made
her uncomfortable to be asked by the Council to go ahead and make the changes
and be trusted with following the direction and later have a document that
does not look like anything that the Council requested or that she authored.
Vice Mayor Barker asked that members
from the police department bring back their input at the work session.
Ms.Connelly stated that Lt.Francis
mentioned to her that they are having instances where the tow company at the
top of the list refused to do the tow.
Lt.Francis added that was something
that needed to be addressed in writing.He stated that the requirement of
towing a vehicles on a roll -back is case law since the vehicle is a piece of
evidence that has to be checked:that he would like to have specified in there
a light and a medium duty wrecker:and he did not agree that in Section 8 it
is stated that drivers,owners,or operators cannot tell people where they can
go to have their vehicles repaired because people who are not familiar with
this area need help with that.
City Attorney Glenn Gimbut stated
that was not intended to prevent the operator of the tow vehicle from
answering a question from a person whose vehicle is wrecked:this is to keep
tow companies honest from telling of a particular repair facility as opposed
to others,and maybe that could be reworded.
Lt.Francis commented on Section 9
that according to what is written in there,if the owner wants his vehicle to
be taken home,then the driver has to take it to his home,and if that was a
call from the police department there might be a problem if the owner of the
vehicle does not want to pay for that:so,if the police department calls the
company,the vehicle should go where they say.
Mr.Gimbut agreed with Lt.Francis
and explained that the City could end up with the bill in that case,but i f
the call is a private deal between the owner of the car and the tow company,
then they will not look at the City to collect the money.
Vice Mayor Barker stated that i t
needed to be clarified in there that this is a City -initiated tow.
City Attorney Glenn Gimbut agreed on
that and stated that it needs to be added that if the tow truck driver takes
them some place else,that would be the tow truck driver's responsibility and
not the City's.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 15 OF 23
Lt.Francis stated that is the way
it has always been,that if they make arrangements of their own,that was
fine;but the police department is concerned with securing the property so
that nothing happens to it.He also recommended that in Section 25 the no-
felony charges apply to all employees of the tow company.
Ms.Connelly pointed out that the
original tow policies from 1987 were a composite of the ones from Phoenix,
Gilbert,Mesa,and Tempe,who have had policies in existance well before ours.
Councilman Hendricks asked if
something will be done about the changes that were done in the policies
without the Council's approval.
Mr.Lee agreed that this is a
serious problem and should not be condoned;that he will seek some answers
on that and get back with the Council.
Councilman Hendricks stated he just
wanted to know that something was going to be done about it.
Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT THIS
ITEM (14a AND 14b)BE BROUGHT BACK AT THE NEXT WORK SESSION.
Councilwoman Richmond SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS
ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION TO RUST ENVIRONMENT
AND INFRASTRUCTURE,INC.
)City Attorney Glenn Gimbut
briefed the Council on this item.
Carroll Reynolds of Rust
Environment,Inc.(previously Donohue)added that they have worked with the
City on a number of projects before and thanked the Council for the
opportunity to work with them.
Mr.Gimbut stated that Mr.Reynolds
is an engineer and former assistant public works director for the City of
Chandler;that he has been for many years a member of the Southeast Regional
Siting Committee for Maricopa County and he indicated that he would be happy
to meet with the Council about those particular issues.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 16 OF 23
Councilman Hendricks asked if we got
anything over and above that the $1,600 was worth reimbursing.
Mr.Gimbut answered yes.
Mr.Reynolds added that the services
were not charged out at what be considered a standard expert witness fee but
were substantially reduced;it would have been more than $3,000 if we had been
charged at the higher rate.
Councilman Hendricks MOVED THAT THE
REQUEST FOR $1,600.00 FOR ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION BY RUST ENVIRONMENT AND
INFRASTRUCTURE,INC.,BE APPROVED.
Councilwoman Richmond SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION TO MEYER,
HENDRICKS,VICTOR,OSBORN AND
MALEDON FOR SERVICES
briefed the Council on this item.
benefits we have received.
)City Attorney Glenn Gimbut
Councilman Perkins asked what
Mr.Gimbut answered the United
States Department of Justice in its orders of rejecting the legislative plan
clearly referred to some of the work of this law firm and it clearly had an
impact with the Department of Justice.
Councilman Perkins asked if it did
impact the redistricting for Apache Junction.
Mr.Gimbut answered that at this
time,under the current decisions made by the Arizona State Legislature and
their recent bill,the answer is no;but the argument still continues,i t is
not over yet even though this law firm is no longer involved.
Councilwoman Richmond asked if this
happens on a frequent basis,that we set a limit and people go over it with -
the anticipation that the Council is going to say okay.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 17 OF 23
Mr.Gimbut replied that the Council
has the option of voting no;that both of the firms asked that this matter be
presented to the Council.
Vice Mayor Barker commented that
about six months ago or so they set a limit on bids but now staff is coming
back again with this.She stated there needs to be an understanding with the
bidders that we are not accepting a bid of an "around"fee;we are asking for
a set fee and if they figure they are going to go over that bid,they should
be aware that the Council is going to turn it down.
Ms.Connelly replied that these were
not bids but professional services rendered.
City Manager Mike Lee added that
those firms agreed to provide the services for a certain amount of money.
Vice Mayor Barker commended the
staff for trying to hold the fees limits down.
Councilman Perkins MOVED THAT THE
REQUEST OF $1,581.42 FOR COMPENSATION BY THE LAW FIRM OF MEYER,HENDRICKS,
VICTOR,OSBORN & MALEDON,BE DENIED.
MOTION.
VOTE:In favor:
Opposed:
The motion carried.
Councilman
Councilman
Vice Mayor
Councilman
AWARD OF BID ENG 93-07,RODEO ARENA
AT PROSPECTOR PARK
Councilman Hendricks SECONDED THE
Perkins,Councilman Hendricks,
Cox,Mayor Perkins.
Barker,Councilwoman Richmond,
Coleman.
briefed the,Council on this item.
bidder was the local company.
)City Engineer Gordon Grandy
Vice Mayor Barker asked if this
Mr.Grandy answered no,this is a
company from Mesa and that the local bidder had to be rejected.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 18 OF 23
Vice Mayor Barker asked if that was
due to incompleteness of their bid.
Mr.Grandy answered yes because they
did not provide the adequate 10% bid bond and did not complete the paperwork
in the proper manner.
Councilwoman Richmond asked if the
paperwork is that complicated.
Mr.Grandy answered no and explained
why the optional 10% more is provided on this.
City Manager Mike Lee asked if that
would require a change order.
Mr.Grandy answered yes and that
would come back to the Council for their information.He further explained
the Finance Department proceeds with the purchase order based on the Council's
recommendation and if there is anything over on the final bill,Finance does
not issue the final payment until it comes back to the Council for approval
and that slows up the contractor's final processing for minor discrepancies.
Mayor Perkins asked if this project
was something that we are going to be proud of or not.
Vice Mayor Barker answered that for
that kind of money it better be good.
Councilman Hendricks asked if this
rodeo arena is going to be done within the guidelines of the national rodeo or
whatever.
Mr.Gary Mulholland,president of
the S.M.P.C.,answered that the Professional Rodeo Cowboy Association does not
have any guidelines;that their guidelines were put together by a committee
formed of people who utilize those kind of facilities and who gave their
input.
Councilman Hendricks was concerned
that this project would be done just for the Lost Dutchman Days event and then
have to go back to it again.
Mr.Mulholland answered that PRCA
have indoor as well as outdoor events,so they do not designate• a size
preferable to any other because they are in the show business and they are not
going to eliminate themselves from an auditorium by limiting the size.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 19 OF 23
Councilwoman Richmond asked if the
rodeo grounds would be of an ample size so that we do not have to come back
and make it bigger.
Mr.Mulholland answered that there
is one other arena here in the East Valley that is equivalent to the size of
this one which is primarily a roping arena out in the Gilbert/Chandler area
but this arena would be larger than that one.
City Manager Mike Lee answered that
our rodeo arena is comparable to the size of a football field which is 300
feet by 100 feet.
Mr.Mulholland answered that was
correct.He thanked the Engineering Department for their help on technical
things.
Councilman Perkins MOVED THAT THE
BID FOR PROJECT NO.ENG 93-07,IMPROVEMENTS TO RODEO ARENA,BE AWARDED TO
AMERICAN FENCE COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $51,240.76 PLUS UP TO 10% TO COVER ANY
UNFORESEEN CHANGES.
Vice Mayor Barker SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF ON PROPOSED LEGISLATION OR ACTIONS
REGIONAL LANDFILL
)Public Works Supt.Doug Dobson
briefed the Council on this item.
Councilman Hendricks asked if the
community did not vote on this issue before.
Ms.Connelly answered they voted on
the water and sewer issues.
Mr.Dobson stated that about
advantages and disadvantages in the survey,the number one concern from people
was the location;the second was traffic and noise;and the third was
environmental conditions;and to continue with that is going to take more
money and staff time.
City Manager Mike Lee added that in
a sense,the present landfill is already functioning as a regional landfill;
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 20 OF 23
that the question is whether the City can be able to get some kind of benefits
from being a host community,because it already is but we are not getting any
of the benefits;and the other question would be how much we want to see this
being increased to,if to the extent of the southeast regional landfill that
is being discussed;and what would be the ultimate size and right location for
a landfill.
Mr.W.Dean Thorpe,1615 N.Delaware
Dr.,spoke opposing this item over the five-minute limit.
Mayor Perkins reminded Mr.Thorpe he
had only five minutes to speak.
Mr.Thorpe requested more than five
minutes.
Councilman Perkins objected to that.
Mr.Thorpe objected as well and
indicated that Arizona Association of Manufactured Homeowners instructed him
to state their position against a landfill in the City.
Councilwoman Richmond asked Mr.
Dobson if there is a proposed site in mind.
Mr.Dobson answered that all he was
asking for right now was to be able to look into the advantages and
disadvantages of being a host community for the landfill;that the sites are
being picked by the Southeast Regional Landfill Committee.
Councilman Perkins MOVED THAT THE
CITY MANAGER BE AUTHORIZED TO FURTHER THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE ADVANTAGES
AND DISADVANTAGES OF LOCATING A REGIONAL LANDFILL IN THE APACHE JUNCTION AREA.
MOTION.
VOTE:In favor:
Vice Mayor Barker SECONDED THE
Councilman Coleman,Vice Mayor Barker,
Councilwoman Richmond,Councilman Perkins,
Councilman Cox,Mayor Perkins.
Opposed:Councilman Hendricks.
The motion carried.
SELECTION OF MEETING DATES,TIMES,LOCATIONS,AND PURPOSES
Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT AN
EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M.AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M.BE HELD ON
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 21 OF 23
MONDAY,JANUARY 31,1994,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,FEBRUARY 1,1994,IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM;AND THAT A
COUNCIL/STAFF RETREAT BE HELD ON FEBRUARY 12,1994,FROM 10:00 A.M.TO 4:00
P.M.AT THE APACHE JUNCTION UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD ROOM.
Councilman Perkins SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
INFORMATION AND REPORTS
Councilman Perkins reported that the Southeast Regional Landfill Siting
Committee has selected twelve sites;six in Pinal County and six in Maricopa
County;that one is south of the City and the other five are in the northwest
area of Florence;that they have scheduled a workshop to discuss the different
sites for this area on February 21,1994,from 4:00 p.m.to 8:00 p.m at the
Apache Junction High School.
ADJOURNMENT
)Mayor Perkins adjourned the
meeting at 10:20 p.m.
Consent Agenda Items are as follows:
1.Acceptance of Agenda.
2.Acceptance of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 21,1993.
3.Award of Bid No.PW 93-16 for a Used Bucket Truck to International
Equipment and Parts.
4.Approval of Resolution No.94-02 expressing City of Apache Junction's
intent to withdraw from the Williams Air Force Base IGA Group and
expressing its support for the implementation of the Reuse Plan.
ACCEPTED THIS 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY ,1994,BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA.
SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 2ND DAY OF
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 22 OF 23
FEBRUARY
44N PERKINS
Mtlyor
,1994.
ATTEST:
KATHLEEN CONNELLY
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 18th day of January,1994.I further certify
that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present.
Dated this 25th day of January,1994.
KATHLEEN CONNELLY
6 07,e—A1,4_i f ,,/
City Clerk
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18,1994
PAGE 23 OF 23