Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-09-21 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 21,1993 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona,was held on September 21,1993 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 7:03 p.m. INVOCATION Councilman Coleman gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Barker 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 Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney Glenn Gimbut Assistant City Manager George Hoffman City Engineer Gordon Grandy Planning Division Manager/Acting Director of Development Services Jim Nakagawa Associate Planner Rodney Class -Erickson Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias Public Works Supt.Doug Dobson Gil Verley,620 S.Palo Verde Dr.,Apache Junction Jimmy Eidson,944 W.3rd Ave,Apache Junction Shirley Camboni,1509 W.Saddle Butte,Apache Junction Robert Camboni,1509 W.Saddle Butte,Apache Junction REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 1 OF 16 Albert E.Pilson,1000 W.Apache Trail #104, Apache Junction Frank Kennemur,2945 E.Tepee St.,Apache Junction Paul Goodman,1000 W.Apache Trail,Apache Junction Wayne Miller,5347 N.Colt Rd.,Apache Junction William Cams,629 E.10th Ave.,Apache Junction Terry Merritt,2320 N.Grand Avenue,Apache Junction Steven Broadsky,101 N.20th,Phoenix,AZ 85016 Robert Trepp,2300 W.Apache Trail,Apache Junction ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA )Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. Councilman Coleman SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. AWARDS,PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Perkins presented a Certificate of Appreciation to Mr.Bud Holbrook for his volunteer work on a city housing rehabilitation project. CALL TO THEPUBLIC Mr.Gil Verley addressed the Council regarding problems with trash companies not using alleys for trash pick up and requested that the city contact the companies about this problem. Mr.Jimmy Eidson addressed the Council in support of the ongoing chip seal program and the consideration of naming the public works facility after Rich Broman;he also spoke against using code changes as an alleged means of taking action against the police chief;against the proposed Citizen Review Board; and suggested that the Council unite to do good for the city. Mrs.Shirley Camboni addressed the Council regarding ongoing problems with their building and allegations regarding Council and City staff. Mr.Robert Camboni addressed the Council regarding ongoing problems with his building. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 2 OF 16 Mr.Albert Pilson addressed the Council regarding his idea of establishing a police commissioner. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None. PUBLIC HEARINGS ORDINANCE NO.858,PZ-4-92,SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS )Planning Division Manager Jim Nakagawa briefed the Council on this item.He stated that this item was postponed to be submitted to the General Plan Task Force and Main Street,Inc. for their input.He briefed the Council on the input from the task force and stated that a report from Main Street was received just prior to tonight's meeting and he did not have time to review it.He presented four options for the Council to consider. Mr.Frank Kennemur,General Plan Task Force spokesman,briefed the Council on their recommendations which included restricting the height of signs to 12 feet and that "A"frame signs be banned and considered illegal in Apache Junction. Mr.Bob Trepp,2300 W.Apache Trail, Main Street spokesman,apologized to the Council for getting their report on the Sign Code amendments so late.He briefed the Council on the Main Street's recommendations which included economic restructuring,recruitment efforts to bring new business into our community,expanding existing businesses and how we can support those businesses'and.help them grow.He further explained the things they looked at in considering the Sign Code amendments. Mr.Gil Verley of the Sign Code committee,briefed the Council on their recommendations.He urged the Council not to delay the Sign Code being proposed any longer and stated that this is a good Sign Code that allows businesses to work. Vice Mayor Barker asked if the Sign Code that was brought prior to this one included the "A"frame signs. Mr.Verley answered that it did .not include "A"frame signs which many of the businesses have illegally and the City does not enforce. Vice Mayor Barker stated that it was then changed to include "A"frame signs and then it was held back,so they have been back and forth on it. Mr.Verley confirmed that. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 3 OF 16 Vice Mayor Barker asked if there are a lot of "A"frame signs in the city. Mr.Verley answered he was afraid it was so. Vice Mayor Barker asked if his business is building a lot of "A"frame signs. Mr.Verley answered he was afraid it was so.He stated that daily he has requests for signs that are illegal in the city and when he tells people that those signs are illegal,they go some place else and have it built and put it up anyway.He commented on 20 -foot high signs and urged the Council that if they decide on the 12 -foot high minimum signs,that they immediately put a two-year limitation on those that exist to conform with the minimum height. a lot of "A"frame signs in the city. was so. Councilman Coleman recalled that when the height was changed to 20 feet,he read in the newspaper that our ordinance was the most liberal in the Valley. Mr.Verley replied that the article in the newspaper was completely untrue.He added that signs in the City of Phoenix can be up to 45 -foot high in some areas but most signs are limited to 25 -foot high according to their new ordinance. Councilman Coleman asked what is the height limit in Mesa for signs. Mr.Verley answered that it was 12 -foot high in Mesa and higher in Maricopa County.He stated that another factor involved with height signage is the amount of property,so on an 80 -foot wide street front a 35 -foot high sign looks very high;that our buildings'height is 25 feet,so a building can have an overhang up to the front line with a sign put up there so that i t is 25 -foot high.He added that Phoenix has exterior window signs and this proposed ordinance provides for exterior window signs which a lot of businesses have been doing all along. Councilman Coleman stated that he had a problem with the 20 -foot high signs;that Mr.Verley is saying that the businesses need it but a businessman had just asked the opposite. Mr.Verley replied that he knows the businessman changed his mind in the last two weeks since he got into the Main Street committee and that he believes that Main Street is not working in the best interest of everybody involved but only a small number of business people. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 4 OF 16 Councilman Coleman stated he was very interested about the General Plan Task Force's input on the Sign Code which is recommending to keep the 12 -foot minimum height and that "A"frame signs be eliminated. Mr.Verley stated that if the Council decides to do that,make it so for everybody so that all have the same abilities for doing business. Councilman Coleman asked if the Council decides on the 12 -foot high limit,can we ask that within a certain period of time all the businesses comply. City Attorney Glenn Gimbut answered that the City of Scottsdale lost that issue with the Arizona Supreme Court. He explained that Scottsdale had asked that all billboards would come down after five years.The Supreme Court's decision was that Scottsdale had bought the billboards. were different than individual signs. Mr.Verley replied that billboards Mr.Gimbut explained that the concept was the same in that "you have to get rid of the sign you have and put something else in its place." Mr.Verley insisted that it was not the same. Mr.Gimbut replied that he would be glad to borrow the information that Mr.Verley had and do a research on that for a definitive opinion and convey it to the City Council. Mr.Wayne Miller,owner of the Basic Drilling property,disagreed with Mr.Verley's comments.He stated that in the world of business there are no absolutes and you should have variances for everything you do and then look at everything on an individual basis.He added that by discontinuing the "A"frame signs the Council would probably be putting six people out of business. Mrs.Nancy Koerner,1026 N. Goldfield Rd.,suggested to wait in adopting the Sign Code until Main Street completes their study.She agreed that everybody should conform with the Sign Code. Mr.William Cams,629 E.10th Avenue,asked that business addresses be included on the signs.He was informed that the proposed Sign Code included the addresses on the signs. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 5 OF 16 Mayor Perkins asked if anyone else wished to speak on this item.There being no one else wishing to speak,she closed the public hearing. Vice Mayor Barker stated that the task force has invested a lot of time in the Sign Code;that Main Street has asked the Council to wait which,contrary to what Mr.Verley said,it does represent a large number of business people who are interested in the Sign Code;that Main Street is asking that consideration be given to slowing down the traffic,which Mesa has already done west of Meridian since Walgreens opened;and that Main Street is also looking into that possibility along with placing business signs in the median. Mr.Verley stated that the task force discussed the possibility of placing sign in the median and explained the inconvenience of doing that. Vice Mayor Barker stated that she wanted to know if the Sign Code would allow signs in the median. Mr.Verley answered that it would not because no off -premises signs are allowed. Vice Mayor Barker commented that even though both the General Plan Task Force and Main Street indicated they did not have enough time to do a thorough and in-depth review of the Sign Code,they agree in keeping the sign height to a minimum of 12 feet and to continue holding "A"frame signs illegal.She added that those signs have never been legal but for some reason or another the ordinance has not been enforced and she protested against that.She stated that if that is going to continue she needed more information about it and she was not ready to vote on this now. Councilman Perkins stated that the Sign Code is not going to be set in stone but will continue to change as the city grows.He stated that if this is passed now it will not hurt to bring it back in six months and amend it;that it may have to be changed again in six years;but there was no sense in continuing this any further. Councilman Coleman agreed with Councilman Perkins except that if after they approve this Sign Code they decide to change the height to 20 feet and allow the "A"frame signs,and try to amend it in six months,the businesses would have already invested in that and he had a problem with that. Vice Mayor Barker stated she also agreed in part with Councilman Perkins but there needs to be a string of consistency so that it does not cost businesses their money. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 6 OF 16 Mr.Kennemur,explained how they arrived at their recommendations of the 12 -foot high signs,no median signs, and no "A"frame signs. Councilwoman Richmond asked if they were to pass this ordinance,how could they word the motion to allow Mr.Gimbut to check and see if the City can set a period of time for businesses to comply with the 12 -foot minimum height. Mr.Gimbut answered that they attempted to do the same with an amendment to the "A"frame signs in an amendment from the floor.He recommended that if the Council wanted to seriously consider a period of time for all signs to conform to the 12 -foot height,that they continue this item. Mr.Verley suggested that the reduction from 20 to 12 -foot height for other signs did not have to be in the Sign Code but could be handled with a different ordinance. Councilman Hendricks asked what will be the sign height for Mega Foods. Mr.Verley answered that it will be a 12 -foot height. Councilman Hendricks stated that the City should enforce the ordinance on "A"frame signs because if a car hit a sign,it would be like a bullet and hurt someone. Mr.Verley answered that City staff informed him that they were instructed not to enforce the ordinance until such time that the Council made a decision on the Sign Code, City Clerk Kathy Connelly informed the Council that the past two Legislative sessions the State Legislature has considered adopting a new State lawthat would force cities such as Apache Junction to reimburse a business if the city were to outlaw a non -conforming use.So,while they discuss that they can do this or that,later the Legislature might make a law that eliminates what Council can do. Councilman Coleman asked for an explanation of that new law. Mr.Gimbut explained that currently, a grandfathered business could do the same type of business no matter if the commercial zoning changed;but with the new law,if the zoning changed,the City could ask that business to go,but the City would have to reimburse the business for the loss they may incur. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 7 OF 16 instructions to not enforce decided upon by the Council Engineer went out to assess signs within the city. Mr.Nakagawa stated they did receive the "A"frame signs until the new Sign Code was and explained that on one occasion he and the City the problem and they only counted six to seven Councilman Perkins MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.858 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. Vice Mayor Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. 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 ARTICLE 21 SIGN CODE,IN CASE PZ-4-92;REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY." Councilman Perkins MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.858,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS:THAT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR DETACHED SIGNS IN APACHE JUNCTION SHALL REMAIN AT 12 FEET;THAT STAFF SHALL REVIEW THE ORDINANCE AND MAKE ALL APPROPRIATE CHANGES REGARDING SIGN HEIGHT;AND THAT "A"FRAME SIGNS SHALL REMAIN BANNED AND ILLEGAL IN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION. Councilman Coleman SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. Mayor Perkins recessed the meeting at 8:18 p.m.She reconvened the meeting at 8:38 p.m. ORDINANCE NO.868,AMENDING THE APACHE- JUNCTION CITY CODE,CH.5 MAGISTRATE COURT )City Attorney Glenn Gimbut explained to the Council that this ordinance was not ready for adoption. Vice Mayor Barker clarified the need for postponing this item.She MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING (OCTOBER 5TH)AND THAT ALL OF THE LITTLE EXTRAS BE TAKEN CARE OF AT THAT POINT SO THAT THE COUNCIL CAN DISCUSS IT AND MAKE A DECISION. Councilman Coleman SECONDED THE MOTION. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 8 OF 16 VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. ORDINANCE NO.870,AMENDING THE CITY CODE CH.2 MAYOR AND COUNCIL BY ADDING ARTICLE 2-20 CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD )City Attorney Glenn Gimbut briefed the Council on this item. hearing. Mayor Perkins opened the public Mr.Paul Goodman,1000 W.Apache Trail,spoke in favor of this ordinance with the exception of the prerequisite for the police academy training for applicants to the Civilian Review Board. He further commented on some things that,in his opinion,the ordinance was not clear about and stated that the Board should not consult and advise the Chief of Police through the City Manager but it should be an independent body answerable maybe only to the City Council. stated that the police department was citizen oversight and control just as decision was directly involved in the favor of a Civilian Review Board. Mr.Wayne Miller,5347 N.Colt Rd., a paramilitary organization with no the CIA which according to a Court Kennedy murder.He further spoke in Mr.Terry Merritt,2320 N.Avenue, spoke about his problems with the police department. Mr.William Cams,629 E.10th Avenue,spoke supporting citizen participation in the Civilian Review Board. Mayor Perkins asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item.There being no one else,she closed the public hearing. Councilman Hendricks MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.870 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilwoman Richmond SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:In favor:Councilman Coleman,Vice Mayor Barker,Councilman Hendricks, Councilman Cox,Councilwoman Richmond,Mayor Perkins. Opposed:Councilman Perkins. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 9 OF 16 The motion carried for the reading of the ordinance.(In order for the reading of the entire ordinance to be waived,a unanimous vote is necessary.) City Clerk Kathy Connelly read the entire ordinance. Councilman Hendricks MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.870,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED. Vice Mayor Barker SECONDED THE MOTION WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS:THAT SECTION 2-20-3,SUB -SECTION 6-7 BE DELETED;THAT SECTION 2-20-3,SUBSECTION D,IN LINE THREE DELETE THE WORD "COUNCIL" AND INSERT THE WORD "MAYOR",WHICH WAS THE WAY IT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN,THAT A NON -VOTING MEMBER SHALL CONSIST OF THE MAYOR OR ONE COUNCIL MEMBER WHO IS TO BE APPOINTED BY THE MAYOR. Councilman Hendricks ACCEPTED THE AMENDMENT. Councilwoman Richmond SECONDED THE AMENDMENT. City Attorney Glenn Gimbut suggested that if Section 2-20-3,Subsection 6-7 is to be deleted,the Council may also want to delete the definition of a Citizen Police Academy as contained in Section 20-2-2.Also,when the City Clerk read the definition of findings as contained in Section 2-20-2-H,the word "investigation"needs to be added to follow the words "citizen complaints"that is at the end of that sentence. Vice Mayor Barker ACCEPTED THOSE ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS. ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS. clarification on all of the amendments. proposed amendments. AMENDMENTS VOTE:In favor:Vice Mayor Barker,Councilman Hendricks, Councilwoman Richmond,Councilman Cox,Mayor Perkins. Councilwoman Richmond SECONDED THE Councilman Perkins asked for Vice Mayor Barker listed all of the Opposed:Councilman Perkins,Councilman Coleman. Councilman Coleman explained his vote stating that he opposed the elimination of any type of training for the board members. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 10 OF 16 The motion carried. MAIN VOTE:In favor:Councilman Hendricks,Councilwoman Richmond,Vice Mayor Barker,Mayor Perkins. Opposed:Councilman Coleman,Councilman Cox,Councilman Perkins. Councilman Coleman explained his vote stating that he had problems with the ordinance because he saw conflicts in Section 2-20-4 E and Section 2-20-5 B and E;that he could not see how a board can sit in a public meeting and maintain any type of confidentiality.He believed that the Council is creating more problems than they are solving;that the board will be restricted and will not be able to talk to the press;and he did not see how the board will set to rest any public concerns. Councilman Perkins explained his vote stating that once this review board is established,it will be used for a witch hunt by members of this Council and members of this community.He stated he will be fighting this ordinance and will be taking every resource in his ability to see that it never becomes an ordinance within this city. Mayor Perkins explained her vote stating that she recently asked a police officer for his opinion on the review board and the officer indicated that a poll of the police department on this issue would probably be 50/50.She stated that answer helped her in her decision. The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS CONTRACT FOR CITY ATTORNEY GLENN GIMBUT that a contract for the city attorney was be postponed again.She recommended that but to have it back when it is ready. )City Clerk Kathy Connelly stated not ready yet,so this would have to the Council not pick a certain date Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF:THAT THIS ITEM BE POSTPONED UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT THE CONTRACT IS AVAILABLE. Councilwoman Richmond SECONDED THE MOTION. Councilman Perkins AMENDED THE MOTION THAT THE COUNCIL DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO MAKE IT AVAILABLE IN HIS SCHEDULE TO MEET WITH THE COUNCIL'S ATTORNEY AND GET THIS MATTER WRAPPED UP IN A SPEEDY MANNER. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 11 OF 16 Councilman Cox SECONDED THE AMENDMENT. AMENDMENT VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. MAIN VOTE:In favor:Councilman Cox,Councilman Coleman,Councilman Hendricks,Vice Mayor Barker,Councilwoman Richmond, Mayor Perkins. Opposed:Councilman Perkins. The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS NAMING THE PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS FACILITY WITH RICHARD BROMAN'S NAME )Asst.City Manager George Hoffman briefed the Council on this item. Vice Mayor Barker asked if the name that appears separated from the others is the original idea. Mr.Nakagawa answered that they talked about several names and that he suggested the name of "Rich Broman's Public Works Facility,"but he did not know if Mr.Mike Lee had a preference for another name. Mr.Hoffman stated he did not recall that Mr.Lee :indicated a preference:on: any oftheJiames Mayor Perkins stated that the CounciThwould besetting aTrecedent:by naming a building with al)erson's name..She explained that we may see ithefaMilies.Of past mayorsmhoAre now deceased coming in also.She atked .thattheiCouncfl postpone this and giveAt some thought Vice Mayor Barker commented in favor of naming the operations facility with Mr.Broman's name. Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF REGARDING NAMING THE PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS BUILDING ON BASELINEI WITH FORMER PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR'S NAME;THAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE NAME "BROMAN OPERATIONS CENTER." Councilman Hendricks SECONDED THE MOTION. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 12 OF 16 VOTE:In favor:Councilman Cox,Councilman Perkins,Councilman Coleman, Councilman Hendricks,Vice Mayor Barker,Councilwoman Richmond. Opposed:Mayor Perkins. The motion carried. AWARD OF BID FOR PROJECT NO.ENG 93-03, SIDEWALKS FOR SAN MARCOS DRIVE AND HANDICAPPED RAMPS IN SIERRA ENTRADA SUBDIVISION )City Engineer Gordon Grandy briefed the Council on this item. Councilman Coleman MOVED THAT THE BID FOR SIDEWALKS ON SAN MARCOS DRIVE AND HANDICAPPED RAMPS FOR SIERRA ENTRADA SUBDIVISION,PROJECT NO.ENG 93-03,BE AWARDED TO M & S PAVING CONSTRUCTION CO.IN THE AMOUNT OF $52,947.00 AND ALLOWING FOR FINAL QUANTITY MODIFICATIONS UP TO 10%. Councilwoman Richmond SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. ADDENDUM TO MAIN STREET,INC.CONTRACT FOR TRANSPORTATION STUDY AND PILOT TROLLEY PROGRAM )Asst.City Manager George Hoffman briefed the Council on this item.He stated there was one potential provider for the trolley system but Main Street did not have a provider at this juncture and it would be incumbent upon them to do so under this contract. Mr.Bob Trepp of Main Street,stated that they wanted to make the trolley system a year-round program if it was feasible and that this would be an inexpensive way for our community to get into it and determine whether it was feasible or not. Mr.Gary Mulholland of the Superstition Mountain Promotional Corporation,encouraged the Council and City staff to continue working with those entities like Main Street,the Chamber of Commerce and SMPC,all of which have the same goals of economic growth in mind. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 13 OF 16 Mrs.Penny Wallace,1303 E.18th Avenue,spoke in favor of this item and encouraged everyone to shop in Apache Junction. Mr.Hoffman stated that two points have been made on this issue in terms of economic development and transportation and as we go into it,we need to recognize that although those terms may overlap,they are two separate goals,which he explained. Mr.Steven Broadsky,101 N.20th Street in Phoenix,briefed the Council on the possibility of bringing his trolleys to Apache Junction and about his experience in this business. Mr.Hoffman explained to Mr.Broadsky that Main Street was conducting a study,that the City would contract with them,and they would select the provider. Mr.Broadsky replied that he understands the City is helping to provide funding for this project and Main Street will select the provider,and that although he has not bid on a community project before,he would do better than others. Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT ADDENDUM TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AND MAIN STREET, INC.FOR TRANSPORTATION STUDY AND PILOT TROLLEY PROGRAM BE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS:THAT THE DATES ON THE CONTRACT BE CHANGED ACCORDINGLY: THAT ON PAGE TWO,PARAGRAPH THREE AT THE END ADD:"MAIN STREET,WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE SELECTION OF THE TROLLEY SERVICE PROVIDER,SHALL FILE WITH THE CITY AN ACCOUNTING OF THE FIXED,UP -FRONT COST TO BE INCURRED BY SAID PROVIDER TO PROVIDE THE SUBJECT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES:AND ANY PORTION OF THE $9,800.00 NOT REQUIRED FOR SAID CAUSE WILL BE REFUNDED TO THE CITY." Councilman Coleman SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (IGA)WITH MARICOPA COUNTY FOR CHIP SEALING ON MERIDIAN ROAD )Public Works Supt.Doug Dobson briefed the Council on this item. Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT THE MAYOR BE AUTHORIZED TO ENTER INTO THE INTER -GOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH MARICOPA COUNTY FOR THE CHIP SEALING WORK ON MERIDIAN ROAD. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 14 OF 16 Councilman Cox 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 Vice Mayor Barker MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M.AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M.ON MONDAY,OCTOBER 4,1993,IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS RESPECTIVELY;AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M.ON TUESDAY,OCTOBER 5,1993,IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM. MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. INFORMATION AND REPORTS None. ADJOURNMENT Councilman Coleman SECONDED THE )The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1.Acceptance of Agenda. 2.Acceptance of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 7,1993. ACCEPTED THIS 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER ,1993,BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER ,1993. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 15 OF 16 ATTEST: / / / r f 1 City Clerk NNEL 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 21st day of September,1993.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 28th day of September,1993. City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 21,1993 PAGE 16 OF 16