Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-02-16 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING February 16,1993 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona,was held on February 16,1993 at the Apache Junction City Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Damiano called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. INVOCATION Vice Mayor Eidson gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilwoman Alger led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmen Present:Mayor Damiano Vice Mayor Eidson Councilwoman Barker Councilwoman Alger Councilman Coleman Councilman Cox Staff Present: (Councilman Perkins was absent) City Manager Michael R.Lee City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney Glenn Gimbut Assistant City Manager George Hoffman Director of Public Works Rich Broman City Engineer Gordon Grandy Parks & Recreation Director Jeff Bell Recreation's Supervisor Chuck Baker Others Present:Mike McCuen,1750 W.Apache Trail,Apache Junction Jean Perkins,616 N.Cactus,Apache Junction ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA )Councilwoman Barker MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,4993 PAGE 1 OF 13 Councilman Cox SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. AWARDS,PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS City Clerk Kathy Connelly read a proclamation designating February 15- 20,1993 as "Patriotism Week."Mayor Damiano presented the proclamation to a representative of the local Elks Lodge #2349. City Clerk Kathy Connelly read a proclamation designating March 19 - April 3,1993 as "Country Music Week." Parks and Recreation Director Jeff Bell briefed the Council on the department's 1992 Progress Report which was included in the agenda packets. Also,Recreation's Supervisor Chuck Baker highlighted two of the programs:the Apache Junction Youth Soccer League and the Preschool Program. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Mr.Mike McCuen,1750 W.Apache Trail,addressed the Council regarding vehicles for sale on empty lots.He pointed out the business license fee that others pay and stated that the city ordinance should be enforced with a warning the first time and followed by a fine the second time. Mrs.Jean Perkins 616 N.Cactus, addressed the Council regarding one lawsuit against the City.She stated that the Council should have not disregarded the suggestions of the Personnel Review Board about the Magistrate Court and urged the Council to stop the needless lawsuits that the City is facing. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Mike Lee informed the Council that the City has received the building plans and Building Permit Application for the Megafoods project; that after review of the plans by March 1st construction will start. Mr.Lee informed the Council that paving of North Idaho Road,adjacent to the Prospector Park,has been completed and explained the problems that had previously led to the failure of the project.He stated that a similar ongoing problem is at Broadway and Delaware and because of the rain it has not been completed. Mr.Lee informed the Council of United Way presentations to employees on February 17th and 19th about their program in Pinal County;employees will be encouraged to participate and the City will provide payroll deduction. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,1993 PAGE 2 OF 13 PUBLIC HEARINGS ORDINANCE NO.850:LOCAL BID PREFERENCE ) )Assistant City Manager George Hoffman briefed the Council on this issue stating that the concept of a Local Bid Preference was presented to the Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors for review and they expressed support.He read the letter from Executive Director Carol Doty.He further spoke in favor of this ordinance and asked the city attorney to explain the legal abilities of it. City Attorney Glenn Gimbut stated that traditionally the State of Arizona has had a local bidders preference in the public works sections of the State Statute;that those provisions have successfully met any kind of court challenges;that in 1988 the statutes were changed and a legal challenge against it prevailed and currently there is no local bidders preference in the public works section of the State law.He stated that according to the court,you must be able to tie a local bidders preference ordinance into direct benefits to be achieved by the public and therefore there must be some reason or rationale which makes sense.He further explained the ordinance. Councilwoman Barker pointed out the word "shall"in Section 3-7-8,line 3,which makes the ordinance mandatory. She asked if it should not be "may"instead. Mr.Gimbut answered that the problem in going from "shall"to "may" without indicating when "may"will be used is when will we exercise that discretion and when will we not.He explained that the City of Yuma is specific as to when they will accept local bidders and when they will not,so that bidders are aware of when this will be utilized and when it will not be.He stated he drafted this ordinance to be automatic and clear as to when this would apply and when it would not. Councilwoman Barker asked if in other words the local bidder will get the bid if they meet the percentage,are suitable and have the right quality. Mr.Gimbut replied that is correct. It was mentioned that suitability and quality could mean almost anything and Mr.Gimbut stated that is why that exception is there.He explained that this language comes directly from the previous State Statutes that the courts upheld as being proper bid preference and that it allows us to differentiate if there is a distinctive difference in the quality or the suitability of the proper service. Councilwoman Barker asked if there are other cities in the State that have enacted what Mr.Gimbut just mentioned. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,1993 PAGE 3 OF 13 Mr.Gimbut answered that Yuma has one. Councilwoman Barker asked what kind of purchases specifically are we talking about. Mr.Gimbut answered that every city department purchases goods and services on a regular basis under $10,000 each, every budget year;that this ordinance allows us to go to a State bid;but as to the totality of supplies,equipment and contractual services that may or may not be found in Apache Junction he did not know. Councilwoman Barker asked if he means that this ordinance will get us around the lowest,responsible bidder mandate because of the wording in there. Mr.Gimbut answered that it allows it as long as the bidders are equal on responsibility,on quality and suitability,and if the local bidder is within five percent of the bid,then he will be awarded the contract. Councilman Coleman stated that he had a problem with the wording that says,"this preference shall not be used where state law or any applicable federal statute or regulation forbids the granting of such preference,or requires another method for competitive bidding."He asked how is it determined whether it's in conflict with the state or federal law? Mr.Gimbut answered that there are certain areas in the state law where bid preference is forbidden;for example, in public works projects it is the interpretation of the League of Arizona Cities and Towns that there is no allowance for local bid preference,no matter what.He stated that in federal grant projects,federal regulations control the manner and method of bidding and it would be covered by the particular federal statute that is in place. Councilman Coleman expressed concern about the violation of constitutional rights. Mr.Gimbut explained the case of Big D Construction vs.Court of Appeals in 1990 where the Arizona Supreme Court made it very clear that the local bid preference statutes had a support in law,but in its change the Arizona Legislature had crossed the line in constitutionality because they left out any rational basis.The changes were that you just had to pay $400 or so in Arizona taxes,you didn't have to be here or have a business here,and you were entitled to an automatic five percent preference;therefore,the amount of tax revenue to the State to get the preference had no relationship to the benefit achieved and the detriment to the public funds that could occur.He stated that in this ordinance he is REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,1993 PAGE 4 OF 13 trying to get back to a solid rationale basis by limitting the bid to under $10,000 and making sure that the business is here for at least a calendar year. Councilman Coleman stated that he still has a problem with it. Mr.Hoffman replied that from an economic development stand point the benefits are clear. Councilman Coleman replied that he understands that but he was concerned with the legalities. City Manager Mike Lee commented that a bid preference is not so common in Arizona but it is in other states. City Clerk Kathy Connelly disagreed with Mr.Gimbut on the word "Shall".She believed it needed to be replaced with the word "may"for two reasons:1)The word "Shall"in there makes the award for the bid mandatory and it does not give the staff the option of perhaps amending the proposal and going back out for bid;2)the word "may"in there is further explained by the words further on "quality and suitability considered."With the word "shall"in there there is absolutely no permissiveness left because one cancels the other. Mr.Gimbut explained that the word "shall" was taken directly from the previous State Statutes;that Arizona has always stated that there is a right to reject all bids;and that he disagrees that this particular statute somehow does away with that right. Councilwoman Barker suggested to insert the language "shall,with the Council's instructions",as it is the case with Yuma,as mentioned by Mr.Gimbut,where the Council instructed that some RFPs be considered as local preference and others not. Councilwoman Alger replied that it would encumber the process;that the $10,000 is there so that the Council doesn't have to keep coming back for all those things.She stated that the word "shall"is appropriate;that it says that if everything being equal --the competing bidders,the quality and suitability is all the same--then it shall go to the local bidder. Councilwoman Barker asked Councilwoman Alger if she is leaving the dependence of suitability up to the people looking at the product and determining the need. Councilwoman Alger answered definitely,they are the ones who put the bid out and know the product that REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,1991' PAGE 5,OF 13 they need and they can look at it;they are the ones who will be comparing the bids and pick the suitability. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.850 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilwoman Barker 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 CITY CODE BY AMENDING ARTICLE 3-7 CONTRACT PROCEDURE BY ADDING SECTION 3-7-8,LOCAL PREFERENCE;REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY." Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.850,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Cox SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:In favor:Councilwoman Barker,Vice Mayor Eidson,Councilman Cox, Councilwoman Alger,Mayor Damiano. Opposed:Councilman Coleman. The motion carried. RESOLUTION NO.93-03 )City Attorney Glenn Gimbut briefed the Council on this item stating that this resolution uses language from Michael Cafiso of O'Connor,Cavanaugh in the ballot question. Mayor Damiano opened the hearing to the public and there being no one wishing to speak,he closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Alger suggested to reconsider what the Council is doing with this resolution.She stated that the Community Facilities District is working on the sewer system and that they seem to be going on the right direction;that this doesn't seem to be something that the Council needs to consider at this time,so the Council might not want to do that. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16-,1993 PAGE 6 -OF 11: Mr.Gimbut stated that in anticipation of that and at the request of Vice Mayor Eidson he prepared a draft resolution which eliminates the question of wastewater from the proposal and limits i t solely to the question concerning the water utility business. Councilwoman Barker asked if they were looking at the question on Exhibit A-1 but eliminating the sewer system. Mr.Gimbut answered there were corrections not only there but also in the language of the resolution eliminating any reference to wastewater;and that the format of the ballot is left to the discretion of the City Clerk. Councilwoman Alger asked if the language on Question No.1 was the normal language used for allowing the City the authority to be in the utility business. Mr.Gimbut answered that i t is language that was put together by our Bond Counsel based in part upon his suggestion,but i t is the exact language constructed by Mr.Cafiso. Councilwoman Alger asked if this is the type of language we must have if we need to go to a further vote for bonding or condemnation or anything like that. Mr.Gimbut answered that i t is Mr.Cafiso's language that we would have full authority under A.R.S.§9-514. Vice Mayor Eidson MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO.93-03,DESIGNATING THE 18TH DAY OF MAY,1993 AS THE ELECTION DATE FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEEKING PERMISSION FROM THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION TO ENGAGE IN THE BUSINESS OF SERVICES RENDERED BY WATER SERVICE UTILITIES PURSUANT TO A.R.S.§9-514;DESIGNATING THE DEADLINE FOR VOTER REGISTRATION;AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY;BE APPROVED. Councilman Cox SECONDED THE MOTION. Vice Mayor Eidson clarified that the Council is not intending at this point to go into the utility business but for water only;but if the voters gave their approval to do that,the Council would take that approval as the point of interest in discussions with Consolidated Water to try and encourage them to take steps to improve their water;if Consolidated Water refused to do that,then the Council would consider getting into the utility business. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,1993 PAGE 7 OF 13 Mayor Damiano recessed the meeting at 8:00 p.m.He reconvened the meeting at 8:15 p.m. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS WASTE DISPOSAL )Public Works Director Rich Broman briefed the Council on the information included in their agenda packet regarding the concept of keeping the Tomahawk Landfill open.He introduced Mr.Steven Nelson of Allwaste and Jerry Nickel of Apache Sanitation,and stated that what they are looking for is the Council's reaction and interest in the concept.He stated that if the Council expresses some interest,there is a lot a work needed to be done to look at the cost and the details of the feasibility of such a project;that Pinal County was made aware of this concept and they are interested in looking at it. Mr.Steven Nelson,Regional Vice President of Allwaste --a New York Stock Exchange Company--briefed the Council on the operation of the company stating it is an environmental services company.He further explained the possibility of continuing the operation of the Tomahawk Landfill and proposed a plan for that area. the landfill in the middle. feet. Vice Mayor Eidson asked how high is Mr.Nelson answered it was twenty Vice Mayor Eidson stated that he doesn't like the possible concept of having the mountain of garbage out there even though is covered with some dirt;also,that he doesn't like the probability that people from east Mesa will be allowed to come into Apache Junction.He asked if those people wouldn't be screened. Mr.Nelson answered that he would visualize obtaining local address and phone number along with license plates. Vice Mayor Eidson asked Mr.Nelson if they would accept the legal responsibilities when they buy the landfill from the County. Mr.Nelson answered that they would do that,but part of their due -diligence process would be an investment through an environmental engineering firm and subcontractors to come in and do REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,1993 PAGE 8 OF 13 an environmental impact study prior to actually taking over and going forward with it. Vice Mayor Eidson asked that if after the company took over the landfill,another reasonable landfill opened somewhere else and it is more feasible for the citizens to use it and the company moves out;since it's inside the city,would the legal responsibilities fall back on the City? City Attorney Glenn Gimbut replied that Subtitle D would require to show financial proof from the very beginning of the ability to close the landfill and the ability to financially take over that burden. Mr.Nelson replied it is right. Vice Mayor Eidson was concerned that the City would be responsible for what will happen to the landfill after it is closed. Mr.Nelson stated that it would not be a problem.He further stated that they are prepared,if they went forward with this,to make the financial commitments that would be required to ensure that after they are gone the obligations will be taken care of. requirements of Subtitle D. Mr.Gimbut further explained the Vice Mayor Eidson was concerned with having a mountain of garbage out here and having residents from Maricopa County using it. Councilwoman Barker asked Mr.Nelson how long do they anticipate the studies will take. Mr.Nelson stated there are six or seven major processes that they would be involved in including the Department of Environmental Quality,the State Land Department,a formal bidding process with Pinal County,zoning requirements with the City of Apache Junction,and a consulting engineering firm;that it would take ninety to a hundred and twenty days and it would be a matter of consummating the momentum they already have going forward in order to get it done. Councilwoman Barker asked Mr.Nelson what is specifically that he expects from the City and the County. Mr.Nelson answered that the County expressed a strong interest in having someone along the lines of Allwaste to come in;that about the City of Apache Junction,if this is something viewed REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,1993 PAGE 9 OF 13 negatively within the community,this will be the last time he will be here; but if it's viewed as a positive step for the community,then they will go forward with it. Councilwoman Barker commented that in Mr.Nelson's letter he says that they might consider sealing the construction landfill against groundwater contamination.She asked if they will seal it. Mr.Nelson answered that it has already been determined that they will commit to sealing it. City Manager Mike Lee commented that it takes some time to acquire state land and asked Mr.Nelson if they had an interim plan to purchase the land on time. Mr.Nelson answered yes,they have had communication with the State Land Department and it is a nine to ten month project to acquire the land,but if things were to fall into place shortly, they hope to get support from the community,elected officials and professional city staff to get this expedited.He added that the landfill can be operated in an interim basis but only for a short period of time. Mr.Lee asked if after the company took over they went out of business,would the bonding requirements be guaranteed,or even in bankruptcy if the proper procedures would be followed in foreclosure. Mr.Gimbut answered that he knows there are very strict standards imposed by Subtitle D but he is not very familiar with the requirements in that case and that he would be checking with environmental lawyers about it. Councilman Coleman asked Mr.Nelson how long do they anticipate being able to extend the life of the landfill. Mr.Nelson answered that it would be somewhere between five and ten years but closer to five and eight years.He added that they see it to be of service to the local community until the regional landfill is in operation,which according to county staff it will not be until four to seven years. does metal from auto body shops go. longer accepted at the landfills. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL_ FEBRUARY 16,1993 PAGE 1TOF 13 Mayor Damiano asked Mr.Nelson where Mr.Nelson answered that it is no Vice Mayor Eidson MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS INTEREST IN EXPLORING THE POTENTIAL FOR EXTENDING THE LIFE OF THE TOMAHAWK LANDFILL BASED UPON THE GENERALIZED CONCEPT OUTLINED IN A LETTER TO THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATED FEBRUARY 2,1993,AND FURTHERMORE THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE DIRECTED TO REQUEST THE PROPOSING FIRMS TO PROVIDE WRITTEN DETAILS OF THEIR PLAN FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT A LATER DATE. Councilwoman Barker 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 Councilwoman Barker EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M.AND A WORK SESSION AT 7 MONDAY,MARCH 1,1993 IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AND CHAMBERS RESPECTIVELY;AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD A TUESDAY,MARCH 2,1993 IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM. MOVED THAT AN :00 P.M.ON CITY COUNCIL T 6:00 P.M.ON Councilman Cox SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. INFORMATION AND REPORTS City Attorney Glenn Gimbut reported that HB 2254 and HB 2255 are going through the State Legislature,which can impact greatly the citizens of Apache Junction. Mr.Gimbut explained that HB 2254 requires the Arizona Corporation Commission to allow water and sewer companies to automatically impose surcharges without a hearing before the Corporation Commission and any time their operating costs increase by five percent.At present time the Corporation Commission holds hearings to determine the cost and also examines revenues to determine if the company income is actually needed to be increased to cover these costs.He explained that because of that Consolidated Water Utilities could automatically increase their rate without any hearings before the Corporation Commission.HB 2255 allows for automatic interim rate increases without a Corporation Commission hearing. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,1993 PAGE 11 OF 13 Mr.Gimbut reported that after the Council contacted the Arizona Legislature opposing these particular bills,the House and Government Operations Committee defeated HB 2255 but HB 2254 passed.He encouraged the Council and members of the public in general to write to all of the Legislators,in particular House Speaker Mark Killing,opposing HB 2254. Councilwoman Alger reported that the Landfill Sitting Committee decided to form a subcommittee of members of Pinal County and Maricopa County to look at the scope of work and come back with recommendations to the committee;that many of the committee members were concerned that the public did not have enough information about the new landfill and about the new procedures coming into effect. Mayor Damiano informed the Council that on February 9th he presented a proclamation for the "I love to Read Week"at the High School Auditorium;that the attended the Salvation Army luncheon at St.George's Catholic Church;that on February 11th he visited the V.A.Hospital where Senator DeConcini gave a speech on the extension of the hospital and that evening he went to an open house held by Senator DeConcini;on February 12th he went to a Nursing Home pageant event;on February 16th he attended the KPNX Minority Advisory Board and also he attended a meeting of WAFB IGA Group. ADJOURNMENT meeting at 9:00 p.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1.Acceptance of Agenda. 2.Acceptance of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 2,1993. )Mayor Damiano adjourned the ACCEPTED THIS 2ND DAY OF mlaRoi ,1993,BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 5TH DAY OF MARCH ,1993. ATTEST: KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,1993 PAGE 12 OF 13 THOMAS DAM IANO 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 16th day of February,1993.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 23rd day of February,1993. KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16,1993 PAGE 13 OF 13