FINAL AGENDA
4:00 P.M. MEETING
Individual Items on the 4:00 p.m. meeting agenda may be postponed to the 6:00 p.m. meeting.
|
1. | CALL TO ORDER
NOTICE OF OPTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the City Council and to the general public that, at this regular meeting, the City Council may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for legal advice and discussion with the City’s attorneys for legal advice on any item listed on the following agenda, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3).
|
|||||||||
2. | ROLL CALL
|
|||||||||
3. | PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MISSION STATEMENT
MISSION STATEMENT
The mission of the City of Flagstaff is to protect and enhance the quality of life of its citizens. |
|||||||||
4. | APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS | |||||||||
A. | Consideration and Approval of Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting of October 21, 2014, and the Special Meeting (Executive Session) of November 25, 2014. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Amend/approve the minutes of the City Council Regular Meeting of October 21, 2014, and the Special Meeting (Executive Session) of November 25, 2014.
|
||||||||||
5. | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public Participation enables the public to address the Council about an item that is not on the agenda (or is listed under Possible Future Agenda Items). Comments relating to items that are on the agenda will be taken at the time that the item is discussed. If you wish to address the Council at tonight's meeting, please complete a comment card and submit it to the recording clerk as soon as possible. Your name will be called when it is your turn to speak. You may address the Council up to three times throughout the meeting, including comments made during Public Participation. Please limit your remarks to three minutes per item to allow everyone an opportunity to speak. At the discretion of the Chair, ten or more persons present at the meeting and wishing to speak may appoint a representative who may have no more than fifteen minutes to speak. |
|||||||||
6. |
PROCLAMATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS |
|||||||||
7. | APPOINTMENTS Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the City Council and to the general public that the City Council may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for the purpose of discussing or considering employment, assignment, appointment, promotion, demotion, dismissal, salaries, disciplining or resignation of a public officer, appointee, or employee of any public body...., pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(1). None |
|||||||||
8. | LIQUOR LICENSE PUBLIC HEARINGS None |
|||||||||
9. | CONSENT ITEMS All matters under Consent Agenda are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion approving the recommendations listed on the agenda. Unless otherwise indicated, expenditures approved by Council are budgeted items. |
|||||||||
A. | Consideration and Approval to Purchase: Thirty-Four (34) Panasonic CF-31 Toughbook Mobile Data Computers to be installed in patrol vehicles. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Approve the purchase contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bid from Creative Communications of Flagstaff, for the purchase of thirty-four (34) Panasonic CF-31 Toughbook Mobile Data Computers for the amount of $122,501.66, plus applicable taxes.
|
||||||||||
10. | ROUTINE ITEMS | |||||||||
A. |
Consideration and Approval of Intergovernmental Agreement: Agreement for the City of Flagstaff's Owner Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program staff to administer Coconino County's Owner Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program. |
|||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
B. | Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance/Resolution No. 2014-41: A resolution of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff authorizing signatures for checks and payment vouchers (Authority to Sign Checks) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2014-41 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2014-41 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-41 |
||||||||||
C. | Consideration and Agreement: Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Arizona Department of Revenue for Transaction Privilege (Sales) Tax Licensing through December 31, 2015. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
D. | Consideration and Approval of Agreement: Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Arizona Department of Revenue for Transaction Privilege (Sales) Tax Auditing through December 31, 2015 (IGA for Sales Tax Auditing) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
E. | Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-39 and Ordinance No. 2014-32: Amending the Employee Handbook of Regulations and Flagstaff City Code by adopting those amendments as shown in "2014 Addendum 6 of the Employee Handbook of Regulations" relating to the Employee Advisory Committee (Employee Advisory Committee election terms; updates) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
At the Council Meeting of December 16, 2014
1) Read Resolution No. 2014-39 by title only 2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2014-39 (if approved above) 3) Read Ordinance No. 2014-32 for the first time by title only 4) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-32 for the first time by title only (if approved above) At the Council Meeting of January 6, 2015 5) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-39 (declaring public record) 6) Read Ordinance No. 2014-32 for the final time by title only 7) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-32 by title only (if approved above) 8) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-32 |
||||||||||
F. | Consideration and Approval of Two (2) Year Lease Amendments: United States Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) for Buildings 3, 4 and 5 (Amendment of U.S.G.S. Leases) (Approve Two (2) Year Amendments to Building Leases with U.S.G.S.) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Approve the amendment of the leases with the United States Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) represented by the Government Services Administration (GSA) for an additional two (2) years.
|
||||||||||
RECESS
6:00 P.M. MEETING RECONVENE |
||||||||||
NOTICE OF OPTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the City Council and to the general public that, at this regular meeting, the City Council may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for legal advice and discussion with the City’s attorneys for legal advice on any item listed on the following agenda, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3).
|
||||||||||
11. | ROLL CALL
|
|||||||||
12. | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION | |||||||||
13. | CARRY OVER ITEMS FROM THE 4:00 P.M. AGENDA |
|||||||||
14. | PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS | |||||||||
A. |
Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-34: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff amending the Flagstaff City Code, Title 3, Business Regulations, Chapter 3-05, Privilege Taxes, levying a local transaction privilege tax increase of 33 cents per $100 of taxable gross income (sales) as approved by the majority of the qualified electors of the city voting in the November 4, 2014 General Election, Proposition 406, “Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative”; providing for use of tax revenues, providing for penalties, repeal of conflicting ordinances, severability, authority for clerical corrections, and establishing an effective date (Transaction Privilege Tax - Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative) |
|||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
At the Council Meeting of December 16, 2014
1) Hold public hearing 2) Read Ordinance No. 2014-34 by title only 3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-34 by title only (if approved above) At the Council Meeting of January 6, 2015 4) Read Ordinance No. 2014-34 for the final time by title only 5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-34 by title only (if approved above) 6) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-34 |
||||||||||
15. | REGULAR AGENDA | |||||
A. | Consideration of Construction Contract Change Order #1: Flagstaff Urban Trail System (FUTS) Signage Project (Approve Change Order #1 to FUTS Signage Project contract) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
|
||||||
B. | Draft 2015 City of Flagstaff State & Federal Legislative Priorities Agenda | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Review and discuss projects and positions proposed as legislative priorities for the City in 2015 covering regional, state and federal issues that provide guidance to City staff and contracted lobbyists representing the City in regional meetings, in state forums involving the Governor, state agencies or before the State Legislature, Congress and federal agencies.
|
||||||
C. | Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-43: A resolution of the Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona, ordering questions be submitted to the qualified electors of the City with respect to amendments to the Flagstaff City Charter, said questions to be submitted at a City Special Election to be held on May 19, 2015 (Calling a Special Election and approving ballot language for Charter amendments) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2014-43 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2014-43 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-43 |
||||||
16. | DISCUSSION ITEMS |
|||||
A. |
Discussion: Walnut Canyon Study boundary discussion
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
The intent of the December 16, 2014 presentation is to provide Council with four boundary options and receive direction regarding which boundary to include in the City’s resolution supporting option two as outlined in the Walnut Canyon Special Study. A draft resolution is included in the attachment wherein a boundary option can be inserted to reflect the Council’s direction.
|
||||||
B. | Discussion: Student Housing Symposium After Action Report | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Review and provide direction on possible action items. Once the list is agreed upon, then formalize in the form of a policy resolution.
|
||||||
C. | Discussion: Potential provision of City owned land on McMillan Mesa (the area currently used for materials storage) to the Arizona Department of Veteran's Services for the construction and operation of a Veteran's Facility. (Use of City land for a Veteran's home) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Provide staff with guidance regarding the potential provision of City owned land for the development of a Veterans Home operated by the Arizona Department of Veterans Services.
|
||||||
17. | POSSIBLE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Verbal comments from the public on any item under this section must be given during Public Participation near the beginning of the meeting. Written comments may be submitted to the City Clerk. After discussion and upon agreement of three members of the Council, an item will be moved to a regularly-scheduled Council meeting. None |
|||||
18. | INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS FROM COUNCIL AND STAFF, REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS | |||||
19. | ADJOURNMENT |
|||||
|
4.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Minutes: City Council Regular Meeting of October 21, 2014, and the Special Meeting (Executive Session) of November 25, 2014. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Amend/approve the minutes of the City Council Regular Meeting of October 21, 2014, and the Special Meeting (Executive Session) of November 25, 2014.
|
|||||
INFORMATION | |||||
Attached are copies of the minutes of the City Council Regular Meeting of October 21, 2014, and the Special Meeting (Executive Session) of November 25, 2014. | |||||
Attachments: | 10.21.2014.CCRM.Minutes | ||||
11.25.2014.CCSMES.Minutes | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
9.A.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval to Purchase: Thirty-Four (34) Panasonic CF-31 Toughbook Mobile Data Computers to be installed in patrol vehicles. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve the purchase contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bid from Creative Communications of Flagstaff, for the purchase of thirty-four (34) Panasonic CF-31 Toughbook Mobile Data Computers for the amount of $122,501.66, plus applicable taxes.
|
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The Flagstaff Police Department currently has Mobile Data Computers (MDC) and are utilizing Windows XP as the operating system. On April 8, 2014 Microsoft announced the end of support for the Windows XP operating system. All MDC's in the Police Department's inventory are still operating on Windows XP which means they are not being supported by Microsoft and running on Windows XP. Thankfully, our wireless carrier has agreed to support our MDC's using the Windows XP operating system until January of 2015. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
In anticipation of the elimination of technical, operating support, replacement of the Mobile Data Computers are already budgeted $100,000 in the Police Communications Equipment (001-04-061-0221-2-4303) and $30,000 in the Computer Equipment (001-04-061-0221-2-4301) accounts. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
Effective governance | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
None. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Forego purchase of the Mobile Data Computers at this time. One unknown is how long the MDC's will be supported by our wireless carrier and Microsoft support to include security updates and technical support. By accepting this option the City may experience additional downtime, additional overtime for officers and may potentially affect the City's ability to provide responsiveness and customer service to the community. | |||||
Background/History: | |||||
A Mobile Data Computer (MDC) is a computerized device used by the police officers to communicate with our Communications Center which provides for more efficiency and effectiveness in our community. The MDC is also equipped with a GPS locator to allow dispatch to identify the location of the patrol vehicle. The MDC allows law enforcement officers the ability to have access to the Flagstaff Police Department calls for service, I/Leads Records Management database system along with the DMV files, ACJIS, and NCIC (FBI National Crime Information Center). The MDC's are also used by officers to type reports in the field. The Flagstaff Police Department purchased the Panasonic CF-29 Toughbooks over a period of five to seven years ago with replacement purchases as needed. FPD has 34 working units which are used on a 24/7 basis. MDC's are utilizing Windows XP as the operating system. On April 8, 2014 Microsoft announced the end of support for the Windows XP operating system. All MDC's in the Police Department's inventory are still operating on Windows XP which means they are not being supported by Microsoft while running on Windows XP. Thankfully, our wireless carrier agreed to support our MDC’s using the windows XP operating system until January of 2015. The Flagstaff Police Department has conducted extensive research and tested various models of MDC's that would meet the demands of the police force. We tested models in the patrol field and received feedback from the officers. Below are the top three units that met our needs; Panasonic laptop CF31-$3602.99 per unit use existing docking station (no extra cost incurred); GETAC V110 convertible tablet $4,066.00 per unit plus new docking station needed; Dell Latitude Rugged Extreme convertible (no internal GPS or Wi-Fi)- $5182.00 per unit plus new docking station needed. On November 14, 2014 staff advertised an Invitation for Bids (IFB) solicitation for procuring thirty-four (34) police MDC laptop toughbooks. A total of four (4) vendors submitted seven (7) bids on November 24, 2014. Staff reviewed all bids and determined Creative Communications of Flagstaff to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Unit price bid is $3,602.99, and staff is recommending to purchase thirty-four (34) MDC units for a total of $122,501.66. During the evaluation period we researched the idea of having an integrated system that would allow for a camera, electronic citation program and electronic signature pad to allow for the violator to sign citations on scene. Unfortunately, we were unsuccessful in finding a unit that met the above options while also keeping GPS, which is an absolute necessity. We located systems which had the overall capability but we would have to give up the GPS locater option. We conducted a survey on agencies and found most of the agencies using an electronic citation program are using separate devices; an MDC and a handheld e-citation unit. Those agencies predominately using a tablet such as the Department of Public Safety do not use the tablet for report writing on the scale that FPD would. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The purchases being recommended were reviewed with extensive research and testing by officers in the field. The Police Department currently has $130,000 budgeted in FY 15 to purchase these MDC's. We have funds in this account to purchase equipment for the vehicle in the current budget to help offset the extra $2695.02. Our recommendation is to purchase the Panasonic CF-31 laptops with the total cost including tax at $132,695.02 to ensure connectivity and operational responsiveness between our patrol officers and the communications center. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The MDC's will have the GPS locater which allows the officer to visually have a map of the city, enabling quicker response and allowing dispatch to track the location of the officers. The officers in the field will have access to run data and write reports for citizens involved in incidents. This MDC will be used as a tool in the future for electronic citations as well. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
None. | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Forego purchase of the MDC's at this time. The Police Department has budgeted for this purchase with the knowledge of Windows XP not being supported. The current MDC's are outdated and operating at less than ideal condition for their intended purpose. | |||||
Attachments: | Bid Tab 2015-46 | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.A.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Intergovernmental Agreement: Agreement for the City of Flagstaff's Owner Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program staff to administer Coconino County's Owner Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program. |
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
|
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The purpose of the IGA is to allow Coconino County Community Services and the City of Flagstaff Housing Section to combine the administration of their respective OOHR program in order to achieve a greater degree of efficiency, leveraging of resources, program stability and better service to regional customers. Subsidiary Decisions Points: None |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There no financial impacts to City General Funds. The City of Flagstaff OOHR Program has historically utilized entitlement Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), as well as HOME and Housing Trust Funds when awarded through the Arizona Department of Housing's (ADOH) competitive grant process. CDBG allocations in recent years have been around $100,000 and HOME awards have been around $330,000. The County OOHR Program has historically utilized CDBG funding from ADOH and HOME and Housing Trust Funds when awarded through the ADOH competitive process. In FY 2011 HOME funding was awarded at $330,000. In FY 2010 State CDBG funding amounted to $303,586. The County currently has a pending award with the State for 2014/2015 funding for rehabilitation. Grant funding will be released in early 2015, pending the approval of this agreement. The proposed OOHR administrative merger will not impact compliance of either agency with any funding source, however it is intended to streamline both programs and create efficiencies. The merger will only combine administration of the two programs. Administration will be performed by the City, and the City will be a sub-recipient to the County. The resulting rehabilitation projects will be directly tied to the various funding requirements. City grant funding will be spent on City projects and County grant funding will be spent on County projects. This proposed structure will not impact compliance issues for either agency with the funding sources. |
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
5. Retain, expand, and diversify economic base 11. Effective governance. Regional Plan Goals Goal NH.4. All housing is safe and sanitary. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
No previous Council Decisions have been made regarding this IGA. |
|||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve the IGA and combine the administration of the two OOHR programs. 2) Not approve the IGA and continue only the administration of the City's OOHR Program. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
OOHR services are designed to address health and safety housing needs of low and moderate income households (currently a maximum of $47,600 for a household of four) who reside in their homes. Both the City and County operate an OOHR Program. The programs are substantially the same, but serve different respective geographical areas. Both programs utilize CDBG, HOME and Housing Trust funds to provide services, leading to identical oversight regulation. Combining the programs under one staff position, with the City serving as the sub-recipient, will lead to administrative efficiencies and program stability for both programs. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The City has the administrative framework and staffing in place to effectively manage the merger of the two programs. The City OOHR program has been successfully operating for over 15 years. The City's Housing Rehabilitation Specialist is well versed in and familiar with all grant compliance regulations required for the administration of both programs. Coconino County has not had funding for any housing programs since 2011 and currently does not have the funds to employ and support a housing program. Partnering with the City will provide the County with the administrative backbone that will enable them to utilize grant funds for this purpose when awarded. In turn, the addition of the administration of the County OOHR program will provide funding stabilization to the Housing Rehabilitation Specialist, ensuring continuity in program delivery. The County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the IGA on November 18, 2014. If approved by the City the IGA will allow the City to partner with Coconino County and will lead to administrative efficiencies and program stability for both programs. An Administration Plan is being developed to outline day to day operations of the program including reporting, outreach, marketing, etc. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
The City of Flagstaff Housing Rehabilitation Specialist position is grant funded. The merger of the programs will allow for greater program stability, as the City will bill the County (on a reimbursement basis) for the administration of the County rehabilitation projects. The County will serve as the pass through agency for grant funds, and the City will become the sub-recipient. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Currently, residents interested in the Program must obtain application materials from the agency that serves their area (City of Flagstaff residents come to the City, County resident go to the County). Combining administration of OOHR programs will allow for better customer service through cross-pollination and applications for both programs being available at both locations, with all clients being served by the same Housing Rehabilitation Specialist. The merger will streamline the application process and provide a greater ability to leverage additional funding sources such as money from utility companies for new appliances, etc. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Collaborate The City has worked closely with the County in creating a program that will best serve the public. |
|||||
Attachments: | IGA - OOHR Administration | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance/Resolution No. 2014-41: A resolution of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff authorizing signatures for checks and payment vouchers (Authority to Sign Checks) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2014-41 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2014-41 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-41 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
When the City experiences a change in staff related to current authorized signers for checks and payment vouchers, the City's bank requires a resolution to update the authorized signers. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: Effective governance REGIONAL PLAN: None. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
The last change to the authorize signers was Resolution 2012-27 at the July 17, 2012 meeting. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
Recently we experienced a change to three positions that are authorized to sign checks and payment vouchers on behalf of the City. This resolution give appropriate authority for our commercial banks to process revised signatory cards. The first change comes from the appointment of Celia Barotz as the Vice Mayor. The second change comes from the resignation of the City Manager Kevin Burke. We may come back to Council when the new City Manager is appointed and do not feel having one less signatory during this time will hinder payment processing. The third change comes with the retirement of Court Magistrate Charlotte Beyal. This full time position was not re-filled so we will not be adding anyone else at this time. The Mayor, Vice-Mayor, City Manager, Deputy City Managers, and the Management Services Director are authorized signatories for the City of Flagstaff. Any one member of these designated positions is authorized to sign checks up to $100,000 and any check over $100,000 requires two signatures. For the Court, the Presiding Magistrate has the authority to sign and appoint additional signers. Historically this has included the Magistrates, the Court Administrator, and the Deputy Court Administrators. Any one member of these designated positions is authorized to sign checks up to $10,000 and any check over $10,000 requires two signatures. The Court's authority is to issue bond refund checks. For the Flagstaff Housing Authority, the Executive Director, Maintenance Director, Director of Section 8, and Finance Director are authorized signatories for the Flagstaff Housing Authority bank accounts. All checks require two signatures. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Authority for signing checks must be in place with those in the organization that have the depth of understanding needed to understand the payment being processed, however they are far enough removed from the accounts payable/purchasing process to maintain adequate internal control. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The community is best served through the application of internal controls that dictate the separation of duties to minimize the possibility of any fund misappropriation. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform |
|||||
Attachments: | Resolution 2014-41 | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.C.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Agreement: Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Arizona Department of Revenue for Transaction Privilege (Sales) Tax Licensing through December 31, 2015. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
|
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
On October 7, 2014, the Arizona Department of Revenue officially postponed the implementation of the single point of administration provisions of Transaction Privilege Tax (TPT) Simplification for one additional year, until January 1, 2016. The original legislation called for the takeover of all TPT licensing activities by the state on January 1, 2015. With the postponement, by law, the City of Flagstaff is unable to issue TPT licenses effective January 1, 2015. This IGA gives the City the ability to issue TPT licenses for an additional year, through December 31, 2015. Subsidiary Decisions Points: None. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
If the City chooses to not approve the IGA and not have the authority to issue TPT Licenses, the City would lose approximately $30,000 in uncollected license fees. In addition, the City may not receive the sales tax revenues from unlicensed businesses that do not remit taxes to the City. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Effective governance.
|
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
No. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve the agreement and issue TPT licenses through December 31, 2015. The Arizona Department of Revenue will assume TPT license issuance on behalf of the City beginning January 1, 2016. 2) Do not approve the agreement and do not issue TPT licenses through December 31, 2015. The Arizona Department of Revenue will assume TPT license issuance on behalf of the City beginning January 1, 2016. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
In May, 2012, Governor Jan Brewer issued Executive Order 2012-01 calling for the creation of a Transaction Privilege Tax Simplification Task Force. The Task Force was charged with: ...reviewing, identifying, or developing proposals that would simplify the TPT code and TPT practice in order to alleviate taxpayer frustration, improve compliance, and avoid redundancies. Specific areas of focus shall include, but not be limited to: a. options for a single point administration to avoid redundancies; b. identification of differences between state statute and the Model City Tax Code; and c. standardization of definitions of taxable transactions between taxing authorities. All three areas noted above were significantly modified by state legislation since the completion of the Task Force, as noted below. a. options for a single point administration to avoid redundancies; Original legislation called for the single point administration changeover to take place on January 1, 2015. The postponement by the Arizona Department of Revenue provision has moved the date to January 1, 2016. b. identification of differences between state statute and the Model City Tax Code; and c. standardization of definitions of taxable transactions between taxing authorities. These two areas have been modified by multiple updates to the Model City Tax Code and the State of Arizona tax codes over the past few years. More modifications are expected in the future as the Cities and State continue to work through the simplification process. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
If the City chooses to not approve the IGA with the Arizona Department of Revenue, the City will not have the authority to issue TPT licenses, resulting in approximately $30,000 in uncollected license fees. In addition, the City may not receive the sales tax revenues from unlicensed businesses that do no remit taxes to the City. | |||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
None. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform |
|||||
Attachments: | IGA | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.D.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Agreement: Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Arizona Department of Revenue for Transaction Privilege (Sales) Tax Auditing through December 31, 2015 (IGA for Sales Tax Auditing) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
|
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
A recent state law requires the Arizona Department of Revenue (DOR) to takeover local transaction privilege tax administration, auditing and collection on behalf of cities. On October 7, 2014, DOR officially postponed the implementation of the single point of administration provisions of Transaction Privilege Tax (TPT) Simplification for one additional year, until January 1, 2016. Specifically, the City will continue to issue local TPT licenses for now. However, ADOR did not postpone and will be responsible for local tax auditing effective January 1, 2015, with the exception that the City may continue to audit businesses which are only engaging in business within the City ("single taxpayers"). State law requires that DOR and the City enter into an intergovernmental agreement regarding their respective responsibilities. The proposed Modification merely tracks the language of state law, and is considered to be an interim agreement. The Modification enables the City to continue to audit single taxpayers. A comprehensive and permanent IGA with DOR is being negotiated by municipal representatives and DOR and will be brought to Council before December 31, 2015. The Modification modifies an existing agreement with DOR related to sharing of taxpayer audit information. DOR is in the process of locating the earlier agreement, it is possible City never updated its 1990 IGA with DOR, in which case DOR may be requesting the City also adopt a more recent form of IGA, along with the Modification. Subsidiary Decisions Points: None. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
If the City chooses to not approve the IGA and not have the authority to audit taxpayers, the City could lose revenues gained from the auditing function. In addition, the City will not be able to educate taxpayers on correcting mistakes that led to the audit, compounding the loss of revenues by taxpayers filing incorrect returns. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Effective governance.
|
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
No. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve the agreement and audit taxpayers through December 31, 2015. The Arizona Department of Revenue and the City of Flagstaff will coordinate audits beginning January 1, 2016. 2) Do not approve the agreement and do not audit taxpayers through December 31, 2015. The Arizona Department of Revenue and the City of Flagstaff will coordinate audits beginning January 1, 2016. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
In May, 2012, Governor Jan Brewer issued Executive Order 2012-01 calling for the creation of a Transaction Privilege Tax Simplification Task Force. The Task Force was charged with: ...reviewing, identifying, or developing proposals that would simplify the TPT code and TPT practice in order to alleviate taxpayer frustration, improve compliance, and avoid redundancies. Specific areas of focus shall include, but not be limited to: a. options for a single point administration to avoid redundancies; b. identification of differences between state statute and the Model City Tax Code; and c. standardization of definitions of taxable transactions between taxing authorities. All three areas noted above were significantly modified by state legislation since the completion of the Task Force, as noted below. a. options for a single point administration to avoid redundancies; Original legislation called for the single point administration changeover to take place on January 1, 2015. The postponement by the Arizona Department of Revenue provision has moved the date to January 1, 2016. b. identification of differences between state statute and the Model City Tax Code; and c. standardization of definitions of taxable transactions between taxing authorities. These two areas have been modified by multiple updates to the Model City Tax Code and the State of Arizona tax codes over the past few years. More modifications are expected in the future as the Cities and State continue to work through the simplification process. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
If the City chooses to not approve the IGA with the Arizona Department of Revenue, the City will not have the authority to audit taxpayers, resulting in a loss of revenues. In addition, the City will not be able to educate taxpayers on correcting mistakes that led to the audit, compounding the loss of revenues by taxpayers filing incorrect returns. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
None. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Attachments: | Modification of ADOR IGA | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.E.
| |||||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-39 and Ordinance No. 2014-32: Amending the Employee Handbook of Regulations and Flagstaff City Code by adopting those amendments as shown in "2014 Addendum 6 of the Employee Handbook of Regulations" relating to the Employee Advisory Committee (Employee Advisory Committee election terms; updates) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
At the Council Meeting of December 16, 2014
1) Read Resolution No. 2014-39 by title only 2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2014-39 (if approved above) 3) Read Ordinance No. 2014-32 for the first time by title only 4) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-32 for the first time by title only (if approved above) At the Council Meeting of January 6, 2015 5) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-39 (declaring public record) 6) Read Ordinance No. 2014-32 for the final time by title only 7) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-32 by title only (if approved above) 8) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-32 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The amendments to the Employee Handbook of Regulations and Flagstaff City Code relating to the Employee Advisory Committee include:
|
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Effective governance. | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
No. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Option 1: Support the changes requested by the Employee Advisory Committee. Option 2: Support some of the changes recommended by the Employee Advisory Committee. Option 3: Request other changes to be incorporated into the ordinance. Option 4: Maintain the current ordinance as written and do not adopt any changes. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Employee Advisory Committee has been in existence since February, 1992, and has served the organization and its employees for 22 years. Since its inception, there have been numerous changes in the City’s organizational structure and in the structure of the Committee. The Employee Advisory Committee has been an organizational tool used in bringing forward issues of concern and interest to City of Flagstaff employees and has forged a collaborative working relationship with City Divisions and management staff. The City of Flagstaff reorganized its organizational structure in July 2013, prompting the Employee Advisory Committee to review its established structure. In an effort to encourage participation, the Employee Advisory Committee is recommending a reduced term and are aligning it closely with the fiscal year to eliminate changing of EAC co-chairs in the middle of the budget process. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The new structure and provisions for the Employee Advisory Committee has been reviewed, approved and recommended by the current Employee Advisory Committee who wishes to make these changes based on current organizational structure. The City of Flagstaff’s Leadership Team has also reviewed the proposed changes as part of the agenda review process. The new provisions can be summarized as follows:
|
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform. | |||||
Attachments: | Res. 2014-39 | ||||
Addendum 6 | |||||
Ordinance 2014-32 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.F.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Two (2) Year Lease Amendments: United States Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) for Buildings 3, 4 and 5 (Amendment of U.S.G.S. Leases) (Approve Two (2) Year Amendments to Building Leases with U.S.G.S.) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve the amendment of the leases with the United States Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) represented by the Government Services Administration (GSA) for an additional two (2) years.
|
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The GSA wishes to amend their leases with the City of Flagstaff for an additional two (2) year period with the same terms and conditions. The terms and conditions include rent escalation clauses so the rents do continue to increase and generate additional revenue during that period. The GSA has indicated their intention to release a future solicitation that would, should the City respond and be successful, lead to the potential renovation and expansion of the U.S.G.S. campus. These lease amendments will provide the time necessary to have the GSA release their solicitation and for the City to respond. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The amendment of the leases will allow the continuation of lease revenues and associated escalations. The lease revenue from Building 3 is over $330,000. The lease revenue from Buildings 4-5 is over $550,000 annually. In addition to the direct lease revenue generated, the amendment of the leases will allow for a maintained relationship with U.S.G.S. that will preserve over 200 jobs which have an annual payroll value of over $13,000,000. Failure to amend the leases could impact future U.S.G.S. use or expansion of the facilities and will result in significant lost revenue. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 5. Retain, expand, and diversify economic base 11. Effective governance |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
There has been a long relationship between the City of Flagstaff and the U.S.G.S.. Numerous Council actions and a bond question have defined the specific and unique nature of the lease and the relationship. Two examples include the approval of Resolution 2011-16 in March of 2011 which authorizes the City to submit a bid response to the GSA to continue providing leased space and to potentially renovate and construct additional space specific to the U.S.G.S.; and Question Number 101 from the General Election in 2004 in which the voters authorized the construction and renovation of the facilities for USGS. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve the amendment of the leases for two (2) years. This will continue the leases under the current terms and conditions until a new Federal process has been completed and longer term leases can be executed with potential for expansion and redevelopment. 2) Not approve the amendment of the leases which will result in non-payment by the GSA. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The City of Flagstaff has leased buildings to the U.S.G.S. since the 1960s. These buildings both generate revenue for the City of Flagstaff and the location of the U.S.G.S. in Flagstaff provides skilled employment opportunities. Over the decades there have been numerous lease extensions, amendments, master plans, and renovations. This requested amendment of the leases will allow the GSA to complete a new procurement process that will lead, according to our correspondence, to new long term leases for the campus. | |||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The two (2) year lease amendments allow the time necessary for the process required for the GSA to release a new procurement solicitation. The City could then respond to the solicitation in order to maintain and enhance the existing unique relationship with the U.S.G.S. The leases expire December 31st so the amendment is time sensitive. Should the leases expire they will enter a holdover situation which will not allow for continued lease payment and could damage the current and future relationship. Having the leases in place is both a revenue generator and a source of jobs. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The amendment of the leases provides jobs and revenue and maintains the relationship between the City and U.S.G.S. which has an economic and employment benefit long term. There is also a value to the synergy between the U.S.G.S., NAU and other science based institutions which provide a strong scientific component to assist in diversifying the economy. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform |
|||||
Attachments: | Lease amendment 4-5 | ||||
Lease amendment 3 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-34: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff amending the Flagstaff City Code, Title 3, Business Regulations, Chapter 3-05, Privilege Taxes, levying a local transaction privilege tax increase of 33 cents per $100 of taxable gross income (sales) as approved by the majority of the qualified electors of the city voting in the November 4, 2014 General Election, Proposition 406, “Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative”; providing for use of tax revenues, providing for penalties, repeal of conflicting ordinances, severability, authority for clerical corrections, and establishing an effective date (Transaction Privilege Tax - Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative) |
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
At the Council Meeting of December 16, 2014
1) Hold public hearing 2) Read Ordinance No. 2014-34 by title only 3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-34 by title only (if approved above) At the Council Meeting of January 6, 2015 4) Read Ordinance No. 2014-34 for the final time by title only 5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-34 by title only (if approved above) 6) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-34 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Subsidiary Decisions Points: The City Charter provides that a majority of the qualified electors in the City voting in a regularly scheduled General Election shall approve any transaction privilege tax (sales tax) increase. This action will amend the City Tax Code to conform with the voter approved sales tax increase. The City has duly posted notice of the tax increase on the City website, published notice in the local paper, and is holding a public hearing in accord with Arizona statutes relating to municipal tax code changes generally. Arizona Department of Revenue (ADOR) has been advised of the tax increase and updated the official copy of the Model City Tax Code on its website. In order to improve transparency concerning how local tax revenues are used, the ordinance will also update the City Tax Code to recite voter restrictions on use of tax revenues; this is a cleanup item. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The voter approved ballot question increases the City sales tax 1/3 of one cent for a term of 20 years. This sales tax increase is estimated to generate $5.3 million per year to fund road repairs and street safety improvements. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1. Repair Replace maintain infrastructure (streets & utilities) 5. Retain, expand, and diversify economic base REGIONAL PLAN: Goal T.1. Improve mobility and access throughout the region. Policy T.1.7. Coordinate transportation and other public infrastructure investments efficiently to achieve land use and economic goals. Goal T.2 Improve transportation safety and efficiency for all modes. Policy T.2.1. Design infrastructure to provide safe and efficient movement of vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
City Council unanimously adopted the ballot language (Resolution 2014-28) for Question 406 - Road Repair and Street Safety on July 1, 2014. |
|||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
This action is procedural only, and will amend the City Tax Code to conform with the voter approved sales tax increase effective January 1, 2015. If the ordinance is not approved the tax will be levied per voter mandate; however ADOR collection may be delayed or jeopardized. ADOR is responsible for all local tax collection as of January 1, 2016. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform Consult Empower |
|||||
Attachments: | Ord. 2014-34 | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
15.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Consideration of Construction Contract Change Order #1: Flagstaff Urban Trail System (FUTS) Signage Project (Approve Change Order #1 to FUTS Signage Project contract) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Approving this change order will add an additional 80 signs to the contract and compensate the Contractor for additional quantities associated with excavating the post holes in rock and removal of existing signs. The change order also extends the contract by 60 calendar days for a new project completion date of May 5, 2015. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Financial Impact: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The project is funded from a federal Regional Trails Program (RTP) grant (65.2%) and city funds (34.8%). The grant funds have additional capacity and can absorb their share of $52,160. The City portion ($27,840) will come from the $50,000 set aside in FY2015 for Special Projects and Un-programmed Work line item. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
COUNCIL GOALS:
1. Repair Replace maintain infrastructure (streets & utilities) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yes, a Grant IGA with Arizona State Parks was approved on November 05, 2010; project was awarded September 16, 2014. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Background/History: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The K-signs added with this change order were not included in the original scope due to the estimated construction cost. The bid came in lower than the estimate so it was decided to ask Conco to give us a unit rate for the K-signs. Reviewing the bids the unit rate of $500 per sign is a competitive rate if K-signs were bid at a later date. Several weeks into the project it became apparent that the quantity for excavating the post holes in rock and existing sign removal was going to be significantly higher than in the bid. Given the difficult nature of determining if the post holes were in consolidated rock verses just cobble, the City and Contractor determined that a lump sum rate was appropriate. The Contractor will take full responsibility for any conditions encountered. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Key Considerations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This is a joint project between the Arizona State Parks and the City. This change order amount has been authorized by the Arizona State Parks as grant eligible. The Grant will pay for 65% of the change total project cost. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The estimated additional quantities and cost are:
The total cost of the above was negotiated for $95,000. The pending change order will use the $15,000 Contract allowance and $80,000 additional funds for a new contract total of $232,632. Budgeted funds will be from other FUTS projects (045-05-111-3305-5, 045-05-111-3018-5 and 040-05-111-3288-5) until the grant reimbursement occurs. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The K-signs are Adopt-A-FUTS signs. This will involve the community in litter control, light maintenance and informing the City of any safety issues. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Community Involvement: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Inform: A number of presentations were made to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committees, Parks and Recreation and Open Space Commissions, and several outside groups at the beginning of the design process. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Attachments: | Change Order #1 | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
15.B.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Draft 2015 City of Flagstaff State & Federal Legislative Priorities Agenda | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Review and discuss projects and positions proposed as legislative priorities for the City in 2015 covering regional, state and federal issues that provide guidance to City staff and contracted lobbyists representing the City in regional meetings, in state forums involving the Governor, state agencies or before the State Legislature, Congress and federal agencies.
|
|||||
INFORMATION | |||||
The attached State and Federal Legislative Priorities agenda provides the platform that establishes City of Flagstaff positions on issues, policies and projects of legislative interest. Materials that guide our lobbying and communication efforts and comprise the context for this legislative agenda include:
It should be noted that with this upcoming year, the League Resolutions Process has changed so there will not be the familiar process for future Resolutions.
In May, the League Executive Committee approved a change in the Resolutions process. The new system will allow for more in-depth research and greater involvement by elected officials and staff in developing the League’s Municipal Policy Statement. There will be five separate policy committees that will more thoroughly vet the issues. These policy committees will be chaired by a member of the Executive Committee, and will consist of elected officials and municipal staff. At times, other stakeholders may be invited to participate to provide needed expertise and perspective. League personnel will coordinate and staff these committees. |
|||||
Attachments: | COF Legis.Agenda-DF | ||||
2014 League Municipal Policy | |||||
2015 Adopted League Resolutions | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
15.C.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-43: A resolution of the Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona, ordering questions be submitted to the qualified electors of the City with respect to amendments to the Flagstaff City Charter, said questions to be submitted at a City Special Election to be held on May 19, 2015 (Calling a Special Election and approving ballot language for Charter amendments) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2014-43 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2014-43 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-43 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The attached resolution calls for a Special May 19, 2015, Election to submit proposed charter amendments to the voters. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
A Special Charter Amendment Election was budgeted in the 2014-2015 budget in the amount of $125,000. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
11. Effective governance | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
A resolution calling the election and approving the ballot language has not been discussed previously; however, there has been much discussion on this topic as outlined further in Background on page 2. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-43 2) Amend Resolution No. 2014-43 3) Direct staff to make changes to Resolution No. 2014-43 and bring back for final action on January 6, 2015 4) Not adopt Resolution No. 2014-43 thereby not calling an election |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The City Council initially gave direction to conduct a comprehensive review of the City Charter through a City Manager-appointed resident committee. This committee met 10 times during 2014 and presented their recommendations to the City Manager in October. On October 28 and November 25, 2014, the City Council discussed these questions and directed staff to bring back in resolution form those questions which were determined had sufficient public input due to the housekeeping changes that were either clarifying (e.g., personnel-related items determined by City Manager such as personnel hires or rules to conform to our Council-Manager form of government, etc.) or of a technical nature (e.g., specifying certain actions are determined by ordinance, etc.) to be placed on the ballot for May 19, 2015. The remaining questions which focus more broadly on policies that Council believes should continue to be further reviewed and discussed with the public, will be taken to the residents of Flagstaff for additional input and will be considered for placement on a future ballot by the Council at a later time for ultimate citizen decision. The questions have been placed in order as they appear in the City Charter. Additionally, on further review and direction by the Council, the first question regarding the Powers of the City was moved to the list that will have additional public review and discussion due to it being a more substantive change. Two questions were combined (Number 10) by the City Attorney as they related to the same topic. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower |
|||||
Attachments: | Res. 2014-43 | ||||
Questions | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
16.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Discussion: Walnut Canyon Study boundary discussion
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
The intent of the December 16, 2014 presentation is to provide Council with four boundary options and receive direction regarding which boundary to include in the City’s resolution supporting option two as outlined in the Walnut Canyon Special Study. A draft resolution is included in the attachment wherein a boundary option can be inserted to reflect the Council’s direction.
|
|||||
INFORMATION | |||||
CONNECTION TO COUNCIL GOALS AND/OR REGIONAL PLAN: Goal E&C.4. Integrate available science into policies governing the use and conservation of Flagstaff's natural resources. Goal E&C.5. Preserve dark skies as an unspoiled natural resource, basis for an important economic sector, and core element of community character. Goal E&C.6. Protect, restore, and improve ecosystem health and maintain native plant and animal community diversity across all land ownerships in the Flagstaff region. Goal E&C.7. Give special consideration to environmentally sensitive lands in the development design and review process (Policy E&C.8.2). Goal E&C.8. Maintain areas of natural quiet and reduce noise pollution. Goal E&C.9. Protect soils through conservation practices. Goal OS.1. The region has a system of open lands, such as undeveloped natural areas, wildlife corridors and habitat areas, trails, access to public lands, and greenways to support the natural environment that sustains our quality of life, cultural heritage, and ecosystem health. Goal LU.3. Continue to enhance the region's unique sense of place within the urban, suburban, and rural context (Policy LU.3.3). The Walnut Canyon Study was compiled by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and National Park Service (NPS) for purposes of determining how best to manage the USFS lands adjacent to the Walnut Canyon National Monument. The Study was authorized in Section 7201 of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, Public Law 111-11, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama on March 30, 2009. The text of Section 7201 requests that the Study aim to assess “the suitability and feasibility of designating all or part of the study area as an addition to Walnut Canyon National Monument, continued management of the study area by the Forest Service or any other designation or management option that would provide for (i) protection of resources within the study area; and (ii) continued access to, and use of, the study area by the public.” The final Walnut Canyon Study was released on January 31, 2014. On February 3, 2014, representatives from the U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service presented an update on the Study to the Flagstaff City Council and Coconino County Board of Supervisors. On February 25, 2014, staff presented a brief presentation to City Council highlighting the three protection options recommended in the Study. City Council requested an additional work session to discuss the options and impacts in greater detail. On June 10, 2014 staff from the City, US Forest Service and Flagstaff Area National Monuments provided an overview of the study and the three management options. The City Council requested staff to return with boundary alternatives in support of option two as outlined in the Walnut Canyon Special Study. On April 15, 2014, the Coconino Board of Supervisors adopted resolution 2014-17 regarding Walnut Canyon. The resolution supports option two in the Study, which provides the highest level of protection for Federal land that Congress can bestow and to continue existing access and uses. |
|||||
Attachments: | Walnut Canyon Presentation | ||||
Walnut Canyon Boundary Option Maps | |||||
Walnut Canyon Resolution Draft Example | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
16.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Discussion: Student Housing Symposium After Action Report | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Review and provide direction on possible action items. Once the list is agreed upon, then formalize in the form of a policy resolution.
|
|||||
INFORMATION | |||||
On October 27, 2014, the City of Flagstaff participated in a Student Housing Symposium initiated by County Supervisor Liz Archuleta and co-sponsored by the City, NAU, Friends of Flagstaff's Future and the Greater Flagstaff Chamber of Commerce. The 1-day symposium featured speakers from the City and University as well as area neighborhoods and representatives from Davis, California and Ft. Collins, Colorado. Many good ideas were generated. The City Manager compiled a list of possible action items from that symposium and has since circulated them among City Staff and shared them with NAU's Office of the President. Both parties agree that this is a workable list and something that could be supported moving forward. The purpose of this agenda item is to present the list to Council for review, additions and deletions. Once amended it is suggested that it be adopted in the form of a resolution so that it becomes a publicly stated policy direction for the City. Implementation is expected to be driven from the City manager's Office as the possible action items cut across many different divisions. CONNECTION TO COUNCIL GOALS AND/OR REGIONAL PLAN: REGIONAL PLAN: Policy LU12.8 Provide strong connections from Flagstaff Medical Campus to the Northern Arizona University campus via pedestrian paths, bicycle connections, streets and transit service. Goal LU.13.: Increase the variety of housing options and expand opportunities for employment and neighborhood shopping within all suburban neighborhoods. Goal NH.3: Make available a variety of housing types at different price points, to provide housing opportunities for all economic sectors. Goal ED.2: Support and encourage an excellent education system that promotes critical thinking and job training programs at all levels. |
|||||
Attachments: | Student Housing | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
16.C.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Discussion: Potential provision of City owned land on McMillan Mesa (the area currently used for materials storage) to the Arizona Department of Veteran's Services for the construction and operation of a Veteran's Facility. (Use of City land for a Veteran's home) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Provide staff with guidance regarding the potential provision of City owned land for the development of a Veterans Home operated by the Arizona Department of Veterans Services.
|
|||||
INFORMATION | |||||
Please see attached memo. It should be noted that the City Attorney's Office has not had an opportunity to fully evaluate the legality of this item. CONNECTION TO COUNCIL GOALS AND/OR REGIONAL PLAN: COUNCIL GOALS 5. Retain, expand, and diversify economic base 11. Effective governance |
|||||
Attachments: | Overview Memo | ||||
Illustration | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||