City Council - Regular Meeting

public process. Tonight, you will have the opportunity to address city council on both agenda and non-aggenda items. To get the process started, you must fill out a speaker request form in order to address the city council. Speaker request forms are located in the back of the council chambers. Please fill it out and deliver your completed form to the city clerk located to the right of the dis accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please contact a staff member if you need any assistance. Public comment on a non-aggenda item will take place during the citizen comment portion of the evening. These are items that don't appear on tonight's formal agenda. The mayor will call your name when it's time for you to speak. At that time, please approach the podium and tell us your name for the record. You'll have a maximum of 3 minutes. The timer is visible on the dis in front of the mayor. You may choose not to speak if other speakers have already covered your topic. Shouting, cheering, and loud noises will not be tolerated. Violators may be removed for disrupting the meeting. Buckeye City Council meetings are streamed live on Facebook and YouTube. Follow the city social media pages so you don't miss out on all that's happening in Buckeye. Thank you for coming to this meeting and being an active part of your city.

Okay, we will call this meeting to order. This is the city of Buckeye Council meeting for Tuesday, April 21st, 2026. We will get begin with the invocation led by Pastor Rick Wilds from the First Southern Baptist Church, followed by the pledge led by Council Member Tony Yoner. Can we pray? Father God, we do come before you tonight and we ask that you bless this time, Father, that you uh provide protection during this time, that you provide civility, that you give guidance and wisdom so that the decisions that are made will bring honor and glory to you, but also bring um success to our city. Please take care of our council and lead them in Jesus name. Amen.

Amen. Please join me in the pledgece to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Okay, thank you both. Uh, can we have a roll call, please? Council member Yoner here. Council member Barry here. Council member Hegestad here. Council member Beard present. Council member Hustus here. Vice Mayor Goodman present. Mayor Osborne

present. Thank you very much. Item number two is comments from the public. Members of the audience may comment on any non-aggenda item of interest. Do we have any speaker request cards? There are no speaker requests.

No speaker requests. On to item number three, awards, presentations, and proclamations. We do not have any for tonight. We'll go to consent agenda items and new business. Approval of items on the consent agenda. All items with an asterct are considered to be routine matters be enacted by one motion and vote of the city council. There be no separate discussion of these items unless a council member requests. The section may include the approval of minutes from previous meetings. Uh council member Hagestad has declared a conflict of interest on consent agenda item number 4A. Uh and this item we're going to pull off of the consent agenda and hear that uh separately. Uh, so council, uh, can I have a motion for the approval of the consent agenda items 4B through 4P?

Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make the consent agenda, um, approval of items 4B through 4P is in Paul. Second. I have a motion for approval and a second for items 4B through 4P. All in favor? I I I

and opposed. And uh that passes unanimous. Uh so agenda item 4A. I I don't know that we have um any request for comment on this. We just want to take this separate from uh from the rest of the consent agenda item and hear this separate so that we're respecting Councilman Hagstad's uh conflict of interest. Any questions from council on 4A? I'm seeing none. Council, what's your pleasure on agenda item 4 A? Mr. Mayor, I'd like to move to approve consent agenda item 4 A as drafted. Second. I have a motion for approval of 4 A and a second. All in favor say I. I.

I. I. And opposed. And 4 A passes unanimous. Thank you. uh agenda or let's see uh number five is public hearings non-consent and new business 5A council to take action to adopt the airport master plan and authorize staff to take all actions necessary to submit the airport master plan to the federal aviation administration for review and approval and Mr. Scott Gray, you are presenting.

Good evening, mayor and council. Again, I'm Scott Gray, your aviation director. Pleased to be with you tonight to talk about the airport master plan uh process and update. Tonight, I'm going to cover a few items uh tonight for you. Some of the airport related studies kind of pairing off of the workshop earlier this afternoon. uh the purpose of the airport master plan, recap of the previous uh concepts that were brought to council back in September of last year, some subsequent feedback that we received on that plan, revised recommendations for you to consider tonight, and then outlining the next steps on how the master plan will be completed. I want to touch upon uh three specific uh plans that are underway. the airport master plan, which is what we're talking about here tonight and possible action. This is an FAA required document, the airport long range concept, and I'll provide a little brief overview of that um later in the presentation. That is a city related document. And then lastly, what you heard at the workshop earlier today was the airport specific area plan. You heard enough about that earlier, so I won't spend much time on that one. Well, let's uh step back a moment and talk about the specifics of the airport master plan and its purpose. It is a 20-year capital development plan for the airport. It is an FAA guided document. It is a requirement for most public airports to complete every 10 years. It is used by the FAA to determine what's eligible for funding and decision making on which projects can move forward, etc. Um, it does help us determine the extent and type of development that'll happen over a 20-year planning period. It is focus on the approved

activity levels that the FAA approved last year. Um, so it's not a visionary document. It is a document based on calculated facts on the number of airplanes that we would likely see at our airport under the current conditions. graphic you see on the right hand side is the process that has been followed. Um it it's broken into four separate distinct areas and then there's a number of public outreach processes that took place in that. We are at the number four or at the far end there um at the tail end of the master plan and in looking for your concurrence this evening. Just a moment on the recap of the previous master plan. Um there were two public meetings that were conducted. One in September of 2024 and uh second one in May of 25 where our consultants provided uh information about all the analysis that was conducted and presented the graphic that you see there on the right. There was a council workshop in September where I presented a very similar presentation to the night of of what was recommended out of that um planning effort. and and briefly it was our current runway alignment 1735 was extended to 7,300 ft. There was a a proposed crosswind runway of 6,000 ft runway 1028 as you can see in the blue on the bottom part of that graphic and then the associated landside and hanger developments that associated with the amount of airplanes that we were projected to have based at the airport over that time. of the subsequent feedback that we received um after that presented to the council was from some adjacent property owners primarily concerned with the impacts of a crosswind runway on the adjacent uh development potential roadway alignment

issues that may have to take place depending upon the exact uh positioning of that crosswind runway. So its impacts to either Palivvery or Johnson Road. Um several additional concepts were also um floated to the city for development around the airport that there were questions from those developers about how that crosswind runway may act their uh potential development. And then lastly is um limited FAA support that we had throughout that process for the crosswind runway and potentially delaying the approval of the master plan if FAA wasn't supportive of that crosswind runway. That's the kind of the synopsis of the feedback that we received after we came to council. What we did at that point was u take a moment and and come up with some criteria. How do we maybe step back and re-evaluate what we did and what we've heard to number one better understand the concerns of those property owners and the developers. Um certainly be able to meet the FA requirements for an approved airport master plan. That is whole purpose of doing the master plan is so they will approve it so we will be eligible for uh federal funding for projects. um make sure that we can meet the forecast demand that was already approved. No changes to that. Um ultimately allow for expansion beyond the 20 years. Again, that's outside of the context of the master plan. It would be a long range vision. We expand beyond what the master plan shows. Then lastly is ensure that we're still aligned with Luke Air Force Base's mission and the airspace study that we've already completed.

The recommendations that came out of that re-evaluation was to remove the crosswind runway for the master plan, just the master plan at this point, and widen the existing runway that was um supported by the FAA to uh to make that change. Um construct the runway existing alignment still out to 7,300 feet. That hasn't changed. And then obviously because the crosswind runway is no longer shown is adjust any landside development um and based on that revised runway layout. So taxiway connections. This is what the the plan that you saw that was on the right hand side of that previous screen. This is the revised and it's it's a little more difficult to see this one. So on the next slides I'll just go through the planning phases and kind of show you those projects. the general overview. Um, but the master plan's broken into 20 years. It's fiveyear, fiveyear, and then the final 10 year. And they're called uh PALS or planning activity level. So you'll see in the information you may see years tied to some specific projects. Um, that's just for sequencing more than it is that specific year. It's based on an activity level. So, if we were to have more airplanes show up, we would need to build more apron in order to find a place for them to park. If more airplanes show up, they may need more hangers. So, um it's based on a triggering aspect, not just the fact that the year came and we should go build it. This is the first five years you can see in in this particular um phase. Let me see if I can get the Um you can see that there is red boxes around some of the hangar development

areas. Um the one on the right is is already moving forward. That one's under lease and they'll be starting that project here in the next month or so. Um the other dotted lines is some areas that we're um have got some expressed interest to build some larger hangers. And then you see in the blue in the middle, that's the expansion of the apron space for more parking to facilitate those developments. And then everything else that you see there is relevant to airside, which is um the runway extension that you can see um to the north, not not all the way to Yuma Road. That's an 800 foot city funded project. You can see that the runway widening is highlighted there. There's lighting projects that are are moving forward, taxiway pavement projects, taxiway lighting, things of that nature, all in that first phase. And those are associated with triggers that some of which we've already reached. Some of those projects we would like to move forward quickly as possible assuming there's funding available. Next five years um is really looking at um more of the landside development. can see the a acquisition of property. We already have a a easement on FAA although will accept easements. They do like to see fe simple ownership of of areas that would be encompassed by a runway protection zone. We would explore that and then there's some other miscellaneous projects there as well. Lastly is the last 10 years. You can see additional landside development including some additional hangers and apron space expansion etc. On the runway you'll see um a other extension which is in the red that is extending the runway to the 7,300 ft. That does require something to happen with Yuma Road. The curve that you see there is the same

curve that's been presented in the previous master plan in 1997 and 2008. It's also what's currently in the adopted transportation master plan. That doesn't necessarily mean that's exactly where it's going to go. There's still some more work that will be done um in conjunction with the PMO's office to determine if there's other alternatives. That could be tunneling, that could be a different location for that road, etc. Um so it's shown on there. is because that's in the adopted transportation master plan, but that will still get further analysis as we move forward with that runway. You can see other pavement work that's done there as well to finish out the 20-year planning period. Similar graphic to what you saw um last time is the funding associated with those various uh planning activity level periods. Um, and it's broken down into the funding source. You will see this particular 20-year plan is shown at about $136 million. Um, last time I was in front of you, September was about $180 million. There was obviously the crosswind runway and other components that were included there. We're down to $136 million. You can see that um 54 million of that is is eligible for federal grants. Again, it's it's eligible. Doesn't mean it will get funded. It just means it would be identified as being eligible if funding were to become available. State funds that would be from AOT of 5.4 million. So the federal projects are a little over 91% federal money and the 9% is split between state and city. And then state funded projects which are ADOT grants are 90% state 10% city. And so you add those matches up, you'll see them in the city line along with um

whatever projects would be city-only funded projects. So the runway shorter runway extension in that first term and then in the last term was a maintenance been proposed for quite some time. Then lastly is private that's all the private hanger development. So the project that's underway for the executive hangers would fall under that and any future larger hangers would fall under that and those are timed based on what the forecast proposed the amount of hanger space that was needed.

Before we go off of this slide, what is the uh in 25 to 29 the 8.4 million uh city So uh approximately 6.3 million of that is for the 800 foot runway extension to the north. And then the balance of that would be um balance of that would be projects that would have grant matches. So that would be what was listed on the planning activity level number one which would be uh lighting drainage studies tower sighting um design work for the extension tower designway rehabilitation apron construction things would be grant-f funed projects that balance of that would match those other grants.

Okay. Thank you. And then same as I mentioned the larger number for the long term was because there was a a city only $5.4 million post. It's shown as being city only. There is a possibility there might be grant funds. One thing I did want to mention here, these are certainly only cost estimates at this point and that this um funding strategy is currently not included in the city's capital improvement program andor budget. Um and it it's not reflected at this time. So, if we were to move forward with the adoption of this, we would work closely with the finance department to see about having these projects added into the capital improvement program, assuming there's appropriate funding left or our city match or city funded only.

Is does that include the 6.3 million for the 800 foot extension? I thought that was uh I thought that was included in our CIP in the next project is there. There are a couple of the projects u mayor that are included in the current but not all of them that are listed that I showed you in those three slides. They're not all already morphed into our current capital improvement. Okay. We'll have to update that.

The next steps on the airport master plan um is to finalize the report based on tonight's direction from council. submit that to the FAA for review and approval. Um the other studies that I mentioned, these are the next steps on that primarily focused on the airport long range concept and that that is a city document. We will be engaging in additional analysis on the development options beyond the master plan. So that will look at different fleet mixes. So the master plan fleet mix is primarily general aviation and we extend foot on the runway. We may see additional corporate type airplanes be able to use it because the runway is longer. It's a safer environment for them. We'll go beyond that in the long range plan and look at um element options that were already looked at and as well as others to see what opportunities we have beyond the 20-year planning period. We are going to certainly do additional stakeholder outreach, public meetings, council workshop. We are doing a lot of coordination with the airport specific area plan team as well to get some synergy of those efforts and obviously bring that back to council for their consideration. The timing is um for the council consideration is we're looking at July 7th meeting I think is the last one before the summer break. If we can get all of this information condensed into this period of time and all the necessary stakeholder outreach to uh bring back some information and then the specific area plan again which you had all the details in in today's workshop that has a slightly different timeline but these two plans will feed into that study for making decisions about land use.

With that, uh, mayor, councel, um, staff recommendation tonight is for the council to take action adopting the airport master plan recommendations, directing staff to incorporate those recommendations into the master plan report and submit it to the FAA for their duration. Happy to answer any questions. Okay. Uh, questions from council. Vice Mayor. Yeah, Scott, you had mentioned the FAA had concerns with the crosswind runway. What were those?

Um when we did the um Vice Mayor um when we did the first part of the analysis in the alternatives analysis, one of the first alternatives was to widen the runway and then there were four alternatives for locations of that crosswind runway. that first alternative was added based on the FAA's initial um direction from them was they weren't sure they at this time they supported that crosswalk. That said doesn't mean that won't change. It just means under the current conditions under the current forecasted type of activity they were questioning the need for that. So their recommendation which comes out of uh one of the FA guidance documents was to widen the existing run which was now included in these recommendations was to do that. If the crosswind were to come back under the long range analysis, um then that's something that would have to move forward with or without their blessing, make decisions based on a city-f funded project. Would the FAA fund that project because we have a change in fleet mix that would then support that need, etc., etc. So, that will come later on. We're supposed to do an airport master plan every 10 years. So the previous one was done in 2008, a little behind the curve, but I think we're ahead of our forecast already activity. So we'll likely be doing another master plan or at least what they call a mini master plan is updating the forecast and the fleet mix probably in a five-year time.

So that think we'll see some of that change to happen. Thanks. So that crosswind run rate could come back at some point. And then you also said a landowner had some concerns. So were those different than what the FAA's concerns were?

Yeah, the what the previous um plan had showed the crosswind runway and then we heard from land owners and developers that that crosswind could impact their development decisions. Um it also um while it wasn't shown on that that particular graphic I showed you, the long range plan that was presented back then also had some impacts to the roadways. So it moved their or both Johnson andor Palivver. So they expressed concerns that that could impact their decision to move forward with projects either east or west of the airport primarily. But then there we've started to receive information from property owners and developers about parcels that are closer into the airport that hey they're looking at doing this. Hey, what happened to the crosswind runway? That going to happen or not? And the answer at this point is is it's not included in the master plan, but it will be analyzed further in the

Very good. Thank you.

Any questions from council? uh the C I I thought the I thought we had FAA's buy in on the crosswind that was depicted on what you had shown just a little while ago based on the wind study that that was done. Uh and and while the widening of the runway was an option, it's not a great option. Um, and I thought they had buy in on on that crosswind and being able to to put that in to deal with the we don't meet the the coverage for uh pilots having the ability to to land in windy conditions, crosswinds.

Mayor, thank you for that question. And um the FAA questioned the need for the crosswind runway all along. Um we moved forward with the crosswind runway for some of the things that you just craft crosswinds at by having that crosswind versus one of the one of the things that the FAA supports and it is in their document is to widen the runway to meet crosswind components. While that is an option under the FAA guidance, it doesn't really solve some of the problems, we did do a full uh wind analysis both for 24-hour winds and daytime and nighttime winds. Most of our activity is during the day. And the daytime activity, um there's a certain amount of wind coverage you need to cover in order to justify a cross. and we were just over that line with the daytime but not the 24-hour time. So, um FAA was questioning whether or not that it was justified at this moment. They said we could certainly do the analysis of the crosswind which we did. Um and we opted to go with that alternative when we presented that back in. But that also then goes to at that time did not have any property owners and developers that indicated that there was an issue that crosswind runway and FA takes into account public support of projects. So I think after we've heard that information that became another possible challenge that could delay us completing the master plan and then jeopardize funding because it's

right. So, I I think this has been one of the most frustrating processes in the history of frustrating processes at the city. Uh I I'm not going to say I started this with a full head of hair because that's not true, but I I think I'm going to lose the last of it. Uh on on this process, uh there's there is a U. So, I guess to go back to to the master plan, it's a very prescribed process that the FAA has that essentially says whatever you have right now from an air a fleet mix is essentially what you're going to have. And we're not going to contemplate anything outside of that unless miraculously you can start landing uh much much larger aircraft on the facilities that we have right now. and that's not going to happen because the facilities that are needed for those larger aircraft are not built and it's the circular reference that we keep going through. So the um I think my intent when we rallied for kicking this entire thing off a few years ago was let's just get something down on paper so that we can take that out to the to the industry and say this is what we want to be when we grow up. And we get through that process or started into that process and the FAA says, "Well, you can't show that." Well, you can't show that. Well, you can't you can't show a crosswind runway that that is long that would accommodate larger traffic that that we see in our future here, which is cargo, the potential of passenger traffic, potential military, who knows what that is out there. Um so we pivot to this idea of a um a long range plan

and and the idea was a master plan that is essentially checking a box for FAA although not completely necessary at this time even though the one we have is expired the the or it's it's old I guess stale uh but we're not gaining really anything in this new master plan that wasn't already shown in the previous master plan. This is a half a million dollar venture over three and a half years. So, um so in in that process, what we're trying to do again is go back and show this is industry. This is what we're looking to do. We're limited to what we can do on the existing runway alignment. So, there's only so far we can extend out. and you start to get into issues with I 10 to the north. You have a canal that's to the south.

So there's and the the land that's up to the north is much more expensive than something that is sorry council member that that is in the middle of a field that is south of and not near uh the the u freeway. So, we started kicking around ideas that plus the the crosswing component started kicking around ideas of what if we came up with a uh and your conversation about if if we do extend past Yuma Road, how do we deal with Yuma Road? Is it a um is it the Wowee that we show on the road right now or is it a tunnel? We will not be building a tunnel. I'm not going to approve a tunnel, the funding for a tunnel for Yuma Road. So the ideas kicked around were, well, maybe we do a crosswind runway that gives us more room to build out a longer facility that accommodates cargo that could be going to Asia that needs much longer runways, buying less expensive property, getting rid of the hindrances that we have in either a canal to the south or a freeway to the north. Uh, and then take that idea and and it gives us that crosswind component also that we need so that smaller traffic when they're coming in are not having to deal with a stiff crosswind which makes our airport essentially unusable at certain times. And then go through and do this entire uh planning airspace planning with Luke Air Force Base. Make sure that we're not jamming them up and that uh and we're being really really good neighbors. In that discussion, Luke says, "Actually, if you turn it the other way, that might be better for us." So, a 1028, which I think is what was depicted on this. Uh, and and then so we've we've cleared that hurdle and there's there's not many

property owners. There's one property owner that is kicking back and saying, "Please do not aim runways directly at buildings that we're contemplating building. So, I just I want to be super clear on all of the the details of this. It's it is a crosswind runway that we're trying to stick in. That is a much longer facility than the 6300 or whatever it was that was shown on. That's the long range vision that we're trying to get to. That's separate from what we're going to approve tonight. Uh but but that that crosswind can be several different areas. That's this long range vision that you're going through is going to contemplate these and and study these different potentials. It could be a slightly turned so it's not pointing at at uh buildings. There's there's a there's a lot of opportunity to deconlict and take care of the one property owner that has an issue. The property owners to the east have no idea what our plan is. We haven't really taken that out on the road and said we're we're potentially aiming um a runway at development that you have on the east side of the property. Uh and and the Johnson and Paulie, we can deal with that as it comes. That's not a those aren't game stoppers for us. So, um, again, just frustrating, probably just more venting than everything, but we're going to approve this, which has to be done at this point. Um, but we have to go immediately into figuring out what our long range vision is. We talked about this at our workshop earlier which is uh we we have got to start showing what the impact of these runways in this facility is on the surrounding

communities so that we can let the property owners aside know do not build residential or do not build data centers in this area. Do not build some other very specific things in the approach or the departure corridor of these runways. uh otherwise folks are going to enclose on us and we're going to miss a tremendous opportunity to realize the full potential of the Buckeye airport and and that window is closing every day. We're talking with developers this afternoon about plans that they have for the eastern edge of the airport. So, it is it is it's important that we pass this, but it is incredibly important that we move fast on figuring out what our long range vision is. Uh, and and we cordon off the area around the airport in this airport specific area plan and go so that we don't lose the opportunity to grow the Buckeye airport in into the economic engine that it's going to be in the future. Uh, I I I just want to make sure we're ultra clear on here's here's the specifics of of where we're at with the the plan. Here's here's why we're not showing a crosswind right now because we're trying to honor what is happening on one landowner that is on the western edge of the uh the airport. So, uh we're going to work through that process with them and see how we can deconlict that. Um but but it isn't as dire as the whole crosswind runway idea or concept goes away. And if you if we show this and we take this out to industry, whoever that is, whether it's a a cargo company or it's um passenger traffic or it's military or whoever is

looking for a new location to land. Uh that's where we start working into incredible opportunities to not not only to to site uh companies out this way but also share in the cost of the infrastructure because we are not going to be building uh the um the 140 or 200 or whatever the the millions of dollars worth of infrastructure there is. Um so I think I'm done with that little hissy fit, but we we have we have got to giddy up on this. We are out of time. Uh council on uh agenda item 5A, what is your pleasure?

Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we approve agenda item 5A as an Adam. Second. Have a motion for approval for agenda item 5A and a second. All in favor say I. I. I.

Opposed? 5 A passes. 5B. Council hold public hearing to take action on Orange number 11-26 approving an amendment to the Sundance Community Master Plan as described in case PLZZ-25-000012 and amending the zoning map of the city of Buckeye for approximately 8.3 acres located west of the southwest corner of Yuma Road and Dean Road from commercial center CC to commercial center CC with Sundance Community uh master plan overlay. Mandy, you are up.

Good evening, mayor, members of the council. My name is Mandy Woods and I'm a principal planner with development services. Tonight, I will be presenting case PLZ25 0012 to this. This is Oh, it worked. It just doesn't like me. Um, so for the project overview, the applicant on this is Jeffrey Blighty with Gilbert Blly on behalf of Yuma LLC, which is the property owner. The location is west of the southwest corner of Yuma Road and Dean Road. Um, two parcels and um that location will be delineated on the exhibit on the next slide. And the overall request is to amend the Sundance Community Master Plan or CMP to include 8.3 acres as a commercial land use designation purpose of a multif family residential development. Site context. Um you can see the subject property is outlined in red on that slide. Currently a vacant property. To the north we have Wind Village residential and then we have vacant auxiliary field landing area south and then to the west we have residential single family community um Sundance and to the east is commercial civic services um library the Coyote branch and then for the general land note is that this land use designation

is typically intended for community master plans or plan developments for the existing zoning of the property. This is um commercial center and then the proposed zoning of the property that commercial center is not changing but we are proposing to expand the the boundary of the Sunday overlay to cover this property. So the request just the land use exhibit that you see up on the slide. It's a big one because it's encompassing the entire Sundance. See the the subject property is outlined red and there's a leader coming off of it that is subject of this area parcel 34. The proposed CMPA is a major amendment um because there's land that's being added to this CMP. It includes the inclusion of um 8.3 acres as I stated. Um so this becomes the new parcel 34C and it will be assigned a commercial land use. I want to clarify this is commercial land use as described in the Sundance CMP. Um and that commercial designation in the Sundance scene allows for more credentials. That is the reason particular land use within the CMP. Um it's generally pretty good planning practice to have kind of cohesive zoning across a project site. And so since the intent for parcel 34C is to develop with the adjacent parcel to the west par 34B, um that is one of the reasons that staff was supportive of expanding the the CMP overlay to have a little bit more cohesiveness in the the zoning of the the ultimate project that will be here.

Um but right now it's proposed to include a total of 188 multif family residential units. Um, I did want to note that multifamily residential is an allowed use in the current commercial center zoning for the property right now. Right now, it could develop with multif family residential, albeit at a a slightly lower density. Um but the benefit of including this within the unance CMP setbacks will be more compatible with the adjacent single bringing it in. Um continuing on to kind of the impact of the the overall CMP the total number of planned units for the overall CMP is increasing from 6798 to 6,954. Um there is a current CMP maximum of 6,933 which is less than the total number of units and we wanted to keep the the impact of this specific to just this parcel and not have wide reaching impacts on the entirety of the CMP. So this particular amendment request includes an exception that would allow an additional 21 units would be restricted to partial 34. Um, and then the overall density with the inclusion of this parcel keeps it at about 3.42, which is well on target with the CMP target density. And then kind of the final primary component of this CMP amendment request. As with all of our community master plans and our PADS, oftentimes they include modified provisions or kind of customized development standards. And in this case, this request includes a modified building height step down provision. The way that it works with just kind of our base code standard is the height of each multifamily residential building

that's taller than 35 ft. In theory, likely taller than three stories, has to be stepped down one full story on any end of that building that's located within 50 ft of an adjacent area that's zoned for residential use. uh as well as anything that's used for residential use. And in this particular case, um for parcel 34C, there is an adjacent 90 foot wide residentially zoned tract that is used for um it's just anway tract. It's a wash corridor. It's never going to be developed with residential use. And so the the provision for that in this amendment request includes um just a slight tweak to the wording where that 50 foot Step down provision would be measured from the nearest property line of a single family resident. The public participation component of this included a neighborhood meeting which was of this year held at the Coyote branch library location so very close to the site. The attendees included the project team of course um city staff one and then was one all notices required for this caseed in accordance with our development code requirements. There were no speakers in the public at the planning and zoning commission public hearing for this um for future development. The there is a companion site plan request that is in for review right now. Um it includes two and threetory kind of garden style or residential buildings, the clubhouse and a there is um traffic impact analysis that

was submitted and approved with this CMPA component has already been done and then uh there's confirmed water and sewer capacity for the very small increase residential units and there's no development agreement updated thatired as a result of this. for um emergency services and schools. The property of course will be serviced by city fire and police and the applicant did fulfill their requirements by doing the adequate school facilities. Notable high schools district and then just to conclude the analysis on this uh staff believes that this does further goals of our general plan. It conforms to our development code and or proposes some alternate standards that will result in high quality development and there are no outstanding issues for the recommendation. U recommendation is to conduct a public hearing and then ordinance approving this case and I wanted to note that the applicant is also here arise. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you Mandy. Uh we'll start with a public hearing. We'll open a public hearing. Do we have any speaker request cards for agenda item 5B? There are no speaker requests. No speaker request cards. We will close public hearing. Uh council, any questions on agenda item 5B?

I have one. Uh to the south of that wash, there's a little walking track where the community uses that walking track. Is that going to still be available to the public? Yeah, you can go back to it. So, right there in the green where it's highlighted in the green, there's a walking track right there. You can see where it comes off of Puma and that little walkway. Yes. And it goes it goes uh it goes west and east and there's a little walking track that the uh community used. We just want to make sure we maintain that because it's it's used a lot. Every morning I see a group of people walking through there.

Thank you for the question. Um the request tonight does not the walking path that's within that HOA tract. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions for council? Council, what's your pleasure? Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve agenda item 5B as in boy. Second. I have a motion and a second to approve agenda item 5B. All in favor say I. I. I.

And opposed. 5B passes unanimous. Thank you, Mandy. 5C. Council state excellent on resolution number 39-26 approving intergovernmental agreement number 26-001579-I between the state of Arizona acting through its department of transportation the city of Buckeye and Arizona Municipal Corporation establishing a funding mechanism to provide reimbursement to the city for certain staffing costs incurred in conjun uh connection with its participation in the construction of the Jackrabbit Trail traffic interchange and associated work on the Interstate 10 I 10 widening project and authorizing the city manager to execute and deliver set agreement and any related documents on behalf of the city of Buckeye. Mr. John Willillet may council audience is one of the few times I actually get to come up here and be excited about talking about a project. those who are aware, we've been working with ADOT for I'll say a few days to try to get this interchange constructed and this is now actually about going to the very next phase and bringing it to reality. So what ADOT has done is they have selected what's called the construction manager risk means they pre-select a contractor. They bring him in to start working on the final design and making comments. I will give ADOT some kudos here. They actually took the initiative and combined the I 10 Jackar rabbit trail traffic interchange and the I 10 widening project that was going to add the fourth lane on I 10 from S85 to loop through three combined it into one project. They saw the foresight because both projects impacted the jack rabbit trail ramps on I 10. Well, the construction manager risk method allows them to do this and is ADOT a mechanism to build the project in phases. We can do phase one, phase two. ADOT calls it a GMP phase. That's what this allows us to

do. So the key thing about this is now we will have a seat at the table. We get to be involved during discussions with the contractor and ADOT and how things may or may not move forward. First time Buckeye has been involved in this. So it's kind of actually is not kind of it really is new to us. But what's the city's role? We will be in the meetings sneak at the table reviewing guarantee maximum price like the bottom button says that the contractor is going to submit. They're going to build phase one for X dollars. We will have a say and are those prices seem reasonable or not. You support ADOT by addressing city related projects. I'm kind of working uphill on the bullet items. Contractor has questions. We ask we provide input. Do things like that. We give them answers. So, what are we helping with? Quality, project timing, and resident impact to make sure this is actually an overall a good project for the Buckeye community. Um, key benefits, it allows us, this this provides a funding mechanism, and this is what's unique. All the time and effort we spend working on this project, answering questions, doing some research, providing information. This allows ADOT to fund us back for our time. This is what's new. So, for example, on the IT 10 widening that happened and finished a few years ago, all the time and effort spent by myself and our staff in meetings, that was just time the city ate. This is an ability for us to be reimbursed back from ADOT for that effort. Allows us to have a proactive role or voice in discussion of regional stuff especially relates to IT 10. Um it helps us keep our interest leveraged when working with ADOT and it allows us to stay involved in a lot of decision- making.

ADOT has created a bucket, so to speak, of reimbursing us $350,000 a year, and this is for two years. It's for the IT 10 widening part, but more importantly, the first phase, which is the Jack Rabbit TI. And with that, I will answer none of the questions you will have. Any questions from council? Go ahead, John. So with this IGA AOT has already approved this. So now it's on our side to approve it.

Actually uh council or vice mayor it is actually we're the first ones. Way ADOT works is we approve it first and then they approve it. But we they provided a draft to us. We reviewed it. Legal reviewed it. We kicked back comments. They gave it back. We gave it back. Finally got to a finished agreement on what all the verbiage is. And once we approve it, we'll kick it to ADOT. they'll approve it and send it right back and then I send it to Summer and she does her magic. Okay. So, just to summarize that pingpong tournament you just highlighted that we won. Yeah. So, we approved this. It goes to ADAT. They've already approved the language and they'll do their thing and we're good to go.

Yes, sir. All right. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Willlet. Uh I just for the benefit of the public maybe a little bit on the agreement and what we're attempting to get out of this with ADOT. Uh the the project is uh kind of complex but it's actually really simple. There are two main components to it. One is the Jackrabbit trail traffic interchange and if we can get funding in the budget uh the governor's budget currently does not provide funding for I 10 uh but the legislature their budget does include funding for I 10. If we can get the funding at least the first phase of the I 10 widening these two projects will go at one time. and we had a conversation with ADOT about what we would like to see in in the I10 widening. Can you maybe go through some of those bullet points and what we're really excited about and really do not care uh is is in that first phase and really our attempt to maximize lane miles and the benefit to the traveling public.

Sure thing, mayor. So caveat to kind of go with that. The Jack Rabbit TI construction is funded by Prop 439. The money to build the interchange is there. It's earmarked. It's moving forward. What you're mentioning is about the I 10 widening project is a legislative earmark, so to speak. It came from the state legislature and that is currently phased over several years because they don't have all the money to do it today. They have initially allocated a certain dollar amount and the goal was to combine that with some money that the city and MAG had to bring to the table and do what as you mentioned phase one of the IT 10 widening back up a smidge. The Seymar process allows ADAT to do exactly what they want to do and that's phases project. So if they only have money for part of IT 10 widening, they can combine that with a TI and do that and then legislator provides funding in 28 27 they can do another what they call GMP phase and do some more widening and then when they get the remaining balance they do another GMP phase and phase finish the rest. So, as you mentioned, what we're trying to get ADOT to do is

for the record, is is that the most efficient way to do construction projects for for this unique project, it's actually not bad. It's actually pretty good. There's no way it makes sense to split up a year and a half project into but since the funding is coming in several the other option is you got to wait till all the money's available. So, nothing happens till 29. So, at least this way we're going to get it in small pieces chunks. will be in construction for or four years, right?

As opposed to build the TI, wait three years, and then go back and work on the exact same ramps that the TI did and do it all over again. So, there is some benefit to bring in the widening part and do it in phases. I said, I'll give ADOT a little bit of kudos. Um, but to talk about what you'd mentioned, what's going to be done phase one, and that the goal is we'd like to get the fourth lane added on 910 from Verado to the 303. The lane only the lane not necessarily all the sound walls the roadway lighting that there's nothing out there today it's functioned without it for years can we at least get enough pavement to add the fourth lane I'll say tomorrow then bring the extra stuff when that phase 2 money is available that's what you and I and others at the city have met with ADOT had proposed

and it it probably does there's going to be plenty of money to do one lane. If we're only talking one lane from uh Citrus to Verado, I think the intent is let's make that lane go as far west as we can. Uh and then maybe take some of that money and because this is a a Seymar project, uh and ADOT can divvy this up however they want to. It's making that lane go as far as it can and then it's potentially intersection or off-ramp improvements at Watson and Miller that make it a much safer condition getting off uh in the afternoons coming home or getting on the uh the freeway and in the mornings heading in. So there's it's not just let's get the one lane in from Citrus to Verata Way. is trying to maximize the dollars that have been allocated and and get as much relief for the traveling public as we can. And that's I think the intent of this. We said we want to be a part of this. be in the conversation so that um you're not just going out and building full freeway improvements from Citrus to Broadway, which is 27 or $30 million with sound walls and lighting and all the other gingerbread that comes with it. It is lanes for the traveling public to um ease that commute.

Correct. Yeah, mayor. That's correct. That's exactly what we'd like them to do. this mechanism, this allows us to have a voice at the table and encourage that loudly, right? As opposed to, "All right, yeah, thanks. We're we're moving forward." We'll actually be at the table and pushing and saying, "Hey, we really need this," or or not being at the table and then have them come up with here's what the plan is and it's already in motion and we have no say. So, we get a beautiful freeway from Citrus to Verataway and then nothing west of there.

Yes, sir. Okay. All right. Uh, beat that horse. Okay. So, um, council for agenda item 5 C. What is your pleasure? Mr. Mayor, I'll make a motion that we approve agenda item 5 C is in Charles. Second. I have a motion for approval of 5C and a second. All in favor say I. I. I. I. And opposed. 5C passes unanimous. 5D. Thank you, Mr. Willlet. 5D council to take action on resolution number 38-26 establishing new or increased municipal fees, establishing an effective date, repealing conflicting resolutions, and providing for severability. And Mr. Brian Craig, you're presenting.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council. This is the successive presentation and action to the workshop we had in December on development and other related user fees at the city. um development services fees, community services fees, some public works fees and aviation fees are being considered tonight. These are unique from impact fees. Uh impact fees are related to the impact on our services and our infrastructure. User fees are more about the impact on our resources in particular staff time to process permits and other types of activities within the city. Um we're really trying to better account and be more accurate for the cost recovery. uh we haven't updated the development user fees in over five and a half years. So we will review just at a high level some of the discussion we had in December at the workshop uh a little bit about the process and how we go about developing the draft fees and then make them more firmed up and final some samples of the fees that are being established and recommended tonight comparisons with other jurisdictions. And then one thing we did some significant changes both uh increases and decreases. And then since the 60-day notice posting we're required by law to do some minor changes that staff is recommending to that and those are all reductions or clarifications. Here's a sample of what's in the development user fees now. And again the bulk of what we're considering tonight for fee changes are uh squarely within this document. The development user fees. Everything from our planning and entitlement, our engineering and building, everything that happens below grade and above grade as far as permitting inclusive of fire fees as well and business licenses. We are not updating section 7 tonight. Uh this council has seen some improvements to that section to create incentives in the downtown area in particular in downtown surrounding area. That that section of the chapter is staying the same.

Not all the graphics are loading unfortunately. uh some of the philosophies tonight. Uh really we'll start with the end in mind. We we talked about in December and we got some head nods that we should be moving towards 100% cost recovery to make sure that the growth related activities for private development are helping pay for the the impact on city resources, city staff. Um there is some changes you'll see and we're happy to highlight that there's some reduction in fees that has a lot to do with the improvements we've made in our department over the last few years and related development disciplines to gain have some gains in reducing the amount of time that a project may go through the review and iterative process. And then again one of the council strategic plans that exists today is to develop a user fee cost recovery philosophy. So, not only for development services, but as you're going to see um the the other half of the presentation in December was related to community services and the types of services they offer the community. And again, those aren't apples to apples. Those are types of services that perhaps are best not recovered at 100%. We'll start with the exception to the rule in mind. And it's important you'll see that fourth bullet down. BA projects based on permit revenues based on valuation make up about 90% of the revenue that comes into development services. This is the type of project where uh we spend a lot of time setting the staff time involved and what is appropriate fee for certain permit type. You need a CFO. You need to come in and get a solar permit. Those are types of things that are a little easier to accurately depict each discipline that's involved and how much time they're spending on that. the there's too much variation in saying we're going to build a new building shell that could be range in size from 10,000 square feet to a million square feet. So to combat that variation, those permit types, the industry standard internationally is to use what's called the building valuation data table. It's published twice a year by the international code council and we're we will be now with this recommendation among 11 cities in the valley that are updating it annually to be more

accurately reflective of the cost of construction. So what you do uh when you use this process is you you take both residential and non-residential permit types. You plug in the square foot and the type of construction method and it gives you a value and you convert that value through our process to a permit fee and a plan review fee. Our recommendation tonight is to annually adopt the new valuation table every February and that will continue concurrently each year with this approval. Uh, one of the things that makes this a good good recommendation is that it creates consistency across jurisdictions. As I said, we're we're among 11 jurisdictions in the valley and the state that are that are using this and it's an industry standard across the country. We have shared this uh with our the building, excuse me, the um the home builder association of central Arizona. They're aware of this. They're used to this sort of methodology for calculating fees across the valley. So outside of the building valuation standard of of assessing a fee category would be this sort of the ABCs of developing user fee schedule beginning first with establishing do we have all the right categories. Some of the recommendations with this update are to remove some categories that are no longer relevant because both technology and permit types and use types are changing. We do have some new proposed categories as well. And then updating uh the bulk of the existing fees. Allocating not only just uh staff time in our department and the types of discipline that are looking at a permit type, but outside of our department, we may incorporate uh review comments from the water resources department on a large project. And so accounting for their staff time. And then before we go and we publish the final recommended version, we do sort of a gut check with other valley jurisdictions to make sure we're not out of we're grossly out of alignment with what's being recommended. And again, this is a sample. So you're not meant to have to go line by line through here, but this is a sample of

what it looks like. In this case, the major site plan review, all the types of different disciplines and levels of discipline that touch that project and their staff time involved throughout the process. And then as promised, we take a sampling of our proposed fees and we look at not only in that the sec the third column over what our existing fees are, but a West Valley average there as well. and then individually some of the the more high growth cities in the west valley. These categories in particular you'll see a couple of them are actually well this first one is being reduced and that's a reflective of site plans are now administrative but there's also a reduction in the number of reviews and the time to get through a process based on our continuous improvement efforts. And then further down the list, the third item, plan review. That's engineering plan review per sheet. Another reduction based on the types of the types of time we spend on that review. And again, just a comparison to make sure that we're not out of alignment with other jurisdictions. And the last one you see, we are much lower than other jurisdictions. And maybe this is a good one to highlight, traffic control plans. This is for items that are temporary uh temporary control control plans for partial closures of streets or full closures of streets. Recognizing that uh not only city projects but private development projects benefit from speed to getting um projects mobed and under and started, we've created a hybrid hybrid program where it's the the plans are reviewed by an inspector. So they spent a little bit of time on the computer reviewing the plans, but a lot of that work happens in the field with their traffic control staff. And then as we highlighted before, some significant changes in the green. Those are savings to customers. Maintenance improvement districts, street light improvement districts, drastically reducing costs based on the that being an entirely in-house review now versus third party review, third party legal and engineering. And then plan unit plan

amendments. another drastic reduction and again that has a lot to do with that being almost an entirely administrative process for us saving some of the hearings involved. There are some drastic increases percentage-wise but as far as dollar amounts somewhat nominal you can imagine Buckeye seven or eight years ago wasn't doing as large projects that you'll see along the I 10 corridor and SR85 corridor now. So grading permits in particular the amount of pages and the amount of acreage that staff is looking at is drastically increased and that's what's being reflected there. And then concept site plan reviews. Historically those were looked at only by planning and maybe one other discipline and gave some preliminary guidance. The way we use those concept site plan reviews now is they're complete reviews involving all the necessary disciplines. So it gives greater confidence to that customer that they can take that and move into construction documents. Then variance fee is one of those ones where there is an increase but the volume of variances the city sees is about one every two years. we had the ability to review back with a recent variance and understand just directly the cost involved. So that's why there's an increase there.

Ryan, before you go off of that, the uh the increase that we're seeing in grading permit cost and uh concept site plan review is is that for any size development? The that grading permit is is more I think that's the first level. We have successive levels above that for larger tracks of land, but this one would be for the first sort of I don't have in front of me. It's going to be like 20 acres or less. I'll get you that number and then it would increase beyond that as well. A lot of grading permits historically have been those infill parcels. So maybe 5 to 10 acres.

Okay. It's a It's just a pretty substantial increase. And I'm sure that's backed up by the amount of time that it takes to process that. That's a 20acre site is much much different than a than a Burlington that's that's being developed. Correct. And typically you would have one acre or less is exempt from certain grading permit requirements or grading and drainage requirements. So that's

okay. These these mentioned they're all reflective of spending time putting in time involved for each level of discipline and trying to accurately account for what we need to recoup back. Do we have what the industry or the the area average is for each of those? We're seeing a pretty significant increase. Is are we coming up to par with across other jurisdictions? I don't have that for you. Okay. I think the and the the salient note on this slide is that we're not recommending over recovering costs on any category. Everything's at the 100% or the high 90s. Round off the numbers.

I guess that's the bottom line on this one is this is just recovering 90% of what it cost us to do the permit. Correct.

Okay. And then another case study, business licensing had historically had 17 different categories. The fees ranging up to $1,000. Some of them we weren't charging any fees. We've cons consolidated those fees into a general category with the exception I'll explain the specialty fee types in a minute. But really the benefit to the city is capturing these businesses. So, not only can we make sure we're accounting for the businesses in our community that are they meeting the sales tax requirements, but are we able to provide them resources and are they part of the network of things that we can provide from the city? So, now the first permit out the door for them, their first time in will be $75 and then an annual review update of $50. And the other thing that's happened with this update and the code change, we had required everyone to renew at the same time of the year, which was a burden on staff to have everything being renewed at the same time. This is a rolling annual update. So you can apply. It's for that good for that 12 month instead of a prorated amount, which we weren't offering before. You would pay that full amount whether it was in January or November. And then these specialty fee types, again, those are a little bit more discernment required, uh, meeting not only city requirements, but federal and state requirements. So, there's more to look at with those applications, and there's a little bit more higher um, scrutiny required as you go through those. And then, as I mentioned at the top of the presentation, there are a few other categories outside development that are increasing their fees. I would say maybe more on the nominal basis. Uh just a couple slides on both the airport and public works slides. Um a couple increases. There's a decrease in there. The commercial photography, that's again one of those things that um there's not a high volume of commercial photography occurring on the airport, but we want to make sure that's not a discouraging fee amount. So

maybe we're not recovering cost to provide that service or allow that service on our property if there's any disruption. These other fee categories are just a matter of it's been five to six years since we've updated fees at the airport and basing them on market rate studies. And this last slide on the airport again more fees um in nominal nature related to just common activities at the airport. And then in the public works realm, there are some additional fees that needed added uh as far as this user services they're offering to the community. First one there, residential household waste drop off, a new $40 fee being assessed there. And then again, white good drop off, $25, and then key replacement. Just nominal fees. Wanted, it's not maybe not worth the the minutes I'm giving it based on the volume of these types of projects. We want to make sure we're we're discussing those. And then unique to public works to align with the solid waste fees there is a 4% annual escalator added. And then community services as Miranda had presented in the December workshop. There is a range from community type of amenity to more an individual type of amenity. You can imagine shelter rentals and private swim lessons being something that's more individual in nature, whereas open access to a park or the library material resources are something that benefits the community as a whole. And so the amount of recovery proposed with those are they range from 0 to 100. So this next slide shows you the recommended column and that's the second to last column and then where the study found that we exist today. call it out in orange where we're a little bit shy or over or under meeting those targets. So, this would what's being proposed

today allows the community services department to study and understand their cost to provide each of these services and recommend a fee within the range that's posted in that third column and then continually monitor their fees for services and the revenue related to that. Make sure that they're within an alignment of that cost recovery suggestion. Can I ask a question back on on that? So, um, are we saying these fees have not been decided yet and they're going to come up with what that fee is somewhere in that range for for cost recovery? Um, Miranda's gonna nod her head, but the first thing I'll say is there is fee fee level being recommended tonight with the fee schedule attached to the materials, but then annually or as periodically as needed, the fees will be updated to make sure that they're maintaining true alignment with those recommended ranges.

So, we've we've talked also about some of the open spaces and specifically like a um uh across the street at Sixth Street Plaza and and trying to activate that area. Uh but it's difficult to do that when there's a a fee associated with uh especially the nonprofits or the the small gathering get together or things like that. It how is that how do we activate those areas? uh and and maybe we are doing fee recovery or we're not doing fee recovery on that uh based on the conversations we've had about it then I I think at our workshop also talking about that or um uh ramadas at the park or or other things along those lines.

Sure. So you can see that the rentals uh specifically are in the 100% uh cost recovery category. Um and the reason for that is that it's a pretty individualized use, right? Um but the open access and the use of some of those facilities is in the lower area. So I guess all that to say that it as we depending on the amount of time that it takes for staff to facilitate that type of use. So, if somebody were coming in and reserving a facility for a birthday party or something to that effect, um we would be tracking the amount of time that we directly spend to facilitate that use and creating a fee category or creating a fee that aligns with that. um in and I don't I didn't bring my my binder up, but in your um packet tonight, there is a range of fees that allows us to be flexible in that right now so that we're not overcharging for what that could be or uh undercharging or subsidizing that. Thank you. So,

so an example, let's say somebody wanted to rent out uh Six Street Plaza for a small one-hour event on on a Saturday morning. What that's that's community-minded. What What would be the cost to rent that?

So, today that cost is $250 because that is the adopted fee and that is the only fee that I can charge. What we're proposing is that we would uh take a look at what that actually costs, which is going to be less than $250, uh, and charge exactly what we find that that costs back to the to the renter. So, you would see that that fee shrink. So I what that's going to do though and we've had this discussion before is it means that nobody uses Six Street Plaza then unless it's a larger event where you have a somebody that's willing to step in. for an hour event. Um, and I probably have one specific in mind, but there there are other events where people would like to, you know, gather in a certain spot and and it um takes a uh a permit. Uh so you've you've got some kind of uh idea of um we're the requirement is you have to have a a permit to do this specific event uh a small get together event like this. Um and and then that triggers a cost to that nonprofit or in some cases it's not even a nonprofit. It's just a group of people in the community that want to get together for for a reason on Sixth Street Plaza. uh $250 doesn't work and $100 they're going to go someplace else.

So whether it's the event I'm thinking of or it's a different event, we're essentially saying don't use this, go someplace else and and hold your event.

So a couple of things. First, the the fee that we are proposing is $10 to $400. So, it allows us to get very um very light on the fee if there is a very light requirement of staff for to help facilitate that rental. Um, a couple of other things. I mean, anybody can come out and use our facility any time as long as it's not reserved for any other reason. So, we don't restrict use of our facilities, you know, in open areas and so forth. um where a fee would would would be utilized as if they were reserving it for a specific reason that um then restricted it from public use otherwise. The other thing that I will say is that we do have groups that we work with pretty regularly that help uh facilitate events for the city in partnership with the city. So the other way that we could accomplish maybe helping facilitate some of those events are through agreements. Um, one of them that you're probably pretty familiar with would be like the Main Street or the Chamber. We work with even the White Tank Mountains Conservancy. We work with groups like that to help facilitate those things. So, I don't know if that answers your questions, but there's a couple of different ways that we can go about either reducing the fees and or um, you know, again, if it's a pretty light facilitation of a of a an activity, then I wouldn't anticipate a large charge.

Yeah. Um, I think I think this probably warrants more discussion. It's It sounds like you have a a a range that you can work that into, but it's still going to come back to a we had to send a guy out there to open a gate or something like that that that is a an hourly rate fee. And I don't I don't know what that was. 100 bucks or 65 bucks or something like that. it it is going to discourage and does discourage people from using the facilities that we have where we're wanting to program and and activate I guess program's not the right term activate those areas so that the public is coming out and spending time in them and if we're charging um fees to do that those groups that we would invite in to to have just a presence at a at the plaza or at a ramada or someplace in a park are going to say we will go someplace else to do this and that's there's there's some of the fees where I understand we're trying to recoup expense and actual expense that we have in it. Uh but there's other ones that are um the the facility is built. It's paid for. It's it's maintained and and I don't know that charging a fee is going to accomplish what we want it to accomplish. It is going to is going to discourage people from using some of the public space that we have.

Understood. I think I mean I don't know at this point if it's best to I'm looking to I guess our our council because council could recommend a lower cost recovery at this point also.

Yes. And Miranda, thank you mayor and council. to Miranda's point, the proposed fees tonight have with the city has followed the notice requirements in the um the statute and that requires that the city prepare a report subst you know supporting the proposed uh new or increased fees and uh post a copy of the report the schedule of the proposed fees um and the that that data on the clerk's website also requires the city to prepare a notice of intent with the date, time, location of the meeting uh tonight to approve or reject the fees and the city has complied with the notice of requirements. Now those the information the report and the schedule sets the upper um limit of the fees. So, um, in in light of the lengthy notice, um, requirements, if council had the desire to, um, modify some of the proposed fees downward within that noticed range, the council could opt to do so tonight or direct staff to to move accordingly. Um, if it were a percentage reduction or something along those lines. Yeah, I um not exactly sure how to handle that.

Do we uh do we have to vote on this tonight or we have can we table it?

So council could table it. It would require a motion uh to either table the item or to continue it to another meeting. If that were the desire of council, I would recommend that you continue it to a date certain. Um um but if there were specific fees, it sounds as though there might be just one or two specific fees that are at issue and if that's something that could be further discussed tonight as well or modified tonight by the council, you could also do so and then have the vote tonight. We don't have to start the process over u for the the um notice of intent to increase fees.

Mayor, if the discussion involved increasing the fees above what was noticed, then then arguably that's not what we're talking to to restart that process.

In this case, it's not. So, we're I think um I think we continue this and we have a more robust conversation about the fees and and what we're trying to accomplish. Um and and some of them it it we're So, here's what's going to happen. If if we go through and we pass this, there's unintended consequences. And it's going to be not next month, it's going to be six months or a year down the road where a group is going to come in and say, "We are the um you know, we're the we're the group that that brings out puppies for petting in uh in a Romana at the park or at at some just some of the most benign, soft, loving stuff that that you can come up with." and and we're going to tell them you got to pay a hundred or $250 to go bring puppies to the park for kids to to pet. Probably a terrible example, but you know what I'm getting at with this. I mean, we've had this over and over and over. And then all that blows back on us as council and then the it's, you know, all buried within the fees that we're talking about. Uh and and so then at that point we come back to you and say, "Hey, can we do anything about this?" and well, you guys approved this 6 months or a year ago. So, I think it's probably a timeout we need to call on this uh and then have the conversation if we can maybe have it at the next council meeting so that we're we're all a little bit more focused on these fees and some of the specifics that we're talking about.

Mr. Mayor, hold on just one second. Doug, you're about to say something.

I was going to say a couple different things. Is uh the way the fee schedule is set up and with the percentages in here, it leaves a lot of discretion to the community services director to be able to deal with those one-off types of situations that you're talking about. Um so that if we do run into a group where the fee is over the top, Miranda's going to have a lot of discretion to be able to deal with those. And I believe we also have some fee waiver abilities in there. and also um a lot of other forms of funding assistance and so on. Um and what we are talking about here are very rare occurrences, one-off kind of situations. And I believe that the way the structure it is structured, we've got the ability to deal with those.

But then we get into the argument every time, well, if I do it for this group, then I have to do it for this group. Or what if this group comes in? What if this group that none of us I mean the the people that bring cats, what if that group comes in, we don't want to give them the the reduction in fee. And so then we're in this circular reference constantly on this stuff. And and that's uh kind of how we got to the what is it? $250 now, right? It's black and white, right?

And to get to black and white, that's what you end up with. If you when you leave a little bit of discretion in there, you do end up with some discussions of the around and around with the gray, but it makes sure that we do have that ability and that discretion. Having it black and white ends up somebody's always not going to be happy. Yeah, vice mayor.

Yeah, I think we're we don't want to get to the point where we're creating policy around the exceptions. And I think we're talking about the exceptions here that you know having read through this that um there is a lot of latitude and and the ping petting puppies group and the you know snuggling cats group. I think

we don't want the snuggling cats. Well, we might at some point, but um I think there's a lot of latitude where those things can we can address those things and I think we have an opportunity moving forward that you know if that if those exceptions become the rule then and modify the policy accordingly. So, I think you know that Miranda and her team and Brian and her team and the others that were involved with this put a lot of work into it and a lot of thought into it. Um, and I think we have a better product now or potentially better product now than we had prior to this. Um, so I I I think we're we're getting into a slippery slope that if we don't look at this and give it a try, then we're going to continually try to create policy around those exceptions and we're not going to have anything we can rely on.

Mr. Mayor. Yes, sir.

I've got a question and I'll make a proposal. If I take my family of eight or 10 and go down to Sundance Park and go to a Ramada number 18 and have a birthday party, are you going to come down and charge me if you see a group of people down there? Because it's not busy on a Saturday. So, I just go down there with my family and I sit down and I have a party. Is somebody going to come along? Because you do have staff down there. somebody going to come along and check my staff status, excuse me, my my permit status. Is someone at that point going to charge me or run me and my family off?

Councilman Huis, no sir. So, our facilities are available and open as long as they are not reserved. So, we do allow the reservation of a ramada so that if you wanted to have a birthday party, you could plan accordingly and you would know that when you show up that Ramada will be made available to you. But if that ramada is open then it's first come first served and there is no charge. So if I go to reserve it I have to pay. If I just go down there I don't have to pay as Yes sir. As long as it's not reserved. As long as it's open it's available for use. And right now that charge is $10.

I'm going to leave it up to council. I'm going to make a proposal. So, I'll make a motion that we delay this to the next city council meeting so we have more time to discuss it and more time for us to understand a little bit more about it. Second. Okay. I have a motion and a second for a um continuence to the next council meeting. Requests a roll call vote. Okay. Have a roll call vote, please. Council member Yoner. Hey. Council member Barry. Hi.

Council member Haggistad. Hi. Council member Beard. Hi. Council member Hustus. Hi. Vice Mayor Goodman. Nay. Mayor Wors. Hi. Let's have it. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Uh, item number six, comments from mayor and council. Any comments from council? Not seeing any. Item number seven, city manager report. Summary of your current events.

Couple items tonight. Mayor council. Uh, last night we welcomed at festival we welcomed approximately 130 residents to our annual openhouse town hall series. This was the first of four openhouse events. The intent of the open houses is to promote a direct connection between our residents, employees, and the services that the city provides. The openhouse format allows residents to circulate, ask questions from city staff, and to get information on the topics and services that they are most interested in. And last night was our first and our next open house will be on May 14th in Tarteso with two additional ones planned in June. And then last week we had 45 participants of the winter 2026 Buckeye Civic Institute graduate from an 11-week program where they were informed about how the city runs and how to become more civically engaged in the community. Due to the success of this program, we will begin offering the Buckeye Civic Institute twice a year with a fall and a winter session. And for any residents who are interested in participating in the civic institute, the interest form is now available on our city's website. Those are my two updates. Okay. Thank you very much. Uh item number eight, proposal for future agenda items. Any from council? Seeing none, item number nine. With nothing else on the agenda, we are adjourned.