City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. Thank you for being here and welcome to everyone. For those of you that are standing in the back, there's still some seats kind of in here if you want to take a seat. Please make yourself comfortable. But thank you for joining us. We're going to go ahead and start the meeting. And we'll start with the invocation by Pastor Paul Elgin with the First Presbyterian Church. And if you can stand, if you're willing and able, and we'll follow that by the Pledge of Allegiance. It will be led by Mayor Pro Tempa Dillon.

Council member elect, somewhere there. Citizens of Casa Grande, please pray with me. I'm going to paraphrase one of my favorite prayers, a prayer written for our nation at the dawn of this century by the Reverend Billy Graham.

Let's pray.

Our Father and our God, we know how blessed we are to live in a city such as Casa Grande, a place where all can live with the blessings that go far beyond what we deserve. And yet we know that Casa Grande is not perfect. That is why we need strong moral leadership such as the city council, police and sheriff departments, fire department, others who serve and protect our city. Help us with the many problems that we can and should face together as elected officials, employees, and citizens. Where there is injustice, convict us of our sins. Help us to turn to you in repentance and truth and set our feet on the path of your righteousness and your peace. We pray tonight on this warm August evening for our mayor, for the city council, give them the wisdom to show what is right and the courage to do it. You know, your word says to us in the Psalms, blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. May this also be the call to our town as we humble ourselves and acknowledge you alone as their Savior and Lord. This we pray in the holy name of Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.

Amen.

Please join me for a pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands,

Thank You pastor Paul into the faith alliance and thank you mayor Pro Tempa Dylan Hey next on the agenda is the roll call Adriana if you can please accept for the record that the council is all here so noted thank you next are the minutes

Mayor Fitzgibbons, I move to consider for the record the August 3rd, 2026 meeting of the City Council regular session, the minutes of the August 3rd, 2026 City Council study session, and except for the record, the minutes of the January 24th, 2025 Fire Personnel Retirement Board minutes from the may 16 2026 youth commission meeting the minutes from the july 2nd 2026 planning and zoning commission meeting and the july 13 2026 arts and culture commission meeting second okay there's been a motion and a second is there any further discussion okay all those in favor please signify by saying aye aye any opposed okay motion carries next item are the claims

Memphis given the move that we consider the list of claims for July 29th to August 11th, 2026. Second.

Okay, there's been a motion and a second to approve the claims. Any further discussion? Okay, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, motion carries. And the meeting agenda approval. Are there any changes, Stephen, to the meeting agenda? No changes.

No changes.

Okay, so if we can get a motion to approve.

So moved. Second.

Okay, a motion and a second to approve the meeting agenda. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, we have a couple special presentations, and so I'll go ahead and first I want to just have the missionaries from the Church of Jesus Christ Latter-day Saints, if all of you guys, if you can stand for me, and then I'm going to make my way down over here. Oh, there's a nice crew here.

Well, thank you for being here.

It's so nice to have you all here. I know you've had a lot of blood, sweat, and tears probably out with all the work that you've been doing in the city of Casa Grande, right? But over the past year, for those of you that don't know and that are watching with us tonight, the service missionaries from the Arizona Gilbert Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ Latter-day Saints has partnered with the city of Casa Grande through the Casa Grande Neighborhood Cleanup Coalition. helping address some of the challenges facing our neighborhoods including illegal dumping graffiti and areas impacted by homeless related challenges this partnership began when the city identified areas where significant amounts of trash and discarded items were accumulating through conversations with our community partners Staff connected with the service missionaries and began working together with code enforcement, sanitation, and our police department's homeless outreach team. The results of their service has been very, very impressive. From May 2025 through May 2026, The service missionaries participated in 15 graffiti abatement days, helped address 315 cleanup sites, painted 756 fence panels, covered approximately 78,624 square feet of surfaces, and assisted with five encampment and desert cleanup projects. And I know we have some photos here. I think you've been showing them, right, Steven? Yeah. Those numbers represent much more than paint, cleanup sites, and square footage. They represent hundreds of hours and a commitment to making a difference in this community. To all of the service missionaries who have given their time, energy, and talents to serve Casa Grande, thank you. Your commitment has made a real and visible difference in our community, and we truly appreciate the partnership you have built with this city. So it's my pleasure on behalf of the City of Casa Grande City Council and our community to present you with a certificate of recognition in appreciation of your outstanding service and present each of you with the City of Casa Grande pin, which we hope you will wear with pride. Thank you for choosing to serve here in the City of Casa Grande and for helping make our community a better place. We are grateful for all you do. So without I mean, I'm not going to give it yet. I'm going to have Deputy Chief layers come up because I know he would like to say a few words also.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Can I have Scott and Brad? Are you here? Scott here. A couple years ago, we were having issues with the graffiti and the illegal dumping and some of the encampments. So I went to the Faith Alliance Board and Scott was there and I asked if they had any volunteers. Well, within a couple of days, I met with Brad. And as you can see what their missionaries have done, we started going out there and cleaning up these locations, also with our homeless outreach team, just in case we displaced anybody there that was living. We wanted to make sure they were given services. Brad, I know you're not doing it anymore. You're turning it over to somebody else, maybe somebody a little younger. But there is a lot of trash. There was a lot of trash out there. And these kids here are just amazing. I was telling the mayor, they drive up in Altima Nissans together. and they drive in fours and they come out and you think they're hit men when they're coming out to the scene there but we're up there early in the morning all evening there's these are some really big sites that they cleaned it took hours to clean so they've saved the city thousands of dollars and i just want to thank code enforcement byron needs to go out there in his own vehicle with his own equipment to help out and sanitation and also our homeless outreach team but if it wasn't for you folks and your missionary we wouldn't be able to do it so thank you very much Happy to do it. All right? Thanks, Chief. And I know Scott, you want to...

Thank you very much. Thank you, guys. Thank you very much. Okay. You guys want to come?

Thank you very much. Thanks, guys. Wow, you all look so nice. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. I think so. Hopefully. Oh yeah.

painting fences or throwing trash out I hope they really pay attention and see all the work that you wonderful people are doing to keep our city clean so again thank you from the bottom of our hearts we really really appreciate everything you do thank you Next item, I think Jennifer Courtson. We brought props. Oh, OK. I'm going to go get .

Okay.

Good evening.

Hi, Regis.

I'm Regis Summers, and I am an employee of the City of Casa Grande. So a few months ago, we had an incident where someone had struck the outer wall of City Hall. So as I came into work, I saw the original bricks to the building. And then I saw them taken away because they were broken. So it broke my heart. So then I thought, wait a minute, there's more bricks inside. So I got permission and I was able to get a brick for each and every one of you to save. because it's part of our history and part of your history. All of you are alumni from this building. All of you had lunch here in this cafeteria, which is now the chambers. So we'd like to present to you a brick from this building for each of you to have in your homes or in your offices. Aw.

I'm Jennifer Courtson, and I'm the public relations officer for the Casa Grande Union High School District, and I'm also a graduate. And I have with me here Richard Wilkie. He is our governing board member. So I'm really honored to be here tonight, especially. Casa Grande Union, as you know, has been part of this community for generations. And many of the people who have gone through these halls and the halls over on Treckle have gone on to serve Casa Grande in meaningful ways. So tonight we have the unique opportunity to recognize our mayor and city council members not only for the service to our shared connection as Casa Grande Union alumni. So these bricks are more than just part of an old building. They are a tangible reminder of where Casa Grande's history began and the people who have carried that Cougar legacy into our community. We are proud that these former Cougars are now serving our city. So we hope that you will accept these bricks as a small piece of Casa Grande's history and as a reminder that once a Cougar, always a Cougar.

So if you'd like to come down and we'll present the bricks to you. Oh, sure. Show them to me so I know, so I can say that. Oh, sorry.

So first we have Mayor Lisa Navarro Fitzgibbons, class of 1982.

It was already in the newspaper.

Council member Matt Herman, class of 1994. Oh, he's taking a little time.

Don't, oh my gosh, don't rush.

Council member Robert Huddleston, class of 1976. Councilmember Sean Dugan, class of 1994. Councilmember Brent Bedillin, class of 1986. And Councilmember Anthony Edwards, class of 1984. And the baby of the group, yes. Councilmember Rebecca Romo, class of 1995. So thank you very much. If we could get a photo, let me get a photo of all of you. And one, two, three. Thank you very much.

That's great. It's heavy too.

Thank you again, you guys. That's very, very nice.

Put a silencer on it.

Okay. Next on the agenda is our consent agenda. So all items listed under the consent agenda are considered routine and will be approved with one motion and one vote of the council. There will be no separate discussion unless a city council member or member of the public requests removal of an item. Is there anything that the council would like to pull from the consent? Any staff? Nothing or anyone from the public? Okay, we can get a motion to approve, please.

Mayor Fitzgibbons, I move to approve the consent agenda as presented.

Second. Okay, there's been a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Adriana, if we can get a roll call vote, please.

Council Member Romo? Yes. Council Member Dugan?

Yes.

Council Member Edwards? Yes. Council Member Huddleston?

Yes.

Council Member Herman?

Yes.

Mayor Prentice-Pinadon?

Yes.

Mayor Fitzgibbons? Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. OK, next are public comments. So the city of Cascaran values citizens' input. When called, please state your name and address, speak clearly into the microphone, and limit your comments to three minutes or less. In fairness to all speakers, please do not exceed your time. In accordance with the law, the city council cannot respond to or discuss items not listed on the agenda, but may direct them to staff upon conclusion of all public comments. I know I have a couple of speaker cards here, so I'll go ahead and start with the speaker cards. But if you didn't fill out a speaker card, you can definitely still come up and speak. I'll just start with the cards that I received. And the first one is Jacob Petroski. Hi there, Jacob.

Hi, Mayor. Hi, City Council. I wanted to go over the FLOC contract with you guys. I've been reviewing it. And the first part of your contract is the mass surveillance portion that says you guys are collecting data. But you guys own the data, which is the imagery. The second part is how the city grants a worldwide, non-exclusive, irrevocable, royalty-free license to use the imagery. Let me translate that. That's free access to the imagery worldwide forever, right? The second part is where you might be actually breaking the law. We've been told that flock is no different than a police officer standing at every corner with a camera. So let's do some math. Say it's 200 people around the city with a camera for 24 hours, seven days a week, 365 days a year, at minimum wage. That's $26 million. So the question is, where's our $26 million for letting them collect all this data? You see, Flock doesn't have a business without the data. They need it to make their ML models. In fact, if they stop collecting the data, the data becomes stale. That means effectively you guys are giving $26 million worth of data free to flock. Now this is a non-exclusive contract. So the question is, when does my company get access to that data? Are you going to give it to me for free? I want to build a model, right? So I'm not a lawyer. Obviously, Brett will attest to that with my poorly written letters. And this is not legal advice, but under Article 9, Section 7 of the Arizona Constitution, the gift clause, a binding Supreme Court precedent, a city is strictly forbidden from giving away valuable public assets to a private corporation for zero returns. Speculative benefits like improving Flock software do not legally count as payment. That means you've been giving $26 million worth of data each year to a private company, which they need, because they don't know about the new 2026 four-wheel drive car. They need to see it in the wild. You're effectively helping a private company train their AI. for free with taxpayer money. And that's illegal. Just throwing that out there.

Thanks. Thank you, Jacob. OK, next speaker card, Adam Power. Hi there, Adam.

Hello. Good evening. My name is Adam Power, 2053 East Escondido Place. I teach high school here in Casa Grande at Mission Heights Preparatory High School, where among other subjects I teach government, economics, computer applications, and game design. I'm actually here tonight because a group of my students asked me to speak. When I began looking seriously at this issue, I realized it sits at the intersection of almost everything I teach them. How should government use its power? What are we willing to trade for security? How much trust should we place in technology? And what happens when the systems we create don't behave the way we intended? Those are questions I ask my students to wrestle with. Tonight, I think we owe it to them to wrestle with those questions ourselves. I want Casa Grande to be safe. I want criminals caught. I want our police to have effective tools to protect us. The disagreement isn't about whether we want safety. It's about how much freedom we should surrender in pursuit of it. Our federal constitution reflects a deep skepticism towards unchecked government power. The Fourth Amendment protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures, and right here in Arizona, our own constitution goes further in its language. Article 2, Section 8 is titled Right to Privacy. It says that no person shall be disturbed in their private affairs without authority of law. Technology complicates what those protections mean. The Supreme Court has recognized that there is a constitutional difference between being observed during a single trip in public and using technology to compile records of our movements. Just this year, in Chaudhry v. United States, the court reaffirmed that Americans have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their physical movements, even when that information is collected technologically and stored in a private company. That doesn't automatically make every public camera unconstitutional, but it should make us ask a serious question. When does observation become surveillance? There is a difference between an officer seeing my car drive down a street and building a technological system capable of recording, storing, connecting, and searching the movements of thousands of people who are suspected of nothing. Oh my gosh. Every society asks us to surrender some freedom. I surrender my freedom to steal from you, and in exchange, I gain the far greater freedom of knowing you cannot steal from me. That's the social contract. So whenever government asks us to surrender another piece of liberty, we should ask, what greater freedom are we receiving in return? And we must consider the cost when these systems fail. Earlier this year in Arkansas, an automated license plate camera missed a plate. Police stopped an innocent couple at gunpoint while their six-year-old baby was in the back seat. A mistake in Google Maps might cause you to take a wrong turn, and a mistake in government surveillance system could put a gun in your face. I guess I'm out of time, but I only have like a paid... Go ahead. Oh, I appreciate that. I appreciate that. It doesn't appreciate it as much. I recently spoke with a former student of mine who's now a police officer. I'm enormously proud of the man he's become. He told me these cameras are useful to law enforcement. I do believe him. I believe he wants to solve crimes and protect innocent people. That's what we should want from our police, but our responsibilities are different. It's the responsibility of law enforcement to enforce our laws effectively. It's the responsibility of citizens to decide what powers we should give them to do it. We don't limit government power because we think the people holding it are evil. We limit government power because no one can guarantee who will hold it tomorrow. Governments change, political parties change, police leadership changes, technology changes, private companies change. If you're a conservative, ask yourself whether you'd want the surveillance infrastructure controlled by the most progressive government you can imagine. If you're a liberal, ask whether you'd want it controlled by the most conservative government you can imagine or by a corporation whose interests don't align with yours. Just about there. If either answer makes you uncomfortable, perhaps the problem isn't who's holding the power. Perhaps the problem is the power itself. I don't know who will control these systems 10 years from now, but I know who will live under the decisions. My students will. They're the reason I'm standing here tonight. The question isn't whether surveillance can make us safer. The question is whether the amount of freedom we surrender is worth the amount of safety we gain. I don't believe it is. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, next I have Michael Henryon. Michael, do I, I probably butchered it again, didn't I? Henryon, okay. Okay, good, thank you.

I make the kids call me Mr. H. It's easier for them. 2552 North Milley Place. Locations that have discontinued, suspended their mass surveillance contracts in Arizona in the past two weeks are Goodyear, Surprise, Chandler, Apache Junction. They've all seen anomalies in their internal audit system. Basically, they've found officers misusing the system. I'm happy to see. Then internal audits of the system are finally catching people misusing the system instead of citizens having to do the work. They've either fired those officers, voluntarily exited the police force, or they are on indefinite leave. In Pinal County, they've ended their mass surveillance contract due to the same reasons I have come to this city council many times, Fourth Amendment violations and already widely documented misuse of mass surveillance systems. Let's talk about the psychology that's going on here in Casa Grande. The theory here, I believe, is that the innocent law-abiding citizens are easier to control. In Sweden, which has a growing gang population in the last decade, has placed ankle tracking devices on citizens at risk of being recruited, making life more difficult for law-abiding citizens. as opposed to going after the gang recruiters. Why? Well, it's easier to control law-abiding citizens and safer for the police to then go after the criminals. Hmm, it's like placing a mass surveillance system over 200 cameras across the city. Law-abiding citizens are more willing to put up with this abuse where criminals won't even follow basic laws. You may have seen in Germany, there have been a large rise in knife attacks. In response to this, they've installed anti-knife zones, authorizing police to place their hands in normal people's pockets in search of weapons, not much unlike breaking the Fourth Amendment and installing a dragnet of cameras across the city. The illusion of helping the community must continue, though. As a teacher, and I believe there is one on your board, you should know one of the cardinal rules of a teacher. It is to circulate, circulate, circulate. You must be moving around the classroom, not just standing in one place, you know, kind of like staring at cameras, looking at your citizens or your students. When you circulate, students are able to access you. When they know you are there, they're more likely to do the work or follow the rules that are set in place. I've noticed a sharp decline in Casa Grande police movement around the city, maybe because they're all stuck in front of those computer screens instead of circulating the community. I've seen Pinellas County sheriffs more than our own police department. Is that how it's supposed to work? Maybe. I doubt it. Even in one of the CG Safe Cities blasts, they talk about how Pinal County sheriffs have alerted about how a citizen was driving unsafely, not our mass surveillance system. Please reconsider the use of this mass surveillance system in our wonderful city. Thank you.

Thank you, Michael. Next. The next part I have is Barbara Sundust.

My name is Barbara Sandus and I live at 1273 East Cordova Avenue. My pleas to the city council and the community is to think of all the people in Casa Grande. That includes the homeless for whom we still offer little help except to move them along, find them and put them in prison for a day or two. In my laundry love experience, I have met many elderly women who are struggling to find a place to live. And it's not because they want to live on the street, it's not because they're lazy, it's not because they have any bad habits, it's because their rent has increased so much that they can't live there so they have to try and find someplace else to live and there's just little them and anyway my my plea again to the city is to take some of the funds that we use for community funds like the pickleball court and take some of that money and use it and and then last time I was here, and the gentleman, a lawyer, who came and talked about the, oh, I can never think of that, the, what are they gonna build here? Data centers. And he said that they would be willing somebody of that group, I don't know who it is, would be willing to give five million dollars to the city as an incentive, which, kind of like a bribe, to build the data centers. And so they're giving five million, and you, so okay, take four million, or five million, but take one million of that and do something for the homeless people. that the gentleman that has living in at Melrose, there are nice places, I went to it today, took me a while to find it, but I went to it today and there are nice places and he would do more if he had a chance, but still it's $800 a month. They can't afford $800 a month, so if the city would subsidize him, or some other apartment complex, then maybe these people would have a place to live. And I mean, I just, elderly women who can't find a place to live, honestly, what would you do if your mom, for some other reason, her rent was too high and she couldn't go someplace, what would we do, just leave her, find a place where she has to live in her car, or? whatever live with somebody that's not supposed to have somebody living with them because that's illegal according to the apartment anyway just truly ask that you consider some way that we can help, like this gentleman, Kasib Habel, he would love to do more, but he's gotta make a living too. So anyway, my plea is just to help these people and help subsidize some of these apartments or something so people, women, these elderly women can live there. Thank you. Thank you, Barbara. Thank you.

Okay, those were the only speaker cards I had, but is there anyone else that would like to speak? Sure, and if you can give us your name and address, please.

I'm Cassie Pavel, 628 West Melrose Drive. I'm the gentleman that Barbara was speaking about. It's good to see you, Mayor. Just to piggyback kind of off of that, we just kind of came up with the idea when I went over to Laundrie Love, and we were just going off of if it was a possibility for the city to see some type of pilot program, if they could... potentially subsidize half of the bed, so no more than $400 from the city coming in. If they have income already coming in from Social Security, some type of income already, it would go a lot further. We could potentially place 11 people in the house or more housing, just depending on the subsidy and their income levels. And I just would love to try some type of program half the amount, something, five people, just something to get it going, because I feel like it could be a big help, especially for our senior population. Just running this so far, it's been great seeing the stories and helping the ladies here in our community. And I know we can have a further impact if we look into more options here. not to replace any project or anything like that but just to test something out on the next ring if somebody needs a major emergency shelter that's good for the hotels or motels to get them placed but if they are able to have some type of income and they can go to that next step of transitioning and then their own private housing i would just like to throw that idea out there so love to sit down with you guys if you guys have the opportunity thank you thank you thank you for coming

Is there anyone else that would like to speak?

Anyone else?

No? Okay, then I'm going to go ahead and close the public comments. And now we're on item I1. And I believe that's Brenda, she's coming up. No, it's not Brenda. It says finance director, it looks like it's Dwayne.

Council or the contract or Dwayne. Like for me.

You're you're my business. There you go.

Staff recommends the mayor and council word contract to Horrocks for traffic engineering services in the amount not to exceed a $151,200. For the remainder of 2026 calendar year. The city ran a qualifications-based solicitation to hire a traffic engineering firm and selected Horrocks as the most qualified. This contract fills a gap since the city engineering division currently has no in-house traffic engineer. Horrocks will conduct traffic studies and engineering reviews, support capital improvement programs, provide technical assistance to city signal technicians, deliver expert presentations to the Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council, and other public bodies. This will ensure the city has continuous access to professional traffic engineering expertise to keep the transportation system safe and efficient. What are your questions?

Any questions, comments? And this is just for the remainder of this year, right, Duane?

Yes. Right, okay.

No questions, comments?

No.

All right.

Oh, do you have one? I thought you were raising your hand.

Okay, there's no questions, comments. We'll go ahead and if we can get a resolution number, please.

Resolution number 5963, a resolution of the Council of the City of Casa Grande, Arizona, accepting the proposal for traffic engineering services from Horrocks LLC, authorizing expenditure of public funds and authorizing the execution of a contract with or purchase order to Horrocks LLC.

Mayor Fitzgibbons, aye. Would move to approve resolution number 5963 as presented.

Second. Okay, there's been a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Okay, Adriana, if we can get a roll call vote, please.

Council Member Romo? Yes. Council Member Dugan?

Yes.

Council Member Edwards? Yes. Council Member Huddleston? Yes. Council Member Herman? Yes. Mayor Pro Tempa-Dillon?

Yes.

Mayor Fitzgibbons? Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. Item K1, I believe that's what I have next, right? Yeah. Brenda.

good evening mayor members of the council this item before you tonight is for consideration of approval of a resolution for the sale and issuance of general obligation bonds and a special bond election held november 8 2022 the issuance of general obligation bonds by the city was approved by the qualified electors for the city of the city for streets and transit improvements Voters authorized GEO bonds in the amount of $51 million. This resolution authorizes the issuance of up to $38 million of GEO bonds, which includes an anticipated issuance of $35 million, bond issuance costs and unanticipated project costs, as well as potential bond issuance premiums. The remaining portion of the $51 million authorization is intended to be issued in future years, potentially in fiscal year 28. In addition to the issuance of the $35 million of new money for street improvements, staff is requesting authorization to refund portions of the existing 2016A and 2016B series geo bonds. The 2016A bonds were issued to provide funding to design, construct, furnish, and equip the recreation center in accordance with bond authorization that was approved by the voters November 7th of 2006. The 2016A and B issues to be refunded were callable August 1st, 2026. The GO bond refunding will have a direct impact on the general fund and an estimated savings of approximately $654,831. Due to favorable market conditions, the refunding and new bond sale are anticipated to occur in early October, 2026. There's certain guidelines, guardrails, if you will, within this, offering statement that will allow the city to wait to do the issuance due to items such as rising interest rates that would make it not beneficial for the city to issue debt at this time. So we do have those guardrails in place for that purpose. Issuance of the GO bond debt, both the new and the refunding, will have a direct impact on the secondary property tax rate of this city. Assuming an average growth of 2.5% in our assessed valuations over the term of the bonds and utilizing funds on hand, it's anticipated that the bonds can be structured in such a way as to have a level impact on the secondary tax rate. of the city and it's anticipated to be maintained at approximately $1.129 per $100 of assessed valuation and that will be level across the term of the debt. Should this resolution be approved tonight, it will provide for the sale and issuance of the bonds, the series 2026A, and the general obligation refunding bonds, and the annual levy of a tax for the payment of the bonds. Authority will be delegated to the mayor, city manager, and finance director to execute the necessary documents for the sale and issuance of the bonds. Also with me tonight, I want to recognize Nick Dodd with Raymond James. He's going to be the bond underwriter on the GeoBond sale. And Zach Sakis from Greenberg Trowel Rig is gonna be bond council on the sale. And if you have any questions, both of them are here to help answer questions, technical questions on the 2016 refunding that I wasn't here for and don't know all of the details behind. So if you have any questions, the three of us will try to tag team some answers.

Thank you, and thanks for being here. Any questions at this point? Matt, go ahead.

I wonder, maybe Nick could give layman's terms of what's happening here instead of the. And again, these are bonds that we have voted on that the people of Casa Grande have voted on to be sold for transportation and like McCartney Road right now is part of this.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and members of the council. Nick Dodd with Raymond James. It's a pleasure to be here this evening. As Brenda mentioned, the city's been going through for a while now a process to get to this point. The election was four years ago almost for the streets. And as part of that, earlier this summer, we did a bond rating presentation. both Fitch and Standard & Poor's came and visited the city. We're very impressed with the growth and all the things going on, and those rating outcomes were very positive. As we've gotten ready to sell the bonds, we were focused primarily on the new money bonds, so the road improvements from 2022. We identified a possibility to refinance some of the old bonds that have been outstanding for 10 years. And just to kind of keep it simple, if you have a mortgage on your home, you can refinance your mortgage tomorrow if you want. And a month later, if rates went lower again, you could refinance a month later. With municipal bonds, it's very common that for a 10-year period of time from the time you sold those bonds, that you're locked out of being able to do a refinancing. So in a perfect world the city could have refinanced it in 2020 or 2021 when rates were very low because of covid and everything going on but unfortunately we are in that lockout period and so it was only earlier this year as we were approaching the august uh 2026 date that brenda mentioned that we could even start to consider it and And fortunately, we were about ready to do a new money bond for the street improvement, so it made a lot of sense to combine those two issues. To be honest with you, today, there is a fair amount of volatility in the market, and we've discussed with staff that we may end up just doing the new money bond. bond issue, the $35 million, because the savings that the city could achieve either aren't realized or they're not sufficient enough that city staff decides they don't want to move forward with them. So the goal here was to have the flexibility to try to save the city and the taxpayers money. And if when the city's ready to sell those new money bonds, the refinancing of the older bonds makes sense, then we would include that in the bonds that are offered. And if they're not, then it doesn't cost the city anything to at least have this ability to consider it. All right.

hopefully that yeah helps nick i knew you could do it good question yes that's what brenda said but like no offense but yes thanks nick yeah no thank you any other questions comments okay so the 35 million is the mccartney road improvements well more than more than the worker more than that i think no no it's more than that yeah no but this initial 35 is it is for the mccartney road improvements right yes

Okay.

I just got a quick question. You mentioned the lock in on those interest rates for 10 years on those bonds the first time. Is there a possibility, are we locked in at this point? Like what if two years from now interest rates start to drop again and can we do this again to save more money?

So first of all these bonds would be sold in the coming months and when they're sold it is customary that there would be another 10 year period we could shorten that investors kind of. extract a premium if you want that security yeah because they like to know that for 10 years they're they don't want their bonds to be called they would rather earn their interest because you guys are a great credit so we evaluate the ability to do shorter or different call optionality but a lot of the time it's it's kind of cost prohibitive and i think for most folks If you can lock in, we think it'll be around 4% on this for 20 years fixed rate. If you never do anything again, you're done. A lot of people today would say, I'll take that versus get a premium and maybe you get some refunding in the future. But you absolutely on these bonds in 10 years could reconsider a refinancing then. And the city's done that a lot over the years.

Makes sense. Thank you.

Mm-hmm.

along that line too i believe one of our strategies is why we don't sell the whole bond issuance at one time so then we always have stability stagger as we go along yeah madam mayor and members of the council just to that point um if for some reason the market doesn't make sense and the savings aren't deemed to be sufficient the city could because there is plans as you all know to do some park improvements and other roads right The city is going to have a couple opportunities to look at this, but some of those bonds are maturing right now in the next year or two. So obviously as bonds get paid off in their final maturity, the savings on those particular ones go away. So we could be talking about this again in a year or two. Right.

And just to clarify, how much money are we saving the city right now by doing this?

It's anticipated that it's going to be about $654 million.

$654 million in savings. $1,000. $1,000. $1,000. $64,000. That would be a lot better if it was a million.

We all knew what you were talking about.

We would be very excited in selling bonds tomorrow for $600 million.

Okay, great. Thank you. Any other questions, comments? Okay. Thank you. So if there's no more questions, comments, if we can get a resolution number, please, Adriana.

Resolution number 5, 9, 6, 4, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Casa Grande, Pinal County, Arizona. One, providing for the sale and issuance of City of Casa Grande, Arizona general obligation bonds series 2026A and general obligation refunding bonds series 2026B and for the annual levy of the tax for the payment of the bonds. Two, approving the form and authorizing the execution and necessary agreements, instruments, and documents related to the sale and issuance of the bonds. Three, delegating authority to the mayor, the city manager, and the finance director to determine certain matters in terms with respect to the foregoing as well as certain matters with respect to certain bonds being refunded with the proceeds of the sale of the bonds. Four, adopting written policies and procedures for tax advantage obligations and procedures for compliance with continuing disclosure undertakings. And five, authorizing the taking of all other actions necessary to consummate the transactions contemplated by this resolution and ratifying all actions taken to further this resolution.

Mayor Fitzgibbons, I move that we approve resolution number 5964 as presented. Second.

It has been a motion and a second is there any further discussion. He ran if we can get a roll call vote, please.

Councilmember Rommel yes, councilmember doing yes. Councilmember Edwards, yes. Councilmember Huddleston, yes. Councilmember Herman, yes. Mayor person but Dylan, yes. Mayor Fitzgibbon, yes motion carries.

Thank you. Okay, item K-2. That's Dwayne, right, Dwayne?

Yep, I'm back. You're back.

So staff recommends that the mayor and city council approve an intergovernmental agreement to allow the Arizona Department of Transportation to administer a multi-use path project at Viola Street from Pinal Avenue to Casa Grande Avenue. In May of 2023, city staff applied for ADOT Transportation Alternatives Program. Eligible project purposes included projects that would enhance safety and mobility for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders. As a compliment to the ADOT Hawk signal project to Pennell Avenue while staff recommended by all the street from Pennell to Casa Grande Avenue to be awarded grant funding for design and construction of a multi-use path. In December 2025, the project was deemed to be eligible and selected to receive funding in the amount of $996,751 with a city match of $60,249. This project will improve pedestrian mobility and ADA accessibility along Viola Street between Pinal Avenue and Casa Grande Avenue through the construction of a shared youth path, replacement and widening of sidewalks, installation of ADA-compliant curb ramps, upgraded pedestrian crossings, and associated roadway improvements. The project will enhance connectivity between adjacent neighborhoods Frank Pratt Park and the city's pedestrian network while improving safety and extending the surface life of existing infrastructure. The project will support three of the general plan goals. Provide a safe, connected, and accessible multimodal transportation system. Provide an integrated system of parks, trails, and open space that enhances the quality of life. Improve and reinvest in existing neighborhoods and public infrastructure. With that, what are your questions? Okay, Matt.

Thanks, Duane. I know this kind of goes with the crosswalk that the state's putting in there. On Pinal so it extends that so we had a lot of questions. I'm sorry and I this morning I got this I emailed Steven to get this map because I drove this on Saturday a few times Trying to figure out what we were going to do because there's a nice sidewalk from Park all the way to Cascade Avenue along the the Spanish trails subdivision there and then it does definitely need it from from the The frontage road there up to park on that South side of the road. And so I'm asking questions to myself, like, why they're building a new crosswalk. I know the state's doing that. Are they can put any sidewalks from there on the other side of now? I don't know if you know that again. I know that's not in your scope or anything to do with this, but it's kind of related. And then does this go with our. Trail master plan. And then third, like a million dollars? I mean, that's, I asked Brent, whose real job is building roads and stuff in his civilian life, and I'm like, man, we used to build a mile of road for a million dollars, but I don't know if that's, you know, realistic anymore. And I know it's a government grant, which is our money coming back to us. The government didn't make this for us, and if we don't take it, I'm sure they'll give it to Eloy or Maricopa or somebody, but... CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THIS, LIKE THE COST OF THESE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, TEN, ELEVEN, LIKE 12 CURBS AND THEN WE'RE EIGHTH OF A MILE OF SIDEWALK? SO THOSE CURBS. NO OFFENSE. THAT WAS A LOT. I KNOW. BUT I APPRECIATE IT.

SO, YEAH. I MEAN, THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE ADA RAMPS IS AROUND $25,000 EACH IN THIS CASE. So that adds up right away to a bunch of money. And then, I don't remember what the thousand, or the mile of sidewalk cost.

Yeah, I mean roads used to, I'm just going off topic.

A mile of roads, about 12, 13 million.

Yeah, and now looking at all this cost breakdown, it says linear feet of curb and gutter, it says one linear foot for 35,000. I imagine that's not quite accurate, but. I mean, did we put these costs together? Did the state? And then you got the state's $30,000 handling fee, of course. Thank you.

It's a combination of us and them. One of the things to remember with ADOT administrating it, right away there's a 30% cost. I know.

I'm joking. I get it. It's nothing to do with us, but it is.

Yeah, and we have our cost estimating company

review all our estimates, make sure they're in the ballpark. And I'm all for trails and multi and doing this stuff, but it was just kind of shocking to me for the million dollar price tag of this small project. But I know things cost more than they did 10 years ago for sure. So you looked, your team looked at it and you're...

Yes, we're comfortable with it. And you think it's gonna be... Because of ADOT being involved.

You think it's gonna be on budget and everything?

Yes, we have budget. Okay.

I drove it like, I had to drive it like four times this weekend, and I was like, man, that's crazy, but it's a nice area. Yeah, that south sidewalk is, I know that's the goal, what to look like along there, and that's a great looking area with that, and I remember when we did work with Spanish Charles West, they helped a lot putting that trail in to connect with all of our trails, so. Yeah. So thanks for answering my questions, Dwayne.

Matt, I would just say, yeah, if you're looking at this, linear foot, no, I'm sure it's lump sum. I know it's the whole thing, but it does say linear foot, and it does, you know, I'm just kind of, it's not a... The way they've done this cost estimate, it's just a full dollar value.

For example, $300,000 of this is design, so it's $700,000 for all the sidewalk work.

Understood, I just wanted to ask.

But those are all just estimates at this point, right? That's not, we don't have a contract. No, it hasn't been bid yet. $300,000 to do it.

It won't move ahead until we either approve or disapprove it tonight.

What's that?

It won't move ahead with it unless we approve or disapprove it tonight.

um yeah i got a quick question uh beyond the grant uh what response responsibility with what percentage of the city be responsible is responsible for any portion of this how much yes our match is sixty thousand sixty thousand okay so the city would be responsible for sixty thousand dollars of this project what what if it comes in under budget are we out i mean can we just do we have to put that forward as a city proportion

So we usually pay that up front to ADOT. Up front, okay. And then at the end, if it comes in with less money, they refund some of it.

Okay.

Or they come back and ask for a little bit more.

Oh, I don't want no more. Thank you.

So ADOT's portion is $996,751 and ours is $60,249, right? Yes. Okay.

Did you have another?

Well, I'm just gonna, so right now we're not, it's not a million dollars right now, right? We think it could be a million dollars. That's what the grant is for. But once we approve it, then ADOT will start the process of putting it out to bid for designers. Once we get the design, then put it out to bid for the work itself.

Yes, that's true, and remember the construction is two or three years away, so we're kind of guessing what the prices are then. And we're being conservative.

Do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do we do And it looks like this is to connect. So there's a crosswalk. So now we have connectivity into the neighborhood. You know, so but is there in there some sidewalk? It looks like that's really that southern side. So it looks like we're trying to make it 88 and, you know, to get get connectivity, get people. So we're people. complaining or any on Viola?

I will say I actually have gotten complaints about from the frontage road to park from both sides of the street about because the north side and they had like broken down entrances those got fixed by the city and then on the south side people have talked to me about how bad because if you drive right there that sidewalk is non-existent and then the sidewalk's really small and then it gets to this big nice wide multi-mobile path and it's really nice and I was like I was like, I hope they're not tearing that out to do, but no, they're just connecting to that. Sorry to interrupt, but yes, I actually have gotten complaints about that.

That's kind of what I was wondering, too, is why was this area identified for the grant?

Right, okay. So why did they not bill the Hawk signal? Yes. So there was a fatality there, which caused it to qualify for federal safety funds. which we paid nothing for that. And yeah, it looks like a path to nowhere, I would agree. But eventually there's going to be development on the west side of Pinell, so why not, at no cost to us, put up the hawk signal and then that, got us to look connectivity, and that's why we're here tonight.

Minimal cost to us.

Thank you, Dwayne. One more, Dwayne.

Speaking of the Hawk, and I brought it, can you ask your friends at ADOT if they're planning to put more sidewalks? You know, because right when you go there, there's a site I drive by it every every day and there's a little bit of sidewalk in there and it's dirt and I know we're hardy people in casting and walked across plenty dirt in my life, but I would like if we can see what we can do. I thought I saw a rep out here tonight too, but maybe we could get some money for that.

It does have a project on panel from Florence Boulevard too. Coast Branch or somewhere out there, I don't know exactly, where they're gonna repave it, fix sidewalks and do all that. Oh, sidewalks too. All right, thanks, Dwayne. But we're still in the middle of negotiating all that. I think they're a few years away from doing that. Okay.

But it's on the radar.

Yes. Yes, it is. We hassle them a lot.

Okay, any other questions, comments? Okay, thanks, Dwayne. Okay is ran if we can get an ordinance number.

Ordinance number 3, 5, 1, 7, and ordinance of the Council of the City of Casa Grande, Arizona authorizing an intergovernmental agreement between Arizona Department of Transportation and the City of Casa Grande to administer a multi-use path project authorizing the expenditure of public funds and authorizing the execution of an agreement by the city manager.

Mayor Fitzgibbons, I move approval of ordinance number 3517 as presented. Second.

It has been a motion and a second any further discussion. If we can get a roll call vote, please.

Councilmember Rimmel. Yes. Councilmember Dugan.

Yes.

Councilmember Edwards. Yes. Councilmember Huddleston.

Yes.

Councilmember Herman.

Yes.

Mayor Pro Temporello.

Yes.

Mayor Fitzgibbons. Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you.

Okay.

And item L1. James, nice to see you, James.

Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and members of council. So in front of you this evening is a zone change request to accommodate a proposal by the Apostolic Tabernacle. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Rodeo and Casa Grande Avenue. It's approximately four and a half acres in size. The current zoning of this property is Urban Ranch. It's the same zoning as the properties that lie to the south along the east side of Casa Grande. However, other than that band of urban ranch zoning, because of its location along Rodeo, there's actually a variety of adjacent zone districts. There's a planned area development to the east for potential medium density residential. And then to the north is a single family neighborhood. And then on the other side of Casa Grande Avenue is another single family neighborhood. The request is to change this 4 1⁄2 acres of property to B2, which is a general business zone. It would be similar to the B2 zoning that you see further to the east on the other side of Codota. Within the existing urban ranch zone, the permitted uses would include single family residential, which is in the area, but unlike the other single family residential, the urban ranch zone requires a minimum of 1.25 acres per lot. So at most you would get three lots for three homes in that area. It also allows agricultural operations and cell towers if they are at 28 feet in height or less. And then with the approval of conditional use permits subject to consideration by the Planning Commission, there's a whole host of other uses, including religious institutions. And again, the applicant of this request is a religious institution. And with the approval of the C U P conditional use permit. The religious institution would be beholden to a minimum of 50 foot setback from all property lines. And that's kind of actually the driver for the request to the B two zone. The challenge with this property is that even though it's over four acres in size, it's a very shallow parcel, 300 feet deep off of Rodeo, but 640 feet wide from Casa Grande eastward. And the challenges is that this applicant was gifted a prefabricated building that they're arranging to be relocated from its current location offsite to this location in Casa Grande. If it were a stick built building that could comply with the 50 foot setbacks, there wouldn't be any concern. But because the building comes in this configuration, there's some challenges slightly with respect to the dimensions on the slot. They basically would have a 200 foot by 540 foot building envelope taking into consideration the 50 foot minimum requirements in the urban ranch zone district that actually would work for this site, however. Um, upon construction of this or development of the slot, we would require additional right of way dedication for Rodeo Road because Rodeo Road is designated as a minor arterial and there ultimately needs to be some additional right of way dedication south of the center line. We already have the appropriate dedication north of the center line, but development of this parcel would precipitate development of the eastbound leg of Rodeo, ultimately being two lanes of travel, bike lane, sidewalk, etc. And so with that right-of-way dedication, 25 feet worth, that would actually narrow that building envelope and property depth from 300 feet to 275 feet. And It would create a challenge based on the configuration of the building. However, in the B2 zone district, the minimum setback for anything from residential areas is 45 feet. So 50 would be the reality in the urban ramp zone. 45 feet would be the distance minimum from the residential area and the B2. And so that would actually be just a very subtle But the real reason for the request is in order to be respectful and to maximize compatibility from the adjacent residential, they would like to cite the building to be as close to rodeo as possible. And in the urban ramp zone, you have to be 50 feet from all of the property lines. In the B2 zoning, they could be as close as 45 feet from the residential, sure, but they can be 35 feet from Rodeo. And actually, with the way that they are conceptually planning to place the building, it will be more than the 50 feet that would be afforded to them in the urban rent zone from residential. They actually can place the building to meet all the other setbacks a distance of 60 feet from that south boundary. And the reason why they're able to do that is they can push the building as close as 35 feet from the rodeo boundary. The proposed building is 20 feet in height, and it's a 28,000 square foot building, I should add. However, I do want to say that this zoning, if approved, wouldn't only allow a church. We have to consider whether or not the zoning is appropriate for any possible uses. But upon evaluating the area, knowing that Rodeo is a minor arterial, and knowing that development there would be beholden to a 45 foot setback from residential and anything that develops there would be subject to further site plan review which would take into consideration matters such as traffic on the surrounding infrastructure, not just from a road standpoint, but utilities and drainage. This site is appropriate given the general plan designation which is the review criteria that gets considered when looking at zone changes. Within the general plan, this area's within the neighborhood's land use, which supports the B2 zone district. Interestingly, the current zoning of Urban Ranch is not identified as a supportable zone district in the neighborhood's category. So if we were having the opposite conversation for some reason, if someone was looking at a change of B2 to urban ranch, it would not be supported by the existing general plan category. there within the general plan it does limit commercial on sites not greater than 30 acres which this would have no problem complying with of course and it would meet one of the guiding principles which is supporting development on vacant infill lots that can be efficiently served by municipal services With development of this parcel, it is more likely to be something than urban ranch, especially along a busy roadway with urban ranch. Like I mentioned, you'd only get about three single family lots. And there are screening measures that that could take place as we look at it from a site plan perspective. Another aspect that we look at with regard to criteria is that non-residential development is limited to a maximum floor area ratio of 0.25. which means that a single story building can take up not more than 25% of the lot. So it really wouldn't lead to a significant impact from a bulk and scale standpoint. And not more than 12% of the neighborhood's land use area within a half mile shall be used for commercial developments. And that also meets that criteria. With regard to the notification process, the city followed that which was required by city code. There was one email provided as a part of the notification efforts that have been shared with Planning Commission and Council. And the email was from a nearby property owner a little bit to the west. But they contended that the urban ramp zoning should be preserved to maintain a lower density environment. They felt that the zoning wouldn't be compatible and that they were concerned about introducing traffic due to sidewalks not being a requirement in the urban ranch zone. And they saw that a church use would see an increase in traffic volume. We would be sensitive to the adjacent urban ranch area, and it is true, in urban ranch, sidewalks are not a requirement. But as a B2 zone, they would certainly be required to construct a sidewalk along Rodeo and their portion of Casa Grande. We're abutting Casa Grande Avenue. And from the conceptual layout, they're not planning to direct traffic towards Casa Grande. To that neighbor's point, those streets really aren't designed to accommodate commercial traffic. And so therefore, because of that existing condition, it's highly likely that the site would be configured to direct traffic to Rodeo. If they were going to be reliant on adjacent streets, those would probably have to be enhanced and improved to be able to accommodate that volume. At its July meeting, the Planning Commission recommended unanimously to forward a vote to City Council to approve this zone change with the standard condition of record regarding the dedication of right-of-way should the city need it for an improvement project. And that concludes my presentation.

Thank you, James. Any questions from the Council?

Go ahead, Matt. You're talking about exiting the traffic onto Rodeo, but then them having to dedicate the right-of-way of Rodeo if it changes to B2. Would they be responsible for building that lane then so that they could put the traffic onto Rodeo? Or how would that work?

Council Member Herman, typically we would be looking at that as a required public improvement. It is largely gonna be dependent on what the findings of their traffic analysis shows and the timing of when exactly they would be moving forward because it might just coincidentally overlap with some city improvement project as it is, but it would be coordinated with the applicant.

So if they didn't, then they would have to make little driveways across the 25 foot right away or whatever to rodeo, right?

Thanks. Any other questions?

Sure, but what are the height restrictions differences between urban ranch and B2?

So in urban ranch, the maximum height is 28 feet and in B2 the maximum height is 35.

And right now their billing is at 20. Correct. If that's the one they go with. So I guess that would be the only thing I could think of is to put a condition on it for height restrictions so that they don't extend that above that 20 foot if something else were to come up later on.

Yeah, in case they decide to build something else besides a church. Yeah.

Just because I understand their need for the setbacks. Understood. I'm okay with changing some setbacks. I like how they've positioned it. My only other concern would be the height. So I guess that would be my only comment to it is that if we approve that we put that condition on it.

I would agree with that for the neighbors. I mean, because they're already having concerns about the traffic and everything else. I would imagine their concerns would go even higher if the height was to go up on that building.

And their expectation when they bought their all-urban ranch that it would be at?

Yes, 20 feet.

28? Yeah, an urban ranch, the maximum height's 28. It just happens to be that this proposed building's 20.

And so with this, can we cap it at 28 then and just leave it at that instead of 35?

You certainly have the option to do that. I always try to say, and as Mr. Gaglia already said, you should look at it as whether the zoning area is appropriate, right? Because we always try to end up fitting a particular use in that may not make a lot of sense. Next door to that, you've got potentially medium density residential, which probably has that same 35 foot cap. But 28, if that's the council's preferences, that's certainly going to be an option that you can put on there. I always recommend as well, I'm not sure if the applicant is here, that we have that conversation with the applicant prior to putting on additional conditions that we don't do in other B2 zones.

So you're saying that the residential that's around that is that 35 feet now?

No, I think the other piece, but the urban ranch zone would be limited to 28. So I would certainly recommend if you're going to condition it, that you do it at 28, which would be keeping it at the same height that it is today, as opposed to reducing that height. Yeah, I think that's what we want to do.

I thought you said 20 feet. Yeah, the 20 foot building that they're going to bring in, correct? 20 foot is the height, so it'll be eight foot underneath the restriction on Urban Ranch. I guess that was my intent, was just leave the height of where Urban Ranch is at.

We would keep it at that, if the applicant's willing to.

Makes sense. Well, this is a public hearing, so maybe let's open it up for a public hearing. Is there anyone that would like to speak on this issue? No? Okay, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Is the applicant here? Oh, sure. If you can step up. We just had a couple questions here for you.

My name is Abram Salas. I'm with Patriot Service General Contracting. I'm also representing the client. We also have another representative with us here from them. So if you have any questions, I'll be able to help you out as much as I can.

So I think the question was as far as putting that height height restriction even though it's 20 you you're building is 20 feet But keeping it at the 28 foot would that be a problem for you?

I don't foresee it being a problem I know eventually they would like to build another sanctuary to the west of where the roundabout area is but I don't think they're planning on going that high because it just be just for the sanctuary and 30 foot there 35 foot sanctuary would be pretty massive and So I don't foresee a problem with that. Do you?

Bell towers or anything like that? You don't want to put any towers up right now? Oh, a steeple. Yeah, a steeple. Steeple, there you go.

Well, even with the steeple, if we do that on the sanctuary where they plan on building their future sanctuary, if we do a steeple, it shouldn't go that high, honestly. I think 28 feet, I think it's very reasonable.

Very reasonable, okay.

That's good. Yeah.

Yeah.

And James, that was the comment that you got as far as the resident that sent the email, right? That was the biggest concern there?

Well, besides the traffic.

Well, traffic. And the traffic will, with the site plan, there'll be the traffic study and recommendations and all that will come later.

Yeah, right. Because the concern was on Cascade Avenue. Right, Cascade Avenue. And I think, and because of that, that's where that question came up. Because they thought, because you're going to have a church there, that you would have more traffic on Cascade Avenue. But I believe it's going to still be Rodeo Road. They'll just be exiting off and getting right on Rodeo Road there. Right. Yeah.

Yeah, currently right now we have that as we do have two entrances into the property from rodeo. It's going to be the main entrance. What you see up there is going to be the entrance and exit. We are doing a safety entrance as well for the fire department right around the roundabout area, which would be chained off only just for safety vehicles and fire departments and stuff.

Okay. Any other questions for him? Anyone? No? Okay. I think we're good. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, so if we can get, let's see, I think we, do we want to go ahead and do an ordinance? Do we need a motion then or call the ordinance first, right?

Yeah, we would call the ordinance first and then we can talk about how you want to move it from there. Okay.

Great. Okay, so we'll get the ordinance first. Okay.

Ordinance number 1178.478, an ordinance of the Council of the City of Casa Grande, Arizona, amending zoning ordinance number 1178 and its subsequent amendments by changing the zoning from Irvin Ranch UR to General Business B2 on property generally located at the southeast corner of Rodeo Road and Casa Grande Avenue, Casa Grande, Arizona.

And at this point, I think the council would have a couple of different options based on what I'm hearing, right? The first would be to move the ordinance as presented, and then you'd have a motion to amend that. Alternatively, you could move the motion to approve the ordinance while numbering the existing language as condition number one and adding condition number two to read any building shall be limited to 28 feet in height.

Okay, you made that really clear.

This is condition one, so we would just add condition two.

On the ordinance itself, it doesn't have a number one, so that's why I'm numbering it as number one. It's on the screen as number one, but it's not in the ordinance as number one since there was only one condition.

Oh, got it. Okay, so the condition of record.

But effectively it would be to add condition of record number two to read any building shall be limited to 28 feet in height.

okay so move number two yeah so mayor fitzgibbons i would move to approve ordinance number 1178.478 with condition one and amending to add condition two read any building to read that any buildings shall be limited to 28 feet are limited to 28 feet in height good job

Second. Okay, there's been a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Okay, if we can get a roll call vote, please.

Council Member Romo? Yes. Council Member Dugan?

Yes.

Council Member Edwards? Yes. Council Member Huddleston?

Yes.

Council Member Herman?

Yes.

Mayor Pro Tempe Dillon?

Yes.

Mayor Fitzgibbons? Yes. Motion carries.

Great, thank you. Okay, no executive session. So we're gonna do reports right now. So why don't I start with Becca Romo?

No reports.

No reports.

You guys are ready to go, huh?

I have a lot of reports. Get comfortable. September 26th is our annual 9-11 day of service, which is not a 9-11, but it's on September 26th, 7-30, at Pier Park. If you want to volunteer or your group, sign up through the website. I'll be glad to help you. So we're glad to see it going. And it's going to be youth-led this year, so it'll be very fantastic. on that note i would like to thank the students from mission height prep stuck around through all the good stuff tonight too didn't leave just thank you we do a lot of crazy stuff the teacher is watching too and the teachers here i hope you get extra credit yeah i'll throw that in too so thank you guys for coming and watching the meeting tonight so we appreciate you being here brett no reports no report no reports

I think they want to get out of here. I think that's what it is. But no, thank you. Thank you for bringing the students. And I just want to remind everyone that's here tonight and watching just to follow along. Our agendas are posted. Our meetings are the first and third. Monday of every month. We post our agendas the week before and it can show you some of the topics that we're going to have several study sessions coming up. One in particular is for the topic you talked about. So just follow along and please come anytime. You can watch us We're all accessible, you can email us and ask questions. So we just appreciate your engagement and coming and getting the facts and finding out what's going on. So we really appreciate it. And again, ways to follow us are get on the city website. We have a website, Engage Casa Grande, that has a lot of the topics that are going on in the community that our public information department updates all the time. You can also sign up for CG alerts and get alerts when different things are going on in the city. So there's definitely ways to engage and be informed on what's happening in the city. So just really quick, I wanted to update everyone on the cooling stations. We are in peak summer right now. And we did expand the hours of the cooling station. Now it's at Len Cola. And we do have a Len Cola open six days a week. I'm sorry, Dorothy Powell. It switched to Dorothy Powell and because of the convenience of the location. So now we have that open till 10 PM. And I just wanted to thank the churches and Church of Jesus Christ Latter-day Saints was here today. And they've been really, really active in coming and providing snacks and water to the cooling station there at Dorothy Powell. So thank you to that group and the other churches that participate on that. And then, of course, we have the other 14 cooling stations that are here throughout the city. We also are still working with the transitional shelter program with Horizon Health. and our non-profits on the homeless and we have had some successes on placing people into homes and so we're gonna have an update and a study session to kind of give just numbers on what's happening with that too. So wanted to give you all an update on that and then finally we will see everyone we will the council will be attending the arizona league of cities and towns conference this week so all of us will be there and so our next meeting will definitely be giving everyone an update on some of the things that we learn from our fellow council cities from throughout the state of arizona so um look forward to seeing everyone there and um with that i'll go ahead and um adjourn so good night everyone thank you everyone for coming good night

Thank you.