Tri-City Council - Regular Meeting

I'd like to call this meeting to order the city of Kingman meeting of the city council on Tuesday, May 19th. If we could please have a call roll call.

Mayor Watkins is excused tonight. Vice Mayor Samoline? Here. Council Member Dikins?

Here.

Council Member Savage?

Here.

Council Member Staley? Present. Council Member Walker? Here. Council Member Ward? Here. We have a quorum.

Thank you. Our invocation tonight will be given by Pastor Tony Henry of the Kingman Nazarene Church, and after that we'll follow up with the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilor Staley. Please join me in standing.

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to pray for us. Let's bow our heads. Heavenly Father, we thank you and we praise you for the freedoms that we have in this country. We thank you that we can come before you today as a public body and seek your guidance and wisdom for this meeting. We thank you for your Holy Spirit that is always present among us. We ask that you give each city council member a heart of integrity and an open mind filled with discernment as they make decisions that affect the people of the city of Kingman. Grant them patience to listen to one another and to the public and the grace to understand different perspectives. And Father, as this school year comes to an end, we ask a special blessing of hope and prosperity over our high school graduates as they walk across stages this week and celebrate in graduation ceremonies. Please bless them incredibly as they begin this next chapter in their lives. And thank you, Father, for the continued protections and the way that you bless our nation. May all of us as citizens bring you glory in all that we do as we live as good neighbors, loving one another. And it is in the wonderful name of Jesus that I pray. Amen. Thank you, Father.

indivisible, with liberty and justice

Thank you. The council may go into executive session for legal counsel in accordance with ARS 38-431.03 to discuss any agenda item. The following items may be discussed, considered, and decisions made relating thereto. Just a reminder too, if you would like to speak on any item as well as call to the public, we invite you to stop over at Deputy Clerk Ferguson's podium and fill out a slip. That way we can keep everything organized. All right. With that, we have presentations. We have a presentation by Mojave County on the recharged detention basins. I believe we have Supervisor Lingenfelter and Director Scott Holtry. Welcome, gentlemen.

Good evening, Vice Mayor, Councilors, Manager Walsh, City Attorney Cooper. Thank you for having Mojave County on your agenda this evening. This should have happened a long time ago, but I'm glad that we can come here and and present on the stormwater work and the water retention, the detention base and recharge work that the county's been doing. I wanna say on behalf of the citizens, they benefit from the strong partnership that the city of Kingman has had with Mojave County. Together, our two organizations have We've done a tremendous amount of advocacy and work. Every year we go to the legislature to try to advocate for our citizens and their water, long-term sustainability of that. In 2017, the City of Kingman and Mojave County entered a three-year contract with the USGS to construct a USGS model, a mod flow model. That county has, we're going to run that every year. We have a commitment to run that every year. We have folks in the county that are trained to run that model by and we're going to continue to run that model every single year with the best possible available data that we can have. And then soon we'll be able to do trends and things like this. So. Our water managers and planners can have some level of certainty in their water planning, which is it doesn't matter if your water planners are in an urban environment or a rural environment. The one thing that we all need to have is some sort of certainty in our water planning. So we're going to continue that modeling. Also, I know all of you are aware, but some of the citizens may not be aware. There's another data source, Arizona Department of Water Resources. It was the legislative session of 2023. They were required to do supply and demand assessment reports on every single basin in the state of Arizona. In 2025, they released a report on both the Sacramento basin and also our Hualapai Valley groundwater basin. That report is available on the ADWR website with the most recent data there. I also want to thank the city and their collaboration. Last week, we had a tremendous all-day event. We had ASU come up, U of A come up, Babbitt Center for Water, all sorts of different nationwide renowned scientists come up. to talk about our Wallapai Groundwater and how do we all work together. So this is one of the things that's within our circle of control. So I'm gonna turn it over to our Development Services Department Director, Scott Holtry, to give a presentation on what we've been doing since 2021. Before I give it to him though, I wanna also say thank you to District 4 Supervisor Don Martin for being here. You have both of your county area supervisors and we're happy to partner with you. So with that, I'd turn it over to Scott, thank you.

Thank you, Chairman Lingenfelter. Welcome, Mr. Holtry.

Thank you, Chairman Lingenfelter. Thank you, Vice Mayor and council members, for this opportunity to be able to present to you. It's great to be able to show the work that we've been doing and the progress that we've made. To start out, I kind of wanted to just give a brief background of why we are here and where we're going. The first slide I have up right now, this is a picture of our Hualapai groundwater basin. It's comprised of three different basins, approximately 1,200 square miles. The first basin is the southern Gregg sub-basin. The middle one, that's on the north, the middle one is the Hualapai sub-basin. And then the southern basin is the Kingman sub-basin. And this is the basin that the city of Kingman derives their water source from. I'm not sure how to forward the slide. Maybe that? Just to kind of a quick recap, Chairman Lingenfelder touched on it a little bit about our water budgets. In 2013, USGS did a water budget for the Hualapai Basin. Basically, a water budget is what's coming into the basin and what's going out of the basin. From that study that they did in 2013, they were able to determine that there's approximately 5,600 acre feet annually that was a deficit for each year. So not very much. We didn't really have any farming at that point. Like Chairman Lingenfelter mentioned, we partnered with the city, Mojave County partnered with the city to be able to develop a model to determine the groundwater basin and the inflows and the outflows. 2021, we were able to get a better estimate of what is coming out of the basin and what's going in the basin. We were able to determine that there was about 26 acres of new cultivated land that was being farmed. With that, the USGS model was able to determine that there was approximately about 30,000 acre feet that was in deficit of the basin. I don't want to focus too much on the numbers. I think those numbers could be It could be less or it could be more, but really what it is, what I like to derive from this is that there is a big difference from our 2013 to 2021. And even into 2024, we were able to update that report. We were able to determine that it grew from that 26,000 acres of cultivated land to 44,000. And or as far as the the water withdrawal from that and then. With that, it increased our deficit to 50,000 acre-feet is the approximate of what we were able to determine. This water budget will, like Chairman Lingenfelter mentioned, this water budget is going to continually get better with the more data that we have. We've been working with the farms to be able to derive their actual numbers of what they are withdrawing from the basin instead of just using the USGS model numbers. This In updating the model for this next year, we have been able to get a lot of the numbers from the farms. There's only a couple that haven't provided those numbers to us, but we're still working with them. So the data is going to continue to get better. But like I said, what I'd like to emphasize is that we do have a bigger deficit than we had in 2013. With that, the board of supervisors wanted to take action. In 2023, they approved the board action to be able to move forward with recharge basins. Being a flood control department, well, that really wasn't our realm, but... We do work with detention basins to be able to mitigate some flood control measures within the city and within other parts of the county. So we took it as an opportunity to be able to mitigate flood within the area, but then also recharge the basin. Just to kind of give you an idea of what a recharge basin is, We like to find locations that have a permeable sub-level so that when the water pools in that area, it would be able to infiltrate the basin. So you're looking for sandy or gravelly areas. Essentially we're trying to hold back the water on those major events, those major storm events that come through the area so that it has time to permeate into the aquifer instead of going out to Red Lake and then just evaporating. uh... with that we were able to determine or would use a uh... consultant to determine the locations that are best suited for uh... recharge within this area also the areas that also needed some uh... stormwater mitigation uh... with that the the map i have up in front of you can show it shows you five basins that were selected i think they uh... determined about nine locations There was about nine locations that we were able to determine with a consultant that would be good for these recharge basins and the storm water mitigation. We selected five of them to be able to move forward with because we didn't have funding for nine basins. The first basin is the Sierra Vista Basin. That one is completed. And then we have four basins that are under construction. The Mojave Rattlesnake Basin, Feldspar Basin, Crestwood Basin, and the Riata Basin. First on the list is that Sierra Vista Basin. This one was started construction in March of 2024. It was completed in September of 2024. This is the smallest of all the basins. It was really just kind of a test basin almost to get our feet wet. Storage and recharge is approximately 1.39 acre feet or 453,000 gallons of water per year. The cost of the basin was around 300,000 and it was funded by Mojave County Flood Control District. Mojave Rattlesnake Basin, this is the largest of our basins. the stormwater mitigation is is quite large on this one it's three hundred sixty one cubic feet per second reduction and downstream velocity so we've received several inquiries from developers in the area that would like to develop north of kingman this would reduce the stormwater in that area by the three hundred sixty one cubic feet uh... per second and a hundred-year storm with that we found it a a great opportunity to be able to recharge as well. This one provides 144 acre feet or 47 million gallons of water in a year to the aquifer. Cost was roughly $4 million and we received WIFA grants and a portion of it was from the flood control as well. Feldspar Basin. This one's located northwest of Stockton Hill and Northern Avenue intersection. This one has the potential to reduce 372 CFS and downstream velocity over a 100-year storm. It directly benefits the properties on Gordon and Northern Avenue. The storage and possible recharge for this basin is roughly 38 acre feet or 12 million gallons of water. And it was fully funded through a WIFA grant, about $2 million. Crestwood Basin. This one's located west of Stockton Hill Road and Keno and in the Sarabat Mountain Foothills. It directly benefits the properties in that Riata Valley area. So any flood-prone properties in that area would benefit roughly 192 CFS reduction in the 100-year storm and about 16 acre feet or 5,300,000 gallons of water. This was also funded through WIFA and Mojave County Flood Control District, about a million dollars. The Riata Basin, sorry, I had that one mixed up. The last one was the, let's go back one, let's redo that. Crestwood Basin. This one is Stockton Hill and Gordon intersections. That's the benefit to it. And it's properties behind the movie theater that are flood prone. That's the ones that it would serve. And again, 192 CFS. The Riatta Basin, the Riatta Basin is Stockton Hill and the Quinoa area directly benefits the Riatta Valley area. 610 estimated CFS reduction in a 100 year storm with 36 acre feet or 11 million, almost 12 million gallons of water to the aquifer. This one is funded through the WIFA grants and Mojave County, about 1.5 million. Just to kind of go over a recap of the basins, they each really do provide quite a bit of flood mitigation in the area, helps protect downstream properties for the Kingman area and for future development north of Kingman. The basin, potential recharge, If you add them all up, it's roughly 237 acre feet or 77 million gallons in a year. So it's quite significant. These projects are gonna be in there for the lifetime. It's not something that we have to maintain very much, but they're gonna continually produce water to that aquifer and the flood mitigations as well. Just a real quick recap on the cost. The county didn't have to spend a whole lot of money. We were able to get congressional direct spending as well as the WIFA, the Water Conservation District ARPA money, as well as the water supply development grants for each of these projects. Roughly 8.6 million in grant funding and the county only spent about eight hundred and thirty six thousand Again we're trying to be proactive with the county we want to Find opportunities to be able to Have as much data as we possibly can as far as the groundwater model the monitoring wells that we have going in and as far as the recharge basins we were looking to hopefully infiltrate and build up our aquifer or put more water into that bank as it's a water budget right we want to do our part as well as mitigate some of those floods in the area flood mid flood hazards in the area. Special thanks to our county manager, David Strahl, former county manager, Sam Elters, and the Board of Supervisors, past and present. Without their direction and their support, we wouldn't be where we are today. But with that, I'm open to any questions that the council may have.

Council, any questions for Mr. Holtry? Comments? All right, thank you for that report. It's a very good report. All right, moving on to presentation 1B, Western Arizona Vocational Education Wave and Shared Co-Workspace Project Update. Ms. Amy West, welcome.

I don't know if I can top that, but I'll try. Vice Mayor, council, city staff, thank you for having me today. I was asked to provide a update on the Wave City of Kingman project that we have been working on with economic development and in the development for a co-work space. So, first of all... Sorry.

Do you want me to wait? For the...

All right, there you go. I'm Amy West, I'm the superintendent with WAVE. WAVE stands for Western Arizona Vocational Education and we are a school district in the state of Arizona, one of 14. The first slide that we have is just a project overview Months and months and months ago, we started this project. It was a joint effort between the city and WAVE. And we are looking at developing a space that includes administrative offices, classroom space, a co-work space, economic development space, and Mojave College Small Business Development Center space. Our entire goal is to support what city council and city staff is currently doing. in helping to develop workforce, support entrepreneurship, and just continue to help Kingman grow effectively and in a smart way. This is where we are right now. So as I show some pictures, that's not our final design. We're working on things, getting things in budget, but the footprint here is pretty good. So if you look at the light blue space, The light blue space on the left is wave offices, two pretty traditional normal classrooms, and then a larger lab type of classroom where you maybe have some industrial type of program, and restrooms. You'll notice that those restrooms are attached and available to the salmon colored item, which is a training space. And so you've got access if you have a large event to both sides for the restrooms. When you get into the yellow area, so the salmon colored space, you've got the training space and then attached to that is a kitchen area, kind of lounge area. to create a collaboration area. The whole thing with all these co-work spaces is that there's a lot of places for relationships to kind of organically develop. So you go into the yellow spot where that is the connector and you've got a entryway lobby And then we go over to the economic development space. You've got more restrooms there. You've got the economic development offices. And then you see all of the lines and all the different areas are rentable co-work space that we have laid out. Part of the process with this is kind of thinking about what you can share and utilizing tax dollars wisely. So rather than all of us building an event space and all of us having a conference room or a meeting area, we're all sharing those spaces. So we have those and it's one of those instead of three of them. Oh, I'm gonna back up. The other thing that's on this one and kind of the dark blue on the side is the Mojave College Small Business Development Center. So the concept with that is that the business development center that Mojave College runs is there to provide capital resources, business plan resources, support to help young entrepreneurs, new businesses develop that plan. So right now, we're in the process of doing a lot of budgeting. And WAVE is currently funding a majority of the project. We have been saving money for a long time to be able to build a building. We've never had our own storefront. We've never had our own office space. And so we have saved money to do a lot of that. We've been in conversations with city staff as far as are there ways that the city of Kingman can help to contribute and support that so that we can get to the finish line. And our goal right now is maintaining a timeline. We would really like to get in there sooner rather than later. And as we've been working on budget discussions, we've probably taken some time that needs to be taken, but then that's gonna push out that occupancy deadline. right now this gives you a view kind of of the student side of the building this would be uh... the street on the right hand side would be fairgrounds that would be a yard where students could be out there working projects things like that uh... we're at about thirty percent completion so we've got a lot of work to do we are value engineering right now and looking at ways we can save so we're doing things like cutting 30% of our windows so that we can reduce that storefront and bring that cost down. We reduced our square footage by quite a bit, cut out some store rooms, still kept the concept, still kept the overall idea of the building, but we did reduce some of that just to make sure that we're being wise with our budget. We will have a bunch of add alternates in case we do get grant funding, in case we do get any of the other stuff that we've applied for. Right here is a picture from the courtyard in the center. We have had some positive community feedback. We have sent it out to a few people as we look at what's market analysis. What can we rent this space for? What can be done in this space? A lot of positive responses from people saying this is just something that we've needed in Kingman for a long time. And there's a lot of excitement around this vision, so we can't wait to see it come to fruition. And then right, the next step, so if you look at the right of this, that's kind of the economic development side. This is from Route 66. You see that center part where it says, it's got the signage in there, that's that courtyard view. And economic development right now is working on developing a business plan. And the whole idea with that is them trying to figure out, like, how will this operate? Will we be 24-7? How are we going to charge for this? What comes with that rental that they pay? What do they get access to? What's an extra charge? Things like that. And the whole idea with that is to support those operations that we're doing and to support the sustainability of what's going on within those walls. And then hopefully there's future grant opportunities. There's a lot of support out there right now for economic development. There's a lot of support out there right now for career and technical education, which is what we're doing with the workforce side of it and the high school portion of it. And for those that don't know, programming that will go in there, I think a lot of people are aware, but career and technical education is the high school side. WAVE can serve students from ninth grade to 13th grade, and it's all career preparation. So everything from business and computers to medical programs, construction, welding, HVAC, all those types of programs that you need in a community that require some sort of training. So our message to high school students is you've got to graduate high school, and then you've got to do something besides that. You can go directly to work. You can go into an internship. You can get a certificate. You can get an industry credential, whatever that case may be. So that's the educational programming that can happen, community program that can happen. There might be things where there's somebody in the community that has some sort of concept and they want to bring people together, they want to mentor people, they want to hold events, they want to train people on things, leadership, that type of stuff, so that type of programming can happen. You've already got the co-work space there, so that entrepreneurial workforce training will happen. CITY WAVE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT. WE OFFER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TO TEACHERS. CITY STAFF OFFERS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S A TRAINING SPACE FOR THAT. WE JUST WANT IT TO BE VERY FLEXIBLE. YOU CAN HAVE EVENTS THERE. I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF UNLIMITED. IT'S JUST GOING TO BE BASED ON WHAT PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO SUPERVISE AND TO HOLD AND TO HAVE IN THERE. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE PROGRAMMING THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT. and then the next step so right now we are on the ground lease has been approved the office lease is underway so we've been working with city staff to kind of look at that office lease what does that look like moving forward uh... what we're kind of at that critical stage of decisions to kind of decide okay what are we going to do next and is all of this going to come to fruition and everybody's going to be okay with that today we just met to talk about kind of the next steps and we have to give that decision to move forward to design development which takes you to about sixty percent of the plans being finalized and we just want to keep this project moving as kind of where wave is uh... we want to make sure we get in there for us starting in december is odd we were hoping to get in august of twenty seven we may have to push that back a little bit for the city operations that's not such a big deal because they're gonna start whenever that building is done wave it's gonna impact programming and when students start and things like that but we'll keep plugging along And then for that, I hope that answered the questions and what you were looking for. But if you have any questions for me, I am happy to answer them.

Thank you for that presentation. Council, do you have any questions? Councillor Staley?

Thank you for the update. I'm really excited about this project. The large event space, how many people does that hold? We right now, I believe, are at 140 to 150, I would say.

If we had to make cuts, it probably would only go down to like 125, but I believe we're at 150 right now.

So it's a really good size.

It is a good size. It's very exciting. And it'll kind of depend on how you lay it out, right? Like you could have round tables in there, you can have long tables, and you can just have chairs. So that kind of depends. And then the other thing with the event space, the goal is to have big sliders on the end of it so that if you did have some sort of event, it could spill out into that courtyard, and you've got the kitchen area for if you had to offer food or something like that.

Wonderful. Thank you so much for your work on this and and thanks to city staff. We're also helping I'm really looking forward to it

All right, thank you. I guess the only question I had was how much of that parcel are you going to? There's there's some ideas out there. I'm just, you know, that parcel is a large parcel and I just want to know what's the proportion.

Do you remember the I think the easy question is basically the West half.

So right on the corner of Fairgrounds and Route 66 on that corner.

So the rest of that city parcel will still be available for. OK, great. I think that's it. Anyone else?

Thank you. All righty.

Thank you so much All right, we're moving on to call to the public item number two those wishing to address the council should fill out request forms in advance Comments from the public will be restricted to items not on the agenda with the exception of those on the agenda Consent agenda there will be no comments allowed that advertise for a particular person or group comments should be limited to no longer than three minutes and The council may not respond to speakers during the call to the public. The council may direct the city manager to study the matter or request that the matter be placed on a future agenda. We do have some call to the public requests. Robbie Stiles, would you like to come forward please?

Thank you for giving me the time to present. We would like to present a A DEMONSTRATION THROUGH THE COUNCIL AT A LATER DATE TO KIND OF SHOW WHAT WE ARE DOING IN THE AREA. WE HAVE A SHOWER TRADER WE HAD BUILT FOR THE HOMELESS. WE'RE CURRENTLY IN THE COUNTY, SERVING THE COUNTY. WE'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT INTO THE CITY, KINGLAND, POSSIBLY MCAF, ONCE A WEEK TO SHOWER THE HOMELESS. So we'd like to come in and do a presentation before the council, maybe at a later date where we could maybe have 10 or 15 minutes of time to possibly waive fees in the park and things like that.

All right. Thank you. Manager Walsh, staff will be in touch. Staff will be in touch with you to get that scheduled.

Awesome. Thank you. All right. Thank you, sir. Mr. Wayne Hollins.

Good evening, sir.

Wayne Holmes, Golden Valley. Vice Mayor, council members. I've got a few comments on the recharge basin areas. $9.5 million to put 237 acre feet into the ground when we're short. over 50,000 acre feet. It's a little start, but a long ways to go. The water budget that we get just in the Hualapai Basin, if we get the average of five inches of rainfall in that area, That gives us 360-some thousand acre feet to work with to put 50,000 acre feet into the ground. So not as easy as it sounds, but there's a lot that we can do, residents, builders, businesses, that can also be working to put that water into the ground. using water instead of pumping water. We've got rainwater we can use for flushing toilets, what have you, in commercial buildings, city buildings, county buildings, what have you. Parking lots, all that water running off, going down, heading out to town as fast as it can go. We need to be flowing that down. We got one place out there we put in a basin to flow down, but you got miles where that water came from, chances to flow that water down. At that rate that we're going to put it in the ground, we'd need about 250 more basins to be able to get to that 50,000 acre feet that's in deficit. So there's plenty of work for everybody to do, and it's not just the government. It's the people who live here. Just as much our responsibility as it is the government's. So we all need to work together, educate the people, and actually go out and do things on the ground. At people's properties, they can do it. It's really simple. If you've got a shovel, you can put water into the ground. So I'd like to see more of it, and we've got a long ways to go. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Jacob Crawford. Good evening, sir.

Evening. Thank you, Vice Mayor and members of the Council. My name is Jacob Crawford. I'm currently serving as the Dean of Student and Community Engagement at the Neal Campus here in Kingman, and I'm here representing the college to advocate for the retention of the yellow line for CART. Well, I understand that the May 14th budget session was that, a working session. I just realized that it did highlight that the yellow line route that crosses into county space to reach our campus, treating it strictly as a county route overlooks the actual people that these buses serve. The majority of our Neal campus students, faculty, and staff are Kingman residents. When the yellow line runs, It isn't just serving the institutions, it's serving Kingman citizens by connecting them directly to higher education, and advanced workforce training and economic mobility. Mojave College is not looking for a free ride, okay? Nor do we expect Kingman taxpayers to subsidize the connection. We are active financial partners in this transit network. The college regularly purchases transit passes in bulk, right? We give these out to students that are in need and don't have access to vehicles. And we do inject a little bit of revenue right back into the transit system. For many of our students, these passes are the only reason that they can reliably attend class, complete their clinicals, or access labs that prepare them for the jobs right here in this local community. If the yellow line is eliminated, the impact will be felt immediately by Kingman families, students will face disrupted educations, and the local workforce pipeline will take a hit. We completely understand and respect the difficult decisions that this council faces regarding employee compensation, public safety. However, we urge you not to balance the budget by cutting a vital economic link for Kingman residents, right? I do this too for the college. We have to balance budgets and it's really tough to make these decisions and we understand that. Mojave College is eager and ready to sit down with city management staff and our county partners to have a collaborative conversation about how we can restructure and preserve this route or expand access to the Kingman Airport and Industrial Park. Let us work together on a solution that protects our workforce and keeps Kingman moving forward. Thank you for your time and continued leadership.

Thank you, sir. Thanks. Dr. Rob Christensen. Welcome, sir.

Thank you. My name is Dr. Rob Christensen. I reside at 3951 Swanson Drive here in Kingman. I come before the City Council to speak about the proposed FY2026 City of Kingman budget before traveling internationally in June. Given fluctuating commodity prices and the unstable geopolitical environment, I believe that it's prudent to take a very conservative approach to budgeting and spending. The city revealed that revenues will not significantly increase for a minimum of two years, and the previous point reaffirms that a conservative approach to budgeting and spending is required. The city is required to spend money to fund fire and police services along with maintaining streets and sidewalks. However, other spending is a luxury that the city must curtail. Some examples include, one, golf course. This is not a required service to preserve health and safety. It serves to provide subsidized golfing for a few. Given the previous fact, Kingman residents should not subsidize this endeavor and the city should immediately investigate and execute a plan that privatizes or sells the golf course to conserve public funds. Two, CART. The city needs to reduce cost by eliminating the yellow route that serves areas primarily outside of the city of Kingman without support of other entities that benefit from its operations. 3. Increasing the number of new employees. Given the current economic and political environment, I contend it is unwise to add employees to the City's payroll until economic conditions improve and City revenues increase. In addition, City staff previously discussed enhancing employee benefits and compensation to attract and retain employees. and I do not necessarily oppose that initiative. However, if the Kingman City Council moves forward with the previous initiative, I request that the Kingman City Council eliminate or reduce other city-funded revenues to pay for this worthwhile endeavor. In closing, my message may not be popular in some quarters, but I believe it's necessary to ensure that fiscal responsibility continues here in Kingman. And I want to thank you all for your time. And I also, just as a postscript, want to thank Councilmember Savage for bringing up the weight restrictions item about airway drive. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. All right, we're moving on to consent agenda. All matters listed here are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from consent and will be considered separately. Council, do you have any items you'd like to remove from consent?

3B.

3B? Any others? All right, council, I'll entertain a motion to approve consent agenda items 3A and C. So moved. I have a motion. I have a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, motion carries. Item B on the consent agenda, adoption of ordinance number 2002, amending the city of... KINGMAN UTILITY REGULATIONS TO MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE WITH ADEQ PRE-TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS. ORDINANCE 2002 AMENDS THE CITY OF KINGMAN UTILITY REGULATIONS RELATED TO THE INDUSTRIAL PRE-TREATMENT PROGRAM TO MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REQUIREMENTS. THE PROPOSED REVISIONS ADDRESS identified during a recent ADEQ pretreatment inspection and update outdated provisions of the utility regulations. Bold text indicates proposed additions and strikethrough text indicates language proposed for removal. Staff recommends approval. I believe we have Jack Blonte. Did you have a specific question, Councillor Dikens?

Actually, two. The presentation that we saw in our packet was very extensive and long. But at the very, very bottom, it talks about the Meconico area. Now, let me back up. I'm very much in favor of accepting this so that ADEQ can be satisfied with those requirements. But if we do pass it, what I would like is to have it come back to us over the two issues that I've got, making that clear. At the very end, it talks about the Meconico area, which is within our service area. But when you look at the water map, the water boundary map that's included in the reg does not cover the Meconico area. So is that possible to update and bring back to us?

Yes, good evening, Vice Mayor, members of the Council. Councilman Dykens, a couple of those items were identified, and currently actually trying to research and figure out why we have service down there, if it's some kind of unique agreement. We're working on that now, so there are some errors or issues in that that need to be updated, some of the language and things, just for... the conversation. As was indicated, this was identified in a pre-treatment investigation, or I'm sorry, inspection with ADEQ. And it's not a water quality issue or anything like that, but there was some frequency and reporting items that needed to be addressed. And so... We were trying to get this completed. We have a pretreatment inspection coming actually the 21st of this month, and so we wanted to have those completed. We do recognize that there are some other areas that need to be addressed in the regs, and we will bring those back to council at a future date to correct those.

Okay, and then the second thing also to consider bringing back is we have a fee schedule, but in this huge regulation, it shows fees in there. To shrink it down a little bit, can we remove the fee schedules from this reg and just say, refer to fee schedule? No, that was it. Can we do that?

Yeah, to answer that question, a lot of our documents, programs, whatever, that's exactly what we're doing is we're referencing the fee schedule and taking out that language.

That's it? That's it. All right. I'll entertain a motion to approve item B on the consent agenda.

Thank you. So moved.

Motion. Do I have a second?

I'll second.

We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, motion carries. Moving on to action items. 4A, adoption of ordinance number 2000, modifying solid waste rates and fees and discontinuing the drop-off recycling program. On March 17, 2026, the City Council was presented with options for increasing the solid waste residential and commercial rates. The council adopted a notice of intent at that meeting and now option A, which was adopted and included an 8.25% increase to residential and commercial rates and discontinuance of the drop-off recycling program is being brought before the council for consideration and possible approval. Staff recommends approval. Good evening, Ms. Moline.

Good evening, Vice Mayor and council members. So we are before you this evening for the final step in the solid waste rate financial update. Tonight is a public meeting to cover what was selected at the Notice of Intent meeting in March. And I am going to cover some of the same slides that I did share at that meeting to ensure that the council understands the action that is requested of them this evening. And I want to start by providing you with an overview of what a financial plan update entails, looking at the purpose of it. So to ensure that our solid waste rate revenues really can cover our operational and capital costs and for our solid waste system, that's our heavy truck replacements. The process looks at our current customer trends, so growth. It also looks at any new programs that are being offered or, in some cases, eliminated. It also then will look at revenue requirements. And if we're seeing something very different from what the prior year's update was, we will bring something to council for consideration. And we do review the rates every year. This is a list of our current rates. I don't need to go over those with you, but we do offer residential and commercial service. We actually require our residential customers, those in our city boundaries, to use the City of Kingman's solid waste service. However, any of our commercial customers can use any of the providers, City of Kingman as well as some of the other providers such as Bulldog Disposal, Waste Management, Westside Disposal. And then this is our current financial plan. So last year, we brought this plan to you, and it was going to entail a 6.5% increase year over year through fiscal year 30. Looking at the plan going into fiscal year 27, you will see that white line, which is our cash reserves, where it actually ends up. And you'll notice that by fiscal year 29, we end up really with no reserves in the system. And by fiscal year 30, we end up with negative reserves. So we knew that at this time we wanted to bring something to council for consideration. We don't want to wait to address this problem now. So what did the review entail? Well, we are seeing customer growth. It might be less than 2% or right around 2%, but we are seeing customer growth. We also look at any sort of service changes. And we know based on all of our growth over the last, goodness, I think the last time we added a driver in a truck was five or six years ago. And so it is coming to that time again. So in fiscal year 28, we're expecting to add a route, which will include a truck and an FTE. So we added that to this plan. And then we, not that we changed anything in our solid waste system as far as the trucks, but we did add a truck for that fiscal year 28 system. So we will be purchasing a truck, but we do replace those trucks on a 10-year period. And we have 21 currently that are used very frequently. Some of them are used every single day. In fiscal year 26, the council, so October of 25 specifically, the council added a drop-off recycling program. Now, it was the council's direction that the program needed to sustain itself. so that the entire customer base did not need to pay for it. However, over time, we've noticed that the drop-off recycling program is not being used to the extent that we had hoped that it would be used and has generated very little revenue over its lifetime of about five or six months at this point. Because the program costs close to, we expect by the end of June, close to $200,000, it is not currently supporting itself. So that is also one change from our plan last year that has happened this year. So in March, we brought to you a few different financial plan options. Option A is the one that council selected to consider at this evening's meeting and for us to post, and that includes adding the route in fiscal year 28. It also includes funding the recycling program through June 30th of this year, so ending at the end of next month, and continuing to maintain cash reserves at a 60-day target level. And you will see the white line in this option does keep us at that 60 day level at about a million dollars by the time we get to fiscal year 29. Option B was something that the council did consider. Everything was the same other than the recycling program and that allowed the recycling program to continue through June of 2027. And then the last option, was the same as the other two options, with the exception of the drop-off recycling program continuing through the entire five, for the next five years. Now, as I shared, the council did notify or consider, are considering, is considering option A. However, option B and option C were also shared with the council. Under option A, well, let's actually start at the top of the table. Again, the current financial plan and the rates were 6.5% for the next five years. The current residential rate is $21.69. With the 6.5% increase, that would jump by $1.41 next year to $23.10. And then you'll see the increases that were proposed last year for the next few years. Option A is slightly different. And that is keeping the recycling program through the end of June of this year. And now, instead of a 6.5% increase, we're looking at an 8.25% increase for three years and then dropping off to 2% in fiscal year 30 and fiscal year 31. What that does is that keeps our 60-day cash reserves where we want them to be in those last few years. It does change the rates that customers will pay those first few years. But by the time we get to fiscal year 30, it is closer to where it was proposed this fiscal year. So at $28.06 by the time we get to fiscal year 30. Option B and option C, I won't review unless the council has questions on it as we continue through the presentation. Now with that, that is an across the board increase. So it is not just our residential customers that would see that increase. Our commercial customers would as well. So I have an arrow next to the commercial rates for option A. I'm only showing fiscal year 27 at this point. Too many numbers, too many tables if I were to show all of the years. But for next year, our commercial customers across the board will recognize an 8.25% increase. Our current rates are at the top left. And then you'll see what that looks like under the proposed option A on the right top of the slide. So comparisons to local providers, we do have other providers in our area. I shared them earlier. They provide service to our commercial customers. They also provide service to citizens who live outside of the city limits. They offer service once per week for residential customers. And you'll see what those rates are ranging anywhere from $24 to $27.89. The City of Kingman still wants to provide twice per week service and you'll see under any of the options that are proposed that our rates are lower than our outside providers and getting a better service, again picking it up twice per week. A couple of other fees that we charge that are not part of that standard rate schedule, it's only if a customer desires to utilize that, and that is our extra trash pickup. We have residential extra trash pickup. We are recommending a 2.6% increase to that rate from $27.45 to $28.15 per pickup. And then we also offer that same pickup for commercial customers. Again, up to five cubic yards. I didn't share that earlier. The current rate for that is $79.05 per pickup. And we are requesting an increase of 2.5% to $81 and a nickel. So at the March 17th meeting, council adopted a notice of intent to consider option A. Tonight, we are asking council to take any sort of public comment, discuss the options, and ultimately take action whether that be move forward with option A, which if that's the case, the rates would become effective on July 1st, or go back to the drawing board and start the notification process over and come back with a different option. And with that, I will try to answer any questions that you might have.

Council, any questions for Tina? We do have a couple of public comment. No? After? OK. All right. We do have a couple of requests to speak. Dr. Rob Christensen.

Again, my name is Dr. Rob Christensen, and I reside at 3951 Sorenson Drive here in Kingman. I come before the Kingman City Council to speak about the proposed trash increase and discontinuation of the recycling program. Although I believe that recycling is good for the environment, I believe that any recycling program needs to be self-sustaining just like other city enterprises. The city's recycling program did not achieve the previous objective and given the previous fact, I'm happy that the city is discontinuing the recycling program. If the city chooses to start a recycling program in the future, I hope that it will implement a recycling program that is self-sustaining. As for the proposed trash increase, I possess concerns about the increase. The current inflation rate is approximately 3.81% according to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, but the city is seeking to increase trash pickup fees by 8.25% annually. I can understand adjusting trash fees to match inflation, but the proposed trash fee increase is more than double the current inflation rate. This leads me to pose the following question. Why are trash pickup fees increasing by 8.25% annually until fiscal year 2029? And then that leads to other questions. Are there other mechanisms available to reduce the trash pickup fees to match the current inflation rate? With transitioning to one day a week, residential trash pickup helped curtail the trash pickup fee increase? Are there other cost-saving measures that the city can implement to reduce the trash pickup fee from increasing it to 8.25% annually to something closer to the current inflation rate? In closing, I understand that trash and water services need to be self-sustaining enterprises, but the City Council needs to strike a balance between having these services self-sustaining and avoiding any initiative to raise trash or water rates significantly above the current inflation percentage. My wife and I were blessed, so we can afford a 10% increase, but not everyone's financially blessed like my wife and I. And I know there are people in Kingman that struggle and pinch pennies. So I ask the city council to consider all that when you either vote or ask the city staff to bring you another plan. Thank you very much for your time this evening.

Thank you. Mr. Wayne Hollins?

Wayne Hollins, Golden Valley, Vice Mayor, Council Members again. I was a proponent for the recycling program when I was on the Kingman Clean City Commission prior to COVID. The problem that we had, we had too many outlying places set up and we got a lot of trash in with the recycling, which just makes it trash. So we consolidated down to one, got a cleaner product and stuff, but we never had any equipment to process the product to make it a sellable product so we could get the maximum value for it. And now we reinstituted it. But we shot ourselves in the foot by going from free to $7.50 for a drop-off, which if you got a bag of plastic bottles, it's not worth it. But it's worth keeping it out of the landfill. But you need to get the amount of product to make it sellable and charging $7.50 for somebody to drop off a few pieces of cardboard and some plastic bottles and glass bottles is too much, especially to start with. If you would start it at a lower rate, obviously we all want everything to pay for itself. That's the idea, but you can't do it unless you have the equipment to process it and have the buyer for it. But like I said before, could charge them $100 and you still wouldn't get the product and you still would be failing. So charging more money or that much money is not how you get a recycling program to sustain itself. You've got to have the product. And I don't care what you're doing other than that. Now we have a baler, at least. We could bail it and possibly sell it if we get enough. But we're not going to get enough product charging what we're charging right now. So all that stuff, instead of going to recycle, will go take up space in the landfill. which we don't need. That was another side issue with even recycling is keep the stuff out of the landfill, extend the life of the landfill, and maybe have a usable product and stuff that we can use otherwise. But what we charged is way out of line with what we want to do. Thank you.

Thank you. Ms. Moline, if you'd like to come back up. I know, Councillor Walker, you had some questions. Did you want to start with that?

Sure. I have a question on the extra trash pickup up to five to six yards.

What's our true cost on it?

It's showing here we're charging $27.45, and we're going to go up to $28.15. But I know when we do that, we send at least two trucks, two guys, Are we losing money on this? I mean, apparently to me, I mean, it looks like we're losing a lot of money on it. So, I mean, is that what we want to look at or what's our reason for charging that?

So councilman Walker, thank you so much. So actually those fees, and this is, we performed a cost of service study a few years ago. So we're basing the cost off of what was developed back then. And then we've just increased it slightly year over year, but those were the costs for, for the, for the pickup for, Residential as well as commercial notice commercials much higher than the residential.

So yes, those are the costs for that service Based on the number of I think they're low Myself, I'm just questioning that you know, cuz we're are we subsidizing this pickup is what I'm asking.

Yes We are not subsidizing that pickup.

Okay?

Thank you Thank You councilman Walker any other questions any other questions? Counselor Savage

If I remember correctly, Tina, we did do look at options as far as a one day service, correct? To be able to do one or two. And and the reason why we chose not to do that, can you explain that please?

Absolutely thank you Councilman Savage and Shakira if you can please bring my slides back up I would appreciate that thank you. So last year when we looked at the solid waste rate plan we sent out a study and we asked customers if they would they would like one time once a week for a lower rate or twice a week at a rate that would include some sort of increase. And I want to say it was about 65%, 67% of the customers said that they are willing to pay the higher rate to keep twice per week pickup. It was going to be a lower rate for once per week, but based on the results that we received from that survey, the direction was to not pursue that option. Thank you. Yes.

Councillor Dikens?

I'm just interested to hear Tina's comments with the questions that were brought up.

I am too, yeah. So pertaining to the 8.25% versus the cost of living, can you address that? And then I also had written down, are there ways or suggestions that you can think of for council to reduce costs? Or are we reducing them as much as we can without compromising service? Are those the questions that you had? Did you have any additional?

Okay, perfect.

Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, and thank you, Councilman Dikens. So Dr. Christensen brought up a few questions, so I do want to make sure that I address those. I think it's important to share that if we look at our current cash reserves for the system, I'm going to start by addressing the rate increase and how it is not in line with inflation currently. So when we look at our cash reserves, and I'm going to point on the screen right here currently, we have 146 days in cash reserves. So clearly we have enough to support the system actually for, well even if we went to this amount, we have several, for several years we could support the system. The intent as we're developing these rates is to ensure that by the time we get to fiscal year 29 and fiscal year 30 that we don't have to, the rates don't have to skyrocket to make sure that we have those reserves. So we try to flatten it out in the beginning to make sure that by the time we get to fiscal year 30 and fiscal year 31, we have sufficient reserves. If we were to use the 4% inflation rate the first couple of years, by the time we get to fiscal year 29 and 30 and 31, those rates are going to be very high. They are not going to be in line with inflation. So we chose to bring to you Let's start with the higher increases now. So by the time we get to fiscal year 30, it's a 2% increase. And understand that we know that raising rates is is not favorable at all, and it definitely hurts our customers' pocketbooks. And if we can get to the point that we are able to increase rates with inflation or maybe even just below inflation, that's ideally where we want to be and what we want to bring to you for consideration. As far as the cost just in general, our truck costs, don't just increase by inflation. They actually increase closer to 5, 6, and even a few years ago, closer to 10%. So we're dealing with that on an ongoing basis as well. And with this year, we had the recycling program. Unfortunately, it didn't cover itself, so we have to We have to pay for it somehow, and that would be through raising rates to, again, make sure that we've got reserves for future years, purchases, operations, capital costs. As far as going to once per week, I think Dr. Christensen brought that up. I think I just shared the reasoning for not going to once per week. As far as other ways to flatten rates, not flatten rates, but to reduce the cost of the system, Solid waste is a very simple budget. We have people, we have trucks, we have landfill costs, and we have fuel. All of those make up 80% of the solid waste budget. So there isn't a lot of wiggle room as far as trying to find ways to cut costs. We didn't replace trucks for many years, and that's why we're here today. So we definitely, although we can look at extending the life of our trucks, we did that. And that's why we have trucks that are in disarray and disrepair. So we don't want to get to that point again either. I hope that explains, certainly addresses Dr. Christensen's questions. And then as far as recycling, Mr. Hollins brought up the recycling program. And certainly we know that it's a benefit to our environment, but it's The rate payers overall will have to pay for the program if we want to reduce the fee for that program. And that was not the direction of the council. So that's the reason for the recycling program going away.

Thank you. Additional questions? Mr. Dickens?

I'm going to put the city manager on the spot. Recently, we had a free weekend of drop-offs. Do you know how many people utilize that free weekend?

I don't have that on the top of my head, but I don't know. If Tina doesn't, I know Jack is here and could answer that.

Councilman Dikens, I don't have that number off the top of my head either, but I know it was not a very large number. I don't know. Yeah.

That helps me. Okay. For the fact that we offered a service for free, and it had... poor or minimal response. So it's like if we can't get people to use the service when it's for free, I have a problem with keeping that, especially if the only way we could do it is put it on all the citizens of Kingman, and I'm totally against that.

I do have the number. It was 124 through the weekend.

I apologize for misstating that.

But still, even at 124 through the whole weekend, our numbers would have to be significantly higher with the $7 a trip in order to cover the cost.

Yeah, Councilman Duckins, we're currently getting about 20 customers, paying customers, 20 to 25 customers per, over those three days. So, I mean, it's over 36 weeks. I mean, it's less than 1,000 customers that we get that frequent the recycling center. Thank you. Any other questions?

Comments? All right. I will entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion that we pass ordinance number 2000, modifying the solid waste rates and fees.

We'll have a motion. We'll have a second. All those in... Smiley, second.

Smiley got me.

All right, we have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Nay. Thank you. Motion carries. All right, moving on to action item 4B, approval of change order 001, water line realignment, Flying Fortress Parkway, phase 2, ENG 25-0079. Flying Fortress Parkway phase 2 construction started on April 27, 2026. During construction, the contractor identified a conflict between an existing 12-inch water line and the new proposed drainage pipe. for 30-inch CMP at STA 223 plus 50 along Flying Fortress Parkway. Based on the designer's recommendations, a realignment of the existing water line is required at this location. This change order will increase the total cost of the Flying Fortress Parkway Phase 2 project in the amount of $47,953 and will be funded out of the I-11 East Kingman Connection Project Fund. Staff recommends approval. Malcolm Roberts.

Yeah, Flying Fortress Parkway. We all think of it as being out in the middle of no place, should be no utility conflicts. And sure enough, we found one. It's basically a corrugated metal pipe for a wash crossing. And there is a 12-inch water line there. And we need to dip the water line under the corrugated metal pipe. And since the pipe is basically a gravity system, there's nothing we can do about relocating the pipe vertically to miss the water line. So it's something that's unavoidable, actually.

Council, any questions? So this, I did have a question. How can this happen? OK. You can give me the cliff note version, but how can this happen?

Okay, those who were involved in Flying Fortress Parkway for a lot longer than I've been involved in it know that the drainage design changed two or three times. And at one point, what is now the drainage design was the design of choice, which those plans showed the relocation of the water line. went through a couple of iterations and eventually came back to that same design. And when the consultant reproduced those plans, he forgot to put in the water line dip. So it should have been something that, I mean, it's something that would have had to happen anyway, but the reason it's a change order rather than having been a bid item is because the consultant basically forgot to put it back in. So we would have had to do it either way. We could debate about what the cost would have been competitively bid versus as a change order. That's pretty hard to put a number on. That's the only thing that we could realistically go back on the consultant for is whatever that difference is. And since we didn't have a bid item, similar bid item, we could compare it to it. Could get a bit contentious. But we might be able to find a way to get that back out in the next project.

That was my question. Is there any recourse against the consultant? Mr. Cooper?

Yeah. Well, there's always recourse, but there's always expenses. So what we would do is, like you say, it's already a cost that would have existed. So the difference between, as Robert's saying, a bid cost as well as a change order cost, we can look at that and talk with the consultant and see what it is. But there's always costs associated of trying to recover money in an adverse situation. So we can look and see what we can do.

I would like to know what that number is, so if we could.

Vice Mayor, if I may, I believe, Robert, we not only requested a quote from our contractor for the cost of this, we also requested a quote from an outside, one of our job contractors, just to verify. And from what I recall, they were within $1,000 of each other. Right.

Almost 46, almost 47, I think.

Okay. Well, that's what I don't like to hear. You haven't been here long enough to know that change order are my two least favorite words in any construction project. So that's what I wanted to know is what the difference was. So thank you, Manager Walsh. All right. Thank you. Any questions for Robert? Council? Comments?

One thing I might add is that we had an item in the bid for, I believe it was $200,000 to cover the cost of any unsuitable material that they might encounter that would have to be replaced. And we're probably two-thirds of the way through the sub-grade excavation and fill, and we've only used like 200 and some of it. So there is definitely going to be some excess funds there that should be able to cover this and anything else that comes up.

Okay. All right, thank you. All right, I'll entertain a motion for item 4B, please. I'll make that motion. We have a motion. Do we have a second?

Second.

We have a motion. We have a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, we're going to move on to public hearings. Public hearing 5A, public hearing and adoption ordinance of number 2001, increasing water base rates, volume rates, capital renewal fee, and other miscellaneous water service fees, and establish two new water fees. On March 17th, the city council was presented with options for increasing the water volume and base rates, the capital renewal fee, and miscellaneous water service fees. as well as the establishment of two new water fees. The council adopted a notice of intent at that meeting to consider option A, which included a 3.85% increase to water volume and base rates, a 50% increase to capital renewal fees, adjustments to miscellaneous water service fees, and establishing two new service fees. These fee changes are being brought before the council in a public hearing for consideration and possible approval. Staff recommends approval. Hello, Ms. Minnelli.

Thank you, Vice Mayor and council members this evening. So this is the water system financial plan update. Very similar process is what the solid waste system financial plan update entails. But again, I will go through the slides to be sure that I cover everything for you this evening. Overview of the annual update. I will not cover these again very similar to the solid waste system We evaluate the plan we look at revenues expenses Customer growth and then if there is any change that we're seeing in cash reserves down the road or significant increases in costs then we will bring something to council for consideration or also if there are changes that That reduce the rates from where we were proposing them to be So we currently have three different types of rates on our water bills. And those are our base and volume rates, which go directly towards our operational expenses. Then we also have a capital renewal fee. And that capital renewal fee funds all of our capital replacement projects. The current financial plan, meaning the one that we brought to you at the end of last fiscal year that's currently in place, increased rates this year at 13% and then proposed the following increases as you'll see on this slide. The number of days of reserves are well over 60 days based on the data that we're seeing in FY26. So you'll see that that purple line on that chart are cash reserves and that goes to show again that we're at about 100 days at the end of fiscal year 26, but 79 to 80 days, which is above that 60-day cash reserve target. That's in the operating fund. For capital renewal fund, where all of our capital replacement projects are, And based on the five-year proposed capital improvement plan, this is the purple line you'll see by fiscal year 27 has a negative balance, finally increases in fiscal year 30 to $500,000, but we certainly can't operate at a negative balance. The five-year rate increase under the current financial plan for capital renewal fees is 20% starting in fiscal year 26 and going all the way out to fiscal year 30, and that would be a year over year. So looking at our customer base, again, we're growing, not by leaps and bounds at this point, but we are growing. So we are seeing some customer growth, both residential, commercial, and inside and outside customers. So what did change? Why are we seeing that change in our cash reserves and in the financial plan? Well, revenues ended up being higher than we expected in fiscal year 25. If you recall, there was not much rain that year. And anytime there's not much rain, people utilize their water for outdoor use more. And so that is one of the reasons why the revenues were higher than we expected. Expenses were also less. So we did not, our engineering team, had quite a few vacancies. We did not expect those vacancies or turnovers, so we ended up having higher savings in personnel costs. We also saved on electricity. Although it's well over $3 million, we expected to spend a little more, so we saved there. And then just on general repairs and maintenance, for whatever reason, not as many broken pumps and motors and so we ended up saving there. Also what contributed to this were our credit card and debit card fees. So utility billing is our largest expense for credit and debit card fees and then engineering as well has had debit and credit card fees. And so in fiscal year 25, those costs were actually over $300,000 in fiscal year 26, much less than that with the implementation of the convenience fees. And then in fiscal year 27 and in the out years, as long as we keep that program in place, there will be zero fees for debit and credit cards. As far as our capital replacement costs or projects, what changed there is we ended up having our main tanks transmission project, which is right here. We originally expected that entire project, which was one phase originally, to be just Gosh, I want to say $3 to $3.5 million. It ended up being much higher than that, and so we had to break it up into two phases, and now it's going to be closer to $5 million for both of those projects. That's one of the reasons and the main reason for the increase in the capital renewal fees for this upcoming five-year capital improvement plan. I do have the service lines asterisk here solely just to bring to your attention that we recognize that over the next five years, $850,000 to repair our service lines. is nothing and not what it will take to replace our service lines. That's something that city staff is going to be working on trying to find some sort of funding source to be able to attack the service line replacements in a much larger scale over the next couple years. So we'll be bringing something to you next year for consideration. We also have other fees that we charge our customers. These are fees that not every single customer is charged. It's only when it's needed. So, for instance, oh, and also these fees have not been increased for many years. You're going to see here in the middle of the table the last time many of these fees were updated, some of them in the 90s, some of them in, you know, 2013, 2014. They currently generate about $325,000 per year. If we were to increase those fees to recover the costs of providing that service, it could generate another $130,000 that would not apply towards the overall rate increase. Some of those, you'll see the fees here as far as the current fee and then what would be the proposed fee. And then also adding two new fees. These are services that we already provide, but we do not charge a fee for. So looking to establish a fee for that. So looking at option A, which is the option that council did select at the March 17th council meeting, what this does is this puts in place the increase to those miscellaneous fees, so recovering fully the cost of providing those services, and then looking at a rate increase of 3.85% over the next four years for the water plan, and then dropping to 2.75% for the water plan. And this is in the operating fund. So those base and volume rates is what would be impacted. There's option B as well. And the only difference between option A and B is that option B does not increase those miscellaneous fees. These are the base rates for option A versus option B. Again, it's 3.85% across the board by meter size, whether you're inside city limits or outside city limits. I don't need to go over those figures with those numbers with you. But this gives the comparison of the option A and option B base rates. The same applies for the volume rates, a 3.85% rate increase across the board, whether you're inside city limits, outside city limits, residential customer, non-residential customer. Now looking at the capital renewal fund. Again, we just talked about operating. Now we're going to look at the capital renewal fees. I shared earlier that last year we proposed a 20% increase year over year because of the main tanks transmission main project increased cost. We are now looking at a 50% increase this year, but it drops off significantly in the out years. So if we were to compare fiscal year 30 for instance fiscal year 30 customers would pay $12 and an inside City limits customer would pay $12 and 84 cents for their capital renewal fee, but under the proposed plan it would be $11 and 27 cents and This is the current versus the proposed capital renewal fees. This is for inside city limits as well as outside city limits. And this fee is based on meter size. It does not matter if you're residential or a commercial customer. And that is a 50% increase in FY27 and then the smaller increases in the out years. So what is the customer impact to their bill? So option A, which is Again, the one that council selected in March. If we were to look at the customer that is a residential inside city limits customer and uses 3000 gallons of water, their current bill is $31 and 22 cents. And that's all the fees that we just talked about that are included in this bill. Their fiscal year 27 bill would increase by 13% or $4.06 to $35.28 per month. If we looked at an outside City Limits customer, a high user at 25,000 gallons, they are currently paying just under $111 per month. It would increase by just about 7%, a $7.57 increase to just over $118. And how do we compare to other cities? So looking at some other rural communities that are around us, you'll see that Lake Havasu City is by far, they have a much lower rate than what we do. But when you look at our rates, whether that's option A, B, or our current rate and compare them to some of the other cities, you'll notice we're right in the middle of the pack with those other cities. And this is based on, I want to make sure I cover this. This is based on a residential customer inside the city limits using an average of 6,100 gallons of water per month. And that is the average that our residential customers use. So the next steps, similar to the solid waste system financial update, at March 17th, the council adopted a notice of intent to consider option A. Tonight, we are looking for review discussions, certainly holding the public hearing, and then ultimately looking for some action, whether that be approve the ordinance before you this evening, and if that is approved, the rates would go into effect July 1st, or to come back to the table, bring something else to you, and go through that notification process again. And I will answer questions now or wait until later to answer any questions. I'm going to open the public hearing. Then we'll bring you back.

OK. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to open up the public hearing. Penny Holden.

Penny Holden with Kingman. I just want to find out, in front of my house, in the next door neighbor, we've had three places that's leaked. You guys have come eight times in the last year to fix those three leaks with two trucks and four employees each time. That has to cost more than fixing it right the first time to come back seven more times to do it. My second question is, when I came to the meetings before, we were told that the contractors, when they're building and they hit the water lines, they don't pay to fix those water lines. We pay. It's not being charged to them to fix what they damaged. So I want to know if that's been changed from last year. Are we still picking up that tab as well? Thank you.

All right, thank you. Linda Crawford? Linda Crawford? All right. She's back. I'm sorry. Okay.

I was supposed to tell you.

Okay, thank you. Eric Weston?

Hello, Council. I'm here, and the reason why I'm here and listening to everything that was discussed My family's been here for years, years and years and years. We're currently living in California because we're working there and working our way over here to retire. So I'm currently retired. My wife right now is working towards coming to retiring right now. She's at work. But I'm here at the meeting because I'm on Social Security. We're going to be on Social Security. And so there's I've paid the water bill here at our place and for years and years and years it's been $20. I'm having to not live there so much right now because we're on the way to moving here. And so I'm watering two trees once a month, maybe even a couple months. It's $20. And for years it's been that. And suddenly it just jumped up last year. And it jumped up considerably. $32.05. And then when I heard about another increase... within just about a year, after all of the years that I've been paying what I've been paying, I'm a little concerned because we're getting ready to retire. And listening to the, for example, the $5 million expense that happened with the main tank. I just would like to recommend your option B, and the reason why is for the residents here. That's not going to add, it's not going to include the other extra fees. Most all of this $32.05 here is not even water for me. I mean, I watered those trees. This is all the extra optional fees. Your option B wouldn't include all that. And so it's a way to go forward without adding increased more. And especially at this time, because it was right in line with another increase that just happened like last year. So anyway, I just want to recommend that. Also, I want to say with trash. where we're at. It's waste management, they're more expensive, but you know they use bigger trash cans and they pick them up once a week. And everybody fits everything in one can. Less gas, less wear and tear on the trucks, and stuff, and everybody has to just get used to just filling up a bigger trash can. But anyway, but those are ways to just, you know, to suggest Because there is a large retirement community here. And so, you know, going forward for people that are trying to escape California, especially. So I was born out on base, 29 Ponds Marine Base. You know, my dad was a Marine. And it's just kind of... You know, I'm sorry, but it's just kind of heartbreaking to have to leave after living our life there and having to move this direction. Anyway, thank you.

Thank you so much. All right, that's all we have signed up to speak. I'm going to close the public hearing. And Ms. Moline, you could come up and address those concerns. And then I have a couple questions, and we'll open it up to counsel.

Thank you, Vice Mayor and council members and members of the public for speaking and sharing your concerns. So to Ms. Holden's point, it is very expensive to have our service operators on call to have to respond to those service line leaks, which is why we are looking to address something in the upcoming fiscal year or upcoming couple of fiscal years. with overtime and fuel and just their mental wellness for having to respond and be up many, many hours of the days. is not well for them either. So we recognize that and are looking into addressing that. As far as contractors who hit water lines, she is right. For many years, we did not charge our contractors. However, that is not the case, has not been the case, I wanna say, the last couple of years. As long as we in finance are notified of that, then we do submit invoices to those contractors. And then as far as the gentleman who approached, and I'm sorry I didn't get your name, sir, but the option A versus the option B. Option A is actually a lower rate increase than option B. Option A is proposing a 3.85% increase versus option B. And any of those other fees that are included on someone's bill, are not necessarily like taxes or anything of that nature. It is when you initiate service, right? You're going to be charged a fee for someone to come out and read the meter and turn that meter on. When you are delinquent, you are going to be charged that fee. And so if we don't implement the increase to those fees, then every customer would need to absorb that 4.25% increase. So that was the reason for increasing the fees for the customers who actually use those services. And with that, I will address any questions that you might have. Council, any questions?

I do have a couple. So with the leaks and multiple return trips to the same leak, I know we have addressed this, but I want to address it again. At what time does that line get evaluated to get replaced? Manager Walsh.

Thank you, Vice Mayor. Our plan, our intent is to, once that line leaks, get back out there, replace that line. Unfortunately, with the volume that we have, the number of leaks that we have, first we have to triage it. We go out, we put a patch on it. It takes us a couple hours to do that. To replace the full line, it takes us a half day to a day. um so in looking at the the number of leaks that we have and and how we can address it our plan and our intent and our desire is to once it leaks we replace it um the reality of of the number of leaks that we have um we've not been able to to get to that just yet but that is where we're striving to go okay all right and then um you had mentioned that if finance is aware when a line is

affected by a contractor, who is the one to be able to notify?

Vice Mayor, so someone in the water operating team would notify. I have several members on my finance team that do the billing for that. OK, perfect.

And then lastly, we talk about the main tanks transmission. I just wanted, for the public's knowledge, can you explain what that project is, why it's necessary? Because it is a huge capital cost. And what we gain to benefit from it?

Vice Mayor, thank you. And I'm going to turn that question over to City Manager Walsh. Manager Walsh.

Thank you. So the main tanks project, the city, we've got a number of wells throughout the city, a number of tanks throughout the city. Historically, as we've built these tanks and lines to the well, or built these wells and then lines to the tanks, We've also run distribution lines off of those transmission lines. the tank still gets filled, the wells come on, the tanks get filled, but the difference between what that does and what we're proposing is, and what we've been working on, is a transmission line from the well sites to the tank without those distribution lines coming off of it. So what that does is as that well comes on and those pressures increase, it's not affecting all of the distribution lines. It pumps the water up to the tank, And then the tank, by maintaining a certain elevation with that water line, it maintains a steadier pressure as it goes throughout town. So our hope is as we do that with the transmission lines, it's less wear and tear on all of our distribution system and maintains a more steady pressure for our customers.

Okay. Thank you so much. That's all I had. Everyone good? All right. I'll entertain a motion on item 5A.

I'll make that motion.

We have a motion. Do we have a second?

I'll second it.

We have a motion. We have a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. Motion carries. On to 5.

Yes, sir. It was you'll make the motion on 5A to approve 5A.

Yeah, I believe that's in the description.

Okay, I just want to make sure it's very clear.

Yeah, it's in the description to consider option A. All right. Okay. Moving on to item B, public hearing and adoption of resolution number 5613GP250-0008 proposal to amend the city of Kingman general plan use designations of approximately 128 ACRES CONSISTING OF MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, PUBLIC, QUASI-PUBLIC, LOCAL, COMMERCIAL, AND PARKS OPEN SPACE TO REGIONAL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOUISE AVENUE AND FLYING FORTRESS PARKWAY. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 322-12-007 AND 322-11-002. APPLICANT MAC HALL OF IRIS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ON BEHALF OF RSF PARTNERS LLC AND WALLAPIS EDGE LLC PROPERTY OWNERS. Staff is requesting council amend the general plan the use designation of approximately 128 acres and establish the regional commercial designation to allow for commercial uses with varying intensities and align with the proposed c3 commercial services service business zone also proposed on the site to facilitate future commercial development potentially consisting of retail stores hotels restaurants and fueling facilities The minor amendment is required before the C3 zoning can be considered, as all rezoning proposals must conform to the projected land use map of the Kingman General Plan 2040. Commission recommended approval 7-0. Welcome, Mr. Mulquin.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, Council. Appreciate it. Tonight before you is GP 25-008 for Hualapai's Edge. This is a minor general plan amendment that's being proposed before you. Overall, the proposal is to amend 128 acres of the city's general plan from medium density residential, public quasi-public, local commercial, and parks and open space to a land use designation to regional commercial. And that's the land use designation being proposed on the site. As shown on the aerial before you, that's outlined in yellow, that's the area that's in question, 128 acres, is located just south of I-40 and just east of the Flying Fortress Interchange and north of Louise Avenue. This is an exhibit that was prepared by the applicant. It just shows the existing general plan designations across the 128 acres. As you can see, it's a varying of different general plan designations. The action before you tonight will establish a single designation across the entire project area. And again, this is our existing general plan map. As you can see to the south of the site that is outlined, we do have medium density residential as well as low density residential. To the north across I-40, we have regional commercial, we have industrial as well as some open space and regional commercial as well to the easterly side of it. To the west of the project site to cross flying fortress Parkway we do have a regional commercial as well as local commercial and then to the east, we have a rural residential densities as well as some open space. And again before you tonight, the application is proposed to amend the general plan to regional commercial across the entire project site. As mentioned in the description, there is a companion rezone that would take place tonight as well. This action does need to take place prior to the rezone being heard. Currently across the project site, there are zonings that consist of C2, as well as recreational open space, as well as medium density, which is R-18, single family zoning requiring a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet. The rezone will be considered post this particular application under a separate item. For the findings on this particular project, in accordance with Chapter 1 of the City's General Plan, the proposed amendment meets the required findings as detailed in the Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report, and those are provided in your packets. There are no outside agency comments that would affect the proposed amendment. Notices were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site. The project site was posted as well as it was published in the Kingman Minor. Staff did receive two inquiries, which one was opposing the proposed amendment. Those have been provided before you this evening as well as before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Again, staff is asking that you concur with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation on May 13th, which voted 7-0, recommending approval of GP 25-008 to the mayor and to the city council. I'm available for any questions as well as the applicant.

Thank you, Jason. I'll go ahead and open up the public hearing. I'm going to go ahead and open up the public hearing. We do not have anyone signed up to speak on this particular item. We do on the next item. Are you Mr. Beatty? Yes. I have you down as 5C. Did you want to speak on both? Yeah, they're directly related. That's fine. Come forward.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, and thank you, members of the council. My name's Robert Batty. I live at 2740 Sandstone Street. And for the last 15 years, I've been the general manager of American Wood Market at the airport. So I'm a longtime community member. And I'd like to thank you for your service to the community, but also for this time tonight. I do have some concerns about the proposal to amend the general plan and to change the zoning. The primary concern I have is what I feel is a lack of planning level traffic analysis on this project. As I currently see the information that's been provided, pretty much all of the traffic into this proposed project would be routed through the intersection of Louise and Flying Fortress. IT WOULD BE HIGHLY UNUSUAL FOR A PROJECT OF THIS SIZE, 155 ACRES OF REGIONAL COMMERCIAL, THAT HAVE ACCESS THROUGH ONE INTERSECTION. IF YOU LOOK AT RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE INSTITUTE OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERS FOR A REGIONAL PROJECT OF THIS SIZE, THEY WOULD RECOMMEND ACCESS THROUGH AT LEAST TWO, EITHER FRONTAGE ROAD, ARTERIAL STREETS OR INTERCHANGE. As it currently stands you would have one arterial road Louise and you The City Planning Commission said that they were looking at possibly having right in and right out on Flying Fortress But that does not resolve the issue of Ingress Ingress would still have to come through the intersection of Louise and Flying Fortress and I The comment that was made to me was that because we don't know the exact composition of the businesses that would go into the development, that it would be hard to do a traffic analysis. But at a planning level, it isn't uncommon to use some assumptions. And you could make an assumption based on recommendations from the Institute for Traffic Engineering that a project that size using 50 to 60 percent of the acreage for actual square footage, you can use that to make some assumptions regarding trip generation and traffic load and get an idea of what that looks like. The concern would be that that much traffic through one intersection creates a choke point and does not provide good circulation for traffic. If you were to have a major incident in that intersection, it would impact traffic through that entire area. Full disclosure, I do live right at the corner of this intersection, but it's not just about me, it's about all of my neighbors too. If a major incident happened in that intersection, you could back up traffic all the way down Louise and impact those in the neighborhood. So I would suggest and ask that you, and it isn't out of place or unreasonable, and it's also within recent precedent of the council to request planning level traffic analysis by a professional traffic engineer prior to granting approval to change the zoning and change the designation. AND SECONDARY, I KNOW I'M OUT OF TIME, BUT A SECONDARY CONCERN I HAVE IS HOW IT FITS WITH INSIDE THE OBJECTIVES OF THE GENERAL PLAN. THE GENERAL PLAN ITSELF, ONE OF THE OBJECTIVES IS TO INCREASE QUALITY OF LIFE OF RESIDENTS OF KINGMAN. THE CURRENT GENERAL PLAN LEAVES A FAIRLY LARGE PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY as open space, public parks, and quasi-public usage. And converting the entire parcel to a regional commercial takes that out of consideration. And so I do, that's a secondary concern. My primary concern is traffic flow through one intersection into this development. And that will be further impacted by the housing development that's currently going in right now, also along Louise. I believe there's going to be a lot of traffic through that intersection, and I think it should be considered. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. All right, I'm going to close the public hearing. Mr. Mokwen, if you'd like to come up, please. If you'd like to address those issues, and then we'll open it up to council.

Certainly, Vice Mayor, Council. With respect to the concerns brought forward by Mr. Batty, For this particular project and what's being proposed, it is in a prime location for being a regional commercial center. It sits at the intersection of the I-40 and the Flying Fortress Parkway. He is correct. It is primarily served by Luis Avenue. There are conceptual plans that have been drafted by the applicant and his design team that do propose two ride-in, ride-out opportunities onto Flying Fortress that does dissipate some of that traffic. However, the ingress would likely come from LUIS. And again, based on when those particular users come online and they have some letters of intent, they are conditioned under the rezone to actually prepare a traffic impact analysis, which will further demonstrate any additional improvements or requirements to the intersection of LUIS, as well as any of the roadway improvements for LUIS.

Okay.

And then with respect to the concern brought up in just regards to the open space, I'll just pull up this exhibit. Currently, there are open space areas on this property. It is primarily wash runoff that runs through this particular property and crosses under I-40. So as they go to develop the site, again, some of those waters will still be conveyed, but the applicant itself, there's additional open space that is further to the east of their project site.

All right, thank you. Council, any questions for Mr. Moquan? Councilman Dikins?

Am I the only one that wants to talk?

I'll talk after you. Don't worry.

In the letter, there was concern about the development and potential gas stations and stuff like that. But do I understand correctly that as it is currently zoned, those facilities could actually be built tomorrow?

As the general plan sits today on the far westerly portion of the project site, we have local commercial under the general plan. We also have general commercial. And then if we were to go to the zoning map, we have C2 that sits at that particular far corner. Under the C2, C3, which is being proposed under the companion application tonight, or even the C1 zone, fueling facilities would be a permitted use by right on these properties.

So in other words, as I said, a gas station could be built tomorrow as is right now. It'll be able to be done as a C3, but as right now, it could still be developed as zoning now.

That is correct.

Is Mr. Batty's comments about Louise and Flying Fortress, I actually like the other, yeah, that works. The intersection of Louise and Flying Fortress. If there's a vehicle accident, if there's something serious that occurs that's gonna take a period of time, there could be complete closure of that intersection and a backup of vehicles or not being able to get out or whatever. Are we looking at, or is it possible, you said something about two right in and right outs. Is it possible that on Flying Fortress that

I'm just going to skip ahead to give you kind of an idea of what that might look like.

Okay. Yeah, there's two right in and two right outs. Or two, yeah, two right in and right outs. Is it feasible or is it possible even with the conception that coming off the freeway, heading south, Can it be developed where there's a left turn into the shopping center as this is drawn, more at the north end?

Vice Mayor, Councilman Dikens, with respect to that particular question, ADOT controls the right-of-way as well as the potential ingress and egresses that would be allowed for this particular project. They do have a spacing requirement in order to get a left end. It would not meet their requirements to do so.

Okay, comments were made about a traffic analysis. What would it take to pursue a traffic analysis?

So our city engineer has looked at it on the conceptual basis of changing this to commercial. They are in concurrence of the proposed amendment. With respect to the project site itself, the applicant would have to have a better understanding as to what particular uses he does have forthcoming on the particular site. This is very conceptual, high level planning. This is to allow them to essentially start to market the site so that way they could get potential interest in the property Once they have significant interest that would allow them to move forward kick off an actual traffic impact analysis that gives us Real numbers with a full understanding of what what improvements would be required But that's

I don't know, it almost seems like that's putting the cart before the horse. We're getting the traffic analysis after we've approved the zoning.

Vice Mayor, Councilman Dikens, that would be correct. The general plan is a high-level designation from the project site. This is really when we adopted it in 2024. Moving forward, it truly is that plan that looks outwards to the next 20, 30 years. The underlying zoning, which is before you this evening under companion application, that is conditioned to have a traffic impact analysis provided at the time that they come in with the site plan.

All right, thank you.

Vice Mayor, if I may just add to that. Sure. As Jason mentioned, the traffic analysis, you can get a high level at this point, but to really know what that demand is going to be, you need to know what those tenants are. And it's not uncommon as those tenants come in to require that traffic analysis at that time. and then whatever improvements are required as part of that analysis those become requirements for that site plan approval so uh... as these tenants are coming in uh... that that traffic and out there basically as those properties are developed and and it's known what what uh... tent will be there At that point that traffic analysis is done and at that point you'll have a much better detailed Traffic plan knowing knowing what is required and then those are those improvements to address What what that impact is will be required as part of the site?

Sure councillors daily I have a question that I think might help the the traffic analysis If this is going to create a lot of traffic, they're going to come forward and let us know who's going to go in this area. That's how you get the car count. And then those improvements that you're talking about, they look like something like you're going to have to add a light. You're going to have to add extra lanes. You're going to have to add a turn lane. These types of things, in order to alleviate the traffic they're going to create. So you require, as part of the actual project when it gets ready to happen, those improvements go in then with the project.

Is that? Mm-hmm. OK. Well, and to add to that, permits aren't issued until that traffic study.

is complete. Vice Mayor Council, that is correct. So at the time they come in with the site plan, they are required to submit their traffic impact analysis. And again, it does dictate what types of improvements. So if additional right-of-way is required, if additional lanes are required, all of that becomes part of their site plan as they are moving forward through the process, as well as any of the signalization that would be required or any phasing of that signal.

Councilman Dikins.

You can read my eyes. I'm not against this, first off. I'm very much in favor of it. I think the development is important. The business is important to the community and such. I live in a neighborhood close to that, not like Mr. Batty right on the corner. And some of the things that he has brought up definitely brings more attention to it. But bottom line, I am in favor of this. It's just I... I'll just leave it at that.

Any other comments? Questions? I just, okay.

You had that photo up earlier of the site rendering. And I'm just wondering because there was a question about a little bit of a buffer between this project in the houses and I'm wondering if this is accurate because there is quite a bit of space and some trees and things to help create a little bit of a buffer between those initial businesses that are closer to the homes will that will you stick with that will be required.

Vice mayor councilman status with respect to this this is an artistic rendering from of the site plan we have not evaluated a formal site plan. However, staff has provided recommendations to the applicant in regards to buffering orientation of buildings drive through placement and so forth so that way they can move into their formal site planning and and bring back something for staff to to really take a look at.

I would assume if they had this drawn up that they're a minimal to that and that's the direction they want to go and would you say that seems accurate.

Yes, okay, thank you So I had a couple of just comments One of them you did address. I I hope that the applicant is taking into some consideration Buffer zones, that's a large amount of commercial and it's right up next to residential and Although I am very pro-growth, I'm very pro-development, I think that it needs to be done with respect to the residents that are going to live there and the residents that have been there for many years. So I'm hopeful that the applicant can can work with us on that. I wanted to just address frontage road. Can you tell me when that gets considered? I don't know where a frontage road would go, so I don't know that it makes much sense in this particular instance, but I just wanted to, for the public, you see frontage roads all the time in the bigger cities, and it's a way to divert traffic and affect traffic flow. So can you speak to that a little bit?

VICE MAYOR COUNSEL, UTILIZING THE EXHIBIT THAT'S BEFORE YOU, A FRONTAGE ROAD WOULD BE NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT SITE. IT IMMEDIATELY BUTTS I-40 TO THE NORTH. THE ELEVATION DIFFERENCE IN THE FREEWAY AND BEING ABLE TO COME OFF OF THE FREEWAY AND FOR ADOT TO ALLOW FOR ACCESS ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD, IT'S JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD PROMOTE OR BE IN FAVOR OF.

Right. I just have heard that. Why not a frontage road? So I wanted to get that out into the public. I am in favor, but again, it's a lot of commercial. So with that, I will entertain any other questions, comments. Councillor Savage?

Yeah. Is it possible to have the applicant speak?

Sure. I'm going to call the applicant up. Can you please state your name for the record?

Tanner Schroeder. Thank you all, and I'm here to answer any questions that you guys might have.

I just have a question. What does your vision look like? I mean, our comments, you've heard our comments. We've talked about open space. We've talked about the residents. We've talked about buffer zones. Could you start addressing those?

I'll start off by saying I also live in Rancho Santa Fe. And when this project, when we looked at doing something like this, we wanted to create something different that isn't here yet. So we went out and we had these drawings done. And we said, hey, we want to do something that is great for the community, that gives the community what they want without sacrificing like all these people are here talking about. So in regards to buffer zones, yes, we are looking at this using trees as buffer zones. I'm sorry. What other questions did you did you have?

I know you had questions about your your concept I mean, you know, what do you what do you see out there?

How do I go to the next slide? There's there's a few more pictures. So if you guys would like to see a little bit more So this is a rendering of kind of what that would look like Looking from the north side of the interstate back towards it to the south of the wallop I mountains We do not have any letters of intent right now. So we can't tell you exactly what it's going to look like at this point. But I do want to say that we are committed to doing something that's great. Something that has trees, something that has some greenery, something that looks nice. Because I believe right now that's what Kingman is lacking in the commercial world. We, for instance, on Stockton Hill Road, we don't have very many places where we can go to this many facilities in the same parking lot. Everybody has to get back on the road to go to the next Facilities and in regards to the traffic analysis Until we have businesses with letters on the tent We can't say what the traffic counts going to be and we're also going to say or we're also going to have people that are doing multiple stops on the same trip rather than one trip for one stop if that makes sense and So when we looked at this, we met with quite a few people at the city and said, hey, what are you guys seeing that's needed? What do you guys think would work? And this is the concept that we've come up with at this time.

All right. Any other comments? Questions? Thank you.

Thank you.

All right. I'll entertain a motion.

I'll make that motion that we accept that change to the general plan.

We have a motion. Do we have a second? We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, moving on to item C, public hearing and adoption of ordinance number 1997, RZ25-0005 proposal to rezone approximately 155 acres zoned R18 residential single family, 8,000 square foot minimum lot size C to commercial. Community Business and ROS Recreational Open Space to C3 Commercial Service Business Zone, located at the northeast corner of Louise Avenue and Flying Fortress, Assessor's Parcel Number 322-12-0007 and 322-11-002. Applicant Mac Hall of Iris Development Services on behalf of RSF Partners LLC and Wallapies Edge LLC property owners. Staff is requesting council approve the rezone to change the zoning of 155 acres to the C3 commercial service business zone, which aligns with the proposed regional commercial land use designation. Under companion application GP, 25-0008 and facilitates future commercial development potentially consisting of retail stores, hotels, restaurants, and fueling stations. Commission recommended approval 7-0. Director McQuinn.

Vice Mayor Kelce, thank you. As stated, this is rezone 25-0005. This is a rezone of the project site that we've been talking about. The acreage on this particular project site is a little bit different than that of the general plan because a portion of the general plan was already designated general commercial. So with that, the overall acreage that's being amended with the proposed rezone is 155 acres. Currently 97.91 acres is zoned R18, single family residential with a minimum lot area of 8,000 square feet. 34.43 acres is zone C2, which is our commercial community business. And then we've got 22.8 acres, which is recreational open space across the project site. And again, as proposed, the 155 acres would be amended to C3, which is our commercial service business zone. This is an illustration of the current zoning map that is on file with the city's development services department. As you can see, properties to the north across from I-40 are designated C2, LI, which is our light industrial, or L1, which is our light industrial. We do have some recreational open space, which again is another part of the wash that cuts through the project site, and again C2 further back to the west. To the south of the project site, you have two different residential designations, R120 as well as R18, so requiring a 20,000-square-foot minimum lot area and then 8,000-square-foot minimum lot area. To the west, across from Flying Fortress, the property is Zone C2. And then again to the east, we have additional open space and low-density residential. This is the exhibit that was prepared by the applicant. This is what actually gives us the acreages that are being amended tonight before you. And again, with respect to the general plan, this was the current general plan that was in effect prior to the last action that was taken. And again, being proposed tonight, which was approved, would be changing it to regional commercial. The C3 zone would be a use that is compatible with the regional commercial. And again, in accordance to the findings, the City of Kingman Zoning Code, Chapter 2-50, Section C-3, the proposed rezone meets the required findings as detailed in your Planning and Zoning Commission staff reports. We did not receive any outside agency comments. And again, as the general plan notices were mailed to the property owners within 300 feet, the site was posted as well as published in the Kingman Minor. And just like the general plan as well, staff have received the two inquiries, one which was opposed that we talked about earlier for the proposed amendment. The Planning and Zoning Commission on May 13th did hear the item as well as any of the arguments for or against the project. They did vote in favor of the project, seven to zero, recommending approval of the rezone to the Marin City Council tonight. With that, that concludes my presentation. I'm available for any questions.

Great, we'll bring you back. Mr. Batty, did you want to speak again?

Yes, just quickly.

Okay, I'm going to open the public hearing.

Thank you again, Vice Mayor and members of council. I appreciate some of the comments and some of the clarifications. I just want to make sure that everyone understands that when I purchased my property, I already knew that the corner in question was zoned for commercial. We've always anticipated the likelihood of even a service station going in there. What was not anticipated is a commercial operation of 155 acres all zoned for commercial. And once again, I'm not concerned about buffer zones and all of that. I assumed, knowing Tanner, I know him personally and he is a good guy and a good neighbor, but I've watched out for his cows for years. But I'm not concerned about that. My concern goes back to the fact that once again, you have one intersection providing access to a regional commercial property. of 155 acres. And you will have to look hard in the southwest to find a property of that size that has one ingress point. Any type of accident or any problem or any interruption of that intersection will drive traffic off of Southern and down through Mr. Schritter's new housing development. So there is another way in, but that's through residential streets. And in an emergency situation, if you had to have an evacuation or you need emergency services in there and that intersection is restricted, you are one access point. And so that is my primary concern. And once again, as to traffic analysis, they do do planning level traffic analysis before they know who tenants will be. And they make that assumptions based on the square footage of the project to be done. And it's not uncommon to see these requests and have city councils request this information prior to changing the zoning. And so I would once again just ask that that be considered. Thank you.

Excuse me, sir. Carl, am I able to ask the speaker a question?

You can choose whatever action you so desire to choose as long as the council is all on board with deviating off of the norm.

Thank you. Council, would you humor me? Thank you. I have a question, sir. I hear your concerns, and you're very consistent with them. And this is a common theme for me, so I'm not picking on you, I promise. If you were sitting in our shoes, What is it that you would like us, what decision would you like us to make tonight?

I think you should have a better idea of how much traffic will be passing through that single traffic point. That would be considered a bottleneck by the Institute of Traffic Engineers. Usually a project this size has access on either end to either a major arterial, a frontage road, which we already know won't happen, or an interchange. And ADOT does control access. Egress is fine. You have to be 300 feet away from the freeway and 170 feet away from the intersection to have your ride-in, ride-outs. That is fine. But for access, the only access is going to come off of the three-way up Flying Fortress and turn on Louise or come down Louise. And that is a lot of traffic for a project that size. And so it needs to be considered at a high level of what is the maximum expected traffic for a project of 155 acres versus piecemeal when you have individual tenants do the traffic studies. It would be very difficult to add lanes if you look at the current way it's laid out. You can go back to the drawings that have been presented. It'd be very, very difficult to add additional traffic lanes or make adjustments. You're basically, the state is already paved right up to, from the freeway right up to Louise. They've already done their medians and you can get a good fill for what that intersection is going to look like as it stands now. So it'd be very, very hard to make any changes for access into that project. Once again, it's not about the idea of commercial being there. I figured we'd probably get a Maverick right there on the corner, which works for me because I like my cold drinks, right? But a 155-acre project, that's a big deviation from the general plan and from current zoning.

Right. And so you can see what we're up against. Yes. It's completely speculative at this point as to the tenants that are going to go in there. So to do a traffic study that is speculative is hard to do at this moment in time. Would you agree?

Not if you do a high-level plan based on assumptions.

Okay. All right. Thank you for your time. I appreciate you. All right. Jason? Garner. Garner. Your writing is almost as terrible as mine. I was in a hurry. I'm sorry. Welcome, sir.

Good afternoon. Good evening, city council. My name is Jason Garner. I'm the principal engineer of a local Kingman engineering firm called Neptune Services, which is incorporated here in Kingman in 2023. I am personally a member of the Institute of Traffic Engineers. and I am here basically just to add my own professional opinion on this particular issue. I think that the development has done its due diligence so far at this stage of the game for the planning and zoning stage. I used to work at Public Works personally at the county. I also believe that Performing this kind of traffic study, if somebody had asked me to do this as an engineer with this level, yes, you can indeed make basic assumptions, but they aren't as simple as based on the square footage of the property or the parcel itself. You do kind of have to have a good amount of idea, you know, a Starbucks is going to bring in a substantially different traffic pattern than, A sizzler, let's say, you know, quote unquote. I think the time for traffic studies and to make it a contingency for approving the zoning is inappropriate. I think, you know, each one of these, every one of these questions is valid and legitimate in its time. And I 100% agree with all of the concerns that have been raised. But they are legitimate concerns that are raised with every single project. And so these things will be looked at as the development progresses. And ADOT's going to have a bunch of input there because it's right off of I-40 as well. And so there will be requirements for the improvements and the roadways, the term signals, the lights, just as Councilperson Steli has mentioned. So yeah, that's all I wanted to say from the perspective of an active member of the Institute of Traffic Engineers, that it would be basically worthless to do at this point for this study and to make it contingent upon to make the approval of the zoning contingent upon that traffic study, I think, is putting the cart before the horse. So, thank you very much.

Thank you, sir. Council, any other questions, comments? Do we need to bring Jason back up here? All right. I think we're good.

I'll entertain a motion. You still have your public hearing. Oh, I'm sorry.

I'll close the public hearing. Thank you. All right. I'll entertain a motion.

I will make that motion to approve resolution. Ordinance number 1997.

We have a motion. Do we have a second?

I'll second.

I'll second. We have a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. Motion carries. Moving on to department reports. Legislative update. I did see Mr. Tom Dorn come in. Welcome, sir.

Madam Vice Mayor, members of the council, the whole audience thanks you for turning the fans on. I just wanted to mention that. Anyway, it's great to be here to talk to you. I'll give you a quick legislative update, very long meeting. First of all, I want to apologize from the last meeting with the microphone situation. But yeah, there's a story behind that I can share later. Anyway, just to give you a quick update on what's happening down at the state capitol, or better yet, what's not happening down at the state capitol is probably a better way to put it. But I just wanted to, from the beginning, remind you that your legislative policy statement for the year, you've actually had a very successful year based on the vision you cast short of the funding for the transportation projects we wanted. But I just wanted to point out that uh... most of the the policy issues in the guiding principles you set forward other cities have joined with those and i think overall it's been a pretty successful effort on the vision that you put forward as far as what you want to happen and not happen save the funding on transportation Just wanted to tell you today is the 128th day, and it's just strange how the legislative sessions get longer and longer now with the per diem changed and increased. Nobody's in a big hurry to get back to their jobs back at the ranch and the farm and the business. I'll just say that out loud. I haven't been down there a long time.

We used to hurry to get out of the legislative session.

Now we just kind of take our time and take breaks. Anyway, we have over 2,000 bills. 61 have been vetoed. 64 have been signed. So they're not sending a lot of crazy bills just up for fun to have her sign or veto. And also these numbers are low because the governor, as you know, put a moratorium on do not send me any bills until you send me a budget. Well, the Republican majority finally did send a budget, and she promptly vetoed it. And there was just... Some things in there that, but one thing I take heart in, in her veto letter, she listed about six things and two of them were opposition to the HEERF sweep because the Republican majority, to much of our surprise, swept $9 million from the HEERF. It was just the interest, but nevertheless, when you take one penny out of the highway user revenue fund, you're taking it out of really rural Arizona, because Maricopa and Pima counties have their own half-cent sales tax. But the rural parts of the state disproportionately are impacted. So grateful for the governor's veto to that end. And then also the Smart Fund, which you're familiar with, which is basically similar to WIFA, where you can get financing to help you draw down federal dollars. And they swept that to $26.3 million. And that was unfortunate. And she called that out in one of the six items that she mentioned. So those are two good things on behalf of rural Arizona that we appreciate in her veto. The legislature, they're about $800 million apart. It's an $18 billion budget. I remember the days when we were like $8 million budget. Now we're $18 billion budget for the state and that's due to our growth and our revenue increases and you can thank I would say out loud thank Governor Doug Ducey and the legislature that that flattened the corporate tax which allows for the revenue growth Because we have more businesses locating and staying in the state. So the revenue is increasing to the state and So we're up at eighteen point eight billion or eighteen million is what the legislature had the big sticking points on the budget come down to conformity to the federal program HR1, some people call it HR1, it's also called the one big beautiful bill. It's the same thing, HR1. There's some conformity issues in there that the governor does not want to conform the state of Arizona's tax code to, and that comes to about $400 million. And then there's also the Proposition 123, the extension of the state land trust borrowing, if you will, borrowing money from the state land trust. And that was actually back when we were fixing a one-time lawsuit. So many of the Republicans don't want to extend that. That was a one-time fix for a lawsuit for education funding. What I'm hearing, you know, like today I was talking to some people down at the Capitol and I heard that we're getting closer. The governor's kind of moving off the Proposition 123 because that actually would require a vote to get approval for the funding in order to have the balanced budget. So I think we're really down to what I'm hearing is the conformity issues. the conformity issues and then what are we going to do on you know there and then there's some loose items that you know bills that we care about water transportation funding uh... so that's where we're at on the budget they do come back on june first uh... and they will uh... not only work on the budget hopefully and pass it that week that would be nice especially with the earlier primary now our primaries now july twenty first and uh... early voting starts on june twenty fourth So they don't want to be in session when they're, you know, that's not a good campaign tactic. So hopefully they'll get out of session, especially when they should have adjourned on the 100th day in April. One of the big items that they are going to be determining, and this is the benefit of being in the majority, and it's now the Republicans on both side, House and the Senate, they can send items to the ballot and get around the governor, whether it's a Republican or Democrat, in this case a Democrat. But they want to put things on the ballot that'll help drive Republican voters to the polls to support them. And so we've got a long list of concurrent resolutions that yet to be determined. all the way from, you know, boys and girls sports to going back to voting in precincts, the HCR 2042, you know, prohibiting cities and towns and counties from being able to control their own fiscal ability. So those are some of the issues that will be determined. And then, of course, on the With regard to our agenda, the Kingman agenda, and just to wrap things up, I'll hurry up, Madam Vice Chair, Vice Mayor Soyuzada. capital. The RTAC funding, I know we had, you know, for Flying Fortress, 7.4, and then we had 9 million for Santa Fe. Our legislators, Senator Angus, Representative Gillette, Representative Biasucci, they have all been fighting for that, but at the end of the day, and we've been reminding them, and you've all reminded them, we want that funding, but at the end of the day, it doesn't look like much is going to be uh... uh... done on transportation projects a lot of that the funding in order to balance the budget has been clawed back and it's interesting to claw it back and then they reappropriate it where they move it out into f y twenty eight twenty nine I mean, I went to ASU and we did math better than that, but that's the way it works, okay? That's what they do. And the water issues, governor has vetoed most of Gail Griffin's bills, which would have hurt Kingman with regard to water. um uh so that the big issue the big issue on the waterfront if you will is the colorado river everyone's talking about the colorado river and that's you know they'll it'll be interesting to see how much money they put away for the litigation fund and you've all been following that and the whole new idea of the colorado i mean the nevada california and arizona working together that seems to be the next big thing but it's almost like all the other water policy discussions just kind of have been set aside With regard to our legislators, Senator Angus has been fantastic. She is not giving up on that public notice bill. She wants to make sure that that gets in there if it's the last thing she does. Mr. Gislet has been going after fraud like crazy. That has been his mission this year, to just really go after the misuse of funding in state agencies. And he's also working very hard it hopefully can get this funding with regard to the water mapping that he had talked to you all about uh... when you're down at the capitol i'm so he's i know that's his top priority for the city kingman and this be a sushi who's going to probably be moving orders senate uh... his big thing as a chairman of transportation is you know i keep asking him You know, we really need that money for, you know, the projects. And he's like, I know, I know. I think at the end of the day, smart funds seems to be the thing that most of the legislators are going to try to salvage as opposed to specific projects. I know you don't want to hear that, but that's kind of where we're at. And I just haven't checked with the manager, but I just want to make sure we're following up on all the projects, I mean the items that we discussed at the Kingman Day. now the capital with the Department of Corrections and Office of Tourism and Eat on with us so Be happy to answer any questions. Just try to go as fast as I could to catch up.

Thank you for that appreciate it Council any comments questions I appreciate you very much. All right. Got it. Thank you very much.

Nice to see you, Tom.

And you've got a microphone that works.

Thank you for coming. The manager can tell you the story. So thank you very much.

All right. Thank you. All right. Department reports. Item B, Kingman sex trafficking data. Chief Cooper.

Vice Mayor, Council, I appreciate the opportunity. And just to be clear, I know we are running long on time. You did ask for these reports, so I will get them through as quick as I can. Human trafficking, obviously, as we all know, is a very serious incident across the country and I do appreciate an opportunity to speak to the facts of how it impacts us locally here in Kingman and the efforts that we are doing as a police department to identify and potentially rescue any victims. It's important to understand that there's different types of human trafficking, there's sex trafficking, there's labor trafficking, there's migrant trafficking. It's also important to be aware that the most people most likely to be victims of this are Runaways and youth in foster programs Individuals create substance abuse and others that are particularly vulnerable But the police department regularly what we do we do regularly coordinate with local state and federal partners in Regards to the trends that are going on and things that are happening in our community in our area and that are passing through officers do receive updates as well as training on things to recognize indicators to identify potential victims and also to have the right line of questioning if we suspect that there is human trafficking occurring the right investigative questions to happen i apologize so Locally, the first incident of human trafficking that I'm aware of since I've been with the department occurred about 10 years ago, where we were asked to assist the Department of Public Safety in interviewing a young lady who was rescued during a traffic stop. And that was 10 years ago. They were passing through town. There was a traffic stop on the freeway. About five years ago, our department was instrumental in organizing a coordinated investigation into illicit activities in local massage businesses. And that investigation resulted in the arrest of workers and managers of those businesses and was ultimately turned over to our federal partners because these people involved were connected to a larger group that was operating out of Las Vegas. They were foreign nationals out of China or Asia, something like that. And what was interesting there is everybody involved in those, there was three, I think it was a total of three different massage parlors in the area. They were all living out of one house, and that house was being paid for by this larger organization out of Las Vegas. But as a result of that investigation, those businesses were closed, and they have remained closed. And something was interesting, it's important to understand, like in that example, that many of these people that are involved in this that are victims of being indentured servants, they have opportunity to leave, but they don't based on threats and just different things going on. And it's more common than you might think. More recently, last week at a truck stop east of town, most of you might be aware of that, a DPS trooper rescued a mother and her young daughter. They were believed to be victims of sex trafficking and in that case the mother was able to use the rapid SOS function on a cell phone and was able to communicate with emergency services and was able to provide updates on the location and we all know that ultimately the suspect was arrested on charges related to sex trafficking and pandering. Human trafficking is often associated with major transportation corridors in connection with nearby metropolitan areas, especially during high-profile events. We all know we have Las Vegas close by and Phoenix isn't too far. But knowing that, I am fully aware that human trafficking victims are passing through our community due to our geographic location, highway, hotels, and the travel-related businesses. But to this date, we have not identified any local victims of human trafficking. There have been allegations and concerns, but none of them have been substantiated or confirmed over the years. But it does not diminish the seriousness of the issue or the importance of our officers maintaining vigilance. We also encourage community members to be vigilant as well, watching out for that. And in closing, in regards to this, I would take this opportunity just to encourage anybody that suspects or has suspicious activity that might indicate somebody's a victim of human trafficking they can contact the National Human Trafficking Hotline at 1-888-373-7888 for confidential assistance and resources.

Thank you, Chief. Any comments, questions for Chief? All right. I appreciate that very much. All right. Department reports, item number C6C, report regarding driver behavior on Gordon Avenue west of Stockton Hill Road. Chief?

Thank you, Vice Mayor and Council. I do appreciate the opportunity to speak to this concern as well. We do receive multiple complaints and concerns throughout the year, as do you. I'm aware of that as well. And this is an opportunity for me to express to you and our community our efforts to address those concerns. We receive some of the most common areas, more frequently reported areas of concern beyond Gordon Drive, our wall up in Mountain Road, Central Avenue, East Beale Street coming into downtown, West Beale Street due to the construction that's going on, of course Stockton Hill Road from Annie Devine all the way to Gordon, our hires, and also the Gordon Drive, particularly west of Stockton Hill Road. When we receive these concerns and they're brought to our attention, they are acted upon. We take every complaint seriously and we use several strategies to address those concerns. One of the resources is available. You've seen it around as a radar trailer. It's a speed radar trailer, which can provide immediate feedback to drivers. And we feel it's fairly effective at obtaining voluntary compliance, although it is temporary. As soon as it's removed, behavior seems to happen. Go back to what's happened before. Officers are also encouraged to conduct report writing or administrative tasks in high traffic areas or high visibility areas if it's safe and if it's practical to do so. Those complaints that we receive throughout the year are communicated directly to our patrol personnel as well as our traffic team. And they have been given the direction to provide a presence and take appropriate enforcement action. In partnership with our streets department, we also conduct periodic traffic studies throughout the city. These speed and traffic analysis provide us some objective data that helps us to better understand driving habits, identify trends, and prioritize our enforcement efforts. And I want to emphasize that when we do this information, as we did on Gordon, it's not meant to discredit the complaints. I have no reason to doubt what people are telling us. They're seeing these vehicles. They live in these areas, right? So this isn't meant to diminish that. But it does help us to prioritize application, how I assign resources in the department. But they also provide us with additional details that's important for us to justify that action. And they are obviously just a brief snapshot of what's happening during a brief period of time, and they don't capture the behavior that's happening week to week or month to month or throughout the year. So, for example, specific to Gordon Drive west of Stockton Hill Road, there was a 48-hour speed data analysis conducted between April 29th and may first and during that period approximately fifteen hundred vehicles traveled through that nine hundred block of gordon drive the average speed recorded was twenty four miles per hour with speech ranging the lowest is three miles per hour and the highest of forty of those fifteen hundred vehicles fiber recorded traveling between thirty five and forty miles per hour in an additional statistics that came out of that study was The average speed of the 85th percentile was 28.4 miles per hour. That means that 84% of the vehicles were going 28 or less. That study captured weekday patterns, which was including to and from school, to and from work. And it did not include weekend activity, which might bring different results. But since the beginning of the year, we've conducted 17 dedicated enforcement efforts at that location, resulting in 20 traffic stops. And the time frame dedicated for those dedicated would be dependent upon the officer's ability to commit to that. So it wasn't hours. It was probably 20 minutes, 30 minutes, or might have been 45 to an hour. It just depends on what the calls for service were at that particular time. Our traffic squad currently consists of two motor officers and one sergeant. We have hopes to hopefully fill a third position into our traffic team as we increase our officer staffing levels. All patrol officers are expected and they're encouraged to be proactive in their, I'll say downtime. When they're not obligated to a call or they're writing reports or doing some other duty, they are expected to be active with traffic contacts and traffic enforcement. I would reiterate, I shared this during our department report, our traffic enforcement efforts did steadily increase over the last three years. Last fiscal year, they increased over 28% from the previous year. And it's actually the highest year we've had in the past five years. And I fully expect that trend to continue. I can assure you and the community that we do treat traffic complaints as serious. It is a priority for us. With that understanding, I know that we might not meet everybody's expectations. But we do listen to the residents, and we evaluate the data and what they're sharing with us. And we do determine on a weekly basis where we're going to be able to deploy resources to address that issue. Because ultimately, our goal isn't just to write tickets, but that is a real effective way of modifying driving behavior. Any questions?

Comments? All right. Thank you, Chief. Appreciate it. On to item number seven, announcements by mayor, council members, city manager. City manager Walsh. Nothing tonight. Nothing? Thank you. Councillor Walker.

Nothing. Councillor Savage. Nothing tonight.

Councillor Ward. Councillor Dikins. I have nothing as well. Item number eight, council request for future reports and updates. Anybody? Anybody? ALL RIGHT. EXECUTIVE SESSION, ITEM 9A, CITY MANAGER AT ANNUAL EVALUATION CONTINUED FROM MAY 5TH, 2026 MEETING. THE CITY MANAGER MAY GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO ARS 38-431.031A1 TO DISCUSS THE CITY MANAGER'S ANNUAL EVALUATION DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. I have a motion, I have a second. I have a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. We are back from executive session. I will entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion in regards to the city manager annual evaluation that we approve and move forward with the discussion that we had in executive session.

WE HAVE A MOTION, WE HAVE A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. ANY OPPOSED? WE ARE ADJOURNED.