City Council - Regular Meeting

As well as the legislative process and bills of particular note and interest. We obviously won't go through that great depth of detail that's in there. But there was a lot that obviously went on as it does in every session. I think it's important to kind of look at each session based on the circumstances that surround it. In this session, we had once again a split government with a Democratic governor and a Republican legislature, so there's a lot of things that they have to do to come together and figure out a state budget, as well as how legislation gets navigated. The Republican majorities at the House and Senate are fairly small, larger than the previous couple of cycles, but still 33-27 in the House, 17-13 in the Senate, and then, of course, Governor Hobbs. So when you approach everything, when you look at everything, Anthony mentioned the league and how we navigate and make determinations about what is in the best interests of cities in the context that Anthony mentioned, local control, revenue issues, state shared revenue, obviously a critical source of what makes up city budgets around the state. So all of those things matter, and dealing with both sides of the aisle to the benefit of really, at the end of the day, everybody's shared constituents. Legislative delegations from around the state encompass cities, and they have the same voters. at the end of the day, different parts of the legislative district, different cities in those districts. But for example, here in Mojave, you have Havasu, you have Bullhead, you have Kingman as the major cities in the legislative district 30. But as you look at the interests of those folks as citizens, taxpayers, those things often cross in the context of the representation for members who make up those legislative delegations. So we have a great coming together of many times and in the education process to try to have members understand that if you affect city revenues in a certain way, if you affect the tax base and various policies that do that, Those are the same people that they represent. Yes, please.

And I'll just, Nick was speaking to sort of the broader view down at the legislature that is something that we have to deal with. I think a particular note to the council and certainly to the constituents is in dealing with that, we have had a record number of bills introduced this legislative session, nearly 2,200 of interest to me, if not to my poor eyesight. Nearly 2,200 bills introduced and then over the course of legislative session had 415 of those passed through the legislature. Of the 415, 264 were signed into law and 151 were vetoed. So by its very nature, session is designed to kill legislation, right? It's incredibly hard to pass anything And with the dynamics that Nick outlined with our Democratic governor, with very slim Republican majorities, but it kind of creates this universe where people do need to work together down there because we have not such a clearly defined party dominance. We have this really unique structure down there that sort of demands working together or die. And so I think that's something that we see down there is If you want to succeed, you need to build a bipartisan coalition. You need to work together. Or you end up in the scenario where things go to the ballot. We have a lot of citizen initiatives. And so I think this year, we were discussing Arizona voters are going to have a lot of items on their ballot this year, where eight referendums will be voted on at the statewide level. We originally had 11. Three of them have been thrown out for various lawsuit court rulings, but we have a lot of things that go on down at the Capitol and certainly a lot of things that affect our city levels. So just wanted to touch on that from a unique perspective on the things we see down there.

Yeah, and just to put an exclamation point on the number of bills, for the first time in history, we had bills in the House of Representatives that started with the number four. So every year the first bill introduced is 2001 in the House, 1001 in the Senate, We got into the 4,000 series for the first time in history. So there are a lot of bills being generated by the members. And it's a very truncated process. So the more you try to put into it, the tougher it gets. So in terms of some particulars, Brittany had mentioned that overview. We had a number of bills that would have been highly problematic, I think, for cities. But also along the lines that Brittany mentioned, you have to deal with building coalitions and you have to deal with members across the board. And working with the league, we do a lot of that. And bills are not always, and in fact most of the time, are not really generated and pushed forward on party lines. You look at the housing bill that would be problematic for cities in the context of starter homes, and we've seen that a few times, and in that context, The way the bills were drafted would have been very problematic for local control, could have had some problematic consequences for the planning processes and how things are generated from the city standpoint. And there is Republican and Democrat support for those bills, and Republican and Democrat opposition. So at the end of the day, there's a lot more to be worked out on that topic. All that bill and others like it were brought forward with really great intentions. So it really, at the end of the day, is a matter of coming together and continuing to hammer out things so that they can be absorbed locally in the best possible way. There were bills that dealt with taking away water credits for cities, that didn't make it. There was a bill and a ballot measure that dealt with freezing city abilities to deal with fee increases. And sometimes you gotta have some dexterity, right? At the end of the day, local residents will tell you what's okay and what isn't okay with them when you propose these issues, to have it dealt with at the state level in a sort of a blanket way to say, cities, you can't for the next four years raise a fee. Well, if you have a project or or a recreation center or something that you all and your citizens want to take place, that's a local decision. So those sorts of things were able to be stopped. The budget, CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE STATE. I THINK PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THESE ARE TOUGHER TIMES RIGHT NOW. STATE REVENUES ARE IN DIFFICULT SHAPE. THERE WAS A 2.5% CUT ACROSS THE BOARD ON STATE AGENCIES AND OTHER MEASURES TO DOWNSIZE CERTAIN AREAS OF THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET. WERE ABLE THOUGH TO NOT SEE ANY DIMINUTION OF STATE SHARED REVENUE. WHICH IS AGAIN OBVIOUSLY ACROSS THE BOARD CRITICAL TO CITY BUDGETS AND CITY PLANNING. SO WE OVERALL ON BALANCE THIS WAS A REALLY GOOD SESSION FROM THE STANDPOINT OF LOCAL DETERMINATION AND CONTROL. And I think citizens live in cities across the state because they want to have their local community have the character that they want. And Havasu is as unique as any city in the state, given its resources and its geography. So those were good results. And then we've got, obviously, the last thing we'll say for the moment, we can then open it up HOWEVER, YOU ALL WANT TO GO FROM HERE WITH US, QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING ELSE, MAYOR, BUT YOU'VE GOT OBVIOUSLY NOT A PRESIDENTIAL YEAR THIS YEAR, BUT ALL THE STATEWIDES, ALL THE STATEWIDES IN ARIZONA ARE UP. AND PEOPLE MAY OR MAY NOT BE AWARE OUT IN THE AUDIENCE HERE, You know, Arizona has the unique circumstance of having all 90 members run every two years. So they are always up for election. There aren't longer terms in the Senate. They're not staggered terms. All 90 members have the burden of OF RUNNING FOR ELECTION EVERY TWO YEARS. SO ALL 90 MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE ARE UP AND ALL FIVE STATEWIDE OFFICES ARE UP. GOVERNOR, SECRETARY OF STATE, ATTORNEY GENERAL, TREASURER, AND THE PUBLIC, YEP, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION. SO THAT'S WHAT VOTERS HAVE BEFORE THEM ON THE BALLOT. IT'S GOING TO BE, THEY'RE ALSO JUST WORTH MENTIONING PROBABLY between eight and ten depending on how you look at it very highly in play contested general elections in the legislature in a lot of the districts highly Democrat districts the Democrat nominees are in pretty good shape and highly Republican districts the Republican nominees are in pretty good shape but there are a number of districts that will make the ultimate determination on how the legislature shakes out and which party is in power. So this is a very dynamic election in that regard. And then, of course, the state whites and at the top of the list, the governor. So with that, Brittany and I, again, really pleased and honored to be here before you this evening and happy to go from here, whatever where you want us to.

Thank you so much for the update and thank you for coming up here and for all the work that you do for us on a daily basis. I know that all of my colleagues are involved in this process, Mr. Kozlowski and City of Leadership, but you guys are boots on the ground. And when things are changing rapidly, you guys are able to help facilitate and ensure that. You know, 85% of all Arizona residents live in a city or town. And so when we talk about local control, what we mean by that is that we believe that government closest to the people, you know, we see our neighbors and residents in a grocery store. And we can talk about an item that might be of interest for our community. And we want to be able to make that decision if that's what's right for Lake Havasu. Another community throughout the state of Arizona might not think our solution is the right solution, but good for them. They can make their own choice in their community. So that's what we advocate always for local control. And our legislative strategy has been fight for local control, balance the tenants of protecting our revenue sources, which is really important. And then we have a couple of other bills that we work on, such as transportation infrastructure, working on short-term rentals. Representative Bliss' bill this year was obviously championed by Lake Havasu and by the league. It's unfortunate to make it through because it was a great bill for all sides. The industry was also a part of that negotiated bill, but we appreciate that work. And 90% of what we do during legislative session is we play defense. We push away bills that are really not advantageous to residents in our communities. And so that 10% that we're working for and advocating for, One or 2% of it were successful and we get a bill that works for us. And one example of local control that's pretty obvious to our residents in Lake Havasu City was short-term rentals. We've had short-term rentals in Lake Havasu City since Mr. McCulloch founded our community. We had no issues managing them ourselves until the state decided that they knew better and in 2016 changed the law and preempted cities and towns from managing their short-term rentals. And over the last 10 years, we've worked with our partners and legislative community, and of course our legislative delegation, Representative Biasucci and Senator Angus during this last session, and Senator Borrelli when he was in, and Representative Gillette and Representative Cobb over the years to get that legislation changed, which still allows short-term rentals to occur, but allows some local control so our residents can sleep at night. And so we've been successful in that area, but If we had local control, the Lake Havasu Cityway would have been here that whole time and would have never been an issue and operators would have been able to operate and residents would have been able to sleep and there would have been no issues. But again, thank you for your efforts. I appreciate it. Any other questions or comments from members of the council? Council Member Lynn?

Mr. Mayor, besides the short term rentals, can you give us a couple of the specific items that you were advocating for, Lake Havasu specifically for? Just so we can tell our residents what you're doing down there for us.

Yes, thank you, council member. Yes, we work closely with the league on dealing with issues that have to do, as I mentioned, with the state shared revenue program. making sure that was okay. The housing bill, again, we were very prominent in dealing, and all those housing issues to ensure that there is the best ability to plan, to be able to have the character of the communities the way that people, the residents and the leadership of the city wants it. To be able to not have circumstances where homeowners can't rely on the zoning that the city has put in place that makes sense for this area. I mean, at the end of the day, right, The folks in Phoenix have to deal with state issues. They are not the best equipped to be deciding what is the best thing on the ground locally for how a city is planned, how it's laid out, and how those zoning issues work, and the aesthetic issues, and those sorts of requirements. And so we think And we work with the League and our other city lobbying colleagues closely to try to maintain the best focus on local control. And that also, Councilmember Lin, goes back to, again, the ability for you all to determine what you need regarding fees, regarding taxes, regarding any of that, any of those revenue generating issues. Because if you're not able to determine that, again, that's difficult to determine from the capital in Phoenix, what makes sense for Havasu, what might make sense for Sierra Vista, what might make sense for Prescott, or any of the cities in the valley, for that matter. So I think that having those things not be pressed upon the cities in a way that hamstrings your ability to plan, your ability to move initiatives forward that makes sense locally, that you determine, your voters put you in that position to do that, and you answer to them. So we worked on those issues as well, Very important to make sure that we keep that where it is.

Nick, I got a follow up question. I'm understanding the process. I guess I'm not necessarily part of those one on one conversations with you. So what are some of the things that we're telling you to advocate for us? I think as a council member myself, I'm not in that specific conversation. So I don't know who you're talking with. So I'm just wondering who's giving you that on our government side and what we're telling you.

We work closely with Anthony and then, of course, speak with the mayor, speak with Jess, and focus on the sorts of things that they WANT TO IMPART TO US AS PRIORITIES IN AREAS OF CONCERN AND FOCUS. THE MAYOR MENTIONED, COUNCILMEMBER, THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL ISSUE. AND THEN IT'S A GREAT QUESTION, TOO, BECAUSE FROM TIME TO TIME, OTHER THINGS COME UP THAT HAVE of implications that sort of kind of have a foot in and a foot out regarding the capital, but the policy issues, working and navigating things that have to do with things like the education campus here and how some of those things were happening and unfolding with ASU and with Mojave Community College. and those sorts of things, when they're brought to our attention, we help navigate on those matters with people who are interested in those, like members of our delegation, Representative Biasucci, Senator Angus. And so we have a lot of interaction, especially with Anthony throughout the session, And Anthony is always interacting with the mayor and interacting with city manager. But we have dialogue with him as well.

May Councilmember Lin, we base it all on the tenets of local control. So how do we ensure that we have the ability to make the decisions here locally? How do we protect state shared revenues and ensure that there is no jeopardy for what those formulas are? And then we work on individual bills, and a lot of it's in defense. So Mr. Simonetta mentioned the bill that was going through the legislature and making some good traction that was gonna prevent us from raising any fee or charge for four years, which in Lake Havasu City, we have a rate plan for our water and wastewater system that's already pre-programmed. It's a five-year rate plan. We'll be discussing a little bit more next year when it comes back up, but everything that's already pre-programmed in there would not have been allowed should that bill have passed. And so over the years, it depends on during this meeting when Mr. Simonetta and his team come up here, we also give them feedback on what it is. But how do we ensure that we have that local control in Lake Havasu City? So then, Brittany, did you have something to add? Then Mr. Kozlowski, if you want to add something as well. Yeah.

Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, I wanted to touch on the fees issue. And Councilmember Lin, I think it's important, too, when we were talking about every single member at the legislature being up for election every two years. what's old becomes new again very quickly. And so we see these concepts that return again and again and again to the legislature. And so in terms of playing defense, sometimes people get inoculated to some of these concepts that, oh, I haven't heard that in a while. That sounds like a novel concept. And then you start to get into the nitty-gritty and concepts like, prohibiting municipalities from imposing and collecting any fees or taxes or any kind of surcharge for the next four years. That sounds really novel when individuals are talking about cost of their pockets, but it is an absolute detriment to planning and security at the local level. And so we had not only a bill that popped up with that framework, but then additional two HCRs which would have bypassed you know any sort of legislative well went through the legislature would have bypassed you know potentially a veto and go directly to the citizens and then it's citizen protected which then becomes nearly impossible to do any kind of untangling or fixing as you progress through through these different processes so just being able to be down there and be able to be nimble to what issues that might pop up and be receptive to the direction of the council when these kinds of things pop up and move very quickly, especially at the end of session. We have a very unique concept called Strike Everything Bill that it can pop up right at the end of session. AGAIN, IT MIGHT BE A BILL THAT YOU'VE DEALT WITH AT THE BEGINNING IN JANUARY AND THEN YOU'LL SEE IT AGAIN IN MARCH AND THEN ONE MORE TIME JUST FOR FUN RIGHT IN JUNE WHEN EVERYBODY'S FEELING TIRED AND TUCKERED FROM THE CONVERSATION, WHICH WAS THE CASE THIS YEAR.

I WANT TO ADD SOMETHING TO THAT, TOO, BECAUSE THE PROCESS IS WHEN WE HAVE THESE COMMUNICATIONS THAT YOU ASK ABOUT, COUNCILMEMBER LYNN, you're dealing with a process that you have to react to in real time, immediately. During session, there is no being tired. For us, there's no being tired at 11 o'clock at night and going, oh, I'll do it tomorrow. You have to do everything in real time. The committee process moves very quickly. five weeks or so for House bills in the House committees, and then another five weeks, and the Senate does their work at the same time, and then they switch, and House bills, about five weeks to six weeks for House bills in the Senate, Senate bills in the House, everything moves so quickly on that conveyor belt that You have to react quickly. So, for example, and I think this maybe goes in part to your question, you know, there'll be something that pops up on Thursday end of day, Friday morning, and it's going to be in committee the next week because of the strike everything process that Brittany mentioned. And, you know, we'll get on the phone and, you know, if it's something that, we know will be problematic for the city. We'll get on the phone with Anthony on Friday afternoon and say, hey, this has come up. Let's talk about it. Let's figure out how we want to proceed, what we want to do. And Anthony reacts right away, and we have to – there is no luxury of time. in the way that the Arizona legislative process is structured. This is not completely unusual for state government and the legislative sessions around the country, but Arizona is particularly intense and truncated over those first 12, 13 weeks of session when you have the committee process in play. And then bills can be brought back, as Brittany mentioned, in various forms. Sometimes it might be good to do a workshop for people to get a little further sense of some of these process idiosyncrasies, because they're fascinating. But, and we use them to our benefit too, but they can, you really have to have your head on a swivel and you have to react in moments during the course of the session. Otherwise, you get left behind.

Thank you.

Mr. Kozlowski, did you want to add something to that conversation?

Can I finish my question? So I really appreciate that process and all that. And I appreciate everything you do and the conversations you're having with Anthony. But I think what I'm feeling that I'm missing as a council person is being part of those conversations. And maybe that's something internally we need to work on, not necessarily on your end. But I struggle with a little bit with, having your contact be Anthony to speak for the council who's speaking for the community. And that's no offense to you, Anthony. I know that might be the process, but I struggle with that. So maybe that's something internally we can work on.

Mr. Mayor, Council Member Lin, I just wanted to touch on a little bit of the process. As far as for me, we have our annual retreat, and I come to council as far as providing you with a legislative update as far as what expectations are moving forward with the upcoming session. We also have conversations regarding what key topics or areas we're looking at trying to address, whether that be SLIFT, State Lake Improvement Funds, or short-term rentals. And then we talk about the broader aspect as far as the three key mantras and making sure we're playing defense and protecting some of those areas. Nick and Brittany have done a fantastic job as far as being our voice as it pertains to protecting SLIF, which has done wonders as far as adding additional amenities to our parks and creating great partnerships with state agencies such as state parks in assisting us with getting additional grant funding over the years. SO THOSE AREAS HAVE TRULY BEEN BENEFICIAL TO MYSELF. AND AS FAR AS TRYING TO UPDATE THE COUNCIL, I DO PROVIDE THOSE WEEKLY REPORTS TO COUNCIL AS DIFFERENT THINGS COME UP THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE SESSION. I'M ALWAYS AVAILABLE IF THERE'S QUESTIONS OR ISSUES. AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH COUNCIL MEMBER CAMPBELL AS FAR AS TRANSPORTATION GOES AS WELL. SO WE'RE HAVING CONVERSATIONS THERE AS FAR AS HOW WE CAN MOVE THINGS FORWARD. AND THEN OUTSIDE OF SESSION, HAVING CONVERSATION WITH OUR DELEGATION AS FAR AS HOW WE CAN POTENTIALLY MOVE FORWARD WITH SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND GET SOMETHING PAST THIS UPCOMING SESSION. SO I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.

MR. DEAS. SO, ANTHONY, REAL QUICK, ON THE WEEKLY REPORT THAT WE GET, SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT, IS THAT A WEEKLY REPORT FROM THE ARIZONA LEAGUE OF CITIES AND TOWNS THAT YOU'RE USING, OR IS THAT A COMBINATION OF WHAT YOU'RE WORKING WITH NICK ON? and Arizona cities and towns?

Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor Diaz, it's a combination. So we're pulling everything together as far as the league puts together a good and bad bills list. Our lobbyist is also tracking bills that are more focused directly towards issues that we care more about. AND THAT'S BASED OFF OF CONVERSATIONS THAT I'M HAVING WITH THEM THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THIS SESSION, AS WELL AS CONVERSATIONS THAT I'VE HAD WITH COUNCIL AS IT PERTAINS TO WHEN WE INTERACT AT THE RETREAT, AS WELL AS HAVING CONVERSATIONS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.

AND I KIND OF SEE WHERE COUNCIL MEMBER LIN IS GOING IS WHEN THAT INSTANCE HAPPENS, NICK, WHERE YOU, I KNOW IT'S A QUICK PROCESS, RIGHT? YOU HAVE TO CALL ANTHONY AT THE SPUR OF A MOMENT, SOMETHING HAPPENS, AND HE'S GIVING YOU AN ANSWER. HE'S, IN THEORY, SPEAKING FOR ALL OF US. SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT You know what I'm saying? Where does that answer come, where is that answer generated from that you haven't spoken to all of us, but you're giving an answer. Here's what we need to do as a city. I GUESS WE HAVE TO JUST TAKE YOUR WORD THAT YOU KNOW THE, FOLLOW ME?

SURE. MR. MAYOR, VICE MAYOR DIAZ, THESE CONVERSATIONS AS FAR AS THE INTERGOP FOR THE CITY, WE'RE HAVING CONVERSATIONS STATEWIDE. SO WE'RE INTERACTING WITH INTERGOPS FROM COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE STATE ON A WEEKLY BASIS, HAVING CONVERSATIONS ABOUT DIFFERENT BILLS. AS WELL AS I'M HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH NICK AND THE CITY GROUP ON A QUARTERLY BASIS AS WELL, WHERE WE TALK ABOUT DIFFERENT BILLS AS FAR AS THE THREE KEY MANTRAS THAT DICTATE IS IT A GOOD BILL OR A BAD BILL BASED OFF OF DOES IT IMPACT LOCAL CONTROL? DOES IT HURT STATE SHARED REVENUE? ARE THERE ANY UNFUNDED MANDATES TIED TO THAT BILL? AND THOSE ARE THE THREE KEY AREAS THAT WE DETERMINE IF IT'S GOOD OR BAD. AND THAT'S HOW WE BASE A BILL MOVING FORWARD.

And I guess we're fortunate up here. Most of us up here have a speed dial relationship with our legislatures, with Hildy and Leo and John Gillette, and hopefully with the two new ones that are going to be in there also. So I appreciate what you do. Thank you.

Yeah, there is a possibility as well that based on this conversation, we could put together a legislative policy that the council adopts so that it's clear what issues we'll be addressing when it comes to local control, protecting state shared revenues, and the other priorities that council may have. Mr. Knutson, did you have something?

Yeah, if I can. And then the other mayor, members of council, the other bill that Nick and his team worked on a little bit this year was in collaboration with Leo Biasucci as the author of a bill to protect the brick-and-mortar boat rental companies and jet ski rental companies within Havasu. It felt just short of, I think, 10 votes in the House after making its way on the other chamber. But that was one bill that we had a lot of conversations about this legislative session as well, too. To speak on the process a little bit, too, is just that it's continued conversations, emails, one-on-ones, doing the best we can to try to identify what bills are important to council, what bills are important to the community, and then the opposite, which ones are detrimental for council's perspective or the community's perspective. But it's a difficult situation because council has to speak with one voice. So for us to come back and put an item on the agenda to talk about a bill, By the time we get to that council meeting, the bill's already been passed or something's happened at that point too. So Mr. Simonetta spoke to kind of the speed of the bills, puts us in a bit of a situation. But if there's a better way of doing things, ears are wide open.

Mr. City Manager, can you explain, is that the bill where they were, we said protecting the boat rental companies from people that just have multiple boats and rent them out to people? Was that a business license?

Yeah, Mayor, Vice Mayor, that's exactly it. That was Leo Biasucci that sponsored and authored that bill. And basically there's some overhead that our brick-and-mortar boat and jet ski rental companies have within the community that's different than an individual. Or what we see here in Havasu is we have people that come in from out of state bringing in half a dozen boats and putting them in storage containers or storage units that are in Havasu. and then renting those out without the proper insurance levels that our brick and mortar companies have. So they're able to do that without the overhead and doing it the right way that protects the residents, the boaters, the users, and those that are renting the watercraft. So the bill that was placed forward would require commercial insurance to the same levels as our brick and mortar watercraft rental companies would have. And that would have been a nice thing for us.

And I would add, too, that in a bill like that, and we see it with short-term rentals, we see it with things like Turo, with the rental cars, there's a natural tension as the sharing economy has grown between people being able to do business with their own property and at the same time being treated on par because, as our city manager mentioned, you have requirements to protect the consumer and the public with insurance requirements and other things that you have to do, safety issues, so that when those things occur and you're doing a business in that regard, there should be on par issues so that people who, whether you rent a boat over here or you rent a boat over here, You're getting a safe watercraft. You're getting appropriate insurance coverage. All of those things that go into it. And so there's a natural tension in there. And we work extremely well with soon to be Senator Biasucci. And then we have two new House members coming in in District 30 who we have relationships with both of them. work together on matters like that one that affect life here in Lake Havasu and doing business in a good way so that consumers have choice, people can do what they need to do, but also have faith in the fact that the things that they're doing are consumer safe and

covered the right way and that business is being done fairly there any other questions or comments remembers the council before we open the public hearing all right this is public hearing would anyone like to address the city council on this item if so just make you ready the podium and state your name for the record thank you mayor council members thank you very much thank you city man

Good evening, Mayor, City Council. Yes, they kept mentioning something that I did not understand. And actually the whole thing has me lost because I didn't hear an update on actually whatever it was that I was supposed to be updated on. And I didn't understand whatever update that I just received. From what I understood was that they're down there in Phoenix and talking to people. at the speed of sound or light and they're always on the move and that's really great because I know all of you are always on the move also. But there were three things that you guys kept repeating that we're supposed to be aware of or you're And I could only understand local control and unfounded mandates. And I got confused with what the third one was. Or maybe I got confused on all of them. When you say about communicating all of this, I remember city council member Campbell mentioned emailing, and I forgot who, a couple months ago or a month and a half ago at a city council session when she gave an update on the planning organization that we needed to contact Well, apparently when there are legislative things that are concerning the citizens, I would think that you would be updating us during a council meeting or posting it on social media so we know who to contact, especially if it's something that we can help with. If all we have to do is send an email to Governor Hobbs or whoever to say, hey, let's pass this. Our city needs it. That's what we're here for. We will send those emails out. I'm pretty certain almost everybody behind me, if they really thought that all we needed to do was email Governor Hobbs and you said, hey, this is what we need to do, they'll do it. Why wouldn't they? That's a simple thing to request, but if you don't inform us, we can't do that. So I was wondering what the third thing was that I got confused on.

Sure, yeah, so it's local control, protecting state shared revenues.

State shared revenues.

And then unfunded mandates. So that would be legislation that would not have dollars attached to it, but would require cities and towns to adopt it and pay for whatever that is.

Unfunded.

Unfunded mandate. So those are the three.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Toye. Anyone else like to address this council on this item? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Are there any final remarks from members of the council?

I'll chime in. I just want to say how much I appreciate your updates, Anthony, to keep us in the loop. I very much appreciate the process because they need to know our principles of those three pillars. But if there's ever anything wacky that I see out there, I'm sure to talk to you about it and tell you my concerns with maybe we forego one of those pillars because we like this bill kind of deal. So I'm happy with the process and I think you guys do a great job of keeping us updated.

All right. Thank you again, Mr. Simonetta and Brittany for being here. We appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. Kozlowski, for presenting. And we will now move backwards in our agenda to Mr. Knutson's city manager report.

All right. I was just told to make it snappy after Nick told us it was going to be a short presentation. Good evening, Mayor, members of council. I'm going to try something from afar and see if this works. Yes. Great. Congratulations to you, Mayor Kalshihi, and to you, Councilmember Michelle Lynn, who were recognized by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns for 12 years of dedicated public service, and also for Jim Dolan, not pictured here, but was also recognized for eight years of public service on the City Council. The years of service demonstrate a strong commitment to Lake Havasu City, its residents, and local government throughout Arizona. So congratulations again on this well-earned recognition, and thank you for your continued dedication to our community. Congratulations to you, Councilmember Jenny Koch, for graduating from the inaugural first-ever CivicCraft Leadership Program through the League of Arizona Cities and Towns. This program provided valuable educational and professional development opportunities for local elected officials across Arizona, helping strengthen leadership and service within our respective communities. Congratulations to you, Councilmember Jenny Koch. This is a great accomplishment, and your continued commitment to serving LeCavasu City is recognized. A special thank you to Accurate Auto Care for their generous $910 donation to the Lake Havasu City Parks and Recreation Afterschool Program Scholarship Fund. The donation was presented at Starline Elementary School and will help provide opportunities for local children to participate in the city's afterschool program. We appreciate Accurate Auto Care for supporting Havasu's youth. So thank you so much for that donation. If you're interested in a career in fire service but not sure where to begin, Lake Havasu City Fire, Rescue, and EMS has a pathway to help you get there. The journey can start right here in Lake Havasu City through the high school fire and EMS CTE programs and continue into the city apprenticeship program, which provides paid training and support while participating and earning their EMT-B and Fire 1 and 2 certs. This process starts at the high school level. So we're grabbing the kiddos that want to serve in our fire departments and other medical fields. From there, the opportunities through fire paramedic training positions, paramedic school, and ultimately a career as a firefighter paramedic. Whether you're a high school student exploring your future or someone that's ready for a new career, Our fire and EMS team is here to help you find the right path and guide you along the way. The career fair for the entire city is going to be on Friday. I'll speak about that here in a second. So it's a great opportunity to come and speak to our fire professionals there. Or contact the fire department administration at 855-1141 if you are interested in a path for fire and EMS. This is, again, a friendly reminder that the city, we are hosting a career fair. It's going to take place this week. It'll be on Friday, August 28th, and it'll take place at our Aquatic Center. If you're looking for some information or want to know more about what a career in public service looks like for working for Lake Havasu City, please join us. It'll be all day throughout the day, so in the morning before you have a job right now and you want to come in the morning or after 5 o'clock, we'll be there to answer any and all questions. We got notified that the Secretary of State's office is bringing its mobile business service team to Lake Havasu City. It'll take place this week. It'll be on Thursday, August 27th. This is an opportunity for local businesses and entrepreneurs to connect directly with the Secretary of State's office rather than making that trip down to Phoenix. You can access helpful business services and resources right here in our community. The event will also include a presentation from the Small Business Center. Our SBDC will be there as well, making a presentation, answering questions. And if you have any questions about this event or the services that they provide, please contact the Secretary of State's office. The heat is slow. Hopefully, it's been a hot one the last couple of days, but hopefully the heat is dissipating, which means coffee with the mayor and city manager is back. We are going to resume on Friday, September 4th. It'll be at 8.30 a.m., and it'll take place right here, in the city council chambers. We invite the community to join Mayor Sheehy and myself for a cup of coffee, a donut, conversation, and an opportunity to hear what's happening around our city. And lastly, a reminder or a heads up that we are closing in on our annual 9-11 Memorial Ceremony. It'll take place on Friday, September 11th. It'll be at 815 and it'll be at London Bridge Beach. This year marks the 25th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, making this year's ceremony an especially significant time of remembrance. The Cabaseous City is honored to partner with the 9-11 Memorial Committee as they organize and host this event. And we invite our community to come together to remember those who lost their lives, honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice, and recognize the many heroes who answered the call to serve on September 11th and in the years that followed. With that, Mayor and Council, that concludes my report for this evening. Thank you, Mr. Knudson.

All right, we'll move back to our public hearings, Item 7. For anyone that's here for Item 7.3, the electric charging station site license agreement, that item is going to be pulled this evening. There's still some additional work that needs to be worked on on that agreement. SO WE WILL HAVE THAT AT A FUTURE MEETING. BUT WE WILL NOW HEAR ITEM 7.2, WHICH IS RESOLUTION NUMBER 26-3938, ESTABLISHING THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION PILOT TO PUBLIC SIDEWALK DINING AND BEVERAGE SERVICE PROGRAM. MR. KOZLOWSKI.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THE CITY WAS APPROACHED BY THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION REGARDING THE POSSIBILITIES OF CREATING A PILOT PROGRAM TO ALLOW FOR DINING AND BEVERAGE SERVICE TO TAKE PLACE ON THE CITY SIDEWALK. The Downtown Association approved a letter and submitted that to the city requesting this pilot program be considered. Through that process, staff identified a pilot program that would take effect for a year. Individuals who would be interested in applying for that pilot program would have to go through a right-of-way permit, submit their application, and define what they would be using for a temporary barrier which would have to be brought in at the close of business every day. Those barriers would have to be four feet in height, and no access would be allowed to be, they couldn't impact any ability to access the property, as well as maintaining ADA accessibility on the sidewalk. With that, I have J.P. Thornton here, who is the president of the Downtown Association, to give you all a brief presentation regarding the pilot program, and I'd be happy to answer any questions if needed. With that, I'll turn it over to him. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Kozlowski. Good evening, Mr. Thornton.

Good evening council, mayor, vice mayor, staff. Thank you guys. So we'll just start. Downtown Association is really trying to come together and enhance our downtown district the way we feel like it should be. So we've got a really good team right now. Everyone's motivated, everyone's on the same page. We want to bring more to downtown. It's worth it. We put all that money and the time into the commons and there's so much more we could do to enhance that and bring more bars and restaurants and more reason for people to spread out and bring more people into town. And more things for our city to do for our people, for our citizens. So the pilot gives every qualifying Main Street food and beverage business an opportunity to apply. BUT NO BUSINESS RECEIVES AUTOMATIC APPROVAL. A ONE-YEAR PILOT GIVES COUNCIL RAIL AND LAKE HABITS RESULTS BEFORE ANY LONG-TERM DECISIONS. WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP IT SO IT'S ALL CITY-FRIENDLY AND IT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY. THIS RENTING SHOWS ORGANIZED CONDITION THE PILOT CAN CREATE, A DEFINED DINING ZONE. DRINKING ZONE, CLEAR BOUNDARY, AND PRESERVED PEDESTRIAN ROUTE. AND THIS IS JUST FOR RENDERING, AND IT'S DEFINITELY NOT TO SCALE, AS YOU GUYS CAN TELL, BUT IT'S JUST CONCEPT ONLY. SO IT'S MEASURED SITE, BUT IT'S CONCEPT ONLY. SO MEASURED SITE-PACIFIC PLAN STILL CONTROLS APPROVAL. THE PROPOSED BARRIER RANGE, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY SAID 48 INCHES, BUT WE WOULD SAY 36 TO 48 BECAUSE THE STANDARD REMOVABLE STANTIONS ARE 36 INCHES. I'M JUST STANDING HOW THEY ARE. THAT'S WHAT GOLFING IS USED SUCCESSFULLY FOR ALMOST TWO YEARS. THEN JERSEY'S, JERSEY'S AMERICAN GRILL. BEEN THERE A LONG TIME. SO THIS RUNNING SHOWS HOW A DEFINED PATTERN CAN ADD ACTIVITY WHILE LEAVING A WALKING ROUND LEGIBLE. Pete gave us this rendering. This identifies that his original permitted project that he actually began on back in 2015. And I don't know all the details of it, but it didn't wind up working out. He pulled a permit and then wound up not being able to do that. So we had to make some changes to how he did it. So he's got a pretty small patio, but being able to spread that out more for a good dining facility and good outdoor facility is something that this program can really benefit from as well. probably should have put the cigar bar in here, the slide, because they have a great outdoor patio, it's successful, and it works really well. And it's been, I think, 10 years, 10 years since they've had that outdoor patio, it works really well. It doesn't really encroach on the city property much, because it has a setback, so it's very minimal. But, I mean, I talked with Brady, he actually supports this whole program for the street, so. HERE'S ANOTHER ONE. FLYNEX. OBVIOUSLY WE ALL KNOW FLYNEX. SO THIS REINFORCES THE CORRIDOR-WIDE PROGRAM, NOT REALLY FOR SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR JUST ONE BUSINESS. SO A DEFINED AREA CAN ACTIVATE ANOTHER FRONTAGE WHILE REMAINING ORGANIZED AND REVIEWABLE BY BY STAFF AND BY CITY. SO AGAIN THIS IS CONCEPT ONLY OBVIOUSLY NOT TO SCALE THE PATIO WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO BE THAT BIG REGARDLESS BUT SAME STANDARDS APPLY REGARDLESS OF THE BUSINESS NAME OR FRONTAGE SO. SO WE'VE EVOLVED TO OUR NEWEST DOWNTOWN DOWNTOWN ATTRACTION SO THIS SHOWS HOW THE SAME DEFINED PATIO APPROACH CAN ADAPT TO ANOTHER MAIN STREET FRONTAGE DIFFERENT STORE FRONTS MAY REQUIRE DIFFERENT LAYOUTS, BUT THE SAME STANDARDS WILL APPLY NO MATTER WHAT, NO MATTER WHAT THE BUSINESS IS OR WHAT BAR OR RESTAURANT IT IS. SO THE DEFINED PATTERN IS ORGANIZED, VISIBLE, AND IT'S EASIER FOR STAFF TO INSPECT. CITY CODE, CITY CODE SECTION 14-03-03-E-4 PERMITS OUTDOOR DINING. So the current code says permitted and approved conditional food and beverage services services uses are permitted to have outdoor dining areas. So you guys read the details on it. The code says food and beverage services uses. It doesn't say restaurants only. The same section allows sidewalk seating and dining during regular business hours with frontage, forefoot clearance, daily removal, CITY ENGINEER APPROVAL AND INDEMNIFICATION CONTROLS. SO THE PILOT CAN ADD NEUTRAL, PUBLISH, ELIGIBILITY AND COMPLIANCE STANDARDS. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO APPLY STILL DOES NOT MEAN AUTOMATIC APPROVAL. SO EVERYONE HAS TO STILL GO THROUGH, MAKE SURE IT FITS ALL THE CODES, EVERYTHING WE NEED FOR ACCESSIBILITY, WHICH IS HUGE, SAFETY, MAKE SURE THE HOURS IT'S BASED ON THE HOURS OF THE BUILDING OR OF THE BUSINESS. NO PERMANENT STRUCTURES. JUST MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING, I MEAN, EVEN IF IT IS ROT-IRON FENCE, BUT AT LEAST EVERYTHING INSIDE OF IT IS REMOVABLE AND CAN BE TAKEN AWAY SO WHERE IT DOESN'T LOOK CLUTTERY. WE DON'T WANT MAIN STREET TO LOOK CLUTTERED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. WE JUST WANT IT NICE AND CLEAN AND DURING BUSINESS HOURS. WE WANT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO GO DOWN THERE AND ENJOY IT AND ENJOY OUR DOWNTOWN. And we wanna make sure the city stays protected, obviously, because we are requesting to be on city property. So we definitely wanna protect that 100% because none of us needs any problems and we want this program to work. So everybody will be in compliant and be held by those standards no matter what. It's important to all of us. So the AA access, this is our first approval test. THE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE IS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL AND CONTINUOUS, NOT MEN LIKE PERFECTLY STRAIGHT, BUT THE ROUTE MAY SHIFT AROUND TREES, PLANTERS, STREET LIGHTS, AND SIMILAR FIXED FIXTURES OF, YOU KNOW, WE REQUIRE CLEAR WIDTH AND MANEUVERING SPACE REMAIN AVAILABLE. BUT NO MATTER WHAT, MAKE SURE IT'S AT LEAST FOUR FEET, MINIMUM. MAYBE SOME OF THE CORNERS MIGHT BE DIFFERENT. IT NEEDS TO BE APPROVED BY, IF THAT NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE MORE TRAINED RAIDENESS OR WE'RE NOT JUST EXACTLY FOUR FEET, THAT'S TOTALLY UNDERSTANDABLE. AGAIN, WE DON'T WANT IT TO INCONVENIENCE ANYBODY. WE WANT IT TO BE GOOD FOR EVERYBODY. WE WANT EVERYBODY TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THIS NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE. AND ADA COMPLIANCE IS BIG. WE ACTUALLY HAVE QUITE A FEW ADA CUSTOMERS THAT COME TO OUR BUILDING ALMOST EVERY DAY. there was never any issues. We did almost two years with those stanchions out there and it worked great. We never received any complaints. I mean, there may have been some complaints that probably why we lost it, but we wanna bring it back correctly and make sure that this works for not only the people, but for the city as well. The defined space is, safer um so what we experience um what we do experience downtown right now that sidewalk it's like a speedway for bikes and e-bikes and it's it's pretty crazy it's it's wild and you can ask if you guys ask any business owner that's on main street it's it's uncomfortable and all of a sudden you're sitting there and all of a sudden you hear a bike that just went by um we have a lot of ada people a lot of um WE HAVE A LOT OF SENIORS AND IT'S DANGEROUS. WE'VE HAD A LADY, WE'VE WATCHED A LADY GET HIT BY A BIKE. NOTHING WAS BAD, NOTHING, NO MAJOR INJURIES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT IT JUST SHOWED US IT'S DANGEROUS. SO ACTUALLY HAVING THESE TO WHERE IT'S NOT SUCH AN EASY PATH, IT ACTUALLY SLOWED PEOPLE DOWN AND EVERYONE JUST SLOWED DOWN AND THEY JUST TOOK THEIR TIME AND GOT THROUGH IT AND THEN BOOM, AND THEN THEY'RE OFF UNTIL THEY GET TO ANOTHER OBSTRUCTION. so um it's actually it helps for safety and it really does and i'm just i'm saying that from first-hand experience so we're that's another benefit of it again i mean cindy's going to inspect and he can revoke suspend any of this at any time this isn't a program where it's going to be a one-year pilot and then all of a sudden everybody gets it for a year and then we'll just see what happens now everyone's on notice and everyone has to follow everyone has to comply or THEY LOSE THEIR PRIVILEGE. AND IF THE GENERAL PROGRAM DOESN'T WORK IN A YEAR, THEN IT JUST EXPIRES. BUT WE GAVE IT A SHOT, AND WE GAVE THE COMMUNITY A SHOT TO DO IT AND TRY IT. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING FOR. AND I MEAN, THIS LEG SHOWS, THIS IS WHAT THE DOWNTOWN IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT. SO THESE OLD ROOT OUT STUDIES, I READ THIS A FEW YEARS AGO FROM 2007, AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO. IT'S FOR THE COMMUNITY FOR DOWNTOWN AND MAKE IT MORE USER-FRIENDLY, PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED. AND THAT'S WHAT EVEN OUR CURRENT GENERAL PLAN RIGHT NOW, 2016, AND THEN NOW THE 2026 PLAN THAT'S BEEN ADOPTED BY YOU GUYS AS WELL. IT'S NOT RATIFIED YET, BUT IT STILL SAYS THE SAME, IT STILL WANTS THE SAME THINGS FOR DOWNTOWN. SO IT REALLY HASN'T CHANGED. SO ALL WE'RE DOING WITH THIS IS TRYING TO, LET'S UTILIZE THAT AND LET'S ACTUALLY BRING WHAT WE NEED DOWNTOWN AND ADD SOMEWHERE TO IT. THESE ARE OTHER CITIES THAT the same program and they're on these are all these are ones are in public right away there may be more um but this was just a a quick check so um so we're not the first ones to do that i've been told that this is this is new no other city's done that in arizona it's not a thing but they're actually they actually have in in public right away not just outdoor use but actually in public right away so um rules laws are a little bit different but it's all the it's all the same standards um they still run on um CITY-OPERATED RULES BASED ON WHAT THE CITY NEEDS. SO THIS IS THE LAST ONE. SO I JUST WANT TO APPROVE, SEE IF WE CAN GET APPROVED. LET'S TRY THIS FOR A YEAR. LET'S MEASURE IT. TRY CLOSE ON A CAUTIOUS DECISION, ONE YEAR, OBJECTIVE ELIGIBILITY, STAFF OVERSIGHT, MEASURABLE RESULTS, AND AN EXPIRATION DATE. EQUAL STANDARDS PROTECT RESPONSIBLE BUSINESSES AND THE CITY. THEY DO NOT GUARANTEE APPROVAL TO EVERY APPLICANT. So let's just figure out how we could make this happen for our citizens and for our people rather than how to figure out why we can't. But I'd love to hear what you guys have to say about that.

THANK YOU MR THORN FOR WORKING TOGETHER WITH THE ASSOCIATION BRINGING THIS FORWARD UH A COUPLE OF THINGS UH JUST BASED ON YOUR SLIDE SHOW YOU IT HAS TO BE REMOVABLE UH BARRIERS AND THEY WOULD BE TAKEN IN EACH DAY YOUR EXAMPLES THAT SHOW IT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ALL WE UNDERSTAND EXACTLY RIGHT I MEAN WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE OPTION NOT TO OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD BE EXPENSIVE FOR US TO PUT IT UP AND THEN WE LOSE THE PROGRAM AND THEN WE DON'T BUT UM So currently it's the way it's written in the proposed resolution is that in the morning you'd come put your barriers out, you would operate, and then you would put your barriers back inside your storefront. Is that how you understand it? That's how it's written, so I just want to make sure you understand.

Yeah, I mean... I probably should have added to be able to have that option, but I don't. I just would probably want to have that discussion and see if we could do. It's almost like because it's a pilot program. Could we even put rod iron up and do that? It's that I don't know how that could work right away. I would be able to do that because we'd always have to anchor it down somehow.

And so that would be so there in the other communities that you mentioned, there's uh fencing that could be wrought iron that's on wheels that can move it and adjust i mean there's lots of places have these types of things where they have removable barriers but i just want to make sure you understand that we can talk the talking points over and get the feedback from the council the other thing that you mentioned in this resolution the temporary barriers must be a minimum of 48 inches you'd mentioned 36 to 48 it currently it's written as 48 so it would have to be 48 Is that an issue that we would need to discuss?

We would need to discuss because if we have removable stanchions, they are 36 inches. Right. And that's what we tried and tested for almost two years.

And then also in some of your comments, you had mentioned that the close of business, but the resolution in front of us has the pilot program that it has no operations shall occur past 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and past 11 p.m. on Friday, Saturday and holidays.

Right. We would need to we would actually need to. we would need to go off the business hours. I think I put like during business hours, right in there.

So it would need to be like, it's what I just read. It's Sunday through Thursday, 10 PM and Friday, Saturday and holidays till 11 PM.

Okay. Yeah. I think that one, I, we wrote that like quite a while ago and I probably should have revisited that.

Okay. All right. Questions, comments from members? Yeah.

Good question. So when JP, when, um, Outside dining and bars and restaurants. This is also for non-bars and restaurants? Like if someone, like the antique store, wants to put little antiques in a little area outside or any of the other stores, retail, they're also a part of this program?

We would like that initially when we were discussing it within the association, that we would like to be able to do that. But we think probably we may need to, for the pilot program, let's test it first with... with this, with doing just the bars and restaurants. Unless, I mean, if we could write this up and revisit on being able to do this and make it make sense. I just haven't had enough, I haven't had any conversation with you guys to see what would. Yeah, I get it. If we can add a little bit. We wanted to, but we're like, we want to get it started. We would love to start with it and try to keep it simple at first because we don't want a bunch of clutter. AGAIN, TOO, ON MAIN STREET AS WELL. SO THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE WRITTEN UP DIFFERENTLY AS WELL, EVEN DURING THE DAY. LIKE, WE JUST DON'T WANT THE CLUTTERY. WE KIND OF WANT IT MORE OUTDOOR DINING AND SEATING AND PLEASANT. LIKE, NOW WE HAVE A BAGEL BIN THAT JUST CAME IN. IT'S LIKE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT FOR THEM TO GET SOME SEATS OUT THERE. AND THEY HAVE SOME SPACE, YOU KNOW.

AND I NOTICED ON LETTER F, IT SAYS, Remove all items, trash removal, cleaning. If people are drinking beer and beer drops on the ground or a drink gets really sticky, we should get really specific about the pressure washing because if you just wipe it or something, it gets really, alcohol gets really sticky. Yeah, absolutely. Sidewalk, so it should be an actual pressure wash. It sounds like that we have some homework to do because I've got 48 inches and he's mentioned 36 and then, The barriers, your stanchions, so there needs to be some homework done. The times they take up and down, we have to get some things clarified.

That's good, I mean, to taking it down, I mean, it's pretty quick.

They just retract and you- I mean, as far as 11 o'clock, it says the 10 o'clock and 11 o'clock.

Yeah, we'll have to probably adjust those times then, just to give it more time, just in case people are open, the hours are later. That's why I was more being like, it's more business specific based on the business hours.

Vice Mayor Diaz, this would be only for dining and beverage services, so the antique store, not right now.

Yeah, we would definitely want to revisit that down the line. We do want all of Main Street to be able to thrive more.

Yes, first off, the cigar bar is a wonderful example because I was actually the person that designed that building. And I designed it set back for a reason. And then when I was trying to put something up back in the day, they demanded, I think it was almost six feet. But then they squished it down to four feet so that they could do that. Cuz then we didn't encroach that much in. Matter of fact, I think it's only inches. that that's encroached. And so now when I look at the standards, because I do some designs for commercial stuff, the minimum standard is usually about six feet. And then you have a 24-inch car hangover. So when, like that picture you saw of Flying X, I can do 3D graphics and I can make them look really great. And it was beautiful. All your presentations were gorgeous. I was like, I so want this. This is what I wanted before. I wish I had time to put those to more scale and make it more realistic.

It would be all great.

But in other cities and towns, we'll use Kingman as an example. They came in and they spent a lot of money. They extended their concrete out. They shrunk the sidewalk. I mean, they expanded the sidewalks and they shrunk the roadway. I was just there. they put planters all in there now it's not even they quit doing it because they said it just didn't work so even though the cities invested a bunch of money money to help get this visual at the end they said they didn't have There was just not enough people that took advantage of it. Go up there, you'll see where they had that. I don't know if any of you guys went. It used to be like a big alcove that came in, and there was like benches all in there or picnic benches and everything. They're all gone. They're planters now. So I don't want to make the same mistake, but I will tell you if some of those spots where you have to squeeze in between the trees that we have now are less than four feet right now. When we did the whole, when I was part of the assessment that cost me like $6,000, it's a one-time assessment to improve all the concrete and everything else. That was where those conversations were discussed. Can we widen them? Can we do this? And they chose not to do it. And then they also did not do handicap accessible. So those are two things. I remember showing up to those meetings 20 years ago going, you're assessing me thousands of dollars to improve my parking lots, replace the... replace the benches and replace the light fixtures that actually fell over and rotted at the base. Almost took somebody out. Even though I'm playing property taxes, I still was assessed at an enormous amount, but we were not heard. I'm not saying that's your fault today, but the problem is I wish we would have been heard because I would have had bigger gaps between. So maybe you could have encroached. I see this in front of you. I wish you had it. I just think if you want this, you're going to have to do what the scar bar did at the beginning. You are doing a big remodel. I think that you could recess it back. I don't know. It's going to take a little more engineering. I know how much money it's going to cost to build what you want to build.

We're pretty deep on them.

Yeah. We all are pretty deep when we do anything, right? But I think there's a way that we could recess back without being on city property. And this would be a great conversation for me if we didn't have four foot areas already. And again, nobody's taking into the fact we have a 24 inch hang when your car parks on that sidewalk. So when you see that forefoot right here and they're like, oh, no problem. We're going to squish. We're going to get our forefoot. But realistically, when you get a 24 inch hang, some trucks are even more than that. When they back in with the which everybody loves boats here and they back in. It's just, I'm concerned that it's just not the right streets and roads for us. I love your vision. You could do it right now. I mean, all those pictures, I mean, almost makes me emotional. It's what I dreamed of when I bought my building back in the day and I built, that was my dream for downtown. I just think that the buildings there are very old. And I think if they need to be retro, they're gonna have to be pushed away. Cuz I don't think that we're gonna be able to come out. That's just my opinion. I've done this for a long time. And I had your same vision. And I even had property down there. And I fought with all of all the things you're doing to make that place amazing. And I thank you for that.

Thank you.

I love the vision. Thank you. I appreciate that.

You guys, you have plenty of space a lot more than that. I mean, you did a setback, but you're like way, way off, you're way off the sidewalk or off the curb.

No, no, no. We recessed all the way back.

Right.

And then you'll see where that overhang is, that same awning. That is the property line. We only went in about three to six inches tops. I mean, that was when Brady came in. Because when I was there, I was told I can't do that because we needed six feet. Since then, they reduced it to four feet. I don't know who did that, but it was a long time ago. So I'm talking, I sold that bar 12 years ago, so I'm going back. I'll be older than you are when I was doing that stuff. So it was a long time ago, but we did, it was a six foot setback for handicap and also the encroachment of the vehicles. And since then, they've made it down four. I think they were trying to accommodate a lot of people, including jerseys and flying X and legends. They all tried to, if you wanted to put bar stools on the outside, I think that's why they reduced it down to four feet. And I'm glad they did that. But in the meantime, I know the bar was, we intentionally set it way back for a reason.

Right.

Okay.

But regardless, if we have to do it, we still have to stay in compliance. Like you said, some of them are even narrower than four feet. So no matter what, if we have to keep that, we have to keep that. So some places may not be eligible because of the space, the distance, because that would obviously cause an ADA compliance issue and a safety issue.

ALL KINDS OF. AND I BELIEVE A LOT OF THEM ALREADY HAVE AN ADA IN CLIMPONT AS SOON AS A VEHICLE PARKS IN THERE IT I HAD A WALKER FOR EIGHT MONTHS TOO SO I KNOW WHAT IT TAKES TO NAVIGATE AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANY HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE ON THOSE SIDEWALKS WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY BUT WE JUST DIDN'T DO IT BACK THEN SO I MEAN THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE OKAY BECAUSE I MEAN A LOT OF THEM ARE PARALLEL LIKE THE CURBS ARE PARALLEL SOME ONLY SOME OF THEM GO IN TO WHERE THERE'S AN OVERHANG OTHERWISE IT'S JUST PARALLEL RIGHT TO THE TO THE CURB THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF THE PARKING SPOTS ARE SO

But again, that would come with what you're saying, and that needs to be put in consideration as well, because we don't want to cause any issues or problems, because then there's problems for the business owner, there's problems for the property owner if they're renting, there's problems for the city, and why do we want that? We just need a program to work for everybody.

How many feet do you think you're going to come out? How many feet is your... And I don't like the temporary thing. I own a bar. I don't know how at 11 o'clock or 10 o'clock I tell everybody in the bar, take all your things with you. I just don't, and who's going to... Who's going to police that? And I have confusions. But how many feet are you planning on coming out on your building? Are you talking for the big building or for the golf and ruse building? Whichever one that you want to encroach. You want both of them to be encroached or you just wanted one?

Well, I want every bar. This isn't about.

I know, but how many feet or inches do you think you need to actually put a table or give that perception that you gave?

Well, I'm going the other direction. I'm going how far off the curb do we need to be. And then that's going to tell you how much.

But as somebody that builds bars, you have to have at least a 24-inch table, two chairs on the side. You're going to have to push back at two feet.

We have room because the big building, it's already set back a little bit more. It's already set back a little bit more than like it's about 16 inches farther back than what Golf Room is right now. And then we... We have it already drawn up to actually set it back a little bit more, but we want to be able to create more patio space, but we want to be able to come out because we want nice patio, nice couches and good seats and little, you know, nice little fire things out there, like just to our outdoor environment, just to increase our outdoor environment.

So, and not everybody will be able to do that. I think you're going to need a lot more space. To get what you're looking for, you're going to need at least six feet out. Which is fine. We have it. have six feet and then still have four feet before we do well minus we have about 14 feet right now from your building to to the curb we have a pretty good amount of space okay again i'm not out there every day i'm just telling you the concerns i've had and um i and again i don't like the city uh on city property because i do agree that a lot of things get spilled and They're dirty and the streets are, I used to power wash that thing all the time, because it used to get dirty constantly. But I do love your vision. I hope it would all work out, but I have some concerns. That's all. Thank you. Council Member Campbell. Council Member McMillan.

Mr. Mayor, I think what we have in front of us, this resolution doesn't exactly match some of the things that you're asking for. So to even vote on this probably would not be. good for us or for you, because I'm reading the same things with bringing things in at certain times, the removing them, the telling the people to go back inside. There's a lot of issues with the way this is written and what you want to do. So I don't think you'd be happy with this either if we voted on the way it's written today. But I think I kind of have some questions legally because You're asking to do business on city property. And so I hate to put our city attorney in this position, but are there some things that we would be looking at if something happened? And I want to know how that outweighs, how are we benefiting our Lake Havasu residents if there's a risk involved in that?

It would still insure, just like when we had our golf and booze patio out there for a while, we had the city as additionally insured. So no matter what, that was still, again, it all has to fall into place. Everything has to work. We have to be compliant. We've got to make sure that the city's on board and we're safe and we're legal and everybody's compliant.

CAN OUR CITY, I APPRECIATE IT. I WANT TO HEAR FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. BECAUSE IT IS CITY PROPERTY AND IF SOMETHING HAPPENS ON IT, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE, THEY'RE NOT EVEN LEASING IT, WE'RE JUST GIVING IT TO THEM? IS THERE A COST INVOLVED? ARE WE JUST GIVING IT TO THEM?

ARE THEY PAYING US TO USE IT? THOSE ARE SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS TO BE HAD BY COUNCIL. MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT, SO THE CITY RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM THE ASSOCIATION TO CREATE THIS PILOT PROGRAM OR TO ALLOW THIS ACTIVITY. And so staff took that information and we worked all the different departments together in creating this resolution. So it's not necessarily incorporating everything that the association is asking for, but we're trying to put some parameters into place that we believe protects a lot of different things, whether it's navigability or safety or whatever it may be. So that's why you're seeing some of the things in the ordinance or the resolution that don't quite match up with what you're being asked by the presenter to approve. And so that's one thing. So we've tried to address some of the concerns that are had by different departments in the resolution. Beyond the resolution, yes, there are some concerns with extending the activity of allowing the consumption of alcoholic beverages on the city sidewalk. And so it's something that we do commonly. We do that with special events and extension of property. So it's something that occurs occasionally or frequently, but not necessarily on a permanent basis. And so this is extending what we might see for a special event to something that's more permanent. And it's not something that we have typically done. And so as you've mentioned before in the past, there's been a requirement that they have to keep whatever openness onto their own property so we're kind of expanding now out into the sidewalk with this pilot program and so that's part of the reason why it's a pilot program not sure how it's going to work there are other cities our own city allows a dining out into the sidewalk and so we have the parameters in there where you can you place it out there and then you remove it at the night none of them are permanent other cities do allow dining into maybe their city-owned property when we were doing our research we couldn't locate another city that allowed the extension of the premise for the service of alcohol on a permanent basis and so if we miss that we're happy to get that information from other cities so it was hard to assess what does this mean what types of risks are associated with that activity particularly in It's different between what may happen during the day and what may happen during the evening and how that will be controlled. We're not sure what that'll look like. That's part of the pilot program to see if that's something. Is that a concern valid or not?

Thank you, Kelly. And I have another question. So this is being brought to us by the Downtown Association. How many businesses are well that are restaurant bar, dining beverage, are interested in doing this? How many have come to the table part of your association that have asked to do this?

Every one that we've talked to has been, they've been on board with this.

Even the ones that already have, and I'm going to say this in no offense, but have done it the right way in the past, have brought them in, like they're okay with that? I mean, I know everything's not fair, but I'm just saying some of these businesses in the past had put a lot of money into doing it correct way according to our code and now we're having other businesses ask to not do that that way so what is the feeling within that i don't i don't go to your meeting so i don't know how that everybody wants to do it the way the code's written but we somehow can't like we haven't we're not able to even though

THE CODE, LIKE WHAT WAS ON SLIDE SIX, I THINK IT WAS, THAT'S THE WAY IT'S ALREADY WRITTEN. WE'RE REALLY NOT TRYING TO CHANGE WHAT'S ALREADY, WE JUST WANT TO ENHANCE IT AND ACTUALLY MAKE IT, LET'S PUT IT INTO USE. IT JUST HASN'T BEEN, IT'S NOT BEING UTILIZED. BUT THE CODE'S WRITTEN THAT WE CAN DO IT. IT SAYS OUTSIDE FOOD AND BEVERAGE ON THE PATTOON.

On your own private property. The difference is the public property.

Not on city property.

So our code currently speaks to if you had private property and you wanted to have that outdoor dining, that's what on slide six that you presented us. The difference here is public property. Public and private.

I want to kind of answer your question, Michelle. I think I reached out to Peter Naval. He did it the right way, as you said, he said he was, I don't know what he was gonna say, he said he was 100% in favor of this. Just for that information.

Thank you.

I like the design, I like all that, I just, I'm kind of a stickler for playing by the rules and it's- The designs were really quick and that just, everybody, every design that you saw was, they sent it to me because they're like, hey, I would say, hey, put something on, give me a rendering.

So there's quick AR renderings, I just plugged those into the- I just would be uncomfortable voting on it the way that it's written today, because I don't think it matches what you want to do. And I don't want- to challenge you later or you challenge us later i would rather clean it up it comes back to us and then i also like to look a little bit more at the legalities of it i understand that you'll have insurance on it but let's be honest there's people that are so happy and they like to sue the city for everything so i just would like to see what that business is we get that and that's why we're very like we need it good for everybody because that's just problems that none of us they just cost us time and money and we don't want to have to worry about that right I just don't feel comfortable voting on it the way it is written today because I don't think it matches what you want.

But do you like the idea and how it is? Could we figure out, maybe we could just do a no vote today and let's try to fine tune everything? We could just table it. Huh?

We could just table it. We could just table it and come back.

Let's table it. I mean, I'm all for sitting down with you guys on different- at a different time and let's make it to where it works and makes sense. And if it doesn't make sense, it doesn't make sense. But everybody that knows me, I always have an optimistic view on everything. So I always want to figure out how to make things happen and how to get it done. So I'm all for putting some time in with you guys.

I think an important COMMENT THAT MS. GEARY MADE WAS THAT THE RESOLUTION IN FRONT OF US IS TAKING WHAT THE ASSOCIATION WANTED AND WHAT OUR CITY TEAM PUT TOGETHER. SO THIS IS WHAT EVERYONE WAS COMFORTABLE WITH FROM POLICE, FIRE, PUBLIC WORKS, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, SO ON AND SO FORTH. SO THAT'S WHAT THE DIFFERENCES ARE FROM THAT COMPONENT. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD, MS. GEARY?

NO, THAT'S ALL, MAYOR, THAT I WANTED TO ADD. if there are certain aspects that council would like to see changed in the resolution that they think would accomplish the goal, then we just need the direction from council to make those changes. Either we can make those changes and improve it, or we make those changes and bring them back at a later time. But there will have to be some weighing of the risks in whatever decisions you make on what you want to change.

Mayor. Councillor Campbell. I have a question for the street department. Can I speak to Mr. Young or one of our engineers here? I would like to see what I was talking about, if this is a concern for them or is it just a concern for me? And I'm talking street events, clearance, all of the things that was a concern years ago.

Mayor, Councillor Campbell, public works as part of the process, we're constantly receiving permits to do work in the public right of way. Obviously, in this case, the comments that have been made about ADA, the clearance absolutely has to be the minimum of four feet. It has to be, we can't, serpentine, it really does have to be clear of trailer hitches, people backing across encroaching onto the sidewalk with vehicles that's been talked about already. The thing that becomes a challenge is we would issue a right-of-way permit for this activity. THE REQUIREMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FOUR FEET, AT LEAST FOUR FEET MINIMUM IS MET IS GOING TO FALL TO CODE ENFORCEMENT. BECAUSE A LOT OF WHAT'S HAPPENING OBVIOUSLY IS WE'LL REVIEW THE PLANS, BEAUTIFUL. Slideshow, by the way, love the idea of being able to offer that to the community. Our review is really just on the safety and ADA side of things. We would expect people to follow that, but if for some reason at 10 o'clock at night someone backed a truck ACROSS THE SIDEWALK AND MADE THAT LESS THAN FOUR FEET. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT OBVIOUSLY WOULDN'T BE A PUBLIC WORKS ISSUE. THAT WOULD FALL TO CODE ENFORCEMENT OR PERHAPS POLICE DEPARTMENT. THAT I DON'T KNOW. BUT FOR PUBLIC WORKS, OUR CONCERN WOULD BE JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE SIDEWALK REMAINS ADA COMPLIANT WITH THE FOUR FOOT.

You worked for Kingman, right? Yes.

I did.

So do you remember that? Can you give us a little history about why they expanded all that? I mean, I just realized that he's the history of that, which was, in theory, was a great idea. They had a very wide main street. They could narrow it. Okay, go ahead. You tell the story.

Well, yeah, I can tell the story. The Main Street, we had several businesses that had basically built seating areas that had actually encroached on the public right of way without permit or permission. And the city had struggled trying to get those businesses back into compliance. We were able to do that during the COVID period. There was obviously a desire to try to make sure that there were public seating and that we could accommodate as much business that the restaurants and bars could handle. So we did parklets. WITH PRETTY LIMITED SUCCESS. BUT THAT GOT US TO THE POINT WHERE THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION, THE BEAL STREET REVITALIZATION. THE GOAL OF THAT, PART OF THAT WAS TO CREATE AN ENTERTAINMENT ZONE SO THAT WE COULD CREATE PLENTY OF WALKING SPACE PAST ANYBODY WHO WANTED TO DO BUSINESS LIKE WHAT'S BEING DESCRIBED. Nobody really took advantage of that as was stated, so.

So I was correct where those little alcoves were, was it like, yeah, popped out, they popped out. And then there was parking that those, if I remember correctly, they had picnic benches or more seating out there. But I noticed the other day it just had planters. And so you were saying that It didn't take off as well as you'd hoped it to. And you did have encroachment issues into the brideways.

Originally, yeah. And we had a couple of businesses that had just set up counters on the outside of their businesses and put seating that they were encroaching without permit.

and do you like he was i was shocked when he said he had 14 feet do you think they have 14 feet well you would know i'm not telling you you're a liar i'm just i'm surprised that they have i've never i there's a lot of spots there that because of the trees that really i mean there's going to be spots that have the four 14 feet clearance and there's going to like you said with with benches or with trees

that's gonna change from different parts of the city. And that includes street lights, we have lights and that kind of stuff, lighting.

Okay, well, thanks for coming out and telling me because I wish I could make it work, but I don't wanna be sorry later.

Any other questions from members council or comments before we open the public hearing?

Mayor?

Yeah, Council Member Koch?

So is this like an application for like a temporary extension of premises? They have to come in and get the application, just like you would a temporary extension of premises, and then the development services department is the one that's going to issue this to them, and then that way we know who's planning on taking advantage of it, and then it just goes away after one year if we didn't want to continue it. Yes.

Mayor councilmember Koch it's two steps so there be an application with the city through the development services department and then to be an application with the state for the extension of premises so that's kind of where this is coming in so yes we do allow an extension or the dining the temporary dining outdoor dining but the second part of it comes in is when they need to extend the premise for the service of alcohol you also need the city's permission for that and we have not been willing to grant that permanent, more permanent extension of service of alcohol onto city property. If this were something that we're going to go from a pilot into something more permanent, we would definitely want to discuss whether that is for a rented price or what that may be. If it's something that is temporary, it's a special event, that's something that hasn't come into play. But if we're talking about a permanent use of city property, that's a lease agreement in any other thing that we do for the city.

That's where I was going. So they'd have a set fee for using city property, but only through a permit fee. But it's not the same as if it was going to be more permanent, we would have a lease fee.

So Mayor, Council Members, as we have the pilot drafted, we really haven't, we didn't dive deep into charging for that use of city property. So that's another element that, although it's not a part of the pilot program, it's something that you need to think about whether you want to incorporate that. If we go forward with the pilot program, you need to think about that. If that's just something we're going to try this out and just see how it goes, they have to move it in and out every night the way that it's drafted right now, unless Council changes that. Since it's temporary, it's transitory, not so worried about the fee, but if it becomes something more permanent, if you allow even the pilot program to be something more permanent, then you might want to consider a fee for the use of that city property.

Councilmember Koch and Ms. Gary, in talking during the agenda setting, Ms. Williams, it's only available for six months, right? So they'd have to do it twice. That was another reason why we were talking about a one-year pilot program and not a smaller time frame because it wouldn't have allowed enough time for these businesses. Do I understand that correct?

Through a temporary extension, it would be up to six months with the extension of premise through the liquor department.

Yeah, so it would have to be issued twice then if they were gonna take advantage of the full 12 months. And then that'd be through your office, they would stay on the state?

Yeah, they would be filed at the city clerk's office and we would process it and then they would go to the state.

All right, Councillor Koch, did you have any additional comments? Okay, Councillor Moses?

Yeah, and thank you, and thank you, JP. If this does end up getting tabled, I want to just give you some concerns that can maybe be addressed if it comes back, both from the staff and your standpoint. So like the liquor department will allow, I know they do extension of premises on a temporary basis. They will allow you to serve alcohol on not your property for forever, essentially.

With an extension of premise, yes. So if they approve that extension of premise, it's not about property ownership at that point. It's about the boundaries of the service area for alcoholic beverages approved by the state.

But as far as my understanding of extension of premises, it's only temporary allowances from what bars are allowed to do. So I would like If we can get clarity from the liquor department that that's okay. Also, insurance companies. I know insurance companies will put the city as additionally insured for temporary use, but for forever? You know what I mean? I'm not completely sure that your insurance company knew exactly what was going on. Because to insure the city for forever... on that little piece of property is a lot different than just, hey, I'm having an anniversary party. And so just some clarity there. I loved your renderings. This is a really hard one for me because, and I'm pretty sure I can speak for everybody that's in the room, the idea of that walkable, vibrant downtown area, that's what we all want. And I applaud you for bringing some of these, you know, you're a mover, you're a visionary, and you're pushing boundaries, and I appreciate that. But I would like, instead of the pretty pictures, a little more schematic of what the sidewalk looks like. Like, the 14 feet, I'm like, what? I thought our sidewalks were like six feet, pretty standard. I could be way off.

All the way up and down.

Like, I'm not an engineer, and when I'm down there, I'm I'm having fun. I'm not measuring sidewalks. So just a few more schematics of what that would actually look like. I'm glad that staff chimed in with some of their concerns, because the whole presentation, I'm like, I want to hear what staff thinks about this. And I'm glad that you guys did have some input on that. I would like to see what's going to happen when the street closures, so Desert Storm, all those big ones. We almost might need to revoke that privilege during those times. You might want to look at that. And then I think it's only fair for there to be a price to a lease. If you're going to be making money on city property from a permanent basis, there needs to be a lease involved and there needs to be a cost.

I agree.

I own my property that I make money off of. Everybody else does too that owns a business. I think it's only right that there's a cost involved. And I'm sure you guys would be open to that. Like a buck? It's going to be more than a buck. We already paid tax dollars on it. Make the city partners, give us 2%.

It's revenue driven, so revenue is tax revenue for the city. Also, we also... I mean, we are partners. 2% tax, additionally to, as a bar and restaurant, to the city of Lake Havasu as well, on top of our regular...

So if this does come back, if we can have some of those answers and different ideas... keep visioning, keep pushing, but those are the questions that came up for me.

Council Member Dolan, did you have any comments before we open the public hearing?

Yeah, I am a little concerned about it. I like the idea of it, but if that's what staff has already gone through and that's what they wanted and that's what we, you know, it's gone through that process. I get a little nervous about us, you know, just making changes on it, which it sounds like we're not. But I just want us to be realistic in some of those wants and needs and, you know, make sure it's legal and everybody's protected. But I love the idea behind it. You know, it sounds like maybe we might need to table it and bring it back another day. But, I mean, I'm kind of okay with it, with how it would be now, based on that's what staff did. But if that's not what they want, and that kind of defeats the purpose, then it sounds like maybe we should definitely table it and reinvestigate it.

Thank you. And then just before we open the public hearing, some of my thoughts on this is I can support a pilot program. I think from a pilot program, we'll be able to learn a lot of what it is we're talking about. Is the bicyclist moving down in rapid space? Is there enough room for people to get through at the four feet? Or is there overhang from vehicles? Is there bad operators that are exposed? standing past that and not opening that area. The way this resolution is written today, I would support it the way that the staff is recommending it, because they went through the whole process, run our pilot program on that, and then based on the outcomes of the pilot program in a year, say, hey, you know, really it's much easier to go till close, or it's whatever it may be. We can then consider discussions about some sort of a cost involved after the year program. We understand kind of all the ins and outs of of what this is going to be, but there's already guardrails in the resolution as it's written now to revoke any bad actors or not issue a permit if there's not the proper ingress or egress or those different spaces. Again, this is led by the business community down in that area, so I can support the framework of that, but if council wants to send it back for additional discussion to make it work, but they've gone through that process already.

Yeah, Vice Mayor, I guess it would be up to Mr. Thornton if he's good with the 48 inches and with the taking down at the 10 o'clock and 11 o'clock time frame. It's really up to him. And if not, then we have to table it.

I mean, is that the only, my only thing, well, the 48 inches is if we have to use temporary. Yeah, they make them 36. So that's how they come. So that's kind of. we can say yes and all of a sudden we're like, well, now what? I mean, yeah, we could do wrought iron and go 48 and with rollers and all that, which is fine. That's not a problem for a lot of people, but then we're just limiting other people that maybe won't be able to spend that kind of money to do that kind of iron to start, because they may wanna test it themselves and see if it's gonna work for their business. And then the hours, I mean, it's just hard because It probably should have been written a little bit different. Weekends, yeah, we're open later during the week, but then if it's a holiday, if it's a holiday weekend, is that, you know, if it's a Labor Day Monday or a Memorial Monday or something like that, is that going to be, are we just restricted, you know?

Yeah, so as it's written, the holidays and weekends are the same. It'd be 11 p.m. There's still a special event process that if you wanted to file a special event permit, which I know you've done in the past for your operation, that's still an opportunity to go through that process. Ms. Gary, do you know, Ms. Gary, where the 48 inches came from? Why is it 48 inches and not 36? And if you don't, that's fine.

That was what was recommended by staff through the process.

Gotcha. Gotcha.

All right, so we'll go, I'm sorry, Council Member Koch, did you...

I just was going to tag on to what you were saying about having the actual permit and the ability to revoke it at any point, but that would also mean that Council Member Moses' questions regarding the liquor license and the insurance, if they didn't have the ability to have those because for whatever reason they weren't able to, then that would also revoke. So we have the parameters and the safety barriers in place for that. If they can't get the permits or the insurance, we can't do it.

We had Department of Liquor. We did it.

Let me explain the Extension Department. So the six months, and maybe to Council Member Moses' earlier question, how that process works.

So there's two types of extensions of premise. There's the temporary extension which allows up to six months for that applicant to indicate what dates and times they're going to have that extended premise. It's more for the short limited time frame and then you have where they're wanting to extend that footprint permanently and that permanent extension is reviewed and then sent both are sent to the state for approvals. It's just that one is for a limited time and the other ones permanent extension of their existing license.

Does it distinguish whether or not you own the property or not?

No, not through the state's application process. Yeah, it's just reviewed through the city.

Council Member Campbell.

Mayor, I have the same concerns that Council Member Moses has because when you do temporary, that's totally different. But when you do a permanent, they want certain permanent fencing and they want to know who else owns the property. Because I know with my liquor license, I had to keep it within my building. I couldn't even extend it to the next neighbor. We couldn't encroach on anybody else's property. It had to stay within the property level. But again, it's been 12, 13 years since I owned a bar. I really don't know. But if you're saying that you've got your liquor of signing off on it, I still have a lot of concerns. I kind of want to see, I want to see an overall, like which restaurants and bars want to do this. I want to see dimensions, you know, site plans like councilmember moses is saying i really want to see where those tight parts are not that i don't trust the staff and i should but i don't want to be in a situation later that we allow all this and then we have a whole year like you say any time we can stop but you can't do that because you're going to spend a lot of money and i'm seeing here um you have exposed plastic barricades no or advertised heavy designs acceptable temporary berries include planters decorative metal panels, wood finishes and approved modular systems. I'm still trying to wonder how you get outside and then push them all inside at a certain time. So if it is at 11 or 10 o'clock. I don't think I have enough information at this time to say yes on this as much as I agree with what the mayor is saying. He feels confident that it's okay to move forward on a pilot program. I don't think I'm confident at this time.

I think we would have a standard of what it needs to be so we have a consistent look, just like we've had to do with our other buildings and new construction. We have to follow a certain standard. So we can't just have anybody put whatever's cheap up there just to, Again, everything has to get approved, and it's per business basis.

If I was passing this, I probably wanted on a permanent basis that you guys could put in the iron and railings and all the things right here and now to give us. I'm good with that for sure. A design committee and everything works. But I've been on that street a long time, and I remember what it looked like maneuvering around it. And I still want to see.

If we could actually start it with that. that's fine but we just kind of decided it would be safer to try it just do a test run first which isn't as good for us everybody on Main Street but if we're thinking long term we're not going anywhere gonna be here for a while so let's let's do what's best for what all right so I think the pilot would be make the most sense for from the city's perspective as well so thank you so much though all right we're going to go ahead and open the public hearing would anyone like to address the city council on this item and so just make you ready to podium stage name for the record

Hi, I'm Pam Swenson. I think this should be tabled as it is written because there's too much conflict between what the proposer is asking for and what is actually written. And for example, in item 1B, there says nothing about keeping the sidewalks open. EVEN THOUGH HE'S STATED THAT IT WOULD BE. THERE'S NOTHING WRITTEN IN THIS RESOLUTION ANYWHERE THAT SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT KEEPING SIDEWALKS OPEN. AND IT NEEDS TO BE WRITTEN IN HERE. I WENT OUT THERE AND...

I HAD THAT SAME CONCERN. AND I WROTE THIS DISCUSSION. IF YOU GO UP TO...

um the very first under recitals uh it talks about uh code section 14.03 that's where that is yeah but it still needs to be identified i think it is identified okay i actually did go measure today and um between the building and where the planter area starts is nine feet And if they need to have a four-foot clearance, that only allows five feet between the building and where they would have to have a separation. Between the building and the curb, or the end of the sidewalk, it is 13.6 feet, not 14. You cannot count the curb width when you are discussing ADA clearance. So that is a concern because there is a groove between the curb and the sidewalk. So it is 13.6 feet. And so I did go there and measure today. And I have pictures of my tape measure in case anybody wants to see them. I think that... The renderings were beautiful. They're not to scale. They do not show what our sidewalks would look like with this on there. And I don't believe that any temporary pilot program should allow for any permanent barriers on the sidewalk. I think it should be mandated that they be removed at night. And I don't think that it should be at close of business. I think it should be the hours that they had on here. BECAUSE THE DIFFERENT BUSINESSES OPERATE AT DIFFERENT TIMES. SO TO BE CONSISTENT IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA, I THINK IT SHOULD BE BASED ON SPECIFIC HOURS AND NOT BUSINESS HOURS. ADDITIONALLY, I WANT TO KNOW WHO IS GOING TO BE THE POLICEMAN ON THIS? IT'S A PILOT PROGRAM. WHO IS GOING TO POLICE IF THINGS ARE DONE THE WAY THAT THEY'RE STIPULATED THAT THEY'RE DONE? Who is going to be responsible for all of that aspect of it? I KNOW WHEN WE HAVE A PILOT PROGRAM FOR THE TWO-HOUR PARKING DOWNTOWN, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS NOT POLICING THAT EITHER. SO WHO'S GOING TO BE POLICING THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THESE GUIDELINES ARE BEING FOLLOWED? SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE. AND THERE'S A LOT OF OTHERS. AND I THINK A LOT OF THINGS WERE COVERED TONIGHT. BUT THESE WERE THINGS THAT DID NOT COME UP THAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT. OH, THERE'S ONE MORE THING. IN THE LETTER THAT MR. THORNTON PRESENTED TO THE CITY, IT SAID THAT THIS WAS VOTED UPON BY THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY ON THE MARCH 9TH MEETING. I WENT ON THEIR WEBSITE TODAY. I COULD FIND NO COPIES OF THEIR MEETING MINUTES. I HAVE NO IDEA how this was presented, who voted on it, or anything like that. It's a nonprofit, and a nonprofit is supposed to have all of their documentation available to the public, and it's not. So that's another concern that I have. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Hello, Janine Thornton. I actually just wanted to clarify the insurance questions because I handle the insurance and supplying it for business. So with the insurance, that will not be an obstacle other than if businesses don't want to pay it because there will likely be an increased premium for them because now they're going to have to accommodate more square footage plus higher occupancy of people. SO THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD CHANGE, BUT THE COVERAGE EXTENDING FOR A YEAR AND PROTECTING AS WELL THE CITY IS NOT A PROBLEM. I DID IT. I TRIED IT OUT, AND WE ACTUALLY SENT IT TO A COUPLE OF YOU JUST INDICATING THAT WE COULD ADD THE INDITIONAL INSURED FOR A YEAR SPAN AT A TIME BECAUSE THAT'S TYPICALLY WHEN YOU'RE RENEWING YOUR INSURANCE POLICIES ANYWAY. SO I DID WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU KNEW THAT THAT IS POSSIBLE. AND I WOULD SAY WITH THE APPLICATION, THAT THAT APPLICANT NEEDS TO PROVIDE THE CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE SHOWING THAT THE CITY WOULD BE THE ADDITIONAL INSURED. AND ON THE APPLICATION, IT CAN ALSO SPECIFY WHAT THE CITY WANTS AS FAR AS INSURANCE LIMITS, YOU KNOW, $1 MILLION FOR THIS, WHATEVER IT'S GOING TO BE. AND THEN, TO ME, THE CITY SHOULD BE MORE SECURE WITH THAT BECAUSE NOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOUBLE INSURED. NOT ONLY ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE which the reality is you can walk out of any store on McCulloch, anywhere, and trip and fall and people are lawsuit happy, they're going to sue you. Well, now if they trip and fall right outside that bar or restaurant door or what have you, and they sue, they're actually going to be suing that bar and restaurant. So you've got two people that are going to be able to cover that person that might be lawsuit happy or what have you. So that was kind of one thing I wanted to address because that was a question.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Taylor Harrison. I've got a lot to unpack here in five minutes. But first, let me get started with what downtown Lake Havasu is. I think there seems to be some misinformation or maybe not an understanding of who it is or even what this is about. This is not a project for golf and brews. Yes, they're doing some things. This is a project brought to you by THE DOWNTOWN HAVASU ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS A COLLECTION OF BUSINESS OWNERS AND INDIVIDUALS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. SO THE VOICE IS A COLLECTIVE, RIGHT? THIS ISN'T JUST ONE PERSON, TWO PEOPLE. THE GOAL OF THIS DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION IS TO BE VOICES OF REALLY THE STAKEHOLDERS OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA TO HELP ASSIST THE CITY HOW WE STRUCTURE DOWNTOWN, BUT TO HELP THE BUSINESS OWNERS AND PEOPLE ENJOY DOWNTOWN MORE. SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY MR. KOZLOWSKI, HE ATTENDS ALL OF OUR MEETINGS, AND WE APPRECIATE THAT. THIS ISN'T JUST A KNEE-JERK THING. THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON FOR QUITE SOME TIME. AND VICE MAYOR DIAZ HAS ATTENDED SOME OF OUR MEETINGS, AS HAS COUNCILMEMBER MOSES. AND WE APPRECIATE YOU GENTLEMEN COMING. OH, MS. SWENTZEN, YOU MENTIONED THAT THE Uh, no, it should be shared. I'll give you a copy of the meeting minutes. No problem. Um, I'm also a business owner downtown. I'm not a borrower restaurant and I would support this. Uh, I don't have any skin in the game. It's not going to benefit my business to have bars and restaurants, seven extension premise, but. I would support it. And I think that would be your biggest naysayers, is people that don't directly benefit. But I think more economic vitality downtown, giving our downtown that feel that we love and have. Like if we walk down by the channel, Dallas has got it down there at the chair, Burgers by the Bridge, that outdoor seating, that kind of vibe, I think that would be really cool to have downtown. Let's see here. It was referenced earlier, asking about people who did it the right way, so to speak. So Pete with jerseys is one of them. He was referenced earlier. Pete is actually on our downtown board, and he supports this project. Brady was referenced earlier. I'm sure you'll hear from Dallas at some point, and he owns a business downtown too. He'll be able to tell you his take on it. Paying for it, maybe a lease agreement could be drawn up if the council doesn't think taxpayer dollars or generated revenue from additional sales tax is enough. Certainly that could be drawn up. I tend to think paying for taxes as a business owner and supplying more taxes is probably good. But, hey, if that's not enough, certainly those business owners, like I said, I'm not one that owns a restaurant or bar downtown, so it's not going to be me. I'm sure they would agree. As far as liability, hey, that's what insurance is for. Additionally insured, that covers it. There really shouldn't be concerns there. Events, I'm very apt for events. I do a lot of events, help with a lot of events. THERE'S ALWAYS ADDITIONAL INSURANCE. ALL THE EVENTS HOSTED AT WINDSOR, ADDITIONAL INSURANCE. THAT'S WHAT INSURANCE IS FOR. VICE MAYOR DIAZ, YOU BROUGHT UP A GREAT THING ABOUT CLEANING, PRESSURE WASHING. I THINK THAT SHOULD ABSOLUTELY BE DONE. I THINK THAT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE BUSINESS TOO. LIKE WHO WANTS TO GO TO A RESTAURANT WITH CONCRETE FLOORS ALL FULL OF GREASE? I WOULD SAY NOBODY. SO IT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY AND THE BUSINESS OWNER. I REFERENCE THAT THIS ISN'T JUST GULF AND BRUISE. there was a question reference, hey, I want to know the bars and restaurants downtown that want this. This isn't just for, like, it is just for the bars and restaurants to start, but it's not for a select few. This is for a collective. The barriers, I know 48 inches was recommended by somewhere in the city. If we think about how high 48 inches is, I think that's actually kind of dumb, for lack of a better word. I think it should be 36, because a kid could walk right underneath 48 inches, no problem. And then he's in a bar establishment, so I think To everyone's point, I think it should probably be the 36 inches. That just makes sense. There's a lot of events downtown. I mean, Desert Storm is one. It was referenced. There's also First Friday, where people set up their booths on the sidewalk. They're generating income. They're small businesses, but they're doing that. That already exists. Councilmember Campbell, you brought up a good point. I didn't know that vehicles extend two feet over the curb. It's true, they do. But you referenced backing in could be a thing. You can't back into those diagonal spots because you'd be going reverse direction down McCulloch, so that's actually good. But the two feet is duly noted. That ADA compliance would have to be maintained. And in your packet, that was a big provision. Trees, there are some trees there. Obviously, that would impede on the ADA compliance, and our downtown Havasu is also a big proponent of helping guide the city in the direction of maintaining those trees. And again, this is a case-by-case basis, so granting this pilot program is a one-year thing, but it doesn't mean that you're married to it or going to be sorry later. That's it. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor, Council. As a person who is handicapped and who does enjoy walking on McCulloch Boulevard during First Fridays and enjoys actually just walking, period, walking is a gift and everybody should enjoy it, just in case you don't. On first Fridays, it's really crowded. There's hundreds of people, thousands of people going there. And when I go, I usually try to take my walker with me just so I have space to sit and someplace to sit because of how crowded it can be. And falling down is not fun. Breaking your toes is not fun. And when Council Member Campbell mentioned about the Overhang of the car. You know, I back in everywhere I go. If it's possible, if I was able to park backwards in those spots, I would. I understand that they are diagonal. And so unless, you know, I was able to in the middle of the day to do that, I probably would. But since I can't, I don't. But I have seen other people do that, which is really weird. Because, you know, when the car shows on Thursday nights, I've seen the cars back in. quite often over there. It's not just first Fridays you have, but you also have London Bridge Days Parade, you have, as someone else mentioned, Desert Storm, Winterfest, a whole bunch of events that happen on McCulloch Boulevard all the time. So there's cars that are blocking that 24 inches into the sidewalk, which will create a hindrance or anything, whatever that forfeit is. Yeah, sorry, it is a concern and I really appreciate Councilmember, woman, Councilmember Campbell bringing that up because I believe that as a city, we do need to be extremely ADA compliant and actually should go above ADA compliancy because the ADA compliance is just the minimum. we can do a lot more than the minimum. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Mayor, Council. I'm new to Main Street. I'm brand new. I've been here a long time, been in the business a long time, and definitely a different animal up there. And I love it. I embrace it. I think it's... I think it's a unique opportunity. I travel a lot down to California, Huntington Beach. I see street closures for these fairs, and it happens every week. And the restaurants and the street is closed, but just absolutely packed. Everybody looks forward to it. Kind of like a first Friday feel. And what I did notice is, and what I ran into building my business down there is, I like to think out of the box as far as decor and making things look nice. And I hit a lot of brick walls. Nope, can't do that, can't do that, can't do that. And so I went down Main Street just looking at other businesses and how the upkeep was really dilapidated and not looking good for our city. And here I'm trying to do something nice for my building. And then I got to thinking, wouldn't it be great, and when JP and Taylor made great points, and I... Fully I support all of those things Councilwoman Campbell you brought up Kingman. This is not Kingman. It's a little bit different but all these roadblocks I did I was trying to make things look nice and I think this is a good opportunity that we can do a pilot program and maybe make all of these businesses look cohesive like a standard 36-inch high railing that all looks the same all the way down, not just this one is hot pink, this one's blue, and this one, you know, that's not what we're looking for. So I think, personally, I think we table this until we can get it written right and present a plan that, Like Councilwoman Campbell said that she wants to see the sidewalks and all of the ADA compliant issues addressed, liquor addressed. And then we come back with a cohesive plan and a look that it's supposed to be. And before we, if we were going to vote, I think we're a little premature on that. But I would like to see Main Street look beautiful, Huntington Beach, fun, safe, and create that environment for Lake Havasu.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else like to address the City Council on this item?

Yeah.

right uh go ahead and uh close the close the public hearing uh bring it back to council for any discussion uh possible motion or any direction to the city staff mayor yeah vice mayor diaz so i would like to make a motion to table this i think there's been good information on both sides but i think we have a few more teams across and eyes to dot and then we could come back with a clean clear

resolution that both parties are good with and not just jump into it and then we're wondering, oh, we should have done this, we should have done that. So I'm going to make a motion to table this for future discussion. Second. And action.

I have a motion from Vice Mayor Diaz, a second from Council Member Campbell. Mr. Kozlowski?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just really quickly, as far as the pilot program goes, I'd love to get some thoughts from you all as far as what you would like to see. With this pilot program, there's a lot of unknowns that we just don't know as far as do we want this to go till close? I don't know if we do, based off of some of the conversations I've heard today. I don't know if we, are we okay with the stanchions being lowered to 38 or 36? Great, but just if we can have some of those conversations here so I know exactly what I'm bringing back.

Thank you. I think, I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor. I think that's one of the things, reducing it from 48 to 36, so that could be agreed upon and we could get the reasonings why we did the 48 and why it's better to do 36 inches. And is it better to do it to close or to do it to keep it the way it is? But let's get all those things talked about and then come back with a clean resolution that everyone can agree upon.

And Mayor, I liked what he said. I don't want everybody have all different temporary fencing. I would like a more uniformed look. If you're going to do it, this is what you're going to do. If you're not going to do it, I mean, you can't do it. I don't want wood over here and a planner over there. And I think that we stick to some sort of design review that I agree. Dallas is probably one of the most creative people I've known. I've known him forever. And yeah, I'm very interested to see what you guys could bring to the table. And JP, I know you are too. So I want to be sure that we have all the ADA, the 24-inch hangovers. I want to see all that before I'll ever approve a pilot program. Thank you.

What we need right now is to tell, to your point, Vice Mayor Diaz, the 36 inches, I would support that too, going from 48 to 36 inches.

Is that a legal height for? Yeah. Okay.

Yeah, so the 36, I could support that. For the pilot program, I think the hours that we have proposed here is ideal. If we then learn through the pilot program, we need to check. I know it's not what they want, but it's what, I mean, they're on public property, and that's what's through staff review and some of our discussion. Otherwise, the alternative is until two in the morning. But we need to have that discussion hours so that we can give the feedback to Mr. Kozlowski to bring it back.

I'm sorry. Can we hear from Kelly for a second? She's a little worried.

I'm not I'm not worried mayor and council we just we need some direction I mean I can't even collectively at this point I don't understand if everybody's in favor of doing the pilot not doing the pilot temporary is okay you want permanent surrounds we do have to talk about the timing and so again this is what staff we took the information we've all debated it among one another and so not everybody on staff is is is necessarily supportive of this program and I'm trying to say this as politically correct as I can but not everybody on staff is supportive of this program and so with that in mind we're bringing to you a concept trying to figure out, is this something that you as council want to do and move forward? And if you tell staff this is what you want to do and move forward, we're absolutely going to do that. But we're only bringing this forward because we're testing the waters a bit. Not because staff is not recommending, not all of staff, and I'll speak just for my own self, not everyone is recommending that you adopt this pilot program. But if it is something that council wants to do, we will absolutely do that. but we need the absolute direction from you. We do not want staff to go back and negotiate with the association. We want the city council to tell us what parameters are you willing to negotiate and within what, and if we need to go into executive session to discuss that and get that, and then we go back and negotiate, that's fine as well. But staff has put together what we feel protects safety, protects navigability, retains some of the components that we think are important. And then from there, we need a little bit more direction from council.

Mayor, let me ask a follow-up question. So then, couldn't we do that? I mean, because some of my answers might change depending on the information that I hear is 48. or 36, is that an issue? So can't we just vote to table this now, hear from the staff, we'll have, I mean, I have meetings with city manager once a week, and he can take me down those 10 different items that you listed, once we hear the answers to these questions, and then staff can then in good faith negotiate once they've collected input from the whole council to be able to negotiate with the users, with the people who are proposing it, and then bring that back at a second meeting.

You can't do that with each of you individually.

Staff can.

No, staff cannot.

And so I motion to go to executive session so we can give you some of our biggest concerns right now.

Well, we have a motion and a second on the table right now to table this item. Do we want to withdraw that? Well, if we table it, we can't.

According to what Mrs. Gary just said, they've already discussed it. They don't want to negotiate with the downtown association. Staff does not want to.

Right. So if we go into executive session, we can give the feedback.

So I'm going to table my motion.

Okay. Are you withdrawing your second, Council Member Campbell, at this point?

Yes, now I'm motioning to go into executive session to give you direct directions so that you guys can move forward and not have to spend any more time on this, okay? From pilot, okay, there you go.

Okay, so we have a motion, a second, we're adjourned to executive session. For those of you in the audience, we will break for just a few minutes to get legal consultation from our attorney, and then we will return to this meeting and resume our regular meeting.

Thank you.

All right, welcome back, we'll resume our regular meeting. Are there any questions, comments from members of the council for any of the staff?

Mr. Mayor?

Yeah, Council Member Lin?

I just wanna explain my vote before we make a motion.

Let's make a motion first and then we can explain anything based on what motion might come before us. Yep, if there's no comments then, and Council Member Dolan, you're back with us as well? Yeah, I'm here. Okay, perfect. Okay. All right. Then we'll entertain a motion. Motion, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, Vice Mayor.

I move to adopt resolution number 26-3938, establishing the Downtown Association Pilot Public Sidewalk Dining and Beverage Service Program effective September 1st, 2026 through August 31st, 2027 and direct city staff to develop and design a standard with the Downtown Association for the temporary barriers.

Second. We have a motion from Vice Mayor Diaz. We have a second from Council Member Campbell. Any additional discussion?

Mr. Mayor.

Council Member Lin.

I'm going to vote no on this because I don't believe this is accomplishing what's being brought forward from the downtown district with the way that it's written right now with the times. And some of the other things in here, because what is being presented is what they need to stick with. And I'm concerned that that's not what they're asking. So my vote is gonna be a no on this.

Is there any additional discussion or comments?

Mayor, the two things that changed my mind is one, I want things to look synchronized. You guys need to go and figure out what you think is gonna look good for the rest. And it can't be wood here and a barricade there and we had a rope there. So that's why I changed. And the other portion is, I was all for the end of closing. But I do think this is a dining experience, it shouldn't be a nightclub experience. And you guys are gonna have to figure that out, because we've heard enough direction that they have some concerns at one or two in the morning, what can be going on on our city streets is more than we already want. So that's, that was why I moved forward with this decision. Thank you.

I had one last thing that we were going to ask whoever gets approved for this program to help with the enforcement of when the items have to be put back inside at the closing times. Not the closing times, but the 10 o'clock and 11 o'clock time period. Work with our staff to make sure you guys are delivering that message, not put it all on them.

No additional comments? We're ready to vote. Councilmember Dolan? Aye. Thank you.

Motion carries six to one.

Thank you. All right, moving on. Item 7.3, as I mentioned earlier, the electric charging station site license agreement with level three Havasu LLC will come back before us at a future date. So we'll move on to item 7.4, which is construction manager at risk construction services contract and guaranteed maximum price for the construction phase of the second bridge and roadway improvement project. Mr. Hart.

Honorable Mayor and City Council, it's an honor to come before you tonight and talk to you about a project I'm excited with, which is another capital improvement project in our capital improvement program. So I'm here tonight specifically to talk to you about our CMAR services contract and GMP for construction phase of the second bridge and roadway improvement project. I thought we'd start with just a first an overview of the construction limits on this project. As you can see here, you can see the channel as it meanders through. You can see the outline of where the bridge and railroad are going. And then to the far right, you see Palo Verde Boulevard, where we have a little bit of work to do with some turn radiuses there, turn stops. So I wanted to jump in closer and show you the project. That's probably the main focus of the whole project, and that is the actual intersections with the London Bridge Road and through the area there along the state parks and then crossing the channel, then the area through the Arizona state lands and where it intersects with McCulloch. And then what we'll do is we'll jump in a little bit closer. So this is on the island side where we intersect with McCulloch Boulevard. And I apologize that it's not quite lining up with aerial photography, but I tried to work with the best I could. But as you can see here, the intersects in a T intersection with a stop. We'll have a right hand turn bay to head obviously towards the right, and then we'll have the left-hand turn way if you go back towards London Bridge. As we make our way back towards mainland, you can see this is an area of the right-of-way that the City Council has already approved through the state lands, and then we come to the second bridge itself. And then we move on coming off the bridge there by the lift station. And we traveled over to the London Bridge Road where we have this four-way stop intersection. And some additional work we had to do to tie in that alleyway there and then into the parking lot. So I'm gonna zoom in too so you can see a little bit better in terms of the different configurations of turn bays and turning radiuses. We obviously have our handicap access ramps on all the intersections and then we have our crosswalks and I didn't show where we go into the state parks, but I wanted to focus in mainly on this intersection with that. So that's kind of a refresher. I wanted to just remind you that with a need identified for the second bridge and roadway improvement project, an RFQ was initiated and we selected NV5. The city council approved the selection of NV5 back in October of 2024. Then at the 20% design phase, the city went out and we interviewed and selected Ames Construction, who has representatives here tonight. It's been great to work with them. We're glad to have them here tonight with us. They were selected as this email back in February of 25. So you can start putting some dates to this. And now we've worked through the 30% which we brought to city council, the 60% which we brought to city council, recently had our 95% submittal. And we have been starting the process of negotiations with our CMAR, which is a construction manager at risk for the guaranteed maximum price. And so we have had a lot of teamwork, as you're aware. A lot of things have been happening, including one of the city council retreats. You folks picked out some of the colors, some of the textures, some of the pier design and things like that. It was real proactive, which is very much appreciated. The project itself is going to have, and I just kind of did some quick generic highlights Big item viewpoints here. We're going to have site grading. Obviously we have areas of new roadway that goes through barren land that we're going to have a lot of site grading on. So that'll help trigger the road construction aspect of it. Then we'll have the bridge itself which will cross the channel with no pier in the water. And then we'll have some utility constructions going on as well. As you're aware, we have three utility lines that will be crossing the bridge. and tying in at key locations, which provide us with redundancy, which is so important. And then we'll get into a project closeout. The construction estimation is 18 months. So should city council approve the guaranteed maximum price, then we would look to secure the contract as quick as possible. WITH THE GOAL OF STARTING CONSTRUCTION HERE IN MID-OCTOBER AND ENDING IN APRIL OF 28 WITH EVERYTHING COMPLETE. SO THE CMARS NEGOTIATED GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE IS $39,921,502.30. AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE ATTACHMENT THAT WAS ON THE CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION, YOU CAN SEE THAT BREAKOUT. And I would respectfully recommend City Council approve the construction manager at risk contract guaranteed maximum price to Ames Construction Incorporated in the amount of $39,921,502.30. If you have any questions, I will be happy to answer.

Thank you, Mr. Hart. And thank you for the work of all of the team that's been involved, our city staff, our contractors, and partners that are helping to build this. Also, a big thank you to Arizona State Trust Lands and Arizona State Parks for their work in working with us. And of course, to our funding partners, Arizona State Legislative Appropriation. So we appreciate Representative Biasucci, Supervisor Borelli, and Representative Cobb, and Representative Gillette for their work on getting us the money that is going to be paying for this. A big thank you to all of those to make this project come to fruition is a really big deal. And once we had the funding identified, we've actually been moving at a record pace. It doesn't always feel like that, but it truly is, especially when you outline, Mr. Hart, the timeframe. So excited to be able to break ground this October. Are there questions from members of council? Yeah, Council Member Lane.

Can you go back to about five slides that has all the stop signs? Right there. So this is super confusing to me. So I'm on all yes for all this, of course. But is there any way that you can draw this up or something a little bit better and maybe send it to me? Because I have no idea what this looks like down there. Or maybe take me a drive down there because this is just a lot of And I'm trying to figure out how boats and trucks are, you're gonna be like stop and halfway in the intersection. So could you maybe?

Yeah, we could do that. And this obviously is zoomed in and concentrated on the intersection. So you can't really see how it flows into it and all that. And that's understandable.

Maybe you just give me a better map so that when people are asking me, I can explain what this all looks like. Thank you.

Lynn, I hope you'll understand this. When I looked at this, I reached over, I said, I love this. You're going to go, why? I don't want a roundabout. I don't want to figure out what our traffic volume is later. I want these stop signs in place. I want to see how people are going to drive. Are they going to still drive through our mayor's parking lot to get to the island? Are they going to go through Mesquite? You know, which way are they going to get there? And I'm a firm believer that Why spend a bunch of money assuming something's going to happen when we might as well do this? And then you'll go, but why would we do this? And I said, because when we get development on the island, when we get big players that want to spend some money, and then this becomes an issue because we have a real traffic data. Then they can fix it. So that was my direction early on and getting rid of the roundabouts and what I'm when you're I saw your face councilmember Moses what I mean by maybe then we might need a stoplight Maybe we won't so at that point that would be the responsibility of somebody else with proper traffic data So that was my direction But I can understand that does look confusing to most people Thank you for asking the question miss Michelle.

I

Vice Mayor Diaz? Mr. Mayor? We'll go to Vice Mayor Diaz, and then we'll go to you, Council Member Dolan.

I don't know if I missed it. Was there a picture in the slide presentation of the actual what the bridge is going to look like? Did I miss that?

The very first picture shows kind of the initial rendering at the 60% phase. We have added a third span, so it doesn't show that.

And I apologize for not having a- Can we get a picture? Because I don't want to have what happened to the downtown commons where they said, oh, that's not what we looked at. I'd like to get an actual picture of what the bridge is going to look like, what they're going to be building. We'd really appreciate it. Thank you.

Yeah, so Ames and us, we discussed that today, the importance of getting that.

Yeah, Councilmember Dolan?

Yeah, I just wanna give my two cents. I think Councilmember Campbell said it correctly, that when we get development on the island, then that's exactly what this is gonna do. It's gonna expedite development on the island. I'm against the island development bridge. And I really wish we would send this as a referendum to the voters, Unless you live on the island, I don't think a lot of people like this. And I know it was free money, but I say it every meeting. I just want to say it again. Just my two cents. I'm against the island development bridge.

Thank you, Council Member Dolan. Yeah, Council Member Moses.

Did I hear you right? You said there's a third pillar or would you say stanchion?

There is a third span.

Yes. So is there going to be a column down the middle of the?

No. So if we look at this picture here, and let's see if I can get a little closer. As you can see, the bridge is, there'll be what we call a pier just off of the edge of the channel here, up above the 450 high water mark. Am I doing it wrong?

Yeah, we can't see if you're moving anything on your screen. I'm sorry. There, yeah, okay.

Okay, so here would be number one. And we'd have a span out to pier number one, which is on dry land and above the 450 mark. Then it'd be span all the way across to the second pier, which is over here on the other side, above the high water mark. And then we would have a span and then the abutment. So you'd have an abutment with a span to a pier, with a span to a pier, with a span to an abutment.

Okay.

And the reason why we did that was to save cost with having to put a retaining wall on the island side. If you can see, as most of you are aware, if you travel down the channel, that slope from right here up to the top here is quite steep and would take a tremendous amount of fill material, which would cause a very large retaining wall, which drove the cost quite high so that it actually was cost savings and adding a third span, excuse me.

And I'll be honest, when Nancy saw my face, when I saw the stop signs, when I knew we were getting rid of the roundabout idea, I just assumed, and this is on me, I just assumed that was going to be a stoplight, that the stoplight was then going to be added into that. I think this is going to be a very, very busy intersection. You know, it's cumbersome to get onto the London Bridge. You've got to go through Cal's parking lot all the time, and it's not fun. Sorry, the London Bridge Resort's parking lot. But I just think this is going to be very busy. I think it's... Sure-sided, but I mean, we'll prove it soon enough and then that'll be on the next CIP budget, I guess. Yep, I think that's it, thank you.

All right, Vice Mayor Diaz. Mr. Hart, can you go to the slide that had the total price? 30 cents is important, I know. So just to clarify for the audience and the people watching at home, so we got $35.5 million from the state legislature, and maybe Mr. Sertsley, I imagine you can answer. The rest is interest that was incurred on that money and anything else? So I want to make sure they know there's no tax dollars that are being spent on this that we're asking them to spend.

Yeah, so this is totally funded through the $35.5 million in addition to the interest that's been collected. And Mr. Fagan worked with Ms. Olsen to make sure that we have an understanding of what the interest will be as we pay down. And in addition to that, we've identified the million dollars that was in the development agreement that was approved for the waterfront project on the island. So that's the fund for that project. The conversation about the stoplight, can't afford it. As of right now. If we want to work within the budget that includes the the legislative appropriation, the interest collected on legislative appropriation, and the million dollars that was collected through the development agreement.

Well, then I guess this is just a stop sign pilot program.

If I could add, I just want to make sure that it's understood that there is a CIP water component to this. And there is a CIP wastewater of 3.5 and then 3 million. And then we do have a drainage component to this of 750,000 for some stormwater that we're addressing there by the lift station and bridge. So just clarify that too.

Mr. Hart, is that included in this contract? In the 39.9. Yes, sir.

Thank you. I have one more, but I, you know.

Yeah, go ahead. We can open the public hearing.

Can you go back to the one where we see the state park? I just wanted, I've already said something to staff, but since we've got Ames here and some of the boys, this is going to be a very, very busy parking lot for some very, very important events that support our charities and our local economy and all that good stuff. We've done a good job of protecting that event space, but inevitably you guys are gonna have staging areas for equipment and materials and all that stuff. We need to get a meeting together with the users. I've already told the Balloon Fest, but we need to have the same conversation with everybody else too. Things are gonna be different, to expect different, and how do we plan and how do we, How do we overcome these, you know, work together and overcome them? Because these little alleyways, they're used for VIP instances and all of that good stuff. There's a lot of uses that goes on. Even though we protected the event space, they do a lot of other things over there too. And so I just want to make sure that we're meeting with the users and making sure we're working together.

Yes, we are.

Thank you.

I just have a simple question on page four. I think it's simple, but I don't understand it, so it must be difficult. That was a joke. All right, on page, no, page one of four, where it says GMP summary, it says indirect costs D, general condition negotiated amount was $3,128,000. And then when you go to the next page, I see... Oh, the CMAR construction fee negotiated fixed fee, 3,145,000. I think I know what that is, but can you explain what those two items are?

I would have Scott Jones with Ames Construction come up and he'll do a better job than what I can. Okay.

All right, Mr. Mayor and members of the council and city staff, I'm Scott Jones with Ames Construction and I can answer that question. In simple term, indirect costs are things that aren't directly associated with building the abutment. If you build an abutment, you have the cost of rebar, you have the cost of concrete, you have the labor to put the forms up, you have the... non-permanent materials like forms and everything indirect costs are stuff like our our job trailers it's um it's housing for for the labor and everybody that come into town it's stuff that is required but it doesn't it doesn't actually become a physical thing okay so that and the fee is on top of that um So the fee structure would be our company overhead plus our profit on ourself and our subcontractor work.

Because I thought maybe that might be design costs when it said indirect costs. So the design cost is all in this too, the original?

No, we don't have design costs in our cost.

They had a pre-construction services contract, which was part of the design working with NV5.

Right.

And that's been taken care of now and done.

That's above and beyond this, right?

Correct.

Wow, okay, now that's different. All right, okay, thank you.

All right, this is a public hearing. Would anyone like to address the city council on this item?

Hi, I'm Pam Swenson. I have a couple of questions. Previously at one of the other meetings, I did ask about ADOT needing to approve the plans because of the partial build on state land. And I was told that you were following ADOT specifications, which I would hope you would be. But having ADOT approve the design is completely separate. And I looked it up and it does say that because it is on state land that ADOT does have to approve the design and they do have to be involved in construction inspection along the way. So I wanted to clarify that whether or not that is going to happen and if I am incorrect in my assumption because I did look it up today. AND THAT'S WHAT THE ANSWER I GOT WAS THAT ADOT DID HAVE TO BE APPROVE HAVE TO APPROVE THE DESIGN OF ANYTHING CONSTRUCTED A ROADWAY CONSTRUCTED ON ITS LAND WHICH STATE PARKS IS STATE LAND SO I WANTED TO JUST GET THAT CLARIFICATION THAT'S ONE THING I HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS BUT YOU CAN ANSWER THAT ONE

Yeah, that's a requirement that we are not aware of. And as we looked into this and researched it, the key factor is it's not a state highway.

So we are building it to- It didn't say a state highway. It said a roadway built on state land, and it is a roadway and not a state highway.

A city roadway, yes.

It's a roadway built on state land.

I understand. There's some complexities to the land that the state park is on. It's not necessarily state land. There's underlying BLM land there as well, so it's pretty complicated. But with all of the experts in the room, I see people shaking their head that they've looked at that. Okay. Point well taken, and we'll make sure that we're in compliance.

Okay, that's one question. And then I have another question for you, Mr. Hart. Are you going to be the project manager on this for the city?

Yes, I am. I'm the project manager, yes.

And may I ask how many bridge design projects you have worked on? THIS IS A MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT. AND A PROJECT MANAGER ON A MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE SIGNIFICANT EXPERIENCE. AND I KNOW YOU'RE A PE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I'M JUST QUESTIONING THAT. AND I'M NOT TRYING TO DISPARAGE YOU IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM. I JUST WANT TO KNOW, AS A RESIDENT, IF YOU HAVE THE knowledge to be able to be the project manager for the city on this.

Mayor, and then Ms. Swenson, if I can answer that. Jason, Mr. Hart is very much qualified as a project manager to oversee our capital improvement plan, not just for bridges, but projects across the board. In the audience behind you, you have individuals that have designed and built many bridges across the state and across this country. and with high regard and a high sense of professionalism. So Mr. Hart's job is not to design the bridge.

I know that.

It's not to construct the bridge. But that's why we hired the experts, and he manages the experts. So in terms of what that looks like, I just want to make sure that we understand that he's in charge of the entire capital improvement program. So that's parks, roads, utilities across the board. And then we hire the professionals with the, to accomplish the task that we need to accomplish.

Okay, I understand that. And I understand he's not the design. I completely am aware of that. But he's going to be overseeing the construction of it, and I just wanted to be sure of that.

Yeah, so I've been involved in over a dozen bridge projects. Bridge projects, okay, that's fine. And one won two national awards, so I feel very comfortable.

Okay, that's fine. I just was asking because I couldn't find any information. And then the other... QUESTION I HAD WITH REGARD TO PUBLIC WORK STAFF AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION ALONG THE WAY AND I WAS WONDERING WHO IN THE CITY WAS GOING TO BE OVERSEEING THE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION.

So we have a capital programs inspector that's involved in a lot of the standard inspections in the contract or specialty inspections that the contractor will be bringing on for the specialty items. So there we go.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else like to address the council on this item?

Good evening, Bonnie Toy. Sorry about not saying it before. Mayor, City Council, I did have a question about what is taxpayer money and what is not taxpayer money.

Yeah, all of our revenues come from either rate payers or taxes that are paid, so I'm not sure what the reference is to your question.

Everybody keeps saying that this is not a taxpayer-funded project because we're getting the money from the state. But as a citizen of the state, I pay state taxes. Therefore, as a taxpayer to the state, I am paying taxes. from my taxes for the bridge, and I just was wondering what taxpayer funds were.

Sure, yeah, so I have not said that, that we're not using taxpayer dollars, but maybe to the point of reference, there's no local taxpayer dollars. It could be potentially what was meant. I'm not sure what comment you're specifically talking about, but certainly we got direct appropriation from the general fund of the state of Arizona. Those are tax dollars that were paid by residents of the state of Arizona and sent to us. So I hope that clarifies your question.

I know I made the comment, and maybe I misspoke, but it is taxpayer dollars, but it's our taxpayer dollars coming back to us. If we didn't get that money from the state, our tax dollars would go to somebody else, 35.5 million. So it's coming back to us for our benefit.

Thank you. Also, where the bridge is coming out, how are you going to prevent traffic on the London Bridge?

What is your specific question?

So when the second bridge empties out onto McCulloch Boulevard, just before Beachcomber and between both entrances to London Bridge Beach Park, when they are going on to McCulloch Boulevard, will they be turning right or left with their vehicles if they're going to the beach or if they're going to Site 6 or the marina or that beach? How will that stop any traffic backup on McCulloch Boulevard at Lake Havasu Avenue?

I have no idea what you're specifically asking. So when you come up to the intersection, you're going to turn left or right at a stop sign, and then you're going to go to the next stop sign, and you're going to go... Is there going to be a three-way stop, or will it go, and then there's a stop sign like...

at the end of the parking lot for Beachcomber Boulevard and McCulloch Boulevard.

So that's not where it comes out. Do you want to maybe, Mr. Hart? Yeah, so there will be a three-way stop there.

There will be a three-way stop, and then there will be a four-way stop at Beachcomber.

Yes, another 1,000 feet down. And we've done traffic analysis, and it doesn't show that there's going to be any encumbrances there.

But that's because currently there are no encumbrances there.

When you do a traffic study, you take into account growth. So I think it was 2045 is what we looked at growth in.

I'm certain that's what they thought on Mesquite in front of Cornerstone also. Thank you.

Anyone else like to address the council on this item? Mr. Mayor, if I can, to lots of conversation in terms of the cost and taxpayer, local taxpayer dollars and so forth. I just want to make sure that we're perfectly clear in terms of the conversation. So the design of the bridge and the cost of the bridge is accounted for in the conversation we just had. We have identified an opportunity to improve on our utilities in that area, right? And we talked a lot about that on the onset. So there is additional dollars that are being spent on the bridge project that include the utilities in that area, water, wastewater, and we'll be bringing an item for council here that was a really genius approach that will be coming up with the next agenda in terms of that wastewater line that's in that area too. But I just want to make sure that on the record, Bridge Road paid for through the appropriation and the conversation I had, but there are some utility improvements that we're making in the area. The opportunity is ripe while we're doing

bridge construction we should be working on the utilities as well so it just makes a lot of sense if I understand correctly that was on a CIP that potentially wasn't there a wastewater on the CIP that would be potentially to improve the wastewater systems while we're doing the bridge because it just made sense yep conversations took place it was in the CIP and discussions and approved by council thank you surprises right

No one else wanted to address this call to public? We'll go ahead and close, excuse me, at the public hearing. We'll go ahead and close the public hearing, bring it back to council for any questions or possible motion.

Mayor, I just got a quick question.

Yeah, Council Member Lin.

Are we gonna have to close the channel during any part of this project?

Yes, we are going to close the channel when we set the girders. And do you want to add to that, Scott? Okay.

So the answer is yes, we're going to have to close the channel. So what would be expected is when we set girders, I believe we'll have about six channel closures. They'll most likely be at night and we'll work around the schedule with the casino boat.

So it won't affect them?

No, we'll work with them. And it's a safety thing because we have a girder there. The girders are literally 10 feet deep, like probably to the ceiling. And that middle span is, I think it's around 102 feet long. And we can't safely have people traveling when we're doing critical activities like that. We'll also close the channel when we do a bridge deck pour. And so just for safety. But other than that, we'll have channelization. So if we're working on a section of the bridge, kind of like if it's a roadway or something, we'll close a section of the channel. People can still go through just to keep a safe working zone in sections as we go across.

I was just making sure that it wasn't going to affect the Havasu landing.

No, it'll be cool.

We don't want to fight with them over there.

Did that answer the question?

Yeah.

Okay.

Is there a motion? Sorry, I had one more question. Just looking at the photos, one of the things I was advocating for was connectivity to our walking trail and to the It does not look like it's on this picture. Is it still included?

Yes, it is.

I'm sorry, I didn't draw it in on this picture. It's okay, yeah, I mean.

So yeah, when you're walking down the channel where it currently ends, actually the walkway will continue along and go underneath the bridge between the pier and the abutment and then goes up in an ADA compliant ramp. up to the top, which connects and will allow you to cross over the bridge, which connects over by the island loop, which is ultimately where you'll be. Yes. All right, thank you so much.

Motion. Yeah, Vice Mayor Diaz. I move to approve the construction manager at risk construction services contract and guaranteed maximum price in the amount of $39,921,502.30. with Ames Construction Incorporated and authorize the city manager to execute the contract with Ames Construction Inc. Do we have a second?

Second.

All right, we have a motion from Vice Mayor Diaz, a second from Council Member Lin. Is there any additional discussion? Seeing none, we're ready to vote. Council Member Dolan? No. Thank you.

Motion carries six to one.

Thank you. All right, item 7.5 is discussion and possible direction regarding call to the public. I'll turn this over to you, Council Member Moses.

Yeah, thank you. Well, in the famous words of Nick Simonetta, well, this will just be a real quick presentation. So this was brought up, and sorry it took me a little bit. I wanted to get some information, see what other cities are doing, all of that good stuff. I more want this to be a conversation, so I only included the code, which I can read out loud and see where we wanna make a change. So I'll just read it, and then I'll make some comments on it, and then everybody else can chime in on there as well. So any individual, so this is code. or call to the public. Any individual wishing to address the council on any issue with the council's jurisdiction will be given the opportunity to speak at the call to the public. One call to the public will be placed on the agenda of all regular meetings of the council. Members of the public addressing the council shall step up to the microphone, give his or her name in an audible tone of voice for the record, and unless further time is granted by the council, shall limit his or her address to the council to three minutes. During the call to the public, the council is limited by state law to responding to criticism, asking staff to review the issue, or asking that the issue be placed on a future agenda. Any issue to be considered, discussed, or decided by council must properly notice an agenda item for consideration, discussion, and legal action as prescribed by this code in the Arizona open meeting laws. And so one of the things, we heard some feedback that we didn't like this. moving it to the end. At the time, my thoughts were that we could make this an administrative move, not necessarily a codify. And I would still kind of agree with that assessment. I think this could just be an administrative move to move it back to the front. Things have kind of cooled down, I think kind of because of the actions that we've taken. Because the problems that were happening at the time when we made this were real. Kids trying to do a social studies project for their civics class at the high school were having to sit through a bunch of nonsense, to be honest. And they were only being able, like they have bedtimes and curfews and they gotta get back and they're only, half the time they're only able to sit through some of the nonsense, which all nonsense is protected, right? But still, they weren't even able to be here long enough to see the actual business of the city, as well as the people who had to sit here and who are just trying to conduct business with the city and also had their problems. So I'm seeing both sides of this and Just kinda hoping we can come to a compromise and figure out something. I'd be okay. So I noticed things sort of calmed down for us, but as I look to other cities or other, even our own county, things are going wild for them. And you hear from them that they wish that they made this move. And so if we were to move it back, I would propose that that there be some parameters put on it, whether there be just kind of some guardrails, right? So whether we stop it at 30 minutes or something along those lines where we allow those people to have their opportunity, but not to bombard or overtake the city council. Cuz that's what it's for. I mean, we can't respond to anything that happens during call to the public. I mean, all of those things that are happening at Call to the Public are actually the better avenue to get anything done is to reach out to me or any one of us individually anyways. It really is more of a grandstanding opportunity and that's sometimes what it gets abused for. And so hopefully we can protect that while also maybe putting in some guardrails. That's kind of the compromise that I'm proposing but Again, this is the will of the council, so I'd love to hear what everyone has to say.

Thank you, Council Member Moses. So I'll start with where I stand on a call to the public. We initially made this change. Well, first, a call to the public is not required by state law to have a call to the public. However, I would advocate to keep a call to the public. I think open and transparent government is really important, but I also argue that the CALL THE PUBLIC IS NOT THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO COMMUNICATE. SO WE CAN LISTEN INTENTLY, BUT WE CAN'T RESPOND. WE CAN'T EVEN GIVE DIRECTION ON, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT FACTUAL INFORMATION OR GO TO THE WEBSITE AND GET THE INFO OR IT'S AVAILABLE HERE OR THE EVENT'S ON TUESDAY. I MEAN, WE CAN'T DO ANY OF THOSE THINGS THAT MAKES IT AN EFFECTIVE TWO-WAY CONVERSATION. BECAUSE OF STATE LAW. SO I WOULD ADVOCATE FOR SAYING AT THE END OF THE MEETING, THE REASON THAT I ADVOCATE FOR THAT IS THAT THIS IS A BUSINESS MEETING. WE'RE ADMINISTERING THE CITY CODE THAT'S ADMINISTERED BY US AS COUNCIL. SO WE REQUIRE PEOPLE TO COME BEFORE US FOR CERTAIN THINGS, EITHER BY CODE, SO EITHER A ZONING ISSUE, A LIQUOR LICENSE, AN ITEM THAT'S OVER $100,000, SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE REQUIRE FOLKS TO GO TO. As we saw today, we had lots of expensive engineers and people in the audience that are here and have traveled from a far distance. And if we have a call to the public that lasts an hour or two hours before the actual regular meeting begins, it creates issues for all of those things. So an open government still allows the ability for a call to the public. AT THE END OF THE MEETING ALLOWS FOR OUR RESIDENTS THAT HAVE SAT THROUGH THE MEETING AND LEARNED SOMETHING OR HEARD SOMETHING OR PARTICIPATED IN THE MEETING IN SOME WAY TO GIVE FEEDBACK AT THE END OF THE MEETING WHEN WE'RE FINISHED WITH IT. BUT I WILL DO WHATEVER THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL IS. IF THIS COUNCIL WANTS US TO HAVE CALL TO PUBLIC AT THE MIDDLE OF THE MEETING, LET'S HAVE IT AT THE MIDDLE OF THE MEETING. IF WE WANT TO HAVE IT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, LET'S HAVE IT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. So I would entertain the conversation that we're having this evening, get the feedback from all of the council, and I would advocate that we do not have a change to the code that Council Member Moses read. I'll just administratively change it to whatever the majority of this council wants to have. That then allows the flexibility when we have a council in six months that says, hey, I want to have it at, THE MIDDLE. I WANT TO HAVE IT AFTER THE SECOND ITEM. WHEREVER THEY WANT TO HAVE IT WE CAN MOVE IT AGAIN BASED ON THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL AT THAT TIME IT GIVES THAT FLEXIBILITY. IF THIS COUNCIL DID WANT TO MOVE IT TO THE FRONT OF THE MEETING I WOULD ADVOCATE ALSO FOR SOME SORT OF TIME LIMIT. BULLHEAD CITY OFFERS A CALL TO THE PUBLIC AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. IT'S FOR THE FIRST 30 MINUTES AND AFTER THE FIRST 30 MINUTES IS UP THE CALL TO THE PUBLIC IS CLOSED AND THEY MOVED ON TO THE REGULAR PORTION OF THEIR MEETING. But those are my thoughts on it, and happy to hear feedback from our council.

Mayor, I just want to say that, why are we doing this now? It was during a survey study that was brought up. Everybody knows my opinion on this. I campaigned on it. I always said if they don't listen to me, they don't listen to you. I believe this is the house of the people and I think them feeling comfortable to be able to come here and they shouldn't have to sit five, six hours through all this either to tell us things that they're concerned about. Maybe they did talk to staff, but I don't need to get into a long lecture why I believe it should be at the front of the public. Michelle will probably tell you why she doesn't think there should be a timeframe. But I'm asking why, because everybody knew that once this election was over, I think it's very fair to say that I am definitely wanted it. I was always open. I wanted it in the front of the front of the agenda. I'm sure Vice Mayor Diaz says the same. Councilwoman Lynn says the same. But out of the blue, Cameron, you wanted to bring this now. And so I question, why now? Because whatever we do right now, it's going to change when a new council seats. Because I know what the mayor was going to say. I know what Councilmember Koch's going to say. And I pretty much know what Doan's going to say. But you said to me that you're willing to listen. And that if you thought the reason why we didn't have what was the study that we did, the survey that we did, said that they didn't have a lot of trust in us, that they didn't feel that they were open enough with us, that we were not transparent enough with them. And I said, well, one of the reasons is a lot of people are said they don't want to come to the call to public because they're not going to sit there for six hours. They too have children at home. They too have other things to do. They do still have to get up and go to work in the morning, just like the high school students that are only here maybe six Once a year? Twice a year? I mean, I don't even see them here this much. So I don't know why they were a priority. So again, I'm asking you, Council Member Moses, why now? Why did we have to do this right before the election? And now that the election is here, why are we discussing it now?

I think you think I'm thinking more about the election than I am. It was literally on a whim when I heard your words during the council meeting, and I said, hey, Nancy, I'll go along with you. Let's do it. but let's figure out a path forward. So I don't know what you're implying. I did my due diligence, I went through the process, figured out a meeting that worked for me, and I did it. I don't know. It's simple. If you wanna table this, table it. And you can vote on that. But... IT'S NOT AS NEFARIOUS AS YOU THINK IT IS.

MR. MAYOR?

COUNCILMEMBER DILLON, ACTUALLY, COUNCILMEMBER LIN'S GOING TO GO FIRST, THEN VICE MAYOR DIAZ, AND THEN WE'LL GO TO YOU.

I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. SO AS WE JUST READ OVER THIS ORDINANCE, NOWHERE IN THIS ORDINANCE SAYS THAT IT HAS TO BE AT THE END. SO I'M JUST CURIOUS. We've done it before, and this is stupid to even think this way, but there's been items that we've moved up on the agenda. If we didn't even change it tonight, and I wanted to, at the next meeting, move the call to the public to the front and ask for that to be moved up, I could do that, correct? Because this isn't, well, there's nowhere written in here that it's at the end.

Yeah, so the mayor is responsible for the agenda, so the mayor can move it.

And so- Where does that say that?

There's another, this is only the section for call to the public, so you'd have to expand out the rest of that code section.

The rest of the code says that the mayor gets to.

We should address that part. Mayor and council members, so there is another code section that just talks about order of business, and it's section 2.04.250. And in that section, it just lists out. All the items that can be on the agenda. It used to, years ago, list the specific order of the items, and we changed that. So now it just lists what items can be on, and then it does say the order of business may be rearranged upon the direction and approval of the mayor.

Okay, so I could ask the mayor at a meeting, and you could tell me no.

But I would, from my perspective, if we had something agended and it was at the end or the beginning or the middle, wherever it's at, prior to me being elected and I had business in front of the council, I would come to the meeting based on where it's at on the agenda. So I might not get here right at 5.30. I might come at 6.05, knowing that my item's number six on this. So I wouldn't want to change it on the floor. I'd want the residents to have certainty that it's going to be at the beginning, it's going to be at the end, it's going to be after item two.

yeah wherever it's at just so that they know i agree i agree i wouldn't want to do that but i'm just i'm just saying i could do that yes and i would and i would not deny that okay and i don't want to do that i wouldn't want to do that everything and i think my issue with i get the time limit thing but this is kind of where i have an issue there's been some issues that have come to the council and we'll have an entire room that is one direction and another side of the room that's a different direction. And if all of these ones get to speak first in the first 30 minutes and we hear nothing on this side because there's no control who gets up there quickest. And even if you use little blue things, once your 30 minutes is up, it's up. So I kind of have a problem with the time restriction. I don't know how we can do it. I see why you want to do it, but I'm concerned with getting everybody to be able to voice their opinion.

Some cities do a lottery, so you can take the first 10 out of a lottery, you know what I mean? To quell some of those concerns.

I don't like that. I still think that's silencing some of our public.

I was talking to Vice Mayor Diaz yesterday, so there would be different strategies that we would employ. So if we had a full room that was here, and to your point, half of it was on one side and half appeared to be on the other side, one, we can grant additional time. So that's already in this code that Council Member Moses read earlier. We can grant more time or we can reduce it. We can reduce from three minutes to two minutes. We can also do consensus, try to bring people that are for the topic, have a spokesperson and speak on behalf of them and give them more minutes, we talked about. Someone that's opposed to it, have them speak on behalf and give them more minutes so that both arguments are there. But again, we can try it. With no changes to call the public, I'm willing to do whatever the consensus is of this council. So if you say, let's move it to the front and let's have 30 minutes as a trial. If that's not working, we change it. And we can administratively change that based on the feedback of the council.

And I understand where you're going with that, Michelle. So if it's like a specific issue for or against... usually that only happens when it's on the agenda. And we're not gonna limit when they're on the agenda. I mean, very rarely, I mean, when certain people for COVID were here, there wasn't really people against it, you know what I mean, or for it, there was just people voicing concern. So I think you're talking about specific issues that really only happen when there's a contentious item that's on the agenda.

and i could say this because i've witnessed it uh in other cities too where where if it's as councilman motion says if it's an agenda item the mayor or whoever's running the meeting will say um if it's if it's uh the agenda item please wait till that item is during on the agenda to discuss it to recall the public these items are not agenda size now if you turn if you took a picture of this room right now that's exactly why calls the public should be at the beginning of the meeting because the room was full and there weren't all the people that were presenting, so there was residents that left also because it's a long meeting. Now, I'm a big Constitution guy, so I think it's called the public at the beginning of the meeting, or happening at the end of the meeting, I should say, does not give the citizens the feeling that they have the ability to address their government. And that's one of the five tenets of the First Amendment. Very rare that you're going to come in here, it's going to be a two to three hours of public comment, I mean, of call to the public. That's very rare. And then we had a couple of issues a couple years, a few years ago when we had the drags thing and it got crazy and COVID. I know it was like a dental appointment where you're getting a root canal and on and on and on. But That's very rare. That's in weird circumstances. But I'm a big advocate of having it at the beginning of the meeting. And if we put some kind of guardrails in place, as long as they're not too restrictive, because some cities have also gotten sued for silencing people during call to the public and having too many guardrails. And they've actually lost due to silencing their right of free speech. So we have to be careful with that. But I think having the proper guardrails, Possibly, I'm good for that, but as far as moving into the front of the meeting, I'm all for that. That would be my vote, to move it back to the front of the meeting. And you could just do that by just saying, getting the consensus of the council. We'll get the consensus and have the discussion.

Yeah, Council Member Dolan?

Yeah, sorry, I had to find the unmute button. I think it's funny people know what I would say. I like call to the public. I think it's a great way for the public to express things that are going on. I like it when it's initiated by the public, when it's genuine public coming in and wanting to do stuff. What I have a problem with is when certain council members weaponized call to the public. They stack the room with people and they create it. So that's the case. I think we should hear them. And I think people also coming, you know, they haven't had a chance to talk on the agenda items, you know, so yeah, I think it's great. Let's do it. I mean, like I said, but for a group priding themselves and having a majority and really wanting a super majority, I think this is great. It's good as good way for the people that majority comes in and they want to cut this and do that. Then have the schools, the parents come in and you know that want the the the water pad and stuff like that. So yeah, no, I think it's a great idea. I just I goes against it in the past because it was weaponized and people to be in the room and they were told to be there by council members. So if people come on their own and great, but I just yeah, so I'm I'm a yes vote on this.

Yeah, thank you, Councilmember Dolan. Are there any other comments? So let's open up the public hearing. Let's see what feedback we get, and then we'll come back and try to get consensus or give direction for any changes. So this is a public hearing. Would anyone like to address the City Council on this item?

Good evening, mayor and city council. I really want to say that I enjoyed when, actually I did not enjoy it when council member or vice mayor Lane initiated the whole moving the call to the public to the back of the meeting because I thought it was really mean. But as I started attending council meetings and having to sit through five hours of council meetings, sometimes not having to, but just enjoying and getting to and being able to. I do realize that having the call to the public at the back of the meeting actually gave me a chance as a citizen to listen to the agenda items to see what was going on and then to bring up different things at the end of the meeting. I enjoy that. However, I do notice that your consent agenda does not have a call to the public. And because of that, when there are items on the consent agenda that people have questions about, they cannot question. No one can question the consent agenda. And if you have a call to the public and you're going to move it on the agenda anywhere, I would like to suggest that you move it prior to the consent agenda so that you can also address those issues as well as during the call to the public. I'M REALLY GRATEFUL FOR THE CALL TO THE PUBLIC. JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT. AND I CAN'T WAIT UNTIL THE END OF THE MEETING.

THANK YOU, MS. TOY. SO JUST TO ADDRESS SOME OF YOUR COMMENTS, WHEN IT COMES TO THE CONSENT AGENDA, I KNOW YOU'VE DONE THIS BEFORE. YOU CAN TALK TO A COUNCIL MEMBER AND THEY'LL REMOVE THAT ITEM FOR YOU. YOU CAN SPEAK TO ANY OF US RIGHT BEFORE THE MEETING OR YOU CAN REACH OUT IN ADVANCE. AND LIKE I SAID, I KNOW YOU'VE DONE THAT IN THE PAST AND THOSE ITEMS HAVE BEEN PULLED. THEY CAN HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. STATE LAW OUTLINES WHAT IS ON CONSENT AGENDA OR WHAT IS ELIGIBLE, AND IT'S THINGS THAT ARE ROUTINE IN NATURE, AND THAT'S HOW THEY END UP THERE. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE ALWAYS GET IT RIGHT. IF A RESIDENT HAS A QUESTION, WE WANT TO ANSWER THAT. SO YOU CAN EITHER REACH OUT TO US IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING INDIVIDUALLY OR, OF COURSE, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, YOU CAN ASK ANY OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS, AND I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S EVER BEEN A TIME THAT SOMEONE WOULD NOT PULL AN ITEM FOR A RESIDENT THAT HAD A QUESTION ON IT.

Which reminded me about the whole fact that when I did request that about the Rocky Point sister city thing, I still haven't seen any advertisement on the Lake Havasu City Facebook page about Rocky Point since we became sister cities with Rocky Point.

I just wanted to let you know that was really disappointing.

But yes, I have asked for that. That was one thing I did ask for. And yes, I know that people can ask for that, but If you have a call to the public before the consent agenda, then they won't have to ask.

So will you give opportunities for citizens to talk to us, but then give opportunities to not talk to us? Is that what I'm hearing you advocate for?

No, I was specifically saying that they don't have to if that was before the, or at least a call to the public specifically for the consent agenda, and then a regular call to the public at the end of the meeting. Might be both.

All right, thank you. Anyone else like to address the city council on this item? Let's see, now we'll close the public hearing, bring it back to council. So we've had some discussion understanding where folks stand. It sounds like the majority, I'm not trying to put words in everyone's mouth, so we'll go down the dais to find out. But it looks like move call to the public to the beginning of the meeting. It doesn't sound like anyone's advocating strongly to change the code that way, just administratively we'll move it. It sounds like there is some discussion on a time limit that has some flexibility to that. Not full consensus, so I'll need to go down the dais for that. And then we'll go from there. So Councilor Moses. Can I lead? Yes. Yeah, thank you.

So since advocating for this, I've had multiple people reach out to me expressing displeasure with us moving it. And so it's very important to me. And so I hear them, and I hear the others. It's very important to me that I build compromise and build consensus. I've proven that in my votes throughout my career up here. So I will not support it only moving to the front without some guardrails. If we can't find a consensus here of some form of guardrails, then I will not support it and we'll leave it as is and things can happen as they may. Thank you, Council Member Moses. Council Member Koch.

I should probably let Nancy answer for me since she knows what I'm going to say, but I'll take the opportunity to answer it myself because she doesn't know what I was going to say. The reason that we moved it originally was because we had so many people here pretty much saying things that were not appropriate for all ears in the audience and because it was taking up people's time that we're here to do business. We haven't had that issue. And it's not in writing that we have to have it at the end. So if we want to move it back to the beginning, we always have the ability to move it back to the end if it becomes a problem. And so I came with an open mind to discuss that opportunity. And I still have an open mind to discuss that opportunity. And I would support that. I would also be interested in finding out what guidelines would look like. But I'm not opposed to moving it back to the beginning.

Thank you. Council Member Lin?

I just want to put it back to the beginning. I don't really think we need any guardrails, so I'm just supporting it, moving it to the beginning.

Vice Mayor Diaz? And then we're going to go to Council Member Dolan, and then we'll go to Council Member Campbell.

So I want to move it back to the beginning. If we do put a guardrail in, if it's being restrictive to the people, then we could always take the guardrail off. But then what is the proper time limit? Are you talking about giving people three minutes a person, or what is it now? Three minutes.

A call to public is three minutes, and then during our public hearing, it's five minutes. You know, I would, as far as guardrails for me, I just know in speaking with Mayor Dahlman from Bullhead City that they do 30 minutes. They seem to think that that works, but again, it's a whole different community with a different set, so I don't want to put too much merit in it, but we have the flexibility. We start with 30 minutes and I can see based on what call to the public is in the room and kind of get the eyes of the council to see do we want to extend this out for some additional minutes, but we would do that at each council meeting. And again, we can change it if it's not working, but that's what I'd advocate for. We can talk about specifics of it. I mean, so right now I have you down for front with potential guardrails. Okay. Okay, and then we'll come back with guardrails. Council Member Dolan?

Yeah, I'm great with moving it back to the front. I just hope we all don't weaponize it, like I said. But yeah, no, I think it's great. The public should come. But I don't really mean, I kind of like guardrails, but I don't like that word. I think when we, in the past, it was a lot of stuff that wasn't really under the purview of the city government. And so it was just kind of complaining about events that we didn't have anything to do with. So, you know, if it, I think there should be a way to get the room back if it is just something that does nothing to do with the city, then yeah, we, I think we need a way to continue business if it gets out of hand, but I don't want it to appear that we're limiting what people can say. And, you know, cause like I said, if people have concerns, they should be able to voice it. So I guess I'd be curious to see what the guardrails were.

I think Mr. Dolan just announced what the guardrail should be. If something gets out of control, we just say it's not in the purview of the city and it's not a proper call to the public item.

Mayor and I've always believed that I've seen a lot of councils the way they ran and there's sometimes they'll say hey if you're going to continue to repeat yourself 16 times over only the first five people that pick two people from your group you pick two you can already see the room get packed control the room get up here I've seen mayors in the past control the room If it needs to be 30 minutes, great. Maybe we have a really long agenda. You can just look around the room. You know it's not a really hot topic or it's one side or another. I think you chair the meeting. You did it before. I think sometimes we can gavel people. I think we can control people. If it's not, if it's just wasting all of our times but i'm here to listen i don't want to put 30 minutes on i i thought of that too when i heard it and then michelle gave a very good point of that somebody comes in and gets all the blue tickets and gives it to their side i don't want to do lotteries i don't want to do all that and we only hear one side and it's sorry the 30 minutes are up and we're all sitting there going wow didn't hear about anybody on the other side so that's what changed my mind on that but again I say move it to the front. I say that let the mayor, you've been doing this for a long time. You know how to control a room. Control the room.

All right, I'm in the final one. I still think it should be in the back of the meeting, but obviously the consensus is that it's at the front of the meeting. So we will move it to the front of the meeting, starting at the next council meeting. And that's where a call to the public will be. And we'll just make sure that we stick with items that are in the jurisdiction of the city. And that if we have a long agenda, that we'll state that at the beginning of the meeting. And that we need to try and I use some strategies where we have people that have shared or shared viewpoints, have a spokesperson. And if we need to make adjustments from that in the future, we will do so. All right. Sounds good. We will move on to the next item on our agenda. And that is item 7.6. It's a cooperative purchase of a new flight submersible pump for the London Bridge lift station from James Cook and Hobson Inc. Mr. Yarbor.

GOOD EVENING, HONORABLE MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. IT'S AN HONOR AND A PRIVILEGE TO BE HERE WITH YOU THIS EVENING TO SERVE OUR COMMUNITY AND SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC WORKS WASTEWATER DIVISION. PRESENTED BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE A NEW new 250 horsepower flight submersible pump. It's similar to the pump that you guys approved at the last meeting at our north regional treatment facility. The difference being that this one is specific to our London Bridge lift station. This pump's been in service for about 20 years and has seen about a half dozen over the course of that 20 years. With that, we're requesting authorization. Let me touch on something here real quick. So this pump is one of our duty pumps at the London Bridge Lift Station, and it is responsible for conveying approximately one to one and a half million gallons of wastewater per day from our mainland to our island treatment facility. With that, I think the other important factor, and I know this came up at the last meeting, just to kind of put it in perspective, when you start to reach the end of the lifespan of these pumps, the 20 year lifespan, and with the amount of wastewater that these pumps have moved over the course of that time, it reaches a point where it becomes more advantageous PHYSICALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR US TO REPLACE THEM RATHER THAN TO REPAIR THEM WITH THAT I'LL FORGO THE REST OF THE MY COMMENTS AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I'D CERTAINLY BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OF THEM THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS MEMBERS OF THE COUNCILOR FOR MR. YARBARO ALL RIGHT THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM

Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing, bring it back to council for any discussion or possible motion.

Mayor, motion. Council Member Moses. Yeah, I move to approve the cooperative purchase of a new floodgate submersible pump from James Cook Hobson Inc. in the amount of $160,334 plus applicable taxes. Second.

We have a motion from Council Member Moses, a second from Council Member Koch. Is there any additional discussion? Seeing none, we're ready to vote. Oh, Council Member Dolan? Aye. Thank you.

Motion carries seven to zero.

Thank you. Thank you. All right, item 7.7 is award bids for the Citywide Pest and Weed Control Services. Mr. Young.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. A small 45 minute presentation here. Just kidding. We put out the bid for our weed and pest control. This bid is designed for one person to take it as well as multiple. This year, multiple took it. Parker Pest Control for the pest category and URW for the weed category. So I'm here to present this to you to be approved for the next upcoming year. And with that, I'll take any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Young. Are there questions from members of the council? Council Member Campbell?

Sorry, I've been waiting for this one all day. First off, what was our total budget? I see that they had different categories, but let's just say, what was your budget for weed and pest? What did you have?

I believe we had right about 100,000. We had to bump it up a little bit. For both? Yeah. Really? And so now... All of them together at $106,000.

The reason why I was excited about this, I didn't know what your budget was, but by looking at some of these bids, I was assuming that we're going to be a little bit closer to them, like at about $150,000. And what I was going to say to you is where it says weeds... I think we could do 10 times better with our weed. So I was going to do my favorite change order thing, which was basically if the lowest bidder was 87,000, I wanted to see twice as many weeds done. But you're telling me we can barely afford the weeds that we did. We went off the last few years, so yes. Okay, I'm only one council member, but if I could give direction, I think we need to do a lot more weed control in the city because I think it's gotten, it doesn't, we could do better. I just am not happy with the, Lot of the weeds. So when I saw this, I was just saying, spend all your budget is what I was gonna say on weeds.

We have had talks in the past with those that were taking care of it when things didn't go well and they righted that and that's where we came along.

But I want those weeds all the way down the bike path, not just where they stop. But maybe next year, maybe next year we'll get some more weeds. so well i counted mr young what is the week where are we doing this at and all over the city facilities along the highway multi-purpose paths um and those kind of things okay then councilman mckay what are you what are you talking about that you want more of i don't i'm unhappy with where the bike paths on the south side particularly they're all weedy and weeds coming up through the bike path and I just, the bike path is beautiful, and I just, I hate to smell the weeds. We stop about there.

I should stop you there. The weeds that get handled are where the gravel is only.

We need to move on. We need to go all the way. We need to do all the weeds along the highway. We need to find you more money.

To the natural desert vegetation you want, weed control?

No, along the bike paths. Around the island, that's a little bit better because of the residence area there. But I have said that all along. That's another one of my things. I would like to see some of our highways more beautified, especially where the bike paths are. I would like to see our bike paths also beautified.

repaved and you know all those things we've had those conversations but multi-use path what we currently are doing along the highway are the areas that are graveled along the highway that are landscaped yeah if they're not landscaped it's natural desert vegetation but as you that that needs to be improved too that was part of my appropriation budget well we still have that for the art tech bill for this next year

Right, I agree. But while we're talking about weeds.

No, I just want to understand.

I'm just saying that I think where it stops and it's right in front of, right before you hit Let's see, where is that? Scott Drive. There's another spot that's just right there. And then it starts again. There's gravel, and there isn't gravel. But I just wish that some of those areas were more beautified. And then it starts again, like, right before you get off of Mulberry. And then it's along, and then it stops. And then it's the bike path. So I'm a big fan advocate of improving the bike path. You're talking about the multi-use path along the highway?

Yes.

Okay. Scott Drive. threw me off a little bit. Yeah, so, okay, I get it. I get your point.

I've been staring at it. I'm with you. I get it. Yeah, I get your point. I even asked for state appropriations for it. I'm going to fight for it again. So I really would like to see all of our, how many people want to see your highways beautified a little bit? I do.

Okay. Yep. All right. Maybe one. Okay. Thanks much.

Appreciate it. Mr. Young. Yeah. Yeah. Vice mayor.

So I noticed it says, um, Annual quantity, so they're just spraying it every six months? They're just spraying the weeds?

They spray it twice, and if the weeds come more, they come back.

They come, okay. And then I noticed one item, one of them was once a year.

Yeah, the water treatment plant, okay.

So there's a spray, and if they come back in between spray every six months, in between the six-month period, they will come back and basically do it. That's what they do with my residents, so the same thing. Okay, thank you.

Any additional questions before we open the public hearing? All right, this is a public hearing. I would like to address the city council on this item. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing, bring it back to council for any discussion or possible motion.

Oh, sir.

Yeah, Vice Mayor Diaz.

I move towards citywide pest control services categories A, C, and D to Parker Pest Control LLC and citywide weed control services category B to URW LLC doing business as United right of way approved expenditures exceeding the threshold annually but not exceeding the annual department budget for the duration of the contracts and all renewal terms. Second.

All right, we have a motion from Vice Mayor Diaz. We have a second from Council Member Moses. Is there any additional discussion? Seeing none, we're ready to vote. Council Member Dolan? Aye. Thank you.

Motion carries seven to zero.

Thank you. Item eight is our call to the public. This is an opportunity for citizens to address the City Council on items within the jurisdiction of Lake Havasu City. They have to be within the jurisdiction of Lake Havasu City. We'll stop that. We can't have a two-way conversation, but we can listen intently. Please just make your way to the podium. State your name for the record.

Good evening. My name is Bonnie Toy. Mayor, City Council, I do want to address a couple of things. One is the safety between on Miss Smoketree Avenue from Swanson to Mesquite for Fright Night. I just want to address that ahead of time because that gives you plenty of time to bring street light, not the street lights, whatever the temporary lights that you had at Rotary Park during July 4th, some of those temporary lights really should be used in that area a little bit because it is very dark. And on Fright Night, they're wearing costumes. And I don't believe that the children or anybody in that area should have to worry about the risk to their lives. And then I just want to say that Dolly Parton was an amazing woman, and I don't think there would be anybody in the city who would be upset if you lit the bridge up for a few days in her honor. That's all.

Thank you, Ms. Toye. Would anyone else like to address the city council's main call to the public? All right, we'll go ahead and close the call to the public. Item nine is current events. Are there any council committee reports? I do have one on behalf of the Mojave County Water Authority. You may have read in the news that the United States has released its record of decision and the operating guidelines for the Colorado River management. The Arizona Reconsultation Committee met yesterday to review the impacts to Arizona. The record of decision adopted the lower basin proposal for shared cuts. The record of decision outlines a 10 year framework with two year intervals so the system can react to hydrological adjustments in the system. We are opposed to the record of decision not treating the upper and the lower basin under the same framework. Nevada filed a complaint to federal court yesterday regarding the record of decision. And Arizona has said that all users will share in the negotiated cuts, but has not released any framework of what that looks like. THE ADOPTION OF THE LOWER BASIN PROPOSAL FOR SHORTAGE SHARING AND THE OPERATING GUIDELINES IS VERY BENEFICIAL TO ALL OF ARIZONA, ESPECIALLY BEYOND RIVER COMMUNITIES. THOSE ARE THE COMMUNITIES THAT RELY ENTIRELY ON COLORADO RIVER WATER. AND THE OPERATING GUIDELINES FOR 27-28, WHICH IS THE FIRST TWO-YEAR INTERVAL, PROTECT THE RESIDENTS AND THE ECONOMIES OF OUR ON-RIVER COMMUNITIES. AND WATER RECREATION ON BOTH LIKE HAVASU AND MOJAVI SHOULD NOT BE IMPACTED. And there will be more to come as we work through what all of that looks like. But that's the most recent. The record of decision was again released on Friday. It's available on their website. You can start reading through all of that information. But progress is being made. The complaint filed in federal court by Nevada throws a little bit of uncertainty into what it was. We had a certain situation, depending on what the courts do. But we're moving with that framework for right now. Are there any other Council Committee reports? All right, our future meetings, our next meeting is on Tuesday, September 8th, 2026 at 5.30 p.m. It'll be a regular meeting. And then on Tuesday, September 22nd, 2026 at 5.30 p.m., we will also have a regular meeting. Are there any future discussion items? Item 12, we are adjourned. Thanks for being here. Be kind, and we'll see you next time. Thank you. Yeah, thank you.