City Council - workshop

All right, we are ready to get started. Today is Tuesday, September 8th, 2026. This is the city council's work session. I'm calling this meeting to order and giving notice to members of the city council and the general public that at this work session, the city council may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public for discussion and consultation with the city's attorneys for legal advice on any item listed on the following agenda. Do we have roll call?

Mayor Daggett?

Here.

Vice Mayor Sweet? Here. Council Member Aslan? Here. Council Member Garcia? Here. Council Member House? Present. Council Member Matthews? Here. Council Member Spence?

Here. Council Member Matthews? Please rise if you're able.

The mission of the City of Flagstaff is to protect and enhance the quality of life for all.

The Flagstaff City Council humbly acknowledges the ancestral homelands of this area's indigenous nations and original stewards. These lands, still inhabited by native descendants, border mountain sacred to indigenous peoples. We honor them, their legacy, their traditions, and their continued contributions. We celebrate their past, present, and future generations who will forever know this place as home.

Thank you. Next up is open call to the public which enables the public to address the council about an item that is not on the prepared agenda. Comments related to items that are on the agenda will be taken at the time that the item is discussed. There is a clock right here. You have three minutes and it will tell you when you're getting close. And I'm going to go up. We have two cards. The first is Isabel Rivera.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. And my name is Isabel Rivera. I have lived in Flagstaff since 1951. I am 75 years old. And I came here to address something. I live on Southside, close to NAU. And just recently, we had two power poles ruined at Agassiz Street and Allen. The police have already came and talked to me because I live so close, I can throw a rock as close as that accident happened. And he, the police officer, I should say the chief of police, came to me because I live so close to the accident, he asked me, which was very proper, what I heard or saw. And I'm just addressing this issue that Southside on WC Riles, the street I live on, was, well, we had that accident on two places of the street, on Agassiz and on Allen. And they are investigating that whoever hit those poles did a lot of damage. And he's just awesome. I can't remember his name. But this is, I'm addressing the problems that happen on WC Riles. They speed through there at 45 miles an hour, if not more. I've seen it because I live right there in the corner and my house faces both streets. So the issue is the speeding, the people that are not... obeying the law. I'm not saying I'm perfect because I'm not, but I don't speed through my street. We have NAU kids there. We have little kids there. I'm addressing the fact that we need a speed limit sign there. We need to stop the semi trucks that are delivering to NAU products or Amazon. They speed right there also. So the speed limit, the noise that is right there, it's a lot and NAU just opened its facility or NAU, had a lot of students coming and going and they park, and I'm addressing this because they do this to the whole street. There's an opening and they park there because there's no signs that say no parking. My driveway does have a city sign that says no parking, but we need more than that because the laws are being not respected. And I have neighbors that are awesome. There are NAU students that are graduating. They obey the lines. And my neighbor himself, who is an NAU student, said they're afraid to go into the street because people just zoom by. It's a residential area. And there's other smaller kids, because they belong to parents, that play out there. And people are not obeying the law. They just speed through there like they think they can. They park wherever there's an opening. Okay, I gotta go, but thank you guys. Thank you, everybody.

Thank you. And staff, will you follow up with Ms. Rivera? Sean Golightly, and he has several people here with him. If you would all stand up if your name is on this card. Thank you. And so you have 15 minutes.

Thank you, Mayor. Mayor and Council. Thank you for your time here today. I am here representing these fine folk who just stood behind me. These were all families, residents, longtime residents of the Southside neighborhood. You may recognize us. You may recognize me. I was here last year, November 18th. And I'm here today to give you an update on everything that has transpired since I last addressed council on November 18th. If you recall, on that meeting on November 18th, I spent a lot of time educating council about the ongoing issues with code compliance and lack of consistent enforcement of Flagstaff's noise ordinances on the south side. Particularly, I'm interested in code compliance around the zoning code, the community commercial zoning code, which explicitly states that commercial practices and community commercial zoning must be compliant with residential neighbors. Now, the Southside has had a long-standing issue with that lack of compatibility and with certain commercial practices being able to go beyond that lack of compatibility or violate that compatibility without recourse and without enforcement. That is what I spent a lot of time educating you all on on November 18th. Hopefully you still have those notes. Maybe you still have that packet. And at that meeting, I also asked you all to direct staff to meet with us so that we could continue to work on this issue and find a solution that would work for our longstanding residents, for our families who are raising children in this neighborhood that we love, in this city that we love. And to that point, I owe you all thanks. Because after that meeting, when I came on November 18th, you did that. You directed staff to meet with us. Now, we had asked for a meeting within a month. Staff was able to give us a meeting within a couple months, and we met on January 23rd, 2026. That meeting went extremely well. City Manager Joanne Keene, Police Chief Connolly came to meet us. Several other staff members from Code and Enforcement came to meet with us. We spent a good time talking about the nuances of this issue and investigating what kind of solutions could be put into place that would support our residents, our families, and our businesses to make sure that the Southside is a livable and thriving neighborhood. And the meeting, again, went very, very well. City staff committed to us that they would follow up to meet with us again in a month. They proposed in that meeting a set of solutions that they asked for time to investigate the feasibility for. We as residents also said that many of those solutions were worth looking at and we were excited to continue down this path towards finally getting some solutions in place for a problem that has persisted in this neighborhood for over six years. Publicly discussed, publicly researched, I should say. You are all very well and very educated on this problem. So that meeting on January 23rd went great. City staff, again, they committed to meeting with us, they committed to following up with us, they committed to investigating the feasibility of the solutions that they proposed. When it came time to schedule a follow-up meeting, we requested that we meet again in a month. City staff delayed that. They said we can only meet on March 13th. Now, this was further out than we had hoped for, but in the spirit of collaboration and good faith, we said, yes, we will take March 13th. We will meet with you then. That March 13th meeting was cancelled on short notice. After all of us had arranged childcare, had taken time off of work, had delayed travel plans, done whatever preparations necessary to accommodate that meeting time. It was canceled on short notice and asked to be rescheduled. Again, in the spirit of good faith and collaboration, we said, yes, we will give you more time. We will reschedule. And they rescheduled for April 30th. When it came time to meet on April 30th, that meeting was canceled with short notice. After we had all arranged childcare, all taken time off work, all delayed travel plans, all put time and expense into preparing for this meeting. They asked again to reschedule four months in advance on August 17th. And in the spirit of good faith and collaboration, we said, okay, we'll meet with you on August 17th so that you can have the time you need to work with us on these solutions. That meeting was canceled on short notice after we had all arranged childcare, all taken time off work, all delayed travel plans and vacations and whatnot to prepare for this meeting. Again, it was canceled on short notice. So for the residents of the Southside and for the Southside Community Association, who I'm speaking with, who I'm speaking on behalf today, we've got an issue, right? Because council directed staff to meet with us on this problem and to continue working toward a solution that would support our families, would support our businesses, and really solve this after six years. And council directed staff to meet with us, and staff has since stonewalled us. We're just about out of our spirit of good faith and collaboration. So I'm coming to you today to remind you That this issue, which you have all been exhaustively educated on, this issue which has been publicly discussed for over six years, this issue for which taxpayer dollars have paid a consultant to come in and build recommendations for this city that were ultimately not adopted, this issue persists. And we need leadership. City staff has shown no intention to further work with us. or at least no intention to do so in a manner that we feel we can trust will actually get to some results. Another year has gone by effectively. And furthermore, your direction as leaders of this city and leaders of this community has been effectively ignored. We got one good meeting, we got some lip service, some proposed solutions, and then we got nothing. When I speak about this issue, too, one thing I want to remind you all, and again, I know you all are familiar with this issue. It's been publicly discussed for over six years. But I want to remind you something. In 2021, when this issue was being discussed in council, then-Deputy Police Chief Lazawicki quoted in the Arizona Daily Sun that the situation between some of the bad apples of business that were creating excessive commercial noise and disturbing residents on the south side were truly incompatible with their residential neighbors. That's significant because the zoning code for community commercial zoning explicitly states that this code exists to ensure that commercial practices are compatible with their residential neighbors. And so your deputy police chief assessed that this was truly incompatible. We have told you time and time again that we have issues with this compatibility and issues with consistent enforcement of the city's codes and ordinances. This is not just me making things up. This is not just our neighbors making things up. This is your own staff recognizing this issue. And this is a pattern of inaction on behalf of the city, on behalf of the council, on behalf of law enforcement. And every day that this pattern of inaction persists, predictable and preventable harm is coming upon your residents. It's coming upon us in the form of sleep deprivation. It's coming upon us in the form of financial loss. It's coming upon us in the form of a wedge being driven between our relationships with our neighbors, with the businesses we love and aim to support. And for over six years, a pattern of inaction has made this problem worse and worse and worse and worse. But there's a solution. There's a solution that you are all familiar with. As I mentioned, the city spent taxpayer dollars to research this issue, to have a consultant develop recommendations, to put those recommendations in front of council. But ultimately, none of those recommendations were taken into effect, were put into effect, were accepted. So we have studied this ad nauseum. We have knowledge of what to do. Other cities have figured this out, have put ordinances into effect that work. And yet we seem to just let them all go off in the wind and do nothing so that we can, what, sit in complacency in an action? I'm here today because you need to know that this problem persists. And as long as this council just sits back in a pattern of inaction, this problem will continue to persist. Not only that, this problem will likely get worse. It'll get worse as business and residents encounter more conflict, as businesses and residents encounter more entrenched and emotional views that will make it harder for collaboration and common ground solution making to come together. So your inaction needs to end. If you need to go back and revisit the study from five plus years ago, do it. If you need to find a new study and bring a new consultant to come up with new solutions, do it. If you need to do some research to come up with your own solutions, do it. Do something. Because the longer you sit and the longer you wait and the longer you allow your city staff to just stonewall us, the longer this problem will go on and the worse it will get. Now for the residents and those of us raising families here today, it's nuanced, right? Because sometimes we have the real extreme bad apple commercial practices that make quality of life seriously hard to uphold in the south side. But then sometimes they go out of business and they drift away. What I can tell you is for those of us who experience this within the community commercial zoning or directly adjacent to the community commercial zoning, We live in a pretty near constant fear that at any moment a new business is going to move in and destroy our quality of life in an instant. It's going to move in and make sure that we can't sleep, that our children can't sleep, because they've decided that their business model involves blaring extremely loud music well past reasonable hours. And what we're asking for is not extreme. We are asking merely that people be good neighbors. And the vast majority of businesses on the South Side are. But we need something. We need leadership to make sure that when people come in and decide that they're going to destroy our quality of life in the name of profit, that you or the city are able to step in and do something to protect your families, to protect your residents, to make sure that your codes and your ordinances are upheld consistently. So again, this problem is known. You have all been exhaustively educated on it over the last six years. This problem is not going away. We need action. We need leadership. And time and time again, we have gone to staff. We have gone to you. We have come with our spirits of good faith and collaboration determined to uphold the same mission which you have all vowed to uphold, to enhance and protect the quality of life for all. That's what we're here to do as well. We're here to enhance and protect the quality of life for our families, for our longtime residents, for our businesses which we love and support. But as long as this council and this city remains complacent enough to dwell in inaction as you have been for the past five years, then this problem will get worse and the wedge will be driven deeper. And I'll be back here again and again to speak to it. Now, folks, I know and respect you all and I appreciate your time here. But I'll be honest with you, I do not want to be here. I want to be raising my family. I want to be doing the work that I need to do to support my family. And it just so happens that because of the lack of leadership on this council, that work now involves advocating for my neighbors. It involves advocating for the mission of this city. It involves advocating for my children and their future to make sure that we can live in the neighborhood that we love and have invested in. And all I ask, all we ask, is that this council supports us. in this endeavor and that you do something. As a final point, There was a meeting years ago after the recommendations of the consultant came through about how to adjust this noise ordinance to make it more compatible with the current state of the neighborhood. There was a meeting years and years ago. I don't know if you recall it. It was a mess. There were dozens of public comments. It was a mess. One of those you're all familiar with. But one of the interesting things that came out of that meeting is that both interests that were opposed to doing anything about this issue, and the residents like myself, we all urged. We said, go back to the recommendations of the consultant. Go back to what you paid for and the expert opinions that gave you a framework of how to proceed in an effective way on this issue. Both sides urged that, and yet nobody seemed to hear it because nothing was done. So maybe that's a good starting point. Maybe you can go back for the expert study that was bought and paid for by the taxpayers of this city, and you can start to put in place a solution to this problem that should have been done years ago. And if you start there, maybe I won't have to come back again. I sincerely hope that's the case. not that you are all lovely to talk to. But I much prefer to see you in my neighborhood, to see you over coffee, to see you at the live music I enjoy, to see you at the theater I enjoy. I much prefer to see you as a fellow citizen in the city that I love, that my neighbors love, rather than here as someone begging you to do your job. Thank you.

Thank you. Nope. Thank you. All right, next up we have proclamation for Hispanic Heritage Month. And if you're here for this, would you please join us down at the edge of the dais?

All of those that would like to stand in solidarity with the Hispanic people of Flagstaff, you're more than welcome to come and join us for the proclamation reading. I wanted to thank Mayor Daggett for giving me the privilege to read to you the Hispanic Heritage Month Proclamation, Office of the Mayor of the City of Flagstaff. Whereas National Hispanic Heritage Month, also known as Mes de Herencia Hispana, observed annually from September 15th to October 15th, honors the histories, cultures, and contributions of the Americans with ancestry from Spain, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central and South America. September 15th is significant as the Independence Day for several Latin American countries, including Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua, with Mexico's Independence Day on September 16th and Chile's on September 18th. This month provides opportunity to acknowledge the diversity and the cultural richness of the Hispanic community. The theme of Hispanic Heritage Month is Unidos Somos Mas, together we are more. Promotes inclusivity and unity for building stronger communities and a stronger nation. The Hispanic, Latine, and Latin communities have been integral in the prosperity of Flagstaff. Starting from the 1920s, these communities continue to represent to be represented in Calaveras, Los Chantes, La Plaza Nueva, and La Plaza Vieja, and many other places in Flagstaff. Hispanic communities are represented in city and county leadership, service in education, business, medicine, social service, military service, and veterans organizations, and visible through nonprofit organizations such as Vale Folklorico de Calores and Nuestras Raices. Now, therefore, I, Councilmember Garcia, on behalf of Becky Daggett, Mayor of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona, do hereby proclaim September 15th through October 15th, 2026 as Hispanic Heritage Month.

Okay, all right, we'll just take a short break. Next up, we have Public Works Accreditation Update.

Yeah, good evening, Mayor and Council. Thank you for having us. We'll only be brief, a couple minutes of presentation here this evening. One slide to show you in a moment. Wanted to come to you and just provide a brief update on where we are in our Public Works Accreditation process. As many of you know, for the last two plus years, we've been going through a process to become an accredited agency by our professional organization, the American Public Works Association. So this evening I have with me our accreditation manager Bailey Schotina and the fellow section directors from our division. Bailey will give you an update on what's coming up in October, which will be very interesting, and then I will close out with our new mission and value statements that have recently been created. In this process, we took every possible process, policy, procedure, directive, operational, routing piece of paperwork, Reviewed it, went through it, made improvements, made changes, documented it, and we've gone through a series of chapters with our organization and professional organizations across the country to try to find the best practice for flag staff. So we've learned a lot. We've had a lot of staff, almost everyone in the division engaged in this process, hence the long time frame. But in culmination, we now have a document that is being reviewed. And this review is coming up, which Bailey will tell you about, but we have a document now that is really reflective of every bit of work that this division does for the city of Flagstaff and the residents. It's been some effort, but I will tell you, we've seen great results from this participation. So I'm gonna let Bailey speak to it just for a moment on what will occur in October. And then again, I will share our mission and value statements with you.

Thank you, Scott. Good evening, Mayor and Council. As Scott mentioned, in October, we will have our evaluation team from the American Public Works Association coming on site to our facility. They will be coming. We will give them a brief presentation about our Public Works Division and the city. We'll be giving them a tour of our facility. And then they will sit with us for three days and review all of the documentation we've put together, all of the SOPs, all of our staff have been working very diligently on And we're looking forward to kind of checking that box off on our accreditation, hopefully. And then we do also have some fun experiences. We're going to give them as recommendations to experience Flagstaff while they're here because some of them are from out of state. So we're looking forward to having them here. We're looking forward to them evaluating our information. And we're looking forward to getting this process done. So thank you all very much.

Yeah, thank you, Bailey. And big credit to Bailey. She's been our accreditation manager, which has been a duty assigned to her above and beyond her regular day. And let me assure you, she's thorough. Also recently, the leadership of Public Works went through and they crafted a new direct mission statement for the division. We had a series in different formats and different styles of mission statements across the division, and we felt as a division within the organization, it was very important that we not only reflected on what your mission is to protect and enhance the quality of life for all, but then how do we contribute to the city's greater organization? Credit to the entire leadership team in Public Works. They went through a series of small group workshops and they finally came up with a sentence that I think does reflect their commitment to the community and what they do for essential and core services delivery. We are committed to providing dependable essential services to strengthen and enhance our community for generations to come. So they focused a lot on what they do today, but what they want to do in the future and it's a good nod to that mission. So we are very proud of this mission. I'm proud of the work they've done. But then we took it one step further and then we created a series of values that really espouse the different characteristics and attributes of each team member. So again, these were all done through the work crews and through the supervisors in this vetting process. But they want to make sure that the community understands the values that we perform all responsibilities with integrity, foster strong collaboration for the success of all, provide the highest level of service, ensure accountabilities of actions and commitments, and committed to safety. So you can find those five key adjectives and those are now part of our branding. You will see this posted to our website tomorrow. We will now start to move into this imagery and into this language as it's now very, very reflective, we believe, of the division and the work we do. So that's all I have. No necessarily action to take, just wanted to make sure you were informed and we wanted to get to the update about October. But thank you for your support through this process and we'll continue to do what we do.

Thank you. Any comments or questions, Council? Council Member House? Did you?

Thank you very much, Scott and team, for the quick presentation. I just wanted to, can you pull back up the mission and values? I can. Sorry.

No, no, you're good. You caught me just as I deleted it. But watch this, I have skills. They're just slower than most. or some. Paul taught me this new trick about F11. Watch this. There we go. Thanks, Paul.

So first of all, I love the mission. Thank you. Definitely love the values that you have so far. I'm wondering about the addition of Something in the ensure accountability of actions and commitments to also speak to, I know you have collaboration shortly above that, but just the, I don't know if the word I'm thinking of is transparency or just the community engagement that goes into some of the decisions that come from teams. I know we over the past couple of years have had some of the conversations about some of the decisions that were made that kind of surprised the community or even in a couple cases surprised us where we heard about something that had been updated from the community rather than coming directly from the team first. I always really appreciate the level of effort that you all have put into that transparency and that community engagement over the past several years, and just would recommend maybe something within the values that states that ongoing commitment.

Yeah, thank you for your comments. Yeah, we'll take that into consideration. Thank you.

Council Member Aspinall.

Thank you very much. It's great to see this. Just one additional comment in the context of the conversations we've all already had around this. I know I've been advocating for a generational mindset as part of our value system and what we're visioning towards and trying to achieve. So I would recommend a small little tweak to the mission statement that sort of enhances and reinforces that a little bit better in my mind, which is to strengthen and enhance our community for this and future generations. So it's not about longevity. It's about who we're serving now, and we're thinking about who's coming. All right, thanks.

Thank you. I'll wait until you take this down, and then we'll have another question for you.

I got a path now. I'm good.

Thank you, Scott.

No, thank you all.

Next step, number seven, we have the code presentation and adoption update.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. I'm Amy Tressler. I am the building official here with Planning and Development Services. So today, our team will highlight the significant changes in the proposed 2024 suite of building and fire codes and seek your feedback and direction. So we have a lot of material to cover. So I would like to focus this afternoon on the most significant changes, local amendments, cost considerations, and the path forward for adoption. Codes are updated to incorporate lessons learned, new technologies, and improvements in safety and building performance. Staying reasonably current helps ensure the buildings we approve today are designed to meet current standards. Flagstaff currently operates under the 2018 codes. Moving to the 2024 codes maintains our established six year code adoption cycle while allowing us to use local amendments where appropriate for Flagstaff. Flagstaff's freeze, excuse me, snow and freeze thaws cycles, cold temperatures and elevation create conditions very different to much of Arizona. The model codes give us the foundation and local amendments allow us to address those unique conditions. At their core, building codes are minimum standards intended to protect three primary things, life safety, public health, and property. They are minimum requirements and not maximum design standards. So this brings us to the actual 2024 code package that we are proposing. So as you can see, we're proposing a coordinated suite of building and fire codes covering building, residential, mechanical, plumbing, energy, fire, wildland urban interface, electrical, and other associated disciplines. These codes are designed to work together and frequently reference one another. Adopting the same code cycle reduces conflicts and provides greater consistency for applicants, designers, contractors, and city staff. We've conducted extensive research and outreach with our board, commissions, industry stakeholders, and the community. We've also worked closely with Coconino County to align requirements where practical. The city and county will not be identical, but regional consistency is an important consideration throughout our review. Additional energy code engagement was conducted following council's direction back in January, which sustainability we'll discuss later. The reoccurring themes were affordability, energy requirements, snow loads, radon, wildfire requirements, and regional consistency. That feedback helped shape many of the local amendments that you'll see today. Model codes were written for nationwide use. Our local amendments allow us to address Flagstaff specific conditions and preserve practical construction methods while balancing safety, durability, energy efficiency, affordability, and constructability. These are a few of our significant building safety amendments, including the snow load increase, a limited residential temporary certificate of occupancy option, and a three-year maximum permit timeframe, and updated plumbing efficiency requirements. These amendments focus on areas where we identified that there was a clear local need. And now I will turn it over to Tamara to briefly cover the... Oh, hi, you're here. Okay, go ahead.

Afternoon, Mayor and Council. Tamara Lawless, Water Conservation Program Manager. Just really briefly gonna cover the recommendations we have for plumbing efficiency. So we are recommending some improvements in efficiency and performance ratings. So the two higher efficiencies that we're recommending are for shower heads and bathroom faucets. So not kitchen faucets, bathroom faucets. We did do a survey of locally available fixtures. So our staff went to 10 stores to see what's on the shelves and found that the majority of the fixtures on shelves already comply with these requirements that we're suggesting. So bathroom faucets, we're looking at a recommendation to go from 2.2 gallons a minute down to 1.5, and showerheads from 2.5 gallons per minute down to 1.8, and both WaterSense certified. And then toilet efficiency, we're recommending to stay the same. Flagstaff has had an amendment making our toilets more efficient for close to 20 years. but we are adding some performance rating requirements. We're adding that they need to be EPA WaterSense certified, and also the MAP testing score has to be 600 grams per flush to ensure that when people are installing these toilets that they get good performance. There are over 2,000 options that meet those criteria, and none of these fixtures are more expensive than what would otherwise be on the market, so it should not be... any more expensive to build in this manner. And both of all these recommendations are in line with our 2020 water conservation strategic plan. These codes were outlined then, and we committed to eventually upgrading to these at that time, which council agreed to. Thank you.

All right, so most building safety changes have little or no measurable construction cost impact. Even the snow load increase is expected to have minimal impact for most projects using engineered truss systems. The more significant energy code costs and savings are addressed in the next section. And with that, I'll turn it over to Genevieve.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Genevieve Pearthree with the Flagstaff Sustainability Division. So I'm here to talk about the energy code and proposed energy code updates and updates to mitigate radon. And together these codes are proposed to be updated to make new homes more affordable, safer, use less energy, and support long-term affordability. All right. Okay, so the intent is to provide council with an overview of the proposed code adoption, the key amendments, stakeholder feedback received and the rationale behind staff's recommendations. I will keep this fairly high level just because they did present on it in detail back in January. There's an addendum with more information and we've had a lot of discussions on these. But I will say that this proposed approach is based on extensive stakeholder outreach, advisory board review, public engagement and staff analysis since January. Okay, so strong energy codes help set a baseline for buildings that use less energy, are more comfortable, safer, and can be more affordable. So basically they support approved energy efficiency, which allows building occupants to achieve the same level of comfort using less energy, thereby ideally reducing monthly utility costs. Utility costs are expected to continue to rise, and a more energy efficient home helps partially insulate residents from future utility cost increases. It also reduces strain on the electrical grid, and it can improve safety. So energy efficient homes stay comfortable longer in extreme weather, especially as the power goes out. And again, this is one of the most effective and impactful ways to address Flagstaff's climate commitments for the built environment because they impact all new construction. And they can benefit, these energy efficiency features can benefit everyone who lives in a home, whether they're the first resident or the 20th. Okay. So this slide just shows basically what the energy code regulates. It's a technical code that regulates how a building uses energy. Again, it sets minimum energy efficiency standards for new construction. There's a residential and commercial code. I will talk about those later on. And this slide just provides an example of some of the things that are regulated. Okay, the energy code primarily applies to new construction. It only applies to existing buildings if they do an addition or undergo a major alteration. So for example, in 2025 for residential, there were approximately 500 new homes. So the energy code in place applied to those and it wouldn't apply to any existing buildings unless they did an addition or a major alteration. However, the impact of a stronger energy code will grow over time as more new buildings are built. So Flagstaff is not alone. A lot of cities have adopted the energy code in Arizona as well as outside. And it is an improvement over the 2018 codes. So Amy mentioned previously, the codes are updated every three years. They intend to improve upon past codes. And the 12 cities in Arizona that have already adopted it, they cover over half of Arizona's population. And there's a lot of states as well. Energy code. Okay, the recommended path forward. I'm gonna talk about that and how we got there. Okay, so since I presented to you in January on this topic, we've done quite a bit of public engagement. We've presented to many groups and reached out to local, regional, and national experts, and I do wanna thank the folks who gave, dedicated their time to this process, so did 16 presentations, some as part of that larger building code engagement, but also some specific to the energy code, as well as reached out to a lot of different folks in the areas of expertise that you see here. And based on their feedback, staff's proposed approach is to go with option two. So if you remember back in January, I presented options one through four. Council, the direction was kind of options two through four approximately. So based on feedback, we're proposing to go with option two now and consider options three and four at a later date. We feel that stronger efficiency requirements in options three and four are best considered in conjunction with other code changes. So you heard about the last cap code analysis project back in June, potential for code updates coming out of that. So want to explore those additional energy efficiency increases as part of that. And that's really based on community feedback on the need to balance potential construction cost impacts with the benefits of energy efficiency. And I will say the strongest support for updating energy code was if we make other code changes that reduce development costs in other places. Okay, so energy code option two, very similar to what I presented back in January, basically includes some local amendments to the code as well as some appendices. So just to clarify, amendments are basically changes to the language of the code, whereas appendices are additional code sections that we can adopt. And again, compared to Flagstaff's current code, homes built to the 2024 code are estimated to use less energy, save on utility costs, and produce fewer emissions. On the second part of this, the staff are also proposing to adopt radon mitigation requirements for new construction. I'll talk about that as well. So this graphic, which I did share back in January, it basically shows how we can get to net zero new construction, which is an adopted policy goal in the city's carbon neutrality plan. It shows how the different options can get us there. You'll see option two represents a stepwise approach from where we are now in terms of getting down in the graph which gets us to net zero ready construction. Okay, so staff are proposing to adopt option two because it's estimated to reduce energy cost savings by approximately 13% for residential construction and they can be substantial over time and they can accrue to everyone who lives in that home. So staff are proposing four key amendments as part of this adoption package. The first one, allowing apartment buildings greater than three stories to use a residential code. I did bring that up in January. That's intended to save quite a bit on construction, design, and operation costs for those larger apartment buildings. There are some other requirements or other amendments intended to reduce costs. They are reducing minimum insulation standard. It's still a little bit higher than what we have now, but less than what is proposed in the code. And deleting requirements for automatic light switches. And those are really just intended to reduce construction costs. The fourth one is adding efficiency standards for gas furnaces and heat pumps. It does not require a specific heating source, like a furnace or a heat pump, but if they are installed in new construction, they just have to meet minimum efficiency standards. Staff are also proposing to adopt three readiness appendices, some of which we already have in our current code, and I'll talk about those in the next slides. So the next one is the commercial energy code. So again, it also reduces energy costs over our current code. It's estimated to reduce them by 20%. The proposed amendments and readiness appendices are pretty similar to the residential code, just a few key changes, which I'll highlight here. One of them, there's a requirement for automatic outlets in the commercial energy code. We're proposing to delete that just because it adds costs and doesn't have a lot of benefits. And then we're proposing to add a readiness appendices for demand responsive control. So it's basically smart thermostats. And that appendix doesn't exist in the residential code. That's why it's in commercial. Okay, moving on to the appendices. So the first one is electric ready. So really the idea is it's intended to provide more choice for everyone throughout the life of a building. Again, it doesn't require one energy source over another. It just makes it easier for people to choose the appliances that work best for them in the future. For residential, it's intended to avoid thousands in costly and difficult retrofits by putting outlets close to appliances at construction, For commercial it includes that as well as making sure that there's a building could accommodate future electric space and water heating and that that would be feasible. The next one is solar ready. So this is almost exactly the same as what we already have in Flagstaff's code. So again the intention is to avoid thousands of costly difficult retrofits. Basically just make sure that there's room on the roof to support solar panels as well as in the electrical panel. It does not require the installation of solar. It just makes it so Whether the first resident or the fifth want to install solar panels, they can easily do that without having to move things on their roof to accommodate solar panels. The next one is EV charging. Basically, the intent is to increase access to EVs for Flagstaff's residents and visitors. Really, it makes it easier for multifamily residents to charge at home. We already have requirements in our code that make it easier to charge at home for single family residents, but it's often harder for multifamily. When the energy code was last updated in 2019, there were a lot fewer EVs on the road than there are now. ADOT anticipates there will be more than one million EVs in Arizona by 2030. So basically this is intended to kind of help increase the access to EV charging for Flagstaff folks. So really it requires a minimum amount of EV spaces for different construction types, but most of those, it's conduit. It's not actually full EV chargers. It's just the the infrastructure underneath the parking lot that can support future EV charging. The last readiness appendix that I'll talk about is demand responsive controls. And again, that's just the commercial code. The intent is you have a smart thermostat in water and space heating that can receive a demand response signal that will basically lower energy use during peak hours. And APS has a program people can sign up for air conditioning that lowers their utility bills. that people can opt into, but does not require anyone opting into. It just provides the infrastructure for them to opt in if they would like. Okay, the next one is radon mitigation. So this is actually not in the energy code. It's in the international residential code and the mechanical code. But I'm talking about it because there are some research that shows that more airtight energy efficient buildings can provide fewer pathways for radon to escape. So if it is a problem in the area, then it's good to mitigate that. Just as a refresher, radon is the leading cause of lung cancer among non-smokers in the US. It's a colorless, odorless gas created from the breakdown of uranium in soil and can seep into homes if they don't have radon mitigation measures installed. We do know that radon is present in Flagstaff based on state and local data that indicate that many homes in Flagstaff test above the EPA recommended level and some test much higher. And even for those that aren't above the EPA level, basically based on the data, I was able to find quite a few homes do have at least some radon in them. And so installing radon mitigation at construction is the least costly and ideally most effective way to mitigate radon. It's also a lot more, yeah, a lot less costly than active mitigation, which is a fan installed after construction. So we're recommending including radon mitigation as part of new construction. Okay, moving on to estimated cost impacts. So the average cost of energy efficiency features is approximately 1 to 2% of the average sales price of a new single family home in a new condo. So this slide shows the breakdown of different things that go into this final sales price of a new single family home. It's from the National Association of Home Builders. Construction costs have the biggest impact, but there are other things that impact costs as well. And energy efficiency features are one of many design decisions that go into the construction costs and the final cost of the home, unlike those many other design decisions that they can lower operational costs over time. So in summary, updating the energy code does have upfront costs, but is a way to invest in Flagstaff's future. Okay, so this is estimates on how much these codes different pieces of the energy code will impact construction costs. And so it's for Flagstaff's climate zone, for the base code, as well as for the three appendices that I mentioned. The estimates are a compilation of local and national data sources from the National Association of Home Builders, the Department of Energy, as well as some local builders and contractors. So they show the range and the average costs. I know there is quite a large range on some of these numbers. That's just what basically pulling together the data and what they've said. I will add that the solar ready and EV charging appendix are basically the same for single family. So any cost associated with that should be minimal. The next one is multifamily. So similar to the previous slide, it shows the range and average upfront costs for different features of the energy code. And again, the solar ready appendix is already in Flagstaff's code. EV charging, the proposed appendix does have more EV charging infrastructure than current code. we'll likely add some costs there. But again, we'll provide more access to EV charging. And then finally for radon, so I mentioned previously passive radon mitigation is quite a bit less costly than active. So just trying to show the total costs there, active versus passive as well as testing. And again, hopefully most homes won't need that active mitigation. So hopefully most homes will avoid that cost at the bottom of the slide. All right, and just a summary, I've kind of mentioned these things, but just to highlight a couple of things. So the buildings that we build today will last for future generations and impact many families beyond the first buyer or renter. We have a lot of Flagstaff neighborhoods with homes that are over 50 years old and that new well-built buildings are an investment in the future of our community. And we know the Flagstaff's climate will look different in 50 years as well. So the building code really helps us prepare for the future. I mentioned this previously, but compared to Flagstaff's current energy code, the 2024 code is estimated to improve energy efficiency and reduce energy costs in both residential and commercial buildings. Energy code also promotes safer, healthier, more comfortable homes, so it helps protect residents from wildfire smoke, for example, as well as during extreme weather and power outages, because these homes do tend to stay comfortable longer when the power goes out. And then lastly, the energy code is the most effective way to meet Flagstaff's climate commitment. So this graph shows how Flagstaff can reduce our emissions, and it shows that buildings are critical to meeting Flagstaff's climate goals because they produce more than half of Flagstaff's emissions. And I'll leave in closing the quote from the Southwest Energy Efficiency Partnership that just highlights the benefits of updating energy codes and building buildings today that will meet the needs of residents today and in the future. So thank you. I'll pass it on to Neil Chapman in the fire department. Thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone. Okay. On January 13th of last year, in response to the Palisades and Eaton fires in Los Angeles, I offered City Council this observation. What we learn will inevitably invite calls for action filtered through the stark lens of hindsight. Recently, Noah Baker and I had the opportunity to ask Los Angeles County Fire Chief Anthony Maroney what he would do differently with the benefit of hindsight. His answer was striking. If he could go back in time one year, he would focus on response planning, but if he could go back in time two years, he would focus on defensible space and home hardening. What we are presenting today is our attempt to apply that same lesson to Flagstaff, not after the next disaster, but before it. I'd also like to recognize Flagstaff has faced this challenge before. In 1884, a devastating fire destroyed much of Old Town, contributing the shift towards what became New Town in the center of modern Flagstaff. In 1893, the tourist hotel burned. The community responded by rebuilding with non-combustible materials, creating the sandstone and volcanic rock buildings that remain part of Flagstaff's historic character today. So, why consider these Bowie changes now? We have firsthand observations from Flagstaff and other communities of what happens when combustible structures meet fast moving wildfire. We have increasingly strong science and research, including work from the National Institute for Standards and Technology, showing how structures ignite and how fire spreads through communities. Fire and economic experts are warning of the consequences of inaction, greater risk to residents, visitors, and first responders, rising insurance costs, and potentially broader impacts on local and municipal finances. And we can pursue non-combustible construction while supporting the regional plan goals for more compact, high density housing. The question is not whether we will learn from wildfire, the question is whether we will learn before or after the next one. We have been presenting the benefits of comprehensive community risk reduction investment for many years to you. Every year we catch undesirable wildfires due to forest restoration and effective response. This effort is about balancing our investment in the built environment. For many years, we've been investing, like I said, across our forests and our wildland areas. Those investments are working. Year after year, forest restoration and effective response helps us keep undesirable wildfires from becoming more catastrophic. But our risk reduction strategy cannot stop at the forest edge. We also need to address the built environment. Fire and building codes are designed to prevent wildfires where possible, protect occupants when fires occur, support effective emergency response, and reduce the likelihood that one structure ignites another. Modern codes can also contribute to a stronger ISO rating, supporting broader community risk reduction. And most importantly, resilient communities recover faster. When fewer homes and buildings are destroyed, fewer people are displaced, fewer businesses are interrupted, and the community can recover more quickly. So you guys have seen this slide from us before talking about the fire pathways that we focus on. So we've really got three here, but we're gonna talk about two today, the vegetation to structure and the structure to structure fire pathways. This is the critical opportunity for us in Flagstaff. In higher density neighborhoods, structure to structure fire spread can become a dominant pathway and reducing combustibility at the building scale creates a community wide buffer, helping prevent one structure from becoming fuel for the next. And so our intent here is to align with the best available science. We know there's three main ways that fire and heat transfer from the vegetation to the structure or structure to structure. Embers, radiant heat, and direct flame. And we can work to mitigate all of these through our WUI code. We can work to de-conflict our codes that cross fire codes, zoning, planning processes. You've heard some of this through our resource protection overlay process and our landscaping guidelines that are part of the last cap process. So we're really working hard to make sure that our information is consistent across all of these codes. We also have the opportunity to align with best practices, including the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety's Wildfire Prepared Home Standard. And we really want to give homeowners, builders, and developers clear standards that make resilient construction easier to achieve. We want to make the safer choice the easier choice. So a small upfront investment is what we're talking about here today, requiring non-combustible materials does not drastically increase the cost of construction. Our analysis indicates that non-combustible construction typically adds about one to 2% to total construction costs. That upfront investment can produce benefits over the life of the building. Lower long-term risk, potentially longer material warranties, avoiding costs, Can't even begin to imagine what the cost is when you lose a home to a wildfire That's not something we can just throw a number out there. That's that's a life-altering event In potential insurance benefits and some markets insurers are beginning to recognize community and property level wildfire mitigation The question is not simply what does wildfire resilience cost the question is what does it cost not to build resiliently I? We're also seeing some recent news out of New Mexico that was very welcomed that the IBHS wildfire prepared home program has been eligible for New Mexico residents for well over a year. They've got a lot more people rolling into that system. It's only been in Arizona a few months. We haven't seen this happening in Arizona just yet, but the office of the superintendent of insurance from New Mexico reports 15 to 18% premium discounts for people who are achieving that wildfire prepared home designation. So cost impacts. The big one here is exterior wall siding potentially has a significant cost increase. But it's inconsistent in a cost increase. We have builders in Flagstaff building with this material today. So the idea that there is a, a learning curve in using this material is quite variable. Some builders have great experience doing it, some don't. It is a little more complicated to work with, but just last month we built out a package on Home Depot's website using the non-combustible siding was $3,534. Using the ignition resistance siding, which is the lower standard siding, cost $1,100 more. So the lower quality material that comes with a five-year warranty costs $1,100 more than the noncombustible material that comes with a 30-year warranty. So these costs that we have on here, I'm not trying to hide anything. I want to make sure we do recognize that there are times where this material may cost more, and there may be builders that are less familiar with it that will have a learning curve in how to use it. But the increasing availability and frequency of use for noncombustible siding is out there. Eaves and soffits, this is another thing. Boxing in those eaves is really important to make sure those embers don't get into your attic. And of course, boxing those in with the non-combustible material is important. Gutter covers, we already require that gutters are made out of non-combustible metal material. This would require a cover, so all that debris and mess that ends up in your gutters that you have to clean out every once in a while doesn't even happen. We're looking at about a $500 cost. And then the zero to five foot non-combustible zone. This is a really important one. In these ember washes, we've seen those videos, millions of embers blowing through the air. They hit the side of the house. What do they land on? Historically, we had codes and landscaping recommendations that said they were going to land on a juniper bush, which is a horrible thing for embers to be landing on. We're getting rid of all those. We want those embers to land on bare ground. We want them to land on stone. We don't want those embers to land on combustible material. That also would include a fence. So if you have a fence coming up to your house, that five feet of fencing should be non-combustible. Windows, we're not seeing a major change. Our current code requires very similar things to what we're working with with this proposal. Roof assemblies, doors, the gutters, vents, no major changes. Decks, this would be a major change. Requiring non-combustible decks would be increasing costs. Decks are not a requirement of a single family home construction or pretty much any construction method. It is an optional design. There are ways to enjoy being outdoors that don't include building a giant combustible feature on the side of your home that increases risk to you and your neighbors. Whether it's patios or stone work, whether it's building that concrete pad when the home is being built, there's lots of ways we can design our outdoor experiences without combustible decking. So in closing, We have the science, we have the experience, we have the building materials, and we have the opportunity to act before the next catastrophic fire forces us to ask what Chief Maroney told us. What should we have done differently?

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Chris Jack, your Staff Fire Marshal. So I'm going to go over the fire code. One thing that is different with the fire code compared to the others, the state fire marshal's office, state of Arizona, they adopt the fire code as well. So we're kind of limited in what we can do with the code as far as what they do. They adopt the code as it's written, so we can never go down in requirements. That would be breaking the state minimum. So I'm going over the big changes for the 24 code. Lithium ion battery and energy storage, those are the biggest changes, additions to the code. And that's the main theme of the 24 code, just all that new technology that came out. Next one, 3D printing, that's fairly new as well. So that's a common theme that you'll see with the code. New technology comes out, new risks. Those need to be added into the code at some point. So this is when we're updating to that point. emergency responder radio systems some new additions to that and then below that just some Some different changes, upholstered furniture and mattress storage, realization that more sprinkler coverage is needed for that. So just different changes along those, hazardous materials, electric vehicle infrastructure coordination, hazardous materials provisions, and expanding carbon dioxide detection. It used to be only sleeping areas, now expanded to more areas. Next, hitting on the amendments. A lot of the amendments from the 2018 version we carried forward. Some of those we actually removed because they're now part of the code and we didn't need them anymore. New for 24, we added two big sections. Electric vehicles, adding Areas in a parking garage that makes it better if you put the electric vehicle chargers in the middle and there is a fire it makes it really difficult for firefighters to get in there and address it. So put them in at the outside perimeter or the roof even is the best. Next is a disconnect and having signage. There's a lot of code previously did not provide a disconnect for electric vehicle chargers. So we respond to a fire with an electric vehicle that's being charged. We got to just watch it. Um, 480 volts in those chargers and firefighters shouldn't be playing with it and getting hurt. Uh, next is emergency responder radio systems. The code required that you met a standard at the end of construction, but it gave no direction on how to get there. Um, This would create certain building criteria that would require just adding conduit and junction boxes so you're ready. That way you don't build the building, have it tested, and then realize that you have to add a system after the fact. Be a minor cost just adding it during construction, conduit and some junction boxes. And that is all I got.

All right. Well, this brings us to the brief summary of the overall proposal, the costs and the next steps. So bringing all of these codes together, the overall goal is safer, more resilient buildings using current construction standards. Updating the codes also improves our preparedness for disasters and can positively influence the city's ISO rating and ISO stands for insurance service office rating, which ultimately can benefit the property owners. So Flagstaff is not alone in moving to the 2024 ICC codes. However, adoption of the 2024 wildland urban interface code is much less common in Arizona. Pima County is one jurisdiction that we did identify that has adopted the WUI. And given Flagstaff's wildfire exposure, we're proposing to include that as a part of our 2024 code package. So this summarizes the estimated additional construction costs across the proposed codes. And as you will recall from Genevieve's and Neil's discussion, it seems that the average estimated overall cost is likely to be less than 4% for overall. And this comes from the city's last cap study presented to council in June. The important takeaway is that other recommended development code changes have the potential to produce housing cost savings that could more than offset the estimated additional costs associated with this code adoption. staff is beginning to work on those recommendations. Tonight, we are asking for council's feedback and direction on the proposed 2024 codes and local amendments. Based on that direction, we'll make any necessary revisions and return September 15th for the first reading, with a second reading anticipated on October 6th, and hopefully implementation targeted for early November. And that concludes our presentation. We're happy to answer any questions Council may have.

Thank you. Council Member Matthews.

Thank you, Mayor. I have a few questions and then later I'll have some comments. But just right now, some clarifying questions. When we started the presentation, We talked about stakeholder engagement, but when I looked at some minutes to meetings and talked to some of the stakeholders, I understand it to be more of just information presentation and there wasn't really an engaged feedback conversation, although there was some feedback mentioned here, but I just wanted to... to say that out loud because I think that it's important if we're going to engage stakeholders that we have a good, robust conversation back and forth, and I don't think some of our commissions had that. I did want to clarify on, I think it was page 20, when we talked about the energy codes were only new construction, but, comma, It also included additions major alterations and changes of occupancy So I'm assuming that means if I remodeled my house, right?

Not just do some maintenance and repairs like exchange out a window or something Yeah, so basically there's specific criteria in the energy code for when it applies so if you did a I think it depends on the extent of the remodel, to be honest. It's really a major alteration. If you're going, as you mentioned, change of occupancy, if you're going from an unconditioned space, like a garage to a conditioned space, then it would apply. And if you're doing addition. So I guess it depends on the extent of your remodel, but it's really only intended if it's like a really huge. So if you're remodeling your kitchen or something and not doing anything else, it shouldn't apply. But adding, like adding a room or just- An addition.

So it's not just new construction, it's- A major remodel, we could say. Thank you. Don't sit down, Genevieve. Because I think you'll have answers to these questions. And so just to tie into that, so when we're working on adaptive reuse projects, it will definitely impact those, correct?

Can I pull up the code? Can we come back to this question and I can pull it up and answer that for you just to be really clear because I want to make sure I give you the correct answer.

Okay. And then I'll go. I had a question. It was on page 27 and maybe I misread it. It said that there was a recommendation to reduce the minimum insulation standard.

Yeah.

That seems like counter to what we would want to do. So could you just explain that methodology?

I will start and I will let Amy jump in as well. Yeah, so basically it is an improvement over our current code, but it is not as much as what the code would require without that amendment. And the reason it's for buildings that take the prescriptive path is what it's called. So basically there's three ways of complying with the energy code. The prescriptive path is the one where you have to follow very specific requirements. Yeah, basically just much more prescriptive, I guess. There's other ones where it's performance and energy rating, where you look at the whole building. So there's a lot more give and take, like a designer can decide. Maybe they give a little here, take a little bit here. But the prescriptive path is very just you kind of follow this list. And the idea is because the installation standards were quite a bit higher in the new code than the current code, that they would add a lot of construction costs. And so this would only impact the buildings that did the prescriptive path, and it's an improvement over our current code, but it's trying to find that balance between construction costs and energy efficiency. Amy, do you want to add anything to that?

No, I think you covered it.

Okay.

Okay, and then... I vaguely remember that conversation we had in January about allowing apartment buildings less than three stories or up to three stories to follow the RC code. What about like home ownership, condos, duplexes, triplexes? Do we have any, you know, a major... development that has multiple units, it could far exceed that, right? Not far exceed it, but.

Yeah, so basically anything three stories or under would be built to the residential energy code. Anything taller than three stories would have to comply with the commercial code, even if it's a residential building. So say you have a five-story apartment complex. That would, without this amendment, be required to comply with the commercial code. And the rationale behind this amendment is that The residential energy code standard is a little bit lower than the commercial. It's still higher than our current code, but it's a little bit lower. And it has lower standards for design and building operations, basically. And so the idea is that this amendment will save those large apartment complexes, ideally quite a bit. I don't have a number there for you, but a lot of cities in the Valley, as well as Tucson, adopted this amendment. And the idea is really to just we'll get increased energy efficiency for those larger residential buildings over our current code, but also find places where we can save costs as well.

Thank you. And then this question was for Neil. Neil, you talked about some of our developers up here are already using the recommended siting. Do you have any idea, like half of them, some of them, Can you give me a guesstimate?

I don't have any statistically significant ability to answer that.

Do you know, you mentioned that it'd be a quick learning curve or something, so it it takes a little bit different talent to install those?

The common non-combustible siding, it's almost more like a cement product versus kind of like a plastic product. So when you're cutting it, you have to use a little different blade and you have to be more careful. When you're attaching it to the structure, it requires drilling a little more careful. If you put the screw in too far, it can crack. You've got to hold it just right. So there is a bit of a learning curve to using some of these other materials.

Thank you. And then I'll save the others for later because they're all comments. So thank you, Neil.

Okay, thank you.

Council Member House.

Thank you, Mayor. Don't go away, Neil. Since you're right there, I'll start with my first question would be for you. So you talked about the insurance savings as we've seen them apply in, I think it was New Mexico. Have we seen... I'm reframing this based off of what you said. So you said that we've only adopted those standards over the past couple of months?

Correct. I believe April or May is when the press release came out that the wildfire prepared home qualification was now eligible in the state of Arizona.

So are there additional steps that we would need to take at the city level to make sure that property owners can actually receive those insurance benefits?

That really was our intent with some of the recommendations within the code proposal is that the construction method If adopted with the amendments we put in there, then every new home would meet the wildfire prepared home plus standard. So they have a base and a plus. Base is designed to reduce your risk of embers. Plus is to reduce your risk of all three of those. So the embers, direct flame, and radiant heat. And that's... That was a challenge, because early on we said, well, maybe some areas should be base and some should be plus. But then it just started to become kind of this meaningless exercise in decision making, where we just kept going back to why wouldn't we want plus everywhere? And the reality is, if you're up against the forest, you should be plus. If you're in a high density neighborhood, you should be plus. There's very few areas where embers only are your threat, and so there's still things a homeowner has on the table that would allow them to not comply with this designation. There's some things about where you would put ADUs, where you would put a hot tub, where you would park a camper on a red flag day. So some of those things that are a little more prescriptive within the wildfire prepared home designation, we're not putting into code. That would be up to the homeowner to maintain those sort of things. But the big ones, the zone zero, the eaves, the roofs, the siding, all those things will be there and then the homeowners are set up for success if they want to continue it.

Great, thank you very much. I think my next questions are for Genevieve or Amy. So I'm wondering about the cumulative costs that were shown for multifamily per unit I think was around 10,000, nearly 20,000 for a 2,000 square foot home, nearly 1,500 for, or 15,000 for a duplex. I'm wondering what portions of those are Is that based on kind of worst case scenario or are there some of those fees that would be seen as unavoidable or do we have an idea of what kind of the mid-range of actual impact might be?

I can speak for the energy code. So this is the average of the data. So it could be less, it could be more. And so this is just the average. I will say for the radon, That includes the installation of a fan, which ideally won't need to be installed very often. So it might be about $22,000 or so less than that, but just kind of as a worst case scenario, at least in that cost category. But yeah, this is the averages, at least for energy codes. So could be less, could be more.

OK. Thank you. Next question is just looking at the the overall impacts of some of these costs. I'm wondering if we've looked at what the impact might be on developments that are technically kind of financially marginal. So like affordable housing, workforce housing, small infill projects, local smaller builders. Is it gonna be a similar impact or is it anticipated to be lesser?

You know, there was a lot of variation in the cost estimate, so I don't know exactly. I will say, you know, we talked about the prescriptive path and reducing the installation requirements. I think those tend to be owner builders who take the prescriptive path more or sometimes, yeah.

Usually those are non-licensed design professionals that use the prescriptive path just because it's a little bit easier than running a performance calculation and massaging the numbers to maybe get less insulation but more window fenestration or U-factors for your window or heavier insulation. There's so many different ways to achieve the base energy code requirements.

All right. Thank you both. And last question. I'm wondering what because we seem very well along the path to implementing it at some level. So I'm wondering what implementation looks like to align these recommendations or adoptions with the streamlined development of projects or things that are already in the pipeline. So in other words, how do we ensure that these adopted changes don't become a roadblock or create confusion? Or are there gonna be some projects that are kind of grandfathered in?

So what we have built into the amendment is the actual implementation date of January 1st. So we have been actively on all of our emails reaching out to contractors and design professionals over the last year, specifying that we were looking to have this adoption done sometime in September or October. So we have let the community know well in advance that this is what we were working towards. But how this works is 30 days after the second read, after it's approved. then it would be implemented. So at that point, from that day on, you could submit under the 2024 code or the 2018 code up until January 1st. And January 1st, you have to submit under the 2024 codes. So we are giving that little bit of leeway. We've been talking with large-scale developers in the process who have yet to submit for a building permit to make sure that they're either going to make that timeline or be able to design under the 2024 code. So we've been really trying to get that out so then we don't encounter people that are designing under a code that we no longer have.

Thank you for that. I know some of these are really kind of tricky or tough questions, but I appreciate you answering these all so well. My only follow-up on that point is just wondering what sort of, I don't want to say training, but like support is going to be made available for developers who are looking at how this maybe will change their plans or what they're proposing.

Well, I believe Genevieve has some funding or sustainability has some funding, right, to be able to perform some training for the energy code. And that I would, we would be hosting. We would bring in an instructor who would do that for our local design community, our contractors, as well as our internal staff. And our internal staff has been taking 2024 code classes for the last two years. So we have internally, we're in a good place to where we know what is coming and we know how to apply it. It's just making sure that our design community is on the same page. But yes, we do have a plan for the training.

Wonderful. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor.

Vice Mayor. Thank you, and thank you for this information. I'm glad we're having the conversation. Ms. House asked one of my questions, so I'll knock that off my list, but Pardon? Council Member Rouse. Sorry. My first question in regards to residential construction, are there any new requirements that you can see that will significantly affect smaller lots or infill development?

No. Nothing has changed really in the 2024 code that would actually impact that small home versus large home. It's from a vertical construction standpoint, we look at it the same way.

Okay, thank you. I received an email from someone in the community that had read the presentation and was talking about some gutter work that they had recently had completed and they were saying that the covered gutters were a lot more than the $500 and I just wanted to ask how you came up with your figures and maybe expand on that a little bit.

Sure, thank you. Backing up real quick, impact on smaller lots, moving to non-combustible I think has a great impact on smaller lots. Structure separation distance is a driver of wildfire risk in the scenarios we've seen. And the fact that one of the biggest risks in high density areas is your neighbor's house is on fire, moving to non-combustible materials gives extended time for a fire truck to arrive and put that fire out before your house gets impacted. So the gutter covers, we took that from a Headwaters Economics report in California, where they were looking at IBHS standards and what's called California Chapter 7A, which is their WUI code construction methods. And that was their estimate that they gave to us for an Arizona number of gutter covers. Now, there's lots of different methods of covering your gutters, everything from just a simple piece of plastic pipe that sits inside your gutter that has holes so the water can drain in, but the debris goes right over it, all the way to really fancy metal covers as well. So there's many different options for covering those, but Headwaters Economics is where we got those numbers.

Thank you for clarifying, and my final question is for you also. Are there certain areas in Flagstaff that you can see will be most affected by these updated requirements, and how did you come to that conclusion and map it out? Can you talk about that?

I think one area that would be greatly impacted by this is, oddly enough, an existing neighborhood, University Heights. So we're looking at 700 acres or so west and southwest of University Heights that is in the planning process right now in different positions. and working with those developers to try to have them build to this standard would provide an incredible amount of resilience for the community of University Heights. If we see our bad day winds from the southwest to the northeast, all of the construction in these corridors to the southwest of town to the south of, eventually we have those state land parcels and the JW Powell corridor, all those areas, when they eventually do get built, building to this standard will provide an incredible amount of resilience to the existing neighborhoods that were not designed to this level at that time. Since 2008, we've had a WUI code that has done wonderful things, but we've learned a lot since 2008, and taking this next step from what we would think of our current code as ignition resistant to non-combustible will add great risk reduction to the existing neighborhoods inside Flagstaff.

Thank you. Council Member Garcia.

I WAS CURIOUS, CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND, LIKE, FROM A STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, WHAT DETERMINING FACTORS, METRICS, OR OTHER INPUTS DID YOU UTILIZE TO SETTLE ON OPTION TWO AS OPPOSED TO OPTION THREE OR FOUR?

YEAH, LET ME PULL UP MY SUMMARY IN THE APPENDIX JUST A SECOND.

THANK YOU.

YEAH. In general, the feedback that we got in the presentations that we gave, there were a lot of concerns about impacts on housing construction costs. And so the feedback that we got tended to be either option one or option three in terms of advancing energy efficiency a little bit beyond option two, but not as much as option four. So that's really the kind of general feedback that we got from folks. And we did hear a lot of comments about how does this fit in with other potential code changes that could be coming down the line from the last cap project in terms of the zoning code. And so we felt like based on that feedback, option two was kind of in the middle of that, also based on council direction from January, which was kind of in between option two and four, kind of all of those. And then wanting to see where those code changes would go for the zoning code and engineering standards, like all the recommendations that that consultant had back in June for updating the city's codes, you know, wanting to see where are those going to go and just so we can kind of see how all these things fit together. And so that's why based on that, it felt like option two was kind of a middle ground. And we did try to, you know, looking at the amendments, like seeing where can we reduce costs as well.

Okay, thank you for that clarification. Option two.

Jenny wants to jump in. Sorry, if I could just add one thing. I think in addition to all of that context that Genevieve provided, and apologies, Jenny Niemann, Deputy Sustainability Director, High Council. In addition to all that context that Genevieve provided, I think that the thing that as we think about option two is also that in many ways it keeps us in line with where so many other cities across Arizona have gone, right? Option two is the base building code plus a couple things that we think are most in line with our goals in the carbon neutrality plan and the sort of community well-being things that we have heard that this community wants. So those are those preparedness amendments as well as thinking about the efficiency of our equipment, right? But those are pretty... They're not minor, but they are not huge steps beyond what many, many other cities in Arizona have gone with. So I just wanted to add that in because we took a long time to look across the context of the state as well as the nation to say, where are folks going? And so while we're having this conversation now, we really wanted to bring you what that sort of first step is. And then to think about, as Genevieve said, options three or four with the last cut process, right? Which is this huge multi-year process to really see how we can go forward. But option two is really that step that takes into context what is happening in the state, what's happening across the country, what other communities are doing.

Thank you for that. I appreciate it.

Thanks, Jenny.

And that's all I have for now.

Okay. Council Member Spence?

Thank you, Mayor. I have a question for Neil. In slide 51, you break down the costs for an 1,800 square foot home, and then you told us about your shopping spree at Home Depot getting a cheaper material that's non-combustible and a better warranty. So is it possible to give a different bottom line on slide 51?

You know, we've been tracking these numbers probably for almost a year. And I think the number I put in here was kind of like the peak number we came up with because I didn't want to short sell anything. We've seen when I priced out this package previously, it was about $40 more expensive for the noncombustible material. Another time about a year ago, it was about $250 more expensive. So we've been seeing that difference shrinking. And I'm not exactly sure why all those changes occur. I just... You know the the frequency of builders using non combustible materials increasing all over the country and there's even some emerging products that are really exciting out there we have We actually have a partner, Sean Gunderson, his name is Sean Gunderson. He's got a product called WoodSyn. And he, instead of using kind of concrete-based materials, he can make a non-combustible piece of siding out of a wood product. So there's all kinds of things coming into the space. Non-combustible material use is much more common in other areas of the world. I think the more communities that require that construction type, we'll see a lot more availability of materials and cost decreasing.

Thank you, and I'm sure other suppliers won't take long to follow Home Depot's leading example there. So if the noncombustible siding is even cheaper than the fire resistant, that's going to affect that bottom line. So I encourage you to do that as we try to explain these anticipated costs to the public.

Thank you, I Think that my question is for Amy. It's just a quick one I've had Members of the public reach out to ask if the city's ever going to offer Right on abatement help like we do with some of the other You know with some of the hardening and and sustainability work Do you have any estimate of how many households are likely affected by radon gas?

This one's probably going to be more of a Genevieve because she's been doing so much research on it. Let me pull that up.

All right, so this is from the state of Arizona, the Department of Health, as well as talking to local radon testers in Flagstaff. So the graphic is from the state. So it shows that the average radon test among buildings that are tested in Coconino County is 4.17 picocuries per liter. The EPA recommended maximum is four. So it does show it as having, at least in this map, the highest concentration in Coconino County compared to other counties in the state. And according to local radon testers, the actual Flagstaff area could be higher than that. I just put some stats. It's kind of an average of what some of the radon testers told me. But basically, they said that about 70% on average of buildings test greater than two, and 30 to 60 got kind of a wide range of responses there. tests greater than four, but then some have found radon at really high concentrations at like 25 or higher. So it does seem to be prevalent in Flagstaff, and hopefully we can continue to get better data to understand this, but it does seem like it is an issue here as well as in Coconino County.

Thank you so much. All right, we have no other questions from council at this time.

Mayor, can I respond to Council Member Matthews' question real quick? Please. Okay. So Council Member Matthews, you asked about the applicability of the energy code. So I just want to make sure I give you what the code says. It's a little bit complicated, but basically it says that if you have a major alteration, an addition, or a change of occupancy, then the energy code does apply, which we did talk about. In terms of alteration, so it's if you alter very specific things. So if you alter the building thermal envelope, so like the walls, the windows, if you alter the roof, ceiling, and attic, and that's not like a roof repair. That's kind of like if you're changing the way that the roof is constructed. If you're changing the floor or below the floor, then it applies. If you have a heating and cooling system and ductwork that's part of the alteration, then it would apply. And... Yeah, that's basically, or a hot water heater if it was part of the alteration. So again, that's just for altering kind of the existing building envelope of a building. If you do an addition, then that addition would apply, the energy code would apply to the addition. But it does not apply to any existing parts of the building that don't undergo either the addition or the major alteration. And it does define some repairs. And again, it says, yeah, things like roof repair does not. So if you get a new roof, it doesn't count.

Genevieve on that when you mentioned like changing out a water heater so if I changed out a water heater would I then be subjected to all the new energy and building codes or just that apply to my water heater?

Yeah so if you have a house and you're just changing out your water heater the energy code doesn't apply or if your furnace breaks or your air conditioner breaks like that does not, the energy code doesn't apply to that. It's only if you're building a new addition and you're installing a water heater in that, or if you're doing some major alteration that triggers the energy code and you have a water heater as part of that, it would apply. But again, if you're just replacing your furnace or water heater, obviously encouraged to meet higher efficiency standards, but not required.

All right, Christy. Bolognani? Bolognani? Bolognani? Am I even close?

Close enough. Thank you, Mayor Daggett and council members, for the opportunity to speak. Thank you all for your work on behalf of the city of Flagstaff. My name is Christy Bolognani. I'm a 16-year Flagstaff resident. I'm also the building's program manager for Southwest Energy Efficiency Project. We were quoted in that presentation. So I provide technical support to state and local jurisdictions across the region, updating their building energy codes. I've also worked locally in both commercial construction and real estate. I'm here today to urge you to adopt a new, better building energy code for the city of Flagstaff. I want to touch on three major issues that I know are important to the city and why updating to the newer codes will support these. One is housing affordability. One is construction costs. and one is the climate city goals. So first, energy efficiency is a housing affordability issue. When we talk about housing affordability, we tend to focus almost entirely on the cost of building or buying a home, but affordability doesn't end once the contract is signed. If you've ever paid a utility bill, you know that the monthly cost of operating that home also matters. A highly efficient home requires less energy to heat, cool, and operate. The city's own code analysis recommendations report from May 2026 found that buildings built to the 2024 International Energy Conservation Code or IECC will use 15% less energy compared with the city's current code. The city's energy efficiency and electrification study estimates an energy cost savings of roughly 14%. For a homeowner or a renter, those are not abstract numbers. These mean lower utility bills, increased comfort and well-being, and less exposure to future energy prices, which is incredibly important right now. Second, I want to touch on construction costs. It is true that better, higher quality construction can have an incremental upfront cost, but the city's own analysis found that much larger forces are driving housing costs, everything from land, labor, materials, financing, supply constraints. This analysis specifically concluded that building codes were not the dominant driver of increasing construction costs. Finally, updating the city's energy codes is essential to meeting its climate commitments. The city has established a goal of carbon neutrality by 2030. They specifically call for adoption of more efficient codes. So efficient codes are central to meeting this commitment. Adopting the 2024 IECC is a practical proven step that addresses housing and climate challenges at the same time, means lower energy bills, means more comfortable homes, greater resilience, which we've heard a lot about today, and less carbon pollution for Flagstaff residents, because these buildings are going to be in our building stock for 50 to 100 years. And with that, I urge council to adopt the 2024 IECC with proposed amendments. Thank you.

Thank you. Dee Hoagland.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Hope you're all well. Climate is now having a greater impact on the built environment than ever before. With hotter summers and heat waves, updated codes are incorporating energy efficient systems. Updated codes can improve solar and EV readiness. They can also strengthen heating and cooling energy efficiency. While stricter codes may increase upfront construction costs, they reduce long-term operational costs. Retrofitting buildings and upgrading existing structures for energy efficiency can prove costly. Laundry rooms, water heaters, furnaces are frequently far away if not on the opposite side of a home from the electrical panel, making the installation of 240 outlets challenging. I recently replaced an old gas dryer with a heat pump dryer. The electrician, oh, he was great. He was qualified, licensed, very friendly, along with the huge bill. to adapt the electrical for the install. But the reward is personal, doing what's right, living up to my ideals. Every fraction of a degree of warming that we avoid is crucial. Please strengthen the energy efficiency code by adopting the updated code. Thank you. Thank you.

Jill Stevenson.

Mayor, council, city staff, and fellow citizens, we are in a climate crisis. I've said this many times before, it's getting worse. We need to be doing everything possible to mitigate these worldwide effects we are all aware of. Extreme severe weather conditions causing damage like we have never before experienced. Deaths from unprecedented heat, fires, floods, droughts, hurricanes, and tornadoes. Unimaginable economic losses to individuals, towns, and whole countries. Looming extinction of many plants and animals. Famine and wars causing huge numbers of climate migrants and more. Even local efforts can make a difference in this frightening scenario. We can all take simple actions to reduce our carbon footprints. We can support climate aware leaders. We can also take actions as a community to cut down our emissions of greenhouse gases. The updated energy codes being proposed by the city sustainability department, if supported by our council, could help prepare for the near future. Urging developers to build more sustainably is a huge step in the right direction. These energy codes reduce greenhouse gas emissions, conserve energy, reduce utility bills, improve indoor comfort, and provide greater safety during extreme weather. These building codes establish minimum standards and are only required with construction needing a new building permit. Supporting this updated suite of codes would help advance Flagstaff's climate goals. For all these reasons, I ask you to please give serious thought to these improved codes and vote to adopt them. Thank you for your attention and consideration.

Thank you. Tyler Denim.

Hello Mayor and Council Members. My name is Tyler and I'm speaking on behalf of Flagstaff for affordable housing. We support the current staff proposal as a reasonable compromise between safety, efficiency and housing affordability. We need homes that are safe and energy efficient and we need people to be able to afford them. We appreciate the work that has gone into balancing these goals, including the cost saving measures that staff have already incorporated. That support is informed by our understanding that the lion's share of the cost increases are baked into the jump from the 2018 to 2024 codes. As staff noted, the codes are best adopted as a full suite and we don't consider it practical to stick with the full 2018 suite. in which case the debate for us shifts to finding cost-saving measures elsewhere. And on that front, our main request is that council pair this code update with a clear commitment to reducing housing costs through the upcoming glass cap reforms. We are making a concrete decision about construction costs in the near future. The commitment to address affordability should be equally concrete. So I hope we can move forward with this proposal and carry the same willingness to find common ground into the next round of reforms. Thank you for your time and attention.

Thank you. All right. Council Member Matthews.

Thank you, Mayor. I was transferring my notes over to paper because I'm almost out of juice talking about batteries. So, you know, I I've said this every time we talk about energy codes, that I'm all for more energy efficient homes. I enjoy my home that has great insulation. We get usually cold all day during the summer because we have such great insulation. I think it's great. But my number one focus and goal is housing affordability. And so when we've had these discussions, I've continued to say, Yes, we can do that. That's a great idea, but only if we can offset it with streamlining the cost to build. And here we are talking about the initial step, but it's still $20,000 all in when it's building fire and energy codes. And that will make a difference on someone purchasing a home and someone who cannot. You know, a lot of people say, well, but the long-term energy savings. Yes, there's energy savings, but typical home ownership is about 12 years. And the recovery cost for the additional cost, not even considering that your 30-year mortgage is increased for 30 years, but the payback cost is 13 to 33 years. Again, I go back to it doesn't really apply if I can't get into the home that I want. It doesn't matter what energy savings I would realize if I can't afford to move in there. Also, we have these two very important goals and crises. We have the climate goal crisis. We have the housing crisis goal. But I looked back, and in 2016, we had We had 6,000, approximately 6,000 workforce that commuted from out of town into the city to work representing about 8%. Currently, we're up to 8,000 or I think it's 12% of our work, 14% of our workforce commutes. So I know people sometimes make the assumption that I don't care as much about our climate goals. I do, I just want measurable ones that actually move the needle. And if we aren't really putting housing affordability on, we're postponing, we're thinking about these code amendments, but we haven't yet adopted the recommendations in last cap. We've just increased housing costs. And so we're gonna push more people out in the city limits and they're gonna drive into town to work. And so what is the net real value there? I want to see measurable results, things that we can actually do that makes a difference and not something that gives us a gold star or a ribbon that we accomplished that didn't really move the needle. So I am in favor for not all the greatest reasons, but option two is recommended tonight. Um, I agree with Tyler that I am very concerned about this is step one. And so when we come back after last cap and then we start throwing in the options that are found in option three and four, that it's not going to seem like such a big jump because now it's just a marginal compared to if we just did it today. So I want to make sure our, our council, my, my colleagues remember that who's ever on council next year, that we started here. And so the jump is still the jump and not just a marginal jump from option two then to in a year option three because the greatest thing I believe we can do to impact housing and our climate goals is to bring our workforce in town so they don't have to travel and make housing more affordable so we can keep our critical workforce here and not move to other towns and cities. It's amazing to me how many people I talk to that work here and live in Camp Verde, Page, Williams. Just that mental health, just driving that long of a distance impacts our health. And so I think we really should start looking at the holistic impact to reaching these goals. And not just wanting to check off a box, so I'm going to give it the thumbs up for various reasons on option two but when we look at the combined impact with fire and Building codes and energy it is significant, and I don't want us to not Not focus on that or not pay attention.

That's all I have Councilmember Aslan Thank You madam mayor.

Thank you everybody Thank you to staff for the long journey this has been, and we're not across the finish line yet. For all the hard work that's to come, And thank you to the public for coming out and showing your support for updating these codes. You know, I've already spoken this evening about a generational mindset that wasn't planned, but it's definitely something that's ingrained in my core and a part of my value system, and it's something I'm always going to speak to. And it's one of the reasons why I'm so proud to be on council, is to be able to bring a generational mindset to the work we do and not just Worry about the things that are happening right now and the and the crises the day-to-day things that we work on You know the houses we build today and over the next several years which will be in the thousands Are effectively going to last forever? It's not totally true, but it's effectively true from our perspective and from the perspective of the next couple generations And so we need to be anticipating the needs of future families. In 2018, early 2019, I was the tie breaking vote to adopting the 2018 code shortly after I was first elected. And I'm very proud of that fact. I really can't imagine where we'd be if we hadn't taken that step then and if we had still been arguing over it years later. And just to add, I'm looking for fast implementation of all of these codes, including the last cap, so that developers have clarity as they're moving forward and they know what to do. And that'll factor into some of my comments a little later. You know, I would really love to get relief to homeowners for insurance, for their compliance and all of this and for all of the good work we're doing. I understand that's a longer fight and it's one we should be engaged in and invested in. But meanwhile, let's still do what's right. I really agree with following the science on this in terms of the firewise aspects. It's also about following common sense. And in the end, it'll be less expensive. So, you know, and just to add into this too, this has always been the case for me. It's been my observation that policy is the most effective way to direct behavior. change and to affect real change in terms of environmentalism and conservation and sustainability. Personal choices matter, but not nearly as much as policy recommendations and directions. And that's another reason why I'm very proud to be up here and able to represent that mindset. So I'm actually firmly in favor of option three. And I would urge council to be bold and demonstrate climate leadership by going the extra distance sooner to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030. And this also goes back to the extra clarity that developers are looking for right now. I think I'll leave it there. Obviously, if we end up with option two, that is acceptable to me, understanding that the work and the conversation isn't over. A stepwise approach is sensible from a part of my perspective, just as long as we're taking it seriously to do this as quickly and efficiently as possible for clarity and transparency. Thank you.

Council Member House.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you to the staff and to all of our public commenters that spoke on this issue. To answer the question that was posed to us in the presentation and in our council packet, I firmly support advancing the code adoption package to that first read on September 15th. I think that the team has done a wonderful job of leaning into a word that one of our public commenters referenced, which was compromise. This plan, as we're proposing adopting it, Both brings us forward in terms of modernizing our codes and aligning with best practices for now, and also moves us towards the implementation plans that we need for the future to ensure that we're staying on the right path. I think it's important to note that clearly through the process that staff has gone through with these presentations to us, to community members, to different boards and commissions, to our developer community and beyond, that we are all weighing and balancing community priorities and needs. And no one is dismissing the upfront costs that are realistically possible or probable. with this code adoption. However, I also go back to Mr. Chapman's words about not waiting to adopt these sorts of changes until something happens that makes it absolutely critical and leaves us wondering, what if? What if we had taken these processes seriously and moved these things forward in the ways that are being recommended to us now? So I am deeply appreciative of the thoughtfulness that our team has put into this. I'm deeply appreciative for all of the team members who came and spoke about what the implications of this code adoption will be. And I am very supportive of moving forward. I remember from our prior conversations feeling a lot of alignment towards option three, initially, I do feel that option two is, again, going back to that word compromise, it's what I feel is probably the best option for now as we move forward with things into the future and keep looking at ways to optimize our plans, optimize our development, streamline those processes, ensure that our developer community is on the same page, and looking realistically for the future of what we can continue to do to advance all of the priorities that we've set in our community. So I'm deeply appreciative of all the discussion that we're having tonight. And again, deeply appreciative to the team for bringing this forward again and sharing this information with us to move us forward. Thank you, Mayor.

Vice Mayor. Thank you. I want to give a huge shout out to the team and especially sustainability. So when we first started talking about this, I immediately said, well, how is this all going to work with Last Cap? And I want to take a step back and really digest this better. And they helped me through diagrams on the whiteboard. I tried to draw a diagram. It didn't go so well. but I think we're getting there and I just thank you for taking that time with me because I do feel like this is a huge discussion for our community and I'm liking where we're going tonight. The presentation was great and I just know a lot of work went into that. I do feel like we're finding a good balance. We have a lot of further discussions coming up with Last Cap and knowing that and knowing that there will be a lot of robust talk in the near future around that, I feel great about option two. I feel like it gives us the balance that I've been wanting from the first iteration of this discussion. And I do look forward to seeing how Last Cap fits into all of this. And again, just thank you for all of your time. And I really appreciate staff on this.

Council Member Garcia.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. And kudos to staff. Nice work. Anybody who could read the packet beyond the presentation could see that staff has really met that word that we keep referring back to as the compromise. And I appreciate that compromise. I am too okay with option two under the context that we will be revisiting this because I think that we can strengthen this. And if there was a bigger lean towards option three, that's where I would be leaning as well. So I'll be brief since it's already been, everything's already been said by my colleagues very well. that I'm supportive of this as long as there's a commitment from staff to bring back the other options after LASCAP is a little bit more solidified and finalized. And that there is more input from the housing department on how we can grow from this point forward on maybe mitigating some of the extra costs that may occur through the higher level options that we will be exploring. staff when staff brings those back after last cap comes back to us to have that department here to help us understand what what their influence on this could be or how how we can better grow from this point forward I appreciate the evolution up till now but I want to continue this evolution through the process so we could have a strong sense of of energy savings for for for people you know that will be working here and living here in flagstaff in the future and the reason i mentioned this is because i too live in a house that was built about 20 years ago i rent and if it wasn't for the the the and the landlord the person that the developer the person that built the house did it just because they wanted to have a good solid house it lasted a good long time for the people they're renting it to And if it wasn't for that, I would struggle even more to make rent than I do now. So it's important. It's really important, even to the working class like myself. So thank you.

Council Member Spence.

Thank you Mayor. I too want to thank the staff for the careful analysis that you've done and I especially want to call out the importance of the radon mitigation component. It is so much less expensive to put in a vapor barrier and put in a plastic pipe under a slab or put a plastic pipe under the floor. So much cheaper to do that as you're building a building compared to retrofitting if you find out, whoops, now that we have a tight building envelope, we now have radon entrapment. So I think this is a very important addition to the 2024 code and I thank staff for being proactive with regard to radon given the fact that random sites in Flagstaff do have high radon levels which are very damaging to the occupants health. So I am supportive of option two and looking forward to how LASCAP CAN HELP US GET TO THE GOAL OF AFFORDABILITY GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE ARE ADOPTING THE 2024 CODE. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK.

I ALSO THANK STAFF AND I'M ALWAYS AMAZED AT HOW WELL YOU WORK TOGETHER AND HOW WELL YOU COLLABORATE ACROSS DISCIPLINES. I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, AND I LIVE IN A HOUSE THAT IS PROBABLY NEARING 60 YEARS OLD, AND I HAVE DONE A LOT OF RETROFITTING, AND IT HAS BEEN VERY EXPENSIVE. SO WE KNOW RETROFITTING IS EXPENSIVE, AND THESE CODE UPDATES ARE REASONABLE. THEY'LL MAKE OUR RESIDENTS AND OUR HOMES SAFER. They'll bring more comfort to residents by the energy efficiencies that are included in this code update. They'll reduce utility bills. And all of that really, really matters. Also look forward to the cap discussion because we have some important decisions to make about what code amendments we can make to streamline our process to reduce costs associated with building and that is in my opinion Equally as important to this work that we're doing with this code update and I look forward to having those discussions. And I'm hearing from council that we have unanimous support for your suggested option, option two. Staff, do you have anything that you would like to say or are you good?

I just want to add one thing. You mentioned earlier about radon mitigation in existing buildings. I just wanted to say that I believe the library has free radon tests that people can check out, as well as the state. You can request a mail-in test as well. So if anyone's interested, just want to put that out there. Thank you.

Thank you so much. I believe Cozy Home does free radon testing as well.

Yeah, there are also local radon testers who will do that too. So thank you.

Thank you for that. All right, well, go forth and do your work and we'll see you on the 15th and we'll be seeing you soon for the CAP updates too.

Thank you guys for your time.

Thank you. All right, we are down to open call to the public and I don't see any. So then we have announcements and updates too from council and city manager. And I will start with my colleague council member Spence.

Nothing this evening.

Council member house.

Just one thing, mayor. I didn't want it to go without saying during the course of our council meeting that today is our city manager's birthday. And as is, I think, a tradition that maybe I started accidentally, I would love for us to join in singing happy birthday to her and hopefully singing a little bit more in key than we have on a couple of past occurrences.

Should we have her stand up?

I think we did very, very well that time. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you very much. That was lovely.

Oh, I can't top that, nothing.

Council Member Aslan.

Just to say very quickly, as opposed to putting this out as a fair in conversations with Erin Young and also with a birthday girl, Joanne Keaton on. My first younger sister. Yeah, my bad. Your name's written right there, I can read it.

Little known fact is people used to say I looked like Tina Yeathers when I was a kid, so.

My bad, well that's my joke birthday present for you. To work on the Verde Wild and Scenic River designation, which is a topic that's come up before, I believe the mayor's worked on it a little bit as well, and it's something of great concern and interest to the Coconino Plateau Water Advisory Partnership.

Council Member Garcia.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Fourth Street Business Coalition meeting will be held this Thursday, September 10th at 7 a.m. for those business owners, shop owners, employees, and folks in the business corridor of Fourth Street that would like to join the meeting at the Market of Dreams on Fourth Street, Thursday, 7.30 a.m. Thank you.

Council Member Matthews.

Nothing tonight. Thank you, Mayor.

All right. Strap in. I had a great ride along with station two of our fire department and we went on, I think it was three medical calls and one fire call. And as I was leaving, they were sitting down to dinner. We had just gotten back from a call and they were sitting down to dinner. I left and then it was a matter of minutes before the truck, the engine was passing me on their way to another call so I guess their food was cold by the time they got back to dinner but it was an awesome ride along and the public is able to do this as well if they'd like and it just It was great to have all that time to talk with our firefighting staff. I have a meeting tomorrow with the Arizona Bio Roadmap. This is a committee that I sit on and we've had a AZ Bio Roadmap event in Flagstaff before and we'll have another one. They do a roadshow around Arizona. and it's an important topic to Flagstaff and to the entire state. Alerting residents that Senator Kelly's constituent services staff will be at the downtown library to help residents with any federal issues they have, such as social security, and that is going to be, I didn't write down the date, Thursday, correct? Yes, I think it's Thursday. From 9.30 to noon. Saturday is the Flagstaff Music Festival in Heritage Square, starts at 1. And also on Saturday is the Just Serve 9-11 Day of Service from noon to 5 p.m. at Flagstaff Mall. There'll be a volunteer event. Expo, there's a blood drive on Friday and Saturday, and service opportunities, and there's also the presentation of Heart of Service awards at this event for some of our first responders, so hopefully people can turn out for that. Birthday girl. Mayor, Council, I do not have any updates today. Do you have plans for tonight? Could we join you? Sure, yes. Thank you. All right. We are adjourned from this and now I'm calling to order our special meeting and giving notice that We may vote to go into executive session Which will not be open to the public for discussion and consultation with the city's attorneys for legal advice on on this item so We are on 11 B consideration and possible action regarding executive session on September 8th 2026 and Oh, Council Member House, could I get a motion to direct and authorize and all of that?

Mayor, I move that we direct and authorize the city attorney and or designated city representative to proceed as discussed in the executive session of September 8th, 2026, items 5AI.

I'll second. Any discussion? All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? All right, we're adjourned.