City Council - Regular Meeting

so so So, Thank you. you you you so so

A study session. And we will start with item one. Time has been set aside for an update on activities of the PAG Regional Council and the RTA Board. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor and members of the Council. Joining us here is Director of Transportation and Mobility, Sam Credio, with an update on these matters.

Thank you, Mr. Manager, and good afternoon, honorable mayor, members of the council. A FEW ITEMS I'D LIKE TO UPDATE YOU ON RELATING THIS TOPIC. THE FIRST IS LAST WEEK THE RTA TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE HELD A RETREAT SO I'D LIKE TO UPDATE YOU ON THE ITEMS THAT WERE DISCUSSED THERE. WE'LL TOUCH A LITTLE BIT ON THE 2006 RTA PLAN PROJECTS AND THEN TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT RTA NEXT. BEGINNING WITH THE TMC RETREAT WE MET ON WEDNESDAY MAY 13TH IN A RETREAT STYLE FORMAT MEETING TO REALLY TALK ABOUT THE DELIVERY of the 20-year voter-approved RTA Next Plan, the new RTA Next Plan. And during the retreat, there were a couple key topics that I want to mention today. The first is the conversation about how we are going to establish intergovernmental agreements moving forward. The idea is that we want to try to streamline the process in order to deliver these projects. Currently, the process involves an intergovernmental agreement between the City of Tucson and the RTA for each project, and then we do amendments for each phase of those projects, typically several amendments over several years that have to be scheduled both and approved by our Mayor and Council as well as the RTA Board. The RTA Executive Director is recommending that for the new plan, we enter into a master IGA between the City of Tucson and the RTA that establishes the relationship between the two entities. And then following the approval of the master IGA, we would create project charters with the RTA staff to staff for each individual project. The project charter would include details such as project scope, budget, sponsor jurisdiction, and any other details pertinent to the delivery of that project. It's expected then that the project charter would be signed by the executive director and a member of our entity, likely either the manager or myself, as we complete that project charter. There is some additional conversation that needs to happen around this matter. In fact, tomorrow, the TMC's policy subcommittee meeting is going to meet again to talk about the details of this, as well as a TMC meeting the following week. We anticipate, though, that later this year, assuming this process plays out, we would bring to you a master IGA FOR THE RTA NEXT PLAN. THE NEXT TOPIC THAT WAS DISCUSSED WAS THE ADVANCED DELIVERY TEAM. RTA IS SHIFTING ITS MINDSET ON HOW TO APPROACH THE RTA PLAN FROM MERELY BEING THE FINANCIAL COMPONENT OF THE PLAN BUT ALSO BEING PART OF THE DELIVERY OF THE PROGRAM FOR THE REGION. AND SO TO THAT END, THE RTA HAS DEVELOPED A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR AN ADVANCED DELIVERY TEAM. This advanced delivery team would be made up of engineers, planners, and other transportation professionals that will look at key projects to identify project challenges early, such as utility relocation, property impacts, railroad coordination, to name a few. The three projects initially being looked at are Silver Bell Road from Camino del Cerro to Aina, which is a Pima County and Marana project, 22nd Street from Keno to I-10, which is a City of Tucson project, and then Thornydale from Cortero to Tangerine, which is a Pima County project. We do anticipate having staff represented on that selection panel, and so we'll be working closely with that advanced delivery team. And the next item that's important to discuss is the conversation around the committee organizational structure for PAG and RTA. Right now, the way the committees are structured is they all report to the executive director, who reports to either the regional council or the RTA board. the proposition from or recommendation from the rta is that they restructure the committee so that the pag management committee the rta technical management committee and the citizen accountability for regional transportation cart committee report directly to the pag regional council and rta board respectively there was also conversation about the committee bylaws right now i believe each committee has its own bylaws and there was conversation about creating a master committee bylaws, so that way there's clarity in what everyone's role is broadly across the spectrum. After conversation, the TMC voted unanimously to support the recommendation from the RTA to create a master committee bylaws.

It's anticipated they will bring those to the PAG Regional Council and RTA Board for their review and approval in September.

Now shifting a little bit to project delivery, we did include in your material a brief summary on all the projects remaining from the 2006 plan. You'll notice that there are two additional projects that you hadn't seen previously. That is 22nd Street from Keno to I-10, as well as Houghton Road from Broadway to Tanque Verde. Both of those projects were included on the RTA Next plan as scope changes. And so now that they are being included in terms of our progress for those two projects, we plan to begin planning efforts on both of those in 2026. And before I move off this topic, I do want to mention just briefly that yesterday we reached a really exciting milestone for the Downtown Links project. We opened Sixth Street underpass to traffic bicyclists and pedestrians for the first time ever. There is one lane of traffic in each direction, and I believe one side of the underpass is open for pedestrians and cyclists. We anticipate that underpass will open fully later next month, and we're really excited about that project reaching completion. Looking ahead now to RTA Next, just a few highlights I want to mention. we talked at great length the last time we met about pavement rehabilitation element i'm excited to report that after your direction on april 21st that evening our staff promptly went to the ioac and received approval to program the entire 20-year allocation for rta next funding for the pavement rehabilitation element We provided a copy of that map in your material. I had also sent a note out to you a few weeks ago with some detailed information about that. We are working very hard to deliver two of those first six projects in the first year, being Silver Bell and Irvington Road. And we anticipate both of those will start construction this calendar year. One of those, we will definitely be having a kickoff celebration to acknowledge that is likely the very first RTA Next dollars that will be put back into the community. Lastly, I want to mention on that is we committed to the IOAC to return annually to just talk about where we're at on the delivery of those paving projects and giving them the opportunity to weigh in and adjust or review the plan accordingly. Regarding the roadway element, I just want to point out that the City of Tucson has two projects in period one. The first is the Drexel Road, Midvale Park, the Calle Santa Cruz. It's also known as the Drexel Bridge project that we've been working on for some time. We're actually working on 60% plans right now. And then the segment of Drexel Road to the west of there, Mission and Midvale Park, we've begun 30% plan development for that project as well. And then lastly, I just want to touch briefly on the transit safety and security item. As you know, staff have been working on a plan and a budget for the city's allocation of Project 51, which is safety and security of the regional transit system. Our allocation is $2.15 million. Last week, DTM staff presented a draft plan to the Tucson Transit Advisory Committee and received feedback. On June 9th, we will be bringing that plan forward to mayor and council during the Safe City update. And just to give you a little bit of what you can expect in that plan, we will have elements including a transit ambassador program, additional special duty police officers, physical improvements at bus stops, as well as technology upgrades, to name a few. And before I wrap up my comments, Mayor, I just want to point out that we do not need any action on this item today. I do want to mention, though, that on June 4, there will be a PAG Regional Council and RTA board meeting. And so it would be appropriate, and this would be the opportunity to provide the mayor with any feedback regarding these topics to be shared during that meeting. With that, Mayor, I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much, Sam. Really appreciate it. Even though you sound so happy to be here, I know your mind is on that baby girl of yours. Thank you for joining us and thank you for the amazing report. I really am so happy that it's a bit of a new day at the PAG RTA with the executive director really kind of re-envisioning how to work, not just with the city of Tucson, but with all of the jurisdictions. And I've had this conversation with Mr. Tamir and yourself in terms of it really will take all of us to make sure that we are delivering on the projects that that were delayed and still not done from the first RTA and then, of course, the RTA Next projects. It really is exciting to know that in the summer we're going to break ground on the first RTA Next repaving project. And I think it's an indication that, you know, all hands on deck in terms of making sure that we're moving quickly to deliver the projects that we promised the voters in 2006 and in 2026. So I will be paying special attention to the quick movement of projects, especially those 2006 projects that were started or maybe not started, so that we can deliver to the voters. I guess my question to you is coordinating with the RTA team to make sure that the city of Tucson is well prepared to deliver those projects quickly to the community. Because some of the things that I hear, besides we need to fix our roads, is when is this construction going to be over? And usually I tell, you know, the dust and the movement and the construction is a sign of progress. But we also have to be realistic in terms of what construction does to people's commutes. And, you know, I know that some of these projects have taken a long time. I know that I hear a lot from neighbors in Ward 3 and 6 regarding Grant Road.

and so How do we prepare to make sure that we move those projects expeditiously Thank you mayor honorable honorable mayor members of the council for that question You know I've got I've got a sheet here cheat sheet of all the projects We have to deliver and it's pretty staggering when you look at how much work we have in front of us I know that I'll take a moment to thank the work that all of our project managers are doing to keep these projects moving. It really does take an army. And so to answer your question directly, Mayor, what are we doing to coordinate with RTA? One of the first things we did when there was a change in leadership at the RTA is we convene a biweekly meeting with all of our project managers and the team from RTA that are tasked with the delivery of these projects and We go through project by project to identify where there's challenges, where we need help, and how we can work together. Some of those areas that we need help and we found value in these meetings is we invite the head of the Main Street Business Assistance Program. He's part of those meetings as well. So that way we're identifying any issues or concerns associated with the construction projects. We've got their director of transportation there to talk about particularly utility relocation. That seems to be where a lot of these projects get hung up because we can't move forward until utilities are moved out of the way. And I know that the executive director has offered to have some focused conversations with the utilities on how we can address that. Another area that when you really look at the life of a project that we spend a lot of time on is right-of-way acquisition. And Mr. Ortega has been very gracious in offering his team's assistance to help us with moving forward, particularly on Grant Road 5 and 6, to identify some acquisition opportunities and work together on moving that forward. So it isn't all hands on deck, Mayor. I will tell you that the projects we have in front of us are not straightforward paving projects. They are massive CIP projects that involve drainage infrastructure, complete reconstruction of roadways, just very complex elements to projects that are going to take time. And so we are gonna do everything we can to move these projects forward and try to minimize the impact to the public as best we can, but just know that we're coming and we're gonna try to move fast.

And Mayor, if I could add a couple of comments there. I think there's two things that are already in place that will help, especially the City of Tucson, deliver on the projects. One is, we keep coming back to the new Executive Director, who's not as new as he once was, but The fundamental shift there was we had a number of projects that were on the cusp of going to the next stage that were stalled for months or even years. And within the first two months, the new executive director cleared all those hurdles out of the way. So a lot of that backlog or that backwater appeared on the city of Tucson side, but it But it really wasn't. But then again, at the end of the day, we're still the deliverers of those projects. So getting that initial clarity was important. And the other piece is those scope changes that were approved by the voters have taken a lot of uncertainty out of the next couple of steps on some of these projects. Because what we were forecasting is battles that would have needed to be fought between the city and the RTA over the scope of a project that now the voters have come in and said, this is the scope. which we shouldn't have been battling anyway, but now we don't even have to have that discussion, and that just adds sand into the gears along the way. So we've got a lot of the things that should not have been impacting projects are also cleared off the roadway as well. So it allows SAM's teams to really focus on just delivering the work as specified.

Thank you, Tim and Sam, on that. I, too, agree that I've seen the change in terms of moving much more quickly, trying to declutter projects and its movement forward versus obfuscating and making up reasons for why not to move forward. And so I've seen the incredible change. I want to thank you all, especially Sam and your team for really moving forward and doing everything you possibly can to get these projects out the door and delivered to the community. On the same vein though, and I know I've said this to you before, If we need to hire staff to help us, this is a 20-year plan. It's not like we're going to be not doing work the next 20 years. And so if that is necessary or if our TA PAG is thinking of staffing up, how do we work together to make sure that we're moving, we're rowing, you know, the same direction to make sure that we're moving as quickly as possible. So if RTA is hiring and or we're hiring to do RTA projects specifically, we need to make sure that we're doing that. And that if there are impediments, like there were previously, many times it's the utilities, maybe many times it is Union Pacific Railroad that has delayed our projects before. You should know that you should bump it up to mayor and council, and then that way we try and move on our end with our federal partners. I WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO MY COLLEAGUES COUNCILMEMBER CUNNINGHAM.

COUPLE THINGS WITH THIS VERSION OF RTA I'D LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN NUMBER ONE I'D LOVE TO SEE IF WE CAN ENTER INTO SOME TYPE OF MOU WITH THEM. in which there's a liaison position that is a city of Tucson employee that's funded by the RTA. I think that's really important. Where it gives, there's a staff member that's funded by them, but it's employed by us, so there's some balance on how they deliver their job. But we seem to have that disconnect in the previous RTA. And I think that's also gonna be helpful to us in staffing up our department. But that, we want that position to exist within the city. THE SECOND THING THAT I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST TO BRING SOME DISCUSSION TO IS NIGHT PERMANENT. I THINK THAT WE'RE HAVING THAT DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW WITH THE PDSD FEES WITH ROAD CLOSURE AND THE PENALTY FOR KEEPING THE ROAD CLOSED LONGER. AND WE GOT SOME FEEDBACK THAT SOME FOLKS DIDN'T LIKE IT. think the opposite. We've got a couple situations where not only has the road closure created a prolonged traffic inconvenience, but it's also created a safety issue. And so I don't think that Samara, I don't think that one, I also got some feedback that we are denying night permits for road closures, and I'm not even sure that people are even applying for them. But I think we should say to folks, hey, there's ways to lower the amount of time that this road's going to be obstructed. if you guys want to do lighting and want to do a six to two shift and a two to ten shift and run ten shifts a week you should do that and i don't think that's asking too much of different contractors and different folks uh to expedite the progress on some of these projects so those are just some of the observations that i have with this with this uh With this piece, that's kind of the stuff that's going on right now. In the meantime, with the renewed RTA and the opportunities it affords us, let's drive forward, get our projects delivered, and do it right.

Any others? Council Member Schubert.

Thank you, Mayor, Director Credio. Appreciate all the work done on this item. And I echo the concerns about ensuring that we're providing certainty and delivering on projects and moving quickly. It also makes sense just in terms of rising construction costs and further uncertainty to get these projects squared away, especially the ones that should have already been done. As you said, Mayor, it's a new day, which makes me think about the great opportunity that we have before us to center safety. The safety epidemic is especially pronounced here in Tucson with pedestrian fatalities up 183% over this time last year. So with this new process, with a new executive director, I'm really interested in looking for ways to bake safety and our Complete Streets policy into these projects. When I was serving on the Complete Streets Coordinating Council, we learned about the opportunity that pavement rehabilitation projects offer, which once you've got the pavement up, you have opportunities to then incorporate other safety improvements and traffic calming things that are going to cut down on traffic deaths. So as we prepare to authorize repaving of arterial and collector roads and creating a master IGA, establishing this relationship, just how are we incorporating the 2021 Street Design Guide of our Complete Streets Policy and following this policy and truly implementing it to improve safety for all users? I'm a big fan of the checklist, the design guide checklist in the back of that document. When I was on the Complete Streets Coordinating Council, we used that for the other section of Silver Bell that's over by Anklum. And from start to finish, from us first considering those plans through to the end of those safety improvements being implemented was eight months. And it was a really great example for me as a commissioner to see a government process working quickly. And it was transformative. We heard from people all the time about what a big difference it made to their experiences. So again, we need to look for every opportunity possible to incorporate safety and complete street design and prioritize saving lives above the convenience of cars. Time and time again, we've been told that safety is embedded in every RTA project. But if we aren't attempting to do anything different with these arterial and collector streets that will be repaved, how can we expect a different outcome? Every day, the Ward 6 office is contacted by people who are asking what we're doing to make our streets safer. And the good news is that we here at the City of Tucson, thanks to you, Mayor Romero, have an award-winning policy We have design guidelines intended to maximize every opportunity like this to make our streets safer. Are we maximizing every opportunity, you know? Last month, the Vice Mayor made a motion to direct staff to consult with the CSCC and the IOAC for guidance on different funding categories within RTA, such as safety and active transportation, pavement rehabilitation. What I neglected to say at the table at that time was to specifically designate the Transit Advisory Committee as another one of those BCCs working with staff to guide funding, especially on the transit safety funding. So I'd like to do that now. I think it's a bit of a formality to just kind of clean things up. But I moved to direct staff to consult with the TTAC for guidance on programming. The transit element category of funding most significantly for spending related to item 51 And that's the safety and security of the regional transit system.

Thank you. So there's a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All right. So I did want to include discussion on that piece because absolutely right on, 100% agree with the sentiment and direction. I know that I've been publicly begging Sam Credio to fix Silver Bell Road. Tim Timure has done the same thing, by the way, and Michael Ortega. We're all West siders so but one of the things that I have been very clear about is Can we continue some of those pedestrian and bicycle treatments that we did on the second piece? you know the on that first piece from Congress to st. Mary's Road on Silver Bell because There are funds available from the RTA next that are for pedestrian and bicycle safety and treatments And so can we layer on? Some of those funds as we're reconstructing Silver Bell Road to make sure that even if there's a possibility of adding trees and more pedestrian features And then of course bicycle Security would be wonderful. So I mean that's something that we are planning to do correct them and Okay.

Mayor, that is correct.

Okay.

Council Member Barajas.

Well, thank you, Mayor and Director Cridio, for your presentation. I'm eager to see the transit safety and security plan move forward and would like to see what is planned for community engagement and what the proposed timeline is. Also, when can we expect more information on the next steps? Thank you.

Mayor councilmember us as I mentioned in my remarks on June 9th there will be a presentation American Council during the safe city update item during that item staff will present the updated transit safety and security action plan. Proposed I guess funding allocation for our chain X so you can expect that in your material for June 9th and then staff will provide a presentation to be available to answer questions.

And we will be able to give feedback at that point on June 9th. OK. All righty. Yeah. Any other questions? Any other questions or comments on the motion? All righty. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any against? Motion carries. All righty. Any further reporting? Alrighty. Well, thank you so much, really appreciate it. Thank you, Sam. Alrighty, we move on to item two. Time has been set aside for a discussion and update on the disputes submitted by employees during recommended fiscal year 2027 compensation plan dispute period. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, honorable mayor and members of the council. Joining me here is our HR director, Dr. Terri Train. She'll give you an update on all of our processes related to the comp plan and the disputes, including the mayor's hearing that was held and what the current status and ongoing status of those items are. So I turn it over to Dr. Train.

Council. I'm going to give you a little bit of the backdrop on some of the numbers. We've identified that in some of the materials provided to you. But I think that sets the stage for the understanding that, again, this is literally the involvement of our workforce at every level. And we're deeply appreciative of everyone's professionalism, their careful scrutiny, not only of their own information, but thinking collegially about what this means for our compensation system. Just as a quick reminder, our comp plan submission to all of you began April 7, of course. And then our electronic filing opportunity for the first time began April 8. We then, of course, had the mayor's hearing per city code April 16th. We did not have a large turnout of employees. We had about eight of our colleagues that actually chose to speak and come to the microphone, of course, referring to the electronic submission that they had made. Now, here are the hard numbers, the real activities that occurred. We had a total of 314 electronic disputes that were filed. Total filings that we found of that group that were not disputable, 269 of those individual disputes. We responded to all 269 by April 22nd. With indication that what they had submitted was not disputable Again, we had total filings that did meet the criteria for additional research and review there were 45 of them and we responded to those 45 by May 1st of the 45 we then drilled down even farther into the research into 27 of them and again there was not a need for additional research or action. We now are with the last 18 that are under review. Our goal is full research and response no later than July 31st. If there were to be any compensation impact or any difference that should be put into action, That would be in, again, preparation for October 4th as we're moving forward. The other thing that's important to know, and again, we embrace the idea that our workforce feels they can reach out and ask questions. We've had an additional 487 email inquiries. And those are questions that are very individual. Remember, every employee has gotten what we call a report card. So that is the overview of their own submission regarding their work history, experience, formal education, et cetera. And a lot of times, of the 400 plus inquiries, the employees are really asking, could I walk through my report card with you? I'd like to just have a bit of a conversation about how the analysis was handled for my personal report card. We will have responses to the 487 employees. by close of business May 22nd. So that's coming up very shortly. Again, a reminder, when we're doing research and we're doing review, our standard comparator communities or organizations consist of the City of Chandler, City of Mesa, Pima County, Town of Marana, and Town of Oro Valley. And so again, when we are involved in this kind of project, the things that are considered disputable categories, when we are again doing the research, things like a market adjustment, and that means our employees are actually looking at the market data that tells the story about positions either identical or very similar to their own. They also sometimes look at data specific to a match with a position in one of those five comparators that I just mentioned to you. And then the third area that could be disputable, salary placement of the classification in a salary grade or a range. And again, that's delving into what is happening in the southern Arizona and Arizona marketplace and then of course that's influenced by the US marketplace at large. Now I will stop at that point and see if there are specific questions I can answer for you or any kind of information that might be helpful.

Thank you, Dr. Train. I really appreciate you and your team doing so much work to really catch us up and do the work that we've done, I would say, you know, the last two years. This Mayor and Council has voted time and time again to invest resources in our team, our staff, our Tucson family, our workers. And this year alone, we're in year two of a compensation plan we passed last year. This year alone, we're investing $18.1 million into our city workers because we appreciate and value their service. And the compensation plan represents the next steps in one of the largest investments in employee pay increases that we've made for city employees. And we've been breaking our own records for the past six years. And since I became mayor, that was one of my focus areas that we invest in. in our city workers. So we have been investing millions and millions of dollars in, you know, since six years ago, we started base pay progression for employees. We've done numerous market rate adjustments. Last year and this year, we started in-rage pay placement or compression for our employees, performance standards for any base pay progression and in-rage range pay placement. We really have invested in our employees. Of course, we need to continue doing our work to make sure that we remain competitive and we continue investing in our employees. But we all know these investments are being made with clear intention during a very difficult budget cycle. It is wonderful to see employees out and about in meetings within the city and being approached by our firefighters or police officers and really getting thanks for these investments. This year, we were also, it was my goal as mayor to make sure that we added additional police officers. We went out to get a grant to hire 50 additional police officers and continue investing in public safety and in the safety of our community. Okay. these key compensation elements work together to build equitable market-based compensation systems and I'm very, very happy. One of the questions that I received, there was a difference in environmental services where our truck operators received a market rate adjustment and our landfill operators got a much more modest adjustment. And so I wonder if we're doing some additional work on that piece of our environmental services.

Honorable Mayor, members of the Council, it is correct that the solid waste equipment operators, which are the ones who do the collections of the bins, received a significant market adjustment, whereas the equipment operations specialists, which is a group that paints across several city departments, including Water, DTM, and ES, did not receive a substantial increase for market. That is not because a market analysis was not done. A market analysis was actually done on that job, and it did not trigger us to bring forward a market adjustment for the EOS group of folks. So we did market-driven analysis of all of those jobs in that department. And in the one case, they were found to be well below market. And in the other case, they were found to be fairly close to market. However, EOS, or Equipment Operations Specialists, is a group that we have on our work list for the coming year to take another look at it, especially including the fact that they're in environmental services, water, and transportation mobility, so they will get a fresh look in the coming year, but it's not that they were overlooked in this year. And if I have a moment, I'll also indicate there's about a handful of additional, we're moving from the formal disputes into the comp plan more generally here, but as we bring you the final comp plan for part of the budget adoption on June ninth, we're still resolving some open questions around police hazardous device technicians, our bomb squad. We're working directly with them. We're trying to finalize some things with fire to make sure we're getting it precise. We've had some concerns from our deputy directors in that When we communicated their initial raise, we communicated it incorrectly, so we're cleaning that up as we go. They are still getting a raise. It's just we're making sure we're being correct and precise. And then we have data analysts kind of generally across the organization is an area where we're also doing some additional look. So I want to bring those forward because, as you mentioned, even when we have formal disputes and what's disputable what's not disputable that's one process but if somebody has a legitimate question or a legitimate concern we're also looking at that even if it's not found to be quote disputable so this work is still in flight and we're going to have as much resolved by budget adoption as we can and as dr train mentioned if as we approach october when the market adjustments go into place if we have to do anything further we would bring it back to you for adoption of any final changes at that time. So we've got a couple more steps along the way to get it just right. But this is a key element of that and making sure that everybody that filed a dispute gets an adequate response.

It was really useful to have the mayor's compensation plan hearing and being able to listen to the employees and their concerns. We heard from, you said they're not a lot, but it was important feedback. And I just want to let the employees know that those mayor compensation hearings are are very useful because then I learn much more about what the needs are, the concerns are, for the places where we still need to do improvement in pay and a fair... uh compensation for uh for those jobs so i i appreciate it i know that one of the things that i requested that the city manager and hr do is include labor unions in these conversations and in my conversations with our labor unions they really appreciate it being able to sit down with HR, sit down with our city manager, and being included into the executive leadership team meetings so that they could have conversations with the department directors based on their knowledge and to be able to represent their members in the labor union. So again, I wanted to thank Mr. City Manager for your incredible work, our CFO, Anna Rosenberry, and of course, Dr. Train in HR and all of your teams for the incredible amount of heavy lifting that you all had to do to get us to this place. Appreciate it. Open to my colleagues.

Council Member Schubert. Thank you. Just a super quick question, just out of curiosity more than anything else. How were the benchmark organization comparators selected?

Those five that I have identified have been the benchmark organizations for, I believe, at least the last five years. And I will turn to our city manager if there's anything additional. But that's my understanding, so prior to my arrival.

Honorable Mayor, members of the council, that's correct. It's been approximately five years. And they were selected based on similar either work environment and or economy of those locations. And the city manager at the time also placed an emphasis on if we're going to be competing in a marketplace, what are the jurisdictions that we're losing people to? If they're choosing to leave us and they're going to San Francisco, that's not our market. And we don't have people going to San Francisco necessarily. But the county and a couple of those valley cities and the towns nearby, that is our market. Those are our competitors for talent. So that was a key factor in selecting those five. And then I will add one more little Mixed to it, the MOUs for Tucson Fire and Tucson Police have a different set, which includes most of those, but a couple of additional ones because of the unique nature of fire service versus like some of those towns don't have a fire department, et cetera. So where an MOU exists with a labor organization, we use those cities or districts. Blanket for everybody else, we use those five. And Mayor, if I could borrow the mic for one more moment. I sent out a note earlier this week to the council. We have selected a new labor manager. This is going to be a direct report to me. And actually, she'll be housed at the Price Service Center to be much closer to where the work is occurring for much of our organization. For those of you that don't know them, Price Service Center that is where a lot of our public safety communications folks are general services folks environmental services transportation mobility ward five little shout out there but also our new south side public safety complex so there's a significant footprint from police and fire there so rather than have deborah hillary is our new labor manager be here in the ivory tower of city hall SHE'LL ACTUALLY BE HOUSED INSTANT AMONGST OUR WORKFORCE TO HAVE VERY DIRECT CONVERSATION AND RELATIONSHIPS WITH REPRESENTED AND NONREPRESENTED FOLKS. SHE STARTS JUNE 1ST.

THAT'S GREAT NEWS. THAT'S AWESOME. COUNCILMEMBER RADAKAS.

THANKS FOR THE SHOUT OUT, CITY MANAGER. I HAVE A QUESTION. WHAT TRENDS OR COMMON CONCERNS ARE BEING SEEN ACROSS THE DISPUTES? ARE THERE SOME COMMONALITIES?

I'll give you the overview where things are not disputable, but this is the trending for the things that have been shared. For instance, benefits increases, cost increases, a call for access to fiscal data, meaning really wanting to learn about our market survey information and having that readily available. Department starting pay, sometimes that's an interesting conversation with various employees. Then, of course, there's passion around individual compensation. And oftentimes when we have healthy and predictive conversations one-to-one with employees, they genuinely are saying, I believe my contribution to the city is worth more than even what the market comparators are demonstrating. And that's a very personal and sometimes emotional reaction for people. Other times, it'll be a job description content discussion. So what we've identified as essential functions or the scope of work, sometimes that is either an opinion where it's too big, or gee, I'm doing much more than what is listed. And that's one of our perpetual assignments that will be continuing into the fall and spring of 27, where we're really beginning to, again, examine some of those individual job descriptions. going on also sometimes performance evaluation. And recall that we now have a citywide opportunity in our Workday software platform for performance evaluations to be completed Those systems are designed to be interactive on a continual basis, not just once a year or anniversary date, but rather goal setting and then goal accomplishment and really helping people grow their career path. And so sometimes there is a hope that if I reach and exceed standards, Would that then translate to, and then there is a preference or there is a hope for an adjustment, and usually it's a percentage adjustment that's being requested. Sometimes salary ranges, and oftentimes that is on the far right side or the high end of the range. And again, as we are teaching all of this in a lot of our academy sessions and just educational sessions with employees, they will say, I notice that the top of the range is here. Why is that the limit? And so again, we are doing education on those kinds of things. And then also suppression rates, hourly rates, and just the mathematical computation, particularly for our commissioned in police and fire. Those are very complex payroll formulas. And then when we're looking at different shift assignments and those kinds of things, sometimes that means we go in and we actually are analyzing the individual employee's pay history. to help them understand this is how we're calculating what is being paid. So those are the things that stand out just in trending in talking to people.

And also what I your might have to help me Terry with this. At the compensation hearing we heard from prosecutors yes or are doing incredible work that we want them to focus on right on the community court. In our specialty courts work. And what else was it? Was it records at police department? There was a few at police department.

Yes, honorable mayor and members of the council. We have trended in your attachment page the 18 items that we're continuing to research. Those areas, data analysis, project manager, but also on the forensic side for PD, et cetera, in the time that I've been serving in the last two years, those are passionate areas where that information or request continues to come forward. We have about 10 market studies now on the docket. We'll begin creating the calendar for that work right in the middle of June. Our goal is to be done with that market work, including those unique areas in the 18 that you see, no later than about November 1. We're going to have a very, very passionate forward movement to try to get that new information and hopefully address these reoccurring, particularly police and some of those crime analysts and data analysts' roles. So that's part of our next effort.

Thank you for the continuous improvement work. Really appreciate it. Any other questions? And you really don't need any direction from us. It's just an update and report. No, we don't.

Just information for you today.

Thank you so much. Really appreciate it. Thank you.

We appreciate your support. Thank you.

Likewise. Ready? So we move on to item three. Item three, time has been set aside for discussion on parks and recreation proposed fees and current feedback on certain fees. Mr. Manager.

Honorable Mayor, members of the Council, joining me here at the table is our Parks and Recreation Director, Lara Hamway. And our intent for bringing this study session open was we've been talking about various parks and recreation fees. We've given notice of intent on specific fees. And we actually have a public hearing for the consideration of potential adoption of those fees at the next meeting. But because there's so much complexity to the Parks and Rec way of doing things, and there were certainly some profound questions from the community, that we wanted to make sure you had one more study session on this, so that if we have to make any adjustments to that final package for your consideration at the next meeting, we can get started on that. And there are a few areas we've been working on that I'll let Director Hamway address things like pickleball, things like how we approach lap swimming, things of that nature. So we'll give you an update on where we are in the conversation. And also, while we don't need any action today, we are seeking any feedback you'd like to be incorporated in that final package brought to you on the 9th. With that, I turn it over to Larry.

Good afternoon, Mayor, council members. So always happy to talk about parks. And like city manager said, we definitely have heard varying levels of feedback on different fees. We know we brought a heavy lift with a lot of fees. And so just kind of going down the list, Pickleball was probably the most vocal users that we heard from, which we resolved on May 5th when there was support for us to enter into an MOU with the Tucson area Pickleball. and that is ongoing. I would say then the next in line were our therapy pool and lap swim users. Originally, the plan was a presentation of $30 a month or $324 for the year. And in engaging with that stakeholder group, we heard very clearly that a lot of them are seniors, disabled, fixed income, and had concerns that at $30 a month, especially if they were not swimming more, than a handful times a month, $30 just would be a heavy lift. A lot of them, proven that they are historical users, talked about back before COVID how they were paying for a $2 punch pass, and kept asking could we possibly go back to that concept so what we have arrived at is a recommendation to do both a $2 punch pass or a $30 a month fee this is going to allow us to cater to both users the user who comes in four times a month and the user who is swimming four times a week because we definitely met all of those types of users And they'll be able to sign up through ActiveNet, Easy Reg, create a profile. And for those that are comfortable to load their punch pass online, they'll be able to do that. For those that would prefer to do it in person, they can do that at any rec center and including the Edith Ball Aquatic Center because that is a location that still has a POS system established. We're also recommending to delay this rollout until September 1st. July 1st, if you can imagine, we've got 40,000 plus people going to pools. Not a great time to roll out a new system and also to educate our users. So September 1st would give us enough time to get everything set up physically on site to do the barcode scanning of the punch pass, but also allow us to educate our users on what the punch pass or monthly pass option would be. So then the next topic is really our youth sports team fee. This is a brand new fee, and it's understandable that we're hearing a lot of confusion around the purpose of it. It is rooted in cost of service. Right now, your youth sports team team users of parks, I said users twice, they're paying a light fee. And if they're participating in the secondary season, then they're paying for some field costs. But they are primarily 80% of our users of fields and currently not paying for any of that use. And there is certainly a cost to prepping those fields, doing allocation every year, making those fields accessible. So we decided a unique approach, which was to approach this in a manner of applying a per team fee per season. which is $100 per team, it comes down to less than a dollar per week per child for each season. And the reason for this approach is we do feel that we get overinflated numbers each season, which then causes us to allocate out fields to teams or to user groups that may not actually need all of those fields. And why is that important? Because the demand definitely outweighs the inventory. So we would like to level set that by applying an approach of assigning a fee per team. It allows us to start collecting some cost service recovery. And then we're also anticipating it's going to help us to see a more fair distribution and active use of fields. I don't know if any of you have received the calls that we get. which is this field at this time on this day was empty, and I was practicing next door with multiple teams on one field, and that's really frustrating. So we're hoping this is going to help us to reduce some of those complaints. And this would really go into effect for spring season, because by the time we go to mayor and council for approval on June 9th, our fall allocation will already have occurred. And then just a few smaller things is that we originally recommended for all fees to be adopted July 1st, but we recognize that summer camp and in-betweeners and learn to swim really apply to summer months, and it would be better for us to basically adopt those fee changes January 1st, because then when we build our registration portal, We're able to appropriately set it up for the true cost if that is approved. And then finally, we have had some feedback as we discussed the current non-city resident fee, which is 25% over what a city resident pays and adjusting that to 50%. And understandably, there are those that have been concerned. So with that, those are the largest amount of feedback that we've received and so happy to chat through and answer any questions and provide any clarity that is needed.

I think it would be good to clarify the youth sports fee because I think there was a lot of confusion. People were interpreting the $100 per team per season as if it were per child, $100 per child. Can you further clarify?

and compare our youth sports fee versus the youth sports organizations that pay pima county parks thank you mayor um so definitely our approach is more unique but pima county if you were to go and reserve if you are youth sports team right now, you would pay $2 per field per hour and $9, if you're using lights, $9 per hour. And to show how we all do things just slightly different, Oro Valley charges just a flat rate of $12 per hour. So they incorporate their light fee into one one usage fee there, like one bulk rate. We are not looking at a per child cost. We are looking at a per team cost. Most teams are going to be comprised of 10 kids, which is why we kind of broke it down to that digestible understanding of under a dollar per week per child per season. And we're happy to communicate this out more clearly, like the intent and then also the root of the cost of service. Because we know that our fields are very valuable, but we also need to be in a space where we do have some recovery.

Council member Cunningham.

So first of all, I want to let everyone know for the record that as a huge youth sports advocate and someone who's worked as a coach in multiple sports, I've coached girls softball, girls soccer, boys soccer. men's basketball, boys basketball, and girls basketball, all in some capacity. Ooh, black football. I forgot about black football. I coached that too. I've coached all those at the recreational and scholastic level. And as Lara knows, as the director knows, I've got a relationship with quite a few of the league presidents for each sport. I'm one of the people who advocated for charging per team per kid. That was brought to me by different coaches and different league presidents. And so for some of the folks who called this week and let me know their displeasure with this, what I want to let them know is that this is not aimed to put the squeeze on folks. This isn't aimed to pass on higher league fees to parents. They already pay enough. This is aimed to control some of the misuse. It's not even overuse. One of the issues we have is we have certain fields that are triple booked seven days a week, and we have other fields that stay empty for half the season because someone locks up the field and then no one uses it. And that doesn't work. That's just not going to work. As a matter of fact, I literally want Parks and Rec, if we can figure this out through a trial and error basis, to begin locking fields once a week anyway. We can't have healthy turf growth IF WE HAVE OVERUSE OF FIELDS EVERY SINGLE DAY, WE CAN'T. I KNOW THAT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE WHO SAY THAT THAT'S POSSIBLE. I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I THINK WE HAVE TO WATER IT AND KEEP PEOPLE OFF AT LEAST ONE 24-HOUR PERIOD A WEEK. I REALLY BELIEVE THAT ON HOW WE GET OUR TURF QUALITY TO A LEVEL THAT'S ACCEPTABLE. SO ALL THAT BEING SAID, I DO THINK WE NEED TO HAVE SOME WIGGLE ROOM. AND THE REASON I THINK IS, IS BECAUSE UNINTENDED AS IT IS, There are situations where we had folks, we have certain leagues that were overtaxed. So we have a good example, probably the easiest example is Rincon Little League. Rincon Little League has 500, 600 kids. And they do not have access to enough fields. They are over-enrolled in their Little League. And they probably needed some extra field time coming north. At the same time, we had another Little League. We had three different Little Leagues that had to merge because they were under-enrolled. And so including Frontier merged with Canyon View, I want to say Cactus is now a hybrid of Palo Verde, Saguaro, and Cactus Little League, and Empire, all merged. So again, we've had some shift. And that's just on the... baseball side. There's also the football side, where four years ago, the Wildcats had 600 families out at Jesse Owens every night. And now their numbers are probably leveled off a little bit and come down. So each club is going to ebb and flow. I want to give you guys some leeway. So if a league paid a ton of light fees last year, And then they're still getting the $100, and they still need that legitimate. And they're looking at doubling or tripling their cost. I want to see if there's some type of bulk-like discount you can give again. We don't know until it comes up. I don't know if we have to make a motion. I don't know what we can do, but I want to give Parks and Rec a little wiggle room, especially with the nonprofit leagues, specifically the nonprofit leagues, which is two of the youth football leagues, AYSO, Pima County Junior, PJSL, I always get that one messed up. And Little League. Little League and Girls Softball Little League. Those are the ones that are nonprofit, full on. They're well established. We've worked with them every year. And for some of them, they're going to come in and say, you're tripling what my budget is last year. And this is legitimate how many kids we have. And you guys have been doing this long enough. You know who's who. And you know who's overstating and who isn't. So you've got some leeway there. So I want to tell you informally now, I'm more than happy to pass this and advocate for these new fees. But I want to tell you now, you need to have some leeway. Because what's going to happen is we're going to get calls from league presidents about their league fees going up. And they're going to tell us how horrible we are. And that's fine. That's part of the job. But at the end of the day, that's not the intent here. So that's kind of my input on this. It's a more informal piece than anything else. And I just wanted to let you know that that's kind of one of the – one of the things I have the other piece is is that the I've got some feedback about the ARC therapy pool and pool sessions and the times of the sessions So I don't know what's going on with how we're allotting you to fall I think we're adding another therapy pool correct into our inventory Mayor councilmember Cunningham so yes mission manner when it opens we'll have a therapy pool and

And I know that part of the engagement around the aquatics pass, we had folks that were advocating in the summer months that we tend to reduce some of our aquatic fitness classes. And they were advocating for us to not do such a reduction because of how much they rely on that. So instead of the two that were planned, we added an additional two. to have that level of consistency for the classes.

OK. I just got some feedback about the ARC therapy sessions and their costs. And the increase might be, you know, that's part of our disabled community. So I just have some questions about that. I'll speak you offline with. But in the meantime, as far as the league fees go, I'm on board. That brings me to my last thing I'm going to talk about today, which is the Kidco fees. I'M WILLING TO GO ALONG WITH THE KIDCO FEES THIS YEAR, BUT RIGHT NOW WITH THE KIDCO FEES WE HAVE, I REALLY WANT TO FIND A THIRD ALTERNATIVE AND A THIRD SPOT WHERE WE GET A HIGHER COST RECOVERY. IT MAY, THE 26, THE 27 PROPOSAL KIND OF MEETS THAT NUMBER, BUT THE REDUCTION, THE The low-income piece might back it out. We really have to see how many more people use the low-income piece this year. But for me, right now, the going rate for after school is about $94 a week. And the current Kidco cost is about $9 a week. And then if we increase even to next year, it would only be about $12 a week. But some of the reductions will go as low as $2.40 a week, which is a really, really good deal. But a lot of the folks that would be receiving that would also be eligible for free AFTER SCHOOL CARE THROUGH DES. AND SO I WANT TO BE SURE WE'RE NOT LEAVING MONEY ON THE TABLE. THE OTHER PIECE I'LL TELL YOU IS THAT WE'RE SERVING 883 KIDS FOR KID CO AFTER SCHOOL, AND WE'RE SERVING ABOUT 1100 KIDS FOR KID CO SUMMER. I THINK IT'S A LITTLE HIGHER THAN THAT, BUT IT'S 1100 AND CHANGE, IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECT. I want to have a second model where we can offer as many as 2,500 to 4,000 families with Kidco. And I think there's a avenue to do that if we add a third piece for a cost recovery option. And we can grandfather in the sites that have the super low cost, but I'd much rather have 4,000 families be available to themselves where they can afford summer supervision. And they can afford recreational supervision. It's not actual supervision. But they can afford recreational programming both after school and in the summer. And it's only about $1,500 a year per kid out of their annual budget. And that would mean a lot. Because as a parent who raised three boys, That usually, even in the last two years, that usually costs right around $6,000 a year. So having it almost universally available, so it's only about $1,500. it'll leave a lot of money in people's pockets. So that's some stuff I want to think about for next year as we implement. It's a good start, and it's what we asked for. And if I'm not going to If I'm not going to support measures like this when you do what we asked for, because it's not exactly the way I want it, then that is in leadership. So we got your back, and it's good work, Larry. Your team should be proud for not only taking the plunge, but taking all the hate emails, taking all the people yelling at you guys. You guys did all right on this, and this is the right move. So I support the proposal.

Any others? Council Member Dahl, and then Barajas, and then Schubert.

Thank you, Mayor. Three things. So kudos to Paul and what he last said, double, Laura and your team. We heard a lot of feedback about the lap swimmers. And I think you've hit on the hybrid solution that will. And we heard a lot of, we don't mind paying fees. We would like to see extended hours and improving services. So just seeding that in your mind. I was the father of youth. a sports fanatic who played on teams on the city leagues. And I think it's fine to do the $100 a team. I myself was on leagues that use park fields, and it seems fair that everybody pays for what they're doing. And just a final note, let's not forget we threw rec centers into the mix, and then we pulled them back. I think it was really good that we didn't go any further Do any further cuts to rec centers because they are lifelines across the city Thank You mayor

Council member Baragas. Thank you, Mayor. Well, you know, our office has met with different sports leagues, including youth football teams, youth football leagues, men's soccer leagues, senior softball teams, and youth baseball leagues. And these teams all shared information regarding some of the costs they incur, as well as some of the same challenges they have faced in using our parks. And I would like to just share some of that feedback. so the teams are asking for reassurance that if additional fees are being charged that there will also be a higher level of accountability and maintenance provided by the city sports organizations and families want to ensure that any new fees directly contribute to cleaner safer and better maintain parks for all users if new fees are approved how will the city ensure parks The restrooms in sports filter are kept safe clean and while maintain for families and youth sports teams especially in our parks that are being you know renovated. So the fees we charge should be fair and equitable in our parks and recreation center should be active while maintain safe and enjoyable to use for all. I don't want to see our families leave our city parks, and I look forward to engaging alongside you all at Parks and Recreation, as well as alongside our neighbors. So I do feel like this presents a good time to just regroup and have a pretty strong protocol when it comes to our youth leagues, having something uniform across the city, because I know it's just not a Ward 5 issue, but these teams that I met with directly utilize our Ward 5 parks. Thank you, and good work.

Council Member Schubert.

A lot of great points already made already. Just want to add my appreciation to Parks and Rec and Director Hamway for listening to community feedback and crafting these thoughtful and innovative updates. We shared these updated proposals with folks who had reached out to our office with concerns, and we heard a lot of appreciation and confirmation that these changes work for them and their families, particularly the pickleball and the pool aspects. The proposal to work with Tucson Area Pickleball in particular is really creative. I appreciate that the community showed a willingness to be positive and work with us on a solution. A solution that allows us to maintain and grow these facilities while also maintaining an environment that works well for the players. And just echoing Council Member Barraja's feedback about ensuring that the revenue generated is reinvested in the areas that are generating it. I also want to say aloud, I hope we can find ways to activate similar energy and processes if we face challenges at other facilities or parks in the future. This type of positive community informed outcome is something we should be aiming for all across the city. And Council Member Cunningham had talked about expanding Kidco access to like 2,500 to 4,000 families. I mean, if we could find a way to do that. I mean, Mary and I were talking about how the three biggest expenses for our families are child care, housing, and transportation. So if we can expand access to a super affordable child care option, I feel like that would be very helpful for our working families. And I think those are all my comments. Thank you so much.

I do want to reiterate my appreciation for all of the work that you, Laura, and your entire team, including the workers at the parks that maintain our facilities. I, too, heard that people want to see the investment in our field, the investment in keeping the bathrooms clean. clean, and that's kind of hard, but I'm looking forward to, because we have so much assets, right, and only a certain amount of employees, so I am looking forward to the possibility of really taking a look at and evaluate at the end of one year, how are things, you know, working? Because I know, and you've said this on the record before, in some of these fees we have not done a cost analysis and we have not brought these fees up, sometimes 10 years. So can you, just for the record, you know, talk to us about the cost recovery efforts that we're trying to do?

with with these proposals Thank You mayor and thank you for all the Acknowledgement of the team's effort because they it really was a heavy lift so To my knowledge a lot of the fees were discussing outside of the brand-new fees have not been changed since 2010 And so what that did do is put us at a disadvantage, especially as just normal cost escalation, staff, supplies, et cetera. So we're committed, and I believe I did mention this when I last came to talk about the fees, is that we really do want to have a yearly tracking system in place, and we're actually standing that up right now so that we can compare As our fee collection advances in the new fiscal year based on approval on June 9th, how it compares to what last year's revenue collection was so that we can still understand in the space what is the real-time impact. And then that'll allow us, when we go into the budget season, to really have good conversation around that and what has adjusted, hopefully in the favor of Parks and Rec when it comes to our revenue forecast.

Thank you so much. Appreciate it. And yeah, I mean, within the next year, we could see what the cost recovery really is, how we will reinvest it back into our employees, our fields, the bathroom cleanups. and reactivation of spaces. I know I've had conversations with Council Member Barajas about keeping, especially those new parks or those renovated parks, keeping them busy with families using the assets. So I'm looking forward to the continuation. And by the way, I agree that we should have some flexibility. You should have some flexibility in terms of how to move things around so that we can accommodate our sports leagues in the city of Tucson. Thank you again for the good update, and thank you for adjusting your plan, hearing from the community.

Thank you, Mayor, and that's the value of an NOI.

I'm looking forward to continue our conversation regarding Kidco. and how we do that expansion. Because as Council Member Schubert said, the most expensive expenses per year per family are transportation, child care, and housing. And so Kidco plays an important role for that equation in terms of affordability.

Thank you very much. Thank you so much. We appreciate it.

Alrighty, so we move on to item four. Thank you, Director Hanley. Item four, time has been set aside for discussion of the tentative budget adoption for fiscal years 2027. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, honorable mayor and council members. We are in the home stretch now. And tonight, we have an item for you to consider tentative adoption of the budget. for a flight twenty seven that tentative adoption is where you spending cap for the city you still have opportunities to adjust specific spend categories as we refine and bring you the final budget for adoption on june ninth but tonight is a very important step along the way Having said that, there's not a lot of action required at this study session, but there is one based on conversation at last meeting. There was discussion of the employee downtown allowance and that that hadn't been adjusted for a number of years, which is true. So we did some analysis on that, and I do have one recommendation for you for this study session, which is to increase the downtown allowance from a paycheck, amount of $11.54 per pay period to $16.16 per pay period. The reason that's strange math is we get paid 26 times a year, not 24 times a year. Having said that, it equates to increasing that benefit from $25 a month into the pockets of employees to $35 a month into the pockets of employees. So that is my recommendation for reconsideration of a potential motion here at the study session. What I will say is that doesn't materially, it does have a cost, but it doesn't trigger us to have to fundamentally change the budget for next year. We have a couple of categories that the employee benefits side can include and accommodate this change, should you make it. So with that, I turn it over to Anna Rosenberry to give you the update, and then we'll seek your direction on that item.

Thank you, Tim. Mayor and Council, I'll give you just a little bit more details about both of those top line items that the city manager presented to you. Our memorandum goes into detail about that tentative budget. The fact that the tentative budget is setting an expenditure ceiling for the next fiscal year, but that ceiling doesn't finalize your allocation between programs. You can do that until you adopt a final budget. So as the tentative budget is adopted, again, you can't increase the amount of spending, but you can make changes that have zero impact or decrease the total budget as you get to a final approval. We've described within the memorandum three revisions that we're bringing forward from what was in the recommended budget. One of them is a correction between what we had budgeted and then general fund between general government and the IT department. Another one is a correction to the number of FTEs, full-time equivalent positions that we had in the recommended budget, adding one position within HCD when in the past we had paid for that through contracted services. So that's kind of a correction to the recommendation. And then we made one revision to accommodate what we are now expecting to be a cash carryover within housing and community development in the general fund. And so we have accurately planned to spend what will be carried over from fiscal 26 into fiscal 27. Those are the three revisions that we've made for you in preparing the tentative budget. There's a bit of information within the memorandum further describing setting the property tax levels, both the primary and the secondary property tax. Nothing changed from recommended budget. We're just continuing to add those details as we go into final budget approval and final tax levy setting. That tax levy adoption is scheduled for June 23rd, so the meeting after final budget. As the city manager described, we're asking for your direction on the recommended increase to the employee downtown allowance from its current amount of $11.54 per pay period to $16.16 per pay period. If you'd like to proceed with that, we would make that effective June 28th, along with the date that we are making our annual pay progression effective.

your honor i'd like to move that we increase the monthly downtown employee stipend from 25 35 seconded there's a motion and a second um do we also have to approve the the the ceiling of the budget right now or during the okay during the hearing already so there's a motion a second any discussion to give direction to add that downtown allowance additions Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any against? Motion carries. Go ahead, Anna.

The materials also include the delivery of our strategic budget analysis report from the Office of Equity for fiscal year 27. Very nice document with a lot of great information on what your departments are doing. to ensure equitable service delivery across the community. I'd encourage you and community members as well to take a read in that document. And finally, we are now tracking on a piece of the communication that we call post-budget adoption activities. And we're letting you know some of the time frames that we're looking at after the budget is adopted to start carrying out and implementing the budget and having conversations about that implementation. So with that, we're available for any additional questions that you have today, Mayor.

Any questions? Nope? Alrighty. No, I actually just want to appreciate all the incredible work done, Mr. Tamir, Anna, and your entire team. I'm really part of the hard work that the city manager and his team and all of us have put into really Having the residents and employees participate in the work of, you know, of putting together a budget. This budget is balanced, and despite significant challenges, it's not based on pitting one service together. against the other or one part of our community against the other. It is a budget grounded in equity, sustainability, prosperity for all Tucsonans. It's a budget towards the future. It's an affordability budget. We make sure that the services that we continue to deliver to our city We are only doing moderate cost of service recuperation. It's a budget that maintains our core services, police, fire. We didn't have to close any fire stations. We are hiring 50 additional officers. We are paying an additional $18 million this year alone. in salary increases. We are being innovative, increasing safety, creating affordability, building resiliency in our city. Today, when so many families are struggling and more and more of our paychecks are going towards rising energy costs, rising food costs, rising gas prices, Rising childcare prices. We, the city of Tucson, are answering the call and offering additional after school activities, increasing heat resiliency, offering free swim classes for our children. That is so important. in a city like Tucson, thanks to our partners at Pima County. Our fiscal year 27 budget protects essential services as we continue to absorb the Ducey-era flat tax and the continual onslaught of Trump's economic policies that are creating chaos, uncertainty, and loss of revenues for cities. So, as I've been before, I'm going to be clear today, we are not balancing this budget on the backs of Tucsonans. We are meeting the needs of our entire community, investing in our employing, keeping recreation centers and fire stations open, supporting community safety programs, and continuing to invest in affordable housing like no other mayor and council have done. We must continue to be honest about the financial strains outside of our control, which are the Ducey-era flat tax, which continues to reduce critical revenue for our city. ongoing uncertainty and compliance requirements tied to federal funding rollbacks from recent legislation for forcing cities to do more with less the state legislature again is thinking of passing additional tax cuts to corporations and millionaires that could continue affecting the state shared revenue of the city of Tucson. And most recently, proposed actions at the state legislature to eliminate the Rio Nuevo district, which keeps $19 million a year of taxes generated by Tucsonans, by the way, to continue to invest downtown revitalization and continued development which is very good for our community so again a balanced budget does not mean across the board cuts it means responsible stewardship and laser focus in making smart investments protecting critical services and planning for long-term stability so This is a very holistic budget, one that looks at the full picture of working families need, what our employees need, and I'm very happy to support this budget. Thank you so much for working so hard for making it a fair, equitable budget for our entire community. So if we don't need any more motions or movements on here, Then I'll let you go. Thank you so much for the update. Thank you. We're going to move to item five. Let me read it into the record. Okay, so item five. Time has been set aside for Mayor and Council to receive an update on strategic initiatives related to fentanyl opioid public health crisis. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, honorable mayor and members of the council. Joining me here now is one of our other assistant city managers, Liz Morales, who's overseeing a number of activities in the safe city space, inclusive of our work in the opioid public health crisis. So we have some presentation here for you today and some updates. With that, I'll turn it over to Liz to guide this discussion.

Thank you Mister city manager honorable mayor members of the Council happy to fill in for the greatly Hopkins who actually gets to take some time off. But I'm going to share a few updates and then introduce some presenters we have today. Just as an update on around community safety health and wellness and the prevention and response work they do around those who. suffer from substance use addictions around opioid. Since January 2026, staff have connected and served over 350 individuals on opioid dependence and overdose prevention, which complements the TC3's quarterly Narcan outreach to local businesses. Our Tucson Police Department, their deflections to treatment, comparing January 1st, 2026 to April 28th of 2026, TPD has deflected a total of 197 people into treatment. When looking over the same period of time in 2025, TPD deflected 103 people into treatment. This is about a 91% increase year to date. I'd like to give you, before I go into an update with, well, I will start with the ROSAC update before we do our presentation on the Safer Center. An update on the financial picture. Pima County, the region, has received a total funds of 31 million. We do expect over the 18 years to receive a total of 127.3 million. At the April 15th meeting of our Regional Opioid Settlement Advisory Committee, which we refer to as ROSAC, we received a report that an additional 1 million is en route. Although it's unknown when we might receive additional funding, we do know that up to this point the annual funding continues to average about seven and a half to eight million per year. I do want to share that on April 15th at the same ROSAC meeting, I was able to present to the committee an opportunity, which is one of the assets we own, which is Desert Cove. I pitched a model called the Desert Cove Recovery Center, which would be a shelter operation focused on serving individuals experiencing homelessness who also have substance use disorders, including those with fentanyl and opioid addiction. Community Bridges Incorporated, CBI, has successfully operated this city-owned shelter for more than two years, but the current funding is set to expire on June 30th, 2026. Through the city's ongoing safer and opioid response efforts, one of the things we're hearing consistently is that one of the big gaps is a lack of shelter for people coming out of jail, coming out of Safer, coming out of all of our different systems, and especially one that would be designed for this population. I believe the Desert Cove Recovery Center would provide a critical transition point for these individuals coming, whether from the streets or from the Safer program, into a recovery-focused environment. The program would be to stabilize individuals, connect them to the next step, services including residential treatment programs, sober living environments, housing and supportive services. Many of these individuals do need more time to become, whether it's access or Medicaid eligible, or to obtain identification and other required documents before they can successfully enter treatment or other housing resources. Staff, meaning myself, requested ROSAC to consider direct funding Desert Cove because this project addresses a critical gap. And we will hear from around the University of Arizona's midpoint report that was one of the gaps that was identified. I will say that positively ROSAC expressed strong interest in this project, but did express some concerns around how to fund it, whether it's direct funding or doing a request for a proposal process, which would be a competitive process. So they decided to discuss further and get back to us, and then I received word back that they did opt to go with a request for proposal process. The operational cost to operate this is estimated at $1.1 million. And so whether a ROSAC funds us fully or partially through this process, it will determine whether we can open the doors. Pima County advised me that the RFP scope would be narrowed from five eligible activities to one category, transitional wraparound support services. So very broad category. And at this time, the timeline for the release of the RFP remains unclear. It does create the concern that Desert will be vacant beginning July 1st if replacement funding is not secured in time. So I wanted to provide that update and hopefully the opportunity to be able to utilize Desert Cove in the near future. I'd now like to pivot, Mayor, to our presenters. As you know, I've been talking about SAFER, which stands for Sobering Alternative for Recovery Center. It's a unique model providing sobering facility up to 96 hours. It was launched this year, January 26, as a six-month pilot. It received $1.8 million in opioid settlement, and it was awarded to Community Bridges. The center provides 15 beds, 24-hour low barrier facility with multiple entry points. It's being utilized as deflection for our law enforcement, also our community safety, health, and wellness, and other departments. The University of Arizona Responsive Insight Strategy, which is referred to as the RISE team, was subcontracted by Community Bridges to conduct a six-month scoping evaluation of the implementation of the SAFER pilot. Today we will hear from both U of A and CBI on the outcomes of the midpoint evaluation, so the three-month mark. I would like to introduce Dr. Laurel Jacobs, research assistant with the University of Arizona's RISE team with the College of Agriculture, Life, and Environmental Services. Also, we will hear from Raeann Buckingham, VP Crisis Services, and Lindsay Tellez, operations administrator for Community Bridges in Tucson.

Thank you, honorable mayor and council. My name is Laurel Jacobs. I'm a research assistant professor with the U of A's RISE evaluation team. And our team serves as the external evaluator for the Safer Center pilot. Today I'd like to share what we learned from the program's first three months, January through March, what is working well, where operations are still maturing, and a few key recommendations from the midpoint report. In terms of who Safer has served so far, between January 1st and May 22nd, 2026, Safer served 138 unique patients from 149 admissions. Patients were predominantly white, most commonly between the ages of 35 and 44, and 84% identified as white or Hispanic. Three quarters carried the Title 19 insurance, also known as Access, and seven unique pets, including six dogs and one cat, were also housed by Safer during this time. Primary referrals to the Safer Center during this period were family and friends, community-based partners, including the City of Tucson's Community Safety Health and Wellness Team, and CBI's own units, particularly its 23-hour crisis unit. CBI began collecting patients' social determinants of health data in March. Among the 30 patients screened, 97% reported being unhoused or having unstable housing, 100% were unemployed, and 67% were food insecure. Post-discharge, the most frequent referral for patients was to another CBI treatment site, and that was for 78 patients. Notably, during the first three months, median length of stay increased from around 11 hours to around 89 hours, suggesting that operational protocols as they have evolved are having a positive impact on the patient experience. In terms of highlighting what is working well with the SAFER pilot, clinical operations are certainly up and running. About a third of patients tested positive for opioids, and of those, 91% were fentanyl. Of patients who received a psychiatric assessment, 40% were diagnosed with polysubstance use involving opioids. As you know, SAFER can initiate medications, uprenorphine specifically for opioid use disorder, or MOUD. In the first three months, uptake was slow, with eight patients initiating MOUD and 11, excuse me, 11 patients initiating MOUD and eight patients continuing, although this has been increasing since April. Also, patients are leaving with a discharge plan. 96% of patients received a referral to ongoing services, although at times, patients with pets remained a challenge. And patients generally reported positive experiences. Among the 16 patients in March who completed CBI's patient satisfaction survey, ratings ranged from 4.7 to 4.9 on a five-point scale. Open-ended comments emphasized staff warmth and the value of a safe place to rest and recover. THAT SAID, THOSE LEAVING PRIOR TO RECEIVING A SURVEY AT DISCHARGE COULD BE MORE LIKELY TO HAVE A MORE VARIABLE EXPERIENCE AT SAFER AND WE DON'T YET CAPTURE THOSE VOICES. ALSO AT THIS TIME THE SURVEY IS ONLY AVAILABLE IN ENGLISH. In terms of where the SAFER pilot is still maturing, documentation is a vital issue. Several key SAFER metrics were not yet captured consistently by the midpoint, challenging our team's ability to assess if SAFER is meeting Pima County's four priority SAFER goals. In particular, there is a gap in characterizing the true TPD deflection impact of SAFER. Also, with about a third of patients testing positive for opioids, there's an opportunity to encourage more MOUD uptake among patients. It is notable that this has also improved in April. And finally, communication with partners. Some partners have referred patients to Safer with misunderstandings of the center's model, which has affected patient engagement once they arrive. In terms of recommendations moving forward, I'll highlight three of the eight found in our report. First, completing staffing is essential, with priority on nursing and behavioral health staff. If feasible, the access enrollment specialist position could also help close the gap for patients between their safer discharge and a seamless transition to treatment. Second. Strengthening SAFER's documentation practices, trainings, and data quality will ensure that key stakeholders can act on complete and accurate data, particularly the TPD deflection data, which would require coordination between CBI, TPD, and our evaluation team. And third, continued focus on providing consistent Safer Center information to community referring partners can support the broadest access to Safer and ensure that patients will stay for intake once they arrive. To close, I'd like to emphasize that the Safer's first three months may best be understood as a ramp-up phase, whereby CBI, with staffing, building operations, and adapting, all while caring for patients in real time, I think it's fair to say that the program's true baseline for ongoing operations has started to stabilize in April onward. The coming months will tell us much more about SAFER's steady state operations and true early impact in our community, particularly related to law enforcement deflections, MOUD initiation, and the pathway for patients after they leave SAFER.

Am I doing it? It's on? OK. Honorable Mayor and Council, thanks for having us. I'm Raeann Buckingham from Community Bridges, Vice President of Crisis Services.

Hi. And I'm Lindsay, the Operations Administrator over at Community Bridges.

I think Dr. Jacobs did a really nice job of explaining where the program is, what the successes have been, and what the ongoing development is. In the beginning, the program definitely felt like, how do you say? building the plane while you're flying it. So the input, the feedback, the evaluation that U of A is doing has been really helpful and insightful for us. Some of the things that we continue to work on are those communications with other partners and individuals who are utilizing SAFER. So we have seen a small increase in our length of stay. So all in all, we've served nearly 300 patients up to last Saturday. And that length of stay right now is at 93 hours. The program was designed to be at 96. And at that midpoint review, I think we were just under 90 hours, so we continue to have those improvements and that connection for patients with that ongoing communication. We are working on developing a work group that will include TPD, Kodak, who's our partner, other community partners as well so that we can have a continuous feedback loop so that they can really understand what the program is and explain that to individuals who are coming to the facility. I think I shared all in all, we've served nearly 300 patients. On any given day, our average census is almost nine. We are bringing in individuals with dogs and even cats, so we've served about 15, well, We're not really serving the pets. But we've seen about 15 pets come in so far. Individuals who come to us with pets end up staying a little bit longer because getting them connected to whatever their next step is is a little bit more difficult. And so we've been working with community partners who, kind of on a case-by-case basis, have been taking individuals and their pets. So that's been successful. Although it is a challenge and remains a challenge, we are able to get that done. Are there any questions for us?

No, I think we're going to continue having the conversation wrap up so that we can ask, you know, expand the conversation. But I wanted to thank Dr. Jacobs and Ms. Buckingham, Ms. Tellez for this incredible work. I hear you when you say we're building the plane while we're flying it, the Safer Center. as the mayor and council and our staff envisioned it, is really taking shape. And I think that it was brilliant to bring in RISE with the University of Arizona, the RISE team with the University of Arizona. Thank you so much, Dr. Jacobs, for your assessment and your recommendations especially, so that we can make sure that we get to a place, this being such a new and innovative program, that we get to a space where it's more and more successful in terms of data and the effects that it brings to our community. I guess my initial question for you all is What we have been hearing for the past two years are two huge gaps. One, the gap for safer services. And that is something that Mayor and Council pushed through to make sure that the Opioid Settlement Committee, the ROSAG, would fund it fully so that we could start the pilot. That was a huge gap that we saw from service providers, including our police department. We need a place where we can send people to sober up. and that have medical alternative treatments available. The second piece, the second biggest gap that we hear from service providers and community, our very own Tucson Police Department, as well as Community Safety, Health and Wellness, Housing First, our other nonprofit partners are, what happens when we get people out of Safer? Where do they land? Because they need special attention in continuing their sobering work. And even individuals coming out of the county jail, the county is spending a lot of money in doing medically assisted treatments while they're at jail. But then when they leave jail, what happens? Because recovery is more than 96 hours, as you all I'm sure know. Recovery, many nonprofits, And people that are on the ground takes six nine months. It's a longer-term recovery and so That's why I'm very curious miss Morales about About this you know desert Cove Recovery Center and the conversations that you and Mr. Holmes over at Pima County have been having and I did read into the review that you identified that as a gap. Can you talk a little bit more, either Dr. Jacobs or any one of you, about that possible gap that you all see?

Yeah. So we serve a lot of unsheltered individuals. So returning home, returning to family isn't often an option. And so we get people who are coming in from the street from a really difficult situation. They get a really good opportunity to stabilize, to participate in treatment, participate in group counseling, and really think about what is going to happen next. Individuals will leave our care going lots of different directions. Some people are going to go back into the community. And so we're working with the resources that are available. And so really kind of matching the resources and the person as best we can. But that isn't always a perfect match. In those cases, we welcome people to return to us because we don't want them to lose the little bit of stability that they have had, and that does happen. We always welcome someone to return so that we can make sure that they're well and that they're safe and kind of why that community placement didn't work for them to explore maybe where they could be successful next. For individuals who are ready to go on to a longer term treatment, then we can get them connected with a 30-day treatment program as long as they have insurance. So that's a big barrier there. We will help anyone who comes to us without insurance do an application so that they can hopefully get access started and have that availability. But that doesn't happen every single time. So we are using what is available to us to meet the individual's needs. And sometimes there are gaps where we have to be creative and get as close to meeting their needs as we can.

Ms. Morales, did you want to add anything?

Dr. Jacobs, did you want to? Okay. Oh, thank you. So, thank you for that question, Mayor. I do believe that exiting and what was just shared by Ran is that as people are leaving, if they want to continue treatment, if they're just starting that access process, they're not going to be able to get into a treatment program. so having a shelter because so many of them are unsheltered we heard 97 are unsheltered so having a place whether it's a shelter and cbi does have a couple shelter options that they've been able to put people but it's uh it's often at capacity as many of our shelters are especially low barrier shelters if they can take their pets so having desert cold recovery center would be low barrier where they can bring pets and also have access to treatment There is no shelter right now that would provide that transportation and services for treatment. And so I think that's why it's critical, a critical next step for people exiting safer. And so one of the things, Mayor, I just wanted as a wrap-up, I shared in the materials a memo from Pima County Health Department Director Theresa Cullen. Dr. Cullen states that the Safer Center remains a critical and innovative investment in Pima County's response to substance abuse and overdose. Early findings demonstrate strong patient experience high referral rates, and meaningful system engagement. However, the evaluation makes clear that data quality and reporting infrastructure are the most urgent issues requiring attention as they directly impact the county's ability to access outcomes, ensure accountability, and guide future decisions. So I strongly support the statement that Dr. Colin shares, because we know that what we're seeing so far is what we need in the community. And thanks to you, Mayor Romero, and council members for your vision and leadership to get Safer Pilot off implemented and off the ground as it is filling an urgent gap and providing us an opportunity to really understand what does this model mean for Tucson. This is a proven model in other communities and we want it to work here in Tucson. And so we're a community that, and the city is, great about pilots, we like to learn, we like to be flexible, and we will adapt. And as we heard about how we can continue to engage, whether it's through our TPD and looking at how that deflection has been impacted, we are at the table both with CBI and the County Health Department to be active partners to ensure that we're evaluating this and making sure it's successful for the community.

All right, so just for the record, just to make sure, what funds are we using for the Safer Center, and what funds are we requesting for the Desert Cove Recovery Center?

Yes, Mayor, the Safer is funded fully out of the opioid settlement dollars, $1.8 million. It was funded for six months. We know that there's sufficient funding for another six months, and from what I have been told by Pima County, that the funding is slated for three years. In addition, the Desert Cove, We believe it operationally would cost 1.1 million a year. We are bringing the asset without asking for leasing, purchase of the property. This property is already being in operation.

And owned by the city of Tucson.

And owned by the city of Tucson. So we believe that the 1.1 million is a very inexpensive investment to be able to provide a property this shelter that would help in this continuum of services for the opioid response that we need.

And the opioid settlement funds are private funds that different companies and corporations and pharmaceuticals paid into because of their intentional sale of opioids to individuals that got addicted to opioids in our country. Let's not forget that a lot of people forget that for more than 20 years opioids played a role. They were sold by pharmaceutical companies as something to relieve pain and they are highly, highly addictive. So these funds come from private companies that settled basically. That's why we call it opioid settlement funds. Just for purposes of clarity, opioid settlement funds are sent to states and states send them to cities, towns and counties. Usually the way that the state sends them to is to pima county health departments okay so i know that the city of tucson a few years back mayor and council decided to pile our funds with pima county um but if we would not have decided to pile our funds together the city of tucson would have full control of how to use opioid settlement funds how much approximately does the city of tucson um How much is our share?

Yes. Mayor, Pima County is getting 18% of the state's allocation of the opioid settlement money. It comes out to about $127.3 million over 18 years. Pima County gets 72%. Tucson gets just under 23%. So if you look at the amount that the city of Tucson, if we had all... from the get-go said the money would all come through the health department to Tucson, we would receive about $29.2 million.

$29 million is something that we would, okay.

For 18 years, 29.

Alrighty. So one of my concerns as mayor, as you all well know, Last October, we launched the Safe City Initiative to help us organize, communicate our citywide efforts in providing safety to Tucsonans, including unsheltered services. And it really, the Safe City Initiative allowed us to think innovatively on how to provide really think about how we did our own work. We partnered with TPD, Community Safety, Health and Wellness, Housing First, and so many other departments to make sure that we are providing safety to our community. One of the biggest concerns Tucsonans have is is the unsheltered. And what we have been seeing, everyone from our police officers to our service providers to our housing navigators to our care coordinators are the, what is impacting a lot of these unsheltered folks, as we heard in the review of the Safer Center, is fentanyl and opioids and the use of that. And so those are the hardest to serve, you know, residents in our community. That is what people are seeing. They are seeing the effects of fentanyl and opioids on our streets daily. And so what my advocacy has been stressing for the last few years is that we need to act quickly. We have to make data-driven decisions, and we have to pivot and pilot and innovate in our work. And that's what the Safe City Initiative has allowed us to do. The reason I bring this up is because there is urgency. to the gaps that we see on our streets. That's why we pushed back when the ROSAC decided not to fully fund the Safer Center. We pushed it back to the ROSAC and said we need to act immediately in creating a Safer Center. I think there's equal urgency to creating the Desert Cove Recovery Center because what is happening is that people are leaving the Safer Center, which we now hear is working. And many times people are going back to the streets. And so all of the investment of time and funds invested in a sobering facility such as Safer or even people coming out of the county jail and the mat services and the investment they've received, they're going back to the street. And so one of the biggest gaps is creating a recovery center, longer-term recovery center like the Desert Cove. And what's worrying me and what the urgency is, is twofold. One, that funds for Desert Cove are going to run out in June. What is going to happen to the individuals that are there now? and what is going to happen in being able to connect from safer in jail into a longer term recovery. That is what's concerning me. If we would have decided as a mayor and council to just take the money to the city of Tucson, we would not be in this predicament of being told by an advisory committee that we need to go back and apply for our recovery center along with everyone else. We could... easily say let's fund the desert cove if we didn't have to if we wouldn't have decided to be honest with you to pile our money with pima county so mr attorney i guess my question to you is is there a possibility of opening up our intergovernmental agreement with pima county to review what mayor and council can do in terms of investing in this recovery facility and really taking a look at the language of the intergovernmental agreement that we decided to join.

sure honorable mayor members of council thanks for that um i i've reviewed the document itself it is sort of bare bones as an agreement it does provide some flexibility but i think uh what uh miss morales has said and and you as well mayor uh is well taken in that it probably needs some different structure some governance structure as it relates to ROSAC and as well as to the participating jurisdictions to ensure that the participating jurisdictions, including the city of Tucson, their goals are met and also allowing for additional flexibility and sort of quick movement on some of these very important issues.

that Ms. Hopkins has been clear with me in terms of what you all feel, the clarity and governance for ROSAC. and their role as an advisory and not the last word. What are the other type of additional language or clarity that we need in that intergovernmental agreement with Pima County?

Mayor Romero, I would add, as the city attorney talked about, a governance structure around roles and responsibilities, how participating jurisdictions can have input, and also around transparency around reporting and and tracking some of the information, the goals that the jurisdictions that are part of this pool have. So I think there is likely more that we can recommend, but I think if we could review that and provide some recommendations. Yes, and also around policy making. Right now, what activities and what are eligible is being recommended by ROSAC, where really this should be the governing bodies of the jurisdictions having that input on what policy decisions.

Right, in the city of Tucson, we have a safe city initiative and we have very clear gaps analysis that tell the mayor and council these are our gaps, right? These are the longer term recovery. It told us that safer was a necessary investment that we had to make. I wonder, Mr. Attorney, what type of language in terms of a motion and or direction to Mr. Tamir and Ms. Morales we need to reevaluate the intergovernmental agreement with Pima County and to see if we can... you know, come to consensus between Pima County and the city of Tucson? And how is it that our priorities as a mayor and council are listened to and we have the flexibility as a city to invest in proven programs that actually work and give results expeditiously? We don't have the luxury, and I know each and every one of your offices receive calls from our community concerned about individuals hunched over, doing fentanyl openly in our parks, in our bus stops, in our transit system. I know that you all receive them because we do. And so this is an urgent public health issue and something that mayor and council have to be able to have the capacity to move on Immediately. So what type of language do we need to encourage the communication with Pima County and the reevaluation of our intergovernmental agreement so that we can make these, you know, discussions and concepts work?

your honor mayor members of council i think an appropriate motion would be to have the city attorney and the city manager reach out to the pima county counterparts to reevaluate and review the current iga in place for the use of rosac funds or excuse me opioid funds and come back with a provide recommendations based on the input that you mayor and the others mayor council have And and miss morales as well as made at this meeting and and bring it back for approval So do you need that in the form of a motion or?

Direction would be would be but okay may get a motion for that.

I'll make it I think there's there's a motion. I think we move on restructuring now the opiate point I

Yeah that's fine that's okay he's he's he's.

I was trying to make the motion like not exactly I want to be able to clarify how it how I'm processing it what I understand the motion to be is that we're going back to Pima County and asking them to reevaluate how we allot the opiate for funds over the next 18 years is that is that not the motion just want to make sure I'm stating yes so there's a motion may have a second.

I think it okay, there's a motion a second and any further discussion.

There's a there's a couple pieces here number one first for the for the folks from safer under presentation really appreciate that the data. It's it's nice that we do have a 138 deflections we we we need that 3rd alternative though where instead of booking someone and set a voluntary deflection we have I guess we can call it quasi-voluntary deflection. And we probably need to find a way to thread that needle. I think there's a lot of folks that we're engaging at the street level, both on the social work side and the law enforcement side. where that convincing to at least engage for a little bit would probably help us gain some ground in this fight. The second part is that it's very concerning to me that we're getting about $1.8 million, and the county's getting $6.7 million a year over the next 18 years. Is my math right on that? And I don't know what that six point seven is doing exactly I know they have some gaps on their side in the correctional side and in the housing side but the brunt of the crisis is being experienced inside the city limits and I don't understand how they got seventy two percent and we got eighteen percent it should probably be flipped.

So those are some of the pieces that I'm kind of trying to figure out if I may councilmember I think that point that you just said in terms of like 72% versus 18% for the city of Tucson. People forget that the city of Tucson is in Pima County. So Pima County has a responsibility to service, provide services and investments to city of Tucson residents. They are Pima County residents. So as I interpret those investments, the Pima County is their piece of the opioid settlement funds should be focused inside the city of Tucson. And that's something else that we should look at the intergovernmental agreement. I think that the city of Tucson has gotten ourselves into an equity model, right? It's not equitable. It's an equity model. Where is the greatest need happening? And so we've got to make sure that we MENTION THE GREATEST NEEDS IN OUR COMMUNITY AND HOW WE TARGET INVESTMENTS IN THOSE AREAS. AND SO THAT'S A FAIR POINT, COUNCILMEMBER CUNNINGHAM, AND I THINK THAT IF WE WERE TO LOOK AT LANGUAGE IN THE IGA, THAT WOULD FOCUS INVESTMENTS WHERE THE GREATEST NEEDS ARE. it would kind of answer the investment percentages for this issue.

Either way, I mean, we have some resources both the county and the city have put some resources in and we are collaborating but we're it we're just not quite aligned yet we're right there i mean we're on the brink but we're just not quite in that space especially with the kind of that third rail deflection piece So I look forward to seeing kind of what happens. I think, again, as we talk about the fentanyl crisis and the unhoused crisis, they kind of meld in and out. Some of it is and some of it isn't. And I think as we carry this discussion forward, eventually we're going to find those blocks and the gaps. To be fair, we can't really execute some of the things that we need, like seven-day-a-week arraignments. We need that. We can't really have situations where we have seven-day-a-week social services. or court services those are the stuff that we need so that the engagement on the street happens in the work happens it's not going to be easy to to thread that needle but I think those are the things that we can look at I think that. Safer utility and importance will increase. as we uh as we kind of implement those pieces so that's kind of what i'd be going to the county about but in the meantime just opening the discussion with them and saying look you've got six and a half million a year sitting there we've got 1.8 let's figure out something that's a little bit more unilateral that can allow us to meet people where they are so that that's my thought i think it's a good sentiment to engage the county on this discussion I'm hoping we're already having it to some place.

There's some discussion. Any others? Council Member Dahl.

I'm not sure if this is the right time, Mayor. This is a question to you. I have a statement from Vice Mayor. She wanted me to read on the Safer Center, but it's not having to do with this motion. Should we do it after the vote? After the vote. Yeah. Thank you.

Any others? Council Member Schubert.

Yeah, I just I have some clarifying questions about what exactly this motion would lead to. Because my understanding about the funding breakdown was it's because the county has a health department. I thought that was why they were getting more of the funding than we were and that we were being really smart and regionally minded by pulling our money together. Because we would it would allow more funding to be spent within the city even though it'd be coming from the counties, I think it's 72% versus 23%. So I'm just concerned about the ramifications of doing this, like would it automatically unpool? Could we look at the benefits, the pros and the cons of unpooling the money and having to administer those funds ourselves instead of the health department? I'm not in the room for those negotiations, so I'm not sure about that aspect of it, and I trust your judgment, but just wanting to be mindful of preserving our relationships and trusting the experts that we appointed to ROSAC. So yeah, just wanting more clarity in general about what we're voting on.

Well, my intention is not to unpull the money immediately. My intention is to take a look at that intergovernmental agreement that is five pages and very general language. It does not talk about governance. It does not have all of this specific language that would give the city of Tucson and our needs leverage to be able to use these funds that really in reality, Marana and they take the money and mayor and council do whatever they need to do with it. So it would really basically be looking at the city of Tucson strategic plan. decide where we need to invest the funds so hopefully my hope is that we don't have to pull the funds but when the city of Tucson presents our needs and there's two clear examples where the input of the mayor and council have kind of gone by the wayside, and we had to really push to get those investments. One is the Safer Center. And the second example is Desert Cove Recovery. These are gaps in services that have been very clear that are needed. And so I'm hoping that we can, right? There's pros and cons. But I'm hoping that we can continue pooling the funds. And we don't need a health department to be able to take the funds and put them to work. I can think of a thousand places that we can use these funds for, including expanding community safety, health, and wellness care coordinators, including expanding housing first navigators, including expanding our safe city deployments. They're, you know, investing in Desert Cove Recovery Center and you know, the list goes on in terms of how we can deploy those funds immediately so that people get tangible benefits from this. And as I said, it is an urgent need. We need to move fast so that people can see that tangible results of these funds being put to work where they're most needed. Mr. Attorney, you had a comment.

Thanks, Mary. I think you covered it pretty well. But just for clarity, the amount that the city would receive would stay the same, whether we pull those funds or not. That's set by the One Arizona agreement with the state. So this is just a matter of whether we pull those funds that we would already receive with Pima County's funds in terms of programming. And I think what I understand from the direction is that we're looking to increase formalize that agreement, that relationship a little bit better in order to be more effective.

Would you like to include anything, Ms. Morales?

Yes, I one want to say we do have really good strong relationship with Pima County Health Department and Pima County Administration. These are really good reasons for us to further talk about how we can strengthen the IGA. I think there's a lot of opportunities there. I want to say that standing this up, we had not pulled monies like this before, and so how it started and where it got us started, getting ROSAC implemented, getting initial funds out, the IGA worked for that. I think there's an opportunity to strengthen the IGA so that we can have more formalized understanding processes clear roles for instance with ROSAC on what role they play and how jurisdictions can have some input. So I think the IGA can only get stronger and more defined versus how it is today very broad and ambiguous.

Any other questions, comments? OK. Thank you so much for the update. Thank you, Dr. Jacobs. Oh, somebody? OK. All righty. That's true. We have to vote. Yes. So can we repeat the motion? And I know that Councilmember Cunningham had some added.

It was just I moved that we direct staff to approach the county in reevaluating the allotment between the county and the city for the opiate settlement dollars. That's it.

Correct. And the beginning of the motion was to review the IGA between the county and the city.

All righty so and I know that you have a statement from the vice mayor as well so anything else and I just as this and chief shainer leave and I just wanted to give them a kudos on their incredible work that they do with the safe city deployments. It's the safer center has created an opportunity for both community safety health and wellness housing first and to some police department as well as our fire department to be able to connect and take people to the Safer Center versus taking them to jail or taking them to the hospital, which would cost one police officer four to eight hours. So, it really is, the Safer has created an opportunity to deflect and get people connected to help and treatment. And so, just wanted to add that in. I'm sorry. that Assistant Chief Shainer left, but we'll let her know. With that, all those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any against?

Nay.

Nay. So it's four to one. Motion passes. Council Member Dodd.

Thank you, Mayor. First, a quick statement from me.

Is it safe for people to call in?

Yeah, never mind. I'll read the vice mayor's statement. We look forward to ongoing data and information from collaborators as related to the success of sobering alternative for recovery, Safer Center, providing treatment and support to people with substance use disorders and their impacted loved ones, neighbors, and communities, a priority for myself as vice mayor. Substance use and misuse is a symptom of other societal barriers to basic needs, such as housing and mental health and behavioral health services. I would encourage my colleagues and constituents to consider the opioid and fentanyl public health crisis a standalone issue that is intersecting with housing. The Safer Center aims to support entities such as local hospitals and police. This 24-7 trauma-informed low-barrier program that offers stays up to 96 hours with additional support and resources upon discharge has already served over 100 community members with only 15 beds. This is a pilot program funded by Arizona's $1.8 million in opioid lawsuit settlement funds that will require ongoing collaboration, funding, and support. I would love to see more beds and more community members served through safer center services, and I'm committed to working creatively and with all entities to ensure ongoing growth and success.

Thank you, Mayor.

That was Vice Mayor's statement.

Thank you, Council Member Dahl. Any other comments or questions on this item? Hearing none, thank you so much. Really appreciate it. Thank you, Ms. Morales. Alrighty, so we are moving on to item six. Time has been set aside for Mayor and Council to receive an update on state and national legislation and regional committees, executive orders, and direction to any associated litigation. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, honorable mayor, members of the council. Laura Dent is joining us here at the table to provide this update item.

Thank you, Mr. Manager. Good afternoon, mayor, members of the council. Things are moving this week at the federal level in the House. Members are expected to consider a handful of major items, including a vote that's expected tomorrow on the 21st Century Road to Housing Act. This is legislation that's critical for home reauthorization and local housing support. So that's the bread and butter initiative that supports our excellent housing team here locally. There will be some committee consideration on several bills ahead of the Memorial Day holiday, which include the House Surface Transportation Reauthorization Bill. That's what funds our highway, transit, and rail and safety programs, and the fiscal year 27 Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development Appropriation Bill. So that gives us a good sense of where congressional priorities are leading on transportation, housing, and community development. In the Senate, at the federal level, attention is expected to focus on the budget reconciliation package. This is known as Reconciliation 2.0, which centers around ICE and CBP funding. We're also hearing chatter about a third reconciliation package, and we'll see how that plays out. Both Senate and House leadership is working on Moving the bill to meet the president's goal of getting legislation to his desk by June 1st, so that's powering forth At the state level the legislature is currently adjourned the Senate will reconvene on Tuesday after the Memorial Day holiday and the house is in recess until June 1st State budget negotiations are ongoing late last week the governor lifted her bill signing moratorium which was invoked based on some stalls of negotiation so that's a generally good signal that those efforts are proceeding so we hope to see some progress on that as well and with that i will conclude my report any questions comments concerns councilmember schubert

We talked about this before. Would this be the appropriate part of the study session to talk about the TEP rate case intervention? OK. Thank you. So last week, TEP concluded its evidentiary hearings before an administrative law judge on its current rate case, in which the company is seeking that 14% rate increase. Coming on the heels of a 10% increase approved in 23, this proposed hike is excessive. In 110 degree heat, electricity is not a luxury, it's a matter of life and death. So last September, with leadership of Councilmember Cunningham, Marin Council unanimously passed a resolution that directed city attorney and city manager to intervene in the Tucson electric power rate case before the Arizona Corporation Commission. and so proud to join a council that decided to be an intervener. So the City of Tucson joined the Arizona Attorney General, the Residential Utility Consumer Office, RUCO, and Pima County among the interveners opposing the proposed increase and urging that it be substantially reduced. The other three interveners mentioned all took a formal stance against A fundamental change proposed in this rate case, I'm talking about the annual rate adjustment mechanism, also known as ARAM, which would allow annual rate increases outside of a full rate case and significantly reduce public oversight and transparency between rate cases. We here at the City of Tucson haven't yet taken a formal stance on the ARAM. Although the hearings have concluded, the process is far from over and interveners have until July 14th to submit their final briefs. So as the city of Tucson prepares its final briefing, I move that the city adopt a resolution formally opposing the annual rate adjustment mechanism. I further move that the city support the Arizona Attorney General's recommendation that any rate increase be limited to 4%.

Second.

Okay, so there's a motion and a second. Just to be clear, the city of Tucson voted to intervene on the TEP case back in September, so mayor and council took a clear position on this. Can you explain further your motion, please, what differentiates from that vote to this continued direction?

Yeah, so the other three interveners in the case have also taken the extra step of adopting a formal stance against the annual rate adjustment mechanism, the ARAM. So that's specifically what I'm looking for today, is just that built-in annual increase that would be outside the public process.

So you'd like to add to our intervening in the case? What exactly are we trying to do?

If I may, Mayor.

Roy, if you can interpret.

Sure. Council Member Schubert. Mayor, I think what Council Member Schubert is looking for is just a formal position from the Mayor and Council on that particular mechanism. And if I can explain.

On the automatic going back to instead of going through a process. Okay.

Correct. And if I can just clarify for those who aren't familiar, the proposal would allow for a particular adjustment of rates in between rate cases so that, you know, community members would not have the opportunity as well as the mayor and council would not have the opportunity to question those rate adjustments in between those rate cases. So that might be the concern.

So Roy, you are the one that has been helping us with intervening in the case. I guess for me and, you know, I appreciate the additional language and direction. I guess for me is do we formally add this language to our intervention or how does it work?

Sure, Mayor, thanks for that question. So there are two things that can happen. We will do our final briefing, and I anticipate we will address that particular issue in our final briefing. But the Mayor and Council can also pass the resolution, and that resolution can be entered into the case itself as a comment.

Member Cunningham.

So there's a few things. I reviewed some of the stuff in the hearings. So I had some concerns. But I know that we took the formal space to intervene. But I also reviewed some of our testimony in the hearings. And while we intervened, we weren't as, shall we say, vehement as some of our partners in the Raitt case. That's the issue. So the issue is that we won't look. We just signed the ESA with them. They're trying to be good partners. I get all that. But at the same time, and that's okay, it's still okay for us to say, dude, 14% is way excessive, and we're not good with that. So that's all we're doing here.

I mean, I'm not going to- Well, that's what we're doing, but there's additional language that Council Member Schubert is adding, which I agree with. But I want to know what mechanism we use to make that statement. And I agree with you. We can- work with each other and have an ECA that we agree with, but we can also say, ah, no, we don't agree with that.

So, what is the... I just want to make sure we're a little more, a little, it's okay for us to put the screws to them if they're coming back at 14% on the back of a 10%er. I'm telling, I mean, I don't think that's unreasonable for us to do that.

And I think it's important that we... Nobody's saying that it's unreasonable. I'm asking for clarity.

THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER CUNNINGHAM AND HONORABLE MAYOR. I THINK AGAIN WHAT WE CAN DO IS WE CAN ACTUALLY DO BOTH OF THOSE THINGS. WHAT WE CAN DO IF THE COUNCILMEMBER IS OKAY WITH IT, WE CAN PASS THE MOTION AND WE CAN PREPARE A FORMAL RESOLUTION FOR INCLUSION IN THE RATE CASE AS A COMMENT AS WELL AS PREPARE FOR OUR BRIEFING TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE AS WELL.

Yeah, I like that because it will make it clear where mayor and council stand on, you know, being able to push back on that automatic, you know, automatic renewal over at the ACC in terms of yearly rate increases. And then, of course, and making it completely clear that mayor and council do not approve of that strategy. And anything else? I think, can you reread your motion, Council Member Schubert?

I move that the city adopt a resolution formally opposing the annual rate adjustment mechanism, and I further move that the city support the Arizona Attorney General's recommendation that any rate increases be limited to 4%.

Thank you, Council Member. I think we can work with your office to ensure that the language is appropriate.

All righty. So any other questions or comments? Council Member Dahl.

I just want to say publicly, thank you. And I think this is very appropriate for us to do at this time. And we will partner with TEP on the really good franchise agreement and an energy agreement that will come from that should the voters pass it in November. But like my colleague Paul said, it's very reasonable to be upset with 14% on top of 10% and then to make it automatic every year in some cases. Thank you again for bringing this.

All righty. Any other questions or comments? All those in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any against? Motion carries. Anything else? All righty. Ms. Dent? Okay. Thank you so much. Really appreciate it. We move on to item seven. Time has been set aside for discussion direction relating to matters pending in front of the Pima County Board of Supervisors and other regional jurisdictions. Mr. Manager.

That was awesome. Wow.

Honorable Mayor, members of the Council, Wonder Woman just changed outfits and sat right back down. We did cover some of this report in the opioid item, so I think the bulk of what we would have shared today we covered in that previous item, but I will turn to Laura to see if you have anything additional that you'd like to share.

No, Mr. Manager, just Assistant City Manager Stephanie somewhat prepared a report that's been submitted into the record. So if there are any questions or feedback, otherwise, that is available to you.

I do.

Any comments?

Yeah, just a second. I wanted to get that. I do have a question, and it's a procedural question. It really doesn't have a lot to do with super city so if i'm out of my element here city attorney you can stop the discussion i don't FEEDBACK FROM CONSTITUENTS, THEY HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE PROCEDURE AND THE LEGALITY OF THIS PROCESS INVOLVING THE SHERIFF, AND IF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTUALLY HAS ANY AUTHORITY AT ALL, AND HOW MUCH OF A LIFT IS IT, AND I JUST DON'T KNOW. SO FOR JUST THE TABLE AND THE BODIES' BENEFITS, SO WE ALL GET KIND OF A CONSISTENT ANSWER, EITHER PREPARE SOMETHING FOR NEXT MEETING, OR IF YOU'VE GOT THE INFO RIGHT NOW, GREAT, BUT I JUST DOUBT IT.

Yeah, I think it'd be appropriate to prepare for the next meeting if that's okay with you, Council Member.

All righty. Thank you, Ms. Dent. Thank you, Ms. Zavora. All righty, Item A. Does anyone have any items to remove from the consent agenda?

Palo Verde Park.

The consent agenda item?

For Judith Blair.

I think it's G. I thought it was L. So Item L to be considered separately. Okay. Right, just to consider it separately. Any others? Okay, hearing none, we move on to item nine. Does anyone have any future agenda items? Seeing none, study session is adjourned. The next regularly scheduled meeting is on Tuesday, June 9th. And we will regroup here for regular agenda at 5.30. See you all soon. Take care.

Thank you. so Thank you. Bye. you you so so so so so Thank you. you

Thank you.

All right. So, Thank you.

Thank you.

Bye. Bye. so you so so Thank you. Thank you. you

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you so so you so so Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you so so Thank you. so Bye. so so Thanks for watching! Thank you. you

Thank you.

¶¶ Thank you.

Thank you.

Bye. you

Thank you so much for joining us this evening. We will commence the council meeting of Tuesday, May 19th. Council will stand in session and we do need to go to roll call. Council Member Cunningham.

Here.

Here.

Here. Council Member Shearer. Here. Vice Mayor Santa Cruz. Absent. Excused. Mayor Romero. Here.

All righty. Before we go to item two, the city attorney will go over the rules of decorum for mayor and council meetings.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor. Arizona's open meeting laws provide that members of the public may attend and listen to the proceedings during tonight's public meeting of the Mayor and Council. Arizona law also allows the Mayor and Council to enforce rules and procedures for public attendance of the meeting to ensure orderly behavior and to prevent unnecessary interference with the public meeting. Here are the rules that apply. The rules require decorum and orderly conduct by the members of the audience. No person attending the meeting shall engage in conduct that disrupts or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the meeting, including any statements or conduct that interrupts the persons who might be addressing the Mayor and Council or that disrupts the discussions of the Mayor and Council. the mayor has the authority to ensure compliance with the rules of orderly conduct. If disorderly or disruptive conduct continues after a warning, and this is that first warning, the mayor may direct the removal of persons from chambers and or recess the meeting itself. If disruptive behavior makes it necessary to clear the chambers, the persons who disrupted the meeting will not be allowed to return to the chambers for the remainder of tonight's meeting. As a final note, please be aware that interfering with or preventing this lawful public meeting from being carried out in an orderly manner not only violates the rules of participation, but also violates Title 13 of the Arizona Revised Statutes.

Thank you, Mr. Attorney. Item two.

Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance, and appointments to boards, committees, and commissions.

Tonight, we are especially rejoicing and appreciative that the invocation will be given by Logan Phillips, Tucson's Poet Laureate. After the invocation, I ask that you remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Good evening. Recently, I was asked to write a poem for a special piece of land. And look, every poem is impossible before it's written, but especially this one. All the more reason to write towards it. So here are some notes for a poem for the land. Between the base of Chukchon and the Rio Santa Cruz, at the highest point, there is a Palo Verde growing, watered only by rain, four years old and over five feet tall. This land holds vowels of coyote song at dusk, holds laughter of children as a horned lizard squeezes between their fingers. This land holds injury and injustice of those who came before us, holds connection of river to mountain, water to earth. This land holds ancestral ties to our deepest history, holds allá por donde corremos los caballos como dicen, allá por donde escribimos los poemas todas juntas, muchas estrofas pues. This land, sunset shadow, buffelgrass volcano, verdant top minnow, future window, fist and song, fox, javelina, water flow, from too right, from wrong. Even the name Tucson Claims comes from this place where so much has already been taken, a whole village taken from its people, clay taken for bricks, alluvium for cement, black rock to build blocks of homes, a wall around the university, even the face of the mountain taken, branded with a logo. This land has already been written on again and again. A poem for the land shouldn't be another settlement. A poem for the land, what a trap. to fall into hubris, thinking that it's mine to write. The only poem I want to write is rain for others' poems to grow from. A poem for the land, land called sacred, land called dump. How we treat this land says everything about what we believe in. So let the poem say, after the rain comes a new leaf. After violence comes the healing. So let this poem remind me of the work of my life, which is to help heal the wounds that I did not create, but have benefited me my entire life. So just who do we think ourselves to be? You know, we'll find out when our children are standing with their children on the banks of the Santa Cruz, looking up at this mountain. The story that they will tell is the story we write tonight, tomorrow, next week, all this year. And yeah, por Dios, let the poem be a little very grandios. Maybe you're as bored as I am of the mundane of hearing what's impossible, impossible, impossible, as if we weren't the ones living here, as if the future were somehow not in our hands, our hands which will shake, embrace, rise to fists, but this particular world is ours to make. The birthplace of our past is the birthplace of our future. And if we are alive, we will never stop being born. So the poem would have to remind us not to leave it up to someone else, not to pass the buck, not to duck the moment. We are needed here, every one of us. And actually, it can't be done without every one of us. To trust enough to land trust. Only we can save us in this time of ruin and bloom, at this site of injury and opportunity, disabled ecology. I could never write this poem myself. This is so many voices speaking. This is us being better than the dumbest ideas of our past, our most violent ignorances, redlined imaginations. This land should be with its people and water. This land should be decided for by the Atum and generational neighbors, and we should be ready to do right by their leadership. And this, my friends, is the blessing. The work that we're willing to do is the blessing, is the deepest gift. So there's this poem I'm trying to write, and I need your help to write it. So please let me know what you all think it should say.

to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you to our wonderful poet laureate, Logan Phillips, for showering us with that wonderful poem. So we move on to item 2D. appointments to boards, committees, and commissions? City managers, communication number 137, dated May 19th, is received into and made part of the record. May I have a motion to approve the appointments and the report, please?

So moved. Second.

There is a motion and a second, and this is moving to approve appointments of Kathy Benin to El Presidio Historic Zone Advisory Board, Audrey Wehner to the Public Art and Community Design Committee, and Hallie Cebloski to the West University Historic Zone Advisory Board. I'd like to thank you all for your willingness to serve the city of Tucson. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any against? Motion carries. Are there any personal appointments to be made at this time? Seeing none, we move on to item three. Mayor and council reports summary of current events. City managers communication number 138, dated May 19th, is received into and made part of the record. This time has been scheduled to allow members of the mayor and council to report on current events. These are to be current events of activities within the community, not position statements on policy issues. Does any council member have anything to report at this time? I'm going to do something a little different. I usually hand it over to the council colleagues. This time, I wanted to start a summary of current events with a statement that I posted yesterday on my social media about Carla Toledo. Carla is a DACA recipient, and she was basically removed by fours from her home. And I want to make sure that I reiterate my support and solidarity with Karla Toledo and her family and join the demand from her immediate release. Karla is a DACA recipient who is a dedicated member of our community and has been living in the United States since she was one year old. The Trump administration continues its cruel and inhumane policies through their pattern of not focusing their immigration enforcement on violent criminals, instead focusing on people and working families who are following the legal process. Now they are attacking DACA recipients. I will continue working with our congressional delegation to demand we hold this administration accountable and that Carla is released. I urge the community to call 520-221-4077, which is the Tucson Community Rapid Response Team. You can report raids, prolonged stops, interactions with ICE or Border Patrol. Request witnesses and community presence to ensure your rights are respected. You have a right to document these interactions and please remain safe. Visit the City of Tucson website for Know Your Rights resources. unfortunate that these raids are happening not just in Tucson, but all over Arizona and the country that are imposing so much harm to families. I just wanted to start with that because I think it's important for me to make sure that the community understands where exactly I stand on this. I'll open it up for my colleagues on the council. Council Member Cunningham.

A few announcements. Last Wednesday, the Tucson Police Department honored their fallen officers during a ceremony at Memorial Plaza since 1892. Ten officers have died in the line of duty, the most recent being Adam Buckner. Two years ago, our condolences to the families of our officers, and we're grateful for your service. May 30th, excuse me, May 29th at 530, We're cutting the ribbon for the new Palo Verde Park. It includes a new lit softball field, new irrigation systems, improvements to the basketball courts, improvements to the ramadas. The dog park's been redone. We replanted a bunch of trees. We're really excited about that park's revitalization. I also want to extend my congratulations to the Tucson Residence Foundation, the 55th anniversary celebration. was this past week. They're actually a word-to nonprofit that has been doing really fantastic work in the community for a long time for people with developmental disabilities, in particular those with Prader-Willi syndrome. The Tucson Residence Foundation started off as a grassroots volunteer effort in 1971, but has now grown to 14 homes and 26 individually designed living arrangements all over the community. Their mission is to offer a continuum Residential options designed to meet the unique needs and goals and aspirations of members a lot of them who have prayed or will you down syndrome and Also for their families and gardener guardians. I want to express some gratitude and give a shout out to their a Executive director Kelly chopowski who basically set this whole thing up We'll be highlighting some of their work at the disability pride day that we do every year I want to congratulate my friend Domingo and the rest of his family on the 50th anniversary of the Gallery of the Sun. The gallery was established by Ted DiGrazia. So Ted DiGrazia was an artist here in Tucson. And believe it or not, he studied under Diego Rivera. He went on to be an enthusiast of Native American rodeos and ranching. And he painted dozens and dozens of paintings that went oils and watercolors that were very world famous. Since then, we've had this gallery of the sun. It's way up on North Swan. And the house itself is almost designed like a celebration of what we have in the Southwest. You know, saguaro rib palapas, adobe, silver and turquoise, all the things that make our Our city and our place are unique. So they celebrated their 50th anniversary this week. If you haven't been out to Gallery of the Sun, I urge people to check it out. I want to thank everybody who showed up to the old Fort Lowell Neighborhood Association on Sunday. We were expecting 60 people. There was about 150 people there. A lot of great things coming for Fort Lowell Neighborhood Association, including the reactivation of the Fort Lowell Commissary. The neighborhood is an important part of the meshing of our Hispanic and Anglo history. The commissary was built around 1872 and features doors that were later installed by world-famous architect Charles Brocious. So the city is working with the local business. It's going to be an XO Coffee, and they're going to kind of rent it. It's going to be pretty neat for that neighborhood. Finally, I went to the Cholla High School Hall of Fame ceremony. I want to congratulate my friend Harvey Thompson, who played for Cholla in 1980 and went on to play for Cole Schultz at the University of Arizona. Believe it or not, he's the first Tucsonan to play for Coach Olson before Sean Elliott, who also went to CHOIA. But they actually inducted a considerable number of people in multiple sports. I think there was like 15 new Wall of Fame inductees, including the late Stacey Redondo, who played softball at the university. And I think it was a great start for what's going to be a really special event at CHOIA every single year. And that's my report.

Thank you, Council Member Rizal.

Nothing this time, Mayor.

Council Member Barajas. Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, everyone. I want to thank everyone who attended our first lunch meetup with Ward 5 a few weeks ago. It was great to connect with neighbors, community partners, local businesses, and government offices while supporting Michael Restaurant during construction. We encourage the community to continue supporting Ramon Becerra and his family at Michael Restaurant on 22nd Street and South Park Avenue. Our next lunch meetup will take place Friday, June 12th at Nico's. More information soon. As Tucson continues to face extreme summer heat, we remain committed to investing in community-centered solutions that protect our most vulnerable residents. Last week, the Ward 5 office joined the City of Tucson Climate Action Team, Pima County Health Department, Housing First, and community volunteers at the El Pueblo Activity Center to assemble over a thousand kits for distribution across our community. Thank you to everyone who volunteered and partnered with us in this important effort. To continue on the conversation, we're excited to host a Heat Loteria Night with the Climate Action Team on Thursday, June 4th, from 5.30 to 7.30 p.m. at our office. This free family-friendly event will focus on heat awareness and climate resilience, and we hope the community will join us. Prizes will be there too. I also want to congratulate the class of 2026, especially our council aide, Rahel Han, on graduating from the University of Arizona's School of Government and Public Policy. Bear down, Rahel. And also, I want to congratulate our intern, Amy Aldama. She's graduating tomorrow from Pueblo High School, one of the top students in her class, and she'll be attending New York University in the fall. We are also very proud. We're very proud of both their accomplishments, and I saw firsthand how hard they worked. I want to recognize a city leader, a climate leader, and a commissioner on climate, energy, and sustainability, ,, who was recognized as an outstanding senior by the College of Science and will be attending MIT for his master's degree. Yes, congrats to you, and your family. Lastly, I want to also acknowledge the community concerns surrounding the detention of my good friend, Carla Toledo by ICE. Carla has been a dedicated and compassionate presence here in Tucson, especially on the south side, supporting neighborhoods, students, families, and through her work with various nonprofits. We believe all individuals and families deserve dignity, humanity, respect, and due process. Our community stands with you, Carla, and together we hope that you will be released soon. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Schubert.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. First want to open by uplifting the words of my colleagues, Council Member Barajas and Mayor Romero. I stand in solidarity with communities who are expressing support for Carla Toledo. And I believe that the onus is on us as local government to continue looking for all the ways that we can stand against this federal overreach and ICE raids that continue to terrorize our communities. I'm proud to be a part of this council and to serve with you both. I'll start my current event report with my traffic violence update of incidents that have happened since our last council meeting. And this is in an effort to keep traffic violence at the forefront of our minds and on our radar as we continue to develop policies and make decisions about funding roadway improvements. On May 6, a motorcyclist was transported to a hospital with life-threatening injuries after a car crash. On May 7th, Associate Professor Mikhail Stepanov was killed after being hit by a truck. Not only did we read about this in the news, but also directly from a colleague and friend of his in the U of A Mathematics Department who says, I'm a full-time bicyclist and I would almost certainly be dead if not for the remarkable progress the city has made in building a great bicycle network. I am grateful for this. just uplifting the need for more investments in safety infrastructure improvements. Early on the morning of Saturday, May 9th, Sam Hughes resident and photographer Dan Chavez was struck while crossing University Boulevard at Euclid Avenue by a person driving a vehicle who ran a red light. Dan was transported from the scene with life-threatening injuries and tragically passed away on Sunday. On May 11th, a 58 year old driver died in a three vehicle crash on the east side. On the same day, across town on the south side, a 56 year old pedestrian died at the scene in a hit and run in which the car was traveling above the 35 mile per hour speed limit. Speed is, the number one cause of serious injuries and fatalities in these incidents. On May 15th, there was a four vehicle crash with two drivers transported to the hospital. And on May 18th, a three vehicle accident involving a rollover had injuries. And we only learned about it because we were contacted at the ward six office they were stuck in traffic for an hour. So in addition to the impacts in terms of catastrophic injuries and fatalities, there's also the costs related to traffic being tied up and people not being able to get from point A to point B because of these terrible, these terrible crashes that We have a charge here on the council to do everything we can to prevent by slowing down cars and implementing data proven safety interventions. Okay, some upcoming current events. Is your home at risk of flooding? Learn how to reduce your flood hazard risk and lower costs with flood insurance at a free virtual outreach event hosted by local floodplain management and the state insurance office. Both of these sessions are virtual. There's one on Wednesday, May 20th, and one on Friday, May 22nd. We have the information in the Ward 6 newsletter. If you're not subscribed, you need the information, feel free to reach out. Upcoming current events, the City of Tucson Housing and Community Development is inviting nonprofit organizations to submit letters of interest to operate a mobile shower unit program serving individuals experiencing homelessness. Through this initiative, the city will provide a mobile shower trailer at no cost to a selected nonprofit partner. The goal is to expand access to hygiene services, improve public health outcomes, and support outreach efforts among unsheltered Tucsonans. Applicants must be registered nonprofit organizations with demonstrated experience serving individuals experiencing homelessness and the capacity to operate a mobile hygiene program. The deadline's tomorrow, Wednesday, May 20th. And then finally, I'm excited to announce that the Ward 6 office is opening a cooling center in our kitchen beginning on Tuesday, May 26. I want to acknowledge the leadership of Ward 3 and Councilmember Kevin Dahl for putting the idea in my head because they kind of pioneered that way of doing things. It's like, it's our office space. Why shouldn't we offer it up? We're centrally located on bus lines in Ward 6, so it makes sense. community members brought this project to us. Hours will be Sunday through Thursday, 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Again, that's starting Tuesday, May 26th. We're also calling it the Chill Space. It's going to serve unsheltered adults, low-income individuals, housing insecure residents, and other vulnerable adults impacted by extreme heat in Tucson. Partner services will rotate through the space to provide information and resource options to attendees. Partners will include Community Medical Services, Old Pueblo Community Services, the City of Tucson's Community Safety, Health, and Wellness, also known as CASU, as well as the Vulnerability Index Service Prioritization Decision Assessment Tool, also known as VSPDAT. The Center will prioritize accessibility by removing common barriers to participation, including lack of identification or sobriety requirements, while also maintaining accountability and safety expectations for all participants. Activities and engagement opportunities will be made available for connection, respite, and pro-social community building. We're going to include an update about the Ward 6 Cooling Center, a.k.a. the Chill Space, in our newsletter this Friday. But feel free to reach out to the Ward 6 office with any questions or concerns. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Councilmember. We move on to Item 4.

City Manager's Report, Summary of Current Events.

City Manager's Communication Number 139, dated May 19th, is received into and made part of the record. This time has been scheduled to allow the City Manager to report on current events. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mayor. One major thing for tonight, in addition to the mobile shower program, the city is also, through the Department of Housing and Community Development, we're seeking proposals from organizations to build and operate community serving facilities in the Thrive in the 05 area in support of our Choice Neighborhoods Implementation, or CNI, grant. As you recall, this is the $50 million grant we received a couple years back that relates to redevelopment of some of our housing stock in that corridor, but also services to the community in and around that area. So as part of the CNI initiative, the city seeks proposals from qualified organizations, developers, nonprofits, healthcare providers, and operators of community serving facilities to develop a community food hub, emergency food or meal distribution, food pantry services and or a market or cafe and other options as indicated. So the city is not seeking to operate these facilities directly, but rather to invest in the development or renovation of facilities and the purchase of equipment needed to support new robust community services in that area. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you so much, Mr. Manager. Item five. Liquor license applications? City Manager's communication number 140, dated May 19th, is received into and made part of the record. Madam Clerk, please read the liquor license agenda.

Your Honor, on the evening's agenda, we have three applications for new licenses, one application for personal transfer, one application for a person location transfer, and one application for a special event. All applications are in compliance with city requirements. An appropriate motion would be to forward items 5B1 through 5 and 5C1 to the State Liquor Board with a recommendation of approval.

May I have a motion, please? So moved. There's a motion and a second. Any further discussion?

Your Honor, I want to second this, but I want to make sure For clarification, the Circle K one was delayed?

Yes, that's not on the agenda.

Second.

So there's a motion and a second, and then we're considering item L separately, correct?

That's for the consent agenda.

I'm sorry. All righty, so if there's no further discussion, all those in favor, please signify by... Aye. Any against? Motion carries. And we go to item six. Call to the audience. I got way ahead of myself. Okay, so item six, we only have one card.

Would you like me to read the notice, Madam Mayor?

Yes, please read the notice.

At this time, any member of the public is allowed to address the mayor and city council on any issue except for items scheduled for a public hearing at the meeting. Call to the audience will last for 30 minutes and speakers are limited to three minute presentations. The green light will turn on when you're called to speak. It will turn yellow when you have 30 seconds remaining and it will turn red and beep when your time is up. At that time, please conclude your comments.

Alrighty, so our lone speaker today is JD Wallace.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is J.D. Wallace, retained speaker for Tucson Electric Power at 88 East Broadway Boulevard. I'm also a Tucson resident. I've lived at the same address in Ward 6 for more than 20 years. I'm here with an update on some ways that TEP is continuing to provide safe, reliable, and affordable service for the community. um one of the things right now all of our journeymen and apprentice line crew members have completed hot stick training in preparation for these days of high electrical demand and also when they must still make those repairs and upgrades while they must keep the power on the crews will work with fiberglass hot sticks that insulate against thousands of volts of current in the wire so with this tool which i had but i couldn't bring in here but they can use these tools to replace the cross arms and other equipment on the poles while the line remains energized and they access hard to reach infrastructure as well while they do this. All with the goal of even fewer outages during times of high temperatures and of course increased need of air conditioning and to keep the air conditioning on. This also supports our efforts to continue to provide 99.9% a reliable service for our customers. Now, of course, safety is, of course, the first priority for our line crews. And so if an outage is necessary, they will take the best course of action to protect the safety both of their crew members as well as, of course, the public. next week we're going to be adding or in the next few weeks we'll be adding another 200 megawatts of battery storage at roadrunner reserve 2 and that is just in time for summer so that we can store solar energy that we that is being generated during the day and then deploy it later to satisfy peak demand and also help our customers avoid higher energy higher priced energy during those times We've also added another 100 megawatts of solar as well as 100 megawatts of battery storage at Wilmot Energy Center, too, just last month. And this is, of course, again, aimed at doing the same thing to increase the amount of renewable and affordable energy that we provide our customers. We recently reported that the average monthly residential bill in 2025 was about the same as 2023, marking three years of rather stable rates for our customers and well below the national average. Another way we encourage our customers to stabilize their bill is to engage in budget billing, which will create the same monthly bill for the year based on their average use, with either a credit for unused energy at the end of the year or a balance that will be distributed over the course of the year to pay back. Customers who can control their energy use and restrict their greatest demand to when electricity costs the least, when overall demand is lower, they can save money through time of use and demand plans. So thank you, Mayor and Council, for this opportunity to update you on how we're working to be a trusted energy provider. Thank you.

Thank you, JD. I appreciate it. All right, so that was our only request to speak. Okay. We move on to item seven. Consent agenda. Reports from the city manager on the consent agenda are received into and made part of the record. Madam Clerk, you are requested to read the consent agenda.

Upon no objection from the mayor and council during the study session, item L will be removed from the consent agenda and addressed separately at council member Cunningham's request. Item 7A, approval of minutes. 7B, approval of the issuance of water system revenue obligations series 2026. Item 7C, approval of the issuance of general obligation bonds series 2026. Item 7D, fourth amendment of lease agreement with the United States of America USDA Forest Service to occupy Approximately three acres of land in 56,100 SFF improved space located within the Public Safety Training Academy at 10001 South Wilmot Road, RES 2026-058LF079BRP1884. Item 7E, License Agreement for Use of Public Right-of-Way Bicentennial LLC Project. Item 7F, License Agreement for Use of Public Right-of-Way MMR Fiber Solutions LLC. Item 7G, Lease Agreement with Stacy Weeks, DBA Norris Design AZ LLC for space located in the Historic Depot at 418 North Toole Avenue, RES 2025-271, LF number 452, RP number 2475. Item 7H, acceptance of award funding for BJA FY25 formula DNA capacity enhancement for backlog reduction program. Item 7I, approval of an intergovernmental agreement with Sunnyside School District and Tucson Parks and Recreation Department for shared maintenance of Sunnyside School pool. Item 7J, adoption of equity by design by the city of Tucson's equity inclusion action plan. Item 7K, amendment number two, the intergovernmental agreement with Pima County for animal care and enforcement services.

May I have a motion, please? So moved. There's a motion. Second. There's a motion and a second. Further discussion? Hearing none, we do have to go to roll call.

Council Member Schubert?

Aye.

Aye. Council Member Dahl?

Aye.

Council Member Cunningham?

Aye.

Mayor Romero? Aye. Aye. The items on the consent agenda are approved by a vote of 5-0. Alrighty, and we are considering an agenda item separately.

7L. Naming the basketball courts at Palo Verde Park, the Judith Blair Courts. Council Member Cunningham.

I just want to thank Tucson Conquistadors, Nova Home Loans, the Kyle Kuzma Foundation. Kyle's currently a NBA player. He actually... did really well against Arizona when he was at Utah, but his foundation also donated NBA Cares, TJ McConnell, and Joseph Blair. So Joseph Blair raised about $125,000 for this project. And because of that, we're going to be able to have two covered basketball courts at Palo Verde Park that's going to coincide with the dedication. There's a separate ceremony in honor of Joseph's mother, Judith Mama Blair at 9 o'clock on Saturday the 30th. And it's a pretty special thing to have this type of public-private partnership going into this park that's also received a new playground, a new pool. received the first splash pad. We've continued to update it. One other thing about these courts specifically is that they'll both be 94 feet, which means they will be both college and pro length, which is unusual for our outdoor courts in Tucson. And they will have the high school, international, and NBA three-point lines painted on, which is a really, I think, a big addition to the court. It'll be hard shaded with an outdoor scoreboard. And we're really excited to have everybody come out. That's going to be on May 30th at 9 a.m. And really big, another big acknowledgement to Parks and Rec, Lara Hamley and her team, for kind of coordinating getting all this done in the city manager's office. You guys did great. So with that, I move the item to rename the Palo Verde Park Basketball Court to the Judith Blair Courts. Second.

There's a motion and a second. Any further discussion? I do. I want to commend Council Member Cunningham for really making the creation of these courts and, of course, the investment of Palo Verde Park one of his priorities. And I also want to commend Joseph Blair and all of the funders of this project for being willing to contribute and invest private funds to really make a significant investment in a city of Tucson Park, and we really appreciate that private partnership. But this one specifically because Mr. Blair is a Wildcat and played with the University of Arizona, has never forgotten his time and effort invested at the University of Arizona. And I really appreciate as mayor, but also a friend, consider this investment very special. And I appreciate that he has never forgotten his appreciation to Tucson for embracing him and his mom and really continues to invest in our community. So thank you, Councilmember Cunningham.

I wanted to add one more thing about Joseph that's appropriate. Just so people know, after he left and played pro basketball, he came back here every summer and did a free camp every single year and sponsored it out of his own pocket. And not only that, he also developed the first free camp for children with autism. I mean, he's gone above and beyond. Believe it or not, I think his birthday, one of the years, was actually Joseph Blair Day in the City of Tucson, Bob Walker did it. So it's not like the guy just came out of the blue. So, all right, thanks. That's enough.

But thank you so much for doing all this work. I know it took a lot of time and effort, Council Member. With that, if there's no further discussion, then I believe we need to go to roll call.

Council Member Cunningham. Council Member Barajas. Council Member Schubert.

Aye.

Mayor Romero.

Aye. The item on the consent agenda is approved by a vote of 5-0. Alrighty, item eight.

Public hearing, revisions to fees charged by the Planning and Development Services Department, including amendments to Chapter 16 and Chapter 26.

City Manager's Communication Number 146, dated May 19th, is received into and made part of the record. This is the time and place legally advertised for a public hearing regarding proposed revisions to fees charged by the Planning and Development Services Department. I'd like to ask staff to review the impact of the construction valuation table and any other presentation that you might have. And Mr. Manager, should we do that first or?

Honorable Mayor, we could have Director Coren Manning come up and discuss those items before we start. She's on her way.

Thank you. Mayor Romero and members of council this is a proposed fee update from planning and development services And this fee update is based on analysis of our cost of service and looking at our cost of providing development services including plan review and permitting and building inspections It also includes amendments to the City Code to Chapter 16 regarding code enforcement fees and Chapter 26 regarding floodplain use permit fees. And really that's just removing fees from the City Code and consolidating that into all of our fees into the administrative manual of the Unified Development Code. The proposed rate adjustment would take effect on July 1st, 2026, should they be adopted by mayor and council. As described in your materials, we've conducted extensive outreach over the past 60 days since mayor and council issued the notice of intent to raise fees, including speaking directly with some of our key stakeholders in the development community, received a bit of feedback that is described in your materials, and happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Ms. Manning. Alrighty, so this public hearing is scheduled to last for no more than one hour. Speakers are limited to five-minute presentations. Please come forward when I call your name and make your presentation. State your name, whether you live inside the city of Tucson or not, whom you are representing, and whether or not you are a paid speaker. First person that I have is David Godleski.

I a good evening, a matter members of the Council. David got less game representing the southern Arizona homebuilders Association. Our office is in the city, but I don't personally live in this in the city limits. And yes, I am retain speaker. So just wanted to speak to you this evening we submitted a pretty detailed letter with our comments on the proposed PTSD related fees. I think the one thing that I wanted to OFFER OR COMMENT ON FROM THE ONSET IS WE'RE NOT HERE JUST TO SIMPLY OPPOSE THE FEES BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING UP. THESE ISSUES ARE MUCH MORE NUANCED. THERE'S A LOT OF GIVE AND TAKE AND COLLABORATION. WE CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND HOW FEES AND TAXES ADVANCE THE CITY PRIORITIES AND PROVIDE SERVICES TO MEMBERS OF OUR ASSOCIATION. WE'VE ALWAYS ENJOYED A POSITIVE COLLABORATIVE RELATIONSHIP WITH STAFF. and certainly don't wanna threaten that if you approve these fees that no one's ever gonna build in this city again. What we see is an opportunity for a continued partnership. We represent a key economic contributor and a resource to help achieve the greater housing goals of increasing inventory and improving affordability. We've made some progress on housing affordability. We've seen the median new home price come down in the past year. but unfortunately our inventory still continues to be a problem. In fact, last year across the region we saw a decline of about 30% in single family permitting. In the city alone there was a decline of about 60%. So obviously fees, taxes, and the regulatory environment does impact the success of projects and our shared goals of housing affordability. And so we would look at what we're going after is really trying to make adjustments to smooth some rough edges and have a more balanced approach. With respect to the PDSD specifically, this is the third year that the fees are going to be increased. This time around there are some new fees that are being proposed. And while this isn't a change that needs your approval, going to the new ICC valuation table is going to be an increase of about 12%, or what our estimates are, around $250 to $300 increase per home. And so while it might not seem like a lot, we're really looking at the cumulative effect of these fees, and you're going to hear from me again on some of the other fees before you this evening. And so what we would ask is you to consider the potential of foregoing the valuation table or perhaps implementing some kind of a cap on how much of the fees may increase. Or if you didn't want to do that, foregoing the new fees and the non-valuation fee increases. And certainly I know the council has made it a priority to encourage infill housing, ADUs, missing middle projects using the corridors tool. And perhaps there could be some exceptions that are made for those types of housings that you're directly changing policies and code to try and encourage. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Godleski. Ben Bueller-Garcia. Yeah.

Good evening, honorable Mayor Romero, members of the Tucson City Council. My name is Ben Buehler-Garcia. I'm a 47-year resident of Ward 3. I am retained by the Arizona Multifamily Housing Association. The AMA is the largest organization in the state of Arizona representing apartment developers, owners, and managers. Breaking news, we're in a housing affordability crisis. The city's own study showed that we need to build 35,000 units over the course of 10 years just to break even. Economics 101, supply and demand. You reduce costs by adding to the inventory. Now, your Housing and Community Development Department has just done a wonderful job of adding to the public housing and the subsidized stock, and they deserve to be congratulated for that. But they're not going to get us there alone. You need private sector market rate partners to help close that 35,000 unit gap. And I've got a very candid with you. Sitting on this side of the table as one of those partners, it can be a little bit confusing because we all talk about housing affordability, but over the course of years, this council has made changes that do nothing but increase the cost of building that housing. The electric vehicle charging ordinance estimated to add another half a million dollars to your standard 250 unit garden style apartment complex. Impact fees went up. The development review fees up 7% over the last two years. And as my colleague mentioned, the valuation fees are going up this July. 2024 International Environmental Conservation Code, Energy Code, which was so onerous it wasn't adopted by many of the jurisdictions in southern Arizona. I was in a meeting with the HUD secretary two weeks ago, and he estimated that's going to add another $21,000 to the cost of every single home. My colleague mentioned single family starts. Let's talk about apartments. In 2023, there were permits issued for 1,244 apartments. Last year, that number was down to 655, almost half 50% drop. This year, if the trend of permits being pulled stays on a steady course, we're looking at 415, or one third of what we had just a couple years ago. And in fact, I don't know if you caught the paper this morning, but the census shows that our population is actually going down in the city of Tucson. That should be a canary in the coal mine for all of us. I just want to talk about cost recovery real quick, too, because I earned a public administration degree from the University of Arizona. And one of the things I hate the most is when people say, oh, government should be run like business. No, it's not. It's not a business. It's government. Your duties and responsibilities are dictated by the city charter. including things like public safety. Now imagine what would happen if you went to City Manager Tamura and said, hey Tim, we want you to write a plan for full cost recovery for fire and police services. Wouldn't happen. You couldn't do it. I propose to you that making sure that buildings in Tucson are safe and meet the standards for our community is a similar service and should not be considered under full cost recovery. Thank you for your time and thank you for stepping up to represent our community.

Thank you, Mr. Garcia. Dr. Denise Bowles.

Hi, Mayor and Council. My name is Dr. Denise Bowles. I do live in Tucson, but I also work in Vail, and I'm not a retained speaker. I'm speaking on behalf of the Greater Vail Area Chamber of Commerce regarding the proposed cross-department fee increases. We understand the city has financial and operational challenges, but the business community has real concern about the timing and scale of these increases, especially during an ongoing budget deficit discussion. Many businesses are already dealing with inflation, higher operating costs, and rising construction and permit expenses. Small businesses in particular are less able to absorb additional fees, which can create disproportionate impacts on smaller local operations. We are also concerned about transparency and accountability. There still appears to be limited details regarding how some of these revenues would be used, including the proposed business support program tied to the loss of use fee. Businesses are also frustrated by repeated fee increases without clear improvements in service, responsiveness, and timeliness. We believe that there should be clear cost recovery and justification and measurable outcomes tied to these proposals. And finally, we are concerned about the impact these increases could have on housing affordability and economic competitiveness. It's difficult to talk about lowering costs for residents while continuing to increase the cost of development and doing business. We do appreciate the opportunity to share our concerns and encourage continued dialogue with the business community before these proposals move forward. And I want to thank you for your time. Thank you, Dr. Bowles.

All righty. I do not have any other cards for this item, but I do want to call and see if there's anyone in the audience wishing to be heard on this particular item. All right. I do not see anyone else wishing to speak at the public hearing. May I get a motion to close the public hearing?

So moved.

There's a motion. Second. There's a motion and a second, and this is to close the public hearing. If there is no additional discussion, all those in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any against? Motion passes. This public hearing is closed. Madam Clerk, you are requested to read Ordinance 12253 by number and title only.

Coordinates number 12253 relating to development fees for planning and development services, submitting the Tucson Code Chapter 23B Unified Development Code Administrative Manual Section 4 Development Review Fees Schedule and Tucson Code Chapter 16 and Tucson Code Chapter 26 and setting an effective date of July 1, 2026. What is the council's pleasure on this item?

Mayor, I want to move that we approve and adopt ordinance number 12253, but I am interested in adding a friendly amendment.

All right, so there is a motion, and let me just make sure that we do this appropriately.

Yeah, I'm not sure on the exact procedure. That's okay.

Mr. Attorney? Thank you. Honorable Mayor, Councilmember, I think we have to have a motion first to have a friendly amendment.

So make the motion to approve and then add your amendment to the motion.

Correct.

Okay.

I'll go ahead and make that motion. So I move to approve and adopt ordinance number 12253. There's a motion. Second.

There's a motion and a second. And now that you can add your. additional language.

Thank you Madam Mayor. I want to add a friendly amendment to direct Department of Transportation and Mobility Planning and Development Services and Housing and Community Development to work together to provide relief for fees for affordable housing development so that our City of Tucson initiatives and policies align and I would like staff to return to Marin Council within 90 days with an ordinance to provide relief for these city fees in an effort to continue to support the housing affordability strategy for Tucson.

Okay, so that is a friendly amendment in addition to the... A question to the city manager.

Do you think that timeline is doable this summer?

Honorable Mayor, members of the Council, I think a 90-day timeline is doable, and I think this has been an ongoing conversation with Council, so I expect we could bring some things in 90 days, and that wouldn't even be the end of the conversation, and we would continue to follow your direction on emphasizing affordability for affordable housing.

I accept the friendly amendment.

Okay, so the seconder of the motion accepts the additional... amendment to the direction. I just want for clarity, I just want to make sure that either Mr. Tamir or Ms. Manning can describe the affordable housing program that we already have that gives relief to affordable housing development.

Honorable Mayor, members of the council, For qualifying affordable housing projects in Tucson, we have the ability for mayor and council to consider paying the impact fees in lieu of the developer paying that impact fee. That program's on the books and exists, and you've exercised it many times in the last few years. So that program exists and it is funded, And it always remains the mayor and council's discretion on what projects would qualify and be awarded that relief. We would take this direction to look at additional mechanisms beyond that existing program.

So we have a program that funds impact fees for affordable housing projects. I know that there is a special project manager that leads planning and development services. Can you describe what we do for the record?

Yes, Mayor, members of council. All projects that would qualify for that impact fee waiver or subsidy, really, as the city manager mentioned, are also eligible for Planning and Development Services' fast-track permitting program, where the permitting time each submittal is reviewed in half the time of a normal submittal. And we've had numerous projects go through that fast-track program. um process in the last year including amazon flats and several others rincon manor and a few other projects and as men as you mentioned mayor one of the ways we're able to achieve that expedited timeline is an assigned project manager that helps that project navigate the permitting process from start to finish not only with planning and development services but with all of the departments that conduct development reviews. So we do have kind of an existing program and framework that I think we can use to build out according to Mayor and Council's direction.

I'd like to add my thoughts in terms of what my concerns are and Part of the reason that I, as mayor, have been consistent in adding new tools to creating affordability in the city of Tucson is specifically for one of the speakers Mr. Garcia talked about, which is there's an affordable housing crisis, there's need for housing in our city, and we want to make sure that the city of Tucson is advancing housing affordability. That's why, you know, you know, under my leadership, we created the housing affordability strategy for Tucson. We created our own development, nonprofit development arm in the city of Tucson. We worked really hard to see the community corridors tool come to fruition. We were the first city in the state to push for accessory dwelling units. We created a LIBRARY OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT MODEL UNITS SO THAT IT BECAME LESS EXPENSIVE TO BUILD THEM. WE PASSED THE MIDDLE HOUSING CITYWIDE. WE'VE DONE SO MUCH IN THE INCENTIVE DISTRICT WE PASSED IT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE CREATING DENSITY AND TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY. I want to make sure that we pay close attention to what these fees can potentially create in terms of slowing down the the building of housing period, right? For me, in my view, I want to make sure that we build every type of housing because the more housing we build, whether it's low income housing or market rate housing, it's good for us here in Tucson. absolutely understand that we are basing these fees on cost of doing business right we're not going above and beyond this is what it costs to do business and in many cases we have not seen any of the fees that we are may be going to approve today. So I just want to see if there's a possibility of creating a one year kind of, I don't want to say exploratory, but a one year assessment report by the Planning and Development Services Department to make sure that we are not an impediment or our fees are not an impediment to continue building in the city of Tucson. I know that we are doing a lot, but we do need our private partners to build housing in Tucson. And so is there any way, Mr. Attorney, that we can come back and review a year later, just to see how these fees are impacting the use of our tools in development.

Honorable Mayor, I think that's absolutely appropriate, and I would remind the Mayor and Council that your leadership in passing the housing emergency declaration also provides for that one-year review as well. So you could include it in that, or if you want to add it to this motion as another friendly amendment, I think that's also possible.

Will the motion maker consider adding that one-year review? Yes.

All right. Yes.

Can I add a point of order?

Yes.

So once the motion is made, it's the possession of the body. So as long as no one in the body has an objection, not just the motion maker to the amendments, then we would move forward. Okay.

So procedurally, we're okay to proceed with the additional language. All righty, Councilmember Cunningham.

So I probably should have spoken up first, because I don't even know if I'm on board with the first motion, let alone the second and the amendment. So I'm good with them having all the amendments they want. I want to put that on the record, but I may not vote for this. I'm going to explain why. One, if we're going to do a one-year study, I'd like to have some wiggle room as we implement these fees, the same thing I asked about the parks fees earlier today. Two, we already have multiple programs for low-income housing. As a matter of fact, we're already trying to initiate an adaptive reuse district that would be tacked onto this as well. So we've got, like, multiple things. burners in the fire that aren't even being considered. It's really hard to change all this at the last minute. When we do these things at the last minute, things get spoiled. Moreover, one of the concerns that the audience brought was the discussion about some of the DTM fees. That's been like the crux of the discussion for the week for me. It's about the lane closures. I understand that that's where the biggest increase is happening. I want to say I'm actually in favor of the lane closure part because we have multiple projects that have gone over and caused longer lane closures. And there's no incentive for people to pick up the pace and finish their project and end the lane closures. And we are getting nonstop emails and discussions from constituents about 5th Street, Grant Road, Tanque Verde, and now 22nd. So when we talk about the lane closures, that's off the table for me. The other thing is that I'd much rather give anyone who builds a low-income project all the fee relief they want, but make them pay their impact fees. We shouldn't be giving those up. They're too important. Not only that, when we do allow them not to pay their impact fees, we have to pay it out of the general fund anyway by state law. That's the last thing we should be giving away. I've been told in the past we didn't have the flexibility to forgive the regular permitting fees. But if we do all of a sudden, then why would we, we should be doing those and making them pay their impact fees. That's actually way more important, or at least half of them. So I'm, we're 15 years, I'm 15 years into this. We've had this discussion six times on relief. Every single time fees come up, it becomes a thing. First of all, our fees are still competitive with half the cities in the state. We're right in the middle. So the fee increases. That's kind of red herring. Sorry, Ben. I love you, but I'm just not going to, I'm not going to. take that. I'm not going to accept that as fact. What I will say, though, and this is fair, is that if we do, and, Doctor, I appreciate your comments as well. What I will say, and this is a fair discussion, is that the last time we faced a recession and the last time we faced a housing building shortage and nobody could get permitted because nobody was lending money and nobody could get their builds going, We reduced everything. We gave everything away for free. So if we have to pull back the fees because there's no activity, we'll be able to do that. And we probably need to have that back door. Maybe we even plan for it on what triggers it. Say we see the number of permits being pulled go under a certain threshold, then, yeah, we'll have to dial back some fees. So there's some discussion, I think, to have here. I think the team... Corin, I think your team has put together an incredibly good package. And I told you in your office, I agree with everything. I think that we've got three different discussions going on here, including the one I just talked about with the relief. And again, some of that... Some of the... the latitude I want to give you guys as we implement these fees over the next year, that maybe we have, I'm wondering if we're better off pulling this and crafting another motion for June 9th. I just think that's important. And if we have to have another public hearing on it, I'm willing to, but there's way too much going on for me to be comfortable moving this forward right now.

All righty. So any other comments? Hearing none, I think we have to go to roll call for the motion with the amendments.

So currently if the body would like to take, so the body took possession of the original motion, which is just to pass the ordinance. So, and then we had a friendly amendment. If the body would like to vote on whether they accept that friendly amendment originally, if it's unanimous, then no problem. But if the body accepts that friendly amendment, because it's not just up to, the motion maker and the seconder to accept in that amendment.

Right. So we're voting for the motion with the amendment right now.

Yes. So you're voting on if you'd like to add the amendment to the motion and what the one year, So we would do it one at a time. So we would first vote on if we would, and I'll make sure the city attorney is comfortable with me saying this, we'll first vote on the amendment, the friendly amendment, to see if that's added on. If that is added on, then we would take the next amendment.

Okay. So roll call vote.

Council Member Cunningham.

No.

Council Member Dahl.

Aye.

Council Member Council Member Schubert.

Aye.

Council Member Barajas. Aye. Mayor Romero.

Aye. Ordinance 1220.

So the friendly amendment has been added. Okay. And so now if you would like to make another amendment for yours. Did you want to make another amendment to? Yes, the one-year review. Yes.

Okay.

Does the motion have to be, the amendment have to be made?

No. Yes, if you wanted to make the motion to amend it.

Okay. If we can add the motion to amend it for a one-year review.

Fine by me.

Okay. Are you seconding?

Is that a so moved or second?

When I've done friendly amendments, it's always just been between those two. This is new to me.

That's okay, yeah.

But it's different, huh?

But it's still procedural correct. This is procedural Robert's Rules of Order, which is our governing. Okay. Unless the city attorney objects.

So Council Member Schubert motioned and Council Member Dahl seconded the additional amendment of a one-year review.

Correct? I believe you made the motion.

She can't make the motion.

We usually don't make the motion.

I usually don't make the motion.

Yes.

So moved.

Okay.

And then who's next? Second. Council Member Dahl seconds. Okay, so there's a motion and a second for additional amendment for review, and we have to go to roll call to add that. We can, yes.

Council Member Schubert.

Aye.

Council Member Dahl.

Aye.

Council Member Rajas.

Aye.

Council Member Cunningham.

Aye.

Mayor Romero.

Aye. Amendment passes. And so the ordinance 12253.

So this is now the full motion. So the full motion has now been decided upon. Obviously, if there's any further discussion or you can vote on the entire motion as altered.

Oh, yeah.

Okay.

One more. So if you can make a motion to pass ordinance 12253.

We don't need an additional motion. We have the motion. But if there's any discussion, you can have discussion or we can just vote. Okay.

So any further discussion on this item? Hearing none, let's go to roll call two.

Okay. Pass. Council Member Schubert. Aye. Council Member Dahl.

Aye.

Council. Council Member Barajas.

Aye.

Mayor Perreault.

Aye. Ordinance 12253 passes by a vote of 4-1. Alrighty. On to item nine.

Public hearing amending Tucson Code Chapter 27 relating to an increase in water rates and charges, miscellaneous fees, and the Central Arizona Project's cap water resource fee for fiscal year 2027 through 2030.

City Manager's communication number 155, dated May 19th, is received into and made part of the record. This is the time and place legally advertised for a public hearing regarding proposed increases to water rates, miscellaneous fees, and the cap water resource fee as required by the fiscal year 2027-2031 financial plan. This public hearing is scheduled to last for no more than an hour. Speakers are limited to five minute presentations. Please come forward when I call your name and make your presentation. State your name, whether you live inside the city of Tucson or not, whom you are representing, and whether or not you are a paid speaker. I have one card or two? I have two cards on this item, and our first speaker is Sandra Alvarez.

Hey good evening. My name is and I love it is from but because as mobile is and I represent the residents of Tucson mobile home parks. Today I'm here to speak about the crisis of a kid in our families. The unfair billing of the ladies is specifically a water. And how these basic necessary is being used to trade in our homes. Mobile homes are among the last affordable housing options here. But in the Sonora desert, access to water has become a tool for abuse. Park managers, who is the direct client of Tucson Water, use unregulated chair meeting systems. charging us inflated administrative fees and forcing us to pay for massive leaks in agent infrastructure that they refuse to repair. This has real and dangerous consequences. Picture this. During the extreme heat of last summer, a family in our community with young children between the ages of zero and six was left without a single drop of water for over 24 hours. Management shut off the supply for a support repair that dragged on endlessly. With temperatures starting over 105 degrees, the children had no way to irritate or cool down. Terrified by the imminent risk of heat stroke, the parents had to make the difficult decision to flee their own home and seek refuge elsewhere. No one should have to abandon their home to survive a too-soon summer simply because their landlord is negligent with a life-saving utility. And here is a cruelest trap. If a resident questions their inflated water bill or cannot pay it, management adds the debt to their rent. They immediately apply late fees and start the eviction process. Families are not losing their homes because they fail to pay their lot rent. They are losing their over fraudulent, unregulated water fees. Water is a human right, not a weapon for displacement. Therefore, we respectfully ask you for your urgent intervention. Transparency and regulation require parks to disclose exactly how bills are calculated and provide heightened markups on basic utilities. Infrastructure accountability. Force landlords to repair leaks. in their main lines and guarantee an uninterrupted water supply during heat emergencies. And eviction protections. Prohibit dispute utility debts for being used as illegal grounds to evict a family. I beg you not to allow water to be weaponized against us. You have the power to protect Tucson's working community. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Ms. Alvarez. David Godleski.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the council, David Godleski, Southern Arizona Home Builders Association. I do not reside in the city. Our office is at 2840 North Country Club. I am a retained speaker. So the miscellaneous fee study item that's before you this evening hasn't been updated in quite a long time. We realize that that has been to our advantage. We have worked with Tucson Water Staff extensively on this. I think they've understood that since it hasn't been updated, what you're seeing is about a 75% increase average increase across the board. So to try and offset some of that rate shock, they're gonna be proposing phasing in those fees over multiple years, which we appreciate. They've also addressed a number of comments that we've brought up and they've made a change to the water line inspection fee. That I think is appropriate and warranted and just to emphasize you know how these costs affect residential projects So in talking to one of my members I was asking about okay So how much how many how much water line is installed on the typical project? So it's not uncommon for like a hundred lot subdivision to require about twenty five hundred linear feet of water line So the inspection fee alone for that line would be $30,000. So that's $300 per home just in inspection costs. And so we would, I know the department has made some progress in trying to create efficiencies, more streamlined processes, so we can avoid excessive reviews and keep fees to a minimum. And we'd certainly appreciate any encouragement that you would offer the department for continuing to do that and then as was discussed earlier I think it would be also applicable to look at different exceptions and we would certainly make the case not just for those that meet affordable housing metrics but any type of housing that's going to result in a lower sales price than what the median home would be thank you

Thank you, Mr. Godleski. That was our last speaker. Is there anyone else here in the chamber that is wanting to speak on this particular issue? Seeing none, I move we close the public hearing.

Second.

There's a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor of closing the public hearing, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any against? Motion carries. All right, Madam Clerk, you are requested to read Ordinance 12255 by number and title only.

Ordinance number 1, 2, 2, 5, 5 relating to water amending certain portions of the Tucson code chapter 27 water article section one sections 27 through 16, 27 through 16.2 for in two print C 27 dash 16.2 print two print D 27 dash 16.2 print two print E and 27 dash 16.2 print two print F article two section 27 through 30, 27 through 32 sections 27 dash 32.1. 27-32.1.2, 27-33, 27-33.1, 27-33.2, 27-33.3, 27-34, 27-35.1, to 27-35.2. 27.35.16, 27.35.21, 27-36, Parenth B, Parenth 3, 27-37, Parenth 1, Parenth E, 27-37, Parenth 1, Parenth F, 27-37, Parenth 3, 27-37, Parenth 4, Parenth A, 27-37, Parenth 4, Parenth B, 27-41.1 , 27-43 , 27-50 , 27-50 , 27-51 , 27-54. Article V, sections 27-86 , 27-86 , 27-86 , 27-86 , charges for water services and volumetric rates for fiscal year 2027 through fiscal year 2030 based on Tucson Water's updated fiscal year 2027-31 financial plan and setting an effective date.

What is the council's pleasure? So moved.

Second.

So there is a motion to pass and adopt ordinance 12255. And a second. Any discussion? Council Member Dahl and then Council Member Schubert.

No, it's Paul.

Oh, Council Member.

I got upgraded if I look like that.

Council Member Cunningham.

A couple things. Number one, This is a really good package. It's pretty consistent with our water policy over the years in protecting our number one resource. The young lady in the back, you gave a really good presentation about extending our low-income program to multifamily. Ben, we've talked about this in my office in the past, and that is one of the problems that we have in our low-income program is that the renter has to have their own meter. And if the landlord's paying the water, and I know this because since my father died, many of you know I became a landlord, We pay the water. So we have to be able to come up, and I'm going to challenge John and his team to, you know, Sylvia, it's going to end up being you, so I know you're going to have to do it. I'm going to challenge you to come up with an algorithm or a formula that allows us to put in low-income rate for renters who qualify when they have a master meter there has to be a way to thread that needle I've said it a thousand times and I absolutely think we can find that medium more importantly if we're gonna have predatory landlords who are jacking water fees I think we should bring back some stuff that that kind of caps what kind of fees they can jack up. There has to be a limit for what they can charge extra, and we have to be able to work with them. That is a discussion for a study session that we bring forward. We just don't bring motions up right there on that day. So that's kind of how I feel about that, but I'm in favor of this package, and yes, we're going to work on your issue 100%. We've actually worked with Ben in the past. I think you guys should exchange information. I'd love to have you both at my office next week to talk about it.

Council Member Schubert.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Cunningham. And thank you to Tucson Water for reducing the rate increase lower than had been previously approved and for providing high quality and reliable water service to our community at the lowest costs that are practical while still running the utility. I want to ensure that the excellent services provided to direct utility customers are provided to sub-metered customers. I want to uplift the work of Sandra Alvarez and the organizers of Poder Casas Moviles. Ward 6 staffer Ray Winch is also involved in that group and that's why I have a particular awareness of the sub metering issue in mobile home parks. So I like many of my colleagues have heard from mobile home park residents who have excessive water charges. We're talking about as high as $1,750 for a month. I'm committed to working with my colleagues and Tucson Water to explore all of our options and I'm happy to support ordinance number 12255.

I also understand that And I too appreciate Ms. Alvarez's presentation. We have been hearing about this for some time, and I do agree that there is a possible solution. I'm not sure that we can do it alone, though. I know that our Attorney General, Attorney General Mays, is really looking and investigating into these abuses by landlords and property owners at mobile home parks. throughout the state, and so I think we should also, you know, make sure that we alert her, our Attorney General, to this concern. Because, you know, when someone wants to be predatory, they are. And our Attorney General should help us figure out which are the predatory mobile home owners that are doing this to working families. So it looks like we've made a motion and a second to pass and adopt ordinance 12255. Any further discussion on this item? Hearing none, we do need to go to roll call.

Council Member Schubert. Aye. Council Member Cunningham. Aye. Council Member Barajas. Aye. Council Member Dahl.

Aye.

Mayor Romero. Aye.

Ordinance 12255 passes by a vote of 5-0. Item 10.

Public hearing. Adoption of proposed rates and fees charged by Department of Transportation and Mobility.

City Manager's communication number 143, dated May 19th, is received into a mid part of the record. This is the time and place legally advertised for a public hearing regarding adoption of the proposed fee revisions and two additional fees charged by the Department of Transportation and Mobility. This public hearing is scheduled to last for no more than one hour. Speakers are limited to five minute presentations. Please come forward when I call your name, make your presentation. State your name, whether you live in the city, whom you are representing, and whether or not you are a paid speaker. Let me see. We have a couple of cards for this one. Our first speaker is Ryan Stuckey.

It's Ryan Stuckey. I'm sorry if I butchered your name. Okay, Ryan Stuckey. I live in Marano, 1265 North Appling Avenue. I work in the city of Tucson, and I'm here today representing the Metro Pima Alliance, MPA, and I do not get paid by them. So MPA, our board has issued a letter opposing I'm too tall, sorry. Opposing the proposed lane closure fees because of the direct impact on housing affordability, economic activity, and project delivery. I want to make it clear, we understand and we actually support the goal of minimizing roadway disruptions. But we also believe that the way it's implemented, which is kind of like a flat per day lane closure fee, it doesn't effectively achieve that goal. In practice, it disproportionately impacts infill development, which is the very type of development the Council is trying to encourage. And then projects on large, undeveloped sites, they often have ample space for staging, materials, equipment, and they don't need lane closures as often but infill projects especially smaller you know higher density multi-family developments they don't have that luxury and we're trying to build 10 or 20 lots or units on a constrained site you know temporary use of the right-of-way it's often unavoidable and so those are exactly the projects that you know they deliver attainable housing workforce housing they're located near transit and walkable amenities and they align better with cities stated housing and growth policies So this fee structure effectively penalizes infill development. It adds cost to the projects that we need more of, and those costs matter. They'll increase the cost to build housing. They'll further strain affordable and workforce housing feasibility. and discourage investments in slow job creation. The fees also don't really reflect how the construction actually works. A flat daily fee doesn't distinguish between delays that are within a contractor's control and those driven by utilities or weather or coordination challenges. And that results in added costs without better outcomes necessarily. And then there's safety implications, more constrained projects, higher cost, at least a staggered, inefficient construction activity in the lanes, which can increase work zone exposure to hazards, both for the workers and for traveling public passing by the sites. So if the goal is to reduce closure duration, We believe there's better approaches, like performance-based incentives or penalties tied to actual delays caused by the contractor. There's flexibility for real-world type of conditions. And so as we noted in our letter, MPA is ready and willing. We'd love to work with the city. but we believe that the proposal in its current state can maybe use some refinement. And so respectfully, we're asking to delay the implementation of the lane closure fee, ensure any approach supports infill housing, affordability, and addresses some of these concerns. And right now we believe the policy in its current form risks discouraging exactly the type of development that Tucson's trying to promote. So thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Stuckey. Van Buehler-Garcia.

Good evening again. I'm Arvind Romero, members of the council. Ben Buehler-Garcia. I'm a city resident. I'm representing the Arizona Multi-Housing Association. As you can imagine, I think Councilmember Cunningham would be disappointed if I didn't bring up the fee issue. I was also told by a three-star general to never do math in public, so don't quote me on this. But I think the poster child for this situation is that student housing complex is going up at Speedway and Euclid. Because it's a high rise, because they're working on a very constricted site, because they're using a crane, lifting very heavy materials, they've had to close that lane of Speedway for, and as I understand it, that'll be closed for two years. So even at the reduced rates, which I really much appreciate, $500 a day times 730 days, let me check my math here, that's $365,000. Now, there are a lot of factors that go into deciding where to place an apartment site. Many of them are outside of your purview, outside of your control. Land costs, land availability, financing, whether the median income in that neighborhood would support the final rates of the product that you want to put out there. But the thing you do control are some of these fees. And Madam Mayor, I really appreciate you putting your finger on that. in the previous hearing about that because there are issues where some bean counter in Boston is making a decision and it might be a razor, it might be $365,000 that determines whether they build an infill project in Tucson or they build in Marana. So what you do influence those costs, I'd encourage like the previous speaker, I'd encourage you to continue this hearing. Allow us to sit down with your staff and allow our stakeholders to sit down with the staff to see if we can find a better way to do this to address the problem. Again, Council Member Cunningham, you and I have shared the frustrations that we have with some of the traffic construction in Tucson, but I think there is a better way to do it. So I respectfully request that you continue this hearing until we've had a chance to better develop this concept. Thank you.

David Godleski.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the Council. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you. David Godleski, Southern Arizona Home Builders Association, 2840 North Country Club, but I'm not a resident of the city of Tucson. I am a retained speaker. So despite the ongoing interactions with staff, the proposed Changes to the DTM fees have been the hardest for us to really assess the impact and have a clear understanding of how the fees will be used and Managed and whether they're right size for the intended purpose for example I've heard of project impacts from our members for new subdivisions that range from say five thousand dollars to nearly a hundred and seventy thousand dollars and so that could be thousands of dollars per home and new costs and We support the goals of minimizing impacts to road construction projects on residents and businesses. Certainly want you to receive less phone calls. But as currently presented, although there may have been some last minute changes, we can't support the fees as proposed. And like the previous speakers request, more time to work with staff. Further would ask you to consider capping total fees, fee costs to ensure predictability and improve budgeting for new development. Potentially providing credits if the contractor improves use conditions or finishes early. Not assessing fees related for work related to a public utility or circumstances that might be out of a contractor's control. And again, creating exceptions for infill housing, ADUs, missing metal, AND PROJECTS RELATED TO THE CORRIDORS TOOL THANK YOU.

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU CLINT ELDER.

NEW SPEAKER GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCIL MY NAME IS CLINT ELDER I DO NOT RESIDE IN THE CITY I LIVE IN MORANA I'M A LOCAL CONSTRUCTION WORKER. First of all, I want to oppose raising the DTM fees currently just because it's been a moving target for us a little bit. Over the last month we've been sitting down with DTM staff. They've been working with us. This thing's been evolving as it's been going forward. We're not there yet to really impose these fees. We are really concerned with how this and this will potentially hurt projects moving forward. We've got a bunch of projects that we build locally here that are determined by $30,000 or $40,000, whether they're going to be built or whether they're not going to be built. I understand going forward that there are incentives to, like you said, that really incentivize construction workers to be faster on their projects, as well as to Do better to get the work done sooner right we don't want to be in the roadways any longer than we have to but currently right now with the way that the fees are structured and how they're at least proposed. They're really ambiguous at that right we still do not understand the true implications of of where this fees will be applied how the money that is received where it'll be where we appropriately. funded and so therefore at this time I would ask mayor and Council to at least Pope postpone this so that we can continue to work with DTM to rectify how all of these projects will go forward thank you.

Mister elder was our last speaker we don't have any more cards is there anyone in the audience wishing to be heard on this item. I do not see any. If not, may I have a motion? I move we close the public hearing.

Second.

Motion to close the public hearing. There is a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of closing the public hearing, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any against? Motion carries. What is the council's pleasure at this time? Oh, Madam Clerk, I think you need to read Resolution 243. by number and title only.

Resolution number 24118 relating to transportation mobility, adopting the proposed rates and fees charged by the city of Tucson's Department of Transportation and Mobility and declaring an emergency.

What is the council's pleasure? I move. So there is a motion. Second. We have a second. There's a motion and a second to pass and adopt resolution 24118. Any further discussion? Council Member Cunningham.

Sorry, I've talked a lot today, but I'm... So for the advocates who came on to this, you caught me on a bad week. We have three projects this week. One of them's gone over six months, and it is a disaster. I get calls on it every single day. So I'm not going to... Give relief here. If we want to have a discussion over the next year on, hey, you know what, can we get a 10-day grace period and factor that in, then let's sit down and talk about it. Nobody's really come and talked to me about any of this stuff yet. Like, no one. I mean, Ben called me last week, so good for Ben. But that's because, you know, we talk a lot. The bottom line is, is that if you guys want to have a discussion about it, we can. But you do understand that in Ward 2 right now, I have four obstructions on major thoroughfares between... Kolb and Houghton. That's just unacceptable. And part of them is because three of the projects delayed and there's no accountability on those projects being delayed. Not only that, I get to receive the emails that say, well, I drove by and there was only three guys working. Well, I can't work with that. So I'm willing to have the dialogue over the next year, but I absolutely support the package as it's presented.

Council Member Broaddus.

Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, I would just like to see staff, DTM, make a recommendation if you could have a clear action plan outlining how some of the funding can be allocated to support more of our local small businesses affected by construction impacts. I know it was briefly mentioned, but I want to see something more specific, specific strategies for traffic signal optimization to help address congestion, drain, and after the project.

Honorable Mayor, members of the council. Oh, go ahead.

Go ahead, Mr. Credo.

I will start and then Sam will correct. BUT YES, WE DO HAVE A NUMBER OF THOSE PROGRAMS IN DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING POTENTIAL USES OF THE LOSS OF USE FEED TO SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESSES ALONG CONSTRUCTION CORRIDORS. WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT TO SAM TO CLEAN UP.

THANK YOU, MR. MANAGER. GOOD EVENING, HONORABLE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. SHARED SOME OF THIS THROUGH THESE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS ABOUT DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK ON HOW WE CAN UTILIZE THE REVENUE, COLLECT IT FROM THE LOSS OF USE FEES SPECIFICALLY TO HELP NOT ONLY IMPACT SMALL BUSINESSES, BUT THEN ALSO FUND WAYS TO OPTIMIZE TRAFFIC ALONG THOSE CORRIDORS THAT WE ARE SEEING THE IMPACTS. AND SO OUR COMMITMENT TO YOU AND OTHERS IS THAT WE CAN RETURN WITH A FRAMEWORK AND A PLAN ON HOW THAT IS GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED.

Thank you. Is there an attached timeline to that program, Sam?

In terms of when we'll return with a framework? Mm-hmm. We can attach a timeline to it. We would expect that the fees...

I don't want to, but I just want to make sure that there's some thought put into a timeline for... for the reinvestment of these funds. I think the other thing that I'm thinking about, I, too, you know, get very exasperated, just like any other user of our roads when there is delays and lane closures, and there's obvious no work happening in those lanes. So what, but I also understand the counter, right? The concern about there being, you know, delays that are not the construction company, but others related to the project. And so I just want to make sure that we have also maybe attach a one year review of what we're seeing. I wanna make sure that there's flexibility and discretion on behalf of the director of the department to see what's happening. We always get the blame, right? The city of Tucson is always at fault when there's lane closures and no one is seeing anyone do any construction in those lanes. and it's usually a utility or others that are requested to close traffic lanes. And right now, and this is a good thing, right now we're seeing a lot of construction and repair and replacement of our infrastructure, which is good. But still, I think people are sensitive to lane closures right now because we have to be able to have movement throughout our city. So I don't know, Mr. Manager, if that's something that we could attach to this.

Honorable Mayor, members of the council, and what I would add to the conversation is under the previous item, when you adopted the PDSD fees, you gave us a 90-day time frame to bring back a package of things related to how do we assure that the fees we're charging are not driving negative outcomes on affordable housing projects specifically. I think this lane closure fee would be certainly covered in that. So what I would suggest is we do exactly what you said, which is bringing back a framework. I would attach a 90-day time frame to it. And even though these are separate fee items, the impacts are cumulative, as speakers have noted. So I think we would just roll this into that 90-day item to come back to you holistically, including uses of that fee. And go ahead, Sam.

Thank you, Mr. Manager. If I could just add one thing. I do want to note that the fees being proposed for the loss of use fees specifically, we are proposing a three-year ramp up. So, the first year is a third of the full cost of the fees. And so, we'll have a really good idea in that first year of what the revenue looks like generated by this fee.

Yeah, and I think it's important that we continue the discussion with those that are developing, right? Again, just like I talked previously, we've worked really hard to allow for infill development in our city. We don't want to put impediments in front. I agree that I think that we should... have rules and fees to charge for closures, but I think we need to make sure that we're evaluating the effect of what that will do to making sure that we're developing infill development and affordability in the city of Tucson. And some flexibility, right? I want to make sure that the department director is also free to evaluate to say, wait a minute, this particular lane closure, because we are doing infill development and there's limited space, we will work with the developer to make sure that it's not crazy amounts of fees that they have to pay. And then continue having conversations with stakeholders. If that's reasonable, perfect. You don't need me to add that to a motion?

We take that as direction, Mayor. If you pass and adopt this ordinance, we will include it in that 90-day follow-up.

Okay. All righty. So if there's no additional discussion, let's go to roll call.

Council Member Barajas?

Aye.

Council Member Dahl?

Aye.

Council Member Cunningham?

Aye.

Council Member Schubert?

Aye.

Council Member Romero? I'm like, who's that?

Who's that? Resolution 24118 passes by a vote of 5-0. Item 11.

Public hearing amending Tucson Code Chapter 15 relating to an increase in environmental services rates and miscellaneous fees for fiscal year 2027 through 2030 and the creation of a clean city fee.

City managers communication number 153 dated May 19th is received into and made part of the record. This is a time and place legally advertised for a public hearing concerning proposed increases to environmental service rates and miscellaneous fees for fiscal year 2027 through 2030 and the creation of a clean city fee. This public hearing is scheduled to last for no more than one hour. Speakers are limited to five-minute presentations. Please come forward. When I call your name, make your presentation.

Oh, we have no presentation?

Okay. If we have no presentations for this one, then is there anyone in the audience wishing to be heard on this item? If not, may I have a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. Second. There's a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please sign, oh, and this is to close the public hearing. Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any against? This public hearing is closed. Madam Clerk, you are requested to read ordinance 12254 by number and title only.

Ordinance number 12254 relating to environmental services amending the Tucson code chapter 15 and implementing a clean city fee and setting an effective date of July 1, 2026.

What is the council's pleasure?

I move we pass and adopt ordinance number 12254.

There's a motion. Seconded. There's a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, we do need to go to roll call.

Council Member Dahl. Aye.

Council Member Schubert. Aye. Council Member Barajas. Aye. Council Member Cunningham.

Aye.

Mayor Romero.

Aye.

Aye. Ordinance 12254 passes by a vote of 5-0. Item 12.

Tentative budget adoption for fiscal year 2027.

City managers communication number 149 dated May 19th is received into any part of the record. Madam clerk, you are requested to read resolution 24123 by number and title only.

Resolution number 24123 relating to finance, adopting a tentative budget for the 2026-27 fiscal year, fixing the time and place to conduct a public hearing on said budget and adopt the final budget in a special meeting and fixing the time and place to levy the primary and secondary taxes for said fiscal year.

What is the council's pleasure?

I move we pass and adopt resolution number 24123.

There's a motion. I second the motion. There's a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, let's go to roll call.

Council Member Dahl?

Aye.

Council Member Barajas? Aye. Council Member Schubert? Aye. Council Member Cunningham?

Here it is, the moment of truth. I've struggled with this one. I'm going to vote for the budget, but I'll have a lot of discussion over the next weeks about it. Aye.

Okay. Mayor Romero? Aye. Resolution 24123 passes by a vote of 5-0. Item 13, adjournment. Council will stand adjourned. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be on Tuesday, June 9th, 2026 at or after 5.30 p.m. Thank you all so much. Have a wonderful rest of your week.

you