City Council - Regular Meeting

Take your seats, the meeting is about to start, thank you. Good afternoon, today is August 25th, 2026, and this is the City Council voting meeting. Roll call, please.

We will now have a moment of silence. We have a large number of city employees here to honor the memory of Scott McClinton. He was a dedicated employee of the city for 29 years, and he was currently the capital projects manager. And also please remember his wife who was in the hospital as a result of this accident. I'd like to ask the city employees to please come in a little closer to the room and come in out of the hallway. Thank you. And after the moment of silence, we'll have an invocation by Pastor Lance Duffield of the Restoration Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilwo

Hey, Jim, could you pull the microphone down?

Thank you. And I'd just like to say one unit of blood can be spun down to many different factors, and the blood donations are used to save lives of preemies, mothers who have just given birth, accident victims. It has so many uses, so if any of you are able to donate, please give Vivalant a call, and they'd be happy to get you in. Thank you.

Excuse me. This is a call to the public. No comments from the council. Thank you.

I'D LIKE TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO LOOK INTO THIS AND MAKE SURE THAT THE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC GETS THE REPORT AS REQUESTED AND I THINK THE COUNCIL WOULD BE INTERESTED IN GETTING THAT REPORT AND HAVING A STUDY SESSION.

To approve consent agreement agenda items B and C. Second.

Thank you. And I believe Lois Freworth pulled this item and we'll begin the discussion.

yeah i'd also like to comment the person that submitted the letter was welcome to come here and read the letter but we just received it which was wonderful all the council received this letter and i believe it was mr gamboge that asked that it be submitted to the minutes and i'm all for public input but i think that that kind of showed some sort of a favoritism towards this one person and either we start submitting everyone's letters or we develop a policy governing submitting these letters. Does anyone else have a comment? Oh, do you want to finish?

Boy, that was pretty good. I'd just like to clarify some of these, the purpose of some of these easements. We had some very wonderful members of the public that donated their property for an easement so that we could run water lines to improve fire flow in the Taylor Hicks neighborhood area. And we also had other members of the public that donated and sold some of their property to us so that we could realign our sewer system and make it more efficient. And then also the last ordinance is to establish some fees for our new municipal court that we are remodeling over there off of Goodwin. And t

Madam Mayor, I'd like to make a motion. I'm sorry, I already pulled something.

I'm going to approve the consent coordinates A through D. Second, please vote.

Yes, thank you. So I'm just curious, I applaud your financial creativity to put those fees together that certainly impact our budget. Did this come up during the budget process itself?

So it's anticipated then that the Goodwin Street property renovation costs will be covered by these fees up to a certain point in time and then And then the fees drop off.

Well, again, thank you for your creativity and your follow through.

Thank you. And I'd also like to mention that if you can't pay the fee all at once, we have a payment plan that you can join.

Madam Mayor. Yes. Point of order. I believe Councilwoman Freworth pulled this item because there was a typo, not to relitigate the justification for this. So I suggest we move on.

Thank you, Judge. Good to hear from you.

Thank you. Well said. And our community is grateful to all of you for serving for our betterment.

I just wanted to say I've been following the CDBG committee and just wanted to acknowledge Chair Suttles and her work and the people that are there. And while you can see that a half million dollars are being spent and that's through federal funding, the annual allotment is somewhat closer to like 250, right? And that is only a third of what was applied for. So just know that the need is far greater than what we're able to serve right now. And the heartbreaking decisions that that committee has to go through gives you a real idea of the needs within our community. So I thank you all for your w

I make a motion to close the public hearing.

Emily, I have a question. What happens if we don't adopt these rates at this moment? What if we wait for, I know you've already done an internal review, but what if we wait for the more comprehensive consultants

Because, so this is pretty much a Band-Aid approach until we can come up with a plan. Yes. Because I don't feel like we've, at this moment, we've taken enough time to look at all the options because I just want to let the public know that our options are basically cut services or increase fees. And we're a full service community. So do you want your trash picked up only every other week? Do you want to have to haul your Christmas tree to the transfer station? Do you want to haul all your hazardous waste whenever you clean out your garage to the transfer station? Because that's what we used to

Okay. I see you there. Lois is first, though. I have her on first in line.

MORE OUT OF THIS THAN IT REALLY IS. PUBLIC WORKS HAS DONE THE CALCULATIONS TO SEE WHAT IT TAKES TO BREAK EVEN. WE'RE TAKING IT FROM 24 TO $31. CORRECT. THANKS TO BRADY I ASKED WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES CHARGE. PHOENIX CHARGES 51. BUCKEYE IS 31. TEMPE IS 31. Some of the surrounding cities are less, and that's because they don't provide the services we do. They don't do recycling. They don't do bulk item collection. They don't do hazardous waste collection, brush collection, or Christmas tree collection. I don't think we need to continue to lose money waiting on the study. And back to my good frien

Thank you, Ted. Let's see. Mr. Ruby, you're next.

Yeah. As I understand it, we're basically if this was a business, we're like running at a deficit. It's not bringing in what it needs to maintain. Unfortunately, this is kind of an essential service. I think we all want to have our trash taken away. So to me, this increase seems. good in that it keeps gets us back to being stabilized and and that seems something that we should vote on now I don't want to like see this type of deficit continue to grow.

Yes, I too am concerned with the growing deficit and I think it's better to take action today, but I have a couple of questions. So on page three of your presentation, we have included higher hauling costs and disposal expenses, 48% increase. One, do we expect to see that similar level of increase over the next several years and what's causing that?

Do we expect that increase to continue? Is that what we're projecting currently, that that expense will continue at that same rate?

Okay, thank you. And another question. So looking at the operating deficit, when we come out, obviously we come out gradually, but I see for the four years projected fiscal year 28 through 31, we're a fund balance of 2.8 to 2.4. Is there an industry standard on where we should be?

Thank you. I would just add, Mayor, that I think that we do have a fiduciary responsibility. We're getting a lot of citizen feedback with respect to rate increases all across the board and I think we owe it to the community to do an assessment despite the fact that it's another consultant.

Thank you, Mayor. My view is that this is an enterprise fund that needs to be in balance. The longer we wait, the further out of balance we're going to be and the higher the rate increase will have to be in the future. So I would support a scenario two.

And if we want to do a study for alternatives, that's fine. I think that's a good idea. But I don't want to continue the deficit. Thank you.

Yeah, apparently this deficit's been going on for, I don't know, several years, and we just weren't made aware of it until this year's budget discussion. Let's see. Mr. Ruby, did you want to speak still?

I have a question. Do you think there's effective ways for this department to be able to run more efficiently?

SO CITY STAFF HAS TAKEN SOME TIME TO LOOK INTO THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS AND THIS IS THE RECOMMENDED SCENARIO.

Yeah, Brady, I have a comment too. We're currently spending $30,000 a month to haul our recycles to the city of Phoenix. And is it just, are those, is that hauling a job going out to bid? Do we get tons of bidders for it or do we just get one bidder every year? How does that work?

But we need to make an effort to put the word out and get more haulers to bid because there's a lot of people out there that would love to have the city business. Another question I have, this contract came across my desk for $370,000 for plastic refuse and recycling containers with related technology services. solutions to extend the expiration date and add funds. Do you know what this means? Plastic refuse?

All right. Thank you. I'll get back to that at the next item. Any other comments? Mary?

Thank you. It's an enterprise fund. I don't think we should be operating in a deficit. I'm on board with the $31. As shocking as it is to the individual residential customer, it's a big jump. And that's can be harsh. I have no doubt about that. Inflation was what it was through the COVID years and beyond, and that was, as was mentioned, out of our control. But the fact is, it's an enterprise fund that's supposed to carry its load, and we need to have the consumers of this service pay for it. But I do like the study session that's coming to address all of these issues and with the goal maybe of

How many years have we been losing money at this?

I can't read the screen, so you'll have to tell me.

Last year? Yes. You said 2025? Yeah, fiscal year 2025. And how much did we lose?

Deficit of 1.3 roughly? Yes, 1.283. I don't want to leave the impression that with the new rates that we're making money, we've already lost 1.3 million at this. So this, to me, is getting to the point where we break even. And I think it's important for... I want you people online and in the audience to know that what you're seeing is a lot of micromanaging. These people know how to collect trash. So our job is to help them do a better job, not to tell them how to do their job.

Thank you. Do we have any public comment? We do. Ken Fedeck?

Thank you, Ken. That's all, Mayor. Okay. Do I hear a motion?

Madam Mayor, I move to approve ordinance number 2026-1959 and resolution 2026-2000. Second. Please vote.

Thank you. Let's start with Mr. Lois, you're first.

I have a comment. Didn't Patriot Disposal go to the state legislature and get a law change so that they could compete picking up trash here in the city of Prescott and they can pick up businesses but not residential? So we already have private haulers servicing our businesses.

OK, so we are being competitive with some of the private haulers and people can change if they want. They don't want to use the city of Prescott. They can use another hauler if they have a business.

Yeah. So I heard a lot of comments and you probably heard them as well as Carter brought up. Is there a reason why city staff could not do this fee study itself? I'm curious. I mean, this may require a certain kind of expertise. It's an open question to kind of answer what came up from the crowd.

It's kind of like an audit of sorts where you might have some blind spots within the department that doesn't see these things and these people are doing this all over the country and they would be able to organize that better. Is that a way of saying it? Yes, correct. Thank you.

Is there a representative from Burns and McDonald's here?

Would it be possible to ask them to increase the scope of their study to look at maybe privatization and efficiencies rather than just studying rates?

Okay, thank you. Let's see who's next. Ted?

I just want to present a caution. Cardinal LaBarge has talked to this. Ken Fittick's talked to this. We seem to have this crutch where instead of solving the problem with common sense, we go out and hire a consultant. And our track record is not very good. The consultant we hired on workforce housing, in my humble opinion, was an abysmal failure. Same goes with the guy that we hired for the general plan. I think this is a simple matter of breaking even. every year and adjust the rates accordingly. Given the rates you've shown me from the communities down south, even when we raise the rates, we

Any other comments? Yeah, I'm wondering if we're overthinking this. You've been with the city for how long in the solid waste department, Brady?

12 years. So I think you and your team, I'm a frequent visitor to the transfer station, and I think you run a pretty... efficient operation out there. So maybe we're just overthinking this and maybe we really don't need a consultant and we can just solve this problem ourself by looking at getting some public input about maybe consolidating our services, maybe having one central point for people to put their Christmas trees. I have an artificial one myself. I haven't had a real tree in years. And maybe we'll have to go back to if you clean out your garage, you have to wait till we have our annu

I'm just curious about do we have the capacity within the city to analyze the self-hauling impact? Because that seems to be a critical part of saving money.

And would that be like a burden on your department or is that something that can work within the workflow of the department?

Okay, do we have any public comment? No, Mayor. What?

Okay, well, I did get a letter from Matthew Cordua. He couldn't make it here today because he is a caretaker for his wife. And he says, I understand the solid waste fund is facing a deficit, but asking residents to pay the full increase on October 1 before the planned consultant-led rate study is finished means we are being asked to cover the shortfall without seeing the full plan for efficiencies, service options, or long-term cost controls. I respectfully ask council to postpone this vote or at a minimum consider a smaller interim increase, a senior or low-income consideration, and a phased

Madam Mayor, I move to not approve city contract 2027-052. No second. Motion fails.

Yes, this contract is costing us $30,000 a month to haul our recyclers, recycles to the city of Phoenix. I looked at their website and they said that 20 to 30% of the recycles are rejected because it's not clean. Apparently your recycling items have to be clean. They specifically talked about greasy cardboard pizza boxes. So they're pretty strict, and especially if you put a liner in your blue can and bag it, it automatically goes to the landfill. So if we're going to continue with this program, we need to re-educate the people and have more clear handouts so they understand what they can recy

Yeah, you mentioned that sometimes we get a return on our recyclable materials. Just in the past year, what have our best months been and has the offset ever been in a positive for us so we're not paying 30,000 a month but getting some money for the materials? I'm curious just how that looks.

Is there any, it's the cost or the value of the recyclable materials has decreased, so they're not giving us what they used to give us.

Because that's true, the Chinese decided they didn't need any of our recyclings, they had enough from other sources. And so there just isn't a market for them anymore. Mary, do you have a comment?

Brady, maybe you know just from your contacts in the industry, do you perceive any change coming by which recyclables will have more value, or are we just doing a feel-good mechanism here that does not have any impact in the world's status of trash?

Do you have a number as to how much money we're losing or how much it's costing us, the recycling program?

5,000 tons? Correct. Wow. That's a lot of recycling. Okay, any comments from the public? Okay. Any comments? Jay, do you have another comment? Okay. All righty. Ted?

I move to approve city contract number 2024-204A2. Second. Second.

Pass the 7-0. Thank you. It's about 5 o'clock. I think we should take about a 10-minute break, stretch our legs, and then we'll continue with the rest of the agenda. Thank you.

Well, thank you. This is moving along. It's been a long time coming to this point. I have a few questions. First of all, I'd like to ask legal about this contract. I understand that you reviewed it, but you didn't negotiate it. Is that right?

Okay. So we just don't negotiate any of these public works contracts? That's just the rule of thumb?

Okay. Thank you. Fan contracting has been around for a long time, local. They employ about 300 people. They serve northern Arizona. They've done a nice job in the past. They built our terminal. I remember when they redid Park Avenue, Copper Basin. We've had a long relationship with them. They have a wonderful reputation. I have a question on the contract. The signature line for fan contracting is blank. It doesn't have a name. Who's the principal now for fan contracting that is going to be?

Yeah, I was just curious. So it's Jason? Yeah. Okay, thank you. One of my concerns was the contract didn't have an exhibit that included the Kimley Horn plans that said option 2C, alternate plan 2C. And if we're going to have a contract, I think it's important that we include, because it says nowhere in the CMAR, which design we're gonna work with. And so, I think I would feel a lot better and it would be a lot clearer for the scope of the design if we included something as an exhibit that's narrowed it down to 2C.

So it's irrelevant whether it's alternate plan 2C or one of the other 20?

Well, I didn't know that. And I think just for members of the public and for the record, I think it would be nice if we included something that said this is the design that you're heading towards.

And then... About the sewer design, please refresh my memory. We're going to have one treated affluent line that's going to go from the airport wastewater treatment plant south to serve Prescott Lakes Golf Course.

Do you have any ideas what those other obligations would be?

So the affluent somehow heads south through Prescott Lakes and then goes back up?

And then we're going to have a line for raw sewage that's gonna go north to the wastewater treatment plant at the airport. That is correct, yes. And then is there, there's gonna be a third line, I seem to remember a third line, just two lines.

Okay, all right, any other, anyone else have any other comments, Mr. Gehring?

Thank you, Mayor. Tim, I've been told that there are differences between the city's request for a proposal and the actual contract with FAN. Are you aware of that or know about that?

For instance, well, the issue whether it identifies 2C, but the mayor's covered that. But what about traffic control and traffic planning?

So you're saying that FAN's gonna do traffic?

Let's see, who's next? Mary Fredrickson.

Thank you. Speaking of that, as you were saying, yeah, they'll be doing traffic, I noticed as I was going through this documentation that there's an exclusions list. This is on page 617 of the packet. Exclusions include traffic control. Traffic plans. And traffic plans are designed. So are... Would this fan contract include traffic control or not?

Okay, and that's actually leading to what my initial question was going to be. So this CMAR contract is for pre-construction services only?

and at least the staff's write-up on background, it indicates that the city anticipates starting construction in spring of 2027. What is it, eight, nine months from now? So is this pre-construction CMAR contract just for the couple of months between now and spring of 2027?

So 358,000 for the CMAR, for the pre-construction contract.

Run through spring of next year. Okay. And is there, maybe by industry standards, of which I'm completely ignorant, the fact that FAN has a CMAR for the pre-construction, does that, at least by usual practice, mean that there'll be the CMAR once construction happens?

THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS, TOO, ABOUT THE EXCLUSIONS. INSTEAD OF HAVING NUMBERS, THERE'S BULLET POINTS STARTING ON PAGE 617 AND GOING TO 618. THERE'S 18 EXCLUSIONS. AND THE SECOND BULLET POINT FROM THE TOP SAYS DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES. Isn't this going to be a design, they're consulting on design and engineering?

And then I understand all the other exclusions, but then we get down to insurance. They've got insurance as an exclusion, but then they have a big, you know, we have a page that covers insurance. Is that a mistake?

Does anybody have a comment? Gwen, is there someone from FAN here?

Yeah, because that's a pretty big issue. What's the question? Well, if you look at page 618 of the contract, the very third page from the end, under exclusions, it says insurance is one of the exclusions. So I was confused about that because there's a big discussion here.

So there's insurance in the contract, but then it says here that insurance is excluded. So I think we need to clear that up because insurance is very important. I'll make sure that happens. And that does bring me to the insurance question on page 32, paragraph 9. You know, insurance is very important, and you can never have enough insurance. And it seems to me like it's... pretty, pretty minimal. It talks about just like million dollar coverage. And, you know, I think I have more coverage for my home and auto and it talks about minimum. And then also it says they may have an umbrella, a liabil

I understand that, but if the design is faulty, there's a lawsuit you know that's what they go after was it the construction faulty or was the construction faulty because it was based on a faulty design so i'm just saying uh from just my gut feeling i'd like to see the insurance uh aggregates everything increased to more of a maximum coverage and throw in that umbrella for liability

I don't know. I would like to find out what the maximum is, because like I said, from experience, you cannot have enough insurance, especially this is a pretty big ticket item that we're dealing with.

Minimum. But my question is, can we go above the minimum?

OKAY. THANK YOU. Anyway, any other comments?

I now have a comment because you brought up a point that I think we need to understand. They're not going into construction. They're just doing design. Right. So your contention is, if I understand it correctly, if they give us a bad design and we don't fix the pipes, then they only have $3 million insurance. Now my question to our city attorney is, during the construction phase, There's, because of design, there's a failure. Do they apply the insurance for the design section or do they apply the insurance for the construction section?

So I would caution against postponing this vote today.

I WASN'T GOING TO POSTPONE IT. I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET SOME INFORMATION AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE AS MUCH LIABILITY COVERED AS WE CAN. THANK YOU SO MUCH. LET'S SEE. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? LOIS? NO. OKAY.

THANK YOU. I HAVE A FEW MORE QUESTIONS FOR YOU, TIM. ALSO I NEED TO LET THE PUBLIC KNOW THAT THERE'S A TERM CALLED SHADING AND THAT'S WHEN YOU HAVE A TRENCH, YOU DIG UP ALL THE BROKEN ROCK, GRANITE, AND YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO CREATE A BED FOR THE PIPE. Until recently we allowed the developers to use plastic PVC pipes which are as water mains which are under pressure and all of our subdivisions are full of those plastic pipes and Unfortunately, the shading wasn't properly done and I don't know what happened to the city inspection the city was supposed to inspect these trenches and And unfortunately

So you're telling me that plastic's gonna last just as long as ductile iron?

The pipe for the raw sewage that's heading north, is that also going to be plastic?

And they'll come with a warranty? Yes. Okay. Any other comments? Mr. Grady?

Yes. This document that we just received now, have you seen it? No, sir, I have not. So it's unfair really for us to ask questions about the data that's being presented. I would say this, that with the level of concerns and controversy and citizen input that we had on this project, we need to make sure that we have appropriate definitions to what does 2C mean, and I'm not asking you to answer that today, but I think it's worth bringing back at another council meeting with some responses to all of these lanes, and I can't rely on my memory, but there's six or seven items in here I do recall bei

And this is like for what, 30% design or is this going to go to 60?

So which percentage are we at with this contract?

I just am uncomfortable. I really think that, you know, we have our city contract and then we have an exhibit A, which is FAN, put in their stipulations. And I really seem to think that we need to add some of our own exhibits explaining in detail what the Kimley Horn design is, their elevations, have maps, and also just KIMLEY HORN DESIGN AND WHAT TO SEE IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE THIS IS ALL, THIS IS NOW WHEN WE SHOULD BE DESIGNING RATHER THAN when it's at sixty or a hundred percent going back and having all these change orders saying oops you know this isn't going to work you know l

Thank you. Any comments from Council? Jay?

All of the different items that you heard come up, to integrate that into the contract, how much time would that take?

OKAY. I DON'T LIKE TO DELAY THESE THINGS. AND AT THE SAME TIME I THINK THERE IS A PUBLIC NEED TO HAVE CLARITY. BUT I AM CONCERNED THAT WE'RE GETTING LOST BETWEEN DESIGN PHASE AND THE NEXT PHASE. THANK YOU.

Thank you, Mayor. I would just say, in my view, I'd just soon delay this until Public Works gets a chance to review Michael Marchant's concerns. Lois?

For my good friend Carter Labarge. The Phoenix contractor put those affluent lines in, Fann didn't. And I've got to confess, I can't convince this council not to try to design a horse and make it look like a camel. You're micromanaging again, so I'm good with delaying it till you're happy. So let's finish this up.

Thank you. You have to take action. I know, I was just about ready to speak but we have, Mr. Grady has a comment.

Yeah, I hear that last, one of those last points being made with respect that this is not the design contract. It certainly raises a question though that I think Public Works needs to respond to. I would frankly vote for this particular contract, but I think as city council, we need to direct city staff to get back to us on the elements of this particular paper, which we're all just seeing for the first time. that we actually have a clear definition of what we thought we agreed to a year ago on the scope of the design for the whitening the no whitening component thank you um

So I'd like to move that we postpone till the next city council meeting. Do you think two weeks is enough?

We just postponed it for another two weeks to review the public input and addressed council concerns about whether or not we should include 2C to be crystal clear as to what exactly it is we're designing. So I'd like to move that we postpone this for two weeks and as council has directed, and bring it back with the amendments that are recommended. I second that. Thank you. Please vote.

Councilwoman Fredrickson? Yes, I was going to vote up on what Mayor Roussing just said, but what I'm looking at on the screen, excuse me, on the screen is approval of city contract number blah blah with fan contract. So it's, I have in here that it's a postponement.

I have a question. Are you planning on any seating above the bucking chutes? Because I've been to other rodeo grounds where they have seating right above the bucking chutes so people can see the cowboys as they get on the animals.

Yes, thank you. I don't know where all you're going with the presentation, but in this presentation, are you planning on giving us a summary of what occurred, what responses we got at the last public meeting?

Yeah, a couple of things. I'm thinking of some items from the last meeting. First of all, great to see this moving forward and getting synthesized. And I'm sure that's a lot of work, so I appreciate it. I am wondering about a couple of things that seem to be quite important to people. And one was the environmental remediation. And so I know that's not an architectural plan, but that is part of...

AND WITHIN THAT, MAYBE THIS IS A QUESTION FOR GWEN, WHO ARE YOU WORKING WITH TO DETERMINE THE MANURE SYSTEM?

And does this plan also include the remediation of the manure that's been kind of ground in that's contributing to the runoff into Miller Creek?

So that information won't be available to us when this plan is completed?

Okay, good. I'm also wondering if any work has been done, because there was a request for archeological assessments. Has that been addressed?

And so will that also, will that be included in the plan that comes in September or not? Or is that?

I'd also like to add that archaeological studies are very expensive. And my impression from the Native Americans is the less the ground is disturbed, the better. And so I don't think we're going to go dig up the whole site looking for trouble. If we need to put in a trench from A to B, AND WE COME ACROSS SOMETHING, THEN WE CAN STUDY, YOU KNOW, THAT AREA. BUT THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO RATIONALE FOR US TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE SITE. THE LESS DISTURBANCE IS THE BETTER. MORE RESPECTFUL, I THINK. THANK YOU.

Thank You mayor I'm curious you spoke somewhat generally on the order of things to be done but it seems to me that all the items in the program summary need to be set in terms of when they get done and why they get done then and that hasn't been done yet as far as I can tell it's not in the current master plan document and

Well, does that become part of the master plan document?

Yeah, and I'd like to clarify a few things. The $15.3 million appropriation from the state is just for the rodeo, okay? It's not gonna be used for this master plan for all the other entities. It's just for the rodeo. And that $40 million, that isn't something the city's planning to spend. That's going to be for the different entities to take care of. If we're done up here, we have one more comment from Mr. Grady. Thank you.

Thanks. At the open house, there were a lot of questions around parking and seating and capacity and fire marshal requirements, et cetera, et cetera. Have we done more investigation of that?

So what's the seating capacity going to end up as?

Are you examining the shuttle system that we've operated for you?

Let me ask you this. When the cowboys come with their horses and their trailers and they have RVs where they stay, are they going to have hookups?

Are we going to provide a pump out for them?

Okay. Just a question about convenience. Okay. Mary?

Did I just hear you mention the fire marshal and I'm wondering if there's been a recent assessment by the fire marshal as far as either the plans that are within the master plan or for example how the current seating and row structure is currently. I know we've heard from people who question the way the seating runs in the concrete bleachers now as far as people being able to get in and out of any particular area. And I don't know, I haven't heard whether or not the fire marshal has given his blessing for the current configuration and or what's considered in the master plan.

Jay? So I'm looking at 33, which is where our current IT place is. What are the plans for where all those folks go? Because they do some pretty important stuff for us.

And then I really like all the green space around or the planted trees around Gale Gardner and Fair Street. Is there any possibility of having some of those trees in the parking aisles there to just kind of reduce heat, increase aesthetic value?

Yes, we want to keep everything as multi-use as we can, as flexible as we can. Okay, well let's go to public comment. I see the rodeo people back there. Carter Labarge. Oh, Carter. We just need to get you up here on council. You need to run.

Thanks for all your hard work making our fair such a success.

No, I think that explains it pretty well.

Well thank you, we've got a lot of input here and I would like to thank our consultants. We appreciate all the hard work you did and also it was fun the way you embedded yourselves in the community and got to know us. So with no more comments, this meeting is adjourned. Sorry, one more.

Thank you, Mayor. I waited till the end of the public comment period to put forth some thoughts. First thing I would say is if you haven't read the Prescott Pulse article of Friday, you really should. They raise a bunch of points and hit most of the questions right on the mark. Mr. Young, are you able to comment on the seating contract?

Well, the departures from the specifications.

The comments I'm going to make are not against the rodeo, but they are questions that a careful owner of a historic public asset should ask before committing lots of funds. The answers are really intended to ensure that the rodeo is a going concern in Prescott for another 113 years. Carter raised the issue of structural analysis. There is a very excellent reason to conduct a thorough structural analysis of the grandstands by a licensed structural engineer. The reason for that is if you look at the upper concourse, there have been added 2,286 bleacher seats. Those are not part of the original d

Well, in order to reduce the amount of coliform reaching Miller Creek, especially during monsoon events, we're going to need some kind of a treatment system and it's going to cover some property. Do we have any idea? Because we should have something reserved in the master plan document for that.

On page 14 of the master plan document, you identify eight deficiencies, and I'm thinking that those deficiencies should be answered in the final document. The proposed activities in the multipurpose center include 500 seats, 12 functions a year. That's a substantial increase in the scope of activities on the rodeo site over what has been occurred in the past. The surrounding neighborhoods have grown up around the rodeo as it exists, but they didn't grow up around a much expanded scope of activities, and there must be a way to mitigate Dust, noise, traffic jams. I mean, if you've seen pictures

I make a motion to close the public hearing.