Remarks by Jay Ruby
36 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 2
I just want to say it is apparent and tangible how the rodeo functions as a critical part of Prescott's identity and the way that it brings people together. I've been over there and seen the volunteers. There is a lot of heartfelt action that takes place inside the rodeo. And I think that's recognized by everybody on city council. I just want to also say there were two people that spoke that I remember, Lenora Bateman and Heather Seitz. I really appreciated your comment because I felt like you carried that spirit of coming together in your comments and that there was concern also for the…
Yeah, this is a question for the city attorney, because there's been issues brought up around the structural integrity of the grandstand. If anything there were to go wrong and the public were to be injured, who would hold the liability for that?
so there have been concerns brought forth that we haven't done a real structural analysis of a grandstand that's aging if we're both legally liable for any damages that could happen there that seems like a critical thing to have in the plan to address
HOW IS THE PUBLIC BEING UPDATED ON THESE CHANGES, LIKE THE MINUTE, SMALL CHANGES THAT YOU MENTIONED?
Because I think a number of concerns are resulting from the fact that there's not a sense of knowing what is in there with the changes. I think the people in the city of Prescott like to know the details and in fact, There might even be a discrepancy here. I think Mayor Mangarelli mentioned this is like a general plan. It's a broad vision. But I think for a lot of people, the devil is in the details. And they really kind of want to know, if this is a plan, what is going to be executed from this plan? And that's the sense I get where we're not completely congruent on what it is.
I just want to say I live about a quarter mile away and the sound system this year was a great improvement for the radio over previous years. So I do want to acknowledge that improvement.
VOTER EDUCATION IS REALLY IMPORTANT. I JUST DON'T THINK THE BALLOT IS REALLY THE PLACE TO DO IT, SO I'M VERY GLAD THAT YOU PUT THE PUBLICITY PAMPLETS OUT THERE, SARAH. I DO THINK THERE'S A TYPE OF MALAISE THAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE TOO MUCH INFORMATION ON THE BALLOT, AND I'M GOING TO JUST SAY We're going to need to educate our friends and families and our neighbors about what is in the propositions. And I think that's where it should come from. If it's on the ballot, I think it's going to just be deaden people when they go to write it out.
I'm curious as to whether there were any discussions about rainwater harvesting with the applicant.
This is problematic for me. because we need to have a rainwater harvesting policy for all of these big developments going on in North Prescott. There's Embry-Riddle, there's the place just southeast of here that'll be where the big box stores are. And I know that we had the discussion about creating a policy, but every time a new building comes in without that policy in place, we miss an opportunity to have a better attempt to do rainwater harvesting. Was there any discussion around the differentiation between rooftop water and surface water?
Okay. In our conversation, which was with me and a few people from city staff, that was a strong consideration because the quality of rooftop water is different, whereas water that hits the top of a parking lot carries toxins with it. So I just get concerned here that we're These water service applications in the north are not taking into consideration something that's very important for the future of Prescott, which is getting our rainwater into a place where it can help to recharge the aquifer. So hearing that those conversations haven't taken place makes it harder for me to wanna support…
All right. I think for me in the long run, the best project includes a commitment to rainwater harvesting that differentiates between rooftop water and surface water in the parking lot. Because the rooftop water you can get deeper into the ground so it percolates into the aquifer. And that is not super cost intensive. So I feel like there's a lack of awareness and a lack of commitment to this. And so when I hear best project, I'm thinking about Prescott 50 to 100 to 150 years from now. And I actually, I want to hear a commitment. And so it scares me a little bit to not hear the commitment.
TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I THINK THE PROJECT IS GREAT AND I THINK THE PROJECT IS GREAT AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE VERY IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE VERY MUCH NEED. MUCH NEED. I SEE IT, THIS IS A SECOND I SEE IT, THIS IS A SECOND BY-PRODUCT ISSUE BUT I WOULD BY-PRODUCT ISSUE BUT I WOULD LIKE TO USE THIS AS AN LIKE TO USE THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DIRECT CITY OPPORTUNITY TO DIRECT CITY STAFF TO REALLY MOVE FORWARD AT STAFF TO REALLY MOVE FORWARD AT DEVELOPING A RAINWATER DEVELOPING A RAINWATER HARVESTING POLICY SO WHEN HARVESTING POLICY SO WHEN PEOPLE LIKE…
I just want to entertain with the the amount of the acre feet requested and we're hearing the possibility of just doing it in part what are are there complications with that and i'm going to direct it to the city attorney there's complications in that in fact the the project is the project you have before you there's not really a way to reduce portions of it um and i don't believe
Meaning it's better to look at this as a whole and approve it or not approve it.
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…
I make a motion to close the public hearing.
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.
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. 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.
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?
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.