Remarks by Patrick Grady
27 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 2
Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Yeah, thank you. So with respect to the state funding and the potential city projects, when you actually get into the preservation plan itself, where the $48 million IS ALSO IDENTIFIED ON PAGE 22. IT HAS A FIGURE OF 8.6 MILLION FOR SITE AREAS, GREEN SPACE, ENVIRONMENTAL AND PARKING. WHERE IS THE UTILITY UPGRADING NUMBER CAPTURED?
So it's not listed as a potential expense then either? So that utility is beyond?
Yeah, Dallin, going back to that program summary and preliminary budget on page 22, so when we approved the master plan, and I guess maybe this might be to the city attorney too, when we approved the master plan, What's the implication that we're approving a $48 million project? It's obviously silent on who's paying for X, Y, and Z. Is there, do we have to have a caveat written in there somewhere? This is not necessarily an obligation of the city of Prescott?
Another related question. On page 10, it talks about facility assessment and also refers to utility systems and the like. So is there a report available to us on the assessment of the facilities and the infrastructure?
And I understand that we have had an engineer looking at grandstands. Have they completed their work yet?
Yes, thank you. Following up on what Lois said, I think that governing piece is really important to keep stakeholders engaged. But speaking from a city council perspective, we also have a number of action steps that need to occur, you know, perhaps more after the lease is approved. But with survey, environmental issues of great concern to a number of us, if not the entire city council, as well as the neighborhood and other citizens. The other lists on page 36 and 37, floodplain investigation, utility studies, geotech, archaeological. I'm thinking out loud that... It's important for city…
I think we should allow for some discussion.
Oh, thank you. So I just wanted to say that The Western Heritage, my wife and I moved here 10 years ago from, dare I say, the Phoenix area. And, yeah, I really value the Western Heritage. We lived for about eight years in Cave Creek, right along the horse trail leading back to Spur Cross Ranch. So, yeah, it's really, I think, really important to this community, and I appreciate the citizen comments about that tonight. And that also is... Kim alluded to if I have a background in public service, it was primarily in economic development. You can't deny the economic benefit of what's going on at…
I just wanted to echo what the Mayor just said, and also thank the Mayor and Lois. I know, and I think Mayor, you are as well, doing some public speaking as well on this issue around the community, and I want to thank staff for all that extra work, because you don't want to simply rely on the package that's coming to us, and so this extra work that we're doing and that Danielle's doing, that's really important, so thanks.
This past Sunday, I participated in a tribute to peacemakers and peace builders at my faith community. The Peace Pilgrim was one of those legendary but real activists who devoted her life to peace by walking literally thousands of miles across our country, relaying her message of peace along the way. She said over 50 years ago, Peace is an idea whose time has come. People need to be moved from apathy, start thinking, and actively work for peace. Begin to seek the real source of peace within and use the way of peace with others. These inspiring actions and words still resonate today. So I'm…
Yes, I was one of those that was concerned with where we were and what the definition of 2C was and is, and so thank you for that additional explanation and also the paper that you provided that compared one of the citizens' concerns and what the city's comments were about those various items, I think, that just gave us a more comfortable level on this critically important project.
Thank you. So I concur with, and this is not grandstanding, I concur with the Mayor and with Jim and with Jay that rainwater harvesting is something we have to get working on now. However, I don't think we can make it a condition upon this approval. I'm assuming, and maybe Chelsea can, I'd say more and expand on this, but it's not a part of our land development code. And until it is, I don't think we want to negatively impact this huge economic engine. And it addresses such issues. critical medical needs for our citizenry. So it's kind of, for me, it's a balance and I think we need to put…
Prior to a motion being made, can I ask for clarification on what the conditions are that are contained in the current motion in front of us?
But did the committee have two conditions that they added? What does that mean with conditions from water issues subcommittee?
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.
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.
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…
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
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?