Council - Regular Meeting

I didn't even bring my swim. really close. Save it for the

pool. Save it a year or two for the pool. Oh, yeah. No problem.

I hoard everything so y'all will still have them next year. Okay, I will call this regular coun city council meeting to order. April 8th, 2026. The time is 5:30. Um, welcome to all the members of the public. I invite you to stand with us for a moment of silence after which councelor Prell will lead us in the pledge of allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to theublic

and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, reminder for all counselors to put on their microphones. And we could hear councelor Hammond. We know that her connection is working. Um, city clerk, will you please do a roll call? Mayor Kidman here. Vice Mayor Pharaoh is excused. Councelor Hettinger here. Councelor Peller here. Councelor Roundtree here. Councelor Cojan here.

Councelor Hammond here.

Item number three, consent agenda for 3 1 2 3 and four. I'm looking for a motion. Councelor Preller. Sure. Mr. Mayor, I move to approve items uh 31 32 33 and 34 of the consent agenda. Second. I have a motion from councelor Pller and a second from councelor Hettinger. All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Thank you. Item number four here from the citizens. We do have two blue cards. Um we'll start with Chuck. Did you want it now or down at the agenda item? Your choice.

Sure. I'll just get it out. Hi, Chuck Stro, Page Arizona. Um, one item I want to just throw out there is this airport terminal expansion extension. Um, reading the notes that were in the packet there, the city is recommending that we just do what we were going to do and at a future date we can go ahead and expand it more. I really think we need to expand it more now because it's going to happen and the prices of all of these things, concrete, etc., etc., are not going to go down, they're going to go up. Bite the bullet. Do it now. Do it right. Contours contracts due this year. They may not even be here. We may have a bigger airplane. We'll see. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. And we have Michelle Zia. Hello neighbors. I'm Michelle Zia from Paige. I'm talking about the data center. We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. Edward R. Morrow. Let's put it this way. We must not confuse opposition with disrespect. It is clear in passive aggressive comments about respect in the last meeting, Debbie and Kenna, that you're again trying to disparrage those who speak in opposition of the data center. Standing up to you is disrespectful only because you don't want disscent. How dare you all keep deflecting. We elected you, pay you, and expect you to represent us in our town, not some trillionaireed overseas AI corporation. Do you think people want to spend their precious time fighting for this town and their lives for 10 years or more? Thank you for this, all of you who want it, for bringing this toxic, thoughtless idea to fruition. You don't get obligatory respect when you disrespect an entire community with lies, insults, deflection, and refusal to engage. Yes, lies. Ensuring communications and input from residents is something you each except for Debbie exclaim as a high priority most of you the highest in your council biographies on the city website. The mayor lists no priorities on the site. I guess his only priority is the data center and he's not talking about that. So we know nothing about the data center or his priorities. Check those out.

When trying to get elected, you promised engagement. Quoting Steve from the Chronicle right after becoming mayor. I want to make sure that the public is informed. I also don't want people to feel to feel like they're lacking information about some of the things we do. I want to make sure that enough information is shared with the public so that they feel confident in any item. Remember that, Steve. News flash. We are not confident about the data center item. Please hear the people you serve and engage. My favorite in regard to the streetscape. If an issue is going to directly impact a certain part of our community, then go to them directly face to face. Because there's a lot of us that don't realize what truly is planned and what is involved and what's about to happen about the streetscape until boom. Exactly. But our boom is a hundred times worse. Undeniable hypocrisy. Debbie and Steve, this was your big beef with past council over the streetscape, over not being informed, being caught by complete surprise, not having input, and in fact believing that a faceto meeting should occur. Right, Steve. You

people continue to lose respect, not earn it.

You should resign if you are in favor of this atrocity. Item number five, reports and announcements. I just have one. Oh, where did I put that? Oh, it's right there. Um, at the last council meeting, I forgot to share about a meeting that I attended with the Lichi chapter with Brian Hill and um, Matt, the engineer down from PUE. Um, it doesn't really fit underneath item number six of boards and commissions because they're not one of our boards. So, I just thought I'd share it now, but we were in this meeting in earlier March. Um, they were wanting to have discussions with us concerning primarily future wastewater planning for the Luchi chapter

community right here. You want it? I'm sorry. What was that? Oh,

oh, okay. um future planning for the wastewater for luchi chapter overview of me memorandum of agreement between the Navajo Nation and the city of page so that they understood how things worked with the PUE those arrangements actually are between uh the city of Paige and NUA which I learned I did not know before that um they were talking about emergency water feed to the city of Paige once that new water line that they are that they are um building from the old NGS intakes is completed. Um they wanted to know about capacity upgrades and um maintenance for our Lee in general. Leche is wanting to improve their ability to expand their their infrastructure right now. They they can't do it. they have been able to secure to a certain point a $3.3 million grant in order to help them to connect a better a better um connection to the page water and sewer. This was all just mainly trying to update POE on what they're trying to do and how to coordinate with them. Other items that were talked about were the horseshoe bend resort which some work has been being done out there, the data center at the analopee corridor and it was overall just a very good meeting. I just wanted the public to be aware that that we are meeting with the Lichi chapter. So that was my report and announcement. On to item number 52, city manager current event summary. Is there anything?

Thank you, mayor, members of council. Just a couple recap, maybe a recap and a special thanks to the uh community services and special events staff for some of the many events that happened in the past couple weeks. We had the Easter egg hunt, which I was shocked and surprised and pleased at the size of that event in Paige. It's bigger than other places I've been. So, they put on a wonderful event there with with with tons and tons of kids. filled up all of the baseball fields. Um, and then we had the America 250 Traveling Museum, which we had a lot of school kids at. That was great. They rang the replica, the Liberty Bell, and a and a good turnout there. And lastly, Saturday, it was a little chilly, but we opened the splash pad and uh a few blue lips going around with the children, but uh all all filled with smiles on their faces. So, that was a success. So, thanks to the wreck department, the special events, the parks and trails team, public works, and everybody that that pitched in on that um big success. So, that's about it.

Okay. Thank you. Item number six, boards and commissions, council leazison reports on board meetings. Does any did anybody attend a board meeting since our last council meeting? Councelor Hedinger,

the parks and recreation advisory board met on Monday. Um they had a lot of great updates, but I wanted to call out a few. The recreation department has a homeschoolers lift lab that they're doing in the afternoons. And then um they also have Golden Citizens Pickle Ball Social on Wednesday mornings. Uh we and then obviously the grand opening of the splash pad. I've also seen people out using that this week. So that's been really fun. Um and then we got an update that the sports complex lights should be arriving soon and then they can schedule the installation. They also finished their work out um bringing utilities to Horseshoe Bend. So I think that's moving to pee now to um do their side of things. One of the priorities of the board is adding accessible equipment to our playgrounds. So, at Monday's meeting, they had a presentation by Unlimited Play, which is a nonprofit organization committed to building inclusion through play. They create really beautiful playgrounds where kids of all abilities can play together. And uh the board spent quite a bit of time discussing options for Annex Park and how we could add accessible equipment there. That conversation is ongoing. And then finally, the board discussed options for the name of the PAR facility and what that acronym could stand for. So, they came up with some recommendations that are going to be be put forward to citizens to vote on and then they'll bring the winner to council for us to review.

Great. Thank you. Any other meetings since our last council meeting? Okay. Can I highlight one though? Yes. Um, Kora So is a senior research fellow from the tribal water policy and she's a proud graduate of Paige High School and she's a lawyer and she's going to be here to do a presentation on April 21st from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. And so I just like to highlight for people to go and and hear her presentation.

Okay. Item number 62, economic development advisory board appointment for Mark I do not know how to say that last name. Mark Vearelli Veelli. Ah, I said it. I'm looking for a motion. Councelor Peller. Sure, Mr. Mayor. I move to approve Mark Veerelli to the Economic Development Advisory Board. And I'll second it. Do we need the dates included on when it ends with an end date? I didn't pull out my computer. June June 30th, 2020. Sure. With an end date of June 30th of 2027.

Thank you. And now I'll second that. We have a motion from councelor Peller, a second from councelor Roundtree. All in favor say I. I. I. I. Any opposed? Thank you. Item number 71 under new business, special event liquor license applications for Glen Canyon Conservancy for that one-day event that they were having a country concert. I think any councelor Hettinger. I move to approve the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control application for a special event liquor license for Glen Canyon Conservancy. Second.

We have a motion from councelor Hettinger, a second from councelor Cojan. Any questions? Oh, did we lose a man? Councelor Hammond, she's still there. Okay. No, I'm here. No questions. Okay. Um, all in favor say I. I. I. I.

Any opposed? None. Thank you. Item number 72, Ordinance 751-26 about the non-disclosure agreements. City clerk, will you please introduce the ordinance by title only? An ordinance of the mayor and city council of the city of Paige, Cookanino County, Arizona, amending section 30.072 of the city of Page Code of ordinances relating to non-disclosure agreements. I'd like to make a motion to accept ordinance 751-26 non-disclosure agreements. Second.

We have a motion from councelor Roundtree and a second from councelor Hettinger. Would it be appropriate me for me to have you read that for the public? The whole ordinance. The ordinance. It's not very long. Well, down down to where the changes are. Yeah. The the the bold. I don't think all um so this would be the provision that's added to the code. It's just one sentence. It says only the city council is authorized to approve non-disclosure or other confidentiality agreements relating to property sales or economic development.

Councelor Roundtree. I'd just like to thank staff for looking into this and for them supporting um council's um wish that we hear about non-disclosures before you sign them so that we're aware of them and so thank you for your hard work on it. Appreciate it. Any other comments or questions? Okay. All those in favor say I. I. I. I. Any opposed? Thank you. Item number 73, scope of airport terminal expansion project. This goes over to the city manager.

Thank you, mayor, members of council. Uh my airport director, Laura, apologizes. She's out of town this week, but she did uh create this wonderful presentation for me. So, I'll do my best to substitute for her and get through it. So, um, so we're talking about the the terminal expansion project which is currently underway but somewhat held off for council to to make this consideration. Um, so the airport, it's a lot of numbers and letters here, but the airport is a class three nonhub airport with part 135 service under 139 certification. Um, and then our airfield as far as the fire rescue goes is index of the letter A. And we'll go through a little bit of those to help explain what they mean. So, class three, the important thing to remember here is it's it's under 30 seats. That's the big thing there. If you change the class, you can get bigger seats. But right now, us being class 3, we're not authorized for anything larger than 30 seats. the size of the airplane doesn't matter as much as the number of seats. Um, and then there's some other stuff on the side here about because nonhub with the amount of employments we have. Um, so 135 is the regulations that we follow for those 30 or fewer seats. Um, and so it's it's less strict than the the 121 regulations, which are your bigger airports that don't limit the size of the seats for that. So, um, the terminal expansion right now, the scope of the project

really would it would only increase from about 30 people to 37 right now. Um, the big thing is it would provide bathrooms and vending services inside the secure area so people don't have to leave and get rechecked through security. Go back. Yes, ma'am.

And so on the expansion of the 37 people though, doesn't it also give them more space because the 30 is so crowded. I mean, each chair is right next to each other. So when we if you increase to 37, is that not going to also give other seats a little more room or is that not true? I you're probably more familiar with it than me. So, I would say that that's highly likely true because I'm I haven't looked at the plans in detail. It also includes some remodels of the um desk areas and the vendor areas outside of the secure area as well.

Um but but but that could highly be possible that it lets those 30 people spread out a little more. Um, so the the costs with this, it's it's an FAA grant of about $3 million. So the FAA is paying the the big chunk of this with a little bit of state and local match to that. It's about 95% FAA money. So, if we had our consultant look and say, "Okay, well, what if we want to expand the secure area to allow for up to 60 passengers?" Thinking about future growth, the design would cost about another 70,000. additional construction. They estimate about 1.5 million with about 200,000 of construction delays because it's the contractors already getting everything ready and mobilizing. So overall, the the number to look at is 2.5 million. Um the FAA deemed that speculative because right now we can't prove the need for all of those passengers. um which would be 50 to 60 passengers. So a little bit of that. Here's some of the criteria of what it would take to go from speculative to approved. So be current air carrier requirements. Um number of implainments. We would have to enhance safety and security. Um, we'd need the needs of the citizens of the sponsor, the airport master plan. There's some just some criteria there. Um, so the contour passengers capacity is 30 right now and the current expansion

would would fully meet that need. Um so current air carrier implainments show a need for increased capacity. Um right now the average employment you're looking at is 17 passengers in 2025 um for departures and then for arrival. So we're still under that 30. We haven't maxed it out yet to where people are calling you complaining that they can't get a ticket. um that could that change? Yes. With with advertising and marketing from our carriers that could easily go up. Some of the proposals we've seen they're saying if you pick us even contour saying that we can increase employments. So um but that's what we've got to now. So, so both the plans for either the 30 or the 60 um would enhance safety and security. They meet the needs. Um and the current master plan includes an expansion of the terminal. While the secure area is not specifically outlined, both plans would fit within the general expansion of the terminal and the master plan. So, we're still adhering to those master plan criterias. um and potential air carrier service. The current plan meets the capacity for all carriers allowed. Again, under those numbers and letters, we're restricted to 30 passengers. Now, a new plan, we could expand the capacity to allow for larger air carriers. We would have to change that 135 to 121. And let me see if she We've got a slide here. Yeah, to go to that we would need to adjust our airport class from a three to a one. So the smaller the number the

bigger the airport and adjust our 139 from 135 to 121. Um and to do that it's a multi-year evaluation requires some stricter standards uh mainly around security you know having badges to be on the secure areas of the airport on the runway and things like that. Um, and some infrastructure upgrades with the with the bigger planes, you need to we'll probably need to look at increasing the pavement strength, lighting, safety areas, marking signage, that sort of thing. And also update our certification manual. Um, and so that's this is some more of the criteria. It's five phases for the certification process. If you want to go through that, we can go through that in detail, but again, it'll it'll take time to get to that part 121 for those bigger planes. We're not there yet is the point here. Um, the benefits is it's a can make room for larger air carriers in the future. Gives you more room now. In my mind, as an engineer, it saves money because you're getting economies of scale for doing the project now. Um um the other factors to consider the FAA again won't reimburse now. Would there be a chance once the need is there to reimburse? Maybe. Not sure how long that would take. And it's kind of a chicken and egg argument there. Would a bigger secure area lead to more implainments quicker or do you wait for the implainments before you get to the bigger secure area? Um,

so that's that's really what it boils down to. And a little clarification on the recommendation that's based from the FAA's point of view that the implainments don't show the extra number of capacity for the growth. So they don't recommend doing that because they couldn't reimburse that. But from an engineering point of view and a staff point of view, I think it's completely appropriate for either option at this point. And it's kind of a where does council want to put the $2.5 million at this point. So um with that, council round tree, but get get your microphone on.

Thank you for reminding me that. So, first of all, this is only about the terminal expansion. So, if we were to go to the larger expansion, then there would be other costs that were not included in here for what would be needed for the runway. Right. So, there correct.

So, there'd be a lot of more money involved in that. And then second of all, it we only get two planes. One day a week, we only get one plane or two days a week, we only get one plane. So, that doesn't mean that we couldn't have more interments with smaller planes. we could have um flights um arriving, more flights arriving if we needed more interments so we wouldn't have to have the bigger plane. Cuz one of my concerns was Southwest's um presentation was 60 passengers, but they had only come once a day with 60 passengers because they felt they could get everyone on there in my discussion um with Cody. And so that concerns me because I really think we need the two flights a day and I don't like the idea of a one um flight a day. So,

right. And and the more flights per day would depend sometimes on weather conditions too and the performance of the airplane depending on which airplane flies in because there's been times when we have flights three times a day in the summertime. I mean it's not all the time but we have when they see the need that they bring in that third plane. Councelor Cojan Mr. I move that we accept the FAA engineer and the project manner recommendation to complete the current expansion plan and if demand decreases the PE page experiencing consistent data showing an upward trend then plan for another expansion in a few years. I second that.

We have a motion from councelor Kojan and a second from councelor Roundry comments. Um I just wanted to uh quickly ask and and clarify. So the um 2 and a.5 million that we are getting reimbursed right now from the FAA, would we still be getting that um reimbursed if we approve this? And then the 3 million extra I might have those amounts backwards. Um that just the new part that we're adding on is what would not be reimbured. Correct.

Correct. What if if council decides to go for the 60 passenger expansion rather than the 37, the project would increase to a total of $5.5 million. 3 million of that approximately would be reimburseable. Okay. Thank you. Not right away though. Yeah, the three million would the three the initial 3 million would be right away. Yes. Okay. Councelor Hammond.

Uh Mr. City Manager, you helped me understand earlier the opportunity that we have with some of the carriers that are looking at um bidding coming here and how we could recoup costs from that down the road. Can you explain a a little bit more to the other counselors?

Yes, thank you for mentioning that u because I failed to mention that. Um there the if you use local money the the cost you could implement strategies to recoup that overtime through avenues such as uh creating landing fees for the planes and charging that to the airlines for landing. So that could be a strategy to try and recoup that money that a couple of the um folks presenting those the EAS bids actually mentioned that fact that they would expect. Was there another hand up over here? Councelor Henninger.

So of the in addition to the 3 million that the grant would cover, do you know roughly what the city's portion is? Are we talking about a h 100red,000? Are we talking about a million for the city or is it 2.5%. Okay. So, the city's paying 2.5% of whatever of 3 million

3 million is great. I I'm usually in big favor of saving money, but given that the f the federal government is basically covering this entire expansion, I think if we show that we need expansion in the future, I don't think it's the most efficient way of doing things. But it sounds like the federal government might be willing to then pay for that expansion down the road. So, I like the idea of expanding, but I think it makes sense to um move forward with this as planned and expand if we need to in the future. Um, councelor Hammond, is that the same hand or a new one?

New hand.

Go ahead. So, I am going to disagree so far with the the voices that have been heard tonight um arguing in favor of sticking with the plan as written. I think that if we take a long-term view in the future of the community, if we think about our um strategic priorities to try and grow the city, if we think about consistent travel opportunities, not just for our city, but as President reminded us in a letter, um consistent travel opportunities for surrounding communities. We should do it right the first time rather than trying to do this twice and we should go for the bigger expansion.

Councelor Roundtree and then councelor Cojan. But a reminder that growth doesn't um have to just come with a a 60 passenger plane. It can come with um more smaller planes at 30 passenger plane landing three or four times which would really help um with people choosing a destination here or choosing to fly in or out of page because when I fly I find it difficult to find connecting flights. So, I would rather see four 30 passenger planes landing um on a in a day than one 60 passenger plane or a two. You know, councelor Cojan,

I think Frank explained it is not just the expansion of the terminal, but there's hundreds of millions of dollars has to be spent to bring us up to class one part 121 and and even the security when we got people roaming around there with the hangers and all that stuff. It's going to be a nightmare to get that point. So, yes, I um I I agree with um Councilman Cochen on that. Councelor Hinger and then Councelor Prowler.

To be fair, though, we wouldn't have to do all of those costs at the same time. We could expand our waiting area and still only allow 30 passenger planes. So, I respect Councelor Hammond's position. I think given though that there's still a lot of opportunity in terms of the number of planes that could come in a day, I'm not seeing the need for 60 passenger planes yet. Um, but I think I stand with the current proposal. Councelor Prowder,

do we know roughly what our odds are on getting the other $2 million, some sort of federal reimbursement? I I Yeah, I think you can hear me. Yeah, my guess would be once the need is demonstrated for the 60 passengers that if I can go back to the slide I think it shows it. Um yeah, right now what you would do is equate that to to number of employments per year, which I've got in my notes on the notes for that slide, but it would be somewhat analogous to the more flights per day that if you can show the number of passengers per year to show that need, I would think that would where that would come in. And uh yeah, but you're saying for the larger planes?

Yeah. Yeah, that's where you could show more than that number of people. So, thanks. Um, I I guess what I'm asking is if if we go with the larger option and then retroactively uh put in for FAA reimbursement, um, are they just going to tell us to kick rocks and not waste their time or do we actually have a shot at getting some money now? Yeah. In the future?

Now, we wouldn't they pretty much said no, we they wouldn't reimburse us for going to the 60 passenger expansion of the secure area. But would they do it retroactive actively if we expanded and then requested it because then our numbers jump? Typically, no. The the grants that I've dealt with that if you expend the money first, they do not reimburse you unless you have to have that agreement in place. So, okay. Um, I don't think we would, if we did it now without federal approval for that extra 2 and a.5 million, there would be no federal reimbursement for that period. Councelor Roundry, did you have a hand up?

Well, yeah. I I don't know if you guys have been following the news, but the FAA just approved seven states to be in the pilot program for the drone taxi, and that drone taxi system will um exist for small towns. So, a lot of plane services in the next two or three years could actually change over to drone taxi services. And Utah is one of the states that was just approved for that. And so, they'll begin the drone taxing. That seems kind of far out there and new age, but it's a real possibility of how it could change us um in society in the next year to two years with that program that the FAA is promoting right now.

Okay. Um, I cannot see. Councelor Hammond, do you happen to have a hand up? Sorry. Oh, there she is. I do not have my hand up. Um, our motion is to accept and to move forward with the original plan going to the 37 capacity security area. Is that correct? Correct. We have a second. Any other comments or questions? All in favor of the motion say I. I. I. Any opposed? Nay. You need a roll vote or are you fine? Okay. Motion passes 5 to one. Thank you.

Okay. Item number eight, potential future agenda item on number one, land sales process. And this was from councelor Prowler. if you'll read for us and let us decide.

Yeah, I got to got to remember what I wrote here. Um, there have recently been uh multiple high-profile land sales uh though they happened legally to the best of my knowledge. Um, there have been concerns uh about the speed and transparency by citizens, the media, and our boards. Would council like to review the process and consider revising uh it on a future agenda? Um, so basically I I would like to open the can of worms um that is our land sale process and just get a uh refresher of how that works. Um, and then maybe uh pass around the hat, so to speak, for ideas on how to improve it. So, you're wanting a presentation from them instructing us and the public at the same time so that everybody knows how it works for

I think that would be a delightful start. Okay. I'll by show hands and interested in having this returned to us when staff can I have concerns. Okay.

So, just very make it very really short. So, if this is about giving a presentation on how it presently works, but I'm not comfortable this council I mean, we're not in charge of processes. That should be an employee matter. So, I'm not comfortable with the council talking about processes, but learning about it and how it's working. Um, and then giving direction to to improve upon or change, but talking about the process is not part of our preview. I mean, that's not something council should be doing. That's an employee matter, employee direction. you you're asking for just an instruction so that we're all fresh on how it works.

So for an instruction on how it goes, I'm in favor of if it's not and giving direction on um employees and how to follow through with the process that I'm not comfortable with that. Councelor Hammond, something real quick. Yeah, I know we're not supposed to be discussing this item, but I just want to ask a quick question to Mr. Marberry. It is this something that you're actively working on is revising the process already

along with many processes as far as staff procedures go especially with the turnover we've had and the reorganization we're working on this process along with others that's and I don't know if I'm allowed for clarification but would this process be what staff goes through or when it's what council when it the process once it's brought to council I think my understanding is a person from the public wants to come and buy land from the city. What's the process from point A to point finish? Okay. So, if it's a presentation on that, I'm in favor of that. But if we're directing processes or changing processes, I don't think that that's what the board has appre

and that's not that's not what you're asking to be brought for us to us. Is that correct? Correct. For for now, just just a refresher on how that works. timelines and and that sort of stuff. But Mr. Marberry, if you're in the process of revising that, would you be ready for that sort of presentation? When what I would advise is we put it on the agenda when I'm ready for it, which would be a future agenda item. Yes, Mr. Mayor. Yes. And that should come from Josh anyway, the legal parts of it. Sorry, but that process is under my control. Josh just keeps him straight, right?

Keep you in line with Yeah, he Okay, I think we have enough on that. Um, council Hammond, did you have something else or did that the old hand? Legacy hand. Okay. All right. Show of hands real quick. Okay. We clearly have enough to bring that to a future agenda item. staff does have an awful lot on their plate. So, we will just ask that they do that when they Thank you. when would be appropriate. We will prioritize it.

Okay. And then educate us on land sales. Okay. With that, um I will adjourn the regular meeting. The time is 6:12. Our next regular meeting, Wednesday, April 22 at 5:30. Thank you.