I would like to call the May 5th, 2026 city council regular meeting and work study session to order. City clerk Ben Lane, may I please have a roll call. >> Thank you, mayor. Mayor Lisa Barowski, >> present. >> Vice Mayor Adam Quasman,
>> present via remote. >> Thank you. Council members Jan Deboscus >> here. Barry Graham >> here. >> Kathy Littlefield >> here. >> Marian McAllen >> present. >> And Salange Whitehead >> here. >> City Manager Greg Kaitton >> here. City Attorney Louis Santea
>> here. >> City Treasurer Sonia Andrews >> here. >> And the clerk is present. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you. And this this evening we have Scottsdale Police Sergeant Eric BS and officers Kyle Shallock and Ray Wilburn as well as Scottsdale firefighters Isaac
Duran and Steven Remky. If anyone requires their assistance, please let a member of our staff know. And thank you for being here, everybody. Uh for the pledge of allegiance, I will ask Councilwoman Whitehead to lead us in that
flag of the United States of America and to the stands one indivisible. >> Thank you very much. And for the invocation, I'll turn it over to Councilman Graham.
Mayor, thank you. Tonight's invocation, I have invited I'm pleased to introduce Pastor John Carolus. He is a pastor at Shepherd of the Desert Lutheran, where he has served as pastor since 2021. And there he currently oversees their
contemporary worship services and spiritual care of preschool students, staff, and families. Shepherd of the Desert started in 1980 out of an office building in McCormack Ranch and built their main campus at the corner of 96th and Sha in 1983.
A preschool opened in 1984 has been operating ever since. Led by uh senior pastor Dr. Scott Sid Sidler, they host 500 in worship in the winter months and 300 during the summer and a preschool enrollment of 175 students.
The United School for Autism has operated from their 96th and Shea property since 2018. With a significant upcoming renovation to the of the of their SHA campus and momentum building and worship attendance, Shepherd strives to be a
family of faith that connects every person in every season to the life of Jesus promise. And I will invite Pastor John to uh open tonight's meeting with an invocation. Thank you, Pastor. Thank you. Uh, Mayor Barowski, members of the city council, thanks for this honor and
thanks for the work you do. Uh, can't imagine what it's like being in your shoes. For those who are who are willing, please pray with me. The eyes of all look to you, oh Lord, and you give them their food at the proper time. You open your hand and satisfy the desire of every living
thing. We thank you, Lord, for all you provide. And tonight, we specifically thank you for the work and role of civil servants, our mayor, and city council. Your word reminds us that you have made everything beautiful in its time and we are blessed to live in such a beautiful city and state together. Guide these
leaders, Lord, in your mercy, that they would have wisdom, patience, and humility to be exemplary decision makers and neighbors. Guide each of us as residents and stewards of this place that we would recognize the opportunities we have to care for one another and enjoy the blessings you pour out of your abundant generosity. In your
wisdom, God, you established the civil government for the servants of its people. Orient the hearts and minds of these servants toward one another in such a way that they would enthusiastically pursue the good of our community according to your mercy. You have placed them in these positions for your purposes. Bless them to be
successful and attentive, recognizing the unique gifts and perspectives each of them brings to the task at hand. All this we ask and implore in the name of the father and the son and the holy spirit. Amen. >> Thank you. Thank you, pastor. >> Thank you very much
for the mayor's mayor's report. First, happy Cinco de Mayo. All right, who brought the margaritas? We got the chips and salsa. Uh, speaking of which, let's talk tourism. Uh, tourism, as we all know, is essential to
Scottsdale's local community and economy. Nationally, travel is a $3 trillion industry that supports 15 million American jobs and generates more than $90 billion a year in state and
local tax revenue for critical services like public safety, education, and emergency response. Here in Scottsdale, tourism is a powerful economic driver. I like to refer to it as our bread and butter and the icing on our cake. Uh
each year our city welcomes 11.7 million million visitors who generate 3.7 billion dollars in local economic impact which supports jobs, small businesses, large businesses and of course a vibrant
community that we all love calling home. Travel strengthens every sector of our economy from healthcare and education to business and innovation. That's why today I proudly we proudly recognize National Travel and Tourism Week and the
vital role th this ind industry especially plays in Scottsdale's success. And I've issued a proclamation today which summarizes what I've just said. And so now therefore, I, Mayor Lisa Barasi, proclaim May 3rd through
the 9th, 2026 as National Travel and Tourism Week here in Scottsdale and encourage our community to recognize the vital role this industry plays in Arizona. and accepting the proclamation is none better than CEO, president and
CEO of Experience Scottsdale, Rachel Sako along with uh Miss Sako this evening is tourism development commissioner Kathy McKver and thank you for your service Kathy. So I'll invite you up here so I can hand this to you, take a few photos and I'll invite my
colleagues down to join us. All right. Ready? Perfect. I don't know if you all heard her say it, but that was Kathy's first uh it's she's been short in the role and look at her success already. So, thank you very much.
All right. for presentations. Tonight, we have the uh the city council recognizes proudly employees with 20 or more years of service as of May 2026. And this evening, we're going to make those presentations, or shall I say, uh
Holly Peralta, communications interim senior director, will talk us through through that, and we will celebrate them. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Barasi, and members of city council. as I do every month. I'm here to celebrate our employees who have served 20 or more
years with the city of Scottsdale. And we have three employees here who um are going to join us up front tonight who all have 20 years of service with the city. So I invite you to think back to what you were doing in May of 2006
because at that time these three employees started their service with the city of Scottsdale. And I invite you to come forward. We have Brandon Chapman who is our fantastic citywide volunteer coordinator. We have Christopher John
who is a building inspector and Amy Tinder who manages our website and keeps Scottdale looking great digitally. So the three of you if you can come up we'll take another photo with the mayor and council members.
And for the record, I remember what Councilwoman Littlefield was doing 20 years ago. She was sitting right back there in that seat. Weren't you? >> I was. All right. Uh, as is the case at every
meeting, during this evening's council meeting, the council may make a motion to recess into executive session in order, if needed, in order to obtain legal advice on any applicable item on the agenda and if so authorized by council. The executive session will be
held immediately and will not be open to the public. However, this general meeting would resume following that executive session. Next, I'll move on to the meeting minute approvals. >> Mayor, I I apologize. Uh we have one more presentation uh for this >> recogni. Sorry,
>> they're all here. Yes. How could I forget? Uh okay. Recognition of the city now will recognize and we will celebrate the 2026 Scottsdale 101 Citizens Academy graduates presented by Joy Rine,
community involvement manager. And thank you all for coming over. By the way, >> thank you, Mayor Barowski, members of the council. My name is Joy Racine, and I'm happy to be here tonight to represent Government 101, Citizens
Academy. Dig deep and discover Scottsdale Government 101. That is just one of our quotes created by our attendees on the last day of class, and you're going to hear and see more from throughout the rest of the
presentation. Our citizens academy is interactive, informative, and is stated by one group, know your city, shape its future. Government 101 is designed to equip participants with the knowledge to actively engage in our community,
understand local government, and network with other residents. It's a place for residents to learn, grow, and connect. Over the course of 10 weeks, 38 residents met weekly to hear from city leaders and department heads. They were able to ask questions, learn how
departments operate, and gain a deeper understanding of what services they provide. Together, we visited the North Corpyard, heard a 92year-old play the piano at the Care Cultural Center. We took a walk in our preserve, and we visited the railroad park.
We learned how life is good in Scottsdale by be going behind the scenes at the North Corpyard with our solid waste fleet facilities and a peak into the TMC. We heard ways to get involved and spent one morning at the food bank where we
packaged 323 healthy packs for children at the local schools. We washed over 30 of the bins to prepare for the next pickup and we created two pallets of water. On another morning, we cleared bottles of alcohol, cigarette butts, and other trash all along Indian School
Road. Even some of you as council members and mayor came and shared your perspective on what it was like to start with the city, what got you involved, and why you enjoy being as a part of council. I could tell you more about what we
covered over the 10 weeks, but instead I'd rather have you hear from one of our participants tonight. I have with me Daryl Tubkin, and he's going to share a little bit about his experience with the rest of you. >> Thank you, Mayor and Council, for having me here. Um, my wife and I have been a
resident here in Scottsdale for over 28 years and really enjoyed the Scotsville 101 class. didn't have any uh perceptions of what I was going to get out of this class, but it was unbelievable the experience that I
received. It provided me behind thescenes opportunity to learn about the city. Um it was great introduction on how the departments work together. Um it's really interesting that uh how the budget and the planning and all these
different departments work together. It gave us a special insight of the hardworking men and women that make this thing work like a like clockwork. And the thing that I really appreciated was that the individuals, it could have easily have been an AI presentation, but
they took the time and effort out of their busy schedules to come in to do a presentation to us and we were able to learn about their individual departments, that being uh court or if it was planning. I really enjoyed that
the history le lessons that Bruce gave us. Um you you're very fortunate to have Bruce as a wealth of knowledge of the city of Scottsdale. Uh taking us to the Titus House which I didn't know that would exist or the history of the Stillman uh McCormack Railroad Park. Um
boy, I've been there a few times and I didn't really know how that came about. And thank goodness that we stole that away from Paradise Valley and it's it's part of part part of the city of Scottsdale. Um 75 years is a big uh big big thing for the city and I'm really blessed that
we're here and I know that the next 75 years is going to be great for the city. Um the water water education that we learned during our class was great and the the direction that the city of Scots is going with renewable resources and clean water is is really important. And
I know you, the council, you have a lot of important decisions to make and I'm really excited to see the direction that you're going to be going. The one thing that I want to leave here is that I learned that I want to be involved more with the city and hopefully someday you will see me uh as part of the board and
commissions. So if you see this face someday, I'm the one that's going to be involved. So, thank you so much, Madame Mayor and Council for giving us the opportunity with this class and my fellow classmates for uh putting up with me for the last nine weeks and Joy for putting out and
her staff putting on a great program. So, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Darl. And I want to add that it's his birthday today, so he chose to spend it with us. >> Cinco de Mayo, baby. Uh, do you want to have every Are you
still presenting? >> I was just actually I was just going to ask if everybody in the class could go ahead and stand up. That was going to be my next spot. So, perfect. >> All right. >> So, if everybody who's a part of it, if you could stand up, we would love to recognize you. >> All right. Well done.
and I spy one of our own budget review commissioners. So, that's exciting. So, thank you all. Congratulations. All right. Well, thank you, Joy. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Next, we're going to move on to the meeting minute approvals. And if there
are no changes or questions on those, I will entertain a motion to approve special meeting minutes of March 24, 2026, executive se session meeting minutes of March 24, 2026, and regular meeting minutes of March 24, 2026.
>> So move second. >> All right. All those will please vote. Next we have our consent agenda item. Next we have consent agenda items one
and 2a. And I don't I haven't heard any uh I don't see any I'll wait a minute. Does anyone have any questions or wish to have either of these all three of these items uh any questions on any of them? If not
and we have received no uh no speakers on these items. So I will entertain a motion to approve consent agenda items one through 2A. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Thank you. Please indicate your vote.
>> I. >> Moving on to the regular agenda. Item three uh is presented by Scott Seline, budget department director. Greg Kaitton, city manager. Tom Shannon, fire chief. Well, I'm not going to name all the names. They're going to get called
up indiv individually. Uh, but it is regarding the propos proposed fiscal year 2026 27 operating budget and capital improvement plan. Scott, I'll turn it over to you. Thank you, Madame Mayor, members of the
city council. very happy to be here tonight with you. It just wouldn't be Cinco de Mayo without 70 slides related to budget to go through. Looking forward to going over this with you tonight. Um this is one of the more lengthy presentations that we bring to you all. Um we'll strive to get through it in a
thorough and expeditious manner. Um I'll present a chunk of the slides. The city manager will present a few slides and there will be representatives from some of the larger departments to present uh to briefly speak to their individual budgets. Because of the length of the presentation today, if it pleases the
mayor and the council, I'll pause at the end of my section at slide 35 to take any questions that you might have on my before we pass it on to the department heads. Before we get started in earnest, um the release of the proposed budget, it's a very significant undertaking. There are
many people who deserve our thanks for that. Uh the budget team, department staff who participated in this effort. uh the budget review commission who spent um many hours reviewing the budget and developing recommendations as well as city council for their overall
direction and support in this endeavor. What you're looking at right now is the general timeline for the budget adoption. We released the proposed budget on April 3rd and then three times in April we met with the budget review commission where they reviewed the
budget and generated their recommendations. Today we are here for the proposed budget presentation and also a work study with the BRC. On May 19th, we'll bring the tenative budget adoption to the city council and
the final budget adoption on June 9th. This slide shows the FY 2627 proposed budget. Total amount is 2 bill118 million $118.9 million. We have it split up into three overall categories. The operating
budget 838.2 capital improvements just under 882 million and then 398 in contingencies and reserves. What you're looking at right now is a comparison of uh the proposed budget to
the two most recently adopted budgets. We're going to focus on the proposed budget within the oval there. the I'll start about halfway down where it says total operating budget and there's that $838 million figure. When you add in the capital improvements of 882 million and
then 399 in reserves and contingencies, you get the total of 2 bill119 million. And then when you compare that total to the 2526 adopted budget, it's a reduction of 85 million or about 3.8%. The slide's not advancing for me. There
we go. Um, at this point, I'm going to pause and allow the city manager to discuss some uh major budget highlights in the proposed budget. >> Thank you, Madame Mayor, members of council. Uh before I talk about some of the mechanics of how we address the
budget, I want to talk a little bit about our methodology, our philosophy, how we approach this. Uh we can advance to the next slide. Thank you. And so uh as we approach the budget cycle which started actually in the summer with some
I would say some preliminary discussions with departments following up on last year understanding some of their needs uh as we entered into the budget cycle. Also we anticipated that we could have some headwinds as it relates to our revenue stream. So we needed to create
some capacity uh within our budget that would allow some flexibility to make strategic investments. And so that was the philosophy which drove the mechanics which you can read on the screen and I'll describe this just in in some greater detail. But again the philosophy
uh as outlined I would encourage uh even audience members uh it's a short read that it's the budget message by the city manager which really outlines our approach and investment. I refer to a lot of these as investments. They're not just spending. So we invest in our
employees and the return on that investment is phenomenal. Uh customer service that and service that we deliver to our community every single day as an example, investing in public safety, investing in our infrastructure. And so those were the core themes uh as we
embark embark on this budget process. It's important to send the message uh to over a hundred employees that put their hands uh on the budget process and to state that framework for what we're trying to achieve. So what we were trying to achieve was not just the
status quo of what we did last year but really a scrubbing of the budget uh line items. And so that directs me to this uh tool that we used. Uh I am a budget reviewer for GFOA, Government Finance Officers Association. And so these are
mechanisms that some of the best of the best across the country uh utilize uh to develop their municipal budgets for their own city. and we're uh obviously an award recipient of that GFOA award for many years. And so let me describe
the 10% and the 2% exercise. As city manager, I am not able to touch every single line item. Uh I am familiar and have done that in smaller budgets, not a $2 billion budget. So what we embarked on was a process that engaged our employees to do that. And this was
exactly what was done. So let's talk to the 10% challenge, if you will, the 10% goal. And so again, it's a mechanism for our employees and the organization to look at every single line item within our budget. And again, two purposes to
that. I think it's good business for us to continue to look at those line items and not live within status quo. Line items need to change from year to year. Sometimes they go down, sometimes they go up. And really, it's a new philosophy of that approach to budgeting. And then also again creating some capacity so
that we can make strategic investments. And so the 10% exercise you take every line item and you get to pop it is in the finance mechanism you populate what that starts off with. You can start off with the same as you start off had last year. Uh you can do zero that's not uh
zerobased budgeting that's a different exercise or you could start with a different number. So we rolled it with minus 10%. What that did is require the departments to go through every single line item, look at it, and in many instances they're not able to live
within a minus 10%. But that encouraged them to look at other line items where they could find opportunities. And I would tell you in conversations with every single department at least twice uh at large sessions, uh they found those opportunities. That saved
approximately $7 million. We found $7 million through that exercise. The second exercise was a 2% reduction. So if you uh 2% of the positions that you have within your department, so for easy math, if the department has 100
employees, uh then we would be looking for them to eliminate two positions, two position 2% of your total personnel count. However, there are some exemptions. There were exemptions of sworn personnel did not count. And so
the 400 approximately uh sworn 409 in police department approximately 400 in in the fire department did not count. We're not uh reducing sworn personnel. There were also other uh smaller functions uh that did not have vacancies
uh in didn't contribute to that process. Uh but then when you look at the minus two within your department, we went to the positions that were vacant and so it was not eliminating any field position that created approximately saved
approximately uh $2.6 million. So the combination of those two efforts nearly $10 million and then as we will discuss later uh there was the uh subtraction or the elimination of positions but then we were also added positions uh for next year. Just so happens that's a balance
pretty close. It looks as a negative on a on an FTE count or full-time equivalent count. It looks like we reduced uh more than we added. But on a full-time benefited position, I'm specifically uh making a distinction between full-time benefited positions
and uh FTEEs or full-time equivalents. And so the balance of adding full-time positions and eliminating full-time positions uh came out about 33 and 33. And so uh that was next slide please. That was that process. So I go back to
our strategic plan is moving forward with investing in infrastructure, investing in public safety. So how did we invest in public safety? What you see here on the 4.8 million for compensation for uh police and fire. That is in
addition to their steps. Uh the step plans for both of those departments for the sworn personnel uh to add up to about $3.1 million of additional compensation uh included in this budget. And then what we see with the 4.8
million is a combination of longevity pay uh that we introduced last year for the police department and introducing this year for the fire department. That's about 1.4 million each. Uh and then also a 1% market move uh for both
uh that get us to the 4.8. Uh the fire department uh really proud about the significant investment. Uh the chief has been talking about uh the tsunami of retirements that's coming and uh really making appropriate funding all for that.
And then obviously ambulance uh roll out final phase three of three. Uh that's a good number of those uh positions that we added for next year as well. I'll let Chief uh Shannon speak to that in more detail. The 2 million for the public
safety retirement, you'll recall last year it was just on one of the previous slides. We made an investment strategic investment on the police side to the tune of 50 million last year. And this two million uh for the fireside is really anticipating some of that
retirement that we'll see an increased rate over the next couple years and then some significant capital investments for these areas. Next slide, please. Really prioritizing that infrastructure. Uh we've talked a lot about uh pavement over the last couple years. Pavement
condition index, our PCI, it was in the low 60s. We have a goal of a 10-year plan to get that into 75. Really proud about the investment that we made in the current fiscal year of just over $40 million. Just for uh the audience's
education purposes, for most years, it was around $15 million on an annual basis was our regular uh investment in this area. So, we significantly increased it in the current fiscal year uh to just over 40 million. And then we're proposing for next year uh 45.9
million. So we have over 85 million over two years. Uh so significantly moving forward uh to improving that PCI on the 10-year uh plan. And then uh the water uh increase costs uh and that's associated here. And there's we will
talk more about the water infrastructure, but that last bullet there continuing to significantly invest in this area with a significant amount of carry forward and that was part of the strategy as well was finishing up those projects that we already have in the pipeline, pun intended. Next slide.
And wrapping up uh my portion of the presentation here uh economic uh development. As council knows, we've been full steam ahead in this area and continue to make strategic investments uh in really what I refer to is the areas, the facilities that we control.
It really started with a management restructuring under uh Miss Doyle's leadership and the portfolio of city facilities that look a little different than than some of our other typical government operations. And so really proud of the partnership with the Giants
to continue forward uh with that and and the Charles and continue forward with that investment. And then Westworld, we've uh talked a lot about Westworld in this room and in many other rooms and uh making good progress there uh on some really the drainage and the significant
capital investments uh in there. So that wraps up my section. I look forward to some discussion later. Thank you. Uh next port next portion of the presentation looks at our general fund revenue situation. Uh what you're looking at is the total
revenues uh for the general fund in the proposed budget for fiscal year 2627. The three largest categories uh taxes, local, state shared revenues and property taxes. Primary property tax encompasses about 75% of our total
general fund revenues. Uh looking a little bit more closely at the taxes local uh category, that blue wedge of the pie down at the bottom left. Um that's mostly our 1% general use sales tax, also our 0.1% public
safety tax. And um there are also a few smaller sources within that category like electric and gas franchise tax and cable TV franchise fee. Um those are much smaller in comparison to the other two I just mentioned. the orange wedge of the pie chart. State
shared revenues that consists of state shared income tax, state shared sales tax, those are the two largest and then also auto and loo tax which comes from vehicle registrations that uh that are shared with cities. And then finally, primary property tax
is about $41.1 million in the proposed budget. I'm not going to go into specific detail on all of the smaller wedges unless of course there are questions later. Uh but the remaining revenue sources make up about 25% of the general fund revenue and the total is
$472.8 million. This shows our projected sales tax collections for the 1% uh general fund sales tax. We just do that one u on this slide to kind of show what we're seeing in terms of sales tax in future years. In the orange bars, we are projecting
some slower growth in sales tax over the first two years of the five-year planning period. A growth of about 3% in the first two years before we gradually return to a more, I guess, traditional rate of growth in years four and five of
4% and 4.5% respectively. We show this slide just to emphasize that Scottsdale's overall sales tax rate of 1.7% is one of the lowest in the valley when compared to our our peer cities.
This slide shows our state shared revenue projections. We base our forecasts on projections from the state for these state shared revenues. Um right now those forecasts are showing modest growth in state shared sales tax as well as state shared income tax. Those are the two major categories in
the state shared revenues. I do want to call your attention, it's mentioned at the bottom of the slide there, depending on what the state does um in its budget regarding conformity with federal tax law. It's possible that there will be a the potential hit to our state shared
income tax in fiscal year 2728. That's not the first year, but the second year of the 5-year planning window. Uh we calculate the potential impact to be about 3 million if they do full conformity, but ultimately it will depend on what is enacted at the state
level. We show this slide to show that our general fund rainy day funds um are intact still over the five-year planning period. the the major the largest one the blue bar there is the emergency and operating reserves that's by our financial
policies 25% of general fund operating expenditures. So that's why you see it kind of fluctuate over the 5-year period. We also carry a $12 million contingency in the orange bar there and a $15 million revenue loss reserve. That that
was a new one that was started in uh the current year, fiscal 2526, and it was meant to offset potentially unexpected decreases in revenue. So now moving on from general fund revenue, we'll have a discussion about the um operating budget at a high level.
Overall, it's $838 million of that $2.1 billion total budget. This slide shows that our operating budget is structurally balanced. So, what this table does is it um it takes all of the major funds on the lefth hand side. That's the first column. And then
the second column is the proposed expenditures in the proposed budget. And then the third column is the projected revenues into that fund in 2627. So, we'll just start at the bottom on the total line. you'll see the total 838 million operating budget.
And when you compare it to the total revenues, it's just over a billion dollars in revenue. And then if you look at the individual funds as well, you'll see that overall the proposed expenditures are um in line with the projected revenues. A large portion of the operating budget
is uh has to do with the FTE count uh within the city. Uh this slide shows the crosswalk from the 2526 adopted FTE number of 2,796.9. It has a crosswalk from that point to the proposed FTE level in 2627. I'll
just go over them very briefly. Phase 3 ambulance will bring 22 new FTE positions. Parks and Wreck will receive six six FTE positions. Those will be funded by the 0.15% park and preserve tax. There's 12.5 other FTE positions
around the city. And then there was a total of 48.83 vacant positions eliminated. When you add all those together, you get a net reduction of 8.33 FTE and you get to the final proposed FTE number of 2788.57.
Um, as the city manager was talking about, another way to look at the overall staffing within a city is full-time benefited positions. So, um, as he spoke to earlier, the departments were instructed to review their vacant positions and with the goal to potentially eliminate 2% of total
position count without impacting the service levels. And there were a total of 33 full-time vacant benefited positions that were identified for elimination through this through this uh initiative. And the the eliminations by department are listed on the right hand
side. And then when we talk about the additions of full-time benefited positions, there was a total of 33 full-time benefited positions that are recommended to be added in the proposed budget. So those are completely offset by the eliminations that we just talked about. 22 will be going to fire, six to
parks and wreck, and then a few others a few more in a few other departments. Looking more specifically at the general fund operating budget, we're going to focus on the proposed budget inside the little oval there. Um, if you look at our base, what we call
our base operating expenditures, you add in the PSPRS additional payment of 2 million and you get the total general fund operating budget of 424 million. Then when you factor in the transfers out to the ambulance fund for debt service and capital projects, you get a total general fund operating budget of
$472.7 million. Okay, this chart shows ongoing revenues in blue and ongoing expenditures in red. You see historically going back to fiscal year 1718 that the revenues and expenditures u ongoing are more or less
aligned and they kind of track with each other. Then when you get to the early fiscal 2020s you see the revenues start to take off and the expenditures kind of lag behind a little bit. The reason for that is when pandemic era revenues started to come in higher than projected
before the expenditures could catch up. If you start to look at fiscal year at the red line, fiscal year 23 24, that's when you see the re the expenditures start to catch up to the revenues a little bit and they continue doing so until we get to the proposed budget and you see a little break in the rate of
growth in the expenditures. That break continues throughout the five-year planning period. Um the delta between the two stays pretty much constant um over that five-year planning period. And the reason why we're able to maintain that is various reasons. um
first of all the exercises that the departments went through that the city manager referenced also some uh debt service that will be maturing and then finally um the expected decreases in the PSPRS rate that due to previous investments made by
the city. Just to emphasize the debt service piece. Um starting with the proposed budget about $10 million in debt service in 2627 and that climbs 13 and 14 million but then falls to about 7 million in uh 2930 and 3031
um as some Westworld and TPC debt comes to maturity. Looking at the PSPRS issue a little bit more closely. Um the blue line well these these show the historical contribution rates for tier one tier 2 employees in PSPRS police in blue and
fire in red looking at police first at the high point of 63.3% in 2223 that represented over a 75% increase when you look at it compared to 27 on the left hand side of the chart. So at the high point is when the city
started making some investments beyond what was required um into PSPRS and you started to see some of the the impacts of that start to trickle into the contribution rate the projected in 2728 that's where you see a big drop that's
when we'll see the impact of the $50 million that we're contributing this year typically you see the impact two years after the contribution is made then looking at fire very briefly you start at 12.5% on the lefth hand side and that increases by more than 100% and gets
over 30%. At the right hand side of the chart, uh PSPRS historical cost, this shows the total amount paid to PSPRS split up between police and fire. And just looking at PD, it starts at 19, gets to about 22 and holds steady for several
years. And then we see it start to fall off a little bit as a result of the contributions that have been made. And we anticipate the larger decrease again happening in 2728. Then looking at fire starting at 5 million. It kind of grows over time. There have been some additions to fire
through ambulance and some other service expansions. Um but you do see it increase and we think that with the $2 million that it's in the projected the proposed budget that that will cause that amount to hold firm and not increase.
This is the operating budget by department. I'm not going to go into every wedge of this pie chart here, but combined together, police and fire make up about 55% of the total general fund operating budget of $424 million. We have some other major departments listed on the slide here. And then
everything else is kind of condensed into that other core services in the bottom right. Uh before wrapping up with the operating budget, uh just wanted to highlight in addition to the citywide the 1% market up to 3% merit and 5% step for sworn,
there is the following personnel related items in the budget. Uh the city manager mentioned uh an additional $4.8 million for additional sworn compensation adjustments. There's $ 1.5 million for some focused targeted classification and comp study
projects. And there will be a one-time adjustment for employees that are currently maxed out in their range. That'll be about 600,000. And then about 4.1 million in vacation, trade, and payouts for for when people leave the city.
Okay, moving on to the capital budget. It's about $882 million of the $2.1 billion budget. This separates the capital budget by the individual program areas. Um, I'm going to just highlight the total line there
at the bottom in the oval. So, there's about $549 million in carry forwards. That's, you know, remaining budget for projects that are already underway. There will be another $47 million in either new projects or new budget for
existing projects. When you add those together, you get 956 million on the right hand side. And that 956, it says it in the title, is a combination of the 882 plus the 74 million in contingencies within the CIP.
We talked about the one-year capital budget. This is the five-year total of $1.88 billion. This is the breakout between the various programs between water and transportation. That makes up almost three quarters of the total fiveyear CIP. and you can see the the
other programs and what's going to them over the five-year CIP. With that, we've covered the budget from a big picture perspective. Um, before we transition to having departments come up, I'd be happy to open myself up for any questions that you may have had on
things that have been presented to this point. >> Councilman Graham, >> I just want to bookmark that. I do have questions but I think we're going to I think maybe to let the departments come and then we have public comment and then and then I'll present my qu because I
may hear things from public comment for example and other department chairs but I do want to share some thoughts and have some questions. So thank you. >> All right Scott, why don't we do that? Uh I don't see any other speakers on the dis here. So, >> okay. At this point in the presentation,
we'll be having representatives from some select departments come up and speak to their specific budgets and CIP projects. Um, once one is completed, the next one will come up. And then once all are completed, I'll get up and conclude the presentation and once again um accept any questions that you may have.
So, thank you. >> Thank you, Scott. >> Welcome, Fire Chief Shannon. Tom Shannon. Good evening, mayor and members of the council. Uh the fire department's uh budget for 2627 includes uh as the
city manager mentioned the execution of phase three ambulance which will bring our total investment uh in into uh the the realm of nine ambulances daily uh servicing over 20,000 calls uh a year for service in terms of transportation.
And so, uh, it seems like it's gone quite quickly, uh, but perhaps not for you at the Deis. Uh, the city manager mentioned an investment in skills replacement. That cannot be underestimated. Uh, this is the first real investment to get ready, the next
generation of firefighters. The incumbent firefighters that exist inside the fire department require an upstaffing of skill sets that are departing as our members retire. And uh this investment is notable because it
won't it won't go on into perpetuity. It'll be over the next few years. I would say probably no more than four years total. Uh and then that we'll see a reduction in that investment. Um and uh included in this is also the upkeep
of the normal everyday work that is goes on out in the fire service in terms of uh uh assuring that our folks are ready to meet the needs of the citizens. It was mentioned that there's an additional $2 million investment in PSRS uh on the fire side to stabilize uh that uh
unfunded liability over time. Uh bringing our fisc year budget in 2627 to uh just over $103 million. Uh I mentioned phase three of the ambulance uh nine ambulances uh with the ability
to peak at 10 as needed. Um, these will be spaced uh north and uh south in the uh city in three uh zones if you will. Uh we've had a great partner in Maricopa Ambulance and uh they will continue to
service us uh through the balance of this year until we're in in service probably by late December of this year, no later than January. Uh, additionally, um, the, uh, the fire department annex, which all of you were at, uh, for the
groundbreaking, will help us serve, uh, that south community by providing quarters, uh, for those southern ambulances. And so, that that is an an outstanding addition to the capability. Uh, in the area of Prop 490, uh, we have
begun the investment. Uh, of course there was a small lag in the execution of the use of those dollars and we wanted to make sure that uh we were uh fully capable of of of executing the plan for hires. Um, you may recall that we have uh three community risk
reduction captains that were already out doing the work of prevention services particularly in what we call that wildland urban interface. Um, and we have transferred those folks fully into the fund. Um we have uh just concluded
our wildland urban interface uh position interviews um and we hope to make an offer very very soon in that regard. And then we've enhanced those technical capabilities. We have a second TRT team in place with enhanced capabilities in and around the preserve and open spaces
of Scottsdale. Uh in addition uh to all those services, we anticipate the use of approximately $1.7 million from that fund uh annually. Uh there's a substantial surplus uh that's carrying over from this year because of the late execution of the plan, but uh we feel
very good about that. Um the great news, I just saw the renderings today of fire station 604, which many of you may know is right next to district 3, and uh it is truly going to be a beautiful building. what was a Jify Lube will become this beautiful, beautiful
structure that complements uh D3. Um that investment uh is highlighted at about $10.3 million with a total project investment of 14.2 once uh capital projects makes the necessary adjustments in all areas of that uh project. But I
cannot say how proud I am of not only our CPM team, but the fire team and our selected contractors and uh architects for what is just going to be an outstanding building. I can't wait for you to see it. As I mentioned, the ambulance annex uh
that you broke ground on uh recently was an addition to uh the program. So the the capital investment that was made for the uh ambulance project was a little bit larger than what the intent was when we first uh discussed this project in
previous councils. Um this city manager saw the need to have contemporary uh uh capabilities to house our members. We were going to invest in a quite frankly a very very tired building uh just to the north of that location. And as I mentioned at the groundbreaking, he he
saw the need to do better and keep those keep those buildings contemporary and healthy for our firefighters and members. Uh that is going to be a busy house that that is going to service well over 8,000 calls a year for service and uh that ambulance will be a very important part of that service delivery.
That is my presentation. >> Thank you. Very well done. Appreciate it. And next I see Chief Joe Leuk coming up to talk to us about police. >> Good evening, honorable mayor, council
members. Uh our budget reflects a uh significant investment in employees through as a city manager said, but in addition to things like uh incentives such as longevity pay and aggressive market adjust adjustments that we've already realized even from last year uh
some incredible numbers and filling our vacancies both in for example dispatch and officers. This year we will realize for the first time uh zero vacancies in our police officer rank which is quite an accomplishment. Um it also reflects an ongoing priority uh to utilize
technology to achieve our mission of public safety. Um we're very focused on finding ways to make our effort more efficient and more effective. We invest heavily in things like the real-time crime centers, our drone programs, and then other automation. We're also this
budget will reflect an investment in artificial intelligence. We're trying to apply that to communications just to add efficiency and we found great value in that. Um in addition to that uh we've really leveraged um investment in our
specialty units and staffing. So when we talk about specialty units these are the units that uh such as our digital forensic unit or our human exploitation unit. um experts that really go a long way in not only preventing crime but solving crime. And if you look at all of
this stuff together, all of these investments together, Scottsdale realizes some of the lowest crime rates and some of the highest clearance rates rates, which really include um talk about our our arrest rate. Um so we're far below the a national average in um
crime rates and far above the national average in clearance rates. And I truly blame uh some of those priorities that I just discussed as as why we're able to do that. What's up on the slide are some of the out of out of budget packages that we are funding in this budget. Um
first one was a wellness initiative. Uh for the last several years we really started to focus on the wellness of our employees. um critically important and uh this is really kind of the first time that we have a budget line item for it and uh it will help us do uh employ some
really critical uh processes um and initiatives and efforts towards that um additionally uh additional security footprint at Westworld and what that really means is contractual services for more municipal security guards over at Westworld. We found that as a critical
need and so we're making an investment with that delivered as an out-of budget package that was approved and to meet our hiring needs um we really need to expand our our polygraph uh group. We had one full-time polygraph examiner. We needed to expand that to another
part-time just to keep up with the applications that we're getting um to make sure that we're processing them through and trying to put as many people in the academy as we can so we don't fall behind. So, that was very uh important to us. And then it shows what our uh proposed budget is um up there as
well, $156.3 million. Want to talk quickly about the park and preserve tax and this also filled a very critical need for us as you're as you look at Scottsdale with the largest urban per preserve in the nation. Uh but then add on to it 46 municipal parks,
you know, all equaling about 31,000 acres of parks, preserve, and entertainment areas. It takes um very specific and specialized uh park rangers or officers that are specially trained to use uh equipment such as off-road
vehicles and um electronic equipment such as uh more rugged drones to go out and search for lost hikers and whatnot. So, we're looking at um this budget through this park preserve tax supporting six warn park rangers, a sergeant because they need a supervisor.
We're expanding that program and we added a real-time crime center technician to help on the back end which really marries up with those drone operations and the other electronics and cameras that are out um and about these preserves and uh whatnot to really
support that work unit. So, it's a critical need um and we're very pleased about that. And then we also um so basically it's just an enhanced safety footprint for the parks and preserve that were needed very badly. So, we're very pleased about that. Just to cover a
couple of our uh CIP projects. Um, one of the things that we're working on right now uh is to renovate and expand the Civic Center jail uh and the downtown police facility to meet demand. We've talked about this before. That building is very unequ. So, the first step is moving the
employees out. That's going to happen in July. Um and then construction should begin August 1st with a completion year around 2028. And also at the same time or slightly into the uh downtown jail project, we're looking at renovating the Vinda police
station to increase efficiency again uh antiquated floor plans not really meeting the demand of the staff that we have in there have in there. This year we completed the top floor project which uh was a remodel of our communications center and um the RTCC and now we're
focusing on the other two floors. The basement floor which is our patrol area that is in bad need of an uplift and then our detective area which is on the first floor of that building. Um so that project uh should start in probably January of 2027 and we're looking at
about a two-year remodel with that. And that was a 2019 um bond project. And with that, we'll go to parks and recreation. Thank you. >> Thank you, Chief Leuk. And I just want to also point out along with every other department in the city, your department
saw just amazing results with um crime reduction and you know, some very highlighted uh events and good job. Can I Good evening, Madame Mayor, members of city council. Nick Mullinary, senior director for the parks and
recreation and preserve department. I'm There we go. I'll start with I'll jump right in and we'll start with a highle look at the parks and recreation department's operating budget. You'll see our operating budget has
increased by approximately $5 million from fiscal year 202526 to the proposed 2627 budget. I think it's important to note that the majority of that spending is not new spending. That's the result of a reorganization
and the McCormic Stillman Railroad Park moving to the parks and recreation department from enterprise operations. And then we have some additional increases in operating. They're minimal. We have approximately $179,000
in increases from 2526 to 2627 in the parks and preserve fund and then about $190,000 increase in the transportation fund which serves as a transfer in from transportation for the parks and recreation department to maintain all
the city-owned medians and rightsway. Next slide. This slide speaks to the 14% parks maintenance allocation for the parks and preserve tax. So that's an operating budget that's specific to park
maintenance. The highlights for this budget which is the fund is budgeted at 3.3 million are the addition of approximately it's 6 point it's six new employees. We did we had a little bit of shuffling with the eight that will be a support position that will be split
between the parks and recreation department and the preserve department. So we're we're working to efficiently manage those resources to the best degree possible. And then we have about $300,000 for new vehicles for those new parks employees.
Next slide, please. This next slide, the allocation for this is the parks improvements allocation, which is a 51% allocation from the new parks and preserve sales tax. That 51% allocation is really the
majority of that is capital. There are some non-C capital expenses in the park improvements budget, but the highlights include uh $6.8 $8 million in transfers to the CIP for park improvements, about $300,000 for the replacement of
park benches, uh, picnic tables, barbecues in our older aged parks in the southern part of the city. And then one thing is important to note, we haven't talked about it here tonight, but we have followed a similar path and a similar
approach to the rest of the city regarding capital. So we did go with a a design first approach for capital with all the projects that are in this budget. So we took out projects that had been in the the plan
last year in 2526 that were just estimates that we had put together to match revenue. We are working on those estimates in 2627 as part of the proposed budget. Those estimates, the designs would be for improvements at
Elorado and Vistadel Camino Parks, Agu Linda, which is Scottsdale's first park, Pike Neighborhood Park, Apache Park, and then improvements to Chapperel Park and the Chapperel Park dog park. Next slide.
This allocation, which is the 18% of the 0.15% parks and preserve tax, is for preserve operating. And I think it's important to note that in 2526 we eliminated the general fund allocation to the preserves operating
and that was was assumed by the parks and preserve tax. So the highlights of this tax of this fund we have it's approximately three $3.4 million in total expenditures that's 10.2 2. So the other the other part of the 0.8 FTE in
the parks and recreation fund approximately $2 million of that is preserve planning and admin. That's staff, vehicles, fleet, healthcare. And then we do have 1.4 4 million for various preserve initiatives that were defined through the parks and preserve
sales tax initiative for sonor and desert education or for sonor and desert preservation wildland fire mitigation invasive plant management and sonor and desert education. Next slide please. So the next two slides will focus on our
most our highest priorities related to capital and they're both 2019 bond projects that we continue to make progress towards. The Indian Benwash lakes and irrigation project is focused in Vista del Camino and Elorado. We are
making significant progress with that project right now. They just started to fill the two new lakes on the the Vista Del Camino side which is exciting for us. Um that 2019 bond project has incurred three 13.4 million to date. Um
we do project the 21.2 million in 2627. We think the project will be done close to the end of 2627 and the total project budget is 34.6 million. This is a really critical project for those two southern Indian
benwash parks which haven't had the investments that we've made in Indian school came back and chaperel parks. So that'll enhance water quality. It'll eliminate seepage in the lake. There's significant erosion in the lowflow channels. So, we'll see some major
improvements in those South Scottsdale parks as we wrap up this project. Next slide. And then we are moving fast and furious on the new dog park at Thompson Peak Park. That is a 2019 bond project. The
total project budget is 6.4 million. We've incurred 1.8 to date. The additional budget is 4.6 million. We expect that project to be done at the end of the summer. So, we're really excited about that. And that'll be a three and a halfacre dog park that will
have three separate dock cells. Happy to to answer any questions that anybody might have. >> Nope. No questions. >> No, there are. Oh, Nick, give me one sec. One second. Uh, yes, if you wouldn't mind sticking up there for for a minute. Councilwoman Whitehead.
>> Uh, thanks. Can you go back three or maybe four slides? Go. Yeah. Right. That one. So the bottom bullet point, can you explain? You said you you removed CIP projects. Could you explain that last B bullet point? >> Yeah. So we have some transfers to the
CIP. That Thank you, Councilwoman Whitehead. I I did probably didn't cover that enough detail. We have some transfers to the CIP for replacement of aging asphalt tennis courts throughout the city. I think there's three of them to replace the the aging water feature
at Elorado Aquatic Center. And then the rest of the projects we have taken the project budgets out of the five-year plan and we have budgeted for design. So we have designed for Vista Elorado improvements that were identified in the
2018 master plan. Improvements at Chapel Park, Aguual Linda Park, Pyute Park. So those projects we will we will move into design for those projects in 2627 and then as we have a realistic expectation about what those project
budgets are we will bring them forward to council. >> So that's a departure of how we do things because it implies that these costs aren't coming but the costs are coming. So the design is a small part. Do we have estimates of how many uh how much was pulled out? I guess I could
look at I have my CIP book right here. Can you do you have an estimate of how much uh we've pulled out of the CIP? >> Councilwoman Whitehead, as it relates to the parks and preserve tax, um I I don't have that information in front of me. I'd have to get that preamp. >> Okay. Thank you,
Councilwoman McCallen. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um thank you for your uh um explanations on everything. Uh Director Molinari, um I started to laugh when you said the water was being filled in the lakes. I received two texts from
citizens. Um, one with pictures from former commissioner Davis. He was on his bike watching. People are very excited about this and you know they keep asking the questions how deep the lake is, all that. But um, actually I asked you that and for aation but my questions are not
about the lake. Congratulations on working on them. Um, my questions are about the uh, and I don't know if this is you or another area. So I'm asking you the sh the shade and tree plan throughout the city. Is that under your department, >> Mayor Bowski? Councilwoman McCallen? No.
The the tree and shade plan is not okay. >> Is not managed under my department. However, we are working very closely with the planning department on the implementation of the tree and shade program. There's actually some shade components that will go into Vista Del
Camino Park as part of the the project that we're working on now. That will be additional trees and shade that are funded through that. So, we're working very closely. We're a partner with with the planning department on the tree and shade plan. >> Excellent. Okay. So, then my next question with that is I believe there's
a position, a new position, an urban forestry person. Will that person answer to you or to planning >> council? The urban forester will live in the parks and recreation department. Okay. >> So, it will report through us and we
have that position was actually funded in this current fiscal year, the 2526 fiscal year. So, we're recruiting for that position now. And two of the new positions, two of the six or 6.8 positions in the 2627 budget are urban
forestry techs. So, really a a process of building our urban forestry team so that we can start to assume some of the work that we've been contracting out for for a long time. And we we are really really excited about that initiative where we can gain some autonomy in how
we care for our trees. >> Excellent. And is that out of 490 funds by chance? >> It is. Yes. >> Yes. Okay. Thank you. Um, one more question for you. Um, in the CIP, uh, community facilities, the parks improvements, it talks about, uh,
construction related design. Um, but it says demolish and reconstruct, renovate, uh, restrooms and storage facilities. Uh, Elorado, Vista, Thompson Peak, and Chapperel. But next to Chapperel, it says boat dock. Are we re rebuilding the boat dock at Chapperel? Currently, we do
not have a plan to rebuild the boat dock, but we do have a plan for planning of improvements and design of improvements at Chapperel Park. So, that boat dock is something that we hear a lot about and we we have people who are very passionate about the boat dock. They love the boat dock. So, that's
something we'll look at and we certainly recognize the the value that our community sees in that in that space. >> I was going to say that is definitely community outreach worthy. Um the amount of people that use that. Thank you for your time. Sorry I had so many questions but um love flying parks and wreck.
>> Thank you very much uh Nick. Appreciate the presentation. >> Thank you. >> And next we'll ask Thyra Ryden Diaz who is the interim water resources senior director to talk to us about water resources. >> Good evening. It's Tira. It's Tira
right. So it's a silent H. So um I know it's a hard name but you'll get it. Um, so I'm just going to jump in and go quickly down the slide. This is day seven for me. So work day seven. So I have our assistant director, David Wallby, in the back in case I need
backup. So next slide. So this is our water and sewer operations for this um proposed budget. So um the rates were brought to you at the end of February and there was a council
presentation on that. So that's a 4.5% water rate increase. Um 3.5% of that is operations and maintenance and 1% is new source and supply. Um which has all been in the news lately. So that will um
help us with that. Um there's a 3.5 sewer rate increase and then an additional $4.1 million for additional for utilities. So that's mostly power um requirements. And then um just under a
million dollars for um additional water purchase costs and chemicals. The chemical markets just um accelerated quickly. And then um a note to the budget is that the Bartlett Dam feasibility was moved from capital to operating. So we are participating in
that feasibility study with I think 23 other communities to um ascertain um what the capital investment would be to um raise that dam. So, next slide. So, these are just a highlight of three of the capital projects that are in the
proposed CIP. Um, the first one is the water source and supply. This is actually $100 million that is not in this year's CIP. It's in next year's in the 2728 in the five-year plan. So, and that's to obtain and facilitate um water
support water sources and supply. Next slide. Wastewater system improvements is the next project we're highlighting. And so this is to design and construct sewer lines to complete treatment plant work and to rehabilitate sewer manholes.
Next slide. Crossroads east is the water system improvements in the crossroads reach reach area. It's to um increase the site 55A booster pump pumping facility. And actually, we have um a design contract that we're just working
through right now that will come to um for your review and um and hopefully approval in June to um kind of rebuild that whole site and and provide some increased capacity. Um and then it's also this capital project also um
includes to install approximately 4200 linear feet of 30-inch transmission main to serve current and future connections. So, I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Councilwoman Whitehead. Thanks, Mayor. Welcome, Tara. >> Thank you.
>> How many days? >> Well, I mean, I've been at the city 27 years. >> Yeah, but the seven >> day seven. >> Working day seven. >> Working day seven. >> I studied over the weekend, so we could count those, too. >> Let's count them. All right. Um, can you go back a few slides to the source and supply?
Well, that one, too, as well. I mean, I I I guess I'm you know, I know that this budget is evolving, but um the needs the needs and the approved plans and um are for this year, not for 2728 because
we're looking at uncertainties. But just go back one more slide. Let's talk source and supply. Where was where was that? Um right there. Yeah, I have a question. So, the term source and supply is pretty open-ended. Um, is there some
is there some place in this that that tells the rateayer that in fact this money is dedicated to strategic plan top objectives? I mean, where do I find that? Because I couldn't find it.
>> Madame Mayor, I'm uh happy to help answer that. >> Yeah. support support my colleague that's been on this position for seven working days. Uh and so let me it's not going to be a short answer because I think a good number of community members
are also interested in this answer. So I think it's helpful to back up uh and when we back up when we presented uh the budget capital budget about a year ago to the budget review commission uh there was a project in the budget review or excuse me in the capital budget for
advanced water purification and we had previously estimated this project about 15 to 20 million and what we proposed a year ago was that it was going to move up to $67 million and the budget review commission said, "This has significantly
increased. You should take a look at this. You really need to take a hard look at this project." So, we did just that. So, what we embarked upon was having a third party engineering firm review uh the advanced water purification. This goes by a couple
different names. Now, it's emerging as pure water. And so, at the time of putting together the budget, we did not have the capital uh expenditure number. Since then, we have a draft and we've shared that with city council. It is
still emerging, but we at least have a realistic number. And lo and behold, guess what? It is more than the 67 million. So, we were we were wrong on the on the 15 million. We were wrong on the 20 million. And I'll come back to why it has changed or at least a component of why it's changed.
>> Greg, can I interrupt? So, my question is a little different than the answer I'm getting. So, let me maybe I better rephrase the question. So listen, if certainty was a requirement in a CIP budget, the budget would be zero. There is no certainty. So
that's not my question. My question is that the city council, the city has a strategic plan that tells the rateayers how we're going to get from today to tomorrow with a more diversified water portfolio. And if that's going to
change, that's a whole another public discussion that we need to have with data, community input, a work study session. We've had none of that up here. So my question is very specific. It's not how much it costs. My question is, are the rateayers getting what they're
paying for, what they are expecting, which is that these dollars fund the strategic plan projects. There's four of them. And those one of the project that is considered most urgent is the APRW
what you just called pure water and as you yourself said in a meeting with me it is the only water source that we have that is certain and cost effective. So the question is if we pass this budget we have what looks like a very
open-ended uh line item water source and supply. That's not usually how we do things. We we tell the rateayers or we tell the taxpayers depending on what the line item is what they're paying for. So the question is really just a yes or no.
Does this water source and supply fund APRW or does it give staff some sort of leeway to change a policy um administratively? That's the question. It's really yes or no. is does this fund APRW and the other
initiatives or can it be used for other other sources? And I know that you've done a good job looking for other sources. We'll probably need other sources, but we have a strategic plan and it's it's and that tells us how do we get to uh a a more diversified secure
tomorrow that's also cost-effective. >> Madame Mayor and uh Council Member Whitehead, I apologize. I thought you wanted a complete answer. The answer is yes. Thank you. >> Okay. So, that's really good. Thank you. Can Can we get that in before we adopt
the the budget, it would be good to just simply say water source and supply and add that it is strictly for APRW. >> It's not for that. So, no. >> Okay. So, the answer is no. >> Well, you changed your question. Your question was two different times when you restated it. I was answering your
first question, which the answer was yes. And the second question, you switched to the AWP. Okay. So, I'm I'm Let's let's let's make sure that everybody in the audience knows what we're talking about as well as your your council members. Okay. So, >> I was headed in that direction with the first answer. >> Okay. No, I'm and I'm sorry it's going to be a long night. I'm trying to keep
it short. So, my question is water source and supply uh does that allow you does that allow changes to the strategic plan projects spending outside of the strategic plan? Can those changes be made administratively versus via a
policy from the council? >> As you see from the screen, Madame Mayor, Council Member Whitehead, this is 2728. We're proposing the 2627. >> Yeah. Well, I'm that's another concern of mine. >> Can't change anything that's not in next year's budget. >> Yeah. Well, that's a concern, too. >> It's not in next year's budget. >> Okay. Well, I would say that Okay. It's
Okay. So, we're not funding the strategic plan. Thank you. >> I issued a memo today to answer the the update on the strategic plan. I >> I read that. I read that and I had the same >> that provides a complete answer. Thank you. >> Actually, I read read it and it did not. So, I would say that that's concerning
to me and I I'll be looking forward to a work study session where we discuss a council approved policy and whether or not we're sticking with it because uh water is the most important service we provide. Thank you. Just to chime in before I move on to
Councilwoman McCallen, I have to tell you, Coun Councilwoman Whitehead, your your questions were not clear and so I don't think we had a clear discussion on any level. So, you know, I know Tyra here is kind of on the spot, but um
let's let's just focus on asking as direct questions about this particular budget as possible. So, Councilwoman McCallen, go right ahead. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, thank you and congratulations on your new job. Um, you
are being thrown into the fire. Good thing it's water um to save you. Uh, I would like to see um I saw the memo that you issued, city manager, and um it does seem specific, but numbers aren't
attached to it. Uh it does seem like it's just a global number. I would like to see and maybe that's also a a suggestion from the um BRC uh specifically outlined what's that hundred million for and if we're if it's
not there yet I would like to also see a study session so we can decide on that if we're doing um advanced water purification pure water and how much as well as if we're purchasing other water someplace else and how much not just um
one big number. Uh so that's just my suggestion. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh I have a question going back to uh slide page 55 which is the one immediately before this. We discussed water rate increases of 4.5%
uh earlier uh in the year. The 1% new source and supply I think might be what Councilwoman Whitehead was getting at which is kind of the flex if you will. um what will that be applied to? Not
necessarily the purification process, but uh alternate supplies as we go through the process. So, Tyro, do you have a comment on that? Can you talk to us about that 4 and a.5% and what the 1%
uh new source means to us and how does that plug into the conversation about future additional supplies? >> I'm happy to help if you want. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> I can try. >> Y >> Okay. Good job. >> You need to save me. You can save me. Um, so mayor and members of council, so
the 1% from what I understand, and I was here for the discussion in February when we were talking about the 1% is to find those new sources, right? We're in a situation that we didn't think we were going to be in this soon in this century. um you know the um
you know um so I mean everyone's seeing the pictures right of like me and it's dropping like I think that today they told me it was dropping um one foot every four days you know rapidly going down to the critical
elevation so it's it's it's all concerning right and we could have like a great rain season we could have big snow pack next year that may not be but there are dwindling supplies that the memo that um you all received about you know the hydraulic lookout on
the Colorado these are all things we just have to consider. So that 1% when it came in was to be like we knew we need to find new sources, right? We need to make sure we're sustainable and we have other sources. We've done a great job at banking water. We've done all the things to make us very sustainable, but
we need to look for that next step. And so that's what the 1% was there is the 1% was to go out and find the next step. And then you know and as to the strategic plan um you know there's five points of the strategic plan. It's not just water purifying. It is also finding new
sources and additional sources and you know expanding our and finding different ways that we can use water that's already in the valley or obtain it or get other long-term storage credits. So it's a number of things and our sustainability for water is not just one
thing. There's not. So, I just attended the Arizona Water Conference this um last week and one of the really simple takeaways I got it is they said, you know, there's no silver bullet to this water. There's buckshot, right? So,
there's bunch of things we need to do. And that's actually kind of what our strategic plan does. It says we need to look at, you know, water purification. We need to look at, you know, perhaps reclaiming some of our sewer flow. So there's a lot of things that go into it. So we really need to think about it
broadly. And you know the 100 million is sitting out there because to say we know we're going to have to do something. We just don't know what that is. And you know I've been an engineer for a long time. I like to have actual numbers not these numbers where we're like we think this is what it is right. We need to
have a little bit more. I'm a little my background is all capital projects and planning them and I've never been over budget here at the city and my 22 years of capital projects and to really plan that and that just takes extra time to plan it up front and I know it's not the
quick answer. it's not the thing, but it's a more precise answer and it also allows us to really evaluate if those costs are what we want to want to pursue or not. And we're in a great position um to pursue some of these things that are
more expensive for other cities to do and we have the funding to do lots of things that will cover the buckshot items. >> Thank you for that. We I appreciate that. uh and the Bartlett Dam feasibility and move from capital to
operating. So clear this up for me. Uh does that ensure that we've got a seat at the table in the Bartlett Dam feasibility a position is maintained? Nothing's changed, right?
>> No, mayor. Um members of council, so I think um I was having discussion of water resources day. I think some of the problem with the Bartlett Dam issue is that everyone thinks we just had this number out there and we were going to participate. There's 23 other 23 communities are participating. So our
payment into that that collective um feasibility study is our seat at the table. And then whether or not that we will you know how much we'll we'll buy into it or how much capital cost that we'll buy to get the percentages is um when Roosevelt was brought up I was
educated today that same thing happened where people participated but then only a few cities bought in to get that extra water. So those are things to look at and see. So we've got our seat at the table for that and when we know have more information about how much that water is going to cost us then we can
have that discussion with council and we can decide what's you guys can decide what's best for the city going forward. >> Agreed. So a policy that's a policy decision. I I thank you for that answer. Uh so the the capital it the capital is
just the feasibility the um sorry the operating is just the feasibility and the capital would be developed once there's the buy in and that's decided upon. >> Yeah. Mayor members and councils. Yeah. And I think that's just a a a lot safer way to go that we know what the money is
as opposed to saying making a policy decision that we're going to spend 200 million and maybe it's not maybe it's more like we don't know what that is. So let's get the study back. like I'm a big proponent of doing feasibility studies, design before we and then have really construction numbers. That's sort of my my wheelhouse. And so um we just can
make much better decisions that way. >> Okay. And so the discussion that was just had about the hundred million that's in that would be brought forward in the next uh fiscal year budget, not this one. >> Yeah. Mayor's memory c. So it is in the
fiveyear. it shows in the fiveyear but it's we wouldn't have that now if there's something that happens we could certainly come to council you could appropriate other money um I mean there's there's options but we know it's out there because there was a lot of comments about not having a placeholder so it's sort of our placeholder in that
fiveyear cip and when we know more um we'll absolutely share with you that >> but it's not earmarked for any specific project as of this point in time >> it is not Okay. Uh okay. Uh with respect to because I
think this was the goal of the discussion earlier with respect to the advanced purification uh system or you know part of our water um product or or infrastructure, excuse me. That is a big
that has been a big focus for Scottsdale, a forward-thinking SC uh focus in terms of, you know, how to have a a backup plan or a secondary plan for for water shortages. And so, can you
describe for me um where that project stands right now? I know it's been taken out of the uh CIP and you know I understand the explanation which is we have no idea what it's going to cost. So in the interest of being prudent and and
responsible we're not going to be funding a project we have no idea how much it costs. The concern that I would have about that and again this is a policy decision. We're not having that discussion right now. The concern I would have about that is we aren't
funding it on a five-year projected uh cycle, which we ordinarily would be doing for the CIP project. So, talk to me about where that project stands in particular. Mayor, um members of council, so um one of my first projects when I moved up to
CIP from development services was doing I had been there a couple years and I did um I managed the expansion of the AWT. So we started that in 2007. We can kind of complete it like 2010 2011. So I was involved with all of that and that was all cutting edge and we were the first in the country and there's a lot
of things to be proud of there and we had a lot of very smart people think out of the box and so because of that legacy if we choose to move forward with the with the with the pure water we're ahead of the game. So we don't have to start from scratch. We can do things we can
add a couple of things to our process. The problem is it's has to do with the um the rules of the state. So we don't know what the rules of the state are to know what the process would be. So these are there's a bunch of unknowns and there's quite a few unknowns like we can
solve engineering problems with a few unknowns and have some factors safety in there. There's a lot of unknowns in there and so um so we're in a good situation if we choose to do that. But knowing what the rules are um is really
important to kind of make that policy decision. >> That made a lot of sense. Uh so ADQ moved the ball a little bit. I understand or maybe a lot of it. Is that what >> um mayor members of the council just um Yeah. And I I it's not it's not completely clear yet. It's not as nailed
down as um we are to kind of move forward and those are shifting a little bit. So um when we really have a and that was a really big discussion at the water conference last week. So, um there's a there's a lot of balls in the air, so we just got to wait till, you know, they catch one and keep it.
>> That makes sense. Okay. And this question is for city manager Kaitton. And just getting back to the $100 million uh I guess not specifically earmarked um CIP funding. That would be just to
confirm a policy decision by the council as to where that money would be allocated. Is that accurate? >> Absolutely. And and just to briefly expand on the thought process is once as my colleague is saying some of that uncertainty is settled and then we'll
return to council in that discussion over the next six to nine months and then that will prepare us a year from now. then we will have the decision whether we move forward with acquisition of new water or that project. So, this really prepares us for that. Thank you, Madam. >> Great. I appreciate both of your
responses. Uh, Councilman Graham, >> thank you. Thank you, Mayor. It's good conversation. I kind of wanted to um hold my questions till after, but I just want to say a few comments about the water issue, even though I wanted to I I
wanted to hear from the public kind of before we got into this. So, but every time we have a I I also understand that we're kind of going topically and people have questions they want to ask the um I'm excited we're doing the Bartlett
Dam. Can you say just a touch more about the Bartlett Dam and um well, first of all, I agree that the feasibility should definitely be in the operating budget. I mean, that doesn't to me it wouldn't make sense to put it anywhere else. And maybe just say just a little more about
the timeline of that. And um do you have any have you modeled like your forecasted any like you know percentage of our water portfolio that might that might supply or is that still is
that premature? And and I don't want this I want this is a budget conversation. This is not a policy conversation. So, I don't want to go too far into policy, especially knowing that we're we have a water policy discussion coming up. So, thank you. >> Okay, Mayor um Councilman Graham and
members of council, I um I don't have any of that detail. Okay. I haven't done a deep dive. I understand um the the capital number that was in there and that took it out that it was really just a you know number we kind of grabbed and and popped in to you know kind of
encapsulate it. So I don't have it but I'm happy to find out. I have not had any of those meetings yet but um I will and I'm happy to return some information to you. >> No that's fine. Maybe you could um remember that for when we do have our work study. >> Absolutely. >> We could then we could that'd be a good
opportunity to talk about that. Um, I read Greg Kaitton's city manager Kaitton's strategic water plan correspondence and I I I thought it was clear. I mean, we passed the strategic water plan in 24. And, you know, like you said, it's got multiple
prongs, five prongs. It's not just one, and it's not just one, you know, pass or fail acid test. Are we doing toilet to tap or are we not doing toilet to tap this year? So, I I thought it was a good memo and a good communication. I wanted
to I wanted to share my opinion on that. And um I think uh I just maybe if we can try to refrain from the the the strategic plan or water study debate here and just focus on
um focus on this as a budget discussion. the I mean the $und00 million that's a placeholder. We have flexibility with that. We're our people are exploring ways to strengthen augment our portfolio. There is I mean like you said there's
there's it's going to be kind of a multiple multipleprong approach and it's it's probably a reasonable placeholder amount. It's not this year. We have a five-year capital budget. It's in the it's within the five years. Not
only is it within it, it's next year. And it gives us um flexibility to be able to adjust to opportunities that may arise. And you know the the reality is that there may be opportunities that
come up as far as as far as acquisitions. We've tried some of that. Um purchasing water rights partnerships, you know, re how you going to re you the
the ideas that are going to come up on this we don't even we can't even predict in my opinion there are going to be opportunities and it's good to have a placeholder for that but also this our staff and this council can be flexible and when time comes we can adjust we can make
adjustments and I mean it just doesn't says nothing about plus it it also just sets the tone like we're not like we're doing nothing or we're falling behind I think that's what this conversation kind of does. We don't We're not talking anything about how much water we've been banking. We
get way more water from the cap than we use and we bank it. We're not even talking about the home inspections and efficiency audits and water smart technology and advanced metering that we're doing. We're not talking about the rebates for permanent savings, turf,
turf removal, water sense fixtures, smart controllers, spa and pool removal. We're not talking about our reclaimed wa uh water leadership and what we already already doing with the advanced water treatment facility at our water campus. Um, so
we're not talking about any of that. And it sounds it might give the impression that we're falling behind and the toilet totap concept. I mean, ADAQ ADQ is developing uh standards and those are changing and those are actually becoming
more stringent and nobody else does that in SC in Arizona. Nobody else does that. Not a single municipality pumps uh that into their drinking supply. Nobody. Is that correct?
>> Um, mayor, um, Councilman Graham and, um, members of council. So, there are plants that are being are under construction. City of Phoenix has a Cave Creek one. Um, we went to lots of presentations about it. So, um,
>> we are doing purified water. So, and I mean that is probably I mean to understand that that's a really big question. And >> but I'm saying right now nobody's pumping it in right now. So Phoenix is hoping for 28 2029. Um I know Tucson is building one and
they're looking at 2031 and it's like hey you know why don't we thoughtfully observe them and we can learn from them. >> Sure. >> But we're I it's just nobody does it right now. I know >> it's blending >> blending purified water straight into
the drinking system in Arizona right now. California does have that occurring and has had that occurring for a while. So, Orange County, so there are other places. So, yeah. >> Um, so I kind of sort of broke my rule a little bit and wanted to save my questions till
later, but I am going to turn it back over to the mayor. So, thank you. >> Thank you very much. And, um, in keeping with your comments to keep it to the budget discussion, that was your point. And so I think we wandered a little, but meanwhile um I want to hear from C uh
Councilwoman Littlefield. >> This isn't directly uh regarding the the current budget, but I just had a thought in my head and I was wondering if you had any information regarding it. Uh is there any thought or or a discussion
about working with Mexico who is also on the river water and below us um to do a some sort of a joint desalinization plant? >> Um Mayor um Councilman
Littlefield and members of council um we are not directly doing that to my knowledge. Scottsdale is there has been some talk there has has been some discussion about doing that as a as a larger effort but um to my knowledge Scottsdale is not directly involved with that at this time. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. And Councilwoman Whiteheads us out. >> Thank you mayor. And I am going to stick to the budget but I do want to answer uh Councilwoman Littlefield's question sort of in a budgetary way. So Del is available from California at $7,000 an
acref foot. Uh right now the city of Scottsdale is paying $300 an acre foot or so from the cap. So water's available, it's just how much do you want to pay? Um and that's why we had the strategic plan was to get the most certain water at the cheapest price. Um,
so when I my concern about this budget is that if we put no numbers in recognizing we are going to have needs for water next year even, you know, and
and we know that the costs are coming. What we're doing is modeling ourselves after Gilbert and that didn't work out so well. So my point is we don't ever have certainty. I'm an engineer. I worked on capital projects in the government as well. So we're uh you know
we're aligned there but we always put a placeholder in so that our rate payers don't get spiked um down the road. So we know the we know the dollars are coming or we know the costs are coming and we
we do a disciplined rate increase based on modeling to make sure that we don't have spikes. And nobody ever minds if we have to uh uh you know bring down those or stabilize the rates, but I just want to that is what I'm looking for in this
budget. I don't think I'm going to get it, but we know the costs are coming. We need to anticipate the costs and do that conservatively so that our rates reflect those future needs. And I just want to say out of the budget, out of the strategic plan, there are besides
conservation, there are four major sources. and two of them are recycled water. So, we're always looking for that forever water, not that one time groundwater. Thank you. >> Thank you. And I think we just to close us out on this um I thought I thought we
just identified two placeholders in the budget in this proposed budget upcoming budget. So, I think we're good with respect to, you know, forward thinking. So, thank you very much. Appreciate your time. >> Sure. Thank you. >> All right. Moving right along, we have
Westworld and Will Loft will tell us what's new and exciting at Westworld. >> Thank you, your mayor, members of council. I'm Will Loftall, general manager of Westworld. I'm here to outline the proposed uh budget for
Westworld for 2026 2027. In 2025 2026, we adopted a budget of 8.1 million. And in 2026 27, we're proposing a budget of 8.7 million. The amounts do not include indirect costs or a significant portion of utilities that are budgeted within
facilities. This is this is why the total budget does not line up with the quarterly Westworld statement of operations. We have an increase of five FTE positions. We have we've added an an event director up for the last number of years. We've had one event director with
with the number of events that we have. Last year we only had eight days where we didn't have an event. So we're we're doubling up on on our event directors so uh we can better service our clients. We're also adding eight part-time maint proposing the adding of eight part-time maintenance workers.
We're as we're going to have a reduction in contractual services which is a decrease of for costs of property liability and workers workman's compensation uh insurance as well as organic waste removal. And we're requesting additional funding for equipment needs. We we're asking for a
reach lift for our maintenance department and also for uh for a disc pull for our uh our uh for the grooming grooming of our equestrian arenas. And we're asking for a software package to help uh with event management.
We're looking forward to uh four drainage projects coming up in the next while. The first one we'll initiate here in July, which will take a a drainage pipe across uh 94 Street over to 96, which will drain which will help dramatically the draining of of uh of of
rainwater that we get during uh during uh the rainy times of the year. Uh we're also looking at uh an upcoming project along West Drive for uh widing widening that channel. And then the in the core campus, we're looking at projects coming
up next year and the year thereafter. As far as capital projects, uh we're looking to do a design study for $150,000 for a Westworld compre comprehensive wayfinding and signage system. This is a big weakness at Westworld. We don't really have very
good signage for a facility that is nearly 400 acres. So, if approved, this will be a a big benefit to us. And again, that's for the design of that project. And we're also asking for a design for a cover of Westworld Arena Number Seven. Um uh a num number of our
shows um u are highly desirous of having arena number seven and the uh the Raven Horse Show in February. Um they they require that. So having that added to our uh our our portfolio would be a great advantage
to us. Be happy to answer any questions that you might have. >> Uh great job. I'm excited to see that drainage repair or improvement, I should say, get get going. Where is Arena number seven?
I should know those, but which one is it? >> It's on the uh it's on the south side of the the facility. Um, >> is it covered currently? >> It's not covered. No, >> you're going to cover it. >> Are you going to cover it? Is that what you said?
>> Okay. >> We're asking for Right now, we're asking for for monies with which for a for a for a study for the uh for the design. >> Oh, gotcha. So, it's not approved yet.
you're >> not approved yet. Just the design is what we're asking for. We we >> hopefully the following year we we could maybe do the do the cover >> or maybe >> I think if we're going to be asked to to contribute or to approve funds for the
design, we should be looking at approving the project too. That would seem to make sense. Just my my two cents there. It'll take this year to do the design and then then we'd we we'd be looking for uh for doing the cover the following year, >> right? I understand that. But we
wouldn't want to approve the design cost if we're not approving the project. Are you following me? >> I mean, this isn't a feasibility study because you already have the evidence that it's 100% needed out there or thereabout. So, typically, don't we
approve the design once the project is approved? Madame Mayor, we're taking this I appreciate the question. We're taking this in two phases to do the design and then we would plan in the just the subsequent year to we would plan to add
the construction or the after we have established the design the cost through the design. >> Okay. As you wish. There we go. Uh I don't see any other speakers on this one. Thank you all. >> Thank you. Uh Allison Timku, city engineer and
transportation and infrastructure senior director. You are going to talk to us about transportation and infrastructure. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, mayor, members of council.
Next slide, please. Okay. So, um this is our pavement overlay pro um program and um I know that city manager Greg Kaitton had uh done a brief overview of this in his slides, but basically we're looking to
fund this at 45.9 million this year. We did do um a big increase from previous years where we had previously last year we increased it to approximately 40 million and years before that was kind of routinely funded at about 15 million. So this is, you know, a big investment
in our paving program. Um, next slide, please. So this project is a bond project. It's build a bridge on Thompson Peak Parkway over Riata Wash to improve safety. Um, it's uh basically we have the eastbound bridge out there. Um, it
was built by DC Ranch back in I think it was 2000 and I think I have the year. you probably know 2004 I think oh 2000 and uh with the agreement that the city would build the westbound portion and that was approved
through the bond 2019 and we're currently in design of that and the scope is basically to construct design and construct the bridge and realign the roadway. Um next slide please. Okay so those are the two projects that I was going to discuss. I also wanted to just
quickly highlight um the Shea and 66th Street um pedestrian crossing. I know that there was some questions from council on that. Um so basically that project is a new project and it's to build a uh pedestrian hybrid beacon or
otherwise known as a hawk at 66th Street in Sheay. And that area um of Sheay has a lot of high volume, high speeds. It's a very wide crossing. Um those are areas where we would typically look at um
facilitating the crossing with a hawk. Um and there was a study done back in 2024 that had looked at the number of pedestrian crossings. the number of pedestrian crossings was just um a little bit lower than the threshold of
when we normally do a hawk. But that doesn't preclude us from doing it because basically it's a safety issue and we really wouldn't want people crossing midblock without the light, without the beacon. And that's what we found is happening. So we've done some
modification at 64 Street to the traffic signal and the timing to actually assist with getting people across the street. um and that was not effective. People were still crossing midb block. Um it is a thousand feet away. So um again that's why this project is in the budget and
it's at just under $600,000. So and with that I can have any questions or if you want to continue on to the next presenter. >> Councilwoman uh we do have a question. Councilwoman Mallen. >> Thank you mayor. Um thank you for your presentation. Allison, um you said the
walk uh the hawk at 6 uh 4th 66th Street, that's a new project, >> correct? >> Okay. Or was that put above other projects that have already been aligned? Is it is it pushing other projects back that had been done prior had been waiting?
>> Um we had looked at all of our projects and prioritize them amongst each other. With the new CIP review team, we look at all the projects from all the departments and we look at the priorities. So again, my question is, is this being moved up and other ones being moved back? >> No.
>> Okay. >> I don't see any. Oh, yes, I do. Council Councilman Graham, >> that's kind of how capital budgeting works. I mean, you just you have projects that
the projects that changing in priorities and you every year you reassess. I mean, that would that wouldn't make sense for us to to be stuck to a two years ago budget approved
by a prior, you know, completely different city council under using totally different circumstances for us to somehow use that as a measuring stick against ourselves, right? Is that right? >> Um, that's correct, mayor, Councilman um Graham, and we did precisely that this
year. We looked at all the projects from all the departments and had to re-evaluate which projects maybe were no longer a priority. When you're looking at new projects, you have to compare them to the existing projects as well to see where the priorities lie.
the um I mean I I've always kind of thought that our CIP the projects in our CIP there were too many zombie projects and not to use kind of a colloquialism but um I think that
it seems to me like staff has really tried to kill some of those zombies this year. Can you maybe can you name a I made one person laugh. Um, can you name uh maybe a couple examples? >> Um, okay, Mayor, Council Member Graham.
Yeah, at one of the council meetings, I did present to you two projects that were removed. One was the um the Fifth Avenue and Goldwater Park. Um, again, we had removed that from the budget because there's a lot of private development construction in the area and a lot of impact on the local businesses. So,
we've moved that out of the five-year plan and it can come back at a future date if it it becomes a priority again. And then the other one was um the Puma Park pickle ball courts that I mentioned. Um again, we would plan to do those in the future when we actually are able to do the improvements to Puma
Park, but that is uh relying on a large drainage flood control project that uh we have funding for, but we have not yet secured the the total amount that we need from uh Maricopa County Flood Control District to do that project. So again, another project that we took out
um and will hold for future placeholder if becomes appropriate. >> Later on tonight, I'm going to give a sermon about how happy I am about the $45 million for road pavements. So I'll be delivering that sermon later. Thank you. Thank you very much, Allison.
>> Thank you, Mayor. >> Thank you, Councilwoman Whitehead. >> I just want to make a correction on uh the phrase zombie projects. Um maybe perhaps uh before the next budget session we can have a list of projects that might be uh pulled out because
they're just excess money uh for projects that are already done. That's what I would consider zombie projects. The two that um you mentioned um are important projects. So uh there was land our last canal parcel owned by the city
slated for development and and the city was ready to sell it. I'm very proud to say I stopped the sale and that will be a new park. And so I'm sorry that that got defunded because the development around there does want the park, but hopefully we'll get uh funding back in and get that new park, the Rose Garden
Park in. So that's certainly not a zombie park. The other one came by citizen petition. It's nice that residents can come to us and then their the budget changes because of their requests and the citizens um down near the Puma Park wanted uh pickle ball
courts and we absolutely complied as we always do to be efficient with your dollars. We combined the pickle ball court construction with um a drainage project. The drainage project has gotten delayed. So the pickle ball courts are
getting delayed. So also not exactly your zombie project. I think residents would be very upset to hear that it is it those projects are moving forward. They're just not moving forward right now. My preference would be to keep them in the budget. We think it will be within the five years. Um so rather than
create an illusion of cost savings, we should just keep those projects in. But you know we we balance a lot of needs. So both of those projects are very exciting and I happen to have been involved with both. Thank you. Thank you, Allison. Appreciate your time
and presentation. Uh, lastly, we have Hassan Mashtag. Hopefully, I'm saying that correctly, drainage and flood control manager, and you will talk to us about flood control and drainage CIP
projects. >> Good evening, Madame Mayor and members of the council. I am Hassan Mushtak. I will be highlighting couple of the drainage and flood control projects from the requested budget for FY26 and 27.
This project is titled Granite Reef Wash Phase 2A. Total budget for this project is $13.9 million. It's a storm drain project from Thomas Road down to McKelps Road and along Mccalip Road from M uh Pima Road to 84
Street alignment. We have a intergovernmental agreement with Flood Control District of Maricopa County through which they will pay us $7.5 million. We have a separate contract with the Salt River Puma Maricopa Indian
Community to pay us another $4.2 million. That leaves us the city liable for only $2.4 million. Next project, this is a small project. 68 street storm
range south of Camelback Road from it's a storm drain from Camelback Road south to Arizona Canal. Budget for this is $3.2 million. Once again, we have a an IGA with flood control district where they will pay us
about $1.3 million, leaving us liable for $1.9 million. So, those were the two slides I had and I think I will hand it over to Scott, department director, budget director Scott Selene for wrapping it up. Thank you.
>> And I didn't see any questions on those, so thank you very much. Welcome back, Scott. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Um, just to highlight very briefly, uh, the timeline that we're on, we looked at this earlier tonight, is has been the proposed budget presentation and work study with the
BRC. We'll be back on May 19th for the tenative budget adoption. And that brings us to the end. Um, happy to entertain any questions or no, >> and I think we're going to wait on uh questions until we hear from the public. So, stay tuned.
Uh this is the time for comment on the proposed fiscal year budget and I'd like to call up in order of signing up Ariela Freriedman followed by Daniel Freriedman
followed by Paris Blumenthal. >> Oh that's okay. Well we can we can go with Daniel Freriedman first. There we go. >> Uh, right there. Excuse me. There. There you go. >> Do I need to do anything >> there? There you go.
>> Hi, my name is Daniel Freriedman. I'm not related to Ariela Freriedman, but I do know her, and I think we're all related somehow. Um, I'm here to talk about the Hawk crosswalk, as I understand that. Um, I
live at 64th and Gary, 6431 East Gary Road in Scottsdale. I'm currently a single dad of three kids, 13. Just had his bar mitzvah two weekends ago. He did very well. Uh, a
13-year-old, a 11, 12y old, and a 10-year-old. I have my kids every other weekend and we traverse 66 and Shay twice a day on Saturday. I'm an active community member at my synagogue. I go
every day. As I said, I have the kids on the weekends and we go across the street. Yeah, we could probably go to 64th and Shay at the light, but my kids like to ride their bikes and so I don't really want them riding their bikes on Shay,
even on the sidewalk. So a crosswalk at 66 and Shay would be uh tremendous. In fact, when services are over on Saturday, we usually bring home 10 12 kids aging ages 9 to 13. Uh, hurting
three kids across the street is a task enough, but hurting 12 to 12, 10 to 12 kids uh, every other Saturday across the street is extremely difficult. So, a crosswalk at that location would be
literally a lifesaver and a tremendous asset to me personally as a single father. And I know that uh there are many other community members, neighborhood members that I know that uh would find this also very very useful. Thank you for your time, mayor, council
members, and city. >> Thank you, Daniel. And Ariela Freriedman uh is next. Thank you. Followed by Paris Blumenthal, Benjamin Benson, and then Mark Grunts. >> Okay. Hi. Good evening, mayor, council
members. My apologies for having to step out earlier. Um, I'm Dr. Ariela Freiedman, a Scottsdale resident for the past 10 years. I'm a surgeon, double board certified in adult and pediatric urology who treats vehicular trauma patients. I'm an assistant professor with dozens of peer-reviewed chapters
and papers, including on surgical trauma. I've served on the medical executive committees at Banner Thunderbird Hospital and surgery centers. But today I also speak to you as a mom of four young children regarding the proposed pedestrian pedestrian crosswalk at 66th Street and
Shay. One day while walking home from synagogue, my elderly father who can't walk the extra half mile to the corner crosswalk attempted to cross Sha Boulevard mid street. Thinking it was safe to cross, my four-year-old daughter followed him and ran into the street. Both misjudged the speed of the oncoming
cars or perhaps hadn't thought to check. Traffic had to come to a halt on both sides of Sheay as cars reached within a few feet of them until they made it to safety. My entire family and others were screaming from the sidewalk, helpless to prevent the unfolding horror. I wish
this was an isolated occurrence, but scenes like this happen every week at this location. Children cross independently, stuck in the middle of Sheay, and traffic comes to a complete halt to allow pedestrians through in the middle of the street. Foot traffic has only increased during this time and this
is becoming a more frequent catastrophe waiting to happen. Congregation Batsilas serves over 800 local Jewish families, many of whom walk to and from synagogue weekly and on holidays because driving is prohibited. But this area is also home to Chapperel Christian Church,
preschool, and K through8 school, a CrossFit gym, and Kokopa Middle School, which has over 850 students in sixth through 8th grade. This is an area serviced by hundreds of families. For anyone walking to or from any of these institutions from east of 64th Street, the existing light at 64th and Sha is
inadequate and too far. There have been multiple attempts to make the light at 64th and Shay Sabbath compliant. And each time they haven't worked. The only solution that the city of Scottsdale has been able to offer was to have the synagogue encourage its members to use that non-Sabbath compliant light or walk
to the next nearest light at 70th Street. That hasn't worked. Human nature is what it is and our members and their children are just not walking an additional mile in 115 plus degree heat in the summer. It has not been an effective solution. It is standard and
routine for all major synagogues with walking families in the Phoenix metro area to have these crosswalks. In fact, Congregation Bethila is both the largest and fastest growing such synagogue in the area. The cost of the crosswalk was greatly exaggerated previously by a previous speaker, as was the burden on
regular traffic, as this crosswalk would only be activated by the presence of a pedestrian looking to cross. There has already been a vehicular related death at that exact location in recent years. I don't know how many more people need to die before this crosswalk is built. I humbly request that all opposition to
this much much neededed crosswalk cease and we can all get on board to protect our most vulnerable citizens, our families, our elderly parents and our young children. Thank you. Thank you. All right, Paris Blumenthal
Good evening, Madame Mayor, council people, fellow residents, and the police protecting us. My name is, my full name is Paris David Blumenthal. Became a resident of Scottsdale in 2015 and a half. started a
company eight and a half years ago, moving company, which I'll be representing the city of Scottsdale and the state of Arizona for the Better Business Bureau for being one of the torch award finalists for the western region. That'll be coming up in July.
I um my kids went through Cocoapa Chapperel High School. Now they're in university and one's in the military. The crosswalk what we were just mentioning before is one of the reasons why I'm here. You had mentioned that
tourism is very important for the Scottsdale. Both the rabbi and I believe the clergy or the priests of the church across the street have been uh fantastic. They've been bringing in a lot of people from all over the world as well as residents and people from out of
state. A lot of people don't know their way around there, but that's a very busy Shea Boulevard, as you know. It's pretty busy. And 64th and 56th, Cactus and 56, Cactus and 64th, Sheay and 64th and
Sheay and 56 are one of the highest accidentprone locations. Only two blocks from there is um the 66 we were talking about. So with kids crossing the street, it's it's
better to prevent than heal the cost of ambulances and everything else, god forbid, and hurting all the children and the young people from Sundays and Saturdays and the tourists coming in and on the weekdays. It's very important that we do have a crosswack placed there and we'd appreciate that all of you have
common sense and would rather prevent than heal. We would like and that's why we voted you all in and we want to thank you. I met two of the cons the council people last night. They're fantastic. It was a really good uh interesting conversation we had. So, I want to thank you all and uh for coming today, people
listening to this. And let's see if we can get that uh crosswalk and you can ask answer yourself one question tonight. Why did the chicken cross the road? Because you wanted to try out that new crosswalk on 66th and Shay. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Next we have Benjamin Benson. Mark Wren will follow and then uh Susan Wood has donated her time to Dan Isac. So after that would be Jason Alexander. Go right ahead Mr. Benson.
>> Hi. Good evening uh mayor and council members. Thank you for uh running our city. Um my name is uh Dr. Benjamin Benson. I'm one of the members at CBT. Uh I'm coming to you to humbly request uh the crosswalk at 66th Street. Uh
something that has already been mentioned is a lot of us are younger our families with young children. And as our families grow, you know, it's it's very difficult for a pregnant mom in her sixth, seventh or eighth month of pregnancy to cross that street very
quickly when there's like a small lull in traffic. So, if it would be possible to get a light at that location, it would be tremendously beneficial to the young families that are living in Scottsdale. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you, Mark Rence.
Thank you, mayor, council members, and uh city staff. Uh I'm here speaking on my own behalf. As I mentioned last week when I introduced a citizens petition on water, which is what I'mma focus on in
my short period of time. Uh I before I retired, I was the Association of California Water Agency's uh director of regularatory affairs. Aqua's public water agency members were responsible
for approximately 90% of the water consumed in the state of California. So I had quite a bit of exposure to a quite diverse number of water agencies. What I found was that the most successful p public water agencies were those that
had a diverse water portfolio and those that invested in innovative technologies to efficiently use, reuse, and conserve their water supply. The reason I bring those two points
forward tonight is uh it's my understanding that the city of Scottsdale's water portfolio is anything but diverse. Over 70% of the water supply comes from the Colorado River. And as uh we all know, the
Colorado River is the subject of much discussion at the Bureau of Reclamation with regards to uh cutbacks on the downstream water diversion and that includes Scottsdale.
But on the second point, Scottsdale is noted noted for its innovative water management tools. It has developed green building codes, incentives for water for
voluntary water conservation, advanced purified water recycling that is the envy of cities across the United States and quite honestly throughout the world and expanding water storage at Bartlett.
Now is not the time to back off from those uh projects, especially given the crisis we've faced. The worst time to be b buying water out on the water market is when you're in the midst of a water crisis. Trust me, the prices that you
think are absorb exorbitant today, you might consider quite reasonable tomorrow as the market plays out. So I encourage the council to ask ask your staff who ma who made an
excellent presentation tonight. What is our contingency plan for reduced Colorado River water? What constitutes transfers out which is
calling for a 30% reduction from fiscal year 25 26 to fiscal year 20s 20 26 27 and I will leave with this last point since I'm out of time a five a 9.5%
reduction in water supply and reclamation seems shortsighted to in a time of water crisis. Thank you very much, Mayor. >> Thank you, Mark. Uh, next we have Jason Alexander, followed by Boaz Curtis, then Linda
Milhaven. Uh, thank you, Mayor Barowski. My objection to the Hawk Project at 66th Street uh has absolutely nothing to do with the goals of it. Of course, it is important to respect the Jewish community, to respect their faith and
the uh tradition of walking on the Sabbath, safety, of course, for pedestrian safety and multimodal transportation. I've been in favor of that on many past projects. My objection to this project is the appearance of it being a pet project intended to be put
forward by council memberwasman without a proper justification. This was studied uh in uh 2024. There was an email sent around to the entire council by the former transportation director.
Uh could I have the overhead please? I know it's a little hard to see from this. um if they could zoom in a little bit. But a couple of quotes from the email from uh transportation director Melenko is that the uh crosswalk the location was not conducive to pedestrian
access that is not located near a major intersection. Staff did observations and do not see enough pedestrian crossings. It went on to say that uh they didn't meet the established volume and the synagogue is primarily used on Saturdays when this would be a very expensive
proposition for not a lot of people using it. Again, my objection is to the appearance that this was a pet project. Why wasn't it studied again? This study was done only two years ago. And if the project is justified, by all means, let's do it.
But let's study it again. You know, interestingly, this council has a bad habit of not wanting to study transportation issues. They did not want to study the parking garage despite the fact that Mr. Graham just recently talked about the importance of rep prioritizing
constantly. Seven years went by from the time the citizens voted for that and it wasn't rep prioritized. I'd further like to criticize Mr. Quasman's handling of this issue and the way that he framed opposition to it is anti-semitic. I was raised Jewish in New
York and New Jersey. I've seen plenty of experiences of anti-semitism. And about the only thing worse than anti-semitism is false flags of anti-semitism like Mr. Quasman who regularly claims anti-semitism when things don't go his way. I can
think of four possibly five instances of Adam doing this. this crosswalk here. >> Point of order. >> Madame Mayor, is this conversation have to do with the budget? Can you enforce that, Mayor? Madame Mayor, >> uh ye yes, I certainly can. And uh your
answer is uh Mr. Alexander is talking about a crosswalk that was part of the um budget uh presentation. So, continue on. And your focus obviously is the crosswalk.
>> Thank you. Yes, the crosswalk again, objection to it. Mr. Clausman framed as simple anti-semitism, ran to the news media to complain that objections to this project were based on anti-semitic issues rather than a lack of study. And this is not the first time Mr. Quasman
has done this. When he was in law school, he famously blasted a Jewish law professor on national news. >> All right, point of order. Point of order. Point of order. >> Uh, let me let me just interrupt you. Uh Jason, if you could keep your focus on
the budget discussion with the crosswalk, it would make this go a lot smoother. Thank you. >> Okay. Well, I would just like to point out Mr. Quasman's hypocrisy, his oversensitivity, his refusal to let things be talked about based on their merits. And if
anyone can have the overhead again, is going to be overly sensitive to words and tones. Let's remember that Adam posted this about DEI a year and a half ago. Poison that will be rooted out. Your time is up, so thank you.
>> All right. >> Yeah. >> Boaz Curtis, Linda, Mil Haven, followed by Gila or Gila Leki. Gila. Okay. Thank you. Boaz Curtis.
Okay. Linda Milhaven, you're up. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mayor and Council. My name is Linda Milhaven. live here in Scottsdale on Belgian Trail and I'm here to speak to you today about water investments. We've heard a lot about from this conversation already. I've worked with
two other Scottsdale residents to meet with you to discuss water policy and subsequently we sent you an email outlining our concerns and I'd like to read an excerpt from our email for the record. Um, this email was from me and from Bruce Halen, who is or the retired recently retired Salt River Project
director of water supplies and Rudy Fisher, current board member of the Central Arizona Project. And the re email reads in part, as Scottsdale residents, our concerns rise out of the proposed budget reductions to the water related capital improvement plan projects. the rates and fees
proposed as well as the impacts these changes will have on Scottsdale's preparedness in ensuring a resilient, affordable, and reliable water supply for Scottsdale's residents and businesses. The sustainable water supply is foundational to Scottsdale's health and stability. As we have learned from
past water resource investment, As we have learned from past water resource investments, costs incurred today for water projects are much less expensive than costs delayed into the future. Scott Stillwater's strategic plan does an excellent job outlining options to replace the impending reduction in our
cap water allocations. The solution must be to pursue all the options outlined in the plan without delay. There's been talk about buying water credits potentially in lie of pursuing other options, but this is just one of several options identified in the
strategic plan that need to be pursued to give Scottsdale more control over our water supplies and water security. Net net $261 million has been removed from the five-year CIP for water projects. Two of the largest projects taken out are advanced purified water for 68
million and the Bartlett Dam for2 million. Some of you have gone on record expressing concerns about expanding the use of recycled water. All water is recycled. Many upstream communities dump their waste water into the Colorado River. We treat that water and mix it in
our drinking water today. Continuing our investment in our recycle facilities to meet the state's new requirements is one of the most reliable, cost-effective, and immediate solutions to impending reductions in our Colorado River water. We are losing time by delaying this project. Participating in the Bartlett
Dam modification gives us rights to water in the Verdie River, a new source of water that is independent of what happens in the Colorado and over the long term an inexpensive renewable water supply for the city. It should be a specific line item and not buried in the operating budget. Mr. Kaitton has
explained that he only included projects in the CIP for which he had reliable cost estimates, what he calls hard costs. We must ensure that all water projects are included in the CIP, even only if as a placeholder with best guessed estimates to ensure that we are planning appropriately. The budget in
future years includes the vague category of sources and supplies. We're pleased to see sources and supply. However, we need to be clear what this what is made up into that category and make sure and and make move that forward. This is delaying the budget. It is a planning
document and it pushes the projects in the future which causes delay. It's a critical junction for our city. We must display leadership, move forward with the capital and with this water strategic plan, put the projects back into the initiative and just to take to
call recycled water toilet to tap is irresponsible. that suggests it undermines the project which is for all of our safety when we are still exploring budgets reflect policy. They cannot be separated. And finally, by pushing these projects out, we are falling behind in keeping our
communities safe. Thank you. >> Thank you, Linda. Uh Gila Lei, followed by Dan Isaac and then David Smith. >> Hi everybody. Madame Mayor, council members, thank you so much for giving me
this opportunity to probably reiterate what you've already heard before. Um, I am a member of Congregation Betila, which is the synagogue that has been discussed already. And Dr. Freeman, I think, elucidated a very compelling
argument, uh, very scary argument about why this is such a critically important initiative. We are members of this congregation. We have been for about 10 years. On a regular basis during the week, my husband is there four times a week. I'm
there once a week. There are programs. There are, you know, morning, day, afternoon, and evening. There are people circulating in that area and there are people trying to cross the street. My husband and I have personally witnessed
holding our breath when we walk out of the synagogue and we're walking towards an area that we where we exit. We have seen people trying to cross and we stand and we look and we pray and we we look
at the six lanes. We're talking about a six lane thoroughare right across the street. That's what it is. It's six lanes. And I would encourage anybody and everybody who questions this, go there
physically. If you have an opinion, have an opinion based on reality. Go there and try to cross and see what it feels like and think about whether or not you feel safe. So without belaboring this any further, I say this is absolutely
critical. If one child dies, one teenager, one parent, one grandparent, one elderly person, then we will all be culpable. Thank you for all your hard work. You guys have a tough job and you're doing
great. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, council members. Thank you to everybody that's helping to facilitate a safe and healthy Scottsdale. Thank you so much. Thank you, Dan Isaac. And Dan, I know
you have some donated time. Can we wrap it up in four minutes? >> I'll do my best. >> All right. Thank you. >> Dan Isaac, address on record. Um, there are people in society who look down at organized religion. I am not one of them. And yes, organized religion has
been responsible for some bad things in the past, but I personally believe that organized religion is a key element of the fabric of society. To be able to come together in worship as a community strengthens the bonds within society.
Whether that's through prayer, preaching, chanting, song, it brings us together. And there are those people who have chosen a life that at times is more difficult because they believe it aligns with their faith. The Orthodox Jewish
community is one of those communities. and they do so for the simple reason that they believe it's pleasing to God and aligned with the covenant that they made with God. It's something that should be admired and respected and I'm disgusted that anybody uses it against
them. Um that said, I'm opposed to this crosswalk for three reasons. One, it's unneeded. Two, it negatively impacts many other residents. And three, it costs city money. When I say it is
unneeded, the statistics prove that it doesn't meet the threshold that the city has set for such a crosswalk. That doesn't mean it can't be done, but it doesn't meet the threshold. Second, when this plot of land was picked by the founders, when it was planned, when it
was developed, when it was designed, at no point did they tell the city, "We really need a crosswalk there." Third, with regard to why it's unneeded, there is a crosswalk at 64th and there's one at 70th. Improve those.
We're talking about this crosswalk at 66th only benefiting those people who live between 65th and 68th north of Shea. That is not the majority of the congregation. That is a small part of the congregation. So, it is not needed.
It is wanted and it will make things safer, but that's not the only reason we make decisions on how to spend money. Secondly, it will negatively impact thousands of people who use SHA as well as Hayden and Scottsdale Road. Sheay is
one of the major, if not the busiest, East West arteries in Scottsdale. We are talking about adding an additional random event stoppage of that traffic has huge implications for the entire length of
Shay plus or minus a couple miles as well as the north south corridors that cross Shay. I believe in the first amendment that we should all be able to practice our religion but we don't get to negatively impact other people by doing so. I am a
practicing Catholic. I don't do it well, but I still practice and will till my dying day. I would not entertain Bishop Dolan asking restaurants in Scottsdale to not serve meat on Friday during Lent because it's distracting to me.
I would not entertain a notion a notion from the Imam of our mosque on Vinda that five times a day when there's called to pray and they're supposed to stop whatever they're doing to pray that we stop all traffic to make it easier for them. Our practice of religion stops
when it negatively impacts other people. This will negatively impact other people. And as far as the cost, I don't care whether it's 50,000, 100,000, or a half a million dollars. If one is a conservative, what is one does not spend money on a project that is unneeded and
negatively impacts other people. And I'm all for safety. None of these people were here when this council took a A-rated roundabout in safety and made it a D in safety. These people don't care about safety. and all of you who do care
about safety, I really wish you were here and called them out for making our road far more dangerous. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Dan. Uh David Smith, followed by Avon Cahill and Raul
Zubia, I almost called you. I don't like R. I almost called you by someone else's last name. Sorry. >> Thank you, mayor, members of council. Um, whether good or bad, I'm going to give you something besides crosswalks and
water to think about as you uh consider the proposed budget for capital improvements. Tonight, I want to alert you to five included projects that run contrary to the express direction of the Scottsdale voters and which are in fact disallowed
under the Scottsdale Center charter. I'm referring, of course, to the limitations on preserve investments that were imposed by Prop 420, which voters approved in 2018. In fact, two members of the council
currently campaigned for a passage of this pro proposition and celebrated its passage by a margin of 3 to one. But when the voters approved this, it superseded and negated all prior
authority for spending preserved tax dollars. And after the election, we in fact inserted language from Prop 420, memorialized it in our city charter at article 8, section 13.A.
And it's entitled limitations on the use of preserve funds. And it states without ambiguity that preserve funds shall not be appropriated or spent by the city for any purpose other than acquisition of preserve land,
the building of new trails, or debt service. The proposed capital improvement plan makes no mention of this voter imposed spending limit. In fact, it ignores the limitation altogether.
and lists on page F10 of your budget five different capital projects that are planned for the preserve next year totaling 2,347,400. Four of these projects are for improvements to existing trail
heads, not new trails. They are to update restrooms and improve the signage and provide shaded gathering and educational spaces, resurface parking lots, add equestrian stalls.
The fifth project is to fund a feasibility study and design a wildlife crossing at Rio Drive. I submit none of these projects fall within the definition of the 2018
legally allowable preserve fund expenditures. You must direct the city manager tonight to either remove these projects from the CIP budget or designate alternative funding for them. It's more than just a
matter of keeping the promise we made to citizens. You cannot knowingly approve a budget that proposes illegal expenditures of taxpayer receipts. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you, David. Uh, next, Raul Zubia
and then Avon Kale. >> Mayor, if I just Mr. Smith, can you email that list of projects to us? >> Mr. Smith, >> can you email that list to us? >> Stand back. I'm sorry.
What was the question? >> Can you email us that that list of projects? >> What's he saying to me? >> Council Councilman Graham has a request. >> Yes, >> David, to email the list that you just went over >> to us. Please.
>> Yeah, I have a hard time hearing up here, particularly in this goofy room. Um, >> that's okay. We'll we'll get you a note. It's fine. I I can certainly email the list of projects if that's what you want, but they're in your budget book and the CIP
book page whatever I said F10, but I will email them to you. Yes. >> Thank you, Raul Zubia. >> Good evening, everyone. Raul Zubia uh address on record and I am speaking to you tonight not just about line items in
a budget but about the fundamental promise of good governance. When we talk about infrastructure, we're often talking about invisible systems that make daily life possible. But today we're talking about something much more urgent. The literal resilience in our
community in a changing climate. I encourage you to keep the CIP funding for the Bartlett Dam expansion and the advanced purified water facility in the budget. If we pull these projects, we aren't actually saving taxpayers money.
We are simply ensuring that when they have to build, the cost and material the cost of materials and labor will significantly be higher. But more importantly, we would be sacrificing certainty. So people choose where to live based on whether a city is thinking 30 years
ahead or 30 days ahead. And by keeping these projects in the budget, you're sending a clear signal that Scottsdale is a safe bet. We are community that values innovation, respects the reality of our environment,
and refuses to leave the next generation with a bill they cannot pay for a crisis they did not create. So, please let's keep these projects moving forward. Thank you. >> Thank you, Raul. >> Last speaker on the list, Avon Cahill.
>> Thank you, Council Mayor. Um, my name is Ivan Cahill. Address is on record. I'm here to talk about the Hawk intersection project and crosswalk. And I just want to um make a statement on my behalf for
the Jewish community that um I watched in dismay the 12 news report by Bram Gresnik and indicating that this was something to do with discrimination and I just was so embarrassing that to hear
that because I have not met anybody that is against the project because of that reason. So, I just wanted to um talk a little bit about that. You definitely have my empathy on the situation. Uh the council has a track record of spending
my tax dollars without showing actual proof of the need. The unfortunate situation is the city approved this without the consideration that it was a synagogue and that they would need a crosswalk somewhere when it was
originally approved. So that was a failure on besa on I think on behalf of the planning committee. So people will ask why are we installing a hot crosswalk in the major arterial interrupting traffic flow when two studies conducted by the city showed the
volume does not meet the minimum requirement. My question is to the city and to um the council, has anybody else looked at something different and that is the need for safety?
Crosswalks on a busy arterial I think give a false feeling. How many red light runners are there in Scottsdale? Huge number. And everybody's speed on shade. I go down it every day. I try to
do the speed limit and people going past me. People are running red lights. People are turning left on reds. I mean, it's crazy. So, my worry is from a safety perspective, if you put a crosswalk in there, a hawk light, is it really going to give
um a false sense of being safe at that area? Has anybody looked at another solution? And that maybe being a bridge. I think it would be a lot better solution. I'm I'm sure it'll be a lot more expensive, but from a pure safety
point of view, I would really like to have the project um considered on something else other than the crosswalk that it is. I did try to the traffic department and they said they have done the best to prolong the signal light
there at the crosswalk to accommodate more traffic on those days. So hopefully you will consider more of maybe from the safety perspective rather than is it needed because there's not enough people using it. Thank you.
>> Thank you Avon. All right. So that concludes the uh public speakers on agenda item number three. So, we're going to go back to a discussion. And um before we start, I'm going to ask uh city attorney
uh S Santea to opine on the comments that Speaker David Smith uh raised. Thank you, Mayor and members of the council. Uh there is a subsection in section 13 of the charter that Mr. Smith
um um didn't mention. Um, and so it it's not quite as clear-cut as he he makes it sound. Um, the subsection at issue is subsection B, which says the section does not apply to funding improvements that existed prior to the effective date of this section or those authorized by
sections 12B1, 12B5, and 12B6. So, in order to determine whether um those particular items violate the charter, I I would need more information um regarding when the the improvements originally existed and whether they meet
one of the the other exceptions which include um uh expansion of trail head parking facilities. Um also they um such and also uh completing the construction of certain uh ones like little granite
uh phrase field pima dynamite trail heads and any necessary trail uh connections as depicted in each trail trail heads approval plan prior to the effective date of when the voters approved this. So it's a little bit more complicated. >> So is that something you need more
information from our staff about? Right. Yes, I can I can't appine off the top of my head without looking at it more closely. >> Okay. Well, will you please do that? I mean, certainly if if it's an issue we should be concerned about, we want to know.
>> We will take an in-depth look that at it tomorrow. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. And in order to make this smooth, I'm trying to figure out uh what the best way to approach going through these topics. I do have another uh question and it pertains to um uh Allison Tim Q and the
and the crosswalk. Um so so I'm going to ask my question and then we can go through these category by category. Um so we'll keep you up there and and see if anyone else has questions for you.
Thank you. Do you have a map of where this crosswalk is located? I know generally where it is, but I'm trying to picture the the bookend intersections that, as I understand it, have traffic lights. Is that right? Uh, mayor,
members of council, I don't actually have a map that shows the whole area, but um, 64th Street and Shea is the closest signalized intersection. That's about 1,000 ft to the west of this location.
So, it goes 64th Street and Shea. Um, then 65th Street, 66th Street, 68th Street, 70th Street, >> and 70th is where the Walgreens is, right? >> Yeah. And that's pretty far. The closest signalized intersection is 64th Street at a thousand feet.
>> And the synagogue is on the south side. >> Southside. Yep. And they are uh right there at between 65th Place and 66th Street. >> So there's two two concerns I have with
this. Um it's the process that you know this project didn't come across our radar until it was plugged in recently into uh you know the transportation and infrastructure budget capital
improvement project budget. So I I have a concern about that. It's the appearance of uh lack of transparency honestly um for this to kind of be sprung up. I don't doubt that there's a need there based on uh everything I've
learned since it was plugged in, but I do have major concerns about a hawk there. I mean, I can't tell you how many people I've heard that the hawk at between and Scottsdale quarter should be
removed because of the danger it poses to pedestrians. And I believe I know Sheay is even a more dangerous road than the area at which that hawk is located. So Oh,
there's the map. Okay, that's great. Can you can you just zoom in or zoom out, I guess, is would be the best way to say that and highlight it because I know exactly what you're talking about, but I just want to see. >> Okay. Okay. Can you see the pointer
there? I can. >> Okay. So, that's 64th Street and Shay. That's the um closest signalized intersection. This right here is 66th Street. These two are 66th Street and Shay. The proposal is right here. Um and the synagogue is located right here.
There's also a church located here. Um and then, uh as you might know, Chevron High School is just located a little bit further to the south in that area. So, the Hawk is is set to be in the middle of the two 66 streets. Not even
>> at 66th Street and um Shay. >> Yeah, but you just said it's kind of jag jagged the way 66 >> Well, 66th Street is jagged, but the hawk is planned to be here. >> Okay. So, has there been any comparison? I
mean, I the bridge is a great idea. I just I I don't see the first bridge in Scottsdale being located there. Um I think that could have value, but I just don't see that happening. Has there been any thought or consideration for a
traffic light that was adjusted to be reactive to pedestrian traffic at that location? That to me seems like it would be far safer. I think that's a really dangerous thing to put on Shea Boulevard. Granted, traffic flows are
not as heavy on Saturday and Sundays, but all the other days you talked about, you know, it's it's a freeway. So, the question was for you. >> Okay. So, um, what we did do back when this was initially studied was, um, we
did modify the timing of the pedestrian crossing at 64th Street and Shay to see that if that would improve usage of 64th Street and Sheay at the signalized intersection. However, um, that didn't
work. the the um pedestrians were still crossing midblock even with us trying to modify the existing traffic signal. Um we wouldn't put in another traffic signal at that location for pedestrians. The appropriate uh crossing there would
be the um pedestrian hybrid hybrid beacon which is the hawk. And the hawks do lend themselves well for roads with high speed, high volume, and the length of crossing, which is what is here at um
this location on CH. >> I couldn't disagree more with that. I mean, even the Optima Hawk that just separates the mall and Optima is dangerous. I mean, people just almost run people over there all the time. I've seen it personally having been office
there for a long time. So I don't I don't get the logic there. Um there is you could do a you know a a traffic signal. I'm just throwing out ideas and I'd love you know to talk about this further or get a response a written response from you but a traffic signal
that was just going one way uh i.e. north on 66th Street, I guess, the the further east 66th Street. Um, like it is at Eastwood, for example, and Scottsdale Road. That's just triggered by vehicular
traffic, but it could just as easily be triggered by pedestrian traffic. So, I I have major concerns about the two things I said. Um, with that I would like to and I see city manager wants to say a few words, but I would like to ask for
uh a written um description of when this project was proposed uh and when it was inserted in the in this um CIP project proposal and what other projects um were
eliminated or if none what what were postponed. That's not really the driving factor for me, but the safety factor is. And I'd also like an analysis of some sort of a um a traffic signal there and what the
cost of that would be. City manager, please. >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. I just wanted to briefly answer or touch on kind of how we got to this point. So this came in uh from community member concern also leadership from the synagogue and so this has been on my radar screen for
some period of time. We tried to adjust uh the pedestrian walkways at 64th and 70th uh 64th although closer is kind of the wrong direction for most that they really traveling uh by foot to the north and to the east. And so what so this is
not the first phase. This was probably a second or third phase. I would refer to it. So what we tried to do is make signal improvements. I'll just speak to the 70th because that's primarily the one that was heavily utilized. And so we had it so that it was automatically
triggered for pedestrian. And so we've been stopping traffic uh on Saturdays specifically at the times uh automatically whether it was triggered or not. So, interestingly enough, for the flow of traffic, this will actually increase uh the flow of traffic because
we will return at the 70th signal to the way it would normally react. And I I'll let uh my colleague speak more to the specifics of the device that's utilized. Um but I just wanted to speak to how we got to this point. Thank you, Madam Mayor.
>> Thank you. I mean, I'm satisfied with the answers so far. I would like the answers to my questions though and either you or city manager would could provide those. I'd really appreciate it. Thank you. Uh Councilwoman Whitehead, uh I was just going to touch uh touch on
the item having to do with the preserve and prop 420. Um so I I just want to point out that the author of Prop 420, I was very involved in that citizen initiative. uh
we verified ahead of time. So I understand uh Mr. Smith's concerns, but we verified that the projects approved prior were not impacted. And actually the other project the several projects he mentioned, I'm not even sure about, but specifically I'm talking about the
Rio Verie uh wildlife and in fact pedestrian overpass project. And so that was approved uh in 2004 in that preserve tax. So that's where that project comes from. I just wanted to point that out. And in fact, you know, attempts to
defund it um last year, I think, uh somebody generated, you know, 200 signatures from residents in a matter of weeks. So once again, listening to the people, listening to what they voted for in 2004, and the fact that it was reviewed by staff and by the author of Prop 420, I think we're pretty good
there. and the other projects. I'm not sure. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councilman Graham. >> Well, I guess I'm going to give my remarks to the budget now. Just uh go over it briefly. Kathy's been waiting for these remarks.
Uh quickly about the uh about the uh crosswalk, the um what what's the what what do we call these now? They used to be called hawks, but I was told that we don't I don't even know what the right term is
for these anymore. You can just do we still call them hawks? Uh, yes, mayor. Council member Graham. So, they are referred to as a pedestrian hybrid hybrid hybrid beacon. Pedestrian hybrid beacon. Um, which is the same thing as a hawk,
>> a ph or a phb. You got an acronym for that? You got Can you put a vow in there? >> Yes. >> Um, >> the PHB, the pedestrian hybrid beacon at Kierland is so successful.
You can't say enough about it. What that looked like before they built that, I mean, that was just a disaster. People were walking across to Quarter and Kierland. And I was on transportation commission at the time. And um
very happy with how that's turned out. And um I think that yeah uh city manager Kate made a comment that this will return 64th Street and 70th Street potentially to their original cycling the original time it uh uh interval. And
so that I think will expedite traffic and and increase flows. Um I do expect it would be used a lot on weekends. Um, I'm actually thinking about whether, you know, kids from Chapperel would use it. And, you know, if you think about it,
it's not far that far from Kokopa. Um, you know, as I look at a map and I I think it's going to get a lot of use personally. So,
those are some comments on the crossrock that I have. Um, overall the budget I think is um it's a good budget. The um we're going to keep looking at it. Tonight's been a good discussion about it. A lot of our community members had a lot of good
contributions to say about it. Um, you know, the CIP spending is down, which I typically don't like to see that because Greg, Greg, I always say that to Greg, don't I, to the city manager. Uh, because it's like you bring the money in and you want to you want to you want to
invest it. And when you're not investing in your capital assets, you're a lot of times you're deferring maintenance. And there's also because we are s such an asset intensive organization you there's always a minimum amount of investment that you want to make into your net
assets to keep them at a certain standard. Um but I will say that you know we even though the budget is down a little bit we were budgeting our capex our capital budget in the past not our capex um but our capital budget
um we were never spending that anyway. it was always just an approval that never fully happened. So, I think this gets us closer to reality. Um, this is, um, city manager Kaitton's first full budget, you know, when he
when he was, uh, uh, tagged with the city manager role. Um, he kind of, what was that, in March or something? I mean, it was kind of like March 2025. It was kind of like the budget had kind of already been developed by the time that he, you know, took the wheel. And um so
we've just seen from Mr. Kaitton so many reforms uh we've seen so many um I would say like outdated and overdue things uh within the organization that I've been very pleased with. I mean even stuff like moving code enforcement, you know,
to to public safety. Yeah, I there's things like that that just kind of made have made sense to what we've uh been seeing. Um I like the um public safety spending, how it protects our public safety. Somebody almost got there, but we didn't
quite talk about the gray tsunami that um some of our public safety leaders like to talk about. I'm still afraid of that one, but yeah, it I you know, it's going to be >> it just comes. >> Is it happening? When is it when is it happening? Blink twice. Uh, Fire Chief
Shannon, if I'm just No, I'm just kidding. Um, >> it's here. >> It's here. I know. The um but we're watching and monitoring the ambulance service. I think so far the roll out's been good. Um and station
618 annex. Um Scottsdale police were I mean what Chief Leuk said about this is this is the first year no vacancies. So I think that I mean that that to me
is one of the headlines. So I hope somebody writes an op-ed on that. Maybe they will. Um with crime falling, crime is falling, especially violent crime, clearance rate is up. The um
the last thing from a sort of a philosophical standpoint is is the road maintenance. And I'm not going to really give a sermon about that like I like I threatened earlier, unless Kathy, you want me to, but I won't. >> That's okay. >> She's like, "No, please don't." But I
mean, we were spending $15 million a year on our road maintenance, which, you know, it just I mean, just to say what it was, we were diverting money to basic road maintenance over the years. We had an 80 PCI, pavement condition index of 80.
In 2019, very good rating. And by the end of 2024, our pavement condition index was 63. It dropped like a lead balloon and um we were I mean we're just being
outmatched by other other peer cities. I mean I think Apache Junction or Queen Creek has surpassed us. So this year we put in this you know the fiscal year that's ending next month. We put in $40 million
budgeting $45 million this year. And I mean just people know this. People know that we're a tourism destination and you know we welcome over 11 million visitors a year and they know that that generates almost $4 billion of economic impact and
they know that they um form impressions about our city and a large part of the impressions they form about our city are the roads and when they're driving over potholes and roads riddled with cracks I mean it just doesn't leave a lasting impression that this is a you know truly
desirable destination for them to spend their tourism dollars. And it's also not only not only is it the impressions that it leaves on our on our visitors, but when you when you don't defer maintenance on roads,
um, every dollar we delay on preventative work, let's put it that way, uh, costs four to 10 times more later in full reconstruction given, you know, depending on how long you wait and, you know, which materials you choose. And we've seen that too many
times. So, you know, nobody's going to tell you though that part of the $45 million that is not also normal maintenance. That's catchup. That's in some cases that's full reconstruction to catch up for deferred maintenance that our residents suffered through.
Um, so some comments about roads. Um, I still think, um, I'll just sort of register this opinion and I'm going to probably have some meetings with staff. I think our revenue estimates are probably too conservative and too low.
Um, and I wanted to ask about this. Um, Scott, maybe you could tell us a little bit about this unexpected revenue loss reserve because I know what you're doing there, but I is that a new concept and is it possible to pull that up on the screen just so we can you kind of had
that you kind of had that I think you know the chart I'm talking about. I think it was the blue color that was, you know, introduced. >> Yes, Madame Mayor. Uh, and council member Graham, that was slide
uh 16 of the presentation from earlier. Um, that that was a determination that was made during last year's budgeting process. In the face of potential revenue losses, there's always um whether it be at the state level or some other level um potential
uh threats to our revenue streams. Um and the intent was to take a portion of our general fund reserves and create a reserve to um to ensure against any event like that happening to our revenues. >> I mean I
that was a recommendation from the budget review commission. >> Madame Mayor, Council Member Graham. Yes, that was >> okay. They're going to come up here in a second, so I'm going to have to talk to them about that. But it's it I understand what you're doing there. And oh, there it is on the screen. Okay. So,
it was the it's the green one that was introduced. Was that introduced? Has that ever have we ever used that mechanism before or or is or is this the first um fiscal is is this year's budget
the the year we're introducing it? >> Madame Mayor, council members can I can make me respond to that. that was developed last year when the legislature was looking at um uh eliminating the food tax and the food tax generates about 15 million for the city. So the
budget review commission uh suggested that we put a reserve for that in the budget and that would we could use that in the event that food tax was eliminated to continue operations while we realign operating expenses with revenues. So that was what that was for.
So, have you funded that reserve um yet or? >> Yes, it is funded. >> It's already funded. Okay. So, you've so you've already you've already transferred 15 million and then you're just going to you're just going to keep that there. You're going to cap it at that give or take. Is that your plan? >> Correct.
>> Okay. And um the same policies with kind of idle cash as far as what we do with interest applies with the reserves and contingencies applies to this too. What was the question on that? >> The same policies that we do with
interest earnings on the remaining corpus of the reserve and um contingencies will apply to this portion of it. >> They do earn interest. They are invested and the interest earnings are um mostly
transferred for capital projects. >> Okay. Well, I'm glad I'm glad that's funded before we start the the budget fiscal year because, you know, then it's not taking away from those projects and we just have it already nailed down. Those are some of my comments for the
time being. Uh maybe some of my colleagues might stimulate more questions or conversations, but I wanted to share those, put those on the record. Thank you. >> Uh next we have Vice Mayorwasman. And that's pretty tricky. I don't know how
he got on my screen. Who did that? Who did that? Oh, mystery solved. Okay, Vice Mayor Quasman, you're up. >> Thank you, Madame Mayor. Um, can you hear me? Can you guys hear me? Okay, just want to make sure. >> Perfectly.
>> Excellent. Thank you so much. Um, this budget represents exactly what the voters wanted to see out of the uh 2024 elections, which is a fiscally conservative budget. And I ask anybody
who um who wants to take an objective look at this budget uh juxtapose it with what's happening uh to our neighbors to the south right now where Tempee is asking their voters to raise their taxes. Um there is a the difference
could not be stark uh more stark. Uh we believe in limiting government so that you can flourish in the private sector. We believe in um we believe in making sure our infrastructure is fully funded
with reserve so that we don't have any surprises later on. Um, we put in uh the the very very best in that we can offer in terms of a city manager in Greg
Kaitton um and his team uh has just done a phenomenal job. both the both the charter officers and the uh and the staff hired by uh Greg Kaitton and in order to prioritize and uh ensure that we are on the
long-term path to prosperity. I applaud the budget review commission. I applaud the mayor's budget review commission, something that she ran on and um and we brought in uh uh together to make sure that uh that the that the taxpayer is
protected. Now, I want to get to um I want to really really speak to some of the u some of the speakers tonight and want to address something once and for all about anti-semitism and hawk and the whole thing.
At no time did any speaker or or any council member for that matter want to mention in my opinion the most important topic that any city can provide which is our police and fire. We just took it for
granted that that's they did a great job. That's the lion share of our budget is those protecting us. And I applaud Chief Shannon and Chief Leuk for doing such an outstanding job working with the city manager in making sure that we are living within our means
and providing the best of the best protection uh for our uh community members and residents. What are people obsessed about in a $2 billion budget? Something that that that amounts to.
025% of that budget. Now, you tell me where where that's where that is what's everybody's bugger. You tell me why.
The fact of the matter is is that is that I I think it's twofold. One is that it's the Jews. And the two and the second thing is that it happens to be my community. I want everybody to know that this issue came up prior to me being elected to the council by community
members that I happen to be a member of the community of but not for me. This was brought before I was ever elected. I want to be very very clear here that there are speakers today that were uh um
in opposition to a crosswalk to save children stating that not having a crosswalk is safer than having a crosswalk. That's absolutely absurd. And secondly, when people are saying
Adam Quasman uses anti-semitism when he doesn't get what he wants. Oh, but by the way, when he was in law school, he did 1, two, three, four, and five, and it had to happened to have to do with uh with Judaism. I'm sorry. It does not hold anywhere close to a candle of
acceptability. We as a council have got to be better than this. We as a community have got to be better than this. And I'm going to call it out whenever I see it. My community is the fastest growing Jewish community
in uh in uh in Arizona. Happens to be in Scottsdale. We're blessed to have a huge Jewish community. We're blessed to have a growing Hispanic community. I care about all citizens and especially children. And I think that we have to
make sure that that we put the infrastructure in place to make sure that children are safe. It's just it's just as simple as that. Do we want children safe? Yes, we've got to build we got to build the infrastructure.
I I am just I'm dismayed that there are those who would think that um uh uh saying that I would crawl would would uh fly to the press o over an issue when the press coverage
yesterday about that happens to be a crosswalk adjacent but it happened to be because of a deep fake AI video and it was about the future of politics. And by the way, the press person I spoke with, I think you anybody could who would who who knows any history of me in Arizona
politics, he and I are not exactly going to dinner together. All right? I did not run to any press member about this and run and and start clanging anti-semitism. But what I heard tonight actually makes
me think that that if if this were some pickle ball court that we were building, nobody has a problem with spending all this money on a pickle ball court. When it comes to helping children, now we have an issue because I happen to be a member of a synagogue that an issue
started prior to me being elected. This is not about me. This is about children in this community. I want to go back to um what council member Graham said about uh the um a
rainy day fund and and making sure that in case the state legislature takes away tax revenue from us. Uh we should be worried and I'm glad that we were there in the last budget to take care of it and that and keeping that uh singular rainy day fund is is absolutely
appropriate. I support it. Um, I want to make sure that as we move forward, uh, this budget is outstanding, but I want to make sure, and I want everybody to hear this, that we will continue to keep our promises to our, uh, to our police officers and our firefighters and make
sure that they are a top three paid uh, um, organization in and respectively in this uh, in this state. We're going to keep those promises. We're going to make sure that roads are paved, cops and fire are paid, and that you, the taxpayer, is
taken care of once and for all and make sure our children are safe. Thank you, Madame Mayor. >> Thank you very much, uh, Councilwoman Whitehead. >> Uh, thank you, Mayor. Um, I, you know, I do want to thank all the speakers who were here tonight. It's really nice
always have people come and speak. And, um, I support the crosswalk. I support safety on our roads. Generally, I would like to see my council colleagues work harder with me as we have defunded very important road projects that have put um
residents in danger. So, that's something to work on. Generally, on the budget, um you know, what do all of the presentations have in common? I'll let you think about that while I tell you
that a budget is a book of priorities and that funding those priorities is the real trick of good governance, right? And so what all those presentations had in common is those projects were funded by the past councils. They were funded
by the voters, the the past councils listening to the residents, then going with 2019 bonds. That was my first success. And then Prop 490, you saw that on every one of those slides from Westworld to police to fire to parks.
And so I I just have two colleagues in the audience right now. Uh C former councilwoman uh Mil Haven and Betty Janick. Thank you for helping fund this year's budget. Um I there was a lot of talk about
um it being a conservative budget. So the operating budget is what we really look at and the operating budget is basically the same as last year and that's good. The difference is that last year we continued a policy that was be
began on the last council which was to pay down ballooning public safety pension debt. So last year we had a $50 million payown which is saving us $5 million a year. So that's the only variance really. Other than that, the operating budget stays the same. So, how
did we keep the operating budget the same? That's where I have some cautionary concerns I want to share. We have slashed a lot of positions. Now, on the surface, it sounds like, well, if you cut positions, you save money. Now,
as uh Mr. Kaitton pointed out, many of these positions are vacant. But people need to understand that what we should be looking at is why can't we fill these positions? We have a very low employee count per um per population. Plus we
have 11 million visitors every year. And I can tell you in the past that philosophy of reduce the employee count didn't work out so well because our employees for instance many of the employees are gone have generated hundreds of millions of dollars of grants that fund our projects, our
infrastructure projects and then keep our taxes low. And we saw in the past there was a lot of talk from my colleagues which I agree with both of them about deferred maintenance. I always say you want to fix the roof leak before the roof caves into your kitchen.
So in the past when um that philosophy of let's cut staff people, we weren't able to maintain the city to the level we needed to. So instead of fixing bridges, we had to rebuild them at a cost to the taxpayers. So I'm very concerned about that. Um, I think that,
uh, we also have in the past realized that when we contract out because we don't have enough staff, we don't get the quality we get from our excellent staff and it costs us more. And there was a little talk about that with the trees. We heard while we're trying,
thank you to Prop 490, um which not everybody up here uh supported, but Prop 490 gave us the money to bring in our own arborists because then we'll get consistent, better management of our trees. So, I also want to talk about the
rainy day fund and I just want to be really clear, our staff is so good at making things um not pointing fingers, let's you know, politicians, we point fingers, right? So let's be clear, the state legislature again and again and again these last few years have gutted
our revenue and just because they gut our revenue doesn't mean we we don't have to protect you. So we that is why uh we built up on my watch we've built up we've changed policies to require more reserves and then this added little buffer because they're going after our
food tax which costs people just really pennies a day and you have to understand these taxes those 11 million visitors pay in. So we're having to have these um special funds because we have a legislature that doesn't report to you as well as the city council does. Um I
then I want to talk about capital improvement projects. Just because we defund them doesn't mean they go away, but it gives an illusion that we're charging that we're more efficient. And I think honesty goes a lot further.
Nobody picks Scottsdale because we're the cheapest city. We pick it because we believe our government will be honest, transparent, and make sure that what that the services we expect, the safety we expect is delivered. And so I'm I'm
very concerned. And of course, as you already heard me speak on water, our job that is that is maybe more important than you policemen. I don't know. I'm looking at our police, police, fire, water. I mean, these are essential
services. traffic safety. Um, we are looking at tremendous cuts to the Colorado River allocation. We knew that. This isn't a surprise. And that's why we developed uh a strategic plan, but we have defunded it for those cuts are
coming next year. They're not coming 10 years from now or five years from now. And with water, when you go from that silver bullet to that silver buckshot, like our staff member mentioned, it's not a switch we turn on. It's an investment we have to make and takes
time. So, we know that ADEQ, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, is going to add an extra layer of treatment. We know what that layer is. There are there are some uncertainties, but other cities, they haven't stopped. They haven't defunded. They're moving
forward while still negotiating with um ADQ to get the rules so that they're right sized and right priced for our residents or for residents statewide. So, I'm very disturbed that we've defunded the uh the really two out of
four water projects in the out of in the strategic plan for this coming year. We're losing time. We're letting that roof cave in rather than to plug the hole. Um, and I want to talk about the Bartlett Dam because um, water is not as
confusing as people think it is. But the what we're paying for is a study and our staff member mentioned that in past studies people paid in for the study, but they didn't necessarily get the water. That's because people don't drink studies, they drink water. And the cost
isn't the study, but if if we pay for a study, but we haven't we haven't been disciplined in putting aside money to actually pay for that future water, will we will we be one of those who's paid for the study and doesn't get the water?
And I can tell you, I've spoken with SRP engineers who have assured me there are far more people who want that water than there is water. So, I'd like to see the final budget have that same disciplined approach that have guided Scottsdale and
Arizona for decades where you go ahead and you put in the number. If you have no funding in the infrastructure in the CIP budget, you are guaranteed to be 100% wrong. So, isn't it better to put that $100 million in the CIP for next
year, budget accordingly, and we always budget conservatively and then come back and say, "Hey, you know, we um whatever we overd delivered, we undersold, overd deliver, you know, we we gave you more." But to not do it has real costs. And
when it comes to water, everything I've done in my eight years and everything the city's done in the last 30 years is to deliver on a single headline that we all want. And that headline is co um Scottdale thrives despite significant
cuts to Colorado River water supply. And that's the headline we need. And we want to make sure we fund accordingly because guess what? the cost of having one headline that isn't that is going to be is going to be permanent damage to the
city even if water still flows. And as I said before, water will still flow. We're talking about cost and there's a big difference between $300 an acref foot and $7,000 an acref foot. So, I'm looking forward to that silver buckshot. We're going to be more diverse in our
water sources. We're going to be more secure and we just have to continue to follow the plan. Thank you, >> Councilwoman McCallen. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I'll be brief. Uh, I just want to reiterate, uh, and this
is to, uh, our city attorney, um, what the mayor said about making sure that we are in alignment with the law. We are, we want to make sure we're following the rules. Um, especially prior to approving a budget, if we have to align things
differently, then we'll have to do that. But um to make sure that the uh the items that uh former Councilman Smith brought up um that we're on the right side of that. That would be my caution to you and that you report that back to
us, please. Thank you, city attorney. >> Thank you. And I don't see any more speakers, but I just want to um it's okay. Uh first um during our a joint session with the budget review
commission last year, I um I challenged the city manager to reduce spending ac divisional spending across the board by 10%. And I got a lot of like shock. So um and I'm I'm glad that I did. I'm glad
that you met the challenge and thank you for doing that. Uh, I still think there's room to sharpen the pencil though and drill down a little further. I know this is the first, you know, first pass at this. Um, I I feel like,
you know, you're really motivated to to do what at least I challenged you to do. And again, I appreciate it. I'd love to see a little more, you know, sharpness, fine-tuning, uh, so that we can really say, you know, not only were 33 FTEEs,
um, eliminated, but there, sorry, that we aren't just saying 33 were eliminated, but yet we have 33 new FTEEs, right? I'd love to see the unfilled vacancy number go down further where possible, and I do think it's
possible. I I don't have any evidence of that, but I trust in your ability to do that. I'd love to see that on our next swipe at this. Um, and to to the to really the rest of the story, I do think this is a great starting point. I think
we're in a really good spot. Um, you know, starting with the 10% savings across the board that you challenged all the departments to do. I mean, things are great. Crime is down. um especially type two is it type two felonies? What?
I forget the the designation. The most the most um dangerous and the most horrific crimes are down dramatically in Scottsdale. We have zero uh zero vacancies in PD, which is exa exactly what we strive to do. Um revenues are
up, expenses for the most part across the board are down. We've paid off debt early so that we have long-term savings year overyear and ultimately in the long run. It's all really great news. Um fire, you know, we've really enhanced
fire protection with respect to burning on the ambulance service and funding that uh funding the additional through the parks and preserve. glad to see those new positions, especially when it comes to the wildfire urban interface
position and the others that you've got in in the uh preserve. So, that's wonderful news and I think, you know, we're really doing a great job and you know, it really looks good on paper. So, thank you,
uh, Councilwoman Dascus. >> Thank you, Madame Mayor. Um I wanted to highlight the um $85 million reduction in a $2.1 billion budget. That's a enormous reduction 3.8% while at the
same time increasing our reserves and contingencies by $20 million. So um cutting the budget in a smart way, not making sharp cuts, but making thoughtful um careful cuts and but also um being able to stash money for a rainy day. So,
that's a that's a really great um way to approach this budget. Um we're adding 22 FTEEs for fire for the ambulance service phase three. So, we're investing in our ambulance service and the health of our community. Um $5 million for sworn
compensation adjustments. We are investing in our sworn officers and uh $3.4 million for the gray tsunami and investment in skills replacement. As the chair of the uh community safety committee, it was my pleasure to hear
Chief Shannon talk about the opportunity to provide more training for the existing team. How are we going to get the guys at the mid level, the ladies at the mid level up to the highest level? Because the highest level, those certifications, those are the ones that
were retiring. Um, and so how do we get that knowledge and bring that into the community? And so these are a couple of years of investment in doing that. One of the things that will do is improve morale. It'll give firefighters an opportunity to learn and grow within the fire department. It's just exciting for
everyone. So, thank you, Chief Shannon, for your continued um effort in that area. Um and then I wanted to highlight 4.5 $45.9 million for roads. We spent $44 million last year. In two years, that's
$90 million on roads. and we're cutting our budget $85 million. It's absolutely incredible money management. There is a road that I travel um that's right in front of our grocery store and it was
rated a 27 PCI index. I went through the calendar that the there's a tool that the city manager's office provides and you can look at the PCI index of the roads in your area or anywhere in the city of Scottsdale. This road was so terrible it was a 27. Anything that
starts with a 50 is teared up and start all over again. So 27 is just absolutely unacceptable. And just over the course of the last three weeks with our spring paving program coming back, that road has been torn up. It was redone and it's absolutely gorgeous. Our investment in
the roads for $90 million over the course of two years is going to have a significant impact on the city of Scottsdale. It's going to have an impact on how people see us when they come to visit on our resident experience and then also on the people the quality of you know the people who want to come and they want to stay here and they want to
live here. They're going to say, "Wow, this is a great place to be. I don't hit potholes anymore." >> So, uh, thank you city manager Kaitton. This is excellent, excellent work. Appreciate it. >> All right. Well, that concludes the speakers from the DAS. And so, moving
right along. Thank you everyone for the presentations. We appreciate it. Uh public comment. This is the time for Scottsdale citizens, business owners, and our property owners to comment on non-aggendaized items. And hopefully
we'll keep it in the fairway and items that are within the council's jurisdiction. Also within the fairway. No official council action can be taken on these items and speakers are limited to three minutes. and it's getting really really late. So, if you can keep
it at least to the 3 minutes, we would appreciate it. If you wish to speak on a non-aggendaized item, please see the city clerk if you haven't already registered. And notably, we still have the joint work study session with the
BRC. So, it is getting late. So, calling all non-aggendaized public comment starting with Steve Sutton, followed by Dan Isaac, Avon Cahill, and then Jason Alexander. Yeah, I don't see Steve either. So,
you're up, Dan. Dan Isaac address still on record. Um, at the last meeting, Adam Quasman disrupted my public comment in an attempt to infringe upon my First Amendment rights. Now, people have a gross misunderstanding of first
amendment rights. The US Constitution specifically says that the federal government cannot limit our speech. However, over the decades and centuries, that has been expanded to state and city government. Now, that does not mean that
I can say anything I want anywhere at any time. If something's threatening or obscene uh or menacing, you government has the right to intervene. But a city council does not have the
right to limit specific words. I sent the case law to our city attorney and to the council and Adam Quasman ignored it. He admitted to me that he never read it. That case law was Aosta versus City of
Co Costa Mesa. It's black and white. A word cannot be prevented from being spoken because somebody might think it is offensive or disruptive. Despite that, Adam Quasman continues to step on
my first amendment rights. The word is the word that Jan Deboscus said when she filed a false criminal complaint against our mayor and then as a child would do in a fit of jealousy
called the mayor a So, I will continue to remind the people of Scottsdale that Jan Debascus behavior is reprehensible and deplorable until such time as she publicly apologizes to the mayor for the false criminal
complaint and using the porative word. And I will continue to remind people until Adam Quasman condemns her publicly for using the word that he thinks is so offensive. Jan Debasquez
controls way more of this city council than people believe. She comes across as very nice and polite because she has Adam and Barry do her dirty work and she also controls our unqualified city manager which is why we get a crosswalk
thrown into the budget without proper analysis. That is why I and others are starting a recall of Jan Debascus because her behavior is unbecoming of an
elected official. >> Interject you can't use uh her electioneering. That's >> I'm not campaigning. I'm making a statement of fact. Her behavior is unacceptable. >> That that may be the case. But here's the deal. You cannot use the podium to
electioneer on a recall election. as specifically prohibited by statute. >> And I didn't ask anyone to sign a petition, did I? >> Did you? You mentioned a recall election. >> People mention that they are running for office. That's not >> Let's go ahead and close this up and let's just
>> So, >> let's >> that's fine. >> Avoid that conversation. Okay. >> Her behavior is deplorable. Her actions are deplorable. She is unfit for city council and people need to know who she is. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right, moving right
along. Uh, Abon Cahill. And then last, we'll have uh Jason Alexander. >> I know. >> Thank you, Mayor and Council. I just wondering um when we come since city uh comments for the public are at the end now. Could would it be inappropriate if
I wear my pajamas because by the time I get home, it's going to be like really late. Um, I wish I was out celebrating Cinco de Mayo instead of being at the city council meeting for four hours. Anyway, I just wanted to talk about uh
the boy who cried wolf, which is a classic fable by Asop about a bored shepherd boy repeatedly tricks the villagers. In the story, a shepherd boy bored while watching his sheep decides
to play a prank on nearby villagers. He runs to the village shouting, "Wolf! Wolf!" The villagers rush to help him, but find no wolf, but the boy laughing. He repeats a trick a second time, and the villagers again come to his aid,
only to be fooled again. A real wolf then appears, attacks a flock, and the boy cries for help. But this time, no one believes him. The wolf eats a sheep. The boy is left to face the consequences of his dishonesty. The story found in
many children's books teaches the moral that liars are not believed even when they tell the truth, highlighting themes of trust, honesty, and a responsibility to the public. Councilman Quasman, you have called so
many people anti-semite that when one actually shows up, no one will believe you. And this includes very close friends of mine who are Jewish. The public has lost trust in you. Running to the press when you do not get
your way with false claims is not becoming to a council member. Thank you. >> Thank you. Lastly, we have Where was I? Jason Alexander. Okay, we're keeping it in the fairway. It's my That's my phrase for the
evening. >> Great phrase, Mayor. Thank you. Uh Jason Alexander, address on record. I want to circle back to uh to two points. One, I'm actually upset that Adam Clausman is not here in person tonight because every time he is here, the community gets to
see just how much time he actually spends on his phone during meetings. Adam mentioned how irrelevant his history in law school was. So, I want to bring some facts up for an article that I wrote about him for the
AZ Jewish News. On January 21st, 2016, Quasman was a first- year law student at ASU. A respected law school professor who was also Jewish named Joshua Drestler was asked about a student's comment about Senator Ted Cruz's campaign that Donald Trump represents
New York values. >> Point of order. I we we respect First Amendment. >> What's your point of order? >> Um, allow me to make my point of order, please. >> Thank you, Mayor. >> And you you excuse me, uh, Councilman Graham. When you make a point of order,
you don't launch into a dissertation. You ask to be recognized. Okay. >> Thank you for the education. >> Thank you. Go right ahead with the point of order, >> Mr. Parliamentarian. My point of order is um comments at non-aggendaized public items should
be on items under our jurisdiction. >> That's correct. >> So, I would ask the presiding officer to please enforce that with the speaker. I don't know how I don't know how um talking about decades ago in somebody's law school class is under our
jurisdiction. >> If you'd let me continue, Mr. Graham, >> I'm going to I'm going to respond to that. >> Uh that is the rule. That is the rule. Uh it's a little difficult to tell in the first
40 seconds if your comments, your public comments pertain to something within the council's jurisdiction. So please direct your comments in the three minutes you have to items that are possibly or
arguably within the council's jurisdiction. >> Relevant to what Mr. Quasman said how he claimed that opposition to his crosswalk was based on anti-semitism. I would like to show that Mr. Quasman in the instance from his law school class
criticized his law professor who said that Cruz's comments about New York values were anti-semitic to him. And Quasman did not accept that. Quasman said, "Oh, you've got to be kidding. How can you possibly say that?" So, it's ironic that Quasman would then attack
other people and and deny their interpretation of events and then justify uh or or excuse opposition to this budget item as pure anti-semitism. I think we're seeing hypocrisy with Mr. Quasman. Now, one thing I do agree with
about Mr. Quasman and if I could get the overhead for a second is I do agree that we should avoid using so uh fake AI generated images and we should avoid putting them on social media which is why it is upsetting that Mr. Quasman has
never condemned his colleague Barry Graham point of order point of order Mr. I Councilman Graham, what is I'll recognize you. What is your point of order? >> How are these comments under council's
jurisdiction? I will ask you to enforce our rules of rules of procedure. >> As I just did, I asked Mr. Alexander to get to his point with the enforcement. He hasn't finished yet. I understand you don't like the
leadup, but uh can I ask you Jason? Are you going to get to something that's within the council's jurisdiction? >> Yes, I believe I will. >> Well, I need you to. >> Okay. Thank you, mayor. >> So, my point is the hypocrisy we see in Mr. Quasman's complaints that are
directed at his budget items. When Mr. Quasman claims that AI should not be used to criticize him, to criticize his policy decisions, I would like him to adopt a similar attitude toward Mr. Graham's PR person who recently put out
these AI generated images from last week's meeting. Mr. Graham has paid Rod Pritchette $54,600. >> Jason, >> how is this within the council >> point of order talking? >> You don't need to interrupt Mr. Councilman Graham.
>> Thank you, Mayor. I I think I've made my point on this. >> How is this within the council's jurisdiction? It's not. >> Okay. I'll uh I'll refrain from doing that then. Okay. Thank you, Mayor Barowski. Thank you for listening. Have a wonderful Cinco de Mayo. >> Thank you. I hope we get there. I hope
it's not CIA. Wait, is that seven? Is six. >> Nice. >> All right, >> Mayor. We We have one. >> Mayor, I'd like to respond. >> I'm sorry. >> I'd like to respond to the to the comments. >> Okay. Please go right ahead. Vice Mayor
>> say sorry >> de Mayo >> say it'll be safe to >> um I I just want to I just want to say that once again everybody is seeing the true colors of what's going on here and
that this is pure politics and unfortunately everybody has to suffer because of it. But uh but I I I just want everybody to know that uh this community and and these members of the
council are going to continue to focus what matters to residents, public safety, prud prudence when it comes to the budget, and making sure that our roads are the most wonderful in all of Arizona. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right, that concludes we
have one more speaker. Uh Paris Blumenthal would like to speak. Oh, she wasn't on my list. My apology. Hi, Paris. Come on back up. Key. I knew that cuz your your name matches your hat. Paris.
>> Well, it's late. We get >> It's me again. Paris David Blumenthal. Um, I wanted to just mention a couple things. I know that anti-semitism and so forth has been brought forth tonight and it's been a been a set of circumstances and then also picking on some of the
councilmen for whatever reasons I find them quite pleasant. Um there were several incidences that I when I moved here I was living overseas for nine years. Um I had a couple threats from these pro Palestinian
groups and so forth in front of the Jewish community center. Um, I was a in my youth I was a bodyguard uh for Whoopy Goldberg, Steven Seagal, and the uh the and George Burns. And
just just random there looks like they're paid to do this, but there are we were talking about the crosswalk before, but just going there is a real life situation of anti-semitism um which I've never really felt before until the last year and a half.
And one gentleman said that he had a gun in front of me because I was trying to protect an older lady. So I obliged him and the police were there. Um I did ask him to pull it please. And um he he decided not to for smart reasons
afterwards, but there is anti-semitism going through the localities of the the synagogues. There's also a beautiful church next to us which a lot of traffic has been generated because of that. But I just say in regards to this
anti-semitic situation when they were bringing in Vice Mayorwasman, um I don't I know him. I've met him before, but I don't see him crying wolf all the time for sets of circumstances for that.
But it is it is alive here and we're just looking for safety and security for our people who live here. Everybody here seated. They all deserve that. and uh and have earned it. But this anti-Semitic set of circumstances everybody keeps on bringing up. It does
exist, but so be it. But please uh I'd like to have some people if they want to talk to the council people and so forth or the mayor. I'm sure they can discuss it in in a you know, they're very nice people personally on the side, but I don't think we should be bringing up our differences and
uh depreciating the value of their character in any such way. Thank you. >> Well said. Thank you. All right, moving right along to the work study session. Uh there's been no I'll close uh public comment and move on to citizens
petitions, which there are none. And so we're going to move right along to the work study session, which is uh of course a less formal setting for the mayor and council to discuss specific topics with each other and city staff and in this case the budget review
commission. Um and it also provides us the opportunity to uh receive direction or them the opportunity to receive direction from the council. We have received three requests to speak
on the public uh excuse me on the work study session and I'm going to take those first. So starting with Betty Janick, thanks for sticking with us this long. >> Oh my goodness, I'm tired. Yeah, >> now I know why I decided not to run.
Anyways, my name is Betty Janick. Um, and uh, good evening, mayor, city council members, and I want to give a very big shout out to our budget review committee. I attended their most recent meeting. They are on task. They study.
It's open for public review and they bring up topics that kind of are a for showing of what will be at our city council meetings. So, thank you very much. Um, could you turn on the overhead, please? Good. You did. Okay.
Real quick, this is a map that shows where we are right now. Some of you have seen it, but just point it out. The green line is our average water that flows into Lake Powell. This blue jagged line is the actual water now and it's
for the first quarter of our year that has flowed into Lake Powell and we are at 22% of our 60-year average and we are ready to set a new record low. So obviously we have a water shortage now.
Will we be able to sustain it for a while to fill the gap between what we need and what we have? And the answer is yes. It's a very resounding yes because our water department is very intelligent and they saved for years all the extra
cap water that we had available. So yes, but it depends upon how deep the cuts are and it depends upon how much we're willing to conserve. So maybe three years, may not be maybe longer. So let's kind of be thinking about conservation.
Now I want to talk about our new sources of water. Um, I'm going to list some of them. Harua, APRW, Arlet Dam, purchase credits, desalination, and anything new that might come along. And the good news is
David Walby, who's been with the water department, has been recently appointed to cover all these new possible technologies so that we can have a robust source of water. Um, the one I like the best, and you're probably not
going to be surprised, is Whoa, hard to read. Hard to read. It's APRW, but I'll go through it briefly. Number one, in 2019, we had the most advanced process for purified recycled water. We got the
award from the state, the first permit to study this issue, and we were very successful. Everybody liked the beer that was made with the water and people thought the water was very refreshing and I consumed it and I am still alive.
Okay. Number two, um the state just changed the guidelines for this. They've added one more step. It has to do with the sampling of the purity of the water as it reaches its destination. It is an expensive step. So there is discussion
at the level of the state to adjust that. We I would suspect within about a year we should have the final final and um we originally thought this would be ready in 2728. It looks like it's going to be closer to 2030. Um we already paid
for the water. We should we should recycle it. If the Artemis astronauts that wasn't 3 minutes can res was it can recycle so can we. So why was it removed? I'll cut it 30 more seconds. It was removed because we changed the way
we did our accounting. I question that. Arizona and Scottdale's success has been to keep politics out of water policy. This feels like we've crossed the line. But then there's good news. We have a 100,000 million dollars in a C cip.
Brian Beesmeer is coming up and our budget review committee has made the recommendation as soon as the numbers are available for pure water they will review it for inclusion into the CIP as a line item. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Steve Sutton Sutton is not
here so we're going to move on to Mark Wren followed by Dan Isaac. Thank you, Madame Mayor. Uh, I've got questions that I hope that your team here can answer, give me better
insight on the plan. But, uh, first of all, I want to thank those comments from this previous speaker. I cannot iterate how important it is for
the council to take this water situation very very serious. I'm just going to leave it at that without getting into too much emotional aspect of it. But I have some questions. First of all,
does the city have a contingency plan in response to specifically significant reductions in Colorado River allocation? It is so very important that it is
recognized that Scottsdale 70% plus of Scottsdale water comes from the Colorado River. If the Bureau of Reclamation cuts back on that water, that will have serious impacts on water supply, it will
also have serious aspects on all this fiscal discussion we've been having tonight. Um, so the question is, if Scottdale has to purchase water to offset Colorado River shortfall, where's
the money coming from? And we're not talking little change either. We're talking money that's going to be very expensive. Water, I mean, that's going to be very expensive. Uh, and I'm not sure I understood what was meant by uh
transferred out, which affects 30% of uh the budget as applies to water supply. Uh, I don't understand why there's no dollars for water source and supply in fiscal year 26 and 27.
I don't understand why there's not any line item budget for recycle water expanding it uh and for uh other infrastructure projects uh most notably the uh increased storage capacity of
Barrett uh dam. I in conclusion I appreciate that uh council uh the council member I hope I pronounce it Dakus uh
gave us a her insight shall we say of fiscal prudence. I would throw back at you, ma'am, that you and others voted on a circle
intersection that was already very close to completion with rejecting city staff's reasoning for the going with the circle. and consequently you threw away
$31 million. I consider that fiscally imprudent. Thank you, ma'am. >> Thank you. And finally, Dan Isaac. >> I'd like to sorry, Dan Isaac address on record. I'd like to echo um Miss
Janick's comments about the BRC doing a yman's job. I've attended one meeting in person and watched several on uh video and they're doing what we need to do and I will also compliment the city overall of really trying to be fiscally responsible. They have done some good
things. However, I would like the BRC to call out shenanigans. One example would be when last year's budget was done, we didn't eliminate
vacant positions. And why didn't we do that? Because some people wanted to come in under budget this year. Now, this for the next fiscal year, they're eliminating those positions so that we can have savings so that we can look like we're fiscally responsible.
This is all gamesmanship. If it wasn't right last year, we shouldn't do it this year. Or if we are going to have an inconsistent policy, we should admit that it's so that we can make things look better. when we take great pride of spending $90
million on improving our streets. We should also mention the fact that there's one council member who's been there for 10 years that allowed the streets to deteriorate and another one who was on the Department of Transportation when the transportation department was playing games with regard
to the pavement quality index. So there are things that need to be called out strongly so that the residents of Scottsdale know the difference between sound fiscal management and electioneering.
That also goes to when they say that safety is one of our biggest concerns. But as the last gentleman mentioned, and I previously mentioned, if safety is such a concern, why did we spend $5 million extra dollars and push $30 million into a next fiscal year delaying other
projects to make something less safe? So, I will conclude with this quote from Senica, and it is really sad that this quote applies 2,000 years later. Beware of men who lie and deceive. They
only wish for power. Their speeches are soothing and fiery. Their vision a paradise. But the reality they create is the opposite. If those who vote could only understand that these men are devils who crown themselves and never
look back on the promises they make. Senica still applies today. Thank you. >> Thank you, Dan. All right, that concludes the speakers on our work study and welcome
all of you. Thank you for sticking with us tonight. So, who is going to kick it off? Mr. Schwiker. >> Um, I believe the city treasurer is going to city treasure. Very >> big. Oh, there you go. Sonia, please.
>> Thank you, Mayor Council. I just have a few quick introductory slide. Today's uh presentation is the commission's report to council. So I'll just quickly go through my introductory slides and turn it over to chair striker. Next slide. I wanted to start by thanking the budget
review commission. Uh we don't have all the commission members here but we have four of them here. I wanted to thank them for the time that that they took to understand the city's finances, the interest that they expressed, the great questions and suggestions that they've come up with and also the effort that
they spent and all the time they took to review the budget fund by fund with us. Thank you for your patience with staff and thank you for all that you've done for us. Um, next slide. Just as the uh a reminder for council and also for our larger audience who may
not understand what the budget review commission does, the budget commute uh review commission is advisory to council, meaning that they do review our budget, but council remains fully responsible for the city's budget. Per ordinance, the BRC is also allowed to
review other budget areas that is outside of the proposed budget. And you will hear from them tonight on some of those areas that they're proposing to look at. And next slide. This is my last slide. And I wanted to recap council's directions and suggestions or guidance
for the BRC. Back in the November 17th work study session, council suggested that the budget review commission look at financial trends and ratios, compare those uh trends and ratios to pure cities, look at budget variances, of course, review the proposed budget
prepared by staff and then bring forward any budget topics for consideration and that is what they have done for the last five uh months and you will hear from them tonight. And I will turn that over to chairw now. Thank you.
Thank you very much. And Chair Schwiker, please proceed. >> Thank you. I'm Mayor Bowski and honorable council members. Sunday, I was at the memorial service for former Paradise Valley Mayor Ed Lowry, with whom I served as vice mayor for six
years. Ed taught me how to effectively run meetings so that everyone was heard and felt their input was valuable. Whenever there were issues where members had divergent views, Ed always had them work together to find
common ground. My old friend David Smith started that with the budget review commission last year, and we continue to work that way. Mayor Lowry always thought that if you studied a situation thoroughly and from all viewpoints, more
often than not, there turned out to be one correct answer. That has proven true with the BRC. Uh this year's BRC is comprised of bright, energized and interested residents, all of whom greatly contributed to our findings. This
presentation was authored by all of them. Mark and Brad and I are merely the presenters and we look at as we look at various subjects. All of our committee members are free to contribute on anything they want to jump in and join talk about. So our task was to make
recommendations that we think are in the best interests of our residents and the city for the next year and beyond. Especially as we reviewed the CIP projects, it gave us an opportunity to recommend ways to futureproof the city.
City revenues are slowing and needs are rising. Roads and water are two of the long-term challenges that we spend a lot of time reviewing. Both are important and we all have trust that the city will keep our roads smooth and our water
flowing. Sustaining police, fire, ambulance, and city services amid unknown challenges to revenue will continue to be issues that need close attention. The BRC could not have done its work without the support
of our wonderful city staff. We greatly appreciate their time and especially the time, effort, and input we received from the city manager and city treasurer. So now let's look at what our work product was. So the BRC had discussions and reviews
of the proposed budget. We started in December and did it through April. Uh if you go to the next slide. Yeah. Um in December we looked at financial ratios, revenue trends, budget variances. Then we moved to preliminary capital
improvement projects. Then we went to the general fund revenues with budget variances and then the proposed 2627 operating budget. And here we are to do a report to the council. So what did we look at?
Mark, you're going to jump in on this one. >> Okay. Go ahead and go to slide seven. Uh yeah, I would like to echo what our chairman said about uh he was very inclusive when it came to the way he ran the meetings and I don't think anyone ever felt like they didn't have an opportunity to have their view aired. So
I do want to thank him for that. Uh the first slide I'm going to go over is the review of a financial conditions report. And that's something that uh a lot of you might not even know exists, but it's something that a lot of time went into to prepare. and it was prepared in a fashion that if anyone ever said the
city of Scottsdale does not take financial s sustainability serious. There are elements of that report that kind of go through each of the measures that a lot of different cities would look at to determine whether or not they're sustainable and whether there's any red flags in there. And it's
actually an excellent document that I'm I'm very close to. and it does a a very good job of uh uh comparing uh comparing us to other cities and in generally uh I'll echo the budget is structurally balanced. Uh the city is focused on
maintaining that structural balance and financial uh stability sustainability and we did have a chart at the end of that that compared us to other cities and you would find that we compared favorably to that. uh we did uh did recognize the fact that I think a lot of
you know we're quite dependent on sales tax and tourism. Uh one other thing I'll add in there because I'm trying to integrate the discussions from earlier today. Uh fund balance is one of the measures that's in there. You saw a slide on reserves. There's like over $und00 million in reserves. That's needs
to be that's a fund balance allocation to help on the bond rating. And then you also talked about this 15 million for lost revenue. My understanding of a lot of the reserves you have are really an allocation of fund balance. That's accumulated excesses of revenue over
expenses over the years and you all have the ability to reallocate those things as you wish. The proposed budget has you allocating over hund00 million of it to the things you need for a general reserve to satisfy bond requirements.
The 15 million is there in case you had a hit in revenue. you already have the fund balance there to absorb that hit is my understanding of how that works. And as you're going to see later, you've got another 50 million in there that's tenatively allocated for potential PSRS
uh paydowns. So, uh I made a recommendation last year that you all periodically look at the roll forward of fund balance. That would be something uh that uh you can decide if you want that. Okay, we can go to the next slide now. Uh slide two, a new thing that was added
this year, we did a quarterly review of budget variances. So we looked at the variances through September and through December for each of those two quarters. Would not have seen anything since then. So we had those two those two to look at. Uh it's a very powerful tool. I think it really helped the understanding
of a lot of the commissioners uh particularly new ones, but all of us an understanding about how the mechanics of the city works. Uh you had a pretty big challenge this year. you had a new ERP system put in. That's a big deal. Uh I uh I'm a retired audit partner with
Ernston Young. Uh and I've audited companies, you know, up to a billion dollars in sales. I have seen a lot of ERP conversions. They're never easy. They're never as uh simple as someone says. You did have uh some uh differences that popped up and I would
categorize uh none of them as any unusual things. And uh I think it really took a toll on your people, but uh they really did an awful good job of managing that and making the corrections that were necessary as as they went in. So uh they really they really did that. That
was that was pretty good. The other thing I'll throw in here uh and u uh city treasure can correct me if I'm wrong. I heard a lot of different comments about flat budget things being done or whatever. City city budgets are very confusing. You have an operating fund, you have an enterprise fund, you
have capital. And when you bundle them all together, it can make it look like things went down by a lot, but one element like capital could have gone way down and it could it can kind of mask what's going on. So, I just encourage you to look at each of the elements. One of the other slides that was in the presentation indicated that your
expenditures were actually flat to budget. But that particular slide included enterprise funds as well as operating funds. So all I want to share with you all my understanding is if you looked at your operating fund which is really the most important one most people view from a city kind of the
general fund the operating fund uh in that case uh your the slide there showed that um your operating fund expenditures actually went up by 12 million. Okay. And then also your expenditures are running 7 million favorable to date this
year. Uh and the projection is that that will be sustained through the end of the year. So, your expenses, just so you know, are going up 20 million this year, but we didn't look into any analysis of that. Some of it's completely explainable. Ambulance is going up.
Therefore, the expense side of the that went up, revenue went up. So, I don't know if you want to look at that or have anyone do any more analysis for you. I just didn't want you all thinking that everything was flattered down because that's not the case when you look at some of the operating the operating things that are there.
Uh, okay, we can go to the slide. I have two more slides that I'm going to cover for right now. Uh these will go quicker. Slide nine. Uh on slide nine, uh the major revenue trends, the consensus of the group that we got out of that again you know this very dependent on sales and and tourism and as uh I think Scott
mentioned earlier uh there is some risk uh uh particularly from the one big beautiful bill. Uh interesting observation I guess we had on sales tax. Sales tax revenue has increased by 3%. One uh interesting observation that the staff made, they said that GDP growth is
protected projected to be around a percent and a half and inflation is expected to be 2% or so 2 to 3%. So if I just kind of look at that, it's if I add those numbers together, your 3% increase in sales tax kind of smells okay. So just a super high level observation on
that. And then on slide 10, um uh the one of the this tells some of the things we reviewed. We reviewed the CIP and you've talked an awful lot about that. When we get to slide 13, I want to go over the change you made on CIP, which I think you all have a pretty good handle
on it and the impacts on water, which you talked about a lot. So, I'm not going to try to go over things that have already uh gone over, but I I do I will touch on uh some considerations on the new methodology. And then we also reserved the operating reviewed the operating funds during uh three
different meetings that took place. Uh so I'm going to turn the next two slides over back to my chair. >> Thank you Mark. Yeah, we spent a lot of time we uh you know it turns out to one slide but we spent a lot of time talking about water and roads and everything and
that's reflected in I think a lot of the debate that you heard. So, as we look on recommendations for the proposed 2627 budget and CIP, um we had a lot of public comments that were received and we think the council should should know
about those. And um there were a lot of public comments specifically requested that the Bartlett Dam and the APRW projects be reinstated into the 5-year CIP. And during this whole process, the city manager came back and said that he
was putting $100 million in undefined but into water projects back in the CIP project budget because we think that's very important because these projects and you know there is not one thing that's going to solve the water problem. I mean we hear there's four or five
different prongs out there. They're all going to end up eventually being done and they're all big ticket items, but they're spread out over a number of years. So, we felt very comfortable when uh the city manager came back and said that there was going to be 100 million
in the CIP project. So, we like that. Um and then there there were also a public comments about consideration for the loss of federal funding for certain human services programs and the city provided uh a memo on various housing
funds and the risk that were entailed with all of them. So while that wasn't really an answer, it gave us a little bit of comfort knowing that they they were looking at it and they were looking at the different options for that. So now we'll go on to uh the next slide,
slide 13. >> Yeah, 13. So uh back to me on slide 13. Uh a couple of the recommendations. Uh one of the first ones was a lot of discussion of the Granite Reef Senior Center and some of the condition that it might be in. And so there's a recommendation include a feasibility study to determine what would be the
best course of action uh with respect to shoring that up. Uh the second one was a lot of discussion on um uh APRW and uh the conclusion there was we we really didn't look at all the different options in water. So we're not your
water people. We just looked at this and Bartlett because those two projects were taken out of the five-year plan. And so that's why they got some attention. And we've heard some really interesting numbers as far as to what this might cost. But I also understand the
regulations are so unclear right now. Uh I don't know that anyone could actually do a calculation of what it would cost to do that project even though it may be something you ultimately need. So the recommendation here was you should consider restoring it once you see what the cost estimates are and if the cost
estimates make sense uh however you measure that compared to other opportunities or other options then that's why that was one of the recommendations. Uh the third point on the financial sustainability okay on your on your five-year CIP what the city manager did
this year is he took a position that by and large said if I don't have enough information to make an int this is my understanding our understanding intelligent uh and decent calculation of what it's going to be in the years it's going to fall why should I put that in there so a lot of things were taken out
on the basis of the fact that we may need them but we don't have good enough cost numbers to do a meaningful estimate. Therefore, those were generally taken out with the exception of I think 35 million for the wildlife crossing and then you could kind of put the 100 million for water in there
because you don't really know what that is. So, that would be a a little bit of an exception to the the rule that was there. Uh I compared your five-year projection to a year ago and it's $400 million lower. So, a lot of dollars went out of that. Those are some of the
projects that did. The concern there is how does that all impact and this will the city will figure this out but how does this all impact our debt capacity the borrowing we're going to need water rates we need in order to build for certain projects so unfortunately there's probably more questions here
than there are answers but I just wanted you all to recognize the fact that all that those project dollars came out of the five-year plan and I think that raises a lot of questions about how you might have to fund certain things going forward And then the final comment was on PSRS.
The um uh contribute the uh I guess the updated actuarial report isn't in yet. And this is just kind of a reminder of the dynamics there. Uh you do have um what is it? You had uh $54.7 million is in your current budget right
now expected to be available at the end of the year if you needed it. It's tenatively designated for that. But again, you can allocate or reallocate things as you wish when it comes to what's in fund balance. And the reminder there, I think that uh I I think Councilman White had touched on it
earlier, is you're basically earning uh 23% on the money that you have sitting. You've got, you know, several hundred million dollars of fund balance reserves. You're earning a couple of percent on that, but if you in if you put it in the pension, the pension's able to invest it at market rates. that
ends up uh being um it'll be an actual assumption there six seven eight% something like that but you'll actually get the actual returns uh that would defay for uh initial pension cost so it can be a real relief to your operating budget and a real reduction of police
cost if you were to do that but it's up to you to decide we're not recommending that you do that because I don't have we don't have enough visibility into the other ways you might need those funds so we can go to the Next slide.
>> So, Commissioner. >> Yeah. I just wanted to take a second here and expand a little bit on the first recommendation, which is in do a feasibility study for the Granite Reef Senior Center. Um this budget uh it is a
2019 bond proposal that keeps getting kicked down the road because there is no clear consensus on what the potential increase in care for seniors there perhaps in partnership with Honor Health or another community partner could be.
So the city manager is absolutely correct. It should go to a feasibility study, but I have a concern about it keeps getting pushed off year after year after year. Everybody who would benefit
from this, every senior would be a resident of Scottsdale, a resident who helped build Scottsdale. Yet, it's not in the budget. But a health clinic for Scottsdale staff is and we value
Scottsdale staff, but 80% of them are not residents. So all I'm saying is if you're going to value staff, also value your seniors who are residents and put this back in the budget, please.
>> Thank you, Carla. You know, we had great faith in what the city was doing and all their budgeting things, but several of us took the city budget and ran it through a bunch of different AI models and everything to look for sustainability and weaknesses
and everything. And it all came out that Scottsdale is in a really good position. All of them had the caveat that we're very tourism sales tax dependent. So, I think those are all very important things to know. Um, you know, one of the things, this is a pretty short
presentation that we're giving you, and that is because the city staff was so good to work with that as we came up with ideas during our meetings, they were incorporated into the proposed budget that you're seeing right here. But there are some things that uh we
might want to look at in the future. We and these are things that um require approval and direction from the council. So, I'm going to turn that over to Brad Newman to go over over those. >> Thank you, Dan, Madame Mayor, and members of the council. We went through
and and looked at as we as we've gone through the budget, there's a certain amount of spend. We've shifted some of that in terms of more roads, more of the basic infrastructure. Councilman Graham mentioned the the net asset and maintaining that. That's becoming a greater need as the asset base of
Scottsdale has grown. uh but yet the breakdown of the sales tax has not and there are certain amounts of tax going certain areas where the needs may have changed over time. So it's been a while since we've looked at that and so these recommendations are are really around
getting an analysis for next year's consideration of what should that sales tax stack be? Not an increase in sales tax. This isn't a what should the tax be, but what should be the configuration of what we currently charge. So it's it's a it's a non-change analysis
because to raise taxes is a different analysis. So these three recommendations are really to ask the city treasur's office to then um develop what is the revenue demand that we have versus where the structural revenues are going
because they're mandated in some cases mandated by voters. So uh for example we have about 3% going to roads. We have about 3% in total going to preserves. Not saying that's good or bad, but it's worthwhile to have the analysis because if you're not buying land, for example,
with preserves, if you're not buying land, there's a lot of money going there that gets trapped. Um, and then but you the only way to move that around is through mo voter mandate. So, at some point, something has to be done there. And maybe that's a broader strategic consideration to say, let's look at the
stack of what we're going to be spending on roads, what we're going to be spending on other aspects. I've heard things around tourism. We just don't have the data on that to know is that the right mix or not, but then come back with a recommendation next for next year's budget. And that would be an obviously a much broader consideration
for for because that would end up as some kind of voter referendum at some point to decide what the sales tax configuration should be. That may or may not lead to what should the sales tax be, but that's a different discussion. But that's the purpose of the first one here is what's the sales tax structure.
Then when you look at uh the first tax that runs out through 2034 for the per for the preserves that tax was for buying land u main the main purpose of that I know Carl's going to have a comment here and and uh and if we're buying land then
you need that tax. If we're not buying land, you're putting money into an account that it can never go anywhere under the way that's configured. With the Prop 490, that obviously takes care of a lot of needs. And I, as I understand, there are um by by a super vote of the of the council, that tax configuration, that particular
configuration can be adjusted uh depending on what happens with the first tax. So, it's a strategic review of what of what those revenues are. The last one has kind of been answered by Treasur Andrew's. Um, it I threw that we threw that in there looking at that because the 2019 bond that's now 7 years old.
We're not done with that yet. How much of that's been spent? It it was kind of thought that uh a a smaller portion that has actually been spent was spent. It's actually been about twothirds have been committed. It's it's it's hard to think that you would go back to voters to say let's reconfigure the bond when
twothirds of that bond has already been committed and finish those projects. But the question was with COVID changes to the city, have these things changed enough that it it's worthwhile to reconfigure some of how the revenue comes in so it more is more compatible with the budgeting process. So that's
the the focus. Um you've got you have this in your appendix and you can go into more detail, but that'll be something that we're asking the city treasures office to come back with for next year's uh review and then we can go through and have a discussion and make further recommendations on that. Okay. you have comment and Commissioner Carlo
would like to make a comment. >> Thank you, Commissioner Newman. Um, while I agree with Commissioner Newman and my fellow commissioners that these two items deserve discussion, um, there's a couple of clarifications. the Prop 490 tax. While you can adjust
percentages of where the money goes with a supermajority vote of council, you cannot go outside the buckets that it's been identified before for which is parks, preserve, public safety, and some
specific items at Westworld. If you wanted to go outside those buckets, it would take a vote of the people, for example, to bring in transportation. Then on the 2004 preserve tax which the debt will be paid off in 2027 which
leaves an additional seven years. Um I want to stress that the preserve commission has started a year-long process to look at what additional qualified projects would be applicable to be covered in the preserve vision for
with this tax. And the number one is strategic land acquisitions because there are 2,000 additional acres that qualify to be bought with this money. And the preserve commission is evaluating that amongst other things.
And of course, nothing would go forward until after they do their review, they come forward to council for direction. But that is a public discussion and a council direction that will need to happen. So, I don't want anyone thinking there's seven years of free money out
there that we could go to a voter, you know, go out to the voters and repurpose to transportation. Perhaps this evaluation has to happen first and direction has to happen because the voters voted for this for the preserve.
And I will want add one final thing that um Mr. Smith, while I admire his passion, he is incorrect. Um, as the city attorney said, when you look in depth at all the different parts of Prop
420, everything that the staff has in future projects does still qualify for preserved tax dollars under Prop 420. So, just a couple of clarifications there. Thank you.
>> Thank you. You want to go to the next slide? Um Carla, would you like to talk on this one a little bit? >> Sure. >> Okay. >> Um the federal funding cuts contingency plan because we know we've had cuts this
year. We'll have more next year and the following year. A lot of cuts. Many families are going to fall off a cliff because of um some of the federal cuts that have trickled down. And this this recommendation is we would like to ask
you to direct the BRC and staff to look at contingency plans to address how our vulnerable citizens and I stress citizens, residents will be continue to be helped. Many of them are seniors and
without a detrimental impact or at least a full knowledge of the impact on the general fund. So that's the first recommendation. And then the second recommendation is when we did a review at the beginning of our cycle and at and
we're looking at what are we deficit in? We are deficit in looking at aging facilities and making sure that we are looking at how are we going to refurbish or fund them or get them up to snuff. I
mean, you heard earlier about a fire station uh looking at doing Pyute, however it ends up doing, is back in this budget, and I thank the city manager for that. Um, but we need to look at that. And so, we're asking if
you can direct the BRC and staff to look at that over the break and how how we keep up on that so we don't end up in a hole. So, those are the two and we'd be glad to answer any questions. Thank you.
>> Thank Thank you very much. >> Uh, one one second because uh, Councilwoman Mckllen was on the board, but do you have any of these recommendations? I have a question about procedure. Did you take a vote? Can we get an idea of was it a majority um,
recommendation? Was it partial? Was it minority? That would be really helpful. Almost everything we voted on was a unanimous vote. >> Oh, unanimous. Wow. Look at you. It's amazing. All right, Councilwoman Mckllen. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I just want to
thank all of you, your entire um commission, but especially Chair Schwiger, Vice Chair Stevens, and then Carla and Mr. Newman for staying this whole night and being so cheery and
presenting these, you know, really um important points. And you know, while we're in a in great shape, we need to be very prudent in how we do things for the future. And my thought when you were
just talking uh Commissioner Carla is before we look to build brand new facilities or add on to a facility, we should take care of what we already have. Um kind of like with the money set aside for the preserve by, you know, so just thank you for your prudence and um
being so cautious. And I also want to thank Sonia and Scott and all of your staff as I'm sure all of us up here do. It's been a long process. you are when I talk to you individually, you're seeing how great the BRC is. The BRC saying how great you are. Uh so, thank you all for
working so well together and um for taking the time. Um >> we do have one more slide to go over though. >> Okay, please do. >> Is that okay? >> Oh, I didn't mean to cut you short. >> I I thought Sorry. Excuse me. Please. >> It's too late to cut the evening short.
Yeah. Right. Right. Right. What but what this one's really about a future direction slide. And I wanted to tell you a little bit about what happened because what was done this year was a lot less than was done in the past. And I I'm going to share a little bit about what happened and I'm going to end it
with us kind of asking you what's the depth of the work you want the BRC doing and what quality do you want of recommendations coming out of it? And then also are you open to allowing seeing if there's a way to allow us access to staff since this year that was
not available to us. So as a result, I can tell you from my standpoint, my effort pad in comparison to last year. So my recommendations weren't the same. I will be providing you all a separate letter indicating things that I think ought to be considered for either the BRC, the uh the staff or internal audit
to consider that I think could make a difference on the budget, but we weren't able to get into that kind of stuff this year. What happened this year was there were some changes and there was a uh we were no longer able to meet with city staff that developed the budget to find out their thought process and what went
into it. A thought was up up there earlier about hey as you're putting it together can we gather information from you without directing you without making any legal decisions in order to be in a better position to come back at a BRC meeting in an open meeting situation and
have more thoughtful discussions. we weren't able to do that. So the preparation I don't think was the same. We also uh our meetings did go too long last year but they were changed this year. Uh staff had recommended that we try to limit them to two hours and there
were only five meetings in which we had time to talk over issues. And so you saw the presentations you got today. You also had the advantage of meeting with people beforehand from what I could tell. Picture yourself getting presentations like you got today. That's
all you get and then you are supposed to talk and come up with some meaningful recommendations. Staff might disagree. They might think that we were able to get anything but it was so difficult to try to get to any people who prepare the information that in my mind it was I was
very dissatisfied and I thought it was very ineffective uh from my standpoint. My views aren't necessarily shared by everyone. But I uh we were told open meeting laws in the application which your legal staff is taking on 3843101
uh does not what I read in there. But that's what we were told we had to live by and we weren't given any options to meet with staff. Now having said that since I might be I may I'm probably the most vocal on this uh if anyone else wants to share their view uh go ahead.
And now for the other point of view Carla. Yes, Carlo. Carlo will say the things that other people won't. Um, with all due respect to m to Commissioner Stevens, he he just went a tiny bit rogue. Um, everything all the other
recommendations were unanimous. Even Brad and I found ways to agree. So, um, you know, so, but what Commissioner Stevens just shared are his personal feelings. I want to stress that staff
was extremely helpful, spent a lot of time with us and legal repeatedly explained why we were constrained by the open meeting law and um treasurer um Andrews worked overtime to make sure to
be the conduit to answer the questions we had. So, I would ask you all to end this by bringing it back around to the actual recommendations that we all agreed on. And please consider putting
some of these items back in your budget and the ones that we're asking you to give us direction to study. Please consider those seriously. Thank you so much for your time. >> I I just have to add one thing on on our our treasurer. I think she and our city
staff are outstanding. She is extremely knowledgeable about city government and what and what's happening here and I think you're very fortunate to have her. My frustration is not being able to prepare for meetings adequately.
>> Thank you. All right. Uh thank you all for your passion and your interest in serving and it's very valuable. Uh I'm going to kick it off because I like a lot of these recommendations. Um, I do
think I for one would like to see you take a closer look at um the increase in expenses for this year. I don't know how you do that structurally before the final budget adoption meetings, but I certainly would advocate for another
meeting or two, whatever it took for you to look at some of these other issues. Um, a closer analysis on the advanced uh purification system. I think there's some it's a murky waters, pardon the pun. Um, really that was a devil and
tandre pun. Uh, murky waters there. So I think that would be helpful to the extent you know you think that's useful for our information and really the puzzle for me uh you know as many years as I've been paying attention to city budgets um what is the what's the actual
impact of taking it out of the five-year CIP how hard is it to catch up there and I think we had some answers about that uh earlier but that would be uh something I would like you to look at and that was on your list um
the 2 million uh for fire the payown was already in there as optional. So I don't I wouldn't concern myself about that because it's for us to decide. It sounds like it's a good idea based on what you said Mark as well. Um,
so the the three options that you set forth, one, two, and three, sales tax structure review, I think that's really good. I think that's a strong item for you to look at. Would that be in this preparation for the next fiscal year? Correct.
>> For the next fiscal year. We can look at whatever you want us to do. We just need some kind of direction or resolution from you as to what you want us to look at. But yeah, those are things. and the advanced water purification. We don't have any more meetings before you adopt the tenativeity budget
>> for next year. >> So, those are all things we can look at over the next year, right? And we're happy to. >> Okay. Yes. And uh I'm just going down your list actually. So, these are helpful. And the 2004 preserve tax
repurpose I think is a good one. I do think that's a good one. You're talking about buying more land. We dealt with that back in 2010 and the answer was no. So, I'd hate to see when Croy Ekla was advising, you know, the council, that was a conclusion that the council came
to way back then, that no more land was needed. Um, but without getting off topic, without getting off topic there, uh, I would love to see that discussion had. Um, abs, uh, absolutely. I have, that's my
note on the 2019 bond audit. I I'll call it an audit of the bond projects. We dealt with that with the parking garage. This was a very big issue determining, you know, and looking at um I guess really the uh the
likelihood or the need or the variance in the bond pro projects that were approved uh back in 2019 versus the useful uhness or appropriateness really of um some of those projects uh looking
at re-evaluating them. So having you on the front lines of those would be of that review would be excellent. And then lastly, I do think that um having an opportunity to hear from staff, have a give and take like we did tonight um
with the staff members or the heads of the departments is extremely valuable and I do think you should have that opportunity. I did talk to the city attorney about this. It would not violate the open meeting law for the for
your budget review commission to request that these staff members visit, you know, come present to you uh alongside Sonia and it would not be inappropriate at all to have that happen. And I do
think that would advance uh the discussion and information completely and that's just within the scope of your open meeting. that's not, you know, going behind the scenes. So, I think that's a compromise that could be really helpful and I would advocate for that
completely. So, of your list, I it's I'm tired and maybe I I didn't capture all of them, but I did like the lists. Um, putting the Granite Reef project back in, I I just really need to know more uh in
order to form an opinion about that. But it's I don't disagree with that idea. Thank you. Anybody else want to talk? I think everyone's asleep. Um >> all right then. I then my my ideas my
ideas go. I'm speaking on behalf of everyone. >> Councilwoman Littlefield likes my ideas. Yay. >> Winning. I like your ideas and I like your presentations. Thank you very much for all the work that you've done for us and the time that you spent getting all
of this material together. Thank you. Um I like your ideas and I think you ought to continue doing exactly what you're doing. Um I like what the mayor said and I support her uh suggestions and actions for what you can do. Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. Uh Councilwoman Dasquez. >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. One suggestion that I might make is for you to consider is um revenue projections. How do we do arrive at the revenue projections? Frequently what Councilman Graham talks
about is that our revenue projections are conservative uh throughout the year, very conservative throughout the year. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. Um but maybe you want to take a look at how do we come up with our revenue projections? Do you think that that's
the right methodology? and um and what might we do consider to do better? You know, the the closer we can get to the budget, then we can really determine how much money we need. How much money do we really need? How much money do we have coming in? How much money we need to ask
taxpayers for? Um and so that might provide us some opportunities for relief from some of these taxes if we're taking a look at at what we need. Um and so if we were able to have a little bit more accurate system, that might be helpful. Or you might say, um, you know, as a
group, we don't want to look at that right now. We we've got our set for the next year. So, uh, just a thought. >> You like looking at money. Good. >> We're happy to look at anything you want us to look at. >> Okay. Yeah. I think it would be helpful because part of what we want to do, we
don't want to end up like Tempe, right? Where now they're looking at a half a point increase. And um, so we want to be careful about how much money do we really have? how much money do we have to spend and could we provide some relief to our our residents or you know
is the current system appropriate? So >> I'd like to share something when you you mentioned something like that. It's probably a question of how deep would you like us to get into something like that. Uh I'm from an audit world. So as a result there's certain things you look at to form an opinion. If it's just
going to be staff making a presentation like they did today to you, we already got that. And so some of us maybe like myself would be happy to dig into something a lot more if there's an area you'd like us to. And I'd be happy to look at how they're uh coming up with
those numbers in a little bit more uh sufficiency. But then that requires me to meet with the staff who are putting the numbers together. And if I'm allowed to meet with Sony and the staff, that's okay. I tried to propose something like that last year. My vision was as they're
putting the information together, let whatever areas you want us to look in, let us piggy back as they're putting it together. That way it's fresh and you're not taking extra staff time. >> So, it's still unclear to me. Maybe next year when we set the scope, you'll have to let us know to what degree we're able
to actually uh get into meaningful information. >> Well, thanks to each of you. Appreciate your time. Thank Thank you for staying late tonight. We appreciate you. >> So, the question was for a council resolution. Uh, Luis, how would you like
us to make this so it doesn't kind of just dissipate into status quo? >> Mayor and members of the council, since it's kind of getting late, why don't we um bring I'll work with the city manager and the city treasurer to bring back a
resolution for a later agenda for you to adopt. >> That would be fantastic. Great. >> Okay. >> Because there's no way I could remember. No, I'm kidding. All right. Well, with that, I think it's a wrap. Uh, thank you very much for your service.
>> Thank you. >> You serve a very big valuable role for us. >> Thank you. Uh, yes, if we can table the council updates until next time. >> All right. >> Yes, I think we can do that. >> Excellent.
>> We'll update. >> Happy Cinco de Mayo. Are you