--------- Uh, welcome everyone. I'd like to call together the uh, November 18th meeting of the uh, City of Scottsdale Budget Review Commission for our regular meeting. Let's start with a roll call. >> Vice Chair Schwiker >> here. >> Commissioner Baden,
Commissioner Carla >> here. >> Commissioner Latiri >> here. Commissioner Newman >> here. >> Commissioner Stevens >> here. >> Uh I would just reinforce uh that you kind of need to be close to the mic when talking and need the green light on in order to be heard by the microphone.
Thank you. >> The first item on the agenda is public comment where citizens may address the members of the budget review commission during public comment regarding non-aggendaized items and on an agendaized item when the
item is presented. Arizona law prohibits the commission from discussing or taking action on an item that is not on the prepared agenda. Citizens may submit one request to speak public comment card per meeting to the city staff. Public testimony is limited
to three minutes per speaker and written public comment cards can be submitted to city staff at any time for the agendaized or not agendaized items. card submitted after public comment has begun for the item will be provided to the commission at the conclusion of the
public comment for that item. Um I don't believe we have any >> okay okay so the first thing on the agenda is introductions and you know we have some new members on here one of them is not here tonight but let's just
go around around and everybody quickly introduce themselves. Mark Stevens. You want more than that? >> Mark Stevens. I was on the commission last year. I'm a retired Ernston Young partner. Bob Lati, new to the commission. Last night
was my first meeting. It's quite an interesting meeting. Glad to be here. I uh started my career with Deote. I've been a uh CFO for the last 30 years and still practicing. >> Brad Newman uh was on the commission
last year. Um 30 years in pharmaceuticals, Eli Liy, Baxter Healthcare, moved moved here from Chicago 5 years ago and and was in various commercial roles. Carla um preserve pioneer Prop 490 campaign manager commissioner last year
and resident of Scottsdale since 1965. >> Dan Schwiker, my uh second year on the commission and a small former small business owner in Scottsdale and a resident of the city for the last 14 years. Okay.
So, welcome and Bob, welcome. Um, I I'm impressed that you showed up today after the meeting last night. It >> Yeah, there you go. There you go. Well, but by the time we finally got to our meeting, it was okay.
Um, so the first item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes from the October 1st, 2025 regular commission meeting. Does anybody have any uh additions or comments on the um minutes? I'm I'm
looking at Carla because I'm guessing she does. >> Um I have no um corrections this time because there's nothing really to correct. And again, I will once more register the fact that I prefer more complete minutes so that in the future,
if people are pursuing data for lawsuits, they have it. I just hope that all of the recorded items will be available 20 to 30 years from now should they be needed. Thank you. >> Yes. Let me just add something.
Jennifer, I can ask you a question right now. It's not it's not a hard one. Uh since these are more abbreviated minutes, which I am totally in favor of, would it be appropriate for us if we think there's a point that's very important for us to say uh Commissioner Stevens would like the minutes to
reflect that he blah blah blah blah blah and then that would be added in addition to the condensed minutes that you otherwise have just the key elements of. So, it would be our responsibility if we think there's something that's meriting uh additional coverage that we it's up
to us to say what that should be. >> I think that that's fine if you want to have the written minutes reflect that. I think as a total picture because the whole meeting is being recorded, that's part of sort of the minutes, right? like
what the city is doing is a summary, a highle summary, but then there's also going to be redundancies. There's the video, the recording, other things like that. If you want the written minutes to reflect something specifically, I think that that's fine if you want to ask for
that. Okay. Sure. I think um I think we should also double check with the city clerk as the city clerk would like these minutes to reflect how the city council does the minutes. So maybe, you know, we should
um seek advice from the city clerk on that as well. Thanks. >> I think that that's a good point. The city clerk has standardized the process for the summary minutes. So we want to make sure that this commission is in alignment with all the other commissions. So I think that that's a great idea. Thank you, Sonia.
>> Okay. So if that's the case, if I do something today where I say I would like it to reflect this, if you decide that's not appropriate, it will not be in those minutes. And I understand that. and it it will be um the city clerk just making sure that it's consistent.
>> Bob, so um I was obviously I wasn't at the uh meeting, but I did read the minutes and I serve on two boards right now and I was u affed at how brief they were. So if what you're saying that the real
content uh is available the all of the recorded minutes from the meeting. So that would supplement the summary that you send out. So if I had any issues or questions I can read through that video.
>> I'm not sure whether it's transcribed. No >> video. Okay. All right. So I would have to watch the video. >> Right. And Sonia is checking in with the clerk to make sure that the the level of detail in the summary is consistent with this city's practice which aligns with
the open meeting law. So she'll make sure she does that and ask the question and we'll continue consistently. >> I know that our attorneys that are on the board always wants to keep things brief, right? But this was so brief that uh now that I understand the supplement
that's available on the video, I am a little more comfortable with it. And I think um to to clarify the request for the minutes to be at the summary level that didn't come from the city attorney's office. That came from commissioners. >> Let me just add one thing. We did um
confer with the city clerk's office and there's really two options for city minutes. One is the detail minutes which you saw from escribers and the other one is the action type format which records just the actions and some bullet points
and comments and observations. So um the council minutes are done exactly like this whereas just actions and observations and suggestions or comments from council members in bullet point format and so we are following the city council format which is a preference of
the city clerk. Okay, with that said, is there a motion to approve the minutes? >> Motion to approve the minutes as written. >> Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> All those in favor, please say I.
>> Anybody opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Um yeah, now we go on to the adopt the amended bylaws. And uh since our last meeting, the the
council made some changes in the ordinance for the budget review commission of which you all have in front of you. And the changes are highlighted in red. And they have nothing to do with, by the way, with the scope of of
what we're doing. but it's just about the mechanics of the uh of the budget review commission and election of officers and things like that. So everything that is highlighted in red that has changed. So I if you
haven't had a chance to look at those go ahead and look at them for a minute or two and then we can go on to it. And does anyone have any questions on the uh changes to the bylaws? Mark, >> I'll make a motion that the bylaws be
adopted. >> I'll second that. >> Is there any further discussion from anyone on it? All those in favor, please say I. >> I opposed. Motion carries unanimously.
council could learn something from us on on meetings. >> Yeah, we are indeed. >> So, uh item number four on the um the agenda for today has been removed and moved to a future meeting at the
request of staff and that's for nomination of election of chair and vice chair. And >> why why was that moved? Well, because now that the bylaws have been amended, uh the the chair and the vice chair um have to be elected at the January
meeting. So, we have to wait till the January meeting. So, so that's just been postponed for two meetings tentatively for two meetings. >> Let the record reflect that we would have done it here because we're fast. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. Would have been done by now.
>> Yeah. Wait. >> Okay. Item number five, approval of the proposed meeting calendar. Uh, Carla. >> Okay. Um, I am going to propose that we we do
adopt this so we can let the city clerk give the public some certainty about what meetings we're having. But based on what happened in the work study last night with council, I think we're going to have to add a couple of meetings because this
calendar, the way it's laid out and the subject matter is to review the budget. And last night, additional things were somewhat authorized. And for example,
you know, we're going to have to come up with some sort of modified work plan. And so if we're going to do that and still stay on schedule, you know, perhaps November, December, we're going
to have to add another meeting where people come in with say their top three priorities for, you know, the work plan and we all just put them together and we reach consensus in my mind on a three-year plan, you know, and then we
can work out if any other addition additional meetings have to be added without putting too much pressure on staff as they have to prepare the budget. But again, this is this calendar is to review the budget. And last night,
um the majority of commissioners and council gave direction that we're going to do a little bit more than that. So that's I don't think we I think we can approve it as is to get certainty on these dates, but with the knowledge that
staff is going to have to come back to us with a couple of more additional dates, at least one, so we can put together a work plan. So that's my two cents. >> Commissioner Newman. Um, along those
lines, I took it upon myself to take I I was kind of thinking about the discussion last night and it kind of went into a one pager pulled an allnighter to put it together. No kidding. But I I I kind of integrated some of the things that the mayor said,
Barry said, you know, others. Um, and made it fit this agenda. And I thought it might at the discretion of the council or the commission, would it make sense to go through kind of what we think are some of the future agenda items and see how it fits with this?
I've got some I'm sure others have something too, but we would have to change the agenda to do that. It might it might be it might be a little less awkward because you said we could approve that. I made I for myself I made that fit my ideas fit to that, but I don't know how others feel. >> Well, I would love to do it. The
question is, is it legal? the order of the agenda. Can it be changed is the question I guess >> right you have to stick with what the description of the agenda that's on the agenda for this item. So it's requesting approval of proposed dates, times, and location of regular meetings.
>> Good. But the question is is can the can the last agenda item for future agenda items be done before this item? >> Oh yeah, you can continue this item. >> Sure. you guys change the just switch the two on the agenda, >> right? Yeah, >> that that was okay. So, that's possible
if we want to do it, but I but it's up to >> Dan. Well, first of all, let me let me give you my view as as chairing. I you know, I'm in charge of running the meeting, but it's not my agenda or anything. So, if people want to do I because because I'm not here to direct people or
anything. I'm here to kind of recognize who wants to talk. So if uh if people want to do it, >> I'm only think I just as I was listening to Carla, I was thinking that it might be worthwhile to have the what are those items that that might affect the agenda
and there might be things that go beyond the agenda, but it might be better to have that discussion first and then you approve you can say does this agenda make sense or do we adjust it? >> So do we need to vote on changing the order of the agenda? Okay. In that case, uh, Mark, you want to say something, but but when you're done, then I I agree
with Commissioner Newman, and I think we should go to um item number six. >> It it'll be a consistent thought. My my thought after hearing last night was if I were to approve this agenda, it would just be as to dates, times, and places, but not necessarily content.
Uh, and then I had the same thought on future agenda items because I think we need to figure out what scope we want to attack to decide what broad areas we're going to do a higher level analytical review on and what areas we're going to
do something other than that. >> Yeah. No, that's that that's a good point. And notice on here, these are preliminary topics, so those aren't written in stone anyway. >> I would agree with that. We could we could we could approve do these dates work and times work and then content
changes. >> If we hear your talk, we we may when we're done hearing that may decide we need another meeting or two. So let's go ahead and >> just knowing what I know about it at this point. I don't think so, but >> Okay, >> it's possible. >> Okay, so let's switch and let's go to uh
identification and approval of possible future agenda items. Commissioner Newman. >> I do. I uh Oh, I got a hand out a couple here. Keep one for myself. Pass
this along. >> Hello everybody. This is just a stream of stream of consciousness this morning sitting down having listened to the discussion last night and thinking about what are some of the things that we could be doing here because we can wait for an we can
wait for an ordinance to be we were kind of saying oh I I was thinking about what I said and I thought that's too permission based I think we can probably do some things here in terms of review and do some of the work you don't necessarily have the authority to give a thumbs up thumbs down on projects or anything like that would be an ordinance
type of thing but in terms of doing some of the work of the commission. Um, we can just start doing it if we if we make the proper request. So, I I kind of took some of the comments from last night and I'll just walk down through it and I was thinking, you know, one of the one of the things that was on the table was around, hey, what's the variance from
budget? So the first item there is at each BRC meeting or maybe once a quarter whatever whatever is decided but we could just start to say hey could we ask that staff come forward with the variances to budget that are over 10% or more than a million dollars and and let's highlight those on an opex and a
capex perspective and and go through that and so are there and if there's are significant delays on projects are there um uh are there are there discussion is there discussion around why it's behind or whatever but I mean that's the operational piece of this I don't want to get into what city manager K city
manager Kaitton always does, but that was kind of what we were talking about last night in ter so so we can we can discuss, you know, whether these are appropriate or not, but that was the spirit of what we talked about last night. Um, and if there are reports that are already in um in place, I certainly
don't want to create work that's not necessary or anything like that, but I would hope that that in terms of these types of things, these are these are reports that already exist as as Commissioner Graham was mentioning. Then at the December 18th meeting, I've I've read through some of the um construction the the construction projects audit uh
which was really great stuff. Uh but also I know there was a lot of assignments in there. So it would be great to hear kind of where we stand on those things. Um and because that was one of the big topics that we had from last time around. So to me it's a one-time thing, but I don't think it would be a necessarily a huge effort to get a report out on that and understand
kind of where we stand on some of those things. I think it would help inform us as we head into budgeting uh this year. Then um the under the December 18th meeting um the fin commissioner Graham was talking about the financial health of the city
and some of the metrics that are there. And so maybe at the December me December meeting we could brainstorm some of those but I suppose there are metrics that the city already has that would be beneficial so you're not recreating the wheel or anything there. And so I I I certainly tried to develop this in such a way that we can leverage what the city
already has. We just don't know what to ask for. So, I'm trying to put in front of us, hey, why don't we get out ahead of this and especially before we get into the middle of the budget session and we can already have looked at some of those import most important metrics, have those in our head as we think about the budget. I think we'll be a little bit more informed commission uh in terms
of being able to ask proper questions when budget time comes around. Um, and once again, uh, if there are mechanisms in place for this, let's leverage those. Let's not create the wheel. And if we don't have those, maybe that's a good opportunity, you know, as well in in terms of what the commission looked critically looking at that and saying, should we have some of this? Then at the
January meeting, um the uh there were target areas for for budget optimization that uh the mayor was talking about. I know that's that's a little bit bigger lift in terms of understanding whether it be but why can't we start why can't we start identifying where are some areas of possible um of possible
scrutiny that we can and discussion that we could have around that in in terms of trying to achieve an overall 5% budget. I mean it's a positive discussion not a not a scary discussion. It's not Doge or anything like that, but it's it's really taking a hard look at at where are some of our cost, where are some of the
opportunities, and certainly that's that's a that's something that is in conjunction with staff. Um, and then from the financial health metrics, um, we we could then come back from the December meeting and follow up on the financial health metrics uh that we that we discuss brainstormed at the LA at the
at the December meeting and do talk about that more formally at the January meeting. maybe that can be an ongoing set of metrics that we periodically look at on a quarterly basis or something like that. And then um there was a I threw in there a discussion of u you know is there is it possible for us to
and I know I know uh city manager Kaitton has looked at some of this and and Sonia uh Treasurer Andrews has looked at this. Um, now that we have our new computer systems in place, there are there are ways to go into those systems
with AI and consultants that have benchmarks of other municipalities. I think that might be the the way to to do a shortcut toward getting um good insight into where there are opportunities for budget savings and and opportunities for consolidation um or
changes that are positive. But it but it's such a massive amount of data across two billion dollars of spend that you know that this is where we could leverage technology to help us kind of get up to speed quickly so we can incorporate that into this budget cycle and not have to wait for the 2728 budget
cycle to go through that. So, those are some future budget items, future agenda items that um we could review as as a proposal and there may be others that have ideas on that, but that was my thinking on that and I thought that might I tried to make this fit the
agenda as written, but I don't know what workload that means, what all that means there. So, uh but certainly when we get into the heat of budget review and things like that, there's so much going on there. It's it's hard to do some of these things. So I thought is is that possible to leverage some of these early
this December and January meeting to do that? >> Yes, Bob. >> No, when I was looking at that 5% it kind of was curious to me. Uh I know when I was with the operations controller of Revlon, I had a huge budget and ED came down for cost
reductions, something like 5%. All we did was look at unfilled positions for the last two years and eliminated them. We had a 10% budget reduction. So I really don't understand the uh arbitrary 5%.
I I think that it would be better if we just objectively looked at patterns of spending to look for opportunities of reduction as opposed to setting an arbitrary target of 5%. And I believe that's what at least
that's what I heard from council uh direction last night was not an arbitrary 5% but look for I mean I know the mayor said 5% but I I heard from other council members that it was just look for efficiency. >> Well if if if you give an objective hey
let's get better. I don't think that does much. I don't think people get rallied around that. You say let's set a target. If you really want to set an aggressive let's set for 10%. I was used to getting targets after the first quarter in every corporation I worked in 10% cut in your budget. Where where's it going to come from? Now, I'm
not saying we're not saying we need to do that here, but if we're going to stretch ourselves, 5% isn't a heavy heavy heavy a heavy burden to to try and at least stretch your thinking and go after that. Now, you do the AI project, you do the
consultant, things like that. Maybe you can go further than that. I don't know. We'll find what. I think it's it it challenges you to challenge your paradigm if you put a number on it. Doesn't mean it's not doge. You're not going after it that way, but you are trying you are trying to say let's stretch ourselves and say how can we become more efficient? How can we
achieve some of these things? So, so I' I'd like to hear a little perspective from uh maybe the city treasurer and the city manager on this because at least I would assume that you're looking at not bringing an inflated budget
where there's an easy 5% for us to go in and say, "Oh, let's lower this by another 5%." But correct me if I'm wrong. >> Yeah, I appreciate uh the question. I continue to ask myself how how do we
best use the expertise that I'm looking at across the room and I think we're just not quite there yet. Um and I see tremendous expertise and this is I appreciate this work. This is great to help refine how do Yeah. How do we move
forward? How do we frame this? And I also think it's important that the s sooner we get on the same page with city manager and the BRC the better. And so that we're not in conflict with our
interests and that the 2 plus two equals five. I use that for fun. Um and I know 2 plus two normally equals four. Um but in this instance, your knowledge, my knowledge and goals and how do we work together to really maximize where do we get? Um
and I I I would respectfully introduce that municipal uh budgeting is different than corporate um the the sources of funds is different. And so the big question is do we talk at a high level?
Do we talk at a granular level? I know kind of the reference of audit type or detailed information is typically referenced if and sometimes you got to understand the tree before you understand the the forest. I can appreciate if some learn that way. I
continue to be a big advocate that we have a lot of work to do over the next uh 40 to 60 days to prepare a budget for city council. And what I would submit as a framework, the best way to utilize the expertise that I'm looking at across the
table is if we do the heavy lift and present an outline of proposed to you and then we use that to scrub it and go through and ask questions and find opportunities. I think without that it's a lot of hypothetical and it's a lot
about what this line item what that line and let let me give even more granular framework to how do we do that. we can start with the capital as soon as and we can spend as we well know a lot of time on the capital um and and that that can
be presented sooner that than the others and that gets us going as we're simultaneously staff-wise preparing uh the operating piece and so capital is being prepared capital comes to you start looking at that reviewing asking
questions and we'll come in we'll have meetings on that probably the Jan January for sake of discussion and then simultaneously parallel we're developing the operating budget and then presenting that to you and then you we pick a framework. So for example when I start
hearing five and 10 and find efficiencies um I've dealt with this for 28 years in my career and so I think when we start presenting uh some major departments you'll see that it becomes
really tough. So for sake of discussion, you've got your fire department. Don't hold me to this, but let's call it approximately 95 millionish or so. You've got your police department uh call it approximately 140 million. So
you've got nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in those first responders. Are we going to cut 5% uh from sworn officers? We've got a couple vacancies now and sworn. Do we start cutting those? I don't think I heard that last night. So, so that's the that right. So,
that's the intricacies when we get into it. It sounds easy, but but again, when make us present, make us justify. We will articulate how we got there. I we've already launched out with our budget message to staff. They're
diligently working on entering into the system, if you will. Uh so, that's going on. So again, just to close out my comments, sorry, a little long-winded there. I really think the more we can deal with the actual 26 27 is going to
be better time spent and end up with a product, a better product uh for city council that collectively we we feel uh we've maximized our time. >> Maybe in the spirit of kind of what I put any when you say 5%. I know it it it
people get nervous about oh they're going to there's a budget cuts coming to me I view it more as I agree with you that there are some structural things that's one of the frustrations I had in the last year last year is that so much money is well the voters wanted this so the voter then money goes there and this
one comes in on this particular tax so it has to go there so I get that but in terms of look and looking at each of those items and then saying is there a bucket somewhere where our target is to get to that because like you police and fire, you're not going to cut that. You're not. I know that. But are there
things within that or outside of that and areas that that have a lesser priority to that are core to the services of the city that where we should be looking in that as we go through the budget. So, it could be it can be in the context of the 2627 budget. I I I I have no issue with that.
But I think the spirit of it is to say how can we how can we look at that and go through as we go through that and say where are we getting because our last budget last year came back and we had expenses growing faster than revenues. So I don't think that's what we want to have again this time around.
>> If I may, Mr. Chair, let me just speak to that a little bit. I totally concur. Uh I think uh I just speak personally for me kind of came a little towards the tail end or maybe middle of the budget
and so uh I felt a little bit um kind of moving along with the train that had already left the station if you will. >> Yeah, exactly. So I think we're in a we're all new. So I didn't want to be in that situation for 2627
and so uh we quite frankly started in May of this year working on 2627. >> You may already have a stack of things. >> Yeah. and and particularly started with the capital and that's the other thing when we start peeling back sounds like the $2 billion budget you know um the
capital there's a lot there and and how we do the multi-year capital I I think is something worthy of con discussion that certainly drives some how we budget those capital projects and it's those types of fundamental things that have
put us on a path that I think we sometimes gloss over. Say that again. The multi-year capital budgeting that we do is fundamentally different than what I'm used to. And that has set us on a path of budgeting. Those types of things
can be articulated and discussed when we are working with a realistic 2627 budget. And as we outline, I will submit that the budget that you see for 2627 will be much different than the budget that you saw for 2526. I mean, you can
you can read this piece of paper, but I also I know you've been doing a lot of those things. So, um and and and I'm I'm sure there's a lot of these you might say that'll be easy that'll be an easy one to show. That'll be an easy one to show. You know, I which is fine. I I I'm just not aware of those things. >> That's right. >> Yeah. >> Bob. >> Yeah.
>> And then Carla, this is mostly directed at the city manager. When I was with Deote, um I was assigned to a uh a large municipality to audit it and I was mostly a systems auditor, not a balance sheet auditor. But what would help me in
my budget review is that what what I found very confusing in my only audit of a municipality was the allowance of funds transfer. So it was like auditing one earmarked fund after another earmarked fund after
another earmarked fund and then there was something called funds transfer and said what is this and they were allowing budget underruns or hard spots in the budget to cover overruns in other parts of the budget. Is that allowed under uh
how you put your budget together might better help me understand it? >> I'll defer to the treasurer on that. I see her already giving the nonverbal response to that. >> Yeah, thank you, city manager Kaitton.
Um, Commissioner um Lati, no, all our transfers have a purpose. So, like for instance, our uh council adopted an ordinance to uh allocate funds from our bed tax to different purposes. So, like
for example, 12% of our bed tax is allocated to the general fund. So you'll see that as a transfer from the tourism fund to the general fund because of the ordinance direction or um there may be a
transfer from the solid waste fund to repay a loan from the general fund that was properly um documented and you know um executed as a loan from the general fund to the solid waste fund. So every internal fund transfer is not to balance
the budget of the fund but there's very specific purposes and we can certainly provide those um explanations to you and the reasons for those transfers. They're also audited by our annu uh with our annual audit. Our our um uh city
auditors also audit those transfers. Thank you >> Carla. And then I think Mark. >> Um yes, thank you. Uh All of this is very helpful. I I I like
what Brad did, but I have a I also understand what what city manager is saying. And my question before I go into specific questions is the overall question is is there a way to marry the two? Because if we do wait and actually see the
budget to get into digging into certain things and then from that could come perhaps the process that would guide the next three years you know because we do need to look at this as a multi-year
approach. So that's one thought. The other thing is I think we heard very clearly last night that with the exception of the mayor, no one wants to look at 5% across the board. Um I mean I
lean more toward what Bob said about efficiencies. Um but I understand it could be five, it could be 10. Again, if you're looking at efficiencies, I do have a couple of questions for Brad about well and for staff too. The the
beginning part about each BRC meeting. My question on that is how much of that would it that add to your workloads and how much would it add timewise theoretically to each meeting? Um, you
know, I'm looking at, you know, time spent versus benefit because I can see a benefit to this. But the question is, how would it work for staff? Then my second question is about the December meeting when you're talking about
metrics and trends. Does that fit into sustainability? I mean, it sounds like it does. um because we had on the December 18th meeting, you know, sustainability and revenue trends and, you know, looking at revenue is one of
the things I would really like to hear, but does that fit into metrics and trends or am I using the words wrong? >> Um, so those are my questions and concerns. >> Chair and commissioners, I would like to kind of bring us back to the agenda
because we do have to comply with that. So, a lot of the discussion that you've been having, I think it kind of falls in the approval of the proposed meeting calendar, some of the conversation you were having with the city manager. But when you start to get into the details of the proposal for future agenda and
asking those specifics, as you see how we've agendaized it, we're not supposed to be discussing and deliberating and taking action on it. All we're doing is voting as to whether we want to put this on an agenda for a future meeting. So
for detailed questions about how this is going to work and discussing details that are in this proposed future agenda item, those discussions would need to occur after it's been agendaized in that future meeting. >> So So we couldn't actually change it to
what Brad's recommending as far as a December 18th meeting. We would have to agendaize this for December 18th and then have the questions and the implementation then. >> No, what I'm saying is if you want to get into the real details of what Brad's
proposing, Brad Brad proposed this, Commissioner Newman, sorry, sir. Um, he proposed this under the agenda item of the identification of future agenda items. So, this has not currently been agendaized. The public doesn't know that we're going to discuss this, deliberate
on it, vote on it. So, the only question is, are we going to have this discussion at a future meeting? Not that you have to wait till December 18th to talk about specific things. You can agendaize this right now for your next meeting to say, "Hey, yep, we want to talk about this,
deliberate it, get into it, analyze, see if we agree with these different points." That's what how you would have to proceed. >> Our next meeting is December 18th, which is why I'm asking that. >> Okay. Sorry, I didn't realize that. Thank you. >> So, I think we just had a miscommunication there. >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> Can I get the staff answer or not? >> It's not agendaized. It It's just for a future possible future agenda meeting. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mark. Yeah. Let me let me tell you where I
thought we were going to end up today or one of my thoughts when I tried to sort all these things together. Uh I thought what I was going to propose as a future agenda item was for uh the agenda item to be deciding the key areas that we
want to review and the nature of the broader procedures we're going to do on the other areas almost like a work plan. And the one thought I had there was I wonder if in getting to that agenda item if it would make any sense for one or two of us as individuals to meet with
our approved leazison which would be treasurer Andrews. I think I'm saying this right. Uh in order to try to flush out a a model of what an approach plan would be and then for city manager C uh C Katon, sorry, you'd think I'd know by
now. Kayen, uh uh I what you said resonated with me about we're not in sync. And so the one thing I guess I'm kicking around in my head is is there a way one or two of us could meet with uh Treasure Andrews, sketch out something that we both think would be doable, not
too invasive on staff time, yet meet the objectives of what this group would want to do that we could flush out and discuss at the next meeting. So anyway, that's kind of what I walked into this this meeting thinking about. Also, I do know on the 18th there's a meeting on
the sustainability and structural balance and I I would hope that that would stay in there. I think you're if I understand things right, you're working on some things in that area that could be beneficial to the our understanding of uh matters.
>> Um, assistant city attorney, um, do you have any comments on what we just heard? My advice on the matter of com subcommittees is we talked about that last time. I think you guys talked about that a little bit last night. So subcommittees also have to comply with
the open meeting law. So if you're doing your planning for your schedule and you're wanting to have two people do that and do that planning privately with the treasur that that can't happen. We need to be doing that in an open meeting. I I thought she was our staff leaison according to the bylaws and we
were permitted to talk to her when it came to understanding information and working on things. Is that not the case that she's not our leazison? >> If if I may help sure interpret just a little bit trying to help uh what I heard you say which I think you're
trying to thread the needle on try to help you as well. I I heard individual and I heard individual uh commission members uh meeting with the leaison. Let's stop there and see if I heard that right. Okay. >> Is that fair? >> I I I did say possibly two of us, but
you're maybe the better way to look at it is individual. >> Yeah, I was trying. Let's go with individual for now and then we'll see if that gets so if that meets individual meeting with liaison on an issue. How's that land? >> You can meet with her. you can talk to
her about things. But if you're doing something that's part of the commission's responsibility, like making the plan for the future of how you're going to do your work, then one person could form a committee, a subcommittee. A subcommittee doesn't have to be two
people. One person could be a subcommittee, and it's still subject to the open meeting law. And I don't think um I know that we've talked about this a lot. You talked about this with the city attorney um last night and so I don't want this to consume the time that you
have because these cons discussions are taking quite a long time. I want to make sure I'm giving you the advice but the advice on that. I've given that advice. >> Okay. So basically what I'm hearing is just commissioners, why don't you just sit back here? The city will feed you
what you need to look at and go take a look at it and tell tell us what you think. That's kind of what I'm hearing. No, my advice is that we have to comply with the open meeting law and so work of the commission including subcommittees
has to be done openly. >> Am I ever allowed to meet separately with Sonia to discuss matters to understand elements of the budget? >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. Then I I guess for this this group though, I still don't know how we're going to come up with a framework
for how we're going to carry out what we're going to do other than we just have to leave it in the hands of city staff to feed us what they believe is best for us in the meetings going forward. agenda. Commissioner Carla,
>> I I I understand um Mark's frustration, but at the same time, and meaning no disrespect whatsoever, I don't get how one commissioner could meet with the staff liaison, which is appropriate, or
talk with them, which is appropriate, but how could they work through and come up with the work plan when there is no consensus from the rest of the commission that has been reached? You know what I mean? I mean, if we aren't giving direction to staff liaison
to then work through it over the phone or however with one commissioner, um then it's not a group effort. >> Mr. Chair, if I may, and again trying to just kind of navigate us here because I I sense where we're we're all trying to
get quite frankly. Um I wonder and again it's a question to my colleague here. It it's pretty standard in or I'm familiar with getting feedback to liaison. So providing individually providing feedback let's call it that for sake of
discussion. We we stay away from direction. uh your your feedback to the liaison and then the liaison really pulling that together and then developing it into a framework for consideration of the body
that may land with I don't trying how does that land with my colleague does that >> yeah is that what would that work for the commission >> my question is is that consistent with how every other commission operates I'm really only familiar with one. It's
called city council. And and that is how that is how so we get >> I recall Carl and I having meetings with the with the preserves group and and staff and that wasn't an open meeting issue. So I'm confused why would this
commission be treated differently than other commissions in terms of the the rigidity and it is rigid of the way the interpretation of the open meeting law where I can't call Sonia and talk with her about something maybe this item that has to be done in open session you're
saying correct >> no that's where I just said that so um so one person coming in I think where we get a little sideways it >> I I'm Right. So, so if individually you have conversations with Sonia and
then Sonia on her own not collectively with develops the framework to be con uh returned for you for your consideration adoption moving forward. That is a normal path that we're used to and I think I'm getting a nod that that's I
think where we go sideways is when two get together. So that kind of starts to add to the the numbers. Certainly it clouds the issue and then this the second point and then if it is really formulated by what then it really feels like a subcommittee and then the the
work is done behind the scenes which is really not transparent. >> Okay. So so let me test this. We have a this on let's say I called Sony up and talk with her about this. I want to present this to the group. I want to talk with you about this. See how it works with this. That's okay.
>> Say it again. Just >> I put this together this morning. Put it together. Was going to hand it and we just handed it out and we just went through it. Let's say I called her and talked and talked with her about this beforehand, you know, because to see how it fits and what do you think and that type of thing. Is that okay
under what you just described? >> Is that okay? >> Yes. >> Great. What >> but but could but but what I heard earlier is you were saying that all of that had to be open meeting. >> I was responding to um Commissioner Newman. I was responding to Commissioner
Steven's statement that two people were going to go and develop the plan. That would be something different. >> What you just described is not developing the plan. You're saying, "Hey, Sonia, I have this this idea. Let's talk about it. What do you think?
I'm going to present it to the commission. You're not two people developing the plan." You're just conversing with liaison. >> And I'm not I want to be clear. I want to help this commission to do what it needs to do and comply with the open
meeting law. I'm not trying to be rigid in the advice, but the advice is is the advice and I'm trying my best to help you to get where you need to go. >> Thank Carla. >> Okay, we're we're at this point kind of going around in circles. So, it's like
why don't we just like fish or cut bait? Let's let's take Brad's item. Let's agendaize it for the next meeting whether it's December 18th or it's something before it. We also ask people to bring their ideas for the work plan
and that is the agenda item and and the focus of that meeting is to come up with a work plan you know springboarding off of these ideas and the calendar because we can't make a decision here.
We can't ask details questions here. We know that we want to consider this. Um, we know that we want to consider some other ideas Mark has. So, let's set a meeting and agenda discussing it and coming to a resolution hopefully
and take into account, you know, city manager Kaitton's ideas about let's do it in a way where we actually are dealing with the budget and then we can figure out how we want to dig into it and then my fact that it has to be a
multi-year approach. So, that's my suggestion. So, Commissioner Carla, do you think we can do that in the framework of the current uh calendar that we have laid out here or or does anyone think we need to add one additional meeting and agenda size and
talk about Mark's idea and and um Brad's idea and have everybody else bring together the three things or two things or one thing that they're interested in looking at this year and then have a meeting where we put those together and in an open
determine our scope of work. >> And my answer to that question would be to ask Sonia because everything she's got listed for the 18th meeting, I would really like to hear. And the question is, do you think we can fit them both in the same meeting?
>> And and to clarify that, I was not suggesting to preempt the agenda that was in place. These are all augmentations or other things, but so I I never was suggesting to preempt the agenda, but >> but it's a big enough discussion that I'm not sure we can do that and do these
agenda items in that meeting. >> Well, I defer >> that's 100% fair. I defer to S. Uh I you know I would tend to agree with um our chair Schwiker that I think it would be hard to fit in these
discussions of um the financial condition because that is a lot of trend information ratios and um historical revenue trends that you probably have a lot of questions on and may have some
interest in um discussing or exploring further. I think that might be difficult to try to squeeze in that discussion in a two-hour meeting with the discussion on top future topics and all that. >> So maybe we need to have a separate meeting to just do that and agendaize
that and this is one of the this becomes one of the items in there to disc to discuss. Okay. >> I'm I'm okay with that. I I just I just wanted to if if we have to go through that process to get there, I feel it can be faster. But I understand, you know, I understand there's rules. So, so what
I'm hearing is is that um I I believe this agenda that we have the calendar set out is good. >> Yes. >> Uh but we want to add one meeting before the December 18th meeting >> if possible. >> If possible. Do we have a consensus on
that? >> What's the nature of that meeting? >> Well, the nature of that meeting is to discuss um your ideas that that you put together, Brad's ideas. Um, I'm sure Bob's gonna have some ideas. >> Can also add to that what
having revealed a little bit of this. What are the ideas staff has in terms of how to efficiently do it? Because I I certainly don't want to create a bunch of work. But these are issues that I think we agree are relevant to kind of how educating uh getting all on the same page. So if we can do that in an
efficient way, I'm happy to >> change it however how however that what makes sense. Commissioner Carla >> and I go back to a word he just said which is efficient. Okay. if everybody's bringing in what they have and I love that you know branch is on one page you
know and if I want to make sure of this you know if before this meeting one commissioner wants to talk through their ideas with the staff liaison they are welcome to call them and that is okay as
long as no consensus is reached that they ask for advice etc etc and And that way maybe they can bring a more efficient suggestion to the meeting. That's correct. We can do that. Okay. Thank you.
>> So, as we come up with these and you you know Brad, you've got yours and you know Mark, you've got your ideas. Do do we have to hold off and bring those to the next meeting or they can they submit those to Sonia and kind of put everything together so we have an an
agenda that shows the topics we're going to discuss? Yes, Commissioner. You can submit those to Sonia and then she can put them on the agenda for the next meeting. >> Commissioner Mark. >> Yeah, thank you. Uh, okay. Sonia, this
will be interesting for you. I'm sitting here and I I all along have been extremely concerned about getting enough information so I can competently do a review particularly within two hours. As we're talking about all these things we want to look into, I'm thinking of you and I'm trying to think is there some
way I can stick to the model because you seem to think this is going to work. I'm I'm skeptical. We've had that discussion, but I'm trying to rethink to say is there some way in which I can you you can share that you can get us the information we need that will be an
adequate quality and still stick somehow to your framework. So another way to say that is if we get you all this information about the things we want to look at, is there a way you can blend that into what you're doing here and then come back to us and say, "Oh, when we go through each of these areas,
here's what we're going to do when it comes to capital improvement plan." Yes, we're going to present it at this meet this time here, but we're also going to have 10 minutes at future meetings to uh to uh go over the variance report very quickly or when we uh give you the
capital improvement plan and uh city manager Kane uh I you're you're saying you're going to give us good information. I don't know what that's going to look like that I really that I'll understand it. Uh, and and part of part of me is is like,
do I just need to trust you that you're going to get me a good enough quality information that I'll be able to do a competent review. So, I'm kind of changing things here a little bit with what I'm saying. I'm trying to see if there's a way to stick with what you've done here, but you're going to tell us more about how we're going to get the
information we need to meet our objectives. So, uh, Commissioner Stevens, I I think I'm going to have to think about how we're going to do this this year given the direction from council. And, um, so
just kind of a recap in the October city council meeting when they adopted the amended, um, BRC ordinance, I felt that there was pretty clear direction to focus on reviewing the proposed budget, which is how this um, calendar came
about. focus on the proposed budget, put the boundaries, not do any, you know, um, kind of, you know, digging in or looking at other things. >> Deep dives. >> The deep Yes. Trying to avoid that word. The the the dives. Um,
>> um, so that was the direction originally from the October meeting, which is um aligns with the ordinance that was adopted. But, uh, last night's meeting gave us a different direction. It sounds like the uh uh council would like the um
budget review commission to identify focus areas, look at metrics, ratios, and help um identify areas that you feel are maybe um you know that that the city
ought to pay some attention to. Identify focus areas and today's conversation understanding that each of you might have specific areas that you would like to see discussed or included in part of
this um work plan. I think what would be helpful is um just like Commissioner Newman has submitted his ideas, if I can obtain some ideas of uh what you feel you should or would like to look into based on council's direction, then maybe
I could put it all in my head and see if I can fit that into this current um schedule of meetings or if we need to make some adjustments to that. Hopefully that is clear.
>> Well, it's clear, but if if we wait until the next meeting before you make the determination if we can do it without adding another meeting, then it's too late to add another meeting. Um >> so um u by uh interchair striker I think
your uh your recommendation to add one meeting before the December meeting might is a good idea and maybe we can look at um availability of the commissioners to have a meeting either the beginning of December or the end of
November to um pull all this together and make sure that this calendar still works for everybody. But I would have to have your ideas all, you know, sent to me. >> So So if we got you our ideas by close of business on Friday,
>> do it this week. >> Do it this week. And then you could pull people and find if there's a time that we could all meet um before the December 18th meeting. I think that kind of will work.
>> Then then this agenda works. >> Yeah. Um Bob, okay with you? Okay, Mark. Okay. Um so let let's go back to the approval of
the proposed meeting calendar and the chair would entertain a motion. I move that we approve the proposed meeting agenda calendar with the addition of one other meeting either the last week in November or in December
before the December 18th scheduled meeting. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Otherwise, the chair will call the question. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed? Motion carries unanimously.
I move we adjourn. >> Did we miss something? >> It's still greedy. >> I do. Do future agenda items. Do we complete future agenda items? >> Oh, I thought we did complete the future agenda items. I'm sorry. >> Just did the calendar. >> Oh, okay. All right. We were
>> I thought we Oh, we didn't >> I don't know that I I have any others, but uh >> before we adjourn, let's see. Does anyone have any other future agenda items? >> Because you don't get it in now, you don't get to do it. >> Okay. Well, then I move >> Okay. Okay, I guess not.
>> What I moved before, >> which is the special meeting agenda item, which is the next meeting, would be to consider um Commissioner Newman's proposal. uh Commissioner Stevens uh
abbreviated proposal because I understand and any other ideas that the rest of the commissioners want to bring forward to be as their priority in the work plan for this cycle and possibly
the next two years. >> Okay. >> And get them to Sonia by >> Do we want a date folks? >> Yeah, but by the end of >> end of this week. end of this week >> by the end of this week which is November 21st.
>> So she can collate them and get them out to the commission before the meeting for review. >> Anything else folks? >> Second. >> Okay.
Is there any other discussion on Carla's motion? Otherwise, the chair will entertain a motion or the chair will call the vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries unanimously. Now, the chair will entertain a motion to adjurnn.
>> Motion. >> So moved. Done. >> Thank you. Um, Part: 2
Uh good evening. Uh it appearing to be the appointed hour for the meeting to begin. Uh, I will as the chair call the meeting to order at this time of the Citizens Bond Oversight Committee and
ask Aaron to do the roll call, please. >> Committee member Coughlin absent. Committee member Davis >> here. >> Uh, Chair Deoce >> here. >> Committee member Fischer is also absent.
Committee member Holland >> here. Committee member her is absent. Committee member Kamasu >> here. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Uh moving through the agenda. Item number one on the
regular agenda is the approval of the May 29, 2025 uh summarized meeting minutes. Uh copy of those minutes have been included uh for the committee members in the uh meeting packet that was uh distributed prior to the meeting.
And uh so uh at this time, unless there are questions, I would uh entertain a motion to approve those minutes as presented. >> I move we approve these minutes. >> All right. Thank you. Is there a second? >> I'll second.
>> Thank you. Uh the uh motion has been made uh to approve the meeting minutes for May 29. Uh questions at this time? No, seeing no questions, I'll ask for a vote. All in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I.
>> Opposed? None. All right. The uh minutes will stand approved. Moving to the second uh item on the agenda. Uh similarly, it relates to the uh September 8th, 2025 summarized meeting minutes.
Again, those uh minutes have been presented to the members in advance of the meeting. It's in the uh package uh that was presented and uh distributed. Uh at this time, uh I will uh entertain a motion to approve those minutes unless
there are questions. See no questions. Is there a minute? Is there a motion to approve? >> I'd like to make a motion to approve. >> Uh member >> second. >> Member Kamasu uh makes the motion to approve. Member Davis. Uh, seconded.
Questions? Seeing no questions, I'll ask for a vote. All in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. I. >> I. >> Opposed. None. Therefore, the minutes will be accepted as approved. All right. Moving
to item number three. an update on the bond 2019 program, including question one, parks, recreation, and senior services. Question two, community spaces and infrastructure, and question three,
public safety and technology. And for that update, uh, I will recognize Allison Timku, city engineer. Alison. >> Uh, thank you, chair, members of the committee. Wrong way.
Sorry, Maya. I'll let you advance it. Next slide, please. Um, next slide. Okay, so this slide shows our um question one fiscal year 2526 projects. Um just wanted to give
you a brief um update on the presentation. Um we just met back in September. There have hasn't been a lot of changes in our projects as they go through design and construction. The process um you know
takes takes some time. So there's not a lot of specific updates on the projects from the previous presentation back in September. So um the first project right here is project number 13. It it's expand Green Granite Re Granite Reef Senior Center to meet demand for adult daycare. Um the
funding for this project has been moved to fiscal year 2627. So that um hasn't started yet. It previously had been funded for 2526. Um project 21 is expand via via Linda senior center to meet demand for senior services and we are
proceeding with program and early design for that project. Project 22 is build new swimming pools and replace building at cactus pool and we have started a feasibility study for that project. Um, we're both looking at location for the
project if Cactus uh the location of C Cactus Park is the most appropriate location or we're also looking at Mountain View Park to see if that might be um a suitable location for this. And obviously, if we make that change, that's something that would come back
through you um first before going to city council for that recommendation. But right now, we're just really early on in the feasibility study. 41 is install the solar heating system for Elorado Pool and that's the project that we're going to bring back to you
again tonight for the consideration of the scope change request. Um 42 is at a dog park to Thompson P. Uh we are planning to start construction uh this winter on that that project. Um project 60 is double solar power generating
capacity at Appaloosa Library. We have had our design build manager evaluating this with our other solar projects and this is likely a project that we we will bring to you in the future um for potential scope change consideration as
it is uh very underfunded and there's not a lot of options that we can do with the amount of funding that we have. But if we do have um savings and other projects, then we could look at what potential we have and bring that to you for further consideration. But that's
for a future agenda item. And then 61 is purchase land, expand Pinnacle Peak parking lot, staff office and restrooms, renovate hiking trail, and construct an interpretive trail. And again, this is the um property that requires Arizona State Land uh department um some of
their land and that would require auction and we're waiting for to see if a developer would be interested to purchase the raining portion of the uh land and then we could proceed with that project. We are doing a feasibility study right now on that project so we
can really determine how many parking spaces we need, how much space it would require, what does the grading and drainage look like. So we are moving forward on a feasibility study on that. Next slide please. And then this slide shows the
implementation schedule for the projects in question one both current and in the future years for both design, construction and other. The other again is the pinnacle peak parking um because we need to acquire the land. Next slide please.
So these are the projects in fiscal year 2526 question two. Our first project listed here is 15 build 200 space parking lot off of 75th Street to serve the city court and the Scottsdale Stadium. Construction is delayed on this
project. Uh we do have some um EPA requirements that need to be met on the site and we don't think we had originally thought we could reschedu it for spring of 2026. Now it's looking it's potential for the following year for spring of 2027 to
start that project. Again, we're just waiting on EPA clearance to be able to start that construction. Um, project 18 is build roadway and pedestrian improvements along Second Street. This project, um, it's indicated as on hold, but what we are doing with this
project is we are going to be looking at how we can design the improvements to Second Street within the existing budget. >> 19 is Yes. Um just a quick one before you move on. Uh backing up to number 15,
the parking lot for uh the city court and the Scottsdale stadium. Is that is that being driven just by the city or uh does the uh does the stadium occupant have some voice in that? When you say
it's delayed for EPA requirements, who who is in who's who's responsible for that or is it delayed because of the lack of cooperation from the other party? It's it's going to be a joint effort, is it not? >> Um, Chair Dubois, uh, yes. So,
>> Duboce, I'm sorry. >> Um, yeah. So, the delay is uh because of the EPA, we're waiting on EPA clearance. So there is some groundwater or ground contamination in the area from previous
companies that operated in the area. Um they're contributing parties and they have to contribute towards the remediation. We originally thought that we were going to be able to construct the parking lot without disturbing any of the ground beneath, but um we're
waiting on EPA clearance to be able to proceed with that project. Is that going to impact the cost of the project from the from the city standpoint? >> Currently, no. >> Okay. >> So, we would still be on budget for that
particular project irrespective of the EPA requirements. >> That's correct. Unless we have to do some uh remediation that uh we we aren't anticipating. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Yep. >> Okay. Okay. Project um 19, build roadway
and pedestrian improvements along Marshall Way north of Indian School Road. That project is new this fiscal year and we have not kicked off design for that yet. 23 is repair lakes and irrigation at Vista Del Camino Park in the Indian Ben Wash and construction is progressing on that project. Um the
latest uh GMP that was authorized here it says 1125 which causes a little bit of confusion. It was 11:25 of 2024. So it was authorized last year that GMP and that construction is progressing. 32 is renovated and modernized stage 2 theater
at SCPA. Um that project is planned to occur with the future expansion Vice Scotsdale Art. They're planning to do an expansion um and build a new stage as an addition and we would do this project at the same time. So construction is only
going on at once. 45 is renovate horse barns to increase runnable space. Again, seven barns are complete and we have funding for um two barns this year that we're moving forward with and then the final barn next year we would have
additional funding in next fiscal year for that. 58 is install parasol shade at the city hall parking lot. That project um the GMP was awarded by council last month on October 21st and we are proceeding with that. 59 is install
solar systems at the civic center campus. Again, um we our design build manager had been evaluating concepts for that as well as location. Civic center campus is a large area and we actually are targeting to um locate those solar
systems with project 15 which was built the 200 space parking lot off 75th Street. So current plan is for that solar array to um be constructed in conjunction with the 75th Street parking lot. 62 is build a bridge on Thompson
Peak Parkway over the Riata Riata Pass Wash. That project is currently in design. And 63 is build parking structures in Oldtown Scottsdale. Um, we did hold our public meeting, our second public meeting in September for this project and we are proceeding with
design um and working towards getting toward to the design review board for that project with construction targeting for summer of 2026. Next slide, please. And again this shows our implementation schedule for um current projects in this
fiscal year as well as projects um in the outy years both design and construction. And next slide please. And for question three um project five is modernize computer equipment rooms to
protect city servers. So, uh, the final phase of that is to replace the HVAC and, um, we're just working through the job order contract with that and that will start soon. Nine is install fiber optic infrastructure to reduce operating
costs. Again, multiple locations in the city are currently in both design and construction, different stages for that. 14 is replace the obsolete planning and permitting software. uh they are continuing to work with their vendor and their go live date for the new software
is currently targeted for January when they would start use that using that new system. 17 is obtain a citywide data management and analytics solution for database decision-m and they're finalizing the architecture requirements
for that project. 28 is build new fire station near Hayden and loop 101 to repro to improve response time. So since our last meeting, that project has been completed and fire staff moved into it on September 22nd of 2025.
So that project will not will move to the completed list for the next update. Project 26 um replace deteriorating deterior vehicle training track at police and fire training facility. Um that project
is currently under design. And then again um the PD training facility project 27 modernize and expand the police and training the police training portion of the police and fire training facility. That project was completed and opened in May. So that project 27 will
move to the completed um list on the next update. 33 is renovate the Vinda police station to increase efficiency. a portion of this uh project is currently under construction or actually just finalized construction and that was the
jail renovation. I do have a couple of slides to show you pictures on that but that's in support of bond project 40 um which I'll talk I'll just briefly touch on next which is renovate and expand the civic center jail and downtown police facility to meet demand. currently under
design. The design is progressing on that project. And again, that's going to require um renovation that will interrupt the use of that jail. So, the jail at the Vinda Police Station um was reconstructed, renovated, so we can have
that in use both short-term for project number 40 and then long-term we can have the jails operating both at North and South. Um project 34 is build a new fire station at 90th Street in V Vinda to replace the aging facility. That
project's at the early design stages and we will be moving forward for a cement at risk contractor on that. And then 39 is renovate foothills police station to increase efficiency and that project is a new uh project this fiscal year.
Next slide please. And then this just shows the exterior of the Vinda police station project 33 um while it was under construction. Next slide please. And this shows um the renovation of the jails there. And final
slide on that just shows some um additional construction at that facility. And again, we're proceeding with design um for the overall uh renovation of that the rest of the project 33. Next slide, please.
And again, we have the implementation schedule um both projects that are currently in the this fiscal year as well as projects in the following fiscal years in their schedule, both design and construction. And then the next slide shows our list
of completed projects. Again, we have six um of 14 in question one. We have six out of 20 completed in question two and we have um 13 of Next slide, please. Oh, thank you, Maya. Um and we have 13
of 24 projects completed in question three. And so far today, we only have the one um project in question three that was eliminated, which was uh 12, update the Scottsdale's 15-year-old digital train model. So with that, I can take any additional
questions that you might have. >> Are there questions from the members? >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right, moving to the uh next item on the agenda, item number five. Um, and that has actually been moved to uh our
next meeting. So we will uh we'll pass that item at this point. and move to item number six. >> Chair Dubois, >> Duboce, >> Duboce, I'm so sorry. Uh, we have item number four. >> Well, obviously I can't count.
So, moving to item number four, presentation, discussion, and possible action on the bond 2019 financial report. Uh, Scott Cellin, budget director, I believe you're going to make your uh presentation for us. >> Thank you, Chair Dubo, members of the
committee. Um, for the record, Scott Seline, um, budget director here at the city of Scottsdale. Uh, could you go to the next slide, please? This is the same slide that we show every presentation and I often just glide through it. Um, perhaps since we started a new fiscal year for the
benefit of people that might be watching this later, I'm going to slow down a little bit. Uh, can we go back three slides? One more. Thank you. Um this is the total budget for the bond 2019 pro program which was split into
three questions as you all know. Question one is for parks, recreation and senior services for an aggregate total of 112.6 million. Question two was for community spaces and infrastructure for a total of 112.3 million. And finally question three was for public
safety and technology for a total of 94.1 million. Each project within the bond 2019 program belongs to only one question. Could you go to the next slide? Thank you. So this graph that you're looking at is
similar to one that we show in most meetings. Um it is a bit simplified and we'll get to the more detailed one here in a couple of slides. Um, at any given time within each question, all dollars that are currently budgeted within a project are counted in gray on this
slide in front of you under the label ITD budget. And what that label means is inceptiontodate budget. So as of June 30, 2025, the inceptiontoate budget for all projects within question one was 66.9
million. It was 56.7 million for question two and for question three there was $76.6 million budgeted to projects in question three. Now any dollar within the questions that is not within the inception to date
budget for a project is counted as future funding. Those are the blue bars with the white dotted lines at the end. If you add the ITD budget amounts with the future funding amounts, you get the amounts uh the total voter approved amounts for each question that we looked
at in the previous slide. So whenever there whenever there are changes to project budgets that causes both the ITD budget bar to increase or decrease and the future funding bar to increase or decrease depending on the nature of the budget change. The future funding bar is
not impacted by spending or commitments or having a project get completed. Only project budget changes cause the future funding to change. Can we go to the next slide? So this is that same graph that we just looked at but updated for September 30 of 2025.
If you look at questions two and three first, you'll notice that the ITD budget bars or the inception to date budget bars got significantly larger when compared to the previous slide and the future funding amounts got noticeably smaller. Uh usually that's what happens with a new fiscal year that begins on
July 1st every year. Um projects get new budgets. There's new budget unlocked for projects and over time the amounts typically tend to go up because project budgets tend to get larger as time goes by as they near completion. However, there are cases where project budgets can get smaller
with the start of a new fiscal year. And this is what happened for question one. The ITD budget went down by about a million dollars on the aggregate. And the future funding amount for question one actually went up by about a million in September of 2025 when compared to
June of 2025. What happened here is that there were some projects that yes that had budget increases, but there were a couple of projects that had budget decreases um in question one. One example is the cactus pool project that was mentioned. I believe there was previously about $6 million in that
project's budget that the budget was then changed to provide $250,000 for a feasibility study. So that's one example. Another example is the Granite Reef Senior Center uh where budget was moved out to a future year. >> So um Scott, >> yes,
>> quick question. So, uh, when those adjustments are made, >> just for sake of clarity, uh, is that new money or is it, uh, money that's already been allocated, but it's just now being, um, attributed in a at a different date.
>> Thank you for the question, Chair Dubo. Let me let me attempt to answer, then you can let me know if I answered it. Um, when budgets change, typically when budgets increase, that is planned. Typically, we have a five-year capital budget with, you know, funding in years one, two, three, four, five. So, when
you go to a new year, the amount that of the budget that is increased is typically planned for. And that's the same thing for decreases in most cases. Um, the cactus pool um project, for example, in the last budget that we published, the you you could see
$250,000 in year one rather than the previously approved I think it was 6 million. I'd have to get the exact number, but typically the changes are planned and we anticipate them and they don't happen unless someone has seen them and city council has approved them. Was that responsive to your question?
>> Uh yes. What about um money that um is allocated u to a project uh from the general fund by the council or money that uh goes to a particular project because of a third-party attribution? Is
that then part of the gray bar or the blue bar? >> Thank you for that question, Chair Dubo, members of the committee. Uh this graph, these graphs we look at here do not contemplate outside funding. They only contemplate bond 2019 funding general fund, you know, transportation fund, any
other fund is is accounted for outside of this particular graph that you're looking at. >> All right. So, we're just we're just talking about the uh the allocated funds from the bond at this point. >> That that is correct. >> The other funds will be accounted for in in a different a different graph or a different manner, right?
>> That is correct. >> Okay. Yeah. The presentation today only deals with bond 2019 proceeds. >> Thank you. Uh could you go to the next slide please? So this chart should look a bit more familiar. We show this chart at every committee meeting. Um this chart splits
up the inception to date or the ITD budget bars, the gray bars from the last slide that we couple of slides that we've been looking at. And what it does is it splits it up into three categories. The inception today budget is split up into actual expenditures, commitments, and then remaining budget.
that is to say, dollars that are in the budget but not yet spent and not yet committed officially. So for question one, there are 53.4 million in actuals, 1.4 million in commitments and 11.2 million in remaining budget for all projects within
question one. And then the amount in future funding for question one is still 46.6 still matches the previous slide um as we saw for question one. For question two, the inception to date budget is 46.2 million. We've got got about
200,000 in commitments and then 40.8 million in remaining budget. And then the future funding is 25.1. Question three, 56.4 in actual expenditures, 3.5 in commitments, and 27.4 in remaining budget. And then the
future funding again should match the previous slides. 6.8 8 million in future funding for projects that are not yet in a budget in the inception today budget. Can we go to the next slide? This slide has not changed from the last time we showed it. Um but we keep
putting it in just to reinforce there's been 319 million authorized with 240 million issued and 79 million in future issuances. Can we go to the next one? Uh, one one Oh, yeah. One one question from uh
committee member Kamasu. >> Um, so I guess is it a fair statement to say for future funding essentially those funds are going to be taken from the 2025 general obligation bond? >> That's possible. Uh, Miss Chair Dubo,
members of the committee. It's also possible that it's um future budgets of existing bond proceeds that have already been issued that are just not in the budget yet because maybe they're allocated for next year. Maybe there's a million dollars from the 2023 issuance
that um is for next year's budget that will unlock on July 1 of 2026 and then it would move into the ITD budget and out of the future funding. And so I assume if if if that scenario happens for like uh funds being used from the
2023 general obligation bond, then they have to the project itself has to be completed by 2026. >> Uh Chair Deo, members of the committee, I I'm I'm not fully educated on the the bond requirements. I did see some nods next to me.
>> I can do it. Um Chair Deoce and committee member Kamasu. Yeah, we have three years to spend the proceeds, >> right? >> Correct. >> Okay, thanks. >> And then again, uh this slide is just information about the recent GEO bond sale. Uh we've had it in at the previous
meeting. Uh we won't cover it in detail tonight since we've discussed it previously, but forformational purposes, we've included it in the slide. Um can we go back I'm sorry, two slides. There's a point I wanted to make that I forgot to make. I think something that I'd like to to put into these
presentations for future meetings is whenever there's a change in the future funding. Um I think I'd like to include some kind of uh itemization of how that changed just so we can reconcile easily what happened with the future funding so that it's it's not a mystery to you all
why it changed from say 46.6 to 50 or to 40 uh over a meeting. Uh, so I think I'll commit to doing that in future meetings just so we can know what's going on with the future funding. And I think with that, that brings me to the end. And happy to entertain any questions you might have.
>> Uh, thank you, Scott. And I appreciate uh your offer to put that information on the next uh presentation. That'll be that'll be helpful. Um I I just have a couple of questions and I'm I'm not sure um if this directly um comes from the
charts or not, but just just trying to get an overall big picture if we can. Um, so as I understand the charts that we've looked at, so we have six of 14 projects completed in question one,
six of 20 in question two, and 13 of 24 in question three. So that leads me with a math of 25 out of 58 projects have been completed to date. Means 33 projects still remain. Um, so
what I'm what I wanted to get a a handle on when we talk about future funding for the 33 projects that remain to be completed. Uh, I think my math would show $78.5 million
left uh for future funding. And I I guess my question is um one one of the one of the ticklish areas that we always deal with is um cost overruns and and estimates for projects
and all the numbers that that we seem to be talking about. we're we're assuming that that our estimates and our projections are are going to be right on and and this money is going to go to those projects and it's going to be uh uh budget specific. It's going to meet
the budget and so forth. So I guess my question is and maybe this is a question to um the entire panel is how how certain are we that the uh funds um the future funding that we have now
for the remaining 33 projects that have to be uh completed yet uh that that we're going to we're going to meet that target. And if not, kind of an associated question I guess is uh what what are we doing to uh provide
guard rails to prevent the kind of inflationary u impacts and the cost overruns that we've experienced in the last six years. I guess um it it seems like that's a legitimate concern and we when we talk about these numbers uh that's that's a
problem that I always worry about is um what do we do if we don't meet the budgets that we've got set aside? um what what are we doing institutionally to address that concern and to maybe ameliate the impact of continued uh uh
increase of costs. >> Um chair do so one of the things that we're doing uh for example is the cactus pool project. So we did identify that the funding for that was um probably not going to be sufficient to build the project. So, and with discussion with
the budget review commission last year, last fiscal year, um, in the spring when they were reviewing budgets, um, we ended up removing the $6 million that we were going to use to start the actual design and potential con beginning of
construction for that. I think it's estimated, I think it's in the bond program at 33 million. Um, so we're doing the feasibil feasibility study. With that feasibility study, we'll be looking at, again, I I mentioned the location, but also we're going to be
looking at better cost estimating, um getting a a preliminary conceptual design that has been um planned out accordingly so we can get better cost estimates. So, we're doing that. Uh we are looking at project scope. Um, for
example, the um the Second Street project that I mentioned, we are looking at what we can do within the existing budget. So, if there are projects that might not have enough funding, we're looking at what we can do within the
existing budget to meet the project, the intent of the scope of that project. So, those are some of the things that we're doing. Again, um you there is concern always when projects are in the outy years um that there might be inflation, but we have been just trying to do
escalation factors to our estimates to see where we are and again work case by case with each project once we get to it to see what we can do um with with the existing funding. So, I take it then that that that the uh
potential cost increases that that that is an item that your office or the city is concerned about, right? We're looking at it. >> Chair Deboss. Yes, we are looking at it. >> Okay. And in particular, when you look at um and I'll just pull one out of the air here. Question three, the imple
implementation schedule for uh the fire station at 90th and via Linda shows construction continuing through fiscal year 2728 which is pretty far out. Uh, so
what what I hear you saying is that the the city and staff is concerned about monitoring those costs and make making sure that we don't get cost overruns like we've had on some of the projects in the past. >> Chair Deoce, that's correct. Um, staff
is always looking at projects and project budgets to um monitor that. >> And then the u again this is a hypothetical. So let's say that that project the estimates that we uh that we have
are we constantly updating those estimates. >> Chair Dubois, yes we do um update our estimates. For example, this year we go through um the CIP process. We're in it right now. Um developing our CIP for
fiscal year 2627. And through that process, we're looking at projects and we're reestimating them and applying the appropriate escalation factor. If it's, you know, scheduled to be 3 years from now for construction, we escalate that cost out. So, we are we do do that.
>> Okay. So, um, if we if we look at the fact that we have 33 projects left and pursuant to Scott's presentation, I think we have $78.5 million future funding. Um, are we confident that we've got enough future funding to handle
those projects or or is it going to be a situation where we may have to look for alternate funding to uh supplement the budget? >> Um, Chair Dwis, uh, at this time I can't say whether we are going to need existing uh additional funding to supplement the projects. Right now, uh,
we're working through the projects that are currently within this fiscal year and we are projecting the ones in the future years. Um but again, some of those projects until we get to conceptual design like we're doing with Cactus Pool, um it's hard to really get
a good grasp on what the what the uh project estimate is going to be, but our goal is to work within the uh the budget that we have. >> All right. U I guess where I would leave it is that uh clearly the charter of
this committee uh is not to make policy but merely to u monitor the spending from the bond project monies to make sure that they're uh spent for for the for the projects themselves. But I think at the same time I would be remiss if I
didn't indicate that there is a sense of of the committee that um we need to make sure that we have in in uh process or in place some system where we can uh constantly revisit estimates to make
sure that we don't run into the problem that uh that we all are aware of where we've had some problems in the past with the estimates. And uh and so uh again u u not intending to beat a dead horse but but just to indicate that that is a
concern that the the committee has and and we want to make sure that that that we address that and uh is something that I think the committee will want to uh keep an eye on as as we go forward. So any other questions? Yes, Mr. Mr. Davis
>> on on the projects that have been completed that ran over budget, where was the supplemental funding or uh for those overruns? Was it taken from the existing bond
funding from other projects or was it supplemented by the general fund? Chair Dubo, uh, members of the committee, I could get you a listing of all those specifically, but my understanding is that it's been they've been supplemented by other funds and in
some Well, I guess let me in in some cases I guess let me just back up and just say that let me get you that information and I can tell you exactly. I don't want to just go off the cuff too much. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? Uh, yes. Committee
member Holland, >> is it possible to maybe recommend that we receive a list of projects that are um maybe falling out of funding or coming close to
um or maybe at risk of uh going over budget >> staff? >> In each of the questions, you know, in question one, there's a few that have gone out of budget. This is, you know, I know that you do a great job identifying
the status, but maybe if we could see it each question and ones that are at risk. >> Chair Dubo, members of the committee, uh, each month we prepare a spreadsheet that kind of feeds the graphs that you were looking at today. Um, if that would be useful to you, we could provide that
spreadsheet to all of you. Um, there are members of the committee that ask for it separately that we provide it to them. um if that would be useful and helpful to you in evaluating the status of projects, we'd be happy to provide that sheet to you. >> Yeah, I think just u uh if I can um as I
understand the question, what we'd kind of like to see is a uh is a list of the uh the projects uh there 58 of them, 25 completed. uh just give a uh some sort of a a list or a graph that would show
what the original budget was and uh for the project that was completed, what it ended up costing. And I think uh what uh committee member Holland is wanting to see is um the actual expenditure for the project versus the budgeting for the
project originally. Is that correct? >> That's correct. So, if we could get that >> and that that information is in that spreadsheet that I referenced each project um by funding source. Actually, it lists them all. Doesn't just list the bond 2019 proceeds, but it does show the
inception today budget, actual expenditures, commitments, and uh remaining budget. >> Yeah, I think that was overall. Uh I think what uh committee member Holland's asking for is we can break that down uh by project. >> Okay.
>> Absolutely. >> All right. Thank you. Other other questions? Yes. Uh committee member Kamasu. >> Um and tied to that request and I I think I sent you an email, Scott, earlier on it. Um it'd be nice to see, you know, in addition to if if a project
is getting overrun, like which uh general obligation bond the money is coming from. I'm just curious, you know, to make sure some of the older ones essentially those projects should be wrapped up. >> Yeah. Chair Dubo, members of the committee, uh, yes, that request is
being worked on. If we can show the the individual issuances, we should be able to get that done. >> And that that perhaps could be something that uh becomes uh a regular item for the presentation at each me at each meeting, right? Yeah, that would be
that'd really be helpful, I think. Thanks, Scott. Other questions? All right. Thank you very much, uh, Scott. Appreciate it. I don't believe uh any action is uh required of the committee at this point.
And so we'll move on to uh item number five. Now that I got my number straight, uh, item number five, uh, is a presentation, discussion, and possible recommendation to council to transfer up to $94,651
in bond 2019 authority from question three, project 37, implement an inventory and asset control system for city technology to question number three, project 17, and obtain a citywide data management and analytics solution for database decision making. And that
presentation will be made by Bianca Lochner, our chief information officer. Uh but uh it uh she's not able to make it tonight. And so we're going to actually move that item to our next meeting. So it'll be agenda agendaized for the next meeting.
All right. Then u again showing that I can follow numbers. Uh moving to item number six uh presentation, discussion and possible action on a modification to the scope of project 41 which is to install solar heating system
for Elorado pool to install a solar photo uh voltaic system in lie of the proposed ground mounted solar water heating system. And uh I would uh uh defer to uh Roger B uh Bernina for uh
the principal project manager for that project uh for a presentation. There you are. Right. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members. Um again, we are revisiting this project. We brought it to you last meeting. It is changing the scope of the current bond
project 41 from a solar heating system to a photovoltaic system. you working it or am I? Okay. Um, so the current language says install a groundmounted solar pool hot water heating system at Elorado Pool to reduce
energy costs for heating the pool during shoulder seasons and winter months. Project is estimated to save approximately $70,000 per year in energy cost. Next. So, looking at this project um and the
age of the estimate that was used to create this project, we had concerns. Uh number one with our facility staff was maintenance of solar water heating systems. We haven't had good luck with them. Um, other concern we had is it's proposed to be ground mounted, which
would take up a pretty large area of the park, which could end up into some 404 requirements with the core of engineer if we get into the actual flow areas of the of the wash.
Um so looking at that and being as we were working with a a consultant on other photo photovoltaic projects we had him look at basically constructing a solar array here could being constructed in the parking lot wouldn't be putting
us in the wash and what could we do with the budget we had. So the canopy that we can afford uh for the budget we have would cover about 10 10 parking spaces and provide uh panels to generate 35.7 kilowatts.
It would be grid connected to SRP and uh of course be expandable in the future because we do have much more parking lot. Next please. So background, uh, the solar water heating system proposed in the bond
project was based on a a 2010 proposal from a vendor. Um, it was projected to cost $570,000 then and would require approximately 21,000 square feet of of panels and then the existing boilers would
still have to remain as the solar would only provide about 50% of the heating for the pool. So the existing boilers are over 20 years old right now but they are still in good condition. Next. So again we present presented this last
time the disadvantages to the uh the thermal or the obvious space constraints the fact that we need 21,000 square feet somewhere outside of the pool to construct this. um the season mismatch. Um obviously you get more heat out of solar in the summertime than you do in
the winter time. Um overheating. I mean we're going to heat water in the summertime. What are we going to do with it? um limited cost savings really pretty low efficiency and a complex system to operate and higher on and m costs in our
experience with anything that involves water requires a lot of maintenance and then of course there's limited monitoring of a water system which is much easier to monitor a photovoltaic system next
and the advantages which led us to the PV was obviously the low maintenance reliable performance, very simple to integrate. Um, it's remotely monitored very easily with software and has long-term durability and it would be
scalable and and flexible for us and it would have some visible impact for the the taxpayers. They would actually see the project in a highly visible area. Next, so the project site, uh, we're looking
at the parking lot for the Elorado pool. Uh there are 130 spaces. Um currently share that parking lot with the Boys and Girls Club. So it' be very scalable for PV installation. Next, what we're able to afford, we believe
with the current funding is a 37.5 kilowatt system that would cover only 10 of these spaces. Next project cost. Right now, design and pre-construction has had $49,000 committed. Guaranteed
maximum price for the parking canopy solar and electrical is $41,000. And if we break out just the solar and electrical only, the cost for that component is $272,000. Next. So, this these are the
projected performance and payback from our vendor. Um, you're looking at utility charges before we put in PV and then utility charges projected after we put in PV. So, the net savings per year is is
projected to be like $4,897. So if we look at how that pays back, obviously it's not looking good. Uh total construction with canopy um as of 81-year payback. If we look at just
solar and electrical only, we have a 55-year payback. So our requested action, um you can adopt this revised scope for bond project 41. We recommend the following language. install a 37.5 kilowatt photovoltaic solar system mounted on new
canopies in the existing parking lot at Elorado Pool to reduce yearly electrical costs for the Elorado Park pool facilities. And alternatively, you can vote to recommend cancelling this project. >> Uh, one quick question on the project
costs uh slide. Have we actually incurred any of those costs yet? the design costs have have been incurred. So, we spent $49,000 so far. Okay. >> Questions? Uh, committee member Davis?
>> Remind me please. I should have gone back and compared this presentation with what you did in the previous meeting. It looks like to me, as best I can remember, it's essentially identical. Nothing has really changed. Correct. I think one thing that did change is we
originally thought we could do a 70 a much bigger system but the budget just you know with the cost of of materials going up solar panels just sound crazy because everybody wants to buy solar panels right now. So um the actual system that we believe we can afford in
this budget is is 35 kilowatts 37.5 kilowatts. >> I I would argue you can't even afford that. The payback is horrible. pretty bad. >> Yes. Committee member Kamasu. >> Um, a couple questions. I guess the
first one on on this slide is like the utility charges after installing the system like for energy the 45,000. Does does that number kind of take into account you had mentioned like the boilers are 20 years old so they're in
good shape now but you know they're getting older. So I would assume that additional costs are going to be necessary or efficiency of the boilers is going to be reduced. Is is that kind of part of the assumptions? >> Are we talking about the system
performance payback? Because I'm only talking about photovoltaic there. >> Oh okay. I I guess uh yeah I guess for in terms of like overall system performance. >> Well for photovoltaic it it face fairly steady. I mean there's some degra degradation over time um but even 25y
old panels are still producing electricity. >> Okay. And I guess the second question um for this solar system that's being proposed is this similar to the one that just got
approved uh as part of question two the the solar shade at at Civic Center? >> That's correct. >> Okay. And that one, I guess, was approved by city council in October. >> Yeah. And that one benefited more from economies of scale, we could do a much
larger system. >> So if does that imply that if you did a larger system here, you'd have better payback? >> It would probably look better. I mean, there's overhead that goes with building a project. You know, if you're building
600 kilowatt project, same overhead to build a 35.7 kilowatt project. You'd still have to have the same number of people on site. >> Okay. But I assume that if if you tried to increase the scope of this project, it would exceed the budget that you've been allocated.
>> Yes. For the 560 that was allocated for this project, we currently can only construct 35 or 37.5 kilowatt. >> Gotcha. Thanks. >> Are there other questions from the committee? and make a motion.
>> Uh, yes. >> What is the motion? >> I move that the uh budget review committee recommend to city council that this project be scrapped and the money reallocated for other projects.
>> Uh, is there a second? >> I'll second it. It's been moved and seconded uh that the requested action um essentially that uh we select uh the alternative action that is the commission uh would recommend to the
city council that this project be um uh eliminated and the monies uh saved allocated to other projects. Any questions on the motion? Right. All in favor? Let's uh vote u individually on this one. Um, Aaron,
would you call the vote, please? The >> Sure. Um, Committee Member Davis. >> Yes. >> Committee member Holland. >> Yes. >> Committee member Kamasu. >> Yes. >> Chair De Boyce. >> Affirmative. Yes.
>> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you, Roger. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. Uh that uh appears to be all of the uh items on the agenda and so we'll move to the public uh comment stage
and uh for the purposes of the record, I will read the public comment requirements. Citizens may address the members of the Citizens Bond Oversight Committee during public comment. This public comment time is reserved for citizen comments regarding
non-aggendaized items. Arizona state law prohibits the Citizens Bond Oversight Committee from discussing or taking action on an item that is not on the prepared agenda. Citizens may complete one request to speak public comment card per meeting
and submit it to the city staff. Public testimony is limited to three minutes per speaker. Written comment cards are accepted for both agendaized and non-aggendaized items and may be submitted to the city staff at any time. Cards submitted after public testimony
has begun will be provided to the Citizens Bond Oversight Committee at the conclusion of the testimony for that item. The Citizens Bond Oversight Committee cannot discuss or vote on items not on the agenda, including items brought up as public comments. If action
by the committee is needed, the items should be placed on the next meeting's agenda to be consistent with the Arizona open meeting law. I don't believe we've received any public comment cards. >> We have none. >> All right. Thank you. Uh with that, the
chair will entertain a motion to adjurnn. Is there a motion? >> I make a motion to adjurnn. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. The motion had been made and seconded that we adjourn. All in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> I.
>> All right. Uh, and before we leave, um, we often forget this, but, uh, again, I do want to, uh, thank all the city staff for being here. Uh, you're we couldn't do our work without you. Uh, you're very helpful, and, um, we appreciate your
willingness to answer questions and and be here with us. So, thanks again for your excellent assistance. And with that, the meeting stands adjourned at looks like 609.