Moved by Councilmember Scott Overton, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to approve the minutes of the City Council Work Session of November 25, 2014; Regular Meeting of December 2, 2014; Regular Meeting of December 16, 2014; Regular Meeting of January 6, 2015.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Mayor Nabours reported that the City's Finance Department had received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). He congratulated the department and gave special thanks to Brandi Suda and Wanda Noffz for their work.

Mayor Nabours reviewed the application, noting that the City departments had no issues. He opened the Public Hearing. There being no public input, he closed the Public Hearing.
 

Moved by Councilmember Jeff Oravits, seconded by Councilmember Karla Brewster to forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Mayor Nabours asked if the funding referenced in the staff summary was the same as what is listed as a fee on the City's water bill. Mr. McKee replied that it was.

Mr. McKee said that this was at the intersection of five points, at Clay Avenue, and will provide a culvert underneath Butler. He said that they will also be improving the drainage easement across property owned by Natural Grocers.

Councilmember Oravits asked about any beautification efforts in the drainage easement on Natural Grocers' property. Mr. McKee said that the City's planning department is working with Natural Grocers and this project will be integrating with what their landscape architect is coming up with. This project will be contributing to some re-vegetation efforts. He said that the plans have been vetting through the La Plaza Vieja Neighborhood and the Planning Department to make a nice gateway. 

Moved by Councilmember Karla Brewster, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to approve the construction contract in the amount of $109,883.49 with JNL Contracting, Inc.; [approve change order authority to the City Manager in the amount of $10,988.00 (10% of contract amount); and authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents - added to motion after item 10-A].

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to appoint Christine Brown, Paul Christian, John Lamb, Gerald McCafferty, Susan Slasor, and Daniel Tom as on-call magistrate judges for the City of Flagstaff.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Councilmember Putzova said that in September the Council gave direction to the Flagstaff Municipal Court to seek candidates for on-call judges, to meet the criteria previously set at a meeting in July. The intent was to increase the possibility that they would get a good, fair judge that has the necessary knowledge.

She said that the direction given in requiring a law degree excluded one individual from the process who had expressed an interest--current on-call magistrate judge Warren Sanford. She said that Judge Sanford has been employed by the court for the last 15 years and 7 different councils have appointed him over that time. She said that he was hardly an unknown, and she has learned that he was one of two of the longest-serving on-call magistrates and one of two currently serving as on-call magistrates that has been to the Supreme Court Judge Training Program.

She said that if he was reappointed by seven different councils and none of his decisions have been overturned, and his evaluations were positive, she asked why they would not consider him. She said that since the City Charter and state law does not preclude them from following any process they want, why could they not appoint those they just reappointed and grandfather in a candidate that was first appointed under other requirements. By doing so the Council would maintain a picture of neutrality. She said that grandfathering is a common practice that the City follows all of the time.

Moved by Councilmember Puzova to reappoint Warren Sanford as an on-call judge for the Flagstaff Municipal Court; motion died for lack of a second.

 The following individuals addressed Council:

John Viktora, Flagstaff, voiced concern with Councilmember Oravits's attendance record while serving on the County's Health Advisory Board.

Antonio Chavez, Flagstaff, voiced concern with hearing that the City was considering leasing the Flagstaff Recreation Center to the Boys and Girls Club, and recommended that they evaluate how that change has impacted the surrounding neighborhood at the Cogdill Center.
  
Rudy Preston, Flagstaff, said he was not able to be at the meeting regarding banning the plastic bag, but he wanted to voice his support for such a ban.

Adam Shimoni, Flagstaff, said that he also supports the ban on plastic bags, although he is in favor of recycling as well.  

Mayor Nabours said that there were previously three Councilmembers that wanted to bring this issue back and tonight they were looking to whether there was a majority of Council to reconsider or review any particular portion of the Water Policy.

The following individuals spoke in favor of reconsidering the Water Management Policy:

• Rudy Preston
• Ann Marie Zeller
• Malene Comes
• Katie Nelson
• Moran Henn, representing Friends of Flagstaff's Future
• Adam Dunstan
• Alicyn Gitliln
• Berta Benally
• Ed Kabotie
• Adam Shimoni
• Sarah Johnson
• Gwendolyn Waring

The following comments were received:

• Does not feel the City should provide water outside of the City limits; water is for Flagstaff residents. 
• If contracts are approved for outside of the City limits, they should be approved by the Council for a five-year period
• All large water contracts should be approved/renewed by Council
• There should be a full cost recovery; a premium on top
• Has concerns with the way "City" is used throughout the document as well as "at the discretion of the City"
• Red Gap Ranch should have its own section in the Policy
• Should change the rate structure to match potable water; the more you use the more you pay
• Ordinance should be brought back for revision to match the Policy
• Following up with Mr. Hill on the Dew Downtown so the City can use reclaimed water next year; if no permits next year, no Dew Downtown
• In 2012 Mr. Hill wrote an article in CityScape that the City was producing A+ water; that was not true
• Need to define "stored water"
• No automatic transfers of contracts
• Water is not a resource to use and abuse; it is a gift of life
• Request review of the section on renewal of reclaimed water agreements
• Water rates are being worked on through the Water Commission
• Water issues are important to the community; Council should be involved in decisions made
• He often votes Republican as much as Democrat; has leaning toward smaller government, but would prefer to have these issues voted on by public. That's not possible, at least the Council should have a say
• Power seems to be in the hands of a bureaucrat
• This is not just a Snowbowl issue; impacted by golf courses, industry
• Impacts jobs, tax base, expenditures maintaining facilities, viability and growth
• She and Mayor were at a meeting earlier where they talked about new techniques in cleaning reclaimed water; maybe there are more efficient ways
• Would like to see a transparent process
• Public's knowledge is an asset, not a liability
• Thanked the Council for opportunity to speak
• Comes from a community where much of his life he lived without running water
• Community has suffered a lot of depletion from their aquifers
• Ancestors learned to live with cycles
• Feels unconscionable when fresh water is used for Dew Downtown
• Born in Israel; is similar to Arizona. Many days the water was turned off. If they water their garden, they get a fine
• Drives him nuts to see so many golf courses and green patches in Phoenix
• Need a more significant water policy
• Would be great to have a huge symposium and figure out everything
• Just got back from Tucson where she heard Brad Lancaster speak on water; should invite him up to speak  

Additionally, written comments were received from the following individuals in support of revisiting the Water Management Policy:

• Dawn Dyer
• James Anders
• Mary McKell
• Sarah Johnson
• Rick Moore
• Rick Resnick
• Malene Comes
• Jen Blue
• Gwendolyn Waring
• Ed Kahotie
• Daisy Purdy
• Sarah Weatherby

Vice Mayor Barotz asked those that had specific sections of the policy they would like to see reviewed to write them down and provide them to the Council.

Mayor Nabours asked staff how many contracts they had to sell reclaimed water. Mr. Hill said that they had 38 agreements; 38 customers and 72 sites or locations where the City delivers reclaimed water. He said that there is one outside of the City limits for providing reclaimed water, but they have several for water and wastewater outside of the City limits.

Mayor Nabours asked what the process is right now if someone wants to receive reclaimed water. Mr. Hill said that if it is inside the City, it depends. If there is a defined amount through land uses, once they are approved by Council there may be development agreements, zoning cases, etc. they would go to the front counter to customer service. Utilities then makes the evaluation of whether they have sufficient amounts of reclaimed water. 

Mayor Nabours asked about service outside of the City limits. Mr. Hill said that in the City Code, which has been there for 20-30 years, they would need to petition the Water Commission and then the Water Commission's recommendation would go to the Council. 
 
Vice Mayor Barotz said that the reason she supported the petition brought forward requesting review was that she thinks there are some questions that the Council should get answers to and consider whether they want to make any policy changes. That is not the question in front of them tonight. She has read the City Code and the Policy and she would like the opportunity for staff to answer some questions. Those answers may guide them in the deliberation on whether they want to make a policy change. It is not easy to tell what the rules are based on -- the language in the policy or the Code. She submitted the following questions:
 

1. Staff explain to CC legally the difference between a request for a connection and a reclaimed water agreement.
2. What provisions of the Code and Water Policy govern and/or relate to who makes the decisions about in-City and out-of-City reclaimed water contracts?
3. For in-City reclaimed water contracts, there are two categories--1) requiring rezoning  and 2) those not requiring rezoning.  What is the process? How does the public weigh in during the rezoning process? It is her understanding that the Planning and Zoning Commission does not talk about water. Is there a way for public to engage and comment on proposed rezoning that would require a reclaimed water contract?   When there isn’t a rezoning, is there a way for public input on in-City contracts during the administrative process? Would that be the place where the public could voice concerns?
4. It is really important to go through Water Policy and clarify what the “City” means. We don’t know.  Do think we may open ourselves up to challenge on not defining that.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that these questions are important to her. She is concerned with accountability. This is not about Snowbowl; it is about planning for the future and making sure that the public gets to weigh in on the process. Would like to see a flow chart on the various opportunities for public input. Once they get the answers, then they would see if there is a majority of the Council interested in making changes.
 
Councilmember Putzova added to the questions the following:

1. Difference between a new agreement and renewal of an agreement –at what point an agreement is considered new?
2. A lot of people voiced interest in reopening the discussion; she heard no request to not discuss the policy. 
3. She is interested in the process of agreement renewal. If the Council reviews every purchase that the City makes above $50,000, why would these decisions be left to an administrator? It should come before Council.

Councilmember Evans said that she supported the petition to bring the issue back. She did not see any difference between this request and those that have wanted to review the Sign Code and Land Development Code soon after they were adopted. She said that things change; new information is provided; and sometimes they may have missed something in the document. She believed this was a reasonable request.

She said that there was an article in the paper a few days ago on Williams, 32 miles west of Flagstaff, having issues with their aquifer. She said that she realized that it was a different aquifer but things were happening all around them and they cannot ignore that. The concept of getting the definitions straight is important. She would like to have "stored water" defined and asked what they were doing with it.

Councilmember Evans said that they should have a section on future water supplies. There should be more of a casual mention of Red Gap Ranch. Additionally, she would like to know if they could charge those customers outside of the City limits an in-lieu of payment since the City does not get their tax benefits.
  
Councilmember Overton said that he sat through all of the meetings and there was a solid effort of the Council last year when this was adopted. He said that this policy put into writing a lot of what the City had been doing and gave staff direction. He said that he sees this as a master plan or policy. They will not all agree on all of the same steps, but he does not see the necessity of reviewing it at this point. He said that it was based on sound logic and he prefers the broadness; the Council wants to have some latitude. He was comfortable with leaving the policy as is. 

Councilmember Brewster said that they do value the audience's input, but sometimes they may not have all of the facts. She said that it would be very time consuming to have every agreement come before Council. She said that the whole push to redo the policy is because of Snowbowl, although it does involve other contracts, and golf courses. She said that practically all of their users are part of the City's economy. She said that the alternative is using potable water. The City has a reputation of being a leader in the use of reclaimed water. Many of the other western states' snow-making places are looking at reclaimed water instead of potable. She said that this issue has been vetted. They went through every policy separately. She prefers to give it a chance to work before they start taking it apart.
 
Councilmember Evans said that they should be thanking Snowbowl for this issue being brought forward to the Council's attention. She said that to say it is just about Snowbowl is giving them too much attention. Whatever they change, if anything, impacts the future, not just for Snowbowl. She said that within the first 12 months after approving the Zoning Code, which cost the City $800,000 in consultants, they reviewed and changed it twice.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that she is understanding that a majority is not interested in reviewing this, but she asked if they could get the answers to the questions.

Councilmember Putzova asked Mr. Hill if, since the document was adopted in April 2014, there had been anything he has seen where it could be changed to protect the City and make it safer.

Vice Mayor Barotz asked for a legal opinion on "City."
 
Mayor Nabours said that it was clear that there are some questions, and they are reasonable questions that he did not think would be too difficult to answer. The question before them tonight was whether there was a majority to reopen the Policy, or some specific  portions of the policy, or if the majority was to leave it the way it is and possibly at a future date they may have some specific sections. Vice Mayor Barotz said that it was her understanding that this evening was the opprotunty to ask questions. She did not have the information she needs to cite specific information.

Councilmember Putzova said that the answers to the questions are very important and the public deserves to hear the answer in public.

Moved by Councilmember Eva Putzova, seconded by Vice Mayor Celia Barotz to postpone to a future date once staff has answered questions posed tonight.

Vote: 3 - 4

AYE:

Vice Mayor Celia Barotz
Councilmember Scott Overton
Councilmember Eva Putzova

Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Scott Overton that no specific direction be given tonight to staff other than answer the questions posed by use of the CCR process.

Vote: 4 - 3

NAY:

Vice Mayor Celia Barotz
Councilmember Coral Evans
Councilmember Eva Putzova

Vice Mayor Barotz asked that part of the answers to the questions include a review to ensure there are no internal conflicts between the Water Policy and the City Code.

Mayor Nabours noted that the answers will be provided in a CCR and posted on the website.

Ms. D'Andrea said that some time back in December they talked about changes to the Rules of Procedure, mostly involving participation from the public on agenda items. She also had a change to make it comply with law about public disturbances. She said that these are the changes being presented this evening.

In referring to the proposed changes, Ms. D'Andrea said that it would no longer give discretion to the Mayor (Chair) of the meeting and would make everything the same with public comment on agenda items as they are for public hearings.

Additionally, she said that sometimes there are changes between the first and second read of an ordinance and she would like to know if the Council wanted to permit someone to speak at the second read if they had already spoken at the first read. Council agreed to allow that as it would be easier to monitor and more transparent.

Ms. D'Andrea said that the other change had to do with the Acosta case which clarifies that someone may be removed if they are causing a public disturbance.
 
She clarified that the Mayor would still have authority to set the timing and decorum, and that direction could be subject to Council voting to overrule.

Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Eva Putzova to adopt the proposed changes to the Rules of Procedure with the amendment that there be no restriction on public comment at a second read..

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Councilmember Evans said that she was asking for the City Clerk to do a presentation on how the two members of the Council Interview Team are selected. Councilmember Putzova said that she would like to broaden the discussion on the outreach efforts in finding applicants and composition of the various boards/commissions. Vice Mayor Barotz asked that they also include what the process was before they had the interview teams.

There being a consensus of Council wishing to have this presentation, staff was directed to bring something back at a Work Session.

Councilmember Oravits said that he has been receiving calls from car dealerships regarding the increased monitoring of balloons.Roger Easetman has been going out into the community to give presentations on the new temporary sign code changes and this issue has been raised. Councilmember Evans clarified that the balloons have not been permitted for a long time. She said that she is not interested in opening up that discussion as there are a lot of Codes they have not been pursuing for lack of staff and/or money. She was not interested; others agreed there was no interest.

Councilmember Putzova said that it was awkward when they go into Executive Session starting a public meeting in a room upstairs. She would like to see it structured to where they start the public meeting in the Chambers and then move to recess into Executive Session. Additionally, in December they had a roundtable meeting with Representatives Gosar and Kirkpatrick and in the future she would like to see those published as actual meetings to offer the public an opportunity to attend.

Councilmember Evans said that she was interested in getting a profit/loss memo regarding the Dew Downtown event, to include information on staff overtime and/or comp time.

Councilmember Evans said that she was again hearing rumors that Walgreens was closing because the City did not let them expand. She would like to get the word out that this was not the case. 

She asked that if there were official talks taking place regarding the Flagstaff Rec Center she would like to know about them.

Councilmember Overton said that they have not had much information about the bus stop facility at the Homeless Shelter on Huntington, and asked if they could get an update on that request.
 
Vice Mayor Barotz requested a CCR on where they were in the process of determining when the next Council elections would be held. 

Vice Mayor Barotz said that tonight's meeting reinforced the lack of clarity in how items get on the agenda.
 
Mr. Meilbeck reminded Council that he had sent out an e-mail asking them to send any ideas they may have regarding the raising of revenue or decreasing of expenses for the Budget Advance coming up on February 11, 2015.

The Regular Meeting of the Flagstaff City Council held February 3, 2015, adjourned at 7:50 p.m.