Councilmember Overton referenced the minutes of September 1, 2015, noting that Vice Mayor Barotz had indicated she would support the motion regarding postponement of action on the generator. Vice Mayor Barotz agreed with that correction.

Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Scott Overton to approve the minutes of the City Council Special Meeting of September 1, 2015, and the Regular Meeting of September 1, 2015, as amended.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Moved by Councilmember Jeff Oravits, seconded by Councilmember Karla Brewster to forward a recommendation to the State for approval of both licenses.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Moved by Vice Mayor Celia Barotz, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to approve Consent items 9-A and 9-B.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

9-1-1 Communications Manager Irene Hunkler briefly reviewed this request, noting that they would provide the same services as in the past. She said that other districts which they dispatch for are Blue Ridge Fire District and High Country Fire & Rescue. She did not believe this would add any unreasonable burden on the department.

Moved by Councilmember Scott Overton, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to approve this Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Flagstaff and Summit Fire District to provide dispatch services for Summit Fire District.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Mayor Nabours said that this went to an evaluation committee, on which he sat, and he would therefore be declaring a conflict of interest and recusing himself. He noted that it was most interesting and enlightening to be on the committee and if anyone on the Council was interested in sitting or observing he would encourage it. He then left the room and Vice Mayor Barotz assumed control of the meeting.

Randy Groth, Project Manager Capital Improvements, gave a brief overview of the project. He reviewed the overall delivery sequencing, noting that their approach is to mobilize construction this fall, beginning above Birch in the neighborhood. Then, as soon as weather allows in the spring they will remobilize in two locations--where they left off and concurrently they will have crews come in to start work from Route 66 to Birch with underground. He said that staff and the contractor have committed to have a goal of completing the downtown effort by Memorial Day. The contractor will apply every reasonable effort, but the schedule can vary due to weather and unanticipated construction issues. Considering that they are working with 115 year old water mains, the underground conditions are often unknown in an older part of town. He said that staff has met several times with the Downtown Business Alliance and they have committed to an ongoing working relationship with them.

Councilmember Oravits asked why they had such a late start on the pipe with winter coming on. Mr. Groth said that they initiated this project through the Request for Statement of Qualification (RSOQ) process. They did an evaluation and selected the top three scoring firms. They negotiated with the top firm but could not come to a successful agreement so they moved to the second.

Mr. Groth said that they are taking out 8" pipe and replacing it with 8" which will handle future needs as well, based on information from utilities and a civil engineer who did the design work.

Vice Mayor Barotz asked if they had any idea how long customers in the construction area would be without water. Mr. Groth said that there is usually a 30-45 minute range when the transition is made. They will keep the existing water main active while constructing the new main and services. They will give notification to each business or residence, usually the day before. The same process applies for the sewer line. Once they make the transition the old pipe is left in the ground.

Moved by Councilmember Jeff Oravits, seconded by Councilmember Karla Brewster to approve the Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) contract with Eagle Mountain Construction in the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) of $2,119,350.00 and a contract time of 350 calendar days; approve Change Order Authority to the City Manager in the amount of $198,740 (10% of the contract amount, less Owner's contingency); and authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents.

Vote: 6 - 0

Other:

Mayor Jerry Nabours (RECUSE)

Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Karla Brewster to read Resolution No. 2015-32 by title only.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

 
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA APPROVING THE APPOINTMENT OF A CITY TREASURER
 

Moved by Councilmember Jeff Oravits, seconded by Mayor Jerry Nabours to adopt Resolution No. 2015-32.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Moved by Councilmember Jeff Oravits, seconded by Mayor Jerry Nabours to read Resolution No. 2015-33 by title only.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF AUTHORIZING SIGNATURES FOR CHECKS AND PAYMENT VOUCHERS, AND REPEALING PRIOR RESOLUTION
 

Moved by Councilmember Karla Brewster, seconded by Mayor Jerry Nabours to adopt Resolution No. 2015-33.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Business Retention and Expansion Manager John Saltonstall reviewed the changes which had been made to the Amendment to Development Agreement, based on previous comments from Council.

Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Eva Putzova to read Ordinance No. 2015-18 by title only for the final time and that specifically the Second Amendment to the Development Agreement that is referenced in the ordinance is in the form received this evening.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF TO ENTER INTO A SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH NESTLE PURINA PETCARE COMPANY TO ALLOW TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT AND UNDERLYING LEASE; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, SEVERABILITY, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
 

Moved by Councilmember Karla Brewster, seconded by Mayor Jerry Nabours to adopt Ordinance No. 2015-18.

Mayor Nabours said that they were appreciative of Nestle Purina carrying out that study.

The following individuals addressed the Council regarding concerns with the Water Rate Study:

•Bryan Bates
•Ann Marie Zeller

Comments received included:

•Water is our most limited and precious resource and it is essential that they conserve water for both biological and economic reasons.
•Reclaimed water users pay a flat rate of 35% of commercial potable rates, already exceptionally low.
•Reclaimed water is a resource that needs better management through conservation and market regulation.
•The reclaimed water rate structure has not been appropriately maintained and revision by a competent water rate consultant should be the first step
•They recommend that Council find a new water consultant and thoroughly vet all information related to water pricing prior to adopting any of the current rate proposals.

Sheri Paralta addressed the Council on concerns with downtown handicap accessible parking being limited, and asked that the Council put this item on the agenda to help the disabled people of the community and visitors.

Mayor Nabours reported that Agenda Item 16, Zoning, would be discussed after Item 17.

Sustainability Specialist McKenzie Jones gave a PowerPoint presentation on animal keeping which addressed:

•PRESENTATION OUTLINE
•EXISTING ANIMAL KEEPING CODE
•COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON EXISTING CODE
•GOALS FOR PROPOSED CODE
•LARGE LIVESTOCKS
•HOW DOES THIS DIFFER FROM CURRENT?
•SMALL LIVESTOCK
•BEEKEEPING
•LOT COMPARISONS
•NEW RULES AND RESTRICTIONS LIMITING NUISANCES
•NEW RULES
•COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
•BENEFITS OF PROPOSED CHANGES

Mayor Nabours asked why the necessary pasture changed from half-acre to quarter-acre. Ms. Jones replied that in order to meet the prior LDC (their most recent code related to horses) those pasture requirements would need to decrease. If the pasture requirement is more important, then the allowable amount on large lots would need to decrease. Since they currently do not have a pasture requirement, they felt anything was better than nothing.

Councilmember Oravits voiced concern with the slaughter issue. He has been hearing from some groups as they were hoping that slaughter of chickens would be permitted. He asked what the rationale was for prohibiting that. Ms. Jones said that many people are uncomfortable with having it next door and do not feel it is appropriate within City limits. She said that there are a lot of cities that do allow it. Some call it "harvesting" chickens, and many say it has to be happen in a garage, or shielded from neighbors.

Councilmember Overton said that he went back in his mind to the days when they had zoning case issues regarding alpacas in a neighborhood and the issue of the code being silent. Ms. Jones said that exotic animals are covered by state and federal laws. She said that they have tried to address it by referring to "other similarly-sized animals" and they have included the majority of types that people want to keep.

Councilmember Overton said that in the nuisance categories it evolved from the same case. He asked if they were still comfortable using that broad of language, or if they need to help the animal control officer and police chief. Ms. Jones said that they struggled with that as well. She said that this was part of the challenge of enforcing codes in general.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that she did not think they could avoid it and need to use the "reasonable person's standard." She said that they were moving in a difficult direction. They could let it play out for awhile and see where the challenges are. Ms. Jones said that part of the way they are trying to address that issue is through a cap on animals. Any animal is going to create a nuisance if they do not pick up after them.

Councilmember Brewster asked if this would apply to property owners as well as renters. Ms. Jones said that this applies to the property, so ultimately if they are renting to someone it is something to be addressed through the lease document.

Councilmember Evans said that she thinks that one of the major issues is that the City has one animal control officer. She said that in this next budget cycle they may need to authorize more than one. Councilmember Oravits agreed; he was shocked to hear they only had one officer.

The following individuals spoke in support of the animal keeping ordinance changes:

•Rosemary Logan, Flagstaff Food Link
•Cara Corbin, Northern Arizona Director of Local First Arizona
•Gabor Kovacs
•Cindy Dorfsmith, Flagstaff Liberty Alliance
•Michael Del Giorgio
•Elizabeth Taylor (waived right to speak)

Comments received included:

•Endorses proposed changes and commend Sustainability Program
•Hope they also consider new beekeeping codes
•Local First Arizona supports proposed changes to animal keeping code

Mayor Nabours asked for clarification with regard to section A8 and chicken shelters being a certain distance from the fence. He asked if they were saying the chickens could not run around the yard. Ms. Jones said that the intent behind the language was that the shelter is what is not allowed to be within a certain distance from the fence. She said that the intent is for a stationary coop with a fenced backyard so they are completely contained, or they will get eaten.

Mayor Nabours voiced concern about the chart and how it corresponds with the amount of pasture. He said that even at one-quarter acre it is inconsistent with the wording. After further discussion, Mr. Eastman said that the Mayor has caught something that is not as clear as it needs to be and they would work on clarifying that language.

Ms. Jones added that staff is requesting that tonight just be discussion and they would bring the ordinance back for first read in November. Councilmember Oravits asked Councilmembers and members of the audience if they would support adding language to allow for chicken slaughtering if it was shielded from neighbors. Members of the audience agreed that they would like to see that considered. No objections were voiced by Council.

Ms. Jones asked if there were any questions or issues to be researched before the next meeting with regard to beekeeping. No comments were received.

Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to postpone this item to a date in the future to be set by the City Manager, and to come back with more refined language.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

FMPO Manager David Wessel reviewed this request noting that he received several questions at last week's meeting and would attempt to answer them tonight. He explained that LPS was set as a standard for lighting in Flagstaff in the 1980's and Flagstaff was identified as the world's first Dark Skies City.  With the advent of LED lighting the production of LPS has decreased resulting in cost increases, poorer quality and delayed deliveries. Further, the LPS lighting fixtures are large, catch the wind and fatigue the light poles and mast arms. Together these create an increasingly urgent need to find a replacement technology. The US Department of Energy promotes the use of LED lights as very energy efficient. This is true for those lights producing white light.  However, the light levels and light spectrum from white LED is very disruptive to the regional observatories. Last year's Darks Skies Summit convened experts in astronomy, development, health and lighting where these and other issues were examined.  Extensive blue light application can have negative implications for health and the environment by disrupting circadian rhythms.

In May of 2015, the Purchasing Section conducted a Request for proposals (RFP) and received a total of four (4) proposal responses. The evaluation committee evaluated and scored the four proposal responses according to the evaluation criteria outlined in the RFP document.  Monrad Engineering's proposal was determined in writing to be the most advantageous to the City, taking into consideration the evaluation factors outlined in the RFP. He said that the FMPO is bringing surface transportation program funds to bear on this project.

Mr. Wessel said that in the long-term how they transition will be based, in part, on the research performed by Monrad on the LPS lights. Vice Mayor Barotz asked Mr. Wessel if he was saying they are obsolete and difficult to get now. Mr. Wessel replied that was correct.

Vice Mayor Barotz asked why the contract states that a variety of LED types will be explored, when they know that many of those will degrade the dark skies. Mr. Wessel said that there may be limited applications, such as high pedestrian activity where they will want to have brighter light for safety purposes. One of the things they want to be able to do is control LED lights, possibly through activation. Those are some of the lights they want to explore, but they would not look at those for high use. He said that recent lab tests done on LPS indicate that the spectrum between LPS and the newer LED is not as great as once understood. There is an opportunity, if the level of light they are experiencing is brighter, or has a different spectrum and if they are performing to the Observatory's need, then that is something they want to explore.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that it was her understanding that the observatory believes that they only potential solution is the amber LED and they are very concerned about moving in a different direction. Mr. Wessel said that they have heard that the narrow band LED's would meet their expectations. They have also heard from the observatory and Monrad that there are some things to be explored. He said that their understanding of narrow band LED and the intent to use existing poles, they would reduce the amount of light on the street considerably because of the lumen output.

Mr. Wessel said that if they were to replace LPS with narrow band LED fixtures, the amount of lumens put out is considerably less. While that meets the observatory's needs, in terms of what the community sees it would be considerably less.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that she did not want to get into the technology, and is trying to get her arms around it. As someone that cares a lot about not just astronomy, but also the economic impact of the observatories, she wants to make sure that while they think they are going in the same direction that they are not at odds. She said that the observatories measure light, and she asked why they were doing this; it would be good to understand what is really going on.

Mr. Wessel said that 1) they will be bringing the observatories to the process and having them sign off on the process to be used by Monrad; and 2) in terms of different perspectives, there are a range of values at play--dark skies, economic value of observatories, public safety and lighting on the streets.

Councilmember Putzova asked if the research was going to drive the policy decision, or if the policy decision should go first. She felt that was really at the core of the concerns. Mr. Wessel said that in putting this together and talking with Public Work staff, they see the priorities of the dark skies and the priority in the Regional Plan and in terms of lighting levels he thinks the policy is driving this. In Monrad's proposal they ask how they apply new technology to meet those objectives. There is a debate within the community on how to go about doing that.

Mayor Nabours said that he thought it would be hard to make policy decisions without knowing what all of the options are and knowing the requirements of many sides.

Councilmember Brewster said that they have a policy of dark skies. Monrad has said there is new technology out that may protect dark skies and also provide safety lighting. Mr. Wessel said that one of the things incorporated into their work is emerging standards are out and they have larned about some of these at the Dark Skies Summit. They see some opportunities to lower some of their lighting levels in terms of looking at an overall strategy and a simple wholesale change would miss that opportunity.

Councilmember Brewster asked how long they think it will take to accomplish some requirement that meets both needs. Mr. Wessel said that the schedule is less than a year. Part of the challenge is the weather. They will set up tests, and when they do the measurements they need conditions to be nearly identical, so depending on the weather it may take time to find that window.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that in her reading of the RFP, it says, "there shall be no degradation of the missions of the observatories, but it says there shall be no modeling. She did not see how the research is valid. Mr. Wessel said that they did not exclude the use of models, but they wanted to be in support of field tests as well. The discussion they have had is that the $200,000 for procurement of lights should be enough to do large tests. Monrad is proposing one large-scale test and several other places around town to do smaller tests.

Vice Mayor Barotz asked what would constitute "large scale." Mr. Wessel said that they are talking maybe 200 light bulbs, with 3600 in the City overall. They felt that the $200,000 would purchase a lot of light bulbs and be adequate for testing needs.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that based on research and discussions she has had, she is not comfortable with the methodology and they all know that methodology influnces outcome. The issue of how the changing of the light and measuring the impact is the critical question. Mr. Wessel said that one of the things they looked at with Monrad's approach was the rigor of their measurements from ground-based to air-based to satellite-based and the range of measures within that regime, it seemed like it would be sensitive enough to detect variability in the tests they are proposing and have the ability, based on region wide application, to generalize what would happen if they replaced lights of various sizes.

Mayor Nabours asked Vice Mayor Barotz if she felt that Monrad was biased. Vice Mayor Barotz said that what she is struggling with is the feeling that, with the work the observatory does, they are saying they have to go and get someone else to tell them what they have already said.

Councilmember Putzova said that Lowell Observatory was part of the team that selected the firm. She asked if they were comfortable with the research methodology framework as they were clearly the experts. Mr. Wessel said that for those of them on the committee not named Jeff Hall, they leaned heavily on his expertise. To the best of his recollection Mr. Hall did not express any misgivings and he thought it was reasonable to say that they do have an opportunity, through their usual project method, to take a look at that methodology and refine it if needed.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that she noticed in the contract there is some language addressing flexibility. If she hears there is some flexibility, she would be more comfortable. Mr. Wessel said that certainly, in terms of a stakeholder, Monrad is expecting that and looking forward to it. He believes there is great flexibility. The proposal is fairly general. Ms. D'Andrea said that she was not familiar enough with the document to comment, but they certainly have the change order process to deal with such changes, if necessary.

Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Karla Brewster to award the contract for Street Lighting In Support of Dark Skies RFP 2015-69 to Monrad Engineering, Inc. of Tucson, AZ in the amount of $100,000.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that when the study is done and it comes back to the Council, she would hope they would invite Lowell and the Naval Observatories to share the results, and offer the opportunity to NAU as well. She then read some comments from Jeff Hall, who was unable to attend the meeting. He could see the value in a kick-off meeting with Monrad, the City and the observatories to review the overall project. He does want the project to move forward, but would appreciate regular communications on its status. The proposed actions compliment those of the Dark Sky Working Group and he would recommend that the proposers stay in contact with the Group. Their timelines are the same, with completion anticipated by late spring of 2016. He supports approval of the proposal because he feels hopeful that the proponent understands that Flagstaff is world renown for dark skies protection and that the selection we choose must maintain or enhance that. It is possible that the results will include recommendations that are a non-starter. They have to work for the City, the observatories as stated in RFP. With above in mind, he said that one important concern is that there might be misunderstandings of astronomical procedures and measurements. This contract includes taking extensive light measurements and analyzing changes in brightness of light. This is all in the wheelhouse of what astronomers do for a living. The data and methods of LPS are going to be essential to understand. The observatories say they know good data and bad data. He is looking forward to a good collaboration and he hopes there is a clear understanding of the methods and wants to ensure the integrity of the methods. When we transition away from LPS we maintain our dark skies and if lucky enhance them.

Vote: 6 - 1

NAY:

Vice Mayor Celia Barotz

A break was taken from 7:43 p.m. to 7:54 p.m.  Mayor Nabours said that they would then discuss Item 17-A.

Zoning Code Administrator Roger Eastman reported that back on June 30, 2015, they had a work session where they laid out the process they have been following since the new Zoning Code was adopted in November 2011. Before its adoption he was already putting together a list of things that needed to be fixed. They have heard from staff, developers, contractors, and citizens, and he has kept all of those comments, large and small. The City Attorney's department is doing a review as well.

He said that so far they have been having weekly meetings with the City Planning staff, going through chapter by chapter. He said that the role of Council was to focus on the broader policy issues. Tonight he has brought forward Sections 10-10 and 10-20. At the request of Council, a summary of the policy issues have been arranged as questions.

Councilmember Evans referenced the proposed amendment in 10-20 that would allow the Planning Director to waive a second or additional neighborhood meeting. She said that this needs to be watched carefully. She has noticed that a lot of older residents do not have e-mail, so they need to notify residents in ways other than e-mail. Mr. Eastman said that rather than actually put that level of detail in the Code, it would go into the process.

Vice Mayor Barotz asked how the Code defined "record of proceeding." Mr. Eastman said that it does not. At the applicant's meeting they ask that the developer tell staff who spoke, what they said, responses, etc. They are not suggesting that level of detail should be in the Code, but maybe they could add some examples.

Vice Mayor Barotz agreed that it should not be in the Code. Part of the challenge is there are cases that reports that come back are not meaningful. What they consider to be important documentation may not be what the City is really looking for.

Council agreed this was the format they would like to review and Vice Mayor Barotz thanked Mr. Eastman for preparing it in this manner.

Discussion was held on the need for the developer to send notice of the neighborhood meeting. Concerned was voiced with notices not coming from the City and maybe being tossed. Councilmember Evans asked how they verify that it was done by the developer. Mr. Eastman said that the City states that the applicant shall mail a notice and they are required to submit a notarized copy of the notice and mailing list. Additionally, they ask for an Affidavit of Posting of the physical property.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that she believed that commenting on this process in the policy guidelines could help the developers.

Councilmember Overton referenced 10-20-30-50, noting that it was not part of a platted subdivision. He said that it seemed more work than would be requested of a single-family residence. Mr. Eastman said that this is current practice. When they have a property that might be on meets/bounds, it is unsubdivided and this gets all of the players around the table to ensure there will be fire access and utility issues are resolved. He also noted in 10-20-50-40 they tried to make it easier to understand the protest procedure, and noted that the percentage is mandated by state statute.

Mr. Eastman said that next time they would be reviewing 10-30, which is general to all, and includes Heritage Preservation. He said that there are a lot of changes, but they are mostly for clarity.

Councilmember Putzova said that she first wanted to clarify that her request had nothing to do with the City-designated holidays as they are adopted in the Personnel Rules and Regulations and any misinformation received was just that. She then provided a little context for her request stating that she has been in Flagstaff for 16 years and witnessed many instances of sometimes open, and sometimes more covert, disrespect for the Native American people. The personal stories of harassment, experiences of racial profiling, and disrespect and disregard for the Native American way of life are troubling.

She said that her request had three components. They are not individual requests but steps she would like the Council to discuss and seek consultation on from the Native American community:

1.  Update on the status of the implementation of general provisions of the Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission and City of Flagstaff MOU and a plan forward addressing items in the MOU with a specific timeline.

2. Provide public hearing opportunities for engagement with the Native American community to identify proposals the City can implement to make a meaningful, positive impact in the lives of their Native American friends and neighbors; and

3. After accomplishing 1 and 2 above, and after adopting an implementation plan for initiatives identified through public engagement, move forward to declare the Indigenous People's Day to be the second Monday in October of every year; and in the same declaration, call upon those that still recognize this day as Columbus Day, including the Federal Government and the financial sector, to replace it with the Indigenous People's Day.

Ms. D'Andrea noted that this item had been placed on the agenda as a resolution; there was nothing addressing the Navajo Human Rights Commission. She did not think it was a problem that it was mentioned, but a larger discussion of those items should be agendized appropriately.

The following individuals addressed the Council:

•Clayson Benally
•Klee Benally
•Mary Chun

Moved by Councilmember Coral Evans and seconded by Councilmember Eva Putzova to suspend the rules (of three minutes limit) and allow Klee Benally to continue.

Vote   4 - 3 Passed

NAY   Mayor Jerry Nabours
          Councilmember Jeff Oravits
          Councilmember Scott Overton

Comments received included:

•Supports Indigenous People's Day
•A lot of times they do not understand their own community
•Went through Flagstaff Unified School District and was taught about Columbus.
•Native American History was included in two paragraphs; history was written by victors of war
•They are saying they want to be heard and be a part of the community
•Most of the time they are ignored
•Agree that a day that celebrates genocide of Indigenous Peoples must be abolished
•Want to see focused policy implementation to affect meaningful systemic changes with a diversity of Indigenous people at the core of decision making, including clear measurable objectives, hard deadlines, and significant accountability.
•Nothing has come of the 2012 Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission hearings regarding violence and discrimination of Indigenous Peoples in Flagstaff

Gabor Kovacs addressed the Council stating that Columbus Day should be left alone, but they should pick another day to honor the Indigenous People.

Ms. D'Andrea noted that it is important to stick with what is on their agenda as it notifies the public of what will be discussed. There is a thin line between explaining the proposal and then adding different components.

Councilmember Evans said that one of the things they were doing here tonight was seeing if there was enough support to place this on a future agenda. She asked if it would not be appropriate at that time to talk about the process of how they would like to see it become a resolution. Ms. D'Andrea said that they can certainly broaden the language for the next discussion to include whatever it is she wants to package. Then people will have an opportunity to address all of the items.

Councilmember Putzova said that she wants to make sure that it is clear that the reason that they received the e-mails was because of the activity of Jeff Oravits. Those e-mails were not even speaking about the content that they are talking about tonight. She appreciates the clarification that she needs to outline all of the components of her request at the time she requests a future agenda item request.

Councilmermber Oravits said that he did notify the public as per her request. She requested a future agenda item and that request was very specific. He echoed what she requested and there was a strong response based on that request. He said that Councilmember Putzova needs to be fair to the process. Just like she lets people know in the community when things are on the agenda, he did the same. He hopes there was no insinuation that there was something wrong with that.

Councilmember Putzova withdrew her request at this time.

Councilmember Putzova said that the City does not have a travel policy specific to the Council and she would like to discuss the issue and establish a policy that outlines explicitly how the travel funds can be used. Vice Mayor Barotz said that she thought it was an important thing to do as it has been unclear to her as the way it has been implemented has changed over the years. Councilmember Evans agreed.

The City Manager was directed to place this item on a future agenda.

Councilmember Evans requested a future agenda item on handicap accessible parking downtown.

She also asked for a CCR to be prepared prior to the next discussion on plastic bags to address: 1) what Bisbee, Arizona is doing re the new law, and 2) what exactly would happen to the City if they implemented a bag tax/fee.

Councilmember Putzova requested a future agenda item to address the three-step process for declaring an Indigent Peoples Day and asked that the Legal Department assist with appropriate wording to allow a complete discussion, based on the discussion this evening.

Mr. Copley said that well before the first F.A.I.R. he had reached out to the Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission as it is time to have their update. He said that it is something they will have on the agenda; they just need to get it coordinated with the Navajo Nation.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that she supported Councilmember Evans' request for an update on handicap accessible parking. She does think it is a real problem and she would like to understand the City's accessible parking standards.

Vice Mayor Barotz said that there was an article in the Governing magazine requiring state and local governments to disclose information about property and tax abatement agreements. Ms. Goodrich said that she believed it is going to be a future requirement for budgets after December 15, 2015, which would be addressed in the City's 2017 budget. In the meantime, she will be preparing a CCR detailing that information for the Council so they do not have to wait two years.

Mayor Nabours referenced a letter Council received from Green Tree Hospitality regarding their interest in purchasing property at the airport. He asked if this would automatically go to the property group for further consultation and then come to Council, or if it would be placed directly on the agenda. Mr. Copley said that he would need to confer with staff tomorrow and discuss it further regarding procurement.

Mr. Copley reminded everyone of next Monday's Joint Work Session with the County Board of Supervisors, and added that there was no Tuesday meeting. He also reported that he would be out of town on Friday and the following Monday, and Ms. Goodrich would be Acting City Manager.

The Regular Meeting of the Flagstaff City Council held September 15, 2015, adjourned at 8:57 p.m.