Chair Simukonda called the meeting to order at 11:02 a.m.

Housing and Transportation VISTA Jamie Larson, Climate Section Director Jenny Nieman, and Transportation Planner Chris Phair presented information on the Micromobility Share program. The provided a PowerPoint presentation that covered the following:

AGENDA
WHY ARE WE HERE TODAY?
MICROMOBILITY SHARE BASICS
WHAT IS MICROMOBILITY SHARE
HOW MICROMOBILITY IS SUPPORTED BY METROPLAN AND CITY PLANNING DOCUMENTS
FIRST/LAST MILE SOLUTIONS FOR MOUNTAIN LINE
MICROMOBILITY SHARE IN PEER CITIES AND FLAGSTAFF
PEER CITIES
DIFFERENT MICROMOBILITY SHARE MODELS
PEER CITY - CITY INVESTMENT AND STAFF TIME
PREVIOUS MICROMOBILITY SHARE IN FLAGSTAFF
MANAGING MICROMOBILITY SHARE RISKS AND CHALLENGES
FEASIBILITY REPORT
PERSONAL INJURY
DEVICE PARKING
LIMITED STAFF TIME FOR OVERSIGHT
PUBLIC PERCEPTION
COMPLIANCE WITH BIKE ORDINANCES
CONSIDERATIONS

Chair Simukonda asked whether they had considered using the existing paratransit certification process to help determine eligibility for ADA-focused micromobility devices, similar to how riders are certified annually for paratransit. The suggestion was to partner with Mountain Line, so individuals already qualified for paratransit could also qualify to use ADA devices, ensuring the equipment is not used solely by people who simply want to ride a trike. Staff responded that Mountain Line is already a partner in a small working group that includes Mountain Line, MetroPlan, NAU, and the City, and agreed this was an excellent suggestion that builds on existing systems and that Mountain Line would likely be receptive. Additional ideas included using an existing eligibility card, potentially enhanced with a QR code, or allowing citizens to register through City Hall if they are not part of paratransit. It was clarified that the current card allows free fixed-route rides for one person, but that benefit would not apply in this micromobility context. Staff invited commissioners to revisit the topic later, once plans are more developed, particularly to focus more deeply on ADA considerations, possibly later in the fall.

Commissioners identified concerns about equipment choices, noting that while tricycles seem promising, the program must also consider people who use canes, walkers, or power chairs, and how personal mobility devices would stay with users while renting bikes or scooters.

Commissioner Randall then raised interest in learning more about sit-down scooters. Staff explained that these are scooters with built-in seats, already used in some cities and sometimes offered across entire fleets. While they may not meet “accessibility with a capital A,” they can improve inclusivity by allowing people who cannot stand for long periods to ride. Concerns were raised about balance and fall risks, particularly for elderly riders, though staff noted that trikes could help address those concerns.

Commissioner Dopson questioned the use of the term “micromobility,” expressing concern that the word “mobility” often signals disability and accessibility to community members and could cause confusion. She suggested that if some bikes or scooters are specifically intended for people with disabilities, the program name should clearly reflect that distinction. Staff thanked Commissioner Dopson for the perspective, acknowledged it was not something previously considered, and explained that “micromobility share” is an industry catch-all term and not a final name. Staff committed to providing clearer explanations going forward and invited commissioners to suggest alternative names.

Public Works Section Director Jen Brown and Public Works Solid Waste Manager Justin Cuevas presented information regarding recent changes to Solid Waste Operations. They explained that the department is currently without a Solid Waste Director due to leadership turnover, and that Ms. Brown and Streets Section Director Sam Beckett are jointly covering the role. She also noted that Mr. Cuevas recently transferred from Streets to Solid Waste, bringing experience and leadership to the division.

Ms. Brown explained that budget pressures led to significant changes to the bulky waste program, reducing pickups from every five weeks to four times per year. She acknowledged concerns that residents might leave bulky waste on sidewalks far in advance, but said the department is closely monitoring the situation and supervisors are proactively talking with homeowners to explain the new schedule and reinforce that bulky items must stay on private property until pickup. Mr. Cuevas added that communication has been expanded through Constant Contact emails and improved website information. About four months into the new program, he said they have not seen widespread issues with early bulky waste placement, though staff continue to monitor neighborhoods closely.

Commissioner Randall asked about enforcement. Mr. Cuevas explained that code compliance staffing is very limited, so Solid Waste staff assist with education and follow-up. He said supervisors use hang tags, take photos, and often make direct phone calls to residents to ensure understanding. While formal code enforcement fines are difficult to pursue, he noted that Solid Waste can apply financial charges when piles exceed standards or require extra handling. He concluded that the department is focused on restoring consistency, clear standards, and better community education under more stable leadership.

Commissioner Randall explained that at the previous Commission meeting he had been asked to draft a letter of support for Barrier Free Flagstaff (BFF) that could potentially be sent from the Commission to City Council. He stated that the letter briefly explained what accessibility expeditions are and asked City Council to support BFF’s efforts to raise awareness about accessibility barriers in the community.

Commissioner Purrington offered initial feedback, recommending that language referencing “city facilities” be removed and replaced with broader language referencing the community as a whole. She then broadened the scope of the conversation significantly by suggesting that, beyond this letter, the Commission consider a more strategic approach. She proposed that the Commission write a separate recommendation to City Council urging the City to prioritize the creation of a formal ADA Transition Plan, a requirement that many municipalities have not yet fully implemented. She emphasized that such a plan should include training city staff to conduct internal accessibility audits, a structured process for identifying and addressing barriers, and the formation of a collaborative working group that could include representatives from the Commission, Barrier Free Flagstaff, city departments, and community members. She believed that without a transition plan, individual audits or expeditions risk becoming fragmented efforts without a clear path toward implementation. She also noted that many cities similar to Flagstaff have already developed strong transition plans that could serve as models, allowing Flagstaff to move more efficiently rather than starting from scratch.

Commissioner Dopson supported the broader direction but raised concerns about language and framing. She explained that terms such as “compliance” can be intimidating or off-putting to organizations and businesses and suggested using concepts like a Disability Equity Index to promote inclusion in a more welcoming way. She emphasized the importance of accessible, strengths-based language and offered to share research and examples from other disability organizations. 

Ms. Saltzburg expressed concern about ongoing confusion between accessibility audits and accessibility expeditions, both within the city and among community partners. She acknowledged that while both approaches are valuable, their overlap could create confusion, inefficiencies, and additional strain on city staff who are already managing heavy workloads. She emphasized that the hiring of a new Risk Manager, who also serves as the ADA Coordinator, presents an opportunity for the Commission to engage early and collaboratively on transition planning.

Commissioner Randall agreed that accessibility audits and expeditions serve different purposes and should not be viewed as competing efforts. He reiterated that BFF is now an established, independent entity that includes city staff and elected officials, including the Mayor, and that accessibility expeditions are already occurring and will continue to occur. He noted that his draft letter explicitly preserved the Commission’s ability to conduct accessibility audits in the future and argued that the community can benefit from pursuing both efforts simultaneously.

Chair Simukonda raised concerns, stating that the way the draft letter had been shared externally created the appearance that the Commission had already endorsed BFF’s work, even though no vote had taken place. She emphasized the importance of clearly distinguishing between actions taken by the Commission and those taken by private organizations, particularly given overlapping memberships and roles. She stressed that the Commission must formally decide what it supports before its name is associated with any external communications, especially communications sent to other agencies or city partners.

The conversation then turned to questions of sequencing and prioritization. Commissioner Purrington explained that recent discussions among Arizona ADA Coordinators had reinforced the urgency of municipalities developing transition plans, particularly in light of potential legal and regulatory changes at the federal level. She argued that while accessibility expeditions play an important role in raising awareness, the Commission’s primary responsibility should be to recommend a structured, compliant approach that positions the City to address barriers systematically and proactively. She emphasized that this does not diminish the value of BFF’s work, but rather clarifies the Commission’s role as an advisory body focused on policy and long-term planning.

Mr. Pfeil clarified that BFF was not seeking to act on behalf of the Commission or replace its work. She stated that BFF’s intent in seeking support from the city was simply to gain permission to access city facilities and provide feedback, and that she did not view the situation as an either/or choice between BFF’s efforts and the Commission’s priorities. She expressed concern that the discussion seemed to suggest conflict where she believed the two efforts could work in tandem.

Commissioner Dorman sought clarification and expressed support for a clearer, more streamlined approach. She noted that activities already underway between city staff and external partners did not necessarily require Commission action, while formal recommendations to City Council should remain concise and focused.

Moved by Susan Purrington, seconded by Rachael Simukonda for the Commission write a letter to City Council recommending that the city prioritize the development of an ADA Transition Plan in coordination with the newly hired Risk Manager, who will serve as the ADA Coordinator.

Vote: 6 - 0 - Unanimously

The Commission discussed whether to move forward with the draft letter in support of BFF. Given the unresolved questions about transition planning and concerns about timing and process.

Moved by Rachael Simukonda, seconded by Susan Purrington to postpone the letter of support for BFF until there is greater clarity around transition planning and engagement with the new Risk Manager.

Vote: 5 - 1

NAY:

Russell Randall

Commissioner Randall clarified that BFF will still present independently to City Council on April 22 as a private organization, outlining its mission, accessibility expeditions, and community engagement goals. It was agreed that the presentation is not in conflict with the Commission’s work and there is no intent to discourage BFF’s efforts. Rather, the Commission sought to ensure that its own recommendations are deliberate, well-sequenced, and clearly distinguished from those of external groups.

Acacia Worsley and Liz Fry, students at NAU, introduced themselves and shared their excitement about the upcoming event recognizing community members in the Flagstaff area who have made meaningful contributions to inclusion. They explained that the goal of the event is to celebrate individuals whose efforts often go unrecognized and to encourage more of the positive actions the Commission values. Commissioners were reminded to RSVP promptly, noting that only four Commissioners had responded so far, and to indicate whether they would bring a plus one, as nominations for awards have already closed and catering plans depend on accurate counts.

They described the event format, which will include light hors d’oeuvres, a dance performance by Ballet Folkorico, and the presentation of certificates. Setup will begin at 2:00 p.m., with the event starting at 3:00 p.m. on April 11. Questions were raised about sound equipment for the dance performance, and it was noted that while the lobby does not have a sound system, the chambers do, and the group may need to arrange portable speakers.

The commission thanked the organizers for their work and expressed appreciation for putting the event together. The students also highlighted strong student involvement, noting that Commissioner Purrington is teaching the class supporting the event, that students meet regularly, and that volunteers have already stepped forward to help with serving, setup, and breakdown. Additional volunteers are being recruited from other classes, sometimes with extra credit incentives, and they were excited about the camaraderie and collaboration forming around the event.

The main goal for Commissioners and attendees was to simply to attend, enjoy the food and performance, and celebrate the honorees, and they concluded by sharing their excitement about welcoming Commissioners and nominees to the celebration.

The commission discussed whether to extend the June or July meeting for the planning session. After discussion the commission agreed to hold an extended meeting on June 23rd to include the planning meeting. The regular meeting will occur from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and the planning session will run from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

None

None

Mr. Spence and Commissioner Eisenburg provided updates related to NACoPT. They reported that the group met the previous day; where they confirmed an upcoming job fair on April 18, from 8:00–11:30 a.m., hosted at Coconino High School. Additionally, Coconino High School invited the team to participate in its summer program, with ideas underway to involve vocational rehabilitation vendors who could speak to students or offer presentations.

None

None

The commission discussed agenda items for the next meeting. Based on the current discussion, the agenda will include the transition plan letter and four main discussion items:

• Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Events will present on hours of operation at recreation facilities.
• A revisit of therapeutic recreation.
• Code Compliance Manager Reggie Eccleston will attend to discuss code compliance.
• At the request of City Council, the team working on the land availability and suitability study and code analysis project will provide an update and seek input from the Commission.

The Commission on Inclusion and Adaptive Living meeting adjourned at 12:59 p.m.