Budget Review Commission - March 21, 2025

start
e
e
e
e e
all right I will uh
ask you all to give us your undivided
attention while
we call this meeting to order and have a
roll call
by the clerk or whoever does
that council member GR
council member
Graham well the clerk called the uh
can I uh can I ask those in the audience
to continue their
conversations Sonia I think that means
you okay we ready um chair
Smith CH
president vice chair Daniel schwier
present commissioner Carla
here commissioner Brad
Newman commissioner Jim ransco here
commissioner Sharon sites here
commissioner Mark
Stevens he's visiting the facilities oh
okay
thank you and if the other members uh
show up I know some are here if they
show up I'll uh announce their arrival
when they get here
um the first thing to get into in the
meeting is to remind people that
citizens May address the the members of
the budget review commission here
regarding any non- agendized item during
public comment time which is
now and by the way now joining the
meeting is Brad Newman commissioner
Newman um and in order to do so you uh
take a public speaking card from the
desk over here and uh give us three
minutes of your time and
thoughts I don't think we have any
requests to speak in the in the public
speaking period I have blue cards here
but these will be used I think for item
number three on the
agenda is that your understanding
or
right what's what's happening
speak do we not have the opportunity for
individuals to speak on a particular
agenda
item the answer is no so we will have
you speak now um and we'll remember your
speech when we get around to item number
three on the
agenda the first speaker is uh Steve
kucho uh who is with the mcdal sonor and
preserve commission so Steve if you want
to come give us your thoughts we welcome
those
all right thank you chair Smith Vice
chair schwier Commissioners my name is
Steve kucho and I'm the chair for the
mcdal Sonoran preserve commission I want
to speak to you regarding a specific
item in the five-year preserve
Improvement plan that being the wildlife
overpass plan for real ver Drive in the
early 1990s the city of Scottsdale EST
established the mcdal or preserve with
the vision in large part to create a su
sustainable desert habitat for wildlife
and desert
Flora in
1997 the desert preservation task force
planned the northern expansion of The
Preserve that plan included an overpass
for Rio
Drive in
2004 Scotsdale voters approved this plan
as well as a
0.15% preserved tax to fund land
acquisition and improvements such as
this
overpass Arizona G and fish conducted
the N the
2012 Maricopa County connectivity
assessment and and identified a
connection between the mcdal
mountains and the tono National Forest
as a necessary
linkage they wrote that manmade barriers
such as roads can affect Wildlife
movement patterns and pose a threat to
the long-term persistance of wildlife
populations in chapter 21 of the city
Charter which governs the mcdal Sonoran
preserve the number one management
objective directs the city to preserve
the local plants
and preserve the local plants wildlife
and natural resources to maintain the
biological diversity and long-term
sustainability of the area's
ecology every iteration of the mcdal
Sonoran preserve commission for the past
20 years has supported the plan for an
overpass including the current
commission who unanimously
approved the overpass a few weeks
ago Scottsdale's
2022 Transportation Act action plan
references that a wildlife underpass or
overpass may be installed in the
vicinity of the 124 Street
alignment since 2001 Scottsdale's
General plans have reference the need
for linkages and migration routes this
includes the 2035 plan approved by the
voters which included both the
transportation and preserved plans in
it the gooseneck region
was planned for and acquired to provide
a corridor for movement as residential
development continues to encroach on
animal habitat in The Preserve so you
can see that there's been a 30-year
history of planning for this Wildlife
overpass I ask that we consider the
wisdom that has been demonstrated over
the
decades and keep in mind the damage that
will occur to the wildlife species in
The Preserve in the coming decades if we
do not lastly I would like to thank
Commissioners Newman and Carla for the
leadership that they've been providing
as we continue to discuss this item
thank
you thank you Steve uh the next speaker
is uh John
zenin and he has the donated time of 600
stewards so he's going to be here for a
while
probably seriously I think John will
hold it to three minutes and I do
apologize to those in the audience we uh
both of these gentlemen are talking to
an item that we will address later as
item number three but apparently we do
not have a the capability in our little
commission here to have comments Germain
to the individual items so even though
my Preamble said they would be talking
about non- agendized items they most
certainly are talking about an agendized
item so go ahead please thank you
making sure this all works
okay thank you commissioner Smith Vice
commissioner schwier and Commissioners
my name is John zius I represent the
mcdal Sor conservancy and it's over 600
Steward volunteers today I'm here to
speak I I live at 11758 North 134 Street
and I've been a Scott resident or
property owner for over 30 years and I'm
speaking to you today to provide
information on uh and to consider
regarding the wildlife overpass and
three key areas safety tourism and
economic value and the importance of
connectedness and biodiversity of the
FAA and The
Preserve as you know Rio verie Drive
near 28 Street is a crossing for the
gooseneck Trail and while crossing a
two-lane road is hazardous when the
planned expansion of the road is
completed this will become a major
barrier to pedestrians in addition this
will also be a major barrier for hikers
bikers and especially equestrian
when we talk about um Public Safety
excuse me going
on and scell is a destination for
visitors from around the world and one
of the key reasons is outdoor activities
in a recent study 92% of Voters in
Scottdale responded that healthy parks
and preserve make Scottdale a great
place to live work and visit which
supports our community and without the
wildlife Crossing The Preserve will not
have a healthy ecosystem The Preserve
will no longer be an attractive
destination
would it still be worth the more than1
billion that the taxpayers paid for The
Preserve one key factor that sets The
Preserve apart from other hiking and
outdoor destinations is the potential
for visitors to both see and enjoy the
wildlife in our beautiful snor and
desert and while The Preserve is an
important ecosystem Regional
connectivity is critical to the
preserve's long-term Health allowing for
the movement of species for forage food
water and mating with the adjacent land
the open space is more than 3 million
Acres offering fauna a wide variety of
environments thus attracting fauna from
one area to the other without this
access the biodiversity of The Preserve
will surely
decline in 2016 through 2018 Arizona
Game and Fish conducted a study to
understand deer movement in The Preserve
the result of this study indicated that
the deer population due to Rio Drive
Road separated the deer population in
and around The Preserve into two
separate subpopulations as you can see
from this map you can see the red mostly
staying up above Rio ver Drive which is
right at the top where that goose neck
starts and the other deer population
below this is not healthy for the deer
population long term as it limits
genetic mixing and grazing opportunities
due to different different typography
and Flora which can vary from the
northern part of The Preserve the Tonto
National Forest and the southern part of
The Preserve
these are some of the things these are
some of the fauna that are in The
Preserve today from Deer ringtails
Badgers even skunks and my little jack
rabbit on the bottom these are all
currently in The Preserve from our
wildlife camera study that we conducted
in
November a wildlife bridge will provide
the following benefits help ensure the
viability and health of the font of the
font and The Preserve ensuring the
connectedness of The Preserve with
adjacent open space The Preserve will
remain healthy and viable for residents
and guests who visit to enjoy the
outdoors and it will also provide a safe
Crossing for hikers bikers equestrian
and Wildlife enhancing Public
Safety thank you for your time and be
open to any questions thank you very
much appreciate your
input um and we will not entertain
questions in this but we appreciate the
public input on the specific on the
project or the uh
item uh before I get into the formal
agenda let me make a comment we talked
briefly last week about how we
accumulate um commissioner um thoughts
I'll call them for ultimately having a
shared session with City Council on
April 22 at which time we'll try to meet
our mandate which is to advise them on
the on the budget and then also advise
them or ask for their guidance on
projects we might undertake in the
called a post budget period um I think I
will recommend that any of the seven of
us put our thoughts down on paper and
send them to uh the uh City attorney
Sherry
Scott and some and and all I'm
struggling with here is how we get an
agenda for ultimately a work session or
work study session where we might um
deliberate what our message is going to
be and in order to do that work study
session we need some um agenda guidance
and I'm happy to provide that but I
can't take your comments directly from
you or your
ideas um because if all of you send me
your ideas suddenly I'm King of the
mountain here with uh with the input
from a more than a quorum of the um
Council so if you send your thoughts to
Sher Scott and you don't have to wait
and do this at the last minute I think
she's can probably create a file folder
to put your thoughts in um but
ultimately she'll pass on to me in an
some sort of an anonymous way the
comments that we've all made and then
we'll put those in an orderly
discussion for a work study and try
amongst ourselves to see what comments
we want to make to the
council um and some of them may be uh
comments that seven of us will subscribe
to others may be minority reports but
we'll try to be inclusive in all the
comments we provide to council
so do that at your earliest convenience
and do it often um you know perhaps with
the fresh remembrance of a meeting um
you'll have thoughts that you think
should be considered as advice to
counsel at that time and shoot an email
to Sher and she will accumulate
these all over time and we will
hopefully meet Our obligation to advise
the Council on the
2526 proposed
budget um and I also have to announce
that in the middle of the public comment
Mark Stevens arrived so we are now a
full Council or a full commission of
seven members all present and accounted
for the other thing I'll say before we
March into this uh presentations here is
we have a lot of data to look at and a
lot of comments on the data I think I'm
going to ask each speaker or presenter
to March through the collection of
slides they have and then we can
withhold our comments until the
conclusion of the
presentation and
um and get into them then so the first
presentation item number one is the
water and Water Reclamation capital
projects and Kevin Rose I think is going
to walk us through that
package thank you chairman Smith
commission I'm Kevin Rose I'm the
interim Water Resources senior director
and be happy to present on our capital
projects for both Water and Wastewater
don't know Scott did you want to cover
this first slide or do you want me to
handle it just say that this is a
comparison of last year's CIP versus
this year and um if there are any
questions we can address them but one
thing the commission should note is we
used to do a one-year adoption of our uh
CIP we are going to a fiveyear so we are
spreading that out so as you can see
adopted FY 2425 is 484 and as we spread
out these projects of when they're going
to go into construction you're seeing it
go down to a proposed uh capital B
budget of 320 million it is a billion
dollar budget so we are spreading that
out to cover that five
years first one I want to talk about is
our water distribution system
improvements we have over 2100 miles of
pipe in the city of Scottdale 11,000
fire hydrants 14,000 valves numerous
pressure reducing valves so we use this
Center to start replacing our aging
infrastructure one thing I always inform
individuals is we're like the rest of
the valley our system's not new it's not
being built we're in rehab mode it's
getting old it's middle-aged roughly
it's about 50 years old on average when
you take the old infrastructure compared
to the new and one thing I do want to
point out I guess one question was uh
the feasibility study only there was a
lot of work to put into this so there
are some errors and I'll Point those out
so we use this to schedule and repair
our water distribution system the this
Center we have
seen uh a big increase uh impact due to
inflation on the uh materials themselves
along along with a lot of lead times to
get the uh materials inhouse so this is
one of our Capital Areas that we do um
schedule smaller Replacements um a good
example is a mile of 8 in pipe of a
drinking water pipe this would be the
cost center we would use that for um I
will be going to council here uh the
next I believe April 8th to start a fire
hydrant replacement program that would
come out here that's about a half a
million to start that for again fire
hydrant that are 50 year 50 years or
older and that we're struggling to get
replacement parts so these are the the
capital uh project uh Center that we use
to uh replace the infrastructure with
the water distribution
system um another one that we use is um
it's going to be a new program uh as we
progress to what we called Advanced
purified recycled water scottd were very
well known in the water industry of
taking waste water recycling it and
either reusing it uh for irrigation
purposes or injecting it in the
aquifer uh the initial budget was 17
million as we gone through this process
due to Drought impacts we were based off
the current permit that we had scottdel
was the first one to be permitted to
actually
take basically sewer clean it up to
drinking water standards and serve it to
the public we only had the regulations
for that type of permit that permit has
expired because as we worked with
Arizona Department Environmental Quality
to develop the new permit or the new
regulations they just got those
finalized in March so as they came
closer to the final rule uh with the
regulations we were working with our
engineering consultant to come up with
hey what would be the design process the
treatment process to implement this
program and as we went through it they
also did a cost estimate that cost
estimate was completed in September of
2024 Coro did that for us so that
explains the difference on that uh cost
difference there initially it was 17
million as we got through with this and
more regulations were required um
redundancy and also disinfection
requirements through the state we had
that was more cost that we
incurred uh this one's been brought up
before the Bartlet Dam modification uh
we are in a feasibility study which
costs 400 million or 400,000 excuse me
and this study is to see the impacts and
the viability of building this Dam our
portion as of today if they started
building the dam would be 48 million it
is in a later part of the CIP I do
expect this to be pushed out further
because we're probably looking at a
10-year window to get this uh the dam
approved and moving forward because it
is going to be working with the federal
government booster station
upgrades um we've seen a lot of
inflation on this one just because of
the motors the electrical side of the
booster pumps um that um are needed to
um ensure that we can deliver water we
have over 100 booster stations that we
have to maintain so this is an active
program that we do uh with our booster
stations to replace whether it's a valve
piping a motor or pump and um as you can
see the proposed increase is only 5.3
million but we are seeing inflation cost
and it's mostly on the electrical
side uh the Frank Loy wri 24-in
transmission Main and booster station um
this one's coming to a close uh this
started in July of 2015 they're actually
starting commissioning this week um we
do plan to have the station up and
running by August of 2020 25 and as you
can see over time we did incur some
costs um with an initial budget of 15.4
million and the current approved budget
the
32.1 uh again that was inflation covid
was a big impact on this booster
station uh booster station Pump Station
55 it says rebuild it's not going to be
a rebuild this will be a new booster
station one thing that we do work with
is um is our infrastructure Improvement
plan uh we're actually in the process of
getting that approved and this will be
one uh here to be approved by Council
where we'll need to build a new booster
station and this will be located at the
water campus the area that it will be
serving is along the Puma freeway Hayden
and Scottdale that area we're seeing a
big need to increase and maintain the
pressure so um this one we're looking to
see Council Improvement and
uh as of today it would be $ 31.8
million the shog regional Wastewater
facilities uh scuss has been part of
this well over 50 years uh we own 99.9%
of the 91st Avenue wastewater treatment
plan and part of the agreement with City
of Phoenix tempy Glendale Mesa and us is
we have to ensure that we have our
Capital funds available if any capital
projects that is is approved by all the
cities uh moves forward um it is a big
number but we are looked at uh to 246 to
have it there and it's essentially
having 5.2 million budgeted every single
year uh for the 2046 because we know
we're going to be part of this well into
the
future uh The Greenway hayen uh loop
sewer improvements uh this one
uh it's going to be coming to close
October uh 2025 and initially uh was
designed for the uh 11.9 million with
change in zoning and scope uh we saw a
drastic increase in cost uh jumped up to
67.9 million uh today we have U paid
46.4 million and that is also part of
development and also what the city is
going to be moving forward and what we
own
uh the wastewater treatment facility
improvements uh this is for our gainy
Water Reclamation plant and the Water
Reclamation plant at the water
campus uh again we're seeing a lot of
inflation CL uh Cause part of this we're
also seeing uh the infrastructure
deteriorate a little bit quicker one
thing I always say with waste water is a
little bit more aggressive water than
your standard U water um has a lot of
materials in it that we have to remove
move it is aggressive it does wear down
the equipment a lot sooner uh and the
infrastructure uh the Jox Road sub
improvements uh this is located off joax
in Pima we are going to be putting a new
list station and sub lines in uh this is
an
area that um has a lot of septic and
also we do see growth that we're going
to have to put this in as of right now
we do have the design uh we're looking a
few years out to get this moving forward
to get it installed and what it will do
be able to serve the uh the residents
and the customers in that area and we
can get people off the septic systems up
there to tie into the the sewer
system uh the Reclamation plan expansion
this was part of our Master planning we
looked at the Wastewater flows coming in
and the one thing we have to make sure
is we're ahead of those Wastewater flows
coming in uh the plant is uh capable of
treating 24 million gallons a day uh as
we continue to watch the flows and
you'll see that negative of why did it
decrease watching the flows they are
increasing but not increasing as much as
we thought so we're pushing that out to
make sure it still stays in the CIP
budget for when the flows do increase we
can go ahead and start moving forward to
um de with the plant expansion now again
it's a 24 million gallon uh plant this
would be a 5 million gallon a day plant
expansion
um another one at the water campus is
the electrical substations replacement a
few years ago we did have a failure at
one of our substations staff responded
beautifully but it spurred us to start
looking at all seven substations up
there to ensure that we are not going to
be in any
challenges uh we did have an assessment
complete it initially we thought it'd be
a million dollars of substation based
off that uh uh assessment plus an
engineering uh an engineer's cost the uh
budget did inflate to 25.3 million for
the electrical
substations I know that was a high level
view as you wanted uh commissioner Smith
uh I'd be more than happy to address any
questions thank you
um I'll yield the floor to commissioner
sites first
thank you I was trying to follow
along in in the book here and I have a
question about two of the projects you
talked about the greenway Hayden Loop
MH you have a June 28 completion date
but according to this there's 21 in 25
26 and nothing in the out
years can you help me understand that
timing it looks like everything's going
to be spent in
2526 uh it's a as you can see best that
you can with the diagram up there it was
a multiphase project um we did we were
up uh sooner to get this uh the sewer
line in to ensure that we had service
Optima being a driver um they actually
installed it for us and we reimbursed
them uh for they they were quicker at
doing it than us so if we did it um we'd
be a little bit slower
uh as of October 25 we'll have this
sewer line in service and available for
use so what confused me was seeing June
28 as a completion and there's no funds
Beyond
26 correct will be done by October of
2025 okay likewise I guess I was looking
I'm trying to understand the scheduling
of the funds a 5year plan and please
note we had a one-year adoption we are
spreading everything out to a 5-year
adoption and with the bill billion
dollar nearly a billion dollar capital
budget it's a lot more challenging than
we thought so we are going through all
of these to make sure they're spread out
for the 5 years for the appropriate
construction so this one has the
opposite situation the water campus
electrical
substations
vl01 I think it says June 26 completion
but there are funds forecasted all the
way out to
28 June 26 um that might have been the
original what we're seeing now um we we
have gone through a preliminary
assessment we are in going into design
um that's going to be a challenge for
twofold we got to get the design done
and then we have to order the electrical
equipment I'm lucky if I get a 56 week
lead time typically we're seeing a lot
longer than
that um that's been a huge impact on not
only uh all electrical projects not only
this for the substation Wells booster
stations um we're not the only ones it's
across the valley crossed many IND
indries don't have an answer of why it's
always electrical equipment that's such
a huge delay it's a frustration to me
because I need to get this up and
running we'll be fine but it's just we
we're experiencing long lead times thank
you commissioner
Stevens yeah I'm still trying to get my
head around some of the big changes we
have let's just help me understand like
on slide four and slide nine you've got
a $50 million and an $86 million
proposed increase uh to me adding $140
more million doll into a plan on two
projects would play Havoc with trying to
manage cash flow and manage overall
allocation among projects within the
city so help me understand like how that
happens or could this have been
reasonably foreseen or should 100
million of this been factored in in the
past so we knew what might happen so I'm
I'm still trying to understand when
these increases happen what's a scope
increase versus what's uh
estimation uh softness or changes but
just looking at those two projects
that's like a really big number so help
me understand just a little bit more on
those where did those big numbers come
from so for when could we have told
counil be happy to uh commissioner
Stevens with aprw this is a new project
for us and we base it on we currently
have at the treatment plant we actually
had a a skid where we could serve
individuals where we clean up the waste
water to drinking water and the initial
costs were based on that plus the
current permit that we had now DEQ
Arizona Department envirment quality
have finalized new regulations based off
that and learning off that skid of what
we would need so we're going to have to
have a different treatment train
multiple
redundancies um more online equipment
for that so then we had Coro help us
design that uh prelim preliminary design
plus with a cost estiment of this what
it would cost they have come back
essentially of 68
million so okay because and because my
note I put down when you were doing the
original explanation was that
regulations changed because you needed a
new permit so did the scope of this
project not get any bigger so we're
still going to get the same volume of
reclaimed water but now because of
regulatory changes it's going to cost
three times times more because of
regulatory changes is one um we have the
capacity to do 20 million gallons a day
and the way we're going to use aprw as a
blend with the drinking water so we're
looking 10 to 20% so we only need 5 to
10 million gallons of water that's
recycled so that's going to be a
different treatment chain on its
own okay so how does something like this
work then does the council evidently
originally approved this at 17 million
and they knew they'd get this many
gallons of water at it reclaimed now
it's going to triple and you're going to
be presenting this budget to them are
they going to be provided information to
know hey is to decide is this still
worth doing or is this something that
now becomes uh not a best use of an
extra 50 million short answer yes this
will be presented to them for their
approval okay so they no the scope
didn't change it cost more and they can
decide whether they want to keep and
they'll have a report of um okay what
the staff went through and our Engineers
went through and then the water one that
was 80 some million was that was there a
scope I wasn't quite following that as
clearly was that a scope increase so we
get more utility out of something or was
that
just shog cost incre yeah what what was
that 80 million roughly so that's
essentially we budgeted this includes
the budget out to
2046 that's 5.25 million a year to 2046
because we're part of the sub Regional
operating group um so it's that's some
okay so it's almost like in some ways
this is an operating cost because you
have to keep contributing to your
portion of that in order to keep that
thing running yes because the dollar
size you're calling to Capital but it's
your contribution for the 99.9% correct
ownership interest you have correct okay
so this increase didn't necessarily
cause any pain because it just includes
a lot more years of utility that you're
going to get correct commissioner
Stevens okay thank you
let me uh interject with a couple of
questions here uh or maybe it's just a
comment but go to your first or your
second slide whatever you call it um
page number two and it's it's a comment
that on that column called proposed 25
to
35e
CIP I I think as a matter of definition
is it's really five years plus in other
words it includes everything in the
Years
Beyond uh chairman Smith yes it does
include some of that in in some cases
and City staff wants to weigh in who's
who's requesting Mr chairman um that
column adopted FY 25 through 29 5year
CIP and then two columns over FY 26
through 30 those numbers Encompass only
the fiveyear CIP anything beyond that is
not contemplated in those
columns okay so it does not include the
oute
numbers
um in I guess I'm I'm still confused if
it doesn't have those future increases
then we're not looking at the total
package that they will be adopting I
mean they'll be adopting these five
years but uh in fact they're subscribing
to a project that may have substantial
dollars Beyond on the 5-year
program I believe that's a true
statement you can correct me if I'm
wrong in some of the presentations
um I noticed
that you had a project that had an
increase of $88 million in the Years
Beyond and I'm looking for which one
that is maybe you know which one it is
um
I believe that would be the shog
chairman
Smith and you've made a note on the
bottom of the page that 84 million of
the proposed budget increase is expected
in the Years Beyond and on this sheet
therefore you have the total proposed
budget of
1586 including the um 84 million in the
Years Beyond is that
true I would have to defer to you Scott
Mr chairman um I'll just speak to this
to kind of describe our methodology for
what we were doing here on the Excel
sheet we were just looking at that was
meant to show The Five-Year budgeted
costs that will be adopted as part of
the 5year CIP now we wanted to on the
individual project slides show that let
me back up so any proposed or planned
expenditures beyond the five years are
not counted in those numbers on the on
the Excel sheet however we wanted to
show on the individual projects that we
are in fact considering and
contemplating the long-term cost of the
project so we sought to show the total
project cost on these slides even if
many of the expend will occur on the out
years that said in the book um the out
years are included under I think the
column is called future so they're in
your book they're just not counted in
that first spreadsheet that you see at
the beginning of each
section I hope that was responsive to
your question it's a Nuance that's
probably boring everybody in the
audience already but I I I see a a
different approach on page nine where
you have included the outy years and on
page 133 where you have not included the
oute and it's Mr chairman um I it's
possible that this was a very manual
process it's possible that that was
missed on an individual project basis
but our intent was to show and portray
on the individual project slides all of
the costs that are being contemplated
even beyond the five years and so if you
turn to page 13 you'll see that that was
not the case so it's a bit confusing to
follow
I think it would be helpful
for the public as well as Council but
for the public to understand the
evolution of some of these
projects if we indicated whether
previous uh approved increases we never
seem to have decreases
but previously included U increases and
my point is this going back to the page
two of the of the handout and it's true
on each individual sheet as
well you say the proposed capital budget
for this coming year the spend rate for
the coming year column three which in
total was $323
Million I
suspect that the combination of that and
the next five years and even the years
Beyond we've had increases in some of
these projects
before just the increases that were
displayed in the far right
column in other words you're saying
we're asking for $189 million of
increase but it may be true for many of
these projects that they started out at
$5 went to 10 then they went to 20 and
now we're asking to take it from 20 to
25 a silly example to illustrate my
point it would be I think
informative for anyone trying to follow
uh the capital budget to understand what
approvals have been sought in the past
on individual projects and in the
Aggregate and that brings us up to where
we were last year and then what are we
asking for this
year
um commissioner Stevens also made the
point that u in some cases it's it seems
like an easy answer to say that you know
this is inflation or it's postco or it's
the cost of moving dirt or
whatever but I think we have to be a
little bit more
disclosive with the public if we accept
them if we expect them uh to accept
these numbers as given we need to be a
little bit more um informative as to the
root cause of some of the increases now
I'm going to pause for a minute city
manager wants to weigh in and tell me
why I'm wrong thank you Mr chair I
certainly would not do that but I wanted
wanted to contribute to your discussion
or monologue that I think one thing
after we get through this budget season
we may want to visit revisit as a group
if the five-year adoption is serving us
well versus a one-year adoption uh case
in point I think some of your uh your
comments that you just made there and
and I've often seen in this fiveyear
what we have is a project that's going
to span mul multiple years and you never
in your first year or second year you
never hit it exactly right so then you
have carry forward and therefore that's
going to change the number from what you
had originally budgeted in year two or
three or the out years so it's this
constant moving Target and I wonder for
tracking and transparency purposes if it
might serve us well to have the one-year
adoption and have it fully loaded and
there are pros and cons to the two
different approaches I appreciate that
um but some of the challenges that we've
had with tying down a number I or the
transparency and articulating that may
be solved through a methodology change
back to a one-year adoption uh that is
what I am more familiar with and as a
new member still wrapping my head around
the fiveyear and how that particularly
changes from year to year with carry
forwards and how did it change from what
was originally adopted and furthermore
when you look at projects over a
five-year span versus oneyear there's a
tremendous amount of upfront lift and
work in refining those numbers and that
may be where that uh certainty is is
very challenging in the environment that
we're in versus one year thank you m Mr
chair and I think you're right I and I
do believe that the council focuses on
the upcoming one year when they're
giving you their approval um
and the out years are important to see
the total anticipated scope of the
project what are we really signing up
for we agree to this spend rate for 25
26 so probably both numbers are are
needed um just perhaps a better
explanation of how we got to that
point turn if you will to page five and
this is the Bartlett Dam
project our proposed budget is $48
million you said this is our share give
me an order of magnitude what is the
total
project at whoever is going to do at the
state or federal level or
whatever as of right now they're only
estimates and it's ranging from 1 to
three
billion is how much 1 to three billion
that's a pretty wide
range and it's still a number of years
out and is our 48 B based on the 1
billion or the three billion or
something in
between uh chairman Smith I don't have
an answer that to that right now but I
can look that into that the importance
of this it may be unnecessary and it may
be required and may have no option but
it's um it's obviously a project over
which we have no discretion we're not
going to go out and build the dam um and
so we need to be pretty sure that we're
estimating our total future commitment
cost as correctly as we
can U commissioner
Newman um just a comment regarding
the go to the project the the for the
sewage treatment plant the re the
ongoing ongoing spend I forget the slide
the shared uh
facility there it is let me get back to
it yeah the shog no next one
nope
one that that one yes okay um I think
this is a great example of what we've
been talking about in terms of capital
replacement and treasure Andrews and I
had a conversation about how to
categorize this this might be better
Cate categorized as really this is a
long-term capital replacement plan and
it's not really a one-year Capital
project because you're going to spend
this every year and eventually you're
going to do a big project because you're
you're using it up over time we have
some of the similar things when you have
to replace a road and you could argue as
PCI a long-term plan because you're
going to have an
ongoing 20 $30 million a year or or a a
base replacement could fall in that
category or a planned plan set of those
it seems like that might this is kind of
what I was talking about when we were
saying hey it's it's situational project
by project but this is a great example I
don't think it really belongs in the
what you would think is the capital plan
we're building a new capacity facility
or whatever we're just using this up
over time and it needs to be categorized
differently and then that adds up to the
wastewater treatment plan of capital but
it it seems like it would be better
separated out that
way um yeah commissioner Newman that's a
good observation because this is really
not a capital project that we capitalize
on our books it's actually a joint
venture uh with the regional group so we
can take a look at that and we have
always just uh considered it a capital
project because we use Capital funds to
fund it since it's a regional Capital
project right and yeah so good good
observation though thank you thank you
and one other comment in terms of the
cash flow on these project it seems like
our policies are a bit constraining for
the folks that are trying to do these
projects very efficiently or as
efficiently as possible and the council
approves a one-year plan but
tentativeness on a multi-year project is
difficult for the people doing the work
it seems like we ought to be approving a
project and and movement of cash flow
within that without having to go back to
the council maybe the city manager
approval with with you know just
communicate to the council but it seems
like within a project you know what the
budget's going to be you're not going to
go over that but cash flows happen
equipment's delayed it comes in early
whatever there's unexpected things if
there's unexpected things you have to
get approval for that from contingency
but I think there's enough constraints
on it but maybe the constraints are so
much that it in inhibits I'd be
interested in your comments if you think
that that stands in the way of your
ability to move projects forward because
of the administrative burden that goes
with
it uh
commissioner it it would be nice to have
that um the way I understand your
question is have that approval and the
funding there as the project starts so
we can continue the project without
getting further approvals or just
scheduling at certain years to get that
cash flow because it does approve
efficiency some projects will with long
lead times will go ahead and get as the
project starts order those first work
with our construction managers and get
those long lead times moving first
instead of waiting you know to a certain
point and saying okay let's go ahead and
order it now so that that is an added
benefit yes thank
you commissioner
spker yeah your slide nine that's up
there um that slide is actually why I
got involved in politics many years ago
when my former town of Paradise Valley
got into into a disagreement with
Scottdale on the uh what the future
needs were going to be and I think it's
important for everybody to know that um
and they may have changed it since I was
involved but it used to be that they
were expanding that facility every seven
years so they would go out to all the
different communities and say what are
your perceived increase needs for the
next seven years and then they would
design it that way and they always
because I spent six years on on mag um
as an East Valley representative and
they' always designed some flexibility
into that because you know if you look
at the growth of the valley it's hard to
project seven years down the road what
it's going to be but it takes them that
long to design and build out that water
treatment plant so that's a number that
I I mean it looks like a huge number uh
increase there I'm not particularly
surprised about that good to know
I'll follow up with one other question
or a couple of them um and by the way I
apologize to you already um Kevin and
this is the advantage or disadvantage of
being number one out of the box here so
many of these questions will be gerain
to the other presentations but you just
uh had the lucky number one to answer it
for your
presentation but the question H deals
with the when you have an increase in
cost that you perceive on a project uh
do you also increase the other
components of the project that were in
the original estimate for example the
overhead the contingency those kinds of
adders that gave us the original
estimate do they go up in tandem with
the increases that you perceive in the
underlying basic materials in labor um
chairman Smith uh to my knowledge no U
we look at the increased cost of its
materials or labor and uh look to see
where available funding um can cover it
and we cover
that and uh another question which I
don't mean to be vicious about this but
seriously does a project in your area or
anybody's area ever come in under budget
do we ever have a champagne celebration
for a project that came in below
expected cost uh chairman Smith I only
speak for water I they typically come
they vary from double to five times the
cost and it's they never come in under
and we do work with engineering
Consultants to get engineering estimates
and they struggle with it too it's not
uncommon to have someone quote materials
and they'll hold it for 2 to 10 days no
more 30 60 days um if you get something
30 days that's where we do a champagne
toast well invite us all to one of those
if
you and maybe the other speakers can
talk to that question to of whether any
of their projects and and I don't know
what happens to the money when if it
comes in at 50 bucks and we thought it
was going to be 100 what do we do with
the other 50 um where does it
go well one thing I do want to say
chairman Smith we do work with a lot of
other utilities even developers and the
developers I met with this week uh they
saw a pricing from 2023 go from 12
million to 40 million
today and they're they're asking us for
we seeing the same we
are commissioner
Stevens yeah I guess commissioner Newman
got me going on the slide 9 to it is it
makes it sound like it's a little more
of an operating type thing so I'm
curious if it was put it's an Enterprise
fund if it goes into operations the
money reimbursement got to come from
rates anyway so are we just pushing on a
balloon because if we made it operating
it would move to operating and then the
funding source would move from one
portion of the Enterprise fund uh
allocation of rate Revenue into you know
from an operating into a capital part or
is there some reason to think there's a
more correct presentation by having it
is
operating okay so I guess the question
for you would be is is this truly
Capital because assets your share of
assets are increasing in value and it
doesn't happen radly over a period or is
it more your share of costs which could
reasonbly expected to be incured every
year that some more operating just for
clarification commissioner uh Stevens
this is for the shrug correct this is
for shr or just in general no I'm
talking about this the the shr so this
would be purely Capital this would be
replacement of buildings and equipment
at 91st Avenue so it's rable it's a big
one year smaller the next depending on
whatever the capital plan is correct
okay commissioner Stevens I'm going to
interrupt you here because somebody on
the city staff level that wants to chime
in Mr chairman I wanted to respond to
your question earlier what happens if a
project comes in under budget if I have
a a project that ends let's say a
million dollars under budget that
million dollars is reverted back to the
the fund of origin that funded the
project thank you for that clarification
um commissioner Stevens you still have
the floor if you'd like uh no that's
okay then commissioner ransco quick
question uh can you comment about what
percentage of your projects are denied
or not approved I'd be curious if any of
them ever
are commissioner um uh ransco I don't
have a number for that um we are very
sensitive to what projects we believe it
we come to what we need not a want it's
a need of
um yeah don't have an answer for that if
I may assist uh Mr chair and
commissioner I'm a little more familiar
with this uh Capital portion as it was
part of my portfolio uh over the last
year before my new role um I would say
in water and primarily in infrastructure
we talked quite a bit about this
yesterday with Transportation I would
probably put them in two categories one
would be expansion to keep up with
growth and in that regard that has been
a significant portion of what uh Water
Resources has been dealing with and then
as Mr Rose referenced the second portion
is Rehabilitation I think it also
translates to uh roads as we were
discussing yesterday a newer Community
is going to have a different PCI uh than
an older community and so I think you're
seeing our community in that uh
transition uh and we have both uh and so
to denied I think it's a matter of
prioritization so the answer is yes
absolutely projects were denied they I
would call them I probably wouldn't use
that term though I would just say that
they were deferred not in the Deferred
sense of kind of how this uh commission
has said that other term but I would say
just prioritized and it's just not of
the highest priorities uh given cash
flow given where we are with other uh
priorities particularly with growth and
and also quite frankly switching the
portfolio I mean what you have here is a
dramatic shift from capap water to these
Alternatives and I would present them as
an option for future consideration by
elected officials so that has taken an
enormous amount of resources Innovation
like we were talking
APW uh and truly on The Cutting Edge of
technology and so there's no way to
predict that type of actual cost down to
the dollar amount because we're the
first we're the Pioneers we're the first
one's doing it so again I think you have
growth you have us diversifying the
water portfolio and then you have
rehabilitating an aging
system uh let me address the city
manager with a question since you
brought up the
the practice of prioritization and I
know that's a reality you try to figure
out what's the highest and best need and
respon in what way is this um
prioritization responsive
to what the public may want I I'll say
and and let me say as an example we
discussed at our recent meeting the okay
uh I'll call it the neglect or the low
prioritization that was given to roads
and the condition of streets and so on
and now we've got some catchup work to
do right but was there anybody or any
Square in the process that somebody
could say wait you know a higher
priority
than horse barns is is pothole repairs
or whatever explain that process
absolutely thank you thank you Mr chair
so uh I recognized and some of my
colleagues also recognized that after
the discussion the other day about how a
capital project becomes how an idea or
concept becomes a capital project given
time we had to to glaze over that it's
still in your your deck um but what we
also added
and we weren't able to do it within the
24hour timeline but we were able to add
a couple additional elements that I
think are
illustrative uh for this
discussion can oh it's not touchscreen
it's just not touchcreen how do we not
have and so thank you so much and so uh
I think it's really important we we'll
provide this uh as a follow-up slide for
uh the commission's consideration but do
know that how we select projects is
based upon a variety of things one in
many instances it's other plans that are
driving that I say uh we get community
feedback every single day um and then
also we have other Outreach
opportunities and then we have
selective uh groups throughout our
organization that prioritize sometimes
it's safety that will drive I I'll give
a good example and Parks and Recreation
they make the playgrounds uh very
different today than they did 30 years
ago uh it's amazing we survived those 30
or 40 years ago and so it's things such
as that that are a part of the
replacement and quite frankly are
dangerous to our community if we don't
so there's that uh element that factors
in and then sometimes uh some a project
or something has really bubbled up uh to
be a maintenance problem and then you
have to come in and address that so it's
kind of a cost savings measure in that
regard all of that comes into
consideration as we prepare these and
there are hundreds of items that are on
a list and then I will say again back to
Government funding and fund accounting
is PCI for the most part or Pavements
given our funding sources wouldn't
necessarily well I'll use this pure
example wouldn't compare with any of the
projects you just saw is and to State an
extreme examp example of different
funding measures because of our funding
sources so we really look at look at
them within each uh Revenue opportunity
but then those do compete um within that
same category and the largest category
uh other than the Enterprises of course
is the general fund and so these are
challenged because of our discussion the
other day also where you have tremendous
upward pressure uh for increas in costs
in the general fund on operating side so
it's our job to constantly put downward
pressure on that which creates
additional opportunities to fund a needs
list of a general fund not a not a wants
list I'll stop there we'll provide uh
those additional slides uh for your
edification and look forward to further
conversation in that
regard thank you for the explanation and
uh Kevin thank you for your presentation
and for your patience in being number
one out of the box here thank you
unless we have other comments on the
water and Water Reclamation projects and
I guess I should say just as an overview
if anybody's watching from TV Land and
doesn't understand this for the most
part I mean this is a big big part of
the capital program for the city is the
money spent in water and Water
Reclamation projects and for the most
part they are recovered through rates
and fees so it's not a tax uh related
issue but it's um these are projects
over in the Enterprise fund of the water
company and certainly a company that I
think we're all proud of every time you
turn on the faucet you have a lot to be
thankful for in terms of what these
folks are doing but um as an order of
magnitude I think their total spend here
in next year is requested to be
something like $330
million um and as I say out of the total
budget that's a big chunk of what we're
going to be
doing unless there's other comments
we'll move on to item two on the
agenda which is the drainage flood and
capital control
projects
um same kind of format and
um Hassan I'll have you introduce
yourself and you
are going to tell us all about
this chairman Smith Vice chair Striker
members of the commission my name is
Hassan mushak good afternoon storm water
engineering manager and flood plane
administrator today I will be presenting
information on the storm water CIP
budget for FY
2526 I promise I won't speak in billions
and I won't have 12 slides it'll be
short and sweet the proposed storm water
CIP budget has a total of 22 items which
includes existing projects and few new
proposed
projects they are small and large in
capacities in various
ways next slide
please this is a summary of the 2526 CIP
and the fiveyear CIP as well if you have
any questions I'm sure Scott will jump
in to answer those I won't speak to any
of these
numbers however I'll move on with my
presentation as requested earlier I will
be highlighting two two storm water
flood control projects for your
information today from the proposed
budget for
2526 next slide
please first one is Riata wash flood
control project this is a project that
will build a new channel enhance
existing channels built by
developers construct several roadway
Crossings certify two levies built by
others between Nial Peak Road to the
north and central Arizona project Canal
to the
South design of this project is at 30
30% level requested budget for FY 2526
is approximately
$400,000 to complete the 30% level
design and the FEMA
process total project cost is almost $60
million however we are anticipating half
of the cost share will come from Flood
Control District of Maricopa County
through intergovernmental agreements
between us and the flood control
district majority of this $60 million is
budgeted outside the current 5year plan
in the outer
years once completed this channel will
contain the 100e flood in the area
reducing the large Riata wash flood
plane and the the flood plane is
depicted in the light greenish color in
the entire Watershed the channel
location it's a little difficult to see
but it's hugging the Eastern edge of the
Watershed boundary once that is built
this large flood plane will be removed
from the map what that does is
approximately 46 th
4,600 structures will no longer be in
this flood plane and the mandatory flood
insurance require requirment will not be
applicable anymore these flood insurance
policy premiums could be as high as
$3,000 depending on the contents in in
the
structure next slide
please next project up is Granite Reef
wash phase
2B uh we Engineers like to number name
things with
numbers uh this is a project uh
primarily we'll build storm drains open
channels enhance retrofit A detention
Basin Pima Park Along Thomas Road
several roadway Crossings Etc from
Thomas Road following the granite uh 87
Street alignment down to Granite Reef
Road alignment all the way down to mips
road to the South the elements
colorcoded on the picture you see on the
North the purple color is is the storm
drains and the retention Basin the light
blue color coming at an angle 87 Street
alignment storm drains and channels the
green color is also storm drains and
channels following Granite Reef Road and
finally confluency with another project
coming from the East side eventually
discharging into the Salt River Pro Salt
River design of this project is at 60%
level requested budget for 2526 is
approximately $5.4
million overall project cost is about 41
million
total and the remaining construction
dollars are spread over the next two
fiscal years 2627 and
2728 once again this is also going to be
a Kare project with Flood Control
District of Maricopa County at 5050 C
share level
this project when it's completed also
will reduce the Granite Reef flood plane
it is not shown on this exhibit however
it is if you can imagine the light blue
color line and the green color line is
all flood planes on the map as of today
once completed the project will shrink
the flood plane to the storm drain and
the street rights of way only this
project will remove approximately 600
structures from the existing flood plane
again the benefit to the citizens would
be removal of the mandatory flood
insurance requirement which could be
pretty high $2 $3,000 based on the
contents
coverage as I promised my presentation
will be short that was the end of my
presentation if we have any questions I
would like to entertain them and thank
you for your
attention thank you
Hassan um and to the public at large
Nick malar's presentation was uh
all about water we can control and
hassans is about water we can't control
and but we try to um it's an important
part of
our um livability if you will but only
appreciated in times of uh 100-year
floods and that sort of thing so it's
important it's important what we're
doing let me ask you Nick um who
determines the need for a project is it
done by You by Scottdale or is it done
by Maricopa Flood Control District or
jointly or who drives this process that
says this is a project we ought to
attend
to Chairman Smith and members of the
commission uh the project starts any
project in flood control area starts
with the citizens themselves we get
complaints drainage complaints flooding
complaints when storm happens from
different parts of the city and we keep
it put track of that so we know what
parts of City are vulnerable for
flooding and we have to come up with
mitigation for those areas when a
concept develops we start corresponding
with our partners Flood Control District
of Maricopa County and look for funding
opportunities and so forth so that's how
we pretty much start any and all of
these projects you see under the storm
water CIP
funds is the uh is the funding from the
flood control district limited as to
dollar amount total that they'll
allocate to Scottsdale or if we came up
with a billion dollars worth of projects
would be would they be right there with
us with a billion from their coffers
or chairman Smith members of the
commission uh it's not cap by any means
but it based on needs Maricopa County
looks at the needs for other agency
other communities within the Maricopa
County as well and they prior PR ize
whose projects are more priority than
others and that's how they allocate
their funding um I don't know off hand
if there is a hard cap on any of the
funding
limits but the word priority enters the
equation again we'll probably hear more
of that in the in the future
commissioner
Stevens uh yes uh just so you all know
what I did several of my questions I
submitted in advance kind of hoping
they'd be able to make things go better
so I did try to do that uh slide two I
just like to point probably shouldn't be
relied on because it's directionally
incorrect on the proposed increases that
says decreases and they're significantly
larger in the other
direction uh this slide was really meant
to be an overview so you knew what to
focus on uh and then my other question
was on um on slide uh on
slide oh slide four
well I guess on um on slide three I I'm
still not sure what that big increase
was for and my question on slide four
was that thing's been around since 2017
only 2 million expended a date and uh
now we're going up
by oh I'm sorry I read that wrong I got
my two projects confused let me go back
to page three on on Project fb55 you've
got a proposed budget increase of $35
million happen
on a a project that's only had a couple
million incurred to dat so that's a
really big increase what what was that
again is that um that's like a six oh my
gosh that's an eight-year old project so
why all of a sudden $35 million
more commissioner Stevens members of the
commission uh thank you for the question
um again priority is is always uh a
factor uh when we're dealing with
projects there is competition between
projects which one gets priority to be
designed and built before others and so
forth this project was not a priority
project uh because of which the design
was a little slower and we've been
working on this design since
2017 however now we have progressed to
30% plus uh stage of the design increase
of the cost is always a moving Target uh
as the city manager eluded a few minutes
ago that uh estimates are always the
target uh two years later the cost will
be different and at different Milestones
of completion of design project we get
estimates done by the consultant and our
own estimators so at 15% level the the
number will be 30 million 30% level the
number will be different uh increase
might be varieties of uh items
additional construction items scope
increase inflation for example uh may
play A Part uh in in in the increase um
if You' like more details I can find
Details talking to the project
management folks and and bring it back
to the commission at a later
time I don't know I just throughout this
process there have been an awful lot of
really commissioner Stevens let me
interrupt you because I've got City
staff they may be weighing on on this
question as well
yeah commissioner Stevens and commission
with the storm water fund we are
dependent on the collection of the storm
water fee to um schedule out how much is
available each year for the projects so
um we don't issue debt for the storm
water fund because the revenue streams
are not strong enough to support debt um
or or only a small amount of debt I
would say and also is dependent on our
intergovernmental agreement with the
flood control district so with the storm
water projects a lot of times we have to
schedule that in the sense that when we
have the collection of the storm water
revenues then we can do this much and we
have to push uh you know either a second
phase or the next uh portion of the
expenditure to another year so that's
kind of how we manage the storm water
projects in the storm water
fund okay but still my big picture
question is this project more than
doubled all of a sudden out out of the
blue regardless of whether the had funds
so either we weren't watching it that
much and now it became more important so
we're looking at it now and I'm just
trying to think about how you run a
business if you've got this you know
these kind of big changes popping up all
the time when it comes to allocation of
resources and does more time need to be
spent or do we need to look at what the
process is for doing the estimates on
these
projects sorry um commissioner so I
think that with some of these projects
um additional improvements are added on
as more um um project needs are
identified and so this is one of those
projects where it could be a variety of
issues whether is additional scope
increase or inflation or having to defer
the project because we don't have the um
storm water fee revenues to fund it so
whenever we have to push the project um
you know to a future year the cost does
increase so there's a combination of
factors where but I think uh Hassan will
have to speak to this specific project
and what was added in terms of scope and
what the inflation cost increases
were and someone someone else is asking
to speak from city state Mr chairman Mr
Stevens I wanted to try to address the
question you asked earlier slide two um
kind of talked about it earlier if you
go to the previous slide what we were
trying to compare on that table are
total fiveyear expenditures in last
year's CIP and the fiveyear in the
proposed so what the figure on the right
that negative 31.8 million shows is that
if you compare the total five-year
project cost from last year's CIP to
this year's you would see a net decrease
of $ 31.8 million now mentioned this
earlier one thing we kind of grappled
with internally is how to account for
expenditures outside of the 5-year
window so this project Riata if you
could go to the next slide is a great
example of that if you look at last
year's CIP book on page 118 the overall
project is expected to be $24.3 million
and all of it was scheduled to occur
within the 5-year window now if you look
at page 40 of the proposed CIP with the
blue cover on it um you'll see that the
overall project is now expected to cost
59.8 which you see on the slide um but
most of it is scheduled to occur in that
future column off to the right meaning
it's outside of the five-year window
that we're comparing on the previous
slide so what we tried to do in those
cases is to have the Excel table compare
only five-year costs um but to have the
individual project slides communicate
the entire project cost um even if it's
scheduled to occur outside of the
five-year window there's critiques you
can make with that methodology that's
just what we tried to do and we could
provide a crosswalk um or slice the
numbers any way you'd like to make it
useful to you
thanks commissioner ransco I was just
looking at the Granite Reef uh wash
project um this is an incredibly mature
neighborhood these are 40 50y old houses
in here so I was just curious
if they've been flooding that long or is
this deteriorating infrastructure that
we're repairing or is it Upstream
contribution that's overwhelming Legacy
engineering commissioner ransco members
of the commission um thank you for the
question it's all of the above uh
improvements and developments Upstream
always cause some adverse impact on the
downstream direction we try to mitigate
that during the development process
infrastructure wise 87 Street alignment
um I believe it's the next slide 87
Street alignment the blue light blue
color it has no storm rins the street
itself is built uh as an invert so it
carries the flow and in the process it
floods side streets homes and so forth
we have I have collected flooding
complaints from this area on and off
very frequently during a large storm
event all the
time I think we've run out of questions
to ask you um if you have if you have no
additional answers to i' be happy to
take care of any more uh if you have
more questions I can answer later on
thank you thank
you item number three is the mcdell or
and preserve capital
projects and um Nick melari who's the
senior director of Parks and Recreation
and preserve and who knows what else uh
is going to make this presentation Nick
go ahead good afternoon chair Smith Vice
chair schwier members of the budget
review commission again I'm Nick
mulliner I am the senior director who
oversees the Parks and Recreation
Division and The
Preserve the following
slides are an overview of the the
proposed projects in The Preserve which
are all funded through the 2004 0.15%
sales tax that is restricted for land
acquisition and
capital these three projects that I'll
review in addition to the other projects
that are funded through this funding
source have all been recommended by The
mcdal oron Preserve commission which
serves as the oversight body for that
2004 preserved tax next slide please
this is the the fiveyear plans as as
compared is not necessarily significant
as we speak to this that we can
certainly revert back to this if we'd
like to as we go over the
projects next slide
please the Gateway Trail Head
improvements are a threee threeyear
project that will improve safety
conditions increase shade throughout the
trail heads and improve storage in
restrooms it will update the trail head
conditions the parking lots and the
trails this is a $4.5 million project
with $1.5 million budgeted in the fiscal
year 2526 budget and then another $1.5
in the following two fiscal
years next slide
please the Tom's Thumb trail head
improvements are a little bit
more incl there there's a little bit
more to the Tom said trail head
improvements this project includes
implementation of a permanent Wastewater
solution for this trail head and a
connection to do the domestic water
system it converts the restrooms to
flushing toilets which um the our our
visitors do not love the condition of of
the restrooms right now it creates some
drainage refinements and updates to all
of the signage and resurfacing of the
equestrian lot currently those toilets
are not tied to the sewer system so they
are shoots and um similar to Campground
toilets so our our visitors do not love
those when Tom Thumb was built we were
the first development out there and
there wasn't anything else there so we
knew that future development was coming
and we installed water infrastructure
that could connect to a Wastewater
system in the future which this project
will will satisfy next
slide so the Rio verie
overpass this project um the the funding
for this project which is in total 35
million starts in fiscal year
2728 this project will fund the design
and construction of a water of a
wildlife crossing over Rio Drive to
assure safe passage of wildlife over the
expanded
roadway the overpass will restore
critical Wildlife connectivity within
The mcdal norn Preserve link The
Preserve to the Tano National
forest and the Rio Drive as an arterial
roadway with a 50 mph speed limit
bisects key Wildlife linkage
Corridor the project will consider north
south crossing for hikers bikers
horseback Riders and other pedestrians
in addition to mitigating the risk of
high-speed vehicular
collisions the proposed project which is
not seen any design to this point is a
200t wide vegetated Crossing that will
be strategically integrated into the
surrounding topography to ensure natural
movement patterns for wildlife we
anticipate that fencing would be
installed along the Rio Drive that would
guide animals towards the the crossing
and reduce roadway
hazards this project does align with
Scottsdale's voter approved General plan
which prioritizes Wildlife connectivity
habitat
preservation in the open space land use
Recreation environmental and planning
and conservation
elements and I'm happy to to take any
questions about any of these
projects thank you Nick um I don't have
any requests to speak right now but I
will make a comment um you show the uh
the source of funding for many of these
as being The Preserve tax
2004 um hyphen or Dash land and
improvements
um and I think you may want to expand
that definition some I mean just
acknowledging that uh in 2018 the voters
approved a severe limitation on the
spending of the preserved tax 2004 so we
are probably more affected by that
limitation than we are by the broad
language of the original 2004 tax
Passage
um and to that point uh the
2018 limitation which is then once it
was approved by the voters it was
incorporated in the charter the city
Charter so it's in our constitution but
it limits the uh use of the money to
Trails and Trail
improvements maintenance of the trails
maybe maintenance is equivalent in
everybody's mind to improve improvements
I don't know but it's a it's a nuanced
word um and so you
might make an argument or talk about the
argument of why are these still legally
possible all of these things that we're
calling improvements I presume it's your
position that those
are in accordance with the 2008 language
those are Trail maintenance is would
that be your
explanation chair Smith members of the
commission we would consider those trail
head improvements to be in alignment
with the
2018 revision correct that's what you're
referring to that's what I'm referring
to which allows for the the spending of
the money for maintenance of
trails these trails are all already
they're they're existing Trails so the
improvements that we're recommending to
these Trails would be would be
considered maintenance or improvements
to those existing assets
and similarly with the
um with the land bridge or the animal
Bridge whatever name you give to it
um that you would consider to
be maintenance of an existing Trail or
creation of a new Trail or how would you
fit that into the language I cheer Smith
members of the commission I don't have a
reference to the 2018 language in front
of me as it relates to the the that
ordinance so I would need to bring that
information back to you in the
commission you may and may just be
something that you take to the council
in as explanation but that obviously the
2018 language is the governing language
not the uh not the broad language of
2004 that said improvements there
too now I have some other folks that
like to chime in uh commissioner Newman
you put up slide five
please yeah that's the
one the land bridge
project side five
please um we've been having a thoughtful
discussion commissioner Carla and Steve
kucho and I and so appreciate the
discussion it's been thoughtful and
informative um and I there's a there's
kind of a disconnect here and I wonder
if this is a bit administrative um to
have this as a standalone project it's a
big number you know um and there are
other projects out there that are big
numbers too um and we can I'm not
intending to get into the details of the
project but administratively there's
also going to be a at some point a road
widening that is just off the the
planning Horizon right now for the for
the widening of real Varity drive and
just intuitively and having done some
research on it the costs change
dramatically if it's incorp if if
considerations like this are
Incorporated into a road another bigger
design project so my question is is to
City staff I'm not sure who should
answer but it seems like we ought to
have some discussion there to do that
because it just makes sense and I think
we kind of have some agreement do
administratively there isn't uh there
isn't a pathway to uh really do that
right now so this is the solution right
now until the administrative thing and
we kind of control the administrative
part I hope so maybe we can come up with
some kind of reasonable Common Sense
solution
here the city manager wants to chime in
probably on this point so let's defer to
him from moment thank you Mr chair and
I'll take that on um so I I think you
raised a good point and I um I when I
look at the start date it's fascinating
to me uh of July 27 and again it goes
back to the fivey year versus the single
year so what we have in the concept what
you have pointed out is two projects s
both are in the future this is before
you today if you will and before Council
because it's within the 5 years then we
have another project that is on a
different timeline potentially and then
how do those two mix and I think the uh
talking about it in the future makes it
even more challenging um and again
having this discussion here when it
doesn't even start until
2027 and then should the other project
move forward at least a relatively close
time frame it certainly would Mak sense
from a mo mobilization standpoint to do
that all at the same time clearly two
different funding sources but there's
significant uh efficiencies to be gained
uh through that combined one-time uh
construction if you will we certainly
recognize that uh I think that sounds
like win-win should those parallel
projects uh come to fruition at any
close proximity that makes a lot of
sense yeah thank you I I don't know
commissioner Smith what we do here
around that other than I think it's a
reasonable approach just
administratively to approach it that way
but to me it would obviously change what
this slide looks like dramatically and I
think that helps a lot of the discussion
overall uh going forward with
this that commissioner Newman that's a
great point and the the oute schedule
for this project in 262 or 2728 as the
design year does allow for some
opportunity for for alignment with
future Transportation
projects commissioner Carla uh yes um
I'll take a couple of things in a row
first off what commission um chair Smith
was talking about about the 2018 vote
that limited the ability to do certain
things in The Preserve it's called prop
420 um this
overpass still qualifies because it has
a trail over it and because it's been in
the plan since
2017 and on you know record the authors
of prop 420 said that they put in
section B1 specifically to allow things
like this so if City legal is going to
follow up on that you know just FYI that
is what they have said on the record
that section B1 is in there to C cover
this project um I and then to go to
commissioner Newman and we sincerely
appreciate the interest and study he has
put into this and I'm not sure if we're
at the same place yet on everything but
when it does come to combining the
widening of Rover to four lanes and
building the long planned overpass it
makes no sense not to do them together
but watching Transportation presentation
yes um day before yesterday um it's not
even on their sight line and I just want
to remind the city manager when you're
talking to transportation that the
preserve's been waiting 20 years for
this because the public first voted and
approved it in the plan in
2004 and we've been waiting for that
ultimate widening of rovery and while
you wait those two de decades now is
more and more developments coming in as
you saw from the the shot that um Mr
zekus showed the deer are starting not
to travel and in order to have a healthy
deer population in the southern part of
our preserve they have to travel to the
Tonto there has to be movement for Gene
diversity and that's starting not to
happen over these 20 years and I know
that that um commissioner Newman still
may have a question and some council
members have a question about the need
for the overpass and what I would ask
you know the chairman here and staff for
direction on is do we need to have a
future agenda item to actually discuss
that here or is that something that
needs to happen at Council because um
the Arizona Game and Fish Department
Wildlife connectivity specialist he is
willing to come in and give a current
presentation um Arizona G and fish has a
contract with the city where they do a
yearly helicopter flyover and animal
count in The Preserve uh deer and
Havalina and they say our deer
population is extremely stable and so we
want to keep it stable and healthy plus
they do a collaring study which I'm not
sure how often that is that tracks the
movement um so they have all of this
information that they could come and
bring in and give a presentation to
whichever entity is appropriate to show
the absolute need for this to keep our
preserve healthy for generations to come
and then on the other part um to not do
it what would be the effect of that and
they can tell us that as well so I guess
I would ask are we still looking at
discussing that in this group or is that
something that is going to get punted
the council um my preference is because
this is as you've said rightfully said
such a big number in the budget um maybe
I think we should make a recommendation
to council related to this that number
one says let's get Transportation off
the dime and combine the two before
we're negatively affecting the um fauna
in the in the southern part of The
Preserve to the point where it can't be
fixed you know and for those of you out
there listening who don't know this the
Phoenix Mountain Preserve which is cut
up by roads it's dead it is biologically
dead you will not have big mammals
anymore you will have scavenger species
we do not want the mcdow's to be like
that you know not from a we owe it to
future generation standpoint from a
tourism standpoint whichever standpoint
you want the promise made to the
citizens in both the two 1995 and 2004
for and also 2021 General plan
approval that's that's all the times the
citizens have voted on this and we have
promised them that this will be healthy
and filled with this wonderful wildlife
and you know flora and fauna for future
Generations that's what they voted for
and the reason I know that is every
single poll that was done in relation to
The Preserve since 1992 the number one
reason the citizens vote for this is to
protect the Wildlife it's it's
indisputable that's why they vote for it
um so I would ask the chair or
commissioner Newman do we want to have a
future agenda item to verify the need of
this and to talk about a recommendation
to
council to make sure this goes in a way
that's forward in a way that saves US
money as a
city um I will answer the question in a
moment but I'll defer to the city
manager who wants to uh probably give an
opinion on the Mr chair thank you at the
risk of jumping into what may be a Hot
Topic and I'm clearly at the 1130 hour
on this coming late to the discussion I
I think the the concept of having
experts come in to verify or lack of
verify projects that we are presenting
is probably a slippery slope because we
we're not going to bring somebody on the
water transportation that we've been
presenting so I might caution against
that piece uh as recommended we're
submitting this project uh for 25 26 uh
budget and then it comes back to the
scope of the uh BRC which we're as we're
nearing the goal line here what is what
what are you going to
deliver um that's up to debate on how
you package your
recommendations but I I didn't
anticipate um Pro receiving feedback
therefore we remove an item and I don't
know that that was suggested but just
the way the mechanics so then this could
be of question to the group and if it's
of question to the group it's your
prerogative to certainly pass that along
in some type of
recommendation uh to city council um
that that I just wanted to kind of
distinguish a couple points there it's
presented I and then is it a
recommendation to uh find efficiencies
you know that's in point well taken
there or is it a recommendation to
removal uh or for removal and I'm not
suggesting that was the those are two
very different things of course and so
uh be mindful of just thoughtful how we
kind of get to the the finish line here
and what's recommended and um but it's
in as we see it at this point Thank you
Mr
chair thank you city manager um and I
have several people may have an opinion
on this I'll share mine and then we'll
hear from everybody um I do not believe
that it is within the purview of our
commission to look at an individual
project and determine its merits I don't
think um we're not elected officials so
we're not attuned to to the public in
that regard and we're not professionals
uh that have been chosen for looking at
a project like the reserve commission
members
are um and we're not like City staff
spending our days thinking about these
things so I interpret the UH
responsibilities of our budget review
commission probably more
narrowly um we are supposed to advise
the Council on the budget and this is
certainly one project of many in that
budget uh and our advice to them may be
um in a generic sense to consider
reductions in the overall capital budget
or increases whichever it may be uh we
may actually um we may even introduce
the the question that I raised at at a
moment just asking Council to verify
that this is a project within the four
corners of the language of the
2018 um ballot language that made it
into the city Charter so we may have
some uh I hesitate to call them
precautionary notes to the council but
we will this will be our advice to the
council u in in several respects in a
generic sense so but to have somebody
come in and talk about this project in a
special
meeting it is my opinion that's beyond
the scope of the project of the budget
review
commission um and now I will defer to my
vice chair Mr
schrier yeah nick uh you just tossed one
thing off uh real quickly but I think
it's kind of important to look at when
you were talking about Tom Thumb and the
fact that you're going to upgrade the
toilets and that they're going to
connect to the Sewer lines I think
that's an example and I think it's
important for people to know that when
the city plans project they do look into
the future you know you put in those
connector lines even there though there
was nothing to connect them to because I
think that's an example of the way that
that you look out in the future and see
what's going on in the community and
development around there so I think
that's an important thing for people to
know that um that you are being
proactive and not just reactive when
these things come
up commissioner
Newman thank you um I've spent some time
on this and thank you commissioner Carla
and Steve and it's made me made me think
deep more deeply about these things I
this is
where the design and decisions and
things like that I don't want to get
into design of these things um I agree
with that's not our purview but policy I
think is whether you know if if you've
got something that's very large that
affects the way because the alternative
is to pay off debt and things like that
with the with the preserve uh preserve
monies okay that so those are all
decisions there I don't know where the
line is on that but maybe the solution
is a subcommittee discussion where you
can have that discussion and have a
Forum around that that's possible I
don't think you want to debate this out
at Council it becomes a very um hot
issue and and I don't think you get to
facts in that type of discussion very
much in that so maybe a a more quiet
thoughtful discussion like we've been
having has been it's been useful now I'm
on the side of okay how much do you
spend on these things a 200 foot White
Bridge would be one of the largest in
Arizona I'm not sure the data that we've
talked about supports that but I'm not
going to get into design right now and
I'm open to Arizona Game and Fish coming
in and talking I'm you know I've been
listening through this but a 200 foot
wide compared to others in Arizona that
would be a big investment it ALS also
the the project kind of presupposes the
outcome Land versus CTS things like that
and other Solutions a north south access
across the road when you widen it I can
see with hikers horseback Riders and
animals all of those things I think
there's a a strong argument there for
doing something I just don't want to
presuppose the argument there and I
think we can be thoughtful about that in
the proper Forum but at some point it
becomes a a a a a solution versus policy
decision in terms of how our money and I
think that is relevant to give guidance
to council uh on that uh as to what
should be the priority especially when
if if it was a $3 million project I
don't think we'd be having this
discussion and I think other Solutions
might lead you to something similar to
that um and so maybe that goes away
because of that subcommittee type
discussion but at some point if it's a
3540 maybe the time we get done it's a
$50 million
decision I I think it becomes a much
tougher policy decision and I think that
does become relevant for the committee
so that's just my how I'm thinking about
that and I appreciate s uh uh City
staff's flexibility to say Hey you know
we do have some competing projects here
there may be some practical things to do
here to combine that and come up with a
solution that works for everybody I'm
not against um what you're proposing and
things I think some of the solutions get
pretty expensive and I think you have to
really think about that relative to
other decisions that taxpayers would
expect us to use the money
for thank you commissioner
Stevens yeah I'm probably the least up
to speed on this particular project uh
of anyone in the room but I guess what
I'll I'd like to share is to me it seems
like when we're looking at things we I'm
I'm taking the position that we assumed
the cities looked at projects and
decided this is the best way to do it so
for example it's somebody's already
decided it's better to have animals
walking over a bridge than under a
bridge or through a tunnel in order to
make it work and so it seems like our
job would then be what's the co most
cost effective way in which that should
be executed and rather than have a
separate meeting and spend a lot of time
that I know is a hot button item that's
going to be dealt with elsewhere
probably by Council uh my thought is to
do is that maybe our recommendation ends
up being whatever you think it should be
in our final report what we say with
respect to this project we recommend the
console consider whether the cost
Approach at 3 uh $35 million is a is a
cost-effective good way to do it or
whether other Alternatives should be
pursued uh that's what I plan on doing
on the earlier one on water
purification that they used to call
something else I think they used to call
it toet to tap didn't they uh and the
water purification one because on that
one that's a big number that's 50
million so I'm going to be proposing
that a recommendation be made to conso
that they
understand that there's no scope
increase to that project and recommend
whether they do a cost benefit
assessment as to whether that project
should move forward so that's that's an
option you could do rather than take
more of our time with a separate agenda
item commissioner
Carin I I understand that and and that's
something worth looking at my only
concern is that we leave this
placeholder in the budget because that's
important I do not want to see something
that's been in the plan since 20 um S no
1997 come out of the budget you know and
say well after we do design and we look
at it then we'll put something back in
you're right this is probably not the
actual figure it could be lower it could
be more and it all comes down to design
but in order to get to design hopefully
in coordination with
transportation we we need to leave it in
the budget we need to leave this plan in
the budget so I'm open to what you're
talking about it's just as long as we
keep the placeholder in the budget and
we recommend that to council um my only
concern is that a recommendation is made
without us having all the most upto-date
knowledge and so if there is any chance
this group is looking at saying to
councel let's take it out of the budget
then you're right that will be
contentious because you don't have the
latest data which clearly shows that it
needs to stay in the budget if we're
going to have a healthy preserve um
so I did bring a couple of handouts and
she can um she'll just put them up on
the Elmo for us and here's these are for
staff there's four of each for staff
table um and I'll pass them down to um
the Commissioners um and when she puts
them up I'll tell you what they
are it's just in case we're not going to
have this oops I gave six there and four
here it's backwards but that's
okay Brad and I already have them
this is this follows up with chairman
cucho's um presentation and what all we
really want you to see from this is this
has been in the plan since
1997 it's been voted on by the citizens
in 2004 and voted on by them again in
2021 in the approval of General plan
2035 and just every iteration of council
and preserve commission have accepted
and kept this in the plan you can go the
second sheet um and then the fact and I
some research from Game and Fish um on
this one and I'm not going to go into
all of it but it's just for you all to
take home and read and learn about um if
you're not going to have a presentation
from Game and Fish and then it again it
ends with the fact that every public
opinion poll related to The Preserve
says protecting the wildlife is the
number one thing the voters want and
we've spent over a billion dollars on
our preserve and to not do one of the
very final pieces of it to me makes no
sense and it's you know you're not
keeping your promise to the citizens um
we can go on to the next
one um and this is from Arizona G and
Fish Department they did a a two-pager
if you this is about the importance of
wildlife overpasses for connectivity and
this is based on the one that opened
down by Oro Valley over six Lanes in
2016 and they've studied and it was a
combo of an overpass and an underpass
and they've studied the data they've
tracked the deer that are using it and
for example 10,000 deer use the overpass
but only a quarter of that will use the
underpass and and it talks about how
that you know Wildlife vehicle
collisions in that area have been
virtually eliminated and you can switch
it over the other side and it has a
picture of the overpass under
construction and the deer actually using
it so these are just some informational
things for us to all look at again if
we're going to make a recommendation to
council I would hope that we get the
more current data that relates
specifically to our preserve but if not
at least at least you have something to
look at and appreciate you all putting
that
up thank you commissioner
Carla um did he get thank you
commissioner carlot the um I I think
this defense of the project or argument
for the project or argument for the
message to council is probably something
that we'll take up when we have our work
study session at some point and we will
decide as a group
what the recommendation will be and
obviously if in if individuals have a
different position then it will be
something other than unanimous
recommendation so it's um and this will
all be relevant at that point in time
I'm sure commissioner
Stevens just something I don't know if
we can should talk about this or not but
I I I was struggling with do I have an
obligation to review the projects and
decide whether they're good projects or
I should recommend them be cancelled and
I think I had an informal discussion
with another commissioner on that and I
thought the conclusion we were going
towards was now it's not really ours to
question whether a project should keep
going we should just Challenge cost
appropriateness and that's why my other
example on the uh water uh Reclamation
one it's it's like I just think they
should know it's going up by 50 million
and just should decide that that's a
good use of the money so if we go down
the path where we're going to start
challenging all the projects I mean
we're we're barely going to do a good a
decent job this year with with what
we've got and if we think that's
something we should do maybe we do that
in the future but maybe we should take
that off the
table if we do it that way we'll be here
a long time commissioner
sites thank you i' like that Carla
commissioner Carla called this a
placeholder and it it makes me
wonder I see that it's forecasted for
the first expenditures in of the 2728
budget
I don't see any harm in having a
placeholder in a future year there's no
current expenditures everyone can plan
for the the tax to cover that as it gets
closer and design is developed um I just
don't see a downside for something to to
put that out there as a placeholder for
everyone who's working with numbers in
the future given that 2728 is a
realistic start um oh I I just don't see
the harm as having a placeholder in
there to be able to plan around it for
this tax
money commissioner
nman just want to I think it is relevant
for us to I for certain projects not
every project but certain projects the
the tradeoff in terms of budget
especially in this one where we talk
about debt versus spending and and there
may be other options that the city could
could offer in that and you know I I
think we I think it is Rel because the
I've seen city council presentations
where one of the comment is made this is
comes unanimous from the Transportation
committee or unanimous from this
committee or whatever so committees do
do that and I think as it relates to
budget to commissioner Stevens uh
comments it is relevant if there is a
budget question there to make a
recommendation so I I would say that's
consistent with other uh committees and
they are not elected officials they are
appointed just like us
commissioner Carla would you like the
final word yes I'm only adding one
sentence which is I agree it's
appropriate for us to make a
recommendation especially if
recommending about Transportation can
save us money because that's a lot of
what this group is supposed to be
looking
at let's move on to item four and Nick
will come back to the uh stand and tell
us about uh Parks and Recreation capital
projects chair Vice chair members of the
commission I'm I'm pleased to shift to
the transition to the Parks and
Recreation projects the projects that we
will discuss will be projects that are
funded through the 2019 Bond program
through the general fund and then
through the prop 490 Parks and
Recreation 0.15% sales tax next slide is
and this doesn't get a great
representation right now as we look at
the 0.15% parks and preserve tax that
speaks to what is proposed in the 2526
budget and then what we have in The
Five-Year Plan I will say that as we
discuss these projects and as we get to
the end with questions I can talk about
how Parks and Recreation projects are
prioritized we can talk about how those
projects in Parks and Recreation impact
our operation operating budgets and then
also how the prop 490 0.15% parks and
preserv tax will impact any of our other
general fund or primarily our general
fund budgets next
slide so this project right here the
agualinda park improvements is a a
capital project in The Five-Year Plan it
is in the
26 27 budget um this project
will will result in improvements to
agenda Park
on um on um McDonald in pimo which is
Scottsdale's oldest park it was it was
opened in
1967 the improvements include
replacement of the playgrounds the
basketball and volleyball courts the
addition of shade a splash pad and new
restrooms next
slide this slide just speaks to the
overall this can be a little bit I'd
have to to let Scott jump in but this is
combining different funds between the
Bond 2019 the general fund and any
special restricted funds that we have
next
slide so the next few slides that we'll
cover will be projects that were funded
through the 2019 Bond
program the this project to build a new
swimming pool and replace the existing
facilities at Cactus pool is the the
budget is $ 31.2 million that's what the
voters approved in the 2019 Bond we are
recommending we have that money in the
proposed 2526 budget at this point we
have not requested any additional budget
or any increase in budget for this
particular project as we are looking for
design and programming before we
understand what what or if the the costs
will be what we projected in prior to
2019 next
slide we have a couple of projects on
here that are they met the criteria that
we originally had for projects that were
over 25 million they're these projects
are primarily completed so this is to
replace the Aging infrastructure at
Civic Center Plaza so the Civic Center
reconstruction project that project was
approved at 27.3 million the there was
general fund money that was applied to
that project in fiscal year
2223 the project is complete and has
been complete with the exception of some
punch list items that we are still
working through with the
contractor next slide
please this the the aquatics life cycle
replacement project is a general fund
project it is the continuation of a
general fund project that we've had for
the last several years that replaces
equipment at the four Aquatics
facilities in the city of
Scottdale the this is one example of a
project project that we are carrying
forward in the general fund this is the
only new request that Parks and
Recreation has in the general fund in
the out
years next slide
please the project to build multi-use
fields in the area of Bell Road resulted
in the construction of the Bell 94
Sports Complex the Riata sports complex
and then the DC Ranch neighborhood park
this project has primarily been
completed in that .8 million that that's
proposed in the 25 26 budget is
primarily for punch list items as
well next
slide repair lakes and irrigation in the
Indian benash this is a project that
started shortly after the 2019 bond
election and that we're working through
right now it is in progress this project
was originally budgeted at $23.5 million
in the in the 2019 B program there was
an additional $10 million allocated to
this project in fiscal year
2223 there have not been significant
scope increases in this project most of
it has been cost increases and
escalation the only scope increase that
did happen in this project was replacing
lateral irrigation lines that were not
originally planned to be replaced as
part of the irrigation replacement
project so initially in 2017 2018 prior
to the bond we had thought that that we
could use existing lateral lines in the
replacement of the irrigation system and
that just wasn't a a logical methodology
when we got to
construction next
slide happy to answer any questions
about those
projects I'll start with a question Nick
which is the the only project you had in
the packet that related to funding from
the most recently passed
0.15 parks and preservation fund
um was the one project I forget what it
was for but uh it was uh improvements at
ainda neighborhood park yes page three
um are there others are we um are we
aggressively spending against this I
mean I think citizens May Wonder
they passed it in November so where's my
new
restroom cheers Smith it's a phenomenal
question so we have a different project
which is similar improvements at Puma
Park in year one so in the proposed 2526
budget and those projects will be very
similar in terms of replacing Recreation
amenities bathrooms at one of our older
neighborhood parks in South
Scottdale we are approach we have
significant projectss in the 5year plan
so the the method for the the prop 490
tax which is a pay as you go system
requires that we have a carry forward
into future years for those significant
improvements so in year to answer your
question specifically we have one Park
renovation that we are planning to
complete in fiscal year
2526 we have two smaller neighborhood
park Renovations that we plan to compete
in fiscal year 2627 the following fiscal
year and in year one we will be doing a
high volume of Master planning for those
projects including design for future
improvements as outlined in the master
plan for vistad El Camino in El Dorado
so I without the numbers in front of me
I believe we have somewhere in the
neighborhood of of $22 million scheduled
for improvements in the Indian Ben wash
which the the tax specified that that
was a priority in years three and in
years five of The Five-Year
Plan as a general comment I would say
the um the council may find it
informative the public may find it
informative to know how this new tax
money is being spent to their benefit
um and the Council may also find it
informative to know to the extent
projects are now funded from this 0.15
tax uh you know what has this freed up
if you will in the available funds that
would otherwise have had a priority
ranking um in the overall Capital
program of the city we you know now fund
them with this tax as opposed to what we
might have done before that's a that's a
great point and we have bu
in the operating portion of that sales
tax for enhanced communication about the
projects that are being completed
through that prop 490
initiative and to answer the question
about that relief on the general fund we
have several projects that are like the
water projects like the transportation
projects they're continuation they're
smaller continuations of larger that
that make up a larger project one would
be our playground replacement program
and the other would be we have a
essentially a park amenities replacement
program that replaces things like
courts bigger Capital items that are
Park amenities those items have been
moved for new projects into the prop 490
tax to the parks and preserve the 0.15%
tax the reason that the
aquatics
improvements that we didn't include that
in the future tax is a lot of those
projects are
are critical for facilities that are in
the northern part of the city so the
McDow Mountain Ranch Aquatic Center the
cactus Aquatic Center those those areas
that were
not identified as the priority through
the the parks tax so we have freed up in
our future projects several areas that
had been in the general fund had been
general fund requests which all of our
projects in Parks had been general fund
or or Bond funded but that's a great
Point commissioner Stevens uh yeah just
slide five on the cactus pool looks like
that thing's going to start and finish
this fiscal year and it's a pretty big
number so I'm trying to understand
sensitivity to changes are you far
enough along in the design engineering
that you know whether you're going to do
like a low bid contract or a job order
Contracting or if you're going to use
one of the other two methods you use or
you not that far along on the design yet
commissioner Stevens we are not that far
along in design we have zero dollars
incurred to date on this project and
it's worth noting that um Carol do you
have one of the we the cactus Aquatic
Center replacement is one that's very
complex we are we are essentially
replacing a building that is inside a
major retention Basin and with that
there's there's some additional study
that we want to do to it would be the
next slide
um next slide Carol the thank you so
this is the cactus this is the site that
the cactus Aquatics facility is located
at this is after a rain event in
2023 so that doesn't necessarily answer
your question but we have several things
to consider as we look at the
replacement of this Aquatic Center and
we have not gotten to the point where we
can make those
recommendations uh commissioner Stevens
we will be looking at those in the
upcoming fiscal year okay well I saw the
June expected completion June 26 maybe
it's going to be later than that let let
me just say gutfield this smells like
one that we could be hearing again in
the future and have big increases in
surprises and stuff so I just encourage
you to do whatever you think you need to
do in putting together your estimates or
prebid studies or whatever it is the
things that you do because it just it
smells like one that could get ugly and
commissioner Stevens part of the reason
why we this is part of the 2019 Bond
program and part of the reasons one of
the reasons we haven't come forward with
any additional request is we really want
to know what we're where we're at in
terms of what that request would be
we've we I've heard several other of my
colleagues talk about this but we want
to know a level of programming we want
to understand exactly what we we need to
build this concept was introduced for
the bond program in
2017 so before we that that really is
our our priority in the upcoming 2526
year is is to go through that that
exercise that you're recommending
Vice chair
Saker yeah I agree with those points
that um commissioner stens just made you
know so you get a better grasp of what a
project is going to look like in
realistic time um but if anyone
questions the need for any of these when
I was on on the 490 uh task force Nick
took us a tour of these parks and
everything that that are in here um if
anyone had questions the needs this I
would ask Nick to arrange a tour
especially in the southern part of the
city I mean I was absolutely appalled at
the condition of some of these and it
kind of goes back to what we're were
talking about with
Transportation because what we're
discovering I think is this is a really
good example of costs
increasing due to unfilled deferred or
unfunded deferred maintenance that the
some of these have gotten down so bad
that it it's replacement not fixing them
up so much like the road repairs you
know if we don't properly take care of
our Parks eventually the cost is way
more than it needs to
be commissioner
Carla uh yes F first thing I also want
to concur with what commissioner stev
said so colorfully said um and maybe
that is going to be one of our future
recommendations that we ask for better
projections so then it doesn't look like
we have so many surprises Rises and I
know it's not intentional but maybe that
is a recommendation because that's what
seems to lead to a lot of the mistrust
um and then to go back to what uh
chairman Smith said and Nick followed up
on those of us who promoted 490 have
talked with various staff especially
about the two commissions parks and
preserve that are overseeing the funds
that starting maybe next year or the
year after when we've built up money and
you've done a lot of pro projects that
every year you start putting out
something like the water department does
um where it's it's a pretty slick thing
but it it goes out and it's not minutia
budget but it's Topline and it says this
is where your money's gone this year and
I really think when it comes to 490 that
we do need to do that so thank
you I think that's it Nick thank you um
and now we are at item number five which
is everything
else um we're going to have a variety
of City staff presenting various
departmental budgets and we'll start
with uh the police capital projects and
Joe I think you're going to whiz us
through
that I plan to uh chairman Smith of Vice
chair schwier and uh me uh members of
the commission my my name is jol luk I
am the inim chief of police and I'm here
to talk to you about a couple more
timely projects
um I'll Advance my slides
here we're our proposed fiscal year 2526
capital budget is uh 40 million 40
million. five I want to talk about two
like I said timely projects the first
one is the radio communications platform
uh transition this is a critical project
um total cost is 3.2 million um and
we're our proposed budget for fiscal
year 2526 is the 3.2 million and what
this is is it's really two uh things it
involves hardware and software that has
reach the end of its life so um as far
as the hardware is concerned it was
installed over 20 years ago uh there's
no replacement parts for it it's the
actual communication platforms that our
911 operators use and then on top of
that um there is a new software system
that is going to sunset in October of
2025 with Windows 10 that we're going to
need to upgrade to an entirely new
system so we need and which also speaks
with the new hardware um if we don't do
this project then uh we won't be able to
operate the 911 Center in Communications
so it's vitally important uh we're
looking at starting this project a lot
in July uh and uh trying to get it done
within a year hopefully under a year
leas in
phases the next timely project I want to
talk about is US replacing the
deteriorating training track um this was
an original Bond project uh back in 2019
and 2018 we estimated 2.9 Million
however there was a lot of conversation
uh at that time as we talked about
expanding our training um footprint with
the fire department and uh we we
determined that building the track over
at the Hans facility where we originally
wanted to do it there just wasn't enough
space to to not only build a robust
track that we need but one that the
state would certify for us to have um
reach a standard of training that we
need training our officers in like
emergency type driving and whatnot
whatnot we were actually fortunate to
find a plot of land uh and acquired it
just south of um the water campus up in
North Scottsdale but that requires some
significant grading and um Construction
and whatnot so as you saw on the
previous slide we were looking for an
additional 7 million to make the project
9.9 million to do the to do this track
right the track would be used not only
by the police department but also uh
defensive driving courses for other city
employees who drive vehicles and whatnot
so those are the two ones that I was
presenting I can answer any questions
now thank you one question I'll ask uh
and maybe you can just talk about it off
the top of your head but one of the
largest projects that you have in the in
the total $40.5 million budget is the
almost $20 million to renovate the the
jail and the um I guess the court
buildings down there can you talk about
that project and um yeah so spe
specifically you're talking about the
Civic Center area that includes the jail
um yeah that's a significant project um
the need for that is uh we just ran out
of space um it it is it was built that
jail was built in 1971 it has Plumbing
issues uh the air handlers go out to the
entire building so there's a sanitary
issue there um the doors another example
on that jail the doors uh are uh
Obsolete and now need actual custom
fittings every time one of the jail
Doors Break Down additionally
surrounding that area um we have several
uh different work units um that have
grown significantly and so we're just
kind of walking all over each other we
we joke around call it a a Franken
building because we've just tried to
piece meal it together for so long to
keep it as an effective space for our
employees and and we're just at the
point now where we're just on top of
each other's not adequate space um the
infrastructure is failing and whatnot so
um that's a project that's on the
horizon but it's fitting in with an a
Court remodel uh a phase 2 jail
dormatory project that we want to do and
so I we're probably looking at that
being spread over several um fiscal
years uh before we were able to actually
break around and start to um see what
that looks
like not bad off the top of your head
thank you and I think everybody would in
agree that we want the doors to work on
the jail so it's so oh yeah commissioner
Newman yes on the vehicle training track
are there other tracks in the area that
are utilized or that's a great question
um there are a couple tracks in the area
that we do use and even right now
because we are without a track there are
some definite challenges to using those
tracks for example we primarily use Mesa
Police Department's track number one
it's scheduling they schedule the track
obviously and they prioritize their own
needs for the track so trying to get
into the schedule to train our officers
is sometimes a challenge additionally uh
we have to take our track cars off all
the way out to Mesa um that in incurs
extra cost in overtime uh the timeliness
of trying to get out there and set up
specific times that aren't conducive to
our schedules sometimes incurs extra
expense like overtime and things like
that so it really just becomes a
logistical issue and and a scheduling
issue for us uh to be able to get out
there and then adequately train all of
our officers in the time that we need
them trained okay there's no no right
answer to this next question but kind of
when you say you're talking about
scheduling complexing what is the
utilization on on a weekly basis or
monthly basis that you see that you
would see for this yeah we we run pretty
regularly I I don't have an exact number
of how how of often we do um monthly um
especially now that we've had our our
our training center under construction
for a while so we've been really beg
borrowing from other places to do
driving training and things like that
but I I would say in our Peak that we're
doing either a defensive driving course
or some type of what we call even V
course um once a month once every couple
months doing doing the emergency driving
because we actually have modular
training and we have to train um all of
our sworn employees on that you know
upwards of 400 to shift them through so
I think once a month is a good number
that that we're using it for the
Emergency driving and maybe a little
less frequently for the defensive
driving the backing and whatnot which is
also utilized by other city employees
well just a a thought that I had going
through this and I'll have the same for
uh
fire the fire chief as well in in terms
of the training facilities if our
utilization is such is that a is that a
monetization opportunity for other
police departments and sharing of skills
and and and best practices you know but
using facilities right now you're using
Mesa I still oppose we pay Mesa for that
but the reverse can be true and you can
have world-class facilities and be a
training center of excellence around
that and and that's monetization but
also sharing of best practices yeah
excellent and you know we we actually
was were already approached by Salt
River uh police department who was very
interested in maybe doing some cost
sharing with our track down the road um
nothing nothing formal but you know just
ancillary conversations about that so
that's a very good
point Thank you you're welcome any
further questions I assume you will not
have a roundabout on the training
track we may we'll have to figure out
how to get around them commissioner
Stevens you have a more serious question
yeah I do um just um I'm curious about
whether you're thinking of having one of
your people who really knows exactly
what you want from the structure of the
jail so it'll operate correctly if
you're thinking of assigning someone who
really knows what you need to be married
to the project manager and design
engineer so that they're working
together as a group to make sure once
that design is done and the thing starts
getting bid and executed that you're
going to get what you want because if
otherwise when you start don't getting
married early enough or close enough as
they're doing it you're going to start
going oh wait I needed this here I
needed that there and that's when the
cost overrun start to hit 100%
commissioner Stevens uh a lot of thought
and a lot of detail is is um an effort
um is brought to bear that that's why
the design phase of this is so important
in the planning phase but it is a robust
effort does that answer your question I
I appreciate that okay thank
you I think that's it Joe thank you very
much thank you very
much Tom Shannon is getting prepared to
approach the dis to uh talk about the
needs of the fire department the next
budget
area good
afternoon chair and members of the
commission uh the fire department is
pleased to present our projects next
slide okay so what you're looking at
here is is the projects underway in
2425 and the uh the there are numerous
uh projects in the in the coming years
to both improve our current facilities
bringing them up to uh current uh
standards within uh the NFPA uh
recommendations as well as some new
projects related to our uh uh beginning
of our ambulance services next
slide of note uh to the commission is
uh a project that is actually not a bond
project it's a capital project that was
budgeted uh for some time um if I can
use the Elmo very briefly uh this will
help kind of illustrate this project a
little bit
better so this is this is station 606 at
108 and Via Linda it's a it's quite an
old station it was uh uh built in uh
1984 and actually housed some of the
fire prevention staff uh back before the
fire department was a municipal
Department um it's it is uh simply just
uh an outdated facility it needs needed
to be completely remodeled when uh we
worked with capital projects to get into
the meat of this project what we
determined was not only were there site
issues with uh sewage draining and and
and a multitude of U drainage issues but
the the uh the building itself as you
can see is a as a triy level and uh that
uh just simply wasn't contemporary in
terms of its design in terms of access
to the uh apparatus Baye for quick
response times or simply the square
footage needed for individual living
quarters which is now the Contemporary
status of of the fire service these
these existing uh cubicles if you will
or cubby holes where uh firefighters
would would reside are no longer contemp
temporary um the current uh plan is to
essentially uh rebuild the fire station
and once that was determined we realized
we could not coexist at that same site
that was probably the most significant
uh change in this in this project
between the site issues and then the
fact that we couldn't ex coexist there
caused us to have to relocate we're
going to relocate just down the street
to the Noah Clinic you may recall is
just down the street uh near the the
Miracle League ball field and uh that is
going to be actually uh invested in for
not only this station's rebuild but also
the station for rebuild which is at the
vinda campus and so the the significant
cost increase that you saw in this this
is the rendering of the Noah clinic and
we can go back to the um PowerPoint
thank
you the significant cost increase that
you saw between the original uh ex uh
cost of the project and then the current
uh proposed project cost is really
related to the need to relocate and then
quite frankly it's a rebuild uh not
necessarily a remodel and so uh uh
commissioner uh Spen uh Stevens uh in
your subcommittee you made a good point
and you just did just a minute ago about
the connectedness of uh staff with CPM
staff and I have every confidence that
we are uh right where you need us to be
in terms of working these projects
together I think this is a good example
of that under uh uh Alice's uh
leadership I think we're going to be
much tighter on the uh programming needs
of projects so that they can get a very
accurate estimate and then we don't we
get little tweaks that might be related
to cost increase so I think we're going
to meet your interest um next slide
okay um as uh this is we're not probably
going to be able to give you champagne
uh commissioner Smith but we're going to
give you probably a a a mimosa uh this
morning or this afternoon um this
project started out as an $18 million
project um very much like the police
department we train our uh uh staff
regionally they have to meet a regional
standard and we were Outsourcing our
staff and have been for our entire
existence to other agencies and quite
simply the system that we exist in is
just just maturing and there's growth
related and we simply don't have the
available space so this project was
conceived uh several years ago and in
its conception uh it was designed with
uh with with a much smaller footprint in
mind and so we initially had some scope
issues when it initially got programmed
and we got together as you uh recommend
commissioner Stevens uh the CPM staff
realized we needed a much bigger campus
so from a 10 to 11,000 squ ft uh uh
footprint for a building moving to more
of a 30,000 square foot uh footprint is
what uh demonstrated the cost or excuse
me the scope increase on this project
and then of course we were subject to
the impacts of covid and the cost of
Commodities there and so this project um
had an increase of about $1 million
overall bringing it to about $33 million
the great news news here is that um the
carryover which is represented in the
5.8 um really only is going to require
about 2 million of that 5.8 and and to
answer your question uh commissioner
Stevens that you offered us it that is a
result of um essentially bills having
not been paid just yet and carryover for
remaining uh uh items that would not
have prevented us to move into the
building there's one small additional
feature to the to the facility that's
being added uh that has to do with uh
quite frankly um uh Hot Zone if you can
if you think of a of of a training
center as having a dirty Hot Zone area a
warm Zone where perhaps uh you begin to
decontaminate and then a clean Zone
where the classrooms might be we need to
provide some additional shower
facilities and a gathering point in that
area but I don't expect that to be more
than about
$300,000 of the remaining uh 2 something
million so you should see about a $3
million uh recovery in this project and
Allison's is nodding your head so
there's your there's your Mimosa okay uh
next
slide I guess we get to
questions well I got my mimosa so I'm
all set questions from the rest of the
people okay seeing no
questions they're either Ted or or um or
tired one or the other but I have no
further questions for you thank you for
the
presentation Miss Doyle is now
approaching the microphone to talk
about Enterprise
operations yes thank you good afternoon
chair Vice chair members of the
commission I'm Judy Doyle the senior
director of the Enterprise operations
next slide
please the Enterprise operations
department is a new department and it
combines those business oriented
divisions Westworld tourism and events
Scottdale Stadium mccormic Stillman
Railroad Park and the airport next slide
please here is a summary of the existing
and new projects uh with various funding
sources within the
department comparing what was in the
adopted fiscal year 2425 budget to what
was uh proposed for fiscal year
2526 next slide please so this afternoon
I'm going to highlight two uh projects
from the Department the first one being
a Westworld project Westworld as we know
is a one-of-a-kind unique venue spans
over 386 acres has 300 Square F feet of
exhibit space 10 Arenas and over 11,000
parking spaces it hosts over 90 events
annually with about 800
guests unfortunately though Westworld
does have some drainage issues next
slide please so there are three
Westworld uh projects that are proposed
for fiscal year
2526 the largest is shown here totaling
14.9 million and it is spread over four
years it will address several uh
existing drainage issues throughout the
uh core of westworld's equestrian uh
areas including the barns
Arenas uh the southern restroom building
the RV areas and parking
areas next slide please so here is a map
um that highlights that Focus area and
then just some of uh the drainage issues
that we see in those photos after a rain
event all three of the drainage projects
are essential to mitigating those uh
flooding issues that we experience that
do damage the
infrastructure and do contribute to
increases in the long-term maintenance
as well as it disrupts those Revenue
generating events that we know
contribute significantly to our City's
economy the proposed drainage projects
uh would be phased in to eliminate or
minimize uh the uh disruptions during
that heavy event season the drainage uh
will be mostly performed over the summer
months uh this particular drainage
project just because of the large scope
it will be spanned over four Summers we
do plan to issue debt for for the three
westw World drainage projects uh which
had always been the plan uh related to
the proposition for 90 issuing the debt
for Westworld and then paying the debt
service with that 0.15 preserve tax not
to exceed $4 A5 million do per year prop
490 did include uh limited westw World
Capital Improvements for drainage and
shade so we plan to issue with a debt
this would be a first for the city the
water infrastructure Finance Authority
of Arizona which manages debt for uh
water related projects they offer lowest
loans to municipalities and
utilities the amounts uh for these
drainage projects um are pretty solid
estimates at least for the total project
uh as a lot of work was done uh as staff
prepared for The Preserve task
force
um the amounts uh will be refined as we
move through the design
process needless to say we're excited
about getting these much needed uh
drainage Improvement projects at
Westworld next slide please moving on to
tourism and events uh we have a proposed
project that has been in the capital
budget since
2017 for downtown Main Street
streetscape and pedestrian improvements
the project is to design and construct
bicycle Lanes
sidewalks roadside landscaping and
replace Street and pedestrian lighting
with the goal of promoting Main Street
as a major East West pedestrian Corridor
the reason for the significant delay in
this project is we had done some
preliminary designs that the
stakeholders in the area were not very
fond of because it was going to reduce
parking uh to get the traffic Lanes the
parking and the sidewalk width to City
standards um parking would need to be
reduced however now uh with a couple of
the new parking structures coming online
in the Oldtown area this should uh
reduce those parking
concerns we know that the project is
going to be a great investment to
Oldtown and we really want to get moving
on this project uh with a design that
will work for all of the
stakeholders based on the latest concept
of the
consultant uh the what the consultant
had put together we did get some initial
buyin from those stakeholders so we
added the needed 5.8 million uh to year
two of the year plan to get this project
completed so next steps would be with
that latest uh concept we would lay out
a public input uh process and timeline
through design and
construction and that concludes my two
projects I'm happy to answer any
questions let me have you clarify for
the public this um uh with a Deb
WFA I think you said it's for water
projects related um and you also said
it's a low attractive interest rate can
you or the city treasur talk about why
this is attractive what we really expect
to save on interest ratewise
uh thank you uh chair Smith
Commissioners the whff program has not
been available for cities outs size
until mo more recently but the
attractiveness of it is um there could
be a principal forgiveness portion up to
20% especially for this uh flood control
project so if we uh qualify for some or
all of that 20% principal forgiveness it
could provide us significant
savings thank you I appreciate that uh
the commissioner Stevens you had your
light on but you've declined now I I'll
just do it real fast uh you've got 14.9
million that's going to happen in about
four years or so so are those today's
dollars or did you factor in some of the
cost increases because we've heard
horror stories about particularly Earth
moving construction type things chair
Vice chair and commissioner the uh
project total 14.9 million for ease was
spread evenly over the four years uh as
we get through design we feel
comfortable about the $ 14.9 Million
number overall for the total project
once we get through design years two
three and four would likely be spread
differently to consider some of those
increases okay so then the only the
question I guess to everyone when you're
doing these things should you be
factoring some of that in now if there's
a reason to believe cost increases might
occur and just don't do everything in
today's dollars that's all yes thanks
thank you understood actually I had the
same question as I was reviewing these
projects for my new area thank
you I think we' have uh exhausted the
the panel here so have Cura come up and
thank you talk to us about Community
facilities if you
will good afternoon uh chair Smith Vice
chair um schwier and members of the
commission my name is Kira Peters and I
am the senior director over library and
Human Services I have three brief slides
that are all relative to the Human
Service division under my area and next
slide please um this is just a little
snapshot of what we have currently
happening um for fiscal year 2425 and
then the future five years for these
three projects that I'm going to talk
about today some of which are Beyond
2526 next
slide this right here is a
representation of the expansion of vinda
senior center um for those of you who
don't know we have two very robust
senior centers in the city of Scottsdale
Granite Reef senior Center and vinda
Senior Center on average per month we
see about 3,500 to 4,000 people between
those two senior centers depending on SE
on the season so these centers are busy
we've got Leisure education classes that
happen that often have weight list in
them so there is definitely a need to
expand um the vinda senior center right
now uh this project is um estimated at
6.3 million we're right now in design
phase for that um have an architect on
board and right now the initial
preliminary designs are coming in a
little underneath 6.3 so we're really
feeling good about staying on budget
with the expansion of vinda senior
center and you can see the timeline
pictured up there um so very excited
about this project that is going to be
upon us shortly next slide
please so the next one again keeping in
the theme of senior centers is to expand
the granite Senior Center to meet the
demand for adult daycare as our
community ages uh we really are finding
that our senior centers are amazing at
offering recreational opportunities for
the community but the need for support
and care for the senior population along
with some maybe moderate medical support
is in need so what we would like to do
in future fiscal years is to expand the
Granite Reef a senior center to also
include an adult Day daycare and right
now um estimated uh budget is 3 million
honestly I do anticipate we are not we
haven't designed that we're just in the
midst of starting to talk about that
right now I do expect just with like
everything else we've been talking about
here today inflation that that number
could increase so we'll work with the
CPM staff on that um and again this
would be right adjacent to the current
Granite Reef Senior Center to provide an
adult daycare center and again timeline
is noted on the slide next slide please
this is a future project for sure but I
just couldn't help myself and wanted to
include it in here as we talk about
aging infrastructure is the replacement
of the pyute neighborhood community
center um pyute Neighborhood Center is
going to be turning 30 this year um even
prior to the city using pyute it was an
elementary school um the infrastructure
there is very old um maintaining this
this building is costly um for the city
uh often times having HVAC issues and
plumbing issues so really having a
replacement of these aging buildings in
the future is going to be important
right now we're estimating this budget
to be 11.2 million but as my colleagues
have talked about today what we're doing
early on we've got several years and I
know commissioner Stevens you posed a
question are we really evaluating cost
increase I think this is one of the
slides you had a question on so I wanted
to address that and yes we are right now
we are really looking at the programming
needs of this commun Community the area
around pyute has really changed a lot so
we're evaluating what the community
needs to really put together a plan on
what this Center will look like and then
compare that against that 11.2
million next
slide I promis to be brief and that was
brief happy to answer any questions
commissioner Newman has a question or
comment just a question a couple of
times in the presentation you mentioned
okay 3 million and then 11 .2 and you
said well we'll see what it is and then
we'll see what the price is from there
I'm kind of used to being given a
certain amount of money and then making
it fit that yeah what what's your
process of thinking about that yes no
thank you um chair Smith and
commissioner Newman um I will correct
myself in that yes we do do that when we
have this budget and we'll meet with the
CPM staff to say all right how can we
stay within this budget unless there are
things that are just extraordinarily not
feasible within that budget so that is
certainly what we'll do in uh vinda was
my first example and that really is
exactly what we did what do we need
what's our budget how can we stay within
that great thank you you're
welcome uh the on slide uh on page 206 I
guess it was when you're expanding the
granite re Senior Center to meet the
demands for adult daycare can you
explain uh what that what that phrase
adult daycare means yes um ch myth it is
a really good question um an adult
daycare can mean a lot of different
things right now Granite Reef Senior
Center really host a lot of recreation
activities special events for seniors
what we're seeing is really a need for
aging adults that might have some
medical issues whether it is early
stages of Dementia or they might need
some um some Le level of medical care
which right now Granite Reef senior
centers as it stands and as we program
it we're not equipped for that we don't
have nurses on site what this adult
daycare could be is really a place where
seniors that need a little bit of
support social interaction along with
some moderate Medical Care could come to
an adult daycare for a fee and be
provided a great place to socialize and
be throughout the day and be safe while
caretakers can go to work um and manage
their lives as well it it truly has been
an area um you know that we're seeing a
lot of need for that for uh adult
children taking care of Aging parents
that are still working needing a place
to be that really has a next level of
support compared to what would
traditionally happen in just Recreation
programming at a senior
center and did I understand you in the
middle of that answer to be saying that
there is this is a fee based service yes
chair Smith you are correct does it uh
and I know I'm asking more than I need
to know about this but uh is this factor
in FTE I mean additional people that
would be associated with the facility
and maybe that's true for any Capital
project we've looked at here today but
uh is chair yeah chairman Smith to the
best of my knowledge this is strictly
for um the construction of the project
um and does not take into account FTS uh
what would probably happen with an adult
daycare just knowing the medical needs
is that this would be contracted out to
a third party who has expertise in adult
daycare needs and we would work that way
to provide this service to the
community commissioner Carla
yes I I mean I think this is very much
needed but I have a question about
you're saying fee based because I know
many of the programs up there they don't
cover the entire expense because you're
trying to make the fee still feasible
for seniors who have only Social
Security so are you thinking along the
same Avenue for this fee because I mean
most of the people who live in that part
of town probably can't afford the full
fee so I was just if you're going to be
operating on the same
ratio thank you for the question um
chairman Smith commissioner Carla we are
really evaluating that right now we're
benchmarking we're doing research how
other other um adult daycares operate on
our health actually has one with my
colleague Judy we were able to take a
tour so we really need to get into that
piece of it and the fees and what that
will look like um quite honestly we're
trying to determine ourselves the scope
of adult daycare and what we really want
to see happen at this facility and see
how our already existing Senior Center
and Granite Reef could support what's
happening there but for sure we will be
taking a look at that and really vetting
that out carefully for the exact reasons
that you
mentioned commissioner
Newman so on this topic I want to ask
this very sensitively because I don't
want to appear cold business or anything
like that but but is this the role of
Scottsdale government and and I don't
want to crush the program or anything
like that but but I mean you're starting
to get into senior care right and I I
don't know if this is something that's
been prioritized by Council or it's an
idea we've had or it's something we've
been doing I don't know so I just don't
have the background but it would be
helpful to understand kind of what from
a policy perspective led to this role of
Scottdale government sure thank you for
the question um chairman Smith and
commissioner Newman it's a great
question and what we've been trying to
do and I've mentioned we're in
evaluation stas of what this could be
and I really mean that we're still
really exploring what would adult
daycare be some of them really do have a
lot of medical care and they're doing
that others really just have expanded
Recreation which is definitely in the
scope of what Senior Services in the
city could could do so um it's a little
preliminary for me to give you exact
answers to that is we're still trying to
evaluate and figure out what this
facility would be but I I do hear you
and I'll take note of that too as we do
our evaluation thank you well just to
before before you come forward for $3
million which it's I guess it sounds
like it starts fairly
soon shouldn't that question be answered
before you put that in the budget and
start down that path I I don't know if
if the research has to come to lead to
that but there's certainly a policy
priority discussion that the council can
have around that to say hey should we
really be doing that
right I'll help yeah Mr chair and
commissioner I think that's exactly what
we're
doing yes so I that this leads to that
decision exactly so you're getting the
preview and I think what I would see is
we're here to serve the community and
just take the senior population we serve
active uh seniors and and we see that
there's a gap in service for this
portion of our community and then we're
going to have a conversation with city
council to see if they want capital and
programming to fill that Gap if women
will play that role yeah yeah I don't I
don't because there's just so many
priorities we talked about here you know
so I don't I don't know where that fits
in that I understand what you're saying
from from
a I just I don't know where the role of
government ends in that and what would
be the magnitude of the followon capital
project because this is the preliminary
is the next one 10 times that sure all
good questions uh Mr chair and
commissioner I would also add from my
limited understanding in this area we're
not the first uh to explore it so there
are uh when
I'm getting notified by my colleague
over here that this is a bond project
too so I would
insert that's yeah she said that so we
can you can question her if you have
questions so uh I am familiar I think
Phoenix for example uh I could be
mistaken but I do know of in another
municipality in the metropolitan area
that provides this um and so therefore
what I understand is that our community
members that are aware of that have to
travel significant uh distances to get
to that facility and we so we have a
need and it's an unmet need and so want
to have an honest conversation with uh
our city council and you uh before that
as we're having here uh if we should
fill that and then maybe the bond
project my colleague could add to that
Peak yeah so the expansion of the senior
center is a bond 2019 project that
voters voted on and approved perhaps
your the discussion is regarding the
operation of it and the program of you
know yeah that that I mean I just see
the slippery slope I mean the facilities
if it's Bond if it's Bond approved by go
voters you know I mean that it is what
it is but I'm sitting here if there's
other municipalities that have done this
it does it cost us $3 million to go find
out what their learnings are from that
and have Council make a policy decision
on that it seems like we could do that
for far less than $3 million so just to
expand on that so what we have is an
expansion and then again when you look
at the Spectrum of the population we are
serving the need in an active area and
some could argue maybe that could be you
could higher the level of service
increase the level of service in the
actives but uh we are significantly not
meeting a need in uh this portion of the
spectrum of our population and as noted
unfortunately we're all getting older
and uh so we see this really is uh the
start of a need that someone has to fill
uh and and should we play a role that's
an appropriate question that we'll be
approaching our city council
with thank you so I think you're hearing
from several us up here that as in a
sense a new business initiative this is
a a program that should be carefully
vetted with Council um and really having
nothing to do with expanding the Senior
Center May been proposed by the by the
bond
2019 understood thank you and that
involves then issues of policy as as
commissioner Newman said it involves the
the FTE requirements and um be careful
that we don't get on a slippery slope
here commissioner
Carla yes I understand all that but but
as a person who's at that Senior Center
all the time for classes and I see
what goes on a lot that there's
caregivers who need to put someone
somewhere for three hours and and they
can't afford to have that done in the
home I just I know it has to be explored
carefully but I do hope it is explored
and we find a way to go forward at least
to provide relief for those clients
because they've used the senior center
since it was built and now they can't
exactly be alone up there but they need
somewhere to go so I do hope it it works
out thank
you and I think that's all the questions
or comments we have for you thank you
very much
chairman
Bianca Tell us everything we know need
to know about uh Information
Services okay good afternoon Mr um
chairman uh Vice chair members of the um
commission I'm really grateful for the
opportunity to brief you on the proposed
um Capital technology project um
projects that includes in included in
our budget proposal um so um our
proposal reflects Investments and key um
reflects investments in key
infrastructure that supports Community
facing and um services and City
operations um as we have adjusted our
fiveyear um Outlook we wanted to ensure
long-term U planning but also that we
can um deliver on our current emerging
needs uh specifically in the areas of
infrastructure upgrades uh connectivity
um cyber security and Cloud Readiness um
the proposed um can I have the next
slide please um the proposed budget um
includes uh continuation of existing
projects as well as new initiatives uh
to enhance uh Service
delivery um so I will be speaking to you
about three of our projects uh this
afternoon next slide please the first
one is a BN 2019 fund funded initiative
um and this project expands our fiber
optics um uh backbone to connect every
city-owned facility including libraries
community centers uh fire stations as
well as administrative offices really
building a uh unified and secure network
that connects all departments um in
addition it provides dedicated fiber
connectivity to all um signal signalized
intersections um TR traffic um
Management Systems as well as other key
uh infrastructure assets including um uh
water facilities and public uh safety uh
stations um ensuring real-time
coordinations of efforts and operational
efficiencies um it also helps us improve
um the reliability of our public network
infrastructure um it helps us optimize
um our traffic um um um operations and
uh increased access to digital um um
Services um and uh um one of the goals
for this project um is to again um build
that secure um reliable communication
network but also to ensure that the city
has um greater control over its uh
critical connectivity and then
eventually we will um see some um cost
efficiencies because we're moving away
from uh least lines to city-owned fiber
um connections um and the majority of
this project as I mentioned is funded by
Bond 2019 but also um uh we have
contributions from uh Transportation
water and um Aviation funding uh really
um demonstrating our um Citywide uh
commitment and uh to to have an unified
approach to our um modernizing our
infrastructure and this project is
governed by a fiber um govern committee
that includes representative from all
those um areas um and then uh to date
more than 60 miles of fibers have been
laid uh with a um 100 um miles of fiber
estimated to be completed once this
project is done next slide please the
next project I will be talking to you
about is um a critical one uh so this
funding is essential to support the um
uh essential the needed upgrades to our
data center server infrastructure which
Powers the entire city including core
systems like uh Financial systems uh
planning um access again access to
information and data and also Public
Safety and emergency um um response
systems um so we have um a five-year
replacement cycle which is a standard
industry standard um uh approach uh and
this funding really reflects um a yearly
phased out approach to replacing our you
know more than 500 um servers um to that
that our end of life um um as we plan
for those Replacements and um really um
replacing this aging equipment and out
of support um uh servers we are
increasing the reliability security and
performance our of our server
infrastructure while also ensuring that
we um we um support our disaster uh
recovery and business continuity
capabilities next uh please so um this
is a new initiativ we are um requesting
support uh for for funding um so today
approximately 25% of our applications
operate in the cloud um and that number
continues to increase as we continue to
Mo modernize our systems um this project
really establishes a foundational
cloud-based architecture that we need to
ensure that those applications are
secure that they're well managed and uh
that they're integrated with existing
data that is on Prem or with um newer
systems that we will continue to acquire
that are software so cloud-based and
off- premise uh Solutions um it also um
helps us to um leverage Cloud native
analytics capabilities that really
empowers our departments to um uh to
gain faster and deeper insights from um
from data and uh you know with with the
goal to to um enhance our um decision-
making capabilities enhance the service
delivery um capability and also um our
responsiveness to community needs and um
uh so this General funding request
ensures not only that we can move to the
cloud but we can do this in a way that's
strategic that secure that really aligns
with our um digital um service goals um
and then it also positions us to take
full advantage of um
new Innovations in AI automations uh
real time data access while ensuring
that we um um have strong cyber security
and um compliance standards for those
applications so that concludes my
presentation I welcome your
questions thank you for the presentation
staying with that slide for a moment I
see um that the completion is not until
whatever four years from now yes is that
purposeful or do we just not have the
money this would seem like a fairly High
yeah we were very conservative yes so uh
again the 25% applications we you know
we were going to focus on on securing
the infrastructure to support um access
um to ensure um that we you know we can
leverage um those applications in a
secure and and um strategic way um and
as we continue to grow so we we're
looking at you know being strategic
about what's systems and application we
can um move to the cloud to again
leverage new capabilities but we'll do
that in a very phased out way and very
strategic way with input from our
business
units so yeah I would say that the
number is
conservative commissioner
Newman just a question around investment
I mean you got some big there's some big
numbers there you know 11 million here
and 17 million there what I can't
remember the exact number but
on it on uh information architecture and
and Technology it ages as you said from
5 year replacement cycle why wouldn't
our strategy be to Outsource as much as
possible rather than build our own and
maintain our own you know AWS and others
have massive systems and there's others
um fiber optics I buy that and have very
good uh gigabit Supply so I don't know
what what brings you to from the service
wanting to own it is it Mission critical
what is it I I I I'd like to understand
that we absolutely we have we have um
you know as investigate and assess um
our
um how how can we prioritize that move
to the cloud but the real reality is
that as a city we will not be able to
move the entire infrastructure to the
cloud right we have um systems that need
to be secure to be on Prem but also
physical infrastructure that needs to be
connected um in in a in a way that is
you know provides us a long-term um
connectivity and we can can control it
um as as an organization um so I would
say we we we again we're being very
strategic about what we can move to the
cloud but we have to do this in a in a
phase out as a as as we prioritize cloud
services well and and so it it's I mean
is
it importance of the miss you can't ABS
I can understand like police and fire it
absolutely can't go down you have to own
those systems you and you have to
maintain that and I agree with upgrading
them from Windows 10 but but but it
seems like um installing fiber that's
leasable and it's it's a it's pretty
much a staple type of utility just like
we buy electricity we don't own the
Electric Plant we buy electricity we why
can't we buy Fiber service why can't we
buy server service we don't have to own
those things so it just seems like a lot
of capital going into things that hey
and and and let them do all the upgrades
maintenance uptime all of that and you
can even pay more for higher uptime and
backup servers and things like that yeah
you can scale and and yes if if we go
back to the fiber slide please um so
that was a project that was um initiated
in
2020 can you one two more back yes and
and one more yeah number 31 page 31 yeah
uh 2020 so that was a decision that was
made
um um then so it's funded by the bond
this is something that the city at that
time decided that was a is a great
strategy so um and we again we are very
close to completing that project so
we're going to leverage that
connectivity capability while we're also
U building that cloud um Cloud strategy
so um as a city we also undertook a
assessment of all our applications to um
again
um assess their Cloud Readiness right
what makes sense what can we shift and
lift um what makes sense to maintain on
Prem uh because of the the cost
efficiencies so so we're we're kind of
having to manage through past decisions
in terms of bond and things like that um
okay I guess going forward I you know I
would hope that we would think more in
terms of Outsourcing these things
because you have to then 5 years from
now you're going to be coming with a
project to say oh we the bond bought
these things and now we need to buy
these things again because they're
outdated yes and that's that's a great
question um so for new applications and
new systems we are Cloud first strategy
so we're looking at the cloud what's in
the marketplace defitely at all those um
Cloud providers cloud service providers
I mentioned software as a service um
when we um have an RFP for prod system
that is one of the um options that we
ask the vendors to propose so we are
Cloud first but where we are we are as a
city we we are going to be hybrid for
for some time great thank you we we've
got smart ITP we need smarter Bond
issues if if I may Mr chair on that
regard I I think we' uh just adding to
this conversation Bianca does
it extremely well but just wanted to add
to the comment about kind of Outsourcing
or versus our own infrastructure and
again two very different projects but
I'll I'll use this one it's very common
for municipality to own their own
infrastructure uh fiber infrastructure
that that has a significantly longer
shelf life some of the software and some
of the applications that could certainly
uh Go a different route but let me use
an analogy just as an example uh in
Fleet Services it's not uncommon for
small businesses in the private sector
to do some type of lease option it's
much more common in municipalities to
own vehicles have Fleet replacement and
be able to control those assets and how
they roll in and out of your system so
just using those two analogies uh again
from my experience very common to have
backbone uh infrastructure for fiber
optics and you have security issues with
fdpd all and then in addition the smart
Ci's applications for these the
bandwidth and controlling all that is
enormous and uh if I talked much further
I'd get Way Beyond my swim Lane and
that's why we have such a wonderful
expert like Bianca mention so yeah Smart
City internet of things so all those um
applications and and Hardware I thinking
all the cameras or the traffic lights
those are now we're able to secure them
and and control them and and really make
sure that they have Integrations with
other systems that help us make better
decisions in real-time decision um as it
comes to um what's happening in our
community okay that's very helpful it it
makes sense you know because I
understand the internet of things and
everything connected across Scottdale
it's a massive undertaking um it just
seems like some of these things you know
when you think about AWS and others
wherever we can use utilize that and let
them take care of it it would be useful
but I understand the critical
criticality of yes and commissioner we
definitely we make that assessment
before we pursue the investments in new
applications we look at what's the cloud
availability and how we can make sure
that it's integrated even with the
existing unpr infrastructure to make
sure we get the most value from that
investment thank you commissioner sites
thank you I had similar thoughts about
build or buy um and I want to confirm my
understanding that that decision was
made in Prior years that's why it's in
an adopted
budget yes so this is adopted budget
we're not asking for additional funds
for from the next fiscal year we want to
present it to you because it is a bond
project as a obviously um um Community
facing budget and we want to make sure
that you have an understanding of um
what we're man
yeah the second part of my question was
the charge back to the Departments
because are are they paying for the uh
buy services and so as we build our own
will the Departments be paying then
for the fiber optic Services you you
charge back a lot of the technology do
you not so once the infrastructure is in
place the cost is not significant in the
three um uh departments Transportation
water and Aviation I mentioned there
contributing um for their specific
facilities so um from the bond it's it's
only 80% of that funding that's coming
from the bond rest is from um other um
yeah
funds I think we have no more questions
for you thank you so
much and at this point we go to agenda
item number five which is to identify
whether anyone up here uh or the staff
wants to uh
suggest an item for future topic to be
voted on the future
agenda and
um we don't discuss the item we'll just
vote on whether we all collectively
think that's a good idea to have on a
future agenda commissioner
Stevens yeah what I did I I was going to
do a proposed agenda item trying to
formalize the review of unfilled FTE
positions because that's one area which
we should have a role and in doing some
conferring thought it would be better if
we formally did a motion and directed
staff to include that information in
their presentation to us so if it's
appropriate I'd like to hand out a
motion let you all have it in front of
you and then i' i' make a motion about
it and if you all agree we can talk
about it and and what what this is It's
just to give you a heads up it's to it's
what we said before it's to take all the
positions at a year-to date that have
been unfilled all year and all those
positions that have been unfilled for
half of the year and then direct staff
uh both the treasures office and the
city manager's office to ask their
people when they put their budgets
together to present to us that they
include the degree to which these
positions were considered in putting the
budget together okay my dream on this
would be that when the department uh
reports are made back to us a part of it
might be here's the positions that were
unfilled all year and the positions that
were unfilled for part of the year we
took a look at those things we decided
that these couple could be eliminated
they weren't necessary we decided we
could combine these two into another
function and then also we decided we
might need you know I freed up staff and
I'd sure like to add this other part to
I also added something because I need
this other capability that's my dream on
this okay but at least then we'd be
directing staff more specifically to
address these things and then after they
do their presentation if there was
something that bothered us in there we
could separately ask for one-on-one
meetings or something like that so I
just wanted you to know my intent on
that before I read the motion chair and
members of the commission sorry to
interject but my request to speak button
is not working um just want to remind
the commission that pursuant to the
Charter boards and commissions cannot
direct staff uh you can certainly make a
motion for a future agenda item request
testing staff provide that
information so you're telling me
politically I have to create an agenda
item to make a motion so I've got to
wait till the next meeting to make this
motion no I'm not I'm not saying that at
all I'm saying that you can't make a
motion to direct staff you can have a
motion to have this item brought at a
future date um what you're you're you're
specifically asking is to order staff to
bring certain stuff back and and and
that's not in liance with the charter so
you can request this be an future item
but talk about all the stuff you're
talking about it's just a it's a
question of of the appropriate
wording so I didn't question
so how do I frame this then do I ask do
I recommend to them or do
I so the the proper way to frame it
would just be to bring a future agenda
item discussing those particular things
as an agenda item correct we're trying
we're the reason we talked about this I
I did some conferring is to try to not
make future meetings more difficult and
say hey you're going to do a
presentation throw this into your
presentation so we don't have to
separately do it as a one-off item and
you can do that
too um I mean we're obviously not on the
same wave link here I'm sorry about that
but um my my point is the commission
can't direct staff to specifically do
something thing and what I'm trying to
say if you want staff to bring this
information back to you simply say can
you bring this back in some form whether
it's a memo whether it's a part of an
agenda item or it's a separate item
however you want to do
it and I can't ask him to have the form
say
request request oh yeah if I change if
can I request them to do something yes
sir okay okay then let me uh let me read
this and I've got two extra copies if
anyone else wants to look at
them
uh do you want to look at a copy of
this
um
yeah uh well I'll leave you a copy okay
whatever it's there if anyone wants to
look at them okay uh I would like to
move that the commission request the
treasurer's office and city manager
Office office to include in their
upcoming presentations to the budget
Commission of the operating fund and the
Enterprise fund budgeted expenditures an
open FTE schedule showing by Department
all unfilled FTE positions through a
recent FY 25 date showing
positions unfilled all of the fiscal
year as well as unfilled over half of
the fiscal year to date I further move
the the treasures office and City
manager's
office oh I further move I further REM
well further move at the treasurer's
office and request the Treasure's
office okay move that the further move
that the well Treasures Office and City
manager's office
consider uh having their budget
presentations include their respective
unfilled FTE position shown in their
schedule and discuss how this
information was considered in their FY
2526 operating budget and any
substantive changes they made to their
FTE budgeted positions from this review
so that's my motion with the key changes
we're now requesting them and we're
asking them to
consider that's my Mo that's my motion
so moved uh to the uh City attorney or
City manager or anybody do you have a a
copy of what he's um reading from or
what he's making his motion
and chair Smith and members of the
commission I do not have a copy but what
he read sound reasonable and within the
powers of the of of of the
commission well then let's let's um
accept it the way that you uh read it I
don't mean accept it as a agenda item
but accept the wording
um
and if the staff uh once they see this
in writing uh has some problem with it I
presume they can come back to us at a
future date before this is agendized and
um we need a second consider
it so does anybody else on the Das here
um number one want to second that motion
I guess we don't go further unless we
have a second to it I'll second
it all right Vice chair uh Saker
provided a
second and pardon who wants to ask a
question I have a question from
commissioner Newman I understand what
you're asking for I would like to
understand from uh Treasurer
Andrews what kind of workload impact is
that and is this maybe a timing issue
around putting that together
um commissioner Newman commission I am
not sure yet so let me take a look and
see what reports we can generate out of
you know um that's that can be easily
generated off of our system and let us
kind of digest the requests and um see
what we can do uh Mr chair if I
may add to the discussion now our
request is working over here um I would
say I I know what it looks like I've
looked at it I think that's the
responsibility of the city manager and
so I'm very familiar with those reports
I will tell you there are complexities
and this is where uh the commissioner
when uh we had an offline um
subcommittee and I think you my
reflection of one of the questions you
asked is are you asking the right
question um that may have been on a
different topic and what I will tell you
having looked at that data it's it's
complex data for example I heard FTE but
uh so parttime for versus full-time uh
that's a big distinction I think um
general fund I heard Enterprise funds so
is the fund matter uh I hear time of
opening I will tell you about a year ago
we had a significant class in comp and
there was a moratorium for hiring so
literally shut down for for 60 days and
maybe it was even longer so there are
complexities that have driven to the
openings uh some are open for a long
time a certain hard to fill we need to
fill them um but they're hard to fill
and so they may be beyond the time so um
I just wanted to add that to the
discussion that it sounds fairly
straightforward this length of time show
us it's it it's not quite as simple as
that when you dive into the data having
looked at the data so I just wanted to
offer that for your
deliberations and and I guess the thing
I'll add to that is the beauty of adding
the word request is now it enables us
possibly to talk to them as they look at
what would be involved and maybe propose
back hey I can do this I can do that and
try to think and and do I need to do it
for everyone or do I just need to do it
for you know this dollar amount so
that's I'm fine with that and then
because they frankly I guess don't have
to do anything uh but I think this will
open up a chance for us to talk about it
to see if the substance of that can be
incorporated into the budget
derivation commissioner
sides my question is maybe I should know
this so I apologize in advance when we
see the operating budget material from
these departments I expect that we would
see a breakdown of personnel costs and
utilities and supplies and some kind of
high level breakdown that tells us the
trending of person personal cost of of
personnel and that that's already
factored into your presentations can you
shed light on that for me yes absolutely
commissioner sites commission uh we are
planning to provide for each um
Department that has been requested to
provide an overview of their operating
budget we will have some highlevel um
picture or data on their number of FTE
their uh person now cost they overtime
um at that at a high
level and and with a little history or I
don't mean a lot of history but
something where we can see change maybe
that's to the point of the FTE being
open then there's no cost in the current
year and in the next budget year and so
forth is there anything like that going
to be presented normally we would just
present the um change from the prior
year at the High level from a Personnel
cost total Personnel costs new FTE
requests but if the commission would
like further detail information related
to unfilled positions or specific
overtime uh or specific FTE requests
then um the direction and the motion
from commissioner Stevens will provide
us direction to add the additional
information can can you provide us maybe
that format I I hear what you're saying
but I'm trying to see
Personnel costs overtime what whatever
you're already considering the in the
presentations yes
yes I think we probably have uh Gone far
out of bounds I kept looking for the
City attorney to reel Us in here but uh
we're not really supposed to discuss or
debate or even clarify an agenda item
it's it's merely a proposal to make this
an agenda item and and
um if
um well I have a motion on a second and
I have no further speakers so I guess
I'll ask ask you to push yes no or maybe
on your
buttons and it is approved
5-2 so it will be incorporated as an
agenda item and
um we'll figure it out from
there seeing no further business I'll
entertain a a motion to uh let Carla
speak it was my understanding that um
commissioner Stevens was going to
propose another agenda item that
accompanied that that had to do with
overtime because as I said last meeting
you can't really have one discussion
without the
other I'm sorry Mr Stevens I really
wasn't aware you had another item
um
proceed I told her commissioner Carly
would get this in advance and it didn't
get done until like shortly before the
meeting and so I was hoping she could
look didn't make any changes she wanted
have you even seen this um yes I read it
oh okay and I just have one friendly
Amendment if possible you just have what
oh okay you'll have a okay you'll have
your correction then or whatever okay uh
proposed future agenda item uh it's for
personal overtime review oh wait let me
cast it beforehand we wanted to look at
have have uh some feedback uh on certain
overtime situations after doing some
pre-meeting discussions I couldn't
figure out how to do it for everything
so we decided the most important ones
were police and fire so this proposal is
just going to right now include police
and fire we can later on expand it if we
want to uh this is in response to
commissioner Carlos uh me saying we want
to look we ought to look at overtime but
her also saying we need to look at all
aspects of overtime including the human
impact that could uh should be
considered so this motion the idea of
this motion is to have police and fire
put a list together of this and then the
ask is just for them to report back to
us their views on overtime as opposed to
getting into tremendous details so based
on that I'll read the mo uh the I'll
read the proposed future agenda item it
would be called Personnel overtime
review to prepare a listing of a recent
fiscal year to date of individuals
showing only their position description
and not their name for police and fire
departments with overtime pay exceeding
50% of their base pay and also those
whereby their overtime pay exceeds 25%
of their base pay showing the position
name and overtime pay as a percentage of
their base pay and describe the
Department's approach to monitoring and
managing acceptable levels of overtime
and evaluating situations whereby
excessive overtime for an individual can
be detrimental to their performance or
safety so that's the proposed agenda
item and it was intentionally written
broad enough so that it basically says
show us the list of these things so we
can get a feel for it and then talk to
us about it and tell us your view so we
can best understand your approach to
overtime and I think
um I understand where you're headed with
this I think commissioner Stevens I'm
not sure this fits the definition of an
agenda item uh I I think an agenda item
would be something that you want to
agendize for future discussion a staff
presentation
on
overtime and these will be the details
you might like to have in there but it's
uh am I wrong I mean somebody from staff
correct me or tell me how to put this
into words right now this is just a
request for
information um
certainly the chair and members of the
commission certainly the commission
could request information um versus a
presentation and and I think your your
item is um set up to um not only just
proposed topics for a future agenda but
um a um or other documentation or a memo
um so I I I don't know if uh
commissioner Stevens if you're you're
requesting actual presentation or you
want a memo on the
topic oh um I thought the agenda item
would be the report that would show the
overtime people and then there would be
a presentation of that
report here's all the people that meet
the overtime criteria let me now tell
you my approach to tell me what tell you
my view on this report so chair uh Smith
and uh commissioner Stevens and members
of the commission you certainly could
agendize that request a report um
covering the topics that you discussed
and have it presented at a a a budget
commission meeting for
discussion do do you want me to just
make this more General and just say we'd
like to have an agenda item for a police
and fire
department uh report on overtime to
date that's your discretion you can do I
think you can do either
if I can if I can interject here the um
if your objective is to uh look at
Personnel
overtime and you can hand this to staff
and say you know these are the things
I'd like to have you present to us but I
think as far as an agenda item it's just
we would like to agenda a discussion of
overtime in the city of Scottdale and
that that's fine um and then staff will
give you a copy of this and you can um
be uh
responsive does that cause anybody any
angst over there at the
table chair and members of commission it
doesn't cause us angst um but if if the
specific intent is to focus on police
and fire versus overtime in other
departments you could agendize it to be
a discussion of overtime involving the
police and fire departments versus you
know I and I I I the city manager could
speak to this better than than I can I
don't know how much overtime is utilized
in other departments maybe the water
department I I I personally would just
make it for the city of Scottdale I
agree with you there's not going to be
that much everywhere else but at least
no stone is unturned if we just say for
employees in scotdale commissioner Carla
yes I I would like to make two friendly
amendments to this motion you know
prepare the following for discussion and
then after the fire department ad and
other departments that consistently have
a high level of
overtime so it's not the whole city but
it's police fire and any other
departments that consistently have a
high level of overtime
okay so we're in a do Loop here of
either
agendize um a future discussion of
overtime in the
city or future discussion of overtime in
police and fire or future overtime and
departments that incur overtime or just
future overtime period why don't we just
make a discussion of overtime leave it
very Broad and then we can separately
talk to staff about what they're doing
but what commissioner Carlo said sounds
perfect yeah because the whole point is
is if you're going to discuss the FTE
and that situation you need to discuss
this
also I mean and you need to have the
information you know I I think
commissioner Stevens did a good job of
lining out the information that would
help the discussion because just to say
we want to discuss overtime you know we
need some spefic specifics and again I
don't think it should be just police and
fire if any other department
consistently has high
overtime they need to be part of the
discussion also and so if you add the
friendly amendment to this doesn't it
work is a
motion okay again I think I will
terminate discussion here because we're
getting into debating the pros and cons
and and mechanics of how we might do
this um
going back to you commissioner Stevens
can you put in 10 words or less what you
would like to have as an agenda item on
this count your words carefully yeah
um a
uh can I do an agenda item for for staff
to make a presentation or is that I can
do that if it's an agenda item they'll
have to make a present okay then I'd
like to have an propos an agenda item
for staff to to report on
overtime
uh oh period I guess overtime Peri
period is good Y and it's uh and you
don't even have to say for staff to do
it because certainly no one else in the
audience is going to do it so if it's
going to be done it'll be staff so let's
agendized to have a discussion of
overtime
and can you can you vote on that agenda
item to put it on the agenda I I beg
your
pardon um chair and members of the
commission can you take a vote on that
to put it on the commission just as a
formality what's he want me to
do that that was I made a motion yeah no
he can but our screen still shows the
last vote we need to pull up a new vote
I second the
motion and now pick a button yes no or
maybe and this one is
unanimous you have uh chairman Stevens
you have any other U
or does anyone else have any other items
commissioner
Newman um going back to our discussion
we had around um the discussion around
real Varity Drive I think we Auto
agendize the policy issue the budget
policy issue around um use of those
funds and as it relates to when that um
preserve tax sunsets and make a recom
make a recommendation to uh councel from
a budget policy perspective and I'll
leave it to the I'll leave it to the
chair his discretion to how to structure
that
but chair has no idea how to structure
but I do think I do think it's something
it's it's got enough we had enough
discussion on it it's it's relevant
because it's a there's a big project
it's not like a small Pro there's a big
consideration of a project there
relative to a polic budget use of funds
and I think it's worth having a
discussion on
that I um I think I understand what
you're talking about whether it's uh
permitted within the in the four corners
of the prop for the uh 2004 language or
the 2018 language prop
420 uh it would be my thought that we
can give as our alert to the city
council this is something that they
ought to look at but it's a it's a legal
determination that I I don't think the
seven of us are qualified to look at it
even if we had further information so I
would
not propose agendize it for further
discussion
but but if you want to make that motion
go right ahead and um I'm
confused while you're thinking about it
commissioner Carla would like to weigh
in go ahead yes I'm confused is the
question about whether or not the
overpass is
appropriate as an as a a budget item is
it appropriate under 420 or are we
talking about the sunsetting the early
sunsetting of the 2004 tax
or is it all of those I'm not sure which
which one you're focusing on yeah I'm
having trouble separating them all
because they all play together
um so perhaps I should think about that
and we can come back to it City attorney
is going to bail us out
here chair and members of the commission
um we are getting far a field as uh
chair Smith pointed out earlier this um
item doesn't permit actual discussion it
simply permits agenda ing an item for a
future me meeting um so we we probably
need to Reign ourselves in and and I'm I
my out or my thinking out loud is really
trying to decide what what to agendize
to me it's to me it's a discussion of
the topic we talked about today no it
was presented to us but I think we ought
to discuss that from a policy
perspective um I will withdraw it and
I'll come back with some thought a way
to a way to do that at the next meeting
how's that
are we done with that one then you mean
or I'm
done if you're done we're
done anyone else have any thrilling
items they'd like to see on the agenda
in the
future seeing no takers then I'll
entertain a motion to
adjourn I move we
adjourn commissioner sites motion move
to adjourn and it was seconded by
anybody did you did you do the second
I'll be the second I Vice chair schwier
will say did the second and now we're
voting and it's unanimous we finally
agreed on something we're going to
adjourn
e
e for