City of Chandler Special Meeting 6/1/2025

It's awesome.
This is good.
Vice Mayor, are you on?
Yes, I'm here, but I'm trying to be to
watch it on YouTube, so I wanted to I
got the link. I'm there on YouTube, but
I'm not seeing anything yet.
All right. I can't hear you very well
just cuz it's loud in here, but I'm
going to go back and push the feed
through so you should be able to see it
soon. Okay.
All right. Thank you. Okay. Have a good
meeting.
Thank you.
There you go.
[Music]
Josh, I don't
fit in the box.
I don't think they're going to slide
under your seat.
You're
just a nod to the head responsibility.
[Music]
Thank you.
Thanks, sir.
I didn't try to find it.
What you want?
It's good to see
They should know about it.
Emergency over here.
Let's
Good evening and welcome to the council
chambers and the regular meeting of the
Chandler city council. Uh tonight
there's quite a few moving items that
are are or moving pieces as part of our
agenda. There is consent. There is a
public hearing. There is voting on that.
There is part of our budget. And then
there are um three other items. Many of
you have intended to speak on one and or
both of them. And we will give everyone
the opportunity and I'll address that
once we get a little closer. So, with
this, I'd like to call our meeting to
order. And um clerk, would you please
take the role? Mayor Hartkey present.
Vice Mayor Ellis
present. Council member Inz here.
Council member Poston here. Council
member Orlando here. Council member
Harris here. Council member Hawkins
here. We have a quorum. Great. Thank
you. Our invocation will be delivered by
Rabbi Mendy Deutsch from Habad of the
East Valley. And our pledge of
allegiance by council
member would like to begin by putting
some charity into a charity box. We
don't just talk about doing good things,
we do something positive.
God of heaven, mass of the world,
graciously bless these distinguished
individuals, chosen by many who have
entrusted them with the responsibility
of legislating for a well-being of their
constituents and
families. While we may be living in
turbulent times, one thing is a
constant, and that is the Almighty God
who resides within each and every one of
us and gives us the strength we need to
remember who we are and what we are made
out of.
We must not be discouraged by the
darkness around us. Instead, we should
bring more light into the world through
acts of kindness and
goodness. Many have heard about what
happened last night in Washington
DC. The way to overcome true hatred and
bigotry is by instilling in our youth a
deep respect for others. We do this by
living by a higher moral code built on
the foundation of the seven universal
laws given to all mankind, teaching them
to love and honor every human being. For
each of us is created by the image of
God. We must also help them understand
their God-given purpose and their power
to make the world a more beautiful and
kind place for all. Through this, we
guarantee to be able to live in peace.
Let there be no ambiguity
ambiguity. What took place last night
was a vile act of cowardness and terror.
At a time of rising hate, those who
believe in justice and human dignity
must be clear and courageous in naming
and confronting the hate in all its
forms. We call on leaders across every
sector, government, civil society, and
faith communities to reject the
normalization of anti-semitism and any
kind of hate and to build a society root
rooted in mutual respect, safety, and
dignity for all. The heroism of our
leaders dedicated to fostering a
peaceful and harmonious world is
commendable. We implore God to grant
each and every one of you, the city
council, and the leaders of our
community. Give them strength and moral
courage to enhance our world daily.
Bestow upon them wisdom, justice, grace,
and empathy, enabling them to bring
honor to your name and blessing to
mankind. Amen.
Thank you, Rabbi, for your words. Please
join me in reciting the pledge of
allegiance.
I pledge algiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One
nation, one
nation and liberty to all.
Thank you, Rabbi. Thank you, Council
Member
Encus. Next on our agenda tonight is our
consent agenda. And um before we vote on
this uh we always invite
uh if there are people who who are uh
being voted on for boards and
commissions to stand and be recognized.
Do we have anyone here from the who's
being voted on in the mayor's youth
commission? So please stand.
Can you shout out your name to us? My
name is Cla Melo. My name is D. All
right. Well, thank you both for coming.
Uh we appreciate your desire for civic
action and uh we're we're blessed that
you guys are here. So, thank
you. Um council, next is I've got no
speaker cards on consent agenda. Unless
someone would like to move a consent
agenda to action, I believe a motion
would be appropriate. Mayor, council
member, I move the proposed, excuse me,
proposed motion to move the approved
consent agenda of May 22nd, 2025,
regular meeting items 1 through 14.
Second. So, we have a motion by council
member Alando, a second by council
member
Harris. All right, council, please vote.
Uh, council member Cena, I just need to
off the record. I wanted to to do a um
recusal on administrative item agreement
number
CA2502.201 for myself that item.
Okay. Thank you so much. That's under
the the bottom on the administrative
part. Okay. Um for those in the
audience, there is a section where if
the amount of money um is is less than a
certain amount u then it's kind of
lumped under that bottom section there.
Um, so that's what council member
incinus is referring to. Council, please
vote.
Vice Mayor Ellis.
Yes.
Motion carries unanimously
with the um with the one with um as
noted um with the item noted by council
member
in. Thank you. Next on our agenda is a
public hearing and action item and
council there is the presentation of a
hearing and after we close out of that
we then will vote on it on this is item
15 and then item 16 we will actually
vote on resolution
5899. So, with that, I'd like to open
our public hearing and invite a staff
presentation. Like to invite uh Lauren
Cole, Rebecca, our DCCP
uh uh development manager as well.
Please proceed. All
right. Good evening, Mayor and Council.
Tonight, I'm here to present the fiscal
year 2526 EMSD enhanced municipal
services district annual assessment.
The EMSD was created in 2005 and it's in
its 20th year. The district covers 61.4
acres and over 1 million square footage
of commercial space. An enhanced
municipal services district is formed to
provide services up and beyond typical
public services elsewhere within the
city. Such services include safety,
beautifification, marketing, and
promotion and professional management
and communications.
These services are provided by the
downtown Chandler Community Partnership,
the DCCP, through an annual contract
with the
city. To further expand upon the EMSD
process, the assessment was was
authorized by the property owners in the
district with 100% of the assessment
proceeds being paid to the district.
City council is a governing body who
officially enables the district. The
district must be renewed each year. The
annual steps are as follows. Step one,
set the rate by the city council. This
is the same assessment formula that has
been used for the past 20 years. This
year, the DCCP requested a 5% increase
for both private and public property
that is allowed by the EMSD bylaws. Step
two, on March 27th, council approved the
tenative assessment and set the hearing
date for tonight. Since then, staff has
published the notice of hearing as
required by ASRS for five consecutive
days before the hearing. DCCP staff has
noticed all uh has mailed all notices to
all property owners in the district of
their right to file an objection. No
objections have been received at this
point. Tonight is the public hearing and
resolution of approval and the approval
of the contract with the DCCP to
administer these funds through the EMSD.
And with that, I'm happy to answer any
questions before I pass this on to
Rebecca, who will present on the DCCP.
Council, any questions for Lauren?
Seeing none, proceed. Hello, Rebecca.
Thank you, Lauren. Good evening, Mayor
and Council. Thank you for your time and
consideration. On behalf of the DCCP
board of directors and our organization,
I'll be providing an overview of some of
the accomplishments that we've reached
in this fiscal
year. But first, I'd like to share our
mission statement. The Downtown Chandler
Community Partnership is a
501c6 notfor-profit corporation whose
mission is to mobilize leadership and
resources to advance the develop the
development of downtown Chandler as a
regional destination for shopping,
dining, living, culture, and the
arts. Next, I'd like to highlight our
board of directors. These individuals
are leaders in the community who invest
and volunteer for the betterment of the
downtown Chandler community.
And I'd love to include our hardworking
team. From your left is Natalie, Maddie,
myself, and
Jess. As Lauren mentioned, the services
that we provide are over and above
standard city services, but I would like
to just include a few here. Our charter
includes providing advocacy for our
businesses, management, events,
marketing, placemaking, and clean team
services as well. Our board this year
has completed an updated draft strategic
plan which we've discussed previously
and we hope to finalize over the
summer. Internal and external
communications have been a focus this
year and how we can refine and the best
ways to serve our businesses. We've
hosted more than 20 meetings. We've also
implemented a pilot volunteer program
where volunteers directly impact small
business owners in downtown such as
providing um replacing light fixtures,
interior paint, and minor drywall
repairs, all free of
charge. In continuing with our marketing
and communication, we partnered with
various marketing teams and local
influencers who not only raved about our
downtown as a whole, but went into
various businesses to highlight them.
Some campaigns included retail only
shops, stay andplay campaigns, and
weekend wedding
experiences. Just wanted to share a few
of our marketing wins. We had over
141,000 views on our social media
platforms and just some of these small
campaigns that we performed. One live TV
segment for Prancer's Pajama Party where
they were live on on site. And then we
had three live TV segments that were at
the studio and it highlighted six
different businesses within downtown.
We hosted 19 events which brought more
than 300 local vendors. This does not
include farmers market vendors. Um, and
our events brought more than 43,000
attendees and generated more than
$100,000 in revenue for the
DCCP. As you can see, we provided a
diverse event schedule and tried our
best to offer as many free opportunities
as we could for residents and visitors
to enjoy. All of these events are made
possible through our event
partners. We just wanted to share a few
fun photos. This year we also started
hosting micro events which provide an
opportunity for community building
without the large crowds. We wanted to
provide reasons for people to keep
coming back to downtown. Free micro
events include running club, book club,
and sunset yoga. We'd like to thank
council member Enzenus for supporting
and joining our running
club. In addition, we're happy to report
after much resident and council feedback
that we have brought the farmers market
management back in house. Natalie has
been successful in growing the market
and we see promising numbers so far. The
market is on track to have more than
40,000 visitors annually. We took over
management in January and the vendor
gross sales so far are
$281,000. All of this back into local
economy. As we look for safety and
beautifification improvements, the DCCP
partnered with the city of Chandler to
install alleyway lighting and two
alleyways, and a third one is pending
approval. We worked with land owners to
install additional turf and sprinklers
to improve the sidewalk along Boston
Street.
We also installed various placemaking
engagements such as expanding our
holiday decorations by 50%, installing
the umbrellas at Dr. AJ Chandler Park
this for spring and hay bales in the
fall season for photo
opportunities. In this fiscal year, we
worked with Peterbug and the vision
gallery through the arts commission to
install three additional utility wrapped
um which were created by local artists.
This gives us five to date and we're
happy to report that the arts commission
also joined us in adding additional um
art boxes in the
downtown. And that is all I have for
now. Thank you guys so much for your
continued support. I'll take any
questions. Thank you, Rebecca. Are there
questions or comments quickly? Council
member Orlando. Thank you, Mayor. Uh
first of all, great job down there for a
good partnership between the city and
the private uh business down there. And
I'm glad to see that there's um uh
growth in different venues we're doing.
So that's perfect. Um the only question
I have is when the assessment is is
made, do the landlords
um or it may be a combination. Do the
landlords actually pick that up or they
sh they uh push it towards the the uh
lease?
That's a great question. Thank you,
Council Member Orlando. uh mayor and
council. Uh it really is up to the land
owner to determine who picks up the
additional expenses. Um but it is a
conversation that we have with our
stakeholders that um what we'd like to
do with the dollars and and having some
assessment increases and and so far um
we've had support throughout the
community. Good. So there Okay, that's
perfect. Thank you, Mayor. Additional
questions or
comments? Council member Clston,
I appreciate everything you're doing
down there. I love the farmers market. I
love the art walk. You've done a great
job with that. I do just want to ask I
really like that you've put an added
emphasis on helping those small business
owners because sort of as council member
Orlando had mentioned some of those fees
do get passed on. I am hearing that
they're feeling the effects of the
economy right now. So I would just
encourage you to have as much action
towards the actual business owners as
opposed to just the property owners as
well. So, um I know we had a a brief
discussion about this before, but I do
want to en encourage you to continue to
do that. Thank you, Council Member
Poston, Council Mayor. Um we take your
feedback
um with much weight, right? It's
important to us and our focus is always
the business owners in addition to the
land owners and we hear you. We also had
some discussions about what that looks
like with the current economy or um the
uncertainty of it. And so we um are
having some discussions as to how we can
continue to strengthen the the
businesses, the small guys, right? The
small businesses that we have in
downtown. Thank you. Exactly. Because
that's what makes downtown special is
that we have so many independent
business owners, but it's a little more
of a struggle when things are a little
bit uncertain like you said. So, thank
you. Thanks for Thank you, Mayor.
Vice Mayor,
thank you so much, Mayor. I really would
like to thank you, mayor, for allowing
me to do the address with the downtown
Mississippi last when you were
traveling. Um, I want to tell them thank
you for having me and congratulation on
their 20 years of working downtown and
it would have never been what it is
right now if a group of business people
and also the Mississippi put all their
hands together to make downtown a
destination place. I had an opportunity
to speak to many of the business owners
that are in downtown currently. They
were in the room. They are very
appreciative of all the work that the
city manager and everybody including all
of us are doing there to support the
CCP. So again, thank you Miss Rebecca
for having me. It was a blast standing
there and doing the address with you
all. Thank you. Continue the good work.
Thank you, Mayor, Council, Vice Mayor.
Thank you so much. Everybody was really
impressed with your address. They loved
having you. We missed Mayor of course.
Um, thank you guys so much again for
your support. We appreciate it. And I'll
close just by saying unless others want
to close my clothes. Uh, I I think our
downtown is has really gotten to be a
strong place that we hear great things
about people feeling safe, about how
clean it is, how warm the folks are, and
uh um, of all the places that I like to
hang out, it's our downtown. and for the
the many reasons and we continue to look
forward to developing this to be a
continued worldclass amenity that not
just serves Chandler the region but
really invites people from around the
world. So, thank you for your work in uh
keeping all of those things a reality in
our downtown. Mayor Council, thank you
so much for your comments. We really
appreciate it and I um will definitely
share with our board and our
stakeholders. Thank you very much.
All right. Um, after council discussion,
is there any questions or comments from
the audience related to the public
hearing? Seeing none, I'd like to close
our public hearing. Thank you.
Item number 16 is um approving what we
just heard, the annual assessment for
the city of Chandler's downtown,
Chandler Enhanced Municipal Services
District. Council, how would you like to
proceed, Mayor? Council Orlando. Thank
you. uh like to move to approve
resolution number 5899 approving the
fiscal year 2025 2026 annual assessment
for the city of Chandler Arizona
downtown Chandler Enhanced Municipal
Services District. So we have a motion
like to second that mayor motion by
council member Orlando a second by vice
mayor. Any recusals? Seeing none council
please vote. Vice Mayor Ellis.
Yes.
Motion carries unanimously. Great. Thank
you.
Item number 17, uh, resolution number
5905, which is adopting the
FY2526 tenative budget and 26 through 35
tenative capital improvement program and
giving notice and dates and times for
hearing taxpayers for final adoption of
the budget and setting tax levies and
tax rates. Um, Matt Dunar is going to
give us a presentation. All right, mayor
and council, I appreciate the
opportunity to be here tonight to talk
about the budget with you again. I know
seems like you've seen my face a lot
lately, but we're getting close to the
end, so you'll get a break here pretty
soon. Uh, I did have a joke for you
about a broken clock, but I didn't think
it was the right time. So,
uh, so our statutory budget process is
the same as it always is. Arizona
revised statute dictates what we do. Uh
we do provide or adopt a tenative budget
which is before you tonight to set forth
the different amounts that we're going
to be required to meet the political
subdivisions expenses for the fiscal
year. After tenative adoption, we have a
public hearing on that budget as well as
on the tax levy uh which is set for June
12th. And then we hold a special meeting
directly following that um just similar
to what we we've just seen uh directly
following that public hearing. And then
the final adoption of the tax levy is
set for June
26. Our total budget for fiscal year
2526
uh is just about
1.629 billion uh a slight decrease from
last year's budget. Our theme this year
is strength in numbers. And so uh we see
that not only with the numbers of in our
budget and adhering to our fiscal
policies, but also in the number of
individuals and partnerships that we
have throughout the community that
really make Chandler a special place. Uh
the total general fund of that 1.629
billion is about $615 million. Uh our
proposed budget does adhere to those
financial policies that you have set in
place. Uh we do use the strategic
framework to guide our decisions. It
provides cost-effective quality
services. Uh maintains our long-term
financial sustain sustainability. Uh and
we did include resident feedback through
our engagement processes through our
budget kickoff, the resident survey,
three budget workshops, our all day
budget brief, and then the events that
we have scheduled over the next couple
of weeks for final and tenative
adoption.
We were able to incorporate a lot of the
budget drivers into this fiscal year uh
including some revenue changes both
increases and decreases for various uh
classifications of revenues expenditure
increases for uh that deal with
inflation public safety pension
obligations uh and inflating costs
across the city. Uh we've budgeted for
grant changes that have we've been
monitoring from the federal level.
Although those keep changing, we'll keep
you updated as we go throughout the next
uh few weeks and months. Uh and then
we've uh utilized some ongoing savings
with or found some ongoing savings with
onetime dollars. Again, making sure that
our public safety pension is completely
funded. A couple of highlights from the
operating budget. Uh we're able to
maintain the lowest privilege tax rate
in Arizona. Again, maintaining that one
and a half percent rate. Uh and then we
are we're able to reduce the primary
property tax rate through the direction
of mayor and council. Uh that's the 10th
consecutive year that we've been able
been able to reduce the property tax
rate. Uh we're also able to maintain
that fully funded status of our PSPRS
obligation adds funding for labor
association commitments and general
employee merit markets and maintains our
strong
reserves. If you missed it at the all
day, here's just a recap of where the
money comes from and where the money
goes for our total budget. uh where the
money comes from, everything from fund
balance to grants to state shared
revenues to local TPT or transaction
privilege tax. Uh our property taxes and
other charges for services. And then
where the money goes is broken out into
categories for de departmental
operating, major capital, uh we have
debt service, contingencies and
reserves, and capital carry forward,
which we'll talk about in just a minute.
Uh just to keep in mind from an overall
cost to our residents for providing all
of the services that the city does. The
city of Tempee does a great job. They do
a study that shows the different costs
estimates for per resident for the
services that we provide. Uh this
includes water, wastewater, solid waste,
property taxes paid, and an estimate of
transaction privilege or sales taxes
paid. The valley average is an average
resident will pay
$2513 to their municipality. City of
Chandler is about 75% of that. So, uh
just over $1,800 per resident. So, we
fare very well as far as the what we're
able to provide to our residents for a
low cost. And we anticipate that when
they update that this next July, uh
we'll be in an even better
position. From our capital improvement
program, the highlights for our 10-year
CIP were about $2.6 billion. uh about a
$130 million increase from last year's
10-year CIP. And it was updated to
reflect uh not only additional utility
projects and project cost estimates, but
also additional projects that were
filtered into the final year, year 10,
which is new this year. Uh again, we
have an increased focus on aging
infrastructure, and it does include
projects utilizing potential new bond
authorization uh in years three through
10. So as we go out to the voters in
November asking for additional bond
authorization, those projects are built
into the our capital planning. Although
we only appropriate the first year of
our capital plan. So this is the total
appropriation in the new for the new
year.
$845.7 million will be our CIP
appropriation split between two major
categories. Capital carry forward uh
which are projects that have already
begun but not yet completed that we need
to make sure that we reappropriate for
in the new year under state law. We have
to do that so we can continue those
projects. And then new funding of about
$278
million. Our key budget dates, uh, a
majority of those are completed,
checkmarked. Tonight, we're doing our
tenative budget adoption, uh, budget
public hearing and final adoption is
scheduled for June 12th, and then the
adoption of the tax levies on June 26th.
And with that, I'll answer any questions
you may have.
Thank you, Mr. Denbar. Um, council
questions.
Council member Harris. Yeah. Um, thank
you. Um, Don, your team continues to do
a great job. I mean, seeing our taxes
being lowered for the 10th year in a in
a row is a big savings to our community.
Tax rate. Tax rate. Tax rate. Yes. Tax
rate for the 10th year in a row. And is
proud to be a part of that process, you
know, and your team worked very
tirelessly to work through that process
to put together a very fiscally sound um
budget. Uh, and it takes many, many
months for those that have been a part
of the budget process from the beginning
to the end. It takes multiple months
before we get hit. And I think we'll be
kicking it off again in October of this
year to to carry it over all the way
into to the we hours of the month of
June. So, um, I'm very proud of this
budget. It's very very sound, strong,
fiscally sound budget and and and I'm
very happy that we have been able to to
do this for many many months and to be
here I'm just like yes. So thank you so
much Mr. Dunbar. Thank you. That's it
mayor. Thank you council member.
Additional
comments council member Orlando. Yeah.
Matt, can you remind us when the PSPRS
payment is due and when do we adjust
that? Yeah. So, through the mayor,
council member Orlando, um it's not
doesn't have a due date for the
additional payment that we make. We tend
to make it at the beginning of the year,
but this year we're going to delay that
slightly. We want to get the new
actuarial report, see where we're at,
make sure we need the full, we have
budgeted $25 million increase for that
payment. If we need the full amount,
we'll be able to pay it as soon as we
get the actuarial report. If it's less
than that, we'll pay just the amount
that's needed. So, it'll probably be
probably November, December time frame.
Oh, okay. Much later. Yep. All right.
Perfect. Thank you. Thanks, Mayor. Yeah,
Matt, can you go back to that one slide
where it compared Chandler to the others
concerning overall tax bill? Absolutely.
Here we go. Great. So, this is with any
increases that we've projected, but we
are talking about a review and adding
wastewater water uh some increases that
will take effect next March is what I'm
currently understanding. Right. So it'll
give our businesses opportunity to be
able to make their budgets accordingly.
So even with that, we're we're going to
be well under 200,000. And as you
stated, this does not take into effect
that all of these agencies, we know
Gilbert has some significant increases
planned that's not included in this and
others. Is that pretty much true of
everyone? Absolutely, Mayor. You're
correct. So, uh, this just reflects as
of last July 2024, uh, and hasn't been
updated with ours. So, we know our
utility rates will likely increase, uh,
but we've seen increases in other
jurisdictions as well, all other
jurisdictions, some of them significant,
as you mentioned, Gilbert. Uh, the other
thing that isn't in this yet is Gilbert
did raise their transaction privilege
tax from one and a half to 2%. So,
that'll be reflected next year. So, a
lot of changes. Those shifts we'll see
in next year's uh Tempe report, but to
your point, the city of Chandler will
maintain that very uh equitable status
with our residents. So, and when you say
that uh I mean, in our case, this won't
raise until we raise rates. So, we've
already we've already folded everything
else in there. So, it continues to just
state and restate. uh and the enviable
position of long-term planning in our
community that allows us to be able to
um bring the best affordability. So,
thank you. Any other questions or
comments?
All right. Thank you, Matt. There's no
speaker cards related to item number
17. Council, is there a motion?
Mayor. Council member Harris. Uh, I got
to see the Just one second. I'm
computer's pulling up. All right, there
we go. Uh, mayor, I would like to make a
motion um for item number 17 to uh
approve the resolution 5905 adopting the
FY2025 2026 tenative budget in the 2026
20 to 2035 tenative CIP and giving
notice of the dates and times for the
hearing taxpayers for final adoption of
the budget and further setting levies
and the tax rates. Second. So, we have a
motion by council member Harris, second
by council member Poston. Any additional
comments or questions? Seeing none, Vice
Mayor Ellis.
Yes.
Motion carries unanimously.
Great. Man, we're just screaming through
this agenda. You think the second half
will be as fast as the first half? Oh,
for sure. For sure. Okay.
I love your
attitude. Okay. Um and council what
we'll do is what we have been doing if
there is a staff presentation or or
questions. This as this next one has
been brought by council member Harris.
We'll take entertain um questions and
discussion here. There are no speaker
cards for item number 18 either at this
point. So item number 18 creating
performance evaluations and criteria
policy for direct hires.
um since I'm not sure if there's staff
presentation since this was your your
item. So, Council Member Harris. Yeah,
thank you, Mayor. I'm bringing this
forward because um as you know,
accountability is very important.
Transparency is important as well. And
when we give out merit-based performance
raises, we need to make sure that
there's an evaluation tool to evaluate
our direct hires. And this is a part of
what everyone, you know, everyone does.
We all get evaluated. Uh, and so I
wanted to bring this forward to make
sure that um staff we can bring this
forward so staff can go and put together
an evaluation so that way our direct
hires have the ability to be evaluated.
They know what they're being evaluated
about. We know how we're going to be
evaluating and it allows it to be
aligned with their contracts. So again,
if if I'm correct, what this does is
basically commission staff to put
something together and then we will vote
on that. That's just not arbitrary or
automatic. That's correct. That's
correct, Mayor. And I have a question
for Ton, our acting legal tonight. I
know that
um when this has been brought up in the
past, we've been advised by legal that
these uh evaluations are potentially
public. These public documents are
public documents rather than than
protected by
um by um executive privilege. Um, I
think Kelly has mentioned that several
times. So, Tone, what's your
understanding of this?
Mayor, you hear me? Yes. Okay. Um,
that's the correct. The record of the
evaluation would be a public record.
So the record meaning that it's happened
or the material on the on the um
actual um evaluations. The material on
the actual evaluations. Okay. So there's
nothing that we can do that would say
that if if we proceed with this that
this would be just a private
communication between council and the
individual staffers if if there was a
public records request.
Mayor, on the the record of the
evaluation, that would be a public
record. You could discuss an employees
performance in an executive session.
I just want to make sure that we're
talking the the same thing. So, I I'm
hearing a little different language and
I just want to make sure I understand.
So, so if I um if I evaluate um city
attorney Schwab, are the materials or
the statements or are whatever I would
say about her that I would might be
interested in communicating privately,
are you saying that that is that is
accessible in a public records request
or your language is just a little
different? I just want to make sure I
understand. Sure, Mayor. I understand.
Yes, that would be a public record.
However, if in your comments you were to
summarize something that had been legal
advice and it was privileged attorney
client legal advice for on behalf of
from the city attorney for the city of
Chandler, that would have to be
redacted. Okay. So if I gave the city
attorney either a 12 out of 10 or a one
out of 10 for a particular particular
merit that would become that is
accessible as public record is what
you're saying. Yes, that is what I'm
saying. Okay. Thank
you council. Additional question. Um
vice mayor then council member Poston.
Thank you so much mayor. Um I have a
question also concerning um the other
employees that we don't directly oversee
the direct hires when we do their merit
um and also we do uh sit down and do
their evaluation does that go into their
file as a public knowledge or is it also
private only them can see it other
people cannot request those kinds of
things
Did I think what she asked is is let's
say um an employee of perhaps you that
if you're if you're given an evaluation
is that also public uh knowledge or how
does that work as opposed to the four
appointees from council
mayor eval p evaluations of employees of
the city are public records. Okay. All
right. Thank you.
All right. Uh, additional questions or
comments from council. Mayor. Um, oh,
I'm sorry, Council Member Poston, you're
already on record. My apologies. Thank
you. Mine was my my comment was similar
to uh the vice mayor's question and it
was just I have been a proponent of
transparency um the entire time I served
on council and when I was a city
employee and my opinion is that um it's
pretty much standard for city staff's
records to be public and I think we
should be holding our executive staff to
a higher standard not a lower one. These
are our most well-compensated employees
with the most responsibility. So, I I
agree with uh Council Member Harris's
idea of making this a written record. Um
and we can be discreet and and we've
been assured that if there are items
that do need to be redacted that our
city attorney's office can do that. So,
that gives us a little extra comfort
level, I think. But, I'm in favor of
this.
Okay. um over here.
Okay. Yeah. I guess my concern
is if
I'm if I'm having an interesting day and
I and I'm or if I'm not happy at the
moment of uh of an action of a public
employee and and and I write something
that I I later we we talk these out and
we have ongoing relationships and
ongoing conversations and and course
adjustments, but I I guess I'm concerned
that if I would write something and
later uh get it resolved but suddenly
there is this impending thing on
somebody's record that uh might affect
their future and honestly I that would
that would concern me. So I'm I'm just
wrestling a little bit with this
concept. I do realize we're just
approving the process and then that's
going to come back to us and maybe we
could shape it in such a way that um
would would alleviate my my concerns
that I'm trying to articulate.
But
so council member Martinez kind of just
um tag on to your concern there. I was
going to ask Council Member Harris, is
your uh proposal to do this at a certain
time of year or is it when their
contracts may be up for um evaluation at
that time or is it yearly or depending
on what the contract falls? Yeah. Um
again, this item only simply gives the
staff the direction to go and figure out
the concept and to bring it back to us
so we can make determinations of how we
want to move forward. This only just
allows us to put forth an opportunity
that we can actually review what our
staff is doing. Our top staff is um um
to your point, Mayor, they're paid
heavily. I think it's approximately a
million dollars that we pay our top
staff between the four and I think it's
very important that we look at that and
we allow the taxpayers to be able to see
that and we can find a way to do it. Um
Phoenix has been doing it. There's
examples out there. Phoenix has been
doing it for quite a long time. Tempe
has been doing it for quite a long time.
Scots the other cities. It's a common
practice. I mean, I sit on boards right
now, government boards where I'm the
chair of and and that CEO is evaluated
and and wish the same process. So, um we
can find a way to do it in a meaningful
way. Um and that's why we that's why we
want to send it back to the staff and
they'll put together something that will
be meaningful and that will allow that
to happen. But I I do believe that our
our direct hires um definitely should be
evaluated as we would anyone else in the
organization. That's just being
transparent, holding accountability, and
providing merit-based performance
raises.
Thank you for that clarification. I feel
like we'll get into all those parameters
if we decide to do something like this.
So maybe that's something we can address
uh Mayor once we're in there, whether
it's timing or um the structure of that
evaluation. Yeah. And I think I think
his direct question was, "Do you see
this upon like right now they're on a
two-year contract upon contract review
or more frequently or or you just kind
of not want to decide yet?" Well, I want
to make sure I I keep an open mind
because I would like um each of the
colleagues to be able to put their input
into this process. Um we annually review
our direct hires. I think that would
probably be the most appropriate time
for them to have an annual review and to
align it um with their contract based on
how council um deems it should be
handled. But a two-year contract is we
we've already set that the previous
year. That's my that's a little so
they've this this year once if we do a
review on them, we won't be we won't be
discussing their contract. We decided
that last year. That's that's I think
that's the part of my part of this
question. Okay. Um,
well, annually the contracts are
typically up. Even if we do something
unique, the reviews just remain
annually. Uh, and that's kind of where I
would probably land. That is an annual
review regardless if council wants to do
indefinite contracts or if they want to
do two-year or threeyear, but um, direct
hires should have an annual review uh,
on their performance. And if we're going
to give raises, it needs to be buried
based raises. and the public needs to
understand how we align those raises to
make sure they understand that we're
still protecting their tax dollars.
Okay.
Council member Orlando, then Vice Mayor.
So, um we talked about this the other
night, the National City Managers
um has their own process and they
recommend you do an annual review. They
have a process. They have several
examples. So, we're not recreating a lot
of things here. Um we used to do this in
the past uh to several of our to our
direct employees. It was written review.
Um the way we did it is we would uh
anything we said it would be put onto
one platform. Nobody would know who's
who said it. There's a lot of ways we
could do this that could help us get a
written contract, a written review like
anybody else. and then we can move
forward on working the logistics on what
needs to be redacted, things like that.
But I'd like to see us move forward at
least look into those uh those ideas and
other cities are doing it. We know that.
So there's benchmarks there. They're
under the same laws we are. So how do
they do it? I don't know. Maybe there's
a way that they figured it out in
Phoenix and Tempe and um so I'm sure
they're not smarter than we are. So
we'll figure it out.
Council member Poston, I want to make
sure that Vice Mayor Ellis. Oh, I'm
sorry, Vice Mayor Ellis. I'm I'm getting
caught up in the moment of thinking
about what people are saying, so I
apologize for that. Vice Mayor, no
problem. I was on standby because I had
my my mute off, so I realized that it
was my turn. Thank you again, mayor, for
allowing me to speak. I appreciate this
conversations that I have been having
with Council Member Harris concerning
this along the way and some other
members of the council. Uh is is it
true? It's true that we would like to
uphold everyone to a standard and that's
what we are trying to do tonight. We are
we are not voting whether we are going
to do this or not at this time. We are
voting on our ideas of telling staff to
go and work on putting something
together that we will have to sit down
and see if that ethical enough for us to
move forward with. And so I'm looking
forward to get something from staff that
will really reflect the nature of who
gender is, our culture, and everything
else that gender is all about. Thank
you. All right, Council Member Poston.
Thank you, Mayor. Um, in the private
sector, there's a saying that feedback
is a gift, and this is coming across, I
think, and it sounds like your concerns
are that this is meant to be punitive. I
think it's meant to set goals and
objectives and make sure that we are
saying what we want to measure and then
during the review measuring it and I
think that's pretty simple and
straightforward and this is done um
pretty much in every sector. So I I
think this is a pretty simple
straightforward item and I think we can
also um in addition to the ICMA like uh
council member Orlando had mentioned we
can also be guided by HR just like the
rest of city staff is. So this is pretty
standard procedure. So I I think it's a
positive thing and it should be seen as
a positive thing. Thank you. Yeah. I
just know with city manager we we in
essence when we craft our strategic plan
he's it's his job to to me I've always
seen that is that's his job description
it's what we say are the goals and
priorities of council but um I don't
want to be leaguer my part in this and
I'm I'm going to I'm going to vote yes
to bring it to the next where we can
kind of piece it apart so unless there's
further if someone would like to make a
motion or we could kind of proceed from
there. So mayor, I would like to make a
motion that we move forward with uh
giving staff direction on this item so
that they can bring it back to us. All
right, we have a motion by vice mayor.
Is there a second? Second. All right,
motion and a second on item number
18. Council, please vote. Vice Mayor
Ellis,
yes.
Council member Hawkins.
Motion carries unanimously. All right.
Thank
you. Um council on items number 19 and
20. We have a lot of comment cards and
there are also a few written cards. The
written cards are just basically saying
I am for this or I'm against this. And
depending on I was I will those will be
entered into the record if you would
like. I could also say um such and such
is for such and such is against these if
you would otherwise we will just do what
I traditionally do and just have them as
part of the record. So when we get there
you can uh give me direction on what
would you would like to proceed. We'll
start each with a staff presentation
uh questions comments back and forth
deliberation. turn it over to speaker
cards and um and then come back further
conversation and then uh if there is the
will to bring it to a vote. Does that
sound acceptable to council members like
we've done in the past? All right. Item
number 19, resolution number
5913, ordering and calling a special
election for the submission of proposed
amendments to the Chandler charter
regarding eligibility of persons to
serve consecutive terms as mayor and
council member. Uh Todd, I think that
would be you.
That would be
me. Thank you, mayor. Uh let's see if I
can Okay, I got my
presentation. Okay. Um item number 19
is resolution 5913.
5913 was drafted and placed on the
agenda for this meeting this evening
because the language of the charter is
ambiguous as to whether a person who has
served eight consecutive years as
council member is eligible to serve
additional terms as mayor without a
break in service.
The practice of
the city going back to 1972 when the
voters elected to impose term limits has
been that a person may serve two
consecutive terms as council member
followed by two consecutive terms as
mayor.
This is a slide of what it looks like if
anyone were to go on the web and search
for the municipal code and the city
charter and come to article 2 section
2.01. We are going to focus on
subsection
E. Copies of this section were provided
to the public and out in the
lobby. Subsection E and this is just the
highlighted portion we're going to focus
on.
No person shall be eligible to be
elected to the office of council member
for more than two consecutive terms or
to the office of mayor for more than two
consecutive terms or to more than a
consecutive combination of same. A
person elected to two consecutive terms
as a council member or two consecutive
terms as mayor or a combination of same
as above said forth should not shall not
be able eligible to hold either office
again until four years have
elapsed. The section goes on and has
what we're not going to necessarily
focus on, but it has some outdated
language and some language that's in
conflict with another part of the
charter. And uh I'll take questions on
that in just a moment. But going to the
history, the election history for this
section of the
charter. It has been put to the voters
quite a few times.
And we summarized this and we gave the
details of the election history in uh a
handout that was available to the public
in the
lobby. But as you'll see at different
times the uh length of the term and the
term limits have been presented to the
voters. If it is the desire of council
to continue the practice of a person
that a person may serve two consecutive
terms as council member followed by two
consecutive terms as
mayor, then council may propose an
amendment to address the ambiguity
clarifying that a person may
serve up to 16 consecutive years.
This is uh this prop this is the
proposal in resolution
5913 a subsection
E that no person shall be eligible to be
elected to a combination of the offices
of council member and mayor for more
than 16 consecutive
years. A person who's elected to two
consecutive terms as council member or
two consecutive terms as mayor shall not
be eligible to hold the same office
again until four years have elapsed
since the end of the last term served. A
person who is elected and served 16
consecutive years in a combination of
the offices of council member and mayor
shall not be eligible to hold either
office again until four years have
elapsed since the end of the last term
served. That is a proposed amendment.
Also to the proposed amendment is to
strike through
some outdated language is to clean up
the rest of section
E questions.
Uh, council member questions for
Ton Council member Hawkins.
Hi, Ton. I have a couple of questions in
um looking at the proposed amendment. I
I don't know if it's addressed somewhere
else, but I did have a question. How do
appointments feed into this amendment?
This amendment is only if elected. So
that doesn't affect any of the 16-year
verbiage that is identified on here. It
the verbiage is for the 16 consecutive
year limit is for someone who has been
elected. Okay. To the term of to two
terms as council member, two terms as
mayor. And do we have that identified
then
um somewhere else in the charter that
already would allow that? I'm I'm just
concerned that would there be additional
gray area if it's not addressed
somewhere
related to appointments or two
appointments and then feeding into the
Yes. So if they were appointed into a
position and then followed by two terms
of council, two terms of mayor or vice
versa.
um through the mayor, council member
Hawkins, it would not the an
appointed time of of office would not be
counted in an elected as an elected
term. Okay. This in this amendment.
Okay. Thank you. Um and then my other
question was I saw that there was the
removal of the um resignation verbiage.
Was there a reason why we chose to do
that? Yes, the mayor council member
Hawkins that is in conflict with another
part of the charter. So another section
of the charter uh it states that to if
you want if you're in the middle of your
term as a council member, you want to
run for mayor, you need to resign to run
for mayor. The conflict is that it the
provision that's been proposed to be
stricken states that if you resign, you
cannot run for office of mayor or
council member for two elections. that's
in conflict because another provision
says you can resign to run for mayor. I
see. Okay. Thank you.
So, just following up on her question
about appointments, I I think I might
have been the last person appointed back
in 2008 when I ran. I was unsuccessful
and ran again. So, there was it added a
year. But have we ever had anyone
appointed more than um more than a year
or
two that you you guys are aware? Yeah.
So it it doesn't affect the elected. It
just for my case it added um an
additional year as an appointee but not
necessarily uh you know to the overall
scheme of that. This would just address
elected
mayor. That's correct. Okay. Additional
questions or comments? Mayor Council
member Poston.
Thank
you. Colin, could you give kind of a
background of how we got here? I know
this has happened fairly recently. Can
you kind of walk through the process?
Uh through the mayor, council member
Poston, you want me to walk you through
the process of how it came to this
meeting or the history of the election?
The Yeah. No, you you covered the
history of the election and the charter
very well. Thank you. It's really more
how we are all here today. Correct. Um
the uh city attorney received a legal
opinion from an outside elections lawyer
that the I think we need to go back a
little bit. Apologize. That was that
like where did where did it begin?
Because why did she why was she looking
at this issue? It was brought up I
believe by some residents
through the mayor. Council member
Poston. I am not aware of that. I
apologize. And we'll just speak to what
you're aware of. That's fine. Yeah.
There was a question that was and I want
to be careful
because I would be speaking on behalf of
the city attorney who's not not here
today. So, my understanding is that a
question was raised as to
whether a council member who has serve
served two four-year terms can run for
mayor and then run, which is the history
of what we have done in this in the
city. And that question was put out to
an outside elections attorney. And that
elections attorney came back and and
this is in the city council's memo um
with a legal opinion. Um, Miss Miss
Christina Worerther appining that under
the existing city charter language, a
person who has served eight consecutive
years as a council member is not
eligible to serve an additional term as
mayor or council member until he or she
has a break in service for at least four
years. Other lawyers have reviewed this
language and come to differing opinions.
That's why we've we I'm very much
emphasizing that the charter language is
ambiguous can be subject to different
interpretations. Okay. Thank you.
And I know I I still have
a we talked earlier and I brought up
that it's a is there still to me this
isn't perfect. There is a scenario where
um either council member Harris or Ellis
after serving eight years on council
with this new language could sit down
for two years and then run for mayor and
then concurrent right after that run for
council. So there even with this new
language, it would allow
uh some council members to run for
council, sit down too, then run for
mayor and then run for council. So a
total of 24 years in 26 years. And I I I
don't know how likely that is. Um but
but again, there's there's still some
uh potential issues with this not
resolved with this particular language.
And I I don't have a solution to that
quite honestly because I I I don't
personally don't have a problem with
someone serving their eight years and
then if they're off cycle wanting to
run. But seemingly the loophole is that
they could then continue um for an
additional 16 under the concurrent
language. And I've thought about it
since we talked when I when I raise this
up and I don't have a good solution to
that but I it's just in there in case it
gets raised later. Does that make sense?
one of under this current language. So,
mayor, council Orlando, thank you. Can
you click the current language up again,
please?
PowerPoint slide, but
the current language today. Yeah. What
you're what you're potentially voting
on, right? Oh, the the proposed
amendment the one you're council member
Orlando that this would be it.
I think it's pretty clear. It says
person who elected and served 16
consecutive years accommodation office
council mayor shall not be able to hold
the office until the last term sir four
years. Consecutive means tied together.
It doesn't mean that there is a break.
That's my there's two there's two parts
up there
though. It just in this language, it
just means they could not serve another
four years as council, but they could
and and I think they should be able to
run from council and um be able to run
for mayor, but the consecutive would be
if they then chose to run for may to go
back to council is that they could have
that additional 16
years. That was that's my point. I don't
I don't see that. attorney. Do you see
that in this?
Can you repeat the question? Council
member Orlando, I apologize. I said, do
you see that in this language?
Did a count that a is a question whether
a mayor could run for another could
someone stop at 16 years and then do
another 16 years? Is that the question?
No.
My I think tell me if I'm wrong, but my
my first raising with this is eight
years on council. Finishing your term,
stepping down and then running for
mayor. That's not consecutive or unless
to me consecutive means that they're
tied together with no break and then
being able to continue to do 16
consecutive years. Mayor, that's
correct. Because if you're if you're
elected to
to the same again for four. So you have
you have
consecutive let me back up. You have two
um a person who is elected and served 16
consecutive years in a combination of
the offices would not be eligible.
They'd have to sit out for four years,
take a a break in service of four years
since the end of their last term.
A person should not be eligible um was
elected to two consecutive terms as
council member or two consecutive terms
as mayor should not be eligible to hold
the same office again for four more
years. They have to sit out for four
years to be to be run. If you're a
council member, you have to sit out for
four years after two consecutive terms
to run for council member again. If
you've been
mayor, you have to sit out for two
consecutive After you've had two
consecutive terms as mayor. you have to
sit out for four years before you can
run for mayor again. And then the next
sentence is to address if you run a
combination
consecutive two terms as council member
two terms as mayor then that person must
sit out for four years
and mayor still yeah please proceed. Did
the um attorney, the election attorney
that we hired, did they look at this?
I see a yes there. Yes, you did. All
right. So, that that is election
attorney uh who is very well known
judiciary and that attorney looked at
this and said, "This is correct what
we're trying to do here."
Yes, you did. Mayor. Okay. Thank you,
Vice Mayor.
Thank you. If I may go back um to the
question that uh council member Fston
asked um from the beginning of this, I
would like to know because I didn't find
out about um the attorney being uh
getting advice from the attorney and
going outside for counsel and all those
things until Wednesday prior to the
Friday when we make the the
the discussion to have a meeting on
Monday. I didn't find out anything about
that until uh Wednesday night. I would
like to know which um which council
member because we are allowed to do that
to go to the attorney with information
and request that she looks into things.
I would like to find out who did that.
Um do we have it on
record? Who gave the direction to the
attorney to go to outside consult?
mayor for that. I didn't answer that
question. It would be to you would be
something to be put to the city
attorney. She is not here right now.
It's also calls for a privileged
response. I don't think it's appropriate
to provide that answer in this public
setting. Okay. All right. I appreciate
that. Thank you. The next question that
I have is um since we have president as
you have been so clearly uh stated and
you show us the the all the previous
mayors and uh council members and
everybody who have run the same way all
the way back to Mayor U pay who have run
consecutively the the 16 the the eight
and then come back and do two with
mayors and not the same office because
of that. Could we continue with the same
way while we wait to go and go back and
do a total review of the charter? Will
that put us into any type of litigation
or any type where the city will incur
any problems if we continue because of
all those years of presidents that we
have and allow any council members
currently who are terming out who would
like to run for mayor to run for mayor
and then give us an opportunity to have
public input sitting down with people
put a committee together to review
everything and then put it on the ballot
at the same time that everybody else is
going to be running. Will that put
jeopardi jeopardize the city in any way?
That's the question that I have at this
time through the mayor mayor, vice mayor
Ellis. That that is that again is that
does call for legal advice.
What I can what I can say today is that
the conclusion is that it is ambiguous
and so if the council wishes to address
that ambiguity and p propose a charter
amendment to go to the voters we present
this resolution to do that. It is an
option of the council to put it into
committee and
to and to see what the result is there
if it's if it's not
amended at the No. Well, what I'm saying
is that the committee will not be making
recommendation to us whether to amend or
not. The committee will will look into
the charter as a whole because this
charter has not really pretty much been
doing a thorough review since for 65
years. And so to peace meal it that
that's my uh view right now and doing
little piece here as we could see it has
done so many different time to
accommodate different people that are
running and different way. That's what
brought us to this place right now. Had
we really spent the time over the years
to to look and get public input and get
everybody involved to thoroughly do a
good job with this charter, we wouldn't
be where we are right now. And it seems
like by us trying to put something on so
quickly right now is going to put us in
the same position. So what I'm asking
you is legal will this allowing
presidents to take to take uh place
right now to allow let's say for example
council member Orlando that's pull paper
to run for mayor that we continue to
allow council member Lindo to run and
then still find a committee together to
put the charter and everything together
so in order for us to review that and
put it in on the ballot in 2026 six.
Will that jeopardize anything in the
city? Because I don't see how it would
be because we've been doing this for so
long.
Mayor, Vice Mayor Ellis,
we cannot opine on whether it will put
in jeopardy a particular council
member's run for office. And I I did
hear that. Is that right?
So we can't opine on that on individuals
running for office um because of the
city attorney represents the city of
Chandler and the whole city council as a
whole.
So as far as the precedent and what that
creates and whether or not there would
be litigation also cannot opine on
whether that would happen and what what
the chances are of any kind of challenge
to a to an individual running for
office.
Okay. So, what I'm hearing from you to
now, it's either we put it on the ballot
now or we we wait for 2026. Either way,
a decision has to be made.
The council may vote this resolution
down. That is an option.
I'm not asking whether we voted up or
down. I'm just asking you the two
options that we currently have.
The two options. Yes, there are two
options. Council um excuse me, Vice
Mayor Ellis. There there's the option to
pass the resolution. Well, there there
are a few options. There's an option to
do nothing. There's an option to to pass
resol resolution 5913.
There's an there's an option to put it
to a committee to look at charter
amendments.
Well, you just give me gave me gave me
three options. You said do nothing.
That's what I was discussing earlier by
saying if we do
nothing, you know what will the
ramification be? You said that we can't
do that and then now you gave it to me
as an option again.
Vice Mayor Ellis and through the mayor,
my apologies. There there is an option
to do
nothing. The me the the resolution was
brought forward to address an ambiguity,
but the the
resolution if it doesn't pass, then the
council is choosing to do nothing or the
council can also put it into a
committee. If if the council creates a
committee to look at charter amendments,
but the then the council does not is not
required to
do to do to have a committee and it's
not required to pass this resolution.
It's not is not required to address the
ambiguity in the charter.
Oh, okay. So, I mean on Monday night for
some reason I didn't hear that part.
Um, Council Francis, I just want to to
your point because um I'm reading here
with the new language on here and it
says, "A person who was elected two
consecutive terms as a council member or
two consecutive terms as a mayor shall
not be eligible to hold the same office
again until four years have elapsed
since the end of the last term served. A
person who is elected and serves 16
consecutive years in a combination of
the offices of council member and mayor
shall not be eligible to hold either
office again until four years have
lapsed since the end of their last term
served. So I think that answers your
question there now. No, because to me
consecutive means no break and if there
was a serving eight years as a council
member and because um a council member
is off cycle that that the the shot
clock starts over again because they've
taken a break not consecutively and then
running for mayor starts the 16-year
consecutive meaning there's no break
between that's that's my question with
this language. So the first eight years
are not consecutively tied with the
additional 16 in my understanding
because it's not consecutive.
Consecutive means you take no break
unless unless u a dictionary can can
educate males
wise. I'm just saying I'm I'm not happy
with the lang. I I just think there's
things in here that we haven't fully
addressed is my point. and um and
whether again that gets uh added as as
you all know I've I've uh sent you two
emails inviting you to um give me names
to start a charter revision that with
your continuence we will I will I'll put
it on the agenda for next month and then
according to our constitution have the
opportunity to provide your names as
part of that. So, I'm I'm fully ready
and raring to start a a charter review
committee with people that you would
choose to be on there. But I it's still
again, it's it's another I just think
this language we're not totally there
yet. That's my point. It might get us a
step further,
but it's we're just I'm not convinced
we're there. So,
any additional comments before we invite
the audience to speak? Um, Council
Member Hawkins, just for clarification,
I know the agenda went out yesterday.
Can you tell me when the uh amendment
proposals went out as well? Was that at
the same time? And what time? Through
the mayor, Council Member Hawkins. It
was at the same time. So, 24 hours.
That's correct.
Um, Council Member Harris. Yeah. Thank
you so much, Ton. Just have a few
questions in regards to this item. Um, I
understand. So, mayor, I understand what
you're saying that if there is um what
does consecutive look like? Ton, did you
get a chance to talk to the election
attorney in regards to this particular
language, the one that actually said
that that it's supposed to be eight
years on, four years off? Did you get a
chance to talk to election attorney?
This this language was was ran by the
elections attorney.
she um opined that it is sound as far as
did we did I talk to her about different
scenarios? No. Okay. So, does the
election attorney the election attorney
has already reviewed this language that
we're proposing to potentially um vote
yes or no on to put on a resolution?
Council member Harris, that's correct.
The language as it stands, it remains
unclear. Um historically it has been you
know eight years basically eight years
as a council member and typically you
move on to be you know if you have
ambitions you can move on to be the
mayor for the following eight years
which means there's 16 consecutive terms
16 consecutive years and then they're
shut off supposed to happen right
correct and I think um the concern is
that if a person who's in the off cycle
if a council members in the off cycle
and they take a two-year break. Um, not
by mere forcing, but just they're taking
a two-year break and then they want to
pick back up and and run for um, let's
say the mayor or seat or whatever it may
be. Does that language address that gap?
Council member Harris, that language
does not address that gap.
the if if with an off year and a
two-year
um break in service would mean that
there would not be a 16-year
prohibition. Okay. So, I guess then the
following question is that if if a
council member in the f the future
council members if they run for eight
years, they win, they're in the off
cycle, there's a two-year break, then
they decide to let's say they decide to
run for mayor.
Um, is there a question of whether they
can then go from mayor back to coun, you
know, serve for mayor for eight years
and then go back to council to serve for
eight years?
The language does not address does not
specifically say address that. However,
because there has been a two-year gap,
they could run they're now they're
prohibited from running for mayor.
They've turned out they could run for
council member.
Okay. So the language basically so
basically what we're talking about is
the so because council members just for
everyone understanding council members
run there's three council members that
run at a time every two years and then
once those um council members run for
those for that time there is a gap that
they could have like they can be in off
mayor oral cycle and if that's what
you're talking about that's kind of what
you're talking about that can we can We
can we address that? Is that addressable
through the mayor? Council member
Harris. This this council may address
that. There there could be a motion to
amend the language that's proposed in
this resolution this or at a at a
different time, but that could be
obviously that could be addressed. This
was to the the proposed language was to
address what was ambiguous and to
reflect the the historical practice and
what um for the 16 consecutive years in
in the city of Chandler and what's been
going on since 1972. So it's to reflect
that. But yes, the answer is yes. Okay.
And then again, I just I just looked
this up. cone. Consecutive means
following one another in uninterrupted
succession of order. So uninterrupted is
consecutive as
language. So mayor, council member,
mayor, I I But actually, Vice Mayor, let
me go real quick. Yeah. Yeah. You're
interpreting it differently than the
mayor's understanding it. Is that
correct? Is that what I heard?
If I understand the through the mayor
and council member posted, if I
understand the mayor correctly, the
question was whether or not somebody who
has a two-year break in service between
council member and mayor could then go
back and run for council member after
terming out as mayor. Correct? And the
answer is that under the amendment, if
the amendment were to pass on the
language the charter, that is correct
because it's not a consecutive 16 years.
The prohibition is only for a
consecutive 16 years. You'd have to take
a four fouryear break in service before
you could run for either office again.
If there was a two-year break in between
going from council member to mayor, then
there you don't have the language does
not prohibit that that person from
running. It it prohibits them from
running for mayor, but it would not
prohibit them from running for
council because there wouldn't be a 16
consecutive year
issue.
Correct. Thank you, Vice Mayor.
Thank you. Um but mayor if I may go back
to the a question that uh council member
uh OD Harris asked concerning the
attorneys
uh which which are election attorneys at
this time. How many of them have we
consulted with? Because I heard you very
clearly, Miss Don, that you said that
you said there were many different um
views or position on the interpretation
of what they read on in the charter. How
many did we did we consult and how many
different opinion did we have?
Yes. Um through the mayor, vice vice
mayor. What that is a reference to is so
we have our
elections attorney, outside elections
attorney we consulted with. We have the
attorneys in the office of the city
attorney. We also received Yes. And then
the third category is we received
feedback from outside of that. We
received feedback from that that some
outside other attorneys who are not
attorneys for the city of Chandler have
a differing differing views.
And if I remember correctly, I even seen
someone who has an opinion who lives in
California also in one of the article
also had an opinion about it. So there
are many opinions and they defer with
each other concerning this. What
bringing me right back to my point that
I made because of such different
opinions so many different people have
an interpretation about it and I think
it's safe for us to say that we continue
with precedents and then we clean this
stuff seriously. We take the time and
clean this thing so that we never have
to come this way again.
Mayor, thank you
mayor. Council member Poston,
I have two questions. Under the current
under the current opinion of the city
attorney, can the mayor run for city
council? And under the new language, can
the mayor run for city council? And then
additionally, under the current opinion
of the city attorney, can council member
Orlando run for mayor? And under this
language, the new language, can council
member Orlando run for mayor? I think
that's pretty much what we're talking
about here.
The mayor, Council Member Poston,
the if I could clarify your question
because the opinion was received from an
outside attorney, Christina Worerther,
um the elections attorney. So what the
what the city attorney has concluded is
it's ambiguous and and that's in the
city council memo but this the outside
attorney who looked at this and said
that there is it there is a term limit
the mayor cannot run for council member
without sitting out of four years and um
and that there is an issue with a
council member running for four years.
I'd like to talk about the position of
mayor and council member versus
absolutely a person. Absolutely. And
because we're not going to pine on
whether um the undersod understood
that's that's a better approach. Thank
you. But she did um opine that that uh a
council member who has served two
consecutive four-year terms could not
would could not run for mayor without
taking a break in service. And great and
then I think what is could you go back
to what we've been doing for the last 50
years and the other council members who
have done that and then maybe please
give us an understanding of how heavily
we weigh precedent when it comes to law.
Sure. Mayor, council member Poston. Um
historically we've had we've had
um 16 consecutive years has not been an
issue. There was a 12 consecutive point
when the mayor was a two-year term mayor
position and and so 12 consecutive years
were allowed things language got flubbed
up and became ambiguous with some
changes to the what appears to be just
just the length of the term of a of the
mayor. Um, and other cities, so Mesa,
for example, has this 16-year
consecutive like cl like it's clear that
you can run for two terms, two four
years as council member and two four
years as mayor and have 16 consecutive
years and then you have to take a break
in service. This language that's being
proposed would align with the city of
Mesa and it would align with historical
practice of the city of
Chandler, which which has been 16
consecutive years of two terms as
council member, two terms as mayor. It's
a little bit of a tongue twister. And
and how heavily do we weigh president in
the terms of law? Well, president is
taken into account certainly by by
courts and by by public.
It's written by how interpret things are
interpreted in the charter just in
general. Yes. But as to as of today, we
have ambiguous language with multiple
opinions. And what we're trying to do
with this particular item is to get it
to the voters and to clarify their
intent, which
is from my understanding, we're going to
hear a little bit about the intent of
the voters in the previous
elections. Did did we do some research
on that the intent of the voters?
We uh council member Poston we presented
the the publicity pamphlets and then we
presented information on which we have
we we've dug through all of that. We
presented information uh summarizing
whether the vote is voters rejected or
approved certain charter amendments for
this particular section. Okay. What
they've done there. Okay. Thank you,
mayor. Vice Mayor,
thank you. If I may ask the attorney
again, let's go back to presidents
because I have done also my homework and
speaking with judges and whether in the
state of Arizona or outside of the state
of Arizona, the higher court, Supreme
Court make some phone calls the last
couple of days and in this case for
chancellor if president does not take
does not weigh very heavily, we would
have to go back to all the way to Mayor
Payne from the time when he ran and
consecutive ly with him, Mayor Don,
mayor uh Jay and currently the mayor
Hockey, meaning that every single thing
that they have done as mayors in their
tenures will have to be erased and we
would have to start uh from scratch
again. So this is how heavily precedence
is weighing in in this case for us to be
able to give the people of Chandler a
chance to go at this charter and do a
proper review for it. And that's where I
am really not struggling but I have a
concern that if president does not weigh
in this case then we will have to really
ask ourselves the question some real
deep questions.
have how have we been running this city
if residence doesn't really work and we
all agreed that it does and so therefore
we can continue as is give the people of
Chandler a chance to go through this
review pro process and then put it on
the ballot in 2026 without affecting
nobody and hurting the city in any way
for that matter and we can continue
doing that so that that's the part that
I would like you to weigh in.
Um, attorney
Don, Vice Mayor Ellis, um, through the
mayor. It's it would be speculative to
know if it went to committee what what
that would look like if it if the
charter is not amended at the end of
this year. And um but the precedent does
hold hold weight. It would you know if
if if something were challenged in
court, the president has part of a
factor that a court would consider. Um
that's as almost as much as I can say
without completely speculating. Um, but
it certainly is within the city
council's um, discretion to send this
to, as I've said before, to a committee
and and not pass this resolution today.
Council, are we ready to listen to I've
got quite a few speaker cards on this.
Would you anything else to say before we
invite the audience?
Just right before we go to comments,
um, Attorney Ta, who prepared the
language for
today? Uh, Council Member Harris, that
was a collaborative effort with the city
attorney and with the elections attorney
and myself and, uh, another assistant
attorney, a couple of other assistant
attorneys in the office. It was
um it was a collaborative effort and it
was thoroughly reviewed by licensed
attorney because my my my concern is
even if even no matter where we go with
this, if it goes to a subcommittee where
there stays, my concern is that it still
will be attorneys that will have the
final say to look at the language
because that's who we're paying. And
that's what we're looking even if we can
open up the charter and say these are
all the wonderful things we want from
Disneyland and we put it there at the
end of the day the attorneys will be the
one to say this is the language this is
the intent this is the interpretation
and that's kind of what I'm hearing
today is that our attorneys are licensed
attorneys because if they are writing
language that um the intent is to do the
very opposite then that mean they would
not be necessarily doing their job. Um
and then the historical precedence has
been 16 years on, four years off. That's
been the historical precedence. And um
you said that that does carry weight in
a court of law. I'm I am
um I'm I'm not a
lawyer. Did not go to school to be a
lawyer, but I do depend on the people I
pay to be the lawyer. And I think that
over time, what we've seen is 16 years
on, four years off. That's kind of been
the goal. for four terms
consecutive, one four-year break. And
that's kind of what I've seen over the
years. So, I kind of want to weigh that
with the fact that I'm not an attorney,
but I am trying to use reason to
understand the development of these
events to make sure that if we are
insinuating other things other than the
fact that um historical precedent may
take place or not. I'm not a lawyer to
say that. I'm not a judge to say what
that could or could not be. I just
wanted to make sure that we're
understanding that our the attorneys put
this together, this language together to
make sure that it can go to the to the
ballot and and that's kind of what I
want to address. Is that correct or do
you want to add anything to that?
Council member Harris, that's that's
correct. I mean, the language though is
to be, you know, what what the language
ultimately is in a resolution
um to go to the voters to vote on for
amending the charter or if it's a
committee that then goes to the council
or um members of the public were to
bring forth a petition to amend the
charter. those the the role of but but
in the role of this attorney's office is
to reflect what the council wants to do
with it with amending the charter and
put to put the voters. So we we we give
the advice on whether or not this
language gets us out of the ambiguity,
whether this language or any other
language gets us out of the ambiguity
gets to the purpose of what the charter
um what the council wants the charter to
say or what and the voters to vote on
the council. Let me you know that I mean
putting it to the voters to vote on what
the charter um should say. And what we
hope to do is is to let you know when it
aligns or does not align with um
election laws, you know, other Arizona
state laws and other parts of the
charter. So, do we So, based on your
analysis and based on our attorneys and
our group of attorneys that have come to
put this together, um the city attorney
has reviewed this language and feels
that it does it does answer the question
of ambiguity or it does specifically
says this is what it is. Is that
correct? That's correct. Okay. Thank
you.
and council member a resident re or
resident review committee their task is
to be presented with ambiguity and
inconsistency and then to make
recommendations to the council legal's
position is to make sure that whatever
recommendations are made that they're
legal that they stand. So, it's not it's
not either or. It's just having more
eyes on it to and citizens in the
community to be able to weigh in on
whatever's presented with them. But
ultimately, we pay legal to make sure
that that that they don't put us into a
bad spot. Yeah. And that's kind of what
I'm saying, mayor, is that even if we
even when um and I'm wait I'm I'm going
to wait to listen to to all the comments
that today. But what I am saying that
even when we put together the
subcommittee, the subcommittee would
then still have to go back to the same
attorney team to interpret and write the
stuff the same items that we have today.
It's going to go back to the same
people. So whether we take the time to
to do that and that's fine if that's
what we want if council that's what we
end up doing today but I am saying that
it's going back to the same people and
so I think that we're setting a
precedent to let people know um all the
mayors before then all the council
members before then all those that was
involved before then it was very clear
that the combination of the language
went right back to the same city
attorney that we have today and whether
we collectively say all these
individuals were wrong. I've had an
opportunity to talk to so many of the
previous mayors and council members and
things like that and they have been able
to weigh in and I think our precedent
that we're setting today is that it we
put a hundred people together. Guess
what's going to happen? It's going back
to the same legal team who's going to
then say we're going to cipher out what
you're trying to give. So, I'm just
trying to make sure we understand
whether we take a week, whether we take
five months, whether we take a year is
going back to the same city attorney
with the same team who you're talking to
today to make the same way. And
unfortunately, because I'm not an
attorney, and I'm sure we're not I don't
know, we're going to have a hundred
attorneys looking at this together. I
mean, one thing I know about attorneys,
boy, they can find an angle about
anything. So, I just want to make sure
that we're very clear and I'm looking
forward to the comments to come forward
so that way I can hear what my
constituents are saying they want me to
do. Thanks, Mayor.
Yeah. And I I would just say that I'm
neither attorney either, but as I looked
at this language this afternoon, I found
a loophole. And I think more eyes on
anything are better. A loophole that our
our legal department did not see. And
neither am I an attorney, but I just
think the more eyes you put on anything,
you get perspective and the same legal
team were then able to bring things
together. So, mayor, we can clear up
your concern with it with an amendment
to this resolution to clear up your
concern. Um, but overall to look at it
and say that our our team that we paid
to to do this, our legal team paid to do
this to look at it and say there's
something that we need to kind of look
more at. Um, everyone is invited to look
at the language. It was posted um for
the public to see um the language as
well. In fact, constituents did email in
with the language and things like that.
So I just want to make sure that it's
clear that everyone has the same
information I have right here on the
diets. Everyone has the same information
and some have it in front of their hands
today. So I just wanted to make sure
that if there's a concern about that
particular area then we can make an
amendment to change that language to
make sure it comes back with that or we
can look at that directly and and and
allow the voters to look at this
themselves if that if that's what we're
going to do today. Okay. Council, you're
ready to um listen to folks. All right.
Um in the order that these were
presented to me, in the order that I'm
going to call you up. So um when you
come up, you have up to three minutes to
talk. Please stick on target of this
specific
uh item. It's also not a question of uh
personalities up here in the days. It's
uh please reflect your comments to the
specific. As I mentioned, you have up to
three minutes. it is just as valid to
say I agree with this person and rather
than articulate uh if you're saying the
exact same thing. Um when the light is
green um I invite you to state your name
and address for the record. When it
turns yellow it's time to start wrapping
up your comments. And when it's red it's
time to be done. So we're all on the
same page with all of that. And with
that, uh, the first person is Mr.
Bulock.
And please make it easy on me when you
see it turns red. Please, you're you're
about a sentence away. Is that it? We're
ready. There you go. Okay. Mayor,
council, thanks for uh listening to us.
Uh, I'd like to say first that I did,
uh, send you an email, too, and most of
my comments are in that.
Uh, I see our city charter as kind of
like our bylaws. In every organization
I've been in, the board can never change
the
bylaws. If you want to amend the bylaws
or you want to suspend the rules, you
have to send it to the body. And that's
why I think the voters should be
involved in this. A couple of members
have stated that maybe we build a
committee and revamp the whole thing. If
the thing is 64 years old and it needs
to be looked at it, why are we putting a
little band-aid on a leak when the whole
pipe needs
replacing? We just need to move forward
with that.
Um, I think also
that voting on the
resolutions might be a little self-
serving.
And I think that if you're voting on the
resolutions and it impacts your current
or future can your current office or
your future candidacy, I I think that um
maybe you should recuse yourself from
voting on this particular issue. I think
there's a conflict of interest there.
Um, I'm hoping that you'll do the right
thing and that uh that we can just move
forward. Uh, I disagree with all of
these resolutions. I I they need to be
sent to the voters
and I just
uh I don't know. I I'm just not happy
with with the way this has come down.
It's very unfortunate that we're in this
position and I know it negatively
impacts some of you. Um, but that can't
be the issue for the city and for the
citizens. Any questions for me? I'm
done. And and again, council, if you
have questions since this is scheduled,
but to be clear, the voters do vote on
this. So it's just what do they vote on
because this will be anything of a
charter change goes to voters to vote up
or down. So
council tonight or not is merely sending
someone some uh items to the voters and
then they ultimately will vote up or
down on it. So tonight is voting on what
is sent to the voters. Correct. And when
is it sent to the voters? The next
election would be November November 4th
I believe. or if it goes to a charter
revision committee. Um since the
language needs to be set by the 9th of
January and we will not have a charter
revision committee in place the next
election possibility or next election
afterwards. And what do we do until
then?
Yeah, we're you've said your comments so
we're just dialoguing. We we operate on
precedent on u practice.
All right, council member Poston. Um
there was an item about um council
members affected city attorney. Could
you I I'm not going to ask that
question. And what I want to know or
maybe to clarify my understanding, my
understanding is that there are only
three people up here on this dis who
wouldn't be affected um by this lack of
change and that ambiguity and that would
be council member Hawkins, council
member inus and myself in terms of if
that current um language from the
outside council would be that a two-term
council member couldn't run for mayor,
that would mean that would leave council
member Hawkins if she chose to resign to
run, but um council member Encus and I
if because our terms would align. Is
that correct? That's what we've talked
about. I just want to
clarify. Council member Poston, there's
there is your I did not follow your
question because I was thinking you were
we've had we've had discussions there
was a there was a question about recusal
and about them recusing and and I don't
believe that's the case at all when we
when we're talking about elections and
council members we're all affected
eventually. So um but in that current
understanding, the way I have been given
to believe is that the beneficiaries of
the current understanding of that
amendment or of that that charter
language would mean that in terms of the
next election of availability to run, it
would be it would be myself and council
member inus that would be because we are
only one-term council members would be
eligible to run for mayor.
which I don't want to do. I I I just to
clarify that is not my intent. I have no
intention. Um but I stand to benefit and
I still see this as wrong and I just
want to make sure that my understanding
is correct. Thank you.
Through the mayor, council member
Poston, the city attorney has not opined
that about anyone being eligible or
ineligible to run for office after they
finish serving the term they are in
right now. We have an opinion from an
outside elections attorney. We have the
city attorney concluding there is
ambiguity. And so there is no legal
conflict in this count in anyone on this
council voting on this resolution.
Okay.
And council member, I would if we were
actually making the decision rather than
deferring something to the voters, I
it's a it's a it's a different thing in
my in my understanding as well. And
mayor, thank you for that and thank you
for that clarification that we're not
today. We're not voting on something
that's going into the charter. We're
voting on something that's going to go
out to the public for them to decide if
something's going to go into the charter
because we swore our oath to the charter
and then the voters are the one that
takes the charter and they decide to put
whatever language they want and we come
back and we put the language in per the
city attorney and per the vote. So,
we're not voting on charter language
that's going to change today. We're
voting on something that could
potentially go on the ballot in November
for you to vote on to decide if you want
the language to stay unclear or clear.
And that's basically what you will be
doing in November.
All right. Next speaker, um, Mr. Minkus,
please come. State your name and address
for the record. You have up to three
minutes to share. Before you start my
time, I appreciate if I have an
opportunity to just ask a question for
clarification. I've heard everything.
That's part of your comments, I think,
sir. So, please not part of my comments
because I've been very confused by what
is the current law or the current uh
charter and when did it become
effective? I Let's start the clock
because this is your time to and we can
respond to that. Well, if you'd respond
to it before I make my presentation, I'd
appreciate that.
What was your question again? What is
the current charter law on this and when
did it become effective?
The current charter has been in
existence since 72. Some of this
language has been nebulous since 72.
um it's changed and altered through the
years, but the language in combination
thereof has been around since 72. Okay.
But the current language that they said
that the attorney that reviewed this who
very clearly stated a person has to
serve eight consecutive years as a
council member is not eligible to serve
an additional term as mayor or council
member until they've had a four-year
break.
So, it's your time. Keep going. If
that's true, when you became mayor, you
were in council for nine years according
to your b your your information here.
How did you become mayor?
If you want me to answer your question
in the middle of your comment possibly,
I can. Okay. Well, my comment then is as
a channel resident in legal uh Arizona
registered voter, I'm attending this
meeting tonight uh that council not vote
on a resolution 5913 tonight. Uh but
rather resolve and to hold a special
election, a special election as soon as
possible. Uh so the voters both u um
in-person voting as well as in mail
voting voters decide on such a change to
the charter as warranted and desired.
Well, we know that both mayor and
council have done some good job uh and
some positive things for Chandler. If
any prior mayoral or council elections
were not then and are not now in
compliance with the current city
charter, then with respect to the
voters, procedural justice and due
process of law should be taken
immediately to correct that violation
and legitimize that office with
qualified representative. as this issue
along with other city lawsuits uh are
that are currently pending can have a
negative impact on the city's bond
ratings that may impact the taxpayers in
the city budget. This special election
should be done immediately as soon as
possible and the uh resolution 5914 can
also be included with that. That's all I
have to say. Thank you. Um Tom question.
Yeah. Um Sam um um he meant u Mr.
Lincoln, thank you um for sharing your
comments. He mentioned a special
election. How much would a special
election cost the taxpayers?
Mayor Harky. Um, Council Member Harris,
the cost for a special election when we
run an election that's outside of the
even numbered years in August and
November.
Um, the cost is approximately
$471,000 right now and that includes the
amount that we spent or um give to the
county and the amount for the publicity
pamphlet. During a special election,
if other um questions are on the ballot
from other jurisdictions, like if the
school board runs an election or if the
county puts an item on, that can reduce
that cost, that 471,000. We don't really
know what how much that reduces until,
you know, we know who's on the ballot
because we're paying um per voter. So,
if we share some of those voters, then
that cost is reduced. So, as it is right
now, a special election not held in
August or November of even numbered
years is approximately $471,000.
Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mr. Mis.
Thank you.
Next one up, Lisa
Esi. Please state your name and address
for the record. You have up to three
minutes to share your thoughts.
Thank you, Mayor and Council, for
allowing me to speak this evening. My
name is Lisa ESI and I live at 2301 East
Indian Wells Drive in Chandler. Um, I am
very perplexed by a lot of the
information I'm hearing tonight. Um, I'm
going to go ahead and read my comments
so I can be clear. As a nearly 40-year
resident of Chandler, I'm saddened to
learn that the city charter, our guide
to good local governance, has been
misinterpreted and consequently
overlooked for the past 50 years. This
document written for the people and
essentially by people should be clear,
concise and not open to
interpretation. Unfortunately, both the
section that is in question in the
charter and the pro proposed to
amendment to fix it is anything
but. It would be extremely unfortunate
to rush a vote to amend the city charter
when said amendment is poorly written
and open to more interpretation.
Mayor Harky should immediately call for
a subcommittee consisting of city
residents and local attorneys to review
the full city charter and propose with
clarifying language proper amendments
that will withstand legal
challenges. The residents of Chandler
deserve better than what has transpired.
We are a city of smart, engaged, and
civically minded individuals and
families that have expressed faith in
our elected officials through our votes.
I call on each of you, our elected
officials, to prioritize public
transparency and to put forth good faith
efforts into solving these issues.
Please vote no on the proposed amendment
to place to be placed on the ballot in
November of 2025 and look to having it
placed on the ballot in
2026 after a full review by a
subcommittee. Please vote yes to support
this subcommittee to properly vet and
propose clarifying amendment changes in
proper time frame, one that is not
rushed to the sole benefit of any
particular candidate, but for the good
of the city and its future. Thank you.
Thank
you, mayor, council member. Um I don't
know. I just want to ask a
question. Um in the previous pass of the
charter changes, have there been
underneath other council members, have
there been a such a subcommittee in the
previous past? Did they do you know when
it's specifically dealing with election,
was there like a a community
subcommittee that that did happen?
Yes. So the the previous language that
addressing elections there were I was on
a subcommittee I think in 94 appointed
by Mayor Tibshriny for example to look
at the charter changes including the
elections as part of that and there's
that list that was presented there's
quite a few and council member Orlando
has a longer window than I do in the
city. We mayor, please to answer your
question, we've done it both ways. We've
done it from the das like we're doing
tonight. We've made made changes to the
charter or at least recommended changes
went to the voters. Voters voted up or
down. We've also done it the other way
as well. Both are successful and both go
back to what has to be done to the
voters. The voters will decide this.
That's the key right now. So, we've done
it both ways. Both were successful in
getting it to the to the ch to the to
the voters to vote.
Council member Hawkins, quick question
on what you mentioned as far as that
we've provided this in the past with
both ways. Has it ever been done in such
a rush scenario though? Um obviously
we're in a tight window as far as what
we have to be um hitting in order to
make that November election. Is that
something that you're familiar with if
we've we've ever done that or have we
had a little bit more time to to really
vet it through? There's been again both
ways. It was in fact one time it was on
a consent agenda to extend terms. So
yeah, I mean a consent agenda tells me
that we're trying to hide something. So
this is an action. It was
published. So yes, it's been both ways.
And on the consent agenda, we I forced
to go to action so we could discuss it.
So yeah, thank you.
All right. Next person, Sher
Johnson. Please state your name and
address for the record and you have up
to three minutes to share your thoughts.
Thank you. My name is Sheri Johnson. I
am at 3627 East Agave Road and I serve
as a community leader for legislative
district 12 which includes parts of
Chandler. I'm here tonight to voice my
strong support for resolution 5913 which
calls for a special election to consider
amendments to the city charter. The city
attorney's request for clarification
raises concerns about long-standing
precedent and invites the question why
now? We are here today because verbiage
in this section of the charter regarding
consecutive terms is being called into
question. By amending the charter, we
have the opportunity to preserve the
historical practice of continuous
service, uphold the voters's
long-standing support for term limits,
and ensure that committed public
servants are not unfairly penalized by
ambiguous language.
Placing this clarification on the
November 2025 election ballot is a
necessary step to provide voters with
clear guidance without additional cost
to taxpayers before the 2026 election
for city council. It will help the city
avoid unnecessary and expensive
litigation and importantly prevent any
perception of partisan interference. For
these reasons, I respectfully urge all
council members to support resolution
5913. Thank you. Thank you,
Mayor. Can we ask the audience not to
applaud in between or not to make noise
and comments? Okay. Thank
you. Next up
is Dwayne
Lman. Mr. Libman, you of all people know
the drill.
Dwayne Lman, 2301 West Palamino Drive,
Chandler in the Orange Tree
neighborhood. Uh, I read the entire
verbiage uh text of resolution
5913 and exhibits A and B. And I support
this. Thank you. Thank
you.
Efficiency. Next up
is Joe
Granado. Mr.
Granado. Welcome, sir.
State your name and address. You have up
to three minutes. Mayor Council, um, my
name is Joe Granado. Uh, I appreciate
the opportunity you given me here to
talk. I'm not going to be as fast as
that guy was, but I'm be pretty quick.
Um, there's a few people actually that
said some pretty important things, which
I agree with. I do got to say as a
longtime resident of Chandler
um native went to high school here went
to college in the state had a business
here for 30 years that I sold was right
on Peckles Road I am Chand I live in San
Marcos and I can tell you today I'm
really disappointed in this right I
expected more um for our leaders here um
or I wouldn't say the leaders are
actually at fault here but I'm hoping
that the verbiage that is actually put
in place by the legal here in the city
is correct so we can move forward. Um
and then if that's not correct we need
to look at our legal staff right for
having this these problems. Okay. But
most importantly I don't want to change
what has happened here in Chandler for
years. There's a formula formula of
success that's been happening here for
many many years. Chandler is good. We
love Chandler, but Chandler can use some
improvements too as well, obviously from
this, right? So, all I'm saying is I
read the original um documents. It talks
about the term limits and I don't read
it how the attorney reads it. I read it
that so we can continue moving forward
the way we've been doing it. The
amendment actually says a little bit
more detail and I like what it says. It
basically says what everybody knows that
what we want here, which is a council
member to go, you know, can go up to
eight years and then go another eight
years as mayor and then take a break of
four years before continuing with, you
know, with public service like that.
Again, I believe that's how it should
maintain. I don't read that the
confusion that I I've heard here. I
don't see it that way. Um, but I like
the amendment. I think we should move
forward with the the amendment. Thank
you, sir.
Next up, uh, Renee
Lopez. You also know the
drill. I'm not used to this side of
it. All right. Thanks, Mayor Council.
Uh, appreciate all the time. Love the
debate. Um, so I'll stick to my time
here. I've been in your situation before
and can appreciate weighing many
opinions, options, the nuances that your
votes are going to be taken today. So, I
have a great relationship with many of
you here uh and uh with many Chandler
businesses, nonprofits, staff, and
community leaders. And I've been
approached many times. It's kind of why
I'm here is I got asked what the heck is
going on. So tonight uh I wanted to kind
of give my opinion and some of the
advisement that I remember in the past
and so I've helped many of you on the
dis before with some advice and
mentorship and uh I consider many of you
friends and I know you all have a heart
for Chandler and want the best for
everyone in the city. So I ask you to
take a deeper look and ask what is best
for the constituency. a knee-jerk
reaction to push through an
inconceivable amendment that I've read
also and we have heard already multiple
interpretations in my opinion still
lacks clarity as the mayor had pointed
out and and to me that makes me ask more
questions. So again, I understand the
negative perceptions that and the
notoriety that this is going to bring to
the
city, but I implore you not to make it
worse by approving an amendment that
could still expose us to further
scrutiny and put forth a solution that
makes our leaders, you all, look
unqualified and of which I know you're
not. So I've heard that there's a
perceived a need to rush this to address
legal liability. However, to me, that
seems disingeninguous. has been
established before that the agenda item
itself states other lawyers have
reviewed the language and have other or
have reached different conclusions. So
under the existing charter as
established by decades of precedent
everyone's intentions for future runs as
been mentioned before should be
unaffected. Chandler has grown
phenomenally into a city to be proud of.
One I myself proudly served alongside
many of you for many years. So, please
do not throw that away due to a
perceived fear and undo all the reasons
why you ran to represent this community
in the first place. Also, placing within
the bond the election to the general
public, it hinders the passage of needed
capital by planting in the minds of
voters, do they really know what they're
doing and are now asking that they want
more money? How can they be trusted? I
do not need to explain to you the
importance of the bond election for the
continued prosperity of Chandler. So
please do not jeopardize our future. I
ask you to vote no as these amendments
establish a charter and please do
establish a charter committee to
thoroughly review these in the charter
and whole and so that we can work
towards a better way and move forward
not my way or your way but the right way
for Chandler. Thank you. Thank you.
Mayor, I have a question. Councilman
Berando,
I just want to compliment you.
Corporation must be doing well because
you look fit. Good job, buddy.
Keep it doing Keep going what you're
doing physically. Thank you. Yeah, there
you go. I'll be available after if you
want to talk more. Will you just give me
a routine? Your workout routine. All
right.
Next up, Francesca Martin.
Francesca, please state your name and
address for the record. You have up to
three minutes.
Thank you. Good evening, mayor and
council. My name is Francesca Martin,
and I'm a proud Chandler resident of 20
years, soon to be 21. It's my whole
life. And proud alumni of our Chandler
Unified School District. Go Hamilton
Huskies. And uh recently the Chandler
city attorney released a new
interpretation of our city charter that
contradicts 50 years of presidents and
bars faithful public servants from
running for mayor. While I strongly
believe that our city charter provides
necessary guidelines for city procedure,
I do not believe we should be able to
selectively choose how and when we want
to enforce this charter. Our city has
seen countless faithful public servants
run for mayor after serving two terms as
a city council member. They have all
given years of public service to our
city, but would violate this new
interpretation of our laws. Choosing to
enforce this guideline in a different
manner now would not only be unfair as a
solid historical president has already
been set, but would block faithful
public servants and two-term council
members from running in the future and
potentially open up our city to
litigation. These conflicting guidelines
should not impact our current mayor and
council, and we, the voters, should have
a say in clarifying the charter and
resolving these conflicts. I urge this
council to send clarifying changes to
the ballot this November. Today is the
last day alongside the already proposed
special election and have voters decide
on the proposed amendments. I would like
to thank our council and current mayor
Hardkey for their service and dedication
to our city. And I remain conti
committed to allowing public servants
like yourselves to continue to serve our
city. I urge your support on this
measure today. Thank you. Thank you.
Next up, uh, Beth
Brazil. Beth, state your name and
address. You have up to three minutes.
Good evening, mayor and city council
members. My name is Beth Brazelle and my
address is 6130 West Shannon Street. I
have lived, voted, and pay taxes here in
Chandler for the past 30 years. I am
here this evening to ask the city
council to vote yes on resolution
5913 ordering and calling a special
election for the submission of proposed
amendments to the city charter regarding
the eligibility of persons to serve
consecutive terms as mayor and council
member. The current city charter must be
clarified to avoid confusion and
expensive
litigation. Chandler has a long history
of council members running for mayor. I
and the majority of Chandler voters
voted for Boyd Dunn Jay Tipsy and Mayor
Harky premier after serving two terms on
the city council. Chandler voters have
overwhelmingly supported keeping the
term limits edge to 16 years. After the
last election tried to extend the
council terms in 2014, Mayor Tip Sheney
stated at that time the council members
would still be able to run for mayor
after being serving two terms on the
council. We already have a bond election
scheduled for no November 4th. So adding
this to the ballot is being fiscally
responsible. Again, I am asking the
council to vote yes on res resolution
5913 and let the chandler voters decide
whether the current city charter should
be amended. Thank you. Thank
you. Next up, uh Mr.
Hume. It's farmer council member night.
Mayor. Council member, he always looks
fit.
Thank you, Mayor. Uh Rick Hume, 4310
West Dublin Street, Chandler, Arizona,
85226. As you all know, I served on this
DAS with several of you guys um for
eight years. As part of the change we
sent to the voters in 2012, this change
was simply to state that the mayor's
terms would be two four-year terms
versus four two-year terms. So the
question about have we done it different
ways. This was done by the council to
the voters and the voters decided on
that. Uh it's basically the same
language that was used back in 1997.
Then that again was voted on by the
voters to allow the mayor to serve eight
years at that time. Um the only change
that happened was we took the back then
the the 12 came out for some reason. I
think the city attorney at the time said
it was ambigu ambiguitous and
duplication. So, um, the history of
these changes was always to allow a
total of 16 years, eight as council
member and eight as mayor if the voters
chose that the voters get to decide
whether you're elected or not elected.
Um, the election of Boy Dunn and you,
Mayor Harky, was done under this
charter. I remember specific
conversations with the mayor at the time
that we wanted to make sure that no one
could serve longer than in the past.
That's why in 2012, the language is very
clear that we had two two-year terms
counted as a four-year and then another
four years counted as a total of eight
years. And we were very specific about
that. Now, we have a ruling that could
be argued in different ways from
different attorneys. As we all know,
attorneys have different opinions. Uh I
think this was rushed by the attorney,
number one, but we're at a deadline
right now to get things onto the ballot
in November. I heard a lot of things
about cleaning up the language. The
language in this amendment is fine. We
could always go back and tweak it in
2026, but we have a chance here to
clarify something that's been
precedented for all these different
years and stuff. So, um, the language in
the ordinance and discussion should also
been reviewed along with the president
that was put in place for all these past
years. Reading just the language is just
not enough. We have to go back and look
at history. I doubt that this election
lawyer did that because if they would
have looked at it all the years of Mayor
Tiff Trainy being elected, Moy Dun
elected, the mayor currently being
elected as well and stuff. So, um, this
amendment will clarify that language and
again we can go about it next year and
clean up those little tweaks about the
gap in two years or appointment things
like that. So, so this isn't extending
anybody's tenure to serve other than
what has been the president all these
years. There are people saying this is
being rushed. It isn't. as the voters
will have the next five months to study
the issue. I would hate to see the next
election for mayor to be thrown into a
legal mess. Thank you guys. Appreciate
it. Thank you, Mr. Hume. Council member
Harris, Vice Mayor, former vice mayor
Rick Hume, come back up to answer some
questions. Absolutely. Um because I the
reason why I want to ask you some
questions because I think you will have
a better understanding. I know we heard
from council member Orlando about some
of the historical context. Can you can
you just briefly just talk a little bit
more about the historical context? What
were you guys doing? What was the
thought during that time and era uh in
which you guys said this is what we're
trying to do? This is how we're trying
to clean it up. Can you talk a little
bit more about that because that's
important? Abs. Absolutely. 1997 was I
before I served on council the language
was changed at the time you can only
serve 12 years and the time it was
changed again to the voters that allowed
the mayor then to be eight years for a
total of 16 years in 2012 we had a
situation where the mayor's terms were
every two years it was crazy the mayor
had to run constantly constantly raising
money it didn't give us really good
continuity so again it was done in the
dis voters in 2012 to say to the voters
okay we want to changed the mayor to two
four-year terms. Okay. And again,
because Mayor Tip Trainy had already
served two two years, we counted that as
four. It's in the language. So, Zach
four plus another four gave him as
eight. Um, it went to the voters and the
attorneys at the time didn't catch the
ambiguity of changing those couple of
words, but it's precedent that's been
set. You know, I'm not a lawyer, but you
know what? You look at a lot of legal
briefs and it's always talking about
what was the intent of the law, what did
Congress do? you can get tweaking words
and things like that. So, it went there.
Um, 2014, the council decided to try and
and ask the voters for a third term.
Voters voted the town. In 2012, the
voters overwhelmingly approved that
because we're not we weren't asking for
extended terms for the mayor to serve 12
years. And we were very careful with
mayorship training at the time. We did
not want to allow him to be able to
serve 12 years. So, one of the questions
earlier, what would happen, you know, if
somebody comes off for two years, all
that kind of stuff. So if that's does
that answer your question? Yeah, thank
you so much. I just kind of wanted to
better understand the framework because
you were in that era of time serving and
I thank you for um laying a trail for me
to serve as well um in this beautiful
city. I just kind of want to get some of
our historical context. Great. Thank
you. Thank you guys. Thank you. Mayor
Mayor, I have a question for um council
member Vice Mayor and former and former
vice mayor man. Um the question that I
have at this time for you, I know you
you talked about the presidents and you
also spoke about the fact that you were
on console at the time when all those
decision was made in order for us to
clear out some of this languages that
today you think that they were what they
were intended versus what really was
happening at the time. Uh my question
for you right now is
um h how is it that
you you approach
the No, let me let me rephrase that
question because I will not ask you it
in this matter.
Um, what was it that triggered
uh you to ask the um attorney, the city
attorney, because she reported to me
that you asked her that question
concerning the mayor running for uh
council at the
time. What was it that triggered you to
ask that question? because you were
there also with some former mayor um Jay
when you asked that question of her.
What triggered you to do that? So, I
will for full transparency, the mayor
and I happened to be down here for a um
a bond election um TV show and the mayor
and I were sitting in the lobby and the
city attorney came up to us and the
mayor actually asked uh former mayor Tip
 asked the city attorney
understood that mayor was thinking about
running for council and the city
attorney told us that was no problem and
the mayor and I both kind of questioned
it based on our history of 16 years. Um,
and that's where we left it. It's not
our job to ask the city attorney to come
up with an opinion. Uh, if the city
attorney did that based on us, so let me
finish. So, if the city attorney did
that, that's not on me or or the former
mayor. That's on your city attorney. You
guys, she reports to you guys. So, if
she should have probably asked, should I
get an opinion? But so, that was just a
question that we had. And like I said,
full transparency. Um, it wasn't any bug
about it. But because we had written
that language in 2012 and all the years
prior, we thought that that was the
intent of nobody being able to do more
than 16 years. So, thank you so much for
clarifying that part because when she
told me when I questioned her, which one
of us on council had given her direction
because based on what you just told me,
I knew exactly what you just stated that
you could not give her direction because
you do not she doesn't work for you and
the former mayor. So, a council member
had to give her direction to go with
outside council and she stated that
council member Orlando gave her that
direction. So, thank you so much for
clarifying that. I appreciate it. Mayor
Mayor Mayor Council member Orlando, we
are going to be very transparent. Vice
Mayor, the the city attorney called me
and said, "I need to talk to you on
Monday, but I need to get a second
opinion on this
language." That's what happened.
When I asked her, "What are you talking
about?" She said, she sent me the
language. Okay. I read the language and
then I said, "Well, I disagree with you.
However, I'll see you Monday on your
attorney with your with your opinion."
So, if this is the rabbit trail you want
to go down, Vice Mayor, we just solved
the mystery.
So, no, I did not call the city
attorney. She called me and said, "We
have an issue."
Well, I'm so I'm so grateful that you
clarified that for me. So, I wanted to
make sure that the public is well aware
that no, I'm not going to any trail. I
just ask a straight question and you
give me a straight answer. That's it.
Okay. So, so you're satisfied there was
no collusion or anything?
What I'm seeing what what I'm saying is
that I ask a question and you give me a
straight answer and I say thank you for
clarifying at this point. Okay.
Appreciate it. So we close chat chapter.
Thank you. All right. Thank you
questions. Mayor, can we take a recess,
please?
Uh, three minutes. Three minute recess.
All right, take a three minute recess.
I'll be gabling it in. Well, actually,
do we need a motion to take a recess or
can we just Can I just do it?
You can just All right. You need to take
a recess. Council members, please do.
hours. Yes.
Council members, audience, three minutes
are up. Um, like to resume our meeting.
Jennifer, can you go see if anyone is
back there and bring them back in during
a
I'm on
Council member Poston are three minutes
or
All right, council. We have a forum. We
will
continue. Our next speaker, um, and I'm
gonna apologize. I I just can't read
your writing is
Marin Muentz off of U Grand View Drive
in
Phoenix. Marian Marin.
Okay, please state your name and address
for the record. You have three minutes.
3435 East Grand View. I represent an
area that includes Chandler and I wanted
to say that we already have an upcoming
election. Um, I don't want to waste
taxpayer money. Um, so why not put it up
to the bo voters? Um, the voters have
supported 16 years of continuous
service. The current mayor and previous
mayors have been elected to both office.
Um, under the current
language, there are attorneys and
attorneys are going to say yes, no,
maybe. So, let's put it back to the
voters. So, let's vote yes on resolution
5913. Um, and basically I want the
voters to have the choice. They have
voted on this. Um, there are people up
here that have been very good as far as
um council members and why not allow the
voters to decide whether hey, should
they be um mayors? And so I think that's
basically the gist of the whole
situation here if we, you know, based if
we look at the politics behind this. And
so a lot of um people would probably
vote yes on changing this
language. That's all I have to say.
Thank you, ma'am. And then you also
filled out 20 council vice mayor.
Thank you. If I may say, I I do agree
with with what you just stated um that
there are great people that are sitting
on the D currently that that will be
available and also are qualified to run
for mayor and I agree with that.
Um my position at this point and if I
may ask this question of you is when you
stated that uh it had always been 16
years do you believe that we are
disagreeing with the 16 years or do you
believe that we are asking that we take
the time to do it right that's the
question I have for you today
she is back at her seat and thank you
vice mayor license a
Um, back up.
All right, Marian, please continue.
Okay. Um, if we don't bring it to the
voters now, then it's 2026 and that
doesn't allow the people that we think
are good people that could be voted in
to the mayor position to be elected. And
so, yes, this is immediate. This
basically we want to go ahead. There's a
deadline. Okay. We want to be
responsible and we want to be able to
make sure that people
um can go ahead and the people will have
the voice as far as who they want mayor.
Well, can I ask another question? Do you
understand it to be that as the lawyer
stated it before, we don't have to do
that? we can leave it the same way it
was and those people that you all
thinking of are still able to run for
and then we take the time then to do the
whole charter rather than doing just a
little bit of it. I just want to make
sure that you understand that in my
position I'm not trying to stop someone
from running. What I'm trying to ask is
is that can we continue as is so that
everyone who want who at this time is
qualified and willing to run they can
but then we still have the time. Yes, I
I heard you on the idea of the money but
it will also be in another election that
we will also be paying for in 2026. So
either way, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Vice
Mayor. I was going to say either way we
are saving the taxpayers money. I just
don't want any confusion on those things
on those two things. Well, there's an
election and so it would not be extra
money as far as the vote and what I've
heard is um our deputy city attorney
says there needs to be
clarification and so you know we can go
ahead and clarify this and have it
clarified. Um, there was a panel of
attorneys that talked and decided. I
mean, my husband is an attorney, okay?
He probably would have an opinion.
There's another attorney that would have
an opinion, but I think it needs to go
back to the voters. Um, you may decide
as a city council to go ahead and
clarify it again in 2026, but let's put
it out there and clarify it.
And I I I heard you. Thank you so
much.
Council, we are being a bit redundant
with some of the same questions. Um,
let's try to move and allow people to
speak and get through everybody and then
we will have the opportunity to decide.
Next up, uh, Mr.
Mallister. Ken
Mallister. Ken has left the building.
All
right. Next up, uh, Dave Speck. Mr.
Spec. Mr. Spec, you have up to three
minutes. State your name and
address. The floor is yours. All right.
Uh, my name is David Spec. 1728 West
Clark Drive, Chandler, Arizona, 85286.
It is tense in
here. I'm here to talk about backyard
chickens. Let's do this. All right. U,
my name is Dave. Uh, I own three
businesses in Chandler. I know that guy
said he was Chandler. I think we're all
Chandler. Um, I'm a Chandler resident, a
property owner, and a board member of
the downtown Chandler Community
Partnership. I'm Chandler, too. So, I
think we're we're all here because we're
Chandler and we care. I'm hearing a lot
of kick the can. And I'm begging you
guys, we're watching you. Do not kick
the can. This language solves what we're
talking about. I had prepared remarks,
but we keep going back to let's let's
pause. Let's push it. We're watching.
This language solves this issue. It
solves it today. We can go later on and
amend this further. Um, but do not kick
the can. All right. Um, I know I'm I'm
usually in in the funny business. Every
time I'm with Kevin, you say I I make
fun of you. But you know what I don't
like? I don't like newspapers calling
Kevin Hardkey illegitimate. I don't like
I mean that's my job, right? As as a
comedian, but calling us illegitimate,
calling uh, you know, Boy Dunn
illegitimate, calling Jay Tibray
illegitimate passes on that the next
election then is illegitimate. That is
the laughingtock. That's the problem.
and that's what can be solved today. So,
that's what we're asking you to do. I I
I mean, I support um having resolution
5913 go on the ballot. Let's vote. Let's
fix this. Let's clear it up. So, I've
got a minute and a half left, guys. Um
you've got really qualified candidates
ready to go. And I'm begging you, please
don't make me run for mayor. All right.
Thank you, guys.
Thank you. Go ahead.
Next up, uh, and our our last speaker
card on this is, uh, Brook
Bill. Mr. Bill, you state your name and
address. You have up to three
minutes. Uh, my name is Brook. I live
live at 85 West Tewood. Uh, 85248.
It's kind of tough to follow that guy.
Um, so I'm here to uh this is the first
time I'm tonight I'm going to be
criticizing the city attorney's office.
Um, I I I disagree with the with the
previous speaker. I don't think you
should be uh rushing this. I think that
uh if if you guys understood this well
enough, we wouldn't have had a 30 minute
discussion before the public comment
started and there are another 40 minutes
of those.
Clearly, it's not well
understood. Um I write requirements for
a living. This is kind of what I do.
They're not legal requirements. They're
not they're not law, but they're
requirements. And you
guys don't communicate the requirements
to me. I I I don't know that I know what
you want to get done with this tonight.
That's how confused I am from your
comments. Uh so for you to go forward, I
think would be would be unfortunate. So
I think you can we can get there, but I
I just don't think that you're you're
ready yet. Thank you. Thank you.
We have one last speaker card um
misplaced as a comment card. Um Miss
Jones, please state your name and
address. You have up to three minutes.
Ruth Jones, 2734 East Birchwood Place,
Chandler, Arizona 85248 49.
Sorry. Chandler needs a
hero, but as I stand here, we're in very
short
supply. I've heard you talk about how
the city's charter is ambiguous, and yet
it's not. I showed it to teenagers. Not
one of them misunderstood what it said.
The specialist attorney that you hired
to look at it said it was
clear. And one thing is very clear, the
city attorney has a stake in this. So I
do not believe we should be looking at
her opinion on this matter, but we
should defer to the specialist who
handles these matters every day.
As I sit here
tonight, I see that you are all very
concerned about getting this amendment
on the ballot so that when the next
election happens, certain people are
available to
run. But I stand here today and say we
are in need of a
hero. The truth is is the charter was
written for expressed purpose.
The charter was written that way so that
not one person or group would hold on to
power for too long and we don't need to
change this charter. We need to follow
it. The will of the people was put to
the ballot and the people said this is
all you get. I hear sit here tonight and
I listen to you talk about well we can
get 16 years and then we can take a
break and we can come back and we get
two-year break and we can come
back and yet you do not allow for this
charter to
stand. I raised my children to follow
the law. I told them if one of the kids
breaks the law that doesn't mean you get
to break it
too. You follow the law and to use
precedence as an opportunity to break
this charter which is clear and was
written and approved by the citizens of
this city which has been upheld by a
specialist attorney for your own
political gain is
inappropriate. Chandler needs a
hero. But tonight I will settle for the
members of this council to have
integrity. You took an oath to uphold
this charter. It's the law of our city.
If you vote otherwise, you will be
judged for that. I stand here tonight
and look for a hero. But I'm praying for
you to see that to rush this amendment
so that you can stay in power and get to
run again as often as you
like is not the will of the people and
it is not following the charter and it
is not following the oath. you took. If
you truly believe the charter needs to
be changed, fine. But to rush it through
so that you can get on the next ballot
is inappropriate. Thank you, Mrs. Jones.
My time wasn't up. I have six seconds.
That's fine. Thank you. Thank
you, council. That is all of the speaker
cards on
this. We have items. Uh, next one is
resolution number 20.
We do have some We have some comment
cards of how people uh would you like me
to read those? All
right. We have uh Robert Sawyer is in
support of this. Moving
ahead. Okay. These are sometimes
confusing because it's the same one. One
with 19, one with 20. That's the same.
Sue Harington supports this. Moving
ahead. That's also the
second. Jose, that's
20. Joseph Russo supports this moving
ahead. Martha Russo supports this moving
ahead.
Randy Ree supports this moving
ahead. And those are our comment
cards. Council, how would you like to
proceed? We've had lots of conversation.
We've listened to our community members
who've come here to
share. Mayor, Council Member Orlando.
So, um, a lot of good discussion
tonight.
Um, early in my council career, I had
the privilege of speaking with several
of the original charter authors to
include former council member Nolles,
former mayor Ky Payne about the thoughts
of why a
charter. They expressed a strong desire
for the reser through their elected
officials to guide them the development
of Chandler rather than having the
state. That's why we have a charter. We
voted for that so that we control what's
going to happen in our own community.
That's been extremely successful over
the many
years. In 1972, the residents voted, as
we heard earlier, that they want term
limits. 53 years ago, we have to have
term limits. Originally, term limits, as
we talked about earlier, were two terms
for council, two terms for mayor. Same
as we have today.
one provisal, we changed it, as we heard
earlier, to two four-year terms for
mayor. And in that language at that
time, they did talk about 12 consecutive
years. Very
simple. Four,
four, two, two, pretty
simple. What conversation with all
former mayors like Jerry Brooks, Jim
Patterson, Kenny Thomas all indicated
the intent of the voters was allow for
fresh
ideas as for term limits but to have an
opportunity for a mayor and you've done
it
well. Boy Dunn's done it well. Ky
Payne's done it well. Jason Strange done
it well to represent us not only at the
MAG level but at the state level and
then on those
representations it was to sell to
advocate on behalf of Chandler
residents. That's when the experience
came in. It was also to help us for
revenue streams for our public safety,
our
transportation, even our parks and
recreation. Experience
counts. they advocate on behalf of
us. The major change that occurred in
1997 again as we talked about made it 16
consecutive years for some reason as as
a former council member human said that
was taken
out. It was pretty simple
language. Eight years 8 years you're
done. I don't know why that was changed.
I can only assume that the four or five
or six city attorneys we had since then
felt it was adequate and was um clear
enough like we talked about having
layers. We talked about this in the
past. So why now? That keeps hearing the
question. And the reality is this folks,
you heard it tonight. is
ambiguous. There's a lot of attorneys
out there. No offense to my fellow
attorneys. Some are very
inexpensive. There's residents out
there, as we heard tonight, that are
upset that potentially this mayor and
all the other mayors might be
illegal. If I'm a developer and I lost a
vote four to three and this mayor was
against me, maybe I have a
lawsuit because if I could argue it was
illegitimate. We have a member. We're
already being sued now. We just served
notice tonight that we're being
sued. We spent a lot of money so far on
this attorney outside
attorney. You earlier less agreed that
this could
be open for a lot of
interpretations. Why now? It's not about
me. I said this before and I'll say it
again. I served eight years. I abided by
the rules. Got off. Served eight years.
Got
off serving my sixth
term. I I'll abide by the rules. But if
they're ambiguous, regardless whether I
run, okay, I can walk away tomorrow. I
still got to take the garbage out
Wednesday night. I still got to take it
out Friday morning. I still got
grandkids that love me. That's not about
me. It's about saving taxpayer
dollars because I could see the lawsuits
rolling in. Again, case in point, we got
one tonight. How many more are coming
in? How many more will challenge the
mayor? So the reality
is we do need
experience. The Chandler residents have
said for 53 years we like this model.
It's been successful. Look at us. We
have a thriving community here.
Thriving. Why? New ideas experience been
a combination. We've had council members
go to other
offices because of the experience they
gained here and they're being
successful. So, let's not discount the
experience. Let's not
discount the fact that we don't we're
not asking for term limits or extension
of term limits which was done three
times unsuccessfully. So, the voters
know what they're
doing. That's the only reason why we're
bringing this
forward. I don't want any more lawsuits.
We just literally folks we just found
this out last
week. Last
week that we have a potential issue
here. So we have until June
9th. Correct.
That's correct. Council member um
Orlando through the mayor. Um the
deadline to submit ballot language is
June 9th.
Okay. I don't want to spend any more
taxpayer dollars. It cost us
$475,000 to run an election. And here's
the kicker,
folks. We have other people that will be
having an election that same day,
November 4th. It'll reduce our cost.
Again, taxpayer dollars reducing our
cost because the school district's doing
it, Maricopa's doing it, and other
entities are doing it. So, we can reduce
our cost. That's why it makes sense.
Now, now in
deference, I am willing to if the
mayor's got a concern about this and
may, and again, I'm not a legal
attorney. It looks good to me, but I'm
willing to um postpone this to June 9th.
Is that the latest we could do this or
should we do it earlier? Council member
Orlando, that is the latest. We'd have
to get them the ballot language by
midnight that night. So, close. Could we
possibly do it um before um June 9th so
that way we can do the same thing but
have a special meeting specifically
about it which will then allow like not
June 9th but like maybe like June I'm
not looking at my calendar. I'm gonna
pull it up like June 6th or June 5th
like on a Friday or a Thursday in
between that time and we can do another
roundabout and if we want to pull some
people together we can do that. That
gives a little bit more time. What? Can
we look at some dates now or can we get
back or can they get back with us and
get some dates set this week or we just
have to do it right now? Uh, council
member Harris, you can call a special
meeting. Um, I don't know that you have
to call a special um specific
date might Can can we work with Mayor,
can we can we work with Can you You
normally call the executive meetings.
Can we work with you to get a date
together between now and whatever
additional things we want to do between
now and I would say before January
before June 6th or before June 5th so
that way if there's any additional
questions that we need to have it'll be
all set and ready to go if there is any
additional additional language mayor
mayor so hang on hang on there vice so
let's see where this still goes there's
other people that I think want to talk
and if it's the will of council to do
that certainly we can but um we'll see
where Okay. So far only council member
Orlando has pretty much spoken. Okay. So
that's my proposal. We could work on a
date and we could we could move this. Um
again I think we discussed everything. I
mean, there's a lot of stuff there we
can discuss and we're if we're hook up
on the language, then I think it it
behooves us to make sure it's correct
because I don't want to be here a year
from now and say, "Gee, this language
has a hole in it and we have more
lawsuits." Um, I saw vice mayor
commented, then I saw council member
Hawkins. Vice Mayor,
thank you. Uh, one of the question I was
going to ask and um, council member
Orlando just explain himself is what is
the direction and what is it that he was
trying to accomplish because I have
heard council member um, Harris is
asking for dates and different things
like that. So I wanted to be clear um,
are we trying to reschedu something
right here right now. Um, and I just
heard him make sure that uh, that we
were going to wait for comment before we
we go forward with anything. But my
comment at this time is as a member I've
lived here in Chandler for 39 years and
council member Orlando I have voted for
in the past when he ran. Council member
have I voted for in the past. I have
voted for um council member Lopez in the
past and other council members that have
uh uh run for city council. When I came
to this council five years ago, the
desire was to serve the people of
Chandler because there is an integral
love in me for this city to see us
continue to thrive but not going
backward. Do I mean that this position
that we are taking tonight will take us
backward? Absolutely not. I think it's
moving us forward. But in my
understanding of things, there is the
time, the right time to do the right
thing all the time. And in order for us
to move forward at the right time to do
this, I believe we need enough time to
make it happen. I'm using the word time
all the time because that's what it is
of the essence. And no one and I I
personally I don't think that I'm
arguing the fact that we do not need to
change this language and we do not need
to remove the ambiguity. That is never
the point here for me
personally. But what I am saying is that
should we give the impression that we
are rushing something like 1:00 in the
morning kind of like sitting around
trying to vote when we know nobody's
going to be present. is that same
sentiment is out there. So the idea that
when council member Orlando just spoke
about all the things, the litigations
and everything else that could happen
and I'm sitting here baffled thinking
that who has sent in a lawsuit tonight
because I have not heard as a council
member. I have not been briefed on that
and now we're discussing something like
that on the DAS. I'm concerned about
that. I just text the city manager. He's
telling me he's not aware of anything
like that. And so for us to be sitting
here and hearing that there's a lawsuit
against the city for presidents and
things like that put me into a position
to ask what what what is it that we were
thinking when we thought that this was
perfectly okay for us to throw it out
into the media and into everywhere
without having our head screwed on the
right way. So, I agree with Council
Member Orlando. It needs to be fixed and
we all need to put our head together and
get it fixed. So, if extended time is
going to give us a a minute to even
think about it, revisit it, talking to
more lawyers or whoever else we need to
talk to before the 9th of June, that is
where I stand. And so I'm wrapping it up
right now with the I with the whole
premise of the fact that I don't think
none of us on the DIS currently,
including the mayor, is saying that we
shouldn't clean this thing up and we
should not make sure that we have
clarity on it. Thank you, Mayor.
Thank you, Council Member Hawkins.
Thank you, Mayor. Um, so two things I do
want to say. Um, thank you for everybody
coming out tonight and showing the
support. I agree this needs fixing. The
question is when, right? Um, but I feel
like the common thing that I'm not
hearing is the um the community input
that that seems to be missing. And I
feel like the amount of people that are
in this room underscores that people
want to be heard. They want that input.
Um, so I do have a concern that we're
kind of lacking some transparency and
those historical precedents where we
have included comments um and ways to
form and um, you know, create that
verbiage of what they want their city to
look like. Yes, we have our our council
or excuse me um, our attorneys to make
sure that it's valid and that um, it
works within the law, but really we want
the voice of our community. And so I
appreciate again that everybody came out
to provide that input tonight. Um,
secondly, I was curious if you could
answer something for me, Ton.
Um, with this amendment, how does that
look? It's not going to be retroactive.
It doesn't affect anything for current
mayor in place. Correct. It would just
be clarification for moving
forward. Council member Hawkins, that's
correct.
Uh, anything else?
Okay. I'd like to hear from people who
haven't spoken before I come back to
people that have on my right. Council
member Martinez, Council Member Poston.
[Music]
Thank you, Mayor again. Um, as Council
Member Hawkins has stated, I want to
thank you guys all so much for engaging
here with us tonight. Bringing us your
voices is what we are here to do and
here to listen um to say as well as
Council member Hawkins mentioned about
having that community input is important
and that input has been provided for
decades. Um, this language has been
carried over for decades, numerous
councils and repeatedly approved by the
voters and I think it is important that
we take it back to the voters. if we do
need some time as council member Orlando
is stating um I'm open to that
recommendation as well just to make sure
we are 100% and then again taking it we
are not making the decision we are
taking it straight to you guys to make
that decision and that vote and tell us
what you want to be done that's my
comments thank you okay council member
Poston
quick question um this doesn't uh city
attorney this doesn't need two readings
does
Council member Poston, this does not
need greetings. No. Okay. Thank you. Um,
okay. I I I think people have spoken
very articulately and I certainly
appreciate seeing a room full of people
and I will say the one good thing that I
know is coming out of this is that a
multitude of people have now read our
city charter and have a good
understanding of it. So that's a that's
a good thing. And they understand that
it's really our guiding documents, our
bylaws, our constitution, and it's very
important.
Um I also think
that we as a council need to be willing
to address this. We do have a bond
election coming in addition to the idea
that that is already paid for and we
have the ability to have a pair up with
other people to make it a little less
expensive makes it important for us to
put this on that November election.
And I have concerns that if voters see
us sitting on our hands and waiting that
it looks like we're not willing to do
hard things. And I think bringing this
to the voters is the right thing to do.
Um, we're asking you, the voters, the
residents, to confirm that you still
believe in the practices that we have
had for more than 50 years and have
voted on over and over and over again.
So, in addition to that, you know,
there's been a lot of talk about the
committee. There's nothing that
precludes the committee from looking at
the entire charter, including all of
this. Um, so I liked what a couple of
people said that, hey, we can look at
this. If there is a concern about that,
we can clean up the language a little
bit in 2026 as well. Both of those
elections won't cost the taxpayers extra
money. And you know, I I understand uh
the vice mayor is upset, but I saw
notice of that lawsuit as well, and I
don't want to sit here for a year um
wondering why we're sitting around
getting lawsuits instead of taking
action. Thank
Thank
you. Um Council Me, I I too want to
thank everyone for being here.
And you know, I know a month ago we met
and talked about this election and
talked
about adding council amendments and
there was great reluctance on most of
council from doing that. Many of which
are certainly wanting to add this. And I
understand it's apples and oranges. I
agree with that. But I I think our our
big concern then was that a concern that
we didn't want to
uh we thought that that would be
detrimental to the bond and again that
I'm that still sticks with me as that's
what council overwhelmingly said at that
time. So I I also agree with you. I
don't I don't it's I I would hope we
would do both if if this council decides
to move ahead with this that uh that you
all will get your names into me so we
can proceed with a council revision
committee and I do agree that those can
be independent or or go on at the same
time as I mentioned I'm willing to start
that beginning of June and I from what
I've heard from you all you're willing
to do the same. So, I'm I'm glad to hear
that. Council, what I guess now is it is
there a motion to move forward or is
there a motion
to refer this to Hang on a second to
postpone this conversation to a certain
day and then uh make that descent
decision? Then I do know on June 9th we
will be meeting
here already. It is a study session work
meeting. Uh so we have a council study
session. Uh if council's wish and if
there's enough votes to move it earlier
than then we can. But um I think
midnight June 9th is our our deadline
for this. So council, how would you like
to proceed? Mayor. Council member
Orlando. I'd like to move resolution
number
5913 ordering and calling the special
election for the submission of proposal
amendments to city charter regarding the
eligibility of persons to serve
consecutive terms as mayor and council
with the proviso that staff comes back
to us for final language approval by
June
9th and call a special meeting I should
say so that we could look at the final
language.
So, so you're you're asking that we
resume or you're asking that I move that
we call for a special election
tonight and come back by June 9th.
Sorry. Special meeting. Special meeting.
Sorry. Come back with a special meeting.
Okay. By June 9th with the language.
That's what confused me when you said
election. And then we could vote finally
on the language that we feel would keep
us out of litigation.
So there is a motion
to call the special election.
Call a special meeting. Thank you. So in
essence you are want to postpone this
decision. No what I'm saying
is I want to the resolution 593 call for
a special election for the submission of
proposal amendments of city charter
regarding the eligibility of persons
serve consecutive terms as mayor and
counsel. It's two separate things. is
I'm calling for the election, the
special election. And then correlated to
that, I'm asking staff to come back to
us with a special
meeting to finalize the language. We'll
vote on that. So yeah, that's what I'm
asking. So you're asking us to call to
put this on the ballot yet. We are not
certain of what the language is. That's
correct. And you could always withdraw
it if we have to.
Mayor,
there's a motion. Is there a second?
I have a question to clarify before I
can Hang on. There's a motion on the
floor. I'm waiting to hear. Is there a
second before we continue with
conversation?
I second. All right. We have a motion
and we have a second. Vice Mayor,
I want I want I I want council member
Olando to reiterate, please, what he
just stated because it was my
understanding when he was talking
earlier, he said he wanted to give us
time to go back and look at this and
then has a have a special meeting among
ourselves to discuss it before we bring
it back before June 9th. So now I'm
hearing that we are voting on what's on
the agenda right now. Is that correct?
Or am I the one who's not understanding
what he's saying? Is that me? Yeah.
Yeah. Um Vice Mayor, um I I meant the
language. That was my concern, the
language. That was what the issue was
that the mayor brought the language.
Sever discussion about it. But I never
said anything about not moving forward
with the special election. If I did, I
misspoke.
I'd like to ask. Yeah, that's that was
my understanding that we were going to
go back with waiting to get all the
information and everything react or fix
everything, look at it, have another
discussion among us again and then come
back with it to vote on it. Not that
voting on it tonight.
City turn a question. So, council member
Orlando is asking us to prove to further
um and to call a spec to take this
language to the
ballot without having explicit language
is I I'd like a weigh in on that.
Mayor, I'm asking the attorney for an
opinion. Thank you,
Mayor.
What it sounds like is that we're we're
we're talking about splitting the
question and and and voting only and and
so the motion is to split the question
into two questions. One being calling
the special election and the other one
being the language for the charter
amendment. The issue though I would I
would I would let you know the special
election has been called for the bond
election. Yes. Yes. So this would run
this was to propose a special election
to run concurrently. I mean it's there
is a special election already that has
been voted through and that is the bond
election. This election for amendment to
the charter would would be running
concurrently would would go to that
election would and would run
concurrently with the general election.
But there already is a special election
that has been called or the bond
election.
So it's not really
necessary. My recommendation is to is to
move to table. If you want to continue
this to a special meeting, you could
move to table this and it will go to the
next meeting that is
scheduled which could you could then
move to have a special meeting put onto
the or direct staff to put a special
meeting on the on the calendar or it
would move it would automatically go to
the June 9th meeting and then you would
need a motion to take it off the table
and further discuss it. But the June 9th
meeting is just a study session. So,
there would need to be actually to call
a um a council meeting at that, which
we're capable of doing, but I I was
struggling with your language of calling
a special election because one has
already been called. Fair. Fair enough.
But I think the key here is you're
adding charter amendments to the special
election. That's what we're doing here.
That's the motion to add charter
language to that special
election. That's all we're saying. the
actual language we could bring back and
then vote on that as a consent saying
that's the that's the language we want
to go to the ballot.
You could you could split the question.
You could move to split the question and
have a motion to present charter a
charter
amendment with no you wouldn't have any
language though. It doesn't it would it
would if if the charter amendment didn't
go anywhere. you're left with calling a
special election on a charter amendment
blank.
Okay, that's my concern. All right, so
we'll redo this again. Thank you. Um, so
if you change it, we'll also need the
second to agree. Is there Would you like
to amend? Do I would do you agree we to
split this? Yeah. Okay. So, let me be
clear what we're doing here. Hey, city
attorney. I'm moving to resolution
number 5913 ordering to call special
election for submission of proposed
amendments to the city charter regarding
eligibility of person to serve
consecutive terms as mayor and council
member
correct and then I'm not I'm not
following because if you going to split
the question you're not going to move to
table resolution
5913 to take it to a we have the table.
No, you just you just said I could split
the question. No, I recommended you
Sorry, let me let me rephrase it then.
The the recommendation is to move to
table the resolution so that you can
then get you get to the another meeting
where you want to be. It sounds like not
want to put words in your mouth. Um,
council member Orlando. Okay. Look, I'm
I just need the legal advice. Yeah. So,
I heard two different things, but let's
just do this. I want to move this along.
So, let's I move to table
this resolution
5913. Are we sure June 9th's enough time
and we can put it early enough in the
day to make this happen?
Council member Orlando, we just have to
have the language to the county no later
than midnight on June 9th. Okay. I know
we could we have do we have to do state
state uh date specific or we can say by
June 9th.
Council member Orlando, you do not have
to state a date specific. You can just
move to
table that resolution
5913 and then it will go to the next
regularly scheduled meeting
and or special or a special meeting.
Correct. Okay.
Um, I'm going to do this. I move to
table this to a special meeting on June
9th. But we also want to have enough or
earlier if we could get everyone in
there. Let me be very clear. Tell by
June 9th or earlier if we get a quorum
so that we could address this issue.
Okay, I got a thumbs up. All right, it's
good.
Okay. So, there is now Thank you. a
motion on the floor
to table this. I second that. Mayor,
hang on. Hang on one second. I think
there's a
proced um you're not recognized. Let me
I know, but they have to withdraw their
first motion before we did. They did.
So, I'm I just want to know what I'm
what we're voting on. So there is a
motion to move this to a future date and
then um then we we need to call that as
well. So either on June 9th or before.
Is that good enough to leave it the way
it is or or I I just want to make sure
we are knowing what we're doing here.
Mayor, that is that is good enough. It
will it will be tabled. The motion is
not debatable. If it's been seconded,
then there will be a vote on that. If it
doesn't pass, then the resolution
continues to be pending, but it can be
tabled. If it's if if the motion passes
and it will go to the meeting of the
next meeting of June 9th or the or if
another meeting is scheduled to be
earlier, then it would go to that based
on the verbiage of the motion of by
council member Orlando. Okay. So, we
have a motion by council member Orlando.
I heard a second by vice mayor.
All right.
This is now back to debatable or
commentable because we have a motion and
a second in place. Correct, mayor.
Motions to table are not
debatable to council vote. Very good.
So, we just need Thank you. So, we just
need to vote this yes or no. Okay. Thank
you, council. This is as mentioned um
there's no further
conversation. Please vote.
Vice Mayor Ellis.
Yes.
Motion carries unanimously.
All
right. Okay. 19 is
done. We now have item number 20 to
discuss. Correct. Council. All right.
Item number 20 has to do again with
another
resolution to um amend the charter
related to the appointment and removal
item not to remove the city manager but
language that discusses the appointment
and removal of city manager city
attorney.
Thank you mayor. I'm making sure that
this clicker is still working. And yep,
there's the PowerPoint
presentation. We are here to discuss um
resolution
5914. This is regarding this channel
Chandler City Charter under article 3
sections 3.01 and
3.02. This is the current language of
the of those two sections. They are
concerning the city manager appointment
compensation
qualifications. Um 3.02 is the removal
as adopted in 1965. The Chandler city
charter provides that the city manager
shall be appointed for an indefinite
term and upon his removal will receive
two months severance pay. These
provisions are the of the charter are
not aligned with the practice of the
city of Chandler or any other Arizona
city or town which is for the city
council to negotiate the terms of an
employment contract with the appointed
manager including severance upon
termination of the contract. Fixing the
charter helps align with the wishes of
council and with how the city manager
contract has been handled historically.
The proposed charter
amendments in resolution 5914 are set
forth here in this
slide. These would clarify that the city
council may contract with its appointed
city manager on such terms as the
council and the manager agree. The
proposed amendment also brings the
provision regarding appointment of the
city manager in line with the provisions
for other appointed officers of the
city as well as the current widely
accepted practice of entering into
appointment contracts for appointed
officers.
I'll leave up the language of the
proposed amendment. Any questions?
Council, any questions for city
attorney? and leave that up for a little
bit here too.
Um um mayor, council member Harris, I'm
I'm just going to ask you like how how
did we get to this particular um
question just because I want to know is
it going to help me make because you
know talk to us a little bit about it a
little more.
We had uh we had four members of the
council that wanted to have a resolution
brought forward for
consideration and um so the resolution
was drafted by the city attorney's
office because the council had asked for
that and this is um this is the language
that was presented in order to bring it
into alignment with the wishes of
of where we think you know this aligns
with the contract of a city of our city
manager and historically with the
contracts
city managers. So, and I'll I'll say
that there are two other um you know, we
have other charter language for city
attorney for city city clerk that are at
the pleasure of the council that at the
pleasure language is with other
positions. So, is the city manager's
current contract in conjunction with the
old language or the new language? Yeah,
the city manager's uh excuse me, council
member Harris, the city manager's
current contract is not in alignment
with with the current language of the
charter. It is in would be in alignment
with the language proposed in this
amendment. So this so is so even right
now on today is the city manager
contract aligned with the old language?
No.
Okay. And the city manager job is what?
Council member Harris, the city
manager's job is to is to manage all
operations of the city. And his language
for his contract has to be in alignment
with the charter. Correct.
Ideally, that's correct. Council member
Harris. And how how has his contract or
previous contracts been unaligned
through these previous years if his job
is to to be
aligned?
Council member Harris, I'm not aware of
all the history of of the contracts and
I I I cannot speak to how you know in
the past and the alignment. I'm sorry.
Okay. So, who prepares his contract for
us? I also was not privy to those
negotiations. Okay. Thank you.
And it's my understanding that this
language is um 72 or well maybe or do
you know it's old and
65 mayor in 1965 great and this is so
current previous councils
have have looked at this and since then
have written out contracts with city
managers
when this when this deviated, I'm
assuming because I I don't know how long
we've written contracts as opposed to
this particular language that or
contracts that deviated with it even I
think we even previous council even
released a a city manager or several at
least one
but that were different. So I
uh but it's been the contract that has
been the rule of the the law with this.
Even when a previous uh city manager was
released, it was the contract and not
the language here that prevailed. Or you
might not be privy to that too. I'm
sorry.
Mayor, I'm sorry. I'm not privy to that.
Okay. Very good. So I guess my point is
again is that we've we've had contracts
with city managers and that has been the
rule of in a dispute it's it's a
contract between the city manager and
council who have signed off on these
every time that has been the rule of the
law on this. So, I I guess I'm just
questioning I I understand there's a
dichotomy, but this too is
um is like other charter amendments to
me that that we need to do and throw to
a
committee. But we'll see where council
wants to go with this one. Comments
before we invite comments. Oh, let's do
comments.
I I saw you reaching before he said so.
[Music]
Um this has been a very frustrating
process all of it I think and in
discussions with the city attorney
um you know the the comments that she
had made to me was it's not good when
the city charter is out of
alignment and this is one of those
issues where it's very clear out of
alignment and just because we've done it
that way before doesn't make it right.
We've all sworn an oath to the charter.
We have sworn an oath to uphold it, um
our city staff is actually quite frankly
responsible for making sure that we are
in alignment with the charter. So when
we find that we are out of alignment
with the charter just because we've done
it this way before um and and maybe
nobody noticed before and that's that's
fair. It it hadn't been brought up as an
issue before, but it's now an issue
before us that we understand. And I
think that we are not doing the right
thing by the voters if we don't address
this particular issue. And I agree with
you. You you said exactly what you said
was we have always followed the um that
contract. And all this is doing unless
someone has a difference of opinion, but
all this is doing is making sure that
our charter is in alignment with the
contract. It seems pretty cut and dry to
me. I don't know if there are
opportunities um I can't imagine there
are opportunities that we get to pick
and choose which items in the charter we
follow and which we don't. So I think
it's important that we move forward with
this. if there is other discussion
tonight where people have the same
discomfort with this item, the language
of this item, um that I would be willing
to table it to be in conjunction with
the other discussion that we're having,
but I am in no way um in agreement that
we shouldn't move forward on this issue.
Thank you. Thank you, council member.
Yeah, good additional comments. Yeah. Or
we invite the public. You know what? Let
the public go ahead. I'll say my
comments at the end. Okay.
All right.
[Music]
Um, first one up
is Ken Mallister. Is Ken here yet? No.
Um again, Marian Marin, um who spoke on
the previous one, are you still
here? No. Okay. Um Dwayne
Lman. Dwayne Lman, 2301 West Palamino
Drive, Chandler. Uh thank you for the
opportunity to speak tonight. Uh, I've
read resolution 5914 along with exhibits
A and B. And I think that we need to
move forward this. You need to be able
to negotiate contracts and
uh so you can attract and retain good
employees. Thank
you. Thank you, Mr. Lidman. Um, Will
Bullock. Is Will still
here?
Okay. Lisa
Asi. Yeah.
I would agree that this language is out
of date. It's not in alignment.
Everything that council member Poston
said, um I think that that this should
go forward to accommodate a proper a
proper statement and contract for the
city manager. But I'd also like to
emphasize that everything that was said
about following the charter should be
applied to the previous conversation
that we just had about the other
amendment. But I do agree on this one.
Thank you,
council. All I have left are comment
cards. Um, not speaker cards.
Mayor, just real quick. Um, good good
question. If we follow this language,
what does that mean? City attorney.
Council member Orlando, if your question
is if we follow the current current
language, right? Yes. Okay. Well, there
it doesn't align with the city manager's
contract, but that's that's that's
really it. This is to bring it into
alignment. If you do not amend, I mean,
if this resolution doesn't go forward
and the charter is not amended, it's
then we would have to restructure the
city manager's contract and rely to the
to the to the language. Correct. To the
charter. Correct. That's that's
incorrect, Council Member Orlando,
because it's it would be what be what up
to you know, the council could do that,
but whether you have to is a different
question because it's the opinion is not
that it's it's not an opinion that it's
in violation. It's not it's an opinion
that it's not in alignment.
Um I guess I beg to differ a little bit
there because I'm up I'm I'm promised to
uphold the charter and there's a
provision of charter. If I don't uphold
the charter, I could be terminated as an
officer. So I don't think I want to be
terminated as an officer on this dis
because we're going to deviate and say,
gee, it's okay to ignore the charter.
It's
okay. Otherwise, I got to restructure
the contract, make an indefinite
contract, and two month severance. I
don't think our current city manager,
his family is going to enjoy that. And I
know we would never recruit or retain
anybody else. So with that, mayor, um I
move resolution number Oh. Oh, okay. We
mayor. Thank you, Council Member Harris.
Um Ton, um you said that is his current
contract is not in violation or is not
against is not against our contract that
we have with him right now is not
against the current
charter. Council member Harris, the my
point was that there's a difference
between it being not aligned and being
in violation. Can you explain the
difference? The the the difference is so
the the language, for example, it states
currently that the city manager will
receive two months severance. An
agreement that provides him more than
two months but not less than two months
may not be in violation, but it's not in
alignment. If you look at if depending
on your reading now we're getting into
attorney reading but this as as far as
we have we have presented this as it's
not in alignment. If council or a
council member wants an opinion on
whether it's in
violation I would rather defer to a time
when we could provide that in an
attorney client privilege setting. So we
can an analyze it and give you that kind
of kind of advice. Whether or not
whether or not the agreement would hold
up in court based on the language of the
charter
currently remains an open question. Ton,
that sounds very confusing that we're
here to talk about the city attorney's
contract and talk about this specific
area about the charter and we're talking
about getting this aligned and we're
saying that he's he's technically not
aligned but he's not in violation and I
don't understand the difference between
an alignment and a violation. it. To me,
it's a violation because his contract
says six months of severance. The
charter says only two months of
severance for the city manager. To me,
those are two different distinctive
conversations. That is 6 months of
severance. The charter says two months
of severance. We are not just out of
alignment. We are in violation, direct
violation of the charter. And if we pull
the language up right now, it'll say
city manager is two months of severance.
And that's the that's what it is. So, I
just kind of want to make sure that we
stay clear about what we're talking
about because we're not here to we're
just here to make sure we keep this the
facts straight. Um, the other the other
aspect of the contract that is in direct
violation is we signed a two-year
contract, but the charter says it's in
indefinite contract unless council
decides to move different. Now, there's
some employment language in there, but
it's definitely showing that his
contract is supposed to be indefinite.
The city manager's office contract
should be indefinite. And so the
language here that we're talking about,
it gives council more flexibility. But
currently, right now, even today in this
sitting meeting right now, he's in
direct violation of the charter. And I
don't understand how we can confuse the
two between alignment and
violation. And everyone is talking about
the charter and we're looking at the
charter. There's no confusion about what
this is.
So, I just kind of think we need to make
sure that if I mean we pay our city
manager a health a healthy amount of
money to make sure that he stays in
alignment with the charter. And if he if
council presents a document for him to
sign that's in out of
alignment then he willfully signs then
he then violates what he was put here to
do which was follow the
charter. And that's what I'm laying out.
That's what I'm sharing with you today.
And so every day that he sits on this as
a city manager and his contract is not
aligned and he was an assistant city
manager before and four to five years as
a city
manager regardless of what council asks
him to do. That's still a
violation. and he should know better
than
that because it says it very clear. So
we brought this forward and now we know
that his contract is out of alignment
and he now knows that is out of
alignment but I he been knowing that
it's out of alignment. So maybe this is
a different conversation for a different
day, but I am if I'm paying a person
$400,000 a year, at least he can get
what his contract says in the
description right.
Thank you, Mayor.
Mayor Mayor, Council Member Orlando.
Mayor, Council Member Orlando, then Vice
Mayor. Mayor, I Thank you. Yeah. Thank
Thank you, Vice Mayor. Appreciate it. Uh
I move to approve resolution number 5914
ordering and calling special. I do have
one more speaker card. Okay. I can still
make a motion there. True. Right. I can
still do that. I believe um although I
don't know what to believe anymore after
tonight.
Um, resolution 5914, ordering and
calling a special election for the
submission of proposal amendments to the
city charter regarding appointment
removal of the city manager.
I second.
There's a motion and a second. And I
would like to allow our speaker to speak
filled out a comment card rather than a
speaker card. Miss
Jones, you have up to three minutes to
share your comments. No problem. You
already know where I live. I'm going to
try and be a little less passionate this
time, but also put something in front of
you that needs to be said. And I
appreciate the comments of some of you
tonight and your passion in following
the charter. That is what we're here
about. But I think there's something you
need to be very careful about as you
consider this particular amendment.
In the past, when the charter wasn't
followed, the people that should make
sure the charter is followed, the people
you pay a lot of money to to get that
done are our city manager, our city
attorney, and our city clerk. In the
last four years alone, our city manager
has received a
35% increase in his
salary. When in fact, he wasn't advising
you and wasn't making sure that the
charter was followed.
So if you put yourselves in a position
where you set his salary and he works at
the behest of you, you put yourself in
grave jeopardy. That's why the charter
set forth the guidelines for him was to
keep you
protected. So by allowing you to be the
ones who set his salary and set the
terms, you can give him a golden
parachute. for example, you can continue
to raise his salary at an exorbitant
rate that does not match what is going
on in the rest of the world with the
rest of the people out there. I don't
know anybody who's gotten a 35% salary
increase in four
years, especially when they're not doing
their job and they are not making sure
that our charter is followed. That's
what we pay them for. That's what we pay
all the city employees for. But the
three I mentioned are the ones that have
the most onus to do so. So I would urge
you with caution to make sure that you
are not when you say that it's at the
behest of the council that you are not
putting yourselves in a position where
you have the appearance of evil. You
continue to raise the salary and he
continues to ignore the charter. I'm
asking you, believe it or not, to
protect yourselves. And I'm asking you
to be aware that there is a conflict
that for the average person in the city
doesn't look very good. To quote someone
I know, if it looks like a duck, if
walks like a duck, most likely it is a
duck. So, you need to be careful that
you protect yourselves. Maybe we do need
to amend this, but I would be very
careful about saying at the behest of
the council. Thank you,
council. We have a motion and a second
on the floor. Is there any additional
comments before uh we
vote? All right, council, please vote.
Vice Mayor Ellis,
my I have a question, Mayor. So,
okay.
We've we've all got our comment ready to
vote. So, uh All right. Go ahead,
please. We have We're waiting on you.
Yes.
Vice Mayor Ellis, was that a yes vote?
Yes. Thank you.
Motion carries unanimously.
All right.
Well, council, we're here. We have three
unscheduled public appearance
cards. Again, I will call them out in
the order that they've come in. To those
who desire to speak unscheduled, we
cannot interact with you. You have up to
three minutes to share your comments. We
will not interact like as we've done
with these previous ones. First up, Mr.
Bill.
As before, state your name and address
for the record. Uh my name is Brook
Beal. I live at 85 West Twood Place,
Chandler. Um, so late last year I sent
an email uh requesting some information
from SRP and they replied back and uh I
forwarded that email to all of you uh to
the city council who the members who
were on the city council at the time but
you all received that. Uh I also sent it
I believe to the city attorney's office
and to members of the police department.
Uh basically the content of that letter,
that email says that ebikes are
prohibited on consolidated canal uh in
Chan, Arizona. Actually in all of any of
the SRP canals.
So, I attended the March 27th council
meeting and I was opposed to to the oppo
the approval of your request for a
special uh permit. Um on April the 5th,
I attended the annual ride. There were
about uh about a half a dozen bicycle
officers there. There were about a half
a dozen ebikes that were there. Uh,
mayor, you spoke uh wishing everyone to
have a safe ride and then you handed the
microphone to someone. You said you
don't know their name. This is what you
told me tonight. You handed the
microphone to some woman and you don't
know who she is. And she said she spoke
into the microphone and she told
everyone there that you can ride on the
canal as long as you're not in power
mode. As long as the power is off. I
have it on. I have that recorded. So you
then did not correct her. You allowed
that statement to
stand. So
um
SRP would like to have the city attorney
contact them to speak to them. They have
concerns that you don't understand what
no ebikes on the canal means.
So, if you would be so kind as to give
them a call, I would appreciate it. And
then after that, what I would like to
have uh you do is to put together uh
some information to specifically address
what ebikes are allowed and not allowed
on the on the canal. I don't think
that's too much to ask. um these guys
who were riding on their ebikes on the
canal. It's a violation of federal law.
It's 6 months in jail, $5,000 fine, can
also be treated as a state uh criminal
offense. Uh month in jail. Also could be
treated under 316C of the Chandler
ordinance. Uh so I would like to have
you respond to those and uh explain
where uh where the position is of the
Thank you, Mr. Bill. Yeah, thank you.
Point of personal privilege is I stated
I did not recall the name of the person
and nothing more and nothing less.
Mayor, we uh yeah council member city
attorney is it possible that you can
look into
um look into the conversation between um
SRP with their team and our teams so we
can get some clarity with that
relationship and that partnership.
Yes, Council Member Harris, I'll be
happy to do that. Thank you. Next up for
unscheduled public appearances,
Alan James.
I can't do it either, sir. But please
state your name and address. You have up
to three minutes to share your thoughts
or concerns. We cannot engage you, but
we listen. Can do. Uh Alan James, 727
West, Summit Place,
85226. Um quick shout out.
Congratulations to any of the new
Wolfpack that graduated tonight from
CHS. A few of us did it ourselves last
century. Um, side note, although I
wasn't here for this evening's agenda,
is one thing I did notice and I didn't
notice anybody making a comment about
it. I'm not sure what her reason was for
calling out, but I believe with the two
things that were addressed, the one
individual that needed to be here the
most tonight was
not, and Ton was the one left having an
answer for it. Kelly Schwab. I don't
know where she was, what kept her away,
but I'm sure she would have had a lot to
say or would have had more clear
answers. At least that's what I would
think would be the story. What brings me
here tonight is I've been a member of
the Mission Valley neighborhood since
1995. In 1995, we weren't an HOA. we
still aren't. But since 1995, especially
in the last 10 years, um sales of homes
and everything else, there have been
people that have moved into the
neighborhood that I have met for all the
wrong reasons. And that's right up to
the point of walking out the front door,
stopping them in my street because we
have two speed bumps entering from the
Amos side. And I'm not sure if the map's
got there in front of you, but the first
two to the furthest part of the east,
between me and a friend that both work
construction, his transit, and me doing
it, what we found was a difference that
was no less than
31% between the one in front of my
house, the one next versus the rest of
the neighborhood. as such um on
different dates here actually October
3rd 2023 verified it was Mesa Unified
School buses because I called them
because of the bus number 102 that went
racing by the house by the time I got to
the person I needed to speak to they
were like oh yeah we show them their
their GPS yeah they just went down the
street could you tell me what their
highest speed has been in the last like
seven minutes you tell me who wants to
know their child's on board a bus doing
40 through a neighborhood that doesn't
have straight streets. Everything's
curved. Next was October 20th, 2023. US
Mel, young curt, young guy that I turned
around and he went jumping over because
he had enough speed. He jumped the mail
vehicle, walked out in the street as he
was coming back filming him and he goes,
"Oh, this is about the post office being
broke into the Mel." I said, "No, no,
no. I'd like to know what need you have
to be coming into here at such a great
speed. Your vehicle actually jumped off
the bump in front of my house." And I
say bump, that meaning speed bump
because it's anything. But if I enter my
street from the far end, I drive an F
350. If I'm doing better than 10 miles
an hour, my rear end on my truck fish
tails. I barely feel it driving over the
two that approach my house. There's a
reason why every Friday night and
Saturday night and every day after work,
there are cars zooming through. Thank
you, Mr. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay.
City manager.
Yes, sir. City manager, can you have
traffic uh get with Mr. Emmerth and uh
direct his complaint and see what we can
do? Yes, mayor. Thank you. Can you do me
a favor, Mr. Right, save that phone call
because Mr. Wong covered that with me
and I'm sure of those signatures I need.
Thank you, sir.
And our last uh unscheduled public
speaker is um Michael Harrington. Mr.
Harrington, you still
here? Mr. Harrington is not here. All
right. Long night,
council. We are up to current events.
I've got a few I'd like to
share. Last Saturday, we we celebrated
the grand reopening of Tumbleeed
Recreation Center. The expansion adds
11,000 square feet of purposely designed
space, including an event hall, game
area, classrooms, a class, a craft
studio, a fitness room, and even a mini
library, all aimed at enhancing
community engagement and supporting
multi-generational programming. Big
thanks to all who is owed of team
Chandler that contributed to the
project. City Manager Josh Wright, Don
Lang, John Septin, Erica Barry, our TRC
staff who will activate the space, as
well as my council colleagues, those who
came and those who have been championing
this since its inception. And perhaps
most importantly, we want to thank our
Chandler residents for bringing this
this project to life. This project was
funded as part of our last bond election
and we are excited to be able to deliver
this project to our
community. Secondly, um I had the
opportunity to represent Chandler in
Germany as part of the GermanAmerican
Semiconductor City Network. This is a
three-year partnership between German
and American cities that have
significant semiconductor investments to
connect, share ideas and experiences,
and most importantly identify strategies
and best practices that can be
implemented in our respective
communities.
We found a very willing audience that we
shared a lot of great information back
and forth and uh Micah Miranda was on
spot in terms of recognizing future
opportunities and building relationships
between our communities and we're really
excited to see where this goes. Many of
these folks, several of these folks will
be back in Phoenix for Semicon, the
semiconductor um conference that its
first time will be in Phoenix in
October.
Other members of our team included Ryan
Peters, strategic initi initiatives
director, as I mentioned, Micah Miranda,
our economic development director, John
Kenudson, public works, as well as Neo
Kapki from ASU, e development, and and
Carla, what is Carla's last name again?
Tran.
Ah, I knew I was going to mix it up.
amazing representative talking about
power and SRP. So together we put
together an amazing team that did great
work in
Germany. Lastly for me, I do want to
wish a very exciting and well-deserved
congratulations to our Chandler seniors.
It's graduation season and whether our
seniors are off to college, trade
school, the military, the workforce, or
exploring another path, we have no doubt
that their futures are bright. I I don't
know whether you caught it, but Chandler
Unified School District was recently
rated the top school district in the
state of Arizona. So to all of our
students, to all of our teachers, to all
administrators, happy summer break.
Council member Incenus, thank you.
Mayor, you stole my final announcement.
I did also want to congratulate all the
seniors of the class of
2025, 2005. Um we do have one of the top
school districts in the country. I'm a
product of that and it's a great
institution to be a part of and I'm
excited for these students to continue
on their education. I do want to give a
special shout out to um some of my
cousins. We have a house divided. We
have some Hamilton Huskys and we also
have some Chandler Wolves out there. I'm
a wolves. Let's go. U to Ariana Asencio
and Flower Martinez. I want to
congratulate them and wish them the best
in their future here in China. Thank
you. Thank you, Council Member Council
Member Poston. I'll keep it short and
sweet. May is small business month. Shop
local, shop together. Wow. Short and
sweet. Uh, Council Member Orlando. Thank
you, Mayor. Um, Councilman Poston will
be um representing us on Memorial Day.
Thank you very much. Um, for those out
there, I have a little saying I've
always said that to remind us just what
this really means. Armed Forces Day are
for those that are still in uniform.
Veterans Day, like myself, Council
Member Harris, are those of us that hung
up our uniform. Memorial Day are those
that didn't make it out of their
uniform. So, please remember that as we
go through that day. Thank you, Council
Member Harris.
Thank you, Mayor. Just wanted to give an
update. Um, this past week, I was in
Washington, DC. As you know, I serve as
the chair of Valley Metro, which
controls 70% of the state's
transportation, and I went to DC this
week to advocate on uh more dollars to
come into our state region for
transportation to provide connectivity
and to continue to uh increase our
safety uh in our in our local region.
So, I was proud to attend that. I got a
chance to meet with the senators and the
in the congress um in the congressional
delegates which is all the delegates
delegates around the uh the state of
Arizona. So that was pretty cool and we
walked away with some great resolve from
um from that as well. Um next is Junth.
We got Junth coming up. So excited. uh
as may come to a close. Uh culture music
in a park is right around the corner and
we want to invite you guys to come on
out downtown Chandler to have a good
time and celebrate with some fun dancing
and just some memorable time of just you
know collaborating with everyone. It's
really good time and and I'mma tell you
we get the l the line dancing out there.
I mayor I hope you're going to be there.
You know he got a little dance that he
does. I won't embarrass him today. I'll
see about later on maybe in next
announcement. U but it's it's really
cool. We've been doing it for a while.
So it'll be everyone is invited to the
culture and music in the park. Something
that I started and created right here in
the city of Chandler June 14th from 700
p.m. to 9:30 downtown. We'll have Miss
Junth Arizona scholarship pageant in
June 13th in the Junth Father's Day
mixer on the 15th. And you can find out
all the details about these events at
chandleraz.govjunth. Thank you, mayor.
Thank you, council member. Council
member Hawkins. Wait a minute. Wait a
minute. I forgot one thing. I want to
acknowledge my wife is in the audience.
I love her. And um we have a family
member visiting from out of town. So I'm
super excited about that. So just want
to put it out there. Council member
Hawkins. Thank you, Mayor. So, I had the
pleasure last Sunday I had the
opportunity to join uh Pastor James
Brown and the Full Life Church for their
100 years of history and service right
here in Chandler. Um it was really fun.
They had a lot of guest speakers, some
folks, some ladies there uh that have
lived in Chandler since when they had
their first location just down here in
downtown. Um so it was really cool to
see all that. I really appreciated that
they invited the city to be a part of
that. Um, and it was just a really
wonderful experience and uh I was
honored to be there. So, I just wanted
to share that fun little fact. Thank
you, city manager.
Nothing tonight, Mayor. Thank you. All
right, council. Long meeting.
Uh, this concludes our night.