Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/15/2011 Council Agenda Packet MAR MARANA TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA 11555 W. Civic Center Drive, Marana, Arizona 85653 Council Chambers, March 15, 2011, at or after 7:00 PM Ed Honea, Mayor Herb Kai, Vice Mayor Russell Clanagan, Council Member Patti Comerford, Council Member Carol McGorray, Council Member Jon Post, Council Member Roxanne Ziegler, Council Member ACTION MAY BE TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL ON ANY ITEM LISTED ON THIS AGENDA. Revisions to the agenda can occur up to 24 hours prior to the meeting. Revised agenda items appear in italics. As a courtesy to others, please tu rn off or put in silent mode a ll pagers and cell phones. Me eting Times Welcome to this Marana Council meeting. Regular Council meetings are usually held the first and third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at the Marana Town Hall, although the date or time may change, or Special Meetings may be called at other times and/or places. Contact Town Hall or watch for posted agendas for other meetings. This agenda may be revised up to 24 hours prior to the meeting. In such a case a new agenda will be posted in place of this agenda. Spea king at Meet If you are interested in speaking to the Council during Call to the Public, Public Hearings, or other agenda items, you must fill out a speaker card (located in the lobby outside the Council Chambers) and deliver it to the Town Clerk prior to the convening of the meeting. All persons attending the Council meeting, whether speaking to the Council or not, are expected to observe the Council Rules, as well as the rules of politeness, propriety, decorum and good conduct. Any person interfering with the meeting in any way, or acting rudely or loudly will be removed from the meeting and will not be allowed to return. Accessihili To better serve the citizens of Marana and others attending our meetings, the Council Chambers are wheelchair and handicapped accessible. Any person who, by reason of any disability, is in need of special services as a result of their disability, such as assistive listening devices, agenda materials Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 1 of 90 printed in Braille or large print, a signer for the hearing impaired, etc., will be accommodated. Such special services are available upon prior request to the Town Clerk at least 10 working days prior to the Council meeting. Age Copies of the agenda are available the day of the meeting in the lobby outside the Council Chambers or online at www.marana.com, by linking to the Town Clerk page under Agendas, Minutes and Ordinances. For questions about the Council meetings, special services or procedures, please contact the Town Clerk, at 382 -1999, Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Posted no later than Monday, March 14, 2011, 7:00 PM, at the Marana Municipal Complex, the Marana Operations Center and at www.marana.com under Town Clerk, Agendas, Minutes and Ordinances. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE APPROVAL OF AGENDA CALL TO THE PUBLIC At this time any member of the public is allowed to address the Town Council on any issue not already on tonight's agenda. The speaker may have up to three minutes to speak. Any persons wishing to address the Council must complete a speaker card located outside the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Town Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. Individuals addressing a meeting at the call to the public will not be provided with electronic technology capabilities beyond the existing voice amplification and recording capabilities in the facilities and the town's overhead projector /document reader. Pursuant to the Arizona Open Meeting Law, at the conclusion of Call to the Public, individual members of the council may respond to criticism made by those who have addressed the Council, may ask staff to review the matter, or may ask that the matter be placed on a future agenda. PROCLAMATIONS Valley Fever Project Proclamation MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS MANAGER'S REPORT: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS PRESENTATIONS CONSENT AGENDA The Consent Agenda contains items requiring action by the Council which are generally routine items not requiring Council discussion. A single motion will approve all items on the Consent Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 2 of 90 agenda, including any resolutions or ordinances. A Council Member may remove any issue from the Consent agenda, and that issue will be discussed and voted upon separately, immediately following the Consent agenda. Cl: Re solution No. 2 011 -35: Relating to Administration; approving and authorizing the mayor to execute a first amendment to the agreement for legal services with Barry M. Corey of the law firm of DeConcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, P.C., providing for Mr. Corey's representation of the Grievance Review Committee established by the Memorandum of Understanding between the Town of Marana and the Marana Police Officers' Association (Jane Fairall) C 2: _O rdinance No 2011.09: Relating to Health and Sanitation; amending Marana Town Code chapter 10 -5 entitled "fireworks permits "; renaming chapter 10 -5 as "fireworks "; adding definitions to the chapter; establishing prohibited and permitted activities in conformance with state laws regarding the sale, possession and use of fireworks; renumbering existing chapter 10 -5; clarifying investigation and insurance requirements for public displays of fireworks; establishing criminal penalties for violations; and designating an effective date (Lain Sklar) C 3: Resolut No. 2011 -36: _Relating to Administration; approving a revised social media use administrative directive for Town of Marana employees and elected and appointed officials (Jane Fairall) C 4: Minutes of the March 1, 2011 regular council meeting LIQUOR LICENSES L 1: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding a New Series #12 (Restaurant) liquor license application submitted by Nilza G. Iwaya Montano on behalf of Lupita's Cafe located at 7077 N. Thornydale Road L 2: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding the special event liquor license application submitted by the Arizona Paralyzed Veterans of America on behalf of Harley- Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I -10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser L 3: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding the special event liquor license application submitted by the Marana Health Center, 13395 N. Marana Main Street, for a grand opening fundraiser BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES COUNCIL ACTION A 1: Resolu No. 2011-37:— Relating to Elections; adopting the results of the primary election held on March 8, 2011 (Jocelyn C. Bronson) A 2: PU BLIC HEAR Ordinance No. 20 11._ 10: to Development; amending the Land Development Code Title 3 (Definitions) by adding a "Designated Commercial Area" definition to Section 03.04 and modifying Title 5 (Zoning) Section 05.02.01 (Zone A — Small Lot Zone), as it relates to permitted uses; and establishing an effective date Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 3 of 90 R esolution N o. 2011-38 Relating to Development; declaring as a public record filed with the Town Clerk the amendments to Marana Land Development Code Title 3 (Definitions) adding a "Designated Commercial Area" definition to Section 03.04 and modifying Title 5 (Zoning) Section 05.02.01 (Zone A — Small Lot Zone), as it relates to permitted uses (Lisa Shafer) ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION /POSSIBLE ACTION D l: Leg isla /Inter og vern Report: regarding all pending state and federal legislation and report on recent meetings of other legislative bodies (Gilbert Davidson) EXECUTIVE SESSIONS E 1: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. §38- 431.03 (A)(3), Council may ask for discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town Attorney concerning any matter listed on this agenda. E 2: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38- 431.03(A)(3),(4) and (7), discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town's attorneys and discussion and to consider its position and instruct the Town Manager and staff concerning (1) the lawsuit entitled Town of Marana v. Pima County/Pima County v. Marana (consolidated), Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2008- 001131, (2) pending legal issues, settlement discussions and contract negotiations relating to the transition of Marana wastewater collection and treatment to the Town of Marana FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Notwithstanding the mayor's discretion of what items to place on the agenda, if three or more council members request an item to be placed on the agenda, it must be placed upon the agenda for the second regular town council meeting after the date of the request ( Marana Town Code, Title 2, Chapter 2 -4, Section 2 -4 -2 B) ADJOURNMENT Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 4 of 90 _ 4 z o , v a'� a v e 11115 505 054 1 M \ \ ti . .......... \ \\ L fE VALLEY WgUEN \ ���� \\ \ \ ECT \. ^\\ r \ \\\ \ \ \ �\ , \ \ma \\ \\ \ \ a y v i e \ and bas \ \\ F R p ak v v V v v \ oh f po AS 3 ya - 4 �\ v \` s ASSOM S; �. IBM- In by No A E' �? ,�� � - )�, �; "a \\ \ MM { aQ u- 5 N \ �• y � - 2 \ \ - \_ k IN 'A lot 34 1" F i a Z 35, \ \\ k \ a � i IIIL \ Ow A \\ \ 22 as \ LMMLM k" rmt�.nN MARANA 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 Council Chambers, March 15, 2011, 7:00:00 PM .... . .. . . . .......... ­­­­ ............................... ­­­ ------ ............... 111-111.1111 ............................. ................. ............. ­­ ...... .... ........... To: Mayor and Council Item C I From: Jane Fairall , Deputy Town Attorney Strategic Plan Focus Area: Not Applicable Subject: Resolution No. 2011-35. Relating to Administration; approving and authorizing the mayor to execute a first amendment to the agreement for legal services with Barry M. Corey of the law firm of DeConcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, P.C., providing for Mr. Corey's representation of the Grievance Review Committee established by the Memorandum of Understanding between the Town of Marana and the Marana Police Officers' Association Discussion: Pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Marana Police Officers' Association (MPOA) and the town, a Grievance Review Committee (GRC) has been established to hear employment-related grievances brought by members of the MPOA. The MOU provides that the GRC may be represented by an attorney, separate from the attorney representing the town, who will be appointed by and paid for by the town. Barry M. Corey of the law firm of DeConcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, P.C. in Tucson was appointed by the Council in November 2007 to act as the attorney for the Personnel Action Review Board (PARB) and has served in that capacity ever since. Mr. Corey provides or has provided these same services for personnel action review entities of other public agencies, including Pima County, the City of Tucson, Pima Community College, Santa Cruz County and the City of South Tucson. During the GRC's first meeting last month, attended by Human Resources Department staff and representatives of the MPOA, there was discussion regarding the appointment of Mr. Corey as the GRC attorney. Although the appointment is the town's decision, the parties informally agreed upon Mr. Corey's appointment, subject to Council approval. The proposed first amendment to the legal services agreement between the town and Mr. Corey will allow Mr. Corey to represent the GRC pursuant to the same terms and conditions as his representation of the PARB. Financial Impact: The hourly rate set forth in the original 2007 legal services agreement was $225 per hour through calendar year 2007, increasing by $5 per hour for each subsequent calendar year; therefore, for calendar year 201 the fee is $245 per hour. These funds are anticipated to come from the Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 6 of 90 Human Resources Department budget. ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: E_J Reso_re_ Barry_Corey_employment_agreement - - GRC _representation_(00025397),DOC Resolution Resolution ❑ Corey, — amend ment_to_Legal Services Agreement Exhibit A - amendment to agreement Exhibit (00025485).PDF Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the first amendment to the legal services agreement between the town and Barry M. Corey. Suggested Motion: I move to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -35, approving and authorizing the mayor to execute a first amendment to the agreement for legal services with Barry M. Corey providing for Mr. Corey's representation of the Grievance Review Committee. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 7 of 90 MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011-35 RELATING TO ADMINISTRATION; APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES WITH BARRY M. COREY OF THE LAW FIRM OF DeCONCINI McDONALD YETWIN & LACY, P.C., PROVIDING FOR MR. COREY'S REPRESENTATION OF THE GRIEVANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED BY THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE TOWN OF MARANA AND THE MARANA POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION WHEREAS the Town Council via Resolution No. 2007 -198 approved an agreement for legal services between the Town and Barry M. Corey of the law firm of DeConcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, P.C., on November 20, 2007 providing for Mr. Corey's representation of the Marana Personnel Action Review Board (PARB); and WHEREAS pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Town of Marana and the Marana Police Officers' Association (MPOA), approved and adopted by the Town Council on June 15, 2010 via Resolution No. 2010 -60, the Town has established the Grievance Review Committee (GRC) to conduct hearings regarding employment- related grievances brought by members of the MPOA; and WHEREAS the MOU provides that the GRC may be assisted by an attorney who is appointed by and paid for by the Town; and WHEREAS to assure that there are no conflicts of interest, it is appropriate for the GRC to have independent legal counsel to guide it in its decision - making process; and WHEREAS Mr. Corey has acted as the attorney for the PARB since November 20, 2007 and is qualified to act in the same capacity for the GRC. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, as follows: SECTION 1. The first amendment to the legal services agreement between the Town of Marana and Barry M. Corey, attached to and incorporated by this reference in this resolution as Exhibit A, is hereby approved, and the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute it for and on behalf of the Town of Marana. RegulaK& 99q I %N9 j "" 15, 2011 - Page 8 of 90 _ _ {00025397.DOC /} SECTION 2. The Town's Manager and staff are hereby directed and authorized to undertake all other and further tasks required or beneficial to carry out the terms, obligations, and objectives of the aforementioned first amendment to legal services agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, this 15 day of March, 2011. Mayor Ed Honea ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney Regul%r ,�W ". gg 15, 2011 -Page 9 of 90 -2 1 i 00025397.DOC /; FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE TOWN OF MARANA AND BARRY M. COREY OF THE LAW FIRM DeCONCINI McDONALD YETWIN & LACY, P.C. This First Amendment to the agreement for legal services (this "Amendment ") is entered into by the Town of Marana, an Arizona municipal corporation ( "Town ") and Barry M. Corey of the law firm DeConcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, P.C. ( "Counsel "). Town and Counsel are sometimes collectively referred to as the "Parties," each of which is sometimes individually referred to as a "Party. Y• RECITALS A. The Parties entered into an agreement for legal services providing for Counsel's representation of the Marana Personnel Action Review Board, an independent board of the Town, on November 20, 2007 (the "Original Agreement "). B. Pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding (the "MOU") between the Town and the Marana Police Officers' Association (the "MPOA" ), approved and adopted by the Town Council of the Town of Marana on June 15, 2010, the Town has established the Grievance Review Committee, an independent committee of the Town appointed to conduct hearings regarding employment- related grievances brought by members of the MPOA. C. Pursuant to the MOU, the Grievance Review Committee may be assisted by an attorney who is appointed by and paid for by the Town. D. The Town has determined that the Grievance Review Committee has an immediate and continuing need for an attorney to advise, counsel and represent the Committee E. The Parties now desire to amend the Original Agreement to provide for Counsel's representation of the Grievance Review Committee. AGREEMENT Now, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises made in this Amendment, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Incorporation of the Recitals The foregoing Recitals are incorporated here by this reference. 2. Representation of Grievance Review Committee Counsel shall serve as attorney for the Grievance Review Committee pursuant to the same terms and provisions as described in the Original Agreement for representation of the Marana Personnel Action Review Board. 3. Other terms Except as modified by this Amendment, all terms and provisions of the Original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall apply to this Amendment. 4. Counterparts This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. The signature pages from one or more counterparts may be removed from the counterparts and attached to a single instrument so that the signatures of all Parties may be physically attached to a single document. 100025394.DOC /► - 1 - 2/22/2011 Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 10 of 90 5. Entire Agreement This Amendment constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties pertaining to the subject matter of this Amendment. All prior and contemporaneous agreements, representation and understanding of the Parties, oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged in this Amendment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties have executed this Amendment as of the last Party's signature date below. THE TOWN OF MARANA, COUNSEL an Arizona municipal corporation -' Ed Honea Bfirry_M Corey Mayor DeConcini McDonald Yetwin & L/acy, P.C. 0 AAO� Date Date ATTEST: Jocelyn Bronson, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney (00025394.DOC 1) - 2/22/2011 Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 11 of 90 AAN 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 Council Chambers, March 15, 2011, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item C 2 From: Laine Sklar , Assistant Town Attorney Strategic Plan Focus Area: Not Applicable Subject: O rdinance No. 20 11.0k.-Relating to Health and Sanitation; amending Marana Town Code chapter 10 -5 entitled "fireworks permits"; renaming chapter 10 -5 as "fireworks "; adding definitions to the chapter; establishing prohibited and permitted activities in conformance with state laws regarding the sale, possession and use of fireworks; renumbering existing chapter 10 -5; clarifying investigation and insurance requirements for public displays of fireworks; establishing criminal penalties for violations; and designating an effective date Discussion: At the October 12, 2010, Council study session, staff prepared a presentation regarding fireworks legislation passed by the state legislature last year. HB 2246 went into effect on December 1, 2010 and altered State law to permit possession, sale and use of permissible consumer fireworks throughout Arizona, while still allowing municipalities the ability to put restrictions on the use of permissible consumer fireworks within their municipal boundaries if they so chose. At the October 12, 2010 study session, the Council decided not to restrict the use of permissible consumer fireworks within Marana town limits. While the Council decided not to limit the use of permissible consumer fireworks within Marana town limits, the changes to A.R.S. Title 36 brought on by the signing of HB 2246 necessitate the amendment of Marana Town Code Chapter 10 -5, to come into compliance with the new statutory language and with the Council's intent. Specifically, current Marana Town Code Section 10 -5 -1 prohibits the sale, use or possession of any fireworks within the Town limits, except those fireworks being used in a public display of fireworks pursuant to a permit issued by the Town Clerk. However, A.R.S. 36- 1605(6) permits the sale of permissible consumer fireworks throughout the state and specifically prohibits municipalities from placing limitations on the sale of permissible consumer fireworks. Additionally, A.R.S. 36- 1605(7) permits the use of permissible consumer fireworks throughout the state unless a municipality has placed limitations on their use. Because Council chose to place no limits on the use of permissible consumer fireworks within the Town limits, Section 10- 5-1 is contrary to Council's decision to permit the use of permissible consumer fireworks within the Town limits. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 12 of 90 Therefore, this proposed ordinance rewrites Section 10 -5 -1 to define the various types of fireworks addressed in Chapter 10 -5. Rewritten Section 10 -5 -2 then sets forth prohibitions and permitted uses for fireworks within the Town limits and is in agreement with A.R.S. 36 -1605 (6) and (7) and Council's previous direction to staff. The ordinance will permit the sale, use and possession of permissible consumer fireworks in the town and will continue to permit the public display of fireworks pursuant to a town - issued permit. The sale, use or possession of all other fireworks will continue to be prohibited. Additionally, these revisions will place responsibility for investigating permits for public displays of fireworks on the fire chief, rather than the Town Clerk, in agreement with State statute. Finally, the proposed ordinance clarifies the bond and insurance requirements for public displays of fireworks and sets forth the classification for violations of the chapter. ATTAC HMENTS: Name: Description: Type: O Ordin —pertaining_to_ fireworks_ (00025174- 2).DOG Amendments to Chapter 10 -5 Ordinance Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance amending Chapter 10 -5 of the Marana Town Code. Suggested Motion: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 2011.09, amending the Marana Town Code Title 10 "Health and Sanitation," Chapter 10 -5 "fireworks permits "; renaming chapter 10 -5 as "fireworks "; adding definitions to the chapter; establishing prohibited and permitted activities in conformance with state laws regarding the sale, possession and use of fireworks; renumbering existing chapter 10 -5; clarifying investigation and insurance requirements for public displays of fireworks; establishing criminal penalties for violations; and designating an effective date. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 13 of 90 MARANA ORDINANCE NO. 2011.09 RELATING TO HEALTH AND SANITATION; AMENDING MARANA TOWN CODE CHAPTER 10 -5 ENTITLED "FIREWORKS PERMITS "; RENAMING CHAPTER 10 -5 AS "FIREWORKS "; ADDING DEFINITIONS TO THE CHAPTER; ESTABLISHING PROHIBITED AND PERMITTED ACTIVITIES IN CONFORMANCE WITH STATE LAWS REGARDING THE SALE, POSSESSION AND USE OF FIREWORKS; RENUMBERING EXISTING CHAPTER 10 -5; CLARIFYING INVESTIGATION AND INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC DISPLAYS OF FIREWORKS; ESTABLISHING CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS; AND DESIGNATING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS the Town Council is authorized by A.R.S. § 36 -1606 to adopt ordinances and regulations regarding the sale, use and possession of any fireworks other than permissible con - sumer fireworks; and WHEREAS the Town Council finds that the regulations established by this ordinance are necessary for the public health, safety and general welfare of the Town of Marana. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, as follows: SECTION 1. Marana Town Code Chapter 10 -5 is hereby renamed "Fireworks." SECTION 2. Existing section 10 -5 -1 of the Marana Town Code is hereby deleted and a new section 10 -5 -1, entitled "Definitions," is added as follows: 10 -5 -1 Definitions In this chapter, unless the context requires otherwise, the following terms shall have the following meanings: A. "Display firework," "fireworks" and "permissible consumer fireworks" are de- fined as provided in A.R.S. § 36 -1601 or any successor provision. B. "Public display of fireworks" means a performance of display fireworks open to the public and authorized by a permit issued by the town. SECTION 3. New section 10 -5 -2, entitled "Prohibited conduct; exceptions" is added to the Marana Town Code as follows and the sections that follow are renumbered to conform: 10 -5 -2 Prohibited conduct; exceptions A. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, it is unlawful to: 1. Sell, use or possess any fireworks within the town limits. 2. Put on a public display of fireworks without first obtaining a permit for a public display of fireworks from the town. Regu1%9 �9 % l h 15, 2011 -Page 14 of 90 - I - {00025174.DOC / 2} B. This chapter does not prohibit: 1. The sale of permissible consumer fireworks by a retail establishment if the retail establishment complies with the rules adopted pursuant to A.R.S. § 36 -1609. 2. The use or possession of permissible consumer fireworks by the general public. 3. A public display of fireworks authorized by a permit issued by the town pursuant to the procedures set forth in this chapter. SECTION 4. Existing section 10 -5 -5 of the Marana Town Code (renumbered as section 10 -5 -6 by section 3 of this ordinance), is hereby revised as follows (with deletions shown with tftea and additions shown with double underlining) 10 -5-66 Investigation issuance of Hermit A. Upon receipt of an application for a permit for a public display of fireworks. #the town clerk shall forward the application to the fire chief for investigation. The fire chief shall conduct an investigation to be to determine, among other things, that the display is being handled by a competent opera- tor, and that the display of fireworks is of such character and located in such an area that when the fireworks are discharged they will not be hazardous to property or endanger any person. B. If the fire chief approves the public display of fireworks after investigation and e applicant is otherwise in compliance with the provisions of this chapter, he town clerk is hereby authorized to issue a permit for the public display of fireworks within the town limits. SECTION 5. Existing section 10 -5 -6 of the Marana Town Code (renumbered as section 10 -5 -7 by section 3 of this ordinance), is hereby revised as follows (with deletions shown with str' and additions shown with double underlining) 10 -5-6Z Bond and insurance requirements A After considering the potential danger to property and the proximity of the dis- play to existing structures, the town clerk shall require an applicant for a per - mit for a public display of fireworks to furnish a cash bond or surety bond is- sued by an insurance carrier licensed in the state in the sum of not less than $500 or more than $5,000, the bond to be issued to ensure that payment be made for all damages which may be caused to persons or property by reason of the display. B In addition to any bond required by paragraph A. the applicant shall also fur- nish insurance in a form and in amounts satisfactory to the town. SECTION 6. New section 10 -5 -9 is added to the Marana Town Code, entitled "Classifi- cation; continuing violations," as follows: 10 -5 -9 Classification; continuing violations A. Whenever in this chapter any act is prohibited or declared to be unlawful or the doing of any act is required or the failure to do any act is declared to be unlawful, the violation of that provision is a class 3 misdemeanor. B. Each day any violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. Regul t@ % 15, 2011 - Page 15 of 90 -2- {00025174.DOC / 2} SECTION 7. The various town officers and employees are authorized and directed to per- form all acts necessary or desirable to give effect to this ordinance. SECTION 8. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are repealed as of the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 9. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordin- ance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of com- petent jurisdiction, the decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this or- dinance. SECTION 10. This ordinance shall become effective on the thirty -first day after its adop- tion. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, this 15 day of March, 2011. Mayor Ed Honea ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney Regu1%gggq 0@g 15, 2011 - Page 16 of 90 -3- 100025174.DOC / 2} MARAN 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 Council Chambers, March 15, 2011, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item C 3 From: Jane Fairall , Deputy Town Attorney Strategic Plan Focus Area: Not Applicable Subject: Resolu No. 2011 -36: Relating to Administration; approving a revised social media use administrative directive for Town of Marana employees and elected and appointed officials Discussion: On October 6, 2009, the Town Council adopted a Social Media Use Administrative Directive (AD) which regulated the town's administration of its own social media sites (such as Facebook and Twitter) and provided guidelines for employees and elected and appointed officials regarding their use of social media sites in general. The AD required Council approval because its provisions applied to elected and appointed officials. Because the AD was originally adopted by Council, any revisions to the AD, such as those presented in this item, must also be approved by Council. The 2009 AD provided that all official town social media sites would be administered by the town's Public Information Officer (PIO) and included a blanket prohibition against individual departments administering their own pages and sites. Over the course of the intervening year and a half, it has become apparent that a blanket prohibition on individual department sites may be too restrictive. While the proposed revised Social Media AD still provides that individual departments will generally not be permitted to administer their own social media sites, the revisions will allow a department to request permission from the Town Manager's Officer to establish its own site or sites, based on the functions of the department and the department's need to communicate directly with members of the public. The AD includes the following provisions regarding an individual department's administration of its own social media sites: 1. Requests should be accompanied by an explanation of 1) the purpose of the social media site or service; 2) primary audience served; 3) the reason internal or existing resources will not meet these needs; and 4) a date range for the project (i.e. when will it launch, how long will it be in effect). 2. Requests should identify appropriate resources, including staff and funding for production and management of services, when applicable. 3. If an individual department is ranted permission to administer its own social media site, the PIO shall monitor the department s use of the site for compliance with the directive. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 17 of 90 4. The Town Manager in his/her sole discretion may direct an individual department to discontinue its use of its own social media site at any time. If the revised AD is adopted tonight, it is anticipated that the Parks and Recreation Department will be the first town department to submit a request to the Town Manager for permission to administer its own social media sites, for a trial period of approximately 6 months. Financial Impact: None ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: El Reso revisions to Social_Media_Use_AD (00025454).DOC Resolution Resolution E:1 Revised _ Social _Media_Use_AD_ (00025289- 3).DOC Exhibit A - Revised Social Media AD Exhibit Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the revised social media use AD. Suggested Motion: I move to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -36; approving a revised social media use administrative directive for Town of Marana employees and elected and appointed officials. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 18 of 90 MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011-36 RELATING TO ADMINISTRATION; APPROVING A REVISED SOCIAL MEDIA USE ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE FOR TOWN OF MARANA EMPLOYEES AND ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS WHEREAS the Town Council has established broad guidelines and parameters regarding the administration of the Town through the Marana Town Code and other ordinances and policies; and WHEREAS Section 3- 2 -1(G) of the Marana Town Code provides that the Town Manager shall be the chief administrative officer and head of the administrative branch of the Town and shall execute general administrative supervision and control of the affairs of the Town; and WHEREAS on September 15, 2009, the Town Council by Resolution No. 2009 -164 approved and authorized the Town Manager to implement an administrative directive system for carrying out certain administrative functions and providing consistency in the performance of administrative tasks, in the use of Town resources and equipment, and in the implementation of the Town Code and other ordinances and policies; and WHEREAS the administrative directive system approved by Resolution No. 2009 -164 included the provision that any administrative directive relevant to the Town's elected and appointed officials would be brought before the Council for its consideration and adoption by resolution; and WHEREAS on October 6, 2009, the Town Council via Resolution No. 2009 -180 approved a Social Media Use Administrative Directive for Town of Marana employees and elected and appointed officials; and WHEREAS the Town Council finds that approving revisions to the Social Media Use Administrative Directive is in the best interests of the Town. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Town of Marana hereby approves the revised Social Media Use Administrative Directive for Town of Marana employees and elected and appointed officials, attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference in this resolution. Regui%qN�k�g 15, 2011 - Page 19 of 90 _ _ {00025454.DOC /} SECTION 2. The Town's Manager and staff are hereby directed and authorized to undertake all other and further tasks required or beneficial to implement the revised Social Media Use Administrative Directive described in Exhibit A. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, this 15 day of March, 2011. Mayor Ed Honea ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney Regulgi�ftg 15, 2011 - Page 20 of 90 -2- {00025454.DOC /} t � T' gR1Z0 ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE Title: Social Media Use Issuing Department: Town Manager /Town Council Effective Date: October 6, 2009 Reviewed: PIO, Town Clerk, Legal, Technology Services Approved: Resolution 2009 -180 Type of Action: Revision (March 15, 2011) 1.0 PURPOSE This administrative directive outlines the protocol and procedures for use of social media to publicize official town services and events. In addition, this policy addresses the responsibilities of individual employees and town officials with regard to social media and the use of town resources (time /equipment), as well as responsibilities related to public records and open meeting laws. 2.0 DEPARTMENTS AFFECTED All Town of Marana departments, employees, and appointed and elected officials. 3.0 REFERENCES 3.1 A.R.S. §§ 41 -1350, 41 -1351, 38-421 and 41 -1347 3.2 A.R.S. §§ 39 -121 et seq: Public records law 3.3 A.R.S. § 38 -431 et seq: Open meeting law 3.4 Town of Marana Personnel Policies and Procedures, Policy 5 -4: Use of communications systems and equipment 3.5 Town of Marana Code of Principle and Ethics - centered Governance 3.6 Town of Marana Town- Issued Computer Equipment/Software and Electronic Communication Usage Policies for Council Members Regular Council MeeTng 9 1GIa& 15, 2011 - Page 21 of 90 3/2/11 4.0 DEFINITIONS 4.1 Social media: Various forms of discussion and information - sharing, including social networks, blogs, video sharing, podcasts, wikis, message boards, and online forums. Technologies include: picture- sharing, wall - postings, fan pages, e-mail, instant messaging, and music - sharing. Examples of social media applications include, but are not limited to, Google and Yahoo Groups (reference, social networking), Wikipedia (reference), MySpace (social networking), Facebook (social networking), YouTube (social networking and video sharing), Flickr (photo sharing), Twitpic (photo sharing), Twitter (social networking and microblogging), Linkedln (business networking), and news media comment sharing/blogging. 4.2 Social networking: The practice of expanding business and/or social contacts by making connections through Web -based applications. This policy focuses on social networking as it relates to the Internet to promote such connections for official town business and for employees, elected and appointed officials who are using this medium in the conduct of official town business. 5.0 POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 5.1 Official town social media sites will be administered by the town's Public Information Officer (PIO), unless an individual department has been granted permission by the Town Manager's Office pursuant to this directive to administer its own social media site or page. The town's social media sites shall be used for the limited purpose of informing the public about town business, services and events. In the absence of the PIO, the Town Manager will designate another individual to administer official town social media sites. 5.2 Individual departments will generally not have their own social media pages or sites. However, a department may submit a request to the Town Manager's Office for permission to establish its own site, based on the functions of the department and the department's need to communicate directly with members of the public. 5.2.1 Requests should be accompanied by an explanation of 1) the purpose of the social media site or service; 2) primary audience served; 3) the reason internal or existing resources will not meet these needs; and 4) a date range for the project (i.e. when will it launch, how long will it be in effect). 5.2.2 Requests should identify appropriate resources, including staff and funding for production and management of services, when applicable. 5.2.3 If an individual department is granted permission to administer its own social media site, the PIO shall monitor the department's use of the site for compliance with this directive. 5.2.4 The Town Manager in his/her sole discretion may direct an individual department to discontinue its use of its own social media site at any time. 5.3 Individual departments may also add content to official town social media sites by submitting a request to the PIO. The PIO will determine if a request is appropriate and adheres to the guidelines of this directive. If a request is not within guidelines, the request will be forwarded to the Town Manager's Office for further review. Regular Council Meeting lUa i�, 2011 - Page 22 of 90 3/2/11 5.4 The town's Web site, www.marana.com, will remain the official location for content regarding town business, services and events. Whenever possible, links within social media formats should direct users back to the town's Web site for more information, forms, documents or online services necessary to conduct business with the Town of Marana. 5.5 Each social media site used by the Town of Marana shall include an introductory statement that clearly specifies the purpose of the site and directs the user back to the town's Web site. 5.6 Town of Marana employees and appointed and elected officials shall not disclose information about confidential town business on either the town's social media sites or their personal social media sites. In addition, all use of social media sites by elected and appointed officials shall be in compliance with Arizona's open meeting laws. Employees and elected or appointed officials' posts are a reflection of their own views and not necessarily those of the town. 5.7 All postings made by the town to social media sites will contain information and content that has already been published or broadcast in an official manner. The town will not comment on other social media members' sites. All official social media postings by the town will be done solely on the town's social media sites or in response to postings made on the town's social media sites. 5.8 Postings and comments to Town of Marana social media sites containing any of the following forms of content will not be allowed: 5.8.1 Comments not topically related to the administrator's posting 5.8.2 Content that violates town policy, including abusive, harassing, intimidating, vulgar, obscene and offensive communications, communications that defame or libel others, and communications that infringe upon the privacy rights of others 5.8.3 Disparaging communications or jokes that are based on race, national origin, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, disability, age, religion, or any other characteristic protected under federal, state or local law 5.8.4 Communications of any copyrighted materials, trade secrets, proprietary information, or any other highly sensitive confidential information 5.8.5 Solicitation of others for commercial ventures or religious, social or political causes 5.8.6 Content that is in violation of the town's Internet use policy 5.9 The Town of Marana reserves the right to remove content that is deemed in violation of this policy or any applicable law. Any participants on the town's official social media sites who are in continual violation of the posting /commenting guidelines may be permanently removed from the town's site. 5.10 The town will only post photos for which it has copyright or owner's permission to use. 5.11 Direct messages sent to social media accounts will be treated as general correspondence and kept in accordance with retention schedules provided by the Arizona State Library and Archives Records Management Division. Town Regular Council Meeting 9 Ma c 1 �, 2011 - Page 23 of 90 3/2/11 employees shall not initiate any direct or private messages on town social media sites. 5.12 Chat or private messaging functions in any social media sites will not be used. 5.13 Links to all social media networks to which the town belongs will be listed on the town's official Web site. Interested parties wishing to interact with these sites will be directed to visit the town's Web site for information on how to participate. 5.14 The Town of Marana reserves the right to temporarily or permanently suspend access to official town social media sites at any time. 5.15 The town may invite others to participate in its social media sites. Such invitations will be based upon the best interests of the town as determined by the PIO in consultation with the Town Manager or designee. 5.16 All content posted on official town social media sites must comply with town Web standards, unless otherwise agreed upon between the requesting department /division, the Town Manager's Office and the Technology Services Director. Employee or town confidentiality shall be maintained in accordance with all applicable laws and town policies. If a question arises regarding the use or posting of confidential information on a social media site, the matter shall be referred to the Legal Department for review. The information in question shall not be posted, or if already posted, shall be removed until an opinion is rendered by the Legal Department. Notwithstanding the opinion of the Legal Department, the Town Manager's Office reserves the right to restrict or remove town information from an official town social media site if the Town Manager believes that the information does not serve the best interests of the town. 5.17 All social media -based services to be developed, designed, managed by or purchased from any third -party source for use requires appropriate budget authority and approval from the Technology Services Director. The requesting department will be responsible for all costs related to the purchase, maintenance and support of third - party products. 6.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 6.1 It is the responsibility of employees and appointed and elected officials to understand the procedures as outlined in this policy. 6.2 The PIO, or the department designee for departments granted permission to maintain their own site, will be responsible for responding to comments and messages as appropriate. Whenever possible, the PIO or department designee will direct users back to the town's official Web site for more information, forms, documents or online services necessary to conduct business with the Town of Marana. 6.3 The Technology Services Department will work with the PIO to ensure that new social networking sites and proposed content meet town standards. Once a new request is determined to meet technology guidelines and town policies, it will be forwarded to the Town Manager's Office for review. 6.4 If the request is approved, the Technology Services Department will allow open Internet access to the applicable social media site for the PIO and other designated employees. Regular Council Meeting lUa 1�, 2011 -Page 24 of 90 3/2/11 6.5 The Town Manager's Office will review requests approved by Technology Services and the PIO and authorize final approval. In addition to the administrators provided by this policy, the Town Manager's Office shall determine /approve additional employee access to social media sites from town computing equipment. 6.6 Designated administrators for town social media sites will be trained regarding the terms of this policy, including their responsibilities to review content submitted for posting to ensure compliance with the policy. 6.7 Employees who are not designated by the Town Manager's Office to access social media sites for official business are prohibited from accessing social media sites utilizing town computing equipment and /or the town's web access. While at work, employees who are not granted access via town systems and computing equipment may use personal computing devices and personal web accounts to access social media sites only during non - working hours such as lunch periods and breaks. If an employee has a need to access social media sites for work purposes, the employee shall submit a request to the Town Manager's Office through the PIO explaining the business need for social media access. 6.8 The PIO will chair a social media committee consisting of the PIO, Permit and Records Manager, Deputy Town Clerk, and Technology Services Director. The committee will meet on a regular basis to update and review policies and make recommendations to the Town Manager regarding current trends and potential impacts on technology services infrastructure. 7.0 ATTACHMENTS None Regular Council Meeting 9 Mar C ch / 4, 2011 - Page 25 of 90 3/2/11 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 11555 W. Civic Center Drive, Marana, Arizona 85653 Council Chambers, March 1, 2011, at or after 7:00 PM Ed Honea, Mayor Herb Kai, Vice Mayor Russell Clanagan, Council Member � Patti Comerford, Council Member Carol McGorray, Council =Member Jon Post, Council;aIember Roxanne Ziegler, Council Me REGULAR COUNCIL METING CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL� Mayor Honea called the meeting to order 7 fl2. p.m. Tow jerk Bronson called roll. All Council Members were present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE VOCATI(1i�/MOMEN ' OF SILENCE Mayor Honea noted that in hoifor of Girl Scout Week, Girl Scouts from Troop 1073 would lead the Pledge. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion to approve jived by ,'#until Member McGorray, second by Council Member Clanag n. Motion tainted una"'i"' sly. CALL T `HE PUBLIC Pastor Dave gepath from Community Christian Church which has been at Grier and Sandario for nead $8 year. 'announced the dedication of their newly renovated and expanded facility o1r Saturday, March 19, 2011 from 9:00 a.m. until Noon. It is open to the public and they would like any and all to attend. He has extra invitations if anyone is interested. The theme of their renovation is "Expanding to Serve Christ, Congregation and our Community." He thanked many people for their support. PROCLAMATIONS Girl Scout Week Proclamation Ms. Bronson read the proclamation. Mayor Honea asked all the Girl Scouts to come to the podium where they would receive the proclamation and then recite the Girl Scout Pledge. Maria Manibusan with the Girls Scouts of Southern Arizona - Sahuaro thanked Council for their support. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 26 of 90 1 March 1, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS Council Member McGorray reported on the success of the Accenture Match Play tournament, the La Fiesta de Los Vaqueros Tucson Rodeo, and also noted that both events brought lots of tourists to the region, including a large number of visitors to the Biosphere 11 near Oracle. Mayor Honea echoed Council Member McGorray's comments and noted that attendance at the golf tournament was up 30 percent from 2010, and is hoping that we will get at least another year of having the tournament in Marana. MANAGER'S REPORT: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS Mr. Davidson thanked all of the town employees for the wor, they did behind the scenes for the match play golf tournament — public works, traffic e nglnering, police, and the public information officer. He also thanked the visible sfif workin the event. PRESENTATIONS None. CONSENT AGENDA Motion to approve moved by Council Member Clanagatt, second by Council Member Ziegler. Motion carried unanimously. C 1: Resolution No. 2011 -31: Relating tip Development; app pp ving a release of assurances for Gladden Farms Block 8 alb acc c of publkimprovements for maintenance C2: Resolution No.. 2011 -32 elating to th ,Environment; approving and authorizing the Mayor to execut & agreem� t with Tucson Audubon Society for borrow pit restoration C 3 • Minutes of the . "8, 2011 special council meeting, the February 9, 2011 Joint Irana/Oro Vall>kudy seSsttzpnd February 15, 2011 regular council meeting LIQUOR LENSES BOARDS, COMM ION AND COMMITTEES COUNCIL ACTION" A 1: Resolution No. 2011 -33: Relating to Marana Regional Airport; approving and authorizing the Public Works Director to execute an Apron Use Permit Agreement between the Town of Marana and Southern Arizona Sports Car Club, Inc. for a series of non - aeronautical special events at the airport; and authorizing town staff to execute other similar agreements for future non - aeronautical special event series at the airport Presented by Barbara Johnson, who noted that this was being brought to Council because for many years non - aeronautical events at the airport just occurred and didn't go through the town process. Due to the restructuring of the airport management, staff has become more aware of the necessity of using the town's process to make sure that things Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 27 of 90 2 March 1, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes are properly managed. The Sports Car Club of America has been using the airport for many years but was told last year that those events would have to terminate because the town's insurance didn't cover those types events. The Sports Car Club came back with a proposal and talked about what their events brought to the town, including working with the high school. The legal, finance, public works, and clerk's departments worked to put a contract together for their events. Because this is the first contract of this type, staff felt it was important to bring this to Council's attention and to ask for their endorsement. The insurance has been changed to accommodate these types of non - aeronautical events and other concerns within the town have been addressed. She also introduced Rob Rockefeller and David Rock of the Sports Car Club who addressed and thanked Council. Kenneth Meeks, the automotive director at Marana High, School, also addressed Council and noted that having the Sports Car Club evntthe airport has provided a great opportunity for student involvement. Council Member Comerford also commented that this is a wonderful opportunity for Maranad for the high school. Motion to approve moved of Council Member Clamug�xt, second b �7il Member McGorray. Motion carried unanimously. A 2: Ordinance No. 2011.08: Relating to Counci amending. Marana Towitode section 2 -4 -1 (A) to eliminate the requirement that a ob 'bil meeting must be held on the third Tuesday of every month and establishing procedul ,by which the Mayor, Council Members and the Town Manager may �_ quest additional meetings as necessary Presented by Cedric Hay, who noted that Arizona state statute mandates that the Council, by ordinance, fix the time and place of its The code currently states r that the Council shall hQld tritings on the first and third Tuesdays of each month. What has been discovered through the agenda process is that occasionally there will be a time when we don't need"two xegular neetings each utprith. The ordinance before Council deletes the requirementtr�­av theceond Tuesday meeting of the month. It gives more flexibility toc urici1 and and money. He asked for comments from Couuell. -Hones asked if the ordinance could be expanded to say that either the first or second regular meetirigt l be dispensed with subject to proper notice so that there` s, an option to excel eitlh'Wineeting. Mr. Hay noted that he had prepared an alternative 1*4inance based on that possible feedback. He projected that ordinance on the screen to Coit!C iq _an d noted the change in language to reflect the Mayor's comments compared to the' � nance in Council's prepared packet materials. Motion moved by Council Member Clanagan, second by Council Member Post, the ordinance shall allow, with proper notice, cancellation of either the first or second regular meeting of each month. Motion carried unanimously. A 3: Resolution No. 2011 -34: Relating to Utilities; requesting the City of Tucson to include a Stored Water Credits surcharge in the water rates charged to Tucson Water customers within the town limits of the Town of Marana Dorothy O'Brien presented this item, gave a brief history of the reason for the change. She noted that the proposed surcharge would be $.08 per CCF which is one cubic feet of water, which is how Tucson Water bills their customers. Each account would be charged Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 28 of 90 3 March 1, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes that amount per CCF on a monthly basis, and that amount would be turned over to the town to recover the cost of transferring stored water credits to Tucson Water on an annual basis as is required by the intergovernmental agreement between the Town and Tucson Water, and then extending water into service areas where they are not contractually obligated to do so. She noted the areas that are contractually obligated and then some smaller areas that represent an individual property owner which has an agreement for the provision of water by Tucson Water. What staff intends is to apply a surcharge which recovers the direct cost of water to buy the long term storage credits to transfer to them as well as replace the water in our bank to replace the credits that are already stored. For a user of about 7,000 gallons, which is fairly average, the $.08 surcharge would be about $.75. Motion to approve moved by Council Member Post, secondl Vice Mayor Kai. Motion carried unanimously. tY ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION ti D 1: Legislative /Intergovernmental Report: regaling all pending stare federal legislation and report on recent meetings of oth legislative bodies Josh Wright reported that yesterday was the 50 die current session. This is about halfway in the process. There are still some lark to be addressed related to municipalities — the biggest being the sty budget. There has been some good news is that January 2011 marked the sixth con §qciahy onth where experience growth in revenues — about 7.5 percent increase dyer Janny. 20 10 There are two bills in particular we are tracking one is SB 1286:dealing wl� p ermits that would require a response for any permit aqi. kind to be given within 60''days. The problem with the bill is that it is vague — what is a y r no response — for a single submittal or the entire project. We are worl, with thLeague on where that bill is headed. The other bill is SB 1525 dealing with imphct is beingdriven by the Central Arizona Homebuilders tAssociation fey h� e � some significant changes to impact fees and worked , "a. the Leag,to aceve a compromise. This year they decided to throw any comprise or negotiaaside straight to the Legislature and ask for what they want. �TEt would make�pger prtess to spend the money but a shorter window from date of co lotion to actualt 'spend the money. Staff will be tracking the progress of this bill. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS Motion to go into executive session on Item E. 3 moved by Council Member McGorray, second by Council Member Comerford. Motion carried unanimously. Council left the dais at 7:33 p.m. Council returned to the dais at 7:43 p.m. E 1: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. §38- 431.03 (A)(3), Council may ask for discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town Attorney concerning any matter listed on this agenda E 2: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38- 431.03(A)(3),(4) and (7), discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town's attorneys and discussion and to consider its Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 29 of 90 4 March 1, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes position and instruct the Town Manager and staff concerning (1) the lawsuit entitled Town of Marana v. Pima County/Pima County v. Marana (consolidated), Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2008- 001131, (2) pending legal issues, settlement discussions and contract negotiations relating to the transition of Marana wastewater collection and treatment to the Town of Marana E 3: Executive session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38- 431.03(A)(3) and (4) to discuss and consult for legal advice with the town's attorneys and to consider the town's position and give direction concerning the application and handling of Park Development Impact Fees collected within the Dove Mountain area FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn moved by Council Member Post, second by ber Comerford Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 7:44 p.m. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing are- true and corre a",",inutes of the Marana Town Council meeting held on March 1, 201 I ,I.further certify that,# quorum was present. Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Y T Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 30 of 90 5 March 1, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes MARA 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 Council Chambers, March 15, 2011, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item L 1 From: Jocelyn Bronson , Town Clerk Strategic Plan Focus Area: Not Applicable Subject: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding a New Series #12 (Restaurant) liquor license application submitted by Nilza G. Iwaya Montano on behalf of Lupita's Cafe located at 7077 N. Thornydale Road Discussion: This application is for a New Series #12 (Restaurant) liquor license submitted by Nilza G. Iwaya Montano on behalf of Lupita's Cafe located at 7077 N. Thornydale Road. Pursuant to state law, the application was posted at the premises where the business is to be conducted. The posted notice provided that residents within a one -mile radius from the premises may file written arguments in favor of or opposed to the issuance of the license with the Town Clerk's Office within 20 days of the posting. As of March 2nd, no written arguments were received by the Clerk's Office for or against the proposed liquor license. The town's Building Safety, Planning and Legal Departments/Divisions have reviewed this application to determine whether the applicant is in compliance with zoning, building and other legal requirements for the business. Additionally, the Marana Police Department has conducted a local background check. All departments found the applicant to be in compliance and have no objections to the issuance of this license. The Town Council must enter an order recommending approval or disapproval of the application within 60 days after filing of the application. By state statute, "in all proceedings before the town council, the applicant bears the burden of showing that the public convenience requires and that the best interests of the community will be substantially served by the issuance of a license." If the Council's recommendation is for disapproval, the order must include an attachment stating the specific reasons for the recommendation of disapproval and including a summary of the testimony or other evidence supporting the recommendation. If the Council enters an order recommending approval of the application, then no hearing before the Arizona state liquor board will take place, unless the director of the DLLC, the liquor board or a resident within a one mile radius from the premises requests a hearing. If the Council enters an order recommending disapproval of the application or does not submit a recommendation to the DLLC within the 60 -day time period, or if the director, board or a resident within a one mile Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 31 of 90 radius from the premises requests a hearing, then the state board will hold a hearing regarding the application. At the hearing, the state board will consider all evidence and testimony in favor of or opposed to the granting of the license. The decision of the board to either grant or deny an application will normally take place within 105 days after the application has been filed, unless the director of the DLLC deems it necessary to extend the time period. ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: E] Descriptions of common_types of liquor licenses_ (00018233).DOC Descriptions of common types of liquor licenses Backup Material El Affidavit - of _Posting..pdf Affidavit of Posting Backup Material L-1 Use_Form_LGB Recommendation.pdf Recommendation Backup Material Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that an order recommending approval be submitted to the DLLC for this liquor license application. Suggested Motion: OPTION 1: 1 move to adopt an order recommending approval of a New Series #12 (Restaurant) liquor license application submitted by Nilza G. Iwaya Montano on behalf of Lupita's Cafe located at 7077 N. Thornydale Road. OPTION 2: I move to adopt an order recommending disapproval of a New Series #12 (Restaurant) liquor license application submitted by Nilza G. Iwaya Montano on behalf of Lupita's Cafe located at 7077 N. Thornydale Road. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 32 of 90 Department of Liquor Licenses and Control Descriptions of Common Types of Liquor Licenses Series 06 Bar This liquor license is transferable from person to person and/or location to location within the same county only and allows the holder both on- & off-sale retail privileges. This license allows a bar retailer to sell and serve spirituous liquors, primarily by individual portions, to be consumed on the premises and in the original container for consumption on or off the premises. A retailer with off-sale privileges may deliver spirituous liquor off of the licensed premises in connection with a retail sale. Payment must be made no later than the time of delivery. Off-sale ("To Go") package sales of spirituous liquor can be made on the bar premises as long as the area of off-sale operation does not utilize a separate entrance and exit from the ones provided for the bar. A hotel or motel with a Series 06 license may sell spirituous liquor in sealed containers in individual portions to its registered guests at any time by means of a minibar located in the guest rooms of registered guests. The registered guest must be at least twenty- one (21) years of age. Access to the minibar is by a key or magnetic card device and not furnished to a guest between the hours of 1:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday and 1:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. on Sundays. This is a quota license, which means there are no "new" Series 06 licenses available. It must be purchased privately and the price is based on availability in the county. Once a Series 06 has been purchased, the buyer must apply for a transfer to have the license put in his or her name, at the same or another location. Series 07 Beer and Wine Bar This liquor license is transferable from person to person and/or location to location within the same county only and allows the holder both on- & off-sale retail privileges. This license allows a beer and wine bar retailer to sell and serve beer and wine, primarily by individual portions, to be consumed on the premises and in the original container for consumption on or off the premises. A retailer with off-sale privileges may deliver spirituous liquor off of the licensed premises in connection with a retail sale. Off-sale ("To Go") package sales can be made on the bar premises as long as the area of off-sale operation does not utilize a separate entrance and exit from the one provided for the bar. Payment must be made no later than the time of delivery. This is a quota license, which means there are no "new" Series 07 licenses available. It must be purchased privately and the price is based on availability in the county. Once a Series 07 has been purchased, the buyer must apply for a transfer to have the license put in his or her name, at the same or another location. Regu%6batWV - March 15, 2011 - Page 33 of 90 Department of Liquor Licenses and Control Descriptions of Common Types of Liquor Licenses Series 09 Liquor Store This liquor license is transferable from person to person and/or location to location within the same county only and allows the holder off-sale retail privileges. This license allows a spirituous liquor store retailer to sell all spirituous liquors, only in the original unbroken package, to be taken away from the premises of the retailer and consumed off the premises. A retailer with off- sale privileges may deliver spirituous liquor off of the licensed premises in connection with a retail sale. Payment must be made no later than the time of delivery. Series 10 Beer and Wine Store This non-transferable, off -sale retail privileges liquor license allows a retail store to sell beer and wine (no other spirituous liquors), only in the original unbroken package, to be taken away from the premises of the retailer and consumed off the premises. A retailer with off-sale privileges may deliver spirituous liquor off of the licensed premises in connection with a retail sale. Payment must be made no later than the time of delivery. Series 11 Hotel/Motel This non-transferable, on-sale retail privileges liquor license allows the holder of a hotel/motel license to sell and serve spirituous liquor solely for consumption on the pi&emises of a hotel or motel that has a restaurant where food is served on the premises. The restaurant on the licensed premises must derive at least forty percent (40%) of its gross revenue from the sale of food. The holder of this license may sell spirituous liquor in sealed containers in individual portions to its registered guests at any time by means of a minibar located in the guest rooms of registered guests. The registered guest must beat least twenty-one (21) years of age. Access to the minibar is by a key or magnetic card device and not furnished to a guest between the hours of 1:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday and 1:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. on Sundays. Series 12,R-Pstaurant This non-7transferable, 4 ate ,"retail ',privile ge's, liquor license allows the holder of 6"i i #tar ant ljcense to sell and serve,' ifituous liquor' solely for consumption on the' premises of an establishment which derives at per' e f last forty ceqt, its gross revenue rorTi the sale of food. Failure to meet the 40% requirement , , ,, shW1:r"IUft in revocation of the Regulwi&ffff!Wf"�ii - March 15, 2011 - Page 34 of 90 R1 ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL 00 UV,Washington 5th Floor Phc e lix , AZ 85007 -2334 (0,021 i1 Date of Posting: '' , of Posting Removal; lwaya Montano Nilze G Applicant Name: Last first Middle 7077 N. Thomydalle lead Marana 85741 Business address: Street city zip ,1' 4'100 License: 1 hereby c rtify that pursuant to A.:S, § 4 -201,1 posted notice in a conspicuousplaceon the premises proposed to be licensed 'by the Bove applicant and said notice was pasted fvr at least twenty ( O) days: Print Natir of G°iWKQurrfy Offidal "title Telephone # 51 rta Date Ski ed Return this affidavit with yow recom rtendation,(Le, Minutes of Meeting, Verbatim, etc) or any other, related ifyou have any questions Tease calt,(602) 542.5141 and aslt for the Licensing Division. Individuals "Wringt veclal accornmodations please call (604,542-90V t W 4raa 9 Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 35 of 90 Y84iWi Arizona Depar of Liquor Licenses and Control 8M Wiest Washington, Sth, Floor ­ 1 5 fidenix, Arizona 85 4t xliqutal:�v 642 - 542°511 LOCAL GQVE, RNI G - - 00DY RECOMMENDATION MARANA 1 CITY {AWN STATE APPLICATION # PIMA COU NTY CA F l tl t"J -N A. 11 l 4 %C£ I TY #' U-2 01 s z Regular At a rrleetlrtcl of the .r- the Ci Dusty ( Regular tlar r Special} (Governin l dy 4 �4 Ma ana ; 1 March 2011 O f h an the day of the (Month) (Year) Nitza Guadakipe lwaya Montano application of for a license to sell spirituous liquors at 12104100 1 the premises described. in Application # License Class Series was considered a provided by Title 4 A.M. as amended. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the APPLICATION of Nilza Guadalupe lwaya Montano 4 ls.hereby recommended for (approval/disapproval) a license to sell spirituous liquors of the class, and in the manner designated in Application. IT 15 FURTHER ORDERS that a Certified Copy of this Order be immediately transmitted to the Department df Liquor Licenses and Control, Licensing Division, Phoenix, Arizona. CITY �COUNTY CLERK" DATED AT This day of (Day) (Month) (Year) * Disabled individuals requiring special accommodations please call the Department AC IM7 W20 Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 36 of 90 AAN 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 Council Chambers, March 15, 2011, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item L 2 From: Jocelyn C. Bronson , Town Clerk Strategic Plan Focus Area: Not Applicable Subject: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding the special event liquor license application submitted by the Arizona Paralyzed Veterans of America on behalf of Harley- Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I -10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser Discussion: This application is for a special event liquor license submitted by the Arizona Paralyzed Veterans of America on behalf of Harley- Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I -10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser. The applicant for this special event liquor license has submitted a special event permit application as well. A special event liquor license is a temporary, non - transferable, on -sale retail privileges liquor license that allows a charitable, civic, fraternal, political or religious organization to sell and serve spirituous liquor for consumption only on the premises where the spirituous liquor is sold and only for the period authorized on the license. Qualifying organizations will be granted a special event license for no more than 10 days in a calendar year. Events must be held on consecutive days and at the same location or additional licenses will be required. The license is automatically terminated upon closing of the last day of the event or the expiration of the license, whichever occurs first. The qualified organization must receive at least 25 percent of the gross revenues from the special event. Pursuant to state law, a person desiring a special event liquor license must request a special event application from the Department of Liquor Licenses and Control (DLLC). The applicant then must file the application with the town for events occurring within the town's limits. The town may then recommend approval or disapproval of the special event liquor license. If the special event liquor license application is approved by the Town Council, and the event meets the requirements for granting the license, the director of the DLLC will issue the special event liquor license to the qualifying organization. If the application is disapproved by the Town Council, the DLLC will normally not consider the application. Attached is the application for the Arizona Paralyzed Veterans of America Poker Run special event to held on March 26th. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 37 of 90 ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: E] SE_Liq_Poker_Run.pdf Special Event Liquor License Application Backup Material Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this special event liquor license application. Suggested Motion: OPTION 1: 1 move to approve the special event liquor license application submitted by the Arizona Paralyzed Veterans of America on behalf of Harley- Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I- 10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser. OPTION 2: I move to disapprove the special event liquor license application submitted by the Arizona Paralyzed Veterans of America on behalf of Harley- Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I- 10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 38 of 90 State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control 800 W. Washington, 5th Floor Phoenix, A. 85007 www.azliquor.gov (602)542 -5141 APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EVENT LICENSE Fee $25.00 per day for :1 710 day events only A service fee ;of $25.00 will be charged for all dishonored checks (A.R.S.§ 44-6852) NOTE THIS DOCUMENT MUST BE FULLY COMPLETED OR IT WILL BE RETURNED. PLEASE ALLOW 10 BUSINESS DAYS FOR APPROVAL *Application must be approved by local government before submission to DLLC USE ONLY Department of Liquor Licenses and Control (Section #20) LICENSE # 1. Name of Organization: 2. Non- Profit/I.R.S. Tax Exempt Numbe 3. The organization is a: (check one box only) 19 Charitable ❑ Fraternal (must have regular membership and in existence for over 5 years) ❑ Civic ❑ Political Party, Ballot Measure, or Campaign Committee ❑ Religious p Q 4. What is the purpose of this event? i ©� R- ►`�-/� 5. Location of the event: Address of physit:al Ieration (Not P.O. Box) City 1- County zip Applicant must be a member of the gualiMna organization and authorized by an Officer, Director or Chairperson of the Organization named in Question #1. (Signature required in section #18) 6. Applicant C2v f 7 - Last I Middle Date of Birth 7: Applicant's Mailing Address: 1 u �,S Z Sheet City State zip 8. Phone Numbers: OW 33�19 ($� ) - 7tevci Site Owner # Applicant's Business # Applicant's Home # 9. Date(s) & Hours of Event: (Remember you ca sell alcohol before 10:00 a.m. on Sunday) Date Day ©f Week Hours from A;M;lP:M To AM; /PW Day 1: ! ( ✓ c am d�pV &22 Day 2: Day 3: Day 4: Day 5: Day 6: Day 7: Day 8: Day 9: Day 10: [� o l�su05/ C Meeti — 1v�9 MA'd 18 4 1 (fn ; special ACC011 modahons, pleam cal (602) 542-9027 10. Has the applicant been convicted of a felony in the past five years, or had a liquor license revoked? ❑ YES A (attach explanation if ves) 11. This organization has been issued a special event license for C days this year, including this event (not to exceed 10 days per year). 12. Is the organization using the services of a promoter or other person to manage the event? ❑ YES 10 NO If yes, attach a copy of the agreement. 13. List all people and organizations who will receive the proceeds. Account for 100% of the proceeds. THE ORGANIZATION APPLYING MUST RECEIVE 25% OF THE GROSS REVENUES OF THE SPECIAL EVENT LIQUO Name Z rj � 49 U� Address O t A; l ,ra a ^y`. Name Addre Per` (Attach additional sheet if necessary) 14. Knowledge of Arizona State Liquor Laws Title 4 is important to prevent liquor law violations. If you have any questions regarding the law or this application, please contact the Arizona State Department of Liquor Licenses and Control for assistance. NOTE: ALL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES MUST BE FOR CONSUMPTION AT THE EVENT SITE ONLY. " NO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES SHALL LEAVE SPECIAL EVENT PREMISES " 15. What security and control measures will you take to prevent violations of state liquor laws at this event? (List type and number of security /police personnel and type of fencing or control barriers if applicable) # Police ❑ Fencing —� # Security personnel ❑ Barriers 16. Is there an existing liquor license at the location where the special event is being held? ❑ YES NO If yes, does the existing business agree to suspend their liquor license during the time period, and in the area in which the special event license will be in use? ❑ YES ❑ NO (ATTACH COPY OF AGREEMENT) Name of Business ( ) Phone Number 17. Your licensed premises is that area in which you are authorized to sell, dispense, or serve spirituous liquors under the provisions of your license. The following page is to be used to prepare a diagram of your special evert licensed Rremises. Please show dimensions, searing areas, fanoing, baniclades or other control measures and security positions. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 40 of 90 I y � f x w i ' g O R- e\ x i �e i NEW_ A' F" , � � xa a d t 17 a rmq IT 4 33 f %h i� k x ar �� N r G d w THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED ONLY BY AN OFFICER. DIRECTOR OR CHAIRPERSQN 'OF THE ORGANIZATION NAMED IN QUESTION #1 18. I ! declare that I am an Of iicerlDirectorlChairperson appointing the (1 full name) ^ � appl'ieant listed in giiesfie 6, t� appfq en 6ehal# of tfie fieFegeinQ aFgarjizatien � a Spi3aal Event Ligiiirr License. ' r rtle/Posibon) (Date) (Phone #) Hal S State o t� County of C r An Q- � t Zb 4 - Notaty PO The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Rim County, kizord », My Conan. Expires 64013 p Year My ommrssion expires on: (Date) (Signature of NOTARY PUBLIC) THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED ONLY BY THE APPLICANT NAMED IN QUESTION #6 19. I, o D �'7—� �..� —�i � declare that I am the APPLICANT filing this application as (Print full name) listed in Question 6. 1 have read the application and the contents and all statements are true, correct and complete. State of 2=LL& County of f X The foregoi g instrument was acknowledged before me this Weana M. Hall Mormr Year ssion a glll` + Pim a Courk AFzorlob furs of NOTA Y PUBLIC Comm. Expires 6.6 -2013 approval. CHM or County MUST recommend event and complete item #2 The local aovemina body may require additional applications to be completed and submitted 60 days in advance of the event. Addi tional licensing fees may also be r equired befor approval may be granted. LOCAL GOVERNING BODY APPROVAL SECTION 20. I, hereby recommend this special event application (Government Official) (Title) on behalf of (City, Town or County) (Signature of OFFICIAL) (Date) FOR DLLC DEPARTMENT USE ONLY Department Comment Section: (Employee) (Date) LJAPPROVED L] DISAPPROVED BY: (L) (fie) Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 43 of 90 '. LARANA 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 Council Chambers, March 15, 2011, 7:00:00 PM .................................. . . . .. ........... ... ................. .. ....... . ................ .......................................................................................... . . ­­____._..­.____­___­ . ... ....... ....... ... To: Mayor and Council Item L 3 From: Jocelyn C. Bronson , Town Clerk Strategic Plan Focus Area: Not Applicable Subject: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding the special event liquor license application submitted by the Marana. Health Center, 13395 N. Marana Main Street, for a grand opening fundraiser Discussion: This application is for a special event liquor license submitted by the Marana Health Center, 13395 N. Marana Main Street, for a grand opening fundraiser. The applicant for this special event liquor license has submitted a special event permit application as well. A special event liquor license is a temporary, non-transferable, on-sale retail privileges liquor license that allows a charitable, civic, fraternal, political or religious organization to sell and serve spirituous liquor for consumption only on the premises where the spirituous liquor is sold and only for the period authorized on the license. Qualifying organizations will be granted a special event license for no more than 10 days in a calendar year. Events must be held on consecutive days and at the same location or additional licenses will be required. The license is automatically terminated upon closing of the last day of the event or the expiration of the license, whichever occurs first. The qualified organization must receive at least 25 percent of the gross revenues from the special event. Pursuant to state law, a person desiring a special event liquor license must request a special event application from the Department of Liquor Licenses and Control (DLLC). The applicant then must file the application with the town for events occurring within the town's limits. The town may then recommend approval or disapproval of the special event liquor license. If the special event liquor license application is approved by the Town Council, and the event meets the requirements for granting the license, the director of the DLLC will issue the special event liquor license to the qualifying organization. If the application is disapproved by the Town Council, the DLLC will normally not consider the application. Attached is the application for the Marana Health Center Grand Opening special event to held on May 21st. ATTACHMENTS: Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 44 of 90 Name: Description: Type: 0 SE_Liq_Health Center.pdf Special Event Liquor License Application Backup Material Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this special event liquor license application. Suggested Motion: OPTION 1: I move to approve the special event liquor license application submitted by the Marana Health Center, 13395 N. Marana Main Street, for a grand opening fundraiser. OPTION 2: I move to disapprove the special event liquor license application submitted by the Marana Health Center, 13395 N. Marana Main Street, for a grand opening fundraiser. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 45 of 90 State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control 800 W. Washington, 5th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007 www.azliquorgov (602)542 -5141 APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EVENT LICENSE Fee = $25.00 per day for 1 -10 day events only A service fee of $25.00 will be charged for all dishonored checks (A.R.S.§ 44 -6852) NOTE THIS DOCUMENT MUST BE FULLY COMPLETED OR IT WILL BE RETURNED. PLEASE ALLOW 10 BUSINESS DAYS FOR APPROVAL "Application must be approved by local government before submission to DLLC USE ONLY Department of Liquor Licenses and Control. (Section #ZO) LICENSE # 1. Name of Organization: 2. Non- ProfiVI.R.S. Tax Exempt Number. 3. The organization is a: (check one box only) W Charitable ❑ Fraternal (must have regular membership and in existence for over 5 years) ❑ Civic ❑ Political Party, Ballot Measure, or Campaign Committee ❑ Religious 4. What is the purpose of this event? Q 5. Location of the event: Address of physical location (Not P.O. Box) city County Zip Tx�> Applicant must be a member of the auaiifyina organization and authorized by an Officer, Director or Chairperson of the Organization named in Question #1. (Signature required in section #18) 6. Applicant Q�:SA 1" <-\f (� Last First I ` Middle c N N W 7. Applicant's Mailing Address: V3 10 L A 1 4 1J �Zi_� c�a�a YA k %AQ � - 4,L, E S6 street city stare zip 8. Phone Numbers: Ste Owner # Applicants Business # 9. Date(s) & Hours of Event: ( Remember: you caru►ot sell alcohol before 10:00 a.m. on Sunday) Date Day of Week Hours front M P.M. To A.M. Day 1: al S = 00 \ 0=30 Day 2: Day 3: Day 4: Day 5: Day 6: Day 7: Day 8: Day 9: Day 10: L94mligtFowncil Meetia blA180 9&M d&W#iQ special accommodations, please cab (602) 542 -9027 10. Has the applicant been convicted of a felony in the past five years, or had a liquor license revoked? ❑ YES f$ NO (attach explanation if vest 11. This organization has been issued a special event license for days this year, including this event (not to exceed 10 days per year). 12. Is the organization using the services of a promoter or other person to manage the event? ® YES ❑ NO If yes, attach a copy of the agreement. 13. List all people and organizations who will receive the proceeds. Account for 100 of the proceeds. THE ORGANIZATION APPLYING MUST RECEIVE 25% OF THE GROSS REVENUES OF THE SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR SALES. Name Percentage Address Name Percentage Addre (Attach additional sheet if necessary) 14. Knowledge of Arizona State Liquor Laws Title 4 is important to prevent liquor law violations. If you have any questions regarding the law or this application, please contact the Arizona State Department of Liquor Licenses and Control for assistance. NOTE: ALL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES MUST BE FOR CONSUMPTION AT THE EVENT SITE ONLY. " NO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES SHALL LEAVE SPECIAL EVENT PREMISES. 15. What security and control measures will you take to prevent violations of state liquor laws at this event? (List type and number of security /police personnel and type of fencing or control barriers if applicable) F# Police ® Fencing --022# Security personnel ® Barriers �..�So�a� vim( �c5► 5�.� �ee'S °'� � oc.IS! �� � t>�. � �a.,Cwr 16. Is there an existing liquor license at the location where the special event is being held? []YES ® NO If yes, does the existing business agree to suspend their liquor license during the time period, and in the area in which the special event license will be in use? (] YES ❑ NO (ATTACH COPY OF AGREEMENT) V3 ( Name of Business hone Number 17. Your licensed premises is that area in which you are authorized to sell, dispense, or serve spirituous liquors under the provisions of your license. The following page is to be used to prepare a diagram of your special event licensed premises. Please show dimensions, serving areas, fencing, barricades or other control measures and security positions. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 —Page 47 of 90 SPECIAL EVENT LICENSED PREMISES DIAGRAM (This diagram must be completed with this application) Special Event Diagram: (Show dimensions, serving areas, and label type of enclosure and security positions) NOTE: Show nearest cross streets, highway, or road if location doesn't have an address. N Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 48 of 90 3 Ar w 4A. ems' z' P b k Est �� � ��aaag� � � �R L •� � � � � c } ax Jtw O"no an or WA a .. z ^,- 1 4 r _. � � � ��M'�'"'^�• +�arts ar ae xrt —ae — wa ar yw Ya *SfSa*�+!!et wf flk?eae x ; THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED ONLY BY AN OFFICER, DIRECTOR OR CHAIRPERSON OF THE JJ?? ORGANIZATION NAMED IN QUESTION #1 �0 • L/A N `Z,, declare that I am an Officer/DImgtq#Chatroemon appointing the lint tuN name) Question 6, to apply behalf of the foregoing organization for a Special Even License. X �(� 1 ,Z7 I! ( i'zo� 69Z -4'li (r9wPosition) (Date) (Phone #) Lorraine Madrid Notary Public - Arix na 5 Of z�D 1 County of Puna county The foregoing instrument was adc ed before me this My Commission Expires January 2, 2013 My Commission expires on: (Date) (SigA&n of N T BU ) THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED ONLY BY THE APPLICANT NAMED IN QUESTION #6 19. 1 � //' declare that I am the APPLICANT filing this application as ( nine) fisted In Question 6. 1 read app6catiort and the contents and all statenwts are true, correct and oomplete. State of Ael �D.0 - County of X The fcregoirig katrurnerit was admowledged before me this orraine Madrid ry / Public - Arizona 7 i Pima County - Yew My Gomm ssion Expires My corl�rntssion ^ ' /f- t�re NOTARY i You must obtain local aovemap a�ttroval. Cif or County MUST recommend event and Complete item #2 The local novernina body may reaulre additional aooiications to be completed and submitted 60 days In advance of the event. Addi tional licensing fees may also be requited befor approval maybe granted. LOCAL GOVERNING BODY APPROVAL SECTION 20. I, hereby recorr mend this special event appkatlon (Goverrtrnent Milli) (Tills) on behalf of (City, Town or Cou *) (Signature of OFFICIAL) (Date) FOR DLLC DEPARTMENT USE ONLY Department Comment Section: prowee) (Date) []APPROVED Lj DISAPPROVED BY: Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 50 of 90 A: 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 Council Chambers, March 15, 2011, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item A 1 From: Jocelyn C. Bronson , Town Clerk Strategic Plan Focus Area: Not Applicable Subject: Resoluti No. 2011 -37: Relating to Elections; adopting the results of the primary election held on March 8, 2011 Discussion: Pursuant to A.R.S. § 16 -646, the governing body of a city or town must meet to canvass the votes after a primary and /or general election. This must be done not less than six days nor more than 20 days after an election. Neither the election results nor the canvass were available at the time this item was prepared for the Council packet. Staff anticipates that the official canvass from Pima County Division of Elections will be available by March 15, 2011, and will be presented to Council at that time. ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: El Option Xl_Resolution CANVASS_OF_THE_PRIMARYVOTES 201 Ldoc Option X1 No Run -Off Candidates Resolution 0 Option-X2-Resolution CANVASS OF_THE PRIMARYVOTES 2011.doc Option X2 - Run -off Candidates Resolution Staff Recommendation: Staff requests Council approval of the official canvass of the vote for the primary election held on March 8, 2011 when it is presented to Council on March 15, 2011. Suggested Motion: I move to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -37; adopting the results of the primary election held on March 8, 2011. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 51 of 90 MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011-37 RELATING TO ELECTIONS: DECLARING AND ADOPTING THE RESULTS OF THE PRIMARY ELECTION HELD ON MARCH 8, 2011 WHEREAS the Town of Marana, Pima County, Arizona, did hold a primary election on the 8 day of March, 2011, for the election of the Mayor and two Council Members; and WHEREAS the election returns have been presented to and have been canvassed by the Town Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the total number of ballots cast at said primary election, as confirmed by Pima County, was SECTION 2: That early ballots were processed and counted; _ ballots rejected. SECTION 3: That provisional ballots were received; ballots verified and counted; ballots unverified and uncounted. SECTION 4: That the votes cast for Mayor were as follows: Name Vote Total Ed Honea SECTION 5: That the votes cast for the candidates for Council Member were as follows: Name Vote Total Dave Bowen Russell Clanagan Jeff Gray Roxanne Ziegler SECTION 6: That it is hereby found, determined and declared of record, that the following candidates did receive more than one -half of the total number of valid votes cast and will be issued a certificate of election: Reg41gF,�gKqq&hAgptA,r Yarch 15, 2011 - Page 52 of 90 SECTION 8: This resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, this 15 day of March, 2011. Mayor Ed Honea ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney Reg�gf,�qKqQjgpt 4f- yarch 15, 2011 -Page 53 of 90 2 MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -37 RELATING TO ELECTIONS: DECLARING AND ADOPTING THE RESULTS OF THE PRIMARY ELECTION HELD ON MARCH 8, 2011 WHEREAS the Town of Marana, Pima County, Arizona, did hold a primary election on the 8 th day of March, 2011, for the election of the Mayor and two Council Members; and WHEREAS the election returns have been presented to and have been canvassed by the Town Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the total number of ballots cast at said primary election, as confirmed by Pima County, was SECTION 2: That early ballots were processed and counted; _ ballots rejected. SECTION 3: That provisional ballots were received; ballots verified and counted; ballots unverified and uncounted. SECTION 4: That the votes cast for Mayor were as follows: Name Vote Total Ed Honea SECTION 5: That the votes cast for the candidates for Council Member were as follows: Name Vote Total Dave Bowen Russell Clanagan Jeff Gray Roxanne Ziegler SECTION 6: That it is hereby found, determined and declared of record, that the following candidates did receive more than one -half of the total number of valid votes cast and will be issued a certificate of election: RegWgF,ggKj6Mqq%qf -yarch 15, 2011 - Page 54 of 90 SECTION 7: That it is hereby found, determined and declared of record, that the total number of valid votes cast for Council will require a run -off in the General Election on May 17, 2011. SECTION 8: This resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, this 15 day of March, 2011. Mayor Ed Honea ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney RegW§fa9pt@j&NgR%9_r-yarch 15, 2011 - Page 55 of 90 2 r MA Vo" 00 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 Council Chambers, March 15, 2011, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item A 2 From: Lisa Shafer , Interim Planning Director Strategic Plan Focus Area: Not Applicable Subject: PUB HEARING: Ordinance No. 2011.10: Relating to Development; amending the Land Development Code Title 3 (Definitions) by adding a "Designated Commercial Area" definition to Section 03.04 and modifying Title 5 (Zoning) Section 05.02.01 (Zone A - Small Lot Zone), as it relates to permitted uses; and establishing an effective date Res No. 2011 -38 Relating to Development; declaring as a public record filed with the Town Clerk the amendments to Marana Land Development Code Title 3 (Definitions) adding a "Designated Commercial Area" definition to Section 03.04 and modifying Title 5 (Zoning) Section 05.02.01 (Zone A - Small Lot Zone), as it relates to permitted uses Discussion: The Town of Marana Land Development Code currently requires all new uses within Zone A- Small Lot Zone to follow the procedures for a Significant Land Use Change whenever the use is not assigned the same 3 -digit subsector number within the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) as the previous use. There are quite a few properties within the Town's Zone A that have been developed for commercial use and it would be very beneficial to those owners to be able to sell or lease without having to obtain approval of a significant land use change. Staff is proposing a modification to the Zone A regulations to allow existing buildings or suites located within a Designated Commercial Area the ability to operate all of the uses permitted within the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone without the need for a Significant Land Use Change, provided that the use can be accommodated within the existing building or suite without requiring a new retail commercial building permit. Neighborhood Commercial zoning has been established in many areas adjacent to existing residential uses. This change will provide more economic vitality to these Designated Commercial Areas and will be beneficial to the residents of the area. If the property owner or tenant wanted to implement any use not allowed within the NC zone, they would be required to process and obtain approval of a significant land use change. Attached to this staff report are the permitted uses for the NC zone. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 56 of 90 Staff proposes the following addition to Title 3 Definitions Section 03 -04 Definitions "D ": . Designated Commercial Area: A lot in Zone A where the only building or buildings were originally designed and constructed to accommodate business, commercial, office, industrial, or warehousing uses and not residential uses. Staff proposes the following modifications to Title 5 Zoning Section 05.02.01 (Zone A - Small Lot Zone: . Permitted Uses. Within Zone A, residential, commercial, industrial, and quasi - public land uses shall be permitted so long as each such land use is conducted on a lot no larger than 2.5 acres and is consistent with the Significant Land Use Change procedure described in Section 05.03 of this Code. Significant Land Use Change approval is n required to establish a use e�rm itted in t he Neighborhood Commercial NC) zone, se ctio n 05.11.02, within an exis suite in a D esignated Commercial Area if t he use can be accommodate within the existing building or suite without requiring an ew retail co mmercial building permit. This is not, however, to be construed to permit any land use that may be specifically prohibited within the Town of Marana by this or any other Ordinance of the Town of Marana or State or Federal Law. ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: O Ord LDC Am endment Title 3 5 Zone A.DOC LDC Zone A Commercial Uses Ordinance Ordinance O Reso Title 5 Zone A Amendment.doc Public Record Reso re LDC Zone A Commercial Resolution Uses ❑ Neighborhood Commercial.doc Allowable uses in NC Zone Backup Material Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No. 2011.10 and Resolution No. 2011 -38. Commission Recommendation - if applicable: This amendment was presented to the Planning Commission on February 23, 2011 and received a unanimous recommendation for approval. Suggested Motion: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 2011.10 and Resolution No. 2011 -38: approving an amendment to the Marana Land Development Code Title 3 and Title 5, and declaring the amendments a public record. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 57 of 90 MARANA ORDINANCE NO. 2011.10 RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT; AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TITLE 3 (DEFINITIONS) BY ADDING A "DESIGNATED COMMERCIAL AREA" DEFINITION TO SECTION 03.04 AND MODIFYING TITLE 5 (ZONING) SECTION 05.02.01 (ZONE A SMALL LOT ZONE), AS IT RELATES TO PERMITTED USES; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS the Mayor and Council of the Town of Marana find that the revisions adopted by this ordinance are in the best interests of the Town of Marana and the general public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The amendments to Marana Land Development Code Title 3 (Definitions) adding a "Designated Commercial Area" definition to section 03.04 and modifying Title 5 (Zoning), Section 05.02.01 (Zone A — Small Lot Zone), as it relates to permitted uses, three copies of which are on file in the office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Marana, Arizona, which were made a public record by and are attached as Exhibit A to Resolution No. 2011 -XX of the Town of Marana, Arizona, are hereby referred to, adopted and made a part of this ordinance as if fully set out here. SECTION 2. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are repealed as of the effective date of this ordinance; provided, however, that this repeal shall not affect the rights and duties that matured or penalties that were incurred and proceedings that were begun before the effective date of the repeal. SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, the decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. SECTION 4. This ordinance is effective on April 15, 2011. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, this 15 day of March, 2011. Mayor Ed Honea ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 58 of 90 MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011-38 RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT; DECLARING AS A PUBLIC RECORD FILED WITH THE TOWN CLERK THE AMENDMENTS TO MARANA LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TITLE 3 (DEFINITIONS) ADDING A "DESIGNATED COMMERCIAL AREA" DEFINITION TO SECTION 03.04 AND MODIFYING TITLE 5 (ZONING) SECTION 05.02.01 (ZONE A — SMALL LOT ZONE), AS IT RELATES TO PERMITTED USES BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, that the amendments to Marana Land Development Code Title 3 (Definitions) and Title 5 (Zoning), a copy of which is attached to and incorporated in this resolution as Exhibit A and three copies of which are on file in the office of the Town Clerk, are hereby declared to be a public record and ordered to remain on file with the Town Clerk. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, this 15' day of March, 2011. Mayor Ed Honea ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 59 of 90 EXHIBIT A TO MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011-38 Amendments to Marana Land Development Code adopted pursuant to Marana Ordinance No. 2011. 10, amending Title 3 (Definitions) by adding a "Designated Commercial Area" definition to Section 03.04 and modifying Title 5 (Zoning) Section 05.02.01 (Zone A — Small Lot Zone), as it relates to permitted uses SECTION 1. Title 3 (Definitions) Section 03 -04 (Definitions "D ") of the Marana Land Development Code is hereby revised by adding the following definition of "Designated Commercial Area" between the existing definitions of "Density" and "Developer ": Designated Commercial Area: A lot in Zone A where the only building or buildings were originally designed and constructed to accommodate business, commercial, office, industrial, or warehousing uses and not residential uses. SECTION 2. Title 5 (Zoning) Section 05.02.01 (Zone A — Small Lot Zone) of the Marana Land Development Code is hereby revised as follows (with deletions shown with s*,..ts and additions shown with double underlining) Permitted Uses. Within Zone A, residential, commercial, industrial, and quasi - public land uses shall be permitted so long as each such land use is conducted on a lot no larger than 2.5 acres and is consistent with the Significant Land Use Change procedure described in Section 05.03 of this Code. Significant Land Use Change approval is not required to establish a use permitted in the Neighborhood Commercial (NQ zone. section 05.11.02, within an existing uildina or suite in a Designated Commercial Area if the use can be accommodated within the existina building or suite without requiring a new retail commercial building permit. This is not, however, to be construed to permit any land use that may be specifically prohibited within the Town of Marana by this or any other Ordinance of the Town of Marana or by State or Federal law. Regu1ab&pjflcA - March 15, 2011 - Page 60 of 90 3/7/20119:29 AM The following uses are permitted in the Neighborhood Commercial Zone a. Apparel stores b. Appliance stores c. Banks and financial institutions, excluding drive - through and outdoor teller facilities d. Barber and beauty shops e. Bicycle shops f. Child care institutions g. Churches, temples, and other places for religious services h. Clinics: medical, dental, and veterinary (completely enclosed) i. Clothes cleaning, pressing, and tailoring shops (completely enclosed) j. Drug stores k. Florist shops I. Food stores, including delicatessens, candy stores, and dairy product sales m. Furniture stores n. Hardware stores (no open storage, sale or display) o. Laundromats p. Office buildings q. Office equipment sales and service r. Package liquor stores s. Pet shops (completely enclosed) t. Public service facilities (government, civic, utility) u. Restaurants, including carry-out establishments, but excluding drive -in service v. Stationery stores w. Theaters, not including drive -ins x. Schools of business, language, music, dance, and art (may require reasonable soundproofing) y. Shoe repair shops z. Supermarkets Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 61 of 90 MARA 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 Council Chambers, March 15, 2011, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item D 1 From: Gilbert Davidson , Town Manager Strategic Plan Focus Area: Not Applicable Subject: L egislative/Intergovernmental Report: regarding all pending state and federal legislation and report on recent meetings of other legislative bodies Discussion: This item is scheduled for each regular council meeting in order to provide an opportunity for discussion of any legislative or regional intergovernmental item that might arise. Periodically, an oral report may be given to supplement the Legislative Bulletins. ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: ❑ 201.1 Legislative Bulletin #_8.pdf Legislative Bulletin # 8 Backup Material El 2011 Legislative Bulletin #_9.pdf Legislative Bulletin # 9 Backup Material Staff Recommendation: Upon the request of Council, staff will be pleased to provide recommendations on specific legislative /intergovernmental issues. Suggested Motion: Mayor and Council's pleasure. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 62 of 90 League of Arizona Cities and Towns - Legislative Bulletin League of Arizona 1&000% r"�4 L-0p, AN OW I I Legislative Bulletin tin — ISSUE 8 - FEBRUARY 25, 2011 Legislative Overview Today is the 47th day of the first regular session of Arizona's 50th Legislature. During the past week, the principal arenas of legislative action moved from standing committees of the House and Senate to the floors of those bodies, where a number of bills affecting cities and towns were considered. Also, and largely behind the scenes, working groups of senators and representatives have been meeting to cobble together a state budget for the coming fiscal year. In addition, the Senate undertook high- profile and fast -track consideration of legislation intended to address the issue of illegal immigration. Capitol insiders agree that the prospects are good for conclusion of the session within the 100 -day limit established by House and Senate rule. Those prospects will improve only to the extent that the Legislature chooses to focus more narrowly on the budget crisis facing the state and less expansively on the imposition of new mandates on cities and towns. Impact Fee Bill Advances A bill that rewrites most key provisions of the development impact fee statutes received a do -pass recommendation from the Senate Committee of the Whole on Thursday. SB 1525 (city; town development fees) makes many substantial changes to sections of law that have been negotiated between cities and the homebuilders over the last six years. This year's bill was written entirely from the homebuilders' perspective with no discussion or input from cities. A document challenging many assertions in the homebuilders "Understanding Impact Fees" handout can be found here. While not banning impact fees outright, the bill creates so many hurdles and regulations that it will effectively end the ability of cities to impose impact fees to pay for infrastructure to serve new development. Apartment Trash Collection SB 1204 (trash collection; multifamily housing), sponsored by Senator Gail Griffin (R- Hereford), mandates that private waste haulers be given the opportunity to contract for the removal of trash from apartment complexes. This is a right the Legislature previously conferred upon waste haulers with respect to commercial enterprises. Since the measure was approved by committee, Sen. Griffin, the League and other stakeholders have been discussing possible solutions to their differences. The bill passed the Rules Committee and Caucus but was retained after its initial placement on the calendar of the Committee of the Whole. Fire Sprinklers The Senate Committee of the Whole passed SB 1374 (strike - everything amendment: municipalities; counties; fire sprinklers; code) late Thursday. The League, fire chiefs and a number of cities have been united in their opposition Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 63 of 90 Page 1 of 23 League of Arizona Cities and Towns - Legislative Bulletin to the measure, which prohibits municipalities from mandating the installation of fire sprinklers in new single family homes. Cities with fire sprinkler ordinances adopted by December 31, 2009 are exempt from the bill's proscription. Companion legislation (HB 2153) passed the House on February 10. The next step is Third Read in the Senate. Consumer Fireworks SB 1388 (consumer fireworks; regulation) passed the Committee of the Whole without any discussion on February 24. The League supports this bill, because it authorizes local governing bodies to regulate the use and sale of permissible consumer fireworks within their corporate limits. Competing legislation, SB 1379 (relating to consumer fireworks), limits the extent to which cities and towns may regulate the sale and use of fireworks. That bill permits a municipality or county to charge an annual fee for each fireworks store and provides that cities and towns may not ban the use of consumer fireworks during the periods of June 15 to July 5 and December 12 to January 2. There has been no action on SB 1379 since it passed the Committee on Government Reform on February 16. Municipal Salary Limits and Managed Competition On February 22, Senate Caucus passed SB 1347 (cities; compensation baseline), legislation to roll back municipal pay grades to the Fiscal Year 2007 level. By limiting the bill's application to cities with a population of at least 500,000, it affects only Tucson and Phoenix. SB 1345 (cities; number of employees; compensation), limiting the number and compensation of municipal personnel in the state's two largest cities, was approved by Senate Caucus on February 17. There has been no action on SB 1322 (cities; services; managed competition), a bill mandating comprehensive private competition for city services, since it passed the Government Reform Committee on February 9. Regulatory Reform Update The League continues to work on two bills affecting municipalities sponsored by Senator Lori Klein (R- Anthem). SB 1286 (counties; cities; permits; time limit) requires counties and municipalities to approve or deny any permit application within 60 days; failure to notify the applicant of the decision within that time period results in automatic approval. The bill was approved by the Rules Committee on Monday and both party caucuses on Tuesday. The League opposes the bill but is willing to discuss alternatives. SB 1598 (cities; counties; regulatory review) would apply the Regulatory Bill of Rights (currently governing state agencies) to units of local government; it would also revise the general plan statutes regarding aggregate resources. The bill was passed by the Rules Committee on Wednesday and was heard in both Senate Caucuses on Thursday. It is likely to be considered by the Committee of the Whole early next week. The League remains opposed to the bill but is working with the counties and bill proponents to develop compromise language. Third Party Collection of Taxes SB 1165 (municipalities; auditors and collectors), which prohibits municipalities from contracting with third parties for the collection, processing or administration of transaction privilege taxes, was voted out of the Senate Committee of the Whole on Thursday. An amendment was offered by Senator Ron Gould (R -Lake Havasu City) to prohibit contingency fee auditing but permit third party tax collection. Unfortunately, that amendment failed on a division vote of 12 -15. An alternate bill, HB 2618 (municipal taxes and auditors), like Senator Gould's amendment, prohibits contingency fee auditing by municipalities but permits third -party collection, processing and administration of local taxes. The League supports the bill, introduced by Representative Nancy McLain (R- Bullhead City), as an acceptable alternative to SB 1165. There has been no movement on the measure, however, since it was approved by the House Ways and Means Committee last week. Utility Charges Bills imposing mandates regarding municipal treatment of utility accounts progressed in each chamber of the Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 64 of 90 Page 2 of 23 League of Arizona Cities and Towns - Legislative Bulletin Legislature this week. HB 2193 (municipal water charges; responsibility), sponsored by Representative Jim Weiers (R- Phoenix), was approved by House Caucus. SB 1157 (sewer and wastewater charges), sponsored by Senator Gail Griffin (R- Hereford), passed the Senate Committee of the Whole. These bills prescribe methods for the collection and payment of delinquent utility charges. The League continues to oppose both bills, as we have been actively engaged in numerous productive stakeholder meetings and believe that differences among interested parties could be resolved without legislation. Emergency Response Fees HB 2003 (emergency response services fee; prohibition) precludes municipalities from imposing fees to recover costs for emergency response services, except under extraordinary circumstances. The bill passed the House Committee on the Whole on February 24. Photo Radar SB 1352 (photo radar prohibition), legislation to impose a statewide ban on the use of photo radar for traffic enforcement purposes, passed the Committee of the Whole on February 24. Two other measures imposing limitations on the use of photo radar were approved by Caucus during the week. SCR 1029 would subject the proposition of a statewide photo radar ban to a vote of the people. SB 1354 (photo enforcement; violator identification response) provides that the subject of a photo radar ticket need not identify the photographed driver or respond to the notice or complaint. The League opposes these bills and will continue to pursue their amendment or defeat in the Senate, and if necessary, in the House. Pension Reform On Wednesday, the Senate Finance Committee held a special meeting to hear Senator Yarbrough's (R- Chandler) comprehensive pension reform bill, SB 1609 (retirement systems; plan; plan design). Unlike HB 2726 (public retirement systems; plan design), this bill only addresses the plans managed by the board of the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System. The League supports the effort to enact meaningful reforms reducing the costs of the system and improving the fiscal solvency of the plans. We are concerned, however, that the proposal may result in employer contribution rates that are higher than current projections. The data generating this concern are available for your review here. We thank Sen. Yarbrough and Senate staff for their willingness to bring interested parties together to discuss this issue and potential solutions. Spice HB 2167 (definition of dangerous drugs; synthetic), which outlaws a synthetic type of marijuana known as "spice," was signed into law by the Governor last Friday. The bill passed both chambers with an emergency clause; this resulted in the new law becoming effective immediately upon the signature of the Governor. The League would like to thank Representative Amanda Reeve (R- Phoenix), Senator Linda Gray (R- Glendale) and Representative Matt Heinz (D- Tucson) for their leadership on this issue. Address Confidentiality Program On February 8, the House Government Committee adopted a strike - everything amendment to HB 2302. The amendment requires the Secretary of State to establish an Address Confidentiality Program (ACP) to protect the residential addresses of victims of domestic violence, sexual offenses, stalking and harassment. Under the ACP, the Secretary of State will set up a substitute address that a victim may provide to an employer, school or local government agency. Language in the bill requires any state or local government agency to accept the substitute address at the victim's request. Interested parties have expressed concerns regarding: disclosure of actual residential addresses to third party contractors; the continued use of actual service addresses for municipal services accounts; and the likely extension of billing cycles associated with the legislation. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 65 of 90 Page 3 of 23 League of Arizona Cities and Towns - Legislative Bulletin The League participated in a stakeholder meeting on Tuesday with the Secretary of State to address some of these concerns. Secretary Ken Bennett expressed that he does not want the legislation to have any negative impacts on cities. The bill swept through the House Government and Rules Committees with unanimous support earlier this month. It was scheduled for consideration in the House Committee of the Whole on Monday, but was retained on the calendar. The League will continue to work with the Secretary of State to address our concerns. Legislator Profile - Representative David Stevens Rep. David Stevens pulls from his pocket a veritable funhouse of wallets, the contents of which mark a rich, eclectic and interesting life. A tour of his personal articles begins with a (still valid) Kuwaiti driver's license, which Rep. Stevens acquired as a defense contractor living in the badly damaged Arab country. It continues with his Eagle Scout card, awarded just days before he reported for basic training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. It winds past his Fry Fire District photo identification card (featuring the requisite bushy moustache of a reserve firehouse superhero) and concludes with a wafer -sized gizmo that functions as a computerized antenna for mobile phones. Boredom is a word unknown to Rep. Stevens. One needn't look further than his exhaustive rotation of cartoon character neckwear to know that this is an unusually fun legislator. Today he is sporting a festive and busy Fred Flintstone number. Tomorrow he might accessorize with Marvin the Martian, Sylvester and Tweety, or perhaps Tigger and his pals from the Hundred Acre Wood. He quips that humdrum, run -of- the -mill neckties are worn by men who are, "angry on the inside." One might guess that it is something of a challenge to match these colorful and somewhat outlandish novelty ties with the rest of Rep. Stevens' legislative wardrobe. But the color -blind representative from Arizona's 25th district has devised an elegant solution: "All of my shirts are white and all of my suits are dark." And as far as he's concerned, everything goes with his signature black cowboy boots. Lanky with swept -back hair and a country-bred mischievous grin, Rep. Stevens is a cross between Judge Reinhold and Larry Bird with voting privileges. At six- foot -five, he is one of the tallest members of Arizona's 50th Legislature. Despite his height, however, he is not a natural hoopster - though he did excel at other sports as a youth and still plays softball when he can. Affable and good- humored, Rep. Stevens freely admits to possession of quirky tastes - like his affinity for the notorious MREs (military meals, ready -to -eat). He actually likes powdered eggs and dehydrated pork patties. Rep. Stevens, a native of Illinois, is an Army veteran whose active military service included a tour of duty at Fort Huachuca. After settling as a civilian just outside of Sierra Vista, his interest in politics was enflamed by the watershed election of 1994, when Republicans wrested control of Congress after a generation of Democratic rule. The real catalyst to his personal involvement in the political process, however, was the tragic loss of an older brother who died at the age of 38. This was a wake -up call to the truth that life is short and that there is no percentage in deferring one's dreams. Originally attracted to the notion of serving in Congress, Rep. Stevens was persuaded that he could make a more immediate difference as a member of the Arizona Legislature. Accordingly, he first ran for the Arizona House in 2002. He lost and ran again in 2004. Defeated a second time, his spirit remained indomitable and he tried yet again in 2008. This time, however, his work as a defense contractor required his full -time presence in Kuwait, where he lived the entire year. The third time was a charm, and his remote campaign for the House was victorious. "1 had to leave the country to win," he is quick to joke. The district served by Rep. Stevens includes parts of five different counties and eleven municipalities. He Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 66 of 90 Page 4 of 23 League of Arizona Cities and Towns - Legislative Bulletin appreciates the amenities offered by his jurisdictional cities and towns, and he respects the role of local government. As a state legislator, his preference is to avoid interference with local authority altogether. Rep. Stevens serves as the chairman of the Committee on Technology and Infrastructure and as a member of the Committee on Military Affairs and Public Safety. His aspiration is to serve out eight years as a legislator and then move on to new challenges. Six months shy of his fiftieth birthday, he still has a lot of gas in his tank and rascality in his heart. By the time it's all said and done, he will doubtless require a bigger billfold to accommodate the mementos and souvenirs of a joyful and rewarding journey. Legislative Bulletin is published by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns. Forward your comments or suggestions to league@azleague.org. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 67 of 90 Page 5 of 23 Development Impact Fees Myth vs. Fact 2011 League of Arizona Cities and Towns In response to " Presentation by: HBACA Understanding Impact Fees The homebuilders say (Page 3): "With a few exceptions, the enabling statute that was passed 28 years ago is the same statute that is used today." FACT: The impact fee statutes have undergone substantial change at the insistence of the homebuilders. Examples include: requirement for a city to produce an Infrastructure Improvements Plan (IIP) to identify the specific projects for which development impact fees are being charged; revised timelines and hearing requirements extending the time between the recommendation of new impact fees and their adoption, giving more time for public (and homebuilder) comment and recommendations; requirement to produce an annual report on the collection and use of impact fees in each city and town; "grandfathering" provision that freezes the impact fee for two years once subdivision plats are approved; allowed for fees to be paid at the time of closing as part of a development agreement. The homebuilders say (Page 3): "The League of Cities and Towns has either opposed any effort at reform or has negotiated minor changes." FACT: The League and its members cities have actively participated in each workgroup that has been created on the issue of impact fees and has negotiated in good faith and agreed to compromise on a number of issues (see above). The homebuilders say (Page 4): "Fees must be of `beneficial use' and share a `reasonable relationship' to the development. FACT: Arizona statute does not say "share," it says "bear." Existing development is not required to "share" in the cost of providing infrastructure to new development. New development is expected to "bear" the cost of its impact on city infrastructure, without making existing residents "share" in subsidizing homebuilders. The homebuilders say (Page 4): "Impact Fees cannot be used for maintenance and operation." FACT: Such fees have never been used by municipalities for operations and maintenance. The homebuilders say (Page 4): "Fees are paid when a construction permit is issued." FACT: As part of one of the compromises agreed to by the League, fees may be paid at the time of closing through a development agreement. The homebuilders say (Page 5): "Cities generally update their IIP and Impact Fee Study every 2- 3 years." Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 68 of 90 Page 6 of 23 FACT: Many cities update the IIP frequently, as the IIP usually includes the capital improvements plan for the city, which plan is updated almost every year as part of the city's annual budget. However, most cities do not update impact fees as often as 2 -3 years because of the significant cost and time involved with fee studies. The homebuilders say (Page 6): "In total a new fee can be adopted in 165 days no matter how large the increase." FACT: 165 is five and a half months —one of the longest time periods required for adoption of any ordinance or fee. Notice required to raise general sales taxes on all residents is generally 120 days. Also, the 165 days does not include the time necessary to complete a fee study or adopt an Infrastructure Improvements Plan. In practical terms, it takes a minimum of 285 days (9 1 /z months) to implement a new fee structure, and even longer if the IIP is adopted prior to the fee ordinance. The homebuilders say (Page 7): "Our association sued over the assessment of a arts cultural fee by the city of Mesa. The fee was assessed to build a $75 million downtown arts center." FACT: The City of Mesa assessed development fees only for a portion of an expansion of the center, made necessary because of increasing uses for the center due to the impact of new development. Cities and towns are not all cookie -cutter copies of each other. Communities have different personalities and amenities, which make them attractive to potential residents (and help sell new homes). Rather than having a one - size - fits -all system, elected Mayors and Council Members adopt impact fee ordinances at public meetings that reflect their individual communities. If homebuilders conclude they cannot make a profit selling houses in certain communities, they will stop building there. History has shown, however, that that is not the case in reality. The homebuilders say (Page 8): "Do these sound like `necessary' public services ?" FACT: The costs listed are TOTAL costs for each of those projects. In each case, impact fees are assessed for only the proportional share of these projects that is attributable to the impact of new development. While some items may be contested based on individual city priorities, a City Hall certainly is a "necessary public service." The homebuilders say (Page 9): "In other words, the nexus of `benefit' is determined by the city." FACT: `Beneficial use" could not be determined by anyone other than the City, because it is charged with the responsibility of conducting the fee study and creating the IIP. Homebuilders who disagree with the City's findings have the opportunity to express those concerns at the time the fee studies are vetted in the required public comment period and during the public hearing process. Cities have to make decisions based upon the good of the entire community, not just the individual developments. The homebuilders say (Page 10): Goodyear is building the Estrella Mountain Ranch (EMR) park, "...a $20 million facility paid for with impact fees by all new homeowners, even if you live 50 miles away." Regular Council Meeting -March 15, 2011 -Page 69 of 90 Page 7 of 23 FACT: A portion of the park attributable to the impact of new development is being paid for by development impact fees, but NOT by "all new homeowners." The City of Goodyear has two separate collection and expenditure zones and the area shown as "50 miles away" is not being assessed an impact fee for the EMR Park. The slide is factually incorrect. The homebuilders say (Page 11): "In Arizona it is legal to increase the level of service for the entire community and have it paid for solely by new residents." FACT: In Arizona it is NOT legal to charge impact fees to raise the level of service in existing neighborhoods. A fee for a higher level of service is allowable only when the service levels are being raised throughout the city, and the existing residents are being assessed for the portion that serves them. Impact fees "must bear a reasonable relationship to the burden imposed on the municipality to provide additional necessary public services to the development." ARS 9- 463.05 (13)(4). Existing residents would be required to pay for the costs of additional service levels they would receive since impact fees cannot be used for that purpose. The homebuilders say (Page 11): "Current law does not require cities to identify where, how, or when existing residents will pay for their share of the new or increased level of service." FACT: Not only is this an incorrect statement of the law, this is an area in which the League has previously negotiated with the homebuilders to provide stronger language. ARS 9- 463.05(E)(1) requires the city to estimate the future necessary public infrastructure that will be required due to new growth, "including a comparison of the necessary public services provided to existing development and the necessary public services to be provided to the new development." ARS 9- 463.05(E)(2) requires that the city forecast the cost of the necessary public services and ARS 9- 463.05(E)(3) requires the city to forecast the revenue sources that will be available to fund the necessary public services. Any development fee study completed in accordance with the statute will clearly show the sources of revenue that would be used to fund the portion of any new necessary public service that will benefit existing growth. The homebuilders say (Page 12): "What we would like: Facilities needed based on existing level of service /projected growth = development fee" FACT: For areas of infill, development fees already do very closely match the homebuilders' desire. Not surprisingly, the homebuilders have, during our many hours of negotiations, often referred approvingly to the fees charged by Phoenix in the older (infill) parts of the city. The problem in applying this same philosophy in new growth areas, however, is patently obvious. Where a lot at Thomas Road and 32nd Street in Phoenix may already have a high level of service due to its proximity to existing city services, it is no more deserving of proper facilities than a new lot in an undeveloped desert area for which the existing level of service may be dirt roads and septic systems. Developing to an existing level of service in new growth areas is simply not workable when the existing level of service is less than what a new resident would find acceptable. In such new growth areas, cities are faced with two choices: (1) require the developer to provide its own, stand -alone infrastructure (e.g. its own sewer plant, water treatment, emergency services facilities, etc.) or (2) charge development fees to collectively develop infrastructure to serve several developments, eliminating unnecessary duplication and cost. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 70 of 90 Page 8 of 23 The homebuilders say (Page 13): "The trial court sided with Goodyear, declaring that Goodyear only has to `consider' these sources, and that it is not obligated to deduct these revenue sources from the fee calculation." FACT: This appears to be intentionally misleading. The citation to the statute at the top of this slide is to the current language of the statute, which the League negotiated with the homebuilders in 2008. The current language of that subsection requires the cities to forecast the other sources and to include those contributions in the calculations. The Court in the Goodyear case was interpreting the prior language of the statute, which only required that the city "consider" the other revenues; there was no requirement for including the contributions in the calculation of the fee. Essentially, the statute examined by the Court in the Goodyear case does not exist anymore. The result of the Goodyear case was amended out of the statute nearly three years ago. The homebuilders say (Page 14): "Nothing in statute requires a city to demonstrate that they are COMPLYING with the infrastructure improvement plan or impact fee study." FACT: ARS 9- 463.05 (H) requires each city or town that assesses impact fees to issue an annual report that gives an accounting of all impact fees, their account balances, status of projects and other details. If a city or town fails to complete the annual report in the required timeline, they are prohibited from collecting impact fees until the report is completed. There is plenty of accountability already built into the statute. The homebuilders say (Page 14): "There is no recourse if: estimated costs double (therefore doubling the impact fee), rampant cost overruns occur..." FACT: Impact fees cannot be increased simply because of increased project costs. They require inclusion in the IIP, an impact fee study and action by the elected Mayor and council (timeline noted above). Cities and towns are very careful to accurately calculate the costs of infrastructure because they cannot go back and retroactively collect increased amounts from builders and they would simply not have adequate funds to complete a project if they missed cost estimates by 100% (as claimed). The homebuilders say (Page 15): "No Oversight of Cost Controls on Projects – Queen Creek Town Library." FACT: The cost of the Queen Creek library may indeed have increased with the massively changing demographics of the community over the six year period from 2003 – 2009. However, this slide leaves out the fact that the IIP was amended to include the changes to the scope of the needed facilities. The homebuilders say (Page 16): "Experts blast $42.7 million price Gilbert paid for future parkland." FACT: Very little of this slide has anything at all to do with development fees, other than to show (in the underlined, bold and italics paragraph near the bottom) that the cost of the park is clearly not borne entirely by new development. The homebuilders say (Page 17): "Very Politcally [sic] Easy to Adopt —They are the best hidden tax around!" Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 71 of 90 Page 9 of 23 FACT: Public hearings over impact fees are often very contentious and are frequently delayed and studied further to assure accuracy and fairness. They are not adopted lightly or seen as an "easy" way to raise revenue. They are assessed under the principle that new growth should pay for its own costs, rather than making residents subsidize homebuilders and new residents. The homebuilders say (Page 17): "Few controls or accountability (no oversight board of advisory council to oversee progress on project completion or cost)." FACT: See above requirement regarding an annual report from the city or town. Mayors and Council Members are elected by the people of a municipality, and are accountable to the voters. Furthermore, most cities and towns work actively with the development community during the fee process either with a formal, standing committee or informational meetings. The homebuilders say (Page 18): "We want our reforms to mirror the reforms adopted in other states" FACT: In discussing many other issues, policy makers say Arizona should lead the way and not follow the examples and misguided policies of other states. Do we get to pick and choose depending on the issue? The homebuilders say (Page 18): "Makes existing homes more valuable by increasing housing costs." FACT: This statement assumes (incorrectly) that an increase in housing costs has a direct correlation to higher assessed valuation. Additionally, unless a city is assessing a primary property tax (many do not), higher assessed valuation would not provide the municipality a direct budgetary benefit. The homebuilders say (Page 18): "...development fees are putting Arizona at a competitive disadvantage." FACT: During the building boom in the early 2000s, homebuilders were selling houses nearly as fast as they could build them and were making record profits —with impact fees in place. The downturn in home sales is due to the national economic recession, not development impact fees. Additionally, the statement of "competitive disadvantage" is not accompanied by any facts to show how growth has gone somewhere other than Arizona because of impact fees. As Arizona was typically either first or second (behind only Las Vegas) in percentage growth during the boom years, it is hard to imagine that impact fees were driving anyone away. With the massive glut in current housing inventory (both built homes and vacant lots) it is unfathomable that many more houses could have been built in Arizona. Contrary to the homebuilders' assertions, impact fees likely produce jobs, because impact fees enable developers to build the infrastructure to provide homebuilders places to build homes and building new infrastructure creates more jobs in the private construction sector. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 72 of 90 Page 10 of 23 n . cd Q W N Cl) H N J u O a � • .--1 a � U p o N �U C 7 O U c`o rn CD f 9 I g o 1 9 3 E Al I+y Vd 3""Q N im cu ce CD K x W � r 3 @ 47 a o L6 2 U c`o rn CD ir t 3 i�t H M N Q W p ..". r N 1; Hill d 1 ` CC." IL 1 1 1 1 1 MIR N a A L6 ACV wo�UK M : c 0 U `m rn m 1 Jn 0 °g 4 N m E if y� Cl) W co Q a go E N d C al El o a 9 � Cl 3 : # L6 t ` CD w �U C U rn Ju w 99 , ; �6 N - m €"a , Q. CD L `tea, M Y _ r+ LPL t � gq a p n e m cc I 121 $ ' CD C V4 C €3 ui u m o U rn CD 09 V lot A", co i � N o u ql 111 � a «r,� A- �, o u � o «o 44 oq 60 ar ot 01.4 I V A avu o N U C N U m` rn a� v . I � M .......... t -.1- �»S p F d L . : co Co W F a rn m 2,44 d ik CD 3 O U rn CD w v 19999 AA�Wq �g �+�r 1;h f co N L co Ila Q N 3 c o c ca V �� 4 99999 N IN C O R 3 d I& � g 3 �A CD o � � N cV XA � _ N L 3 II i V o N P4 tq � T to c 0 • U rn a) w i O i �pl S CL O W £' �Ir M o cli 3 rn 3 co N o i t N A M w CD 'U C 7 7 Of N R 4 MA �.. N ca C. G a� ' c ar c CL 00 cc c w " � a V o N L6 2 �U C 3 O U m rn d Rj Ln m 5 t N R CL` IL OD o W ( to s� a us N 3 0 U d f6 rn m ' 1 4 g £ 6 co N .1.., r co � N d e, m CL Q 3 Rg.. £ i � 3 di.� O a � o " - co &® "" a ; U 7 O U m 7 JJ kA N League of Arizona Cities and Towns - Legislative Bulletin Page 1 of 5 League OtAnzona E ll AN 1OWT10 Legislative Bulletin — ISSUE 9 - MARCH 4, 2011 Legislative Overview Today is the 54th day of the first regular session of the 50th Arizona Legislature. Lawmakers are working in overdrive to push bills through the legislative process, while negotiations continue on a state budget and as leadership endeavors to conclude the session within the 100 -day limit imposed by House and Senate rule. Despite the recent flurry of legislative activity, only six of the 1,337 bills introduced by members have been signed into law. Impact Fees SB 1525 (city; town; development fees) passed out of the Senate this week by a very narrow margin. Because of the opposition voiced by many cities and towns and the skepticism of several senators regarding the sweeping changes proposed in the bill, it mustered only 16 votes to achieve passage. During debate, several senators commented that they thought the proposal was too extreme and said they wanted it to be amended in the House. The League has learned that there will be a workgroup process set up as early as next week to begin discussions about the many fundamental changes proposed by the bill. The bill, which largely represents the homebuilders' wish list, was drafted without any input from cities and towns. We thank those senators who voted against the bill and encourage you to contact your House members to oppose the bill as passed by the Senate. Deannexation and Incorporation On March 1, the Senate Committee of the Whole passed SB 1333 (cities; towns; deannexation; incorporation). The League strongly opposes a particular provision of the bill that creates a statewide process for the deannexation of small pockets of land within the incorporated boundaries of an existing municipality. The provision could result in a number of problems, including: • Proliferation of county islands within cities and towns; • Creation of overlapping governments; • Disenfranchisement of property owners from the process; and • Disputes over commercial and industrial property required to support the tax base. The League has committed to the bill sponsor that it is prepared to work cooperatively on issues related to the "3 and 6 mile" rule. The "3 and 6" mile rule relates to the requirement that cities and towns of a certain size and within a certain distance of a proposed municipality approve the proposed incorporation. The League, however, cannot support the proposed deannexation process and therefore must oppose the bill. Third Party Tax Collection The League this week changed its position on SB 1165 (municipal taxes; auditors and collectors), which prohibits Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 86 of 90 League of Arizona Cities and Towns - Legislative Bulletin Page 2 of 5 cities from contracting with private, third -party firms to collect sales taxes. The bill is a high priority for the Arizona Tax Research Association (ATRA), which has testified that tax collection should be a function performed exclusively by governmental entities. In order to continue to work productively with ATRA on issues of mutual concern, such as preserving and streamlining the Model City Tax Code (MCTC), the League has decided to ask that cities and towns no longer oppose SB 1165. We are particularly grateful to Rep. Nancy McLain (R- Bullhead City) and Senator Ron Gould (R -Lake Havasu City) for their support of the municipalities in their district that are currently using a third -party firm for tax collection. But, in order for us to continue to use the framework of the MCTC, it was necessary to change our position on SB 1165. Apartment Trash Collection Senator Gail Griffin (R- Hereford) agreed to work with the League to address issues associated with SB 1204 (trash collection; multifamily housing) when that bill moves to the House. The bill, which mandates that private waste haulers be given the opportunity to contract for the removal of trash from apartment complexes, passed Senate Third Read on Thursday by a vote of 26 -0. Consumer Fireworks SB 1388 (consumer fireworks; regulation), introduced by Senator Steve Pierce (R- Prescott) and supported by the League, was defeated on Senate Third Read by a vote of 12 -17 on February 28. This bill would have authorized municipalities and counties to regulate the use and sale of permissible consumer fireworks. Competing legislation, a strike - everything amendment to SB 1379, further limits the extent to which cities and towns may regulate the use of fireworks, mandating that no city may prohibit their use during certain holiday periods. SB 1379 is on the Senate Rules calendar for Monday. Fire Sprinklers On Wednesday the Senate passed HB 2153 (municipalities; counties; fire sprinklers; code) by a margin of 19 -11. The Senate substituted the bill, which had previously passed the House, for SB 1374, an identical bill with a Senate origin. The League opposes the legislation, which strips cities and towns of the authority to enact local ordinances mandating the installation of sprinklers in new residences. Cities that adopted fire sprinkler codes before 2010 are exempt from the bill's provisions. The bill now proceeds to the Governor for her consideration. Regulatory Reform Update The Legislature took action this week on two bills imposing regulatory reforms on local governments. SB 1286 (counties; cities; permits; time limit) requires counties and municipalities to approve or deny any permit application within 60 days; failure to do so would result in automatic approval. The bill passed Senate Third Read on Thursday by a vote of 17 -8. We remain strongly opposed to the measure, though the bill sponsor did commit to work with the League on amendments to the legislation as it moves to the House. SB 1598 (cities; counties; regulatory review) would apply the Regulatory Bill of Rights (currently governing state agencies) to local government; it would also make changes to the general plan statutes regarding aggregate resources. The bill passed out of Committee of the Whole on Wednesday. The League is engaged in ongoing discussions with various stakeholders to develop amendatory language to address our concerns. Utility Charges HB 2193 (municipal water charges; responsibility) passed the House on March 1 by a vote of 49 -8. Across the Capitol plaza, SB 1157 (wastewater and garbage charges) passed the Senate on February 28 by a vote of 20 -9. Both bills restrict the ability of municipalities to seek recovery of delinquent utility charges from property owners vis -a -vis utility customers. The League and its membership have worked cooperatively and successfully to address this issue with other stakeholders, and we do not apprehend a need for legislation at this time. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 87 of 90 League of Arizona Cities and Towns - Legislative Bulletin Page 3 of 5 Emergency Response Services Fee On February 28, the House passed HB 2003 (emergency response services fee; prohibition) by a vote of 52 -6. The bill prohibits municipalities from seeking recovery of costs associated with emergency response activities. The bill had been previously amended to permit charges for fire or police services provided outside of a city or town located in a county with a population of less than one million persons. The bill is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Committee on Public Safety and Human Services on March 9. Even though no city or town currently charges (or plans to charge) for emergency response services, the League will testify in opposition to the bill as a preemption of local decision - making authority. Photo Radar On Wednesday, SB 1352 (photo radar prohibition), which would impose a statewide prohibition on the use of photo radar for traffic enforcement purposes, failed to pass Senate Third Read by a vote of 15 -15. This vote constituted a significant victory for cities and towns that use photo enforcement for speeding or red light violations. SB 1354 (photo enforcement; violator identification; response) provides that persons receiving a photo radar ticket would be required to neither identify the driver in the photo nor respond to the complaint. It passed the Committee of the Whole on Wednesday. Also on Wednesday, the Committee of the Whole passed SCR 1029 (photo radar prohibition), a measure to put the question of a statewide photo radar ban to a vote of the people. The League opposes all three measures to the extent they dimish local control and impact public safety. Liquor SB 1460, the liquor omnibus bill, passed the Senate Committee of the Whole this week. For the benefit of cities, the bill was amended to permit municipalities and counties to protest the transfer of an existing liquor license to a new business owner. We thank the bill sponsor, Senator Michele Reagan (R- Scottsdale), for responding to our concerns and supporting the amendment. Firearms The firearms omnibus bill, SB 1201, passed the Senate by a vote of 21 -8 on March 3. Although a number of provisions that we opposed have been removed from the bill (e.g. changes to Shannon's law, penalties assessed against violators of gun rights), it still requires those public entities that prohibit firearms in their buildings to provide metal detectors, lock boxes for storage and armed personnel at their entrances. The bill now proceeds to the House. Pension Reform Update Senator Steve Yarbrough's (R- Chandler) comprehensive pension reform bill, SB 1609 (retirement systems; plans; plan design), moved rapidly through the Senate this week. The bill progressed through Rules on Monday, Caucus on Tuesday and Committee of the Whole on Wednesday. It then passed out of Third Read on Thursday by a vote of 21- 5. The League remains concerned about certain financial aspects of the proposal and is participating in ongoing discussions with the sponsor and Senate staff. Legislator Profile - Senator Linda Lopez It is often said that no good deed goes unpunished. If that is so, then Senator Linda Lopez should brace herself for a lifetime of torture. The story of the senator from District 29 is a chronicle of service above self, involving a legacy of contributions to the unfortunate, the disabled and those who reside at the margins of society. Take, for example, her extended occupation as a foster parent. Over the course of ten years, Senator Lopez parented forty -four children who had Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 88 of 90 League of Arizona Cities and Towns - Legislative Bulletin Page 4 of 5 been neglected and abused. Several of them suffered severe behavioral, physical and psychological problems. Or consider her ongoing work for La Frontera Center, the largest community behavioral health agency in Arizona. As someone who has helped numerous poor and homeless drug addicts pull their shattered lives together, Senator Lopez radiates pride when she recounts client success stories - like that of a man who lived on the streets for twenty -four years, but who now, with the help of the center, is working, has enjoyed sobriety for the past four years, and is living in his own apartment. The senator's interest in community activism was enflamed as a young woman who entered the University of California at Berkeley on a full scholarship during the turbulent 1960s. At the time, Berkeley was the collegiate epicenter of active protest for social change. Attending school on a Spencer Scholarship, Senator Lopez became involved in a number of causes. When then - Governor Ronald Reagan proposed tuition increases at state universities, for example, Senator Lopez and her mother marched from Berkeley to Sacramento in protest. She remembers the excitement she felt when Cesar Chavez, the famed labor leader and civil rights activist, joined the demonstration. She also traveled to San Francisco to participate in one of the largest anti -war marches of the era with singers Joan Baez and Judy Collins. Senator Lopez's road to elective office coursed through the Sunnyside School District in Tucson. As a foster mother with three children of her own, she became an active volunteer in the local schools. Volunteer activity led to committee chairmanships, which in turn led to district -wide involvement. A regular attendee of school board meetings, it occurred to her that the all -male board, while attentive to fiscal matters and infrastructure, had very little to say about academic achievement, parental involvement or the well -being of children - principles that very much mattered to her. Accordingly, she ran for a seat herself and beat an incumbent in a landslide. The patronizing attitude of her colleagues eventually gave way to respect as she developed a superior understanding and knowledge of educational issues that could not be ignored. Senator Lopez's service on the Sunnyside School Board lasted for eighteen years. During that time, she also served as president of both the Arizona School Board Association and the National Hispanic Caucus of School Board Members. Over time, she came to recognize that she could have an even greater impact on education as a policymaker at the state level. Accordingly, she ran for and won a seat in the House of Representatives in 2000. She served four terms in the House and moved to the Senate in 2008. She has never lost an election. The senators electoral success is doubtless due, in part, to her unparalleled people skills. Warm, welcoming and compassionate, she has a way of making a stranger feel like a longtime friend. Her legislative assistant, who moved with Senator Lopez from the House, positively gushes about her kind and understanding boss, enthusing that she is inspiring, ever - pleasant and never condescending. Senator Lopez is an inveterate supporter of cities and towns. 'They're the entities that make this state work," she observes, adding that it is highly inappropriate for state legislators to dictate the terms of municipal governance from above. Senator Lopez is also a newlywed. She married Rudy Jones, a retired public servant, right after Thanksgiving on a bitterly cold day in Tucson. A friend of hers blamed Senator Lopez for the frigid weather. "She had been telling all of our friends that it would be a cold day in hell before Linda gets remarried, Senator Lopez recalls with a laugh. Mr. Jones entered the union with five grandsons. Not to be outdone, Senator Lopez is herself awaiting her fourth and fifth grandsons, the twin boys of her expectant youngest daughter. 'Between us, we'll be able to field two basketball teams." Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 89 of 90 League of Arizona Cities and Towns - Legislative Bulletin Page 5 of 5 It may be that no good deed goes unpunished. But it may also be true that what goes around comes around. In that event, Senator Lopez will, for years to come, enjoy the support, comfort and love of a grateful community. Legislative Bulletin is published by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns. Forward your comments or suggestions to league@azleague.org. Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 2011 - Page 90 of 90 Fiscal Year Jonucry 20111 General Fund Budget in Brief Summary General Fund revenues for January of $2.76 million exceeded expenditures of $2.51 million by $0.25 million. Overall revenues are slightly higher than budget expectations for the first seven months of the fiscal year at 60.7 %. Expenditures are slightly less than expectations at 52.2 %. As described in earlier updates, a significant portion of the resources accumulated through the current period will be used by June once the second half of the required debt service transfers occur and one -time projects and programs are completed. Percent of Revenues Current Month Year to Date FY201 1 Budget Budget Sales tax revenues $ 2,004,979.81 $ 11,777,108.37 $ 18,983,515 62.0% Other agency revenues 497,571.33 3,265,613.40 5,680,866 57.5% Licenses, fees & permits 163,131.57 1,426,929.92 1,676,250 85.1% Charges for services 10,763.36 200,126.61 873,250 22.9% Fines and forfeiture 48,534.09 314,256.10 735,000 42.8% Grants and contributions 7,366.47 152,419.23 110,950 137.4% Investment income 4,223.26 36,206.23 75,000 48.3% Miscellaneous revenues 21,243.58 237,143.69 568,789 41.7% Total Revenue 2,757,813.47 17,409,803.55 28,703,620 60.7% Expenditures Personnel & benefits 1,591,992.34 10,244,696.54 19,105,370 53.6% Contracted services 308,982.06 2,682,104.33 4,430,443 60.5% Operating supplies & equip 173,869.83 1,168,407.06 2,886,403 40.5% Capital outlay 387,600.56 554,815.46 1,591,405 34.9% Transfers out 45,225.36 1,353,078.36 2,615,706 51.7% Total Expenditures $ 2,507,670.15 $ 16,003,101.75 $ 30,629,327 52.2% Net Revenues Over /(Under) Expenditures $ 250,143.32 $ 1,406,701.80 $ (1,925,707) -73.0% * Amended on 03/11 /11 1 Revenues Approximately 92% of General Fund Revenues come from sales taxes, intergovernmental revenue and licenses, permits and fees. Collectively, these comprise the "big three ". The following describes those major revenues. Sales taxes - Overall tax collections (excluding the portion of contracting taxes allocated to the Transportation Fund) were $1.92 million for January and were 6.09% higher than January 2010. Increases in hotels, restaurants and contracting were partially offset by a reduction in retail and utilities sales taxes. Retail sales tax collections were 4.38% lower for January 2011 (December sales transitions) than the same period a year earlier. This variance is somewhat of a departure from the nation -wide average increase in retail sales of just over three percent. Despite that variance in January, Contracting sales taxes remain slightly higher than budget expectations at 68.5% Fire, Insurance and Real Estate category is significantly higher than projections at 97.2 %. This tax revenue stream is extremely sensitive to economic impacts on commercial activities. Over time, positive trend may be an indicator of increased commercial leasing activity. Overall tax collections through January were $11.67 million or 62.6 %. Percent Category of Current Month Current YTD Current Budget Budget Mining $ 1,366.05 $ 8,395.98 $ 5,000 167.9% Contracting 211,354.02 1,357,525.06 1,981,495 68.5% Transportation, Communications, Utilities 225,151.60 1,831,137.08 2,920,620 62.7% Wholesale Trade 23,784.91 117,169.99 373,320 31.4% Retail Trade 993,190.05 5,091,807.38 8,463,925 60.2% Restaurant & Bars 144,497.22 926,326.10 1,512,485 61.2% Fire, Insurance & Real Estate 76,864.03 763,659.94 785,990 97.2% Hotels & Other Lodging 120,076.37 831,360.38 1,348,320 61.7% Services 85,395.50 558,020.66 886,715 62.9% Manufacturing 9,554.03 76,893.35 186,515 41.2% All Others 23,916.38 108,130.95 169,130 63.9% Total Revenue $ 1,915,150.16 $ 11,670,426.87 $ 18,633,515 62.6% 2 Intergovernmental - Intergovernmental collections were $0.50 million for month of January and overall collections through January are $3.26 million or 57.4 %. The immaterial variances of roughly 4% in auto lieu collections will be closely monitored. Percent Current of Category Current Month Current YTD Budget Budget State Shared Sales Tax $ 204,610.86 $ 1,164,618.38 $ 2,004,971 58.1% Urban Revenue Sharing 216,768.14 1,517,377.53 2,600,828 58.3% Auto Lieu Tax 76,192.33 581,329.17 1,075,067 54.1% Total Revenue $ 497,571.33 $ 3,263,325.08 $ 5,680,866 57.4% Licenses, permits and fees - Collections were approximately $0.15 million for January and overall collections through January are $1.42 million or 84.4% which is significantly higher than budget expectations. This is primarily due the increased number of new single family residence permits issued through January over expectations (23 per month actual average vs. 16 per month budgeted) as well as new commercial permit revenues which are at 120.2% of budget expectations (majority of this revenue is attributable to one large permit). Percent Current of Category Current Month Current YTD Budget Budget SFR new permit $ 75,332.66 $ 600,843.42 $ 560,000 107.3% SFR existing permit 1,426.03 14,996.38 20,000 75.0% Commercial new permit 9,389.50 240,487.47 200,000 120.2% Commercial existing permit 14,261.50 80,021.84 105,000 76.2% Grading permit 18,218.76 40,044.30 47,000 85.2% Utility permits 9,417.02 10,577.78 3,000 352.6% Pool permit 2,358.90 24,819.28 25,000 99.3% Sign permit 599.09 8,387.98 25,000 33.6% Patio wall permit 1,005.25 8,249.48 10,000 82.5% ROW permit 6,182.54 22,705.54 22,250 102.0% Floodplain permit 205.00 2,1 15.00 500 423.0% Misc. permit 4,428.05 50,956.62 65,000 78.4% Franchise fees - 157,620.24 300,000 52.5% Business licenses 8,365.27 71,095.01 125,000 56.9% Liquor licenses 50.00 1,750.00 6,000 29.2% Aggregate mining fee - 80,367.58 150,000 53.6% Bank protection fee - - 12,500 0.0% Total Revenue $ 151,239.57 $ 1,415,037.92 $ 1,676,250 84.4% 3 Expenditures The General Fund expended $2.51 million in January. Through the period ending in January, the General Fund expended $16.0 million or 52.2 of budget. The variances in Town Clerk and CIP are primarily due to the timing of one -time capital projects or programs. Percent Current of Department Current Month Current YTD Budget Budget Non - departmental $ 288,980.68 $ 3,191,001.00 $ 6,125,026 52.17o Mayor and Council 18,133.93 133,687.57 259,773 51.5% Town Manager 54,559.11 432,613.15 971,894 44.5% Town Clerk 16,253.25 125,698.06 376,693 33.4% Human Resources 25,118.35 220,536.21 402,728 54.8% Finance 78,671.48 398,420.65 709,988 56.1% Legal 60,462.49 418,243.64 752,282 55.6% Technology Services 127,066.12 892,940.14 1,772,180 50.4% Development Services GM 12,866.67 94,327.33 180,389 52.3% Permits and Records 38,615.88 274,394.22 472,374 58.1% Inspections & Enforcement 31,888.59 224,548.96 473,071 47.5% Planning 41,199.59 287,504.84 486,155 59.1% Engineering 102,161.01 779,544.62 1,377,672 56.6% Police 745,737.54 4,652,506.38 8,920,634 52.2% Magistrate Court 64,662.95 473,227.09 921,869 51.3% Public Services GM 35,732.77 242,052.02 411,704 58.8% Streets & Community Response 487,577.18 1,217,246.97 2,072,366 58.7% CIP 94,359.77 372,420.90 1,037,259 35.9% Parks and Recreation 167,151.90 1,455,083.04 2,702,957 53.8% Community Development 16,470.89 117,104.96 202,313 57.9% Total Expenditures $ 2,507,670.15 $ 16,003,101.75 $ 30,629,327 52.2% 4