HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/13/2011 Study Session Agenda Packet 7
r
SL
A .' ANA
=/f\
f\
MARANA TOWN COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
NOTICE AND AGENDA
11555 W. Civic Center Drive, Marana, Arizona 85653
Council Chambers, December 13, 2011, at or after 6:00 PM
Ed Honea, Mayor
Patti Comerford, Vice Mayor
David Bowen, Council Member
Herb Kai, 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. 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 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.
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
DISCUSSION/DIRECTION /POSSIBLE ACTION
D 1: Presentation: Relating to Streets; a presentation on Interstate 10 construction
from Prince Road to Ruthrauff Road (Keith Brann)
D 2: Presentation: Relating to Special Events; community partners review of the
34th annual Marana Founders' Day Festival event (Del Post)
D 3: Presentation: Relating to the Marana Chamber of Commerce; Business Walk
Program presentation (Ed Stolmaker )
D 4: Resolution No. 2011 -109: Relating to Personnel; amending the fiscal year
2011 -2012 classified salary schedule to change the position title of Economic
Development Administrator to Economic Development and Strategic Initiatives
Manager and to change the position title of Utilities Technology Analyst to
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 1 of 99
Technology Analyst (Suzanne Machain)
D 5: Ordinance No. 2011.35: Relating to Development; revising the Town's
development impact fee program to conform to A.R.S. § 9- 463.05, effective January
1, 2012; establishing separate accounts for development impact fees collected before
January 1, 2012; and establishing an effective date (Frank Cassidy)
D 6: Relating to Animal Control; discussion and direction regarding request from
Pima Animal Care Center (PACC) to authorize PACC to divert a portion of the
Town's dog licensing revenue, collected by PACC from Town residents, to the
Animal Welfare Alliance of Southern Arizona's (AWASA) spay and neuter initiative
(Jane Fairall)
D 7: Resolution No. 2011 -110: Relating to Boards, Commissions and Committees;
modifying the procedures for filling current and impending Planning Commission
and Board of Adjustment vacancies (Kevin Kish)
D 8: Resolution No. 2011 -111: Relating to Economic Development; supporting the
development of a Union Pacific Railroad rail yard and industrial park in Pinal
County (Gilbert Davidson)
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.
ADJOURNMENT
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 2 of 99
A ANA
t�w\
11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653
Council Chambers, December 13, 2011, 6:00:00 PM
To: Mayor and Council Item D 1
From: Keith Brann , Town Engineer
Strategic Plan Focus Area:
Not Applicable
Subject: Presentation: Relating to Streets; a presentation on Interstate 10 construction from
Prince Road to Ruthrauff Road
Discussion:
The Arizona Department of Transportation has given notice to proceed for expansion of
Interstate 10 from Prince Road to Ruthrauff Road, which includes the expansion of I -10 to four
lanes in each direction and the full reconstruction of the Prince Road interchange including a
grade separation with the Union Pacific Railroad.
ADOT representatives will be giving a presentation on the project.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Description: Type:
O 110R2P_PPT Presentation 1213.1.1-
1Up,pdf Presentation Backup Material
Staff Recommendation:
Presentation only.
Suggested Motion:
Presentation only.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 3 of 99
r
II
u
s
i
/ 04
IS
CL `_ D
C3 a
,,,• V-4.
4-k
WHOM U,
CL
,,
N
y \\
-----------
-ateVAA _ - `
- - .
v -^
\
\\\�
\ \\
LA
gp-
maim
......... .
......... . . ..... i
0 EM
............
-- — --- -----
wa,
41
mn
:,�N IN
N -V
40
lk ,
trL
01"
" NOR �
" R X �
B�
E
o N
0
µµ 0O
S �
�N
N
T
3
U)
U U)
co
N N >
O C/) O
CL �-
O �-
O p — O
LIM
U N
O j Q .. cu
U
cu � � cn =
•— -*.-a o -0
� 0 O
O O O CU cu
U O U .�
O U
}, N +�
CU c
a
0 Q
3: 0 o o •- C6
Q U A UE
�
• • • •
1. 2
t
Ln
uj
Voa mu,
Uiou
PV
fam
SE
CO
CU
Cu
N
co
A co
``
si
r
s
Any
plot V OW55 "
UCUI
r, I AI
r
f S s �,rr ✓i �.�vy
3
r
/rS
tl ,�
C
00 C13 +� �
CIO Munn* � ° co
amom
d
_ R
CO cu a
CIO o
ti[ V N
.O
�... Co
Z
N
A
N
0
° E
r
cu _0 c ' O
O
� C U
_0 •�
O a) : QL cu
E o E C cn
� c a�
o =
E � �� O
o o �
a) O
o C - 0 o
L o a)
O cn
0 cn
(a. y a} O O �- w CD O c
_0 CU ca
a) �° ca
U U O U N O :3 a) a) E a� o }' �- a
� N CM co cn cu
cm
N
M
gD
W W C� ~ W U) Q
Li I 0
N
a
N
O •
co
4
E
E U
E
O � j
E ° O
C: ° � to c�
o •—
._ .�
E °o Z � C'a 0
O O U
E cn 4- E � :3
cn cu
O v O 4—
O L_0. z LL
N
O �cl
Q A A A A A A
<o
co
CU
E -�
O
O V-
--
CU 0
.V U
C:
0 N
any E cm C: C6
O
U � N Cll
N
.— CU U U
O . O ^♦
cm
C: O O
a
N
o C7
a � � L
o�
�o
J. 2
N
a H
S IN
T
7
O cn CU n/
(6 � � V
U) O U
O
-� C:
U C: i
O
i O cm
CD � .�
a�
cy) E aw
all
a� —
I cn 0 >
a) c: p U 0
c .0 U N
O p N
N
CD
°'
CIO U cn
CD N
O i N
^ L a
i1
+ U Co O 0 C 'C �
ti O O Q Ca -� O 1
E U > C!� U
o
�
• • • • •
co
U)
L
O
.0 O
� •V
CO
� O
CO
O O m
o CC o O
U N N m CU 00
@ >
Q N O O 0
CU L O O
V LO
o °° LO
�
CD O cy)
Q j .. C6
i N
CO cn N C:
C:
co
_ 00 0 00 0
co
-� U N
O N
�
C) C) � N O -' g�
.�
LO RS LO g
J a O m Lo
0
• • • • •
3
cn
E cu
O '0
4-a U C
O
O
N .0 0 U
(u C c: , (D
E C: O '� °
0 N _ Q.
.1 cu p >
0 '0
-0 O O
U i cn
N V O
O
t_a to O N
O - 0 _a
N
cu •U
E N
(u �_ a
CU ' �
LL �--- Q O C�
•U •�
O
A A A � A A
U) °
0
lot
0
CL 0
r.L >%
00
s�
0(j)
� L
CL
0 0
a
o
e
U
$ Q
C
< , 2
W
m
7
' MARANA
11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653
Council Chambers, December 13, 2011, 6:00:00 PM
To: Mayor and Council Item D 2
From: Del Post , Deputy Town Manager
Strategic Plan Focus Area:
Heritage
Strategic Plan Focus Area - Additional Information:
Founders' Day is one of Marana's "signature" events and an opportunity to increase visibility and
participation by residents and visitors. The 2011 Founders' Day Festival was expanded to a four -
day community celebration and involved many partner organizations from throughout Marana
and Southern Arizona. The event offered "activities for all ages" and was intended to
incorporate and showcase Marana's heritage.
Subject: Presentation: Relating to Special Events; community partners review of the 34th
annual Marana Founders' Day Festival event
Discussion:
Founders' Day is Marana's oldest and most well- attended special event, starting with the
community's incorporation in 1977. The presentations will be designed to provide the Council
with input and feedback from the Town's community partners, and will provide Council an
opportunity to ask questions and to give guidance to staff and our community partners on the
future of the Founders' Day event.
Staff will make a brief presentation reviewing the supporting and partnering organizations that
made the 2011 Founders' Day Festival event possible.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Description: Type:
❑ Founders_.D...ay Notespdf Founders' Day Survey Results Backup Material
Staff Recommendation:
Suggested Motion:
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 16 of 99
U O O '
N
U Ln U >O
O O O w
N -N Q
a) N
O cn Q > O N .
0
3 7 N E N O p
to O M E cn
O 4— O O O
� O '� •— O O � cn
> O N
N Q� O U _
U O m O O H O
p '� >,
cm
O a
.{� O N 3 O O 2 W C
N � O N
_ a
tn
O O in O O
T
7
co
L
O O �
O � �
a-0 U -�
U N
(D � U
O Q C: O O
IZ— V) O
-{- U +' L+-
0
co
cm
CD w
0 0 > •- O
"f W > J J O
0 I I I I 0 �
■ ■ ■ y
N
T
N
l"
�J
n L
W
o
o � �
4)
a) ° 4�
a O •— 70 7
.0 4) -C U 0
� N Ui
a E � E V) °
o 0 cli
c- a) C, a) C6
vi � rn a) 4) Q o -� U
•— , V/ n1 nn �/ ° r' 8
,L � V v) W W I- Z ` c ) o
M
0
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
co
S
l
O L
o °
O �
•� W
� � O 7C) O
o 0
O � � N N
p O O
o
� - 0 o o
C)7 C: N -0
� u) . 0 O - 4- O
a� � - C) }
Q p N
> U O O U O O
• cn Q � x U
+- p 4- O 00
O H O 3 N 0 0 0 N
0
0
.� u QO .� D 0 O N O
C
W C 1J
O p p p 1 �O p p p
_ cn n Z Z LL o
CA
i
0
N
L
O
� U >
N N O
� o
0 0 �
0 O •� •�
a�
a) o Q
C-4- o422 O-_ O
c z �. C: � •i a) .V cn
N N } C > C
O� O N O N
�- O U >
O> N p O o N 0
O N +-
N > 3 -� N O> O N O
'� •� O O •� O�
o- o N a o 0 3
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) —V
!D m m o
0
y
ax
T
7
In
� � O � O O
O O � O '� >
02 3 p
� — O cn cn
•� > p Q O
O _
O p E
v � 0
U �_ �_ �- N
a > a o
O X 0 4� 4� >
� (D L O) (D
■ ■ ■ ■ C
I
W
O
W i
N
O 3 3 N O O= •N a
Q w cn V) w C�
0
i n l
W
O �
�. O
•� O
N L
> EE O
O N O Q ,C:
O
O a •�
-�—
N O > O
— O N O O
-�
O �
O O (1) O O O O O
O E E> U O N
�— O N O N
O� U N M
O O a 7 O O O O
Z Z U U" Z O O o
0
W
W
� p
U
N Q
U N � L-
N p
N
O Q
O N a
V a) V V M
i D _ _ C
Q U U U
w w sry
w
0
0
` ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Y'
j yy y4
ddl l�"
II I
W
� p
i
}
IZ
N O O
E +-
O
0
co
Q `� Q > •>
cc
N
O p _� �— U N Q > C
F Q Q Q W CD
cn (>
CD
0
0
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
U)
U)
W
-F-
U
O
_O
Q
O
O
O
� p
O 0
_ o
0
O O
CD
CL
0
y
T
7
T
O
I S /
i
� � 3
o >
� o �
U o
co
N
^` m
W cl
7
CD
J U
Z Z I I O
H � o
0
■ ■ ■ ■ d
co
T
a
in
M kRA NA
11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653
Council Chambers, December 13, 2011, 6:00:00 PM
To: Mayor and Council Item D 3
From: Ed Stolmaker , CEO Marana Chamber of Commerce
Strategic Plan Focus Area:
Commerce
Strategic Plan Focus Area - Additional Information:
This presentation is related to the Commerce focus area of the strategic plan, under the initiative
to identify Town resources to engage in the recruitment of new business and industry.
Subject: Presentation: Relating to the Marana Chamber of Commerce; Business Walk Program
presentation
Discussion:
The Marana Chamber of Commerce proposes to implement a "Business Walk Program" in direct
support of the Town of Marana's Strategic Plan.
The Marana Chamber's objective is to implement, launch, and integrate a "Business Walk" in the
Marana area. This program will enhance reaching out into the Marana business community in
order to allow Town, Chamber, and Civic leaders to meet with local business in the community,
listen to their opinions, issues and concerns, and respond as outlined in the Marana Strategic
Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Description: Type:
❑ Marana Chamber Business Walk Plan .F...inal_Draft.p_df Marana Chamber Business Walk Plan Cover Memo
Staff Recommendation:
Suggested Motion:
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 29 of 99
Marana Chamber of Commerce
A Business Plan
For
The Economic ve Committee
" Business Walk Program
Marana Town Council Vision:
"Marana will be the centerpiece of the Sonoran Desert, where fun and progress meets."
Marana Chamber of Commerce Mission:
"The Marana Chamber of Commerce is the voice of business that works to build economic growth and
quality of life in our community."
Background:
Founded in 1987, the Marana Chamber of Commerce accomplishes its mission in many ways, such as
serving the business and professional community as the voice of commerce, and providing numerous
programs and services to improve the economic environment for our members and the community as a
whole. The Chamber promotes an atmosphere that maximizes business potential and profitability.
Our members don't just talk about the future, they shape it! Our Legislative /Economic Development
Committee meets once a month with state, county, and the Town of Marana business decision makers.
Additional information is available on the chamber's website: www.maranachamber.com
The Town of Marana established a 2010 Economic Roadmap as one of the crucial initiatives within the
Marana Strategic Plan - Commerce Center Focus Areas. Five focus areas were developed by the Marana
Town Council. These focus areas are the community's top priorities and serve as the categories under
which the Strategic Plan is organized.
One of the key focus areas and initiatives of the Marana Strategic Plan is to "identify resources and
strategies that support the retention of existing businesses."
These are the initiatives of this focus:
➢ Create and implement a comprehensive retention plan.
➢ Continue support of and increase interaction and co- sponsored programs with Marana Chamber
of Commerce.
➢ Increase contact with existing businesses to determine their needs.
In this spirit, the Marana Chamber of Commerce proposes to implement and integrate as a regular
function of its activities a "Business Walk Program" in direct support of the Town of Marana's Strategic
Plan.
Jim
What is a Business Walk?
Business Walks are part of a regional "best practices" strategy for business retention and expansion,
according to Michael Faust, senior vice president for public policy and advocacy at the Sacramento
Metro Chamber. Business Walks help initiate contact with businesses in the region and act as the start
of "an ongoing conversation" to help get businesses the resources they need to succeed.
The Sacramento Chamber, along with the West Sacramento Chamber and the city of West Sacramento,
has previously hosted a highly successful Business Walk. Over the last two years, this strategy, named
Metro Pulse, has logged visitations of more than 2,100 businesses.
This community -based program brings together economic development agencies and companies
throughout the region. The program helps companies identify barriers and then seek solutions for the
survival and growth of local business. In addition, they contribute to the sustainability and expansion of
the region's economy.
Metro Pulse was awarded the Business Retention & Expansion International Conference Award in 2010
for high impact on the region's businesses. Over the last three years, Metro Pulse has conducted nearly
5,000 business visits and business walks where economic development and business officials meet
directly with owners and managers of retail, commercial, service, and manufacturing businesses of all
sizes.
Business Walk Program Objective:
The Marana Chamber's objective is to implement, launch, and integrate a "Business Walk" in the
Marana area. This program will enhance reaching out into the Marana business community in order to
allow Town, Chamber, and Civic leaders to meet with the local business community, listen to their
opinions, issues and concerns, and respond as outlined in the Marana Strategic Plan.
MIN •.
Business Walk Program Value Proposition:
A formal "Business Walk" program provides much value and benefit to the business community.
Individual business owners and managers have the opportunity to meet directly with Town, Chamber,
and a variety of civic leaders who can provide weighted input and act on behalf of the business
community to ensure a positive and prosperous commerce environment.
The "Business Walk" enables community leaders to hear directly from local businesses of all sizes about
their challenges, and what it will take to continue investing in their facilities, create additional jobs, and
increase revenues that directly help to support town services. Direct input in a face -to -face business
walk also provides immediate input that can be collected and analyzed to determine how the Town of
Marana may be able to encourage desirable business expansion and attract new business entities to our
community.
Business Walk Program Questions:
To ensure consistency and effectiveness of the "face -to- face" visits with business owners / managers
and to gather valuable feedback, three questions will be asked of all businesses. In all visits, the intent is
to focus directly on the business's positive /negative experience and allow maximum input from the.
owner /manager in the shortest amount of time. This is a "listening" project.
The three questions to ask are:
➢ How is business?
➢ What do you like about doing business in Marana?
➢ How can business be made better?
Business Walk Program Target Areas:
➢ Ina Road
➢ Camino Martin — Jeremy Place —West Massingale Road — North Meredith Boulevard
➢ Thornydale Road
➢ Costco Drive — Costco Place
➢ Orange Grove Road — River Road — Travel Center Drive
➢ North Silverbell Road from Safeway to Fry's
➢ North Cortaro Road — North and West Cortaro Farms Road — North Leilani Lane — North Joplin
Lane
➢ North Business Park — North Hartman Lane
➢ North Casa Grande Highway between Cortaro Road and to Ina Road
➢ North Casa Grande Highway between West Coca Cola Place and West Gillette Road
➢ West Arizona Pavilions
➢ North Courtney Page — West Jenna Nicole Road — West Hospitality Road — North Continental
Links Road
➢ North Sandario Road - West Barnett Road — North Anway Road — West Twin Peaks Road —
North Scenic Drive — North Sunflower Drive — North Marana Road — North Marana Main Street —
West Kirby Hughes Road — North Luckett Road
➢ North Dove Mountain Boulevard — North Tangerine Road — West Moore Road — North
Thornydale - North Boulder Bridge Pass
➢ North and West Adonis Road — North Casa Grande Highway - West and North Amole Circle —
West Chapel Drive — El Paso Gasline Road
➢ West Grier Road
➢ West Avra Valley Road — West Camino de Manana — Marana Regional Airport — North Derringer
Road - West Silverbell Road — North Coachline Boulevard
t s s ! e s
Business Walk Program Action Items:
1. Formalize the Business Walk Plan.
2. Coordinate with the Marana Town Council and Town Officials.
3. Develop / implement an IT database system that allows centralized collection of input from each
walk and allows reports to be generated and facilitates communication through all entities (i.e.
Town Council, Town Officials, Marana Chamber).
4. Develop a schedule for conducting regular and periodic "walks" to gather input and feedback
from business leaders.
5. Recruit up to 40 key individuals from the Chamber, Town and Council who can participate on a
regular basis.
6. Organize and brief the volunteers on business walk policies, procedures, and business courtesy
to ensure consistency of questions, gathering of input, and to be mindful of the business
owner's /manager's time.
Business Walk Program Timeline:
June 2011 Economic Development Committee discusses feasibility
July 2011 Fact finding from Sacramento Chamber of Commerce
August 2011 ED Committee discusses findings and agrees to pursue meeting with Town of
Marana officials for briefing and acceptance of joint sponsorship of the
"Business Walk Program"
September 2011 Review of draft business plan, review potential team of volunteers, and initial
list of businesses to be visited
October 2011 Finalize business plan and list of volunteers
Continue to work the list of businesses and segment by sectors to be visited
Implement IT solution to capture, manage input collected, and facilitate stake-
holders communication
December 2011 Business Walk power point presentation delivered by the Economic
Development Committee to the Marana Town Council at its December meeting
Finalize list of volunteers
Q -12012 Finalize list of volunteers and complete the final planning and coordination
Q -2 2012 launch "Business Walk"
M
11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653
Council Chambers, December 13, 2011, 6:00:00 PM
To: Mayor and Council Item D 4
From: Suzanne Machain , Human Resources Director
Strategic Plan Focus Area:
Not Applicable
Subject: Resolution No. 2011 -109: Relating to Personnel; amending the fiscal year 2011-
2012 classified salary schedule to change the position title of Economic Development
Administrator to Economic Development and Strategic Initiatives Manager and to
change the position title of Utilities Technology Analyst to Technology Analyst
Discussion:
The attached resolution accomplishes an amendment to the Town's current FY 2011-
2012 Classified Salary Schedule for the purpose of retitling two existing classifications. The title
Economic Development Administrator is proposed to be retitled to Economic Development &
Strategic Initiatives Manager, and the title of Utilities Technology Analyst is proposed to be
retitled to Technology Analyst.
Economic Development & Strategic Initiatives Manager
The Town is preparing to fill the vacant position previously occupied by Josh Wright whose
position was uniquely classified as a Director of Strategic Initiatives. Reevaluation of the
position has resulted in a decision to refocus the primary duties of the position toward economic
development and in alignment with the Town's Strategic Plan. The position will continue to
maintain oversight for coordinating strategic plan initiatives and will report to the Town
Manager. When the Town opens a competitive recruitment to fill this vacancy, the job title
Economic Development & Strategic Initiatives Manager will be used. The term manager is a
better descriptor for the position. The salary grade for this classification will remain at the current
grade level Grade 23).
Utilities Technology Analyst
This position is housed in the Technology Services Department and the use of the word
"Utilities" in the title limits the use of the position to one specific software need (CarteGraph).
Now that the Town has moved from an implementation phase to an integration phase, the
position can be utilized interchangeably as needed to work on a variety of software applications.
The salary grade for this classification will remain at the current grade level (Grade 20).
Financial Impact:
No impact.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 37 of 99
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Description: Type:
O Resolution amendment to_classified_ salary schedule_
(00028789).DOC Resolution Resolution
❑ EX_A_FY2011-
12 a. Classified_S lary_ Schedule_Amended_12- 13- 2011.x16 Exhibit A Exhibit
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends amending the FY 2011 -2012 Classified Salary Schedule to change the title of
Economic Development Administrator to Economic Development & Strategic Initiatives
Manager and the title of Utilities Technology Analyst to Technology Analyst.
Suggested Motion:
I move to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -109, amending the fiscal year 2011 -2012 classified salary
schedule to change the position title of Economic Development Administrator to Economic
Development & Strategic Initiatives Manager and to change the position title of Utilities
Technology Analyst to Technology Analyst.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 38 of 99
MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011-109
RELATING TO PERSONNEL; AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2011 -2012 CLASSIFIED
SALARY SCHEDULE TO CHANGE THE POSITION TITLE OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATOR TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND STRATEGIC
INITIATIVES MANAGER AND TO CHANGE THE POSITION TITLE OF UTILITIES
TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TO TECHNOLOGY ANALYST
WHEREAS the Marana Town Code, Section 3 -3 -1, provides that the Town Council shall
adopt a personnel system for classified employees of the Town; and
WHEREAS on June 21, 2011, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 2011 -67
approving a classified salary schedule for FY 2011 -2012; and
WHEREAS the Town's Personnel Policies and Procedures, Policy 3 -3, provides that the
Town Manager shall ensure the maintenance of the classification plan and that any amendments
to the plan require the approval of the Town Council; and
WHEREAS the Town Council finds that amending the Town's classification plan as set
forth in this resolution is in the best interests of the Town and its residents.
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 amended classified salary
schedule for fiscal year 2011 -2012, attached to and incorporated by this reference in this
resolution as Exhibit A.
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 amended classified
salary schedule in Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
MARANA, ARIZONA, this 13 day of December, 2011.
Mayor Ed Honea
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 39 of 99 100028789.DOC /}
EXHIBIT A TO MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -109
Town of Marana
CLASSIFIED SALARY SCHEDULE*
FY 2011 -2012
Grade 10 $18,240 $22,800 $27,360 Annual
424 Document Imaging Clerk Nonexempt $1,520.00 $1,900.00 $2,280.00 Monthly
824 Recreation Aide Nonexempt $8.77 $10.96 $13.15 Hourly
410 Reproduction /Supply Clerk Nonexempt
446 Transcriptionist Nonexempt
Grade 11 $20,064 $25,080 $30,096 Annual
412 Mail Carrier /Courier Nonexempt $1,672.00 $2,090.00 $2,508.00 Monthly
422 Office Support Assistant Nonexempt $9.65 $12.06 $14.47 Hourly
818 Recreation Center Attendant Nonexempt
Grade 12 $22,072 $27,590 $33,108 Annual
408 Customer Service Specialist Nonexempt $1,839.33 $2,299.17 $2,759.00 Monthly
700 Laborer Nonexempt $10.61 $13.26 $15.92 Hourty
822 Recreation Assistant Nonexempt
820 Recreation Leader Nonexempt
Grade 13 $24,280 $30,350 $36,420 Annual
420 Accounts Payable Clerk Nonexempt $2,023.33 $2,529.17 $3,035.00 Monthly
456 Court Clerk Nonexempt $11.67 $14.59 $17.51 Hourly
436 Customer Service Clerk Nonexempt
610 Engineering Assistant Nonexempt
414 Human Resources Technician Nonexempt
Grade 14 $26,704 $33,380 $40,056 Annual
417 Accounting Clerk Nonexempt $2,225.33 $2,781.67 $3,338.00 Monthly
406 Administrative Secretary Nonexempt $12.84 $16.05 $19.26 Hourty
812 Court Security Guard Nonexempt
612 Facilities Technician Nonexempt
614 Fleet Technician I Nonexempt
Grade 15 $29,376 $36,720 $44,064 Annual
404 Agenda & Records Clerk Nonexempt $2,448.00 $3,060.00 $3,672.00 Monthly
450 Court Collections Specialist Nonexempt $14.12 $17.65 $21.18 Hourty
454 Courtroom Specialist Nonexempt
438 Executive Assistant Nonexempt
702 Inmate Services Coordinator Nonexempt
416 Human Resources Coordinator Nonexempt
600 Maintenance Worker Nonexempt
430 Permit Clerk Nonexempt
418 Senior Accounting Clerk Nonexempt
616 Small Engine Mechanic Nonexempt
442 Utility Billing Specialist Nonexempt
528 Backflow Specialist Nonexempt
Grade 16 $32,312 $40,390 $48,468 Annual
434 Development Coordinator Nonexempt $2,692.67 $3,365.83 $4,039.00 Monthly
336 Engineering Aide Nonexempt $15.53 $19.42 $23.30 Hourly
508 Fleet Technician II Nonexempt
500 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning (HVAC) Technician Nonexempt
306 Planning Technician Nonexempt
304 Plans Review Technician Nonexempt
458 Project Coordinator Nonexempt
466 Recreation Programmer Nonexempt
526 Right of Way Inspector Nonexempt
428 Senior Permit Clerk Nonexempt
618 Signal Technician I Nonexempt
606 Utilities Operator I Nonexempt
Grade 17 $35,544 $44,430 $53,316 Annual
472 Administrative Manager Exempt $2,962.00 $3,702.50 $4,443.00 Monthly
544 Acceptance Inspector Nonexempt $17.09 $21.36 $25.63 Hourly
314 Computer Technician Nonexempt
525 Construction Inspector Nonexempt
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 40 of 99
EXHIBIT A TO MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -109
Town of Marana
CLASSIFIED SALARY SCHEDULE*
FY 2011 -2012
534 Electric Pump & Well Technician Nonexempt
312 Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Technician Nonexempt
426 Legal Assistant Nonexempt
602 Maintenance Coordinator Nonexempt
322 Real Property Acquisition Agent Exempt
402 Records & Elections Coordinator Exempt
460 Senior Administrative Assistant Nonexempt
604 Senior Maintenance Worker Nonexempt
704 Signs & Markings Technician Nonexempt
532 Water Quality Inspector Nonexempt
608 Utilities Operator II Nonexempt
Grade 18 $39,096 $48,870 $58,644 Annual
518 Building Inspector I Nonexempt $3,258.00 $4,072.50 $4,887.00 Monthly
232 Contracts Analyst Exempt $18.80 $23.50 $28.19 Hourly
474 Council Liaison Exempt
242 Court Probation Monitor Nonexempt
200 Curation Specialist Exempt
710 Foreman Nonexempt
462 Grants & Housing Coordinator Exempt
514 Housing Rehabilitation Specialist Exempt
208 Human Resources Analyst Exempt
276 Management Assistant Exempt
214 Payroll Administrator Exempt
476 Recreation Coordinator Exempt
324 Senior Real Property Acquisition Agent Exempt
542 Signal Technician II Nonexempt
440 Special Events Coordinator Exempt
530 Utilities Line Inspector/Plan Reviewer Nonexempt
Grade 19 $43,008 $53,760 $64,512 Annual
516 Building Inspector II Nonexempt $3,584.00 $4,480.00 $5,376.00 Monthly
540 Community Response Manager Nonexempt $20.68 $25.85 $31.02 Hourly
522 Code Enforcement Officer Nonexempt
400 Deputy Town Clerk Exempt
308 Engineering Technician Nonexempt
512 Facilities Maintenance Supervisor Exempt
252 Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Analyst Nonexempt
212 Management & Budget Analyst Exempt
520 Planner Nonexempt
302 Plans Examiner Exempt
464 Police Telecommunications Supervisor Nonexempt
326 Risk Management & Safety Coordinator Exempt
210 Senior Accountant Exempt
Grade 20 $47,312 $59,140 $70,968 Annual
220 Public Information Officer (PIO) Exempt $3,942.67 $4,928.33 $5,914.00 Monthly
234 Contract Administrator Exempt $22.75 $28.43 $34.12 Hourly
452 Court Supervisor Nonexempt
254 Database Analyst Nonexempt
226 Environmental Project Coordinator Exempt
316 Network Technician Nonexempt
708 Parks Supervisor Exempt
246 Planner II Exempt
470 Police Records Supervisor Nonexempt
236 Project Control Specialist Exempt
318 Public Safety Technology Specialist Nonexempt
216 Purchasing Coordinator Exempt
152 Senior Administrative Manager Exempt
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 41 of 99
EXHIBIT A TO MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -109
Town of Marana
CLASSIFIED SALARY SCHEDULE*
FY 2011 -2012
538 Signal Technician III Nonexempt
482 Utilities Services Supervisor Exempt
484 Utilities Production & Distribution Supervisor Exempt
268 Technology Analyst Nonexempt
Grade 21 $52,040 $65,050 $78,060 Annual
230 Civil Engineer Exempt $4,336.67 $5,420.83 $6,505.00 Monthly
814 Crime Scene/Property & Evidence Supervisor Exempt
546 Facilities & Fleet Services Manager Exempt
172 Permit Center & Records Manager Exempt
164 Police Telecommunications Manager Exempt
206 Senior Human Resources Analyst Exempt
256 Senior Network Analyst Exempt
332 Software Engineer Exempt
300 Senior Plans Examiner Exempt
502 Superintendent Exempt
334 Utilities Coordinator Exempt
Grade 22 $57,248 $71,560 $85,872 Annual
222 Associate Town Attorney Exempt $4,770.67 $5,963.33 $7,156.00 Monthly
176 Chief Building Inspector Exempt
238 Construction Manager Exempt
250 Employee Relations Administrator Exempt
328 Principle Plans Examiner Exempt
258 Senior Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Analyst Exempt
240 Technology Manager Exempt
266 Traffic Engineer Exempt
Grade 23 $62,968 $78,710 $94,452 Annual
261 Assistant Town Attorney Exempt $5,247.33 $6,559.17 $7,871.00 Monthly
228 Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Manager Exempt
264 Cultural Resources Manager Exempt
330 Database Administrator Exempt
202 Economic Development & Strategic Initiatives Manager Exempt
274 Finance Manager Exempt
204 Intergovernmental Affairs Administrator Exempt
244 Planner III Exempt
800 Police Lieutenant Exempt
333 Senior Software Engineer Exempt
150 Utilities Operations Manager Exempt
Grade 24 $69,264 $86,580 $103,896 Annual
270 Construction Division Manager Exempt $5,772.00 $7,215.00 $8,658.00 Monthly
170 Court Administrator Exempt
160 Engineering Division Manager Exempt
Grade 25 $76,192 $95,240 $114,288 Annual
158 Assistant Public Works Director Exempt $6,349.33 $7,936.67 $9,524.00 Monthty
148 Assistant Utilities Director Exempt
156 Assistant Planning Director Exempt
801 Police Captain Exempt
262 Senior Assistant Town Attorney Exempt
174 Traffic Division Manager Exempt
Grade 26 $83,816 $104,770 $125,724 Annual
154 Deputy Town Attorney Exempt $6,984.67 $8,730.83 $10,477.00 Monthly
*Excludes positions covered under the MPOA Memorandum of Understanding Effective July 1, 2011
* *Fair Labor Standards Act Amended December 13,201
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 42 of 99
" «,�
M
11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653
Council Chambers, December 13, 2011, 6:00:00 PM
To: Mayor and Council Item D 5
From: Frank Cassidy , Town Attorney
Strategic Plan Focus Area:
Not Applicable
Subject: Ordinance No. 2011.35: Relating to Development; revising the Town's development
impact fee program to conform to A.R.S. § 9- 463.05, effective January 1,
2012; establishing separate accounts for development impact fees collected before
January 1, 2012; and establishing an effective date
Discussion:
This year, the Arizona Legislature adopted Senate Bill 1525, comprehensively revising A.R.S. §
9- 463.05, the statute defining the development impact fee authority of cities and towns.
SB1525 is effective on January 1, 2012. By that time, all cities and towns must revise their
development impact fee schedules to eliminate fees for public services that do not fall within the
"necessary public services" definition of SB1525.
The Town Attorney has reviewed all of the Town's adopted development impact fees, and
concludes that, with one possible exception, they fully fall within the "necessary public services"
definition of SB1525. The possible exception is the Town's development impact fee for parks.
The "necessary public services" definition of SB1525 includes:
. "(g) Neighborhood parks and recreational facilities on real property up to thirty acres in
area, or parks and recreational facilities larger than thirty acres if the facilities provide a
direct benefit to the development. Park and recreational facilities do not include vehicles,
equipment or that portion of any facility that is used for amusement parks, aquariums,
aquatic centers, auditoriums, arenas, arts and cultural facilities, bandstand and orchestra
facilities, bathhouses, boathouses, clubhouses, community centers greater than three
thousand square feet in floor area, environmental education centers, equestrian facilities,
golf course facilities, greenhouses, lakes, museums, theme parks, water reclamation or
riparian areas, wetlands, zoo facilities or similar recreational facilities, but may include
swimming pools."
The consulting firm CLA assisted the Town in preparing the September 30, 2004 technical report
supporting the Town's development impact fee for parks. The portions of the 2004 study
applicable to the parks fee are included with the backup documents for this item. CLA has
prepared a new report analyzing the technical report and other data leading to the April 5, 2005
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 43 of 99
adoption of the parks fee (Ordinance No. 2005.11) through the lens of the 2011 "necessary public
services" definition of SB1525. The new CLA report is provided as part of the backup materials.
With respect to the Town's development impact fee for parks, the new CLA report recommends
that the Town simply not use fees collected after January 1, 2012 for the proposed Bureau of
Reclamation regional park, the Heritage Park, or the proposed alternative agricultural storage
basin. In addition, to comply with the SB1525 mandate to charge all development impact fees to
non - residential as well as residential development, the new CLA report proposes to attribute 95%
of park costs to residential, since parks overwhelmingly benefit residential development.
The Town Attorney has analyzed the new CLA report's findings in light of the original
September 30, 2004 development impact fee report and the public record leading up to the April
5, 2005 adoption of the park fee. The public record includes two important documents not
previously mentioned. The first is a 2005 report by the consulting firm EPS, commissioned by
SAHBA. It contends that larger credits should have been applied to account for new
development's contributions toward the cost of addressing then - existing deficiencies. Instead of
the $3,095 per home fee determined by the 2004 report, the EPS report concludes that the parks
fee should have been $2,794. (The portions of the EPS report that analyze the parks fee are also
included in the backup materials.)
The second additional document in the public record is the Council communication ( "bluesheet ")
accompanying the April 5, 2005 adoption of the parks fee. A copy of the 2005 bluesheet is also
included with the backup materials. It explains how the concerns raised in the EPS report were
accounted for in the final adoption of the parks fee. Specifically, the bluesheet explains that linear
parks and specialty parks were added to the parks originally addressed in the 2004 report, to
reduce the then - existing park deficiency. The 2004 report had expressly excluded specialty parks,
and relied simply on the cost of providing community parks.
Because the original 2004 technical report supporting the parks fee was limited to community
parks that continue to meet the SB1525 "necessary public services" definition, and the 2005
bluesheet reduced the deficiency by adding parks that do not meet that definition, the Town
Attorney recommends that the original 2004 technical report and the adjustments proposed by the
2005 EPS report be used as a basis for the SB1525- revised fee. This would bring the 2005 fee
down to $2,794. Because the 2004 technical report attributed the entire cost of new community
parks to residential development, the Town Attorney further recommends reducing the SB1525-
revised 2005 fee to 95% of $2,794, or $2,654. With the construction cost index adjustments
applied since the adoption of the fee, the SB1525- revised 2012 fee would then be $3,294 per
home -- down from the $3,579 currently charged.
The technical reports associated with other Town development impact fees did not attribute the
full benefit of the public services to residential development. They calculated and charged to
residential development only the portion of the cost attributable to residential development. As a
result, no similar adjustment needs to be made to those fees.
The proposed ordinance makes two additional changes to the Town's development impact fee
program based on SB1525. The first is to create separate development impact fee accounts for all
development impact fees received by the Town through December 31, 2011. This will allow the
Town to use and track the pre- SB1525 development impact fees using the preexisting rules. For
example, fees received after January 1, 2012 must be spent within ten years of receipt (15 years
for wet utilities), but pre- SB1525 fees do not have those limitations.
The second change eliminates the automatic annual indexing of fees using the construction cost
index. The Town applied automatic annual indexing to certain development impact fees by the
adoption of Ordinance Nos. 2006.12 and 2007.33. SB1525 no longer allows automatic indexing.
Because this ordinance is administrative in nature, it is not subject to referendum and need not be
adopted by emergency to go into effect in less than 30 days. It will go into effect on January 1,
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 44 of 99
2012 -- the same day SB1525 goes into effect.
Financial Impact:
This proposed ordinance will reduce the Town's development impact fee for parks by $285 per
home.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Description: Type:
El Ordinance mo..ifying_DIF —program —per SB1525_
(FC 1370),DOC Ordinance Ordinance
O 2...0...04 Parks DIF Report.pdf 2004 Parks DIF Technical Report Backup Material
❑ 2005_EPS_Report _ to_SAHBA_Park DIFs_onlyPDF 2005 EPS Report on Parks DIF Backup Material
0 2005_Parks DIF B..L.uesheet.pdf 2005 Parks DIF Bluesheet Backup Material
0 12 -08 -2011 Marana DIF_,pdf 2011 CLA Parks DIF Analysis Backup Material
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No. 2011.35, modifying the Town's development
impact fee program to comply with S131525.
Suggested Motion:
I move to adopt Ordinance No. 2011.35, modifying the Town's development impact fee program
to comply with SB1525.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 45 of 99
MARANA ORDINANCE NO. 2011.35
RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT; REVISING THE TOWN'S DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE PROGRAM TO CONFORM TO A.R.S. § 9- 463.05, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2012;
ESTABLISHING SEPARATE ACCOUNTS FOR DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
COLLECTED BEFORE JANUARY 1, 2012; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS the Town of Marana has adopted various development impact fees since
1999 based on the legal requirements that applied at the time of adoption; and
WHEREAS the Arizona Legislature's 2011 adoption of Senate Bill 1525 revised the
requirements applicable to municipal impact fees effective January 1, 2012; and
WHEREAS the Town Council finds that modification of the Town's development impact
fee program in accordance with this ordinance conforms to SB 1525 and is in the best interests of
the Town of Marana and its citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, as follows:
SECTION 1. The Town -wide parks development impact fee adopted by Ordinance No.
2005.11 and indexed annually pursuant to Ordinance No. 2006.12 is hereby reduced from $3,579
to $3,294.
SECTION 2. The annual indexing of fees pursuant to Section 4 of Ordinance
No. 2006.12 and Section 8 of Ordinance 2007.33 is hereby terminated.
SECTION 3. All Town development impact fees collected beginning January 1, 2012
shall be maintained in accounts separate from Town development impact fees collected before
January 1, 2012.
SECTION 4. The Town Manager and Town staff are authorized and directed to take all
further acts necessary or prudent to comply with SB 1525.
SECTION 5. This ordinance is effective on January 1, 2012.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
MARANA, ARIZONA, this 13 day of December, 2011.
Mayor Ed Honea
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Study secs o 3nm D C. B ro n s o n 26 �Pag l f ss Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney
Ordinance No. 2011.35 (FC1370.DOC /}
Development Impact Fee Study
Northwest Marana Roadways
Parks
Town of Marana
Curtis Lueck & Associates
September 30, 2004
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 47 of 99
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 1
Introduction 2
Northern Marana Roads 4
Northern Marana Transportation Benefit Area. 4
Benefit Area Roadways and System Performance. 5
Description of Service Unit . 11
Roadway Demand and Cost Estimates 12
Credits and Fee Calculation. 15
Examples of Impact Fee Calculation . 17
Periodic Review of Fees 18
Parks 19
Benefit Area 19
Benefit Area Parks 19
Park Demand and Cost Estimates 21
Description of Demand Unit 21
Deficiency Analysis 22
Fee Schedule 22
Credits for Donations and Improvements. 23
Periodic Review of Fees 23
Exhibits
Exhibit 1, Future Transportation Network 6
Exhibit 2, Northwest Marana Area Plan 7
Exhibit 3, 2010 Roadway Network 9
Exhibit 4, 2020 Roadway Network 10
Exhibit 5, Northwest Marana Parks Draft Plan 20
Tables
Table 1, EDU Equivalents for Residential Types 11
Table 2, Roadway Development Costs 13
Appendix
Appendix A, Transportation Modeling. 24
Appendix B, Construction Sales Tax History 47
Appendix C, Estimated Costs for Park Construction . 48
Appendix D, Park Deficiency Credit Analysis 49
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 48 of 99
Executive Summary
The Town of Marana is rapidly growing, creating considerable demand for infrastructure
to support the new growth. State Statutes mandate that new growth "pays for itself' and
provides for the adoption of impact fees as a method for equitably assessing growth and
the cost of improvements. The Marana proposes using impact fees to meet this mandate.
The Town of Marana previously adopted an impact fee to support the construction of the
Twin Peaks Interchange and based fee collection upon a benefit area identified by
transportation studies. The Town intends to pursue impact fees based upon benefit areas
associated with specific projects or needs in the future. Some benefit areas will focus on
those directly enjoy the benefits from a project, while others may be townwide. Future
Transportation benefit areas may even overlap, if different transportation needs are
identified.
This study presents recommendations for two new impact fees, for varying purposes.
The largest fee is for local transportation facilities in Northern Marana at $6,315 per
single family residential dwelling unit. Marana's first townwide impact fee for parks is
also proposed, in the amount of $3,095 per new residence, for the development of
community parks.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 49 of 99
Introduction
Northern Marana is on the verge of explosive growth. The area currently has a
population of only 2000 residents, but is anticipated to swell to 70,000 by the year 2030.
The new residents and businesses will create extraordinary demand upon the
community's infrastructure. This demand can be accommodated in the short term by the
existing facilities, but they will be woefully inadequate once the available capacity is
absorbed. Without new policies for developing infrastructure and funding, the
community will be left struggling to upgrade its infrastructure to meet demand, while
trying to support the accelerating growth rate.
A better approach is one of systematic, planned implementation of infrastructure
improvement. For the Town of Marana, this translates to provision of timely
improvements, equitable cost sharing and continuous provision of high levels of service
as the community grows.
The Town's vision and goals are described in a number of documents, including the voter
approved Marana General Plan, the Northwest Marana Area Plan, Departmental Mission
Statements and the adopted "Core Values" of the community.
Many tools are available to the Town and Community to facilitate its goals. These
include the use of improvement districts, industry group targeted sales taxes, cost sharing
and fair share agreements, community facilities districts, and probably the most important
tool, development impact fees.
Development impact fees (DIFs) are allowed by state statue to ensure equitable cost
allocation for needed improvements, with the underlying goal of broad equity between
current and future residents. DIFs place the burden of developing the new capacity
necessary to support growth squarely upon new development. The DIF statutes also
recognize that new residents should not shoulder the burden of existing infrastructure
deficiencies. These principles are consistent with the Town's goals, and support the
expansion of impact fees to Northern Marana.
Marana currently has a DIF which affects developing properties south of the Avra Valley
Road alignment. This is described as the South Marana Transportation Benefit Area, and
funds raised are dedicated to the new Twin Peaks Road Interchange.
The issues of greatest concern to the Town are the development of adequate roadway
facilities and neighborhood parks. Considerable funds have been expended by the Town
of Marana using reserves, grants and regional funds to address previous roadway and
park deficiencies. The Town is committed to having a high quality of service for parks
and roads.
The Mayor and Council subsequently established level of service (LOS) standards for
both transportation (LOS "C ", per the Marana Transportation Plan Update and by
resolution) and parks (6 acres of developed park per 1000 population, per the Marana
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 50 of 99 2
Parks, Trails and Open Space Master Plan). This direction is the foundation for
infrastructure planning in Northern Marana.
Developers working in Marana contribute greatly to the community's infrastructure.
When these contributions consist of land, built improvements or tangible assets that can
be incorporated in the ultimate community infrastructure, they will be credited against the
developer's impact fee liability. Improvements not creditable include those that (1) are
necessary to address interim conditions, (2) mitigate safety concerns created by their
projects, and/or (3) cannot reasonably be incorporated into the ultimate infrastructure of
the community.
The Town always prefers to have infrastructure built by the development community,
rather than through impact fee collection and expenditure. The construction of major
infrastructure at the time of initial land development activities causes less community
disruption, is more economical and provides early benefit to the community. The benefits
of early infrastructure construction are far greater than the costs of short-term
maintenance of under- utilized infrastructure.
The Town anticipates and desires to have an aggressive impact fee credit program, based
upon the costs the community expects to expend on infrastructure rather than the
developer's actual costs.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 51 of 99 3
Parks
The provision of adequate parks and recreation facilities is key to community satisfaction
and quality of life. Marana has long held this belief, and became the first Tucson suburb
to own and operate its own park system.
Parks and recreation facilities are in short supply within the Marana planning area. In
addition to the 7 public parks owned and operated by the Town of Marana, nearby public
parks include Arthur Pack Regional Park, Christopher Columbus Park, Rillito Vista
Community Center and the Picture Rocks Community Center. Private Parks also provide
much needed recreation facilities in the Dove Mountain, Continental Ranch and
Countryside communities.
The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) established guidelines which call
for active recreational parks at the rate of 6 acres of developed parks per 1000 population.
Currently, the Town of Marana has 3.8 acres of public parks per 1000 population. With
the present population of 24,000 residents, a deficiency of 53 acres of park exists. The
town has acquired a 48 acre district park site, and an additional 10 acre neighborhood
park to satisfy this deficiency, but park development costs have yet to be programmed.
The Town nevertheless remains committed to providing 6 acres of park per 1000
population in spite of the deficiency.
The Town approved a Park Trail and Open Space Master Plan in July of 2000. That
Master Plan called for the provision of active recreation parks in accordance with the
NRPA standards, and facilities for team and individual sports such as basketball, football,
baseball, softball, tennis, racquetball, swimming, skateboarding and similar activities.
Parks which provide more passive recreation opportunities, such as linear parks, natural
areas, conservation areas, heritage parks, or special purpose facilities such as rodeo
facilities, etc. do not satisfy this requirement.
Benefit Area
The Benefit Area for parks is the Town of Marana.
Benefit Area Parks
The Marana Parks, Trails and Open Space Masterplan generally describes where future
parks will be demanded. A more refined projection of estimated park needs for
Northwest Marana is included in Exhibit 5.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 52 of 99 19
.................... . . ............................................ .................. ... . .......... ....................................................... ................................................ - ................ . . . . . . . . ......... . ....................... . ... . .. . . ............ . ..... . ................................................................ . ...... ..........
%\ % } /� \{ } \ \� / /! \�\
2\ }\ \« \ / \ \ \\
2\ \\ ƒ? \�
� � � � � � � �� � � ^�
/\ � � � � � � � � � / \� \�
Park Demand and Cost Estimates
The Town has recently completed three neighborhood parks for which development costs
are known, and are the basis for determination of future park development costs in
Marana, The costs for these recent projects are in Appendix C of this report.
Park development costs are based upon land acquisition, construction cost and design and
construction administration. On a per acre cost basis, these costs are estimated to be:
Land Acquisition $ 30,000
Construction Cost 150,000
Design & Construction Admin. 45,000
Total cost per acre of park $225,000
Description of Demand Unit (DU)
For the purpose of this benefit area, a typical Marana single family residence is a Demand
Unit (DU), with an equivalency of 2.7 residents per DU (census 2000). Projects likely to
have lower residency or occupancy rates (such as apartments, age restricted communities,
etc.) may provide alternative information for consideration.
Through 2025, the Town is anticipated to grow from 24,000 to approximately 90,000
residents. This will increase the demand for parks from 144 acres to 540 acres. The cost
of the new parks required to support growth is estimated to be $89,100,000, based upon
current costs.
Communities designed to target and provide a particular recreation niche will be
considered on their recreation merits for the determination of their DU per residence.
Projects such as residential golf communities with onsite athletic clubs may have
relatively low equivalent demand, but it is incumbent upon the developer to justify any
reduction in DU equivalency.
All projects will be evaluated at the time of development plan or preliminary plat
submittal for their D.U. equivalency.
Based upon 6 developed park acres per 1000 residents, the proportionate cost for park
development (Base Fee), is determined to be:
(Park Cost per Acre) (2.7) (6) _ $3645 = Base Fee
1000
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 54 of 99 21
Deficiency Analysis
A deficiency currently exists within the community for parks. The current (2004)
population of the Town of Marana is 24,000 residents. The Town has 72 acres of
developed public neighborhood parks at 5 locations. 19 acres of Linear Park either have
been developed or are under construction and funded. An additional 53 acres are
required to be developed to satisfy the existing town park deficiency. This can be met in
part by the 48 acre Silverbell District Park, a site presently being developed by the Town
near the intersection of Cortaro and Silverbell Roads. To address the existing deficiency,
the Town has 58 acres of parkland (5 acres more than the deficit requires). The Town
must develop 53 undeveloped acres owned by the Town at $195,000 /acre. The cost to
satisfy the Town park deficiency is $10,335,000, but it also has 5 acres of additional land
that can offset $150,000 of the deficiency. The value of the Town's deficiency is
therefore $10,185,000.
General funds will be necessary to make up the current deficiency, and credit must be
equally given new and existing residents. The cost of the deficiency per existing
dwelling must first be calculated as follows:
(a) Determine the cost of the existing deficiency, to be met with bond funds.
(b) Determine the population of the community at the time of impact fee adoption.
(c) Determine the cost of the deficiency per resident, by dividing (a) by (b).
(d) Multiply (c) by 2.7 to identify the deficiency for each existing DU.
The existing park deficiency amounts to $424.37 per existing resident, or $1145.81 per
DU.
In order to identify the credit granted to new development for existing deficiencies, the
contribution that new growth will make towards the repayment of the bonds issued to
satisfy the deficiency.
Appendix D demonstrates that residential development will pay for 48% of the identified
deficiency, and must be equally available to support new development demands. The
Park deficiency credit is therefore $550 per DU
Fee Schedule
The recommended impact fee for neighborhood park development is equal to:
Fee per DU = Base Fee — Deficiency Credit per DU
or
$3095 per DU
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 55 of 99 22
Credits for Donations and Improvements
Credits will be available to offset a project impact fee liability where substantial park
land or improvements are dedicated to the town as a part of project development. In
keeping with the Town's preference to accept improved parks rather than to collect
impact fees, the Town will give a "book value" of $225,000 per acre of improved park or
$30,000 per acre for land suitable for future parks. Recreation facilities, or specific
amenities being developed in existing parks will be given reviewed on a case by case
basis for credit against impact fee liabilities.
Improved neighborhood parks which are to be gifted to the town must be greater than 10
acres in size, and must include adequate parking, amenities and restrooms. All parks
proposed for public dedication must meet public standards for park improvement, and be
approved by the Parks and Recreation Director.
Land for dedication (unimproved) must be of sufficient size and geometry to be usable
and efficient for public maintenance. Public parks of 40 acres and above are preferred, as
they can be developed and maintained more effectively than smaller parks. Land which
is principally used for flood control will not be considered creditable unless it is fully
developed with adequate design and maintenance features for use as a public park.
Public parks which are developed and dedicated to the town, in accordance with town
standards, will be credited at the rate of $225,000 per developed acre. Parks which are
developed using public financing tools such as community facilities districts (CFD's) will
be credited based upon the actual cost of construction.
Periodic Review of Fees
The Town will annually review all cost and credit data contained within this report, and
will publish an update of this report no later than June 30 The updated figures will be
employed in an amended fee and credit schedule, to be adopted by the Town Council.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 56 of 99 23
Appendix C: Estimated Costs for Park Construction
The Town has recently completed 3 contemporary parks. These parks include El Rio
Park, Continental Ranch Community Park and Coyote Trails Elementary School Park.
The costs for construction were $208,619, $2,307,043, and $964,780 respectively.
The average per acre cost of park development was:
El Rio $ 89,800 /acre
Continental Ranch Community 180,904 / acre
Coyote Trails 138,130 / acre
The total park area developed amounted to 22.05 acres. The average per acre cost for
development was $157,843 per acre.
El Rio Park has no athletic fields or restrooms, resulting in low development costs
Continental Ranch has a skate park and neighborhood constraints adding to costs.
Coyote Trails benefited from adjacent school improvements for cost savings.
Based upon the forgoing, a $150,000 / acre construction cost is believed to be appropriate
for estimating purposes. This figure is also consistent with regional averages experienced
by other agencies.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 57 of 99
Appendix D, Park Deficiency Credit Support
The Town of Marana currently has an existing park deficiency valued at $10.185 Million.
This deficiency is proposed to be resolved as a part of a $15 Million park development
bond issue, which will also fund projects benefiting new growth areas. This bond issue
will be paid for using pledged sales tax revenues of the Town. To the extent these sales
tax revenues are attributable to new growth, they are creditable.
The life of a $15 Million park development bond is projected to be 20 years, and the debt
service is estimated to be $1.308 million per year.
Sales tax revenues are generated from both residents and non residents of the Town of
Marana, and come from collections on many Industry Groups taxable under the State Tax
Code. Industry Groups such as Hotels, Wholesale Trade and Mining have little
correlation to the residential community. On the other hand, Construction Industry tax
receipts are very dependant upon new residential growth. Finally, Marana enjoys a
vibrant commercial district which draws from a broader community than just Marana.
The commercial sales tax receipts are therefore attributable to a larger population than
Marana.
Total sales tax income in fiscal year 05 (FY 05) is estimated to be $18.835 million.
Subtracting the Construction Sales Tax component allocated to the Transportation Fund,
leaves a General Fund sales tax contribution of $13,424,000.
Sales tax revenue directly attributable to the residential portion of the community comes
from the Insurance, Utility, Service, Restaurant, and Retail Sales Industry Groups. The
collections from Utility, Service and Insurance Groups amount to $2,535,000 in FY 05.
Retail and Restaurant tax receipts are from a broader trade area, estimated to consist of
40% Marana Residents. Marana residents therefore contribute retail and restaurant taxes
in the amount of $3,411,600.
Marana residents contribute $5,946,600 to the general sales tax base, exclusive of
construction sales tax. This correlates to 44% of all sales taxes collected, and averages
$669.00 per household.
Construction sales taxes for a new $190,000 home amount to $4,940.00; only 25% of this
($1235) is allocated to the General Fund. If distributed over the 20 year life of the bond,
the equivalent contribution is $61.75 / year.
Adding the equivalent annualized contribution of the Construction Sales Tax to the
average household sales tax generation of $669.00, yielding $730.75 per year, per
household. This increases the equivalent contribution of new development to 48% of
funds needed to satisfy the Park deficiency addressed through bonds.
The credit to new development for addressing existing park deficiencies is 48% of the
deficiency cost, per dwelling Unit (D.U.). The credit is therefore calculated to be
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 58 of 99 49
$1145.81 (.48) = $549.99. A credit of $550 is therefore applied to the park impact fee for
new development's participation in addressing the existing park deficiency.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 59 of 99 50
's
Ecollonlic c
Planning syslenls
MEMORANDUM
To: Alex Jacome; Southern Arizona Home Builders Association
Ed Taczanowsky; Southern Arizona Home Builders Association
From: Jamie Gomes and Ken Zahn
Subject Draft Analysis of Proposed Town of Marana Development Impact Fees;
EPS #14751
Date: February 11, 2005
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., (EPS) has reviewed the proposed road and park
development impact fees (fees) under consideration by the Town of Marana (Town).
The proposed road and park fees are based on the Development Impact Fee Study
conducted by Curtis Lueck & Associates and dated September 2004 (Study). This
memorandum discusses issues related to proposed road and park fees.
OVERVIEW
The Town has projected substantial growth in Northern Marana (Study Area) for the
next 30 years that is driven primarily by the addition of medium - and low- density
single - family housing. The Study uses the Northwest Marana General Plan Amendment
(General Plan) published in 2000 as the basis for residential land -use projections. The
Study proposes a road and park development impact fee to fund road and park
facilities. The Town's goal is to have the road and park infrastructure built by the
development community and to use the road and park fees as a source of `repayments or
credits.
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS
EPS has analyzed the road fee and park fee separately. Analysis of the proposed road
fee is based on analysis of the road cost allocation methodology. EPS has not reviewed
the cost assumptions, traffic capacity, or trigger for roadway improvements or park Cost
assumptions specifically, all of which would be more appropriately reviewed by an
engineer.
SACRAMENTO RERKEIEY DENVER
• ! "iCt !]...'.0 rFd .: rl•.Y. S:1 i:r �•E5 _ 5sy r3: .Si les .. n;:c•ar. +Iv -add.: 0,
. a'F..1!yn.. . "�. e: isi. .•da �i. ': nS=n`:t ta\ i:.. •'. 2: . ..,. :i'. :...' ?..tly C
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 60 of 99
Memorandum
Torun ofMarma Development Impact Fee Review
Februmy 11, 2005
ROAD IMPACT FEE
The Study estimates that roadway improvements to be funded by the road fee are
approximately $183 million. Roadway improvements include local roads and a share of
interchange costs. Those improvements that have been identified as regional in nature
(e.g., Tangerine Road) have been reduced by a percentage to represent only the local
share of the roadway improvement.
EPS has calculated the gross road fee (before credits) under four scenarios to examine
alternative methodologies for road cost allocation. It is important to note that all of the
calculations in this memorandum are stated in gross terms, before credits for
construction sales tax.
Scenario 1 represents the model proposed by the Study, and Scenarios 2-4 show
alternative cost allocation methods that could be considered. The various scenarios are
summarized below:
Scenario Cost Cost Allocation
Scenario 1 _ $183 million Residential units only
Scenario 2 $183 million Residential and nonresidential land uses
Scenario 3 $48 million Interchange cost to residential and nonresidential land uses
$135 million Remaining roadway costs to residential units only
Scenario 4 $48 million Interchange cost to residential and regional nonresidential land
uses
$135 million Remaining roadway costs to residential units only
Table 1 shows the resulting gross road fee based on the four cost allocation scenarios
considered. As shown in Table 1, depending on which alternative cost allocation
methodology the City considers, the road fee for residential land uses could decrease by .
1 to 20 percent.
PARK IMPACT FEE
The Study identifies approximately $89.1 million in new park facilities costs attributable
to the development of approximately 24,500 new equivalent dwelling units (EDUs). As
calculated in the Study, and shown in Table 2, the total park oust per EDU equals $3,645
before estimated credits. f
2 i��stnrFOsaza�a«
i-
i
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 61 of 99
Memorandum
Town of Murana Development Impact Fee Review
February 11, 200
Table 1
Town of Marana
Summary of Scenarios [1]
Land Use Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4
per unit
Residential
Low-Medium-Density $6,963 $5,548 $6,595 $6,901
per bid-a. sq L
Nonresidential
Regional Commercial $0.00 $12.21 $3.17 $3.44
Local Commercial $0.00 $12.21 $3.17 $0.00
Industrial $0.00 $4.44 $1.15 $0.00
Office $0.00 $6.66 $1.73 $0.00
'sttmm'
[1] Fees are shown in gross terms before credit for the construction sales tax.
In addition to new park development costs, the Study has identified a deficit in park
acreage for existing residents. To meet National Recreation and Park Association
guidelines, the City will develop approximately 58 acres of parks (at a cost of
$10.2 million) to satisfy the needs of current residents. Financing for this existing park
deficiency will be provided through a proposed park development band issue, which
will be repaid via sales - tax revenues from existing and future residents.
Because of the proposed bond issue, the Study appropriately assumes new development
should receive a park development fee credit. The Study - estimated fee credit of $550
per EDU assumes annual sales tax revenues represent 48 percent of all sales taxes
collected per household and, when 48 percent is applied to the $1,145 existing park
deficiency per EDU, yields a credit of $550 per EDU. EPS does not follow the logic of
this park fee credit calculation because the two factors used to determine the estimated
fee credit are not related to one another. In this memorandum, EPS has presented an
alternative methodology for consideration.
The alternative park development fee credit consists of the following two credits:
1) Credit Associated with Annual Sales Tax Revenues; and
2) Credit Associated with Currently Proposed Bond Sale.
E
3 isrn�ozis.as.�
i
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 62 of 99
Memorandum
Town of Mama Development Impact Fee Review
February 11, 2005
Table 2
Town of Marana
Summary of Proposed Park Fees and Fee Credits
Item Amount
Park Aries per Resident 0.006
Residents per EDU 2.7
Park Acres per EDU 0.0162
Park Cost per Acre $225,000
Estimated Park Development Cost per EDU $3,645
Less Proposed Park Development Fee Credits
Credit Associated with Annual Safes Tax Revenue ($777)
Credit Associated with Currently Proposed Bond Sale ($74)
Total Proposed Park Development Fee Credits ($851)
Estimated Park Fee after Fee Credits $2,794
. parlr fes•
Source: 2004 Development Impact Fee Study, Town of Marana; EPS
Each of these proposed park development fee credits is briefly summarized below and
described in more detail later in this memorandum. Appendix B of this memorandum
contains detailed calculations of the alternative park development fee credit analysis.
Table 2 shows the components of the proposed park development fee credit, which is
estimated at $851 per EDU. The alternative park development fee credit consists of a
credit for annual sales tax revenues from new EDUs, which is estimated at $777, and a
credit associated with the new EDU's share of the proposed $15.0 million bond sale,
which is estimated at $74. The estimated park development fee after proposed fee
credits is $2,794 per EDU, as shown in Table 2.
4 �vsin� aeir a�a�
t
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 63 of 99
Memorandum
Town of Marano Development Impact Fee Review
February 11, 2005
assumed that commercial, office, and industrial land uses will receive benefit from
the interchange infrastructure, as workers and shoppers from other areas will be
using the interchanges on their trip. Roadway improvements other than the
interchange are allocated only to residential land uses. Under this scenario,
residential costs will be approximately $6,600, and nonresidential land uses will be
charged a share of the interchange improvements per 1,000 square feet. Table A -7
shows Scenario 3.
Scenario 4— Similar to Scenario 3, this scenario separates the roadway improvement
costs into interchange costs and other roadway improvements. Scenario 4, however,
assumes that only a portion of the nonresidential land uses will be built to satisfy
employment and shopping demand from outside communities. Table A -2 shows
the difference between land uses supported by local residents and projected buildout
of nonresidential acres. Readers' Note: EPS is still awaiting confirmation from Town staff
on the assumptions used in this table.
Any acres in excess of those supported by local residents are assumed to be
supported by nonresidents, and nonresidents will be using a share of the
interchanges on their trip to work or shopping at locations inside the Study Area.
Thus, "regional" retail space is allocated a share of the interchange costs. Scenario 4
is shown in Table A -8, and the amount of office and industrial space that will serve
non -local residents is still preliminary. Under this scenario, residential costs will be
approximately $6,900, and nonresidential land uses will be charged a share of the
interchange improvements on a per-building-square-foot basis.
All assumptions for land use, cost, and cost allocations are documented in Tables A -1
through A-4.
PARK IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
The Study identifies approximately $89.1 million in park facilities costs attributable to
development of approximately 24,500 new EDUs. Assuming that the Town requires
6 park acres per 1,000 residents and that the average park development cost equals
$225,000 per acre, the total park cost per EDU equals A645 before estimated credits.
In addition to the costs associated with new development, the Town has an existing park
deficiency of approximately $10.2 million The Town proposes to resolve the existing
deficiency via a $15.0 million bond sale secured by sales tax revenues. As shown in
Table B -3, the $15.0 million bond sale will fund the $10.2 million deficiency plus
approximately $1.8 million in park costs attributable to new development.
t
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 64 of 99
Memorandum
Town of Mmrmra Development Impact Fee Revfcw
February 11, 2005
The Study acknowledges that because general funds will be used to cure the existing
deficiency new development should receive a park development fee credit. The Study
calculates the park fee credit based on the contribution that new development will make
toward the repayment of the bonds issued to satisfy the deficiency.
As calculated in Appendix D of the Study, the park development fee credit for new
development is based on an estimated annual sales tax ($669) plus an annualized '
amount for construction tax per residential unit ($62).. According to the Study, the total
$731 equates to 48 percent of the funds needed to satisfy the park deficiency through
bonds. The Study then assumes the park development fee credit should be $550 per
new EDU, assuming $550 is 48 percent of the $1,145 park -cost deficiency per existing
unit.
While it is correct to assume that new development should receive a fee credit, EPS can
not rationalize the logic applied in the Study to arrive at the park development fee credit
amount. Specifically, the Study states in Appendix D that $731 per new unit equates to
48 percent of all sales taxes collected per household. While this statement is true, there is
no direct relationship between this 48- percent number and the existing deficiency of
$1,145 per existing dwelling unit. In other words, EPS does not understand why
48 percent was applied to the existing deficiency of $1,145 per unit to derive a park
development fee credit of $550.
In Appendix B of this memorandum, EPS has summariz an alternative approach for
calculating the estimated park development fee credit. This alternative approach is
detailed below. The alternative park development fee credit consists of the following
two credits:
1) Credit Associated with Annual Sales Tax Revenues; and
2) Credit Associated with Currently Proposed Bond Sale.
Each of these proposed park development fee credits is described in more detail below.
Credit Associated with Annual Sales Tax Revenues
Tables B -1 through B-S show the assumptions and calculations used to derive the
alternative park development fee credits for new development. The fee credit principles
are consistent with the Study in that new development should receive a park
development fee credit consistent with the funding assumptions for existing
development used to resolve the existing park deficiency.
Tables B -1 through B -3 summarize the park cost, new development, and annual sales
and construction tax estimates provided in the Study. Table B-4 estimates the
7 xbsz ozu.osea
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 65 of 99
Memorandum
Torun ofMarima Devdoprnent Impart Fee Review
February 11, 2005
proportion of the proposed bond sale that will benefit existing and new development.
As existing development will benefit from approximately 85 percent of the bond
proceeds, existing development will be responsible for approximately 85 percent of the
annual $1.3 million debt service. _
i
Table B -5 compares the share of proposed bond debt service attributable to existing
development to the total annual sales tax revenues available from existing development.
As shown, approximately 19 percent of the annual sales tax revenues from existing
development will be required to fund the annual debt service (park cost deficiency)
associated with existing development.
Correspondingly, new development should receive the equivalent percentage of annual
sales tax revenues as a credit towards park development costs. The calculations to
support this approach are shown in Table B-6. Approximately 19 percent of the annual
$731 in sales tax revenues from new development equates to $137 revenues per new
residential unit. This calculation methodology equates the sales tax contribution per
new unit to that from an existing unit by assuming that each will be contributing
19 percent of its annual sales tax revenue generation to support park development
financing through bond proceeds.
The new unit equivalent annual sales tax contribution of $137 (at 19 percent of the
$731 total) would result in approximately $1,570 in park development bonds, assuming
the same financing terms used in the Study. Assuming bond proceeds equate to
approximately 80 percent of total bonds, the $1,570 in bonds would correspond to
approximately $1,250 in bond proceeds available for park development.
While the ultimate new development buddout period is unknown, the alternative park
development fee credit analysis assumes the fee credit would be available only for the
assumed 20 -year bond period. In other words, annual tax revenue from a new
residential unit developed in year 5 would be available to leverage park development
bonds only from year 5 through year 20, or for a total of 15 years. Correspondingly, the
estimated park development fee credit would decrease each year, based on the
remaining bonding capacity from a new development unit. Table B -7 shows the
declining park development fee credit on an annual basis for years 1 through 20.
Because administration of the fee program could be cumbersome if annual fee credit
adjustments were required, the Town may consider using an average park development
fee credit amount that would apply to new development during the first 20 years. For
these purposes, Table B -7 calculates the average annual fee credit as $777.
R
8 i +�s: au ar ».osaa
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 66 of 99
Memorandum
Town of Marana Development Impact Fee Review
February 11, 2005
In summary, the alternative park development fee credit analysis assumes a new
development will be treated similarly to an existing development unit by assuming that
the same percentage of its annual sales tax revenues would be available to support
bonds to fund park development. In addition to the credit for park development
associated with sales tax revenues, a portion of the currently proposed bond sale will be
used to fund the park costs attributable to new development. The following text
describes the credit for new development associated with this funding.
Credit Associated with Currently Proposed Bond Sale
The Study describes a proposed $15.0 million bond sale that will fund the entire park
deficiency amount of $10.2 million plus a share of future park facilities. As shown in
Table B4, a $15.0 million bond sale will generate approximately $12.0 million in bond
proceeds available for park construction. Of the $12.0 million in anticipated proceeds,
the existing deficiency of $10.2 million equates to 85 percent of the proposed bond sale.
The remaining 15 percent, or $1.8 million, will be available to offset the cost of park
facilities attributable to new development. Consequently, new development should
receive a credit for the $1.8 million in park facilities costs that will be funded via bond
proceeds.
The estimated credit per EDU equals the $1.8 million park cost funded via bond
proceeds divided by the estimated future 24,444 EDUs to derive a credit of $74 per EDU.
The total credit per EDU of new development equals the sum of the average credit
associated with estimated bond proceeds from future sales tax revenues ($777) plus the
estimated credit associated with the proposed bond sale ($74) for a total credit of $851.
t
g 14751 D1F 02.11.OSd« '
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 67 of 99
Economic c-
Planning; Systems
i
4
AP PENDDC B
TABLES SUPPORTING ANALYSIS OF PARK ;
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
E
• � t
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 68 of 99
Table B -1
Town of Marana
Assumptions for Park Development Costs
f
Item Cost
Bond Assumptions
Bond Principal $15,000,000
Term 20
Interest Rate 6.00%
Cost Assumptions
Total Park Cost $99,285,000
Existing Deficiency $10,185,000
Net Cost $89,100,000
EDUs
Existing Development 8,889
New Development 24,444
Total 33,333
Annual Sales Tax Revenue Assumptions
Tax from Existing Residential Development $669
Tax from Future Residential Development
Tax Related to Residential Development $669
Annualized Equivalent of Construction Sales Tax $62
Total Tax Revenue from Future Residential $731
�ssumpflons bard'
Source: 2004 Development Impact Fee Study, Town of Marana; EPS
Prepared by EPS 20 14751 MadaO 201/20Q'S l —
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 69 of 99
Table B -2
Town of Marana
Sales Tax Contribution Assumptions .
- r
L
E
Item Amount
2005 Town of Marana Sales Tax $18,835,000
Less Transportation Fund Allocation ($5,411,000)
General Fund Sales Tax less Transportion Fund Allocation $13,424,000
Estimated Sales Tax from Residential Development
Sales Tax from Insurance, Services and Utilities $2,535,000
Sales Tax from Retail and Restaurant $3,411,600
Total Annual Sales Tax from Residential Development $5,946,600
Existing Development
Number of Existing Residents 24,000
Sales Tax Per Existing Resident $248
Existing Residents per EDU 2.7
Estimated Sales Tax per Existing EDU $669
New Development
Estimated Sales Tax per EDU (from above) $669
Construction Sales Tax Contribution
Construction Sales Tax $4,940
Percent to General Fund (25%) $1,235
Estimated Annual Contribution (divided by 20) $62
Total Estimated Sales Tax per New EDU $731
'sales fax'
Source: 2004 Development Impact Fee Study, Town of Marana
t
ProparedbyEPS Z1 14751 MOdsOW1112005 !
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 70 of 99
Table B -3
Town of Marana i
Proposed Park Development Bond Assumptions
i
Item Assumption Amount
Total Bonds Issued $15,000,000 i
Issuance Costs (rounded)
Capitalized interest 12 months $900,000
Bond Reserve Fund 1 year debt service $1,300,000
Other Costs 5% of principal $800,000
Total Bond Issuance Costs $3,000,000
Total Proceeds (rounded) Approx. 80% of bonds issued $12,000,000
Annual Debt Service (rounded) 6% interest, 20 year term $1,308,000
lbond proceeds'
Source: EPS
PMWW by EPS 22 14751 ModsO ?111!2006'
i
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 71 of 99
Table B-4
Town of Marana
Estimated Share of Bonds for Existing and Future Development
Percent Share Share of
Issuance of Total Annual Debt
Bonds .• Bonds Proceeds Costs Bonds Service
}
Total Development $15,000,000 $12,000,000 $3,000,000 100% $1,308,000
Existing Development $12,750,000 $10,200,000 $2,550,000 85% $1,111,800
New Development $2,250,000 $1,800,000 $450,000 15°x6 $196,200
debt = sprjt"
Source: EPS
• i
Prepared by EPS 23 14751 Mode13 2H 112005
i
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 72 of 99
Table B -5
Town of Marana
Comparison of Debt Service to Total Annual Sates Tax for Existing Development
i
Item Reference Amount
r
Total Annual Sales Tax from Existing Development See Table B -2 $5,946,600 E
Debt Service for Existing Development See Table 84 $1,111,800
Percent of Debt Service to Annual Safes Tax 18.7%
Source: EPS
i
pmpainddpy EPS 24 19751 AWOU 2(11 /1005
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 73 of 99
Table B-6
Town of Marana
Taxes per Unit from New Development
' - l
Item Assumption Amount
r
T
New EDU Sales Tax Contribution See Table B -2 $731
Percent of Debt Service to Annual Sales Tax See Table B-5 18.7%
Equivalent New EDU Sales Tax Contribution $137
Present Value of Equivalent New EDU Sales Tax 6% interest, 20 year term $1,567
Estimated Proceeds Available from Equivalent
New EDU Sales Tax Approx. 80% of bonds issued $1,254
Source: EPS %tw pv' -
' k
Prepared by EPS 25 14751 Models 241/M E-
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 74 of 99
Table B -7
Town of Marana
Estimated Annual Credit to New Development
Estimated Annual Credit
Year Bond Year to New Development
f
1 20 $1,254 f
2 19 $1,220
3 18 $1,183
4 17 $1,145
5 16 $1,105
6 15 $1,062
7 14 $1,016
8 13 $968
9 12 $916
10 11 $862
11 10 $804
12 9 $743
13 8 $679
14 7 $610
15 6 $537
16 5 $460
17 4 $379
18 3 $292
19 2 $200
20 1 $103
Average Credit Amount [1] $777
Source: EPS
(11 The Average Credit Amount is an average of estimated
annual credit to new development for years 1- 20.
i
PfepaFedbyEPs 26 14751 Mode13 W711 2M _
- i
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 75 of 99
Table B-8
Town of Marana
Estimated Credit from New Development's Share of Current Bonds
i
Item Amount
Share of Bond Proceeds Attributable to New EDUs $1,800,000
EDUs from New Development 24,444
Estimated Credit per EDU for New Development $74
'credit
ti
- i
. I
i
Prepared byEPS 27 14751 MOW ?/t!/2005 t
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 76 of 99
OF
TOWN COUNCIL ApWN
MEETING TOWN OF MARANA 9 MR NA 7
INFORMATION 4 1Z ti
MEETING DATE: April 5, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. B. 4
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: James R. DeGrood, P.E. Assistant Town Manager
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 2005.11 Relating to Development; identifying
the Marana Park Benefit Area, accepting and approving the
technical report identifying park needs within that area,
adopting park development impact fees for that area, and
providing an effective date.
DISCUSSION
On September 30, 2004, the Town of Marana released an Impact Fee Report recommending the
adoption a new impact fees for park development and for arterial and collector roadways in
Northwest Marana. The analysis recommended a new impact fee in the amount of $3,095 per
dwelling unit for new park development.
Copies of the Impact Fee Report have been available at Town Hall, and have been distributed to
developers and builders working within the Town. Presentations on the new fee proposal were
made at a developers' roundtable October 6, 2004 and at the Southern Arizona Home Builders
Association (SAHBA) Technical Committee on October 19, 2004.
Comments have been received from four organizations, including a request from SAHBA for an
extended review period due to the complexity of the impact fee report and the time constraints
associated with the end of year and holiday season.
A public hearing on the proposed impact fee was held on December 7, 2004. There were no
speakers on this matter, however staff recommended that the adoption of the new impact fees be
delayed until after February 1, 2005 in order to allow for full comment and review by SAHBA.
SAHBA subsequently engaged EPS, a highly regarded public finance and impact fee consultant
from Sacramento to perform a peer review of the Impact Fee Report. The analysis was presented
to the Town for comment and consideration on February 10.
The Town's study showed a deficiency in the developed park areas needed for the existing
Marana population. It was further suggested that the Town would bond to construct
improvements to meet the deficiency, and provide credit associated with the bond repayment.
The EPS analysis suggested that greater credit would be due to new development associated with
the bonding for deficient park improvements, and that the appropriate fee amount would be
$2,794, rather than the $3,095 proposed.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 77 of 99
Staff reviewed these comments and proposes to 1) broaden the definition of parks to include
linear parks and other specialty parks, 2) include the land recently obtained for parks through
trade with Pima County, and 3) drop the proposal to satisfy the deficiency through bonding.
In doing the above, the Town's park deficiency is reduced to 33 acres, and a credit based upon
the proportionate cost of developing the deficient facilities.
A revised Development Impact Fee for Parks in the amount of $2,884 per new residential
dwelling unit is now proposed.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the adoption of an impact fee for the Marana Parks in the amount of $2,884
per equivalent dwelling unit.
SUGGESTED MOTION
I move to adopt Ordinance No. 2005.11.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 78 of 99
-2-
TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
PARKS DEVELOPMENT FEE
RECOMMENDED ACTION PLAN PRIOR TO SB 1525
JANUARY 1, 2012 EFFECTIVE DATE
December 8, 2011
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 79 of 99
TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
PARKS DEVELOPMENT FEE
RECOMMENDED ACTION PLAN PRIOR TO SB 1525
JANUARY 1, 2012 EFFECTIVE DATE
CURTIS LUECK & ASSOCIATES
5460 WEST FOUR BARREL COURT
TUCSON, ARIZONA 85743
(520) 743 -8748
CLA PROJEcr No. 2011.20
December 8, 2011
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 80 of 99
Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................... ..............................1
Overviewof SB 1525 ................................................................................................... ..............................1
SubstantiveChanges ................................................................................................... ..............................2
ProceduralChanges ..................:................................................................................. ..............................2
History of Marana'S Development Fee Program ........................................................... ............................... 2
Need to Conform the Current Program by January 1, 2012 ...................................... ............................... 3
Reviewof Current Fee Structure ................................................................................... ............................... 4
Parksand Recreation Facilities ................................................................................... ..............................4
OtherConsiderations .................................................................................................. ..............................7
Summary Recommended Action ................................................................................... ............................... 8
List of Exhibits
Exhibit 1 Parks and Recreation: Approved Capital Project Allocations and Expenditures ...................... 6
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 81 of 99
INTRODUCTION
Overview of SB 1525
On April 26, 2011, Governor Brewer signed Senate Bill 1525 (Chapter 243, First Regular Session,
2011), which significantly alters development fee programs for Arizona municipalities. In essence, SB
1525 completely rewrote A.R.S. §9- 463.05, the statute that enabled municipalities to assess, collect and
use development fees. Under the new requirements, any new development fee adopted after the
January 1, 2012 effective date must comply with §9- 463.05 as amended.
Pursuant to §9- 463.05(K), a municipality may continue to assess any development fee it adopted
prior to January 1, 2012 until August 1, 2014, but the municipality must replace the existing fee with one
consistent with the new law on or before that deadline. This section, however, limits the continuation of
existing development fees past January 1, 2012 and until August 1, 2014 to development fees that "will
be used to provide a necessary public service for which development fees can be assessed pursuant to
this section." Under this provision, some categories of fees are eliminated altogether, some are
restricted, and all require an updated Infrastructure Improvement Plan (IIP), a new expenditure plan,
and more rigorous adoption process.
SB 1525 has been described as "essentially a complete rewrite of Arizona's development fee
statute." It amended all but two subparagraphs and added "some 14 pages of statutory language" to the
existing statute. Summarizing the impacts of changes that are so sweeping is not easy, but for the
purposes of this report, the major changes can be categorized as substantive and procedural.
This report emphasizes development fees for parks. The new legislation revises park funding
more so than any other infrastructure categories. We address the three major changes in this report:
• Park size (larger or smaller than 30 acres);
• Park amenities (many typical park features are no longer fundable with development
fees); and,
• A new requirement to assess park development fees to both residential and non-
residential uses.
The Town imposes development fees for other categories, which is being addressed separately
by Town staff.
1 Previously known as "development impact fees ", the new legislation uses the term "development fees ", which is
used herein.
Z See Culp and McGuire "Understanding SB 1525," PowerPoint presentation to 2011 conference of the Growth
& Infrastructure Consortium. http:// growthandinfrastructure .org /proceedin /2011 proceedings /culp sb1525.pdf
Page 1
Study - bar 13, 2011 - Page 82 of 99
Substantive Changes
Primary procedural changes in SB 1525 would include (1) more restrictive definitions of what
constitute "necessary public services" that are eligible for financing with development fees; (2) a
requirement that a municipality assess both residential and non - residential development fees if it
wishes to have a fee program; (3) municipalities can no longer automatically increase development fees
to account for inflation; (4) a stronger requirement to associate necessary public services with a
"substantial nexus" or "direct benefit" to service areas and developments; (5) requiring that
municipalities identify necessary public services in formally adopted "infrastructure improvements
plans;" (6) tighter time constraints on when infrastructure projects are to be completed or necessary
public services delivered; and (7) more expansive property owner and developer rights to credits,
refunds, and rights to litigate development fees.
Procedural Changes
SB 1525 imposes more expansive requirements for public notice, public hearings, and adoption
of new development fees, for amendments of development fees, and for regular review of development
fees. CLA believes that some of the substantive changes made by SB 1525 will have immediate impact
on the Town's ability to comply with the requirements of §9- 463.05(K). For example, SB 1525
significantly limits what parks and recreation facilities the Town can assess development fees for.
HISTORY OF MARANA'S DEVELOPMENT FEE PROGRAM
The Town has collected development fees for several purposes, including parks, beginning in
1999. The initial collection dates for the specific infrastructure development fees:
• Lower Santa Cruz Levee Fee ($500 /Acre) — February 16, 1999
• Collection of South Transportation Impact Fees ($2,435) — April 23, 2001
• Collection of NW Transportation Impact Fee ($5,941) —July 4, 2005
• Townwide Parks Fee ($2,884) — also July 4, 2005
• Collection of Water Infrastructure Fee ($864 per 5/8" meter) and Water Resource Fee
($1,467 per 5/8" meter) —July 31, 2006
On April 5, 2005, the Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 2005.11, creating impact fees for
parks, and effective 90 days after adoption. The Town Council established the municipal limits as the
singular benefit area for the parks development fees. The ordinance established parks development fees
for only residential development, using the "single family residence" as the equivalent demand unit, or
EDU. The fee amount per EDU was originally established at $2,884. The fee has been adjusted each
year since then based on the CCI and is currently $3,579/EDU.
Fees are initially based on area and subdivision. Since adoption, fees have been adjusted based
on Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI) adjustments, the buildout of subdivisions for
which the fee applied, development agreements and other reasons.
Page 2
Study - ber 13, 2011 - Page 83 of 99
Need to Conform the Current Program by January 1, 2012
The Town retained Curtis Lueck & Associates (CLA) to provide an independent review of the
Town of Marana's current parks development fees. The purposes are to (a) evaluate conformance with
SB 1525; (b) to recommend to the Town what programmatic and interim changes are necessary by
January 1, 2012; and (c) to recommend how these changes can be implemented effectively.
Based on review of the statutes, consultation with legal experts in the field, and discussion with
peer municipalities, CLA maintains that needed changes in the Town's development fee program can be
accomplished administratively because the changes likely would not increase the fees. Statutes require
a more rigorous public notice and regulatory process only for changes that increase fees or add new fee
categories.
Page 3
Study ber 13, 2011 - Page 84 of 99
REVIEW OF CURRENT FEE STRUCTURE
In reviewing the current fee structure, we concentrated on amendments to the Town's
development fee program by January 1, 2012, to conform the program with (1) new definitions of
necessary public service, (2) deleting provisions for automatic annual increases in development fees; (3)
ensure that projects funded with development fees have a necessary direct benefit or nexus; and (4)
deleting disallowed elements from fee calculations and reduce fees as necessary.
Parks and Recreation Facilities
The Town began collecting development fees for parks and recreation in FY 2005. The Town has
balance of $3,050,010 in the Parks Development fee fund as of June 30, 2011. The Town assesses and
allocates parks and recreation development fees to the Marana Park Benefit Area, which is defined as all
lands lying within the limits of the Town of Marana, in Town Ordinance 2005.11.
SB 1525 makes two changes that effect park and recreation facilities. One is related to park size
and the other is related to types of buildings and amenities within the parks:
1. The statute requires that a municipality assess both residential and non - residential development
fees for the same facility. The Town has not assessed non - residential development fees for parks and
recreation facilities, because such development does not generate demand for parks and recreation
services. We recommend that the Town administratively adjust the fee so that 95% is paid by residential
development and 5% by non - residential uses.
2. ARS §9- 463.05(T)(5)(g) establishes the following definition of parks and recreational facilities
that are and are not "necessary public facilities."
Eligible parks and recreational facilities those on real property of up to thirty acres in area; parks
and recreational facilities larger than thirty acres if the facilities provide a direct benefit to the
development; and may include swimming pools.
Under the new statute, parks and recreational facilities that are larger than thirty acres and
which do not provide a direct benefit to the development would be ineligible for development fee
collection and use. In addition, development fees cannot be collected and used to purchase vehicles or
equipment, or to finance any portion of any otherwise eligible facility that would be used for the
following purposes:
3 We contend that parks greater than 30 acres provide a direct benefit to land within the locally defined service
area, as supported by parks master plans or Infrastructure Improvement Plans.
Page 4
Study ber 13, 2011 - Page 85 of 99
• Amusement parks • Environmental education centers
• Aquariums • Equestrian facilities
• Aquatic centers • Golf Course facilities
• Arenas • Greenhouses
• Arts and cultural centers • Lakes
• Bandstand and orchestra facilities • Museums
• Bathhouses • Theme parks
• Boathouses • Water reclamation or riparian areas
• Club Houses • Wetlands
• Community centers greater than • Zoo facilities
3000 square feet in area • Similar recreational facilities
Several public and private parks and other recreational facilities serve the Town's residents. The
2010 Marana Parks and Recreation, Trails and Open Space Master Plan (herein referred to as the Master
Plan) provides a description of the existing parks, including their characteristics, location, size and
service areas.
A map of the Town parks, prepared by staff, is attached to this report with the park service
areas identified. The service area sizes are based on the type of park (neighborhood, community,
district, regional and special purpose) as designated in the Master Plan. The service areas for the
community parks are within a 1 mile radius of the park and the service areas for the district parks are
within a 2.5 mile radius. Linear parks (in red) and paths likely have at least a 3 mile radius service area.
It is clear that there is a large portion of the Town that is not served by the Park system (as
measured by service area), particularly central and northeast Marana. The following requirement for
recreation area is provided in Section 6.03.02.1 of the Town's Land Development Code:
1. Requirement: All new residential projects with a density greater than or equal to 3.0
dwelling units per gross acre and containing 50 or more dwelling units shall provide an
improved on -site recreation area, as accepted by the Parks and Recreation and Planning
Departments in compliance with the adopted Park, Trail, and Open -Space System Master
Plan. The recreation improvements shall be constructed at the project developer's expense.
This requirement does not require developers who build subdivisions with less than 3 RAC to
provide park or recreation areas as part of the development. This may be one reason there have been
no parks constructed in northeast Marana.
It should be noted that the two district parks (Ora Mae Harn and Crossroads at Silverbell Park)
are over the 30 acre threshold for parks, but developments in the vicinity of these parks benefit from
the proximity of these parks.
CLA recommends that the Town amend its existing development fee program by January 1,
2012 to conform the program to these requirements defining what are eligible parks and recreation
Page 5
Study ber 13, 2011 - Page 86 of 99
facilities. This can be achieved by providing funds only for parks that meet the size and nexus test, and
contain only allowed buildings and amenities.
Exhibit 1 is a summary of approved project development fee allocations, expenditures, and
remaining allocations for park and recreation projects, as of June 30, 2011. There are three projects
listed in the June 30 report that have not been funded by development fees since 2009: four projects
were funded by development fees in 2011.
Exhibit 1 Parks and Recreation: Approved Capital Project Allocations and Expenditures
Project 2008 2009 2010 2011
Heritage Program $12,856.99 $85,108.80
C.R. District Park $4,311.29 $66,840.02 $2,007,227.00 $124,952.43
(Neighborhood or District)
BOR Sports Park (Regional) $14,760.72
El Rio Park Improvements $3,233.50
(Neighborhood)
Santa Cruz Shared III (Spec. $21,282.51 $3,872.00 $1,643.00
Purpose)
Heritage Park (Spec. Purpose) $60,190.74 $7,230.00 $7,900.00
Santa Cruz Path II (Spec. $33,362.00
Purpose)
Total Project $35,162.50 $233,422.07 $2,018,329.00 $167,857.43
MENEM
Non Project 2008 2009 2010 2011
Parks Master Plan $119,140.00
Admin $332.45 $85,000
Other $203,029.41
Total Non - Project $119,140.00 $203,361.86 $85,000.00 $0.00
I I �
r TotalExpended $154,302.50 $436,783.93 $2,103,329.00 $167,857.43
Except for the BOR and Heritage Park projects, all other capital projects shown in Exhibit 2 could
be candidates for using the grandfathered use rights, provided they comply with the definition of
Page 6
Study ber 13, 2011 - Page 87 of 99
eligible necessary public services at §9- 463.05(T)(5)(g). The BOR (500 acres) and Heritage Park (240
acres) projects are large scale projects that greatly exceed the 30 acre allowable size for eligible park
projects.
Current Projects in the Town of Marana Annual Budget & Financial Plan (FY 2011 -2012) include
• Barnett Linear Park and Flood Control Project ($832,495)
• Santa Cruz River Shared Use Path — Phase II ($1,483,000)
• Santa Cruz Shared Use Path — Phase III ($226,000)
• Cortaro Silverbell District Park ($49,978)
• Alternative Agricultural Storage Basin ($122,000)
Under the new legislation, it is unlikely that the Alternative Agricultural Storage Basin project would be
eligible for development fee funding, and that another funding source would need to be applied. Also,
development fee funding for the Barnett Linear Park and Flood Control Project would need to be based
on the proportion of park use or acreage associated with the entire project.
Other Considerations
CLA recommends the Town make another change to its development fee program by January 1,
2012:
Eliminate Automatic Annual Adjustment in Development Fees
In May 2006, The Town Council approved Ordinance No. 2006.12, which provided for an annual,
automatic adjustment of development fees, beginning on July 31, 2008. §9- 463.05, as amended, does
not permit automatic annual adjustments of development fees. We recommend that the Town delete
the automatic annual adjustments section of the ordinance.
Page 7
Study ber 13, 2011 - Page 88 of 99
SUMMARY RECOMMENDED ACTION
CLA has made several recommendations for actions the Town should take by January 1, 2012 so
that the Town can continue to assess development fees through August 1, 2014 in a manner consistent
with the requirements of SB 1525. These recommendations are listed below.
Parks and Recreation Facilities
Town should amend its existing development fee program by January 1, 2012 to conform the
program to these requirements defining what are eligible parks and recreation facilities. This can be
achieved by providing funds only for parks that meet the size and nexus test, and contain only allowed
buildings and amenities.
Allocation of Fees to Non - Residential Uses
A detailed analysis is necessary to fairly allocate fees to the non - residential uses. This will have
to be included in the Parks IIP, which will be prepared by or for the Town by 2014. However we expect
the non - residential fees to be minor, certainly less than 10% of the residential fee on an EDU basis.
Automatic Annual Adjustment of Development Fees
We recommend that the Town revise Ordinance 2006.12 to delete the automatic annual
adjustments. These are no longer allowable under the new legislation.
Development Fee Account Administration
Establish a new account for Parks (as well as each of the other development fee categories) so
that "old money" and "new money" are not comingled. We believe that money collected prior to the
end of this calendar year can be spent according to the current legislation, whereas money collected
thereafter is subject to SB 1525. Due to the many differences and restrictions that commence on
January 1, 2012, the separation of funds is an administrative necessity.
Parks Planning and Fee Establishment
The new development fee planning and implementation process is onerous and time consuming
compared to past endeavors. We recommend that the Town commence the more detailed studies and
infrastructure planning using either in -house staff, consultants, or a combination of the two, in the next
six months so that the August 1, 2014 regulatory deadline can be met.
Page 8
Study - ber 13, 2011 - Page 89 of 99
A
11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653
Council Chambers, December 13, 2011, 6:00:00 PM
To: Mayor and Council Item D 6
From: Jane Fairall , Deputy Town Attorney
Strategic Plan Focus Area:
Not Applicable
Subject: Relating to Animal Control; discussion and direction regarding request from Pima
Animal Care Center (PACC) to authorize PACC to divert a portion of the Town's dog
licensing revenue, collected by PACC from Town residents, to the Animal Welfare
Alliance of Southern Arizona's (AWASA) spay and neuter initiative
Discussion:
On November 10, 2011, Pima Animal Care Center (PACC) sent a letter to the Town requesting
that the Town authorize PACC to divert funds from the Town's dog licensing revenue to support
the Animal Welfare Alliance of Southern Arizona's (AWASA) no cost spay and neuter initiative.
The goal of the initiative is to reduce the number of unwanted animals in the community. A copy
of the letter is attached for the Council's information.
For many years, the Town has contracted with PACC for animal control services within the
Town. Prior to 2006, the IGA between the parties provided that the Town's expenses under the
agreement would not exceed $10,000 in any given fiscal year. However, since 2006, the
agreement between the Town and the County has indicated that PACC will collect licensing,
impound, adoption and other fees from Town residents on behalf of the Town and apply the
collected fees to the expenses incurred by PACC on the Town's behalf in performing animal
control services. Pursuant to the IGA, if the revenue collected from Town residents does not
cover the Town's expenses for animal control services in a given year, the Town must pay the
difference to PACC. Since the 2006 change in payment terms, the Town's animal control
expenses have increased dramatically, as indicated below:
Fiscal Year Amount Paid by Town
2006 $28,241
2007 $0 (Town revenue exceeded Town expenses)
2008 $ 6,832.22
2009 $36,590.61
2010 $48,576.10
2011 $47,046.99
In his letter, PACC Manager Kim Janes indicates that the Pima County Board of Supervisors
directed that funds collected due to the County's June 2009 license fee increase be dedicated to
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 90 of 99
the initiative. The Town also increased its licensing fees in July 2009, and Mr. Janes suggests
that the Town consider allocating the funds collected due to the increase to the AWASA
spay /neuter initiative.
The Town's current animal licensing fee schedule, as last amended in July 2009, as well as the
amount of increase effectuated by the 2009 amendments, are as follows:
License Fee Current Fee Amount of 2009 Increase
Unaltered Dog $60.00 Per animal $10
Unaltered Dog
(Senior/Disabled) $17.00 Per animal $3
Altered Dog $15.00 Per animal $3
Altered Dog
(Senior /Disabled Fee) $10.00 Per animal $2
Dog Declared Vicious
Destructive and/or dangerous $100.00 Per animal $20
Delinquent payment
between 30 days and 1 year $10.00 Per animal $3
Delinquent payment
between 1 and 2 years $22.00 Per animal $4
Delinquent payment
more than 2 years $36.00 Per animal $6
Duplicate License $10.00 Per license $3
License Transfer $10.00 Per license $3
PACC estimates that if the Town diverted the funds collected due to the 2009 increases, the
Town's contribution to the AWASA no -cost spay and neuter initiative would be $14,400
annually. Town staff analyzed the numbers and believes that $14,400 is an accurate estimate.
Financial Impact:
If the Town diverts any of the Town's licensing revenue funds collected by PACC on the Town's
behalf to the AWASA initiative, those funds will not be used to cover the Town's expenses for
animal control services. Therefore, the Town can reasonably expect that its annual bill from
PACC will increase by the same amount. As an example, if the Town diverted $14,400 in
licensing revenue to the AWASA initiative in FY 2011, our bill at the end of the FY would have
been in excess of $61,000, rather than the approximately $47,000 we paid for FY 2011.
If the Council does choose to divert revenue to the AWASA initiative, the Council may choose to
divert a lesser or a greater amount of funds.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Description: Type:
O LTR PACC to Gilbert re divert fees to AWASA initiative Backup
{0002.8778) PDF Letter from PACC
Material
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 91 of 99
Staff Recommendation:
Council's pleasure.
Suggested Motion:
OPTION l: No motion; none of the Town's license revenue funds will be diverted to the
AWASA initiative
OPTION 2: 1 move to direct staff to authorize Pima Animal Care Center to divert that portion of
the Town's license revenue funds attributable to the dog licensing fee increases adopted by the
Town via Ordinance No. 2009.11 and collected by PACC on the Town's behalf to the Animal
Welfare Alliance of Southern Arizona's spay and neuter initiative, unless and until directed by
the Town's Manager, by letter addressed to the PACC Manager, to discontinue the dedication of
funds.
OPTION 3: 1 move to direct staff to authorize Pima Animal Care Center to divert percent
of the Town's license revenue funds collected by PACC on the Town's behalf to the Animal
Welfare Alliance of Southern Arizona's spay and neuter initiative each fiscal year, unless and
until directed by the Town's Manager, by letter addressed to the PACC Manager, to
discontinue the dedication of funds.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 92 of 99
alp PT
PIMA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
PIMA ANIMAL CARE CENTER
4000 N. SILVERBELL RD 0 TUCSON, AZ 85745
(520) 243-5908 FAX (520) 243-5954
www.pimaanimaicare.org
November 10, 2011
Gilbert Davidson
Town of Marana
11 555 W. Civic Center Drive
Marana, A7,85653
Dear Mr. Davidson:
The Town of Marana and Pima County face many challenges in its common responsibility to safeguard
public health and safety,. protect animals from abuse and neglect and mitigate the impact large numbers of
unaltered stray and companion animals have on the community. Pima Animal Care Center (PACC)
accepts, impounds or picks up over 25,:000 animals annually. Over 50 percent of *the: animals taken in at
the Center each year are strays and in FY 10/11343 or 2% of the animals came from the Town.
Our community has made concerted effort to increase rescue opportunities and PACC has been
successful in not having to put an adoptable animal to sleep since December of 2002. PACC staff has
worked to modify the selective criteria for previously un-adoptable animals to allow for greater rescue
prospects and broader partnerships.
The challenge continues to be that the number of animals needing rehabilitation far exceeds our
community's capacity. Reducing the number of strays entering local shelters through an aggressive,
consistent, affordable and available spay/neuter program is needed to effectively mitigate the gap between
the number of animals needing new homes and the community's demonstrated capacity to provide those
homes.
Local experience with the donation and grant funded Animal Welfare Alliance of Southern Arizona's
(AWASH) no cost spay/neuter initiative has proven Pima County residents will alter their animals when
the service is affordable and accessible. Due to the outstanding success of the program from it inception
in 2004 through early 2009 and the high potential to reduce unwanted animals in the community and our
.shelters, the Pima County Board of Supervisor's directed the June 2009 license fee increase be dedicated
to the no cost spay/neuter initiative. As a result, the County has ptovided an additional $150,000 annually
to this effort. In Fiscal Year 2010-2011, the County program altered 3,696 at an average cost of $64.90.
Pima, County Animal Care staff agrees with national animal welfare organizations that a sustained,
si&mificant effort towards safe, effective voluntary spay/neuter programs made available and accessible to
the community is the most effective way to reduce animal overpopulation, shelter intake and possible
euthanasia. Staff recommends the Town of Marana. favorably consider contributing to reducing animal
intake and the nwnber of unwanted animals through authorizing PACC to fund AWASA's spay/neuter
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 93 of 99
initiative with 'a similar share of its licensing revenue. Should the Town choose to fund spay /neuter in this
manner, staff projects Town support would add an additional $14,400 to this effort, which would be
enough to alter another 222 pets.
PACC staff looks forward to continued positive collaboration. with the Town in animal welfare efforts.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at 243 -5908.
Sincerely,
f
Kim J es
Manager
i
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 94 of 99
LA
=/
11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653
Council Chambers, December 13, 2011, 6:00:00 PM
To: Mayor and Council Item D 7
From: Kevin Kish , Planning Director
Strategic Plan Focus Area:
Not Applicable
Subject: Resolution No. 2011 -110: Relating to Boards, Commissions and Committees;
modifying the procedures for filling current and impending Planning Commission and
Board of Adjustment vacancies
Discussion:
The Town currently has vacancies on both the Planning Commission and the Board of
Adjustment, and the current terms of two members of the Board of Adjustment end in February
2012. Staff requests more direct and streamlined Council involvement in the selection process for
these positions than provided in the normal appointment process.
The normal Town Code process for appointment and reappointment of board, commission, and
committee members involves a invitation for application through the Town Clerk's office
and staff verification of applicant qualifications, followed by forwarding of the applications to
the Town Council at a public meeting for consideration and appointment.
The Town Code allows the Council to modify the appointment procedures by motion or
resolution for a particular vacancy, board, commission or committee. For the current and
impending Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment appointments and reappointments,
staff recommends that the Council establish a committee of Council Members to receive and
review applications and interview prospective members prior to the presentation of the applicants
to the full Town Council.
Temporary use of this more direct and streamlined approach for filling vacancies may lead the
Council to make more formal and permanent revisions to the normal appointment process
currently found in the Town Code.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Description: Type:
O Resolution—M—
BOA Appointment Modfication.doc Resolution Resolution
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed resolution.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 95 of 99
Suggested Motion:
I move to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -110, modifing the procedures for filling current and
impending Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment vacancies.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 96 of 99
MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -110
RELATING TO BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES; APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF A COUNCIL COMMITTEE TOREVIEW
APPLICATIONS AND INTERVIEW PROSPECTIVE MEMBERS PRIOR TO
THE APPLICANT'S BEING PRESENTED TO THE TOWN COUNCIL
WHEREAS, Section 2 -64 of the Marana Town Code authorizes the Town Council to
modify any of the procedures set forth in this chapter; and
WHEREAS, Section 2 -6 -2 of the Marana Town Code sets forth procedures for the
application, recommendation, appointment and removal of board, commission or committee
members; and
WHEREAS, Section 2 -6 -4 of the Marana Town Code provides that the Council may by
resolution modify any of the procedures set forth in Section 2 -6 -2 related to the application,
recommendation, appointment and removal of board, commission or committee members for a
particular board, commission or committee; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, as follows;
SECTION 1. A Council committee shall be established to review Planning Commission
and Board of Adjustment applications for current vacancies and reappointments and
interview prospective members, prior to applicant's being presented to the Town Council.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to Section 2 -6 -4 of the Marana Town Code, the procedures set
forth in Section 2 -6 -2 regarding application, recommendation, appointment and removal
of board, commission and committee members are hereby modified, as described above.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
MARANA, ARIZONA, this 13 day of December, 2011.
Mayor Ed Honea
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 97 of 99
A A'
11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653
Council Chambers, December 13, 2011, 6:00:00 PM
i
To: Mayor and Council Item D 8
From: Gilbert Davidson , Town Manager
Strategic Plan Focus Area:
Commerce
Strategic Plan Focus Area - Additional Information:
Engage in the recruitment of new business and industry
Subject: Resolution No. 2011 -111: Relating to Economic Development; supporting the
development of a Union Pacific Railroad rail yard and industrial park in Pinal County
Discussion:
Union Pacific Railroad is planning to construct a 1,000 -acre rail yard and industrial park in
southern Pinal County adjacent to I -10 and 20 miles south of I -8. The project will bring
significant economic development benefits to the region, particularly if it includes rail spurs and
intermodal- transfer facilities for other industries and businesses. In particular, the project will
bring intermodal freight transfer opportunities to Pinal Airpark and northern Marana, especially if
a rail spur is developed to link those areas to the rail yard and industrial park.
This proposed resolution gives formal Council support to the project. It also authorizes
reasonable staff action to carry out the resolution.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Description: Type:
O Resolution_Supporting_UPRR_
(00028805).doc Resolution Resolution
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 2011 -111.
Suggested Motion:
I move to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -111, supporting the development of a Union Pacific
Railroad rail yard and industrial park in Pinal County.
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 98 of 99
MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2011-111
RELATING TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; SUPPORTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD RAIL YARD AND INDUSTRIAL PARK IN PINAL COUNTY
WHEREAS the Union Pacific Railroad is pursuing plans for a 1,000 -acre rail yard and
industrial park in southern Pinal County; and
WHEREAS the Town Council finds that development of the rail yard and industrial park
will provide significant economic development benefits to nearby communities, including the
Town of Marana, particularly if the project includes rail spurs and other intermodal- transfer
opportunities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, that the Town of Marana hereby supports the development
of a Union Pacific Railroad rail yard and industrial park in Pinal County, urges Union Pacific
Railroad to equitably compensate property owners impacted by the project, urges that the project
include rail spurs and other intermodal- transfer opportunities, and authorizes Town staff to take
reasonable actions to support the project.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
MARANA, ARIZONA, this 13 day of December, 2011.
Mayor Ed Honea
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney
Study Session - December 13, 2011 - Page 99 of 99 {00028805.DOC /}
N LA CAN
W y ? R OIL
0 co i� Q a �,
Q q i Lu
o a O
Oki 3 _j 3
NONNVHS N z f
O 3 # S
a w
THO m O NYDALE RD t C
a r O a �N
O m `^ 3: �' 3
�I/ J ;
t m M6, z 3 _
Z
co
z _
ui
k �
U NE Ra
.�
�` �"'� • ,. � PUMA
L 44r yy
................
#ZV -
�tia � Oa
- log
cu
b
a;. y� a
W
_ >
C ` Qp
\ O
nt E a
�C� y N SANDARJD RD N SANDARI
__..
a. z �P W
Q J
� J
�p � NS DE D >
O a
z �Q
11
v�
' �II
f L
3
r
W
J
J
N TRI RD 19 N TRICO RD
4M N C <
3 G
aC
� 3
M
H
4 v
NONI WAS N Q 3
4 F
t
� 4
L wP r
°
s _
`: r *i SMiDA N 5
Ak
j .
f
N $E RS FC
J
t
Z
CL
CN °i
h
(/J L
W 0 a a
> <
CL H
(D i° a �
N TRICO RD N T RICO j O V E y
021 931KI N 4 N y
Q1 .
J V
W
3
co
a
h �.