Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/05/2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes'4d MARANA AZ ESTABLISHED 1977 MARANA TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING 11555 W. Civic Center Drive, Marana, Arizona. 85653 Council Chambers February 5, 2019, at or after 7:00 PM Ed Honea, Mayor Jon Post, Vice Mayor David Bowen, Council Member Patti Comerford, Council Member Herb Kai, Council Member John Officer, Council Member. Roxanne Ziegler, Council Member MINUTES C-At_,f, rro ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Mayor Honea called the meeting to order at 7:00 p. i1i.. 1 1 own Clerk Cherry Lawson called roll. Council Member Officer (late arrival 7:08 p.m.) A sufficiciit I-I'LITI-Iber of council members were present constituting a quorum. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE: Led by Mayor Honea. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council Member Bowen motioned to approve, with a second provided by Council Member Kai. The motioned passed, 6-0. CALL TO THE PUBLIC There were no request submitted by the public. PROCLAMATIONS P1 Proclaiming February 7 through February 14, 2019 as Congenital Heart Defect Awareness Week (Cherry L. Lawson) February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes Jennifer Pager thanked the Council for the Proclamation and asked the public to remember individuals afflicted with Congenital Heart Defects. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS There were no Mayor or Council reports offered. MANAGER'S REPORT: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS Town Manager, Jamsheed Mehta highlighted the Council Executive Report providing an update on the number of single family building permits for the month of January which is the lowest the Town has seen in some ears; averaging 63 to 65 permits per month. He reminded Council of the Council Connections Meeting on Saturday, February 9, 2019 from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. at ora Mae Harn District Park. PRESENTATIONS PRI Relating to Commerce; introduction of the newly appointed Marana Chamber of Commerce President, Audra winters (Ed Stolmaker) Ed Stolmaker, President and CEO of the Marana chamber of Commerce, introduced Tom cope who would provide the introductions for the newly appointed President and CEO, Audra winters. Tom cope, chairman, Marana Chambers of Commerce, introduced Audra winters. After a nationwide search resulting in 102 applicants; 52 candidates were reviewed, Ms. Winters was the best candidate for the position. Ms. winters was the CEO of the New Mexico Chambers, and is relocating to the area with her family. There will be a breakfast tomorrow to host and welcome Ms. winters to the Marana area. He invited the Council to come out for the event. Audra winters, President and CEO, Marana chambers of commerce, thanked the Mayor and Council and the Marana Chamber Board, and highlighted the good working relationship of the Town and the Chambers as it is important to businesses within the community, but the entire community. She is looking forward to working within the community as well as with the community partners. CONSENT AGENDA: Vice .Mayor Post motioned to approve the Consent Agenda, and Council Member Lowen second the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0. C1 Relating to Procurement; approving a change order to the Marana Road Realignment project (ST044) construction contract with Pima Paving Inc. in the amount of $67,241.54; authorizing the transfer of appropriations if necessary for the change order; and authorizing the Town Manager or designee to execute the necessary documents to effectuate the change order (Keith Brann) C2 Relating to Procurement; approving a change order to the Construction Contract with Southern Arizona Paving for the Ina Road Pavement Reconstruction (ST058) project in the amount of $103,931.46; authorizing the transfer of appropriations if February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 2 necessary for the change order; and authorizing the Town Manager or designee to execute the necessary documents to effectuate the change order (Keith Brann) C3 Resolution No. 201.9-007: Relating to Personnel; approving and adopting amendments to the Town's Personnel Policies and Procedures, revising Chapter 1 -- General Employment Rights and Responsibilities, Section 1-1-6 "Plan for Harassment Prevention and Elimination" (Jane Fairall) C4 Resolution No. 2019-008: Relating to Utilities; approving and authorizing the Mayor to sign the AZWARN Mutual Aid Agreement (AZWARN MAA) among members of the Arizona Water and Wastewater Agency Response Network (John Kmiec) C5 ordinance No. 2019.005,-, Relating to Animal control; amending Town code Title 6 (Animal Control), Chapter 6-8 (Removal, Impoundment, Forfeiture and Disposition of Animals); revising section 6-8-6 (Hearing; Rules of Hearing; Remedies; Testimony of Defendant; Appeal; Costs) to reduce time for appeal; revising section 6-8-7 (Findings After Court Hearing) to eliminate tattooing as an option the Town Magistrate can order, and designating an effective date (Libby Shelton) C6 Resolution No. 2019-009: Relating to Development; accepting Breakers Road for dedication and maintenance and Tangerine Road for dedication adjacent to the Marana Technology Campus site (Keith Brann) C7 Approval of the January 8, 2019 Study Session Meeting Minutes and Approval of the January 15, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes (Hilary H. Hiser) LIQUOR LICENSES BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES COUNCIL ACTION Al PUBLIC HEARING: Ordinance No. 2019.004: Relating to Development; amending Title 17 (Land Development) of the Marana Town Code by adding new Chapter 17-10 (Signs); repealing existing Title 16 (Signs) of the Marana Land Development Code; and designating an effective date (Brian D. Varney) Resolution No. 2019-005: Relating to Development; declaring as a public record filed with the Town Clerk new Chapter 17-10 (Signs) of Title 17 (Land Development) of the Marana Town Code adopted by Marana Ordinance No. 2019.004 (Brian D. Varney) February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 3 [7:16 PM1 Mayor I onea opened the Public Hearing and deferred to Town Attorney, Frank Cassidy for a review of the item. Frank Cassidy apologized to the Mayor and Council for his passionate remarks during the January 15, 2019 Public Hearing. Since that meeting, the Town has had several conversations with members of SABA and the homebuilding community. However, no agreement was reach. From a staff perspective, the recommendation from. the January 15 meeting is essentially the same. SABA is not happy with that approach and will request a different outcome of the Council. Should Council elect not to consider staff's approach, staff would request direction from. Council to determine how Council wish to proceed. Mr. Cassidy provided a PowerPoint Presentation of the Sign Code (az)ailable on fire in the Tort�n Clerk's Office). The Sign Code deals with all types of signs in the Town. The remaining issue primarily deals with signage for new home subdivision as of this day. He explained, the Town currently as a Regulatory wayfinding Program, as well as it is part of the problem for the Town, relating to bandit signs. Those are signs that are typically placed in around town on Fridays, and removed Sunday evening or Monday morning that advertises new home subdivisions. Sometimes those bandit signs are placed in front of regulatory signage. Mr. Cassidy stated Mr. Angell counted. 74 signs between I-10 interchange and Lon Adams at Tangerine Road. He explained how bandit signs were placed throughout that area. There are also bandit signs coupled with sign walkers advertising the various housing subdivisions. In the last meeting, homebuilders expressed acknowledgment that there are too many bandit signs, and would understand if the Town adopted some form of ordinance to regulate them. However, they believe the bandit signs are critical to their business. This is where the Town and the homebuilders are not in agreement with one another. The Town's position is to modify and modernize the Town's Wayfinding Program, the homebuilders can still get the type of exposure they need to build and sell homes. He provided an overview of the wayfinding Program to Council referring to Resolution. No. 2010-86 in the packet. Mr. Cassidy explained Resolution No. 2010-56 did not adopt the sign as displayed, but rather indicating the Town's Engineer will create a detail; it was created in 2010. The resolution does not mandate the Town to use the same detail. The program works by putting these signs preceding major intersections, following major intersections and no closer than one mile intervals when there is no intersection. These signs can include the builders name, logo and is only allowed while the new home sales office is open on site. The Town provide three different options for Council consideration, as follows: * option 1 (recommended by staff as presented on January 15): Use and modify the existing regulatory wayfinding program.. Under any of the options, staff will proceed with the wayfinding program... As with this option and all options, that Council allows off-site signage for new subdivisions where signs are placed on private property. To be placed only at major turning points. Under this option, February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 4 no directional signs will be permitted in the right-of-way. Only signs in the right-of-way for the new subdivision would be the regulatory wayfindin.g signs. • Option 2 (presented to the Commission during the October 2075 meeting) has the same first two items as Option 1, the regulatory wayfinding program would still be available, and the off-site directional signs would be available. Under this approach, open houses and each new home subdivision, and those within five miles are permitted to have up to eight of signs. They would need to be placed during daylight hours and taken down before night fall. The premise was model homes were only open during business hours, unless there was an event extending outside of those hours. At that meeting SABA representative, Ben Bulgier -Garcia claimed Option 2 was problematic for new home subdivisions to put up and take down signs each day. At which time, he requested another approach be taken. Commission Sherman stated perhaps the Town should consider some form of off-site signage as part of the subdivision sign package. The Subdivision Sign Package allows up to 500 square feet of signage onsite at a subdivision. The suggestion was to add a provision for offsite signage. The Town came to develop the off-site directional signage on private property. • option 3 (presented at the Noveniber 2018 Conimission Meeting) directional signs were added permitting signage in the right-of-way, but no more than six square feet, be within a reasonable distance of a subdivision.. Mr. Cassidy explained with the signage that is directed to a particular development or builder, the Town wanted to combine all housing building development onto one sign. Under this approach, would remain in the right -of. - way for the entire time the subdivision has a model home sales complex open. Once the model home complex close, the signage would be removed. At the November Commission Meeting, SABA sent their comments to the Town in response to this approach. In essence, the Town's approach is too complicated for developers to coordinate as they are competing builders to be placed onto one sign. Since it is six square feet of a sign, it will be problematic to have multiple signs on one structure in the right-of-way. The Commission having heard this twice, advised the Town to work out this remaining issue, however, accepted the rest of the Sign Code. Town staff met to discuss this concern realizing that if the Regulatory wayfinding Program was improved, the Town would coordinate the signage of the homebuilders as it is in the right-of-way. Staff brought this option before the Council during the January 15 Council Meeting. Staff still believes it is the best approach as it is the approach that is being recommended. However, if Council does not agree with February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 5 this approach, staff would welcome feedback from Council as staff would be willing to bring back a modified approach based on Council's feedback. Public Nearing Comments Shawn cote thanked the Council for the delay on this item as it provided the homebuilders and staff an opportunity to meet on this issue. From an industry perspective, they found it to be a productive meeting that resulted in additional items -- a third option. That option as presented to SABA is believed to be the best option for homebuilders to meet their needs, but also believes it is a win from the Town's perspective in terms of some of the concerns raised about clustering of signage. Developers view it as an opportunity to meet with the Planning Department to discuss the sign plan based on the unique needs of the builder in coordination with the Planning Director. He spoke of the example cited of having 74 bandit signs clustered, stating there are seven builders in that area of town. That equates to approximately 10 signs per builder which may or may not be too much. The industry believes that Option 3 is the best option that works best for them and their marketing needs. Vice Mayor Post asked whether the Sign Code is being followed as it relates to the 74 signs that are in and around the subdivisions. He is interested in helping the homebuilders in the area. If the Town's current Sign Code is not currently being followed, it presents a problem. Mr. Cote responded stating he is not aware of whether current signs are following the Sign Code. Vice Mayor Post stated if the Planning Director indicates that the homebuilders are not following the Code as it states and the Town is not in a position to authorize a new permit, how the homebuilders respond. He asked whether the homebuilders would review this as the Town's unwillingness to support their business. Mr. cote stated under option 3, it would allow the homebuilders to come to the Town to submit its plan. It is his belief that the homebuilders do not intentionally set out to violate the Sign Code. Vice Mayor Post express the Town's intention to work with homebuilders, but would expect the Sign Code to be followed. Mr. cote stated the intent of the SABA members is to follow the Town Code. Fen. Bulgier -Garcia on behalf of the Southern. Arizona Home Builders Association, stated he has been involved with this conversation from the beginning. This is his third sign code update starting with Tucson, Sahuarita, and now Marana. Every national study will inform the reader that signage is the most cost-effective and tool for any business. He walked Council through the progress of discussions regarding the Sign Code with regards to the proposed. option 2 that was discussed at the October 2018 Commission Meeting. Their main issue ,with that option was the five (5) anile limit. With Marana, developers are having to move potential buyers from Interstate 10 to the project. Some builders feel as though five (5) miles is not sufficient to attract buyers. SABA did not attend the November meeting as they felt reasonable assured that some of the changes that staff made was something that [SABA] could live with. He February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 6 understand, that some changes were made subsequence to the November meeting which brings thein back to this meeting. In general, SA.BA could have lived November recommendations with. option 2; however, some additional changes were made unilaterally with the materials that are presented this evening. option 3 provides reasonable distance rather than the five (5) mile limit. The recommendation included within the packet as provided by staff brings forward authorizes the Planning Director to have some additional flexibility depending on the unique aspects of each homebuilder's project. They support option 3 as there are no major changes to the proposed. Brent Davis, DL Horton Builders, spoke in support of option 3 as it is effective and provides the builders to get the signage out in the community to draw potential homebuyers. He stressed the importance of signage in relation to traffic over the last month for visitor traffic into their development. He thanked staff for their willingness to engage them in conversation on this issue. He commented on the 74 signs placed near the homebuilding communities stating it may be excessive in number; however, there are seven (7) active building sites along that area. From a builders' perspective, many of those signs placed belongs to DL Horton. Steve Huffman stated when they began to speak with the Town regarding the Sign Code because of the Reid vs. Gilbert Supreme Court ruling, former Town Manager Gilbert Davidson was still with the Town. In reviewing the beginning of this process, we are all moving in the right direction from previously situated. He asked for Council consideration on one issue because they do not know how the Town will enforce the Code if approved. They do not wish to be in a position to try to interpret the Code to its members, nor will they encourage members to work outside the scope of the Code. In section 17-10-34 dealing with portable signage which largely impacts realtor's signs, there is a provision that has been discussed part G (He meant 17-10-34, H, not G): No sign shall be placed u4thin 20 feet of another sign authorized by this section. He provided an example of sign placement and who would be considered first, second or third in the placement order of the signage. The other concern is for the code Enforcement staff being able to identify who placed the signage on the roadway in an ordered manner. He understands the Town position to eliminate the clustering of signage, but seeks to better understand how the Town arrived at this decision to enforce the Code. He sees this as being a problem for its members in the future. [7:50 PM] Mayor Honea closed the Public Hearing and deferred to Council for discussion on the item. Council Member Bowen asked of Mr. Cassidy about the placement of wayfinding Program signage within the Town. Mr. Cassidy explained the signage is placed at intersections and changes of. directions. If there is none within one mile, then there would be one placed after a one mile stretch. Council Member Bowen confirmed of February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 7 the smaller wayf finding sign structure (30 in.. maximum height) can only be placed at the one mile interval. Mr. Cassidy reaffirmed, as is provided within the Code language -- currently at a one mile interval and at change of direction. Council Member Bowen continued, the signage begins at no more than five mile from the subdivision. Mr. Cassidy stated Mr. Bulgier -Garcia did correctly explained that some of the feedback the Town received for subdivisions during the October meeting. The manner in which the Town is spread -out, there could be situations where the logical starting point for directing people might be further than five (5) utiles away. In response to those concerns, the Town took out those (five mile) limitations on option 3 on the version that the Commission reviewed in November; instead, left it to the Planning Director as part of the subdivision signage package to determine that reasonable distance; though there is some flexibility under option 3. Council Member Bowen asked under the proposal for the smaller signs if max -out at eight (8) for a developer, and only one entry way for the subdivision, could the builder cluster the signs as they currently are or would they need to be spread out. He asked whether the builder would be required to put space between the signs. Mr. Cassidy responded stating that raises the question as presented by IIIb. Huffman. The signs would have to be 20 feet apart, as they would fall under the open house sign rules. on Option 2, signs would also have to be at turning and changing locations. Council Member Bowen stated he agrees with Mr. Davis as one mile is a long way to drive before coming upon a housing development. He expressed some concern regarding the enforcement of the signage, and whether the Town has a sufficient number of employees to handle it. Mr. Cassidy stated the bandit signs are, as raised by Vice Mayor. Post, all illegal. The Town does not have any provisions within the Code to address bandit signs. option 2 would permit those types of signs (open house style) to be placed within the community. option 3 is the type of signage that would remain in the right -of. -way for the entire time that the model home complex is open. The option 3 sign would be a permanent sign fixture. Council Member Ziegler stated if. the Town truly wished to be in compliance, Council would go for option 1 as there is no flexibility ,with that option. There would not be any bandit signs, the static wayf inding Sign would contain those signs, and the Town has not been policing those signs as there is only one Code Enforcement employee. In order to police this without taxing the Town is to select option 1. Although not advocating for the option, she is Just stating the obvious. She does not necessary agree with Mr. Davis, as a person interested in buying a home could locate the signage if it is along a one mile stretch of roadway without changing directions or turning. She would agree with having a wayfinding sign one-half mile away from the subdivision development. Those would be more visually appealing than the bandit signs. It is more acceptable to have those types of signs during an election cycle as candidates want to get exposure as well as votes. She does not agree with option 3 as it presents more of a February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 8 challenge to the Town police and enforce the Code. She asked Council to give more thought to this selection. Council Member officer asked why the need to have two of the same signs side-by- side. Mr. Davis stated homebuilders are trying to catch a potential buyer's attention much in the same respect as a council candidate. Under option 3, developers would have to schedule a meeting with the Planning Director to present its signage plan that would have to be approved by the department. It would be an opportunity for staff to limit the number of signage that are placed in or near the subdivision. Mr. Huffman provided examples of having an open house, and how option 1 may impact potential sellers in selling their homes. Council Member Ziegler stated the bandit signs that are in the community only contains the builder name, not CFD's or other information as they are directional signage. She is in favor of the wayfinding signs, not the bandit signs, however, she is willing to negotiate a reasonable amount of signs to market and promote the subdivision. She questioned the section of the Code from which Mr. Huffman quoted asking whether it is from. the Town's Code. Mr. Cassidy replied stating it is from the proposed Code. council Member Ziegler asked how the Town would be able to enforce the code as being presented. If the Town is not going to enforce [it] then take it out of the Code. Council Member Comerford expressed her frustration with staff and the process of corning to an agreement with the options presented in this section of the Code. She does not agree with Council member Ziegler that the signs are directional in nature. In her view, they are marketing and advertising signage. She does not understand why there is difficulty in establishing a Sign Code that presents challenges to enforce as it has been in violation. This is before the Council due to the Courts decision, to be fair to everyone. Everyone needs to work together to develop that section of the Code that is agreeable and fair to the Town, staff and developers. Council Member Bowen asked whether all three options are within the confine of the law. Mr. Cassidy stated the Town believes all three options presented are defensible. The difficulty with this topic relates to the Reid Case, which did complicate signs. It is more defensible to prohibit all signs from the right-of-way. State law prohibits us from removing political signage from the right-of-way. we are preempted from doing that; however, under our Sign Code, it is silent as state law preempts the Town from removing political signs during election cycles. The most constitutionally way to handle this is not permit any signage in the right-of-way. However as a practical matter, people will have difficulty in selling homes with that approach. The Town recognizes that, and wish to have some flexibility with the open house signs. once the Town open the door to that approach, it does create the potential for challenges. This is where staff is coming from to minimize any potential challenges by reducing exposure. February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 9 Council Member Bowen commented on the issue of the 20 feet placement of signs stating it is related but not the issue before the Council. All of the options are defensible, some are less than others and can defend the Town if challenged. Vice Mayor Post stated Gladden Farms community is approaching 20 years since initially being developed. He drove by the community today and counted a number of signs there. For persons purchasing a home valued at $200,000 or more having to view a number of signs clustered within the community each day, would be difficult for any homebuyer or owner to put up with for the next 30-40 years. There has to be some form of (whether by the Town or builder) compromise in order to attract persons to live in these communities. The signs are there all of the time! He prefers option 3 as it allows the Town Planning Director to approve the Sign Plans submitted by developers. Council Member Ziegler stated she supports option 3; however, asked for clarification on enforcement by the Town. Mr. Cassidy stated option 3 permits signs to be there as part of the Sign Code and is approved at the time the subdivision is open. council Member Ziegler asked for clarification on the number of days signs can remain. Mr. Cassidy replied for the length of the time that the model complex is open to the public. If a developer choses to place temporary signage in the permitted right--of--way and take it down during the week, they could do that. Mayor Honea asked for a roll call of the votes on this item., and directed the Clerk to call the roll. Vice Mayor .Post motioned to approve Option No. 3 of Ordinance No. 2019.004, and Resolution alio. 2019-005, and Council Member .Bowen seconded the motion. .Mayor Honea called for a roll carr vote. Council Member Bowen - Yes Council Member Comerford - Yes Council Member Kai - No Council Member officer - Yes Council Member Ziegler - Yes Vice Mayor Post- Yes Mayor Honea - Yes The motion passed, 6-1. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ POSSIBLE ACTION DI Relating to Budget; discussion, direction and possible action regarding development of the fiscal year 2019-2020 budget, including proposed budget initiatives and expenditures (jamsheed Mehta) February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 10 Mr. Mehta provided a brief overview stating Council requested to have an item placed on the agenda to provide them with the opportunity to provide comments related to the budget. If Council has any ideas or suggestions for budget items, it should not be limited to the budget session meeting. This item will remain on the agenda through the budget cycle and Town staff will be happy to do any research needed and will share the information with Council at a future meeting. Council Member Ziegler asked whether Tuition. Reimbursement for employees could be restored to the budget as it had been removed some time ago. She asked whether staff could look into restoring the benefit to employees, and follow-up with Council on the findings. Mr. Mehta stated staff will look into this request and report back to the Council at a future meeting. council Member Ziegler stated some years ago the Town were members with G -Tech, formerly Trio and now Sun Corridor. At the time they were G -Tech., Marana was small in nature and did not pay the full cost to betaine a member. She provided a historical account for the time that Marana was a member with this organization. In or 2007, Council motioned to not renew the agreement with G -Tech at that time as it was not cost effective for the Town. She asked whether the Council would be interested in having a Study Session Meeting to have some discussion on whether it would be to the Town's advantage to rejoin Sun Corridor in an effort to spur economic growth.. Mayor I ionea stated several council members have spoken with hien as well as Mr. Mehta about restoring the Town's membership in some form. He is not sure whether a Study Session is needed—all is needed is for staff to do some research in terms of cost, benefit and input of the Town. He does agree with that the Town should consider revisiting the membership with Sun Corridor. Council Member Bowen stated he appreciates Council Member Ziegler bringing forward this recommendation. He mentioned two items pension funding as the Town continues to work toward chipping at it to ensure the Town remains solid financial ground. Increasing roads and infrastructure and planning for the future of this community to ensure that we continue to maintain the type of roadways that Marana is accustom to having. Marana has a longstanding history of doing roads, public safety and recreation well. He wish to continue that longstanding tradition. Mr. Mehta, PSPRS requirement for this body to approve a PSPRS Policy is a state requirement on the Town. He stated, Council should expect to have a study session in the near future as the Town has to have a policy in place by the end of the fiscal year. Regarding infrastructure, or management of infrastructure, that is essential to the Town as it was previously discussed in the last budget cycle. The streets and roads this year, for the first time in several years, the Town. is revisiting the issue by completing an evaluation of every street or pavement within the Town limits. From this, the Town would have a full assessment of the conditions of the roadway. February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 11 O2 Relating to Legislation and Government Actions; discussion and possible action regarding all pending state, federal, and local legislation/ government actions and on recent and upcoming meetings of the other governmental bodies (jamsheed Mehta) Mr, Mehta stated Tony Hunter, Assistant to the City Manager, has prepared a list of some of the pertinent legislative bills that are before the Legislature. Approximately four thousand (4,000) bills that have been submitted to date. The deadline for the Senate to review the bills have past; however, the House has until February 11 to review and make recommendations. He discussed the Drought Contingency Plan that has been submitted by the Town, and approved by the Governor. It is relevant to Marana as plan imputes the removal of a sunset on effluent credits. The current statute had it set at 2025 which would have been a sunset of all credits Marana receives from the effluent. This agreement removes the sunset clause which is very favorable for Marana. In the end, Marana continues to receive long-range storage credits for the recharge of the effluent. The Governor vetoed the tax conformity to the tax code that entailed the changes that were made by the House, which the Governor then vetoed due in part to the drop in revenue the state receives. There is a wayf inding and digital goods item that requires additional discussion and clarification.. At issue, is the definition of software as a service. Staff is currently monitoring the bills being presented such as the I iB2109 County Transportation Excise Tax. It is a proposal by Pima County, presented by Representative Shope of Pinal County, adding an additional 1/2 cent to the existing authorization that MPO or RTA.'s that the state has. It increase the capacity of the county -wide tax to 1/2 cent to a full cent, and does not nuke changes to the work in process as the last session bill had made. Senate Bill 1001., Highway Safety Fee, the attempt to repeal the $32 fee. we will learn more on this as this bill progresses. Lastly HB2201 Partisan offices, a repeat of the bill from the last session would require all candidates for local elections to display political party affiliation. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS Pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03, the Town Council may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, to discuss certain matters. Mayor Honea asked for a motion to go into Executive Session. Vice Mayor Post motioned to go into Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38- 431.030)(7). Council .Member Kai seconded the motion. .Motion passed unanimously: 7-0. EZ 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 con.cernin.g any matter listed on this agenda. February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 12 E2 Executive session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(7) to consider its position and instruct the Town's representatives regarding negotiations for the possible sale of Town -owned land to Northwest Fire District. Mayor Honea asked for a motion based on the language offered by Town Attorney, Frank Cassidy. Vice Mayor Post motioned directing staff pursuant to the discussion in .executive Session to sell a parcel of property to Northwest .Fire .District for $125,000 under the terms discussed with Council by the Town Manager, Council Member Kai seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Notwithstanding the mayor's discretion regard'Ing the items to be placed on the agenda, If three or more Council Members request that an item be placed on the agenda, It must be placed on the agenda for the second regular Town Council meeting after the date of the request, pursuant to Marana Town. Code Section 2-4--2(h). ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Honea motioned to adjourn at 9:00 p.m., with a second provided by Council Member Bowen. The motion passed unanimously, 7--0. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing are the true and correct minutes of the Marana Town Council m 'ng held on February 5, 2019. I .further certify that a quorum was present. Cherry L. awson, Town. Clerk MARANA ESTABLISHE,D 1977 February 5, 2019 Regular Council Meeting Minutes 13