Feb 21, 2023 City Council Meeting

>> VICE MAYOR ASLAN? COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS? COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSE?

>> COUNCIL MEMBER MATTHEWS?

>> COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY?

>> COUNCIL MEMBER SWEET?

>> THANK YOU. THERE'S VICE MAYOR ASLAN AND COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS, AT SOME POINT IS GOING TO BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.

COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY, WOULD YOU PLEASE LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE?

>> I WOULD. PLEASE STAND IF YOU CAN

>> COUNCIL MEMBER MATTHEWS, I ASKED YOU FOR THE MISSION STATEMENT; IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YOU DID MAYOR. THANK YOU.

THE MISSION OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF IS TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL.

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER SWEET, OUR LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT?

>> THE FLAGSTAFF CITY COUNCIL HUMBLY ACKNOWLEDGES THE ANCESTRAL HOMELANDS OF THIS AREA'S INDIGENOUS NATIONS AND ORIGINAL STEWARDS.

THESE LANDS STILL INHABITED BY NATIVE DESCENDANTS BORDER MOUNTAIN SACRED TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLES.

WE HONOR THEM, THEIR LEGACIES, THEIR TRADITIONS, AND THEIR CONTINUED CONTRIBUTIONS.

WE CELEBRATE THEIR PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE GENERATIONS WHO WILL FOREVER KNOW THIS PLACE AS HOME.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.

[4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public Participation enables the public to address the Council about an item that is not on the agenda. Comments relating to items that are on the agenda will be taken at the time that the item is discussed. If you wish to address the Council at tonight's meeting, please complete a comment card and submit it to the recording clerk as soon as possible. Your name will be called when it is your turn to speak. You may address the Council up to three times throughout the meeting, including comments made during Public Participation. Please limit your remarks to three minutes per item to allow everyone an opportunity to speak. At the discretion of the Chair, ten or more persons present at the meeting and wishing to speak may appoint a representative who may have no more than fifteen minutes to speak. ]

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ENABLES THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ABOUT AN ITEM THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA.

COMMENTS RELATING TO ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE AGENDA WILL BE TAKEN AT THE TIME THAT THE ITEM IS DISCUSSED.

IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS COUNCIL AT TONIGHT'S MEETING, PLEASE COMPLETE A COMMENT CARD AND SUBMIT IT TO THE RECORDING CLERK AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

YOUR NAME WILL BE CALLED WHEN IT'S YOUR TURN TO SPEAK.

LET'S START, AND I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE IF I GET LAST NAMES WRONG.

WE HAVE STEVE CANTER.

>> YES, STEVE CARTER.

>> CARTER. THANK YOU.

>> MY TURN?

>> OKAY. GOOD. MY NAME IS STEVE CARTER.

I LIVE IN THE CONTINENTAL AREA OF EAST FLAGSTAFF.

I'D LIKE TO EXPRESS MY CONCERNS ABOUT A COUPLE OF ITEMS ON THE OPERATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

IT APPEARS TO ME THAT YOU'RE CONCENTRATING ON SOME NATIONAL ISSUES LIKE ABORTION, CLIMATE CHANGE, WHEN THERE ARE VERY PRESSING LOCAL ISSUES THAT SHOULD BE YOUR FOCUS.

FIVE YEARS AGO, THE VOTERS IN FLAG PASSED A NEW TAX ISSUE BY 66 PERCENT THAT ADDRESSED NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS TO INFRASTRUCTURE AND STREETS TO IMPROVE THE TRAFFIC FLOW IN TOWN.

IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE MUCH PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE IMPLEMENTING THAT AND SPENDING THAT MONEY ON IMPROVEMENTS, INSTEAD, YOU'VE INSTALLED BIKE LANES AND BIKE CURVES ARE BARRIERS THAT ACTUALLY DECREASE SAFETY AND ACCESSIBILITY TO US BIKE USERS.

THESE BIKE LANES CAN'T BE ADEQUATELY CLEANED IN THE WINTER OR SUMMER, AND THE DEBRIS THAT'S FREQUENTLY PRESENT FORCES BIKERS TO USE THE STREET INSTEAD OF THE LANES.

THESE BARRIERS AND CURVES SHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY AND REVERTED TO STANDARD PAINTED LANES.

YOU ALSO OUGHT TO PROBABLY GET THE MONEY BACK FROM THE GUY WHO SOLD YOU ON THEM.

MANY OF OUR STREETS NEED TO BE WIDENED TO FOUR LANES LIKE BUTLER OR LONE TREE, AND THE EXTENSION OF FOURTH STREET DOWN TO POWELL BOULEVARD SHOULD BE DONE.

US 80 TO THE NORTHWEST NEEDS TO BE FOUR LANES TO ACCOMMODATE THE SKIERS AND THE RESIDENTS DURING THE SKI AND TOURIST SEASONS.

ANY NEW HIGH-RISE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES MUST INCLUDE ADEQUATE INSIDE PARKING, INSIDE THE STRUCTURE, NOT ON THE SURROUNDING STREETS.

TRAFFIC SIGNALS SHOULD BE TIMED TO FACILITATE TRAFFIC FLOW ON MILTON, BUTLER, AND ROUTE 66 INSTEAD OF THE WAY IT SEEMS THAT THEY'RE OBSTRUCTING THE FLOW.

THE CURRENT TRAFFIC SITUATION ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTES TO MORE DANGER FOR PEDESTRIANS AND

[00:05:02]

BIKE USERS BECAUSE TRAFFIC IS SO SLOW THAT CARS RUN RED AND YELLOW LIGHTS TO TRY TO GET THROUGH THEM, AND THAT DECREASES SAFETY DAY EVERYBODY.

AS FAR AS ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES WE'RE ALL INTERESTED IN THAT EVERY DAY, BUT I WOULD SUGGEST YOU FOCUS ON LOCAL FLOOD CONTROL, FIRE CONTROL, FLOOD WATER REMOVAL SYSTEMS TO BENEFIT THE RESIDENTS OF THE AREAS, NORTH LOCKET AND GREEN LAW WHERE THE FLOODING SEEMS TO BE GETTING WORSE.

THE SURVEYS THAT I'VE SEEN TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND FIRE AND FLOODING ARE FAR MORE URGENT THAN THE NATIONAL POLITICAL ISSUES THAT THE COUNCIL SEEMS TO BE INTERESTED IN.

I'D LIKE TO REMIND YOU, AS A FORMER MEMBER OF THE US MILITARY AND ARIZONA LAW ENFORCEMENT, WE ALL TOOK AN OATH TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND ARIZONA.

LET'S NOT FORGET, WE NEED TO OBEY ALL LAWS. NOW IS YOUR TURN.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT WE HAVE SONOMA BOYNTON.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, AND COUNCIL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY.

MY NAME IS SONOMA BOYNTON, AND I AM AN AMERICAN ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY CO-MEMBER SERVING AS THE STREAM STEWARDS COORDINATOR.

I'M HERE THIS AFTERNOON TO SHARE INFORMATION ABOUT THE NEW STREAM STEWARD'S PROGRAM.

THIS PROGRAM WAS CREATED THROUGH A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE FRIENDS OF THE RIO DE FLAG, THE SUSTAINABILITY OFFICE, AND WATER SURFACES STORM WATER SECTION.

OUR GOAL IS TO ENGAGE AND EDUCATE COMMUNITY MEMBERS ABOUT OUR WATERSHED.

WE DO THIS BY SUPPORTING VOLUNTEERS WHO HAVE ADOPTED SECTIONS OF THE RIO DE FLAG.

STREAM STEWARDS REMOVE INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES, WOODY DEBRIS, LITTER, AND OTHER ITEMS THAT MIGHT BLOCK THE FLOW OF WATER IN THE RIO AND PROMOTE SAFETY AND RESILIENCE ALONG THE WATERSHED.

WE ALSO OFFER INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES WORKSHOPS, EDUCATIONAL WALKS, AND THE SUMMER WATERSHED CLEANUP SERIES TO INCREASE AWARENESS AND KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE RIO AND ITS MANY COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

IN LESS THAN A YEAR, WE HAVE HAD 16 SPECIES ADOPTED, AND HAVE HOSTED FOUR EVENTS.

WE ENCOURAGE ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED TO ADOPT A SECTION OF THE RIO DE FLAG.

TO ADOPT STREAM STEWARDS COMMIT TO CONDUCTING AT LEAST THREE CLEANUPS A YEAR, AND I WILL BE FORWARDING MORE DETAILS INFORMATION TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL ABOUT THE STREAM STEWARD'S PROGRAM AFTER COUNCIL MEETING THIS EVENING.

ANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON ADOPTION, PLEASE VISIT THE STREAM STEWARDS WEBPAGE.

DURING THE NEXT SUSTAINABILITY DIVISION UPDATE, THE SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTOR WILL BE INQUIRING IF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO FORMALLY ADOPT A SECTION OF THE RIO DE FLAG.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TO THE STREAM STEWARDS PROGRAM THIS AFTERNOON.

NEXT WE HAVE JEANETTE HARVEY.

>> HELLO. THANK YOU, MAYOR DAGGETT, VICE MAYOR, ASLAN, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.

MY NAME IS JEANETTE HARVEY I'M A NATIVE OF FLAGSTAFF, WAS ACTUALLY BORN IN GRAND CANYON.

I AM HERE REPRESENTING MY COMPANY AIR METHODS.

WE ARE THE LARGEST AIR MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION COMPANY IN THE UNITED STATES.

MY SIX SPACES IN NORTHERN ARIZONA ARE ALL NATIVE AIR BRANDED.

WE HIRE THE BEST LOCAL TALENT, SPEND LOCAL, AND HAVE BEEN IN THE COMMUNITY FOR DECADES.

NOW THAT WE NO LONGER HAVE A NON-COMPETE WITH GUARDIAN AIR, I'VE OPENED A BASE IN COTTONWOOD, I ALSO HAVE PACKETS THAT HAVE EXCELLENT INFORMATION ABOUT THE SERVICES WE PROVIDE AND WE INTEND ON OPENING A BASE HERE BY THE END OF QUARTER 1.

AS OUR POPULATION CONTINUES TO GROW, OUR INTERSTATES ARE BUSIER THAN EVER.

ACCIDENTS CONTINUED TO HAPPEN.

MEDICAL EMERGENCIES THAT OUR FIRST RESPONDERS ARE CALLED UPON, NEEDING CRITICAL CARE CONTINUE TO RISE, THUS VALIDATING THE NEED FOR TWO AIRCRAFT IN OUR COMMUNITY.

STRUGGLING EMS DEPARTMENTS ALSO DEPEND ON US TO HELP FILL IN THE GAPS.

ULTIMATELY, AT THE END OF EVERY 911 CALL, IS A PERSON NEEDING HELP, ESPECIALLY IN THE MORE RURAL AREAS OF ARIZONA WHEN TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE, WE HAVE THE TEAMS READY TO SAVE LIVES.

OUR EDUCATION IS CUTTING-EDGE.

WE HAVE BLOOD ON BOARD, WHICH HAS CONTRIBUTED TO SAVING OVER 120,000 LIVES ANNUALLY, AND WITH THE PANDEMIC, WE HAD RECORD LEVELS OF AIR TRANSPORTS SINCE THEN.

I AS NATIVE AIR, LOOK FORWARD TO BRINGING THIS VALUED SERVICE TO

[00:10:01]

OUR COMMUNITY BY THE END OF Q1. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU. JANINE KELLY.

>> JANINE, I'M FRENCH-CANADIAN.

HOW DO WE CREATE A BELOVED COMMUNITY IN FLAGSTAFF? SIMPLE, BY LOVING OUR NEIGHBOR.

HOW MANY SIDEWALKS IN FLAGSTAFF ARE ICY AND SHOVELED IN DANGEROUS DESPITE THE ORDINANCE REQUIRING THAT THEY'RE CLEARED OF SNOW? WHY DO WE NEED OUR SIDEWALKS SHOVELED? WELL, FOR THE SAFETY OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CHILDREN, DOG WALKERS, JOGGERS, SENIORS.

NO ONE SLIP FALLS AND SUFFERS A TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY, BROKEN ARM, OR LEG.

WHAT IF ALL NEIGHBORHOODS IN FLAGSTAFF INITIATED A LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR PROJECT? WHAT IF THE CITY COUNCIL AND CODE COMPLIANCE MANAGER CHAMPIONS SUCH A PROJECT? I'VE LIVED IN FLAGSTAFF 45 YEARS AND OVER THREE DECADES IN UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD.

SADLY, THERE ARE MANY HOUSEHOLDS WHO WINTER AFTER WINTER, NEGLECT TO SHOVEL THE SNOW FROM THEIR SIDEWALKS.

UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS DRIVE SOUTH UP TO GUILLEN WATER NEEDS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE FOR THE SAFETY OF SCHOOL CHILDREN WALKING TO DEMIGUEL ELEMENTARY.

THE SIDEWALK ON THE CORNER OF LITSON UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS IS ESPECIALLY TREACHEROUS.

THAT'S WHERE I SLIPPED FELL AND SLIDE 11 FEET INTO THE STREET.

UNFORTUNATELY, I'M NOT IN TRAINING TO BE A NAVY SEAL.

THE RESIDENTS SAW ME, STARED, AND LEFT ME IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET AND DID NOT OFFER TO HELP ME UP.

WHAT CAN THE CODE COMPLIANCE MANAGER DO TO MAKE CITIZENS MORE ENGAGED? I SHARE THESE IDEAS.

AIRING PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENTS, PLACING LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR, SAVE SIDEWALK FLIERS AND MAILBOX, SUBMITTING PHOTOS TO THE ARIZONA DAILY SUN, ENCOURAGING TEENS TO BECOME HEROES IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS, INVITING THE MUSCLE OF THE BOY SCOUTS, YOUTH CHURCH GROUPS, AND OFF-DUTY FIREFIGHTERS TO HELP OUR SENIOR OR DISABLED NEIGHBORS.

I'VE ASKED PASTOR ADAM AT THE URBAN CHURCH OF GOOD HOPE IF HIS YOUTH WOULD HELP VOLUNTEERS SHOVEL THE SNOWY SIDEWALKS OF THE ELDERLY OR THE ILL ON MY STREET.

HE'S WHOLLY DEDICATED TO SERVING THE FLAGSTAFF COMMUNITY, AND HE GRACIOUSLY SAID, YES.

IF CHARLES DICKENS WERE ALIVE TODAY.

I THINK HE WOULD WRITE THIS AND HOUSEHOLD WORLDS WITH BOB CRATCHIT LIKE FAMILIES WHO ARE STRUGGLING TO PAY FOR GAS AND FOOD AND EVEN EGGS, THEY CANNOT AFFORD AN AMBULANCE RIDE TO THE ER, MRIS, PHYSICAL THERAPY, OR CHIROPRACTIC CARE NEEDED IF THEY SLIP FALL AND INJURE THEMSELVES DUE TO A HOMEOWNER'S NEGLIGENCE IN THE CITIES NEGLIGENCE AND NOT ENFORCING THE CODE MOST VIGOROUSLY.

SECOND ISSUE, I'M THERE AND ENCOURAGED MY HERO, VICE MAYOR AUSTIN ASLAN AN OUTDOOR ENTHUSIASTS TO LIST THE CITY CREW TO GROOM BUFFALO PARK FOR CROSS-COUNTRY SCHEME.

BECAUSE OUR NEEDS, OUR TEAMS NEED TO ESCAPE SOCIAL MEDIA AND CONNECT WITH NATURE.

ABUNDANCE OF RESEARCH REVEALS THAT THOSE WHO DO IMPROVE THEIR MENTAL WELL-BEING AND PHYSICAL FITNESS, ALL POLITICIANS MAKE EXCUSES, BUT INTELLIGENT, COMPASSIONATE LEADERS LIKE THE CITY COUNCIL AND OUR MAYOR, SOLVE PROBLEMS IN A TIMELY MANNER.

TOGETHER WE CAN CREATE A BELOVED COMMUNITY, EVEN DURING THIS BLEAKNESS MID-WINTER, WHEN SNOWING SNOW BLANKETS OUR STREETS AND SIDEWALKS.

THANK YOU.

NO MISTAKE. I'M LEAVING BECAUSE IT'S HAILING AND I'M FROM MIAMI IN FLORIDA.

>> IT LOOKS LIKE WE DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS ONLINE.

WE ARE DOWN TO ITEM NUMBER 5, COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS.

[5. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS]

LET'S START WITH COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSE.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, JUST ONE REPORT FOR ME TODAY FROM THE COMMISSION ON DIVERSITY AWARENESS.

I WAS ABLE TO SIT IN ON THE MUNICIPAL EQUITY INDEX REPORT THAT WE MISSED LAST TIME, BUT THEY GOT A SIMILAR REPORT SO IT WAS GREAT TO HEAR UPDATES ON THAT, AS WELL AS HEARING ABOUT UPCOMING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CITY HOLIDAYS AND COMMEMORATIONS.

I'M CURRENTLY WORKING WITH THE COMMISSION ON A PROCLAMATION FOR WOMEN'S HISTORY MONTH, AND THEY ARE CONTINUING TO HOLD ON CONVERSATIONS ON ANTI-CAMPING ORDINANCES AND WORK BEING DONE ON THE RENAMING OF THE PEAKS PROJECT.

THAT'S IT FOR ME.

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER SUITE.

>> THANK YOU. AT LAST WEEK'S WATER COMMISSION, IT WAS AN ACTUAL VERY GOOD, ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT THE OPEN CHANNEL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM, TO HELP EVERYONE REST ASSURED WE'RE WORKING ON IT AND TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CHANNELS STAY CLEAR TO REDUCE FLOODING, EROSION, AND REDUCE THE SEDIMENTATION.

MOUNTAIN LINE, UNFORTUNATELY, HAD TO POSTPONE THE UNVEILING OF THEIR NEW ELECTRIC BUS DUE TO THE INCOMING WEATHER.

I KNOW WE'RE ALL VERY EXCITED,

[00:15:02]

SO STAY TUNED ON THE NEW DATE. WITH THAT, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. AS I NOTED LAST WEEK, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR METRO PLAN IS WANTING TO RETIRE HERE IN THE NEAR FUTURE AND THE BOARD HAS BEEN DILIGENTLY WORKING ON A REPLACEMENT.

WE MADE THE DECISION TO APPOINT AN INTERIM DIRECTOR AND WE HAVE INTERVIEWS OF TWO CANDIDATES THIS SATURDAY.

HOPEFULLY, WE CAN RESOLVE THAT SOON, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO GIVE OURSELVES A FEW MORE WEEKS TO SELECT A PERMANENT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.

THAT'S THE NEWS FROM LAKE WOBEGON.

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER NOTHING FROM ME.

VICE MAYOR ASLAN.

>> THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY FOR THE METRO PLAN UPDATE.

OF COURSE, I'M INVOLVED IN THAT AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE INTERVIEWS WE'RE DOING AT 08:00 AM, ON SATURDAY MORNING.

LIGHT ON LIAISON REPORTS TODAY, COMMISSION REPORTS.

BUT I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS TO SAY.

I WAS ABLE TO GO TO QUALITY CONNECTIONS A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AND BE INTERVIEWED BY A LOT OF THE FOLKS THERE FOR THEIR NEWSLETTER.

THAT WAS A LOT OF FUN.

THEY GRILLED ME FOR AN HOUR WITH VERY PERSONAL QUESTIONS.

THEY DID THEIR RESEARCH, THEY ASKED ME MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT MY BOOKS.

THEN I GET AT MOST AUTHOR EVENTS, WHICH WAS REALLY AMAZING.

WE TALKED ABOUT MY TIME AS A PEACE CORPS VOLUNTEER AND MY WORK IN MAUNA LOA ON THE BIG ISLAND OF HAWAII AS A NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION RESEARCH FELLOW, GETTING MY MASTER'S DEGREE.

I WAS REALLY IMPRESSED WITH THE LEVEL OF DETAIL THEY WENT INTO.

I HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT ALL OF YOU GET IN TOUCH WITH THE GOOD FOLKS OVER THEIR QUALITY CONNECTIONS AS YOU HAVE THE CHANCE.

THEN THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO REPORT ON REAL QUICKLY IS, I WAS ABLE TO MEET WITH DR. ERIC HEISER.

HE'S THE NEW PRESIDENT OF CCC.

DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW THIS, BUT HE'S A THREE-TERM COUNCIL PERSON HIMSELF FROM THE COMMUNITY HE COMES FROM IN NORTHERN WYOMING, MOUNTAINOUS WYOMING PARTS.

WE HAD A NICE CAMARADERIE TO START THINGS OFF WITH RIGHT AWAY.

HE KNOWS WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL BODY.

NOW HE'S RUNNING THINGS UP AT CCC AND WE HAD A LOT OF GOOD CONVERSATIONS AND LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT RELATIONSHIP AND HE'S VERY MUCH LOOKING FORWARD TO THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEETING WITH ALL OF YOU AS YOU'RE ABLE.

I THINK I'LL LEAVE IT THERE FOR NOW MAYOR.

THERE'S MORE I COULD SAY, BUT I GOT TO GET TO FLORIDA BECAUSE IT'S HAILING.

>> THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBER MATTHEWS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. LAST WEDNESDAY, I ATTENDED THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COUNCIL MEETING AND IT WAS REALLY INFORMATIVE.

WE DISCUSSED CRIME RATES, ARREST RATES, AND MAINLY THE EFFECTIVENESS OF OUR CARE PROGRAM.

WE ARE ANTICIPATING WITH OUR SECRETARIATE TO COME AND DO A PRESENTATION ON JUST THE RESPONSES THAT THEY HAVE GONE TO AND HOW IT'S HELPED REDUCE THE POPULATION IN OUR JAIL SYSTEM.

WE ALSO HAD COMMITTEE UPDATES FROM THE INDIGENOUS INITIATIVES COMMITTEE, THE JUVENILE JUSTICE COMMITTEE, BEHAVIORAL HEALTH COMMITTEE, AND KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR COMMITTEE.

DOING A LOT OF GOOD THINGS OVER THERE AND IT WAS A GREAT HONOR TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. IT LOOKS LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS HAS NOT YET JOINED US ONLINE.

I AM GOING TO MOVE FORWARD TO ITEM NUMBER. [OVERLAPPING] MAYOR, SHE HAS JUST JOINED.

COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING UNDER COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS TO ADD?

>> COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS, ARE YOU ABLE TO UNMUTE?

>> OKAY. I THINK I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND JUMP DOWN TO ITEM NUMBER 6;

[6. LIQUOR LICENSE PUBLIC HEARINGS]

A AND B, LIQUOR LICENSE, PUBLIC HEARINGS.

HELLO. WELCOME. THANK YOU.

FIRST, I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM STAFF.

[00:20:07]

I'M OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND NOW STAFF MAY GO.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, COUNCIL.

I'M SERGEANT SAP, I'M WITH THE FLAGSTAFF POLICE DEPARTMENT UNDER THE PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS DIVISION.

I'M HERE, I'VE GOT TWO LIQUOR APPLICATIONS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

THE FIRST IS FOR A MOBILE COUNTRY CLUB AT 3690 COUNTRY CLUB.

IT'S FOR A SAMPLING PRIVILEGES, AND THE SECOND IS FOR HARRINGTON'S TAP HOUSE LOCATED AT 2711 EAST LINCOLN.

THAT'S A SERIES 10 BEER AND WINE STORE APPLICATION.

I FOUND NO DEROGATORY REMARKS FOR EITHER APPLICATION AND THEY SHOULD HAVE BUSINESS REPRESENTATIVES HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY.

>> COULD YOU TELL ME WHAT SAMPLING PRIVILEGES MEAN?

>> IT'S AN ATTACHMENT TO THE SERIES 9 LIQUOR LICENSE THAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE.

IT ALLOWS THEM TO BE ABLE TO ALLOW THEIR CUSTOMERS TO SAMPLE UNDER STRICT GUIDELINES THAT ARE MANDATED BY THE LIQUOR CONTROL.

>> IF THEY WANTED TO SAMPLE LIQUOR X, THEY COULD BE POURED A SMALL AMOUNT OF IT, THEY COULD TASTE IT AND IF THEY LIKE IT, BUY IT, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> CORRECT.

>> THANK YOU. IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT.

DO EITHER APPLICANTS WISH TO SPEAK?

>> MAYOR, THEY ARE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS BUT THEY DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD AT THIS TIME.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? I AM GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO FORWARD THE APPLICATION TO THE STATE.

>> I HAVE TO SAY THE WHOLE THING DON'T I.

MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE TWO LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATIONS THAT ARE PRESENTED ON OUR AGENDA FOR APPROVAL OR TO BE MOVED TO THE STATE.

>> TO FORWARD THE APPLICATION TO THE STATE WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL?

>> YES, THAT'S WHAT I MEANT.

>> WONDERFUL. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> THANK YOU. ANYMORE DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> NEXT UP. ITEM NUMBER 7, CONSENT ITEMS.

[7. CONSENT ITEMS All matters under Consent Agenda are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion approving the recommendations listed on the agenda. Unless otherwise indicated, expenditures approved by Council are budgeted items.]

ARE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT ANY COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO PULL FROM THE LIST? IF NOT, THEN COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS? COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY?

>> YOU CAN SAY IT. I MOVE TO APPROVE CONSENT ITEMS 7A THROUGH 7F.

>> WAIT A MINUTE. ISN'T IT JUST A THROUGH D?

>> NO. IT'S A THROUGH F, MADAM MAYOR.

>> I MUST BE ON AN OLD AGENDA SO HOLD ON JUST A SECOND.

I AM GLITCHING. THERE WE GO.

WE HAVE A MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

WE MOVE DOWN TO ITEM NUMBER 8A UNDER ROUTINE ITEMS.

[A. Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2023-02 : An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff amending the Flagstaff City Code, Title 10 Flagstaff Zoning Code, Chapter 10-40 Specific to Zones, Division 10-40.30: Non Transect Zones, Section 10-40.30.050 Industrial Zones, to modify Table 10-40.30.050.B to allow Manufacturing/Processing - Heavy in the Light Industrial Zone with a Conditional Use Permit, providing for the repeal of conflicting ordinances, severability, and establishing an effective date STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Read Ordinance No. 2023-02 by title only for the final time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2023-02 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2023-02]

CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-02, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, AMENDING THE FLAGSTAFF CITY CODE TITLE 10.

FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE CHAPTER 10-40, SPECIFIC TO ZONES, DIVISION 10-40.30, NON-TRANSGENIC ZONES.

DO I NEED TO READ THIS WHOLE THING? SECTION [LAUGHTER] 10-40.30.050 INDUSTRIAL ZONES TO MODIFY TABLE 10-40.30.050.B TO ALLOW

[00:25:07]

MANUFACTURING/PROCESSING HEAVY IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONE WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, SEPARABILITY, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM?

>> I HAVE NOTHING BUT I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS?

>> WHAT'S THE ITEM AGAIN? [LAUGHTER]

>> IT'S 8A.

[LAUGHTER] YES, COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY.

>> MAYOR, COULD YOU READ THAT AGAIN? [LAUGHTER] NO.

KIDDING ASIDE, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS AND ONE OF THE KEY PARTS OF IT IS THAT BEFORE THIS TYPE OF CHANGE CAN BE MADE, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY PLANNING AND ZONING, AND THEN THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THAT.

AN IMPORTANT PART OF THAT THAT WE ESTABLISHED LAST WEEK IS THAT ALL THE NEARBY NEIGHBORS WOULD BE NOTIFIED OF ANY SUCH CHANGE.

CONSIDERING ALL OF THAT, I WILL SUPPORT THIS.

>> THANK YOU FOR MAKING THOSE POINTS COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT. COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSE.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. JUST A QUICK QUESTION.

I WAS LOOKING AT THE MAP THAT WAS PROVIDED IN HERE AND WAS JUST HAVING TROUBLE IDENTIFYING, I ASSUME IT WAS THE LIGHT PURPLE. [OVERLAPPING]

>> LIGHT PURPLE IS THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

>> OKAY.

>> DARK PURPLE IS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AND THERE'S ONLY MAYBE FIVE PARCELS IN TOWN SO MOSTLY THAT ONE CORRIDOR WHERE THE LIGHT PURPLE IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

>> THAT IS NOT MIXED WITH RESIDENTIAL, CORRECT?

>> NO, NOT NORMALLY.

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME.

>> ALL RIGHT. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> I MOVE TO READ ORDINANCE 2023-02 BY TITLE ONLY FOR THE FINAL TIME.

>> SECOND.

>> THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBER SWEET.

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> WE'RE DOWN TO THREE.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> CITY CLERK NOW READS ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-02 BY TITLE ONLY.

>> TERRIFIC. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, AMENDING THE FLAGSTAFF CITY CODE, TITLE 10, FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE, DIVISION 10-40.30, NON-TRANSGENIC ZONES, SECTION 10-40.30.050 INDUSTRIAL ZONES TO MODIFY TABLE 10-40.30.050.B TO ALLOW MANUFACTURING, PROCESSING HEAVY AND THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONE WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES, REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, SEPARABILITY, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> WELL SAID.

>> I MOVE TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2023-02.

>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER SWEET.

>> ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT.

ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED.

ITEM NUMBER 8B,

[B. Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2023-01: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff City Code, Title 10, Flagstaff Zoning Code, Division 10-80.20: Definitions of Specialized terms, phrases, and building functions, Section 10-80.20.040: Definitions “D” to modify the term “duplex”; Providing for penalties, repeal of conflicting ordinances, severability, and establishing an effective date. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Read Ordinance No. 2023-01 by title only for the final time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2023-01 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2023-01]

CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-01, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, AMENDING THE FLAGSTAFF CITY CODE TITLE 10, FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE, DIVISION 10-80.20.

DEFINITIONS OF SPECIALIZED TERMS, PHRASES, AND BUILDING FUNCTIONS, SECTION 10-80.20.040.

DEFINITIONS D TO MODIFY THE TERM DUPLEX, PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES, REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, SEPARABILITY, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

DO WE HAVE ANYTHING FROM STAFF ON THIS?

>> NO. BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE ABLE TO ANSWER. [LAUGHTER] SORRY ABOUT THAT.

>> COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? DO I HAVE A MOTION TO READ ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-01 BY TITLE ONLY FOR THE FINAL TIME?

>> COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSE.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, I MOVE TO READ ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-01 BY TITLE ONLY FOR THE FINAL TIME.

>> THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER SWEET.

[00:30:01]

>> ANY OPPOSED? CITY CLERK READS ORDINANCE.

YOU GET IT. CITY CLERK, WILL YOU READ THE ORDINANCE, PLEASE?

>> AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, AMENDING THE FLAGSTAFF CITY CODE, TITLE 10, FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE DIVISION 10-80.20.

DEFINITIONS OF SPECIALIZED TERMS, PHRASES, AND BUILDING FUNCTIONS, SECTION 10-80.20.040, DEFINITIONS D, TO MODIFY THE TERM DUPLEX, PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES OR APPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, SEPARABILITY, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE?

>> MAYOR, I MOVE TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-01.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSE.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER SWEET.

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

[C. Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2023-03: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff City Code, Title 12, Floodplains, Chapter 12-02, Stormwater Management Utility, by amending Section 12-02-002-0003, Schedule of Stormwater Management Utility Service Charges and Fees; providing for repeal of conflicting ordinances, severability, penalties, authority for clerical corrections, and establishing an effective date STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Read Ordinance No. 2023-03 by title only for the final time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2023-03 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2023-03]

THANK YOU, STAFF.

ITEM 8C, CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-03, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, AMENDING THE FLAGSTAFF CITY CODE, TITLE 12 FLOODPLAINS CHAPTER 12-02, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT UTILITY BY AMENDING SECTION 12-02-002-003, SCHEDULE OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT UTILITY SERVICE CHARGES AND FEES.

PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, SEPARABILITY, PENALTIES, AUTHORITY FOR CLERICAL CORRECTIONS, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> [BACKGROUND].

>> MY APOLOGIES.

BECAUSE OF NOTICING ISSUE, WE ARE GOING TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IF THERE IS ANY COMMENT OR IF COUNCIL MEMBERS WANT TO ASK ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, THIS MAY BE FRESH IN EVERYONE'S MINDS BECAUSE WE'VE DISCUSSED IT SO MANY TIMES.

DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING THAT YOU WANTED TO ADD?

>> GOOD EVENING. NO, WE ARE JUST HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT COME UP OR COMMENTS.

HAPPY TO TAKE THOSE, BUT NO NEW PRESENTATION OR NEW MATERIAL. THANK YOU.

>>THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY.

>> JUST TO CLARIFY, WE HAVE THREE SCENARIOS LAST TIME AND WHAT WE VOTED ON WAS OPTION 3, WHAT WE'RE CALLING 3B AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON TONIGHT.

>> CORRECT.

>> DO I HAVE A MOTION TO READ ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-03 BY TITLE ONLY? I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> FIRST IF YOU COULD CALL TO THE PUBLIC TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER COMMENTS AND THEN CLOSE. THANK YOU.

>> THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS THAT I CAN SEE SO I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH CITY ATTORNEY.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO READ THE ORDINANCE?

>> MAYOR, I'M HAPPY TO MOVE THE ADOPTION ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-03.

>> THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> JUST ONE CLARIFICATION.

I THINK THE MOTION WAS TO ADOPT.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO READ FIRST?

>> SURE.

>> [LAUGHTER] SO MOVED UP.

>> DID I SAY ADOPT OR DID YOU SAY ADOPT?

>> I SAID ADOPT.

>> THANKS FOR CATCHING THAT.

>> I'M HAPPY TO MOVE THAT WE READ THE ORDINANCE FIRST, 2023-03.

>> THANK YOU AND COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSE, I BELIEVED HAD A SECOND.

>> I WAS ACTUALLY JUST NOTING THAT CITY ATTORNEY HAD A COMMENT.

I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY BEAT ME.

>> CAN I SECOND THE MOTION TO READ THE ORDINANCE FOR THE FINAL TIME.

>> THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. CITY CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE READ THE ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY FOR THE FINAL TIME?

>> AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, AMENDING THE FLAGSTAFF CITY CODE, TITLE 12 FLOODPLAINS CHAPTER 12-02, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT UTILITY BY AMENDING SECTION 12-02-002-003, SCHEDULE OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT UTILITY SERVICE CHARGES AND FEES.

[00:35:02]

PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, SEPARABILITY, PENALTIES, AUTHORITY FOR CLERICAL CORRECTIONS, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE?

>> I TRIED TO SAVE THE CITY CLERK AND TROUBLE OF READING THAT, BUT I WOULD INDEED LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE ADOPT RESOLUTION 2023-03.

>> YOU MEAN ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-03?

>> I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-03.

>> THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND.

>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSED? WE HAVE ADOPTED THE ORDINANCE. THANK YOU.

>> ON DOWN TO ITEM NUMBER 9, PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS.

[A. Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2023-04: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, authorizing the exchange of property of substantially equal value with the Arizona Board of Regents; providing for delegation of authority, repeal of conflicting ordinances, and establishing an effective date Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2023-05: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, approving the First Amendment to an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Arizona Board of Regents related to Consolidation of University Campus and Road Projects. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: At the February 21, 2023 Council Meeting: 1) Read Ordinance No. 2023-04 by title only for the first time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2023-04 by title only (if approved above) At the March 7, 2023 Council Meeting: 1) Read Ordinance No. 2023-04 by title only for the final time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2023-04 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2023-04 4) Read Resolution No. 2023-05 by title only 5) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2022-05 by title only (if approved above) 6) Adopt Resolution No. 2023-05]

CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 2024-04 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, AUTHORIZING THE EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY OF SUBSTANTIALLY EQUAL VALUE WITH THE ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS, PROVIDING FOR DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY, REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

ALONG WITH THAT, WE HAVE CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 2023-05, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO AN INTER-GOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS RELATED TO CONSOLIDATION OF UNIVERSITY CAMPUS AND ROAD PROJECTS? YES.

>> MAYOR, YOU SAID ORDINANCE 2024-04.

IT'S ACTUALLY 2023-04.

>> THANKS FOR KEEPING IT REAL COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY.

2023-04 AND 05. STAFF, DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR US?

>> I DO. A VERY SHORT ONE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

BRYCE DODI, THE REAL ESTATE MANAGER.

THIS ITEM IS AN IGA AMENDMENT WITH AN AU ALONG WITH AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A PROPERTY EXCHANGE.

IT HAS FOUR THINGS.

HERE'S WHERE WE'RE PLAYING IN THE WORLD.

STARS ON THE MAP, MOSTLY OFF MILTON AND A LITTLE BIT BEHIND ON THE EAST SIDE OF NAU CAMPUS.

FIRST THING IT DOES IS WE NEEDED TO GET THE BIOLA UNIVERSITY PROJECT GOING.

A LOT OF THAT HAPPENS ON UNIVERSITY, ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE, WHICH HAPPEN TO BE OWNED BY NAU.

WE WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE BEST SOLUTION TO HOW WE WANT TO DO OUR PUBLIC OR A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WHILE STILL WHILE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THEIR OWNERSHIP IS.

THROUGH THE NEGOTIATIONS WE CAME OUT WITH THE BEST SOLUTION AS WELL, THE PORTION OF THE UNIVERSITY THAT'S ACTUALLY SERVING THE PUBLIC, WHICH IS THE TARGET SHOPPING CENTER AND GREEN TREE AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.

THAT'S NOT DIRECTLY IN LINE WITH NAU SHOULD PROBABLY GO TO THE CITY TO MAINTAIN.

THAT'S THE DEAL THAT THIS PROPERTY TRANSACTION DOES.

ULTIMATELY FOR US TO DO OUR BIOLA UNIVERSITY IMPROVEMENTS, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THAT PORTION OF UNIVERSITY.

IN EXCHANGE, LAST YEAR WE ABANDONED A PORTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OFF OF HOSKYNS AVENUE.

THAT'S WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT HERE.

WE'RE GOING TO EXCHANGE THAT, ABANDON RIGHT AWAY TO NAU, WHICH IS THIS PORTION RIGHT HERE.

HERE IS THE SHINY NEW PIECE OF ROAD THAT WILL COME INTO THE CITIES MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES.

ALONG WITH THIS, THE NEW RIGHT-OF-WAY, THESE RED LINES ON THE TOP, THOSE ARE NEW DRAINAGE EASEMENTS THAT WILL BECOME PART OF THE CITY'S DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE.

LET'S SEE. JUST TO REITERATE WHERE IT'S GOING TO STOP MAINTENANCE IS RIGHT WHERE IT INTERSECTS WITH THE TWO PARCELS THAT BECOMING NAU PROPERTY.

THE OTHER CONSIDERATION IS THAT THE NAU WILL STILL MAINTAIN THIS FOR SNOW PLOWING OPERATIONS, BUT ALL THE OTHER ROAD MAINTENANCE WILL BE TAKEN ON BY THE CITY.

THAT'S THE MAIN PART OF WHAT THIS ACCOMPLISHES.

HERE'S THE QUICK EXCHANGE VALUES AND WE TRIED TO GET AS CLOSE AS WE COULD, COULDN'T GET THERE INITIALLY.

THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF A DEBT THAT THE CITY HAS OR A DEBIT THAT THE CITY HAS AGAINST NAU, WHICH IS WHY WE MEMORIALIZE THIS IN THIS IGA SO THAT WE CAN HAVE OTHER THINGS WHERE THE CITY AND THE COLLEGE WORK TOGETHER SO THAT WE CAN FIND GOOD SOLUTIONS TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN EASILY.

[00:40:02]

PART OF THAT IS THE FOURTH THING THAT'S HAPPENING ON THIS, WHICH IS THE EXPANSION OF LONE TREE.

WE'D EXPECT IF THERE IS A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE EXCHANGE HERE, WE'LL WANT TO MAKE IT UP ON ANY OF THE VALUES THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO EXCHANGE TO WIDEN LONE TREE IN THE FUTURE.

THAT'S THE PRIMARY THING IT DOES.

THE SECOND THING IT DOES IS NAU BOUGHT THIS PARCEL, WHICH WAS THE OLD CHINESE RESTAURANT, AND THEY BOUGHT IT FROM A COMPANY THAT WANTED TO BUILD A CVS AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE CVS WAS REQUIRED TO PUT A TURN LANE ON MILTON.

THE MASTER PLAN FOR NAU, THEY HAVEN'T REALLY IDENTIFIED WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THAT.

THAT WAS TIED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CVS.

THE AMENDMENT, THE IJ IS ALSO THROWING THAT IN THERE TO CLEAN THAT UP, TO SAY, YOU'RE NOT ON THE HOOK TO BUILD A CVS OR TO BUILD A TURN LANE ON MILTON.

THAT'S THE THIRD THING.

THEN THE FOURTH WAS JUST TO AGREE TO WORK TOWARDS THE EXPANSION OF LONE TREE.

THAT'S WHAT THIS ITEM DOES.

I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER MATTHEWS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY.

ON THAT LAST PARCEL, THE ABANDONED RESTAURANT AND THAT OTHER PROPERTY, IS THAT PART OF THE EXCHANGE TO US? ARE WE TAKING THAT OVER OR ARE WE JUST ELIMINATING THEIR NEED TO BUILD A CVS?

>> WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY OWNERSHIP OF IT.

THAT PROPERTY IS BURDENED BY A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY.

WE'RE CANCELING THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SO THAT THEY'RE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO BUILD THE ENTITLEMENTS OR TO BUILD THE TURNING LANE AS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATED.

>> IF I CAN FOLLOW UP ON THAT WHEN THEY COME FORWARD OR WHEN WE ENTER INTO ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THAT PARCEL, THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE A TURN LANE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE USE IS GOING TO BE.

>> YES, GETTING OUT OF MY DEPTH REALLY QUICKLY I MIGHT NEED IF PLANNING IS HERE TO REITERATE BECAUSE I KNOW IN TERMS OF WHO'S SUBJECT TO THE CITY'S ZONING, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT INTERPLAYS WITH IT BEING THE NAU.

>> I GUESS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS JUST AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OR A CONFIRMATION THAT THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION ONCE NAU KNOWS WHAT THEY WANT TO GO INTO THAT.

IF THEY USE MERITS A TURN LANE, THAT'S GOING TO BE PART OF THE DISCUSSION.

>> THAT'S MY EXPECTATION.

THIS IS THE FIRST READ OF THIS.

LET ME CLARIFY WITH DURING THE SECOND READ.

>> DAN MUST HAVE BEEN LISTENING IN HIS OFFICE.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, I'M DAN FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.

I HEARD PART OF THE QUESTION.

I THINK IT WAS ABOUT LAND USE AND THE UNIVERSITY.

>> YES. AS PART OF THIS IGA, WE ARE RELEASING NAU FROM THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT HAD THEM BUILDING A TURN LANE AS PART OF A CVS.

I GUESS I'M ASKING FOR CONFIRMATION THAT WHEN NAU DECIDES WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THAT PARCEL, THAT WE'LL BE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS AGAIN AND WILL HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT REFLECTS WHAT WE DEEM NECESSARY IN TERMS OF WHATEVER THAT USE IS GOING TO BE.

>> I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS GOING ON AT THE TIME REGARDING THAT TURN LANE, BUT IF IT'S ANY PROPERTY THAT THEY OWN THE PROPERTY, THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO FOLLOW CITY ZONING AS MY UNDERSTANDING.

THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION.

I'M NOT 100% SURE IF DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PROPERTY WOULD INCLUDE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

I'D HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THIS ONE A LITTLE MORE.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER MATTHEWS.

>> AT ONE POINT, THERE WAS TALK ABOUT A ROAD AND AN EXTENSION OF ROUTE 66 FROM THE WEST GOING ACROSS MILTON AND GOING INTO THE NAU CAMPUS AT THAT POINT, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S STILL VIABLE, BUT THAT WAS AN ACTIVE DISCUSSION THAT WAS HAD A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.

[00:45:02]

>> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AT WHERE ROUTE 66 AND MILTON INTERSECT?

>> YES. THIS WOULD BE THE PROPERTY THAT WAS FORMERLY A CHINESE RESTAURANT.

>> YEAH, THERE WAS A LOT GOING ON AT THE TIME.

I THINK THAT LAST IGA WAS EXECUTED, NAU WAS LOOKING AT DOING AN ENTRANCE THERE? THAT'S CORRECT.

I BELIEVE THEY ACTUALLY USED A TRANSIT GRANT TO DO SOME PLANNING.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY'VE ABANDONED THAT IDEA FOR NOW. IT COULD COME BACK.

BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS DURING THAT WHOLE TIME THAT WE CAME UP WITH THIS AGREEMENT AND THE TURN LANE AND HOW WE WERE GOING TO MANAGE THAT IMPROVEMENT AT THAT INTERSECTION.

BUT FOR NOW, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S HAPPENING.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER MATTHEWS.

>> IT ISN'T A DOCUMENTARY THAT'S KNOWN AS ARIZONA.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR. DAN OR MAYBE THIS IS FOR STERLING, IF I UNDERSTAND YOU RIGHT.

WHEN NAU WAS IN A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T GOING TO BUILD OR HAVE A CVS PHARMACY BUILT THERE, THEN THAT'S WHEN WE GOT INVOLVED.

BUT BECAUSE NAU OWNS THE PROPERTY IF THEY DO SOMETHING JUST FOR THE UNIVERSITY, BECAUSE THEY'RE CARVED OUT OF THE CITY.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME TO US FOR ANY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS OR ROADWAY.

>> YEAH. I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT HOW IT ALL HAPPEN.

I BELIEVE WHAT HAPPENED WAS WE HAVE A SITE PLAN FOR CVS.

IT WAS PRIVATELY OWNED AND THEN IT WAS THAT PROJECT DIDN'T HAPPEN AND I BELIEVE ANY YOU PURCHASED IT AFTER THAT HAPPENED. IT'S COMING BACK TO ME.

IT WAS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT CVS PROJECT, BUT YEAH, WE ENTERED IT IN SIJ BECAUSE I THINK IT IMPACTED ANY PROPERTY AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE TURN LANE AND ALL THAT WAS HAPPENING.

BUT SINCE THAT PROJECT WENT AWAY, I BELIEVE NAU THEN BOUGHT THE RESTAURANT. WHAT WAS THERE.

>> THAT CLARIFIES WHAT WE WERE GETTING AT. [OVERLAPPING]

>> YES. I HAD TO THINK FOR A SECOND THERE.

FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, YOU'RE CORRECT AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE ZONING.

THE CVS PROJECT, IT WAS PRIVATELY OWNED AT THAT TIME?

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? YES.

FOR THIS MEETING, WE'RE JUST READING ORDINANCE-04 AND THEN WE'RE ADOPTING BOTH AT THE NEXT MEETING?

>> CORRECT.

>> CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO READ THE ORDINANCE BY TITLE FOR THE FIRST TIME?

>> I MOVE TO READ ORDINANCE 2023-04 BY TITLE ONLY FOR THE FIRST TIME.

>> THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSE, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? CITY CLERK, TAKE IT AWAY.

>> AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, AUTHORIZING THE EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY OF SUBSTANTIALLY EQUAL VALUE WITH THE ARIZONA BOARD OF REGIONS, PROVIDING FOR DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY, REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, SEPARABILITY, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> THANK YOU. I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL WE HAVE FOR THAT ITEM.

ITEM 10, DISCUSSION ITEMS.

[A. Presentation on Civil Rights and Municipal Equality Index Obtain feedback and input from Council on the Flagstaff Nondiscrimination Ordinance and the 2022 Municipal Equality Index issued by the Human Rights Campaign.]

WE HAVE A PRESENTATION ON CIVIL RIGHTS AND MUNICIPAL EQUALITY INDEX AND WE HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION, I KNOW.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR DAGGETT, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME THIS AFTERNOON.

THIS WAS ORIGINALLY GOING TO BE ON LAST WEEK'S AGENDA, BUT WITH THE WEATHER AND CHANGE, IT WAS MOVED TO TODAY.

LET'S OPEN THIS UP HERE.

I ALSO GAVE THE SAME PRESENTATION LAST [NOISE] WEEK TO THE COMMISSION ON DIVERSITY AWARENESS.

COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSE YOU MAY HAVE HEARD SOME OF THIS BEFORE, BUT WE'LL GO AHEAD AND DO IT AGAIN.

THIS IS THE SECOND YEAR THAT I'VE GOTTEN TO GIVE THIS PRESENTATION.

I GAVE ONE LAST YEAR AS WELL. IT WAS A BIT EARLIER IN THE YEAR.

I THINK IT WAS IN EARLY JANUARY, BUT IT'LL COVER THE SAME TOPICS AS LAST YEAR.

THERE'LL BE TWO MAIN PARTS OF THIS PRESENTATION.

THE FIRST ONE AFTER LACHISH PRESENTATION AND FROM HEARING FROM SOME OF YOU LAST YEAR, I DECIDED IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO BEGIN WITH JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW OF WHAT OUR ORDINANCE ACTUALLY SAYS,

[00:50:02]

BECAUSE IT'S PROBABLY NOT A SECTION OF CITY CODE THAT I IMAGINE EVERYONE IS TUNED IN TO AND KNOWS LIKE THE BACK OF THEIR HAND.

I'M GOING TO GO OVER SOME OF THE PROVISIONS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR ORDINANCE.

I'M GOING TO GO OVER WHAT OUR COMPLAINT PROCESS LOOKS LIKE, IF SOMEONE BRINGS FORWARD A COMPLAINT TO THE CITY.

I'LL GO OVER SOME OF OUR OUTREACH, AND THEN I'LL ALSO GO OVER AN AREA WE'LL ALL SEEK DIRECTION ON A POSSIBLE CHANGE TO THE ORDINANCE THAT CITY STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED.

AFTER THAT, WE'LL MOVE INTO PART 2 OF THE PRESENTATION, WHICH IS ON THE MUNICIPAL EQUALITY INDEX.

IT'S A DOCUMENT PUT OUT ONCE A YEAR BY THE HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN.

LIKE I SAID, PART A AND PART B OF THE PRESENTATION.

OUR CIVIL RIGHTS ORDINANCE APPLIES TO EMPLOYERS, LABOR ORGANIZATIONS, AND PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS.

THINK OF THAT LAST ONE AS ANYWHERE THAT YOU AS A CITIZEN CAN GO AND EXPECT SERVICES, SO A RESTAURANT OR HOTEL, ANYWHERE THAT IS GENERALLY OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.

IT INCLUDES ENTERTAINMENT VENUES, RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS, ALL THOSE THINGS, RETAIL.

IT'S ANOTHER CATEGORY, BUT IT'S ANYWHERE THAT YOU CAN GO AND EXPECT SERVICES.

I'LL NOTE ON THIS SLIDE, WHAT IS NOT PRESENT IS HOUSING, AND I'LL COME BACK TO THAT IN A MOMENT, BUT OUR ORDINANCE DOES NOT COVER HOUSING.

AGAIN, I'LL COME BACK TO THE DETAILS OF WHY THAT IS SHORTLY HERE IN A MOMENT OR IN THE SECOND PART OF THE PRESENTATION ON THE MUNICIPAL EQUALITY INDEX BECAUSE THERE'S AN ITEM THAT TOUCHES THAT.

THERE ARE SOME BUSINESSES THAT ARE EXEMPT FROM OUR ORDINANCE EXPLICITLY.

IT INCLUDES BUSINESSES THAT ARE ON OR NEAR NATIVE AMERICAN RESERVATIONS AND OPERATE AS NATIVE AMERICAN BUSINESS.

THEY ARE ALLOWED TO GIVE PRIORITY HIRING TO MEMBERS OF THEIR TRIBES.

IT ALSO DOESN'T INCLUDE PRIVATE CLUBS.

FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS, JUST LIKE WITH OUR MINIMUM WAGE ORDINANCES ARE ALSO EXEMPT.

THAT WOULD INCLUDE, NAU AND COCONINO COMMUNITY COLLEGE.

THERE'S AN EXPLICIT EXEMPTION FOR ANYONE THAT IS UNRULY IN PUBLIC.

FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU GO TO A RESTAURANT AND YOU ATTEMPT TO MAKE A CLAIM THAT YOU WERE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST IN ONE OF OUR PROTECTED CLASSES, AND WE LEARNED THAT YOU WERE ACTUALLY KICKED OUT OR REFUSED SERVICE BECAUSE YOU BERATED A STAFF MEMBER OR OTHERWISE UNRULY, YOU'RE NOT PROTECTED IN THAT CASE.

RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS ARE ALSO EXEMPT, OUR CHURCHES AND RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES.

THERE'S AN EXEMPTION THAT ALLOWS FOR SENIOR AND STUDENT DISCOUNTS AT RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS.

I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY EXISTING IN OUR CITY, BUT IF THERE WAS A ONE-GENDER GYM THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED, THEN UNIFORM AND DRESS CODES BASED ON GENDER ARE STILL ALLOWED AT BUSINESSES WHERE THAT'S NECESSARY.

THE PROTECTED CLASSES COVERED BY OUR ORDINANCE INCLUDES MOST OF THE SAME ONES YOU'LL SEE IN A STATE OR FEDERAL CATEGORY, RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, AGE, DISABILITY, VETERAN STATUS, NATIONAL ORIGIN.

IT ALSO INCLUDES THREE ADDITIONAL ONES THAT ARE NOT IN STATE OR FEDERAL RULES, AND THAT'S SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY AND GENDER EXPRESSION.

I GOT A QUESTION ON THIS LAST WEEK.

GENDER IDENTITY AND EXPRESSION ARE CALLED OUT SEPARATELY HERE.

I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD SEE THOSE BEING VERY SIMILAR IN A LEGAL CONTEXT, BUT WE DO HAVE A SEPARATE DEFINITIONS FOR BOTH OF THOSE AND CALL THEM OUT SEPARATELY IN OUR ORDINANCE.

WHEN I GET A COMPLAINT, IF YOU THINK ABOUT THIS AS BEING READ FROM LEFT TO RIGHT, I KNOW THERE AREN'T ARROWS THERE, BUT THE BLUE ONES ARE CONTINUED ACTIONS THE RED ONES ARE PERIODS IN WHICH A CASE CAN BE DISMISSED.

A GREEN, THAT'S A FAVORABLE OUTCOME WHERE EVERYONE WALKS AWAY WITH AN AGREEMENT.

THEN THE YELLOW IS JUST MISCELLANEOUS COLOR THERE FOR WHAT CAN HAPPEN IF WE GET TO THE END OF THE PROCESS.

BUT A COMPLAINT IS FILED, FROM THE POINT THAT I RECEIVE A COMPLAINT, I HAVE 45 DAYS TO DO A COUPLE OF THINGS, I REACH OUT TO THE BUSINESS OR THE INDIVIDUAL THE COMPLAINT WAS MADE AGAINST AND I SOLICIT A RESPONSE FROM THEM SO THAT THEY CAN GIVE THEIR SIDE OF THE STORY.

THEY HAVE 20 DAYS FROM WHEN I NOTIFY THEM AND ASK FOR THEIR RESPONSE TO SEND ONE TO ME.

THEN IN THAT 45 DAY PERIOD, I ALSO HAVE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION ON WHETHER THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED TIMELY, MEANING THAT IT WAS FILED WITHIN OUR 90 DAY WINDOW, WERE THE RIGHT JURISDICTION, WERE THE RIGHT PEOPLE THAT THE COMPLAINT SHOULD GO TO, AND THAT THE CONTENT OF THE COMPLAINT IS JUST.

MEANING THAT IF THE ALLEGATION WERE TRUE, THAT IT WOULD CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF OUR ORDINANCE.

IF ALL THREE OF THOSE BOXES ARE CHECKED, WE GO TO A MEDIATION PERIOD.

THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE CITY, BY ORDINANCE ACTUALLY, CITY STAFF IS NOT ALLOWED TO CONDUCT THE MEDIATION THERE.

BUT WE GET THE PERSON WHO MADE THE COMPLAINT TOGETHER WITH THE RESPONDENT, AND SEE IF WE CAN WORK OUT AN AGREEMENT.

UNLIKE WITH MINIMUM WAGE TYPES OF COMPLAINTS, IT'S SOMETIMES HARD TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE RIGHT RESOLUTION IS.

THAT'S WHERE WE GO TO A MEDIATION PERIOD TO SEE IF WE CAN READ SOMETHING THROUGH A MORE FLUID PROCESS.

[00:55:04]

IF ANY OF THOSE THREE BOXES ARE NOT CHECKED, OR IF IT'S NOT FILED TIMELY, IF IT'S NOT THE RIGHT JURISDICTION OR IF THE COMPLAINT WOULDN'T CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION, THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.

THAT'S WHERE YOU SEE THE FIRST FORK.

AFTER MEDIATION, WE HOPE FOR AN AGREEMENT, BUT IF MEDIATION FAILS FOR LACK OF A BETTER SENSE, WE GO DO AN INVESTIGATION AND THAT CAN BE CONDUCTED IN THE CITY.

WE TAKE STATEMENTS, WE DIVE DEEPER, LOOK AT THE RECORDS AND THAT THING AND IF WE DETERMINE THAT THERE IS SOMETHING HERE, WE GO THROUGH A CITY COURT PROCESS AND IF NOT, THAT'S THE OTHER POINT THAT THE CASE CAN BE DISMISSED.

WELL NOTE THAT IN MY TIME AT THE CITY AND AS FAR BACK BECAUSE I'VE SEEN RECORDS FOR, I'VE NEVER SEEN A COMPLAINT GET TO THAT POINT.

I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW THAT WOULD PLAY OUT JUST BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE UNCHARTED WATERS.

WE HAVE A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON OUR ORDINANCE HERE, AND THIS IS WHERE I HAVE THE RECOMMENDATION.

WE CAN PAUSE FOR IF WE'D LIKE.

OUR ORDINANCE SAYS THAT THE COMPLAINTS HAVE TO BE FILED WITHIN 90 DAYS OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION.

THERE'S NO EXTENSION PERMITTED UNDER OUR ORDINANCE FOR ANY REASON.

IF THERE'S A PERIOD OF RECURRING VIOLATIONS, SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE'S A CASE WHERE SOMEONE [NOISE] IS REPEATEDLY DISCRIMINATED AGAINST AT WORK OR A RESTAURANT OR SOMEWHERE ELSE, AND IT CONTINUES ON FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, AND THEN THEY DECIDE TO FILE A COMPLAINT, ONLY THE INSTANCES THAT IT HAPPENED WITHIN 90 DAYS ARE CONSIDERED VALID.

IF IT BEGAN A YEAR AGO, WE CAN ONLY LOOK AT THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN THE LAST THREE MONTHS.

I'LL NOTE THAT BOTH THE FEDERAL RULES AND THE STATE RULES ALLOW FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS FOR THESE TYPES OF COMPLAINTS.

THE FEDERAL RULES ACTUALLY ALLOW AN EXTENSION UP TO 300 DAYS IF THAT SAME TYPE OF COMPLAINT CAN ALSO BE HANDLED BY A STATE OR LOCAL ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW.

I DON'T WANT TO SPECULATE TOO MUCH, BUT I BELIEVE THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT THEY WANT TO LET THAT FIRST PROCESS PLAY OUT AND IF IT DOESN'T, THEN YOU CAN STILL FILE IT WITH THEM AS A SECONDARY OPTION.

BASED ON THESE AND BASED ON THE NATURE OF COMPLAINTS WE'VE SEEN TALKING TO PEOPLE THAT HAVE FILED THESE THINGS, I HAVE NO ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY, BUT A RECOMMENDATION IF YOU'RE PALPABLE TO IT, WE CAN BRING THEM BACK IN THE FUTURE TO INCREASE OUR ORDINANCE TO MATCH THOSE AT 180 DAYS.

THIS IS THE THING WHERE WHEN A PERSON FILES A COMPLAINT LIKE THIS, I'LL NOTE THAT IT'S OFTEN A VERY EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE.

THEY'VE GONE THROUGH AN INSTANCE THAT HAS LEFT THEM DEEPLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THINGS AND THAT CAN TAKE AWHILE FOR A PERSON TO RECONCILE WITH THAT AND DECIDE THAT THEY WANT TO PURSUE IT.

ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY DAYS IS NOT FAR ENOUGH THAT WE'LL BE ON A WILD GOOSE CHASE LOOKING FOR CORROBORATING EVIDENCE OR THINGS LIKE THAT, IT'S STILL FRESH ENOUGH IN PEOPLE'S MINDS WHERE WE CAN REALLY DETERMINE WHETHER THINGS ACTUALLY HAPPENED AND WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED, BUT IT'S NOT TOO SHORT THAT WE'RE GOING TO LOSE A LOT OF PEOPLE FOR THAT REASON.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THAT AT THIS POINT, I CAN PAUSE AND THAT CAN HAPPEN OR I CAN CONTINUE, WE CAN GO BACK TO THAT AT THE END.

IT'S REALLY, I THINK, UP TO YOU THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH THAT, BUT THAT'S AN OFFICIAL RECOMMENDATION I'D LIKE TO BRING TO COUNCIL.

>> ARE YOU AMENABLE TO STAFF BRINGING THAT BACK AS A RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE? LET IT BE NOTED EVERYONE IS NODDING THEIR HEAD AFFIRMATIVELY OR GIVING THE THUMBS UP, SO CONTINUE.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. WE WILL LOOK AT PUTTING THAT ON A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM AS AN ORDINANCE.

WITH THAT, I'LL MOVE ON TO THE SECOND PART, WHICH IS THE MUNICIPAL EQUALITY INDEX.

THIS IS THE PART THAT IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT I GAVE LAST YEAR.

I'LL EXPLAIN ANY DIFFERENCES WHERE THERE ARE, BUT SOME OF THE PARTS WILL BE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS WHAT I GAVE A YEAR AGO.

THE MUNICIPAL EQUALITY INDEX IS AN EVALUATION PUT OUT EVERY YEAR BY THE HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN AND IT'S PUBLISHED NEAR THE END OF THE YEAR, USUALLY IN LATE NOVEMBER, EARLY DECEMBER, THAT EVALUATES THE INCLUSIVITY OF LAWS, POLICIES, AND SERVICES PROVIDED BY CITIES ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

IT LOOKS AT THOSE TYPES OF THINGS BASED ON BOTH SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY.

I'LL NOTE HERE, THAT IT DOES NOT HAVE EXPRESSION, WHICH WE HAVE IN OUR ORDINANCE, BUT I THINK THAT GENDER EXPRESSION WOULD FALL UNDER GENDER IDENTITY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THEIR EVALUATION.

JUST LIKE LAST YEAR, THEY LOOKED AT 506 CITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY.

ELEVEN OF THOSE CITIES ARE IN ARIZONA.

WE HAD A PERIOD IN MIDDLE OF SUMMER WHERE THEY GAVE US A DRAFT SCORECARD AND WE WERE ABLE TO SUBMIT A CASE FOR WHERE WE THOUGHT WE SHOULD GET MORE POINTS IN THEIR SCORECARD AND WE HAD A BACK-AND-FORTH THAT I BELIEVE IT WAS IN JULY OF LAST YEAR.

[01:00:02]

WE EXPECT THAT TO HAPPEN AGAIN THIS YEAR.

YOU CAN RECEIVE A MAXIMUM OF 100 POINTS, THAT'S THE HIGHEST SCORE YOU CAN GET.

ADDITIONAL TO THEIR STANDARD 100 POINTS, THERE ARE 22 FLEX POINTS.

WHEN YOU ADD THOSE TOGETHER, THAT'S YOUR SCORE, BUT YOU CAN'T GO ABOVE 100, SO REALLY YOU CAN GET 122 POINTS, BUT THEY WON'T SCORE HIGHER THAN 100, THAT'S THE WAY IT GOES THERE.

THERE'S FIVE CATEGORIES THAT THEY SCORE CITIES ON.

THE FIRST ONE IS THEIR NON-DISCRIMINATION LAWS, THAT WOULD BE LOOKING AT TITLE 14 OF OUR CITY CODE.

THEY LOOK AT THE MUNICIPALITY AS AN EMPLOYER, SO THAT LOOKS AT OUR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES, SOME OF THE THINGS WE PROVIDE TO OUR CITY STAFF.

MUNICIPAL SERVICES, THESE ARE THE PROGRAMS THAT THE CITY RUNS FOR THE COMMUNITY.

LAW ENFORCEMENT, THAT'S A REALLY SIMPLE CATEGORY, THERE'S ONLY TWO ITEMS IN IT.

THEN LEADERSHIP ON LGBTQ EQUALITY.

THAT'S THE MOST SUBJECTIVE AREA AND THAT'S WHERE THEY LOOK AT MEMBERS OF OUR COMMISSIONS IN CITY COUNCIL AS WELL AS SOME OF OUR HIGHER-UPS IN THE CITY JUST TO SEE THEIR ACTIVITIES AND REPRESENTATION.

LIKE LAST YEAR, I COME BACK TO YOU WITH A SCORE OF 88 OVER 100.

WE GOT THERE THROUGH DIFFERENT MEANS, A DIFFERENT WAY, BUT WE GOT TO THE SAME PLACE.

THERE ARE SOME AREAS WE GAINED POINTS AND SOME AREAS WE LOST POINTS AND I'LL GO OVER EACH OF THOSE HERE GOING FORWARD, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE BREAKDOWN OF HOW WE SCORED IN EACH OF THOSE FIVE CATEGORIES, AS WELL AS A COLUMN SHOWING WHERE THE CHANGE HAPPENED BROADLY SPEAKING.

I BELIEVE LAST YEAR WE ALSO HAD AN 81 PLUS 7, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT REALLY MATTERS A WHOLE LOT.

BEFORE I GET INTO THE MEAT OF WHERE WE LOST POINTS AND WHERE WE GAINED POINTS OR WHAT NOT, I WANT TO GIVE A QUICK CAVEAT AND THAT'S THAT THIS SCORECARD IS A HANDY TOOL, BUT IT IS JUST THAT, IT IS A TOOL, THERE MAY BE AREAS IN THE SCORECARD WHERE WE LOSE POINTS BECAUSE WE DON'T SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE'RE FAILING OUR CITIZENS OR WE'RE FAILING TO PROVIDE A NECESSARY SERVICE.

THAT IS A SUBJECTIVE AREA AND I'LL ATTEMPT TO NOT WEIGH MY PERSONAL OPINION TOO MUCH IN THOSE AREAS, BUT JUST BECAUSE YOU SEE A ZERO SOMEWHERE, OR YOU SEE A SCORE LOWER THAN IT COULD POSSIBLY BE, I WOULDN'T REACT TO THAT RIGHT AWAY SAYING, OH MY GOODNESS, WE'RE TOTALLY FAILING ON THIS CATEGORY.

IT'S ONE WAY TO VIEW SOMETHING, BUT IT'S A VERY SUBJECTIVE FIELD AND CREATING AN OBJECTIVE SCORE FROM SOMETHING SO SUBJECTIVE.

I THINK THIS SHOULD BE TAKEN WITH A GRAIN OF SALT, THAT'S MY DISCLAIMER.

THIS IS A BUSIER SLIDE, BUT IT'S JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW OF ALL OF THE AREAS THEY EVALUATED THAT WE DID NOT GET ALL OF THE POSSIBLE POINTS.

SOME OF THESE AREAS WE RECEIVED ZERO POINTS, SOME OF THEM WE RECEIVED PART OF THE POINTS OUT OF HOWEVER MANY THEY COULD HAVE GIVEN, BUT THESE ARE THE AREAS THAT WE DID NOT RECEIVE A PERFECT SCORE.

OUR HOUSING IN THE NON-DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE WHICH I MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO, ARE ALL GENDER FACILITIES, THAT'S ACTUALLY ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE GAINED POINTS ON FROM LAST YEAR, CONVERSION THERAPY, TRANSGENDER-INCLUSIVE HEALTHCARE BENEFITS.

I HAVE SOME NOTES ON THAT ONE SPECIFICALLY, THE WAY OUR NON-DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE IS ENFORCED AND I'LL NOTE THAT IF YOU SEE NDO GOING FORWARD, THAT'S WHAT THAT MEANS, IS REFERRING TO ORDINANCE.

YOUTH BULLYING PREVENTION POLICY, SERVICES TO UNHOUSED LGBTQ PERSONS, SERVICES TO LGBTQ+ OLDER ADULTS, SERVICES TO THE TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY, ALL THREE OF THOSE ARE VERY SIMILAR IN THE WAY THEY EVALUATED US.

REPORTING OUR 2020 HATE CRIME DATA TO THE FBI, THAT'S A NEW ITEM THIS YEAR AND I'LL EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHY THAT'S ON THERE WHEN WE GET TO IT.

LEADERSHIP'S PRO-QUALITY POLICY EFFORTS AND THE LAST ONE IS TESTING THE LIMITS OF RESTRICTIVE STATE LAWS.

THE FIRST ONE HERE IS HOUSING IN A NON-DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE.

IF YOU RECALL THAT WE GOT AN 88 OUT OF 222, THAT REALLY MEANS THAT THERE WAS 34 POINTS AVAILABLE THAT WE DIDN'T GET POINTS ON.

THIS WAS 10 OF THOSE 34, IT'S A HUGE ITEM ON THEIR SCORECARD.

AS I MENTIONED, OUR NDO COVERS PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, BUT NOT HOUSING.

THERE WERE THREE CITIES IN ARIZONA THAT DID RECEIVE THESE POINTS, IT WAS TUCSON, TEMPE, AND PHOENIX.

THE REASON THAT THOSE CITIES AND ONLY THOSE CITIES RECEIVED POINTS FOR THIS, IS THAT THERE IS A STATE PREEMPTION FROM ADDING HOUSING TO NON-DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE OR PASSING OTHER TYPES OF PROTECTIONS AROUND HOUSING.

THE STATE LAW ALLOWED, THAT'S PAST TENSE, ALLOWED, CITIES WITH A POPULATION OVER 350,000 PEOPLE TO ADOPT A FAIR HOUSING ORDINANCE, BUT IT HAD TO BE ADOPTED BEFORE JANUARY 1, 1995, SO THAT'S PRETTY FAR IN THE PAST.

WE NEEDED THOSE REQUIREMENTS WERE UNDER 350,000 AND THE 2023 IS FAR PAST THE DEADLINE THAT THEY SET.

I'LL NOTE THAT IT'S NOT ON THIS SLIDE BECAUSE IT HAPPENED SO RECENTLY, BUT THERE WAS ACTUALLY AN OPINION FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE,

[01:05:04]

JUST A MONTH OR TWO AGO, RELATING TO SOMETHING ELSE THE CITY AT TUCSON ATTEMPTED TO DO, THEY ATTEMPTED TO ADD SOMETHING TO AN ORDINANCE PROTECTING HOUSING BASED ON THE WAY A PERSON MADE THEIR INCOME.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ESSENTIALLY SAID, NO, IT'S AFTER 1995, CAN'T DO IT.

THIS HAS BEEN LOOKED AT RECENTLY.

I'M NOT SURE IF IT HAS SINCE THE STATE OFFICE HAS RULED OVER, BUT I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT ON THE SLIDE.

UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T HAVE ANY IDENTIFIED POSSIBLE ACTIONS ON THIS.

>> CAN I POP IN HERE?

>> PHOENIX, TUCSON, AND TEMPE, DID THEY ADD THIS BEFORE THE DEADLINE AND THEY HAD ALREADY MET THOSE QUALIFICATIONS?

>> ANOTHER NOTE HERE, JUST WITH THE LANGUAGE I'VE USED, I HAVE AT THE BOTTOM POSSIBLE ACTION IN EACH OF THESE SLIDES.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU.

I PUT POSSIBLE INSTEAD OF RECOMMENDED, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO VENTURE INTO THE POLICY CREATION SIDE OF THINGS AND I'M HERE TO GIVE YOU INFORMATION AND NOT RECOMMENDATIONS, SO JUST A NOTE ON THAT.

SINGLE-OCCUPANCY ALL GENDER FACILITIES.

THIS IS ONE OF THE AREAS WE RECEIVED THE NEW POINT. WE GOT ONE OUT OF TWO.

WE GOT ONE NEW POINT SINCE LAST YEAR AND THIS WAS BECAUSE OF THE DIRECTION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL GAVE LAST JANUARY TO REQUIRE ALL GENDERS FACILITIES AND CITY-OWNED BUILDINGS.

I BELIEVE THAT JUST REQUIRED US TO CHANGE SOME SIGNS IN OUR CITY BUILDINGS, IF I REMEMBER PROPERLY.

TO GET THE FULL TWO POINTS, THEY WOULD REQUIRE THAT CITYWIDE ARE REQUIRED TO DO THE SAME THING, THAT'S A BIT OF A BIGGER ASK AND I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST YEAR.

I DID MAKE A CASE TO THEM WITH OUR SUBMISSION IN JULY THAT WE'VE ADOPTED THE 2018 ADDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, WHICH REQUIRES NEW CONSTRUCTION TO HAVE THOSE TYPES OF FACILITIES IN IT, SO THAT'S AN AREA THAT ANY NEW BUILDINGS OR RENOVATED BUILDINGS WILL HAVE TO MAKE THAT CHANGE, BUT OLDER BUILDINGS WILL NOT.

THEY SAID THAT WE WOULD NEED AN ACTUAL ORDINANCE THAT ADOPTING THE IBC IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO GET THOSE POINTS.

THE ONLY POSSIBLE ACTION I SEE BASED ON THOSE CONVERSATIONS WOULD BE TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ON GENDER NEUTRAL FACILITIES IN ALL BUILDINGS CITYWIDE, WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE OWNED BY THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF.

NEXT ITEM IS PROTECTING YOUTH FROM CONVERSION THERAPY.

WE DON'T HAVE AN ORDINANCE ON THIS TOPIC.

IT'S NOT BANNED AT THE STATE LEVEL AND THERE IS NO PREEMPTION RIGHT NOW IN STATE LAW THAT WOULD STOP US FROM HAVING AN ORDINANCE ON THIS MATTER.

PIMA COUNTY HAS ONE AND AS FAR AS I WAS ABLE TO FIND THAT THEY'RE THE ONLY JURISDICTION IN THE STATE THAT BANS CONVERSION THERAPY.

TO GET THESE TWO POINTS, I THINK THAT WE WOULD NEED AN ORDINANCE BANNING CONVERSION THERAPY FOR THOSE UNDER THE AGE OF 18.

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION HERE?

>> THIS WOULD BE REGARDING COUNCILORS.

THE CITY WOULD HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT SAYS NO COUNSELOR OR NO PROGRAM MAY USE CONVERSION THERAPY.

>> I LOOK OVER, MAKES SURE THAT STERLING'S NOT STARING IN THE BACK OF MY HEAD AS I ANSWERED THIS QUESTION, BUT [LAUGHTER] I BELIEVE THAT'S APPROXIMATELY CORRECT.

SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.

>> CAN YOU SEND US PIMA COUNTIES?

>> YEAH, I CAN DO I CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT.

[NOISE] I CAN SEND THAT TO THE COUNCIL EMAIL ADDRESS WITH A COPY OF THEIR ORDINANCE IF YOU'D LIKE.

>> NEXT ITEM IS THE CITY PROVIDING TRANSGENDER-INCLUSIVE HEALTH CARE BENEFITS.

AND THIS IS AN AREA THAT WE'VE BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN MYSELF AND SOME MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF AS WELL AS THE HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN.

WE SET OUR BENEFITS IN COORDINATION WITH THE NORTHERN ARIZONA PUBLIC EMPLOYEE BENEFITS.

WE ARE NOT THE ONLY JURISDICTION THAT TAKES PART IN THAT, AND THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF GENDER-AFFIRMING CARE THAT ARE INCLUDED WITH CITY HEALTH CARE RIGHT NOW AT GENDER REASSIGNMENT IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT IS COVERED.

I'LL NOTE THAT I DID NOT KNOW THAT UNTIL AFTER I HAD SUBMITTED EVERYTHING TO THEM LAST SUMMER, SO I WAS NOT ABLE TO MAKE THE CASE. I COULD HAVE.

I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

THAT'S UNDERSTANDING.

THE WAY HEALTH CARE IS PAID FOR AND COVERED IS A VERY COMPLEX TOPIC AND IT'S NOT ONE THAT I'M AN EXPERT IN.

I LEARN MORE AFTER I SUBMITTED IT.

I DO HAVE MORE OF A CASE TO MAKE THIS YEAR AND I HOPE THAT I CAN COME BACK NEXT YEAR WITH MORE POINTS ON THIS ITEM.

BECAUSE FROM WHAT I'VE LEARNED OF OUR HEALTH CARE BENEFITS AND WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR.

I BELIEVE WE MEET THIS CRITERIA, BUT WE JUST HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO MAKE THAT CASE TO HIM YET.

[01:10:02]

I'M HOPEFUL THAT IF WE SEEK CLARIFICATION TO MAKE A BETTER CASE NEXT YEAR, WE CAN GET SOME OF THESE POINTS AS WELL.

WE LOSE TWO POINTS BECAUSE OUR NONDISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE IS NOT ENFORCED BY OUR COMMISSION ON DIVERSITY AWARENESS.

I'LL NOTE THAT THE EXISTENCE OF THE COMMISSION ON DIVERSITY AWARENESS IS AN AREA THAT WE'D GET POINTS FOR ELSEWHERE IN THE SCORECARD.

THEY'RE HAPPY TO SEE THAT.

INSTEAD, IT'S ENFORCED BY THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, BY MY OFFICE HERE.

MOST OF OUR COMMISSIONS IN THE CITY THEY SERVE ADVISORY AND EDUCATIONAL ROLES.

IF THE CITY COUNCIL WANTED TO GIVE CODED THAT RESPONSIBILITY, IT WOULD BE, I BELIEVE THE ONLY ONE THAT HAD THAT TYPE OF RESPONSIBILITY.

AGAIN, IF STERLING HAS ANY COMMENTS ON THIS ONE, I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.

BUT WE'D BE HAPPY TO RESEARCH THE POSSIBILITY OF THAT IF YOU'D LIKE IT BUT THAT'S THE ONLY RECOMMENDED POSSIBLE ACTION ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

>> EXCUSE ME, JUST ONE MOMENT.

COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY

>> I JUST POINTING OUT THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CAN ACTUALLY MAKE BINDING AND POLICY.

HOWEVER, I'M NOT I DON'T SEE A NEED TO CHANGE THIS FOR DIVERSITY AWARENESS COMMISSION.

>> AS FAR AS MY KNOWLEDGE GOES, WE HAVE A LOT OF COMMISSIONS I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH ALL THEIR WORK, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT I KNOW OF THAT THAT HAS THAT RESPONSIBILITY.

>> IF I MAY COMMENT, THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S BEEN DELEGATED BY THE STATE TO ALLOW US TO DO SO SPECIFICALLY FOR ZONING ISSUE.

>> PERFECT. THANK YOU SHERIFF.

NEXT ITEM IS A YOUTH PREVENTION POLICY FOR CITY SERVICES.

THIS WOULD BE FOR OUR YOUTH PROGRAMS. THEY HAVE ONE POINT EACH FOR COVERING SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY.

I'LL NOTE THAT WE DEFINITELY DO THIS.

WE DON'T ALLOW THAT IN OUR YOUTH PROGRAMS. IT'S JUST NOT IN A CENTRAL LOCATION.

EACH PROGRAM WILL HAVE ITS OWN POLICIES AND WHETHER IT'S SOME LESSONS OR A LIBRARY PROGRAM, WHATEVER IT MAY BE WHEN YOU SIGN UP FOR THAT, YOU'LL BE HANDED A DOCUMENT THAT SHOWS ALL THEIR RULES AND NONBULLYING POLICIES ARE GOING TO BE IN ALL OF THOSE.

IT'S JUST THAT WE DON'T HAVE IT IN A CENTRAL LOCATION AS AN ORDINANCE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THE OPTIONS IS TO GET THESE TWO POINTS I THINK WOULD BE TO EITHER TRY TO COLLECT EVERY ONE OF THOSE THAT WE HAVE FOR THE CITY AND SUBMIT THEM ALL.

I DIDN'T ATTEMPT TO THAT LAST YEAR, I COULD ATTEMPT TO THIS YEAR IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

OR THE OTHER OPTION I THINK WOULD BE TO PASS AN ORDINANCE.

I DON'T MEAN TO GIVE ANY OPINION ON WHICH OF THOSE WOULD BE MORE EFFECTIVE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

BUT THOSE ARE JUST THE TWO OPTIONS I THINK SEEING FORWARD AND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE SLIDES THAT IF I CAN GIVE A PROFESSIONAL OPINION NOTES SO THAT I THINK WE ARE DOING A GOOD JOB ON THIS EVEN IF OUR POINTS DON'T REFLECT THAT.

THE NEXT THREE SLIDES, I THINK WILL ALL BE FAIRLY SIMILAR.

THE FIRST ONE IS THE CITY PROVIDING SERVICES TO MEMBERS OF THE LGBTQ COMMUNITY EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS.

THIS IS ONE OF THE TWO AREAS WE RECEIVED MORE POINTS FROM LAST YEAR.

I MADE A VERY STRONG CASE TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN LAST YEAR.

THIS ONE, HONESTLY, I WAS DISAPPOINTED ONLY TO GET 1.4 BECAUSE I THINK THE WORK WE'VE DONE IN THIS IS PRETTY GOOD.

DO SOME COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANTS THAT WERE GIVEN OUT OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS.

SHARON MANNER, WHO'S A LOCAL NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION, WAS ABLE TO RENOVATE 13 OF THEIR STUDIO APARTMENTS TO HELP HOUSE UNSHELTERED INDIVIDUALS.

THE REASON THAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT A STUDIO APARTMENT HAS ALL OF THE SERVICES YOU NEED IN ONE LOCATION.

THERE IS NO SHARED BATHROOMS, THERE'S NO SHARED LIVING SPACES.

THOSE CAN REALLY BE A HUGE THING FOR INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE MEMBERS OF THE LGBTQ COMMUNITY BECAUSE THEY HAVE THAT SPACE TO THEMSELVES WHERE THEY WOULDN'T IN A TYPICAL SHELTER ENVIRONMENT.

A HUGE THING THAT WE'VE DONE IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT I THINK IS QUITE POSITIVE.

JUST ONE THAT WE ONLY RECEIVE 102.5.

I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY ONLY GOT 102.4 BUT I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT PROGRAM THIS YEAR.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. A QUESTION FOR YOU.

DID THEY JUST LOOK AT THE SERVICES THAT SHARON MANNER PROVIDED THAT GIVE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE LGBTQ COMMUNITY? I'M ASKING THIS BECAUSE A NEW LIVING ALSO IN STATESIDE AND THEIR WEBSITE, THAT THEY DO NOT DISCRIMINATE TO ANY OF THOSE PROTECTED CLASSES AND ALL OF THE UNITS, R STUDIO UNITS FOR THAT REASON THAT THEY CAN HAVE THEIR PRIVACY AND HAVE THEIR OWN [INAUDIBLE].

WAS THAT INCLUDED IN THEIR SCORING?

>> COULD YOU REPEAT THE NAME OF THE ORGANIZATION?

>> A NEW LIVING.

>> OH, YES. WE DIDN'T INCLUDE THAT AS WELL.

THEY WERE LOOKING AT THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, BUT THEY WERE LOOKING AT THEM AS FAR AS HOW THE CITY FUNDS THEM AS WELL.

I THINK THESE BLOCK GRANTS SPOKE MORE BECAUSE IT WAS A HIGHER AMOUNT OF FUNDING AND IT WAS NEWER.

[01:15:03]

>> WHO DOESN'T TAKE FEDERAL MONEY, THAT'S FINE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT, THAT MEANS THAT THIS IS AN AREA THAT THE COMMUNITY DOESN'T HAVE ONE.

THERE MAY BE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE THESE KINDS OF THINGS.

I JUST WAS NOT ABLE TO FIND ONE THAT EITHER RECEIVED DIRECT CITY FUNDS OR THAT WE PROVIDED DIRECTLY.

THEIR DEFINITION HERE WAS PRETTY RIGID THAT IT HAD TO BE A PROGRAM NOT JUST THAT WAS INCLUSIVE TO THIS COMMUNITY, BUT WAS REALLY TARGETED AT THAT COMMUNITY SPECIFICALLY.

WE CAN BEGIN OFFERING THOSE PROGRAMS LOOKING TO FUND A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT DOES, BUT THOSE ARE THE WAYS ON THIS ITEM THAT I THINK WE COULD ATTEMPT TO GET THESE TWO POINTS IN THE FUTURE.

JUST LIKE LAST ONE, I DIDN'T SEE THAT TYPE OF PROGRAM IN OUR INVENTORY OR IN A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT WE GIVE DIRECT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO.

THE NEXT ONE IS REPORTING 2020 HATE CRIME DATA TO THE FBI.

THIS IS AN AREA THAT WE RECEIVED 12 POINTS IN EACH OF THE YEARS PREVIOUS, BUT WE WERE KNOCKED DOWN TO 10 ON THIS ONE.

I'LL NOTE THAT AFTER SOME CONVERSATIONS INTERNALLY WITH THE STAFF HERE, I THINK WHAT HAPPENED HERE IF SOMEONE ELSE IN THE ROOM WANTS TO SPEAK TO THIS MORE WITH PEACE OPERATIONS I'M HAPPY TO SEE THE FOREDOOM.

BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT A DATABASE CHANGED OVER THE WAY WE REPORT THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION, AND WITH THAT CHANGE A DOCUMENT THAT HAD CROSS-TABS WITH SMALLER TYPE OF THINGS WAS LEFT OFF OR WAS NOT PICKED UP ON DPS SIDE OF THINGS.

I'M NOT SURE WHICH OF THOSE EXACTLY HAPPENED, BUT SOMEWHERE IN THAT LINE OF COMMUNICATION SOME CROSS TABS WERE LEFT OFF OF A REPORT.

AS SOON AS WE ARE MADE AWARE OF THIS, WE SUBMITTED THEM I BELIEVE THE SAME DAY THAT WE WERE MADE AWARE OF THIS.

THEY ARE ALIVE NOW.

THEY EXIST IN THE FBI DATABASE AND THAT'S WHY WE STILL GOT 10 OF THE 12 POINTS.

IT WAS JUST LATE FROM WHEN THEY LOOKED AT IT.

I ALSO CONFIRMED THAT THE ONES FOR THE NEXT YEAR WERE SUBMITTED IN AN ART SHOW IN THE DATABASE PROPERLY.

ONE THING YOU MIGHT NOTICE HERE IS THAT IT'S 2022 DATA, SO THEY LOOK QUITE A BIT IN THE PAST.

THE REPORT CARD NEXT YEAR THAT REALLY COMES OUT LATER THIS YEAR WILL BE FOR 2021 DATA.

I THINK THIS IS A TYPE OF DATA THAT TAKES A WHILE TO PUT TOGETHER AND GETS SENT OUT.

WE'RE LOOKING IN THE PAST FOR THAT, BUT WE HAVE CORRECTED THIS SMALL THING AND WE'VE MADE SURE THAT IT WON'T HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.

I'M VERY SORRY THAT, THAT HAPPENED BUT WE INTERNALLY HAVE TAKEN THE STEPS NECESSARY TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS CORRECTED AND IT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.

NOW WE GET INTO THE LAST OF THE FIVE CATEGORIES TO LEADERSHIP.

THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST SUBJECTIVE AREAS THAT THEY LOOK AT LEADERSHIP'S PRO-EQUALITY LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY EFFORTS.

I PUT TOGETHER A PORTFOLIO OF EVENTS THE CITY HAS HOSTED, EVENTS THAT MEMBERS OF COUNCIL ATTENDED OR MEMBERS OF OUR COMMISSION DIVERSITY AWARENESS ATTENDED AS WELL AS ANY FAIR TERMS THAT WERE SUBMITTED IN THE LAST YEAR.

TO ADD TO THIS, THEY GAVE US 2-3 POINTS.

I CANNOT TELL YOU WHAT THE POINT WAS LEFT OFF FOR, IT'S A VERY SUBJECTIVE AREA.

REALLY THIS IS AN AREA THAT I DON'T HAVE A POSSIBLE ACTION BECAUSE IT FALLS TO OUR ELECTED AND APPOINTED LEADERSHIP TO TAKE ACTION AND TO MAKE STATEMENTS AND THAT THING.

MY LAST SLIDE HERE IS THE CITY TEST LIMITS OF RESTRICTIVE STATE LAW.

I'M GOING TO BE VERY CAREFUL WITH THE SLIDE, IT MAY SEEM LIKE OBVIOUS REASONS.

WE RECEIVED 0-3 POINTS FOR THIS ONE.

THIS ITEM EXISTS ON THE SCORECARD.

THINK OF IT AS A CARROT TO GET A CITY WITHIN A RESTRICTED STATE GOVERNMENT OR WITH PRE-EMPTIONS IN THE STATE LAW TO ATTEMPT TO PUSH BACK ON THOSE IN CERTAIN WAYS WHETHER THAT BE THROUGH LEGAL ACTION OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE.

THEY WANT CITIES TO TEST THOSE RESTRICTIVE STATE LAWS AND TAKE STATEMENTS AGAINST THEM.

THEN NOTICE HERE UNDER POSSIBLE ACTION, I DIDN'T PUT NONE.

I PUT N/A. THINK OF THAT AS NO COMMENT BECAUSE I'M NOT ABOUT TO SIT HERE RECOMMEND OR EVEN SUGGEST ANY ACTION THAT WOULD TAKE US THAT DIRECTION.

[01:20:01]

INFORMATIONAL ONLY WE COULD GET THREE ADDITIONAL POINTS IF THE CITY WERE TO ATTEMPT TO TEST THE RESTRICTIONS AT THE STATE LEVEL, BUT I HAVE NO COMMENT ON WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE OR WHAT IT SHOULD LOOK LIKE OR ANYTHING TO THAT EFFECT.

THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION.

IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE THOSE AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER ALICE.

>> THANK YOU CHRIS FOR THIS PRESENTATION AND YOU'RE RIGHT.

I'VE HAD THE HONOR OF HEARING IT TWICE.

HOWEVER, THIS TIME I DID HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE NDO SPECIFIC TO THE HOUSING POINTS.

>> I'LL GO BACK TO THOSE SLIDES FOR YOU.

>> THAT'D BE GREAT. IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, THE NON-DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE IS SPECIFIC TO SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, AND GENDER EXPRESSION AS WELL.

>> I'M JUST WONDERING IF THE GROUP THAT ASSESSES THIS HAVE LOOKED AT AMENDING THAT SCORE ITEM ON THE BASIS OF THE FACT THAT GENDER IDENTITY AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED COVERED BY THE PROTECTED CLASS OF SEX SINCE 2020.

>> WE MADE THAT CASE TO HIM.

THAT WAS THE CASE I MADE LAST YEAR BECAUSE THERE WASN'T REALLY A LEGAL PATH FORWARD.

I SHARED SOME DOCUMENT SHOWING THAT THE CITY'S INTERPRETATION OF SEX AND AS A FEDERAL PROTECTED CLASS INCLUDES THOSE.

THEY WERE NOT AMENABLE TO THAT ARGUMENT UNFORTUNATELY.

>> VICE MAYOR.

>> CHRIS, THANK YOU. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT LAST SLIDE? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

>> THE VERY LAST SLIDE?

>> YEAH.

>> OKAY. I THINK THIS IS ALSO A QUESTION FOR A COUPLE OF FOLKS DURING THE NEXT CONVERSATION WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ABOUT STATE LEGISLATION.

THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF ATTACKS ON YOUTH ACCESS TO GENDER AFFIRMING CARE CROPPING UP AROUND THE COUNTRY.

I JUST WANT TO SIT WITH THE SLIDE FOR A SECOND.

IT SEEMS LIKE THERE MAY BE OPPORTUNITIES ON THE HORIZON TO ENGAGE IN THIS PUSH BACK OR TESTING THE LINES.

I WONDER IF YOU CARE TO COMMENT ON THAT AND THEN JUST A HEADS UP FOR OUR LOBBYIST OR STATE LOBBYISTS.

I'M WONDERING IF YOU'RE ABLE TO LOOK UP WHAT THE LATEST IS AND WHERE CHATTER IS ON LAWS LIKE THIS WITHIN THE STATE OF ARIZONA OR SARAH IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT TOO GET THOSE READY FOR THE NEXT CONVERSATION.

>> CAN I ASK WHAT COMMENTS YOU'VE ONLY LISTENED.

>> YOU DON'T HAVE TO COMMENT. I'M JUST GIVING YOU AN OPPORTUNITY, THIS MIGHT NOT REALLY BE YOUR LANES.

>> ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, I'M VERY COGNIZANT OF THE POLITICS ADMINISTRATION DICHOTOMY AND WHERE I FALL ON THE ADMINISTRATION SIDE OF THAT.

ESPECIALLY WHEN IT INVOLVES STATE PRESUMPTIONS AND STATE RULES AND AN ITEM THAT I THINK IS ATTEMPTING TO INCENTIVIZE A BIT OF TESTING THE WATERS.

I REALLY DON'T WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT IF I DON'T NEED TO.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? DO YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEED FROM US?

>> IF YOU'RE LOOKING TO GIVE ME CERTAIN DIRECTION, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE THAT.

I DON'T THINK I'VE REALLY HEARD OF DIRECTION TO MYSELF PERSONALLY, BUT IF YOU'D LIKE TO GIVE THAT I CAN COME BACK WITH OTHER THINGS IN THE FUTURE OR INFORMATION YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.

I LOVE QUESTIONS, BUT MY IMPRESSION RIGHT NOW IS I HAVE NOT BEEN GIVING SPECIFIC DIRECTION ON THIS ITEM.

IF THAT'S INCORRECT, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.

>> WHAT ABOUT THE EARLIER WHEN WE [OVERLAPPING].

>> ON SENDING THE ORDINANCE?

>> YES, I HAVE THAT ONE. SORRY.

>> WONDERFUL. COUNCIL MEMBER, YOU'RE OKAY.

NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU, I WILL SEND THAT ORNAMENTS FROM PIMA COUNTY, AND IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS OR WOULD LIKE FUTURE THINGS FEEL FREE TO SEND ME AN EMAIL. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

[NOISE] NOW WE'RE MOVING DOWN TO ITEM 10B: STATE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE.

[B. State Legislative Update STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion and direction from Council.]

>> GOOD EVENING THERE COUNCIL.

>> WITH SHAWN JOHNSON.

>> THAT IS ME. LET ME CLOSE UP HERE.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL. GOOD EVENING.

SHAWN JOHNSON, CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL, ALONG WITH SARAH LANGLEY, OUR PUBLIC AFFAIRS DIRECTOR.

WE DO HAVE TODD MADEKSZA ONLINE, AND THEN WE DO HAVE BRIAN MURRAY WHO JUST STARTED WITH US LAST WEEK.

HE WILL NOT BE ON THIS CALL, BUT IN OUR NEXT LEGISLATIVE UPDATE WE WILL HAVE HIM.

I'M VERY EXCITED TO HAVE A NEW MEMBER OF THE TEAM.

[01:25:02]

I'M GOING TO GET RIGHT INTO IT.

BEFORE WE GET STARTED INTO THE DOWN AND DIRTY OF THE BILLS, I REALLY WANTED TO JUST DO AN OVERVIEW OF HOW A BILL BECOMES A LAW.

IT'S FOR A REFRESHER COURSE AS WELL AS FOR THE COMMUNITY.

YOU'LL HEAR US SAY THE BILL IS IN ITS SECOND GRADE OR IT'S IN COW, WHICH IS COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

I JUST WANTED TO GIVE A REAL QUICK OVERVIEW OF HOW THAT GOES AND THEN I CAN ALSO SEND YOU THIS FUNNY SIDE NOTE.

I WAS GIVEN THIS WHEN I WAS A LEGISLATIVE INTERN FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICE ON MY FIRST DAY.

I STILL REFER BACK TO IT SOMETIMES.

IF YOU EVER NEED IT, LET ME KNOW.

WHEN A BILL COMES IN AND THEN THIS GOES FOR BOTH THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE CHAMBERS, THIS FIRST-LINE HEARING.

I'M NOT SURE IF YOU COULD SEE SO IT'LL BE THE FIRST TO THE LEFT UP THERE.

A BILL IS INTRODUCED TO THE LEGISLATURE.

IT GOES THROUGH THE FIRST READS.

EVERY BILL THAT COMES UP, ANYBODY THAT COMES UP WITH AN IDEA, IT HAS TO BE FIRST READ IN THE HOUSE OR THE COW, THEY CALL IT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

THEN ONCE THAT GETS READ FOR THE FIRST TIME, A COMMITTEE WILL BE ASSIGNED BY THE HOUSE SPEAKER, THE SENATE PRESIDENT.

GETS ASSIGNED TO A COMMITTEE, GOES INTO A COMMITTEE, DOES ALL THIS STUFF, AMENDMENTS, THEY DEBATE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.

IT THEN GETS SENT ONTO RULES JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING'S ABOVE BOARD, OF COURSE.

THEN IT MOVES TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WHERE EVERYBODY GETS TO VOTE ON IT.

ALL THE REPRESENTATIVES, ALL THE SENATORS, WHERE AMENDMENTS ARE COME OUT, SEE IF ANYTHING CHANGES.

THE BILL COULD DIE IF IT DOESN'T MAKE IT THROUGH.

THEN IT DOES MOVE ON TO A THIRD READ.

THEY HAD TO HAVE THAT THIRD READ WHERE EVERY MEMBER WILL VOTE ON IT AND THEY HAVE TO BE PRESENT TO VOTE ON IT.

IF THAT MAKES IT THROUGH THE WHOLE SHEBANG, THEN IT WILL BE TRANSMITTED TO THE SENATE.

THEN JUST PICTURE THIS.

WHILE THE HOUSE IS DOING THEIR THING, WE'LL SAY, THE SENATE IS DOING THE SAME THING.

WE JUST CROSSED THAT DEADLINE, I WANT TO SAY LAST FRIDAY, THE 17TH OF WHEN BILLS HAD TO GO ACROSS IS WHAT THEY SAY.

RIGHT NOW ALL THE BILLS FROM THE SENATE ARE IN THE HOUSE, FROM THE HOUSE ARE IN THE SENATE.

ONCE THE BILL DOES GET THROUGH EACH CHAMBER, IF IT IS DECIDED ON THAT THEY LIKE IT, THEN IT WILL GO STRAIGHT TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE FIRST SIGNATURE.

HE OR SHE CAN VETO IT AND THEN THEY COULD ALSO JUST NOT SIGN IT AND THEN IT GOES INTO LAW AFTER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DAYS.

THE HOUSE AND SENATE AREN'T REALLY MEETING, THEY DON'T REALLY LIKE EACH OTHER ON THAT ONE, THEY'LL GO INTO A CONFERENCE COMMITTEE AND EACH CONFERENCE COMMITTEE MEMBER IS PICKED BY THE SENATE PRESIDENT AND THEN THE HOUSE SPEAKER.

LIKE THE PICTURE, I GUESS. THEY'LL DO GET OUT A LITTLE FURTHER BILL.

IF WE CAN GET IT ALL THROUGH AND THEY ALL LIKE WHAT'S GOING ON, THEN IT WILL GET SENT TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE.

IF IT'S NOT, THE BILL USUALLY DIES, OR IT COULD GO BACK AND GET SOME AMENDMENTS TO SEE IF THAT WOULD WORK BUT USUALLY THEY WOULD DIE IN THAT PROCESS IF IT DOESN'T MAKE IT THROUGH THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE.

WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, I'M GOING TO GO STRAIGHT INTO IT.

WE'RE GOING TO START WITH BAD BEFORE GOOD AND SO WITH OUR OPPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS.

THIS IS NOT AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF ALL THE BILLS THAT ARE GOING THROUGH LEGISLATURE RIGHT NOW.

WE HAVE, I WANT TO SAY AROUND 1,600 THAT WERE INTRODUCED.

I BELIEVE THERE'S 500 MOVING FORWARD NOW AND THERE'S A LOT OF OPPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS THAT I WOULD THROW ON THE MANY OF THE BILLS THAT ARE GOING.

WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THESE AND GET THE COUNCIL'S THOUGHTS ON IF YOU'D LIKE TO OPPOSE IT, OF COURSE.

OUR FIRST ONE WILL BE SENATE BILL 1117.

THIS ONE IS A BIT TRICKY, BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE ALL RESIDENTIAL ZONING REQUEST TO BE APPROVED.

WE WOULDN'T REALLY NEED US PLANNING, COMMISSION, PLANNING AND ZONING.

IT WOULD JUST GO OUT BY RIGHTFUL SAY.

IN GENERAL AND DOES NOT FOCUS ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND IT'S NOT IN LINE WITH ANY OF THE ZONING REFORM DISCUSSIONS BEING HAD, IT ACTUALLY PROMOTES LARGE LOTS.

WITH THIS ONE, I THINK IT'S PRETTY SELF-EVIDENT, BUT WANTED TO PRESENT IT TO YOU ALL IF YOU'VE GOT ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE FIRST OFF, IF THAT'S HOW WE'D LIKE TO TAKE IT.

>> THUMPS UP THUMPS DOWN.

>> LET'S DO THUMBS UP, THUMBS DOWN UNLESS WE THINK WE NEED ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION.

>> WE DO HAVE TAUGHT ONLINE SO YOU CAN DEFINITELY FILL IN SOME BLANKS THERE [OVERLAPPING]

BIG THUMBS DOWN ON THIS ONE.

>> I SAW A THUMBS DOWN.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION.

THERE'S A LOT OF SILLY LEGISLATION GOING BACK-AND-FORTH IN THE STATE HOUSE RIGHT NOW.

I EXPECT THIS LIST TO BE LONG.

WE DON'T NEED TO SPECULATE ON WHY THAT IS BUT I JUST WANT TO

[01:30:04]

ACKNOWLEDGE RIGHT FROM THE START OF THIS THAT I HAVE BEEN RECEIVING LOTS OF CONCERN FROM THE COMMUNITY, FROM ALL CORNERS AND ALL ANGLES, NOT JUST THE USUAL SUSPECTS, BUT EVERYWHERE SHOWING CONCERN ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE BEING TALKED ABOUT IN THE LEGISLATURE RIGHT NOW.

I EXPECT A LOT OF THESE BILLS TO DIE, THEIR DEATHS AS THE PROCESS GOES ALONG.

BUT WHEN YOU CAN SHAWN, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO COMMENT IF YOU'RE ABLE TO, ON HOW VETO PROOF SOME OF THESE BAD BILLS ARE, WHEN THAT MIGHT BE SPECIFIC OR DIFFERENT FROM AVERAGE.

JUST TO SAY THAT AT THE OUTSET, IF YOU COULD DO THAT FOR US.

I KNOW THE PUBLIC WILL APPRECIATE HAVING THAT ADDITIONAL CLARITY AT TIMES ON HOW LIKELY THESE THINGS ARE TO GET THROUGH THE FULL PROCESS, EVEN WITH A MORE BALANCED STRUCTURE IN THE GOVERNMENT RIGHT NOW.

>> THAT MAKES SENSE. I WOULD PROBABLY LEAD ON TODD FOR THAT AS WELL.

BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, IT'S SHOULD BE PRETTY SELF-EVIDENT WITH OUR NEW GOVERNOR ON BILLS THAT WOULD MOST LIKELY BE VETOED BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO REMEMBER THE NEGOTIATIONS.

SHE JUST VETOED THE FIRST BUDGET.

WE REALLY HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE ON WHAT WILL THEY GIVE US IF WE GIVE THEM SOMETHING.

IT'S STILL IN THOSE BEGINNING STAGES WHERE I REALLY WOULDN'T WANT AND COMMENTS ON WHAT'S COMING UP BECAUSE WE REALLY HAVE TO SEE WHAT'S GOING TO BE BARGAINED WITH.

THAT'S PROBABLY THE BEST I CAN SAY ON THAT ONE UNTIL WE GET A LITTLE FURTHER AND THE BILL START DWINDLING DOWN AND THEN WE ALSO ARE GOING TO BE HAVING [OVERLAPPING].

>> SHAWN, CAN I BREAK IN FOR A SECOND?

>> YEAH. GO FOR IT TODD.

>> I REMEMBER JANET NAPOLITANO.

GOVERNORS TYPICALLY DON'T LIKE TO GIVE VETOES.

WE NEED TO MOBILIZE AND FIGHT A LOT OF THESE SO THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS A REASON TO VETO IF WE NEED HER TO, BUT IF WE CAN DEFEAT THEM, WE SHOULD GIVE HER AS MUCH COVER AS WE CAN.

COUNCILMAN OR VICE MAYOR, YOUR POINT IS REALLY SATIENT.

WE CAN'T RELY ON THE GOVERNOR FOR A LOT OF THESE THINGS.

WE HAVE TO USE HER AS A BACKSTOP APPROPRIATELY, BUT WE NEED TO FIGHT THEM.

FIGHT SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT WE OPPOSE.

IF YOU DON'T OPPOSE THEM, WE WON'T FIGHT THEM, OBVIOUSLY.

BUT YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN, VICE MAYOR.

>> ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU, TODD.

>> CAN I JUMP IN JUST WITH A VERY QUICK THING? WE'VE DISCUSSED, BECAUSE THE PROCESS MOVES SO QUICKLY AT THIS POINT, WAYS TO INFORM US OF THESE TYPES OF ITEMS EARLIER RATHER THAN WAITING FOR THE PRESENTATION, BECAUSE WE GET ASKED ALL THE TIME, ARE YOU WEIGHING IN ON HB, WHATEVER.

I THINK WE GENERALLY HAVE A SENSE BECAUSE IT'S IN OUR LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES, BUT WE DON'T ALWAYS NECESSARILY KNOW EACH INDIVIDUAL BILL, WHETHER WE'VE WEIGHED IN.

I JUST LET THE PUBLIC KNOW THAT WE HAVE HAD THOSE INTERNAL DISCUSSIONS AS WELL ABOUT HOW WE CAN, NOT NECESSARILY DISCUSS IT AS A COUNCIL, BUT MAKE THE BILLS THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING, MAKE THAT PUBLIC INFORMATION SOONER IN THE PROCESS.

>> ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S PERFECTLY FINE. [OVERLAPPING]

>> YES, VICE MAYOR.

>> THE WORD I'M DANCING AROUND WHEN I HEAR YOU IS HOW NIMBLE CAN WE BE DURING THIS PROCESS, WHERE THERE IS A LOT OF VOLATILITY AND THINGS ARE HAPPENING QUICKLY.

WE'VE GOT TODD THERE AT THE STATE HOUSE WITH A SUIT AND TIE ON DOING HIS BEST TO REPRESENT US.

I DO THINK THERE'S ROOM FOR A CONVERSATION, ESPECIALLY IN THIS CURRENT ENVIRONMENT THAT WE'RE MOVING INTO.

TO REALLY THINK THROUGH HOW ARE WE MOST NIMBLE WITH THIS.

GOVERNMENT CAN MOVE SLOWLY, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE OPERATE BY MAJORITY DIRECTION.

THAT'S JUST ANOTHER THING HOVERING OVER THIS CONVERSATION A LITTLE BIT, HOW DO WE RETOOL OUR INSTITUTION TO BE AS NIMBLE AS POSSIBLE IN THESE MOMENTS WHEN WE'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT SOME OF THE BAD LEGISLATION THAT'S GOING THROUGH? AT TIMES WE ARE GOING TO BE VERY EXCITED ABOUT SOME REALLY COOL OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE COMING OUR WAY, AND SHORT WINDOWS THAT ARE OPEN TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

[01:35:04]

JUST THINKING OUT LOUD AS WE MOVE THROUGH THIS CONVERSATION TODAY, AND REALLY JUST MOVING FORWARD, WE MIGHT WANT TO RETOOL SOME OF THESE THINGS A LITTLE BIT.

JUST AS AN ASIDE, IT'S GREAT TO SEE YOU ON BOARD, SEAN, AS PART OF THE LEGISLATIVE TEAM.

>> APPRECIATE IT, VICE MAYOR.

THEN JUST A REMINDER TO THE PUBLIC, WE WORK WITH THE LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITIES AND TOWNS.

THAT IS THEIR LET'S SAY NUMBER 1 THING; IS LEGISLATION, AND SO WE'RE ALWAYS KEPT UP TO DATE ON THAT.

THEN FOR OUR ELECTIVES AS WELL, THERE'S ALWAYS THOSE MONDAY LEGISLATIVE UPDATE CALLS, AND THAT'S A REALLY GOOD WAY TO GET JUST INTO THE NITTY-GRITTY OF IT.

YOU COULD ACTUALLY ASK QUESTIONS TO TOM BELSHE, WHO'S WITH THE LEAGUE AS WELL.

WE HAVE EVERY POSSIBLE [OVERLAPPING]

>> IF I CAN ADD A CLARIFICATION TO THAT.

BUT WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY WAITING FOR THE LEAGUE TO HAVE A POSITION ON SOMETHING FOR US TO TAKE A POSITION ON SOMETHING. THANK YOU. [OVERLAPPING]

>> THEY'LL REACH OUT TO US FROM TIME TO TIME ON IF WE LIKE SOMETHING OR IF WE DON'T, BUT YEAH, IF WE SEE SOMETHING WE'LL PURSUE IT REGARDLESS. [OVERLAPPING]

>> THEN TO VICE MAYOR'S COMMENTS ABOUT BEING NIMBLE, WE ALSO HAVE BRIAN MURRAY STARTING, OR MURRAY, I BELIEVE.

THAT'S ANOTHER TOOL IN OUR TOOLBOX.

WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO HAVE HIM AS WELL.

I WILL CONTINUE ON HERE TO HB 2808.

THIS ONE'S A LITTLE WONKY AS WELL.

IT STARTED OUT THAT IF A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST CAME IN, OUR CITY CLERK TEAM WOULD HAVE TO HAVE IT FINISHED IN FIVE DAYS.

IT HAS NOW BEEN AMENDED TO 15 BUSINESS DAYS, WHICH GIVES US A LITTLE MORE TIME, BUT WITH THE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC RECORDS THAT WE GET THROUGH THE CLERK'S OFFICE, IT'S JUST NOT REALLY FEASIBLE UNLESS WE HAVE MORE STAFF TO TACKLE THAT.

RIGHT NOW IT'D BE 500 A DAY EACH DAY WE GO OVER THE 15 BUSINESS DAYS.

ESPECIALLY WITH ALL THE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS WE GET, THAT COULD DEFINITELY ADD UP.

DEFINITELY, IT WOULD BE AN IMPOSE TO THIS ONE AS WELL.

I SEE HEADS NODDING, PERFECT.

I GOT ANOTHER ONE, HB 2003, CORPORATE INCOME TAX.

THIS ONE WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE A GINORMOUS COST TO THE CITY.

IT WOULD CUT INCOME TAX RATES FOR ARIZONA CORPORATIONS BY NEARLY HALF.

IT COULD CUT STATE REVENUES BY NEARLY 670 MILLION A YEAR, AND THEN THE CITIES WOULD HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE TO COME UP WITH THEIR SHARES.

RIGHT NOW WITH OUR FISCAL NOTE, ABOUT 1.6 MILLION A YEAR THAT WOULD COME OUT OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF'S FUNDING.

WE'RE DEFINITELY OPPOSED ON THIS ONE.

PERFECT. I GOT ONE MORE PAGE OF BAD, I APOLOGIZE.

[LAUGHTER] 1312, AND VICE MAYOR MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN THIS ONE AS WELL.

THIS WOULD PROHIBIT THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF FROM ESTABLISHING VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL REDUCTION GOALS, OR TARGETS IN DEVELOPING ANY TRANSPORTATION OR LAND USE PLANNING, OR SELECTING TRANSPORTATION OR TRANSIT PROJECTS.

THAT'S LIKE OUR CARBON NEUTRALITY PLAN, VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED.

THIS WOULD JUST CUT THAT OUT COMPLETELY.

IT GOES AGAINST PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING THE CITY IS STANDING FOR AND OUR LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES, SO THAT WOULD DEFINITELY BE A NO AS WELL.

AWESOME. ANOTHER ONE, SB 1108.

THIS WOULD ALLOW EMPLOYERS IN THE CITY WITH A WAGE, THIS IS OUR MINIMUM WAGE ONE, THAT'S MORE THAN THE STATE MINIMUM TO CLAIM A 10% CREDIT FOR THE DIFFERENCE.

THE STATE WOULD ALSO DEDUCT THAT CLAIM FROM THE CITY'S SHARE OF STATE REVENUE.

IT WOULD COME STRAIGHT OUT OF THAT.

A FISCAL NOTE FROM THE JLBC, WHICH IS THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE BUDGET COMMITTEE.

THIS ONE COULD POSSIBLY COST US OVER 17 MILLION IN THE FIRST YEAR, AND THEN THAT GOES UP EVERY YEAR.

THIS IS ONE OF THE HUGE ONES, AND I KNOW WE HAVE OPPOSING VIEWS FROM OTHER COMMUNITY OUT THERE.

BUT I WOULD DEFINITELY SAY NO ON THIS ONE.

I THINK THAT'S A GENERAL TERM AROUND THEM.

>> YES, CITY MANAGER.

>> WE HAVE SAID NO ON THIS ONE.

>> THEN LAST BUT NOT LEAST ON THE BAD ONES.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> ALONG THOSE LINES, JUST TO REITERATE, WE'VE ALREADY WEIGHED IN AND YOU'RE CHECKING IN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE AGREEING WITH THAT POSITION.

>> YEAH, THESE ONES ARE RETROACTIVE, BECAUSE YOU'RE ALREADY VERY FAMILIAR.

[OVERLAPPING] AND YOU GOT IT.

>> THIS IS A HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION.

IF THIS WAS TO BE PASSED, IT WOULD GO TO THE VOTERS OF THE STATE, AND IT WOULD ASK AGAIN THE VOTERS TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO MAKE THE REGULATION OF EMPLOYEE BENEFITS, INCLUDING WAGES, STATEWIDE ISSUE,

[01:40:01]

AND BAN CITIES FROM FURTHER REGULATING THEM.

IF THIS DOES MAKE IT THROUGH, IT WOULD GO ON THE BALLOT FOR 2024, FOR THE STATE TO DECIDE IF WE WANT TO STILL GO DOWN THAT ROAD OR NOT.

I FIGURED THIS WOULD BE A NEGATIVE AS WELL. AWESOME.

>> MADAM MAYOR, JUST TO COMMENT ON THAT, SEAN, REAL QUICKLY.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF ONE THING THAT I THINK THE STATE LEGISLATURE IS GOING TO PIVOT TOWARDS; IS THESE BALLOT MEASURES, TO GET AROUND THE GOVERNOR'S VETO PEN IN THE CURRENT ERA.

WELL, I DON'T WANT TO GO DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE OF COMMENTING ON BALLOT MEASURES TOO MUCH, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE AN AVENUE, A STRATEGY, AND APPROACH THAT WE NEED TO SCRUTINIZE A LOT.

MAYBE IT'S GOOD, MAYBE IT'S BAD, BUT WE JUST NEED TO BE REALLY [OVERLAPPING]

>> WATCHING IT.

>> LOOKING AT THAT WITH A MICROSCOPE.

THE FINE PRINT ON THESE STATEWIDE BALLOT MEASURES AND VOTER-APPROVED INITIATIVES CAN BECOME VERY CONSEQUENTIAL.

>> ON 2023, I BELIEVE IT WAS, IT WOULD BE IN COMPLETE CONTRADICTION TO OTHER INITIATIVES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN PASSED BY THE VOTERS.

>> [OVERLAPPING] SORRY.

>> EXACTLY.

I'M GOING TO MOVE ON TO SOME GOOD STUFF NOW.

THIS ONE, WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT HB 2543, APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GREATER ARIZONA TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS.

SPECIFICALLY, IT WOULD APPROPRIATE 2.6 MILLION TO THE LONE TREE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS, 5 MILLION TO THE JW POWEL BOULEVARD INTERSTATES 17 OVERPASS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, THEN ANOTHER 3 MILLION TO STATE ROUTE 180 FLOOD MITIGATION IMPROVEMENTS.

WE'RE ALREADY BEHIND THIS ONE AND WE FIGURED THIS WOULD BE A THUMBS UP BECAUSE IT'S AWESOME.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE LANGUAGE OF THAT BILL IF IT CAN BE SENT TO ME DIRECTLY.

I DO LIKE TO BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THESE APPROPRIATIONS WHENEVER WE CAN.

I'M VERY GRATEFUL TO THOSE WHO ARE HELPING TO BRING THEM ABOUT AND THOSE WHO ARE WRITING THEM AND INSERTING THEM.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO ME THAT WE DON'T FIND A FINE PRINT THAT MIGHT CAUSE US TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT OPPOSING VALUES IN ONE PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

AGAIN, JUST ANOTHER UMBRELLA THING TO BE AWARE OF AND KEEP IN MIND. [OVERLAPPING]

>> WHILE IT'S ALWAYS GREAT TO GET MONEY FROM THE STATE, WE KNOW THAT SOMETIMES THERE ARE STRINGS ATTACHED.

I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR, ANYTIME THAT WE SUPPORT AN APPROPRIATIONS BILL, THAT WE KNOW IN ITS ENTIRETY WHAT WE'RE SUPPORTING.

>> THAT WE'RE GETTING FAIR THING FOR THE BUCK DEAL.

AWESOME. COOL. WE'RE GOING TO BE AT SB 1224, STATE PARKS LOTTERY HERITAGE FUND, AND THIS WOULD RESTORE THE 10 MILLION ALLOCATION FROM THE LOTTERY DOLLARS THAT THE STATE GETS BACK TO THE STATE PARKS HERITAGE FUND FOR TRAILS, PROTECTING CULTURAL SITES, AND EDUCATION.

FOR FLAGSTAFF, IT DOES DO ALL THE TRAILS, AND SO IT DEFINITELY WOULD HAVE A PIECE FOR US TO SUPPORT.

AGAIN, WE WILL LOOK FOR THE STRINGS ATTACHED VICE MAYOR AS WELL TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NOTHING COMING WITH THAT.

BUT I WOULD SAY DEFINITELY SUPPORT THAT ONE.

PERFECT. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, WE HAVE SB 1714, AND THIS IS FOR THE ARIZONA TRAIL FUND.

IT'S ANOTHER APPROPRIATIONS BILL AND IT WOULD APPROPRIATE 250,000 TO THE ARIZONA TRAIL FUNDS.

WE DON T KNOW SPECIFIC PROJECTS, BUT AGAIN, ARIZONA TRAIL DOES RUN THROUGH HERE AND SO IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR EVERYBODY.

WE WOULD DEFINITELY SUPPORT THAT ONE AS WELL.

UNFORTUNATELY, I ONLY HAVE THREE GOOD ONES.

BUT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO A SUPPORT LETTER FOR 1224.

THIS IS RETROACTIVE APPROVAL.

THEN THIS WILL RESTORE THE ARIZONA STATE PARKS HERITAGE FUND, WHICH WE'VE ALREADY SENTENCE.

WE JUST WANTED TO GET A THUMBS UP ON THAT TOO, HAVE THAT.

THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. THEN ACTUALLY, THAT IS IT.

IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, EVERYBODY CAN REACH OUT TO ME OR SARAH OR MR. MODESTO OR MR. MURRAY.

WE DO HAVE TODD ON THE LINE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

>> COUNCIL, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

COMMENTS? VICE MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE WITH ME THIS AFTERNOON.

TODD, JUST BECAUSE IT WAS COMING UP, I DO WANT TO ASK YOU IF YOU HAVE

[01:45:01]

ANY COMMENTS OR MAGIC EIGHT BALL SENSE OF THAT QUESTION ABOUT YOUTH ACCESS TO GENDER AFFIRMING CARE AT THIS TIME? JUST BECAUSE IT ALREADY CAME UP ONCE.

>> NO. VICE MAYOR, I REALLY DON'T.

I SHARE YOUR OPINION OF IT, BUT I HAVEN'T BEEN WATCHING THEM BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN A COUNCIL PRIORITY AND I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND RESEARCH IT.

I KNOW THESE THINGS ARE SALIENT.

I KNOW THEY LOWER THE BASE OF POLITICS, AND I GET IT, SO I KNOW WHY THEY COME UP.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WEIGHT THEY HAVE AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY LEGS THEY HAVE, BUT I'LL LOOK INTO IT AND HOPEFULLY BY THE NEXT TIME WE HAVE AN UPDATE OR IF YOU AND I WANT TO TALK OFFLINE, I'LL GIVE YOU MY FEELING FOR IT.

I HAVEN'T BEEN WATCHING THEM TO BE HONEST.

>> THAT'S FINE. AGAIN, IT'S NOT PART OF OUR STATED LEGISLATIVE PRIORITY LIST.

MAYBE WORTH A CONVERSATION DOWN THE ROAD WHEN IT BECOMES TOPICAL ENOUGH.

JUST TO FINISH UP, THERE ARE BILLS THAT I DEFINITELY POSE THAT WE DIDN'T GO OVER IN THIS LIST.

YOU BEGAN BY SAYING THERE'S A LOT MORE BAD BILLS OUT THERE THAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT.

I'LL JUST DO MY PART TO SHARE WITH YOU GUYS OFFLINE SPECIFICALLY WHAT THOSE ARE.

THERE'S SO MANY MOVING PARTS TO THESE.

I DON'T THINK IT'S WORTH EVERYONE'S TIME TO GO THROUGH THEM IN DETAIL RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS PART OF THE DETERMINATION I'M SURE YOU ALREADY MADE, BUT I'LL SEND THOSE INTO YOU. [OVERLAPPING]

>> SO YOU HAVE THAT ON RECORD FROM ME AT LEAST.

>> THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR.

>> VICE MAYOR, WOULD YOU CC ME AND MAKE SURE I KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TO?

>> NO. [LAUGHTER] JUST TEASING YOU, TODD.

>> ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? THANK YOU, SEAN.

WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENTS EITHER. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU COUNCIL.

>> GREAT JOB, SEAN.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE ARE DOWN TO AGENDA ITEM 10C,

[C. Discussion regarding a rate and fee study for water, reclaimed water, and wastewater funds. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Information only.]

DISCUSSION REGARDING A RATE AND FEE STUDY FOR RECLAIMED WATER AND WASTEWATER FUNDS.

WE HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM STAFF.

WELCOME, AARON. GOOD TO SEE YOU HERE IN FRONT OF US.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I'M JUST PULLING THIS UP REAL QUICK.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

AARON YOUNG, WATER RESOURCES MANAGER.

IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE ON YOUR AGENDA TONIGHT TO INTRODUCE THE NEXT RATE AND FEES STUDY FOR WATER, RECLAIMED WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICES.

SHOOT.

SLIDESHOW. I CAN'T SEE IT DOWN.

>> YOU NEED OUT YOUR NOTES?

>> THANK YOU. NO, WE DON'T NEED NOTES. THANK YOU.

I HAVE THE PLEASURE OF INTRODUCING OUR NEW WATER SERVICES DIRECTOR WHO WILL BE PRESENTING THIS TONIGHT.

I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT THIS IS A PRETTY ROUTINE TOPIC FOR YOU COMING WITH 25 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WITH ANOTHER UTILITY.

WITH THAT, I'LL INTRODUCE MR. SHANNON JONES.

>> MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS SHANNON JONES.

I'M THE WATER SERVICES DIRECTOR.

I'M HERE WITH THIS INFORMATIONAL ITEM TO REALLY JUST LAY SOME GROUNDWORK AS WE TALK ABOUT [NOISE] REALLY PLANNING DOCUMENTS WITHIN UTILITY.

A FEW OF THOSE PLANNING DOCUMENTS THAT YOU WILL HEAR A LOT ABOUT ARE THINGS LIKE MASTER PLANS, FINANCIAL PLANS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS.

AGAIN, A LOT OF PLANS WITHIN THE UTILITIES, SOME OF THEM INTERACT DIRECTLY WITH EACH OTHER AND SOME BUILD ON TOP OF EACH OTHER.

THE STUDY THAT I WANT TO SHARE WITH ABOUT TONIGHT IS A PIECE OF A PLANNING DOCUMENT.

OBVIOUSLY, SPECIFICALLY THE FINANCIAL PLAN FOR THE UTILITY.

UTILITY DOES MAINTAIN A FIVE-YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN THAT LOOKS AT MANY ASPECTS.

SOME OF THOSE ASPECTS WOULD COME FROM A WRITTEN FEE STUDY.

A STUDY LOOKING AT PARTICULAR COMPONENTS THAT REALLY MAKE UP HOW THE UTILITY SPENDS MONEY, WHERE REVENUES COME FROM, HOW MUCH WATER PRODUCES, AND HOW WATER IS USED BY THE COMMUNITY.

[01:50:02]

AGAIN, WITH THAT BEING SAID, IN ORDER TO DEVELOP AN UPDATE SOME OF OUR PLANS REQUIRES THESE TYPES OF STUDIES TO REALLY TAKE AN INWARD LOOK AT OUR DATA, TO CHALLENGE ASSUMPTIONS AND TO REALLY BENCHMARK AND TESTS.

ARE WE ON THE RIGHT PATH WITH MAINTAINING A SUCCESSFUL UTILITY AND HELPING TO SUPPORT THE SUCCESS OF A COMMUNITY, SUCH AS FLAGSTAFF.

DON'T CHANGE THIS, I'LL MULTITASK.

RATE STUDY IS REALLY A FINANCIAL DOCUMENT.

IT TAKES A LOOK AT, AGAIN, WHAT ARE OPERATIONAL COSTS? UPCOMING AND EATING REPLACEMENTS? WHAT DOES OUR CAPITAL PLAN LOOK LIKE? WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF DEBT SERVICE THAT THE UTILITY IS CARRYING? THESE EXPENSES, MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE COVERED BY REVENUES, REVENUES THAT COME IN FROM SOURCES OF HOW MUCH WATER IS PRODUCED, HOW MUCH CUSTOMER USES, AND HOW DO YOU COMPARE THOSE? AGAIN, LOOKING AT TOTAL REVENUE, WHAT IS THE THE SUSTAINABILITY? WHAT IS THE PREDICTABILITY OF THOSE REVENUES? THESE WOULD ALL BE THINGS THAT ARE RESTRUCTURE STUDY WOULD LOOK AT.

ENSURES THAT WE ARE IN A POSITION THAT OUR RATE STRUCTURE AND THE FEES THAT WE CHARGE ARE INTENTIONAL AND THEY'RE ALSO DEFENDABLE AND TRANSPARENT TO THE PUBLIC AND THOSE CUSTOMERS THAT WE SERVE.

I THINK, IN ADDITION TO JUST LOOKING AT HOW MUCH EXPENSE ARE COMING IN, HOW MUCH REVENUES COVER THOSE EXPENSE, DEBT SERVICE, AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS, A STUDY ALSO GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THINGS ABOVE THE BOTTOM LINE.

AGAIN, WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SPECIFICALLY COUNTY CITY COUNCILORS ON OUR WATER COMMISSION, IS THE DESIRE TO TAKE A LOOK AT ADDITIONAL THINGS SUCH AS HOW OUR RATES ARE TIERED, HOW CHARGES ARE DISTRIBUTED AGAINST CUSTOMER CLASSES TO REVISIT ALLOCATIONS BETWEEN RECLAIMED WATER AND THE ACTUAL TREATMENT OF SANITARY SEWER? THE ABILITY TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT WILL SEASONAL CHARGES LOOK LIKE? HOW WOULD THAT IMPACT OUTDOOR AND INDOOR WATERING? WHAT WOULD THAT MEAN FOR THE COMMUNITY? DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CAPACITIES, BUY-IN FEES, CONSTRUCTION, AND DEVELOPMENT, HOW DOES THAT IMPACT US AS A COMMUNITY AND HOW DOES IT AFFECT OUR RATE STRUCTURE? ALSO EVALUATING THOSE SOCIAL AND BUSINESS EQUITY LENS, AGAIN, LOOKING FOR EFFICIENCY VERSUS VOLUME.

I THINK A COUPLE OF SLIDES THAT ARE INFORMATIONAL ONLY ARE EXAMPLES OF WHAT WE WOULD SEE AS THE DATA COME THROUGH.

BUT REALLY IDENTIFYING OUR WATER CLASSIFICATIONS, AGAIN, RESIDENTIAL FIRE SERVICES, DIFFERENT CUSTOMER ACCOUNTS.

BUT WHAT IS OUR BASE CHARGES? WHAT ARE OUR PEAK DEMANDS? AND THE CUSTOMER RELATED CLASSES, LIKE THESE ARE THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE LOOKED AT, AND FROM THOSE, HOW DO WE DEVELOP THROUGH THE DATA THINGS SUCH AS AVERAGE FLOWS, PEAK FLOWS, METERS AND BILLS, AND HOW IS OUR COST ASSOCIATED WITH PROVIDING EACH ONE OF THOSE SERVICES? VERY SIMILAR FOR WASTEWATER, YOU WOULD HAVE SEWER CLASSIFICATIONS.

AGAIN, BY VOLUME, BY CAPACITY, THE STRENGTH OF THE WASTEWATER.

AGAIN, HOW MUCH TREATMENT DOES IT TAKE TO ADDRESS THAT LEVEL OF CONCENTRATION AND CUSTOMER RELATED CLASSES.

ALSO COMING UP WITH WHAT WERE THE STREAMS, PEAK FLOWS, AVERAGE FLOWS? AGAIN, THESE ARE SOME EXAMPLES HOW WE WOULD TAKE THE DATA AND BREAK IT DOWN INTO VISUALS.

WE WOULD ALSO DO THE SAME FOR RECLAIMED WATER.

AGAIN, TAKING A PRINCIPLE SUCH AS A COST OF SERVICE STUDY, LOOKING AT THE SERVICES WE PROVIDE AND WHAT ARE THE COST TO PROVIDE EACH OF THOSE SERVICES, AND HOW THOSE ARE DELINEATED ACROSS THE CUSTOMER CLASSES.

AGAIN, A RATE AND FEE STUDY WOULD ALLOW US TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT DATA, AND AGAIN, ADDITIONAL OUTSIDE PRINCIPLES OF LOOKING AT THE DATA THROUGH DIFFERENT LENSES TO MAKING SURE THAT THAT MATCHES.

IT IS ANTICIPATED PROCESS LIKE THIS WOULD TAKE SOMEWHERE 12-18 MONTHS.

A LOT OF DATA THAT WOULD BE PROCESSED, THAT WOULD BE LOOKED AT, MODELS THAT WOULD BE BUILT.

TAKE INTO ACCOUNT OTHER THINGS LIKE EVALUATE INSENSITIVE PRIORITIES, POLICY REVIEWS, AND HOW THOSE ALIGNED WITH OUR BUSINESS PRACTICES.

WHAT ARE THE REVENUE NEEDS AND HOW ARE THOSE ASSESSED? OF COURSE, THE COST OF SERVICE, KNOWING WHAT IT COSTS US TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES.

I LOOK AT RATES, STRUCTURE, AND DESIGN AND ALTERNATIVES.

THERE'S MULTIPLE WAYS TO DO THAT.

WHAT DOES EACH ONE, WHAT ARE THE PROS AND CONS THAT WILL BRING TO THE COMMUNITY? ALLOWING FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND EDUCATION.

[01:55:04]

WORKING THROUGH A PROCESS, THROUGH A COMMUNITY.

AGAIN, WORKING TO BE TRANSPARENT THAT THE THINGS WE'RE WORKING ON THAT THAT DATA IS MADE AVAILABLE.

BUT ALSO ENCOURAGING THAT FEEDBACK TO REALLY TALK ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT WE ALIGN WITH THE VALUES AND THE DIRECTION WHERE THE TARGETS THAT THE COMMUNITY IS TRYING TO REACH AND THE ROLE THAT WATER SURFACE IS PLAYS IN THAT.

IF NEEDED, ADOPTING THOSE STRATEGIES AND STRUCTURES TO MEET THAT.

I THINK JUST TO PAUSE ON THAT ONE FOR A SECOND, AGAIN, I BELIEVE TAKING A DIFFERENT LOOK TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WATER RATE STRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE, SETTING ASIDE HOW MUCH IT COSTS AND WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR WHAT.

BUT THE STRUCTURE THAT WE DO THAT I DO BELIEVE WOULD REFLECT THE VALUES OF THE COMMUNITY.

MY SIMPLE EXAMPLE WOULD BE, AGAIN, A COMMUNITY WITH A VALUE AND WATER CONSERVATION WOULD TYPICALLY HAVE AN INCREASING CHARGED BUCKET, MEANING THE MORE WATER YOU USE, THE MORE THAT YOU WOULD PAY.

IT WOULDN'T BE A FIXED RATE WHERE EVERYBODY JUST PAYS THE SAME AMOUNT.

THE MORE YOU USE, THE MORE CHARGES.

LOOKING AT THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF RATE STRUCTURE, I CAN SEE THAT KIND OF ALREADY BUILT, ESPECIALLY IN THE RESIDENTIAL, WHICH LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THAT ONE OF THE VALUES OF THE COMMUNITY IS CONSERVATION.

AS MORE WATER IS BEING USED, I CAN ALSO SEE AN INCREASE IN NET COST.

DEFINITELY, INCENTIVIZING THE CONSERVATION AND MY WILLINGNESS TO USE LESS WATER, AND THEN I CAN SEE THE RETURN ON THAT INVESTMENT.

AGAIN, HEARING FROM THE GOVERNING BODY, WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE ACROSS OTHER CLASSES? AGAIN, WHAT WOULD BE THE PROS AND CONS OF THOSE? WITH THAT BEING SAID, AGAIN, A COST OF SERVICE TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHERE IT COSTS US TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE.

HOW DO OUR RATES AND REVENUES COVER THAT IS A GREAT FINANCIAL LOOK? OUR ABILITY TO DIG INTO SOME MORE POLICY AND SENSITIVE MATTERS AND ENGAGE THE PUBLIC TO A CONVERSATION IS REALLY OUR DESIRE MOVING FORWARD.

IT IS TYPICAL FOR A RATE STRUCTURE TO OCCUR EVERY 3-5 YEARS.

OUR POLICY ACTUALLY CALLS FOR IT TO BE DONE EVERY THREE YEARS.

IT HAS BEEN A COUPLE OF YEARS BEHIND ON THAT, AND WE'RE LOOKING TO RAMP UP TO GET THAT DONE.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING TO GET THESE THINGS IDENTIFIED, GET THEM INTO A SCOPE AND A SHORT TIME IN THE FUTURE COMING BEFORE THE GOVERNING BODY WITH A RECOMMENDATION, TURN TO A CONTRACT TO ACCOMPLISH THIS RATE AND FEE STRUCTURE.

PRIOR TO THAT, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE ONE MORE CHANCE TO STAND BEFORE YOU AND TALK ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS TO ME, BUT ALSO TO HEAR FROM THE GOVERNING BODY ON ANY CONCERNS YOU HAVE OR WHAT THAT MEANS TO YOU.

WITH THAT, I WILL STAND FOR QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION, COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY?

>> LET ME JUST MAKE A QUICK COMMENT.

I WAS ON THE WATER COMMISSION WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS A COUPLE OF TIMES AGO.

THE PHILOSOPHY THEN, AND I THINK SHOULD BE NOW, IS THAT WHEN PEOPLE USE A LOT OF WATER THAT THEY SHOULD PAY MORE PER UNIT VOLUME.

IN OTHER WORDS, REWARD PEOPLE THAT CONSERVE WATER AND PEOPLE THAT USE COPIOUS AMOUNTS OF WATER SHOULD PAY FOR IT.

THAT ENCOURAGES CONSERVATION.

I GUESS THE ONLY QUESTION IS, DO WE WANT TO EXTEND THAT TO SAY RECLAIMED WATER ALSO? WE MIGHT WANT TO DO THAT.

ONE THING TO KEEP IN MIND IS RECLAIMED WATER IS A FUTURE WATER SOURCE.

THE OTHER THING I WONDER OUT LOUD IS, AT WHAT POINT ARE WE GOING TO START THINKING ABOUT FULL TREATMENT OF OUR WATER? THIS COUNCIL, IT WAS THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTUALLY, WENT DOWN AND DID A TOUR OF THE SCOTTSDALE WATER PLANT, AND THEY DO A MUCH MORE THOROUGH TREATMENT OF THEIR WATER THAN WE DO.

AT SOME POINT, I THINK WE WILL HAVE TO DO THAT TOO FOR VARIOUS REASONS I WON'T GET INTO.

I GUESS THE QUESTION IN MY MIND, IS WILL WE START THINKING ABOUT THAT NOW OR ARE WE JUST GOING TO IGNORE THAT FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS? AWAY WITH THAT.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? THANK YOU SO MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT.

>> YOU'RE WELCOMED TO THE TEAM.

WE HAD NO PUBLIC COMMENT REGISTERED FOR THIS ITEM, CORRECT?

[02:00:01]

>> MAYOR, WE DO NOT. YEAH, I DIDN'T THINK SO.

>> ALL RIGHT. BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A 20 MINUTE BREAK.

WE ARE DOWN TO ITEM NUMBER 10D,

[D. Discussion regarding potential resolution on City Council’s position regarding United States Supreme Court Decision of Dobbs v. Jackson and regarding the Arizona legislature’s enactment of laws on abortion STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION Discussion and possible direction]

DISCUSSION REGARDING POTENTIAL RESOLUTION ON CITY COUNCILS POSITION REGARDING UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISION OF DOBBS V. JACKSON, AND REGARDING THE ARIZONA LEGISLATURES ENACTMENT OF LAWS ON ABORTION.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL STERLING SOLOMON, YOUR CITY ATTORNEY.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THIS AND JUST GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW, IF YOU WILL, OF WHAT THIS AGENDA ITEM IS TONIGHT AND WHAT YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS.

IN AUGUST OF 2022 PETITION WAS RECEIVED BY THE COUNCIL REQUESTING THAT THE FLAGSTAFF CITY COUNCIL, "DISCUSS PROTECTING FLAGSTAFF RESIDENTS FROM POSSIBLE ARREST AND PROSECUTION FOR PROVIDING, ACCESSING OR ASSISTING WITH ABORTION SERVICES." NOT LONG AFTER THAT, THEN COUNCIL MEMBER ASLIN MADE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL TO DISCUSS A POTENTIAL RESOLUTION ON THE MATTER OF ABORTION IN LIGHT OF THE RECENT US SUPREME COURT DECISION IN DOBBS VERSUS JACKSON, WHICH OVERTURN ROE V. WADE.

ALSO IN LIGHT OF STATE LEGISLATION RELATED TO ABORTION.

JUST FOR EVERYONE'S INFORMATION HERE, HERE IN ARIZONA, THE CITIES OF TUCSON AND PHOENIX ADOPTED RESOLUTIONS EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO DOBBS AND COMMENTING ON STATE LEGISLATION RELATED TO ABORTION.

FLAGSTAFF CITY COUNCIL NOW HAS THE SAME OPTION, IT ALSO HAS THE OPTION NOT TO MAKE ANY KIND OF STATEMENT BY RESOLUTION AT ALL.

THAT IS WHAT TONIGHT'S AGENDA ITEM IS.

IT'S ESSENTIALLY FOR COUNCIL TO DISCUSS POTENTIALLY GIVING DIRECTION TO MY OFFICE TO BRING A POTENTIAL RESOLUTION SIMILAR TO TUCSON OR PHOENIX'S BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION ON MARCH 7TH THAT THE REGULAR MEETING, OR TO NOT GIVE SUCH DIRECTION.

IF COUNCIL DIRECTS MY OFFICE TO BRING BACK A POTENTIAL RESOLUTION, IT WILL BE VERY SIMILAR TO THAT OF TUCSON AND PHOENIX.

AS WE WERE REMINDED DURING COVID, THE STATE OF ARIZONA REGULATES THE HEALTH INDUSTRY NOT CITIES.

IF YOU DIRECT MY OFFICE TO BRING A RESOLUTION BACK TO YOU FOR CONSIDERATION, IT WILL BE VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT TUCSON AND PHOENIX DID, I.E, IT WOULD NOT CREATE A LAW, BUT IT WOULD MAKE A STATEMENT ONLY.

WITH THAT, MAYOR, I'LL TURN IT BACK TO YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE HAVE A NUMBER OF COMMENT CARDS AND WE HAVE SOME ONLINE COMMENTERS.

I'M GOING TO TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE I OPEN IT UP TO DISCUSSION FROM CITY COUNCIL.

AS I SAID, WE HAVE QUITE A FEW, SO IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOUR VOICE HAS BEEN HEARD IN OTHER STATEMENTS AND YOU WANT TO WAVE MAKING A STATEMENT, THAT'S FINE.

JUST LET ME KNOW WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME.

FIRST STEP WE HAVE DEBORAH BLOCK.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS DEBORAH BLOCK.

I'M A 30-YEAR RESIDENT OF FLAGSTAFF, A MEMBER OF THE FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE AND A MOTHER.

LAST YEAR IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE DOBBS DECISION OVERTURNING THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO ABORTION, THERE WAS A VIGOROUS EFFORT TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION REGARDING THE RIGHT TO REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM.

ALTHOUGH THERE WAS LIMITED TIME AND RESOURCES TO QUALIFY FOR THE 2022 BALLOT, IN COCONINO COUNTY, WE COLLECTED SIGNATURES FROM 30 PERCENT OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORATE IN 35 DAYS.

WE HAD PEOPLE LINING UP TO SIGN WHEREVER WE WERE IN A PUBLIC SPACE.

WE KNOW THAT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC SUPPORTS THE RIGHT TO ABORTION.

ON FEBRUARY SECOND, TWO MEMBERS OF THE FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE JOINED THE FIRST MEETING OF GOVERNOR HUBS REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS BALLOT MEASURE COALITION.

WE ARE A COALITION OF NATIONAL, STATE AND LOCAL ORGANIZATION TEST WITH CRAFTING AND ESTABLISHING A LEGAL PATHWAY TO REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE FOR EVERY ARIZONAN.

THE GOVERNOR IS COMMITTED, AS ARE WE, TO ENSURING THAT BANDS AND OTHER RESTRICTIONS ON REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE AND ACCESS BE ELIMINATED.

[02:05:01]

I WAS 15 WHEN ROE V. WADE BECAME LAW.

AS THE YOUNGEST OF FOUR GIRLS, I WAS ALREADY AWARE OF THE HARDSHIPS ENDURED WHEN A PREGNANCY WAS UNWANTED, FOR WHATEVER REASON.

LAW WAS AN IMPERFECT LAW AND EQUITABLE ACCESS WAS NEVER ENSURED.

WE ARE NOW IN A POSITION TO RECONSIDER TRUE BODILY AUTONOMY FOR EVERY PERSON.

CONTROL OVER ONE'S BODY IS FUNDAMENTAL TO FREEDOM.

CONSIDERING THAT WE ARE EXTENSIVELY A NATION OF LAWS THAT REGULATE WHAT IS AND WHAT IS NOT LEGAL, IT IS ABSURD FOR PEOPLE TO ARGUE THAT ONE GOVERNMENT, ANY GOVERNMENT BODY AS REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE PEOPLE, NOT ENGAGE IN ADVOCATING FOR THEIR CONSTITUENTS.

ON JUNE 24, 2020 SIX UNELECTED, UNACCOUNTABLE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES UPENDED THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY.

IT IS OUR DUTY TO RECLAIM IT.

I ASK THAT YOU MOVE FORWARD IN SUPPORTING OUR CITY RESOLUTION, AS WELL AS AN INITIATED AMENDMENT FOR THE 2024 BALLOT.

THANK YOU [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU. ONE THING I DID FORGET TO MENTION, BUT YOU'LL SEE IT WHEN YOU'RE UP HERE, IS THAT EACH SPEAKER IS GIVEN THREE MINUTES AND YOU'LL SEE IT START BLINKING RED WHEN YOU'RE GETTING DOWN IN YOUR TIME.

NEXT, WE HAVE ERICA CHRISTIANSON.

>> HELLO. MY NAME IS ERICA CHRISTIANSON.

I LIVE WITH MY HUSBAND AND ALMOST SIX-YEAR-OLD DAUGHTER IN SEDONA, WHERE WE MOVE TO BE CLOSER TO MY MOM OR GRAMMY.

I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AS A NEIGHBOR WHOSE FAMILY RELIES ON FLAGSTAFF FOR HEALTH CARE.

LIKE OUR KIDS, EXCELLENT PEDIATRICIAN AT FLAGSTAFF MEDICAL CENTER.

I UNDERSTAND THAT ABORTION CAN BE A HARD ISSUE FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE TO TALK ABOUT.

I THANK THE COUNCIL FOR TAKING IT UP TODAY.

I USED TO BE SOMEONE WHO DIDN'T THINK ABOUT ABORTION MUCH NEVER MIND, TALK ABOUT IT IN PUBLIC.

BUT THAT WAS BEFORE MY HUSBAND GAREN AND I STARTED DOWN A LONG HARD ROAD TO BECOMING PARENTS.

WE WERE MONTHS INTO A HIGH-RISK PREGNANCY WHEN WE LEARNED THE COMPLICATIONS WERE MUCH WORSE THAN OUR DOCTORS HAD THOUGHT.

IN COUNCIL WITH OUR DOCTORS, WE DECIDED TO HAVE AN ABORTION, WHICH FELT LIKE THE LEAST TERRIBLE OF ALL OF OUR TERRIBLE OPTIONS.

BUT THEN WE LEARNED WE WERE PASSED OUR STATES CUTOFF A LINE WE DIDN'T KNOW EXISTED UNTIL WE HAD CROSSED IT.

NOT ONLY WOULD I NOT BE ABLE TO GET CARE FROM THE DOCTORS I HAD COME TO KNOW AND TRUST, I MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO GET CARE AT ALL.

THEN MY DOCTOR TOLD US ABOUT A CLINIC IN COLORADO THAT SPECIALIZES IN COMPLEX CASES LIKE MINE.

QUICKLY, WE CHARGED LAST-MINUTE FLIGHTS, RENTAL CAR, AND HOTEL ROOM.

AN OUT-OF-STATE ABORTION WASN'T COVERED BY MY INSURANCE, SO MY MOM TOOK THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OUT OF HER RETIREMENT FUND TO PAY FOR IT.

ON ONE HAND, IT FELT CONFUSING AND PUNISHING FOR THE LAW TO INSERT ITSELF INTO MY PERSONAL HEALTH CARE EMERGENCY.

ON THE OTHER HAND, WE FELT INCREDIBLY LUCKY TO HAVE ACCESS TO THAT MONEY AND WONDERED HOW OTHERS IN OUR SITUATION DID WITHOUT IT.

AFTER IT WAS ALL OVER, WE FELT BOTH INCREDIBLY SAD AND RELIEVED.

OF COURSE, TERRIBLE THINGS HAPPEN, BUT WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO LEGISLATE AWAY BAD PREGNANCY OUTCOMES.

WHAT WE CAN CONTROL ARE THE LAWS THAT PUNISH US FOR THEM, OR PUSH CARE OUT OF REACH, ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE ALREADY STRUGGLING.

ABORTION BANS MEAN ABORTION IS ILLEGAL AT SOME POINT IN PREGNANCY, CARRYING HARSH CRIMINAL AND CIVIL PENALTIES.

THEY CREATE PRESSURE, EXACERBATE INEQUITIES, AND DENY CARE TO THOSE NOT ABLE TO SURMOUNT THE MASSIVE BARRIERS LIKE I COULD.

TODAY MY HUSBAND AND I ARE PARENTS OF A SMART, ALMOST SIX-YEAR-OLD DAUGHTER.

SHE EXISTS BECAUSE I WAS ABLE TO GET A SAFE ABORTION.

IT IS DEEP GRATITUDE FOR THE DOCTORS AND NURSES WHO CARED FOR ME AND DEEP CONCERN FOR MY DAUGHTER'S FUTURE, COMPELLING ME TO BE HERE TODAY.

THANK YOU [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU. EXCUSE ME.

COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY HAS A QUESTION. ERICA.

>> COULD YOU COME BACK UP? I JUST WANTED TO TALK TO YOU BECAUSE YOU'VE HAD TO GO THROUGH THIS AND I'M SURE YOU DID NOT ENJOY ANY PART OF THAT.

IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THE LAW DECISION SET THE LIMIT OF WHEN YOU COULD HAVE AN ABORTION AT VIABILITY.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE OR DO YOU THINK EVEN THAT RULE IS TOO BURDENSOME FOR SOMEONE?

>> I THINK THAT THE HUMAN BODY DOES NOT FOLLOW LEGAL TIMELINES AND I THINK THAT WHEN THE LAW DECIDES TO INSERT ITSELF INTO OUR BODIES,

[02:10:03]

INTO OUR HEALTH CARE AND DRAW LINES ABOUT WHO IS ABLE TO ACCESS CARE AND WHO ISN'T, I THINK PEOPLE ARE LEFT OUT.

THE PEOPLE MOST LIKELY LEFT OUT ARE YOUNG PEOPLE, VERY YOUNG PEOPLE, PEOPLE OF COLOR, PARTICULARLY BLACK WOMEN WHO HAVE MUCH HIGHER RATES OF MATERNAL MORTALITY.

I THINK ABORTION BANS ARE NOT ROOTED IN HEALTH OR SCIENCE, WHICH IS WHY THEY'RE WHOLLY REJECTED BY ACOG AND SMFM.

SO IF WE LOOK AT THE EXPERTS ON THIS ISSUE AND WHAT THEY SAY, THEY BELIEVE NO ABORTION BAN IS JUST.

AGAIN, THESE ARE CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES.

I MEAN, IT'S SUCH A HARSH PUNISHMENT FOR PEOPLE GOING THROUGH WHAT TIMES ARE URGENT HEALTH CARE ISSUES, AND I THINK THE LAW OF GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE TO REMOVE BARRIERS, NOT TO BUILD THEM.

>> I WANT TO THANK YOU.

I'M GETTING EMOTIONAL.

I'VE NEVER GOTTEN EMOTIONAL FOR MY SEVEN YEARS ON COUNCIL BEFORE.

I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR COMING UP AND SPEAKING TO US FROM YOUR HEART. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU [APPLAUSE].

>> GAREN MARSHALL.

>> HI. MY NAME IS GAREN MARSHALL.

I'M ERICA'S HUSBAND, ACTUALLY.

YOU KNOW WHERE WE LIVE, WE'RE FROM SEDONA.

WE HAVE FAMILY HERE IN FLAGSTAFF AS WELL, AND WE COME HERE OFTEN TO SPEND MONEY AND GET HEALTHCARE AND SEE THE SNOW.

[LAUGHTER] SITTING HERE TODAY I HEARD A NUMBER OF ISSUES IMPORTANT TO THIS COMMUNITY.

THINGS LIKE SNOW AND ICE REMOVAL, TRAFFIC AND PARKING, FLOODING, ZONING, EDUCATION, WATER, STUFF LIKE THAT.

ALL OF IT MAKES SENSE, BUT IN THE FIRST COMMENT TODAY, THE SPEAKER REFERRED TO THIS ISSUE OF ABORTION AS A DISTRACTION, LIKE A NATIONAL ISSUE OUTSIDE OF THE PURVIEW OF THIS COUNCIL.

SOME OTHERS MAY SHARE THAT VIEW, BUT I WANTED TO CHALLENGE THAT.

ARIZONA HAS OVER 40 ABORTION RESTRICTIONS ON THE BOOKS.

THESE INCLUDE A 15-WEEK BAN ON ABORTIONS PERFORMED BY PHYSICIANS, A CIVIL WAR-ERA TOTAL BAN ON ABORTION THAT THREATENS ANYONE ELSE WITH A 2-5 YEAR PRISON SENTENCE, A MANDATORY 24-HOUR WAITING PERIOD REQUIRING TWO VISITS, WHICH IS A HUGE BURDEN ON RURAL FOLKS.

A TELEMEDICINE PRESCRIPTION BAN ON FDA-APPROVED ABORTION PILLS, A BAN ON OTHER MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS PROVIDING ABORTION CARE WITHIN THEIR SCOPE OF PRACTICE, AND THERE'S MANY MORE.

THESE RESTRICTIONS DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECT YOUNGER PEOPLE, LOW-INCOME PEOPLE, RURAL COMMUNITIES, AND COMMUNITIES OF COLOR.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THESE LAWS AFFECT PEOPLE.

FOR ANYONE AFFECTED BY THESE LAWS, I ASSURE YOU THIS QUICKLY STOPS BEING A NATIONAL ISSUE OR EVEN A STATE ISSUE, IT'S A PERSONAL ISSUE.

IT WAS VERY PERSONAL FOR ME AND MY WIFE.

IT SURE WOULD MEAN A LOT TO FOLKS IN THIS COMMUNITY STRUGGLING TO ACCESS ABORTION CARE OVER ALL OF THOSE BANS IF THEY KNEW THAT YOU, THEIR CITY COUNCIL, THEIR MAYOR, HAD THEIR BACKS.

I KNOW IT WOULD HAVE MEANT A LOT TO US IF THAT HAD HAPPENED IN OUR SITUATION.

A RESOLUTION ADDRESSING THIS SENDS A MESSAGE.

IT SAYS THAT THE TAXPAYER-FUNDED RESOURCES THIS CITY NEEDS FOR ALL THOSE OTHER LOCAL CONCERNS WON'T BE USED INSTEAD TO TARGET AND PUNISH PREGNANT PEOPLE AND THEIR DOCTORS.

I ENCOURAGE YOU TO PUSH THE LEGAL LIMITS COUNCIL ON WHAT YOU CAN DO AS A BODY.

>> GOOD EVENING, AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

ROSANNA TAR.

MY NAME IS ROSANNA TAR.

I'M A WOMAN, AND I'M OPPOSED TO ABORTION.

I'M A MOTHER OF FIVE CHILDREN.

WOMEN DESERVE BETTER THAN ABORTION.

NOW I KNOW THAT THERE ARE LOTS AND LOTS OF DIFFICULT SITUATIONS OUT THERE.

BUT WOMEN DESERVE LOVING, EMOTIONAL, AND SOMETIMES PHYSICAL HEALTH.

ABORTION HUBS WOMEN EMOTIONALLY, SPIRITUALLY, AND OFTEN PHYSICALLY.

WOMEN DO DIE FROM LEGAL ABORTIONS, AND THAT INCLUDES THE ABORTION PILL.

[02:15:01]

THAT'S WHY THERE ARE GROUPS LIKE SILENT NO MORE, RACHEL'S VINEYARD, AND OTHERS TO HELP WOMEN WHO ARE FORCED ABORTING.

IT'S REALIZED ABOUT A 60% OF THE ABORTIONS ARE PERFORMED ON WOMEN WHO ARE FORCED, COERCED, AND PRESSURED INTO ABORTION.

WHERE ARE THEIR RIGHTS? BUT I DIDN'T COME HERE TO DEBATE THE ABORTION ISSUE, I CAME TO SAY YOU DO NOT REPRESENT ME AND THE MORE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THAT I KNOW IN MAKING ANY RESOLUTION REGARDING THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISION OF DOBBS VS JACKSON, OR THE ARIZONA LEGISLATURES' ENACTMENT OF LAWS ON ABORTION.

YOU WERE ELECTED TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF ALL FLAGSTAFF CITIZENS.

YOUR JOB IS FUNDING THE PLACE, TAKING CARE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THIS TOWN, FLOOD MITIGATION, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, ETC.

ABORTION IS AN INCREDIBLY DIVISIVE HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE.

FOR THE FLAGSTAFF CITY COUNCIL, TO ISSUE POSITION STATEMENT ON ABORTION AS THOUGH THIS STATEMENT REFLECTS THE ATTITUDES AND BELIEFS OF ALL FLAGSTAFF CITIZENS IS HEAVY-HANDED AND DISINGENUOUS.

RECENT POLLS INDICATED THAT MORE THAN 50% OF AMERICANS SUPPORT RESTRICTIONS OF SOME KIND OR ANOTHER ON ABORTIONS.

SO PLEASE DO NOT MAKE ANY PROCLAMATION ON THIS ISSUE.

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.

>> THANK YOU, ROSANNA. SANDRA ENGELKE.

DID I PRONOUNCE THAT CORRECTLY?

>> YOU DID PERFECTLY VERY WELL.

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL FOR GIVING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY.

I'D ASK THAT THOSE THAT DON'T SHARE MY OPINION WOULD BE RESPECTFUL AND NOT BE SHAKING THEIR HANDS OR COMMENTING BECAUSE THAT'S HOW WE LEARN AND ARE RESPECTFUL TO EACH OTHER, WHICH I THINK IS GREAT FOR OUR CITY.

AS A RESIDENT OF FLAGSTAFF FOR NEARLY 45 YEARS, RAISED ALL FIVE CHILDREN HERE INCLUDING FOUR STRONG, INDEPENDENT BUSINESS OWNER AND WOMEN THAT OUR TEACHERS, OUR FAMILY DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF MAKING AN OFFICIAL RESOLUTION ON THIS MATTER.

IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE OR IN THE SCOPE OF THIS COUNCIL TO MAKE A STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS OF FLAGSTAFF ON THE MOST DIVISIVE SUBJECT IN OUR COUNTRY.

THE COUNCIL IS CHARGED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY TO "PROTECT, AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL," AS STATED IN THE MISSION STATEMENT, FOR THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF.

IT WOULD BE PRUDENT FOR COUNCIL TO SAVE THEIR ENERGY AND PERSONAL OPINIONS TO FOCUS ON PROTECTING OUR CITY BY PROVIDING EXCELLENT FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES, SUPPORTING LAW ENFORCEMENT, ENHANCING ALCOHOL AND ADDICTION SERVICES, ENHANCING FLOOD CONTROL AND FIRE SUPPRESSION, AND HELPING OUR HOMELESS POPULATION, AND ENSURING OUR CHILDREN CAN PLAY SAFELY AT A CITY PARK WITHOUT THE REAL THREAT OF WITNESSING A DRUNKEN FIGHT OR PUBLIC URINATION.

ASK YOUR MOMS AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH WHEN WE GO TO THORPE PARK, WHEELER PARK. IT'S AWFUL.

WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THOSE SITUATIONS.

PLEASE COUNCIL, I ASK YOU TO STAY IN YOUR LANE AND MANAGE THE INCREASING CRIME AND COST OF LIVING IN FLAGSTAFF, THE JOB THAT YOU WERE ELECTED TO DO.

PLEASE RESPECT THE DIVERSITY OF ALL THE CITIZENS THAT CALL FLAGSTAFF THEIR HOME, AND REFRAIN FROM ISSUING AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT ON THIS POLITICALLY CHARGED AND DIVISIVE ISSUE.

PLEASE RESPECT MY OPINION, I WILL RESPECT YOUR OPINION AND LET THIS GO THROUGH THE COURTS AND THROUGH LEGISLATION AND HANDLE IT THERE.

BUT I THINK IT'S OUT OF PLACE FOR THIS CITY, WHO WE COULD FIND 50% IN SUPPORT OF THIS ISSUE, 50% AGAINST.

PLEASE BRING OUR CITY TOGETHER AND DO NOT ISSUE A PROCLAMATION.

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.

>> THANK YOU, SANDRA.

EMMA SHREINER.

>> HI.

I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING PREPARED.

[02:20:01]

I'M JUST GOING TO SPEAK TO YOU FROM MY HEART.

I AM A RESIDENT OF FLAGSTAFF.

I GREW UP IN A TINY TOWN CALLED CORNVILLE, ABOUT 45-MINUTES SOUTH AND I WANT TO BRING ATTENTION TO THE INTERSECTION OF SEXUAL ASSAULT.

TRIGGER WARNING FOR ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT HAS HAD AN EXPERIENCE OR DOESN'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT THAT.

I'M ABOUT TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

WHEN I WAS IN COLLEGE, I WENT TO NYU.

I WAS ABOUT 21 AND AN INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENTLY SEXUALLY ASSAULTED ME.

I WANTED TO DIE.

I FELT LIKE I HAD DIED, AND IN THE WAKE OF THAT, I WASN'T THINKING ABOUT PLAN B. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT THERE ARE RESOURCES AVAILABLE IN THE COMMUNITY AND I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT VICTIM WITNESS SERVICES.

I TRIED TO GO TO OUR POLICE.

I DIDN'T EVEN REALLY LIKE POLICE, BUT I TRIED BECAUSE I WAS TOLD THAT'S WHAT YOU DO.

JUST TO GET AN ORDER OF PROTECTION, AND I WAS ASKED IF I HAD A STRONG MAN TO GO SLEEP NEXT TO TONIGHT TO FEEL BETTER, AND I'M ALSO HERE AS A RESULT OF A LEGAL LIFE-SAVING ABORTION.

MY MOTHER HAD AN ECTOPIC PREGNANCY, WHICH SHE THOUGHT HER APPENDIX HAD RUPTURED, AND IT TURNED OUT THAT SHE HAD AN ECTOPIC PREGNANCY, AND BECAUSE OF THIS LEGAL LIFE-SAVING ABORTION, I WAS BORN ABOUT A LITTLE BIT OVER A YEAR LATER.

I'M ONLY ABLE TO SPEAK TO YOU HERE TODAY BECAUSE OF THAT. FULL DISCRETION.

I FULLY INTEND TO FIGHT TO GET RESOURCES INTO THIS COMMUNITY FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH.

BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS IT SOMETHING THAT WE NEVER REALLY HAD, IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS ACTUALLY LIFESAVING, AND IF I WERE PREGNANT, I DON'T THINK I WOULD BE HERE TODAY.

I DON'T THINK THAT I WOULD HAVE SURVIVED THAT.

I'M SPEAKING TO YOU FROM MY HEART AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER, AND I JUST ASK YOU TO PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE THE DEEP IMPACT THAT A LEGAL SYSTEM TELLING ME WHAT I CAN DO AND CANNOT DO WITH MY BODY LIKE HOW THAT AFFECTS ME.

IT FEELS LIKE BEING ASSAULTED AGAIN, EVERY SINGLE TIME I READ THE NEWS, EVERY SINGLE TIME I HEAR ABOUT A 15-YEAR-OLD OR AN 11-YEAR-OLD THAT'S FORCED TO CARRY TO TERM.

THAT IS VIOLENCE, AND ALSO SILENCE IS VIOLENCE.

I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE SPEAK.

PLEASE USE YOUR VOICES FOR THIS, AND I THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING AND I THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU [APPLAUSE].

JOYCE DAVIDSON.

>> HI. I'M JOYCE DAVIDSON, MAYOR DAGGETT AND CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.

I'M A BOARD-CERTIFIED WOMEN'S HEALTH CARE NURSE PRACTITIONER AND A CLINICAL NURSE SPECIALIST, AND I'VE PRACTICED IN THE FLAGSTAFF COMMUNITY FOR 30 YEARS IN PRIVATE PRACTICE AT NORTH COUNTRY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER AND ADD COCONINO COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER.

I'M AN ACTIVE IN THE FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE WHERE I'M WORKING ON TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN RESTORE ABORTION SERVICES IN FLAGSTAFF.

MANY IN THE PUBLIC AREN'T AWARE THAT THERE ARE NO ABORTION SERVICES IN FLAGSTAFF AND IN NORTHERN ARIZONA.

THERE ARE NO ABORTION SERVICES NORTH OF THE PHOENIX AREA, AND THERE HAVE NOT BEEN ANY SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR OVER A YEAR, APPROXIMATELY.

ABORTION OPPONENTS AND THEIR ALLIES IN THE ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE, EVEN BEFORE THE DOBBS DECISION, HAVE MADE IT INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT FOR PREGNANT PEOPLE TO RECEIVE ABORTION SERVICES, ESPECIALLY IN SMALLER CITIES AND RURAL COMMUNITIES IN ARIZONA.

IN 2021, WHICH IS THE LATEST YEAR THAT STATE STATISTICS ARE AVAILABLE FOR, THERE WERE 185 ABORTIONS PERFORMED FOR RESIDENTS OF COCONINO COUNTY.

NOW, NONE OF THESE WERE CARRIED OUT IN COCONINO COUNTY.

THEY ALL HAD TO TRAVEL AT EXPENSE, TIME OFF OF WORK, ET CETERA, AND WE ARE ASKING THAT YOU APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION IN HOPES THAT WE CAN DISPEL AN ATMOSPHERE OF FEAR AND MISINFORMATION THAT EXISTS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

[02:25:04]

WE BELIEVE ABORTION IS HEALTH CARE AND SHOULD BE PART OF THE FULL RANGE OF REPRODUCTIVE SERVICES THAT PEOPLE GET FROM MEDICAL PROVIDERS.

WHETHER THAT'S FROM PLANNED PARENTHOOD, THEIR OWN PRIVATE OB-GYN, OR THEIR PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIAN.

THE ARIZONA LEGISLATURE HAS BANNED ABORTIONS AFTER 15 WEEKS.

PRIOR TO 15 WEEKS, THE MAJORITY OF ABORTIONS ARE NOT SURGICAL, BUT THEY'RE PERFORMED BY THE INGESTION OF TWO ORAL PILLS TWO DAYS APART, WHICH HAVE TO BE INITIALLY GIVEN IN A PROVIDER'S OFFICE.

THESE PILLS HAVE A VERY STRONG SAFETY RECORD.

ARIZONA LAW REQUIRES THAT A MEDICAL PHYSICIAN PROVIDE THIS.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT BY LAW CANNOT BE PRESCRIBED BY A NURSE PRACTITIONER OR PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT AS OF 2019.

CURRENTLY, THERE ARE NO PROVIDERS IN FLAGSTAFF THROUGH PLANNED PARENTHOOD OR PRIVATELY THAT PRESCRIBE THIS MEDICATION.

PLEASE HELP US RID OUR COMMUNITY OF FEAR AND MISINFORMATION BY PASSING A RESOLUTION THAT LET THE PEOPLE OF FLAGSTAFF KNOW THAT YOU BELIEVE WE SHOULD HAVE FULL ACCESS TO ABORTION SERVICES.

I'M ASKING THAT YOU SUPPORT THIS RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT THE PROVIDERS IN OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. EXCUSE ME.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER MATTHEWS HAS A QUESTION.

>> HI. THANK YOU. I WAS JUST CURIOUS.

YOU WERE SAYING THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY ABORTION PROVIDERS UP HERE.

ALTHOUGH ABORTIONS ARE ALLOWED UP TO 15 WEEKS. WHY IS THAT? IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVEN'T HAD ABORTION PROVIDER FOR MULTIPLE YEARS, NOT JUST LAST YEAR WHEN THESE THINGS CHECKED, CORRECT?

>> WELL, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT FOR YOU SPECIFICALLY AS A NURSE PRACTITIONER.

I AM NOT, BY LAW ALLOWED TO DO THAT, WHY THERE ARE NOT PRIVATE PHYSICIANS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE NOT DOING THAT? I CAN'T REALLY ANSWER FOR ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES, BUT I'M SURE THERE IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FEAR IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THAT.

PLANNED PARENTHOOD AGAIN, I'M NOT PRIVY TO WHAT THEIR DECISION-MAKING AND THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS IS ABOUT THAT.

BUT EVEN PRIOR TO A YEAR AGO, THERE WAS ONLY A PROVIDER, UP HERE ONCE A WEEK.

>> BEFORE THE OVERTURN OF ROE V. WADE OR WHATEVER IT IS NOW, IT'S NOT WE'RE NOT BEING PROVIDED THAT SERVICE UP THERE.

THIS IS NOT A NEW THING, CORRECT? THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT JUST CAME ABOUT LAST YEAR.

>> WHEN PLANNED PARENTHOOD STOPPED PROVIDING TERMINATION SERVICES? AS I SAID, I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT HERE FOR 30 YEARS AND WHEN I FIRST MOVED TO FLAGSTAFF THERE WERE ABORTION SERVICES IN FLAGSTAFF ALL THE TIME.

I THINK THAT YOU'RE ASKING ME ABOUT A GREATER POLITICAL ISSUE AS TO WHAT IS THE ISSUE WITH PLANNED PARENTHOOD HERE IN ARIZONA? THEIR LACK OF PROVIDERS, THEIR LACK OF FUNDING.

I JUST CAN'T ANSWER THAT FOR YOU.

I'M SORRY, I CAN'T REALLY TELL YOU WHAT THEY'RE THINKING IS ABOUT IT.

>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET CLARITY ON WAS THE EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR THE RESULT OF THE LACK OF PROVIDERS NOW OR HAS THIS BEEN AN ONGOING ISSUE FOR A LONG TIME.

>> IT'S FAIRLY RECENT THAT THERE HAS NOT BEEN A FULL-TIME SERVICES HERE IN FLAGSTAFF? MAYBE MORE THAN A YEAR, BUT FAIRLY RECENTLY [APPLAUSE].

>> SUSAN SHAPIRO.

>> HELLO.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME TODAY.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE.

I THANK THE COUNCIL FOR PUTTING THIS SUBJECT ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS PURSUANT TO OUR FEAR OF REQUESTS SUBMITTED LAST AUGUST, WHICH WAS SIGNED BY 83 CITIZENS, WHICH I THINK WE GATHERED IN A DAY OR TWO.

IT'S ALREADY BEEN REITERATED THAT THIS PETITION ASKED COUNCIL TO DISCUSS PROTECTING FLAGSTAFF RESIDENTS FROM POSSIBLE ARREST AND PROSECUTION FOR PROVIDING, ACCESSING OR ASSISTING WITH ABORTION SERVICES.

I'LL NOTE THAT SINCE ADOPTING RESOLUTION IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO GO ABOUT PROTECTING CITIZENS, AT THAT TIME LAST AUGUST THAT WE SUBMITTED THE FAIR PETITION, WE ALSO PROVIDED COPIES OF RESOLUTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY OTHER CITIES INSIDE AND OUTSIDE ARIZONA.

[02:30:02]

TODAY, WE HAVE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT AND DEFERENCE, TAKEN THE FURTHER STEP OF OFFERING A DRAFT RESOLUTION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

IT'S LARGELY BASED ON THE TUCSON AND PHOENIX RESOLUTIONS.

INCLUDE STATEMENTS OF SUPPORT FOR ACCESS TO ABORTION AS A SAFE PROCEDURE.

THAT'S CRITICAL TO THE PHYSICAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL, AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC WELL-BEING OF CITIZENS.

IT ACKNOWLEDGES A HISTORY OF ARIZONA LAWS THAT AIM TO LIMIT OR DENY ACCESS TO ABORTION CARE AND I'LL NOTE THAT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL BILLS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED BY OUR CURRENT LEGISLATURE.

IT ACKNOWLEDGES THE DISPROPORTIONATE EFFECT ON MINORITY AND LOWER-INCOME PEOPLE, WHICH INCLUDES THE MANY THOUSANDS OF STUDENTS IN OUR CITY.

IT AUTHORIZES THE POLICE TO NOT MAKE A PHYSICAL ARREST FOR VIOLATION OF ARIZONA ABORTION LAWS, AND INSTEAD REFER THE MATTER TO THE COCONINO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES.

SOMETHING THAT WE ADDED FROM THE BOISE, IDAHO'S RESOLUTION WAS A STATEMENT TO DENY THE USE OF CITY FUNDS TO STORE AND CATALOG INFORMATION ON REPORTS OF PROVIDING OR ACCESSING ABORTION CARE, WHICH GETS TO THE ISSUE OF SURVEILLANCE.

WE FELT THAT WAS A GAP IN THE OTHER RESOLUTIONS.

SINCE SCOTUS RULING, WE ARE SEEING ATTACKS ON REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE ALL OVER THE COUNTRY.

A TEXAS JUDGE IS SET TO OUTLAW MIFEPRISTONE, AN ABORTION MEDICATION THAT'S BEEN SAFELY USED FOR 25 YEARS.

HERE IN ARIZONA THE IDEA OF SENTENCING WOMEN WHO GET AN ABORTION TO DEATH.

THE DEATH PENALTY HAS BEEN FLOATED.

LUCKILY, I DON'T THINK THAT GOT OUT OF COMMITTEE.

LAWS DESIGNED TO ENSHRINED FETAL PERSON HAD LIKEWISE ARE DESIGNED TO CRIMINALIZE ABORTION.

THE PRESENCE OF THE ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM, WHICH IS AN ANTI-LGBTQ HATE GROUP ADVISING OUR LEGISLATURE IS DEEPLY TROUBLING.

WE TURN TO YOU NOW SINCE YOU HAVE THE UNIQUE AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROTECTING THE CITIZENS OF OUR BEAUTIFUL CITY AND WE URGE YOU TO ACT WITHOUT DELAY, TO ADOPT A MEANINGFUL RESOLUTION THAT OFFERS SUCH PROTECTION.

>> THANK YOU, SUSAN. KYLE NITSCHKE.

>> MAYOR DAGGETT, VICE MAYOR ASLIN, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING.

MY NAME IS KYLE NITSCHKE AND I'M THE CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA STUDENTS ASSOCIATION.

I'M SPEAKING TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE STUDENT ASSOCIATION.

WE'RE A A NON-PROFIT, NON-PARTISAN ORGANIZATION.

WE ORIGINALLY FOUNDED IN 1974 BY THE STUDENT BODY PRESIDENTS OF U OF ARIZONA, U OF A, ASU, AND NYU TO ADVOCATE FOR STUDENT INTERESTS.

THROUGHOUT ORGANIZATION'S HISTORY, WE'VE REGISTERED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF STUDENTS AND WORKED HARD TO GET YOUNG VOTERS OUT TO THE POLLS.

THIS LAST YEAR, WE SAW THE SECOND-HIGHEST MIDTERM ELECTION TURNOUT FOR YOUNG VOTERS, AND WHILE WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR FULL ANALYSIS OF LAST YEAR'S ELECTION RESULTS, TODAY WE'RE ABLE TO LOOK AT VOTES CAST BY PRECINCT.

WE'VE SEEN ON OUR COLLEGE CAMPUSES, VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY VOTING FOR DEMOCRATS.

FOR KATIE HOBBS FOR CHRIS MASON FOR PRO REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE AGENDA, FOR EXAMPLE, IN NAU'S CAMPUS, 93 PERCENT OF VOTERS OF STUDENTS VOTED FOR KATIE HOBBS.

THEN THIS IS CONGRUENT WITH WHAT WE'VE SEEN ON THE GROUND ORGANIZING OUR PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES, STUDENTS OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORT THE RIGHT TO ABORTION AND MANY OF OUR STUDENTS WHO ATTEND FROM OUT-OF-STATE ARE APPALLED BY OUR STATE'S ABORTION LAWS AND A LACK OF ACCESS ONCE THEY LEARN ABOUT IT.

WE'VE ALSO SEEN THOUSANDS OF STUDENTS AND FLAGSTAFF RESIDENTS ATTEND PRO-ABORTION RALLIES SO INCREDIBLE COMMUNITY SUPPORT BEHIND THE BALLOT INITIATIVE LAST SUMMER AND NOW YOU HAVE THE ATTENTION SUPPORT THE STUDENTS BEHIND YOU TONIGHT AS WELL.

WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT THERE'S SUPPORT AROUND THIS ISSUE FOR OUR STUDENTS.

I WANT TO SPEAK BRIEFLY TO WHY IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AS CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE ACTION.

A LITTLE BIT MORE BACKGROUND STUDENTS ASSOCIATION FIRST, WHEN WE'RE NOT REGISTERING VOTERS, WE ARE ORGANIZING AND ADVOCATING AT VARIOUS LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT FOR ISSUES THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO STUDENTS.

FOR EXAMPLE, STUDENTS ASSOCIATION IS SENDING STUDENTS TO DC TO LOBBY NEXT MONDAY AND TUESDAY ABOUT AROUND STUDENT LOAN DEBT FORGIVENESS FOR THE SUPREME COURT CASE.

WE HAVE A REGISTERED LOBBYISTS TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE, AND IT WILL BE BRINGING OVER 50 STUDENTS FROM ACROSS THE STATE TO THE CAPITOL LATER THIS MONTH.

WE'VE ALSO HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK IN STATEWIDE COALITIONS OR A FILIBUSTER VOTING RIGHTS AND EDUCATION POLICY.

I BRING THIS UP TO GIVE SOME CREDIBILITY TO MY NEXT STATEMENT, AND IT IS THAT OUR STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ARE BROKEN AND REALLY INCAPABLE OF ADDRESSING THE ABORTION RIGHTS ISSUE.

AT THE STATE LEVEL WE'RE STUCK WITH THIS 15-WEEK ABORTION BAN AND REPUBLICANS ARE TRYING TO PASS VERSUS ABORTION LAWS, KNOWING IT'S JUST GOING TO GET VETOED BY KATIE HOBBS.

THERE'S NO MEANINGFUL CONVERSATION LIKE WE'VE HAD TODAY AROUND THE REAL EFFECTS OF ABORTION TO OUR RESIDENTS.

I'M TRYING TO SPEED THROUGH SOME THINGS REAL QUICK.

AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, REPUBLICANS CAN GET YADA, YADA, YADA. THE FEDERAL LANDSCAPE.

[02:35:02]

IT'S A MESS. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ABORTION FEDERALLY THINGS ARE MIRED IN POLITICS AND RELIGION AND CULTURE.

TONIGHT I REALLY HOPE THAT YOU LEARN THAT ABORTION IS NOT A COMPLICATED POLITICAL ISSUE. IT'S HEALTHCARE.

IT'S A HUMAN RIGHT AND IT IS YOUR DUTY AND YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO STEP IN WHEN THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO PROTECT OUR RESIDENTS AND OUR STUDENTS.

FLAGSTAFF HAS BEEN A LEADER FOR THE STATE ON SEVERAL FRONTS AND SO WE'RE HERE TODAY ASKING FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AGAIN.

THE ARIZONA STUDENTS ASSOCIATION ASK THAT COUNCIL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RESOLUTION THAT THE FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE HAS PROPOSED AND THEN USE YOUR PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL CONNECTIONS TO WORK TO BRING NEEDED HEALTH CARE TO FLAGSTAFF.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. [APPLAUSE]

>> THANK YOU, KYLE.

MARYLAND WEISSMAN.

>> MAYOR DAGGETT AND CITY COUNCIL, MY NAME IS MARYLAND WEISSMAN.

I'M A THIRD-YEAR RESIDENT OF FLAG.

I'M SPEAKING TODAY TO SUPPORT THE CITY COUNCIL MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS RESOLUTION.

I'VE BEEN ASKED RECENTLY WHY SHOULD THE CITY COUNCIL WEIGH ON AN ISSUE LIKE THE DOBBS DECISION, A COURT DECISION THAT HAS NO JURISDICTION OVER.

I MYSELF HAVE BEEN WRITING LETTERS TO OUR CONGRESS, SENATE, AND PRESIDENT AND HAD BEEN DEMONSTRATING IN SUPPORT OF ABORTION RIGHTS.

WHY AM I APPEALING TO YOU TONIGHT? YOU ARE THE MOST ACCESSIBLE AND CLOSEST REPRESENTATIVES TO MY GOVERNMENT.

YOU HAVE INFLUENCE, YOU HAVE PAID LOBBYISTS.

YOU ARE THE LEADERS OF MY COMMUNITY.

I WOULD THINK THAT AN UNWANTED PREGNANCY COULD POTENTIALLY AFFECT AT SOME POINT IN THEIR LIVES ALMOST EVERYONE IN THIS TOWN, AS YOU'VE LEARNED, IT IS CURRENTLY IMPOSSIBLE TO GET AN ABORTION IN FLAGSTAFF AND ALL OBSTACLES ARE PUTTING THAT WAY WHEN YOU DO FIND AN ABORTION PROVIDER IN A BIGGER CITY.

THE ARIZONA COURTS AND LEGISLATURE ARE STILL AT THIS MOMENT WORKING ON WAYS TO COMPLETELY BAN ABORTION.

SHOULD YOU CITY COUNCIL, THE LEADERS OF OUR COMMUNITY STAND BY WHILE OUR RIGHTS ARE BEING ERODED AWAY, YOU MAKE VALUE JUDGMENTS ALL THE TIME AND THE DECISIONS YOU MAKE.

HAVEN'T YOU ALREADY DECIDED TO PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY FROM THE RAVAGES OF CLIMATE CHANGE, TO WORK TO ENSURE THAT EVERYONE IN FLAGSTAFF HAS A ROOF OVER THEIR HEAD, TO PREVENT ANY IN THE LGBT COMMUNITY FROM BEING DISCRIMINATED AGAINST? WHY WOULD YOU NOT WANT TO CREATE A COMMUNITY THAT PROTECTS A PERSON'S RIGHT TO CONTROL THEIR OWN BODY? THAT PROTECT IS ACTOR'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE HEALTH CARE FOR THEIR PATIENTS.

WHY DOESN'T OUR TOWN HAVE AN ABORTION PROVIDER? MAYBE THE ANTI-ABORTION FORCES HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL AND INTIMIDATING DOCTORS TO ANSWER THIS NEED.

IF YOU SUPPORT ABORTION RIGHTS, WHEN DO YOU WANT TO CREATE A COMMUNITY WHERE PATIENTS AND DOCTORS DON'T HAVE TO FEAR RECEIVING, ARE PERFORMING A NECESSARY PROCEDURE? OUR COMMUNITY ALREADY UNDERSTANDS THAT ABORTION IS A RIGHT WE'VE HAD FOR 50 YEARS A RIGHT THAT OTHER COUNTRIES ARE ONLY NOW JUST OBTAINING, BUT THAT WE ARE IN DANGER OF COMPLETELY LOSING.

YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TONIGHT TO BEGIN TO SHOW OUR GOVERNOR AND ATTORNEY GENERAL THAT YOU SUPPORT THEIR EFFORTS TO STOP THIS MADNESS AND RESTORE TO SHOW OUR STATE LEGISLATURE THAT YOU DO NOT TO SUPPORT THEIR EFFORTS TO BAN ABORTION AND TO SHOW YOUR CONSTITUENTS THAT YOU WILL STAND UP FOR THEM.

I'M ASKING YOU TO BE LEADERS TONIGHT AND DO THAT.

[BACKGROUND] WILL YOU SAY THAT AGAIN WHEN YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MARYLAND.

DR. SON JOHN.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT'S SANDRA MALVOLIO. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'M SPEAKING HERE TONIGHT AS A MOTHER AS A LONG-TERM RESIDENT OF FLAGSTAFF, HAVE BEEN HERE FOR 27 YEARS, AND AS A MEMBER OF THE FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE, AS EDUCATOR AND SOMEONE WHO DOES RESEARCH IN THE AREA OF REPRODUCTIVE HISTORY AND REPRODUCTIVE CARE AND I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE A LOT OF STUFF THAT HAS BEEN SAID, I HAVE THE LUXURY OF USUALLY SPEAKING FOR 15 MINUTES TO ONE HOUR 15 MINUTES IN A CLASSROOM.

I'M GOING TO DO THIS IN THREE MINUTES.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE BELIEVE NO BAN IS A GOOD BAN, IS SOMETHING THAT WE BELIEVE IN FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE.

WE FIRMLY SUPPORT BODILY AUTONOMY FOR EVERYONE, FOR ALL OUR CITIZENS, AND WE ARE REALLY HERE AND THE RESOLUTION HAS BEEN PLACED TO LIFT THE 15-WEEK BAN THAT'S IN PLACE IN ARIZONA.

I THINK IN LIGHT OF THAT CONVERSATION THAT WE'RE HAVING AROUND ABORTION AND REPRODUCTIVE CARE.

THIS IS ALSO A GOOD TIME TO REALLY REVISIT WHAT WE HAVE ON THE BOOKS IN ARIZONA, WHICH IS REALLY A RACIST SEX SELECTION, ABORTION BAN, AND IT TARGETS, OR SOME OF YOU MAY KNOW, IT TARGETS THE ASIAN DIASPORA, IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY, AND THE BIPOC COMMUNITY HERE, AND SEX SELECTION IS REALLY NOT.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY DATA SUGGESTING THAT SEX SELECTION IS A PROBLEM IN THE UNITED STATES.

IT IS A PROBLEM IN PLACES LIKE INDIA AND IN CHINA.

BUT HERE IT SEEMS TO BE AS SOMEONE HAS RIGHTLY SAID, A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM.

WE REALLY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SEX SELECTION.

[02:40:01]

THE OTHER ISSUE THAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IN TERMS OF RESTRICTING ACCESS TO REPRODUCTIVE CARE AS AN INTERSECTIONAL FEMINIST.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE ARE EXTREMELY MINDFUL OF THE DISCRIMINATION THAT PEOPLE FACE DUE TO DISABILITY, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO REPEAT THIS.

WE ARE NOT MAKING ENABLE LIST ARGUMENT.

HOWEVER, IN LIGHT OF THE CHALLENGES OF LIVING IN AN ENABLE SOCIETY, WE ASK THAT THERE BE NO RESTRICTIONS PLACED ON ABORTION ACCESS IN SITUATIONS WHERE THERE IS AN UNRELIABLE PREGNANCY OR A NON-VIABLE FETUS, OR FETUS WITH DISABILITIES, AND WE ASK THAT TO SUCH TIME THAT WE HAVE SERVICES AND STRUCTURES IN PLACE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR FAMILIES WHO TAKE CARE OF THEIR LOVED ONES IN THESE CHALLENGING SITUATIONS TILL SUCH TIME THAT WE DON'T HAVE THOSE IN PLACE.

WE ASK THAT THERE BE NO BAN AND THERE'D BE NO RESTRICTIONS ON ABORTION.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. [APPLAUSE]

>> THANK YOU. JULIAN BERNHARD.

>> THAT'S ME.

[LAUGHTER] THIS WORKING.

OH MY GOD. HI EVERYBODY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR LETTING ME SPEAK TODAY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR PUTTING THIS ON THE AGENDA.

MY NAME IS JULIAN BERNHARDT.

MY PRONOUNS ARE HE, THEY SHE AND WHATEVER ORDER YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH, I USE ALL THREE OF THEM.

I'M IN AN AU STUDENTS STUDYING PSYCHOLOGY AND POLITICAL SCIENCE.

I MAY BORE AND RESIDENT OF FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA.

I KNOW HE LIKES.

WE DON'T SHARE THE SAME VIEWS.

I'M THE OLDEST OF EIGHT CHILDREN, AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE.

IN APRIL OF 2022, I WENT THROUGH AN ASSAULT ON CAMPUS AND IT CHANGED MY LIFE.

WHEN I WENT TO CAMPUS AND TALKED ABOUT WHAT HAD HAPPENED, THEY GAVE ME A PAMPHLET AND SAID, GOOD LUCK.

NOW IMAGINE IF I WAS PREGNANT AND I NEEDED AN ABORTION, OR IF ANY OF MY SIBLINGS NEEDED AN ABORTION, OR IF THERE IS NO RESOURCES AVAILABLE LIKE THERE IS TO THIS DAY.

THERE ARE NO RESOURCES AVAILABLE FOR US IN FLAGSTAFF.

I'M HERE TO SPEAK AS THE HEAD OF THE NAU CHAPTER FOR THE FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE AND SAY THAT THE NAU STUDENTS ARE COMMITTED TO HAVING ABORTION ACCESS IN WHATEVER WAY, SHAPE, AND FORM THAT COMES IN.

WE SUPPORT THE RESOLUTION AND WE SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD ON THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE MORE NAU STUDENTS COMING EVERY DAY, AS WELL AS WE STAND WITH CCC STUDENTS TO WE STAND WITH COLLECTIVE STUDENTS TO SAY THAT WE NEED THIS RESOLUTION TO PASS BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH WE CAN'T GET AN ABORTION IN FLAGSTAFF, SOME OF US DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO GO DOWN TO PHOENIX AND GET AN ABORTION.

IT'S JUST NOT FEASIBLE FOR US.

SOME OF US DON'T KNOW THE RESOURCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE THROUGH COCONUT OR COUNTY HEALTH.

I JUST RECENTLY FOUND OUT THEM.

WE GO TO CAMPUS HEALTH.

THEY GIVE US A PAMPHLET AND SAY, GOOD LUCK.

WE NEED RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO US, AND IF RESOURCES AREN'T GOING TO BE PROVIDED, IF WE CAN'T GET A PRACTITIONER APPEAR, IF WE CAN'T GET SOMEBODY TO HELP US, WE NEED TO HAVE A RESOLUTION THAT PROTECTS US WITHIN THE REALMS OF THE LEGISLATION ALREADY.

I DON'T REALLY HAVE MUCH ELSE TO SAY, BUT THAT I'M COMMITTED TO THIS ISSUE, AND THERE ARE SO MANY STUDENTS LIKE MYSELF WHO ARE COMMITTED TO THIS, WHO ARE HERE WITH ME TONIGHT.

WHETHER IT'D BE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE, HOW IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE NEED TO UPLIFT OUR FIREFIGHTERS AND OUR POLICE AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT AND HAVE PEOPLE WHO WILL SUPPORT THAT.

IF YOU'RE FORCED TO CARRY A PREGNANCY, IF YOU'RE FORCED TO DEAL WITH ANY TRAUMA, IF YOU'RE HANDED A PAMPHLET AND SAY, GOOD LUCK.

IF YOU'RE HANDED A PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT SAYS, GOOD LUCK.

YOU'RE GOING TO CARRY THIS CHILD.

THEN YOU'RE NOT GOING TO WANT TO BE ABLE TO HELP YOU GOING FORWARD.

I WANTED TO DIE.

THERE'S SO MANY OTHERS DID TOO.

WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO FEEL THAT WAY, BUT WE CAN'T GO FORWARD UNLESS WE HAVE RESOLUTION THAT HELPS US.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. [APPLAUSE]

>> THANK YOU. JASMINE V.

THANKS FOR PUTTING THE PHONETIC PRONUNCIATION OF YOUR NAME THERE.

>> I USUALLY LIKE TO PUT V FOR VICTORY THAT I HELD OFF THIS TIME. THANK YOU ALL.

MY NAME IS JASMINE V. I'M A REP HERE WITH THE FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE, AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR HEARING US AND FEARS AND CONCERNS THAT THE STOPS DECISION AND THE SURGE OF ANTI-ABORTION LAWS AND ARIZONA ARE NEGATIVELY IMPACTING THE PEOPLE AT FLAGSTAFF, AS WELL AS FOLKS IN OUR NEIGHBORS IN OTHER NORTHERN ARIZONA COMMUNITIES THAT MUST RELY ON OUR HEALTH CARE SERVICES.

CURRENTLY THERE ARE ZERO ABORTION SERVICES OFFERED IN NORTHERN ARIZONA.

MEDICATION ABORTIONS WERE SUSPENDED AT

[02:45:02]

THE FLAGSTAFF PLANNED PARENTHOOD CLINIC WHEN THE DOGS DECISION AND SUBSEQUENT 18, 64 TERRITORIAL BAN WENT INTO EFFECT, AND NO SURGICAL ABORTIONS HAVE BEEN OFFERED IN DECADES.

AT THE MOMENT, THERE ARE NO PLANS TO REINSTATE SERVICES AT PLANNED PARENTHOOD FLAGSTAFF ANYTIME SOON.

RIGHT NOW, THE ONLY IN-STATE ABORTION PROVIDERS ARE IN PHOENIX AND TUCSON, WHICH NECESSITATE AN OVERNIGHT STAY FOR THE TWO IN-PERSON CLINIC APPOINTMENTS REQUIRED BY OUR STATE, AT LEAST 24 HOURS APART FOR MANY IN FLAGSTAFF IN NORTHERN ARIZONA, THIS CREATES INSURMOUNTABLE BARRIERS WITH DANGEROUS LIFE ALTERING CONSEQUENCES.

FOR THIS PURPOSE, WE ARE ASKING OUR LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES TO SUPPORT A RESOLUTION THAT PROTECTS PREGNANT PEOPLE FROM THE INHUMANE AND RESTRICTIVE ABORTION BANS BEING LOBBIED ACROSS ARIZONA.

CURRENTLY UNDER ARIZONA LAW, THERE ARE 40 BANS AND RESTRICTIONS CENTERED SPECIFICALLY ON ABORTION AND PROVIDER CARE.

THESE BANDS AND RESTRICTIONS DENY ARIZONA'S EXPLICIT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF CHOICE IN MEDICAL DECISION-MAKING.

FURTHERMORE, THEY UNDERMINE ONE'S AGENCY IN MAKING INFORMED DECISIONS ABOUT THEIR REPRODUCTIVE CARE.

PLACES DEHUMANIZING AND COSTLY OBSTACLES IN THE WAY OF PATIENTS SEEKING ABORTION CARE.

THEY HINDER THE PROVISION OF ACCURATE AND TIMELY MEDICAL CARE AND INFORMATION.

THEY PLACE UNDUE BURDEN ON THOSE PROVIDING ABORTION RELATED CARE, LIKE THE PEOPLE HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND THEY LIMIT THE ABILITY OF PERSONS IN RURAL AND LOW-INCOME COMMUNITIES TO ACCESS ABORTION SERVICES.

EVEN MORE SO, ABORTION BANS AND RESTRICTIVE LEGISLATIVE POLICIES ARE MEDICALLY UNSOUND AND MOTIVATED BY MISGUIDED RELIGIOUS IDEOLOGY, POLITICAL AFFILIATION, AND TYRANNY.

WE ASK YOU, OUR CITY REPRESENTATIVES TO PLEASE SUPPORT EFFORTS TO ENSURE THAT FAMILIES AND FLAGSTAFF IN OUR GREATER NORTHERN ARIZONA COMMUNITIES HAVE ACCESS TO THE FULL RANGE OF SAFE AND EFFECTIVE OPTIONS FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE.

CURRENTLY, RESOLUTIONS PROTECTING ABORTION ARE BEING WIDELY ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCILS AROUND THE STATE AND COUNTRY, AS WAS HIGHLIGHTED BY COUNCIL TODAY, AND WE ARE HOPING THE FLAGSTAFF CITY COUNCIL WILL DO THE SAME. THANK YOU. KINDLY.

>> THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] MIA RODRIGUEZ.

>> HI, MY NAME IS MIA RODRIGUEZ.

I'M A STUDENT AT NYU AND I'M A MEMBER OF THE FLAGSTAFF ABORTION ALLIANCE.

I WAS NOT TAUGHT ABOUT ABORTION GROWING UP.

IT WAS NOT UNTIL MY LATE TEENS I FOUND OUT HOW MUCH THIS REALLY AFFECTS US.

PEOPLE OF COLOR, LGBTQ, AND LOW-INCOME INDIVIDUALS ARE ALL AFFECTED BY THE OVERTURNING ROE V. WADE.

I'M ALL THREE AND I'M WORRIED FOR THE FUTURE OF NOT JUST ME, BUT MY 15-YEAR-OLD SISTER, WHO'S CONSTANTLY PRESSURED INTO GROWING UP IN A COUNTRY WHERE HER BODY IS NOT GOING TO BE HURT BY THE TIME SHE'S MY AGE.

MY MOTHER RAISED US ON HER OWN.

I HAVE THREE TERMS. THIS IS MY MOM AND MY SISTER AND I AND IF NOT FOR ABORTION, MY SISTER WOULD NOT BE ON HERE.

SHE DID HER BEST TO SHIELD US FROM A WORLD WHERE OUR BODILY AUTONOMY IS BEING TAKEN AWAY FROM US AND I WAS 12 YEARS OLD, I KNEW SOMETHING WAS NOT RIGHT, AND BY THE TIME THAT WILL BE WADE WAS OVERTURNED, I KNEW I HAD TO DO SOMETHING.

I HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK UP AND WE ALL HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK UP AND MAKE A CHANGE.

I WILL NOT STOP ADVOCATING FOR THE RIGHTS OF THOSE WHO ARE DISADVANTAGED, DISCRIMINATED AGAINST, AND DISCOURAGED FROM BASIC HEALTH CARE.

ABORTION IS HEALTH CARE.

IT SHOULD BE FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS IT OR NEEDS IT.

THIS IS NOT JUST MY FUTURE.

WE ARE ALL AFFECTED BY THIS.

IT DOES NOT MATTER WHERE YOU ARE, WHO YOU ARE, WHERE YOU COME FROM.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT AFFECTS US AND WILL CONTINUE TO AFFECT US UNTIL A CHANGE IS MADE.

>> THANK YOU. EMMA BURNS.

>> GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU GUYS FOR TAKING THE TIME TO HAVE THIS IMPORTANT DISCUSSION WITH US TODAY.

MY NAME IS EMMA BURNS AND I'M A STUDENT HERE AT IU.

I THINK I SPEAK FOR A LOT OF STUDENTS HERE WHEN I SAY I DIDN'T CHOOSE TO GO TO SCHOOL AT NYU BECAUSE I FELL IN LOVE WITH THE LUMBERJACK LIFESTYLE.

I CHOSE TO COME HERE BECAUSE I LOVE FLAGSTAFF.

THIS COMMUNITY, I'VE ALWAYS FELT SAFE AND PROTECTED,

[02:50:01]

AND YOU GUYS, THE LEADERSHIP HERE HAS CITIZENS' BEST INTERESTS IN MIND.

I ASKED YOU TODAY TO AFFIRM THOSE ASSUMPTIONS BY PASSING A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF ABORTION ACCESS.

THIS SEU HITS VERY CLOSE TO HOME TO ME.

WHEN I WAS 19 IN MY SOPHOMORE YEAR OF COLLEGE, I LEARNED THAT I WAS PREGNANT.

UPON READING THE TEST RESULTS, I COULD FATHOM TO OUTCOMES.

I WOULD EITHER EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO CHOOSE OR I WOULD TAKE MY OWN LIFE.

THAT SOUNDS DRAMATIC, BUT I COULD NOT SEE ANOTHER WAY OUT. I WAS LUCKY.

I AM PRIVILEGED.

I HAVE THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO USE MY REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM RIGHTS.

I HAD ACCESS TO SAFE MEDICAL CARE AND ACCESSIBLE DOCTORS.

THAT WAS WHEN WE HAD A DOCTOR ONCE EVERY WEEK HERE IN FLAGSTAFF.

THOSE TWO APPOINTMENTS HAD TO HAPPEN A WEEK IN BETWEEN EACH OTHER.

GO TO CLASS IN BETWEEN AND HAVE TO LIVE WITH KNOWING WHAT WAS GOING ON BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAD SUCH SPARSE ABORTION ACCESS AT THE TIME.

BUT STILL, I WAS LUCKY.

ALTHOUGH I WAS TERRIFIED AND I STILL AM TERRIFIED, TO BE HONEST, I HAD IT EASY.

AS WE SIT HERE TONIGHT, INDIVIDUALS IN ARIZONA NO LONGER HAVE ACCESS TO THESE RIGHTS OR SERVICES.

IF THIS WAS ME AND IF THIS IS THE CASE WHEN I WAS 19, I KNOW WHAT I WOULD'VE DONE.

I WOULDN'T BE ALIVE TO SPEAK TO YOU HERE TODAY.

I'M AFRAID THAT IF ACTION IS NOT TAKEN, WE LEAVE COUNTLESS OTHER INDIVIDUALS TO BE BACKED INTO THIS VERY SAME CORNER.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT AND WHAT DIRE ACTIONS ARE TAKEN BY INDIVIDUALS WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO AND ARE BEING DENIED CARE BY THESE RECENT DECISIONS WILL BE THE PRODUCT OF THE ACTIONS OR INACTIONS OF TODAY.

PLEASE HELP US CONTINUE TO FEEL SAFE YOU'RE IN FLAGSTAFF.

IF THE MISSION OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF IS TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF ALL OF ITS CITIZENS.

YOU HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALIVE HERE FIRST, THIS RESOLUTION SHOULD BE A NO-BRAINER.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CARE.

I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, EMMA. [APPLAUSE]

>> SYDNEY SHABBAT.

>> HI. MY NAME IS SYDNEY SHABBAT, I'M A FLAGSTAFF RESIDENT, I'M A GRADUATE STUDENT AND I'M A SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVOR.

AFTER ONE OF THESE ASSAULTS, I WAS SURE THAT I WAS PREGNANT.

I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MY OPTIONS ARE, WHAT MY RESOURCES WERE, AND WHILE DOING THAT, I LEARNED THAT PLANNED PARENTHOOD, YOU CAN ONLY GET AN ABORTION AFTER SIX WEEKS.

THIS 15-WEEK ABORTION BAN ISN'T 15 WEEKS, IT'S 11 WEEKS OR LESS, AND AS WE'VE LEARNED SO FAR, THERE WAS ONLY AT THIS TIME ACTUALLY, THERE WAS ONE PROVIDER IN FLAGSTAFF WHO WAS THERE ONE DAY EVERY TWO WEEKS.

I HAD VERY LIMITED TIME.

LUCKILY, I DIDN'T GET PREGNANT.

BUT IF I DID, I WOULDN'T BE IN GRADUATE SCHOOL.

I WOULDN'T BE GOING TO GET A PH.D. NEXT YEAR.

LET'S DISCUSS THE REASON BEHIND THE DOBBS V. JACKSON RULING.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT STATES THAT BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION, WHICH WE KNOW WAS WRITTEN IN 1787, IT DIDN'T MENTION ABORTION.

SCOTUS THINKS THAT THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO RULE ON ABORTION, AND THAT'S WHY THEY OVERTURN ROBY WADE, BUT THEN MADE DOBBS V. JACKSON, WHICH THEN CRIMINALIZED ABORTION.

THAT DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE, AND YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE THE CONSTITUTION DOESN'T MENTION, IT DOESN'T MENTION WOMEN AT ALL IN THE CONSTITUTION.

IF WE'RE NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN IT.

ALSO, THE CONSTITUTION SAYS THAT BLACK PEOPLE ARE THREE-FIFTHS OF A PERSON. THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

WHY ARE WE FACING THIS DECISION OFF OF A DOCUMENT WRITTEN BY MEN, NON-PRODUCING HUMANS IN 1787, IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

ESPECIALLY A REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS DECISION.

LIKE I SAID, THEY CAN'T REPRODUCE.

WHY ARE WE EVEN LISTENING TO PEOPLE WHO ARE LONG DEAD AND WHO WEREN'T VERY PROGRESSIVE AT ALL.

I'M JUST ASKING SO PLEASE DON'T BASE YOUR DECISION ON WHAT SCOTUS SAYS OR WHAT THE DOCUMENT DOBBS V. JACKSON SAYS, BECAUSE YOU SHOULD CARE ABOUT THIS ISSUE BECAUSE GLOBAL CHANGE HAPPENS LOCALLY FIRST.

YOU HAVE TO BE THE CHANGE IN THIS COMMUNITY IN ORDER TO SEE THE CHANGE GLOBALLY.

PLEASE JUST DON'T FORCE PEOPLE TO GIVE BIRTH, AND I ALSO JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT THERE WAS A STAT BROUGHT UP EARLIER 50% FLAGSTAFF IS DIVISIVE 50%.

I DON'T KNOW THAT STATISTIC.

I'VE NEVER HEARD OF THAT STATISTIC.

I ASKED YOU TO LOOK IN THIS ROOM AND SEE, DOES THAT LOOK LIKE 50/50 OUT HERE? WHERE ARE THEY? I AM WORKING RIGHT NOW.

I HAD TO LEAVE WORK TO COME HERE.

I'M ON CALL RIGHT NOW AND I CAME HERE, SO WHAT'S THEIR EXCUSE? THEY'RE JUST NOT HERE BECAUSE IT'S NOT REAL. THEY DON'T CARE.

I ASKED YOU TO PLEASE BE THE CHANGE IN

[02:55:01]

THIS COMMUNITY AND BE THE CHANGE FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN ASSAULTED, FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT A CHILD FOR ANY REASON, JUST BE THERE FOR THEM AND CARE FOR THEM. THANK YOU.

>> [APPLAUSE] THANK YOU, SYDNEY.

THANK YOU. AIKA JOSHI.

>> AIKA JOSHI. I'M CORRECTING SUBSTITUTE TEACHERS FOR ALL OF THE 16 YEARS THAT I'VE LIVED IN FLAGSTAFF ARIZONA.

I AM A HIGH-SCHOOL JUNIOR HERE, AND I'M HERE SPEAKING TO YOU TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THIS RESOLUTION.

FOR MY ENTIRE LIFE, FLAGSTAFF HAS NOT ONLY BEEN MY HOMETOWN, BUT MY COMMUNITY.

ALL I HAVE TO SAY TO YOU TONIGHT IS THIS, I CAN'T VOTE.

LEGALLY SPEAKING, I HAVE NO SAY IN THE DECISIONS MADE ABOUT THIS ISSUE HERE IN THIS ROOM TODAY.

BUT I AM PART OF THE GENERATION THAT IS GOING TO GROW UP DEALING WITH THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THE CHOICES THAT YOU MAKE TODAY, AND I'M AFRAID I DO NOT WANT TO GROW UP IN A COMMUNITY WHERE I DO NOT HAVE THE BASIC RIGHT TO BODILY AUTONOMY, AND I DO NOT WANT THAT FOR MY PEERS.

YOU HERE TODAY HAVE THE POWER TO MAKE A DECISION THAT SAFEGUARDS OUR DIGNITY, OUR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, AND OUR BODIES.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN DO THROUGH THIS RESOLUTION, AND ALL I HAVE TO SAY TO YOU TODAY IS THAT I HOPE YOU CAN FIND IT IN YOURSELVES TO DO THAT FOR THE FUTURE OF YOUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]

>> THANK YOU. DAVID MONAHAN, JUNIOR.

>> MARIN COUNCIL. I ALMOST PASSED OVER THIS AGENDA ITEM BECAUSE THERE WERE NO LINKS TO IT.

NOW THAT IT WAS MENTIONED THAT PAST PETITION, I DO RECALL THAT.

BUT THERE WAS NO DESCRIPTION THERE TO TELL ME WHAT YOU WERE THINKING ABOUT.

THERE MUST BE SOMETHING.

THERE WAS A REFERENCE TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE SO I SEARCHED THE STATE LEGISLATURES SITE FOR THE WORD ABORTION.

THE TOP RETURN WAS REGARDING LIVE BIRTH.

I'M AGAINST LETTING A BABY THAT'S BORN AND DIE.

THE NEXT TWO WERE PARENTAL CONSENT.

I'M AGAINST THE STATE BEING ABLE TO TAKE A CHILD OFF AND DO SOMETHING TO THEM WITHOUT THE PARENT'S CONSENT OR KNOWLEDGE.

IT STARTS DROPPING OFF AFTER THAT.

I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT YOU WERE UP TO.

THAT SEEMS A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY THAT LET MY IMAGINATION RUN OFF.

THIS IS A PARTISAN POLITICAL ISSUE AS A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS HAVE CLEARLY STATED BEFORE YOU, BOTH FOR AND AGAINST MORE FOR THIS RESOLUTION.

BUT YOU WERE ELECTED ON A NON-PARTISAN PLATFORM.

I WANT YOU TO NOT DO PARTISAN POLITICS, DO FLAGSTAFF. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, DAVID. SABRINA HERSHEY.

>> HI. I DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING PREPARED, SO THIS MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT ROUGH.

I JUST WANTED TO TOUCH ON ONE SUBJECT THAT I KEPT HEARING BROUGHT UP, WAS THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS COUNCIL IS, FIRE-EMS MAKING SURE THE CITY RUNS WELL.

WELL, I'M A WOMAN AND I WORK IN FIRE-EMS AND I WOULD SAY THAT REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS ARE CENTRAL TO MY ABILITY TO DO MY JOB.

IF I GOT PREGNANT, I COULDN'T [LAUGHTER] WORK IN FIRE THIS SEASON WHEN OUR FOREST ARE BURNING AND NOT JUST MYSELF.

I'VE SEEN, WOMEN, FRIENDS, MENTORS DEAL WITH REPRODUCTIVE ISSUES AND NEED HEALTHCARE SO THEY CAN DO THEIR JOBS.

THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SAVED LIVES OF FLAGSTAFF RESIDENTS, AND LED TEENS INTO THE FOREST TO HELP FIGHT THE FIRES.

I'VE WORKED IN PLACES THAT RETAIN WOMEN AND PLACES THAT DON'T, AND IT'S NOT JUST A CODED TO MEET FOR DIVERSITY.

I'D SAY THAT THE PLACES THAT HAVE WOMEN AND PROTECT THEM ARE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE AND HEALTHY WORKFORCE TO BE IN.

THAT'S ALL I HAD TO SAY I FEEL LIKE PEOPLE HAVE DONE SUCH A GOOD JOB AT COVERING THIS TOPIC.

I JUST WANT TO PRINT THIS IS LIKE WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW, MAKING SURE THE CITY RUNS WELL AND PROTECTING THE WOMEN AND PEOPLE THAT CAN HAVE CHILDREN AND THOSE REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS WILL IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF FLAGSTAFF'S WORKFORCE, AND FIRE-EMS, POLICE, THINGS THAT SEEMED TO BE THE ARGUMENT AGAINST YOU ALL MAKING THIS DECISION.

[03:00:05]

THAT'S ALL I HAVE. [APPLAUSE]

>> THANK YOU, SABRINA. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF ONLINE COMMENTERS AS WELL.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL WE HAVE ONE COMMENTER TONIGHT.

ANDREA, YOU MAY GO AHEAD AND ADDRESS MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

>> HI. THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE TIME TO SPEAK TO YOU.

I WAS TRYING TO BE THERE IN PERSON, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, LIFE HAPPENS.

I ORIGINALLY LIVED INTO SPEAKING TO THE COUNCIL AFTER MY SON AND I SAW A PERSON ON SOLIERE THIS WEEKEND BEING HAULED OFF IN A BODY BAG.

IT WAS VERY UPSETTING.

I LOOKED INTO TALKING TO THE COUNCIL ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND IN LOOKING AT THAT, I SAW THE AGENDA.

I SAW NOTHING ABOUT HOMELESSNESS, WHICH IS A MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM FOR THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF RIGHT NOW, THEN ABORTION.

THE REASON I SAY THAT IS TO REITERATE WHAT SOME OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID.

ABORTION IS A PERSONAL ISSUE.

AS I WAS SITTING HERE LISTENING TO EVERY SPEAKER BEFORE ME, I HEARD MANY VIEWPOINTS.

THE BIGGEST THAT STOOD OUT AGAIN WAS, IT'S A PERSONAL ISSUE.

NOWHERE IN THE CITY COUNCIL, MISSION, VISION, OR VALUES DOES IT SAY, ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO MAKE A PROCLAMATION ON HEALTHCARE OR LIFE CHOICES? THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO FOCUS ON REAL ISSUES FOR THE CITIZENS OF FLAGSTAFF.

ISSUES THAT YOU CAN CHANGE, ISSUES THAT YOU CAN IMPACT, ISSUES THAT YOU CAN MAKE CHANGES AND MAKE AN IMPACT.

A PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY SUPPORT OF ABORTIONS IS NOT MAKING A CHANGE.

ALL IT DOES IS SAYS, THIS SELECT GROUP OF PEOPLE, WHOEVER IS WILLING TO SIGN THAT PROCLAMATION, HAS THE OPINION ON ABORTIONS, IF YOU TRULY FEEL IT IS NECESSARY TO MAKE SUCH A BROAD PROCLAMATION, THEN I CHALLENGE YOU TO PUT IT TO A VOTE, PUT IT TO A VOTE OF THE CITIZENS OF FLAGSTAFF.

I'VE READ OVER THE PROCLAMATIONS FROM TUCSON AND PHOENIX.

WHAT I READ IS BY MAKING A PROCLAMATION SUCH AS THIS, YOU ARE GIVING A DIRECTIVE TO OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND COURTS TO LOOK THE OTHER WAY WHILE THE LAW IS BROKEN.

WHAT'S NEXT? ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE A PROCLAMATION ON ASSAULT, THEFT, OR DUI? I DISAGREE THAT IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY OR WITHIN YOUR ROLE.

I'VE BEEN A DRAW ATTENTION TO THE MISSION, VISION, AND VALUES OF THIS CITY COUNCIL.

I'M SURE I LOST HALF OF YOU THE MOMENT I FINISH SAYING IT'S A PERSONAL CHOICE.

LET ME SAY IT AGAIN, THIS IS NOT YOUR CHOICE AS A COUNCIL TO MAKE A PROCLAMATION SUCH AS THIS.

AS A CONSTITUENT IN THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, I SAY DO NOT MAKE THIS PROCLAMATION.

PUT YOUR FOCUS TIME AND ENERGY INTO EDUCATION, GROWING OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND RESOURCES THAT CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

IN ADDITION TO WHAT THE YOUNG LADY JUST SAID, THAT SHE WORKS FOR THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF.

MAKE IT SO HER INSURANCE WILL TAKE HER TO ANOTHER STATE IF SHE WANTS TO, YOU CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE.

THAT IS WITHIN YOUR POWER, HOWEVER IF YOU MAKE THIS PROCLAMATION [OVERLAPPING]

>> THANK YOU, ANDREA. YOUR THREE MINUTES IS UP.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> I HOPE I DIDN'T BREAK ANYONE'S EARDRUMS WITH THAT.

ANY OTHER ONLINE COMMENTS? NO OTHER IN-PERSON COMMENTS.

NOW WE'RE GOING TO TURN IT INWARD AND HAVE A DISCUSSION AMONG COUNCIL AND WHAT I WANT, I JUST LIKE TO KICK IT OFF BY SAYING THAT EVERY PERSON WHO CAME HERE TO SPEAK TONIGHT SHOWED A LOT OF BRAVERY FOR GETTING UP AND SPEAKING.

I KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE THAT IT CAN BE A LITTLE NERVE-WRACKING TO SPEAK BEFORE COUNCIL, SO I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AND THANK ALL OF THE SPEAKERS FOR HAVING THE COURAGE TO COME AND MAKE YOUR VIEWS KNOWN, AND ALSO FOR EXERCISING YOUR RIGHTS AS A RESIDENT OF THE COMMUNITY.

I VERY MUCH I APPRECIATE WATCHING THAT INACTION.

THANK YOU. NOW, OPENING UP TO COUNCIL, COUNCIL MEMBER MATTHEWS HAS A COMMENT.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I HOPE THIS FLOWS I DID WRITE IT DOWN JUST SO I COULD KEEP UP WITH MY TRAIN OF THOUGHTS AND SOME A LITTLE ADD.

I REVISE IT A COUPLE OF TIMES SO I APOLOGIZE IF I SOMETIMES DON'T MAKE SENSE.

[03:05:07]

BUT I'D FIRST LIKE TO START OFF SAYING, I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND STATE MY APPRECIATION FOR OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT WHO PUT SEVERAL HOURS OF RESEARCH, TIME, AND PREPARATION, PROVIDING US WITH A CLEAR LEGAL INFORMATION TO EQUIP THE SEVEN OF US, TO DISCUSS THIS VERY HOT TOPIC.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND EXPRESS APPRECIATION FOR OUR LOCAL CITIZENS WHO WERE INFORMED ABOUT THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS TOPIC ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA AND HAD TAKEN THE TIME TO EXPRESS YOUR CONCERNS, YOUR SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WE HEAR YOU, WE HEAR YOUR EMOTIONS, AND YOUR PASSION ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE.

BUT I WILL SAY THIS SEVERAL TIMES HERE THAT THE FLAGSTAFF CITY COUNCIL CANNOT CHANGE THE LAW AND WE CANNOT PROTECT YOUR RIGHT TO ABORTION.

AS CITY COUNCIL, WE ARE FACED WITH MAKING DECISIONS THAT IMPACT MANY PEOPLE'S LIVES AND MOST OF THE TIME, SOME CITIZENS WILL AGREE WITH OUR DECISIONS AND SOME WILL NOT.

THIS DECISION TONIGHT IS GUARANTEED TO UPSET A GOOD PORTION OF CITIZENS REGARDLESS OF THE STEPS WE TAKE MOVING FORWARD, NO LAW CHANGE OR ORDINANCE WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED TONIGHT.

A RESOLUTION CANNOT DO WITH THE MAJORITY HAVE REQUESTED, WHICH IS TO PROTECT YOUR RIGHT TO ABORTION.

WE CAN ONLY MAKE A POLITICALLY CHARGED STATEMENT.

THE DISCUSSION SURROUNDING ABORTION LAWS ARE EMOTIONALLY CHARGED, DECISIVE, A DIVISIVE, AND POLITICALLY MOTIVATED, AND STATE AND US REPRESENTATIVES ARE TASKED WITH MAKING OR CHANGING STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS.

STATE LAWMAKERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING OR CHANGING ABORTION LAWS.

AS ONE OF THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS STATED TONIGHT, THIS ISSUE OF ABORTION WAS THE MAIN ISSUE DRIVING VOTERS TO THE BALLOT BOX THIS LAST NOVEMBER.

WE NOW HAVE A BODY OF LAW MAKERS REPRESENTING THE MAJORITY OF ARIZONA AND THEIR VIEWS ON ABORTION.

MANY HAVE SAID TONIGHT THAT ABORTION HAS NOT BEEN AVAILABLE IN NORTHERN ARIZONA IN SOMETIMES SO EVEN BEFORE DOBBS VS. JACKSON WAS OVERTURNED, THERE WAS LACK OF WOMEN'S ABORTION PROTECTION RIGHTS UP HERE.

FLAGSTAFF CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES, ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCAL POLICY-MAKING REGARDING ALL THINGS FLAGSTAFF, LIKE ZONING CHANGES, STORMWATER, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS, NO REMOVAL, AND AT TIMES MAKING SPECIAL RENAMING OF FOOTS TRAILS TO HONOR SPECIAL LOCALS LIKE COSMIC RAY.

IN THIS TIME IN SPACE, I WISH WE WERE DISCUSSING ACTIONS AND IDEAS TO ADDRESS OUR HOUSING CRISIS, OUR TRAFFIC CONGESTION, OR HOW WE CAN SUPPORT LOCAL BUSINESSES AND OUR LOCAL ECONOMY.

BUT INSTEAD, WE ARE DISCUSSING A POLITICALLY CHARGED RESOLUTION, MAKING STRONG STATEMENTS, WHICH WILL SURELY UPSET MANY CITIZENS, BUT SADLY, DO NOT HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO MAKE THE CHANGES OR SET ANY ORDINANCE, A RESOLUTION IS ONLY A STATEMENT.

FROM DAY 1, I'VE STRUGGLED WITH THE QUESTION AS TO HOW I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITIES, THAT THE DECISIONS AND VOTES I MAKE, AS I SERVE AS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FLAGSTAFF COMMUNITY AT LARGE, DO INDEED REPRESENT THE COMMUNITY AND NOT MY PERSONAL INTERESTS OR BELIEFS.

I KNOW THAT THIS IS CHALLENGING, BUT I THINK IT IS OUR JOB TO ALWAYS STRIVE TO ACHIEVE THIS.

WE RECEIVED SEVERAL EMAILS AND NOW IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENTS REPRESENTING ABOUT 0.0125 PERCENT OF THE POPULATION HERE.

SOME PEOPLE SUPPORT AN ABORTION RESOLUTION AND SOME OPPOSE THE RESOLUTION OF THIS NATURE.

MANY WHO ARE SUPPORTING THE RESOLUTION SEEM TO BE UNDER THE MISCONCEPTION THAT SB 1164 BANS ALL ABORTIONS, AS WELL AS PLEAD THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CAN CHANGE THE LAW OR AN ACT, A LOCAL ORDINANCE PROTECTING LOCAL'S ABORTION RIGHTS.

THEY ARE INCORRECT ON ALL COUNTS.

SB 1164 ALLOWS ABORTIONS UP TO 15 WEEKS.

WE CANNOT PASS AN ORDINANCE PROTECTING ABORTION RIGHTS.

WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS VERY POLITICALLY AND EMOTIONALLY CHARGED ISSUE JUST TO MAKE A POLITICAL STATEMENT THAT CLEARLY DOES NOT REPRESENT THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE? WE TOOK AN OATH OF OFFICE WHEN WE WERE ASSIGNED THIS TO UPHOLD THE STATE CONSTITUTION AND ITS LAWS, AND UNTIL THOSE LAWS CHANGE, WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE OATH OF OFFICE WE TAKE.

I WILL BE LATER MAKING MY VOTE ON THIS BASED ON THE OATH OF OFFICE THAT WE'VE TAKEN. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER.

COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSE.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE THAT CAME OUT TO SPEAK TONIGHT.

[03:10:01]

AS I'M SPEAKING NOW, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME NOT TO BE EMOTIONAL ABOUT THIS.

I THINK IT TOOK A LOT OF BRAVERY FOR MANY OF YOU TO SHARE YOUR STORIES.

I THINK IT WOULD BE AN ACT OF COWARDICE OF ME NOT TO JOIN YOU AND TO SHARING THAT THIS IS A PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND NARRATIVE FOR ME AS WELL.

IT'S A CHALLENGING THING FOR ME TO SHARE THIS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT I HAVE FAMILY AND FRIENDS THAT WATCH THIS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW SOME OF WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU THIS EVENING ABOUT MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCES AND MAY NOT AGREE WITH SOME OF MY VIEWS ON THIS TOPIC.

HOWEVER, AS A SURVIVOR OF SEXUAL ASSAULT, AS A WOMAN OF COLOR AND AS A MEMBER OF THIS COMMUNITY WHO VALUES THE VOICES OF AN INPUT OF ALL, WHO PUTS A LOT OF STOCK IN THE MISSION OF OUR CITY, WHICH IS TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL.

I DON'T SEE THIS AS A POLITICALLY CHARGED ISSUE.

I SEE THIS AS A PERSONAL ONE.

I SEE IT AS ONE THAT IS WORKING TO ADVANCE THAT MISSION.

I KNOW THAT THERE ARE LIMITS TO WHAT WE CAN DO, AND I KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE DISAPPOINTMENTS IN SOME OF WHAT WE CANNOT DO WITH A RESOLUTION THAT WE MAY PASS.

HOWEVER, I FERVENTLY SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT IF WE CAN MAKE A STATEMENT TO SUPPORT THE PEOPLE OF OUR COMMUNITY, THEN THAT IS PART OF OUR ROLE AS MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

I'M CHALLENGED VERY MUCH BY SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT TALKED ABOUT WHAT WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON INSTEAD OF THIS.

PRIMARILY BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT IT IS AN EITHER OR QUESTION THAT WE'RE BEING FACED WITH, IS IT BOTH AND HOUSING IS OF MAJOR IMPORTANCE TO ME.

SUPPORTING OUR POLICE AND FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES IS OF MAJOR IMPORTANCE TO ME, AS IS PROTECTING AND ENHANCING THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF ALL, WHICH INCLUDES EVEN A STATEMENT ABOUT OUR SUPPORT OF THE ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE FOR THE WOMAN OF OUR COMMUNITY AND THOSE OF THE LGBTQIA COMMUNITY WHO HAVE UNIQUE EXPERIENCES IN THIS.

MEMBERS OF THE DISABILITY COMMUNITY WHO HAVE UNIQUE EXPERIENCE IN THIS, AND MEMBERS OF THE BIPOC COMMUNITY WHO HAVE UNIQUE EXPERIENCES IN THIS.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A DISCUSSION FOR US TONIGHT.

I'M IN SUPPORT OF MOVING FORWARD WITH SEEKING LEGAL GUIDANCE AND CONTINUE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT A RESOLUTION THAT WE COULD PUT FORWARD.

I JUST WANT TO SAY AGAIN, THANK YOU TO EVERYONE THAT CAME OUT TO SPEAK TONIGHT, AND I WANT TO ENSURE THAT IT'S UNDERSTOOD THAT THAT INCLUDES THOSE WHO SPOKE AGAINST THIS RESOLUTION.

BECAUSE I HAVE SAID THROUGHOUT MY TIME ON COUNCIL THAT EVERY VOICE IN THIS COMMUNITY MATTERS, EVEN THOSE THAT DON'T AGREE.

THAT'S IT FOR ME THIS EVENING.

BUT THANK YOU [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSE.

COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS

>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>. CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY. SORRY. FIRST OF ALL, LET ME APOLOGIZE TO THE AUDIENCE FOR NOT BEING THERE IN PERSON.

I WAS REALLY LOOKING AT THE WEATHER AND DECIDED I MIGHT BE SAFER AT HOME.

BUT IT IS NOT BECAUSE I DID NOT THINK THAT THIS ISSUE WAS IMPORTANT, AND THAT'S WHY I TURNED MY CAMERA ON WHEN WE GOT TO THIS ISSUE BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT.

WHEN I RAN FOR OFFICE, I DID NOT GIVE UP MY RIGHTS AS AN INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN.

MANY OF US HAVE STRONG FEELINGS ON THIS SUBJECT.

IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT THIS HAS BEEN MADE A POLITICAL ISSUE.

I SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT MY BODY, ABOUT MY HEALTH.

WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO ME, WHETHER THAT IS A MATTER OF ABORTION, CANCER TREATMENT, OR ANY OTHER OPERATION THAT I MAY NEED.

I'M A PRO-CHOICE.

ALL OF US SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE PERSONAL DECISIONS ABOUT OUR BODIES.

I'M IN SUPPORT OF REQUESTING THAT OUR LEGAL STAFF LOOK AT DRAFTING A RESOLUTION THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TONIGHT.

AS AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN WOMAN, AND ESPECIALLY A WOMAN AT MY AGE, I KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE PERSONALLY, NOT TO HAVE RIGHTS OR TO HAVE YOUR RIGHTS TAKEN AWAY OR NOT HAVE THE INALIENABLE RIGHTS THAT OTHER PEOPLE HAD.

[03:15:04]

IT WAS PEOPLE LIKE THOSE OF YOU HERE TONIGHT WHO MADE IT POSSIBLE OR PERSONAL LIKE ME TO BE ABLE TO SIT ON THE DIAS AND TO LISTEN TO THIS CONVERSATION.

IT WAS PEOPLE LIKE THOSE OF YOU HERE TONIGHT WHO HELPED TO SECURE THE RIGHTS THAT I NOW ENJOY.

IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY AS A COUNCIL MEMBER TO DO THE BEST THAT I CAN TO PROVIDE WHATEVER SUPPORT AND ASSISTANCE THAT I CAN FOR THE MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

EVERY ISSUE THAT YOU BRING TO THE DIAS OR YOU BRING TO THIS COUNCIL IS IMPORTANT.

EVERY ISSUE DESERVES TO HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF ATTENTION THAT ANY ISSUE HAS, AND SO WITH THAT, I'M IN SUPPORT OF US AT LEAST DIRECTING OUR STAFF TO LOOK AT DRAFTING A RESOLUTION.

THANK YOU [APPLAUSE]

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS [APPLAUSE].

ANY OTHER? COUNCIL MEMBER SWEET.

>> THANK YOU. I WANT TO START OFF BY STATING I AM IN SUPPORT OF A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE, AND I SUPPORT THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS A WOMAN SHOULD HAVE OVER HER BODY.

WE HAVE HEARD FROM PEOPLE WITH VARYING OPINIONS ON THIS TOPIC, AND SOMEHOW WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO COME TOGETHER AND MOVE FORWARD.

THIS IS OUR CHANCE TO MAKE A STANCE, SHOW WHO WE ARE AS A COMMUNITY AND AS LEADERS, AND TO CREATE A SAFE PLACE FOR ALL.

I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR THE EMAILS AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE HERE TONIGHT.

I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR SPEAKING THEIR TRUTH.

I APPRECIATE THE THOUGHTFULNESS AND HONESTY YOU'VE ALL BROUGHT TO THE DAIS.

THIS TOPIC ISN'T EASY.

I APPRECIATE YOU ALL FOR SPEAKING UP.

WELL, THE COMMUNITY WILL ALWAYS HAVE DIFFERRING VIEWS AND OPINIONS ON TOPICS SUCH AS THIS.

THIS IS ONE WHERE I FEEL I NEED TO MAKE MYSELF CLEAR AND THAT I WILL ALWAYS SUPPORT A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE, AND WITH THAT, I SUPPORT DIRECTING STAFF TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION SIMILAR TO THE TUCSON AND PHOENIX ONE.

THANK YOU [APPLAUSE]

>> THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBER SWEET.

COUNCIL MEMBER MCCARTHY.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I WANTED TO TALK TO THE AUDIENCE.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THE TESTIMONY WE HEARD TONIGHT.

EVERYONE ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE WAS GIVEN A CHANCE TO ENUNCIATE THEIR VIEWPOINT.

I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT I'M OLD ENOUGH, I HAVE GRANDCHILDREN.

I'VE NEVER BEEN INVOLVED IN ABORTION, A WOMAN THAT I'VE BEEN WITH.

BUT I'VE KNOWN PEOPLE THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH IT FOR VARIOUS REASONS.

ABORTION IS A PERSONAL AND VERY DIFFICULT DECISION AND WE HEARD SOME TESTIMONY ON THAT TONIGHT.

I WANT TO STRESS THAT IT'S A PERSONAL DECISION.

WHAT IN THE HELL IS THE GOVERNMENT DOING INVOLVED IN AN ISSUE LIKE THIS? THAT'S MY OPINION.

I SUPPORT A RESOLUTION THAT WILL URGE THE LEGISLATURE TO CHANGE THE LAW TO ALLOW THE RIGHT OF ABORTION, WHICH HAS BEEN THE LAW OF THE LAND FOR 50 YEARS.

I WISH WE COULD DO MORE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW IS WE CAN'T DO MORE THAN THAT.

IT'S UP TO THE LEGISLATURE, BUT WE CAN URGE THEM TO DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, AND THAT MAY NOT HAPPEN IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS.

IT MAY NOT HAPPEN IN THE NEXT YEAR, BUT IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN.

I THINK THAT THE HISTORY IS MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION.

I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE LEGAL STAFF COMING UP WITH A STRONG RESOLUTION AS IS POSSIBLE AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE LIMITS ON THAT, BUT IT SHOULD BE AS STRONG AS POSSIBLE.

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER, VICE MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I DO HAVE SOME NOTES HERE.

I DIDN'T PREPARE ANY COMMENTS BECAUSE I WANTED TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK AUTHENTICALLY OFF THE CUFF WITH ALL OF YOU.

I KNEW THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE A SOMEWHAT ORGANICS SITUATION, AND IT'S REALLY NICE TO SEE A ROOM FULL OF WARM BODIES ON SUCH A COLD EVENING.

WE HAVEN'T HAD A LOT OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SINCE COVID.

SOMETHING HAPPENED THERE SOMEWHERE AROUND MIDNIGHT 2020,

[03:20:03]

THAT AFFECTED THE DYNAMIC THAT I WAS USED TO, COMING IN TO COUNCIL, AND I'M JUST REALLY GRATEFUL FOR EVERYONE WHO CAME HERE IN PERSON AND TO EVERYONE WHO WAS ABLE TO BE WITH US REMOTELY AS WELL.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT TOPIC.

I THINK IT'S ONE WORTHY OF DISCUSSION AND I'M GLAD WE'RE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.

I AM PROUD OF MY ROLE IN BRINGING THIS FORWARD TO COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION, AND I'M SORRY, THAT I CAN'T DO MORE, AND I FEEL THAT THERE ARE SOME COMPLICATIONS HERE THAT PREVENT US FROM GOING AS FAR AS I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO.

THINGS GET BINARY REAL FAST.

THE HIGHER WE GO IN GOVERNMENT, AND MOST ISSUES ARE INHERENTLY GRAY. I BELIEVE.

IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I WAS ATTRACTED TO LOCAL POLITICS AND LOCAL SERVICE IS BECAUSE WE CAN ACTUALLY GET STUFF DONE HERE AT THIS LEVEL.

WE CAN TALK ABOUT COMPLEXITY, WE CAN TALK ABOUT COMPLICATED ISSUES, AND WE STILL HAVE TO BUY MILK TOGETHER AT THE GROCERY STORE.

THERE'S A LEVEL OF RETAIL NEXT TO THIS.

THAT'S REAL AND IT'S A PLACE I LIKE TO BE AND I LIKE TO EXPLORE GRAY AREAS, AND I LIKE TO THINK THAT I CAN THINK ABOUT ISSUES FROM MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES.

MY LIFE'S JOURNEY HAS TAKEN ME FROM ONE OF A VERY TRADITIONAL, STAUNCHLY CATHOLIC PRO-LIFE POSITION.

I EVEN MARCHED AGAINST ROE VERSUS WADE IN WASHINGTON DC AS A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT.

ONE, I WOULD AGREE THAT THIS ISN'T COMPLICATED, AS SOMEONE SAID, AND I THINK IT WAS KYLE WHO SAID THIS ISN'T COMPLICATED.

IT'S VERY CLEAR TO ME WHERE TO FALL ON THESE ISSUES RIGHT NOW.

WHAT THESE ISSUES ARE COMPLEX AND THE MORE THAT WE CAN BE RESPECTFUL FOR EACH OTHER AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE COMPLEXITY INVOLVED, THE VALUES COMPLEXITY, THE LEGAL COMPLEXITY.

I THINK WE CAN MAKE REAL PROGRESS FORWARD, AND MAYBE THIS IS THE PROVING GROUND.

THIS IS THE AUGER PLATE UPON WHICH WE CAN HAVE ACTUAL DIALOGUE, MUTUAL RESPECT, AND COME TO NEW UNDERSTANDING WITH EACH OTHER, AND THAT CAN RISE UP TO THE NATIONAL LEVEL AND CHANGE THE DYNAMIC FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE STUDENTS AND ARE SCARED FOR OUR FUTURE AND FOR OUR FRIENDS AND THEIR FUTURE.

I DON'T WANT TO BE PIGEONHOLED, AND I'VE TALKED TO MARYLAND ABOUT THIS A LOT.

I'M A RELUCTANT WARRIOR HERE IN THIS ARENA.

BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT ABORTION CAN BE PAINFUL.

I DON T THINK THAT ABORTION IS A GO-TO SOLUTION.

I THINK THERE ARE OTHER WAYS THAT WE CAN ADDRESS A LOT OF THESE PROBLEMS. I DON T THINK THE PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT DOES A GOOD JOB OF ACTUALLY BEING PRO-LIFE.

I THINK THAT THEY QUICKLY GET ZEROED IN AND FOCUSED ON ONE ELEMENT TO THIS AND I CAN APPRECIATE THE PERSPECTIVE THAT THEY BRING AND HOW URGENT AND CONCERNING IT IS.

JUST BECAUSE WE CAN SEE THIS ISSUE WITHOUT COMPLEXITY DOESN'T MEAN THAT A DIFFERENT SIDE DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF COMPLEXITY TO IT.

ANYWAY. THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT I FEEL STRONGLY THIS IS A MATTER BETWEEN A WOMAN, SOMETIMES THEIR FAMILY, AND A HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.

SOMEONE SAID ABORTION IS HEALTH CARE, AND I FULLY AGREE WITH THAT.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS IS NOT A DECISION THAT GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO BE INVOLVED IN, AND SO EVERYONE HAS SHARED A LOT OF PERSONAL STORIES HERE.

I HAVE THE ABILITY TO PHILOSOPHIZE ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT.

I GREW UP AS A COMMUNITY ORGANIZER AND ONE OF OUR PRINCIPLES WAS THOSE WHO AREN'T CLOSE TO THE PROBLEM CAN AFFORD TO PHILOSOPHIZE.

I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PRIVILEGE BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE PERSONAL EXPERIENCES THAT BRING THIS LEVEL OF URGENCY TO THE TABLE.

BUT I DO HAVE A DAUGHTER WHO'S GOING OFF TO COLLEGE THIS YEAR.

I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT LEVEL OF HEALTH CARE IS GOING TO BE AVAILABLE TO HER ON CAMPUS IN THE DORMS WHEREVER SHE ENDS UP, AND I HAVE A 13-YEAR-OLD SON.

WHO PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE HERE IF IT WASN'T FOR A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE AND A ROBUST HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THAT WAS ABLE TO RESPOND NIMBLY AND QUICKLY TO AN EMERGENCY SITUATION.

MY WIFE HAD AN ECTOPIC PREGNANCY AND I WAS IN SAN DIEGO AT A WORK CONVENTION,

[03:25:03]

A RETREAT OF SOME KIND WHEN ALL THIS HAPPENED AND IT WAS ALL OVER AND DONE WITHIN A 36 HOURS PERIOD.

I DIDN'T EVEN MAKE IT HOME IN TIME TO BE SUPPORTIVE PART OF THAT PROCESS.

MY WIFE WAS IN AND OUT OF THE HOSPITAL AND RECOVERING BY THE TIME I RETURNED HOME FROM SAN DIEGO, AND HER REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM WAS INTACT AND WE WERE ABLE TO GO ON AND COMPLETE OUR FAMILY THE WAY WE WANTED TO.

I DO HAVE THE EXPERIENCE OF KNOWING HOW IMPORTANT IT IS FOR WOMEN TO BE ABLE TO RECEIVE THE CARE THEY NEED RIGHT AWAY.

WITHOUT RESPECT TO ANY ARBITRARY WINDOWS BEING SET UP BY POLITICAL BODIES SOMEWHERE OFF IN THE DISTANCE.

THESE ISSUES ARE WEIRD.

YOUTH ACCESS TO GENDER AFFIRMING PRACTICE IS SOMETHING THAT I PERSONALLY BROUGHT UP EARLIER THIS EVENING.

I HAVE COMPLICATED FEELINGS ABOUT ALL OF THAT.

I HAVE QUESTIONS, BUT IT'S NOT MY ROLE TO LEGALLY BLOCK FAMILIES FROM STRUGGLING WITH THE COMPLEXITIES ON THEIR OWN AND I SEE THAT AS VERY MUCH PART OF THE SAME CONVERSATION.

THIS IS A PRIVATE MATTER BETWEEN FAMILY MEMBERS AND HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS.

IT'S NOT FOR ME TO VALUATE IN MY OWN WILL INTO THE SITUATION.

I DO THINK THE SUPREME COURT HAS MOVED BACKWARDS ON THIS CASE AND I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED AND I'M SORRY THAT I'VE LIVED TO SEE THE DAY WHERE OUR SUPREME COURT IS HOLISTICALLY TAKING RIGHTS AWAY FROM ENTIRE PORTIONS OF OUR CONSTITUENTS AND OUR PEOPLE AND OUR COMMUNITY.

IT'S REALLY FRUSTRATING TO SEE.

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD DO A RESOLUTION OR WHAT'S THE POINT OF DOING A RESOLUTION? I JUST WANTED TO TOUCH UPON THAT REAL QUICKLY.

I'M NOT ONE TO RUSH TOWARDS RESOLUTIONS AS A WAY TO OPERATE UP HERE.

I THINK IT SHOULD BE DONE SPARINGLY AND I HAVE SUPPORTED RESOLUTIONS IN THE PAST NOT MANY.

I DO RESERVE THE RIGHT TO WEIGH IN ON A RESOLUTION NOW AND THEN AND I THINK IT CAN BE USED EFFECTIVELY IF IT IS A SPARING TOOL.

I ALSO THINK WE ARE ABLE TO WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S A LITTLE INSULTING TO HEAR THAT WE'RE LOSING OUR FOCUS BY LOOKING AT THIS AND NOT JUST FILLING POTHOLES OUT THERE [LAUGHTER] THIS ISN'T A ZERO-SUM GAME.

THIS IS IMPORTANT TO A LOT OF PEOPLE.

IT'S GOING TO BE IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE WHO AREN'T EVEN PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS CONVERSATION AT ALL RIGHT NOW, AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO WEIGH IN.

WHAT'S THE POINT OF A RESOLUTION? WELL, IT CREATES SPACE FOR A CONVERSATION LIKE THIS FOR ONE, AND IT CREATES SPACE FOR COMMUNITY PROBLEM-SOLVING AND FOR THAT LEVEL OF DIALOGUE AND MUTUAL RESPECT TO RISE UP AND BECOME A NEW MODEL FOR HOW DO WE DO THIS AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL? THE OTHER THING, SOMEONE SAID THAT IT MEANS A LOT TO KNOW THAT YOU HAVE OUR BACKS.

ONE OF THE FIRST SPEAKERS.

THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT FOR ME.

AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MONTH WE DECLARED A PROCLAMATION FOR BLACK HISTORY MONTH, LOTS OF WAREHOUSES, AND THEREFORE ACKNOWLEDGING THE SHARED HISTORY WE HAVE, THE HARMS, THE HEALING AND IT WAS JUST A VERY ENRICHING THING FOR THIS BODY TO BE ABLE TO DO.

A RESOLUTION FROM TIME-TO-TIME IS AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO EXPRESS A MAJORITY OPINION AND FEELING ABOUT THE WAY THINGS ARE GOING AND WE DO IT IN ALL SORTS OF FORMS, AND THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, AUTHENTIC WAY TO DO THAT.

I WANT THE COMMUNITY TO KNOW THAT THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL HAS ITS BACK ON THIS ISSUE.

THAT'S IMPORTANT TO ME [APPLAUSE] THIS WON'T GO AS FAR AS SOME OF YOU WANT BECAUSE IT CAN'T AND THAT'S WHERE THE LEGAL COMPLEXITY COMES INTO THIS.

WE'RE NOT WHERE THIS BATTLE NEEDS TO PLAY OUT IN TERMS OF ITS END GAME BUT I WOULD LIKE OUR COMMUNITY TO KNOW THAT COUNCIL MAJORITY HAS YOUR BACK AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT I WOULD LIKE TO GO AS FAR AS WE LEGALLY CAN TO MAKE SURE THAT FLAGSTAFF KNOWS THAT WE ARE BREATHING DOWN THE NECK OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND BRINGING TO BEAR THE WEIGHT THAT WE ARE ABLE TO,

[03:30:08]

TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR POLICE FORCE AND OTHERS ARE STAYING IN THEIR LANE AND NOT GETTING TOO INVOLVED IN ENFORCEMENT ON THESE MATTERS AS WE'RE ABLE TO.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THE RESOLUTION WE HAVE BEFORE US RIGHT NOW GOES AS FAR AS IT CAN.

I THINK SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US BY THE ABORTION LINES LATE THIS AFTERNOON AT 12:45 PM, I THINK [LAUGHTER] SHOULD BE FINESSED AND TOYED WITH, CITY ATTORNEY TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN.

I WOULD PRESS FOR US TO GO RIGHT UP TO THE LINE WHERE WE CAN.

REMEMBER TOO, WE'RE IN A NEW PARADIGM.

WE'RE NOT PUNCHING BAGS ANYMORE FOR THE STATE.

WE HAVE A NEW ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO I PERSONALLY TALKED TO AND INVITED HER TO FLAGSTAFF AND SHE AGREED TO COME OUT HERE.

SHE WAS TURNED AWAY BY THE WEATHER.

WE SEEM TO BE HAVING THIS PRETTY CRAZY WEATHER EVERY TUESDAY THIS YEAR, WHICH IS UNFORTUNATE AND I THINK THAT WINDOW OF GETTING HER ATTENTION WAS REALLY SMALL AND IT MAY HAVE CLOSED FOR THE TIME BEING.

WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TRYING TO GET HER UP HERE, BUT SHE'S HITTING THE GROUND RUNNING NOW AND VERY BUSY WITH HER ACTUAL JOB AND NOT JUST CAMPAIGNING.

WE'LL SEE WHERE THAT GOES.

IT WAS GOING TO BE REALLY REFRESHING AND NICE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION BEFORE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION.

BUT HERE WE ARE. IT'S A MATTER OF URGENCY AND WE NEED TO GET TO THIS.

I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE MOVING FORWARD.

BUT JUST KNOW THAT WE HAVE A DIFFERENT SITUATION AT THE STATE.

WE HAVE MORE POWER AT OUR CORNER THAN WE ONCE DID AND WE'RE NOT THE, WELL, I'M GOING TO NOT SAY THAT.

I DON'T WANT TO TRIGGER ANYBODY.

WE HAVE MORE POWER THAN WE THOUGHT WE DID AND AS RECENTLY AS THE RECENT PAST AND WE SHOULD TEST THAT AS MUCH AS WE CAN AND SO I WILL SUPPORT ANY RESOLUTION THAT THIS COUNCIL CAN AGREE ON AS A MAJORITY BUT MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE TAKE IT AS FAR AS WE CAN IN ORDER TO HAVE THE COMMUNITIES BACK.

THANK YOU, MAYOR [APPLAUSE]

>> THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. MY COLLEAGUES AND EVERYONE WHO HAS SPOKEN THIS EVENING HAVE BEEN SO ARTICULATE.

I KNOW THAT I CAN'T MATCH YOUR ELOQUENCE THIS EVENING, BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WANT TO SAY.

THE FIRST IS THAT I AM FIRMLY PRO-CHOICE AND THAT I SHARE MANY OF THE SENTIMENTS THAT WERE EXPRESSED ABOUT WHY A CITY COUNCIL WOULD PASS A RESOLUTION.

A COUPLE OF PEOPLE HAVE COMMENTED ABOUT THAT THIS IS A VALUE STATEMENT AND THAT BY MAKING A VALUE STATEMENT YOU DON'T REPRESENT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.

BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY TO THAT IS THAT EVERY DAY WE'RE MAKING VALUE STATEMENTS UP HERE, OUR BUDGET IS A VALUE STATEMENT.

OUR VOTES ARE STATEMENTS OF OUR VALUES AND WHERE WE WANT TO PUT OUR TIME AND ATTENTION AND MONEY.

I WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT EVERYONE WAS HEARD AND CONSIDERED BECAUSE MAYBE NEXT TIME IT'S A TOPIC WHERE IT'S COMPLETELY FLIPPED WITH PEOPLE COMING OUT AND SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF OR AGAINST.

I WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT THEY WERE HEARD.

I FIRMLY BELIEVE, AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT I BELIEVE REALLY, BUT THAT ABORTION IS HEALTH CARE AND THAT A RESOLUTION BY US ISSUING A RESOLUTION, WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE LAW, NOR ARE WE BREAKING THE LAW.

WE'RE STATING WHAT THE MAJORITY OF THE FLAGSTAFF CITY COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO COMMUNICATE TO THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ABOUT LAWS THAT THEY'RE PASSING.

[03:35:07]

YOU SAID CHEW GUM AND WALK AT THE SAME TIME, I HAD WRITTEN DOWN WE CAN DO MULTIPLE THINGS SIMULTANEOUSLY AND IT'S A GOOD THING OR NOTHING WOULD GET DONE IN THIS CITY.

THIS IS POLITICALLY CHARGED, BUT IT SHOULDN'T BE BECAUSE THESE ARE MEDICAL DECISIONS THAT SHOULD BE MADE BETWEEN A DOCTOR AND A PATIENT.

THE NEXT STATEMENT COULD BE, WHAT BUSINESS IS IT OF YOURS ISSUING THIS RESOLUTION, BUT AGAIN, IT'S JUST OUR VALUES AND SINCE IT HAS BECOME POLITICALLY CHARGED, AND WE WISH THAT THAT WASN'T THE CASE, BUT IT IS.

I JUST WANT TO GO ON RECORD AS STATING WHERE MY VALUES LIE.

I'D LIKE TO, AGAIN, THANK THE PUBLIC AND THANK MY COLLEAGUES UP HERE.

I THINK THAT WE HAD A REALLY GREAT CONVERSATION, A VERY RESPECTFUL CONVERSATION, AND I SO APPRECIATE IT AND FOR EVERYONE WHO SHARED A PORTION OF A PERSONAL STORY TO AN ENTIRE PERSONAL STORY.

THANK YOU FOR GIVING THAT TO US.

I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE IT.

I TOO WOULD LIKE TO SEE US SUPPORT A RESOLUTION THAT IS AS STRONG AS IT CAN BE.

CITY ATTORNEY, DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH DIRECTION OR DO YOU NEED COUNCIL MEMBERS TO GET MORE SPECIFIC WITH WHAT WE ARE INSTRUCTING STAFF TO DO?

>> I BELIEVE WE HAVE ENOUGH DIRECTION, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. AGAIN, THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING OUT THIS EVENING.

THANK YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DO IN THE COMMUNITY.

LET'S TAKE A 60-SECOND BREAK JUST TO BREATHE.

I'M GUESSING YOU GUYS WANT TO LEAVE [LAUGHTER] YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO STAY BUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE, I'LL GIVE 60 SECONDS FOR THE HUSTLE AND BUSTLE OF LEAVING AND WE CAN ALL JUST TAKE A BREAK FOR 60 SECONDS [APPLAUSE] [NOISE] THIS FAIR ITEM WAS REQUESTED BY

[A. Future Agenda Item Request (F.A.I.R.): A request by Mayor Daggett to place on a future agenda a discussion about parking requirements. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council direction. ]

ME TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

I KNOW WE HAVE AN ONLINE COMMENTER SO I'M GOING TO ASK FOR THAT BEFORE WE GET INTO A DISCUSSION.

IS MICHELLE READY? [BACKGROUND] OKAY, MICHELLE.

>> OH YES, I AM READY.

>> MICHELLE JAMES.