Extracted text (via pymupdf)
50894 characters
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
COUNCIL MINUTES
May 14, 2026
The City Council of the City of Mesa met in the Study Session room at City Hall, 20 East Main Street, on
May 14, 2026, at 7:30 a.m.
COUNCIL PRESENT
COUNCIL ABSENT
OFFICERS PRESENT
Mark Freeman
Scott Somers
Rich Adams
Jennifer Duff
Francisco Heredia*
Dorean Taylor*
Alicia Goforth
Scott Butler
Holly Moseley
Jim Smith
(*Participated in the meeting through the use of video conference equipment.)
Mayor Freeman conducted a roll call.
Mayor Freeman excused Councilmember Goforth from the entire meeting.
1.
Review and discuss items on the agenda for the May 18, 2026, Regular Council meeting.
All of the items on the agenda were reviewed among Council and staff and the following was
noted:
Conflict of interest: None
Items removed from the consent agenda: None
In response to a question from Councilmember Taylor regarding agenda Item 4-b, (Three-Year
Term Contract with Two-Year Renewal Options for Vehicle Detection Systems for
Intelligent Transportation Systems for the Transportation Department (Sole Source)
(Citywide)), on the Regular Council meeting agenda, Transportation Department Director Erik
Guderian explained that each of the traffic signals use vehicle-detection technology to adjust
signal timing based on traffic demand. He compared the existing detection methods to the
proposed system which would provide improved signal efficiency and more reliable detection
technology. He clarified that the proposed system only detects the presence of a vehicle at a
traffic signal and does not collect driver information or personally identifiable information.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Taylor regarding agenda Item 4-e, (52-Month
Use of a Cooperative Term Contract for the Purchase of Apple Computer Products for the
Department of Innovation and Technology (Citywide)), on the Regular Council meeting
agenda, Chief Information Officer Scott Conn stated that the City of Mesa (COM) technology
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Page 2
equipment is generally replaced on a three-to-five year cycle to avoid technical debt and to ensure
compatibility with current software and technology. He pointed out that Apple products, including
iPads, are typically replaced every five years, with annual replacement costs ranging from
approximately $100,000 to $300,000, and that replacement schedules are planned by department
based on each device’s purchase date and age.
Mr. Conn verified that all COM data is securely removed from retired equipment and that the
equipment is processed as electronic waste (e-waste) rather than resold. He noted that any funds
received through the e-waste program have been donated to Community Spirit initiatives. He
reported that, with matching funds from the Council, approximately $12,000 was provided to an
elementary school for new technology equipment.
Mr. Conn explained that delaying equipment replacement could lead to software incompatibility,
slower system performance, reduced employee productivity, longer response times, and
diminished service levels.
In response to a question from Councilmember Taylor regarding agenda Item 4-g, (Use of a
Cooperative Contract for the Purchase of Nine E-One Cyclone Custom Pumper
Apparatuses, Two E-One Cyclone Custom Heavy Rescue Apparatuses, and One E-One
Cyclone Custom Rear Mount Aerial Platform Apparatus (Replacements) for the Mesa Fire
and Medical Department (Funded by 2022 and 2024 Public Safety Bonds) (Citywide)), on
the Regular Council meeting agenda, Assistant Fire Chief Brian Darling introduced Fire
Maintenance Administrator Jason Nickelson and displayed a PowerPoint presentation. (See
Attachment 1)
Mr. Nickleson reported that fire apparatus delivery times have increased from approximately 12
months to as long as four years. He stated that, to address the extended lead times, the COM is
purchasing apparatus included in the five-year bond program in advance, resulting in initial
savings of approximately $980,000. He noted that the advance purchase will allow the units to be
delivered in accordance with the established replacement schedule and is expected to reduce the
impact of future price increases. He confirmed that each unit will be manufactured in accordance
with the National Fire Protection Association standards in effect at the time of production.
Mr. Nickelson explained that the purchase includes nine pumpers, two heavy rescue units, and
one rear-mount ladder truck. He commented that the two heavy rescue units, also referred to as
squad units, respond to major incidents throughout the Valley and serve as regional assets. He
pointed out that although the units typically accumulate fewer miles than other fire apparatuses,
replacement parts are guaranteed for only 20 years, and the existing units are approaching that
threshold, which could affect the City’s ability to repair them. He stated that pumpers currently
cost approximately $1.2 million each, while the ladder truck is estimated to cost $2.6 million. He
mentioned that limited competition among manufacturers has contributed to significant increases
in both pricing and delivery times. (See Pages 2 through 7 of Attachment 1)
In response to comments made by Councilmember Duff related to the benefits of Mesa’s electric
fire truck, City Manager Scott Butler verified that the electric fire truck has performed well and has
been positively received by crews because it is quieter and reduces exposure to diesel exhaust;
however, he recalled that electric apparatus currently costs nearly twice as much as comparable
diesel-powered equipment, making additional purchases cost-prohibitive at this time.
City Attorney Jim Smith advised that national litigation alleges anticompetitive practices within the
fire apparatus industry and stated that the COM may consider joining the litigation. He clarified
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Page 3
that the potential litigation would not affect the Fire and Medical Department’s need to proceed
with purchasing critical apparatus.
Mayor Freeman thanked staff for the presentation.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Taylor regarding agenda Item 4-k, (Hohokam
Stadium and Fitch Park Improvement Project - Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR),
Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) (District 1 and 4)), on the Regular Council meeting agenda,
Assistant City Manager Marc Heirshberg reported that the improvements are required under the
25-year facility use agreement with the Oakland Athletics for the use of Hohokam Stadium and
Fitch Park. He indicated that the agreement requires the COM to make upgrades at 10-year
intervals to maintain operations and preserve the condition of the facilities. He noted that
improvements may be required when previously replaced capital items reach the end of their
useful life or when five or more Cactus League teams have comparable facilities. He confirmed
that this is the first 10-year improvement interval under the agreement.
In response to a question from Councilmember Taylor, Mr. Smith confirmed that the facility use
agreement is legally binding and requires the COM to complete the specified improvements. He
outlined the potential results of failing to comply with the agreement.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Taylor, Mr. Butler advised that Spring Training
generates significant economic activity for the COM, including increased sales tax revenue from
visitors who shop, dine, and stay in Mesa. He added that maintaining high-quality facilities is
essential to retaining teams and supporting the COM’s broader economic development strategy.
He estimated that the return on investment generated exceeds the capital costs associated with
maintaining and improving the facilities, particularly when evaluated over the 10-year
improvement period.
Councilmember Adams recalled that the Council strongly supported retaining the Chicago Cubs
and attracting the Oakland Athletics because of the economic and visitor benefits associated with
Spring Training. He noted that competition among communities for professional sports teams
creates expectations regarding facility quality and maintenance and stated that the 25-year
agreement provides the Oakland Athletics with long-term certainty while allowing the COM to
strengthen the partnership and build on the economic value of Spring Training.
Mayor Freeman introduced the Director of Spring Training Business Operations for the Oakland
Athletics, Joseph Pun, and the Operations and Sales Manager for the Oakland Athletics Spring
Training operations at Hohokam Stadium, Dave May.
Mr. Pun stated that the team values its long-standing relationship with the COM. He reported that
Spring Training attendance and tourism increased during the most recent season and noted that
the team continues to engage with the community through partnerships with local organizations
and businesses. He explained that the proposed improvements would help the Athletics remain
competitive with other teams while enhancing the experience for visitors who use Hohokam
Stadium throughout the year. He added that the stadium hosts events beyond Spring Training,
including high school baseball championships and the Western Athletic Conference baseball
tournament.
Office of Management and Budget Director Brian Ritschel reported that the COM typically collects
approximately $26 million in sales tax revenue each month. He noted that collections increased
by an average of approximately $4 million in March 2026 during Spring Training, compared with
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Page 4
an increase of approximately $6 million during the holiday season. He confirmed that although
the COM cannot isolate the portion attributable solely to Spring Training, the increased revenue
reflects activity across several categories and demonstrates the positive economic impact of
Spring Training and spring break activities in the COM.
Responding to a question from Vice Mayor Somers regarding agenda Item 5-d, (Approving and
authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Foreign Trade Zone Operator Agreement for
Foreign Trade Zone 221 with Apple Inc., to activate and operate a high-tech manufacturing
and storage facility for foreign-trade zone activities at 3740 S Signal Butte Rd; Foreign
Trade Zone No. 221. (District 6)), on the Regular Council meeting agenda, Economic
Development Administrator Chris Molnar introduced Deputy Economic Development Director
Benjamin Snow and displayed a PowerPoint presentation. (See Attachment 2)
Ms. Molnar explained that Apple is requesting an expansion of its existing Foreign Trade Zone
(FTZ) subzone by approximately seven acres. She reported that the expansion would not change
Apple’s current operations but would add acreage to the existing site. She clarified that the data
center itself is not eligible for FTZ benefits; only areas used to assemble server cabinets and
related equipment qualify. She added that Apple imports components, assembles the equipment
in the COM, and distributes it to other data centers in the United States and internationally. She
noted that U.S. Customs and Border Protection conducts site visits, reviews proposed
expansions, monitors the square footage used for eligible FTZ activities and has confirmed that
Apple was fully utilizing its previously activated space before supporting the proposed expansion.
(See Pages 2 through 5 of Attachment 2)
Ms. Molnar reported that the COM’s FTZ may include up to 2,000 acres and that fewer than 150
acres are currently in use. She confirmed that the proposed expansion would not limit other
economic development opportunities and that ineligible data center space would not count against
the COM’s available FTZ acreage. She mentioned increased interest in FTZ participation due to
tariffs and other economic conditions.
In response to a question from Councilmember Taylor, Mr. Snow confirmed that there are no
acreage limitations on domestic manufacturing because it is conducted through the COM’s normal
development processes. He noted that FTZ No. 221 encompasses the entire COM and serves
as an economic development tool available to qualifying companies throughout the city. He
explained the benefits of FTZ participation.
Mr. Butler clarified that the FTZ program does not disadvantage domestic manufacturing; rather,
it encourages companies to manufacture in the United States by reducing or deferring duties that
might otherwise make domestic production cost-prohibitive and lead companies to move
operations overseas. He explained that the federally authorized program applies only to qualifying
activities and currently benefits a limited number of companies in the COM.
Discussion ensued regarding the economic benefits of the FTZ program to the COM.
Ms. Molnar recalled that, since July 2022, the Alternative Site Framework has allowed FTZ No.
221 to encompass the entire COM. She stated that the COM operates and provides departmental
oversight of the FTZ program and assists qualifying businesses with participation, noting the
compliance requirements.
In response to a request from Mr. Butler regarding agenda Items 11-a, (Staff recommended
ordinance for ZON25-00635 "Ascension," 40± acres located at the northeast corner of East
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Page 5
Brown Road and North 32nd Street. Rezone from Agricultural (AG) to Single Residence-15
with a Planned Area Development Overlay (RS-15-PAD). This request will allow for a 46-lot
single residence development. Brown Road Citrus, LLC, Owner; Baylee Lopez, Wood,
Patel & Associates, applicant. (District 1)), and 11-b, (P&Z Board recommended ordinance
for ZON25-00635 "Ascension," 40± acres located at the northeast corner of East Brown
Road and North 32nd Street. Rezone from Agricultural (AG) to Single Residence-15 with a
Planned Area Development Overlay (RS-15-PAD). This request will allow for a 47-lot single
residence development. Brown Road Citrus, LLC, Owner; Baylee Lopez, Wood, Patel &
Associates, applicant. (District 1)), on the Regular Council meeting agenda, Assistant Planning
Director Evan Balmer explained that there are two ordinances being introduced for properties
located within the Citrus Subarea. He confirmed that the Citrus Subarea identifies RS-35 as the
appropriate zoning district to preserve the area’s character. He noted that lots smaller than 35,000
square feet have historically been supported when the overall development remains consistent
with the RS-35 density standard through the inclusion of additional open space.
Mr. Balmer advised that the proposed development includes 47 lots, resulting in a density of 1.27
dwelling units per acre, which exceeds the RS-35 standard of 1.24 dwelling units per acre. He
confirmed that staff recommended approval, subject to modifying the plan to comply with the 1.24
density standard, while the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval without that
condition and supported the proposed density of 1.27 dwelling units per acre. He pointed out that
two ordinances were presented for Council consideration as a policy decision and to maintain
consistency with how other developments in the Citrus Subarea have been evaluated.
Councilmember Adams expressed his support for the proposed project.
In response to a question from Vice Mayor Somers, Mr. Balmer stated that the proposed
development is generally compatible with the surrounding area, except for the proposed density,
and agreed that the new legislation should be reviewed before the Council takes final action.
Assistant City Attorney Kirstin Dvorchak explained that the new middle housing law does not
modify the underlying zoning district standards. She added that any additional density created by
incorporating middle housing would need to be offset elsewhere within the development to
maintain the allowable overall density. She noted that the proposed density of 1.27 dwelling units
per acre slightly exceeds the RS-35 standard of 1.24 dwelling units per acre and confirmed that
smaller lots may be permitted when sufficient open space is provided to maintain the RS-35
density standard. She pointed out that the project is currently in the preliminary plat stage and
clarified that the middle housing law applies both within one mile of a designated central business
district and to new residential developments exceeding 10 acres.
Mayor Freeman declared a recess at 8:50 a.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:56 a.m.
2-a.
Hear a presentation, discuss, and provide direction on the proposed 2026 general obligation
bonds, including funding for public safety and street and transportation improvements.
City Engineer Lance Webb displayed a PowerPoint presentation. (See Attachment 3)
Mr. Webb provided an overview of the proposed 2026 General Obligation Bond program. He
explained that public safety projects represent a major component of the proposed bond and were
developed in coordination with the Police and Fire and Medical Departments. He reported that
the proposal includes $44.7 million to complete the needed improvements at the Public Safety
Training Facility in northeast Mesa. (See Pages 2 and 3 of Attachment 3)
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Page 6
Mr. Webb explained that the proposal includes $16.8 million for a new 20,000-square-foot joint
training building to be shared by the Police and Fire and Medical departments. He stated that the
facility would support simulated and virtual training environments. (See Page 4 of Attachment 3)
Mr. Butler pointed out that the COM reevaluated the Public Safety Training Facility to develop a
comprehensive buildout plan rather than continuing with piecemeal improvements that did not
fully meet the needs of the Police and Fire and Medical Departments. He listed the proposed
enhancements that would allow both departments to conduct additional training during the
summer months and maximize use of the site.
Responding to a question from Mayor Freeman, Mr. Butler explained that staff continue to pursue
federal, tribal, and other funding opportunities that could offset a portion of the project costs. He
acknowledged that any grant funding received would reduce the amount of bond proceeds
needed; however, due to the uncertainty and limited scale of available grants, the proposed bond
authorization is intended to ensure that the facilities can be completed while staff continue seeking
supplemental funding.
Mr. Webb reported that the request includes $5 million for the acquisition of property for two
additional fire station sites. He explained that the Fire and Medical Department identified areas of
remaining service need throughout the city and that each site would require approximately two to
two-and-a-half acres. (See Page 5 of Attachment 3)
Mr. Butler recalled that acquiring the properties now would allow the COM to stay ahead of
anticipated growth and secure suitable sites at a reasonable cost. He referenced the site of Fire
Station 224, which was acquired before substantial development occurred in the surrounding
area, as an example of the value of planning ahead.
Vice Mayor Somers expressed concern about locating future fire stations near neighboring
jurisdictions and noted that COM-funded resources could respond disproportionately to calls
outside the city.
Mr. Butler clarified that those locations are not among the City’s highest priorities and that the
map reflects all identified long-term needs based on service-demand analysis. He added that any
station proposed near the Tempe or Gilbert boundaries would likely require an intergovernmental
agreement and cost-sharing arrangement because the facility would serve multiple jurisdictions.
He noted that such agreements would be complex and could take several years to develop.
Mr. Webb continued by stating that the proposed bond program includes improvements to the
Central Station in Downtown Mesa. He advised that the project consists of approximately 30,000
square feet of tenant improvements within the existing building and a proposed vertical expansion
of nearly 15,000 square feet. He stated that the estimated cost is $7.9 million for improvements
to the existing building and $20.8 million for the vertical expansion. (See Page 6 of Attachment 3)
Police Department Deputy Director Patrick Phelps introduced Public Safety Strategic Planning
and Data Analysis Coordinator Spencer Houk. He explained that the building currently serves as
the Central Substation and houses the Central Patrol District, including patrol operations and the
bicycle unit. He confirmed that although the facility is located adjacent to Police Headquarters, it
functions as a separate operation.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Page 7
Mr. Webb continued by saying that $3.9 million will be needed for the demolition and relocation
of the West Yard warehouse. He explained that relocating the facility would make additional space
available for Fleet Services operations while addressing the needs of the public safety and
Transportation departments. (See Page 7 of Attachment 3)
Mr. Butler added that relocating the West Yard warehouse is the first step needed to create space
for future Fleet Services improvements at the Westside Service Center. He noted that the projects
have been sequenced so the COM can complete the Westside improvements before shifting its
focus to the Eastside Service Center. He added that project costs were allocated among the bond
program and utility funds based on each department’s proportionate use of the facility, with
approximately $4 million funded through the bond program, and $18 million funded through utility
obligations.
Mr. Webb stated that the $77.1 million renovation of the West Yard Fleet Services facility would
address deficiencies in the COM’s capacity to service its vehicles and equipment. He stated that
the project would include dedicated heavy-duty and light-duty service areas, a parts warehouse,
a tire shop, and office space for Fleet Services staff. He reported that approximately $40.1 million
would be funded through utility obligations, with the remaining $37 million funded through the
proposed General Obligation Bond. (See Page 8 of Attachment 3)
Mr. Butler pointed out that the West Yard Fleet Services facility started in 1969 and is antiquated
and undersized, unable to accommodate modern-sized vehicles and equipment inside the bays.
He stated that the facility limitations reduce maintenance capacity, especially during hot summer
months, and affect vehicle readiness for Solid Waste, Transportation, Police, and other
departments. He emphasized that although the COM plans to add a third shift to maximize use of
the existing facility, this is a temporary measure and that long-term improvements are necessary
to increase service capacity and provide appropriate working conditions for employees.
Fleet Services Director Mike Lewis reiterated that improvements to the Westside Service Center
must be completed first. He noted that Police Department vehicles account for approximately 40%
of the COM’s fleet. He reported that the addition of a third shift and three light-duty technicians at
the Eastside Service Center is expected to improve turnaround times for Police vehicles by
maximizing the use of existing service bays. He added that the proposed Westside improvements
would further increase efficiency by improving workflow, reducing shift overlap, and allowing
technicians to service vehicles more effectively without adding staff.
Mr. Webb discussed the proposed upgrades to the TOPAZ Regional Wireless Cooperative radio
network. He recalled that the radio network supports interoperable communications among the
COM and several neighboring jurisdictions and explained that the existing equipment is nearing
the end of its supported service life. He confirmed that the estimated cost of the regional upgrade
is $15 million, of which COM’s share is approximately $10.1 million. He stated that the upgrade
would improve interoperability for Police, Fire and Medical, and other municipal services. (See
Page 9 of Attachment 3)
Mr. Webb summarized the public safety projects included in the proposed 2026 General
Obligation Bond program. He noted that approximately $21.6 million remains available from the
2022 Public Safety Bond for the new Public Safety Training Facility and that portions of the West
Yard warehouse and Fleet Services projects would be funded through utility obligations based on
each group’s use of the facilities. (See Page 10 of Attachment 3)
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Page 8
Mayor Freeman emphasized that the proposed public safety projects are critical to the COM’s
continued progress and noted the need to modernize the Westside Service Center.
Mr. Butler added that improved working conditions would support employee recruitment and
retention as the City competes with the private sector for highly skilled mechanics and technicians.
Mr. Webb presented the transportation improvement projects included in the proposed 2026
General Obligation Bond program. He explained that the COM intends to leverage Proposition
479 funding for regional roadway projects, allowing the bond funding to support additional safety
and connectivity improvements throughout the city. He reported that the Warner Road project
would be reimbursed through Proposition 479, with the remaining $16.9 million funded through
the proposed bond. He noted that the improvements would provide an important connection in
southeast Mesa, including crossings over the Roosevelt Water Conservation District canal and
the East Maricopa Floodway. He stated that Mesa Drive Phase 3, extending from Main Street to
Brown Road, would be reimbursed through Proposition 479, with the remaining $19.8 million
funded through the proposed bond, and pointed out that the project would complete the final
phase of the major improvements along Mesa Drive. (See Pages 11 and 12 of Attachment 3)
In response to a question from Mayor Freeman, Mr. Guderian clarified that Proposition 479 may
reimburse up to 70% of eligible project costs, with the bond funding serving as the COM’s local
match. He noted that both projects are included in the first phase of the 20-year regional
transportation program and are eligible for reimbursement between 2026 and 2030.
Mr. Webb reviewed the shared-use path projects included in the proposed 2026 General
Obligation Bond program, totaling approximately $66.8 million. He stated that the projects would
improve connectivity, complete missing segments within the COM’s pathway network, and
establish a regional connection between the Mesa Gateway Shared-Use Path and Gilbert’s
pathway system. (See Pages 13 and 14 of Attachment 3)
Mr. Webb highlighted proposed transportation safety improvements along Higley Road between
McKellips and Broadway roads, including raised medians, as well as the $18.8 million
reconstruction of Broadway Road between Spur Street and Gilbert Road, which would include
intersection improvements and raised medians. He explained that coordinating the Broadway
Road improvements with utility work already underway would allow the projects to be completed
during the same construction period and reduce repeated disruptions to nearby residents and
businesses. (See Page 15 of Attachment 3)
Mr. Webb summarized the transportation projects included in the proposed bond program and
reported that the total program is estimated at approximately $188.6 million, including regional
reimbursements and other funding sources. He noted that the proposed 2026 General Obligation
Bond election would include separate questions for public safety and transportation projects. (See
Pages 16 and 17 of Attachment 3)
(At 9:30 a.m., Mayor Freeman excused Councilmembers Taylor and Heredia from the remainder
of the meeting.)
City Treasurer Mark Hute reviewed the estimated tax impact of the proposed bonds. He reported
that a homeowner with a taxable property value of $250,000 would pay an estimated average of
$69 annually, while the estimated annual impact for the median homeowner would be $54. He
clarified that the presentation had transposed the estimated impacts for the two bond questions
and that the figures would be corrected. He also explained that property taxes are based on the
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Page 9
limited property value established by the County Assessor rather than the property’s full market
value. (See Page 18 of Attachment 3)
Mr. Smith stated that resolutions proposing the bond questions would be presented to the Council
on June 1, the final Council meeting before the deadline for submitting ballot information to the
County. He explained that the proposed November ballot would include authorization for $150
million in general obligation bonds for public safety improvements and $135 million for
transportation improvements.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Duff, Mr. Hute clarified that voter authorization
would not result in the full amount being issued immediately. He stated that bonds would be issued
incrementally as projects proceed and costs are incurred, generally over approximately six years.
He added that during that period, existing bonds would continue to be paid off, and that staff would
pursue financing strategies and other funding opportunities to minimize the impact on property
owners.
Mr. Butler emphasized that the estimated annual costs represent the total potential impact and
would be phased in over several years. He added that the proposed projects were selected based
on essential public safety and transportation needs while considering current economic conditions
and the financial burden on residents. He confirmed that the COM would conduct public meetings
and provide communications to inform residents about the projects included in the proposed bond
questions.
Mayor Freeman thanked staff for the presentation.
2-b.
Hear a presentation, discuss, and provide direction on the proposed 2026 amendments to the
Mesa City Charter, including to Charter Sections 209 and 211 to conform and be consistent with
state law.
City Clerk Holly Moseley displayed a PowerPoint presentation. (See Attachment 4)
Ms. Moseley presented the proposed City Charter amendments for the 2026 General Election
ballot. She explained that the City Charter serves as the COM’s foundational governing document
and that the proposed amendments would update the Charter to conform with state law and
modernize outdated procedures. (See Pages 2 through 4 of Attachment 4)
Ms. Moseley reported that the proposed amendment to Charter Section 209(A) would align
Council meeting procedures with state law, including requirements related to the time and place
of regular meetings, public notice, and executive sessions. She stated that the amendment would
provide the Council with greater flexibility to establish its meeting schedule by ordinance while
maintaining all public notice requirements. (See Pages 5 through 10 of Attachment 4)
Mr. Smith clarified that the proposed changes to Charter Section 209(A) affect a single paragraph
addressing Council meeting procedures. He explained that, because several provisions within the
paragraph contain inconsistencies with current state law, staff recommend revising the entire
paragraph to consistently require compliance with state law.
Ms. Moseley discussed the proposed amendment to Charter Section 211, which would require
ordinances to be posted on the COM’s website and at one physical location. She pointed out that
it would allow ordinances to be published using methods authorized by state law, supporting
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Page 10
modern communication practices and potentially reducing newspaper publication costs. (See
Pages 11 through 16 of Attachment 4)
In response to a question from Councilmember Adams, Assistant City Attorney II Kirstin Dvorchak
clarified that the COM would remain subject to state law even if the proposed amendments were
not approved by voters.
Ms. Moseley outlined the next steps, noting that the ordinances are scheduled for introduction on
May 18 and adoption on June 1, with the proposed Charter amendments to appear on the
November 3 ballot. She added that, if the two proposed bond questions also move forward, voters
would consider a total of four City ballot questions. (See Page 17 of Attachment 4)
Responding to a question from Councilmember Adams, Mr. Smith explained that ordinances are
typically introduced at a Monday Council meeting and submitted to the newspaper the following
Tuesday for publication that Saturday, well within the two-week requirement.
Mr. Butler advised that, if the Council advances both bond questions and the two proposed
Charter amendments, four COM questions would appear on the November ballot. He noted that
staff did not recommend adding additional questions because of concerns regarding voter fatigue.
Mayor Freeman thanked staff for the presentation.
3.
Acknowledge receipt of minutes of various boards and committees.
3-a.
Historic Preservation Advisory Board meeting held on April 7, 2026.
It was moved by Councilmember Duff, seconded by Councilmember Adams, that receipt of the
above listed minutes be acknowledged.
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed:
AYES – Freeman–Somers–Adams–Duff
NAYS – None
ABSENT – Goforth–Heredia–Taylor
Mayor Freeman declared the motion carried unanimously by those present.
4.
Current events summary including meetings and conferences attended.
There were no reports on meetings and/or conferences attended.
5.
Scheduling of meetings.
City Manager Scott Butler stated that the schedule of meetings is as follows:
Monday, May 18, 2026, 5:00 p.m. – Study Session
Monday, May 18, 2026, 5:45 p.m. – Regular Council
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Page 11
6.
Adjournment.
Without objection, the Study Session adjourned at 10:10 a.m.
____________________________________
MARK FREEMAN, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
HOLLY MOSELEY, CITY CLERK
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Study Session
of the City Council of Mesa, Arizona, held on the 14th day of May 2026. I further certify that the meeting
was duly called and held and that a quorum was present.
_______________________________
HOLLY MOSELEY, CITY CLERK
lr/sr
(Attachments – 4)
Apparatus Replacement
2025 - 2030
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 1 of 7
(9) Eone Cyclone
Pumpers
• Will receive 3 units in 2028,
2029 and 2030.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 2 of 7
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 3 of 7
(2) Heavy
Rescues
• Replacing units:
• 2548 21 years old
• 2551 20 years old
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 4 of 7
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 5 of 7
(1) RearMount
95’ Platform
• Replacing unit
• 2527 14 years old
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 6 of 7
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 7 of 7
Foreign Trade Zone No. 221
Apple Expansion – Subzone 221A
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 1 of 6
What is a Foreign Trade Zone?
• A Federal program
• Encourages U.S. activity
and competitiveness
• Allows businesses to pay
reduced, delayed or no
customs duties on
foreign merchandise
• Secure areas under
supervision of CBP
• Considered outside the
customs territory of U.S.
for purposes of duty
payment
• Administered by the
Foreign-Trade Zones
Board (FTZB), comprised
of the Commerce and
Treasury departments.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 2 of 6
What is a Foreign Trade Zone?
• City of Mesa - Grantee for FTZ No. 221
• Administered by the Office of Economic Development
• Responsible for facilitating application process, annual
reporting compliance
• Ensure fair and reasonable for all participants
• July 2022 authority granted to operate under the
alternative site framework (ASF), expanding the FTZ to
City boundaries
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 3 of 6
Apple Inc Expansion
• Apple Inc Subzone 221A
• Activated in 2015, 83.17 acres
• Expansion approved by FTZ Board 4/9/2026, additional
7.05 acres
• Executed Operator Agreement with Grantee City of Mesa
required prior to activation by CBP
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 4 of 6
Apple Inc Expansion
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 5 of 6
Foreign Trade Zone No. 221
Questions?
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 6 of 6
2026 General
Obligation Bond
Election
City Council Update
Lance Webb – City Engineer
May 14, 2026
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 1 of 18
Public Safety
Projects
2
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 2 of 18
New Public Safety Training Facility
• 69,600 SF
• $66.3M Total
• $21.6M from 2022 Bond
• $44.7M 2026 Bond
3
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 3 of 18
Public Safety
Training Facility –
Joint Training Steel
Building
• $16.8M for Mesa Bond
• 20,000 SF Facility
• Mimics the Architecture of
the Cubs Pitching Facility
4
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 4 of 18
•
$5M for property
acquisition for 2
additional sites
•
Future needs
identified in green
circles – in East
Mesa
Acquisition of
Future Fire
Station Sites
5
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 5 of 18
Central Station Expansion
and Tenant Improvements
• 29,240 SF of Tenant Improvements
• 14,620 SF of Proposed Expansion
• Constructed in November 2000
• Full renovation of all existing floors and
addition of one floor for expansion
• $20.8M for Vertical Expansion
• $7.9M for Tenant Improvements
6
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 6 of 18
West Warehouse – Demo and Relocate
$22.0M Total
$18.1M Utility
Obligations
$3.9M Mesa
Bond
7
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 7 of 18
West Yard Fleet
$77.1M Total
$40.1M Utility
Obligations
$37M Mesa Bond
8
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 8 of 18
TOPAZ P25 Radio
System Upgrades
• $10.1M for Mesa share
• $15M Overall for the
upgrades (shared costs)
• Upgrade existing TOPAZ 800
MHz voice radio network
• Includes equipment at three
wide-area sites, ten simulcast
cell radio sites
9
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 9 of 18
Public Safety Project Summary
10
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 10 of 18
Transportation
Improvement
Projects
11
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 11 of 18
Regional
Roadway
Improvements
Warner Road Bridge
$38.2M Total
$21.3M Prop 479
$16.9M Mesa Bond
Mesa Drive: Phase 3 – Main
to Brown
$50.8M Total
$31.0M Prop 479
$19.8M Mesa Bond
12
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 12 of 18
Shared Use Paths
• Lehi SUP – Phase II and
Nodes - $13M
• Mesa Gateway SUP Phase
III SUP - $11.8M
• US 60 SUP: Eastern to
Consolidated Canals -
$13M
13
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 13 of 18
Shared Use Paths
Downtown SUP - $12M
• Light Walk Phase 1
Thomas Road SUP - $17M
• Provide Connection from
Red Mountain SUP to
Longbow
14
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 14 of 18
Safety
Improvement
Projects
Higley: McKellips to
Broadway Road with
Raised Medians - $10.4M
Broadway: Stapley to
Gilbert – Arterial
Reconstruct and Raised
Medians - $18.8M
15
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 15 of 18
Transportation Project Summary
16
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 16 of 18
2026 Transportation Bond Projects
17
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 17 of 18
Two Questions
for 2026 Bond
Public Safety
Transportation
18
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 3
Page 18 of 18
Proposed Amendments to
the Mesa City Charter
2026 General Election Ballot
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 1 of 21
What is a City Charter?
• A City Charter is a city’s foundational governing document.
• Mesa first adopted the City Charter in August 1967.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 2 of 21
Why are Charter Amendments Proposed?
Conform with
state law
Change
government
structure or
authority
Address local
policy priorities
Update
outdated
language or
procedures
Clarify
ambiguities
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 3 of 21
Process for City Charter Amendments
• Section 903 of the City Charter provides the process for Charter
Amendments.
• Amendments may be framed and proposed: by ordinance of the Council, report of
a Charter Commission created by ordinance, and an initiative by the electors.
• After submission of a proposed amendment, the Council shall submit same to the
electors.
• If approved by majority, amendment becomes effective after a set time or 30 days,
and upon approval of the Governor.
• Amendments approved at 14 elections since 1967.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 4 of 21
City Charter, Article II – City Council
Section 209: Procedure – relating to Council meeting procedures
Section 211: Ordinances in General – relating to posting and
publication procedures
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 5 of 21
City Charter, Section 209(A): City Council Meetings
• Sets forth certain procedures applicable to Council meetings, including
the time, place, and frequency of regular meetings, public notice of
meetings, and purposes for which the Council may convene an executive
session.
• State law regulates these same procedures.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 6 of 21
Section 209(A) – proposed amendment
Schedule of Meetings:
The Council shall, BY ORDINANCE, FIX THE TIME AND PLACE OF holdING a
regular meetingS at least twice in every month at such times and place as
the Council may prescribe by ordinance IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE
LAW.
A.R.S.§ 9-233 requires the Council to:
“by ordinance, fix the time and place of holding stated meetings…”
Council, by ordinance and Mesa City Code Section 1-5-2, has fixed the time and place as follows:
“The regular meetings of the Mesa City Council will be held on the first and third Monday
evenings of each month at 5:30 p.m. unless a notice providing otherwise is posted in
accordance with the Arizona Open Meetings Act.”
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 7 of 21
Section 209(A) – proposed amendment, cont.
Notice of Meetings:
Special meetings may be held on the call of the Mayor or of an absolute
majority of the Council and, whenever practicable, upon no less than
twenty-four (24) hours notice to each member and the public. News media
located in the city shall be given prior notice of the time and place of such
meetings. PUBLIC NOTICE OF ALL REGULAR AND SPECIAL MEETINGS
SHALL BE GIVEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
A.R.S. § 38-431.02 imposes specific requirements related to public notice of meetings.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 8 of 21
Section 209(A) – proposed amendment, cont.
Executive Sessions:
All such regular orAND special meetings shall be open to the public,
provided, however, that the Council may recess and discuss in HOLD AN
executive session any matter which might defame or prejudice the
character or reputation of any person, matters relating to negotiations for
the acquisition of real estate or public utilities or to the settlement of
claims or litigation, or personnel matters ONLY FOR THOSE PURPOSES
ALLOWED BY STATE LAW, and provided that the final ANY REQUIRED
COUNCIL action thereon shall not be taken by the Council except at a
public meeting.
A.R.S. § 38-431.03 enumerates the purposes for which a public body may hold an executive session.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 9 of 21
Section 209(A) – Proposed Language
Section 209: PROCEDURE
(A) MEETINGS. The Council shall, by ordinance, fix the time and place of holding regular
meetings in accordance with state law. Special meetings may be held on the call
of the Mayor or of an absolute majority of the Council. Public notice of all
regular and special meetings shall be given in accordance with state law. All
such regular and special meetings shall be open to the public, provided,
however, the Council may recess and hold an executive session only for those
purposes allowed by state law and provided any required Council action
thereon shall be taken at a public meeting. The Council may hold informal
meetings in advance of any regular or special meetings for the purpose of
discussing matters on the agenda or other matters pertaining to the welfare
of the City.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 10 of 21
City Charter, Section 211: Ordinances in General
Section 211(B): Procedure – relating to posting
Section 211(D): “Publish” defined – relating to publishing
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 11 of 21
Section 211(B): Procedure
• Governs the notice procedures for proposed ordinances.
• Requires, following introduction of an ordinance, that the City Clerk post
a copy of the ordinance in three public places within the City and that a
summary of the ordinance be published in a newspaper prior to a public
hearing.
• Governs the notice procedures for adopted ordinances.
• Requires, following the adoption, that the City Clerk post a copy of the
ordinance in three public places within the City and a full copy of the
adopted ordinance must be published in the newspaper.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 12 of 21
Section 211(B)(1) - proposed amendment
“Upon introduction of any ordinance, the City Clerk shall distribute a copy
to each Councilmember. The Clerk shall file copies in his office to be made
available to the pubic, shall post a copy OF EACH ORDINANCE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE LAW ABOUT THE POSTING OF
ORDINANCES AND NOTICES in each of the three (3) public places
designated for the posting of public meeting notices and agendas, and shall
publish at least one (1) time a summary of the ordinance, together with a
notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon and for
its consideration by the Council.”
A.R.S. § 9-813 sets forth notice procedures of certain ordinances. In 2021, it was amended to
reduce the number of required postings, from three public postings to one, and added a
requirement that such ordinances be posted to the City’s website.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 13 of 21
Section 211(B)(4) - proposed amendment
All adopted ordinances shall be publicly posted as provided in Subsection
(B)(1) and shall be published in full ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW within
two (2) weeks following adoption as provided in Subsection (D).
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 14 of 21
Section 211(D): Publish – proposed amendment
“PUBLISH” DEFINED. As used in this Charter, the term “publish” means to
print, DISPLAY, OR OTHERWISE MAKE AVAILABLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
STATE LAW. at least one (1) time in one (1) or more newspapers of general
circulation in the City.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 15 of 21
Section 211: Proposed Charter Amendment
• Amending Charter Section 211 will:
• Add a requirement that each ordinance be posted on the City’s website;
• Revise the number of physical public postings to require ordinances be posted at
one physical location in Mesa, instead of three;
• Update the definition of “publication” so the City can utilize modern publication
practices as permitted by the State.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 16 of 21
Next Steps
• Council Direction on Proposed Charter Amendments
• Section 209(A) – Council Meeting Procedure
• Section 211(B) and 211(D) – Ordinance Posting and Publication
• May 18, 2026 – Introduction of Ordinance(s) for Charter Amendment(s)
• June 1, 2026 – Adoption of Ordinance(s) for Charter Amendment(s)
• November 3, 2026 – General Election
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 17 of 21
Section 209(A) – current language
“ The Council shall hold a regular meeting at least twice in every month at
such times and place as the Council may prescribe by ordinance. Special
meetings may be held on the call of the Mayor or of an absolute majority
of the Council and, whenever practicable, upon no less than twenty-four
(24) hours notice to each member and the public. News media located in
the city shall be given prior notice of the time and place of such meetings.
All such regular or special meetings shall be open to the public, provided,
however, that the Council may recess and discuss in executive session any
matter which might defame or prejudice the character or reputation of any
person, matters relating to negotiations for the acquisition of real estate or
public utilities or to the settlement of claims or litigation, or personnel
matters, and provided that the final action thereon shall not be taken by
the Council except at a public meeting...”
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 18 of 21
Section 211(B): Procedure – current language
(B) PROCEDURE:
1.
Upon introduction of any ordinance, the City Clerk shall distribute a copy to each
Councilmember. The Clerk shall file copies in his office to be made available to
the pubic, shall post a copy in each of the three (3) public places designated for
the posting of public meeting notices and agendas, and shall publish at least one
(1) time a summary of the ordinance, together with a notice setting out the time
and place for a public hearing thereon and for its consideration by the Council.
4.
All adopted ordinances shall be publicly posted as provided in Subsection (B)1
and shall be published in full within two (2) weeks following adoption as
provided in Subsection (D).
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 19 of 21
Section 211(D): Publish – current language
“As used in this Charter, the term “publish” means to print, at least one (1)
time in one (1) or more newspapers of general circulation in the City.”
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 20 of 21
Section 211(D) – Amended Language
“PUBLISH” DEFINED. As used in this Charter, the term “publish” means to
print, display, or otherwise make available in accordance with state law.
Study Session
May 14, 2026
Attachment 4
Page 21 of 21