Amended Minutes of the March 27, 2025 Budget Workshop #3
Extracted text (via pymupdf)
24218 characters
Amended Meeting Minutes
City Council Special Meeting
March 27, 2025 | 4:00 p.m.
Council Chambers Conference Room
88 E. Chicago St., Chandler, AZ
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kevin Hartke at 4:00 p.m.
Roll Call
Council Attendance
Appointee Attendance
Mayor Kevin Hartke
Joshua Wright, City Manager
Vice Mayor Christine Ellis
Kelly Schwab, City Attorney
*Councilmember Angel Encinas, arrived 4:45 p.m. Dana DeLong, City Clerk
Councilmember Jane Poston
Councilmember Matt Orlando
Councilmember OD Harris
Councilmember Jennifer Hawkins
Staff in Attendance
Tadd Wille, Assistant City Manager
Dawn Lang, Deputy City Manager / Chief Financial Officer
Andy Bass, Deputy City Manager
John Knudson, Public Works & Utilities Director
John Sefton, Community Services Director
Mickey Ohland, Community Services Planning Manager
Alexis Apodaca, Mayor & Council Public Affairs Senior Manager
Helen Parker, Budget & Research Principal Analyst
Jeremy Abbott, Public Works & Utilities Assistant Director
Daniel Haskins, Capital Projects Manager
Matt Dunbar, Budget & Policy Director
Ryan Peters, Strategic Initiatives Director
Discussion
Page 2 of 13
1.
Budget Workshop #3, Fiscal Year 2025-26
1. Opening Remarks
2. Overview of Proposed 10-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
3. Review List of Projects in Proposed 10-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
4. Chandler Water and Wastewater Utility Rates
5. Key Budget Dates and Questions
JOSHUA WRIGHT, City Manager, introduced the item.
DAWN LANG, Deputy City Manager / Chief Financial Officer, presented the following presentation.
• FY 2025-26 Budget Workshop #3 CIP
• FY 2025-26 Budget Theme “Strength in Numbers”
o Our Brand A safe, diverse, equitable and inclusive community that connects people,
chooses innovation and inspires excellence
• Agenda
o 01. Overview of Capital and Infrastructure and Related Progress
o 02. Overview of Proposed 10-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Review
List of Projects
o 03. Chandler Water and Wastewater Utilities: Major Projects and Rates
o 04. Key Budget Dates and Questions
• Chandler Budget Process Timeline
• Strategic Framework Guides Our Decision Making
• Overview of Capital and Infrastructure and Related Progress
• Continued Focus on Chandler’s Aging Infrastructure
COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS asked about the result of the facility efficiency study.
MS. LANG said the study was completed, resulting in the suggestion of combining some downtown
facilities such as the Development Services and IT buildings. The move would require
infrastructure investment such that the return on investment for the move would be costly.
Another recommendation was to relocate Fire Fleet to the Central Fleet building and then sell or
repurpose the original property.
MAYOR HARTKE added that the space assessment has guided some improvements, such as the
improvements to the 5th floor in City Hall for flexible space to accommodate interns.
MS. LANG continued the presentation.
• Capital Projects Historical View
MAYOR HARTKE asked if there are any comparable cities in the area working on a Pavement
Quality Index for paved roads.
Page 3 of 13
JOHN KNUDSON, Public Works & Utilities Director, explained that other municipalities use a
different index, Chandler is the only city using the Pavement Quality Index. The index takes into
consideration different conditions. Chandler is setting the standard for cities of comparable size.
MS. LANG continued the presentation.
• Capital Projects Completed or Underway
• Parks and Recreation
o Tumbleweed Softball Complex
o Tumbleweed Multi-Gen Expansion and Pickleball Courts
o Various Neighborhood and Community Park Improvements
• Public Works Streets
o Street Repaving Projects Citywide
o Boston Street Improvements
o Downtown Alley Projects
o City Hall Parking Lot
o Cooper Road/Insight Loop
o Frye Road Protected Bike Lanes
o Ashley Trail/Paseo Trail Connection
MAYOR HARTKE asked about the projected timeline for completion of the Chandler Heights and
Price Road projects.
DANIEL HASKINS, Capital Projects Manager, said he would follow up with Council about the
projected timeline for completion.
MAYOR HARTKE noted residents do commonly share feedback about these projects.
MR. KNUDSON said the roads will be repaved before the conclusion of the projects to make them
smooth. It is a work in progress, and anticipated completion may be in Spring 2026, as there is still
much work to be done on the internal sewer lines.
MS. LANG continued the presentation.
• Public Works Utilities
o Reclaimed Water Interconnect Facility (RWIF)
o 66” Wastewater Line Rehabilitation
o Water and Sewer Main Replacements
• Police and Fire
o Fire Station 2 Rebuild
o Fire Dispatch Equipment Refresh
o Police Work Area and Storage Renovation
o Real-Time Operations Center
• Facilities
Page 4 of 13
o 21 Fire Alarm systems Replaced
o 15 Roofs Replaced (e.g. Center for the Arts, Sunset and Main Libraries)
o 5 HVACs Replaced (e.g. Center for the Arts, Boys & Girls Club, Fire Training)
o Various Electrical and Structural Enhancements Citywide
MAYOR HARTKE asked when to expect an update on the forensic facility.
MR. WRIGHT shared that Chandler and Gilbert have been in discussion exploring a partnership
with each other. As soon as Gilbert can move forward on their end, a contract for design services
may come to Council for approval.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO suggested an approach emphasizing Chandler’s readiness.
MR. WRIGHT said they will let us know, and Chandler has communicated that the city is ready.
MS. LANG continued the presentation.
• Proposed 10-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if there is anything to be done to shorten the timeframe of
projects.
MR. WRIGHT explained there are several different construction delivery methods that Chandler
can request, such as design bid build, design bid, or construction manager at risk. The delivery
method is paired with the specific project timing needed.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked to relay communication in a way that will achieve Chandler’s
goals.
MR. WRIGHT agreed and said the pause on the forensic facility project is dependent on if there
will be one entity or two entities served, and what the stakeholder engagement process would
look like.
MAYOR HARTKE said a decision will be forthcoming.
MATT DUNBAR, Budget & Policy Director, continued the presentation.
• Fiscal Foundations – “Strength in Numbers”
o Current 10-Year CIP Council Guidelines
o Maintain secondary property tax rate flat
o Re-imagine resident amenities scheduled for replacement
o Prioritize aging infrastructure
o Finish planned construction of streets, parks, fiber and utility systems
o Prior to adding capital, ensure related ongoing O&M can be supported
Page 5 of 13
o Utilize master plans to guide long-term capital investment
o Ensure sufficient bond authorization exists to complete projects desired by residents
o Balance timely completion and coordination of capital projects with impacts to
neighborhoods and businesses
• Priorities for One-Time Dollars
o 1. Maintain reserves sufficient to meet financial policies including PSPRS fully funded
status
o 2. Reinvest in existing aging infrastructure, systems, including projects that generate
ongoing savings
o 3. New initiatives and capital that generate sustainable ongoing financial savings
o 4. Focus operating & capital spending to move forward strategic focus area action
items
• 10-Year CIP Overview
o 2026-2035 CIP total is $2,693,093,022
o ($204.2M more than the 2025-2034 CIP)
o Anticipates bond election after year two
o 73.6% of projects are funded with bonds
o Updated to reflect continued inflationary pressures
o Continued focus on aging infrastructure
o Includes $1.32B in key infrastructure projects for water and wastewater
o Capacity was limited from secondary levy growth lower than anticipated (+0.4%
actual versus +4% budgeted)
MAYOR HARTKE clarified that the secondary levy growth of 0.4% was due to a structural
realignment and not market forces.
MR. DUNBAR said it is primarily due to the restructuring of tax rate on tangible personal property.
MR. DUNBAR continued the presentation.
• Bond Tax-Exempt Status
o While there has not been a push toward this after the initial rumblings, should the
tax- exempt status of bonds go away, we would anticipate higher borrowing costs.
o A 1%-2% rate increase would be expected
Investment dollars may leave to other vehicles outside of local government bonds
o For each $50M in bond sales, approximately $500k to $1M in additional interest
cost per year
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if bonds would have to be sold at a higher rate to grab the
market’s attention in the case that tax exemption was not achieved.
Page 6 of 13
MR. DUNBAR said the tax-exempt status of the bonds is what is attractive to investors. Investors
prefer a lower interest rate to get tax exempt status. A change in tax-exempt status may affect the
demand.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said if a government yield is paying more, investors may choose that
over bonds.
MR. DUNBAR said that is correct, investors may investigate other options to earn revenue because
the best incentive is the tax-exempt status.
MR. DUNBAR continued the presentation.
• 10-Year CIP Comparison by Department
COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS asked if there are plans for improving turf in Snedigar Park to address
heavy use.
JOHN SEFTON, Community Services Director, said there are many aspects to the issue. First, the
high demand for playing space will be addressed by further park development in Mesquite Groves
and Lantana Ranch. Aging infrastructure such as irrigation is addressed by preventative
maintenance, the CIP project gives the department the capacity to renovate and improve.
Additionally, improving sports scheduling at the facility will reduce current overuse.
MR. DUNBAR continued the presentation.
• 10-Year CIP by Focus Area
• CIP Projects Comprehensive Map
MAYOR HARTKE commented that information regarding the Construction Price Index increases is
important to share with residents to explain inflationary cost impacts to Chandler’s projects.
MR. DUNBAR continued the presentation.
• Debt Service and Tax-Levy – Proposed CIP
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked where the estimated 4% growth in 2035-2036 come from.
MR. DUNBAR said this is the projection created from historical increases of property valuations.
Historically, around 6.5% increase has been observed, but this is a conservative estimate.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked how much is left in the loan repayments.
MS. LANG said she will follow up with that answer.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said this would be one-time dollars for the general fund.
Page 7 of 13
MS. LANG said that was correct, this was incorporated into the earlier presentation on Monday,
March 24.
MR. DUNBAR continued the presentation.
• Summary of Proposed Key General Government Capital Projects in the 1st 5 Years
• Summary of Proposed Key General Government Capital Projects in the 2nd 5 Years
• Review List of Projects in the Proposed 10-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
(Handout)
Council reviewed the handout and discussed several projects.
VICE MAYOR ELLIS asked about line 6FI662 on page 4 of the CIP handout, Ambulance Emergency
Vehicles.
MR. DUNBAR explained that this is for the initial purchase of the ambulance emergency vehicles
to bring them on board for operations. The first year will be one cluster of vehicles, and a second
cluster in the second year so they are due for replacement at different intervals, beginning in FY
2032-2033 and FY2033-2034.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO, discussing page 2 of the CIP handout, asked that the city consider
conducting a study for Orangetree retention basin to identify possible improvements for the new
park.
JOHN SEFTON, Community Services Director, explained that the park was developed as part of a
development agreement and, as a result, was not included in the city's capital projects.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said he was adding a potential study to explore drainage
improvements at the park to increase its usability. He asked if the city could now take a closer
look, since the park is officially recognized.
MS. LANG said that they certainly can.
MAYOR HARTKE suggested waiting a few years before proceeding, noting that the park has not
yet been opened.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO recommended starting with a cost estimate for a survey this year,
without committing to a timeline, to help decide when to proceed. He noted uncertainty about
available funds but emphasized the importance of beginning the discussion now.
MS. LANG said the ribbon-cutting ceremony is scheduled for June 7, with the park opening
targeted for that date.
Page 8 of 13
MAYOR HARTKE said he was uncomfortable moving forward with a study since the park has not
opened yet.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said he was referring to a future study but emphasized the need to
agree on setting a starting point to begin the evaluation.
MAYOR HARTKE said he was unsure because the park has not yet opened.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said they already know the park is coming to Chandler.
MAYOR HARTKE said it’s not uncommon policy to open a park first and then later consider studies
for improvements.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said the main issue has always been drainage, which residents have
repeatedly brought to their attention. He asked staff to review the drainage situation and estimate
the cost of possible improvements to increase usability. He acknowledged that deciding whether
to address it in year 2, 3, 5, or 10 is a separate fair question.
VICE MAYOR ELLIS asked if the new park’s drainage had already been considered in the current
plans or if the improvements being discussed were additional.
MR. SEFTON explained that the park covers over three and a half acres, split into two parts. About
half of it is developed as a neighborhood park, featuring turf, a playground, and a ramada. The
other portion is a gated retention basin that manages stormwater for the entire development. He
noted that the area flooded about ten years ago, so the park functions both as recreation and
stormwater retention. The gated basin area to the north is not accessible for recreation and is
covered with gravel.
VICE MAYOR ELLIS said that the flooding issue occurred ten years ago.
MR. SEFTON responded that several areas across the valley experienced flooding at that time.
VICE MAYOR ELLIS asked if Chandler has experienced any problems with that area since then.
MR. SEFTON said he was not aware of any specific issues since then and believed the area has
performed as intended.
VICE MAYOR ELLIS confirmed that the area has been performing well for the past ten years.
Page 9 of 13
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO reiterated the request to study the area to see if improvements are
possible. He said if the cost is too high, that’s a different matter, but without a study, they won’t
know if they can increase the usable acreage by reducing some of the retention area.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON confirmed if the request was to see how much a study would cost or
to complete the study.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said he would like to know how much a study would cost.
MAYOR HARTKE clarified that the request was to investigate how much a study would cost, that
could potentially be included as part of the plan later.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked about the item 6TP775 – Union Pacific Rail Corridor Shared Use
Path: Ray Road to Frye Road.
MR. DUNBAR explained that is for a study in year 10 of the CIP to examine what the use path might
look like and feasibility.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked about including item 6PR634 – Fitness Equipment in the CIP.
MS. LANG said the fitness equipment at Tumbleweed Recreation Center is replaced on a rotating
schedule. A capital plan was created years ago, it is a certain amount every year, but because the
purchases are greater than $50,000 with a use life between five to seven years, it is included in
the capital plan for funding with general fund dollars.
VICE MAYOR ELLIS asked what is done with equipment older than the five to seven years.
MR. SEFTON explained that the city works on a cycle with equipment providers to turn in old
equipment.
MAYOR HARTKE asked if that is standard practice.
MR. SEFTON said yes this is similar to other municipalities.
COUNCILMEMBER ENCINAS asked about item 6PR650 – Folley Pool Renovation if the park and
pool are separated.
MS. LANG said the pool and park renovations are considered together in this item.
MAYOR HARTKE asked about the timeline for Folley Park.
Page 10 of 13
MS. LANG explained that the first year is for the design element, which has been pushed out
because of the timing of other large projects and bond authorization.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked about page 3, item 6PR014 – Right of Way – Landscape
Improvements, if this item is for replanting or maintenance.
MS. LANG answered this is mostly for replanting.
JOHN KNUDSON, Public Works & Utilities Director, said there is a maintenance program which
takes care of medians, but the CIP program takes care of special revegetation projects such as a
case of storm damage. This program is now moving to Community Services.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked about item 6CA551 – Center for the Arts Facilities
Improvements.
MR. WRIGHT explained that language and time of use considerations in the agreement between
the city and the school district need to be updated. Once the agreement is updated, future capital
projects may be introduced in partnership with the school district.
MS. LANG added that the projects scheduled are for planned improvements such as stage
equipment.
COUNCILMEMBER ENCINAS asked about 6CA675 – Downtown Parking Lots.
MR. WRIGHT said this is a project to add parking capacity in the downtown region and add to
existing parking structures. This item would be construct a small surface lot to rein in street
parking. This would be a fairly routine design so it is possible that design and construction can
occur in a single year. More information will be provided later on in the project.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked about item 6CA619 – Downtown Redevelopment.
MS. LANG explained this funding is for downtown improvements for use by the downtown
redevelopment program such as shade or colonnade structures.
VICE MAYOR ELLIS asked about item 6FI643 – Dual Band Radios.
MS. LANG said those will be purchased under Fire.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked about item 6FI662 – Ambulance Emergency Vehicles.
Page 11 of 13
MS. LANG explained the ambulance fund would be an enterprise fund. Any expenses before the
program begins go into a loan that will be repaid. Within four years purchases may be paid from
ambulance revenues.
VICE MAYOR ELLIS asked about the expected timeline for this item.
MS. LANG said it will be an expected timeline of about four years.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked about the expected timeline of ordering the vehicles.
MS. LANG said it is expected for an ambulance to be delivered between 18 months to two years.
MR. DUNBAR added that the Fire Department has been in contact with the vendor directly. The
prolonged wait for delivery is why an early order was done.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked about item 6GG676 – Monument Sign Maintenance.
MR. DUNBAR said this is for the replacement of existing monument signs and the addition of any
new monument signs.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked about page 5, item 6ST702 – Washington Street
Improvements.
MR. DUNBAR explained that the design would come in Year 1, with construction potentially
beginning in FY2027-2028 which was changed from bond funded to general funded construction.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if residential updates would occur in the area soon, if this item
could be advanced.
MS. LANG said since it will be general fund funded, there is some flexibility in the timeline.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked for a timeline on updates for this project.
MR. WRIGHT said the studies have just been completed and will be presented to Council shortly.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked about page 6, item 6WW696 – Robertson Lift Station.
MR. KNUDSON explained it is located at 202 and Kyrene Rd. in ADOT right-of-way, first constructed
when the 202 was built. This project is for improvements to redundancy and anticipated increased
flows due to development.
Page 12 of 13
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked about item 6WW621 – Water Reclamation Facility
Improvement.
JEREMY ABBOTT, Public Works & Utilities Assistant Director, said the current year amount is for
Phase III upgrades currently under design now. The department reevaluated the remaining items
and pushed out upgrades until FY2030-2031.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked what would be needed in FY2030-2031.
MR. ABBOTT explained it is currently unknown as it depends on the completion of Phase III.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if future items are a placeholder or part of the plan?
MR. KNUDSON said the cost of maintaining machinery on a water or wastewater plant is high,
money is seeded in the out years for anticipated maintenance. It is common practice to anticipate
projects in the out years to allocate funds.
VICE MAYOR ELLIS asked about item 6WW697 – Ocotillo Water Reclamation Facility Influent Pump
Station.
MR. KNUDSON said new odor control has just come online for that plant recently. The previous
odor control system needed an upgrade which was covered within operations, not CIP.
MS. LANG continued the presentation.
• Chandler Water & Wastewater Utilities: Major Projects & Rates
• Utility Rates
• Major Drivers – Aging infrastructure
o Water
▪ Total mains 1,228 miles, and in CIP over 30 years replacing all Highest, High,
and
▪ Moderate risk watermains
▪ 31 operating wells- CIP replaces oldest wells to reduce average age of
infrastructure
▪ CIP adds redundant 48” transmission line to reduce risk of single failure point
o Wastewater
▪ 958 miles of sanitary sewer lines and CIP includes new 66” underneath Loop
202 to allow for existing pipe rehab
▪ 19,000 manholes and in CIP over next 30 years 7,000 will be repaired covering
all Highest, High and Moderate risk segments
• Utility Rate Adjusted for Current CIP and Operating Needs
Page 13 of 13
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO talked about the 10-year plan and basing the rates on the “ifs” in the
plan. He wondered how they would blend that if they did not know if they would be utilizing that
money or at that rate.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO requested staff to review the out years of the wastewater and water
rate 10-year CIP plan and provide Council some options to reduce rates.
MS. LANG continued the presentation.
• Cost of Services (COS) Allocations – Water / Wastewater
• Cost of Services Allocations – Water / Wastewater
• Key Budget Dates
• Questions?
Public Comment
None.
Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 5:57 pm.
ATTEST: _______________________
______________________________
City Clerk Mayor
Approval Date of Amended Minutes: June 26, 2025
Certification
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Special
Meeting of the City Council of Chandler, Arizona, held on the 27th day of March 2025. I further
certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present.
DATED this _______ day of June, 2025.
__________________________
City Clerk