Meeting 206 complete
2026-02-03 · Town Council
Items: 20 / 20
Docs: 23
Docs: 23
Town Council Regular Session
Synced: 2026-06-27 15:40 AZ
Meeting Documents
- Agenda ↗ Agenda
- Packet ↗ Agenda Packet
- VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT ↗ Minutes
- SUMMARY OF ACTION ↗ Summary of Action
- View all documents on portal ↗
Item text
Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
Item text
Invocation
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
Item text
Roll Call
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
Item text
Statement of Participation
Anyone wishing to address the Council regarding items listed on the agenda should fill out a Request to Comment card located in the back of the Council Chambers and hand it to the Town Clerk prior to consideration of that agenda item. Once the agenda item has started, late requests to speak cannot be accepted. When your name is called, please approach the podium, speak into the microphone, and state your name and if you are a resident for the public record. Please limit your comments to three minutes. To avoid disruption of the meeting, to maintain decorum, and provide for an equal and uninterrupted presentation, applause is not permitted, except when community members are being honored by the Council.
Anyone wishing to address the Council regarding items listed on the agenda should fill out a Request to Comment card located in the back of the Council Chambers and hand it to the Town Clerk prior to consideration of that agenda item. Once the agenda item has started, late requests to speak cannot be accepted. When your name is called, please approach the podium, speak into the microphone, and state your name and if you are a resident for the public record. Please limit your comments to three minutes. To avoid disruption of the meeting, to maintain decorum, and provide for an equal and uninterrupted presentation, applause is not permitted, except when community members are being honored by the Council.
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
Item text
Summary of Current Events by Town Manager & Proclamations
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
Item text
Presentations
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
Item text
PRESENTATION: Fiscal Year 2026 - 2nd Quarter Revenue Update
The Chief Financial Officer will provide a 2nd quarter update of Fiscal Year 2026 (October - December 2025) Revenues.
The Chief Financial Officer will provide a 2nd quarter update of Fiscal Year 2026 (October - December 2025) Revenues.
Supporting documents (8)
Item text
PRESENTATION: Public Works Update on Proposed FY 26, Pavement Management
On September 2, 2025, staff presented the proposed pavement management projects for Fiscal Year 2026 to the Town Council. The presentation included pre-programmed maintenance consisting of crack sealing and a preservative surface treatment. This work was described as having been previously performed between 2016 and 2018 and was therefore prescheduled based on records maintained in the Town’s pavement management files. Staff noted at the time that these roadway segments were not selected by the BOSS pavement management system but were included based on historical maintenance records.Following Council approval, staff conducted a follow-up review of the presentation materials and initiated field inspections of the affected roadway segments. During this review, staff determined that the referenced maintenance work had not been performed during the 2016–2018 timeframe due to funding shortfalls. In addition, pavement management records did not accurately reflect this omission, resulting in inaccurate information being presented to Council.Based on current field conditions and consistent with best management practices, staff has re-evaluated the roadway segments and determined that a full-depth mill and fill is the appropriate treatment. These local roadways were constructed prior to Town incorporation and have deteriorated beyond the point where crack sealing or preservative surface treatments would be effective or fiscally responsible.The Fiscal Year 2026 pavement management budget was developed and approved based on the originally programmed crack sealing and preservative seal treatments. The approved FY26 budget does not contain sufficient fund balance to accommodate a full-depth mill and fill, which is significantly more costly than the previously proposed maintenance activities.The estimated cost to perform the recommended full-depth mill and fill is approximately $3.1 million. Due to the funding constraints within the FY26 budget, staff is recommending that this work be programmed into the Fiscal Year 2027 pavement management schedule, where it would be prioritized following Council adoption of the FY27 budget.In the interim, staff is taking steps within available FY26 funding to help preserve overall roadway conditions across the community. This includes initiating hot asphalt repairs and addressing pavement delamination in other areas of Town where timely intervention can extend roadway life and prevent further deterioration. These efforts are intended to maximize the effectiveness of the current budget while preparing for more significant rehabilitation work in FY27.Staff is bringing this information forward to ensure Council has accurate and complete information regarding the condition of these roadways, the limitations of the FY26 budget, and the rationale for deferring the work to FY27.
On September 2, 2025, staff presented the proposed pavement management projects for Fiscal Year 2026 to the Town Council. The presentation included pre-programmed maintenance consisting of crack sealing and a preservative surface treatment. This work was described as having been previously performed between 2016 and 2018 and was therefore prescheduled based on records maintained in the Town’s pavement management files. Staff noted at the time that these roadway segments were not selected by the BOSS pavement management system but were included based on historical maintenance records.Following Council approval, staff conducted a follow-up review of the presentation materials and initiated field inspections of the affected roadway segments. During this review, staff determined that the referenced maintenance work had not been performed during the 2016–2018 timeframe due to funding shortfalls. In addition, pavement management records did not accurately reflect this omission, resulting in inaccurate information being presented to Council.Based on current field conditions and consistent with best management practices, staff has re-evaluated the roadway segments and determined that a full-depth mill and fill is the appropriate treatment. These local roadways were constructed prior to Town incorporation and have deteriorated beyond the point where crack sealing or preservative surface treatments would be effective or fiscally responsible.The Fiscal Year 2026 pavement management budget was developed and approved based on the originally programmed crack sealing and preservative seal treatments. The approved FY26 budget does not contain sufficient fund balance to accommodate a full-depth mill and fill, which is significantly more costly than the previously proposed maintenance activities.The estimated cost to perform the recommended full-depth mill and fill is approximately $3.1 million. Due to the funding constraints within the FY26 budget, staff is recommending that this work be programmed into the Fiscal Year 2027 pavement management schedule, where it would be prioritized following Council adoption of the FY27 budget.In the interim, staff is taking steps within available FY26 funding to help preserve overall roadway conditions across the community. This includes initiating hot asphalt repairs and addressing pavement delamination in other areas of Town where timely intervention can extend roadway life and prevent further deterioration. These efforts are intended to maximize the effectiveness of the current budget while preparing for more significant rehabilitation work in FY27.Staff is bringing this information forward to ensure Council has accurate and complete information regarding the condition of these roadways, the limitations of the FY26 budget, and the rationale for deferring the work to FY27.
Supporting documents (3)
Item text
Consent Agenda
All items listed on the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine, noncontroversial matters and will be enacted by one motion of the Council. All motions and subsequent approvals of consent items will include all recommended staff stipulations unless otherwise stated. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or member of the public so requests. If a Councilmember or member of the public wishes to discuss an item on the Consent Agenda, he/she may request so prior to the motion to accept the Consent Agenda or with notification to the Town Manager or Mayor prior to the date of the meeting for which the item was scheduled. The item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. The remaining items on the consent agenda will be enacted by one motion and vote of the Council.
All items listed on the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine, noncontroversial matters and will be enacted by one motion of the Council. All motions and subsequent approvals of consent items will include all recommended staff stipulations unless otherwise stated. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or member of the public so requests. If a Councilmember or member of the public wishes to discuss an item on the Consent Agenda, he/she may request so prior to the motion to accept the Consent Agenda or with notification to the Town Manager or Mayor prior to the date of the meeting for which the item was scheduled. The item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. The remaining items on the consent agenda will be enacted by one motion and vote of the Council.
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
Item text
Regular Agenda
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
Item text
CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Regarding a request for a CUT/FILL waiver for property located at 14050 E. Diamondback Ct. to allow fill in excess of 10' on a portion of the property.
The owner of the property at 14050 E. Diamondback Ct. is preparing plans to build a new single-family home on this lot. The plans submitted for this 58,703 sq. ft. lot show a developed area of 9,000 sq. ft. and a building footprint under roof of 6,907 sq. ft. The proposed home is located on the lot to take as much advantage as possible of the less steep portion of the lot. The area of the excess fill is on the north side of the house and is about 1,880 sq. ft. in size. The ordinance allows up to 5% exemption on the excess cut or fill which, in this case, would be 290 sq. ft. The maximum fill is a little over 15'.The portion of the lot nearest the street is a ridge line with slopes generally under 10%. From about the middle of the lot going north, the slopes begin to increase to 20% and then 30%. There is a ravine that runs along the northern portion of the lot. The home has been pushed to the south as close to the street as setbacks allow to take advantage of the flatter ground.Staff has identified three objectives in reviewing cut and fill waiver requests. Those objectives are:1. To reduce the visual impact of the proposed development as viewed from the adjacent properties and rights of ways.The property owner to the east will have the closest view of the new home and the area which will be filled to create the level building pad. The elevation on this side of the house is proposed to use two retaining walls. The area in and around the walls will be landscaped.2. To review the measures applied by the designer to minimize the amount of cut and fill on the lot.The designer has several options that could be used to minimize the amount of fill. One would be to lower the finish floor elevation of the home a couple of feet. This would reduce the excess fill area to a little over 1,000 sq. ft. The retaining walls on the north side would be lowered, but the ones on the south and west would be increased in height.Another option would be to have the northern portion of the house step down to follow the contours rather than building it up to a level pad. The proposed house is already a two-story home so stairs do not seem to be an issue. If the northern portion of the home were lowered by two feet, the excess fill area would be cut approximately in half and the maximum fill depth reduced to a little over 13'. While this might lower the roofline a corresponding two feet, given the slopes involved, it will result in little change to the retaining walls for this visible portion of the property. 3. To consider possible alternatives to the proposed plan that would conform to the ten-foot maximum cut or fill.As noted above, it may be possible to design the home such that the northern portion of the home steps down a couple of feet. This will not make a significant difference in the overall appearance. The home has already received approval from the HOA. Given the minimal change in the amount of fill needed, the cost of the redesign may not be worth the benefits.
The owner of the property at 14050 E. Diamondback Ct. is preparing plans to build a new single-family home on this lot. The plans submitted for this 58,703 sq. ft. lot show a developed area of 9,000 sq. ft. and a building footprint under roof of 6,907 sq. ft. The proposed home is located on the lot to take as much advantage as possible of the less steep portion of the lot. The area of the excess fill is on the north side of the house and is about 1,880 sq. ft. in size. The ordinance allows up to 5% exemption on the excess cut or fill which, in this case, would be 290 sq. ft. The maximum fill is a little over 15'.The portion of the lot nearest the street is a ridge line with slopes generally under 10%. From about the middle of the lot going north, the slopes begin to increase to 20% and then 30%. There is a ravine that runs along the northern portion of the lot. The home has been pushed to the south as close to the street as setbacks allow to take advantage of the flatter ground.Staff has identified three objectives in reviewing cut and fill waiver requests. Those objectives are:1. To reduce the visual impact of the proposed development as viewed from the adjacent properties and rights of ways.The property owner to the east will have the closest view of the new home and the area which will be filled to create the level building pad. The elevation on this side of the house is proposed to use two retaining walls. The area in and around the walls will be landscaped.2. To review the measures applied by the designer to minimize the amount of cut and fill on the lot.The designer has several options that could be used to minimize the amount of fill. One would be to lower the finish floor elevation of the home a couple of feet. This would reduce the excess fill area to a little over 1,000 sq. ft. The retaining walls on the north side would be lowered, but the ones on the south and west would be increased in height.Another option would be to have the northern portion of the house step down to follow the contours rather than building it up to a level pad. The proposed house is already a two-story home so stairs do not seem to be an issue. If the northern portion of the home were lowered by two feet, the excess fill area would be cut approximately in half and the maximum fill depth reduced to a little over 13'. While this might lower the roofline a corresponding two feet, given the slopes involved, it will result in little change to the retaining walls for this visible portion of the property. 3. To consider possible alternatives to the proposed plan that would conform to the ten-foot maximum cut or fill.As noted above, it may be possible to design the home such that the northern portion of the home steps down a couple of feet. This will not make a significant difference in the overall appearance. The home has already received approval from the HOA. Given the minimal change in the amount of fill needed, the cost of the redesign may not be worth the benefits.
Supporting documents (2)
Item text
CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Regarding Resolution 2026-02, Fountain Hills Town Council Rules of Procedure Amended and Restated February 3, 2026, restoring "Call to the Public", updating Section 6, improving format, and incorporating changes requested by Council and Staff.
On November 18, 2025, based on a recommendation from the Town Attorney, the Council voted to amend the Council Rules of Procedure to, among other things, eliminate the "Call to the Public" at Council Meetings.The Town Attorney recommended eliminating "Call to the Public" in response to a Notice of Claim that was filed against the Town alleging, in part, that religious comments made during the Call to the Public violated the law. The Town Attorney recommended temporarily removing the Call to the Public to allow sufficient time to review and amend the Rules of Procedure to ensure maximum compliance with state and federal laws.At that Council meeting, Councilmembers voting in favor of amending the Rules of Procedure to remove the "Call to the Public" asked that work be done to review and amend the Rules of Procedure so that the Council could bring the issue back again and restore the "Call to the Public".At the request of Councilmember Earle, and with the consent of Mayor Friedel, a working group was formed to review the Rules of Procedure, specifically focused on restoring the "Call to the Public" and amending other sections of the Rules of Procedure, including section 6, Procedures for Conducting the Meeting.On January 20, 2026, the Council held a public Work Session to discuss the amended Rules of Procedure that had been drafted by the Town Attorney based on the working group's recommendation. The Council reviewed the proposed changes and made additional suggestions.Specifically, the amended Rules restoring "Call to the Public", placing it at the end of the agenda and limiting the maximum time allotted to 30 minutes, with no maximum on the number of potential speakers, however each speaker is limited to a maximum of three minutes. The amended Rules also requires those wishing to speak to turn in the Request to Comment Card before the meeting starts. Section 6, Procedures for Conducting the Meeting were updated and include content inspired by the City of Scottsdale 2025 Rules of Council Procedure. All of the Rules of Decorum were consolidated to Section 6, making it clear and understandable for all meeting participants. In addition, significant formatting changes were made to make the document more readable.Following the Work Session, the added requirement regarding use of professional audio and video equipment was amended to make clear that the rule applies to any attendee, not just the media, and clarified that the attendee must provide advance notice, not obtain advance approval. The purpose of the rule is to ensure that the Town is prepared to accommodate professional equipment without obstructing or displacing residents, and if necessary, seek equipment consolidation.Overall, the substantive changes made were limited to restoring "Call to the Public" and amending and clarifying procedures for conducting the meeting, including the Rules of Decorum. No significant substantive changes were made to other sections of the Rules of Procedure. To the extent that other sections of the Rules of Procedure may need updating, the Town Attorney recommends that it be done at a later date to allow more time for a comprehensive review.
On November 18, 2025, based on a recommendation from the Town Attorney, the Council voted to amend the Council Rules of Procedure to, among other things, eliminate the "Call to the Public" at Council Meetings.The Town Attorney recommended eliminating "Call to the Public" in response to a Notice of Claim that was filed against the Town alleging, in part, that religious comments made during the Call to the Public violated the law. The Town Attorney recommended temporarily removing the Call to the Public to allow sufficient time to review and amend the Rules of Procedure to ensure maximum compliance with state and federal laws.At that Council meeting, Councilmembers voting in favor of amending the Rules of Procedure to remove the "Call to the Public" asked that work be done to review and amend the Rules of Procedure so that the Council could bring the issue back again and restore the "Call to the Public".At the request of Councilmember Earle, and with the consent of Mayor Friedel, a working group was formed to review the Rules of Procedure, specifically focused on restoring the "Call to the Public" and amending other sections of the Rules of Procedure, including section 6, Procedures for Conducting the Meeting.On January 20, 2026, the Council held a public Work Session to discuss the amended Rules of Procedure that had been drafted by the Town Attorney based on the working group's recommendation. The Council reviewed the proposed changes and made additional suggestions.Specifically, the amended Rules restoring "Call to the Public", placing it at the end of the agenda and limiting the maximum time allotted to 30 minutes, with no maximum on the number of potential speakers, however each speaker is limited to a maximum of three minutes. The amended Rules also requires those wishing to speak to turn in the Request to Comment Card before the meeting starts. Section 6, Procedures for Conducting the Meeting were updated and include content inspired by the City of Scottsdale 2025 Rules of Council Procedure. All of the Rules of Decorum were consolidated to Section 6, making it clear and understandable for all meeting participants. In addition, significant formatting changes were made to make the document more readable.Following the Work Session, the added requirement regarding use of professional audio and video equipment was amended to make clear that the rule applies to any attendee, not just the media, and clarified that the attendee must provide advance notice, not obtain advance approval. The purpose of the rule is to ensure that the Town is prepared to accommodate professional equipment without obstructing or displacing residents, and if necessary, seek equipment consolidation.Overall, the substantive changes made were limited to restoring "Call to the Public" and amending and clarifying procedures for conducting the meeting, including the Rules of Decorum. No significant substantive changes were made to other sections of the Rules of Procedure. To the extent that other sections of the Rules of Procedure may need updating, the Town Attorney recommends that it be done at a later date to allow more time for a comprehensive review.
Supporting documents (3)
Item text
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION: Directing the Town Manager to Send the Governor a Letter of Support for Tax Conformity SB1106.
At the January 20, 2026, Council meeting, Vice Mayor Skillicorn requested a future agenda item directing the Town Manager to write a letter to the Governor in support of SB1106. This bill was put forth for tax conformity with recent federal tax changes and was vetoed by the Governor on January 16, 2026. Councilmembers Larrabee and Earle also supported this future agenda item, and therefore, staff placed it on the agenda tonight for discussion and possible direction. Summary of Arizona Senate Bill 1106Arizona Senate Bill 1106 was a legislative proposal during the 2026 session that sought to align the state’s individual income tax code with recent changes in the federal Internal Revenue Code, including provisions retroactive to the 2025 tax year. The bill would have amended Arizona Revised Statutes to reference the federal code as of January 1, 2026, incorporating certain federal tax provisions and adding several state tax adjustments affecting retirement income, dependent credits, and childcare deductions. Key Provisions and Intent The bill aimed to conform state tax law to federal changes enacted through federal budget reconciliation legislation, with the intent of simplifying filings and reducing taxpayer confusion. It included new or expanded deductions and credits for certain taxpayers, such as retirement income and dependent care, alongside a retroactive effective date for the 2025 tax year. Proponents viewed the measure as a means of providing tax relief and ensuring state conformity with federal rules, while opponents expressed concern about revenue reductions and the distributional effects of the changes. Fiscal Impacts on State and Local GovernmentsAccording to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee fiscal note, the conformity and related changes proposed in SB 1106 were projected to reduce Arizona’s General Fund income tax revenues by approximately $441.3 million in FY 2026 and hundreds of millions annually in subsequent years. Because a portion of individual income tax revenue is shared with cities and towns under the Urban Revenue Sharing formula, a reduction in state income tax collections would have a corresponding impact on municipal revenues. The JLBC estimated that the bill would reduce municipal revenue from state shared income tax by about $79.4 million statewide in FY 2028, declining to approximately $53.4 million by FY 2031. As state shared income tax distributions are based on population and the statewide income tax base, changes in income tax collections have a direct, proportional effect on the revenue cities and towns, including Fountain Hills, receive. As a result, revenue reductions could have fiscal implications, potentially influencing long-term financial planning, service delivery, and capital investment strategies.
At the January 20, 2026, Council meeting, Vice Mayor Skillicorn requested a future agenda item directing the Town Manager to write a letter to the Governor in support of SB1106. This bill was put forth for tax conformity with recent federal tax changes and was vetoed by the Governor on January 16, 2026. Councilmembers Larrabee and Earle also supported this future agenda item, and therefore, staff placed it on the agenda tonight for discussion and possible direction. Summary of Arizona Senate Bill 1106Arizona Senate Bill 1106 was a legislative proposal during the 2026 session that sought to align the state’s individual income tax code with recent changes in the federal Internal Revenue Code, including provisions retroactive to the 2025 tax year. The bill would have amended Arizona Revised Statutes to reference the federal code as of January 1, 2026, incorporating certain federal tax provisions and adding several state tax adjustments affecting retirement income, dependent credits, and childcare deductions. Key Provisions and Intent The bill aimed to conform state tax law to federal changes enacted through federal budget reconciliation legislation, with the intent of simplifying filings and reducing taxpayer confusion. It included new or expanded deductions and credits for certain taxpayers, such as retirement income and dependent care, alongside a retroactive effective date for the 2025 tax year. Proponents viewed the measure as a means of providing tax relief and ensuring state conformity with federal rules, while opponents expressed concern about revenue reductions and the distributional effects of the changes. Fiscal Impacts on State and Local GovernmentsAccording to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee fiscal note, the conformity and related changes proposed in SB 1106 were projected to reduce Arizona’s General Fund income tax revenues by approximately $441.3 million in FY 2026 and hundreds of millions annually in subsequent years. Because a portion of individual income tax revenue is shared with cities and towns under the Urban Revenue Sharing formula, a reduction in state income tax collections would have a corresponding impact on municipal revenues. The JLBC estimated that the bill would reduce municipal revenue from state shared income tax by about $79.4 million statewide in FY 2028, declining to approximately $53.4 million by FY 2031. As state shared income tax distributions are based on population and the statewide income tax base, changes in income tax collections have a direct, proportional effect on the revenue cities and towns, including Fountain Hills, receive. As a result, revenue reductions could have fiscal implications, potentially influencing long-term financial planning, service delivery, and capital investment strategies.
Supporting documents (1)
Item text
CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Related to any item included in the Arizona Cities and Towns' weekly Legislative Bulletin or relating to any action proposed or pending before the State Legislature.
n/a
n/a
Supporting documents (2)
Item text
Council Discussion/Direction to the Town Manager
Item(s) listed below are related only to the propriety of (i) placing such item(s) on a future agenda for action, or (ii) directing staff to conduct further research and report back to the Council.
Item(s) listed below are related only to the propriety of (i) placing such item(s) on a future agenda for action, or (ii) directing staff to conduct further research and report back to the Council.
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
Item text
Future Agenda Items
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
Item text
Adjournment
Supporting documents
No supporting documents stored.
17 item(s)