Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Flagstaff lays out 10‑year public‑safety needs; citizen committee will deliver June recommendation on possible ballot measure
Summary
Assistant City Manager Shannon Anderson told the council that a citizen committee has identified prioritized public‑safety needs totaling roughly $47 million over 10 years (tier 1 ≈ $14 million/year average); staff will run a community survey, the committee will finalize recommendations, and council will decide in June whether to place a measure on the November 2026 ballot.
Assistant City Manager Shannon Anderson briefed the council on March 24 about months of work by a citizen committee charged with identifying public‑safety needs and revenue options.
Anderson said staff built a detailed 10‑year cost tool and presented a tiered list of priorities to the committee. Staff summarized that Flagstaff currently spends about $83 million annually on public‑safety operations (police, fire, dispatch, airport and emergency management) and that the committee's prioritized kit of needs totaled roughly $47 million spread over 10 years. Anderson described a Tier‑1 package whose 10‑year total was roughly $45 million (presented in committee materials as a 10‑year total and as an annual average of about $1.3–$14 million depending on the lines chosen); staff used those figures to discuss potential ongoing‑revenue versus one‑time funding options.
Staff walked through the major program needs the committee heard: emergency management (three additional FTEs, alerting and regional planning), fire department operational and wildland response staffing (75 operational/wildland staff and additional support staff and risk‑reduction positions), facilities and engine/apparatus needs, airport ARFF and security personnel required to meet FAA Index B requirements as passenger volumes rise, and police needs including evidence and records staff, an integrated operations center, training space, and patrol and investigative equipment. Anderson noted call volume has grown from about 9,984 calls in 2008 to 18,051 in 2024 and that police headcount rose from about 107 in 2006 to 119 in 2026.
Anderson and staff reviewed funding options discussed by the committee: one‑time resources (e.g., bonds or impact fees) for capital and ongoing revenues (e.g., sales tax or user fees) for personnel and operations. Staff also reviewed examples from other Arizona cities that used local excise or sales taxes to fund public safety enhancements and noted both successes and a recent failure of a ballot measure elsewhere as context for community education and outreach.
Council members expressed mixed reactions: several, including Council Member Matthews, said the committee's findings were sobering and emphasized the community burden of additional taxes and rates; others praised the committee and staff for the work and stressed the need to educate voters on what a measure would fund and how it would address response times, training, and wildfire resilience. Anderson said the committee paused meeting to await a community survey; staff expects the committee's recommendation in June and council will then decide whether to adopt language for the November 2026 ballot.
