Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Flagstaff public-safety committee delays roll-call as members press for clearer breakdown of police, fire funding
Summary
Committee members debated whether to bundle police and fire items in proposed sales-tax and bond measures, pressed staff for clearer itemization of police investigative technology, and clarified Fire Station 7 funding; the committee postponed a roll-call feedback vote until next week to allow more public comment and revisions.
The Flagstaff Public Safety Citizens Committee on an internal meeting debated how proposed public-safety ballot measures should be presented to the City Council, pushing staff to separate and clarify what items would be paid for by a proposed sales tax, a $40 million bond and the city—s water-resource (RIP) fee.
At the meeting, resident Jody urged members not to "shackle" police and fire items together. "Please let me vote for things I think are good and not vote for things I think are bad. Please don't shackle them together to try to coersse me into voting for things I don't want," she said during public comment, arguing the combination could coerce committee and voter support.
Staff leading the presentation explained the package is organized to reflect both ongoing personnel needs funded by a half-cent (0.5%) and quarter-cent (0.25%) sales tax proposals and one-time capital needs funded by a $40 million general-obligation bond. The presentation also restored discussion of a water-resource infrastructure protection fee (RIP), which staff described as a separate mechanism intended for preventative work such as fuel reduction and protection of water infrastructure; staff said the current RIP rate is 0.53 per 1,000 gallons and that a rate study is planned.
Committee members repeatedly requested more transparency on so-called criminal-investigative tools listed in bond or operations materials. "There should be transparency to the public about what that equipment will be used for given the concern with flock and surveillance in the community," a committee member said. In response, Chief Connley of the Flagstaff Police Department said the tools are intended to serve victims and to produce admissible digital evidence for prosecutions, not to create a "surveillance state." "I am not here to be part of a surveillance state or create a police department that is surveilling community outside the scope of law," he said, adding that some specialized forensic extractions can cost several thousand dollars and that such tools are part of modern casework and court expectations.
The presentation also included specifics on capital funding for Fire Station 7. Staff said the bond includes roughly $16.5 million toward building a new station (property acquisition and construction). Because the parcel was originally designated for affordable housing, the city would reimburse the housing fund for the public-safety portion; staff said development fees would likely cover about $5–7 million of the project. Committee members noted the packet currently funds one crew (12 personnel) for the station, while the fire department originally requested 24.
Members discussed how much detail to include on public-facing slides versus what to present verbally or in supplemental materials. Staff said the survey used in outreach separated wildland firefighters from other firefighter/paramedic roles and that wildland prevention (RIP-funded thinning and hazard-reduction work) is distinct from response personnel funded by sales tax. The committee asked staff to make those distinctions clearer on slides and in the council presentation, and to provide a concise explanation of the investigative tools listed in bond or operations materials for public review.
Committee members also agreed to draft a letter for Council to accompany the staff presentation; staff will follow up with the committee chair about a draft and circulate it before the next meeting. With additional public comment still expected and at least one member absent from today—s meeting, the committee voted by consensus to postpone the planned roll-call feedback vote to next week to allow revisions and fuller participation.
The committee will reconvene next week at 3:30 p.m. at Core Services; staff said she will revise the slides to add clearer labeling (for example, distinguishing wildland prevention vs. response) and provide additional details on criminal-investigative tools for the committee and public record.
