Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

September 2nd, 2026. Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll? Yes, thank you, Madam Chair.

Good morning. Supervisor Stewart?

Here.

Supervisor Galvin? Good morning, here. Supervisor Gallardo is absent today. Vice Chair Lesko?

Here.

Chair Brophy-McGee?

Here.

Thank you.

Our next item on the agenda is the invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. Supervisor Galvin, would you please introduce us to your guest who will lead us in the invocation and pledge?

Madam Chair, it is my true honor and privilege to have invited Congressman Matt Salmon to deliver the invocation and pledge of allegiance for us today, and I ask that I have a couple of minutes for remarks afterwards.

I'll give you five to ten.

Okay, we can go there. All right, everyone please rise.

Our dear Father in heaven, we, above all, are thankful to live in a land that's free. We're thankful, Father, for the many, many blessings that we have received as a nation. And we pray, Father, that thy spirit will ever be with us to guide us and direct us in fighting for just causes and doing what's right always. Father, I'm personally very, very thankful for the leaders here at the Maricopa County because they are just wonderful people and I'm really, really thankful to have known each of them and been friends with them. I pray that thy strength will be with them to uplift them and see them through the difficult times. Please guide them with wisdom and righteousness. And please Father, as our country is now getting ready in a few months for another election and seems like over the last several years, people have become so entrenched in their ideas that hate has taken a hold. in their hearts because of the things that they believe in having no tolerance for others. Oh God, please bless us to remember that we're all members of the human family. We're brothers and sisters and help us to treat each other by the golden rule. Help us to disagree without being disagreeable and to not hold grudges, and to realize that if our best days are yet ahead, then it's about working together in unity as Americans first. Father, again, we thank thee for all things. We bless for thy strength and thy wisdom, and we do this in the name of Jesus Christ, amen. Please join me in the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, Congressman. Supervisor Galvin.

Madam Chair, thank you. First of all, Congressman Salmon, thank you so much for that beautiful prayer. and for leading us in the Pledge of Allegiance to our flag. I'm going to read some prepared remarks I have, Madam Chair, but also going to make a few comments of personal observation about Congressman Salmon and his considerable service to our state and to our country. Matt Samet, former Congressman of Arizona, is now serving as Vice President of Government Affairs and Professor of Practice at Arizona State University. He oversees the university's international, federal, state, local, tribal, and cultural relations teams, and assists the university in advancing its global strategy in creating an institution committed to excellence, access, and impact. Mr. Salmon represented Arizona for five terms in Congress prior to retiring in 2016. But during his time as U.S. Representative, he had a wide and major impact on our country. He was a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He served as Chairman of the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere and as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, leading numerous delegations to China. Mr. Salmon lived in Taiwan as a missionary for two years and speaks fluent Mandarin. He earned his bachelor's degree at Arizona State University and holds a master of public administration from Brigham Young University. He and his wife Nancy have been married for 42 years and are the proud parents of four children and nine grandchildren. Now you know the legacy of his family And his love for Nancy is the most important aspect of that resume that I just read. I had the good fortune of spending time, Madam Chair, this morning with Mr. Salmon. And he's one of those few people that I wish I could spend hours with. In all my personal dealings with him, he has afforded me much decency. And he's always afforded me much guidance and wisdom. And frankly, he has been a pillar and a lodestar of what I think any young elected official should want to be. You should aspire to be like Matt Salmon. This is a man who honors God and loves his country. And he's exemplified that in so many different ways, not just in the elected office, but even now in his service to the community and his service at Arizona State. When you say the name Matt Salmon, people come to attention. They recognize what that name means. It means someone who has served with dignity and integrity, but has done so while treating not enemies, but political opponents with respect. And what Matt Salmon has loved more than anything throughout his entire life and career is a debate of ideas. We all love our country, and Matt Salmon recognizes that in you, even if he disagrees with you. And one of the parts of our conversation this morning that we had that I really appreciated was our discussion of Theodore Roosevelt and the quote, the man in the arena. And if there's anyone who's been a man in the arena, it's Matt Salmon. And I ask everyone to please give him a round of applause for his service to Arizona. So, Congressman, thank you. Madam Chair.

And thank you, Supervisor Galvin. Thank you, Congressman. That was quite the beginning. We will now proceed to the Pet Showcase. And I would like to bring up animal care and control representatives to tell us about this event. Darling little dog. I didn't get the chance for my pet therapy this morning, but hang on just a second.

So in a very rare occurrence, it is actually the same dog this time that is in the slide. So this is Magnolia. She, like many other dogs of the shelter, we don't know what she was going through or what her story was before this, but she was actually found as a stray hiding underneath somebody's car. Um, and it's clear that at some point she may have had babies. I'm not sure, but all we know, all we can do is focus on what's next, right? And she is just as sweet as can be. The finder had kids ranging between seven and 13 and she loved them. She loved the kids. I guess they even took her to the dog park in the week that they had her. And she also got along with all the dogs there. So she really would do well in just about any home. She's a little nervous here because it's her first board meeting. So, you know, she has a little stage fright.

Shows high intelligence.

But she really is just as sweet as can be. And even now she's putting on her bravest face right now. And I just know that she'd be a great companion for just about any home. So if you want to adopt her, she's at our West Shelter at 2500 South 27th Avenue.

Thank you, Kim. Thank you, Magnolia. May you find the best owner ever. Okay. May, I'm sorry. Madam Clerk, are there any announcements or corrections to today's agenda? Madam Chair, I do not have any announcements or corrections this morning. Thank you very much. We will proceed to planning and zoning. Consent hearings items five six seven and eight supervisors. Do you wish to remove any item from consent madam chair?

Mr. Gallant, I will recuse from this consent item for the zoning agenda From from the agenda for consent.

Thank you, sir The whole agenda, so please let it note that supervisor Galvin has recused for planning and zoning consent agenda

Vice Chair, let's go. Thank you, Madam Chair. I make a motion that we remove number seven from the consent agenda because I understand there's a speaker signed up.

Well, you don't even need to move it. We'll just remove it. So that being said, is there a motion, Madam Vice Chair, on items five, six, and eight?

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve items five, six, and eight.

Thank you.

Is there a second? Second.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor and present will say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? None opposed. That passes. Now we go back to item number seven. Madam Vice Chair and Madam Clerk, we have a speaker on this item.

Madam Chair, yes we did. We received one speaker form in opposition and he marked Items 7 and 8 from Skyler Simonton.

My apologies. Let's hear the testimony. And if we need to reconsider, we will.

Good morning, everybody. My name is Skylar Simonton.

I live in unincorporated Tonopah, and I'm speaking today as a neighbor, homeowner, and somebody who intends to raise a family on that land. It appears Tom Bilston of Bilston Consulting is doing community outreach on this industrial rezone, but what has not been made plain to the neighbors is exactly what is planned on this ground. When a consultant can talk about an industrial rezone but obfuscate exactly what is planned on being built, this community has reason to believe and assume that an industrial rezone will ultimately result in a data center. If this is in fact a data center that is planned on being built, we want some guarantees. A project of this size does not just sit on a map. It sits on our groundwater, our roads, our power system, and our quality of life. Once these things are damaged, they're not easily put back. We also need to be honest about what is driving this rush. These campuses are being built to run large language models, systems that predict the next word from patterns and data, that is useful software, but is not generative artificial intelligence, simply a language model. And the speculative bubble of AI is not guaranteed of lasting local value. As mentioned, a lot of the money chasing these sites is speculative. If the hype cools, the business model does not pay, or if these companies fail or walk away, this community will still be here. The servers can leave. That is why we need protections in writing, not slogans, not a vague industrial label that hides the real use until after the vote. First, watering. We live in the desert. Evaporative cooling that pulls millions of gallons a year out of the already stressed basin is not an acceptable trade. We want a binding agreement and guarantee in the zoning that developments... Excuse me. The development agreement and the operating permits that any data center on this site will use a true closed-loop cooling system. Water is filled once, sealed, and recirculated. It is not consumed for cooling. No cooling towers or evaporative cooling towers that will make use of our aquifer and put it into the air. No closed loop until it gets hot exception. If the technology cannot meet that standard in this heat, This is the wrong place for it. Second, we will not foot the bill if this bet goes bad. Promises on the slide deck are not protection. Before a shovel hits the ground, we want bonds, performance bonds, environmental restoration bonds, and decommissioning bonds, large enough to cover what the community needs. Large enough to cover what this community would actually have to fix if the operator fails, sells, or abandons the site. Contaminated soil, leftover equipment, damaged roads, drained or degraded wells, and the cost of tearing it down. These bonds should be payable to the county or a local trustee, reviewed on a set schedule, and increased if the project expands. If these companies are as solid as they claim, posting real security should not be a problem. If they are not, that is exactly why we need these bonds. We also need the rest in writing, a clear statement of the intended use, who pays when construction wrecks our roads, what happens to rates and reliability when large new loads come online and electrical, how noise and heat are limited at the property line, and how groundwater monitoring will be public, independent and ongoing. This community did not ask to become a collateral for speculative tech cycle. If this rezone proceeds, it should proceed only with honest description of what is being built. Closed loop cooling to protect our water and bonds so that if these companies fail, Tonopah is not left holding the bill. Thank you.

Thank you very much. May I ask Mr. Darren Gerard to please come forward and Vice Chair, it's my understanding that the Wendy Riddell is here on behalf of the applicant and the owner. Can we start with any questions from board members for our staff? Would you introduce your staff, please?

Hello, Madam Chair. I'm Darren Gerard. I'm acting planning director, and with me is Rachel Applegate, who is our planning manager.

Thank you very much. Any questions?

Madam vice chair, please madam chair. Could you please give a summary of what this planning and zoning?

Proposal is about Yes, ma'am It's twofold there's a CPA 26007 which is a plan amendment to change the land use designation within the Tonopah Arlington area plan to mixed use and And it is a rezoning to Industrial II IUPD of 593 acres located southeast of the southeast corner of 411th Avenue and Camelback Road north of I-10 in the Tonopah Buckeye area. The Industrial II IUPD zoning will allow for mixed-use development, in particular industrial development. The IUPD overlay will liberalize maximum building height, minimum parking, and screening. It will... Water and sewer is intended to be provided by Global Water Resources. There is not water and sewer to the site at this time, but that will be documented with plan development and subsequent construction permitting. There are no outstanding concerns from reviewing agencies. Until today, there was no known opposition. I will note that the CPA case approvals by resolution on August 6, the commission voted unanimously to approve the CPA, as well as unanimously to approve the rezoning subject conditions A through I. And I'll draw your attention to condition F, which is the IUPD development standards. Happy to try and answer any questions you may have.

OK. Mr. Stewart?

No, ma'am.

OK. If you would remain there, please, and I would ask Wendy Riddell to come forward. Can you get the presentation complete in four minutes?

Like any good lawyer, Madam Chair, I can speak very quickly.

Thank you.

Wendy Riddell with the law firm Barry Riddell. My pleasure to be here this morning on behalf of Arizona Land Consulting on behalf of Volterra. You jumped to the first slide. To give you an idea, we just wanted to show you the various holdings that we do have in the area. This is an area that's near and dear to our heart as well, that we're very excited to see some development and economic opportunity come to this area. Next. To get an idea of the overall vision, this is not all data centers. Yes, there may be some data centers that get included here. But the broader vision is actually for a film studio. Many of you may know my client here. Anita actually is involved in a film studio and is very excited to bring that here to Arizona and some of the surrounding uses that would accompany that. So that's part of the driving force behind this request today. Next. The site in particular, by the way, is pretty intense plans already that exist for development here. And ultimately, back in 2006, it has a development master plan. It has 4,500 residential homes, all of the mixed surrounding uses. While the site was not rezoned, that was the development master plan. Those are the entitlements that are in place today. Next slide, if you would. We are here, as I mentioned, it wasn't rezoned. We are now seeking to rezone it. Next slide. Our request is a comp plan amendment to a mixed use designation. If you actually look at this area, there's kind of a mixed use core that already exists here. We're actually really just seeking to expand that mixed use core designation. The IND to IUPD gives us that range of uses from the commercial, entertainment, industrial, and some residential uses. That is what's planned for this site. Next. Again, you can see here that blue is taking that mixed-use designation, expanding it to accompany this, and then obviously the rezoning on the right side. Next. To give you an idea of what that could look like, this is admittedly very conceptual. We have been engaged. Tom Bilstein has been out knocking on doors, talking to neighbors. I appreciate that the neighbors want to know more about my plan. We wish we could tell them that, too. But this is something that evolves over time. And so while we have that vision, getting these entitlements in place is a very necessary component for us to be able to advance that planning. So that is part of why we are here today. This is kind of that overall vision of what we hope to see occur here. Next. Everything we are proposing, by the way, is consistent with the comp plan. It is planning a coordinated plan of development. It is enhancing the regional environmental quality of the mix of uses and, of course, fostering a diverse economy. Next. Also consistent with the Tonopah-Arlington area plan, improve and connect to the existing roadways. As we come forward with our plan of development, we'll have to produce the Traffic impact studies will have to demonstrate that we're bringing all of the necessary roadway improvements here. Frankly, all the way down to that interchange on 411th, we think a pretty significant improvement for the area. And again, supportive and consistent with the already surrounding mixed-use designation. Next. Again, pretty significant investment in the economy. That's what's driving it, supporting that already existing mixed-use designation that is there, helping to advance that. Next. Here we are within Global's water service area as well as within their service area for sewer and APS's service area. Those are all plans that will continue to advance as we bring this project forward. We are within the Phoenix active management area, which I'm sure this board recognizes, put some pretty strong, stringent regulations on us as we come forward with water. We have to demonstrate a conservation master plan We have to demonstrate that we recycle. There's a number of pretty stringent restrictions that are in place on this particular project. So with that, Madam Chair, I will wrap up my time. I'm certainly happy to answer any questions, and we would respectfully request your support.

Thank you, Ms. Riddell. Vice Chair? Thank you. Mr. Stewart? Thank you. No questions. We will now proceed to... vote on the final agenda item number seven madam vice chair madam chair I move that we approve item number seven thank you is there a second second it's been moved and seconded hearing no further discussion we will proceed to a vote all those in favor will say aye aye aye any opposed motion passes we will now proceed to the planning and zoning hearings regular agenda I neglected to read the rules of decorum, which I usually start out the business portion of the meeting doing, but I'm going to make up for that and read them now. It is the intent of the members of the Board of Supervisors to follow orderly procedures for conducting business. The chair of the Board of Supervisors has the authority to maintain order and professional standards during open meetings and may enforce the following rules. Those disregarding those rules are subject to removal. Attendees shall remain seated during an open meeting to minimize distractions to the board or other attendees unless called upon to address the board or if leaving the meeting room. And no person attending an open meeting shall engage in disorderly or boisterous conduct. including but not limited to applause, whistling, stamping of feet, booing, or making any loud, threatening, profane, abusive, personal, impertinent, or slanderous utterance that disturbs, disrupts, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the meeting. We want to hear from you, and your opinion, your time is not to disparage other speakers, will not be recognized. And with that, we will move to the planning and zoning hearing regular agenda, items 9 and 10. Please stay seated, Mr. Girard, Ms. Hathaway. Madam Clerk, are there any speaker forms?

Madam Chair, yes, we did receive two speaker forms. Both wish to speak in opposition on items 9 and 10 from Crystal Lloyd and Guadalupe Campos.

If those speakers would please come forward. Could you read the name again, please?

I'm sorry. First speaker in opposition, Crystal Lloyd. Excuse me, Madam Chair.

And will you be giving them a time limit? Yes, I will. Thank you. Three minutes. And also, if you would please state your name for the record, and we welcome you to the meeting. Thank you, Madam Chair.

My name is Crystal Lloyd.

You need to move the microphone closer. Sorry.

I've never done this before, and thank you for hearing me.

Excellent. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Crystal Lloyd. I live in Tonopah near this proposed Camelback Creek development. I'm here to ask the commission to recommend denial of items 9 and 10. My family chose to live in Tonopah because it is rural and residential, and I strongly oppose this rezoning for large-scale industrial development. I'm especially concerned about our roads and our water. Our road infrastructure is already inadequate for the amount of traffic we have. The highway access near this project is the only way to my home, and since additional truck parking was developed nearby recently, I regularly encounter semis blocking the roadway and creating dangerous situations while entering and exiting the highway. This is a rural community where many school children are dropped off at bus stops and then walk along these rural roads to get home. We do not have sidewalks or any pedestrian infrastructure. Adding significantly more commercial or truck traffic to these roads that the children are already walking alongside is a serious safety concern. My home also depends on a private well, as do many of my neighbors. This development intends to rely on groundwater. Residents deserve to know how much will be pumped, what the long-term drawdown could be, and what happens to us if our wells decline or fail. Ms. Riddle noted, that this area is near and dear to her heart and that there already exists misuse and entertainment, et cetera. My question to Ms. Riddle would be what entertainment, what heavy industrial exists because currently I drive 411 every single day and I have yet to see any entertainment or heavy industry down that road that doesn't involve a horse or a goat. I don't believe existing residents should be asked to accept these risks so that rural land can be converted into industrial use. I respectfully ask you to deny these requests and preserve the rule and residential character of our community. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Next speaker in opposition, Guadalupe Campos.

Welcome. Please state your name for the record. Good morning. You have three minutes.

Thank you. Good morning. My name is Guadalupe Campos, and I am a resident of West 411th Avenue, speaking alongside neighbors who live near the proposed development. I ask the board not to approve CPA 26008 and C260019 without clear answers and enforceable protections for existing residents. My biggest concern is water. I think we lost your mic. Sorry. There, that's better. Thank you. Sorry about that. My biggest concern is water. The developer's representative confirmed in writing that development on the site would use groundwater from the same regional water aquifer that supplies our private wells. He now says detailed water planning, possible hydrological studies, and well locations will be determined later. He also stated that global water or future well users likely would not insure other well owners against local aquifer impacts. Yet the board is being asked to approve the zoning without a projected maximum water demand or an enforceable plan to restore nearby wells if they decline or fail. The end user is still unknown, yet the proposed standards allow warehouse and data center uses and 85 foot buildings. No data center has been confirmed, but the board must consider what the zoning would legally allow and open the door to. Residents also need enforceable protections for truck, traffic, road, noise, power and utility infrastructure, drainage, emergency service access, and buffers from homes. These protections should not be postponed until after rezoning and the water impacts and protections cannot be clearly established now. I respectfully ask the board not to approve this rezoning. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Vice Chair, would

planning and zoning Presentation quick presentation be of help and then I will call forward Miss Riddell again Mr. Gerard yes madam chair supervisors again twofold CPA 26008 is a plan amendment to the Tonopah Airline Arlington area plan designating the site for mixed uses and then a rezoning z260019 to industrial to IUPD for approximately 310 acres of at the northwest corner of 411th Avenue and Camelback Road in the Tonopah area. The Industrial II IUPD zoning will facilitate industrial development. There's no plan of development incorporated into this request, but there will be subsequent PODs for administrative review and approval before establishing uses with construction permitting. The public outreach did result in requirement for a 50-foot landscape buffer adjacent to all boundaries with established residential use. The IEPD overlay will allow for increased maximum building height, liberalized parking ratios for employee extensive uses, and it will limit entitled uses until such time that water and sewer service the site. The proposed water and sewer provider is global water resources. There are no outstanding concerns from review agencies. As noted in the previous presentation, which is across the street, this is an expansion of the 411th Avenue I-10 mixed-use node in the county's area plan. At the time that we drafted the staff report to the board, there was no opposition. We have a handout before you today with 19 items of opposition from 17 parties. None are within 300 feet. There are two parties within about a half mile to the west. There are three items of support. These are coming from immediately across the street to the east. One is provided on a handout for you today, and it's a video support from a generational resident at that site. The commission on August 6th on these two cases voted unanimously 7-0 to recommend approval of the CPA. And I'll note again, the CPA case approval is by resolution. And also voted unanimously to recommend approval of Z2600 Subject to conditions A through I, I'll draw your attention to condition F, which outlines the IUPD overlay zones development standards that deviate from the base standard as well as the use regulations. So condition F.5 indicates permitted uses are limited to those that can be accommodated by on-site septic and still touch time as water and sewer is available to the site. So I'm happy to entertain any questions you may have.

Madam Vice Chair, questions and also...

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I do have a question. One of the items that was brought up by one of the speakers was their concern about the roads. And if this is developed, depending on what is developed there, can you kind of lay out what is usually expected on developments as far as roads?

Yes. The... The requirement for dedication will be determined with traffic impact studies at time of plan of development, which is administrator review, as well as the time of building permit. The required half-story improvements will be required at that time to be completed. Likely, there would be a 75-foot half-width requirement for a principal arterial. But again, that would be determined with traffic impact study at each stage at the plan of development and at building permit.

Thank you. If you, Mr. Gerard, Ms. Applegate, if you'd stay seated and Ms. Riddell, come forward. Do you have four minutes? Yep, we're going to get it done. Thank you.

Madam Chair, Wendy Riddell with the law firm Barry Riddell, 6750 East Camelback. A bunch of my presentation, you're going to have a little deja vu, so I'm going to move through those quickly and hit on a couple other subjects, namely the outreach that we have done on this case already. Hoping someone's pulling up the presentation for me. There we go. Wonderful. Thank you.

Thank you.

So the site that we're talking about, you can see we're actually now, we've jumped across 411th Avenue. We're on the western side. East, of course, was Volterra that was just approved. Next slide, if you would. We talked about it a little bit on the last one, and Crystal, I really appreciate the comment about the goat. That was very funny. But the mixed use that we're talking about here is the planning documents, of course, not what's actually occurring out on site. The blue that you see is the existing plan that has that mixed-use designation. You can see how Volterra and Camelback Creek are seeking just to expand that mixed-use node. Next slide, if you would. Again, you can see that expansion. Next, if you would. We talked a little bit about our vision for the area. Next. Our request is a comp plan amendment to the mixed-use, to the IND2. for this mixed use development. Next, if you would. We've talked a little bit on the last one that we are also consistent with the comp plan here, adding a coordinated plan of development, again, expanding that mixed use designation, supporting economic development here in the area. Next. Again, we've also talked about this already, how we're consistent with the mixed use designation. Next. We did on this project, as we do on really all of our projects, have Tom Bilstein go out and walk the site, walk door to door to everybody that was out there. There is a subdivision that was planted back in the 1970s to our north. We talked to several of those folks out there. That is as a result why we agreed to do not only the 40 foot half street that you see here, the other 40 feet ultimately having to be on the other side. Next slide if you would. But we also agreed to a 50 50-foot landscape setback that would be there to buffer that residential. Next, if you would. As we mentioned, we're in Global's water and service area. We know that we really cannot build anything until we work out how we get water and sewer here on the site through Global and obviously through APS. Next.

Next.

One of the things, because we have had quite a bit of back and forth with the neighbors, there was sort of a recent Facebook post. So we went into Planning Commission with no opposition. The Tonopah group, there was a Facebook post. We've had some of these folks. And we've been working with them and trying to address the concerns that have been raised. I do want to point out what I'm sure this board already knows. that when you have wildcat development, you can put your well anywhere. They are exempt wells. They are unregulated wells. There are no restrictions at all. However, when we here are working through a water service provider like Global, that is heavily regulated by ADWR. And that's really, those are the protections for the community that's out there. Next slide, if you would. Some of those protections include things like well spacing and well impact rules. We have to prove that there is no drawdown on adjacent wells when we install a new well. We have to do annual water use reporting requirements. We have to do things such as recycling on site. We have to do facility conservation plans, and there's limitations on turf and other landscaping. By the way, I'm naming about five items. There's like 50 of them that we ultimately have to do. pretty stringent regulations, ultimately, that come as part of our regulation through ADWR. Next slide, if you would. And then, again, as I mentioned, we did robust community engagement here. We actually were very fortunate, if you'd look at the next slide, to have three letters of support. One gentleman enjoyed making a video for us, which probably made its way to you. Next slide, if you would. That support, ultimately, you can see, is pretty close to the site. We were very grateful to have it. Next. Very quick here, if I could. You can see the more recent opposition was a result of a Facebook post. The two folks that were, I think, the closest, about seven-tenths of a mile, Ms. Campos, we have been talking and working with her. As we go forward through the plan of development, we're delighted to continue that engagement.

Thank you. Any questions? Madam Vice Chair.

Yes, thank you, Ms. Riddell. In most of the opposition letters that we received, I'm just going to read part of it, and you've addressed it, but if you could address it again. Sure. It says, as a rural resident who relies on a domestic well, I'm concerned that this rezoning would allow large-scale warehouse and data center development without adequate public information regarding water supply, groundwater impacts. I know you just went through that, but could you reiterate again why you do not believe their domestic well will be affected by any projects that you do on this site?

Absolutely, Madam Chair, Supervisor Lesko. I would respectfully suggest that the community out there is far better served by us coming in and working through global water because we then have to abide by a number of very stringent requirements from ADWR. We have to prove up effectively that we, for a 10-year period, are not impacting their wells. As the well impact rules, the well spacing rules, we have to provide conservation plans. We have to report on our water usage. By comparison, if this were a wildcat subdivision, if this were an unregulated subdivision, and we went out and just put in our individual exempt wells, which, frankly, the area to our north, I think you're going to see a tremendous number of unregulated exempt wells. I can put it immediately on my property across from somebody else as well. It is not regulated. There is no water reporting requirements. I don't, frankly, have to do anything other than file a notice of intent to drill. And I think that's probably should perhaps be a bigger concern for folks out there versus what we ultimately have to prove up to develop the site.

Thank you. Any questions? Supervisor Stewart or Gelbin? No. Madam Vice Chair, are you prepared to go forward with the motions?

Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve items number 9 and 10.

Thank you. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded. Hearing no further discussion, we will proceed to a vote. All those in favor will say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. I want to thank very much the public who came forward to speak on these items. And hopefully your questions were answered. If not, please reach out to Ms. Riddell and she will be available. Excuse me. We will proceed then to planning and zoning regular agenda item number 11, Glengal Logistic. Madam Clerk, do we have any speaker forms?

Madam Chair, yes, we did receive four speaker forms. All four wish to speak in opposition.

Please proceed. Hold on for just a second.

OK. First speaker, Thomas Watson, followed by Karen Tisler, and then Marcus Hankerson.

Mr. Watson. Please state your name for the record.

Thomas Watson. Tom Watson.

You have three minutes.

And I would prefer to go after the girls, but I'm here for support of them. I think if you open this up and approve this, you're opening a floodgate for our little island, county island that we have. I've been there for 46 years. and watched it grow from farmland to now big commercial buildings. And now we're becoming truck stops and commercial trucking equipment, major equipment storage. I have one across from me. A lot of this stuff is getting approved somehow without notice to the people. I have one right across the street from me that all of a sudden it turned commercial. Don't know how, but I know that they left it vacant so they couldn't put another house on it due to the John McCain law. The problem with some of these vehicles, their county roads are not built for a semi-truck to turn on it. They're not wide enough to make a turn. They have to cross lanes and then also go in the ditch to make corners. There's a five-minute idle time that nobody's enforcing. I've been running down Cereval Avenue, chasing them down and getting the cars. They're blocking the view of the traffic coming on me, which is a one lane lane. street coming at me and now they're starting to stay away from the parking and off the ditch and the side of the ditch in front of the neighbors yards. You got me going here. My property is, and I have to go back, I still go back to the John McCain law. You guys can change it if you wanted to. You all signed it, you didn't sign it, but your predecessors all signed it. It's the John McCain law, and made it enforce that we couldn't rebuild on our properties, we can't do anything. So that's why the housing, when they go to sell the housings, They're taking the housings and making a truck stop out of it. There's three of them on Alsup that nobody's enforcing. They're still parking in and out of it and pulling in every day. I was told that this gentleman that we're talking to is doing it the right way. Well, he should have done it before he started parking all the semis out there. It's like having a camping world in your backyard, except they're semi trucks. Putting an eight-foot wall does not take care of a 13-foot trailer. And I support these ladies because it's time that we could do something. Nobody's cleaning the rocks off the trucks as they come out of the gravel road. Sorry. But I'll let the girls go on with that. But I'm here for support and we need to do something with our little county island that's getting all surrounded.

Thank you. Could you stand for a question from the vice chair? Just stay at the microphone, please.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to clarify, you're in opposition to the item. You're in support of the women that are opposed. Yes, I am.

The neighbors of the community.

Okay, because you said a couple times, I support. I just want to make sure we're clear and if you're in opposition to the item.

I missed the support part, but I'm kind of going wiggly.

All right, thank you very much, sir. And also, stay there a second. Mr. Girard, if he has other, it sounds like he had other complaints about other businesses going on that shouldn't be there. What can he do about that?

Madam Chair, Supervisor Lesko, I can give him my card. He can email me directly. We also have an online zoning violation complaint website where citizens can file, including photos and other material that can be linked. If they believe that there's a land use that doesn't have the proper zoning or construction without building permits, those type of complaints, they can submit those, and we're happy to follow up on that.

Great. Thank you very much. So sir, if there's other things going on, we have done that. He's the guy.

Okay. We have done that and nothing seems to be affecting it.

Make sure you get it. He's the main guy.

I know it. I have his card.

Yeah.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you. Madam clerk.

Thank you. Next speaker in opposition, Karen, Karen Tisler followed by Marcus Hankerson and Rhonda Smith.

Thank you. Please state your name for the record.

Karen Tisler. Good morning. I'm here in dire opposition to a trucking company on my south fence. It goes 350 feet. All I have for my view out of my big, new, beautiful home are semi-trailers, headlights shining into our house at night, the noise, the trash, etc., And I believe that this case brought before you this morning is just the first foot in the door for all the multiples that have been lighting on Alsup. I have five acres, my south, west, and north fence lines are now surrounded by eight trucking companies. This is the first it comes to before you. I don't feel the privacy of my home any longer. I can't go out to the chicken coop in my robe any longer. I don't want to lean over and dig a gopher hole. These are not neighbors. These are strange people. I have no idea who these multiples of mainly males are. That's just the privacy issue, not to mention semis going up and down a road that we give easement to the county. We maintain it, and I have 80,000-pound semis going down my street that we maintain, we pay taxes on. The noise is... continuous, not just from south of me. Granted, I have these others that are even closer to my house, but there's constant pneumatic tools, air brakes, tire guns, air compressors, welders. My husband works construction and he's around this sort of machinery all day. And he comes home and gets out of his truck and what does he have to greet him? and it's continuous, 24 hours a day. I have no idea how a trucking company can operate without these factors, but they don't belong on rural residential land. The property that we are speaking of, I do believe there was a degree of due diligence because the realtor that sold him that property had sold it to a shredding company prior, which the county, with our support, got ousted. I mean they had huge wood shredding. I had wood particles in my toilet bowl. It was that impacting. So I believe they knew that when they bought it, mainly because he went around to all the neighbors and brought us all a bottle of wine and told us how he was just gonna park trucks there. Well, he also told us at another meeting, oh, I don't do reefers. Well, he does do reefers that run constantly. And in Arizona, if you have something that needs protected, surely he can't run them off, turn them off. But they don't belong in our community. Thank you.

We are not an impoverished community.

Thank you very much. Your time is up. Yes. We have some other speakers. Madam Clerk.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Next up in opposition, Marcus Hankerson, followed by Rhonda Smith.

Please state your name for the record.

Marcus Hankerson. Good morning. Um, I'm in opposition for this trucking company in our neighborhood. My property, the trucking company is on the west side of my property and we moved to this, our house about 13 years ago, brought our to raise our children to get away from all the, all the traffic, um, and all the commercial activity, um, and the safety concerns that come with them. We moved here because we wanted a residential environment. where we can raise our kids, where they can ride bikes, and they can do that in any neighborhood, but the quietness of our neighborhood, we know all of our neighbors, and we wanted to get away from the hustle and bustle of a regular community. Introducing increased commercial traffic into this neighborhood changes the very character of our community we chose to call home. I mean, we've spent 13 years making this our home. We've built the pool. We've added on. We've upgraded our home. And this is not going to increase our property value. It's just going to go down. And so this is something that we don't want. in our area. And it is a safety issue I would say as well. We don't know the people that come and go on a daily basis. And I have two young daughters, 13 and 10, and I do care for their safety. They don't even ride their bikes anymore because of trucks coming and going. And God forbid, and there's many other kids in our neighborhood, God forbid one of them get hit by the truck. Just the last two weeks ago, actually last week during the storm, maybe two weeks ago, During the storm, one of the trucks fell over onto our neighbor's fence. And we don't need something like this coming into our neighborhood. We just don't. We already have buildings surrounding us. And we just want our little neighborhood to be residential. That's what we want. So thank you for your time.

Thank you, sir. Madam Clerk.

Last speaker in opposition, Rhonda Smith.

Welcome and please state your name for the record. You have three minutes.

Hi, my name is Rhonda Smith. I live approximately 126 feet from this property. I chose to live in this rural residential community because I love this way of life. I have three mules and I have eight chickens, I have a turkey, I have my two French bulldogs, I run around in the backyard all the time. Now my backyard is full of semi-trucks. So I look out and right about where you're sitting, I've got a semi-truck facing me. So I no longer go in my backyard. As my neighbor mentioned, wearing, you know, just going out from just getting up, walking out in your backyard to have a cup of coffee. You might be in your robe. Well, I don't do that, you know, obviously, because now there's men in trucks facing me with their lights on my property at 5.30 in the morning. I have followed the rules. I filed the complaint. I put in that. I contacted dust control. I've taken multiple online dust control classes and the importance of dust control. Filed those. They graded the entire four acres. Dust was like a nightmare there. No water on the property. You know, we've been told multiple things, but they came in and put millings in, about a foot maybe or so of millings compacted with trash. For months we've been picking up trash out of there. I'm not sure where the millings came from, but they had particles of trash in it. But again that rating and drainage I mean I I'm gonna potentially build another house in Maricopa County and Buckeye and I know that there's grading and drainage That you have to apply for permits you have to supply you can't change the flow of the water now that water is going to be on my property because it's a foot and a half above my elevation of my property and So I'm just concerned about the trucks. I'm concerned about the character of that. I'm concerned that a six-foot, you know, screen wall is not going to be sufficient. You know, Mr. Gilmore, who is representing the client or the neighbor is saying that they would work with us and they're going to ask for a continuance, but we're not going to be wanting to be agreeable whether they move a building to the back end of my property or to the front end. We don't want to have that in our neighborhood. We want it to stay the rural residential that we moved into and that character and the neighbors and the safety and you know, the openness. That's what we would like. We don't want to have block walls or screen walls all around us to, you know, to hide out these semi trucks. And again, a 10 foot wall wouldn't cover the semi trucks. They're 13 feet. So they're going to see over the wall anyway. So at the end of the day, you know, I just don't think that's going to be a sufficient solution. So Thank you for hearing us. I'm hoping that, you know, from the prior meeting, the commission, they did a 7-0 to deny it. So I'm hoping you'll also deny this as well. Thank you.

Thank you. Before we proceed for board questions, is the applicant owner Jack Gilmore here? Welcome, sir. Please state your name for the record, and you have four minutes.

Thank you. Madam Chair, supervisors, my name is Jack Gilmore, Gilmore Planning and Landscape Architecture, here representing Glengale Logistics. We're here requesting a military compatibility permit for a small trucking operation. Did we get my PowerPoint loaded? Okay. This area on the west side of...

Pause the time. There we go. Please proceed.

This area on the west side of Glendale, west side of Luke Air Force Base, is a regional area in transition. The city of Glendale has annexed a lot of property around the west side of Luke Air Force Base. They recently annexed eight acres on the northwest corner of Reams and Myrtle. North of Orangewood, there is a half-million square foot warehouse at the northwest corner of Orangewood and Reims. Another million square footer north of that facing on the northern. There has been quite a bit of concern expressed about the traffic and this is a small trucking operation. Mr. Singh owns 25 trucks and his truckers are independent drivers. They come typically eight to five. This is an eight to five operation. and they bring their cars in, they pick up a truck, and they leave, all the traffic goes to and from Loop 303. So they leave the property on Myrtle, turn west, which is the predominant source of truck noise, and they go west on Myrtle to Allsup, south on Allsup to Glendale, and then west to the Loop 303. There is no truck traffic at all on 157th Drive, and that's the front door for the neighbors to the east who have... filed letters of opposition. We couldn't agree more that we want to maintain their rural lifestyle and because we're not generating any traffic in those streets, I guess I'm that have been part of our request to meet with the neighbors. We did have a neighborhood meeting and we had a lot of folks show up, express their concern about the noise, the truck traffic. And since that time, we have been promoting some options on a site plan that would actually shift our building. It's an 800, 8,500 square foot building. It's going to have three service bays and a small warehouse. And we've suggested, we sent a plan. I think you guys have copies of it. to the northeast corner, and I think that's the most effective noise buffer and visual screen that we can promote. The site plan we had suggested was going to place 20 non-sidious low water trees 20 foot on center along the east property line that will get to about 20 feet. So between the 8-foot wall and the tree row, I think we're going to be able to create a pretty effective buffer visually, and I've done enough noise studies in the past with industrial projects to know that an eight-foot wall can effectively defer or screen some of that noise. And that's why ADOT builds those noise walls all along the freeways for the same principle. We recently sent out those plans that we've shared with you this morning to the neighbors requesting that we have a chance to meet and discuss some options. I think they may have some more site plan options that might be effective, and we're willing to discuss and meet. So far, there's been reluctance to let us meet and discuss those options, but we're hoping, with your support, that we can request a continuance and continue that effort to meet with the neighbors. And I'd be glad to answer any questions.

Thank you. Mr. Gilmore, are there questions from the board?

Madam Chair. Mr. Stewart. Are you asking the board to continue this item? Yes. Okay.

And if I may, just very quickly, we do have letters of support. There are 19 properties that surround this property that are within our 300-foot boundary. 11 of those we've had direct contact with. four letters of support, and eight or seven of those are not opposed to this. They are more concerned about getting the eight-foot wall, and they said they're going to be happy. There's one vacant property that we discounted.

Thank you, Vice Chair. This is in your district.

I don't have questions at this time, but I would like to hear from Mr. Girard when we're done.

Thank you, Mr. Gilmore. Stand by in case more questions will be asked. I have a question for you, sir. Continuance for how long and for what purpose?

Madam Chair, Supervisors, the continuance would be probably for a date uncertain. If we can meet with the neighbors and get some support on a modified site plan, And I think we'd want to go back out for the benefit of the neighbors, issue letters, again, showing maybe a modified site plan, and then possibly going back to Planning and Zoning Commission to show how we've modified the plan to gain, hopefully, some support, and then back to this board. But it's the effort to meet with the neighbors, generate a plan, and then get those modified plans out to the neighbors, and hopefully generate more discussion, and then get back to Planning and Zoning.

Thank you. In the meantime... What will be the conduct of business on the site? Are you going to stop conducting business and stop the trucks, or what's your plan?

Thank you. Madam Chair, Supervisors, there is a violation, and there is a co-compliance agreement in place. So the trucking operation has continued. Since this date of the initial complaint, there has been no further complaints on the property. Our neighbor, Mr. Johnson on the west side, who attended the initial neighborhood meeting over a year ago, mentioned the concern about the reapers. And that is an issue. And as soon as Mr. Singh learned about the reapers, he instructed all of his drivers not to bring any reapers on the property, and there's been no complaints since that time. The reapers that Mrs. Tisler is talking about are the properties that she's dealing with on her west side. Thank you.

That's really not what I'm looking for. I'm just trying to figure out, well, you cease operations until such time as approval might be warranted or gained. It's really a yes or no question.

No. We will continue because that's part of the compliance agreement.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Please stand by, Madam Vice Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. If I could ask Mr. Girard to give a summary of this project and What were the concerns, and what did planning and zoning recommend?

Yes, Madam Chair, Supervisor, Supervisor Lesko, MCP 26002, Glendale Logistics in District 4. It's a military compatibility permit with a plan development for truck freight and logistic operation in the rural 43 MAAMF zoning district on a four-acre site on the north side of Myrtle Avenue between Allsup Avenue and Reams Road. The proposal has 86 parking spaces for trucks and an 8,500 square foot three bay truck maintenance building. The narrative indicates it's a 24 hour operation that allows drivers to drop off and pick up trucks 24 hours a day. Access is directly from Myrtle Avenue, which is an egress easement maintained by the property owners along the north side of the street. The south side of the street is a large scale logistics center in the city of Glendale. So there's heavy industrial operations in the city. They do not have direct access or any access onto Myrtle. They directly access Reams to the east and Glendale to the south, which are arterial streets, multi-lane. So Myrtle Avenue is a local street. This site is surrounded on the east, north, and west by rural residential lots. Again, that military air base, ancillary military facility over the zoning district prohibits new residential uses. But this existing community is grandfathered in and it's well established. The proposal does have a use, consistency, and compatibility determination from county planning staff and Luke Air Force Base with regard to military air base operations and statutory requirements of the high noise and exit potential zone. However, that is a separate determination from reviewing this proposal in its totality and isn't an appropriate site in the context of the surrounding community. Staff's opinion and recommendation was It is not appropriate. It is a four-acre site with a heavy industrial use immediately adjacent to large lot residential. The trucks enter this site and have to traverse the length of an internal driveway that is L-shaped. At the end of the site, the semi-trucks do a three-point turning maneuver before searching out a parking space or exiting the site along the same drive aisle. Essentially, it's too intense of a use for a small site surrounded and immediately adjacent by a rural residential. Staff recommendation was for denial because of the inconsistency between heavy industrial proposed use and surrounding rural residential. We have from that community four statements of support and four statements of opposition, some of whom spoke to you today. The commission recommendation was for denial unanimously. 7 to 0. They're included in your printed agenda today are an alternative should you choose to act on it for approval subject conditions A through M. You also have a handout where the applicant has requested that indefinite continuance. However, I'll note there is an existing zoning violation. The property owner has been operating without zoning entitlement for the ongoing land use of this trucking operation. We did enter into a compliance agreement The compliance agreement specifically says you're not authorized to continue violation of the zoning ordinance, but it does set a series of deadlines by which if you meet those but remained out of compliance and kept operating at any point during that agreement, we have the ability to administratively compromise accrued noncompliance penalties. It's important to point out that the compliance deadline under that compliance agreement was August 31st, which has passed. So there is not a compliance agreement that allows continued operation. There is a zoning violation, and that should be taken into consideration if you were to entertain an indefinite continuance. Happy to try and answer any questions you may have.

May I have a nice share of questions? I do not.

Thank you.

Mr. Galvin?

Darren, quick question for you regarding this compliance agreement. Mr. Gilmore laid out how he sees it. Does that differ from how you see it and how you would describe it to the board?

The key point is... Even if I acquiesced on the continued operation while the compliance agreement, after it had been executed and during that compliance agreement terms, the compliance deadline outlined in the executed compliance agreement was August 31st, which has passed. So he is not in compliance with the terms of the compliance agreement in that they are still operating.

Okay, thank you. Madam Chair, one more question.

Please.

Mr. Gerard, you said there were four letters in support and four letters in opposition from the community.

Yes, sir.

What is the location of the folks who signed the four letters of support, and do they say why they support this application?

On the overhead, you can see one is the property that the subject site wraps around. The other four are to the northwest. I do not know the reason for their support. Okay. And then the ones in red are the opposition? Yes. They've made their opposition reasons very clear. Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Stewart? No, thank you. Okay. So, Mr. Gerard, if the board votes today to accept the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation to deny, does that then require that these operations cease and desist?

Madam Chair, yes. The Compliance agreement also indicated if it was denied that he had 90 days to get off the site before we would continue with code enforcement, prosecution of the code enforcement. Thank you.

Madam Vice Chair, are you prepared to go forward with the motion?

I am. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to make a few comments before I make the motion, if you would permit.

Please.

There has been a compatibility determination with regard to the military Air Force operations. However, we must also consider if the proposed land use is appropriate for this four acre site surrounded by rural residential community to the east, north, and west. The staff has recommended denial. Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to deny. There is opposition from neighbors directly adjacent to the site. There's also support from neighbors directly next to the site. I believe the site is too small to properly host a truck terminal for parking and maintenance. And as Mr. Gerard said, The trucks will require three-point turns for semi-trucks to turn around and find a parking space. I believe the use is simply too intense to adjacent large residential lots. I agree with staff on this, and therefore I move denial of item number 11, which means if you vote yes, board members, you are voting to deny it.

Thank you. It's been moved. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded. In the interest of board members wishing to explain their vote, I will ask Madam Clerk to conduct a roll call. Supervisor Stewart?

No. Excuse me. Yes, in support of denial. Thank you.

Supervisor Galvin?

Yes.

Supervisor Stewart is absent today. I'm sorry, Supervisor Gallardo is absent today. I apologize. Vice Chair Lesko? Yes. Chair Brophy-McGee?

Aye. Thank you, Mr. Gilmore. Thank you, those who spoke. The motion to deny passes unanimously. We will now proceed to statutory hearings. Clerk of the board, items 12 and 13, and transportation, a road file. Madam Clerk, have we received any speaker forms? Yes, Mr. Gerard and Rosalie, you are released. Do we have any speaker forms? Madam Chair, none on these items. Thank you. The board will now consider items 12 through 14. Madam Vice Chair, is there a motion, please? Thank you, Madam Chair.

I move that we approve items number 12 through 14.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. Hearing no discussion, all those in favor will say aye. Aye. Those opposed? Motion passes unanimously. We will move to the Board of Supervisors Consent Agenda. First items 15 through 71. Supervisors, do you wish to remove any items from consent agenda items 15 through 71?

Madam Chair.

Mr. Stewart.

Thank you. I'd like to remove items number 24, 25, 41, and 44 and 45.

Would you say that more slowly, sir?

Sure. Item number 24 and 25, item number 41, item number 44 and 45. Thank you.

Madam Vice Chair, on the remaining consent agenda items, would you introduce a motion when you get there?

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve items number 15 through 23, 26 through 40, 42 and 43, and 46 through 71. I think it almost got us there. 26 through what? No, 46 through 71. So 15 through 23, 26 to 40, 42 and 43, and then 46 through 71.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

The board will now proceed to a vote. All those in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed? Motion carries unanimously. We will now proceed to consideration of item number 24 separately. And that is replacement warrants victim compensation program. Mr. Stewart, this was your item. Would you be so kind as to ask your questions?

Thank you, Madam Chair. As a matter of fact, I'd like a presentation on 24 and 25 together, if that would be okay. Thank you. Thank you.

I appreciate your coming forward, and please state your name and your job duties for the record.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Blaine Gatto, Chief Deputy County Attorney. Good morning, Madam Chair and Supervisors. As well as... Supervisor Stewart, I appreciate the opportunity to talk about these two items. First, let me start with the replacement warrants. As you'll hear when I talk about these items, we continually try to make sure we get restitution to the victims that are affected by these particular items. And so if we're not able to find them, if we can't reach them, if the checks that we send come back, we're going to continue to come back to the board and ask to be able to reissue those monies when we can find and locate those people. If I can talk about the FPIP program first, and I don't know which agenda item that is off the top of my head. That's 25. That particular program was the predecessor to our current felony diversion program. So these monies were obtained from felony defendants who went through our predecessor FDP program. That program has morphed into our current diversion program, which is a very robust program. There's a lot of information about it on our public-facing website, including the criteria that we use to put defendants into the program, what is done with those defendants when they're in the program, the kinds of offenses that we allow in, and that kind of thing. A lot of first-time drug offenders, a lot of first-time low-level things like criminal damage and business burglary where we're hoping to change behavior early. When a defendant goes into the program, they agree to pay full restitution if it's a victim case. That's required before they can get out of diversion. And then they'll get screened by our diversion provider. They'll go through a specific program designed for them, either group therapy, individual therapy, whatever it is that they need in terms of cognitive restructuring and societal behavioral changes. If they succeed through that program and they pay their full restitution, then they can be released from felony diversion and have their criminal charges dismissed. The current felony diversion program is post-charging, so we do charge the defendants and then put them in the diversion program. This gives us the opportunity to see how they do on the program and make sure that there is some incentive, some significant incentive for them to complete the program. And so in FY25, just by way of a little bit of information, there were approximately, and by the way, FDP is one of our many diversion programs. This is just one of several that we have. 2,000 or so defendants went through in FY25, recovering about $230,000 for victims in Maricopa County. Those people avoided the criminal justice system. The victims avoided having to come to court. They got their restitution, and the system didn't have to absorb the additional costs of prosecution with those people beyond the initial charging review by our office, which is something that we need to do. Additionally, the restitution monies that came to those victims came directly from the offenders. So there were no general fund monies used in that. As far as item number 24, if I may speak briefly about the victim compensation program. This is a statewide program. All 15 county attorneys participate in the program. There is a compensation board run over at the state government office that reviews applications for the program from victims of crime. There are certain requirements, and they're fairly stringent, but once a victim is approved, things like medical expenses, psychological care, certain kinds of job loss expenses and that kind of thing that are caused directly by a victimization can be paid through the victim compensation fund, regardless of whether or not we're able to prosecute the defendant for that. particular situation. So it creates an incentive for victims to come forward and get whole whether or not we can make the case. And that's important for cases that we just simply can't prosecute for one reason or another. And the program is very structured. It's very organized. And in each county attorney's office, I'll speak for ours specifically, Our Victim Services Division manages and runs the applicants through that program and assists us with making sure that there is no fraud or anything that's being done to get paid when you shouldn't get paid. But those are the essential core of the programs. And of course the replacement warrant request is just making sure that we can find people if we haven't been able to find them in the first place.

Mr. Stewart. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the background on this. You know, there's things that come across our desk in these agendas from time to time where I recognize the great work that our departments are doing, and this is a tremendous program. One, from a cost savings perspective, but more importantly, for the victims, right? And for your office to be as diligent as you are in making sure there's restitution and follow-up, and hopefully lowering the burden on the community for... incarceration and things like that through these programs, it's tremendous. And I just wanted the community to know about that and I appreciate the background information. Thank you for the time, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Any other questions from board members? Thank you, sir. Thank you, Madam Chair. I will assume, Mr. Stewart, that takes care of both 24 and 25?

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you. Madam Vice Chair, motion on said items?

Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve items number 24 and 25.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. Hearing no further discussion, we will proceed to a vote. All those in favor will say aye. Aye. Those opposed? Motion passes unanimously. We will now proceed to item number 41, the adoption of a resolution for the 2026 general election. Mr. Stewart, you pulled this item.

Madam Chair, thank you. I'd like a brief presentation on the plan for where our locations will be, and I've got a couple questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Please introduce yourselves for the record and the audience.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Zach Scherer, Assistant County Manager for Elections and External Affairs.

Madam Chair, members of the Board, good morning. I'm Scott Jarrett, the Maricopa County Elections Director.

Thank you Madam Chair and Supervisor Stewart for the question. This board heard an election plan prior to the primary election this summer. which we detailed out the methodology for how scott and his team go and find vote centers around the county and per that methodology they have upped the number of vote centers from the primary election to 254 for this election so the vote centers that were used over the summer will be the same ones used in november with the addition to that 254 number So Scott's happy to go through some of the methodology behind procuring those sites, and we're happy to answer any questions.

Mr. Jarrett.

Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the board. Yes, so this resolution that we bring before you, as well as the exhibit, Exhibit A, which is the Election Day Vote Center's As Mr. Scherer mentioned, there's 254. And Exhibit B, which is the emergency voting vote centers, those are open on the Saturday before Election Day as well as the Monday before Election Day. Those are in alignment with the plan that the board adopted and approved in late June. At that plan, we were looking to have between 250 to 260 vote centers for the upcoming general election. And we landed right at 254, almost smack dab in the middle of that range of 250 to 260. How we identify voting locations is the first portion of the methodology is to use voting locations that have been used in the past. And one of the reasons is one of the highest percentages of respondents from voters of where they choose to vote is going to the location that they previously voted at. So even though we establish a website for voters to be able to look up where their voting locations are, we send out sample ballots to voters that show where their closest voting location is. A lot of times they may disregard those items and just show up at the location that they've previously voted at. So that's the number one methodology is reach out to voting locations that have worked well for us in the past and have served as voting locations. Then we go through an analysis to identify where we have some gaps. And so we do a heat map analysis that show where voters, where they live, and then they participate and vote in person. And we usually go back to the prior three years of elections, so 2022, 2024. and then some of 2020 and would look at primary elections and general elections. And then we also look at new registered voters since 2024 that are not signed up on the active early voting list, meaning they won't get a ballot sent to them automatically. We plot them on the heat maps. We identify where we might have some of those gaps. We also include a 10-minute drive time analysis when we're looking into this. And so this will be all the way down to the number of site books. So those are the check-in stations that voters use. to check in how many check-in stations that we have in these voting locations. How many voting booths? Do we have enough resources to identify and be able to serve these voters? And part of all of this analysis identified why we wanted to expand to have more locations than we had in 2024. So in 2024, that was a presidential year, which means turnout will most likely be significantly higher than we have in 2026, a gubernatorial election year. But because we were planning for a two-page ballot, very similar to 2024, and I do have a little bit of breaking news that I want to present to the board here today, is we are pretty much finished our proofing of the ballot. And because a lot of the referrals that were referred to the legislature did not make it through the court systems, then one of the initiatives that the citizens submitted did not make it to the ballot. We will not have a two-page ballot, meaning two separate pieces of paper with contents on both sides of those pieces of paper for this upcoming general election. Our ballot design team has been diligently proofing, and we are solidly within a single-page territory, meaning one piece of paper, content on the front and back. So that will be actually streamline the voting process significantly. But we still wanted and we're going to still rely on these additional voting locations and how we identified where we'd put these additional voting locations was really also to look back to what we experienced in 2024 and where the longer lines were. And that was predominantly out in the southwest valley. That's where most of the growth is occurring. So the Tolleson area the Avondale area the Goodyear area. So we did identify several new locations there. We had some locations actually one just like between Peoria and Sun City. We added another location there and then another location out in the Mesa area and then in South Phoenix. So that pretty much rounds out where we found additional locations. And if we happen to lose any, we try to find replacements. So the total numbers are 254 for election day. We have 54 that will be open on the Saturday before election day, and then 151 that will be open on the Monday prior to election day.

Thank you, Mr. Jarrett. Mr. Stewart, questions.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And again, well, there's two things. One, you probably couldn't see it up here, but the elation that I'm feeling over a one-page ballot is tremendous because we know what a long jam that creates on Election Day when people drop off their early ballots at the last minute. So a couple of things. One, kudos on the primary. Again, I want to be able to share that. And I appreciate you working with the Recorder's Office on these locations. I like how you guys are working together and getting these things done. A couple questions that I've got relates to alleviating pressure. Thankfully, we've got nine more locations. But alleviating pressure on the people that bring their early ballots in and want to tabulate on election day. Those were the only areas. Everything else ran smoothly. And I know we didn't have many lines in the primary, but I do have a concern that there might be some lines with checking site books, showing their ID, the things like that, that I think most Arizonans want people to do. Are you concerned about the long lines for tabulation on date? on election day?

Madam Chair, Supervisor Stewart, with the additional locations, the single page ballot, there will always be lines on election day. Our goal is to keep those lines shorter than 30 minutes at the high end. That's a pretty reasonable standard that's adopted nationwide. I would think, and even based on the 2026, our 2024 presidential year when we had two pages, Our average wait time was only a few minutes across the board. Now, there were some locations, as I mentioned, in the Southwest Valley that did have lines that at the very end of the day approached over 30 minutes. And so that's why we added those additional locations. So I am confident that we'll be able to keep, based on our turnout models, even if we had turnout that was very similar to what we had and experienced in 2024, presidential general election our lines would be under that 30 minutes for the most part and then if we had to if we have one location that's experiencing an issue having a longer line we are very proactive through getting the word out for where those alternative locations are and that's one of the beauties of a vote center model is you're not assigned to that specific location you can go to one That's approximately. On average, our voting locations are about 1.18 miles apart from one another. So they can go to another location. So we'll be pushing that information out on social media. The poll workers have handouts that show where their closest locations are around them. So they can provide those resources to voters to find another location if that 20, 30 minute line is too long.

Scott, that's fantastic. I appreciate that. Madam Chair, are you guys still looking for locations or are we good?

Madam Chair, Supervisor Stewart, so this would be the final. It's really too difficult for us to add any locations at this point in time. Our recruiting efforts have started. Now, if we lost a location between now, because that can happen. we would potentially look to replace that location, but not add any additional.

That's great. And then I like that you brought up the PR, the social media, encouraging folks to vote early if they have that option or get their ballot in the mail. As we've talked about several times on this, and for those that have not heard about this, but the biggest logjam that we have is those late early ballots that show up on election night at 7 p.m. There's a physical aspect to it where We have to pick it up from the voting location, take it to the MEXTEC or the voting tabulation center. We have to verify signatures. That takes time. Then we have to open up the envelope. That takes time. And it's a human process. So if we want to get our results in Maricopa County done quickly, the 95-5, which Supervisor Galvin brought forward a while back, that would really help us attain that goal, would it not?

Madam Chair, members of the board, Supervisor Stewart, absolutely. The earlier that people get their ballots back to us, the faster we can have results reported. The law does allow voters to take advantage of that option of dropping it off and not checking in. But we will. We have nice signage outside of our voting locations. Our poll workers are trained to be able to serve those voters that if they do want to hold on to that ballot till the very last moment, and decide to check in, they can then check in, they can then actually tabulate that ballot on site, and those results are then posted on election night, and they don't have to go through all those extra steps that you were alluding to.

Well, that's fantastic, Scott. Madam Chair, I just want to thank you guys for what you're doing. You and your team, along with the Recorders team, are really putting a best-in-class project out there, and I appreciate the information. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Supervisor Galvin.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And first of all, I want to echo what Supervisor Stewart had to say with kudos for the last primary election and the kudos that he gave for you today in your presentation. So I have a couple of questions. Scott, I hate to put you on the spot, but you said 254 voting sites for Election Day this year, correct? That's correct. Do you recall, and if you don't, that's okay, but do you recall how many you had on Election Day for 2024 and for 2022?

So for 2024, we had 245. So this is nine more. And it's escaping me the exact number we had for the general election. And it was in the 230s, but I don't remember if it was 235 or 236.

But this is a reflection that you guys have increased it along every cycle for these important statewide races. And you've done it in compatibility with the growth that we're seeing. So there's a purpose in it. There's a method to the madness, so to speak, where you're seeing significant growth where Supervisor Gallardo and Supervisor Lesko are located. I think kudos to Supervisor Lesko for speaking up on behalf of her area, including Peoria and Sun City. And I know that Supervisor Stewart and I are happy to see extra in Mesa as well. I think what is different this year in terms of operational logistics is that the recorder's office will be in charge of early in-person voting. then we're gonna come on so to speak at the end can you please walk us through how I don't even know if it's a handoff because I think the recorder's office will not have as many locations as we will obviously an election day but just the different aspects to it that you now have to think about and prepare I'm not asking you to speak on behalf of the recorder's office I think that would be unfair if I did that but at the same time if you can just give us from your vantage point your awareness of what your team has to do in Vis-a-vis the recorder's office handling early in-person voting.

Yes, Madam Chair, Supervisor Galvin. So the Recorder's Office has agreed that he's going to use the same locations that we are using. So he won't have any different locations. And the final number, it's through a phased approach, he'll be opening those. But the final number will be 46 that will need to transition from the early voting period into the emergency voting period. So we're working closely. hand in glove very closely with the recorder's office to arrange a handoff. And that's going to include exchanging out some of the equipment. So the ballot on demand printers the site books Those types of technical items will be transitioned either on that Friday night or early in the morning on Saturday So then we can have all those locations open up at 9 a.m The 46 that came from early voting and I believe there's nine more that are opening for the first time on that Saturday or to get us to that 54 so eight more that are opening up on that Saturday and that will then be able to serve voters.

Okay. So, um, madam chair to follow up. So the recorder's office will have their own equipment and then they will remove that equipment. And then the election team reports to the board of supervisors has its own equipment and we'll move in their equipment. That's correct. And we'll jointly go to the vote center together to recorder's office.

We'll have staff members that are removing their equipment and we'll have team members there that are,

Installing the new it okay, and then Matt. I'm sorry does Zach want to add Madam chair supervisor Galvin I just wanted to point out that the lists of sites that are attached today being emergency and day of not including early voting and everything that Scott is describing here is Your staff implementing the court-ordered settlement that we came to over the summer and so that is why some of these items look different but I will say that working together so far to implement the settlement has gone smoothly and And I do think we have a good plan to transition between early voting and day off.

Yep. And everything I've heard is that things have gone smoothly between the recorder's office and your team. Madam Chair, as a follow up, those 46 sites, how did the recorder's office and your elections team have either input or collaboration or was it exclusively one or the other? for those 46 sites that were chosen for early in-person voting?

So Madam Chair, Supervisor Galvin, I'd really defer to the Recorder's Office for those specifics, but most of those were used during the primary election, so they're the same ones. And then it was truly up to him whether he wanted to keep that same model that was used in the primary or add a few more. And so he made the final determinations, but Essentially, they're nearly identical to what was used in the primary to the general with a few additions.

Okay, so I'm just asking out of curiosity. So the Recorder's Office signed off on these 46 locations. These were acceptable to them? Madam Chair, Supervisor Galvin, that's correct. Okay. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Madam Vice Chair. Yes, thank you very much, Madam Chair. You know, I've served now, I don't know, 17 and a half, I think more than 17 and a half years in public service. But until this job, I did not realize how complicated elections were. And so it's been really quite interesting to me. And I know one of the things that is very difficult that people don't understand, and I didn't understand before I got into this job, is how difficult it is to get voting centers. Because I know a lot of folks think, hey, we should have tons of these things. But it's my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, that It's really hard to get voting centers and you have to work months in advance to sign a contract with these places because it used to be schools used to do it a lot. Now they don't. I don't know why. I guess because they are afraid of the controversy. I'm not sure. It used to be that more churches did it, now they don't. And so during the primary you had asked me to look for some places because we had a shortage in the Sun City area and I called around and we got some, but it's not easy. And so for those of you that are out there thinking this is just easy, let's just add more voting centers, they don't wanna do it. These places don't want to do it, so to get this number of voting centers more than we had in 2024, I think is really a great accomplishment. And so I give you credit for doing that. I also want to thank the locations for agreeing to doing it. Because sometimes there's controversy at these sites. There's people that may debate each other right then and there at the 75 foot mark where different candidates who oppose each other get at it with each other. thank you to those locations that agreed to be voting centers. I do want to ask you a question. Has the Recorder's Office made public the locations for their early voting sites and the Dropbox locations yet?

Madam Chair, Supervisor Lesko, I'm not aware of him making those public yet. The plan is though to use So for sure they will be made public by September 18th. That's when we always publish all the voting locations. And we will use one website to show all of those locations. So that will be locations.maricopa.vote that voters can go to. For sure, every location will be easily accessible for voters to access, whether early, emergency, election day, including the drop boxes. But I'm not aware of them being published by the recorder's office yet.

OK. And Madam Chair, if you could just do me a favor, when he makes it public, could you alert me to it so I can see where the locations are? Also, how many drop boxes, do you know how many drop boxes the recorder has approved now? Because that's under him now, correct?

Madam Chair, Supervisor Lesko, that is under him. So our team was involved in menus of services with schools that are hosting locations with cities and towns that are going to be having an election. So I know of the number, but this has not been officially submitted to the recorder for his approval. so I declined to provide that number today.

Well good, it would just be good to know so that we can publicize it or maybe the recorder will publicize it when he gets it. But now ours are public, correct? Ours are public as soon as we, well it's already public and if we approve it, it will probably go out on our website, correct? That's correct. All right, good. Well good job, thank you. Thank you.

Supervisor Galvin, a follow-up?

Yes. Madam Chair, thank you. Sorry, I forgot to ask you this one question. And this is very specific for an item in my district. It was two years ago. The location was Indian School Park and Tennis Center. It was on Indian School Road. It's a very well-trafficked road. I actually voted there in person. I believe it was the Friday before Election Day. The lines were pretty long because I know what happens. People drive by Indian School all the time. They see it. It's a very popular park. But the location that actually hosts polling sites itself is very small. It was just a small little room. What I ended up doing was then going driving up to, I believe it was Scottsdale Community College, which was just down the road. Much bigger location, much bigger facility, way more parking spots, no line. I mean, nobody was there. So it just shows to me that humans kind of go to the path of least resistance. And I remember driving back and telling people standing in line, that there was another location down the street. But just like when we're at Disneyland, you don't want to leave the line. And once you're committed, you're in. But are there ways that you guys can think about that? And I know it's very hard. And I had a few suggestions that were probably not good last time. Figure out ways where we can help communicate to folks before they arrive to one location, just for whatever reason it's popular. but probably more congested and bottlenecked, and to make them aware that right around the corner, there might be another location that frankly has no people at all.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Supervisor Galvin. That's a great question. As you might recall in the primary election, when there were a few sites that did have lines or if they had an issue that would impact voters, we'd obviously let you and your district know and then put something out on social media to alert voters that there's either a long line here or we had two vote centers in District 4, lose power with a regional power outage. So we immediately go to social media, let voters know through our social media channels and other channels that there's either a line or you're not able to vote at this time. And here are the closest vote centers you can get to. So once it reaches a certain threshold of a line or some sort of issue, we will be proactive. We will, of course, work with you in your offices so that you can help amplify that message with us. But we definitely want to get in front of voters before they get there and stand in line so that they can have that smooth

Voting experience like you talked about Thank You madam chair madam chair supervisor Calvin Mr. Jarrett for that India Bend location. We did try to look to replace it because it is fairly small we were unsuccessful and one of the reasons is it is a 20 it's open for 28 days starting the 27th day before Election Day But I was remiss and saying we did add another location right nearby That's even closer to it and I forgetting the name of it that's even closer than the Scottsdale Community College. Because we were relying on it, we wanted to have one more location there as well. Great, thank you.

Madam Chair, to that point.

Madam Vice Chair.

Perhaps it's possible to put a sign at that one, so you know there's another location right next door.

That was my suggestion, Madam Chair, two years ago. And as always with these guys, the conversation turns into a lot of unintended consequences.

I call it tinkering. At any rate, it's not exactly governing, but we try. So is the item before us today in conformity with the settlement that was reached with the recorder?

Yes, Madam Chair.

And it only involves Election Day and emergency voting centers? Yes, Madam Chair. We do not have information about early voting sites or drop boxes as of this point. So yes or no?

No, Madam Chair.

Are we required to approve these sites or is that an additional gesture of transparency at a public hearing?

No, Madam Chair. You're only required to approve the resolution to use the vote center model, not the actual locations.

Thank you. I would invite Recorder Heap when he makes his decisions to please present the early voting sites and drop box locations in the interests of transparency and cooperativeness. And I've been able to observe firsthand the level of cooperation that is going on between both offices. I continue to thank Judge Christopher Curry for figuring out these details, and I want to commend election staff for their work in this area. Last thing is a comment for housekeeping. Board members should have received, or actually their chief should have received an email with all the information that was just presented sent to their chiefs. So if you need to refer back to it for additional questions, please do so. Madam Vice Chair, is there a motion? Yes.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve item number 41.

Thank you. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded. Hearing no further discussion, we will proceed to a vote. All those in favor will say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Those opposed? Motion passes unanimously. We proceed on to item 44, amendment to contract with Newton Community Development Corporation. Mr. Stewart, you pulled this item.

Madam Chair, I'd like a little bit more background on this amendment and what we're trying to accomplish here.

Thank you. Welcome, please introduce yourself and your job responsibilities for the audience.

Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Tamara Bridwell and I'm the Human Services Director. Just for some background, Supervisor Stewart, the purpose of these agreements was designed to meet HUD's home ownership goals. So it's home ownership opportunities for income qualified households through two related activities, that's 44 and 45. The development and sale of affordable homes and then down payment assistance for eligible home buyers. That down payment assistance was included in the original scope of work and was available for eligible purchasers participating in that project. What changed was as the development progressed, rising construction costs and the timing of selling of those homes created some financial feasibility concerns for the developer. So continuing to require the originally anticipated number of homes, which was 16, was going to create some additional financial pressure on that developer. So we reduced the number of income-restricted homes eligible for purchase. We reduced that to 10 from 16. The rest will be sold at market rate, which will help recoup some of those costs for the developer. So in response to some of those other concerns, since we reduced that investment, we wanted to move that over to down payment assistance for the county-wide program. This is based on income. That's kind of where we were thinking we would do that since it was in the original scope of work. So the adjustment allows us to protect the viability of the development by responding to that increased construction costs and market conditions around the timing of the sale of those homes. It also preserves the affordable home ownership units by maintaining home investment in 10 of those restricted homes. And it also continues advancing HUD's home ownership objectives by using the remaining home resources for down payment assistance by helping those income qualified buyers overcome one of the primary financial barriers to home ownership. So the bottom line for the board is that the county made a financial feasibility adjustment within the existing scope of work. We retained, again, those 10 affordable home ownership units and shifted a greater portion of the federal investment to the existing down payment assistance component. And this approach protects the viability of the development while continuing to use the home funds to expend affordable homeownership opportunities for income-qualified buyers throughout the county.

Thank you. Mr. Stewart, questions?

Thank you. Thank you for that background. So if I'm understanding this, and I appreciate you explaining it, so when was this first, like, kicked off? In 22? Or was this in, what year did we make this agreement with Newtown? sorry i don't have the exact year in my head but i do have the contracts here i know that this was part of arpa funding isn't it may 18 2022 yes thank you thank you so so in may 18 2022 we put out an rfp to to launch this project did we were we planning on using arpa funds at that time yes okay And so we're in 2026, and in that timeframe, building costs have gone up. And why didn't the builder build in 23 or 24 or 25? And now we've got inflationary pressures. We're being asked to provide more funding and provide less homes.

Madam Chair, Supervisor Stewart, they weren't asking us to provide more funding. They are asking to just reduce the number of income-restricted affordable units that they did develop. And these developments just take time sometimes, trying to get the capital stacks together, trying to pass environmental reviews, some other federal barriers that just slow the process down. There's a lot of documentation that's required for the use of federal funds, so sometimes it just takes a little bit longer to complete these projects.

Okay. So if I understand this correctly, we had ARPA dollars, 22 RFP, four years before we get to build for whatever, you know, regulatory reasons or whatever. In that timeframe, costs have gone up, what, maybe 40, 50%. And the reduction in homes is nearly 50%, assuming that those numbers math out on my napkin here. But I guess my biggest concern is like, and I applaud the chairman's effort on affordable housing initiatives. The challenge is that we're trying to build more homes quickly in order to, it's an inventory issue, not necessarily a subsidy issue. So I get what we're trying to accomplish here. I'm just very concerned when we get, we get changed items all the time as it relates to inflation. It just surprises me that we're having such a reduction in the number of homes and then it's going to market, right? So the money goes to the builder or the bank or whoever it may be for the financial stack and then we're able to put less product out into the market Was there any bite of the apple that Newtown or anybody else took of on this to be able to keep it at 18 homes instead of 10?

Madam Chair, Supervisor Stewart, if I understand this item correctly, it was because that is not the most efficient use of money. And so to make a greater impact, I believe this item is actually switching to down payment assistance so that we can help a greater number of people. So it's a pivot based on the inflationary cost increases so that we can actually improve the amount of affordable options that we're offering. Is that correct, Tamara? That is correct.

And to that point of correction further, this is not my program. It preceded me and will go on long after I do. It's something Maricopa County does, has done for a long time, and does exceptionally well, unlike many government entities.

Madam Chair, thank you for that. It was an attempt to compliment on the work that you're doing currently, and this factors into that portfolio. So I appreciate the background on this. I don't have any further questions, Madam Chair. Madam Vice Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks, Tamara, for the summary. Can you tell me who's eligible to get these down payments? Like how much money can they make?

We limit it to folks that make 120% of the area median income and below.

And can you tell me, I don't know what the median area income is.

So for an example, just off the top of my head, a family of four would be around $89,000 a year. Okay.

And Madam Chair and Tamara, and how do people apply for this? Because there's only a limited amount of money. So how do they even know about it?

Newtown is the one that is also doing the down payment assistance. They have an application on their website. We also put eligibility on our website at Human Services so they can learn about the program there as well.

And Madam Chair Tamara, can you tell me what do these people have to have legal status, be citizens in order to qualify? Madam Chair, Vice Chair Lesko,

Because this is defined as a public benefit, federal and state law have requirements that you cannot just limit it to US citizens. You'd have to be either a US citizen or a lawful permanent resident. And that is in US code and that is also state law.

And when you say a lawful resident, is that a green card holder? Who is that?

Chairman Brophy McGee, Vice Chair Lesko, yes, that would count as somebody who has a green card. There's a whole list of documentation on the Arizona State statute website that has a list of different documentation that you can provide to meet that statute criteria.

And Madam Chair and Tamara, do you know, I heard that there was some type of attempt to perhaps ban legal residents from getting it. Was there a court action that said we needed to offer this to legal residents?

Chair Brophy-McGee, Vice Chair Lesko, I think you might be referring to the Supreme Court Graham versus Richardson, 403 U.S. 365 in 1971. And that was the Supreme Court struck down Arizona's attempt to restrict welfare and public benefits based on citizenship or length of U.S. residency for lawful resident aliens. The court held that denying welfare benefits to resident aliens or imposing longer residency requirements on them violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. And the court also emphasized that the federal government's predominant authority over immigration classification stood.

Thank you. So I think what that means is that we are doing the county's requirements are the same as the Supreme Court's requirements. Is that correct?

Chair Brophy-McGee, Vice Chair Lesko, correct. Our eligibility requirements are the more restrictive requirements under federal and state law. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Galvin.

Thank you for that presentation. I have a couple of questions for you. So when they say they're going from 16 residential units to 10, if you take that universe of 16, does that mean they're still building 16, but now six are going to be sold basically under free market principles, and then 10 will be through assistance?

Correct. Chairwoman Brophy-McGee, Vice Chair Lesko, members of the board. The 10 will be sold at income-restricted rates, so the other six will be market rate. It helps them recoup some of the funds that they were losing as part of the affordable housing development.

Okay, so I've been a proponent, especially during this ARPA's discussion, of having as many projects as possible reflect the free market. There was a lot of projects that I remember that were being debated and deliberated on at the previous board, that I spoke up and said that I believe it would be much better if we just let the market dictate and decide. So now that we're moving six more units subject to market conditions, I think is a lot better. Casa del Sol, what is that program and can you explain to me why it says here that it's being decreased in funding?

Because, sorry, Chair Brophy-McGee, members of the board, we are reducing the investment that we had in those affordable housing development and moving that over into down payment assistance. Because if we still have the HUD investment in those other six units, it would be income restricted. So by subtracting that and moving it over to down payment assistance, we can still serve low income individuals and meet that goal of getting home ownership while allowing those other six units to be sold at market rate.

OK. $702,000 in reduced funding means we're going away from that, I would say, protocol that I was not a fan of, where you're just saying, hey, we're just going to do subsidized housing. But now we're going to do what I see. It seems to me we're doing more targeted programming, where we're addressing people who need the help immediately and more obviously. Is that how it's working?

Chair Brophy-McGee, members of the board, yes, this will actually expand their opportunity of where they can buy a house to, whereas before a lot of the down payment assistance was going to be for those 16 units that All Thrive 365 was developing. This will allow a little bit more flexibility in where folks can buy a home.

Okay. So I think you know that the county board has always tried to be flexible with taxpayer money, try to be flexible with taxpayer money and also efficient. These are monies that were provided to us by the federal government that were provided to all different states and counties throughout the country. So technically it's either our money or we lose it because otherwise in different programs we'd have to find it probably from our general fund. This question before the board, if we vote this down, does that mean that these programs continue unchanged but would be less efficient in how we're spending that money?

Chair Boefer-McGee, members of the board, if we vote this down, it still wouldn't allow the developer to develop all 16 of those units to be affordable because they do not have enough funding to be able to do that.

Right. Okay. Um, and Madam chair, I want to see if the County manager can provide me analysis. If we voted down, what are the effects?

Madam chair, supervisor Galvin, if you vote this down, it would be essentially, um, status quo of the agreement and you would lose the ability to provide that additional funding for additional families for down payment assistance.

But is that, and Madam chair, is that in essence, like we're, would be wasting the $700,000 that we think would be better spent in other ways?

Madam Chair, Supervisor Galvin, that would be my assessment.

Okay, thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Any other questions?

Madam Chair.

Please.

Thank you. Supervisor Galvin brings up a really good point. If we are not able to use ARPA dollars for this RFP that we went out for and for this program that we've committed to, where does the funding come to Newtown to be able to support this? Does it come from our general fund or does it come from another vehicle?

Uh, chair Brophy McGee, uh, supervisor Stewart, are you asking about the 700,000 that we're moving from one scope of work to the next?

I'm asking about all of it, but that you could start with that.

If we did not move those, that funding over, we wouldn't be able to serve all those different households that may need down payment assistance to, to buy a home. And these are low income individuals that were, that is HUD is trying to create, um, a lot more home ownership opportunities, especially for people with low income. especially with the cost of housing, we wouldn't be able to serve as many people if we did not move that funding over.

Madam Chair, Supervisor Stewart, we do not have general fund dollars that are being used to backfill these programs. So the amount of money, the ARPA money that has been designated to these programs, if it is not sufficient, then the program cannot be realized.

Okay. Thank you. And Madam Chair, I'm trying to get to... a deeper understanding so that I can support this project. The nation's $40 trillion in debt. ARPA dollars now are five years removed from that particular initiative. And I know that some cities and some counties are returning that money to the Treasury. I just want to understand how this impacts. Do we already have families that are waiting for these? Homes or, because this money goes to the bank, right, the down payment assistance. I'm just curious, do we already have people that are in line for this and families slotted for this funding?

Chair Brophy-McGee, members of the board, for the down payment assistance?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Galvin. Madam Chair, two questions that are now have arisen. Number one, you're working with HUD currently, right? Yes. Overseen by President Trump? Yes. Okay, so what are the policies and mission of President Trump's HUD vis-a-vis working with Maricopa County? What direction have they provided to you on what they want to see?

Chair, members of the board, increased in home ownership and increase of affordable housing is what the focus has been.

Okay, so this presidential administration's HUD has been supportive of our efforts? Correct. Your efforts? Yes. Okay. Second question, Madam Chair. So if we don't reallocate the $700,000, we're under contract with Newtown, correct? So that means if we don't make this amendment to the contract today, that we still have to spend that $700,000 under the terms of the contract with Newtown, but it wouldn't be a wise investment of the money because it's just not going to go as far, and so basically we would be throwing good money after bad. Is that how you see it?

That is how I see it, yes.

Okay, so we don't want to spend the $700,000 just to waste it. We'd rather, if we're going to spend $700,000, reallocate it and directly help people per President Trump's HUD policies.

Chair Brophy McGee, members of the board, yes.

Okay, thank you. That's very convincing. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Mr. Stewart, as long as we're on the subject and have Ms. Bridwell here, do you have any questions about the other item you pulled, number 45? I believe your presentation encompassed both, but would you have, first of all, Ms. Bridwell, do you have some follow-up comments?

It's both, since they were both on the same scope of work.

Mr. Stewart.

Thank you. I was speaking about them both as well, Madam Chair.

That was my assumption, but we were only working off 144. What I hope are closing comments, no guarantees. The issue with ARPA funds is sending them back, even for a county our size, is the equivalent of spitting into the ocean and saying you got it done. It creates a lot of internal and problems with county budgets and our contracts and agreements. The issue with ARPA funds is when government entities, and many of them have, commit those funds to ongoing needed services, overhead, whatever, where when those funds go away, there's true need and hurt. I don't want to pick on school districts, but I will. They hire more teachers. They do that. type of funding we have not and we have always recognized that ARPA funds are one time and We use them as efficiently and expeditiously as we can so Hearing no further discussion and moving on quickly Matt advice Jared you have a motion. Thank you Thank you, Ms. Bridwell.

Madam Chair, would you like me to make a motion on just 44 or 44 and 45? 44 and 45, please.

All right.

Thank you. Madam Chair, I move that we approve items number 44 and 45. Thank you. I'd like to explain my vote, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Madam Clerk, roll call.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Supervisor Stewart.

Madam Chair, I'd like to explain my vote after the board votes. Thank you. I'll defer.

It's a roll call vote.

I understand. We'll move to the next.

I'm asking for your vote. It's a roll call vote and you certainly can have comments after the vote.

I'd like to vote after. Okay, thank you. So I'll make some comments first, Madam Chair. I appreciate the background on this. If more information would have been provided to my office, which we talked about in our last meeting, we could have gotten through this meeting today and discuss this in a little bit more detail with your office. I appreciate you sharing with me about the families that will be affected by this. As somebody that is a fiscal hawk, if you will, I'm also compassionate, and I understand that there's families waiting on this, and this is a plan that's been put into place long ago. However many years it took, that's government efficiency for you. I think that, or maybe it's the vendor that we're using. It's unfortunate that it took this long, but I'm grateful that there are families that will be supported. And when I walked into this meeting, I was a no on this because I felt like our money should be sent back to the Treasury. I think it's gone on way too long. It's an inflationary factor. which is affecting all Americans, and it's also their money as well. But learning more today about the program, I've changed my mind because I feel like there's a human element to this. And if there's families waiting for these projects to move forward, it's something we should follow through on. And so I'll be voting in support, Madam Chair. I vote aye for 44 and 45.

Supervisor Galvin?

Madam chair if I can explain my vote please I vote aye Actually, I think supervisor Stewart explained it really really well So I'm not gonna speak as much as I thought I would because I think he did a great job of explaining it I too hate to see wasting of taxpayer money So if there's a plan presented to us by staff of how to better allocate in one instance here $700,000 I'm going to be happy to do it and I'm open to doing it I think supervisor Stewart EXPLAINED IT PERFECTLY WHILE WE'RE DOING THIS. THESE ITEMS ARE IN LINE WITH WHAT WE HEARD FROM STAFF REGARDING PRESIDENTIAL TRUMP'S HUD ADMINISTRATION INCREASING CHANCES FOR HOME OWNERSHIP. AND ALSO FINALLY, MADAM CHAIR, WE'RE UNDER CONTRACT. AND SO THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT. SO IF WE'RE UNDER CONTRACT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND THE MONEY EITHER WAY. SO I'D RATHER SPEND IT IN A WISER, MORE EFFICIENT WAY. SO I AGREE WITH SUPERVISOR STEWART. AND THANK YOU TO STAFF FOR PROVIDING THIS INFORMATION TODAY. IT WAS VERY HELPFUL FOR ME. AND I VOTE AYE.

Supervisor Gallardo is absent. Vice Chair Lesko? Aye. Chair Brophy-McGee?

Thank you. A little bit of housekeeping here. Board members have these agenda items well in advance. A week in advance. And they are truly invited to reach out to any and all staff through the county manager to ask questions, clarify as needed. And with that, I vote aye.

Madam Chair, four ayes, the one absent. Motion passes.

Thank you. We will now proceed to the Board of Supervisors addendum, item 72, competition impracticable procurement for Greenberg, Trowig, and Melendrez et al. versus Sheridan et al. Number 73, initiate special action regarding tax court decision in Shealy v. Maricopa County. Number 74, chief deputy county superintendent of school salary. And 75, settlement in Green v. Maricopa County et al. Madam Clerk, do we have any speaker forms?

Madam Chair, yes, I do have two speaker forms. Both wish to speak on item number 72 in opposition, Andrew Tai and Leah McCarty.

Thank you. Mr. Tai, please come forward. Good morning, board members.

My name is Andrew Tai.

Thank you, sir. You have two minutes.

Constitutional oversight before litigation. This board is considering another $750,000 for outside counseling and litigation involving county law enforcement that should remind the government of something important. Constitutional oversight is far less costly before government ends up in court. Residents are currently bringing this board's documented concerns involving law enforcement, surveillance technology, government data, transparency, and constitutional protections. I'm not claiming those concerns are subject of the Melendrez court case. They're not. The lesson is prevention. When residents provide evidence in constitutional notice, investigate it while corrective action is still possible. Establish safeguards before technology expands. Don't wait until questionable practices become institutional practices, or until taxpayers are funding attorneys to begin meaningful oversight. Returning directly to item 72, today's request demonstrates that litigation has consequences and taxpayers ultimately receive the bill. Constitutional oversight shouldn't begin in a courtroom. It should begin here before the government actions becomes government litigation.

Madam Chair. Mr. Calvin, I have a question for the speaker. Do you oppose or in favor of us hiring an attorney to end? What we think is an overdue too long oversight over the sheriff's office.

Mr. Ty I would oppose paying the 750,000 allocating that for So madam chair, you believe that this process with the monitor should continue Mr. Ty

State that again, please. Madam Chair, sir, I'm asking, do you believe that this process with the federal monitor that costs at least $2 million a year and total cost for the sheriff's office that costs $34 million a year should continue? No, I don't think it should, but. Okay, that's what we're trying to do here, Madam Chair, is we're spending money on attorney to save the $34 million that you and your fellow taxpayers pay every single year for this. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Madam Clerk.

Have a good day.

Next speaker, on item number 72, also in opposition, Leah McCarty.

Thank you, and please state your name for the record.

My name is Leah McCarty, and I'm also speaking on agenda 72. This item asked taxpayers to authorize up to another $750,000 for outside council in Melendrez v. Sheridan. Before approving another three-quarter of a million dollars, the public deserves the complete financial picture. How much has already been authorized and spent? Why is another $750,000 necessary? And what financial exposure remains? This matter was heard on executive session August 31st and then added to today's agenda. Litigation sometimes requires outside counsel. That's not the issue. The issue is whether taxpayers can clearly see the cumulative cost and understand why additional money is necessary. And remember, 57 other agenda items today were bundled within the consent agenda category to be passed by you. Single vote unless pulled. Item 72, before approving another $750,000, put the total already spent, the reason more is needed, and the remaining financial exposure into the public record. Taxpayers shouldn't have to reconstruct the bill after the money is gone.

Madam Chair.

Excuse me, are you complete with your comments? Yes. Thank you. Mr. Liddy, from the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, would you come forward and speak to these objections?

Thank you, Madam Chair. And I won't speak specific to any either of those two objections, but just to provide information that each is called for. So starting in 2009, there was an effort made by the ACLU to get the court to interfere and oversee the operations of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department for a series of specific reasons, all which are well established and are in the public domain involving allegations of racial profiling by the human smuggling unit. And now we're going on year 16, and it's costing over $30 million per year. The federal court is now running vast portions of the sheriff's office rather than the people of Maricopa County's elected sheriff. and this has been going on for well over a decade, well into the second decade now, this body, the Board of Supervisors, has hired an attorney in order to try to restrain or end the expansion of the monitor's efforts to control the people of Maricopa County Sheriff Department. And so these funds are being asked to be allocated to continue that effort to save that $34 million per year.

Thank you. Any questions from board members?

Madam Chair.

Mr. Gallagher.

I don't have a question, but I have a statement I want to ask Mr. Liddy. Ms. McCarty, thank you so much for coming down here with your question, and I hope this is edifying for you. Because Mr. Liddy, as I pointed out earlier to the previous speaker, Maricopa County taxpayers have to pay $2 million to a federal monitor, which was court ordered by a federal judge. Maricopa County has to pay about $34 million a year in outlays to the sheriff's office even before one sheriff deputy even hits the street. We have been subject to this federal oversight for over 15 years. We have asserted that this has cost the taxpayers, Ms. McCarty, over $350 million. The monitor has asserted to the federal judge that this has cost $100 million. Either way you slice it, that's a lot of money with a lot of zeros. Also, Ms. McCarty, we hired legal counsel in 2025 to file a motion in court to end this. And that Rule 60B motion was filed in December of last year. And Mr. Liddy, the federal court process is very laborious, takes a very long time. Have we yet heard an order from the judge on that Rule 60B motion that we filed last December?

Madam Chair, Supervisor Galvin, no, we have not. And I wouldn't say it's unusual that we haven't yet. It does take time, but we will. But the reason why we need these outside lawyers is we're anticipating that whether the judge grants the motion or denies the motion, it's going to go to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and we have an appellate specialist whom you have retained. That's what this item is involving.

And Mr. Liddy, do lawyers who are retained for federal court cases like this require a specialty and experience and education? Very much so. OK. Not any lawyer off the street can do this.

No, not to have any success at all in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals or the United States Supreme Court.

OK. So asking for a budget max of up to $750,000 in an effort to save the taxpayers from spending any more than $300 million so far is a wise investment?

Well, I, as a member of the county attorney's office, I will refrain from saying it's wise or unwise, but I would say it is well within the authority of the people's representatives right here on this body to make that decision.

I do think it's a wise investment, and I think all five supervisors here have been working really hard over the last two years to save the taxpayer money paid for by Mr. Tide and Ms. McCarty. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Supervisor Galvin.

Madam Clerk, do we have any other questions? Speakers for these items? Madam Chair, no other speakers.

Madam Vice Chair, would you put forward a motion on 72 through 75?

Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve items 72 through 75.

Thank you. There's a motion on the floor. Is there a second?

Madam Chair, I'd like to second that and make a comment for my vote.

Thank you. It's been moved and seconded, Madam Clerk roll call. Supervisor Stewart.

Thank you, Madam Chair. When you think about all the moving parts with elections, this Melendrez case has almost as many. We have gotten farther in the past couple years in hopefully relieving the taxpayer and the sheriff's office from this burdensome that seems to be moving goalposts every time we have a meeting. That being said, Supervisor Galvin outlined this perfectly. This is an investment. From this board and we've been very immersed in this subject for quite some time to help Support the constitutional police force. Well, I think it's one of the best police forces sheriff's departments in the nation as it relates to providing public safety and also adhering to the Constitution. This investment, hopefully, and I'm very confident that it will, save the taxpayer a tremendous amount of money moving forward. We're talking about numbers of 30 million a year 300 million since this began, and it just keeps growing. This board is here to fight that, and we're here to support our sheriffs, and we're here to support the taxpayer, and we'll continue down that path. But I do want to comment. It's great that the public's here asking for more understanding because it gives us the platform to share the thoughts that Supervisor Galvin just shared, the thoughts that I have as well, and I know that my fellow board members also support that. So thank you very much, Chair.

And you voted aye?

Yep. Madam Clerk. Supervisor Galvin. I agree. Aye. Supervisor Gallardo is absent. Vice Chair Lesko. Aye.

Chair Brophy-McGee. I have said from the start that I would rather see those precious taxpayer dollars that are going out of state to a monitor that is hardly here ever be really reinvested back in the community to public safety. With that, I vote aye.

Madam Chair, and just for my clarification, this roll call vote was for items 72 through 75 with four ayes and one absent. Yes, ma'am. Motion passes.

Thank you. With specific comments to public participation and thanks on 72. Okay, thank you, Madam Clerk. We will recess as the Board of Supervisors and convene as the Improvement District. Madam Clerk, any speaker forms?

Madam Chair, none on this item.

Thank you. The Board will now consider Item 76. Madam Vice Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve Item 76. Is there a second?

Second. It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor will say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. We will adjourn as the Improvement District and convene as the Flood Control District Board of Directors. Madam Clerk, are there any speaker forms for 77 through 79?

Madam Chair, yes. We do have two speaker forms. Two wish to speak on item number 77 in opposition, and one speaker wishes to speak on item number 78 in opposition. First two speakers on item number 77, Roger Mabe and Leah McCarty.

Thank you. And Mr. Poffman, this is you. Please come forward. Mr. Mabe.

My name is Roger May. This item increases relocation benefits from $25,000 from approximately $185,000 to $210,000 and specifically includes reasonable ADA accommodations at the replacement dwelling. I support legitimate reasonable accommodations, but item 77 establishes an important principle. Government recognizes that meaningful access sometimes requires modifying the ordinary procedure to accommodate an individual's circumstances. Residents have also requested reasonable accommodations to meaningfully participate in county government, including remote technology that already exists and is used during these meetings. The principle should be consistent. If government recognizes here that a barrier may require accommodations and is prepared to fund that accommodation, then meaningful access to government deserves the same serious consideration. Returning directly to item 77. Reasonable accommodations shouldn't depend upon which county doorway a person is trying to enter. If removing a barrier here, removing a barrier to the meaningful participation in government should matter also. You all use the webinar and you are not handicapped. Yet people are being denied webinar First Amendment access in these meetings. For example, myself, Lydia, and others. You have continued to deny equal access to participants in these meetings. You're supposed to be public servants, not royalty.

Thank you. Madam Clerk.

Next speaker on item 77 in opposition, Leah McCarty.

Good afternoon, I'm Leah McCarty. And the words I want the board to remember from its own agenda are reasonable ADA accommodations. Item 77 recognizes that government may need to respond to an individual's circumstances in order to provide meaningful access. So that principle deserves consistent application throughout.

Ms. McCarty, I am going to rule your comments out of order. They do not reflect to the agenda item, amend and determination of relocation benefits. So direct your comments to item number 77, or I will ask you to be seated.

Okay, I thought that's what this was.

No, ma'am. It has to do with relocation benefits due in a flood control district project. Thank you. Mr. Boffman, I don't think there were any comments made to which you need to respond.

No.

Please be seated, and thank you for coming up. Alex Smith, too.

Madam Chair, I do have one more speaker for you.

Oh, one more speaker. Hang on.

Andrew Tai wishes to speak on item number 78 in opposition. Okay.

Mr. Tai.

So my first question would be, is item number 78, is this in regards to the Whitman Area Drainage Master Study? Is that correct? Okay. Today you're being asked to approve change order number four. And the thing that I'm looking at is accountability. What I have found over the last year coming to these meetings is it seems that you take on projects, but then there are these multiple occasions where things have to be changed. And it would just seem to me from a business owner and a realtor that maybe the plans aren't being looked at correctly and this is why these things need to be changed continually. This is the fourth change order on this project. Oversights means determining why you're here for the fourth time and whether the taxpayers are being adequately protected. Public money is entrusted. Accountability comes with that trust. Item 78 shows taxpayers the entire bill. Explain how this reached change order number four and tell the public whether another $300,000 and another 485 days finally finished the job.

Thank you for your question. Specific to the agenda item, Mr. Tai, do you have any other questions before you are seated?

Not currently, but if you could answer maybe some of the other ones, that would be great.

Please be seated. And Mr. Boffman, can you speak to the questions on the Whitman Area Drainage Master Study Plan Update?

Yes, Chair Brophy-McGee, members of the board, my name is Paul Boffman. I'm the Chief Engineer and General Manager of This particular item is for a $300,000 increase to allow work assignment number four for the area drainage master study for the Whitman area to proceed forward. The intent would be to allow the project team to identify potential projects that could improve drainage in this area. It's a 310 square mile area. Mr. Tai asked about some of the previous change orders and the reasons. these originally there was an intent to try to of course as always use the taxpayer money in the best way possible and take advantage of resources that they did this in a couple of different ways they combined different aerial lidar survey data three different sets into one set to try to make it a more affordable situation I mean lidar is very expensive to acquire and then there were some 150 foot of gap in there or mismatch they had to fix which wasn't something that they originally anticipated and so there was a cost change for that there was also an attempt to streamline the analysis of flat wash bottoms in this area this 310 square mile area and the streamlining was not as efficient as we originally hoped and so that was another reason why there was some changes here. So the way these area drainage master studies work is you start with a general analysis where you take aerial survey and then you do modeling. This had 19 different what we call subdomains. In other words, you break up the area that's going to be modeled and you break it up, in this case, into 19 different areas. The last area had a model run time of about 30 days, which meant that it delayed the project. We didn't pay for that model run time. It's just the computers run. The consultants don't charge us for that. But it did cause a delay every time we needed to do a new iteration or make an adjustment to the model to fine tune it or calibrate it. It caused a delay in time to run that, the first 18 and then the last 19th one that took this 30-day run time. It's something where, because normally these area drainage master studies are not so large, they're usually a little bit bigger, maybe half this size, maybe smaller. This one in particular had some surprises for us. And so we're now working with the city of Surprise and the Maricopa County Transportation Department to identify specific areas, just a few areas. Originally we had anticipated few more areas but now we're just looking at specific ones that are especially important to the Transportation Department and the City of Surprise to find solutions based on the analysis we've done over the last several years of this area to kind of make some improvements or where we could potentially make improvements and that's what this fourth work assignment number four is for the the change order for the 300,000.

Thank you. Are there any questions for Mr. Botham? No? Excellent. You finally got there, but it sounds like a very complicated project.

Madam Vice Chair? Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve items 77 through 79. Second.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor will say aye. Aye. Hearing none opposed, motion carries unanimously. We will adjourn as the Flood Control District Board of Directors and convene as the Library District Board of Directors. Madam Clerk, are there any speaker forms received for items 80, 81, or 82? Madam Chair, yes.

I do have two speaker forms to wish to speak on item number 81 in opposition. And I have one speaker to speak on item 82 in opposition. I'm sorry, the first two speakers They wish to speak on item 81, Roger Mabe and Veronica Corcoran. Veronica also wishes to speak on item 82. So she'll speak on item 81 and 82. Thank you. Mr. Mabe.

My name is Roger Mabe. This board, acting as the library district, is being asked to approve $4.325 million in additional expenditure authority for the Anthem Capital Project. Your own county website tells the public that approved minutes include summaries of the board's decisions, presentations, and speakers' comments. Yet residents who repeatedly address this government body on significant issues of the library district can later find the substance of those concerns barely reflected or not meaningfully reflected in the writing of the minutes. A legal minimum should not become government's transparencies maximum. Madam Chair, for- That matters when the- Point of order, Madam Chair.

Is the speaker speaking on item- number 80 regarding... No, 81.

But I'm questioning, this is a capital project, sir. And would you please confine your comments to the capital project, which you are opposing?

The $4.32 million in additional expenditures authority. I covered that in my opening statement. Thank you. So let me finish. That matters when the same board exercises substantial financial authority.

Sir, your comments are to that item only, not to general library concerns. If you are complete in commission.

I just said that matters when this board exercises substantial. This all pertains to this topic.

You are excused. The topic is the Anthem Library Capital Project. Thank you. Ms. Corcoran.

Thank you, board. I do have concerns regarding the library myself and I actually wonder who provides the money and who actually, you know, it shows clearly that you guys have authority to authorize and, you know, when it comes to library and this is my concern because Maricopa County tells the public that is approved minutes include summaries of speakers' comments. Our residents have repeatedly brought substantive concerns about library district policies, classification, materials, and access to minors. But I'm just talking about

Your comments need to be to the Anthem Library Capital Project.

Yes, the Anthem including, yes. Because my point is governance. If the board has authority to approve millions, this is the budget.

I'm sorry, this is a capital project. It's specific to building out the Anthem Library. My question is...

Otherwise, your comments are indeed out of order. Okay. Does also include responsibility of meaningful policies, oversight, and what is presented on your website? Because the public should see... It is a capital project. Yeah, but the public should see... Thank you. I don't want to argue your comments are out of order. Okay. No problem. Public needs to understand what's going on.

If you would like then to proceed to item 82, Ms. Corcoran, you are signed in to speak on the library minutes.

Yeah. Library minutes, it's the same. The minimum should not be the standard. I'm speaking about agenda approval of those library minutes because I understand Arizona law permits minutes to provide general description of the matter considered. But Maricopa County tells the public something more. Your own website says approved minutes include summaries of board discussion, presentation, and residents who ask our concerns. So when residents provide substantive information about library district policy, classification, materials, access by minors, who I'm personally, I'm very, very concerned. It's damaging for their development. But the minutes reduce that to a generic topic of all, to all identify the substance in a much less serious transparency. So a legal minimum should not become a government's transparency maximum. So item 82, these minutes become the permanent written record, someone reviewing those minutes in the future should be able to determine more than simply that somebody spoke about libraries. They should be able to understand what significant concern was actually presented to the governing body, but by us, the people. If your website promises summaries of speakers' comments, then the official minutes should meaningfully deliver what your website tells to the public to expect. So why the official minutes don't deliver what your web page tells the public to expect? It's a big stretch. We would love public to understand that we need to protect, we need to be good governors of our children. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Corcoran. I think what I can tell you is that Minutes are required to show action, who moved, who seconded, what actions were adopted. That's it. Madam Vice Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve items 80 through 82.

Thank you. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor of the library items will vote aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. We will adjourn as the Library District Board of Directors and reconvene as the Board of Supervisors for public comment. Madam Clerk, do we have any speakers signed up? Madam Chair, yes, we do have 10 speaker forms.

Please proceed. First Speaker Elizabeth Venable, Tony Harris, David Morgan,

Welcome, Ms. Venable. Please state your name for the record. You have two minutes.

My name is Elizabeth Venable, City of Phoenix resident. I'm with a group called Fund for Empowerment, and we are very concerned about the potential expiration of the heat relief funding. There is about a $3 million potential gap because of expiring federal funding. And I wanted to say that there has been a significant reduction in deaths as a result of ongoing heat relief efforts collaborating with the county, but also with some municipalities that contribute, such as City of Phoenix. And it's been a, I think there were over 200 deaths, a 30% reduction. that were stopped, 200 lives that were saved. And it extends further beyond those 200 lives to other people suffering and to having a place in the summer also for people who are indigent to go so they're not present in public spaces and have more opportunity for success and resources through heat relief services and associated services so I just wanted to one of the things City of Phoenix has done has been to combine different positions sort of a common sort of budgetary thing and try to find wiggle room where they can support it out of the general fund and I would think that this is a pretty low expenditure for a whole year and I would encourage you to make it I think it's very important for Maricopa County and for an example for that country.

Thank you, Ms. Venable. Madam Clerk.

Next speaker, Tony Harris, followed by David Morgan, Diane Barker.

Welcome, Mr. Harris. Please state your name for the record, and you have two minutes.

Tony Harris, advocate for Fund for Empowerment, for the homeless. Yeah, as far as this funding that needs to be extended with these cooling centers, a lot of these people that need the heat relief that are homeless, if there's not any more funding for that, we're going to end up seeing people camping out on up and down the sidewalks like before. And it's illegal to do that, obviously, and they can be arrested and locked up and then get a criminal record. And also at these heat relief centers, I know a guy that could be a stepping stone to get housing. I know a guy that was homeless for years, and he was going to this one right around the corner. And he just last week got housing. And so he's doing good now. So we need funding to keep these heat relief centers open. Because it could lead to a lot of people getting housing from the staff members there. So thank you. Thank you, Mr. Harris.

Madam Clerk?

David Morgan, Diane Barker, Juan Mendez.

Welcome, Mr. Morgan. State your name for the record.

I'm David Morgan. I'm with Funds for Empowerment. I'm also homeless. The heat relief centers are a major concern for all of us. The ones that they have here in Phoenix are helping a lot. But further out in Maricopa County and the surrounding areas, we need more centers. We need more places for people to get heat relief. The summer here, we all know, is horrible. It's hot. There's very little shade. We need as much help as we can get. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Morgan.

Madam Clerk. Diane Barker, Juan Mendez, Leah McCarty.

Welcome. Thank you, and good afternoon, Madam Chairman, women, Kate Brophy McGee, and the Board of Supervisors. My name is Diane Barker. I am an American citizen residing half of my life, and in the last, I'd say, maybe 15 years in this district five. My concerns have been ongoing about the air quality or lack thereof in Maricopa County and mobility, our choices. Rather than trip reduction, TRP program, which came out of the, what, 1987, we started that, where don't drive one and five, and it morphed then into trip reduction, really hasn't been successful when we find out that particularly West Phoenix has the worst air quality in the United States. We live in a valley surrounded by these beautiful little buttes or even mountains. And so we do have, we had back in the 80s, but the carbon monoxide, we set up a serious plan to attend to that. But we have the ozone, and this weekend we had particulates in ozone from the dust. from Friday to Saturday, so it's an ongoing thing. I'm very thankful, Jen, to be able to have access to Phil McNeely, and I talked to him about today's 26th replacement of vehicles and also the 62 transportation. That is actually the monitoring. So I keep up on this, and I'd like to see our elected officials model Good trip choices. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Barker. Madam Clerk.

Juan Mendez, Leah McCarty, Veronica Corcoran. Welcome.

Thank you. Really quick, I also want to second the extending of the heat relief centers. I just saw them save somebody's life two days ago, so the heat's not going anywhere soon. Also, thank you for voting and adopting the 26th general election resolution, but I'm back here today to remind you that the voters of Maricopa County are still watching, and the questions they have for you all is, who do you serve? Do you serve election officials with hyper-partisan ties and influences, the falling status quo, or do you serve the communities who rely on you to protect our democracy? The Arizona Supreme Court brought heaps to the table while also handing him $20 million of our tax funds for his own separate IT infrastructure. While that outcome is not what we were expecting, the ruling is not the same as handing over your duty to the voters. Your primary constitutional obligation is not just to settle lawsuits, avoid headline drama, and just move along to get along. It's to guarantee that every lawful vote is counted and that our elections are certified. so we're not waiting around to see what he does or doesn't do with the elections moving organizers across the valley are joining forces and soon we'll be taking talking directly to voters educating our neighbors about our demands for election access and transparency and where you stand with election access and transparency and we're uh so we're building momentum by the next meeting we'll be delivering a petition with a lot of people who want to see the county's plans for concrete actions to safeguard our access to the ballot again we want less open police presence at polls, more drive-thru drop boxes, demographics for heaps ballot signature rejection, and more transparency, forward transparency on heaps spending. Look, I know you can't respond right now, but going forward, it would make everything easier if we could ask all of you to make a clear public commitment that we can communicate to the voters that you will uphold the law, resist bad faith conspiracy theories, and certify the results of the upcoming general election no matter who wins. Our election infrastructure belongs to the people. We expect you to defend it, not supervise compromises with Heap by standing by and doing nothing as he spends $12 million on his own separate IT infrastructure. Thank you.

Thank you. Madam Clerk.

Leah McCarty, Veronica Corcoran, Andrew Tai.

Good afternoon, Chair and supervisors. My name is Leah McCarty, and I'm speaking about the common thread running through items 23, 29, 77, and call to the public, public money, public authority, public access, and public accountability. Item 23 concerns crime victims. Item 29 involves MCSO emergency communications. Item 77 concerns reasonable access and accommodations, and a call to the public is where citizens petition their government. The Arizona Constitution begins with a fundamental principle. Political power is inherent in the people, and government exists for their protection and benefit. Our constitutional system also protects due process, equal protection and the right of citizens to petition government. Through Urban Night Girl, I advocate for families dealing with DCS, dependency courts, ICPC exploitation and human trafficking. I also work with face-based One Stop Life Center and with Exposed Monsters Media to bring documented concerns into public view. Today, while attempting to address item 77, I was not allowed, permitted what I understood to be my full two-minute comment. I ask that the recording and official timing be preserved and the applicable rule be identified. I understand Sheriff Jerry Sheridan is independently elected. This board does not control individual investigations. but the sheriff receives public authority and resources, and this board approves significant county funding and agreements. Authority must be measurable. So I place six requests on the record. First, identify who receives reports involving missing, abused, exploited, or trafficked children. Second, identify MCSO's written procedure for documenting those reports, preserving evidence, determining jurisdiction, making referrals, and requiring supervisory follow-up. Third, identify... Identify the lawful referral pathway. Thank you. Thank you, no.

Please have a seat. Please. Madam Clerk.

Veronica Cochran, Andrew Tai, Roger Mabe.

The point of upcoming election, thank you, Ms. Lesko, for recognizing how complicated our elections are. You remember, it was very easy. One day, one vote in precincts, we used to come, Some countries even have a thumbnail. It's so simple. Why and who made this complicated? Think about that and pray about that because it's not honoring human lives anymore. It's like becoming a robotic machine. We need to be careful and mindful of that. And misformed voters are also not serving our community and even they are hurting themselves. Because we see the media, like our Governor Hobbs getting away with horrible lies all over her commercials everywhere. They are paid by people who don't love this country. If people would love this country, they would not have commercials full of lies. I'm sure these who fund them are really those who don't care for American middle class. And I wonder, you know, why so many people buy lying propaganda? You know, why so many people fall for the lie? Because some people call for democracy, but at the same time, they have a satanic temple. They worship Satan. There is such a disconnect. in the community right now that unless we really return to the roots of who we are as Americans, we have been very blessed by our founding fathers. And now in District A legislator, they are trying to remove the constitutional constitutional rights and they are going radical. God forbid the liberals win this election because eventually our divine inspired nation will perish and God bless all candidates who are still upholding our constitution. That is the only guarantee that we can be continually black. Thank you. Madam Clerk.

Andrew Tai, Roger Mabe, The last speaker, I'm sorry, cannot make out the last name. It looks like C. Phelous.

We'll figure that out when we get there. Mr. Tai.

Thank you. Follow the money and the Constitution. Let's stop pretending that these excess funds are complicated. When a bank forecloses, the trustee is given an enormous amount of power. But here's the question. Who's watching the trustee? And who is the trustee? I always thought it was an attorney. It can be an employee for the bank. It can be an agent. It can be anybody that they want to throw in there. They don't need a law degree. And they do not represent both sides of the foreclosure proceedings. They strictly represent the bank. And here's what ARS 33-812 states. Costs and expenses come first. The debt comes next. The legal entitled junior lien holders. But when those obligations are satisfied, the law says the remaining money goes to the homeowner. And I know from looking at other things, you've passed other statutes that forego that. I understand that. So what happens to the money when it isn't returned? It goes to the county treasurer's office, who you have authority over and are supposed to foresee. You haven't started an investigation or done anything. I've been talking to you for a year. I think one of the things that I haven't really talked about is the 14th Amendment. The Constitution says the government cannot deprive a person of property without the process of the law. Who took the property? Who handled the money? Where did the dollar go and who authorized it? I just feel that there... In 2024, $15 million went in and $16 million went out of the county treasury's office.

Thank you. Roger May, followed by Lee. I'm sorry. Thank you. Roger May, followed by Lee Fellis.

Mr. May.

My name is Roger Mabe. You were warned, now act. Earlier this week, every member of this board receives an email from Ms. Shepherd containing detailed video concerning expanding government surveillance. You were also specifically asked to pull agenda item number 67 from consent for public scrutiny. No one had asked to pull 67, so we could not speak on it. Unbelievable. That video included statements from technology officials about expanding surveillance capabilities and Pinell County Sheriff Ross Teeple's constitutional concerns. I previously stood before you regarding the constitutional notice on surveillance. So the question is no longer whether you were warned. Today's item 67 documents CCTV's cameras, detection devices, network communications, software real-time management, and the integration and archiving and sharing of data. Meanwhile, I drive approximately an hour and a half each way to participate here while the webinar's First Amendment access to me is denied. Government embraces increasingly powerful technology to monitor the public while denying citizens existing technology to access the government. That's backwards. You've received notice. You've received information. you are asked to examine item 67, investigated. Contact me. Address the constitutional concerns. In closing, please move this meeting to evenings or Saturdays. And remember, people before dogs.

Thank you. Madam Clerk, our last speaker.

Last speaker, Lee Fellis.

Thank you, sir. And please state your name for the record.

Lee Ellis II, Funds for Empowerment. I just want to speak briefly on our cooling stations. I know the one up off from Stapley provides us with meals. They have cots in there where we can rest. You can get a voucher down there for Goodwill. You can get clothing. So we do need these resources in our community. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, sir. Madam Clerk? Madam Chair, there are no other speakers. Okay, that concludes the public comment section of the agenda. We will move on to Supervisor's Summary of Current Events. But first, Madam County Manager.

Nothing today. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Mr. Stewart.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for a great meeting. You know, we've been out in the public, it's been a few weeks since we've been here, but always out in the community. We attended a Sun Lakes Procedure and Educational Forum where I was able to moderate a panel with the wonderful Helen Purcell, J.D. Mesner, who's a state senator, Dana Lewis, the Pinal County recorder, and Andrew Gould, a former Supreme Court justice. Incredible conversation centered around how we can continue to improve what we do here underneath state law. It was quite eye-opening for me. A lot of historical references, a lot of background. It's really important to know where we've been. to understand where we're going. Attended the Arizona League of Cities event, saw a number of mayors and council members as well as folks that help influence policy, good public policy around the state and around Maricopa County. Attended my first Queen Creek Unified School District business partner breakfast. So this is like all of the business partners within the community show up to a breakfast and figure out ways to support the school district with funding, events, and things like that. It was quite an extravagant event. A number of awards were handed out there as well. Speaking of awards, congratulations again to our NACO award winners, those leaders and teams, tremendous job here for the county. And then we attended the Business and Education Summit at the Queen Creek Chamber. Just another tether or tie between the educational community and our business community, which is wonderful in District 1. And then I attended the economic update series with the Chandler Chamber of Commerce. We talked about drones, automation, and on-demand logistics. Chandler and the East Valley continue to lead the way in innovation. They will be implementing the first aerial drone service for packages and medicine called Zipline. And the gentleman from Zipline talked about when they launched their business, they first did business in Africa because they don't have the stringent FAA rules that we have here. but they talked about saving a young child with drone service that was bit by a cobra, I think it was, and they were able to transfer anti-venom to them within 45 minutes versus the three hours that it would have taken by ambulance and the child may not have survived. So their mission is pure and it was really great to hear from him. Attended the AZ Pie Club speaking event with Arizona, or with County Attorney Rachel Mitchell, and that was quite an event as well. But, you know, More importantly, football season is back. No, it's not more important. But football season is back. There will be a lot of wives and husbands that will be widowed on Saturdays. Or not widowed, but absent on Saturdays watching football games. But I did want to point out that Basha and Hamilton, two Chandler Unified School District schools, battled out on ESPN last Friday, I'm sorry, last Saturday night And Basha was victorious, but I have a feeling those two teams will meet again in the playoffs. They are two juggernauts of football excellence. And then I want to wish everybody a happy Labor Day. And to our 13,000 staff members, enjoy the long weekend. And also it's important to remember that Labor Day is a holiday that celebrates the changing of a lot of labor laws and a lot of things that make life easier for our families, as well as good wages and things like that. That's why it's so important for us to continue to onshore manufacturing back to the United States, and I hope that initiative continues at the federal and state level. So enjoy the weekend, and this is the last weekend of hot dogs, too. Apparently, there's 7 billion hot dogs consumed between Memorial Day and Labor Day. Did you know that, Madam Chair?

It's insane. No, I eat hot dogs year-round.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Stewart. Mr. Galvin.

No, thank you.

Supervisor, Vice Chair Lesko.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to take a moment to recognize the outstanding work being done by the Maricopa County employees. This year, Maricopa County received an incredible 78 national achievement awards from the National Association of Counties, recognizing innovative programs and services across our departments, elected offices, and judicial agencies. These awards are reflective of the dedicated employees who come to work every day here. And as I've said it before, I've always been impressed by the staff here at Maricopa County. So congratulations to all the employees, all the departments and agencies that received awards. You deserved it. I also want to thank my staff. My staff has been out and about in my district, going to all different types of events and community activities. And so they're doing a great job as well. And I look forward to our next meeting.

Thank you, board members. Thank you, county manager. And thank you, staff, for your exemplary and Madam Clerk, your office for the exemplary preparation and presentation of this meeting. Please check my newsletter. You can see our D3 team is out and about and doing many wonderful things. We very much appreciate it. There being no further business before the board, this meeting is adjourned.