Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

The broadcast is now starting. All attendees are in listen only mode.

Good morning and welcome to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors formal board meeting of I'll get there. 04/22/2026. Madam clerk, would you please call roll?

Yes. Good morning. Thank you, chair. Supervisor Gallardo? Here. Supervisor Lasko? Here. Supervisor Galvin? Here. Supervisor Stewart? Here. Chair Brophy McGee?

Here. We are all in attendance. We will proceed with supervisor Stewart introducing his guest who will lead us in the invocation and pledge.

Thank you, madam chair. I'd like to invite our very own sergeant Mark Hellman up to the podium to lead us in the invocation and pledge. And if you wouldn't mind, I'd to make make a few comments afterwards, madam chair. Thank you.

Testing. Testing. Morning, everyone. Alright. Let us pray.

Heavenly father, lord Jesus, spirit of the living God, I come before you today not with hollow words, but with a fully surrendered heart. And with that, I pray with so much going on in the world today, father, I pray that you would instill into us a remembrance that we can trust in you, father. You are the only one that we can trust in, that we can take all of our problems and issues and run to you and just lay them at your feet, Lord. For there is no problem too great for you. You are the creator of all that is created.

You are the author of life, and we can trust in your sovereign provision and your divine providence. So, Lord, I pray for everyone here in this room that you would grant us the eyes to see and the ears to hear the proclamation of your holy word, father, that we would obediently and joyfully accept it into our hearts, that we would have the strength and the courage and the faith to walk the narrow path that you lay before us, father, that your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Father, we love you so so much and we know you loved us first. And we are so grateful for all the ways that you move in our lives. And we are so thankful for all that you've given, not just to us, father, but for us.

I pray this in the mighty name of our savior and soon to return king, the lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

Amen. Hallelujah.

Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. 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. Supervisor Stewart.

Thank you, madam chair. Thank you, Mark. Sergeant Mark Hellman began working for the security service department here at Maricopa County a little over three years ago and was recently promoted to sergeant. Congratulations, sir. You know, before his time with the county, Mark spent a few years with the eighty second airborne division with multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan in the early two thousands.

Thank you for that, sir. Now in his free time, Mark enjoys golf, shooting, and volunteering at Christchurch and City Of Hope. Mark is a regular fixture in the county, ensuring her staff and patrons remain safe while the county business is conducted. I wanna thank you, Mark, for your military service and for your commitment to keeping the county safe and for the work you do in our community. Thank you again.

Thank you very much, sergeant. Thank you, mister Stewart. Proceeding to item number four, pet showcase, Maricopa County Animal Care and Control. Kim.

All right. This is my friend Shadow, who has me all tangled up right now. Don't mind my hot dog. She is a sucker for some hot dogs, who isn't. Shadow is seven years old. She was actually surrendered to the shelter. She was in a home for, seven years she was a puppy, and she was surrendered on February 2. The previous owner said she was no longer getting along with the other dog in the home. So we do believe she would probably do best in an only dog home, but the good news is that she loves people. She has never met a stranger. I'm pretty sure her tail hasn't stopped wagging. It might have stopped wagging for the first time ever during the applause, because it sounds a little bit like fireworks, I

think, at least to dogs. So she is

a little bundle of joy, really. She is, great on leash. She walks really slow. So if you like a stroll through the park that at a leisurely pace, she is your girl. We took her yesterday to White Tanks Regional Park. She's our bark ranger, and she did great on the hike even though it was a a little warm, but she she hung with us and and did great on that hike as well, and also met a tarantula, a gopher snake, and a tortoise. So she is she's a well rounded dog. And I do think she wants to be a lap dog. I think she is a true house hippo. But make no mistake, she is built like a linebacker.

So she is she is a pretty pretty strong up front, but she is a lover nonetheless. Again, she's seven years old, so all that puppy nonsense is out of the way. She's just looking for a great home to spend her golden years, and her adoption fee is just $25.

Thank you, Kim. I'm gonna turn this over to our latest Bark Ranger Escort, Vice Chair Lisco.

Thank you, madam chair. Yes. I had the opportunity to being with Shadow. Was it just yesterday? I think yesterday morning. And for anyone that wants to adopt a dog that doesn't get too excited about things and riled up, I mean, this dog, I think, is it. Because they we held a tarantula right by the by this dog, and the dog was looking at it, but didn't really, you know, make a fuss. Also, a snake. Mhmm. And so, good dog, and and I think those are good behaviors for for people that are looking for a good dog.

Yeah. And I will add too, she's also been on a couple Tales Around Town Adventures, and people have taken her to dog friendly patios, and she's done great, didn't react to the other dogs. So I think she just wants to have all the attention to herself in the house. It's what it is. So she's a great people dog.

Thank you so much, Kim. Thank you. Good luck, Shadow. Board members, I'm gonna proceed to item number 68, transfer of ownership of retiring equine Jack. That does require a unanimous roll call vote. And checking, madam clerk, are there any speakers?

Madam chair, I have none on this item number 68.

Thank you. Madam vice chair. Thank you, madam chair.

I move that we approve item number 68.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. Is there further discussion? Hearing none, we will proceed to a roll call vote. Madam Clerk. Yes. Thank you. Supervisor Stewart.

Aye.

Supervisor Galvin.

Aye.

Vice Chair Lasko. Aye. Supervisor Gallardo.

Aye.

Chair Brophy McGee.

Aye. Motion passes unanimously. We will now proceed to the planning and zoning consent agenda. But before we start, I would like to reintroduce the rules of decorum, which helps us stay on task and accomplish the business of the county. 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, remembering disregarding these rules will be subject to removal. Attendees shall remain seated during an open meeting. This minimizes distractions to the board or other attendees unless you're called upon by the chair to address the board or to leave the meeting room. 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 or disrupts or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the meeting. Please be advised that I, as chair, will not tolerate disparaging other speakers.

Thank you. Supervisors, we are on items five and six, consent agenda for planning and zoning, all trucks, auto parts, and USA 5292, P H 0 355th Avenue. Do you wish to remove either of these items? Hearing, there are no items to be removed. Madam vice chair, is there a motion?

Madam chair, I move that we approve items five and six.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. We'll now proceed to a vote. All those in favor will say aye. Aye. Motion passes unanimously. Moving on to the planning and zoning hearing regular agenda item number seven, Rancho Bravo. Supervisor Gallardo, do you wish introductory remarks?

Thank you, madam chair. I I have done some homework on here. I I actually took the time to listen to the entire PNC hearing. I was able to visit the site over the weekend and kind of see it firsthand on what what it's always good to be able to have a view of of what people are discussing. But I would turn it right over to the applicant. I know they're resent they're represented by counsel and we have our trustee staff here

answer any questions.

I would like to ask for a presentation from planning and zoning staff first. Is that suitable to you, sir?

That's fine with me. Definitely.

Mr. Ellsworth and mister Gerard, please come forward. And please introduce yourself to the audience. Make sure your mic is on and close so we can hear you.

Alright. Madam chair, members of the board, my name is Tom Ellsworth. I'm the director for planning and development.

I'm Darren Girard. I'm with planning I'm planning manager with P and D. Thank you. Please proceed.

Madam chair, this this case is S U 240001 known as Rancho Bravo. Specifically, it's for a special use permit for an outdoor wedding and event venue in the rural 43 zoning district. The subject property is approximately 8.8 acres. It's located on the North Side Of Indian Springs Road at 134th Avenue in the Avondale area. The site's currently a residential property.

The applicant resides on the property and would manage the proposed venue. The proposed event venue per the site plan shows 16 a 16 square foot open sided gazebo and a 7,000 square foot outdoor patio. Site plan also shows parking for 88 spaces, as well as dedicated restroom facilities. On the site, you can see that the existing residence is located on the south side of property towards Indian Springs Road where the event venue is located to the rear of the site up against the Gila River. Access to the site is is shown off of Indian Springs Road via two two driveways.

A traffic impact statement was reviewed and approved by both McDott and Avondale. To date, staff has received letters representing about 49 persons in opposition and 38 in in in support of the project. Concerns from the neighbors relate to noise, lighting, traffic, and the compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. At this time, the opposition is primarily to the south, but it's not within the area that would trigger a super majority vote. This this application was heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their March 5 hearing.

After the public hearing and discussion, the commission did recommend, by a vote of seven to zero, to recommend denial on this case. Prior to that commission hearing, staff had also proposed conditions of approval to the commission, if they so chose, that would mitigate some of the concerns that were raised by the neighborhood. Those conditions are in the staff report today, and also before the board if they were to recommend approval with those conditions. What those do is they limit the hours of operation, the maximum attendance, they regulate the lighting standard, as well as noise issues. Specifically, conditions limit the events from Sunday through Thursday from 10AM to 8PM, with the venue being completely closed by nine.

Friday and Saturday from 10AM to 10PM, with the with the venue being shut down by 11PM. A maximum number of people is is limited to a 176. Lights would be shut off by 11PM and would comply with the Maricopa County zoning ordinance and noise ordinance. The limit the recommended limit per the conditions would be a ten year time limit on this SUP. With that, I get to answer questions.

Do board members have any questions for mister Ellsworth or mister Girard?

I I would defer.

Vice chair.

Yeah. Madam chair, can you review for us why the planning and zoning commission denied it seven zero? Like, what were their major concerns?

Madam chair, vice vice chair, Lesko, primary concerns, I believe, as they heard from members from the from the surrounding neighborhood, I believe there's agreement with them on some of the concerns they heard, and therefore, we're more in favor of recommending against the against the SUP.

Supervisor Cayando. Thank you,

madam chair. Just to kinda indulge a little bit more, because I did listen to the hearing. It was Some of the comments was, I don't like wedding venues. Well Or event venues. Well, you're not supposed to Your bias is on certain types of businesses should be to the side, and it's what's in the best interest of the community, and does it fit the planning area, and that sort of stuff.

That's how you should look at it, and not I mean, if we had a marijuana dispensary and someone's, oh, we don't like marijuana. Well, that's not not it's not about the product. Well, I guess it is about the product, but it's does it fit the actual plan? That's and and then you take in all the other consideration. The two things I wanna I wanna talk about real quickly, and this is it's the opposition. I went out there, and I looked around, and the first my first my first thought was, and I had to reach out to staff, I Am I the right spot? Where is this place? It's empty. There's nothing out there. We're in the middle of nowhere. And sure enough, I found a little sign and

Madam chair, I'm sorry to interrupt, but it seems that we lost our webinar. Are we back on? Yes, ma'am. Thank you.

Are we good? Oh. Please. So so I I so I finally found it, and I went and I took a look. We have a total of 87 people that have weighed in in opposition. Even if you counted a husband and wife in every home, there's not 47 homes out there or 40 homes out there. Even even in the distance, unless there's something that I'm missing. As I'm driving and I and I would have to go back out there and count. I'm counting at least 15 homes, and that's in the far distance.

Just a second, mister Garret. My apologies.

And that's I'm sorry. And that is in the far I mean, that's if you really count the homes way way far. Where who are the folks that are weighing in? I the the the ones that you showed, the the the six or so homes, there's seven because there's one right next door. That that okay. I I get it, and I wanna hear their concerns.

And if you if I could defer the answer so the public can hear, because I understand we have some folks online. Let's see if they can do some magic in the audio visual room.

Okay. Continue. Continue.

It's I'm waiting for it okay. To Thank you, sir.

Madam chair, it sounds that the issue is with GoToWebinar only. This is being streamed via the YouTube.

So members of the public attending online, are they redirected to YouTube? We can have them redirected. Yes, ma'am. How long will that take? Give or take.

Thank the audience for their patience, please. Don't change pictures. See if it holds. I'm teasing you. As soon as I think we're back online.

As soon as madam clerk returns, we will continue with the meeting. And again, I thank the audience for their patience. Are we all set, madam clerk?

Madam chair, we are starting up the GoToWebinar, but we are telling everyone

Welcome to the webinar. You have entered as a panelist and may now speak to any other organizers or panelists on the line.

I'm sorry. We are back on with GoToWebinar. Right. And broadcasting is me. All of us are

in listen

To only

YouTube. To YouTube or our other option is our website, the Clerk Okay. Of the

Thank you very much. Gentlemen, do you remember the questions Mr. Gallardo asked? Yeah. In terms of

I mean, there's a lot of folks that weighed in, and I appreciate their comments. Don't get me wrong. I don't I'm not dissing their their their their thoughts here, but I'm more the ones I guess, homes that are directly impacted are the ones like, their concerns are what I wanna focus on instead instead of the 87 people that have weighed in, and there's definitely not 87 homes out there. If they are, maybe on the other side of the mountain or something, but do we know where these 87 people reside?

Yes. So madam chair, member Gallardo, if you look at the the screen, we've got the aerial up. There were 87 items received. 49 were in opposition, 37 Primarily, were in the opposition was coming from the neighborhood to the south? Okay. So there were 49 individuals, there were duplicative items that were But the opposition map that we just had up shows the within 300 feet, there were three or four property owners immediately across Indian Springs Road that were in opposition. Again, concerns related to noise, traffic, and compatibility. Yeah.

And and and and that's what I wanna focus. And and I'll be upfront here. From from the traffic side, I just I I don't agree with that. I don't. I mean, there's there's you can throw a rock at Phoenix International Raceway that has a 100,000 people there at and on on there's two major weekends.

And then on top of all the events because I've been out there many many times at Phoenix International Race, anything from concerts to I was just out there a week ago where at least a thousand people there, much more than 80 cars. It, you know, could be three, four hundred cars. So the traffic and and so on, and and with Avondale's view that, you know, with their traffic study, they're okay with it as well. So I don't really buy the traffic issue. I do buy the the the noise because you do have the six homes that even though they are relatively there is a distance from the site plan because if you I mean, to get to the actual venue, you kinda have to take a little road.

It can't go you have to go a ways in order. It's way it's away from the highway. So you have to go a ways. So I think that helps in terms of the noise, and even from the from from from the light perspective, but I still wanna kinda focus on the noise, because I think that that is kinda for those I think it's six homes. That is an actual legitimate concern. And what what's being done in terms of that? I know we have the stipulation on the hours, which I believe are, you know, if everyone's okay with it, I'm okay with it. But in terms of the noise, because that is legit.

So, Chair Brophy McKee, Supervisor Gallardo, as far as the noise, that is what's trying to be mitigated within those suggested conditions of approval. It's the hours of operation, special use permit, and the narrative of description of the activity is to the north, the more north part of that site away from the south side of that site, specifically stepping back to the noise the noise ordinance itself. I believe there is a condition of approval in there about noise levels within 500 feet. Mister Gerard has reminded me that they're they're screening and and building a sound wall around the the event venue area itself.

Is that is that is that I've I've I've never heard of it. I guess there are sound walls, but how effective are they?

Well, Brophy McGee, supervisor Grey Elder. Sound walls are typical. Usually they're about six feet in height. How effective they are is relative to the activities happening behind Yeah.

I So one of the other thing that that and I haven't met the applicant. When I went down there, there was another gentleman. It may have been an employee that was kind enough to allow me to go on onto the property and and walk to the actual venue. It was stated, and I did notice that that the actual venue is kind of in a in a hole. You're you're lower than where the highway is. How when it comes to sound, how how does that impact? Does that reduce the the noise?

No. Supervisor Gallardo. One of the advantage of this height is that it's not equivalent or sitting above. Yeah. It's also down down below as you get towards the river and there's several not several. There's about a 100 or so mature trees in the area too that cut down on that visual and the noise. Again, the effectiveness of the noise diminution of that is I think it would be relative to what's happening on the site.

And and and and, madam madam chair, that's when I go and I look at these sites, I'm looking at I am addressing I wanna look at the concerns. It's hard for me to say I mean, the mitigate all the mitigations, the the sound wall, if they say it works, put it in there. That's good. The fact that it's in kind of in a in a in a lower elevation, it's near the the river I think the noise is gonna come from Phoenix International Raceway, not here. That's where the noise is coming from.

But nonetheless, I have taken the opportunity to to take take a look. I heard the entire hearing on PNC. I did do my homework. But I I would like to hear from the applicants and anyone else who would have a viewpoint on it.

So with your permission, miss Gallardo, I'd like to proceed with the applicant, who I understand is represented by counsel. If you please introduce yourself, your firm, and who you represent. Good morning. Have me. You have four minutes.

Honorable chair, respectfully, I was hoping to request fifteen minutes. My client has been in the middle of this procedure for roughly two and a half years. I have presented a full PowerPoint presentation. That being said, I understand the call is yours. If you'd like to minimize that, I understand if you'd like to go check

If you would please be so kind to minimize

Absolutely. And

that will allow then, because there are people who have signed up to speak as well, and you will also be afforded equal time for rebuttal.

Absolutely. Thank you, madam chair. Thank you, sir. Honor able chair, vice chair, supervisors, my name is Jordan Greenman with Greenman Law Firm 1621 West Walletta Street, here in behalf of the applicant Juan Bravo Villanueva. We are here today to request a special use permit 240001 at 13414 West Indian Springs Road.

Do I get a clicker by any chance or will you be driving? Thank you so much. So this matter comes before you today after the recommendation of denial from the planning and zoning committee on March 5. Staff spent substantial time reviewing this application, the site plan, the traffic, the conditions, and they have requested approval with with a series of stipulations. What the record actually shows, madam chair, is that during planning and zoning hearing, vice chair Hernandez flatly stated he refuses to support outdoor venues in R U 43 zoning.

As a member of the Central City Village Planning Committee with the city of city of Phoenix, I found this quite concerning. There were no discussions about the traffic, the photometric plan, all the work that's been done to minimize the site and its future impact. County staff also mirrored our confusion by stating in an email that there was no discussion of the site itself. Most of the concerns were biased in our opinion, madam chair. We respect we are here today to respectfully approve s U 240001 with two limited adjustments.

The first is being operating hours, and the second is being lighting on Friday and Saturday, madam chair. To understand why this works, it's important to understand the property, its size, and particularly its location in relation to the Phoenix International Raceway. This is a very large rural parcel. It's approximately 8.8 acres. The event venue is set roughly 500 feet back from Indian Springs Road. It's heavily screened by mature vegetation and natural topography. As you can see here, this is an aerial. What's very important about this site other than its massive size is the idea that this drops down. So there is a a substantial slope. Right?

At the road, you sit at 936 feet of elevation. At the north portion of the site, you're at 924 feet. So this site recedes down into the bank, and what that interestingly does, it helps contain views, light, and sound. To the north, importantly, there's open floodway land. To the west, there is vacant land. The property owner to the north owns a 150 acres. It's owned by Spartan Industries, and they are in support of this. So a small capped reservation only type venue in this corridor is not out of character. We believe it's modest in comparison. Now we have taken substantial steps to understand that this is near Phoenix International Raceway, an area that has raves venue.

It's a very busy venue. They have country concerts going up until midnight. The staff report mentioned that the existence of PIR right here, contextualizes this peaceful area. This is a place with some noise. It is a place with some activity. Our goal here is to create a small reservation only type of venue, near the Phoenix International Raceway while also mitigating the impact of noise, light, anything like that. So the the site plan itself discusses, substantial improvements that we've already done on the property. We have, substantial screening. We have restroom facilities on the site, and it is all set back roughly 500 feet to the north. We have a u shaped driveway on the site.

This is the aerial, and you can see how the site plan tucks neatly in here. Now one of the things we've been working on as we've altered the site several times here is the u shaped green portion there. First and foremost, we are going to be planting 10 trees, and those trees will be surrounding a 10 foot sound wall. The point of the sound wall

Can you summarize, sir?

I would love to, madam chair.

One of will have time at the end.

Absolutely. Thank you, madam chair. The thing I'd like to summarize most importantly, madam chair, is that there were 49 letters of opposition. 40 of those were from 2024. Our site has gone through several changes. We've done noise control plans, photometric plans, and I'd like to take thirty more seconds of the council's or the the board's time to discuss how much this site has changed, and that will really contextualize where a lot of the opposition has came from. In 2024, my client came in. We had exactly what you see on the screen. This is a rodeo arena with 350 parking spots. After that point in time, the site was amended to reduce that even further, and again even further.

And finally, we're here today. We've minimized the impact on the neighborhood, and we now have support from over 30 people. And as you can see on this final slide, madam chair, these are the the those in support, and you can see how close they are exactly to the site. I yield my time, and thank you for the extra

minutes, mister Bill. And I appreciate your condensing. Are there questions for the applicant's representative from board members? Vice chair.

Yes. Thank you, madam chair. I do have a question for the applicant. You said you so the staff said even though the Planning and Zoning Commission denied this, the staff came back, our staff in front of us, and said, if the board does approve it, staff suggests conditions a through k. But you only want two of those, and which two are those?

Thank you for the question, vice chair Lesko. There are two flexible requests we're looking at here, vice chair. The first is to on Fridays and Saturdays, to extend the time to operate until midnight as opposed to 10PM. The reason being, vice chair, weddings, quinceaneras, they often later in the night when it comes to the summer. It can be a 110 degrees by 9PM.

Also, as children and the elderly start to leave the area, as they start to leave the venue, it does get quieter. So our goal is not to upset the neighborhood. Our goal is to fit in with what Phoenix International Raceway does, particularly on Fridays and Saturdays. The second question, vice chair Lesko, we are requesting lighting to be on one hour after our venue closes, and that would extend into one AM. To be clear, we did submit a photometric plan, and no light will bleed outside of the bounds of the property. We are at one less than one candlelight at every boundary of the property. So those are the two requests we are making in relation to the stipulation modifications, vice chair.

And, madam chair and Vice chair. You. And all of these other there's a whole bunch of other stipulations, conditions you're agreeing to?

Yes, vice chair.

Okay. So you want I think it's c, which talks about the operational hours instead of what staff recommended, which was Friday and Saturday, ten to 10PM. You want it 10AM to mid night. And then

Yes, vice chair.

And then in number three, under c, it says parking lot lighting and related venue lighting shall be shut off by staff recommends eleven. You want one.

That is correct, vice chair.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Supervisor And

and and I'm I'm I'm excited that supervisor brought that point up too. How did we determine like, how did we get to, like, 10PM on Saturday? How how was that?

Mister House

I I don't know. I mean, I'm I'm just curious. Like, how how do we find 10PM being the the good date or the good time to close it off?

Madam Chair, supervisor Gallardo, typically, we're looking at those types of conditions, they are subjective to what's going on in the area. Typically, 10PM is something that is amenable to to neighbors is when things usually start shutting shutting down. So that's that's where we get 10PM.

Any other questions for the applicants? Supervisor Gallardo.

Yeah. In terms of because because one of the one of the applicant or one of the folks during the meeting mentioned that they brought up Phoenix International Raceway, and it's a when PIR, they have the race weekends in November and March. They're huge events. Been out there just about every one of the race race weekends. They're exciting.

You know, they're huge events and so on. And within the comment, if I remember right, said something to the fact that, well, those are, you know, two weeks throughout the entire year that they have to endure that type of of of noise and lights and traffic, and and and it is. It's a huge event. How I mean, this is an outdoor venue. Can you and your I know your applicant is there too. Is when when will you be having these events? I'm assuming you wouldn't have the events. In the summertime or would you?

Thank you for the question, supervisor supervisor Gaillardo, and I'd like to personally thank you and your staff for your time to look into this. We really appreciate it. This venue will not be busy all the time. This venue will not operate at every single hour of every single day in operation. Our goal is to have this operate like a mom and pop shop. My client, Juan Bravo Villanueva, lives on the site. He doesn't wanna be bugged all the time. He wants to operate this as a ticketed venue which will operate at reasonable hours. We will not be operating every night Thursday till 10PM. Truth be told, when you think of a wedding, a quinceanera, those operate typically Friday, Saturdays, maybe a baptism during the day.

Also, would you understand that we have summer coming up. People don't have outdoor events during the summer, so this will not be busy all the time. This will not be in operation all the time.

Any idea of how many events throughout the year?

Best guess?

Thank for

the question, supervisor. I can defer the question to my client. Okay. I understand that he and his family will be running this, so I I highly doubt this will be an everyday thing. I would like to invite my client to come up.

Say your name and your address, please.

Oh, hi. My name is Juan Bravo. I'm the owner of the property for Rancho Bravo, and I wanna thank you guys for this meeting. And the question is you guys asking about the days per per year. It's just hard to say because in the summer, we don't you don't do a whole lot outdoors.

But I would say anywhere from six to about six to seven maybe events per month. And that would be more towards the, you know, better weather months of the year, but it will not be every every day. We have every day on the paperwork for for example, a graduation can come up on a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday. I just wanna be open for that, but not that does not mean that we're gonna have events every day.

Supervisor? I'm good. Okay. Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

I don't see any other questions. So we will go to speakers. Madam clerk, for and against. How many? And do we

have any online? Madam chair, I have a total of in person, three, that wish to speak. I do not have anyone online. First speaker, Tony De Amato, wishes to speak in opposition. Gary Guider in opposition. Norma Avila, she did not mark if in favor or in opposition.

So if the first person called, who

was said? Tony Damato. Tony Damato, would you come forward? Ah, there you are.

And miss Damato, please state your name for the record when you get to the microphone.

My name is Tony Damato. Good morning chair and members of the board. I am a nearby resident. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today. I can hear I can hear to respectfully ask that you deny the special use permit for Rancho Bravo to operate as an event venue hosting rodeos, large parties, and similar gatherings in our rural rural residential area.

The events that have already taken place have been extremely loud. Because of the open desert landscape, the sound travels far bouncing off the mountains and echoes back into the neighborhood. The noise has continued until two and even three in the morning. Families cannot sleep. Children cannot sleep.

The level of the level of bass, bass, and amplifications is so intense at times that it causes physical discomfort. The property backs up to a wildlife preserve. The excessive noise and activity disturb the wildlife and push animals out of the area. Many of us chose to live here because of the quiet and the open space and the opportunity to enjoy nature. Residents here own parcels ranging from one and a half acres to 20 acres and more.

We invested in this community for peace and serenity, not commercial entertainment. There are also safety concerns. Our road is used regularly by bicyclists, organized cycling groups, and neighbors walking to exercise. Large events increase traffic, create congestion, and pose risks to pedestrians and cyclists. There is already a racetrack down the road. Adding another high traffic venue compounds the problem. This is a rural residential land commercial event venues belong in proper properly zoned commercial areas where infrastructure and buffering are stunned for the level of activity.

Just a moment, please.

I'm almost done.

Yes. I was gonna ask you to summarize, but I intended that speaking on this item to be three minutes. So please summarize. Okay.

We are not opposed to someone enjoying the property. We are opposed to ongoing commercial events that negatively impact surrounding homeowners and wildlife. I respectfully ask you to protect the character of our community and deny this special use permit. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you so much. Madam clerk?

Next next speaker in opposition, Gary Guider.

Welcome, mister Geider. Please, when you get to the microphone, state your name for the record.

Yeah. My name is Gary Geider. I met Juan shortly after he bought the property in 2020. For the gentleman on the board that was worried about the noise, his lawyer was nice enough to show us pictures of the sound wall that they built. Sound wall doesn't work. On the March 14, Juan had a gathering down there. I'm assuming it was probably family and friends. Wall didn't help at all. My wife and I were sitting in the house watching TV. We could still hear his music fine. Had a little gathering on Sunday. We could still hear the music fine. In our little area there, there's probably 40 houses. Easy. That little valley back in there is a perfect echo chamber.

You can hear my dog bark, and he barks at himself when the when the echo comes back. We all moved out there, and like Tony did a pretty good job of describing it, so I don't need to to carry on about it. It was nice and wants a nice guy. I just don't like the loud music. That's all there is to it. So it's pretty much there. If you wanna hear how it is, next time he has something, give me your phone number and I'll call you, and you can come out and listen to it. Okay? The ball's in you guys' court. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Madam clerk? Norma Avila? Welcome, miss Avila. Please state your name for the record.

Good morning. My name is Norma Solis Avila and I'm here in support of Rancho Brab. Pretty much what I wanna say, I was here at the last hearing as well, and it was pretty upsetting because nobody took the time to really look at the the proposed venue that we're trying to do here. I am his wife, and I understand all the neighbors' concerns. I understand that they're worried about the noise, but I think that if we run a well managed control event venue, we could help with the noise level as well.

I know one of the neighbors now said that we already have a sound control wall. We have something there, but it's not what we want to do. We do wanna add a a like the council mentioned, more of a sound wall that's gonna make it that noise level as well. You know, all we're trying to do is offer a space, well controlled, well managed space for venues and for gatherings. You know, it's you know, it's something small, it's something like they mentioned, we we're not gonna have events all the time. It's going to be especially in summer, nobody really wants to do outdoor things. It's going to be more in the nice weather, and all we're trying to do, like I said, is offer a well managed, well organized space for events.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Supervisor Thank you.

And it could be either the the attorney by the attorney probably is best. So the the gentleman stated about an event on March 14. Can you kinda elaborate what that event was? How late did you go, all that good stuff.

Supervisor Gallardo, I did not receive an invite to that event, so I will have my client

Neither do that.

Yeah. Thank you. On that day, we actually had a family baptism. I even have a invitation we can show you guys. So that's why sometimes it doesn't feel fair that we can't do our own personal events, you know, without having our neighbors calling the sheriffs on us at 8PM. So I can show you, you know, any type of evidence to show you that was family, and we're not gonna stop from doing family events just, you know, if someone doesn't like us or like the noise, you know, we still gotta live our lives.

On that family event, sir, how how late did did the event go? I did they call the the the No. Law enforcement law

enforcement never showed up.

Oh, law okay. What how late did that event go?

I believe we went to about 11PM, and I have a decibel reader. I actually go up the road on on our side of the property and the vehicles that pass through, they're almost triple the noise level as anything that we create. We're just similar to ambient noise level with the reader.

K. And just and just for for my own mindset and my own thinking, I mean, did you have a was it a DJ, a band? What how how did you what was the music like?

We we had a live band. Yeah. We had a

live I ask what kind of band?

Well, earlier, we had, like, like, a banda type of band. Banda? And later on, we had a because we know some friends and stuff that are in the music business, and they play, like, a like, a nocteno type of music.

That's

fine. But everything was completely controlled with the volume and obvious and, you know, I'm also paying attention to that to keep the, you know, the noise level downs. But I do have equipment to look at that noise level, and anything with the vehicles is three times the noise.

Okay. And and I guess I wanna ask thank you. I appreciate it, sir. Thank Appreciate for sharing that with you. So any thoughts on

Yes. I'd like to give him time for a rebuttal.

Oh, yes.

Is that right?

There you go. Please. Yeah.

So I'll give you four minutes.

Thank you.

I'm not used to this district for it. This

is true.

Thank you, honorable chair. I I would like to respond to the the two neighbors that came out in opposition. I appreciate them taking time out of their Wednesday to be here, and we appreciate them being here. First and foremost, I'd like to mention the discussion from Tony Damato. Tony Damato had mentioned the large rodeos that happened on the site.

That hasn't happened on the site for about two years, and that that, in our opinion, shows where most of the opposition is from, and it's from when this was an illegal operation two years ago before my client reached a compliance agreement with Maricopa County to fix the site, ensure the proper entitlements, and to to reduce the amount of number of people, the amount of events, and the type of events. We've heard the complaints. We've completely altered the site plan, we've done photometric plans, grading and drainage plans, we've gone through numerous site plan revisions with the talented staff at Maricopa County, and we believe that through a series of stipulations, this can be managed, it can be mitigated through the noise in it ordinance p 23, which I believe says you cannot have noise over 500 feet away from the venue. We're willing to adhere to those stipulations. And we do understand now, madam chair, the neighbors are listening.

The neighbors are looking. We believe this deserves an approval, and my client completely understands that if enough neighbors complain against this, if we don't operate in a reasonable manner, this will be taken away from us. So we understand that the neighbors care and they can keep us in check because once we have this approval, we will be operating reasonably in a safe way and not to bug the neighbors. The second conversation was from Gary Geider. I appreciate Gary coming out as well.

The topographical map which we've created shows a 12 foot slope down into the riverbank. This is not a bowl. We do have the topographical map. I can show you, madam chair, honorable port, but we slope essentially to the north. And in doing so, that pushes sound to the north. We can add the screening wall. We can add additional vegetation. We have roughly a 175 mature trees on the site itself. And again, we understand the neighbors are listening. We understand that the neighbors have concerns.

The concerns of traffic about biking, ADOT and the city of Avondale have approved this under our traffic impact study, which my client covered. That being said, we understand that the neighbors are watching. And we believe that through a series of reasonable stipulations, madam chair, that we can operate in tandem and with the neighbors.

Thank you. Are there any questions from board members?

No questions, but I do have one for staff.

Please.

So it was staff's recommendation for on a on a on a correct me if I'm wrong. Friday, Saturday to go from 10AM to 10PM. Correct?

Correct.

Their the the applicant's suggestion is midnight. Is that what What would be the thought of 11PM? Kinda in the middle. I don't know. What's your I mean, I know I'm putting you in the hot seat. I I apologize.

Madam Chair, Supervisor Coyherdow, ten and eleven on Friday and Saturday night, it would be typical of what you would see at an event an an event venue like this.

What's your thoughts? What's your thoughts, sir? Supervisor Gallardo, we do not have an issue with that.

And the Thursday to Friday what was the Thursday to Friday time from

It was to 8PM.

Ten to eight. What's your thoughts? Maybe 9PM.

Are you asking me, supervisor Gayed?

Anybody.

We're comfortable with 9PM as well. That being said, I will defer to mister Ellsworth and his team.

Madam chair, supervisor Gallardo, it'd be a similar 9PM if you're shutting down on a weekday.

Putting you in a hospital.

To clarify, it says

The shutdown. Yeah.

I got it. Sunday to Thursday, ten to eight shut. At 9PM, venue shutdown. So and that's not you're not asking for exceptions. But you are asking we're asking Friday and Saturday, 10AM to midnight, and a 1PM venue shutdown. 1AM. So

wait. So I guess, help me understand or educate you on the shutdown. What when you say shutdown, what is that having please leave? Is that what is

Madam chair, super president, Gregor, typically, the event would run until midnight, and then shutdown would be any of the cleanup and the takedown, and then

there would be no more

activity going.

This case, hypothetically, if the board wanted to do 11PM, m, the event ends, but you give them until midnight to pick up the trash and throw away stuff and all the cleaning.

That's correct.

And and but that's not noise. That's light, I guess. Just the lights?

Yes.

Okay. Thank you, madam chair.

Are there other questions from board members? I'm still unclear as to whether or not you've requested additional permissions beyond the written recommendation we received from planning and zoning staff?

Honorable chair, we have. That is correct. So in the stipulation modification request or in the stipulation I apologize. Stipulation request. There are two stipulations. The first is regarding hours of operation, which was eight to eight during the week. We are requesting eight to ten, closed Mondays, madam chair. And on the weekends, the original proposal was 10PM. We are requesting on Friday and Saturday to operate until midnight. On top of that, honorable chair, we're requesting a one hour addition for lighting so we can clean up the site on any night.

Okay. Mister Gallardo?

I'm sorry. Thank you, madam chair. The the Sunday to Thursday re repeat that one more for me, please.

I believe it was eight. It ends at 8PM. Is that correct? Yes. So it ends at eight 8PM. Supervisor Gallardo, we are requesting 9PM, which would leave the lights on until 10PM. But that being said, we have a photometric plan which shows there is no light bleed out outside of the bounds of the property beyond one candlelight. And then Friday, Saturday, we are requesting midnight with 1AM as the lighting stop.

And so item three, parking lot lighting and related venue lighting shall be shut off by 1AM?

That is correct, honorable chair.

But all the stipulation changes you're actually requesting are in c one related to operational hours.

Honorable chair, I don't have the slide in front of I apologize. Madam chair Mister Girard.

I believe stipulation c point three could read, lighting will be shut off one hour after closing.

Okay. Mister

Gariardeau? And thank you, sir. I don't think there are any other questions. How do you wish to proceed?

Well, I think I'm ready to make a motion, madam chair, unless there's additional questions. I'd like to throw out a motion, and then if my colleagues have some suggestions, I'd love to hear them as well. I have been out there. I've seen the facility. I can't remember the gentleman.

I met whoever at the site. He did take me down to where the the site is is is is located. There is a distance. I'm not too traffic You're by raceway. Avondale says it's okay as well, and Phoenix International Raceways has tons of events.

They just open it up as much as they can. Now they're branching out into concerts and other large events outside the race weeks that they have. They have regular events in there. They have a little ballroom that they have, probably holds a good 1,500 people. I was there a week ago.

I think it was ASU had something there. I've been there many times, a lot of traffic, and it seems fine, so I don't really concern about the traffic. Avondale's okay with it. In terms of the noise, I mean, that's we gotta be considerate because there are homes even though the house next door to it, probably within 50 yards from the from from the property, is okay. You do have homes right across the street that we had to be considerate about.

I'm not too sure about all these other homes that I did not see. They may be out there. I'm not going to even question that, but there are some. There are the five or six that are directly right across, so I take that in consideration as well. But, madam chair, I think when I went out there and you look at we do a lot of these event venues.

If there's ever a spot for an event venue, this is it. This is, you know, the just the area right next door to PIR. With that said, you do have just a couple of things that we need to deal with, and I think the stipulations will will cover most of that. I do have a motion. I have a couple of motions in front of me, but I will make a motion, madam chair, and then Please.

My colleagues can join in. Madam chair, I make a motion to approve item number seven, Rancho Bravo with the modification conditions to c one as followed. Operations hours, Sunday through Thursday, 10AM to 8PM with lights out at 9PM. That is Sunday through Thursday. It is my understanding. I I did hear you, sir, at the at the PNC hearing, and you indicated that you guys are are closed on Monday?

That is correct.

Monday? So you're looking at four days in which you're gonna have to have these hours of operations from ten to eight, lights off at 9PM, closed on Monday. Fridays and Saturday, we'll we'll kinda kinda meet in the middle, Friday and Saturday from 10AM till 11PM, lights off at midnight.

And c three.

Is there another motion?

Yeah. Because Yes.

The c what was C 3? C 3. Oh, the the parking lot light and related to the venue light. So c c 3, they have down yeah. Strike out that whole line under c three in regards to the shutting off the lights at 11PM. Does that make sense?

Or the suggestion was one hour after closing.

There you go. Thank you, madam chair.

Is that clear?

Is that clear? That did I do it right?

I think we have a motion.

Alright.

So it's a motion for approval with those stipulation changes. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor will say aye.

Aye. Any opposed? No.

The motion passes four to one. We will now move on to.

Thank you.

And thank you, sir. The next agenda item. Statutory hearings, clerk of the board liquor license applications applications, and transportation roll files. The items are agenda item eight a, b, and c, and nine a through b, and 10. Madam Clerk, do we have any speaker forms?

Madam Chair, none on these items.

Thank you. The board will now consider items eight through 10. Is there a motion?

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve items eight through 10. Thank you.

Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor will vote aye.

Aye. Any

opposed? Motion carries unanimously. We will now move on to consent agenda items 11 through 67. Board members, do any of you have any items you wish hold for separate consideration? Hearing none.

Madam chair.

Supervisor Stewart.

If you would be so kind, I'd like to make a comment on item number 12 while we're done voting.

Yes, sir.

Thank you, sir.

Okay. Hearing no further items to be pulled, vice chair, will you please introduce the motion?

Thank you, madam chair. I move that we approve items 11 through 67.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. Hearing no further discussion, we proceed to a vote. All those in favor will say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Supervisor Stewart for comments.

Madam chair, thank you so much. I wanna thank Jared Kleinman for accepting a reappointment to the State Board of Equalization. With twenty years of experience in valuing diverse property types throughout Arizona, he brings vital knowledge knowledge to this board, and he served the board since 2017. We're grateful for that. And he's highly regarded having rendered fair and impartial decisions on property tax appeals. Thank you, Jared.

Thank you, mister Stewart. We will move on to the board of supervisors regular agenda item 69, real estate, Salt River Project, agricultural improvement and power district, power district easement. Madam clerk, do we have any speakers signed up?

Madam chair, I have none on this item.

Okay. The board will now consider item number 69. This item requires a unanimous roll call vote. Madam vice chair, is there a motion?

Madam chair, I move that we approve item number 69. Is there a second?

Second.

K. Hearing no discussion, madam clerk, will you please call the roll?

Yes. Thank you. Supervisor Stewart? Aye. Supervisor

addendum. Item 70, clerk of the board, setting of a hearing for proposed Fieldhouse Community Facilities District, and item 71 through 77 for the county attorney's office. Madam clerk, are there any speaker forms received for these items?

Madam chair, yes. I do have a few on items 72, 74, 76, and 77.

Thank you. Let's start with 72.

First up first up on item number 72, Lori Barone followed by Tom Arnold.

Thank you, miss Barone. You have two minutes.

Alright. According to the agenda, it says this conflict it's a to approve a conflict waiver request from Statecraft PLLC's law firm for the firm to handle candidate petition challenges relating to upcoming elections. The matter was heard in the executive session on Monday, and it just was slid yesterday afternoon and onto the agenda. So first of all, that's not enough time to get people to look things over and know what what's going on. There's no hyperlinks in any of those things that you slid in yesterday afternoon, and I'd like to make make it known.

Also, I'm speaking on agenda agenda item 72, the board of the item involves legal representation of candidate petition challenges related to upcoming elections. It was discussed in executive session and added to this agenda within twenty four hours of the meet this meeting. Based on that posting, there are no linked materials or supporting documents. For an election related legal matter that is that's unusually limited. Is this a conflict because Statecraft PLLC is led by managing partner Corey Langhofer who also represents you in this in the board on on events and the things that you're doing?

What's the urgency that required this timeline following executive session? And when most of the agenda is handled together and items like this appear late within with minimal detail, the public is left trying

to

understand decisions in real time. We also have 76% of the agenda items grouped together and voted in consent agenda, meaning no one can speak about them. So what's the urgency that's required that required this timeline following executive session? I'd also like to add that a lot of these issues could be handled if you were listening and following a a corrective action plan as advised over several years. You may not be in this situation if you were and wasting our tax dollars if you were in group following those cap plan.

Madam clerk. Next up on item 72, Tom Arnold.

Morning, Tom Arnold. Members of the board, I am speaking on agenda item 72. As presented presented with minimal detail, meaningful review becomes constrained. This item contains no accessible supporting documents, no hyperlinks or attachments, so it appears there were no materials available beyond the agenda text, which, as I looked, it was about that much. Question.

What is the expected scope and cost range, please? When roughly three quarters of the agenda moves forward that Lori just said that, so I I won't bore you with that again. Question number two. For an item effect affecting election processes, what level of detail is that level of detail is very limited. Thank you. I did have two questions, please.

Thank you. Madam Quirk.

The next two speakers, madam chair, are on item number 74, Laurie Lorie Barone, Roger May.

Sorry. Okay. This is item 74, the competition and practical procurement for state Craft. Again, mister Langhofer's he is the principal partner in that firm. It's about approving a competition procurement for attorney Corey Langhofer and State Craft pl l c in an amount not to exceed $250 for Statecraft to represent Maricopa County in Maricopa County Superior Court case number CD2026Dash006822.

This matter was heard in executive session on Monday, April 20, two days ago. And I'd like to know, is that the case file that you're that deals with mister Heath that you're trying to lawyer up about? I'd really like to know. Also let's see. So this contract is for hiring him who already represents you most of the time.

So you're gonna give him $250,000 more to represent you according to in in cases that you're not sharing with the people what it is you're you're you're needing representation for because you've offered no hyperlinks and no information about what that's regarding other than what I just read to you. There what specific conditions made the competition impractical impracticable in this case? You couldn't get competitive bids for this that might not cost we, the taxpayers, quite so much money? That might be worth looking into. With the majority of items handled in one action, this was represent and this represented presented without materials, the public is left with questions instead of being able to review things.

And, you know, that just makes it look like y'all are trying to hide things. That's not a wise wise idea because people are watching. Good luck and shame on y'all.

Thank you, madam clerk. Next on item 74, Roger Mait.

My name is Roger May. Members of the board I'm speaking on agenda item number six seventy four. This item bypasses competitive procurement procurement and is presented without supporting documents. What safeguards are in place to ensure fair pricing? That's a question.

Do you have further questions, sir?

I just asked a question. What safeguards are in place to ensure fair pricing?

Understood. Are there other questions?

I I have that one question.

Okay. Thank you.

I have a closing statement though. When over half of the agenda is approved at once and items are added this late, the opportunity to review is limited. So what we can ask for in this setting.

Thank you. I will address the public speaking to item seventy two and seventy four. The board considered these items in executive session and received legal advice and directed an action. And by law, that action must take place in a public session. It pertains to attorneys that work for the county.

We have competition in practicable a fair amount of the time and have been procured for various reasons, not just this one. And in addition, if a firm is working on other issues that may be considered adjacent or related, then they go back and disclose that they are working on other cases. And that in turn, they request as an abundance of caution in this case, a conflict of interest waiver. So I hope that answers people's questions. Mister Stewart?

Madam chair, thank you so much. You know, I wasn't available or I wasn't, part of the executive session where item number seventy four and seventy eight were, discussed. And as I have my own representation as it relates to this case, and I understand this is procurement and some other things, but I'd like to, one, either make a motion to move to executive session so I can get an understanding understanding of of the the basis basis for for this procurement, which I assume will be to move forward with an appeal of the ruling of the court case last week. Or even better, I think it might be important for me to get a briefing from staff on what we are missing from the original court case to the resolution that was provided or the judge's order that was provided, and what are we missing that would require an appeal from the board of the court's ruling?

Mister Stewart, this pertains to items 71 through 77 and item 70. You reference an item that follows.

Madam chair, maybe I should rephrase it like this. I apologize.

Could you confine your question?

I could. Yes. Can we remove item number seventy four and seventy eight to from the agenda, from this consent so that we can just discuss and vote separately?

And respectfully, sir, 78 is not part of this discussion.

We're on set.

That's that's coming up.

So then. Seventy two and seventy four. Thank you.

So you're asking for seventy two and seventy four to be removed for separate consideration?

Yes, ma'am. Thanks for helping.

Thank you. And we can do that. Let's finish out public participation for item seventy six and seventy seven, and then we would go back and take action. Is that okay? Madam assistant attorney, I always get in trouble. Okay. Good. Madam clerk.

Thank you, madam chair. The next three speakers wish to speak on item number 76, Luamar Garza, Andrew Tye, and Joe Hoff.

Lemore Zedigarzan, Number 76. You have a settlement in Maricopa County versus Purdue Pharma at all as to the six remaining defendants. You say you were proving a settlement in Maricopa County against Purdue Pharma, Associated Pharmacies, American Associated, J. M. Smith Corporation, Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company, Morrison Dixon Company, North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Company.

In this particular one, again, you had the meeting on April 20. You have provided no relative documents to these so that we can actually examine. And I would have a great suggestion, instead of having these meetings meeting on the prior Wednesday or prior Thursday, finalize it on Friday so that we can all review it over the weekend. As it is, you give us four hours to review these documents and these documents have up to 400 pages on their hyperlinks And we would like for you to reconsider whenever you have these meetings. Please make it available if you're going to attach the documents.

Please make it available for us to look settlement, I see that you have an internal C1926101X00 number. If you are doing a settlement with the remaining six, do you have a civil case number for this? And if you're making the settlement, third question, what is the amount? And who is losing it? The taxpayer or or or these pharmacies? Thank you.

Thank you, madam clerk.

Next, Andrew Tye followed by Joe Hopp.

Good morning, board members. My name's Andrew Tye. I'll be speaking on item item number 76. Members of the board, I'm speaking on item 76. This item involves significant financial and legal implications, yet no supporting documentation was provided.

In these types of cases, without having those additional items, it almost would make it impossible for someone to really evaluate and take a look at it. How will the settlement funds be allocated? That's, you know, I think what everyone's looking for in this case.

Thank you. Do you have other questions? We're making a list that will respond when I hear all public participation.

Okay. That that's the only question that I have.

Thank you, sir.

And my closing statement. When 57 items move forward together and others are added late, review becomes a matter of question rather than preparation. Thank you.

Thank you. Madam clerk?

Next on item 76 is Joe Hoff, followed by Leslie Shepherd on item 77.

Members of the board, I'm speaking on agenda item 76. This item involves a multi party legal settlement. It was discussed in executive session and added shortly before this meeting. There are no settlement summaries or linked documents available for review. What is the total settlement value attributable to Maricopa County?

With most items grouped for approval and is presented with limited detail, understanding is reduced to what can be asked in the moment. Understanding is reduced to what can be asked in the moment. Thank you.

Thank you. And before we proceed to 77, county manager, I have a summary of the questions on 76, settlement in Maricopa County versus Purdue Pharma et al.

Yes, madam chair. This settlement is one of the questions is who is paying, and it is the pharmacies that are listed in this item. Right now, we're anticipating it's approximately $400,000, but this is part of a larger settlement. And if we would like more information on how the money is allocated, allocated, Marcy Marcy Flanagan Flanagan can can speak speak to to that. That.

Miss Flanagan.

Afternoon, chair, members of the board. My name is Marcy Flanagan. I'm an assistant county manager, and I oversee the health and legal services, which includes public health that oversees the opioid settlement dollars. So any of these additional defendants

that

were added, this is they were added as part of the one Arizona agreement. If anyone is interested, you can just simply Google the one Arizona agreement. All of the counties in Arizona and the state are part of that agreement. That determines who what defendants are part of it. So all of the counties agree, they sign on, and when those actions are formed at the federal level, that's how the funds come to Arizona.

And that also the one Arizona agreement also outlines what the percentage breakdown is that comes to Maricopa County and all the cities and towns within Maricopa County. Those funds come to public health, and then they distribute them out to all the local cities and towns. We do have a dashboard. Again, you can just Google it, but it's on the maricopa.gov website that does show every dollar that we receive for opioid settlement, and where all of those monies are going in accordance with our substance use plan.

Thank you. Were there any other questions? I wrote some of them down, but now I can't read my writing.

Madam chair, those were the three questions that I noted.

Okay. And could you, for the record for the public, repeat that website again?

Yes. Madam chair, members of the board, the website, if you go to www.maricopa.gov and you go to the public health website, you can look for the opioid settlement dashboard, or you could just Google Maricopa County opioid settlement, and it'll take you directly to the dashboard.

Thank you very much. Also, looking at my list of questions and talking about the addendum and where that comes from, following executive session, which is held on Monday, we legally notice items on which we are required to take action in public. We can't take action in executive session. The time frame legal time frame is twenty four hours to amend an existing agenda, and we adhere to that we adhere to that strictly. Thank you. Madam clerk, item 77.

Leslie Shepherd on item 77.

Hello.

Alright. This one is the settlement in Maricopa County versus Martin, ETA, and then it gives a c v two zero two four zero one three four three nine. Now this is a settlement before it actually goes to court for $225,000. The reason I'm bringing this up is because I I wanna understand know you keep talking about executive session that I'll wait for you, Kate, to actually listen to me because you're supposed to hear what I'm saying instead of Zach talking to you right now. So so I'm I'm curious about agenda item number 77 that you've got this one here for 02/5000.

I also noticed that there's a little bit of a a precedence that's been going on. The one that happened on 11/05/2025 for agenda item number 48 for January is the one that was Moran versus Sheridan. I checked into that, and the reason I'm asking you is because when I check into these, it doesn't, like, bring up anything. And then when I actually did a public records request, it didn't come back that it was attached to Sheridan with Moran, but yet you did it for 1,200,000. So this one's for 225,000 before it goes to court. I wanna put on record another court case that should be considered before it has to go to court. It's c v two 026011500. That would be approximately about $15,000,

which would be,

you know, chump change compared to this stuff.

So I'm trying to this this agenda item.

Actually, does. It ties in. I'm trying to understand how you determine could you please stop interrupting me during my allotted time? I'm trying to figure out how you guys determine how do you determine what when this comes I'm trying to if you'd stop interrupting me. So I'm trying to to figure out could you please stop interrupting me?

Miss

Shepherd? How do you determine what falls in this category where you guys would actually approve something before it goes to court? And I know that you don't take good notes because you're handwriting, so could you remember to remember what I

asked there? Thank you. Your comments are concluded.

So I I wanted to know how do you determine what goes on this agenda? That was my clear one question. You only have to write here. And you shut my time off before my time went off.

And Shepherd, you're because you are as, again, out of order. My prior statement about items considered legal advice in executive session to receive attorney confidential attorney advice if action is to be taken, we then move to the public session which is today and agenda these for action. A public vote of the board is required. You can't do it in executive session. So hopefully that answered the question.

We will now proceed to consider these items. Madam vice chair.

Madam chair.

We are withholding items seven two and seventy four for separate consideration.

Madam chair, I'm comfortable with item number 72 that can remain on. I would like a separate discussion on item number 74. Thank you. I just had my numbers written down wrong.

So the conflict waiver for statecraft item 72 can be part of the group motion?

Yes, ma'am.

Okay. Madam vice chair?

Madam madam chair, I'm sorry. I have a question. So I just wanna get confirmation of which numbers we're actually voting on.

I I I'm getting there.

Okay. Thank you.

So I'm on item seventy, seventy one, 72, 73, 75, 76, and 77. Item 74 has been pulled for separate consideration.

Thank you madam chair.

Madam vice chair.

Thank you madam chair. I move that we approve items 70 through seventy three and seventy five through 77.

It's been motioned. Is there a second?

Second. Second.

Move then. Hearing no further discussion.

Madam chair, I apologize. I'd like to make a comment after the quick comment after the vote.

I am hearing further discussion. Supervisor Gelb. After the vote?

After the vote, please. I'll be very quick. Thank you, madam chair.

Oh, yes. Yes, sir. We will proceed to vote. All those in favor will say aye.

Aye. Aye.

There any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Supervisor Gellan.

Madam chair, thank you and thank you so much for handling all of those different disparate items. One thing I wanna point out for people either here in the audience or watching online is that everything we do is through a public process. And in fact, our attorney that represents us is the county attorney, the county attorney's office. And as you can see here on the agenda, it literally says county attorney. All of these items beneath where it says county attorney is us acting at the direction or the advice of our county attorney.

Everything we do is in public, and this includes obtaining conflict waivers and also showing to the public how the procurement process works. I believe our procurement officer, mister Tyne, is here today, and it explicitly includes the words procurement. And I just wanna thank you, madam chair, for these items.

I appreciate it. We will now consider item 74, competition and practical procurement for Statecraft pl l c. Mister Stewart.

Madam chair, thank you very much. Can I get a presentation from staff or our legal department on the background of item number 74? As I mentioned earlier, I wasn't privy to the conversations that you had regarding this in executive session. I'd like a little bit more detail on this, if that's okay.

Madam County manager.

Thank you, madam chair. And not sharing executive session privilege, but this item is a competition impractical for the procurement of Statecraft l p l l c for the entire defense of that superior court case.

And can you provide some clarification on the case?

Maricopa County Superior Court case c v twenty twenty six six six eight two two, which I believe is recorder Justin Heap, and each of the board members were named in that case.

Okay. Madam chair, if I may, are we asking to approve, essentially, a retainer for $250,000 for for Corey and his team in order to use that as funding to for an appeal of the court case that happened last week. Is that the intention?

Madam chair, supervisor Stewart, this is a not to exceed amount of $250,000. So it is not a retainer. It is an authorization to spend up until $250,000 for the entire defense of the case. There's been

So essentially, madam chair, if there's a if there's an appeal, this would be the funding mechanism to do that. And that's item number 78.

Madam chair is I'm sorry. I thought you directed that to the chair. Madam chair, supervisor Stewart, item 78 is just possible action. It is not directly related to item 74. Item 74 is specifically a procurement item for the entire defense of the case. Okay.

I think I understand a little bit better. So seventy four and seventy eight, in my from what I just learned, seem to be tethered as it relates to it's a funding mechanism for a possible appeal that has to go to a vote in, would it make more sense to take action on item number 78, madam chair, and then depending on the outcome of the vote, decide whether or not we need to finance this more?

Madam chair, sorry. I wild there with my with my microphone. May I add there is also, I believe, another case pending? So this would also include this case. I apologize for not saying that before.

In what case is that?

I don't have the direct number in front of me, but there is another case on related to a statutory authority of the board.

Oh, I gotcha. Okay. So that's as it relates to there's a separate Sorry. Madam chair, there there is a separate case, as I understand it, that that has been filed as it relates to the statutory authority of the board to remove elected officials. We've done that's happened in the past. I remember what the was it an assessor when he did some really bad things and we had to remove him? Is that what that is kinda similar to that? Correct. Or Jen? Okay.

Thank you. So I I guess what I'm wondering then, shouldn't would it be prudent for us to move 78 and what's the item with that? What's that second case? Jen, if you don't mind, madam chair, through Jen. I

apologize. Just I think I was not clear. So item 74 is not tied to item 78. Believe it is a c it's a competition practical for the c B 2026006822, which is the Maricopa County it's recorder Justin Heap against the board, and it is not tied to item item 78.

Understood. So 78 is the the separate lawsuit that we're looking to make a motion or or make a Mister Stewart. Yes, ma'am.

78 has been agenda for possible action, and it does not pertain to 74 other than the litigants. It's a different case.

Okay. Well, I guess 74 is the only thing on the table. Right? Or 74 is the only thing on the table right now. We'll move to 78 next, and hopefully, can get a presentation on that. Correct?

I am seeking action on

'74.

Yes, sir.

Yes, ma'am. Okay. We can move forward.

Thank you, sir. Madam vice chair, is there a motion on item 74?

Thank you, madam chair. I move that we approve item 74.

Is there a second?

Second. Okay.

All those in favor will say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

No. And I'd like to make comment, madam chair.

Mister Stewart.

Thank you. Voting no, just so my fellow board members understand. I just don't have enough information about this particular item to be able to to move forward. My my attorney did reach out to your attorney regarding this. Due to attorney client privilege, no other information was allowed to be provided. So thank you for your

time. Respectfully, mister Stewart.

Yes, ma'am.

This item was discussed. 74 was discussed in executive session. You were not able to be present for that. It does not pertain to item seven eight where you are represented by separate counsel.

I I understand, madam chair. It it's a it's a funding mechanism, but we can follow it through. Yes, ma'am.

Just for your clarification, you are not represented by mister Tully on item 70.

I know this.

So if you wanna vote no, that's fine.

But there

is absolutely no relation.

Okay. Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you.

Madam No.

You're covered. Thank

thank you, madam chair. I just am trying to help clarify it. There you were able to be present for number 70 I think you were unavailable.

Yeah. Thank you.

Thank you. Another way of saying it. So we will now skip to item number 79. Settlement in Cox Communications, Arizona versus Maricopa County.

78.

79.

79.

I'm exercising my discretion as chair.

Oh, okay.

And what I will also say is we are going to complete the rest of the agenda and then go back to item 78. So bear with me. Settlement in Cox Communications, Arizona versus Maricopa County. Madam clerk, do we have any speaker forms?

Madam chair, yes. I do have two speaker forms on item number 79 from Tom Arnold and Roger Mapes. Thank you.

Mister Arnold.

Tom Arnold. Members of the board, I am speaking on agenda item 79. This item affects valuation and tax implications and is presented without supporting documentation. Official question I have. What criteria is used to determine the settlement amount?

And I said official question, if you're allowed to answer a couple more questions again, when I said before, this item had had this much, and and one of the statements was this matter was heard in executive session on 04/20/2026. My unofficial question I would like to ask is, and if everybody else here knows the answers to this, I apologize. But am I allowed to come and listen in to the executive session? No? Okay.

And the other question, unofficial, that I have is, whether it's this or any other agenda, how long before the agenda item goes to executive session is it introduced, and am I allowed to sit in on any of those meetings?

Mister Arnold, are those your questions? Questions? Yes. Thank you. What I would say is that those items are considered by the board in executive session.

In this case, I think with the assessor's office, if I'm correct. And we received legal advice on how to proceed as reference to the settlement. So those are confidential, attorney client privileged, and that is one of our duties as your supervisor, sir. So we reached a consensus yesterday. We have a settlement, and we then bring it forward into the public forum for the board members to vote on it.

That is the transparency, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Madam clerk.

Next person, Roger Maeb.

My name is Roger Maeb. Members of the board, I'm speaking on agenda item 79. This item involves a tax related settlement affecting business property valuations. It was discussed in executive session and added within only twenty four hours. Maybe you'd listen to me when I'm speaking instead of having a side conversation.

I'm listening to every word, sir.

No. You were talking. I do it every meeting. You were both talking to each other.

Mister May

You can't do that.

Do you wanna keep doing it? Please.

I just said, please don't talk while I'm talking.

We heard you.

Please don't talk while

I'm It was a sidebar but I was listening. Please proceed.

That's disrespectful by the way. There are no evaluation reports. There are no supporting documents available for us to review. What is the estimated impact on the county's tax revenues with a large portion of the agenda handled to all huddled together and items like this added late the public is left asking questions rather than reviewing details. Please answer this question. What is the estimated impact on county tax revenues? And thank you for not talking while I'm talking.

Are those your questions?

That's my one question.

Do you have another?

I said that's my question.

Yes, sir. Thank you.

That's my question. Chair.

Thank you, madam chair. The once the settlement is recorded, it'll be publicly available. But as a rough estimate, the impact countywide across all county taxing jurisdictions jurisdictions is is approximately approximately $4.04 point 550,000 million dollars. Dollars. Thank

you. In the settlement, when it is completed, will be recorded, and that will then be available to the public. Madam vice chair, is there a motion?

Thank you, madam chair. I move that we approve item number 79.

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? None. Motion carries unanimously. We will recess as the board of supervisors and convene as the flood control district board of directors for considerations of items 80 through 84. Madam clerk, do we have any speaker forms?

Madam chair, none on these items. Thank you. The board will now consider items 80 through 84. Madam vice chair.

Madam chair, I move that we approve items 80 through 84.

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

Aye. Those

opposed? Motion passes unanimously. We are now at the public comment supervisor summary. We will therefore return to item 78.

Madam chair.

Mister Gallon.

I like to make

motion to recess the formal board meeting for at least an hour for the purpose of obtaining legal advice in an emergency executive session from the board's attorney as listed on the agenda. Thank you. Thank you, mister

Galvin. Galvin. Is I'd there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Aye. Thank you very much. And we will recess the meeting for the for the executive session. It is anticipated we will return in an hour, give or take. So thank you.

Thank you, madam chair.

Yes. Okay, I think we're ready to start. Thank you, everyone, for waiting. We appreciate your patience. Board members have been briefed in executive session by their respective attorneys, mister Stewart by his and the board by ours.

And we are now going to address item 78, possible action regarding case CV twenty twenty five zero two zero six two one. Madam clerk, do you have speaker forms received for this item?

Madam chair, yes. We did receive a few, like 17 speaker forms on this item. Please proceed. First, Justin Heap, followed by Katherine Sigman, and then Ty Hassett.

Welcome, mister Heap. Please state your name for the record. And also, if you would tell us, are you here as a concerned citizen or in your official capacity, sir?