[3. Board Supervisors - Accept an offer in the amount of $100.00 from the City of Prescott for the sale of Tax Deed Parcel No. 105-03-018, pursuant to A.R.S. 42-18303(E), for a public purpose related to transportation, waive administrative fees, and abate any remaining taxes and interest. ]

[4. Board of Supervisors - Approve abatement of taxes and interest on Parcel No. 400-06-020 in the amount of $15,243.63. ]

ITEM NUMBER THREE.

OKAY, I'M KIND OF ACTUALLY CAN ALMOST COMBINE ITEM NUMBER THREE AND NUMBER FOUR TOGETHER BECAUSE THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE PROCESS.

AND AS WELL AS THE FACT WE'RE ACCEPTING AMOUNTS OF MONIES FROM OTHER PEOPLE ON TAX DELINQUENT PROPERTIES.

SO, MARTY, DO YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH THIS ON NUMBER ONE, EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS? IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THERE ARE $16,745 OWED ON THIS PROPERTY AND WE'RE ACCEPTING $100 FOR IT.

EXCUSE ME, CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

SUPERVISOR BROWN.

THAT IS WHAT'S PROPOSED IN THE AGENDA ITEM.

STATE STATUTE AUTHORIZES THE COUNTY TO ACCEPT LESS THAN THE AMOUNT OWED ON PARCELS WHEN THE PURCHASER IS A CITY, TOWN OR SPECIAL DISTRICT, AND THEY WANT TO USE THE PARCEL FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE, BASICALLY FOR FLOOD CONTROL OR TRANSPORTATION.

SO IN THIS CASE WE HAVE A SMALL SLIVER REMAINDER PARCEL THAT REALLY HAS LITTLE TO NO VALUE FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE.

IT WAS LEFT AS A REMAINDER WHEN OTHER PARCELS WERE SPLIT AND IT CONTINUED TO BE TAXED EVEN THOUGH IT HAD VERY MINIMAL VALUE.

NOW WE'VE BEEN APPROACHED BY THE CITY OF PRESCOTT.

IT'S IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THEIR RIGHT OF WAY.

SO THEY WANT TO BUY THAT LITTLE SLIVER TO WIDEN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

AND SO AGAIN, PURSUANT TO STATUTE, THE COUNTY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT LESS THAN WHAT'S OWED.

IN THIS CASE. THEY'VE MADE AN OFFER OF $100 THAT DOES COVER THE COUNTY'S COSTS IN AT LEAST PUBLISHING THIS PARCEL, THE SALE OF THIS PARCEL.

SO WE AREN'T OUT ANYTHING BUT THE REMAINDER OF THE TAXES THAT HAVE ACCRUED ON THE PARCEL WOULD HAVE TO BE ABATED AS PART OF THIS AGENDA ITEM.

AND THIS IS THAT AREA THAT'S RIGHT THERE ADJACENT TO TAMARACK LANE.

CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

ABOUT THE SIZE OF A SIDEWALK.

YES. AND THE PARCEL REALLY HAS NO VALUE FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO HOW DID IF IT HAD NO OTHER VALUE FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE, HOW DID IT GET UP TO $16,000 IN DELINQUENT TAX? SO OBVIOUSLY, THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE HAS TO TRACK A LOT OF PARCELS AND WHEN DEVELOPMENT OCCURS AND PARCELS ARE SPLIT AND SPLITS FROM THE SPLITS, SOMETIMES THERE'S A REMNANT AND THAT REMNANT WILL BE ASSIGNED A VALUE.

EVEN THOUGH IF YOU WENT OUT AND DID A PHYSICAL INSPECTION AND DID A DETERMINATION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE, WHAT'S BEEN ASSIGNED TO IT PROBABLY ISN'T CONSISTENT WITH ITS FAIR MARKET VALUE. AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE.

SO IS THAT THE SAME CASE IN ITEM NUMBER FOUR IN REGARDS TO THE WORKING WITH THAT PARCEL IN CLARKDALE, IT IS THE SAME.

THIS ONE ARGUABLY HAS EVEN LESS VALUE.

IT'S IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE WATER OR WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT, AND IT'S BISECTED BY A ROAD THAT'S OWNED BY CLARKDALE.

IT'S A VERY SMALL, IRREGULAR SHAPED PARCEL AND YES, IT HAS LITTLE OR NO VALUE IN THE TOWN OF CLARKDALE HAS OFFERED TO PAY $1,000 FOR IT, AND THEY INTEND TO USE IT FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE OF EITHER FLOOD CONTROL OR TRANSPORTATION.

OKAY. AND THAT'LL WIPE OUT THE.

WHAT IS IT? 15,243.

63 OF TAXES.

DELINQUENT TAXES? THAT'S CORRECT. AND THAT WAS THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF TAXES DUE LESS THE $1,000 THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY PAYING FOR THE PARCEL PLUS THE $125 IN COSTS THAT WERE INCURRED BY THE COUNTY RELATIVE TO THE OFFERING THIS PROPERTY FOR SALE.

OKAY. RIGHT.

AND THESE ARE ALL SALES THAT ARE HANDLED THROUGH THE CLERK OF THE BOARD'S OFFICE, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.

I'LL MOVE TO ACCEPT ITEMS NUMBER THREE AND ITEM NUMBER FOUR.

SECOND. SECOND BY SUPERVISOR BROWN AND A SECOND BY VICE CHAIR OBERG.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM NUMBER 12 SUPERVISOR BROWN.

[12. Community Health Services - Approve a compensation increase for the Medical Examiner Coverage Pathologists from Pima County from $5,000.00 per week to $6,000.00 per week beginning on August 1, 2023, and transfer capacity from general fund contingency, if necessary. ]

ITEM NUMBER 12.

IT'S GOT TO BE THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, RIGHT? MEDICAL EXAMINER? YEAH.

OKAY. MEDICAL EXAMINER WE'RE STILL LOOKING FOR A MEDICAL EXAMINER, IS THAT RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY, YES.

WHO ARE YOU? I AM LESLIE HORTON, DIRECTOR OF YAVAPAI COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS

[00:15:05]

ISSUE. AND I'D LIKE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE.

BUT YES, WE ARE STILL SEARCHING FOR A MEDICAL EXAMINER AND THE CURRENT AGENDA ITEM IS TO INCREASE THE RATE FROM 5000 PER WEEK.

FOR OUR COVERAGE, DOCTORS WHO ARE HELPING US FROM PIMA COUNTY TO 6000 PER WEEK.

IS THIS A CONTRACT OR IS THIS JUST A STIPEND? IT IS NOT A CONTRACT.

IT IS A HOURLY RATE THAT WE SET BASED ON A 40 HOUR WORKWEEK.

HOWEVER, THEY DO AS MUCH WORK AS NEEDED TO COVER THAT 40 HOUR WORKWEEK.

SOME OF THAT IS IN PERSON HERE.

AND THESE ARE TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES.

IS MY UNDERSTANDING, ARE THEY SEASONAL OR TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES? AND THEN SOME OF THEIR WORK IS DONE THROUGHOUT THE WEEK DOING THE CERTIFICATIONS AND SIGNING OFF FROM THEIR LOCATION IN PIMA COUNTY.

SO BEING TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES, THEY DON'T EARN ERS? CORRECT. THEY DO NOT KNOW THAT IT IS A FLAT RATE.

SO IF WE LOOKED AT OUR MEDICAL EXAMINER FROM WHAT WE WERE PAYING HIM WHEN HE WAS A COUNTY EMPLOYEE, THAT WOULD BE ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT, 6000 A WEEK, WOULD IT NOT? IT WAS APPROXIMATELY RIGHT THERE.

WE. WITH THIS.

WE EXPECT THAT IF WE WERE TO HIRE SOMEONE AT, SAY, AN AVERAGE NOW GOING RATE OF A MEDICAL EXAMINER OF $250,000 A YEAR PLUS ERA, THAT PUTS US RIGHT AROUND 310,000.

WITH THIS 6000 BUDGETED PER WEEK, IT PUTS US AT $312,000.

SO IT REALLY, TRULY, DEPENDING ON WHO WE HIRE, WE HOPE TO FIND ONE SOON.

AND WHEN THEY GET IN HERE, ONCE WE START PAYING THEM AN ANNUAL SALARY AND ERA, IT REALLY, TRULY COMES OUT TO ABOUT WHAT WE'RE BEING CHARGED BY THESE DOCTORS WHO ARE HELPING PROVIDE US COVERAGE.

SO IF WE HAVE ANY DOCTORS OUT THERE THAT WANT TO BE THE EM, THEY ALREADY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE MAKING, WHICH IS SUBSTANTIAL FOR THIS COUNTY.

SO ANYBODY WHO'S OUT THERE, SHE'S TAKING PHONE CALLS.

SO. YES, PLEASE.

ANYWAY, I'LL MOVE TO ACCEPT IT SINCE IT'S A BASICALLY A WASH.

AND AT THIS POINT IN TIME, HOWEVER.

I WISH WE COULD FIND SOMEBODY PERMANENT.

YES, WE HAVE A COUPLE PEOPLE THAT HAVE RECENTLY STEPPED UP TO LOOK INTO THIS POSITION, AND I'M HOPING ONE OF THESE MAY PAN OUT OVER TIME. ONE OF THEM CAN START WORKING FOR ALMOST A YEAR STILL UP HERE BECAUSE OF OTHER OBLIGATIONS TO MARICOPA COUNTY.

THERE'S OTHERS, THOUGH, AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO OUR BEST TO ADVERTISE, PUT IT OUT THERE THAT WE'RE WILLING TO PAY A GOOD SALARY.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE VERY FEW OF THESE TRAINED AND IN THIS EXPERTISE, THESE DOCTORS IN THE COUNTRY, AND WE'RE VYING FOR A SCARCE RESOURCE.

SO WE HOPE THAT WE DO FIND A GOOD ONE SOON.

THANK YOU. I'LL MOVE TO ACCEPT ITEM NUMBER 12.

I'LL SECOND. OKAY. WE GOT A MOTION BY SUPERVISOR BROWN.

A SECOND BY SUPERVISOR MALLORY.

VICE CHAIR OBERG. DID YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? YES, MR. CHAIRMAN. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

THE MEDICAL EXAMINER POSITION.

WAS IT PART OF THE COMPENSATION STUDY? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

IS WENDY ROSS HERE? SHE IS NOT. THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION.

THEY'RE ACTUALLY NOT ASSOCIATED WITH A RANGE AND STEP.

AND THE MEDICAL EXAMINER THEMSELVES, I DO NOT RECALL IF THEY WERE PART OF THE COMPENSATION STUDY OR NOT.

WELL, IT SEEMS TO ME WE'D WANT TO DO THAT BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND HIRE SOMEBODY FOR LONG TERM.

I'M JUST WONDERING WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE TOTALLY UNCLASSIFIED POSITION OR THEY WERE CLASSIFIED DURING THE TIME THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT THE COMPENSATION STUDY.

SO I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS RIGHT NOW, THE 6000, WOULD THAT BE, YOU KNOW, MIDPOINT OF WHATEVER WE HAD DETERMINED WAS THE APPROPRIATE PAY FOR THAT PERSON? SO I THINK THAT'S A QUESTION I'D STILL LIKE TO TRY AND GET ANSWERED.

THAT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY A MIDPOINT.

WHEN I LOOK AT WHAT I KNOW OF SALARIES OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS GENERALLY, THERE ARE ONES RIGHT OUT OF SCHOOL THAT ARE MAKING UNDER 200,000, BUT THEY CAN MAKE ANYWHERE UP TO 500,000 A YEAR.

AND SO WE'VE HAD RECENTLY SOMEONE COME IN AND ASK IF WE WOULD PAY THEM 400,000.

WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT WE'VE PAID IN THE PAST TO MEDICAL EXAMINERS, IT WAS IN THE LOW 200 THOUSANDS WHERE THEY STARTED.

AND WE DO ALLOW THEM, THE COLAS, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ASSOCIATED WITH A RANGE AND STEP IN OUR NORMAL EMPLOYEE SYSTEM.

THEY'RE A VERY HIGHLY PAID INDIVIDUAL.

WE DO I ASK THE BOARD EACH YEAR TO HONOR THE COLA THAT WE GIVE TO THE OTHER EMPLOYEES AND IT GOES INTO INCREASING THEIR PAY OVER

[00:20:02]

TIME. BUT WE DO LOOK TO TRY TO FIND SOMEBODY THAT WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK AT A REASONABLE RATE.

RIGHT NOW IT'S A VERY SCARCE RESOURCE AND WE MAY HAVE TO BE MORE COMPETITIVE WITH WHAT WE'RE WILLING TO PAY AND THAT WILL BE DEPENDENT ON WHAT THE BOARD WILL ALLOW AT THE TIME WE FIND SOMEBODY WHO'S INTERESTED.

IS THERE ANY REASON WHY WE DIDN'T TRY AND GET THIS PERSON ON A CONTRACT RATHER THAN AS A TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE? THERE'S THREE OF THEM AND THEY ROTATE IN EVERY THREE WEEKS.

SO THERE'S THREE DOCTORS FROM PIMA COUNTY RIGHT NOW.

WE DO HAVE OTHERS THAT MAY, AFTER THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, WANT TO ENTER THAT ROTATION.

AND SO AS A GENERAL RULE, SINCE I'VE STARTED OVERSEEING THE MEDICAL EXAMINER'S OFFICE, WE'VE USED THE TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE STATUS SO THAT WE CAN SET THEIR HOURLY RATE, GET THEIR PAPERWORK ON THE BOOKS, BUT THAT WE CAN ROTATE IN DIFFERENT DOCTORS AS NEEDED, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE NEED EXTENDED COVERAGE LIKE THIS.

IT'S BEEN A YEAR SO FAR THAT THEY'VE BEEN PROVIDING US COVERAGE.

AND SO IF WE NEED TO MAKE CHANGES TO THAT, IT'S SOMETIMES BETTER NOT TO HAVE THEM ON CONTRACT SO THAT WE CAN ADD IN OTHER DOCTORS OR FIND OTHERS WILLING TO PROVIDE THIS COVERAGE.

WELL, AGAIN, IF YOU HAD A CONTRACT, YOU COULD HAVE A VERY SET AMOUNT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PAY THEM AND IT WOULDN'T BE COMING TO THE BOARD AND TRYING TO GET ADDITIONAL COSTS COVERED. SO I'M JUST A LITTLE WORRIED THAT, YOU KNOW, SIX MONTHS FROM NOW THE PERSON MIGHT COME ALONG AND SAY, YOU KNOW, I REALLY NEED TO GET 7000 A WEEK.

SO I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

ARE WE PAYING TRAVEL OR ANY OF THEIR LODGING WHEN THEY COME UP HERE? NO, THEY DID REQUEST THAT WE PAY LODGING IN ADDITION TO THE 6000, AND THAT WAS A NO ANSWER BASED ON OUR POLICIES FOR WHAT WE PAY FOR LOCAL. LODGING, BUT ALSO THE 6000 WE WERE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE TO THE $6,000 RATE THAT MUST BE INCLUSIVE OF TRAVEL AND LODGING AND ANY OTHER COSTS.

SO THE ADDITIONAL COST OF THE 6000 OVER FIVE, IS THAT CURRENTLY IN YOUR BUDGET OR ARE YOU ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING? THIS WILL BE ADDITIONAL FUNDING.

NOW. WE WILL HAVE SOME COST SAVINGS BASED ON THE FACT THAT WE HAVE AN ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATOR POSITION THAT'S CURRENTLY UNFILLED AND THE AUTOPSY TECH POSITION THAT WE'RE APPROVED BY THE BOARD.

SO WE WILL HAVE SOME VACANCY SAVINGS BASED ON VACANCIES.

WE WILL THOSE ARE GOING TO BE POSTED.

SO WE WILL BE LOOKING FOR THOSE POSITIONS TO BE FILLED.

BUT WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR RIGHT NOW IS THE $52,000 INCREASE IN THE SALARY LINE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

MR. CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN, I BELIEVE MISS ROSS IS AVAILABLE IN PRESCOTT TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT THE COMPENSATION STUDY.

GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN GREGORY AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, WENDY ROSS, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND RISK MANAGEMENT.

IT IS TRUE THE MEDICAL EXAMINER POSITION WAS NOT INCLUDED AS PART OF THE COMPENSATION STUDY.

WE DID NOT INCLUDE ANY POSITIONS THAT ARE NOT ATTACHED TO A GRADE IN OUR COMPENSATION SYSTEM AND THAT HAPPENS TO BE ONE OF THEM.

I WILL SAY THAT THIS POSITION HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN DIFFICULT TO FILL AND IT'S TURNED OVER SEVERAL TIMES DURING MY TENURE HERE. AND EACH TIME THAT IT HAS TURNED OVER, WE HAVE DONE A SALARY STUDY, AN INDEPENDENT SALARY STUDY FOR THAT PARTICULAR POSITION TO ENSURE THAT THE SALARY THAT WE'RE OFFERING WHEN WE ADVERTISE FOR IT IS COMPETITIVE.

BUT AS LESLIE MENTIONED, THERE ARE VERY FEW OF THESE PEOPLE OUT THERE IN OUR COUNTRY AND IT IS A VERY DIFFICULT POSITION TO FILL.

SO IT'S ALMOST LIKE WE HAVE TO GET LUCKY AND FIND SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO LIVE IN OUR AREA THAT HAS THIS SKILL.

AND IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IT'S NOT ATTACHED TO A RANGE SO THAT WE CAN BE FLEXIBLE IN THE SALARY THAT WE ARE OFFERING WHEN WE DO FIND A QUALIFIED CANDIDATE.

WELL, MISS ROSS, THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION.

AND OBVIOUSLY THIS IS IMPORTANT WORK THAT HAS TO BE DONE.

SO I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO BITE THE BULLET ON.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

WITHOUT ANY FURTHER BOARD DISCUSSION.

OKAY, LET'S GO TO A VOTE.

ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE. AYE.

AYE. THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

MOTION CARRIES. NEXT IS ITEM 13 COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVE AND SALARY PLACEMENT ABOVE MIDPOINT FOR A

[13. County Attorney - Approve an Advanced Salary Placement above midpoint for a highly experienced Attorney. ]

HIGHLY EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY.

SUPERVISOR BROWN.

GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING.

HOW ARE YOU? GOOD, HOW ARE YOU? AND WHO ARE YOU? I'M TARA HUGHLEY.

I'M THE BUSINESS MANAGER FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN GREGORY, VICE CHAIR, OBERG AND SUPERVISORS.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. AND IT'S NICE TO FINALLY MEET YOU ALL.

OH, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS MORNING.

ANYWAY, WE HAD SORT OF PASSED OVER THIS THE LAST TIME WE WERE OUT HERE.

AND BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANYBODY HERE TO REPRESENT YOU.

OKAY, SO NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT AN APPROVED AN ADVANCED SALARY PLACEMENT ABOVE MIDPOINT FOR A HIGHLY EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY.

[00:25:05]

IS THIS A NEW ATTORNEY WE'RE HIRING? IT'S A NEW ATTORNEY TO OUR OFFICE WHO HAS WORKED THERE IN THE PAST.

HE DOES HAVE 13 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WORKING FOR US FROM 2001 TO 2014.

HE WAS A PROSECUTOR.

HE WAS ALSO A JUDGE FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY FOR ABOUT FIVE YEARS.

HE WAS A JUDGE, CORRECT? OKAY. SO ARE WE CREATING THIS NEW POSITION? NO. THIS IS A VACANT POSITION THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO FILL WITH HIM.

OKAY. SO IT'S NOT A NEW VACANCY.

CORRECT. IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO GO AROUND AND GET THOSE THREE POSITIONS THAT YOU ASKED FOR IN THE BUDGET BY GOING AROUND BEHIND OUR BACKS.

NO, SIR. OKAY.

I'M JUST UNFORTUNATELY, IN THE LAST 18 MONTHS, WE'VE LOST SIX VERY SEASONED PROSECUTORS.

TOGETHER, THOSE SIX PROSECUTORS CARRIED ABOUT 100 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE.

SO WE STILL HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PROSECUTING THOSE CAPITAL CASES.

AND WE'RE WE'RE GETTING KIND OF DESPERATE TO GET SOME REALLY QUALIFIED PEOPLE IN THERE.

IT'S GREAT TO BRING IN BRAND NEW PROSECUTORS THAT HAVE JUST GRADUATED LAW SCHOOL.

BUT THE TYPES OF CASES THAT THOSE PROSECUTORS CAN CARRY JUST AREN'T THE SUBSTANTIAL KIND OF CASES THAT OUR OFFICE GETS.

WE DO PROSECUTE EVERYTHING FROM DOG AT LARGE UP TO FIRST DEGREE MURDER AND EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN.

SO WE DO HAVE TO HAVE THOSE QUALIFIED CANDIDATES IN THERE.

SOMEBODY WITH 42 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IS A DIFFICULT TO GET OUR HANDS ON.

OKAY. THAT WAS BASICALLY AS THE QUESTION WAS, IS WHETHER THIS IS GOING TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON YOUR BOTTOM LINE.

IT SHOULD NOT, NO, BECAUSE OF THE TYPES OF LOSSES WE'VE HAD AND THE EXPERIENCE THAT THOSE PEOPLE CARRIED AND THE SALARIES THEY WERE MAKING WHEN THEY LEFT, OUR BOTTOM LINE WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY IT.

OKAY. YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YES, MISS. CHAIRMAN, HOW MANY VACANCIES DO YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW IN YOUR STAFF OR LAWYERS? WE HAVE TWO VACANCIES.

WE DO HAVE TWO CANDIDATES HOPEFULLY SCHEDULED TO FILL THOSE.

THIS PARTICULAR CANDIDATE BEING ONE AND THEN ANOTHER CANDIDATE COMING ON BOARD IN OCTOBER.

OKAY. AND HOW MANY? OF YOUR STAFF, LAWYER STAFF ARE AT THE AT THE TOP LEVEL FOR PAY OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I WOULD I WOULD GUESSTIMATE ABOUT FIVE OF THEM.

I COULD GET YOU SPECIFIC NUMBERS IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD HELP WITH THIS.

YEAH, JUST IT SEEMS LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE YOU'VE HEARD ABOUT GRADE CREEP AND PAY CREEP.

I'M ALWAYS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO COVER THAT.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME STRATIFICATION OF POSITIONS SO THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GET PEOPLE AT AN ENTRY LEVEL AND THEN THEY CAN WORK UP AND BECOME, YOU KNOW, MORE EXPERIENCED. SO I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY TIME COUNTY ATTORNEY COMES TO OUR OUR MEETINGS, HE'S ALWAYS TRYING TO PUT SOMEBODY AT THE TOP, TOP LEVEL.

AND I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT COST.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

THANKS. IS THE HR DEPARTMENT APPROVED THIS? YES, THEY HAVE.

ALL RIGHT, THEN I'LL MOVE TO ACCEPT.

SECOND. YOU GET A MOTION BY SUPERVISOR OBERG A SECOND BY MYSELF.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE? AYE. AYE. AYE.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH. THANK YOU.

OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO GO TO ITEM NUMBER TEN, WHICH WOULD BE COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES APPROVE AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN SPECTRUM HEALTH

[10. Community Health Services - Approve Amendment No. 1 to YC Contract No. 2021-354 between Spectrum Healthcare Group, Inc. and Yavapai County Community Health Services that acknowledges $171,144.28 having been funded but that no further financial funding obligation will exist. All other terms of the contract shall remain in effect, including financial audit and program reporting terms. YC Contract No. 2021-354A1 ]

[11. Community Health Services - Approve Amendment No. 1 to YC Contract No. 2021-356 between Spectrum Healthcare Group, Inc. and Yavapai County Community Health Services that acknowledges $124,538.97 having been funded but that no further financial funding obligations will exist. All other terms of the contract shall remain in effect, including financial audit and program reporting terms. YC Contract No. 2021-356A1 ]

CARE AND YAVAPAI COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES.

SUPERVISOR OBERG, YOU PULLED THIS ITEM, NUMBER TEN.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. AND THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. AND AGAIN.

HELLO, MISS HORTON.

I THINK ON TEN AND 11, THE THING I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT IS.

I SEEM TO RECALL BACK SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, I THINK WE HAD TO PAY SPECTRUM HEALTH CARE FOR THEIR WORK ON COVID, AND I THINK IT CAME TO 900,000, ALMOST $1 MILLION.

IS THIS PART OF THAT? IS THIS STILL FURTHER CATCH UP FROM THAT PERIOD OF TIME? GOOD MORNING AGAIN, CHAIRMAN, VICE CHAIR, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS LESLIE HORTON WITH COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES AND WITH NUMBER TEN AND NUMBER 11. THEY ARE BOTH CONTRACT TERMINATIONS WITH SPECTRUM HEALTH CARE.

WE REALLY TRULY APPRECIATED ALL THE WORK THAT THEY SET OUT TO DO DURING THE PANDEMIC.

THEY REALLY STEPPED UP IN A HUGE WAY TO HELP WITH A LOT OF THE HEALTH CARE NEEDS AS WELL AS VACCINATIONS OF OUR COMMUNITIES DURING COVID 19. NOW, WE DID MAKE AN AGREEMENT TO UTILIZE ARPA FUNDS FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE, AND WE DID AT THE SAME TIME HAVE

[00:30:02]

AN ADDITIONAL NUMBER.

TEN IS AN IMMUNIZATION FUND THAT CAME FROM THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES.

SO NUMBER TEN IS AN IMMUNIZATION FUND FROM HHS.

NUMBER 11 IS A IS ARPA FUNDING.

WE HAD AGREED TO PAY THE THAT SPECTRUM HAD UNDER ARPA FUNDING AND THE IMMUNIZATION FUND.

BUT WHEN IT CAME DOWN TO IT, THE REGULATION AND RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS UNDER ARPA WERE SO MUCH THAT WE ENDED UP HAVING TO GO SEPARATELY AND ASK THE BOARD TO MAKE GOOD ON THE CONTRACT.

BUT WE COULD NOT UTILIZE THE ARPA FUNDS TO PAY FOR THEIR SALARY PORTION, WHICH WAS A HUGE PORTION OF THAT AGREED UPON AMOUNT.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT HAS BEEN PAID ALREADY.

THESE WERE ALSO AMOUNTS AGREED UPON EARLY IN THE CONTRACT TO COVER THEIR COSTS, BOTH UNDER THE IMMUNIZATION FUND AND ARPA FUNDS ENDED UP BEING LESS THAN WE ORIGINALLY HAD BUDGETED.

IS STILL ARPA FUNDS THAT HAVE BEEN REALLOCATED TO OTHER PROJECTS.

AND THEN THERE IS STILL IMMUNIZATION FUNDS LEFT OVER.

OBVIOUSLY WE DIDN'T USE ALL OF IT.

THERE WAS ABOUT 100,000 LEFT THERE AND THE STATE HAS BEEN ASKING IF WE WOULD GIVE THOSE BACK AND WE DO BELIEVE THAT WE WILL PROBABLY BE FORFEITING THOSE BACK TO THE STATE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT DOING WHAT IS REQUIRED IN THAT GRANT ANYMORE, WHICH IS GIVING OUT THE COVID VACCINATIONS AT A HIGHER RATE ANYMORE. SO I SEEM TO RECALL SEVERAL MONTHS AGO WHEN WE APPROVED THAT ALMOST $1 MILLION, AS I UNDERSTOOD IT THEN, THAT WAS THE TOTAL CATCH UP. WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY OTHER OTHER COSTS.

SO IS THIS JUST FOR THE CLEANUP THAT WE DID? WE WERE UNAWARE OF AND AND WE'RE NOW HAVING TO PAY? YES. THOSE COSTS THAT YOU COVERED WERE THE ONES THAT COULD NOT BE COVERED BY ARPA.

SO THESE WERE ORIGINALLY AGREED UPON COSTS THAT ARE BEING COVERED HERE.

AND ACTUALLY THEY WERE ALREADY COVERED.

THIS IS JUST THE CONTRACT TERMINATION.

SO WE'VE ALREADY PAID THEM THE MONEY.

THEY'VE ALREADY DONE THE WORK.

WE'RE TERMINATING THE CONTRACT SAYING THAT WE ARE NO LONGER PAYING THEM ANY MORE BEYOND WHAT WE'VE PAID THEM IN THE PAST AND WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO CLOSE OUT THE CONTRACT WITH THE AGREEMENT THAT THEY'LL STILL PROVIDE US ANY FINANCIALS THAT THE FEDS COME AFTER OR THAT WE GET AUDITED ON FOR THOSE ARPA FUNDS.

SAME WITH THE IMMUNIZATION FUNDS.

THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN PAID LONG AGO, SEVERAL MONTHS BACK, AND WE'RE JUST TERMINATING THOSE CONTRACTS SO THAT THERE'S NO MORE OBLIGATION ON EITHER OF OUR PARTS.

OKAY. NOW, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT ITEMS TEN AND 11 ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SECOND. OKAY.

WE GOT A SECOND. WE GOT A MOTION BY VICE CHAIR OBERG AND A SECOND BY SUPERVISOR BROWN.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE.

AYE. THANK YOU.

OKAY, WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 42.

[42. Sheriff - Approve an agreement with Off-Duty Management, Inc., to provide software application, insurance, billing and payroll services for deputies working off-duty jobs. YC Contract No. 2019-389A2]

WELL, IT'LL BE APPROVED AN AGREEMENT WITH OFF DUTY MANAGEMENT TO PROVIDE SOFTWARE APPLICATION INSURANCE, BILLING AND PAYROLL SERVICES FOR DEPUTIES WORKING OFF DUTY JOBS. SUPERVISOR OBERG, YOU PULLED THIS ITEM? YES, MR. CHAIRMAN.

AND GOOD MORNING, CHIEF DEPUTY NEWMAN.

COULD YOU EXPLAIN THIS ONE? BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WHY THIS IS COMING BEFORE US.

THERE MUST BE A GOOD REASON, BECAUSE YOU YOU HAVE IT ON THE AGENDA.

BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS REALLY OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW TO TO HAVING A RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS.

SO COULD YOU JUST EXPLAIN THAT FOR US? YES, ABSOLUTELY. GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD SUPERVISOR OBERG, THIS IS A CHIEF DEPUTY, JEFF NOONAN FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE HERE REPRESENTING SHERIFF RHOADES.

THIS IS A PARTNERSHIP THAT WE'VE HAD WITH OFF DUTY FOR A LITTLE BIT NOW WE'RE LOOKING TO EXPAND IT.

AND THIS THIS CONTRACT MAY EXPAND IT INTO SOME OFF DUTY DETAILS THAT WE CURRENTLY MANAGE, BUT IT ALSO INCREASES THE RATE OF PAY FOR THE DEPUTIES AND THE VEHICLE REIMBURSEMENT TO THE COUNTY.

WHAT THIS IS OFF DUTY DETAILS, WHAT WE CALL THEM, ARE OFF DUTY JOBS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT.

THESE THESE ARE JOBS THAT THE COUNTY DOES NOT NORMALLY BUDGET FOR.

THEY'RE UNFORESEEN DETAILS THAT COME UP.

A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT WOULD BE WHEN YOU HAVE ROAD CONSTRUCTION AND MAYBE ADOT REQUIRES LAW ENFORCEMENT TO BE PRESENT AT THE BEGINNING OF THAT CONSTRUCTION, AT THE END OF THE CONSTRUCTION, TO PROVIDE SAFETY AND A LARGER PRESENCE DURING THAT IN THAT AREA TO PROVIDE LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR ANYTHING THAT MIGHT HAPPEN IN THAT WE SAW THAT WITH THE ROAD WORK AND THE EXPANSION IN CASTLE CANYON, MESA, IF YOU WILL, BECAUSE THE COUNTY OR THE STATE MAY

[00:35:01]

REQUIRE ADDITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT PRESENCE.

YOU SEE THAT WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING DOWN THE FREEWAY AND YOU HAVE AN EXTREME WIDE LOAD AND THERE'S THERE'S AN OFFICER IN THE BACK AND IN THE FRONT, THESE ARE DETAILS THAT REQUIRE A LAW ENFORCEMENT PRESENCE BECAUSE OF SAFETY REASONS, BUT IS NOT A NORMAL FUNCTION THAT IS FORESEEN BY THAT ENTITY TO BUDGET FOR OR ASK FOR ADDITIONAL MANPOWER TO PROVIDE THAT, BECAUSE THOSE OFFICERS HAVE TO STAY THERE IN THAT LOCATION FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME. SO THAT'S WHY THE COUNTY, THE STATE, OTHER ENTITIES, WHEN WHEN THERE'S PERMITS THAT ARE GIVEN OUT AND THIS COULD BE A SPECIAL EVENT, FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, A SPECIAL EVENT THAT HAPPENS ON THE COUNTY SQUARE OR IN A IN AN AREA SUCH AS CONGRESS OR WHATNOT, WHERE THE COUNTY WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, WE WE WILL APPROVE THIS SPECIAL EVENT, BUT WE FEEL LIKE THIS NEEDS MORE LAW ENFORCEMENT PRESENCE THAN THE SHERIFF HAS THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE ON AN ON AN ON A ROUTINE BASIS, BECAUSE THESE EVENTS, IF WE WERE TO PROVIDE THIS JUST LIKE ANY OTHER DUTY, THAT DEPUTY WILL HAVE TO LEAVE FOR CALLS FOR SERVICE AND THEN THERE WON'T BE SOMEBODY THERE TO PROVIDE TRAFFIC CONTROL.

OR MANY TIMES WHEN YOU SEE THOSE OFFICERS ARE WRITING CITATIONS TO SLOW PEOPLE DOWN AND INVESTIGATING ACCIDENTS THAT OCCUR WITHIN THAT AREA.

AND THAT BECOMES OUR OUR AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY IN THAT OFFICER'S AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY.

SO THEY'RE VERY THEY'RE NECESSARY.

WE'VE ALWAYS HAD THEM.

IT IS THOSE DETAILS ARE MANAGED BY THE SHERIFF.

SO THE SHERIFF CAN VETO A DETAIL IF HE DOESN'T WANT TO PROVIDE, IF HE DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THAT NECESSITATES AN EXTRA DEPUTY OR HE MAY SAY, YES, I BELIEVE IT NECESSITATES AN EXTRA DEPUTY, BUT WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THAT'S PART OF OUR REGULAR DUTIES.

SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO CHARGE THE VENDOR THESE SPECIAL DETAILS, GO BACK TO THE VENDOR LIKE LIKE IT WOULD BE FAN CONTRACTING, FOR INSTANCE, THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE, YOU KNOW, THE REPAVING OF A ROAD.

THEY NOW HAVE TO PROVIDE ALL OF THE THE PAY TO THE THE OFFICERS, AS WELL AS REIMBURSE THE COUNTY OR THE STATE OR THE CITY FOR THE VEHICLE USAGE.

THEY ALSO HAVE TO THEY ALSO HAVE TO PROVIDE ANOTHER LAYER OF UMBRELLA OF PROTECTION THROUGH LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR THOSE SITUATIONS.

AND THAT BECOMES THEIR RESPONSIBILITY.

WHAT OFF DUTY MANAGEMENT DOES FOR US IS IT TAKES THE THE ONEROUS TASK, IF YOU WILL, AWAY FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO PROVIDE AN FTE TO MANAGE THAT THAT ENTIRE INFRASTRUCTURE.

WHAT IT WAS BEFORE WE HAD ONE EMPLOYEE THAT PROBABLY SPENT A THIRD OF HER TIME MANAGING ALL OF THESE OFF DUTY DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE VENDORS, SETTING THEM UP, MAKING SURE THAT THEY HAD THE APPROPRIATE INSURANCE, PAYING THE DEPUTY, GETTING THE 1099 INFORMATION TAX INFORMATION FROM THE OFFICER BACK OR FROM THE FROM THE VENDOR TO THE OFFICER AND FOR TAX PURPOSES, BECAUSE ALL OF THIS IS A SEPARATE ISSUE FOR THE OFFICER WHEN THEY WORK THIS STUFF.

IT'S NOT IT DOESN'T COME THROUGH THE COUNTY.

IT DOESN'T GO ONTO THE RETIREMENT.

WE'RE NOT PAYING. IN ARES.

THEY HAVE TO PAY TAXES ON THAT.

THE COUNTY IS NOT DOING THAT FOR THEM.

AND SO THIS VENDOR DOES ALL OF THAT FOR US.

AND IT'S IT'S AT NO CHARGE TO THE COUNTY, WHICH IS IMPORTANT FOR US.

THEY CHARGE THE VENDORS 15% FOR EACH ONE OF THESE INS AND THAT'S HOW THEY THEY MAINTAIN IT.

SO THIS IS BASICALLY A CONTRACT BETWEEN OFF DUTY MANAGEMENT AND THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, OFF DUTY, OFF DUTY MANAGEMENT AND THE COUNTY.

CORRECT. AND WHAT IT DOES IS IT ENSURES THAT WE ENSURE THE COUNTY ENSURES THAT THEY HAVE THE PROPER LEVEL OF LIABILITY.

IT ALSO GIVES US ABSOLUTE CONTROL, THE SHERIFF, ABSOLUTE CONTROL OPERATIONALLY ON SOME OF THESE DETAILS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS SOMETHING THAT THAT HE WANTS TO PROVIDE A UNIFORMED OFFICER FOR.

SO THERE'S NO COST TO THE COUNTY EXCEPT FOR THE USE OF OUR EQUIPMENT, WHICH WE GET REIMBURSED FOR.

THAT'S CORRECT, SIR. OKAY.

MISTER CHAIRMAN, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THIS ITEM.

SECOND. OKAY.

WE GOT A MOTION BY VICE CHAIR OBERG.

A SECOND BY SUPERVISOR BROWN.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BY THE BOARD? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE.

AYE, AYE, AYE.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUS.

MOVING ON.

ACTION. HUMAN RESOURCES APPROVED REVISIONS TO HUMAN RESOURCES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.

[1. Human Resources - Approve revisions to Human Resources Policies and Procedures 5.05, Sick Leave.]

5.05. SICK LEAVE.

WENDY ROSS.

GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN GREGORY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

WENDY ROSS, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND RISK MANAGEMENT.

THIS IS A REQUEST TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO OUR SICK LEAVE POLICY.

AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS TO PUT IN A CAP ON THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF SICK LEAVE THAT AN EMPLOYEE CAN

[00:40:06]

ACCRUE THROUGHOUT THEIR CAREER WITH THE COUNTY.

A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND.

WHEN THE ARIZONA SICK LEAVE LAW WAS FIRST PASSED, THE LANGUAGE WAS A LITTLE BIT UNCLEAR ABOUT HOW TO CAP THE BENEFIT OVERALL.

THERE'S LANGUAGE ALREADY IN THERE THAT YOU CAN STOP ACCRUING AFTER 40 HOURS HERE, BUT THE OVERALL CAP WAS A LITTLE FUZZY AT THE TIME.

SO AT THE TIME WE IMPLEMENTED THIS POLICY, WE DID NOT HAVE AN OVERALL CAP AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SUGGESTING NOW.

SO WE'VE WRITTEN THIS TO INCLUDE A CAP OF 480 HOURS AT 40 HOURS PER YEAR.

IF AN EMPLOYEE DID NOT USE ANY SICK LEAVE AT ALL, THEY WOULD REACH THE CAP AFTER 12 YEARS OF EMPLOYMENT.

UM, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW.

BALANCES ON THE HIGHEST BALANCE THAT AN EMPLOYEE CURRENTLY HAS IN THEIR SICK LEAVE BALANCE IS 271.

SO EVEN THE PERSON WITH THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF SICK LEAVE RIGHT NOW IS PRETTY FAR AWAY FROM REACHING THAT MAX OF 480.

THE OTHER THING THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THIS.

AS YOU KNOW, WE RECENTLY IMPROVED OUR SHORT TERM DISABILITY BENEFIT AND SHORTENED THE WAITING PERIOD FROM A 90 DAY WAIT PERIOD TO A 30 DAY WAIT PERIOD.

AND WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO AS WE IMPLEMENT THIS CAP ON SICK LEAVE IS TO ALLOW EMPLOYEES TO SUPPLEMENT.

THE SHORT TERM DISABILITY PAYMENT WITH THEIR PAID LEAVES.

SO THAT IS WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING.

AND ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? YES, SIR. AND WITH THAT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE NEW SICK LEAVE POLICY.

SECOND. OKAY.

MOTION. I'LL SECOND. MOTION MADE BY MYSELF.

SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR BROWN.

ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE? AYE. AYE. AYE.

AYE. THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

MOTION CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, WENDY. OKAY.

WE'RE MOVING ON TO HEARINGS.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVE A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR AN EXISTING BILLIARD ROOM CONSTRUCTION FROM TWO CONVEX BOXES.

[1. Development Services - Approve a Use Permit to allow for an existing billiard room constructed from two Connex boxes, on approximately 0.25-acres in the RCU-2A (Residential; Single-family; Rural; 2-acre minimum lot size) zoning district, subject to the conditions of approval. Project Name: Harris Billiard Room Use Permit; Owner: Craig Harris & Terri Miller; Applicant: Craig Harris; APN: 204-09-054; PLA23-000030. The property is located at 6614 East Mountain View Road in Crown King, AZ. Section 15, Township 10 North, Range 01 West, G&SRB&M. Staff: Stephanie Johnson (District 2 - Supervisor Gregory)]

GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN GREGORY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

I'M STEPHANIE JOHNSON, PLANNER WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

BEAR WITH ME JUST A MOMENT WHILE I OPEN UP OUR.

PRESENTATION.

I'M HERE THIS MORNING TO PRESENT TO YOU THE HARRIS BILLIARD ROOM.

USE PERMIT REQUEST.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN DISTRICT TWO SUPERVISOR GREGORY'S DISTRICT.

THE ADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY IS 6614 EAST MOUNTAIN VIEW ROAD IN CROWN KING.

THE SUBJECT PARCEL WAS FIRST CREATED AS LOT 24IN THE CROWN KING ACRES.

MINETTA THIRSTING DIVISION SUBDIVISION APPROVED BY YAVAPAI COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN 1958.

THIS LOT HAS REMAINED IN ITS ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION SINCE THAT TIME.

THE SUBJECT PARCEL IS ZONED RCU TO A AND IS SURROUNDED BY RCU TO A ZONED PARCELS THAT ARE MOSTLY DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL PARCELS.

WHEN THE SUBDIVISION WAS CREATED, IT WAS CREATED WITH NON-CONFORMING PARCEL SIZES.

THESE PARCELS, MOST OF THEM DON'T CONFORM TO THE TWO ACRE MINIMUM DISTRICT.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONSIDERATION OF A PERMANENT AND TRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR AN EXISTING BILLIARD ROOM CONSTRUCTED FROM TWO CONEX BOXES ON APPROXIMATELY A QUARTER OF AN ACRE IN THE RCU TO A ZONING DISTRICT.

THE PROPERTY OWNERS ALSO ACQUIRED OR HAVE ACQUIRED THIS PARCEL IN OCTOBER OF 2020, ALONG WITH THE ADJACENT PARCELS, 204 09055B AND 056.

THE THREE PARCELS OF COMBINED TOGETHER WOULD HAVE A TOTAL ACREAGE OF 1.39 ACRES THAT IS STILL UNDER THE TWO ACRE MINIMUM FOR THAT ZONING DISTRICT. THEREFORE, THAT USE AND HAVING THIS KONNEX ROOM CONEX BOX BILLIARD

[00:45:01]

ROOM, IT STILL FALLS UNDER THAT TWO ACRE MINIMUM, CAUSING THE NEED FOR A USE PERMIT.

THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE HAVE PROVIDED THIS PLOT PLAN SHOWING THAT THE EXISTING BILLIARD ROOM IS MEETING THE REQUIRED SETBACKS FOR THIS PARCEL, 20FT IN THE FRONT, 25FT IN THE REAR AND SEVEN FEET ON THE SIDES.

THE PROPERTY WAS POSTED WITH A PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE ON MAY 31ST, 2023.

THIS IS A CLOSE UP PHOTO OF THAT POSTING.

THIS PHOTO IS OF THE POSTING FROM MOUNTAIN VIEW ROAD.

YOU CAN SEE THE BILLIARD ROOM TUCKED IN HERE ON THE PROPERTY.

THIS GOOGLE AERIAL IMAGE SHOWS YOU THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE LOCATION IN RELATION TO THE BILLIARD ROOM.

HERE'S A VIEW OF THAT BILLIARD ROOM WITH THE RESIDENTS VISIBLE IN THE BACKGROUND.

A CLOSE UP VIEW OF THE BILLIARD ROOM.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ENJOYING THE BILLIARD ROOM.

THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING ROOM.

THE BILLIARD ROOM.

THERE IS NO ELECTRICITY OR WATER TO THIS STRUCTURE.

THEY USE ONLY SOLAR LIGHTING OUT THERE.

THE APPLICANT SENT A CITIZEN PARTICIPATION LETTER TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300FT OF THE PARCEL ON MARCH 10TH, 2023, AND AGAIN ON MARCH 15TH, 2023.

THE INITIAL MAIL OUT MISSED A FEW ADDRESSES.

THEREFORE, STAFF REQUESTED THAT THEY RESEND THAT MAILING AND THEY WERE MORE THAN HAPPY TO COMPLY.

THEY'VE BEEN VERY COOPERATIVE THROUGH THIS ENTIRE PROCESS TO DATE, INCLUDING TODAY.

I DID DOUBLE CHECK OUR SURVEY.

ONE, TWO, THREE.

WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES IN OPPOSITION NOR IN SUPPORT VIA SURVEY ONE, TWO, THREE.

STAFF. POSTED THE PROPERTY ON MAY 26TH OF 2023.

AND AGAIN, AS AS OF TODAY, HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION.

THE APPLICANT, HOWEVER, DID PROVIDE SIGNATURES OF 11 NEIGHBORS THAT ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.

IN SUMMARY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONSIDERATION OF A PERMANENT AND TRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR AN EXISTING BILLIARD ROOM CONSTRUCTED FROM TWO CONEX BOXES ON APPROXIMATELY A QUARTER OF AN ACRE IN THE RCU TO A ZONING DISTRICT.

MR. AND MRS. MR. HARRIS AND MS.. MILLER ALSO OWNED THE TWO ADJACENT PARCELS FOR A TOTAL OF THREE PARCELS, WITH A COMBINED ACREAGE OF 1.39 ACRES.

THE PARCEL THAT THE EXISTING BILLIARD ROOM IS LOCATED ON DOES NOT HAVE A WELL, DOES NOT HAVE A WASTEWATER SYSTEM AND DOES NOT HAVE UTILITIES. SOLAR LIGHTING IS THE ONLY TYPE OF LIGHTING ON THAT PARCEL.

THE PROPERTY ITSELF HAS SOME UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY THAT ALLOWS THE EXISTING BILLIARD ROOM TO SIT TUCKED IN ON THE PARCEL AT A LOWER ELEVATION THAN THE ROADWAY AND THE PROPERTY OWNER'S RESIDENCE.

THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY LIFE SAFETY ISSUES WITH GRANTING THIS REQUEST.

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ON THE OVERHEAD ARE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

WE ALSO HAVE MR. HARRIS AND MS.. MILLER HERE AND AVAILABLE TO.

ANSWER QUESTIONS AND I DON'T SEE OUR COMMISSIONER HERE.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.

BUT I DO NOT SEE THAT WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER HERE.

WE DID HAVE A UNANIMOUS.

THEY DID MOVE TO APPROVE THE PERMIT UNANIMOUSLY.

CLERK OF THE BOARD, HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? WE HAVE NOT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

I'LL SECOND. SECOND.

OKAY. MOTION BY MYSELF.

SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR MALLORY.

ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUS.

THANK YOU, STEPHANIE.

NEXT HEARING ITEM WILL BE NUMBER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSING AND CONTROL OF A SERIES TEN BEER AND WINE LIQUOR LICENSE

[2. Development Services - Recommend approval to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control of a Series 10 Beer and Wine Store Liquor License application (248836) without protest, submitted by Stephen Clifford Cook for Cornville Market located at 9420 Cornville Road, Cornville AZ 86325. (District 2 - Supervisor Gregory)]

[3. Development Services - Recommend approval to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control of a Series 10 Beer and Wine Store Liquor License application (248834) without protest, submitted by Stephen Clifford Cook for Cornville Shell located at 1220 S. Eastern Dr. Ste-A, Cornville AZ 86325. (District 2 - Supervisor Gregory)]

[4. Development Services - Recommend approval to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control of a Series 10 Beer and Wine Store liquor license application (248628) without protest, submitted by Gregory Raymond Levy for TA Express Ash Fork located at 950 Old Highway 66, Ash Fork AZ 86320. (District 4 - Supervisor Brown)]

APPLICATION WITHOUT PROTEST.

SUBMITTED BY STEVEN CLIFFORD COOK FOR CORNVILLE MARKET LOCATED AT 9420 CORNVILLE ROAD, CORNVILLE, ARIZONA.

JEREMY DIE. YEAH.

GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND BOARD MEMBERS.

JEREMY DYE, DIRECTOR FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

AND I'VE GOT YEAH, THE NEXT FEW ITEMS ARE JUST SOME LIQUOR LICENSES FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL.

[00:50:06]

THIS FIRST ONE HERE IS A SERIES TEN BEER AND WINE LIQUOR STORE STORE LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION FOR THE CORNVILLE MARKET LOCATED AT 9004 20 CORNVILLE ROAD IN SUPERVISOR GREGORY'S DISTRICT.

WE HAVE WE HAVE RECEIVED NO OPPOSITION, ANY ANY COMPLAINTS FROM THE OR CONCERNS FROM THE CLERK? NO. OKAY.

ANY DISCUSSION BY THE BOARD SUPERVISOR? BROWN ON NUMBER TWO, THREE AND FOUR AND ALL ALL THREE OF THESE CASES, IT'S BEEN ANY OPPOSITION AT ALL? WE'VE RECEIVED NO PROTEST ON ANY OF THEM.

CLERK OF THE BOARD? NO, THANK YOU.

WELL, THEN I'D MOVE TO ACCEPT TWO, THREE AND FOUR.

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

SECOND. SECONDED BY MYSELF.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. HI.

OKAY. THAT COVERS ITEMS TWO, THREE AND FOUR.

GOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR DI.

OKAY, WE'LL BE GOING INTO A STUDY SESSION WITH COMMUNITY HEALTH DISCUSSION WITH ADK STAFF REGARDING CHEMICALS IN DRINKING WATER AND RELATED

[1. Community Health Services - Discussion with Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) staff regarding chemicals in the drinking water and its related components.]

COMPONENTS. THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT.

SPECIFICALLY OVER THE DRINKING.

THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME THIS MORNING.

I'D LIKE TO PRESENT A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT OUR DEPARTMENT IS DOING, NOT ONLY IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, BUT ACROSS THE STATE.

WE ARE PROACTIVELY SAMPLING AT PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS FOR P-FAS COMPOUNDS IN ANTICIPATION OF UPCOMING REGULATIONS PER EPA.

WE HAVE WE HAVE DONE SOME PREVIOUS P-FAS SAMPLING IN YAVAPAI COUNTY THAT VICE CHAIRMAN OBERG I'M SURE YOU'RE WELL AWARE OF THIS SAMPLING EVENT IS A BIT DIFFERENT IN THAT IT IS.

THE SAMPLING LOCATION WILL MIRROR WHERE THESE SYSTEMS WILL NEED TO SAMPLE ONCE IT IS REGULATED.

THE PREVIOUS SAMPLING EVENTS WERE DONE AT THE SOURCES OR AT THE WELLS.

WE DO HAVE A SHORT VIDEO TO PROVIDE A FOUNDATIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF P-FAS AND I'M HAPPY TO FIELD ANY QUESTIONS AFTER THAT.

P-FAS IS A TERM FOR A GROUP OF CHEMICALS THAT MANY ARIZONA RESIDENTS ARE LIKELY TO HEAR MORE ABOUT IN THE COMING YEARS.

WE AT ADEQ WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH A BRIEF INTRODUCTION OF P-FAS IN ARIZONA SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT P-FAS ARE, WHAT A-DEC IS DOING TO ADDRESS THESE CHEMICALS IN OUR ENVIRONMENT AND WHAT STEPS TO TAKE NOW TO PROTECT YOUR HEALTH.