[00:00:03]
>> WELCOME EVERYONE. THIS IS A MEETING OF
[ CALL TO ORDER]
THE YELLOW PIKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING TODAY AND THAT YOU HAVE A PIKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES VERDE VALLEY COMPLEX HEARING ROOM, FIRST FLOOR, 10 SOUTH SIXTH STREET AND COTTONWOOD, ARIZONA.TODAY'S DATE IS WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20TH, 2023.
I CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 09:00 AM.
ALL ITEMS LISTED ARE POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
THE ORDER OF THE ITEMS MAY BE MODIFIED AT THE MEETING.
ONE OR BOARD MEMBERS MAY ATTEND TELEPHONICALLY OR VIRTUALLY EVERYBODY IS HERE TODAY.
BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING TELEPHONIC, OR VIRTUALLY WILL BE ANNOUNCED IN THE MEETING.
WILL START OFF WITH THE INVOCATION BY SUPERVISOR MICHAELS, AND THE PLEDGE BY VICE CHAIR ROBERT.
>> GOOD MORNING HEAVENLY FATHER.
WHAT A GREAT A DAY, YOU HAVE BROUGHT TO US.
WE THANK YOU FOR ALL THE BLESSINGS THAT WE BROUGHT US SAFE.
WE ASKED YOU TO KEEP US CLOSE YOU HELPING TO THIS BOARD IN DIFFICULT AND EASY TIMES.
TO ALWAYS HAVE OUR CITIZENS AS OUR PRIORITY.
THIS MOMENT ON THIS MEETING WE THANK YOU FOR OUR ABILITY TO DO WELL IN HAVING A HOME IN SHELTERS, AND FRIEND, AND COMMUNITY.
HELP US ALWAYS DO RIGHT BY THEM.
PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO OUR NATION'S FLAG.
>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR MICHAELS AND VICE-CHAIR ROBERT, TORQUE AT THE BOARD.
>> YES. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GREGORY.
>> THANK YOU. YOU HAVE A QUORUM.
>> THANK YOU. WE'LL START OFF WITH THE WARDS AND PROCLAMATIONS.
[ AWARDS AND PROCLAMATIONS ]
APPROVED PROCLAMATION FOR CLEMENCY SCHOOL BUILDING.SUPERVISOR MICHAELS, THIS IS IN YOUR DISTRICT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, WHAT A GREAT HONOR.
WHAT A GREAT HISTORY OF COMMUNITY AND DEMONSTRATION OF WORKING TOGETHER TO CREATE A WAY TO HONOR OUR HISTORY.
IT'S WITH A REALLY WARM PLEASURE THAT I READ THE PLOT PROCLAMATION TODAY ON THE HUNDRED-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF OUR PUBLIC SCHOOL, THE CLEMENCEAU.
WHEREAS THE CLEMENCEAU PUBLIC SCHOOL WAS FOUNDED 100 YEARS AGO AS AN INSTITUTION OF LEARNING DEDICATED TO FOSTERING KNOWLEDGE, CHARACTER, AND COMMUNITY SPIRIT.
WHEREAS, THE SCHOOL HAD BEEN AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE VERDE VALLEY, FOSTERING THE MINDS AND TALENTS OF GENERATIONS OF STUDENTS, INSTILLING VALUES OF LIFELONG LEARNING, LEADERSHIP, AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY.
WHEREAS THE FACULTY, STAFF, AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE CLEMENCEAU ALL PUBLIC SCHOOL HAVE TIRELESSLY DEDICATED THEMSELVES TO PROVIDING QUALITY EDUCATION, CULTIVATING A NURTURING ENVIRONMENT, AND PROMOTING A CULTURE OF INNOVATION AND CREATIVITY.
WHEREAS FOR AN ENTIRE CENTURY, THE CLEMENCEAU PUBLIC SCHOOL BUILDING HAS STOOD AS A BEACON FOR EDUCATION, ENRICHING THE LIVES OF COUNTLESS STUDENTS, AND CONTRIBUTING SIGNIFICANTLY TO THE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF OUR COMMUNITY.
WHEREAS THE 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CHROMOSOME PUBLIC SCHOOL BUILDING PRESENTS A MOMENTOUS OCCASION TO REFLECT ON ITS RICH HISTORY, CELEBRATE ITS ACHIEVEMENTS, AND ENVISION AN EVEN BRIGHTER FUTURE.
ENSURING THAT IT'S LEGACY OF EXCELLENCE CONTINUES FOR GENERATIONS TO COME.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE YAVAPAI COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DO HEREBY PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 30, 2023 AS A DAY OF COMMEMORATION AND CELEBRATION OF THE 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF CLEMENCEAU PUBLIC SCHOOL.
WE CALL UPON ALL MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY PAST AND PRESENT TO JOIN IN, AND HONORING THIS REMARKABLE MILESTONE THROUGH VARIOUS EVENTS,
[00:05:03]
ACTIVITIES, AND EXPRESSIONS OF APPRECIATION.THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD ON BEHALF OF THE YAVAPAI COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, SETS HIS HAND AND CAUSES THE SEAL OF THE YAVAPAI COUNTY ARIZONA, TO BE A FIX ON THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023.
MR. CHAIRMAN, IT GIVES ME GREAT PERSONAL PLEASURE TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS PROCLAMATION.
>> TODAY WE HAVE A MOTION BY SUPERVISOR MICHAELS SECONDED BY VICE-CHAIR UBER.
>> OKAY. NEXT ONE WILL BE PRESENTATIONS.
>> BE POSSIBLE, MR. CHAIRMAN, FOR AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS TO MAYBE SAY A WORD ABOUT THE SCHOOL, THEY'RE HERE AND TO TAKE A PHOTOGRAPH?
>> ABSOLUTELY. I DIDN'T REALIZE OVER HERE.
>> THIS IS OUR SUPERINTENDENT, MR. STEVE KING, WHO WOULD LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS, MR. CHAIRMAN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [BACKGROUND]
>> YOU GOT TO PUSH THE BUTTON FIRST, I GUESS.
A 100 YEARS CLEMENCEAU BUILDING ON THE 30TH, WHICH IS A SATURDAY. COME ON UP HERE.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CELEBRATION WITH ALL OF OUR PAST AND PRESENT.
I SEE MR. GODDARD'S BACK HERE AND PLANNING MAYBE AN ATTORNEY ON THAT.
DIFFERENT PEOPLE WHO WENT TO SCHOOL THERE.
MY CLAIM TO FAME, I ACTUALLY USE MY GRANDMA BACK IN 1955 AND MY GRANDPARENTS MOVED TO COTTONWOOD.
BECAME A LIBRARIAN IN THE CLEMENCEAU OUR BUILDINGS.
I GET TO WORK IN THE SAME BUILDING AS MY GRANDMA DID WAY BACK IN ON THE EXACT OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
IF YOU'VE NEVER BEEN THE CLEMENCEAU, OUR HISTORY MUSEUM, I HIGHLY ENCOURAGE A VERY INTERESTING PLACE.
THEY'VE GOT A DIORAMA IN THE VERDE VALLEY.
YOU CAN LEARN NOT JUST ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE SCHOOL BUILDING, BUT ALSO ABOUT THE HISTORY OF OUR COMMUNITY.
WHAT BROUGHT SO MANY OF US HERE OVER TIME, INCLUDING MYSELF.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT SUPERVISOR MICHAELS.
THAT WAS FANTASTIC. I APPRECIATE THAT GREATLY.
>> JUST HAVE TO TELL YOU YOU DON'T LOOK A DAY OVER 20 YEARS. [LAUGHTER]
>> REALLY? I FEEL IT AND WHO KNOWS.
>> IF WE COULD TAKE A MINUTE TO MR. CHAIRMAN FOR A PHOTOGRAPH?
>> THANK YOU. EVERYBODY WHO'S ASSOCIATED, PLEASE DO COME UP.
I SEE MR. GODDARD, HIS WIFE CHRIS, AND I KNOW THERE'S OTHERS THERE FOR THIS PHOTOGRAPH.
>> STAND RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE THINGS. [BACKGROUND] [LAUGHTER]
>> I THINK THAT'S GOING TO WORK RIGHT THERE.
JUST KEEPS SMILING, RIGHT HERE.
JUST ONE MORE. GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.[APPLAUSE]
>> [BACKGROUND] YOU ALWAYS SAY THE RIGHT THING.
>> THANK YOU, EVERYONE. NEXT ON IS PRESENTATIONS,
[ PRESENTATIONS]
PRESENTATION REGARDING A BRIEFING ON THE BLM PROJECTS BY IRINA FORD FROM THE HOLOCENE EPOCH FIELD OFFICE, BLM. MORNING.>> GOOD MORNING, SUPERVISOR GREGORY.
FOR THE RECORD, I'M LEON THOMAS.
I'M THE DISTRICT MANAGER FOR THE PHOENIX DISTRICT BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT.
IRINA FORD IS THE FIELD MANAGER.
OUR DISTRICT HAS TWO FIELD OFFICES, THE HASSAYAMPA FIELD OFFICES AND NORTHERN FIELD OFFICE WHICH ENCOMPASSES YAVAPAI COUNTY, AND SO I'M GIVING THE BRIEFING TODAY, IRINA SITTING RIGHT HERE ALONG WITH JAMES HOLDEN, WHO IS OUR ASSISTANT FIELD MANAGER.
WE'VE ALSO BROUGHT ANGIE MEESE, WHO IS OUR ASSOCIATE DISTRICT MANAGER AND OUR PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICER, CHRIS WONDER IS HERE AS WELL. THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.
IF WE CAN ADVANCE TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
[00:10:03]
IN FACT, I'M GOING TO PROBABLY SKIP A COUPLE OF SLIDES AND GET RIGHT TO THE MEAT OF THIS THING.THE TABLE MESA 2010 PLAN THAT WE DID WAS A TRAVEL MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT ALSO ALLOWED FOR US TO BUILD SOME FACILITIES IN THE TABLE MESA AREA OFF THE TABLE MESA EXIT THERE.
THAT AREA WAS NEVER FORMALIZED AS A FULL RECREATION AREA.
WE HAD THE WE HAD SOME AMENITIES PUT IN, BUT WE NEVER FORMALLY PUT A RECREATION AREA BOUNDARY THERE.
WE JUST DID THE TRAVEL MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND BUILT A COUPLE OF CAMP FACILITIES AND IMPROVE SOME OF THE OHV TRAILS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
OUR EFFORT RIGHT NOW IS TO ACTUALLY TURN IT INTO A RECREATION AREA, IMPROVE SOME OF THE FACILITIES, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE.
AS SOME RECREATIONAL SHOOTING SITES RIGHT NOW WE HAVE SHOOTING GOING IN ALL DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS OUT THERE.
NO REAL MANAGEMENT OF IT, AND SO WE WANT TO TRY TO GET OUR ARMS AROUND THAT QUITE A BIT.
ALSO IN SOME OF THE AREAS WHERE WE WON'T BE HAVING SHOOTING IN THAT AREA, WE ANALYZE FOR LEAD CONTAMINATION AND CLEANING UP THAT LEAD CONTAMINATION AND OTHER DEBRIS OUT THERE AND SO THAT'S A HUGE LIFT AND SOMETHING THAT'S VERY NEEDED OUT THERE.
THEN WE ALSO WANT TO INCLUDE SOME OTHER ACTIVITIES OR IMPROVED SOME OTHER RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES OUT THERE.
ADD SOME ARCHERY, IMPROVE SOME CAMPSITES AND HAVE AMENITIES SUCH AS THAT.
BASICALLY WE SEE IT AS AN AREA THAT RIGHT NOW IS ONLY USED FOR A COUPLE OF USES WITH SOME OF THE RECREATIONAL TARGET SHOOTING OUT THERE THAT'S GOING ON.
IT'S TAKEN OVER AS THE PRIMARY USE UP THERE, AT LEAST IN THE SOUTHERN PARTS, AND SO WE WANT TO ALLOW FOR OTHER RECREATIONAL USES IN THAT AREA SO THAT'S THE FOUNDATIONAL PREMISE FOR WHY WE ARE DEVELOPING THE RECREATION AREA THE WAY WE ARE.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. WE CAN GO ONTO THE NEXT ONE.
I WANT TO GET TO THE MAP SLIDE IF WE CAN ADVANCE TO THE MAP SLIDE THAT'D BE GREAT.
THAT'S IT. THE PURPLE AREA TO THE NORTH THERE, THAT'S THE AREA THAT ACTUALLY IMPACTS THE YAVAPAI COUNTY, I BELIEVE IT ENCOMPASSES ABOUT 3,500 ACRES.
THE SOUTHERN PART IN THE YELLOW BELOW THAT PURPLE HATCHED AREA, AND TO THE EAST OF THE PURPLE HASHED AREA TO THE WEST THERE.
THAT IS THE AREA THAT WAS ORIGINALLY ANALYZED IN THE TRAVEL MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND THAT IS WHERE WE ARE SEEING MOST OF THE ACTIVITY NOT ONLY IN THE CAMP SITES THAT ARE THERE, BUT ALSO SOME OF THE RECREATIONAL TARGET SHOOTING THAT I WAS ALLUDING TO EARLIER.
WHAT WE'RE ANALYZING IN THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT IS, WE ARE ANALYZING PUTTING A WRECK AREA BOUNDARY WHICH HAS HATCHED ALL THE WAY AROUND THE YELLOW PORTION THAT ALREADY HAS BEEN ANALYZED, AND IN ADDITION, ADDING THE PURPLE AREAS IN AS A PART OF OUR RECREATION BOUNDARY.
THE PORTION TO THE NORTH THERE THAT FALLS INTO YAVAPAI COUNTY.
IF WE INCLUDE THAT IN THE RECREATION AREA, THAT WILL ALLOW US TO ENCOMPASS THE BLACK CANYON TRAIL INTO THE RECREATION AREA AND HELP TO MANAGE FOR THAT A LITTLE BIT BETTER AS WELL.
THAT'S THE PRIMARY GOAL OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
NOW, WE JUST ENDED OUR COMMENT PERIOD AND THROUGH MEETINGS WITH K-MINE AND SOME OTHER ENTITIES, THEY BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION SOME ISSUES THAT THEY SEE WITH US, INCLUDING THAT NORTHERN AREA.
ONE OF WHICH IS THEY ARE CONCERNED THAT IF WE INCLUDE SOME OF THEIR MINING CLAIM IN THE AREA THAT THEY WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO MINE.
WE MET WITH THEM A COUPLE OF TIMES AND WE ASSURED THEM THAT EVEN IF I WANTED TO, I HAVE TO HONOR THEIR BALLOT AND EXISTING RIGHT AND BEING ABLE TO MINE THERE.
WHETHER THERE'S A WRECK AREA BOUNDARY THERE OR NOT, IF THROUGH THEIR DEVELOPMENT, THEY FIND THAT THERE'S SOME VALIDITY THERE AND THEY COME IN WITH A VALID PLAN OF OPERATIONS WE WILL AND WE HAVE TO BY LAW OF HONOR THAT PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND ACT ON IT ACCORDINGLY.
HAVING A WRECK AREA BOUNDARY UP THEIR WILL IN NO WAY HINDER THEIR ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO CONDUCT THEIR BUSINESS AND TO MINE IN THAT AREA AND IT'S OFFICIAL ON THE RECORD THAT I SAID THERE.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THEIR COMMENTS, NO DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE, WE'RE ANALYZING A FULL RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES FROM A NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ALL THE WAY OUT TO WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT RIGHT HERE AND ALSO HAVING ANYTHING IN BETWEEN.
[00:15:05]
THE FINAL DECISION THAT IS ISSUED AND SIGNED BY ME CAN INCLUDE ALL OF THIS OR JUST A PORTION AS FAR AS WHAT IS ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN THE RECREATION AREA BOUNDARY.AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF LOOKING AT THOSE COMMENTS AND PROVIDING OR ELISE DRAFTING RESPONSES TO THE COMMENTS.
I'LL PAUSE THERE CHAIR, AND SEE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU OR ANYONE ELSE ON THE BOARD HAS?
>> I DO. ON A 3,500 ACRES, I UNDERSTAND THE BLACK CANYON TRAIL.
BUT WHAT BENEFITS DOES IT HAVE TO ENCOMPASS THAT AREA RIGHT NOW?
>> WELL, THE BLACK CANYON TRAIL IS THE PRIMARY BENEFIT, INCLUDING THAT IN THE AREA.
IT ALSO GIVES US MORE OF AN ABILITY TO MANAGE THE AREA WITH OUR RECREATION REGS.
RIGHT NOW, SINCE IT'S NOT A FORMAL RECREATION AREA OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT THEY DON'T HAVE A DEFINED BOUNDARY AS TO BE ABLE TO TELL WHEN SOMEONE'S IN THE WRECK AREA OR OUTSIDE THE WRECK AREA.
SO SOME ACTIVITIES THEY CAN ACTUALLY ENFORCE WITHOUT IT BEING WITHIN THE WRECK AREA AND HAVING A DEFINED WRECK AREA BOUNDARY.
IN SOME INSTANCES, IT CAN HINDER THEIR PROBABLE CAUSE FOR CITING OR APPROACHING A PERSON IF THEY CAN'T DEFINITIVELY SAY WHETHER THEY WERE IN THE WRECK AREA BOUNDARY OR NOT.
WE ARE TRYING TO INCORPORATE AN ACTUAL WRECK AREA BOUNDARY.
NOW, IS TO GET TO THE HEART OF YOUR QUESTION AS FAR AS THE BENEFIT UP NORTH, IT'S REALLY ABOUT ME TRYING TO ENCOMPASS THAT BLACK CANYON TRAIL IF I CAN INTO THE RECREATION AREA BOUNDARY.
>> I THINK WHAT YOU'RE DOING, IT'S A GOOD IDEA WITH THAT SHOOTING RANGES, AND THANK YOU FOR OPENED UP COMMUNICATIONS WITH US IN THE PROCESS.
BUT MY CONCERN IS IS A LOT OF THAT AREA, YOU'RE GOING TO CONTROL A LOT MORE CAMPING, SHOOTING, WHICH IS GOING TO PUSH THAT AREA NORTH, A LOT OF THE ACTIVITIES UP TO BUMBLEBEE ROAD, WHICH IS GOING TO TAX US AS FAR AS ADDITIONAL SERVICES, MAINTENANCE ON THE ROAD, AND ALSO WITH THE ENFORCEMENT WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
EVENTUALLY THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE A MANAGEMENT OR PROBABLY A RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREA.
ALSO BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOING TO PUSH SOME OF THAT TRAFFIC UP BECAUSE THAT'S FIRST EXIT FROM PHOENIX WHERE EVERYBODY IS RECREATING AND SHOOTING IS THAT TABLE MESA ON IT, IT IS A WAR ZONE DOWN THERE, I GUESS OUR CONCERN IS, ONCE THAT TAKES PLACE, IT'S GOING TO PUSH THAT UP NORTH.
WHY NOT INCLUDE THE YAVAPAI COUNTY PORTION OF IT? WHEN WE LOOK AT THE BUMBLEBEE PORTION BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE ADDRESSING THAT NEXT.
I CAN ASSURE YOU WITHIN THE NEXT 3-4 YEARS ONCE WE START IMPLEMENTING THE CHANGES DOWN THERE.
THEN THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO BE A PART OF THE PROCESS FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS, AND UNDERSTANDING HOW WE CAN IMPLEMENT WITH ENFORCEMENT, WORKING WITH OUR PUBLIC WORKS, WITH ROADS.
WE JUST COMPLETED A TRAVEL MANAGEMENT PLAN, BUT WE BOTH GOT INTEREST IN THAT AREA, SO IT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION FOR NOW AS WE NOT INCLUDE TODAY THE YAVAPAI COUNTY PORTION OF IT, BUT INCLUDE THAT WHEN WE DO THE BUMBLEBEE, WHEN WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT IN THE FUTURE, BECAUSE MOST OF THE ROADS THAT GO THROUGH THAT SECTION RIGHT THERE ARE ACTUALLY ACCESSIBLE FROM BUMBLEBEE MORE SO THAN THE BLACK CANYON CITY AREA.
THAT JUST MAKES MORE SENSE TO ME, BUT THAT'S MY INPUT, BUT LET ME ADD THAT YOU GUYS, I THINK THIS IS A LONG TIME COMING AND I APPLAUD YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS AND GETTING THAT STUFF UNDER CONTROL DOWN OR OFF BUMBLEBEE CAMPUSES, IT'S QUITE THE ISSUE DOWN THERE.
>> IT ISN'T, THANK YOU FOR THAT FEEDBACK SUPERVISOR GREGORY.
WERE YOU ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT AS A FORMAL COMMENT THAT WE.
>> I DID, I PROVIDED THAT IN THE MEMO AND I SENT IT TO YOU.
>> WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
>> YES. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD?
BLESS YOUR HEART FOR ALL OF YOU TRYING TO CONTAIN THE BAD ACTORS, THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS.
NO ONE WANTS TO BE ABLE TO RECREATE MORE THAN I DO.
WHY I'M SITTING ON THIS BOARD WHEN I COULD BE OUT RIDING MY HORSE? IT'S WONDERFUL DOWN THERE AND IT'S BEING DESTROYED.
THAT'S MY DEEP AND ABIDING CONCERN.
[00:20:01]
THERE'S NO STEWARDSHIP REALLY.I'D LIKE US TO TALK SPECIFICS, IF YOU WOULD.
WOULD YOU SAY HAVE MORE CONTROL, IT'S ON WHAT? I DARE SAY THAT WE HAVE TO UTTER THE WORD OHV, DON'T WE? OFF HIGHWAY VEHICLES.
WE'RE WORKING ON THAT ACROSS THE STATE.
IN FACT, SHERIFF RHODES SITS ON A COMMITTEE ADDRESSING THAT VERY ISSUE ON A STATEWIDE LEVEL, AND I SUPPORT THAT AND I'VE WRITTEN SOME POSSIBLE LANGUAGE FOR CONSIDERATION TO HELP.
BUT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING IN THE INTERIM THAT'S EFFECTIVE.
BUT WE CAN'T CONTINUE TO LET THE DAMAGE CONTINUE TO GO ON AT THE LEVEL THAT IT IS.
YOU DON'T WANT TO DRIVE DOWN, YOU CAN SEE THIS HUGE CLOUD OF DIRT HANGING IN THE AIR AND IT'S FROM OHV USE, IS IT NOT?
>> SUPERVISOR MICHAELS. DR. MICHAELS, I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE DO YOU LIKE.
>> YOU TOUCHED ON A COUPLE OF THINGS.
>> LET'S START WITH WHAT BOTH YOU AND SUPERVISOR GREGORY WERE TALKING ABOUT AS FAR AS THE RECREATIONAL TARGET SHOOTING AND THE POSSIBLE DISPLACEMENT, IF WE WERE TO PROVIDE FACILITY AREAS THERE.
I CAN'T SAY THAT THERE WILL BE ZERO DISPLACEMENT.
BUT WHAT I WILL SAY IS THIS, IS THAT WHEN WE TOOK A LOOK AT WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOW SHOOTING DOWN THERE, AND LOOKED AT THE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WE ARE STILL IN THE ENGINEERING PHASES OR WE WILL BEGIN THE ENGINEERING PHASE AS SOON AS TO WHAT THE NEW FACILITY AREA IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE FOR SHOOTING.
WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MIRROR AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE THE AMOUNT OF SPACE AND USAGE THROUGH BAYS AND ALL OF THAT TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE AT LEAST TRYING TO MEET THE NEED THAT'S THERE NOW.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO SET IT UP IN A WAY TO WHERE IT'S SAFE, IT'S DIRECTED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND IT'S IN AN AREA WHERE WE KNOW WE CAN GET IN AND CLEAN UP OR HAVE PEOPLE CLEAN UP AFTER PEOPLE ARE USING IT.
I DO WANT TO SAY I SUPPORT RECREATIONAL TARGET SHOOTING.
IF ANY OF YOU CAN CHECK MY RECORD OR OUR RECORD, WE HAVE BUILT FACILITIES ALONG 74, WE BUILT THREE NEW FACILITIES.
WE ARE THE PIONEERING DISTRICT IN PROVIDING FOR ACTUAL RECREATIONAL TARGET SHOOTING FACILITIES FOR THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT.
WE'VE SHOWN OTHER DISTRICTS ACROSS THE BUREAU HOW TO DO IT.
I'M ACTUALLY THE ONE WHO WENT AND BRIEF SECRETARY BERNHARDT UNDER THE LAST ADMINISTRATION AND TALKED TO THEM ABOUT HOW WE NEED TO DO THIS AND CONVINCED THEM THAT WE NEEDED TO DO THIS.
I THINK THAT NOW HAS ALLOWED FOR US TO HAVE SOME TOOLS HERE THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE BACK IN 2010 WHERE WE CAN GO AHEAD BUILD THESE FACILITIES, AND GET TO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SUPERVISOR MICHAELS WHERE NOW WE CAN SAY THIS IS WHERE WE WOULD LIKE THE OHVS TO RECREATE, GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY, BUT NOT HAVE IT HIJACK THE AREA.
SAME WITH RECREATIONAL TARGET SHOOTING.
NOW WE CAN PULL IN OTHER THINGS LIKE INTERPRETIVE STUFF FOR CULTURAL, WE CAN PULL IN CAMPING, BOTH DISPERSED AND PRIMITIVE CAMPING.
WE CAN PULL IN MORE EQUESTRIAN TRAILS, ARCHERY, ALL THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT OUT THERE.
NOW WE HAVE A RICH RECREATIONAL EXPERIENCE, NOT ONLY FOR MARICOPA COUNTY, BUT YAVAPAI COUNTY, RIGHT ALONG THE I17 CORRIDOR WHERE PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITIES CAN ENJOY IT HOLISTICALLY. THERE I GUESS AT THE HEART OF.
>> WELL, ABSOLUTELY, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO START TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO MANAGE OUR PUBLIC LANDS IN A WAY THAT'S GOING TO BE GOOD STEWARDSHIP WHILE AT THE SAME TIME RECOGNIZING OUR RIGHT TO BE OUT THERE AND RECREATING IN THE WAY THAT WE CHOOSE, AS LONG AS IT'S RULE ABIDING.
THAT'S WHAT'S NOT HAPPENING RIGHT NOW, THAT CAUSES ME GREAT CONCERN.
HAVING VERY SPECIFIC AREAS FOR TARGET PRACTICING IS GREAT.
IF I EVER DO GET DRAWN AGAIN, I'LL NEED TO ZERO IN [LAUGHTER] AND THAT'S A GREAT WAY TO DO IT.
BUT THE OHV IS ANOTHER MATTER.
IT'S AN OUTLIER THAT WE'RE ALL TRYING TO GET OUR HEADS AND HANDS AROUND.
I INVITE YOU TO WORK WITH US, OUR BOARD, AND I DO LIKE THE SUGGESTION OF OUR CHAIR ABOUT WORKING TOGETHER AND HAVING SOME MORE DISCUSSION, WE MAY BE ABLE TO BRING TO THE TABLE SOME INSIGHT THAT WE HAVE GAINED IN WORKING WITH THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE AND LEARN FROM YOU ON OTHER MATTERS AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I WANT TO SAY I'VE BEEN THE DISTRICT MANAGER HERE FOR EIGHT YEARS, AND THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE BEEN ON THE BOARD KNOW
[00:25:01]
THAT BEFORE COVID WE WERE HERE QUITE A BIT.I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT OUR MO IS WE LIKE TO WORK WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS EARLY IN THE PROCESS AND I DON'T THINK WE DID A GOOD JOB OF DOING THAT THIS TIME, BUT IT'S NOT OUR NEW MO.
WE'RE GOING TO LEAN IN AND MAKE SURE THAT ON FUTURE PROJECTS THAT WE START HERE, SIT DOWN WITH YOU ALL AND SEE WHERE WE CAN COALESCE AND GET THINGS MOVING IN A DIRECTION THAT BENEFITS BOTH.
WE WILL MAKE IT A POINT TO BE HERE AND TO BRIEF THE BOARD QUITE OFTEN.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT AS FAR AS THIS AREA IS CONCERNED, WE UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE TO THE COMMUNITY, NOT ONLY FROM A SOCIOECONOMIC STANDPOINT, BUT FROM A RECREATION STANDPOINT AS WELL.
I NEED YOU TO KNOW THAT I'M CONSIDERING ALL OF THOSE FACTORS AND THE DECISIONS THAT WE'RE MAKING HERE.
>> YEAH. I JUST WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND A SINCERE THANK YOU FOR YOU COMING UP HERE, FOR BRINGING ALL OF YOUR TEAM.
THAT THE FACT ALL OF YOU CAME UP HERE, AND I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH AND I KNOW THE COMMUNITY DOES AS WELL.
THANK ALL OF YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE IN PERSON. IT MEANS A LOT.
>> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR GREGORY TALKED ON ENFORCEMENT WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
A LOT OF TIMES I HEAR THE NARRATIVE THAT THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO ENFORCE ON OUR PUBLIC LANDS.
NOW, IF YOU LOOK AT 3.1 MILLION ACRES THAT WE MANAGE, WE MAKE UP THE MIDDLE THIRD OF THE STATE, WE PROBABLY DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH LAW ENFORCEMENT TO COVER ALL 3.1 MILLION ACRES.
BUT TRUST ME, WITH THE CHIEF RANGER THAT WE HAVE AND THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, WE BROUGHT ON TWO ADDITIONAL ONES THAT WE HAVE.
THE AREAS THAT WE ARE MANAGING FOR RECREATION, INCLUDING THIS AREA HERE, OUR SHOOTING SPORTS SITES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, WE MAKE SURE WE HAVE ADEQUATE COVERAGE AT ALL TIMES AND WE JUST PATROL SCHEDULES NOT ONLY WITH OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT ALSO OUR PARK RANGERS TO ENSURE THAT WE COVER THESE AREAS.
WE WON'T BE LEAVING THE YAVAPAI COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, MARICOPA COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE OR ANYONE OUT.
WE WILL BE LEAVING THEM HANGING OUT TO DRY WHEN IT COMES TO MANAGING THESE AREAS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
>> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR BROWN.
>> I WOULD ASSUME FROM WHAT YOU JUST SAID THEN YOU'VE HAD THIS DETAILED DISCUSSIONS WITH THE SHERIFF IN REGARDS TO WHAT THEY CAN HELP PROVIDE OR NOT PROVIDE AS FAR AS LAW ENFORCEMENT AND/OR EMERGENCY SERVICES?
>> IT GOES BACK TO WHAT I WAS SAYING BEFORE.
WE HAVE NOT HAD THE DETAILED DISCUSSIONS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE.
MOVING FORWARD, WE'RE GOING TO ENSURE THAT WE LEAN IN WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY SHERIFF, WITH SHERIFF RHODES.
>> THIS REMINDS ME OF AN EVENT SEVERAL YEARS AGO IN REGARDS TO A MINE THAT NOBODY KNEW ABOUT AS WELL.
ALSO I WANT TO PASS ON, YOU MAY HAVE SENT THAT LETTER TO HIM, BUT I DIDN'T GET ONE, AND HE HASN'T HAD ONE.
WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE NOT MADE COMMENT IN REGARDS TO ANYTHING IN REGARDS TO YOUR PLAN.
I THINK TABLE MASON HAS GOT SOME REAL PROBLEMS TO THE WEST OF IT WHERE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH THE ATV AND AN ACTIVITY LIKE THAT, BUT I'M SURE THE SHERIFF TRYING TO EXPAND HIS INFLUENCE AND/OR PATROL AREA IS A SIGNIFICANT HIT ON HIM WHEN HE DOESN'T HAVE THE STAFF TO DO IT OR MAYBE THE EQUIPMENT WHICH WE'LL ADDRESS LATER ON.
>> I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF.
>> BUT IF YOU WANT A PARTNER, WE WANT A PARTNER, BUT BE A LEGITIMATE PARTNER, NOT JUST DOING WHAT WE'RE DICTATED TO BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
I KNOW BLM, YOU'VE GOT YOUR RULES, WE HAVE OUR RULES AND THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS THE SAME.
WE NEED TO GET THOSE THINGS OUT OF THE WAY BEFORE ISSUES HAPPEN.
NEXT QUESTION IS, THE SHOOTING RANGES YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, ARE THESE GOING TO BE MONITORED IN SOMEWHERE? SOME FASHION? IS THERE GOING TO BE A RANGE MASTER OR IS THERE GOING TO BE SOMETHING LIKE THAT? OR ARE WE JUST TALKING ABOUT A RANGE WHERE PEOPLE CAN GO OUT AND FIRE THEIR WEAPONS?
>> YOU TOUCHED ON A LOT OF THINGS SUPERVISOR BROWN.
LET ME GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF SOME OF THE [OVERLAPPING] TALKING ABOUT.
>> I HAVE A TENDENCY TO DO THAT.
>> BY THE WAY, I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR ALL THE ASSISTANCE YOU DID GIVE US THOUGH IN THAT PRIOR ISSUE IN HARRY'S DISTRICT IN REGARDS TO THE MINE IN SKULL VALLEY.
IN PARTNERING WITH SHERIFF RHODES AND THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, WE DIDN'T TOUCH BASE THE WAY WE SHOULD HAVE AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PROJECT.
THAT'S A MISS BY US AND I'LL DO EVERYTHING I CAN TO ENSURE THAT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.
[00:30:03]
WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD TRACK RECORD WITH OTHER COUNTIES.I WANT TO MODEL WHAT WE'VE DONE IN OTHER COUNTIES, MARICOPA COUNTY, PINAL COUNTY IN PARTICULAR.
WE'RE WORKING QUITE WELL WITH PINAL COUNTY WITH A SHERIFF LAMB DOWN THERE IN SOME OF THE ISSUES GOING ON DOWN THERE, SO MUCH SO THAT WE'VE PARTNERED AS FAR AS PATROLS BACK-AND-FORTH ARE HIS DEPUTIES ALONG WITH OUR RANGERS REGULARLY COMMUNICATE ON THE GROUND, WORK CERTAIN SITUATIONS AND ISSUES TOGETHER.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE'VE BEEN TALKING WITH SHERIFF LAMB ABOUT A POTENTIAL COST SHARE WHERE WE CAN PAY PART OF THE SALARY FOR SOME OF HIS DEPUTIES DOWN THERE TO HELP WITH SOME OF THE PATROLS IN THE AREAS THAT WE CAN'T REACH OR TOUCH AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
I'D BE INTERESTED IN SITTING DOWN WITH SHERIFF RHODES TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING SIMILAR UP HERE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> OR UP HERE IN THIS PROJECT.
>> WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT. YES.
>> YOU ALREADY HAVE AN ARRANGEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL FORESTS.
>> I'D LOVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT SIMILAR HERE SO THAT ANY IMPACTS THAT WE DO HAVE, WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT IT'S MITIGATED AS BEST WE CAN BY HAVING SOME COST-SHARE AGREEMENT WHERE WE'RE HELPING TO PAY THE SALARIES OR HELP SUBSIDIZE AVENUE AND MORE DEPUTIES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I'D LOVE TO SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT THAT.
>> REPEAT YOUR SECOND PART LIKE THAT.
>> YOU'RE ASKING ME TO REMEMBER THAT FAR BACK? [LAUGHTER]
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CAPTURING EVERYTHING.
>> IT HAD TO DO WITH JUST THE JOINT EFFORTS WE'RE GOING TO TAKE AS FAR AS MANAGING LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES AND/OR OVERSIGHT AT THE GUN RANGES.
THERE'S A BIG CONCERN I KNOW OUT OF THIS BOARD IN REGARDS TO THE ATV ACTIVITY OUT THERE AND SO WE DON'T WANT TO SEE IT DESTROY OUR FORESTS OR OUR BLM LAND OR EVEN OUR PRIVATE LANDS FOR THAT GOES, AND THERE'S A LOT OF ACTIVITY AND DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW TO APPROACH THAT, AND IT'S NOT AN EASY SUBJECT.
LIKE I SAID, WE'RE THE TEST DISTRICT FOR IT. WE'VE DONE A GREAT JOB.
WE'VE INFORMED OTHER DISTRICTS AROUND THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT AS TO HOW TO MANAGE THESE SHOOTING SPORT SITES.
SO THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS.
ONE, I RECEIVED SOME LETTERS FROM SOME STATE REPRESENTATIVES AND STATE SENATORS.
MY PLAN IS TO TAKE THEM OUT ON A TOUR TO TABLE MESA AND TO THE SHOOTING SPORTS SITES THAT WERE CURRENTLY HAVE OFF OF HIGHWAY 74 THERE, CAREFREE HIGHWAY.
AND JUST TALK THROUGH THE ACTUAL MANAGEMENT ON THE GROUND AND THE PRACTICES THAT WE HAD AT TABLE MESA COMPARED TO THE SUCCESSES THAT WE'RE HAVING AT OUR SHOOTING SPORTS SITES THERE.
AS FAR AS OVERSIGHT, IT'S A MIXED BAG.
WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT THE ENGINEERING DESIGNS OF THE SITES WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THERE, AND IT DEPENDS ON HOW FAR OUT OR HOW DEVELOPED WE MAKE THE SITES AS TO WHAT TYPE OF PRESENCE WE'LL HAVE OUT THERE.
RANGE MASTERS ARE ON THE TABLE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THEM AS SOME OF OUR OTHER SIDES, BUT WE ALSO HAVE REGULAR PATROLS OF OUR PARK RANGERS BEING UP THERE ON A REGULAR BASIS.
WE HAVE A SLEW OF VOLUNTEERS THAT WE HAVE TRAINED AS RANGE SAFETY OFFICERS THAT ARE OUT THERE ON THE GROUND AND NOT ONLY AT OUR DEVELOPED SITES THAT WE HAVE NOW, BUT WE'LL HAVE SOME OUT AT TABLE MESA AS WELL.
THEY GO THROUGH A TRAINING CLASS B RANGE SAFETY OFFICER AND THEY KNOW HOW TO MITIGATE SITUATIONS OUT THERE ALONG WITH OUR REGULAR LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT'S OUT THERE.
IT'S PRETTY TRIED AND TRUE AT THE SHOOTING SPORTS SITES THAT WE'VE DEVELOPED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, AND WE THINK THAT WE CAN EMPLOY THOSE SAME PRACTICES DOWN IN TABLE MESA.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU. GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN.
>> YOU'RE WELCOME. GOOD TO SEE YOU AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I JUST GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY GRAZING ALLOTMENTS IN THAT AREA?
>> WE DO. JAMES, HOW MANY GRAZING ALLOTMENTS DO WE HAVE IN THE AREA THERE?
>> THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY THIS AT ALL?
>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. HOW ARE THEY AFFECTED IF THEY ARE, JAMES?
WE'RE NOT EXPECTING MUCH THE WAY OF EFFECTS.
REALLY THE CONCERN RIGHT NOW IS THE RECREATION WHICH IS GOING ON I [INAUDIBLE] USE OF THE AREA.
SO ONCE WE GET THIS DEVELOPED, IT'S GOING TO HELP AND MANAGES ALLOTMENT A LOT BETTER.
>> WELL, I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE PROBLEM WE HAVE IN MANY PLACES, EVEN IN THE NATIONAL FOREST.
SO HOW MANY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS DO YOU HAVE IN YOUR BLM IN ARIZONA?
> I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER. I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU WHAT I HAVE ON MY DISTRICT AND WHAT I WILL HAVE.
>> SO WE HAVE SEVEN CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW, AND WE'RE GOING TO ADD ANOTHER TWO TO MAKE IT NINE, INCLUDING OUR CHIEF RANGER.
>> NOW, WELL, ONE OF MY CONCERNS, OF COURSE, IS THE CAMPING, THE PRIMITIVE.
AND IF YOU DO HAVE DESIGNATED SPOTS,
[00:35:03]
I KNOW THAT THE FOREST SERVICE HAS DESIGNATED SPOTS AND YOU CAN STAY THERE FOR TWO WEEKS AND THEN YOU HAVE TO VACATE BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE JUST MOVE DOWN TO ANOTHER DESTINATION SPOT SOMEPLACE ELSE.BUT I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PRIMITIVE ONES.
I KNOW DOWN IN MY AREA AROUND CONGRESS, SOON AS IT GETS COOLED OFF, YOU'LL HAVE A LOT OF TRAILERS OUT THERE, RVS, AND THERE'LL BE THERE FOR LONG PERIODS OF TIME.
THEY'RE NOT REALLY DESIGNATED SPOTS.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THEIR TRASH OR THEIR WASTE OR ANYTHING ELSE.
SO HOW ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO MANAGE THIS AND MAKE SURE THAT IT DOESN'T BECOME EVEN A GREATER PROBLEM?
>> I FEEL LIKE YOU JUST TOSSED ME A SOFT ONE AND I'M ABOUT TO KNOCK IT OUT OF THE PARK.
SO LET ME CALL MY EXCITEMENT DOWN.
THE WRECK AREA BOUNDARY ALLOWS FOR US TO DO AWAY WITH EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THE FACT THAT SOMEONE CAN JUST CAMP ON PUBLIC LAND FOR 14 DAYS AND GO BEYOND THAT HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE'VE HAD TROUBLE WITH ENFORCEMENT ACROSS THE DISTRICT.
MORE SO DOWN IN APACHE JUNCTION.
SO WE FOUND THAT BUILDING THESE WRECK AREA BOUNDARIES ALLOWS FOR US TO SAY, HEY, YOU CAN ONLY BE CAMPING IN THIS SPOT FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT'S TRULY DESIGNATED AND IT ALLOWS OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO TAKE ACTION A LITTLE BIT FASTER IN A WAY THAT WILL BE ACCEPTED BY THE ASSISTANT US ATTORNEY, AS FAR AS WHEN TICKETS AND THINGS GO TO COURT.
SO NOT HAVING THE WRECK AREA BOUNDARY ALLOWS FOR JUST DISPERSED CAMPING, 14 DAYS AND BEYOND, AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD WHEN WE WANT TO ENFORCE THE 14-DAY RULE IS THAT WE HAVE TO PROVE THAT THEY'D BEEN THERE FOR 14 CONSECUTIVE DAYS IN THAT SPOT.
SO WE'VE HAD TO HAVE OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT AND OUR PARK RANGERS GO OUT, DOCUMENT EACH DAY WITH GPS TABLETS, THAT THEY'RE IN THAT SPOT, AND IT'S JUST BEEN A DAUNTING TASK.
SO THIS WRECK AREA BOUNDARY WILL ALLOW FOR US TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT AND GO ON IN THERE AND ASKING PEOPLE TO MOVE ON IF THEY'RE NOT THERE FOR THE USE THAT'S DESIGNATED FOR THAT SPOT.
>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT.
>> TAG ON. THAT WAS A VERY GOOD POINT ABOUT MONITORING, AND I UNDERSTAND THE MANPOWER AND TIME THAT TAKES.
THE FOREST SERVICE HAS AN APP, AS I AM TOLD, THAT THEY COULD PUT IN THEIR PHONE, THAT WILL ACCOUNT THE DAYS FOR ONCE THEY GET THE PICTURE OF THE LICENSE PLATE AND THE BASIC INFORMATION, AND HELP MANAGE THAT TIME FRAME A LITTLE MORE EFFICIENTLY USING TECHNOLOGY.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW ABOUT THAT APP OR HAVE TRIED IT.
I KNOW IT'S NEW, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT REALLY IS EFFECTIVELY REPLACING THE TIME YOU WOULD SPEND IN THE FIELD, BUT I JUST OFFER THAT UP BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S A REAL PROBLEM UP HERE, GETTING FOLKS TO MOVE ON AND PROVING THAT THEY'VE BEEN THERE BEYOND THAT 14-DAY ACCEPTABLE TIME PERIOD.
>> WE SHARE THAT APP WITH THEM.
IT'S THE SAME APP THAT WE'RE USING.
THE ISSUE IS, AND IT'S NOT REALLY EVEN AN ISSUE, IT'S JUST, IT TAKES TIME, IS THAT EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE THE APP, YOU HAVE TO GO OUT THERE AND PHYSICALLY MARK AND SAY THAT THEY'VE BEEN THERE ON DAY 2 OR DAY 5, AND JUST PROVE THAT THEY'VE BEEN IN THAT SPOT WITH THE GIS APP.
YOU HAVE TO PHYSICALLY BE IN THE SPOT AND SEE THEM THERE AT LEAST FOR A CONSECUTIVE NUMBER OF DAYS, A FEW DAYS BEYOND THE 14 DAYS BEFORE THE AUSA WILL AT LEAST TAKE THE CASE.
ACCORDING TO THE CURRENT AUSA, WE HAVE TO SHOW THAT WE'VE OFFERED THEM SOCIAL SERVICES OR PROVIDED WRAPAROUND SERVICES FOR THEM, WHICH I'M ALL FOR, BY THE WAY.
BUT THAT'S A STEP THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE INSTEAD OF SAYING, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO TICKET YOU OR MAKE YOU MOVE ALONG, THAT WE'VE OFFERED THEM SOME ASSISTANCE AS FAR AS LETTING THEM KNOW WHAT SHELTERS MAY BE IN THE AREA OR WHATEVER ELSE.
SO WE'VE BEEN DOING THAT AS A PART OF OUR DUTIES AS WELL.
>> I'M KEENLY INTERESTED IN THE SLEW OF VOLUNTEERS THAT YOU REFERRED TO.
I WOULD APPRECIATE MR. CHAIRMAN, IF IT'S ALL RIGHT WITH YOU TO HAVE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, LIKE THE DOCUMENTATION, THE TRAINING INFORMATION, ET CETERA, AS WE GO FORWARD, WHO KNOWS WHETHER THAT MIGHT BE A POSSIBILITY IN OUR NECK OF THE WOODS TOO.
>> SHERIFF, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ANY COMMENTS IN ADDITION?
>> DAVID RHODES, YOU HAVE A PIKE COUNTY SHERIFF.
FIRST I JUST WANTED TO THANK MR. LEON AND HIS TEAM FOR COMING UP HERE AND PARTICIPATING IN THIS PUBLIC MEETING,
[00:40:04]
PROVIDING INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT IT IS THAT THEY'RE DOING DOWN THERE.IT'S DIFFICULT TO I HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS BECAUSE THE BUREAUCRACY AROUND LAND MANAGEMENT AND PUBLIC SAFETY IS EXTRAORDINARY AND IT'S NOT JUST HERE YAVAPAI COUNTY, IT'S ALL OVER THE COUNTRY.
I THOUGHT MAYBE I WOULD JUST TAKE A SECOND TO REMIND THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND WHAT THIS PROCESS LOOKS LIKE AND WHY THESE PARTNERSHIPS ARE SO IMPORTANT.
THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, OBVIOUSLY A FEDERAL AGENCY, OVERSEES SOME OF THE LANDS IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA, AND OF COURSE, HERE IN YAVAPAI COUNTY.
THERE ARE LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCIES, SO AS THE US FOREST SERVICE, BUT THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACIES.
WE HAVE TWO LINES OF CONVERSATION ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY AND CAMPING ISSUES OHV WHATEVER IT IS WITH TWO DIFFERENT GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACIES WHERE YOU'RE TRYING TO COME TO TERMS WITH ONE CLEAR, CONSISTENT MESSAGE SO THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND WHAT THE HECK IS GOING ON OUT THERE.
BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH WE THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE IS NOT INVOLVED IN THE OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF IS NOT INVOLVED IN CREATING TRAVEL MANAGEMENT OTHER THAN PROVIDING INPUT AS REQUESTED, WHETHER A TRAVEL MANAGEMENT, WHETHER IT'S RECREATION AREAS OR WHATNOT, WHICH BY THE WAY, THESE THINGS NEED TO OCCUR FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY STANDPOINT.
WE CANNOT ALLOW THE LANDS TO BE DESTROYED.
WE CAN'T HAVE SHOOTING RANGES THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE THE BACKSTOP IS, YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE CAMPING.
IT'S GOT TO BE ORGANIZED AND IT'S GOT TO BE CORRECT.
BUT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND THE COUNTY, WHETHER IT'S MARICOPA IN THIS CASE, YOU HAVE A PIKE COUNTY PANEL.
THAT'S WHERE THE 911 CALLS RING WHEN PEOPLE SEE VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW.
WHEN THERE ARE ISSUES WITH SHOOTING, WHEN THERE'S UNSAFE, WHATEVER IT IS, SEARCH AND RESCUE.
THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR RESPONDING TO THOSE CALLS AND CREATING DISPOSITION.
NOW, MANY TIMES PEOPLE SEE THINGS THAT THEY BELIEVE IS A VIOLATION OF THE LAW AND IT'S ACTUALLY AN ADMINISTRATIVE RULE THAT WAS CREATED BY ONE OF THE GOVERNMENT AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCIES.
THEY CALL AND I'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH SUPERVISOR OBERG, SUPERVISOR BROWN, MET SUPERVISOR MICHAEL.
ALL OF YOU, PEOPLE ARE FRUSTRATED AND CONFUSED BECAUSE THEY CALL 911 WHEN THEY SEE SOMEBODY DOING SOMETHING THAT'S NOT AGAINST STATE LAW, BUT IT'S AGAINST ONE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE RULES CREATED BY THE LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCIES.
THOSE AND THEN THEY GET HANDED OFF FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, FROM 911 TO, IN THIS CASE, A BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT SO THAT THEIR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS CAN GO AND TAKE WHATEVER ACTION THAT THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE.
THIS PROCESS LENDS ITSELF TO A LOT OF DIFFICULTY FOR EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE CONDUCT.
WHAT DOES THE LAW SAY? WHAT SPECIFICALLY, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENFORCING WHAT? WE HAVE TO BE VIGILANT AND DILIGENT IN THESE PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS, WHICH IS WHY I'M GRATEFUL THAT THE ENTIRE BLM TEAM FROM THE DISTRICT IS HERE TODAY.
PERHAPS TAKE QUESTIONS AFTERWARDS IN THE HALLWAY OR WHATNOT, BUT WE HAVE TO BE DILIGENT IN COMMUNICATING BACK AND FORTH ABOUT HOW THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
AS SUPERVISOR MICHAEL'S POINTED OUT, THERE IS AN OHV STUDY COMMITTEE.
I WAS ASKED TO BE A PART OF IT.
THERE'S A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE PART OF IT TO TRY TO COME UP WITH SOME TYPE OF LEGISLATION THAT DOES NOT RESTRICT ACCESS TO PUBLIC LANDS, BUT DOES HELP GOVERN THE USE OF OHV'S THAT WHEN PEOPLE ARE TEARING UP PUBLIC LANDS, WHEN THEY'RE DOING DAMAGE TO PROPERTY, WHEN THEY ARE HARASSING LIVESTOCK, WHEN THEY ARE, WHATEVER IT IS THAT'S HAPPENING, WE NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB.
WE'RE GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
WE KNOW IN THE LAST THREE YEARS, REALLY SINCE THE PANDEMIC, THE USE OF PUBLIC LANDS HAS EXPLODED ALL OVER THE NATION.
CERTAINLY HERE IN ARIZONA AND CERTAINLY HERE IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, WHICH IS THE NEED FOR NOT ONLY ENFORCEMENT, BUT PUBLIC EDUCATION ON PUBLIC LANDS HAS INCREASED DRAMATICALLY.
I HAVE FOUND THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE OUT THERE ATTEMPTING TO USE PUBLIC LANDS AND RECREATE AND DO THINGS ARE GOOD LAW ABIDING CITIZENS THAT WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
[00:45:02]
DON'T WANT TO TEAR THINGS UP, DON'T WANT TO WRITE OFF ROAD, DON'T WANT TO SHOOT UNSAFELY.DON'T WANT TO CAUSE ANY PROBLEMS. THEY JUST WANT TO ENJOY THEIR PUBLIC LANDS AND SO THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DISCUSS IN OUR COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE BLM.
WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE POLICIES THAT IS MANAGEMENT BY CLOSURE EVER.
I WANT IT TO BE VERY CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC THAT I HAVE NOT PERSONALLY SUPPORTED THAT.
I'VE NOT KNOWN ANYBODY TO SUPPORT THAT.
CERTAINLY, MR. LEON AND HIS TEAM ARE WORKING TO FIND WAYS TO KEEP ACCESS OPEN.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, SUPERVISOR BROWN, IT'S AN ONGOING DIALOGUE ON PUBLIC SAFETY.
I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT THE DIFFERENCES AND WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT AND WHY WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO DISCUSS HOW TO MAKE THESE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS.
WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION IN THIS ROOM LAST WEEK WITH THE CHIEF OF THE FOREST SERVICE, THAT'S TWO WEEKS AGO.
I'M LOSING TRACK OF TIME, BUT THE DIFFICULTY THAT THERE IS IN THE BILATERAL ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS. I'LL CLOSE WITH THAT. I APPRECIATE THE TIME TO MAKE THOSE COMMENTS AND I APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION.
>> I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME BRINGING YOUR STAFF UP HERE AND ANSWERING ALL THESE QUESTIONS AND PRESENTING WHAT WE HAVE GOING ON.
DOWNTURN THAT SOUTHERN AREA TABLE MESA OR ANYBODY DRIVEN SOUTH TO I17 SOUTH, THE BLACK HAND CITY, IT'S A DUST CLOUD DOWN THERE TOO.
THERE ARE SOME MANAGEMENT NEEDS TO BE DONE.
>> THANK YOU. IT'S SOMETHING I'M VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT.
I GREW UP HERE IN ARIZONA, WENT TO NYU IN LUMBERJACK, AND SO I WAS HANDED ONE OF THOSE OHV'S WHEN I WAS 10 YEARS OLD AND SO I KNOW BOTH SIDES OF IT.
IT'S SOMETHING I THINK THAT HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE SOME POSITIVE CHANGE OUT THERE. THANK YOU.
WE'RE GOING INTO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[ CONSENT AGENDA (Routine items that may all be approved by one motion. ALL ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEMS 7, 8, 34, AND 35.]
CONSENT ITEMS ARE ROUTINE ITEMS THAT MAY BE APPROVED ALL BY ONE MOTION.I HAVE ITEMS NUMBER 347, 8, AND 35 BEING PULLED ALL BUT 34 BEING PULLED BY SUPERVISOR OBERG.
IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL ITEMS? IF NOT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEMS 1-35 WITH THE EXCEPTION OF 7, 8,3 4, AND 35.
>> I MADE THE MOTION SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR OBERG.
>> MOTION CARRIES. NOW, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 7.
[7. County Attorney - Approve a Victim Assistance Grant from the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission (ACJC) for the receipt of $62,863.00 in State Funding to commence July 1, 2023 and terminate June 30, 2024, and request re-establishment of Fund Number 792 for the award. YC Contract Number 2023-348 ]
COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVED VICTIM SERVICE GRANT FROM ARIZONA CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION FOR THE RECEIPT OF $62,863 IN STATE FUNDING. SUPERVISOR OBERG.>> THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY FROM COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HERE TO EXPLAIN THESE TWO ITEMS? SOMEBODY UP THERE.
>> GOOD MORNING VICE CHAIRMAN OBERG MY NAME IS BILL HUGHES.
I'M THE CHIEF DEPUTY AT THE YAVAPAI COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND I'D BE HAPPY TO DISCUSS OR ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CAN ABOUT THOSE TWO AGENDA ITEMS.
>> NUMBER 7 IS, IS THIS A NEW REQUIREMENT? HAVE WE HAD SOMEBODY IN THE PAST AND WE'RE JUST FINDING SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THIS PERSON GOING FORWARD OR IS THIS A NEW POSITION?
>> IF I CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION WITH A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY BEHIND THIS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 7, THE BOARD MAY RECALL DURING THE BUDGET SESSION THAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAD FOR MANY YEARS RECEIVED A BOKEH GRANT THAT COVERED THREE OF OUR VICTIM ADVOCATE POSITIONS.
MANY COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICES AROUND THE STATE RECEIVED SIMILAR GRANTS FOR VICTIM SERVICES THIS YEAR BECAUSE OF FUNDING ISSUES OF VOCHA, SEVERELY CUT BACK THAT GRANT AND THE NET RESULT OF THAT CUT BACK WAS WE LOST FUNDING FOR THREE VICTIM ADVOCATE POSITIONS.
IN AN ATTEMPT TO RESPOND TO THAT; WE, MY OFFICE APPLIED TO ACCJC WHICH IS A DIFFERENT ENTITY FOR GRANT FUNDING.
THAT APPLICATION WAS PENDING AT THE TIME WE ACTUALLY WENT TO THE BOARD.
WE WANTED TO GET BASICALLY THE VOCHA MONEY MADE UP THROUGH
[00:50:02]
ACCJC AFTER THE BUDGET PROCESS AND CONCLUDED ACCJC APPROVED BUT THEY ONLY APPROVED FUNDING FOR ONE POSITION WHICH IS WHAT THIS BUDGET ITEM IS, BUT IT GETS A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED.THE SENSE THAT AT TIME THE BOARD WHICH WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE BECAUSE IT WAS A CRITICAL NEED FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, THE BOARD APPROVED PAYMENT OF THOSE THREE VICTIM ADVOCATE POSITIONS THAT PREVIOUSLY VOCHA HAD BEEN PAYING FOR AND THEN ACCJC CAME FORWARD AND SAID, YES, WE WILL PAY FOR ONE.
THE PROBLEM IS, IS UNDER THE TERMS OF THEIR GRANT, THAT MONEY CANNOT BE USED TO SUPPLANT ANY POSITION THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED OR PAID FOR.
NOW WE CAN NO LONGER USE THAT MONEY FOR ONE OF THOSE THREE POSITIONS, AND SO WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS WE HAVE APPLIED TO ACCJC TO MODIFY THE ORIGINAL GRANT PROPOSAL THAT WE FILED BACK BEFORE THE BUDGET PROCESS, TO MODIFY THAT FROM A PAIN FOR SALARY AND ERE AND THAT SORT OF THING FOR OTHER VICTIMS SERVICES NEEDS.
I CAN GO OVER WHAT SOME OF THOSE NEEDS ARE BUT ONE OF THE CRITICAL NEEDS IS INTERPRETATION SERVICES.
MY OFFICE DEALS WITH A WIDE SPECTRUM OF VICTIMS. AS I'M SURE THE BOARD CAN UNDERSTAND, SOME OF THOSE VICTIMS ARE NOT ENGLISH-SPEAKING PERSONS BUT YET THEY'VE BEEN HORRIBLY VICTIMIZED.
THEIR CHILDREN HAVE BEEN VICTIMIZED OR THEY THEMSELVES HAVE BEEN VICTIMIZED AND BECAUSE THEY DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH, IT HAS BEEN VERY DIFFICULT FOR THIS OFFICE TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY WITH THEM.
PART OF WHAT THIS OFFICE DID YEARS AGO, THE BOARD MAY REMEMBER AS MORE OF MY HISTORY LESSON, IS WE CONVERTED TO A AUTOMATED SYSTEM IN ORDER TO SAVE MANPOWER COST TO THE COUNTY.
THAT AUTOMATED SYSTEM SENDS A LOT OF LETTERS AND OTHER NOTIFICATIONS TO VICTIMS TO LET THEM KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THEIR CASE AND THEN GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND WITH A PHONE NUMBER TO CALL IN.
THE PROBLEM WE HAVE IS WE HAVE WELL OVER 100 OF THOSE STOCK NOTICES THAT WE SEND OUT.
THEY'RE ALL IN ENGLISH AND THEY NEED TO BE INTERPRETED.
IT'S BEEN ON OUR HONEYDEW LIST OF AN URGENT NEED.
WE JUST HAVEN'T HAD THE FUNDING TO CONVERT SOME OR ALL OF THOSE NOTIFICATIONS INTO SPANISH.
WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS WE'VE GONE BACK TO ACCJC AND WE HAVE ASKED ACCJC TO MODIFY THIS GRANT TO ALLOW US INSTEAD OF USING IT FOR THE POSITION WHICH WE CAN'T USE IT FOR LEGALLY NOW, TO ALLOW US TO USE IT FOR OTHER NEEDS THAT VICTIM SERVICES HAS INCLUDING THE TRANSLATION ISSUE, ALSO SOME NEEDED TRAINING FOR VICTIM SERVICES FOLKS FOR PROSECUTORS, FOR INVESTIGATORS, AND THEY OFFICE ON VICTIM RELATED ISSUES.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. I APPRECIATE THAT EXPLANATION, BUT I THINK THERE'S ALSO SOME MATCH ON THIS.
WHERE'S THAT MATCH COMING FROM?
>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION VICE CHAIRMAN OBERG.
THERE IS A REQUIRED MATCH, BUT THE MATCH AS I UNDERSTAND IT AND I RECEIVED PRETTY GOOD BRIEFING ABOUT THIS, THE MATCH WILL COME JUST FROM OUR REGULAR VICTIM SERVICES BUDGET, SO THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE COUNTY TO PERFORM THAT MATCH.
THE COUNTY'S ALREADY PUTTING ENOUGH MONEY INTO VICTIM SERVICES THAT MATCH WILL BE MORE THAN COVERED BY OUR EXISTING BUDGET.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION.
ANY OTHER FURTHER DISCUSSION TO ACCEPT THIS ITEM?
>> WE HAVE A SECOND FROM OUR MOTION BY VICE CHAIRMAN OBERG, A SECOND BY SUPERVISOR BROWN.
>> NOW NUMBER 8. AGAIN, I THINK THAT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE 1-2 POSITIONS.
[8. County Attorney - Approve the Victim Rights Program Grant from the Arizona Attorney General's Office in the receipt of the amount of $94,200.00 to commence July 1, 2023, and terminate June 30, 2024. YC Contract No. 2023-404 ]
THEY'RE ALSO OR IS THAT ALSO GOING TO BE SERVICES?NUMBER 8 IS A GRANT THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED FOR AT LEAST 10 YEARS, PROBABLY BEYOND THAT BUT WE WENT IN PREPARATION FOR THIS DISCUSSION TODAY.
MY VICTIM SERVICES DIRECTOR WENT BACK.
WE'VE RECEIVED THIS GRANT SINCE AT LEAST 2013.
OUR ANTICIPATION WAS WE WOULD RECEIVE THIS GRANT, SO WHEN WE WENT TO THE BOARD AT BUDGET TIME WE HAD ALREADY ANTICIPATED THAT THIS POSITION IT'S ACTUALLY ONE FULL POSITION AND A THIRD OF A SECOND, 31% OF A SECOND POSITION.
WE WENT TO THE BOARD EXPECTING THAT WE WOULD BE RECEIVING THIS GRANT FUNDS AS WE HAVE IN ALL THESE OTHER YEARS AND SO THIS ITEM AGENDA NUMBER 8 IS SIMPLY ASKING THE BOARD TO ACCEPT THIS GRANT MONEY FROM
[00:55:04]
THE ARIZONA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE THAT WE HAD ANTICIPATED THAT HAS FUNDED THESE POSITIONS FOR QUITE A PERIOD OF TIME.>> DO YOU HAVE THE FUNDING FOR THE OTHER TWO-THIRDS FOR THAT SECOND PERSON.
>> THAT WAS BUILT INTO OUR BUDGET REQUEST AND THE COUNTY HAS BEEN PAYING THE OTHER TWO-THIRDS FOR QUITE SOME TIME AS WELL, I BELIEVE.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN HAD BEEN ANY OTHER FURTHER DISCUSSION? I MAKE THE MOTION GO AHEAD AND APPROVE ITE.
>> WE GOT A MOTION BY VICE CHAIR OBERG, SECOND BY SUPERVISOR BROWN.
>> MOTION CARRIES AND WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER 34 WHICH WAS PULLED BY SUPERVISOR BROWN,
[34. Sheriff - Approve acceptance of a Funding Award in the amount of $112,000.00 from Arizona State Parks and Trails for the purchase of two side-by-side Off Highway Vehicles (OHV), associated equipment and trailers, and request the establishment of a new Fund Number. YC Contract No. 2023-406]
APPROVED SEPTUM FROM FUNDING AND THE AMOUNT OF 112,000 FROM THE ARIZONA STATE PARKS AND TRAILS FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO SIDE-BY-SIDE FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.SUPERVISOR BROWN DO YOU PULL THIS ITEM?
>> THE REASON I PULLED THIS ITEM AND I ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS WITH THE SHERIFF [INAUDIBLE] AND WITH THE CHIEF DEPUTY.
OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE ALWAYS ON THE LOOKOUT FOR ANYTHING THAT WILL PROVIDE US THE FUNDING TO GO A STEP FURTHER IN THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OR ANYTHING ELSE WE DO WITHIN THE COUNTY.
I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT WE'VE GOT THIS AWARD.
HOWEVER, WITH ALL OF THESE AND I'M GOING TO MAKE MY FAMOUS STATEMENT, WHAT'S THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF TAKING THIS MONEY? DO WE HAVE TO HAVE ANY MATCH? DO WE HAVE TO BUY ANYTHING ELSE AS FAR AS EQUIPMENT TO GO ON THESE? IT WON'T BE COVERED BY THE 112,000 DO WE HAVE COMPUTERS. DO WE HAVE ENOUGH DEPUTIES TO USE THE EQUIPMENT? DO WE HAVE TO HAVE MORE TRAILERS? DO WE HAVE TO HAVE MORE TRAILER HITCHES AND VEHICLES? I'M JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE.
>>WELL, DAVID RHODES, YAVAPAI COUNTY SHERIFF, MR. CHAIRMAN, SUPERVISOR BROWN.
LET ME GO OVER THE HISTORY OF THIS REQUESTS A LITTLE BIT AND THEN I'LL GET INTO ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION.
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, AFTER THE PRESENTATION FROM BLM, WE'VE HAD JUST A PROLIFERATION OF OHVU, SEARCH AND RESCUE PUBLIC LAND USE IN THE COUNTY WHICH HAS LED TO MANY MORE CALLS FOR SERVICE, MANY MORE OPERATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE OUT ON THE PUBLIC LANDS.
AS WE STARTED WORKING [LAUGHTER] ON THIS OHV STUDY COMMITTEE AND LEARNING ABOUT THE OHV TAG FEES SO YOU HAVE TO PAY THE $25 FOR THE TAG, THE STICKER, AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS PASSED WAY BACK IN 20006, 8, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AT THE TIME WHEN THEY PASSED THAT LAW CREATING OHV TAG FEE, THEY DECIDED THAT THE PREVAILING WISDOM AT THE TIME WAS THAT THAT FUNDING WOULD GO TO A COUPLE OF PLACES.
ONE WAS ARIZONA GAME AND FISH WHO WOULD BE DOING THE PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT.
IT WAS THOUGHT AT THAT TIME SINCE MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT WERE DRIVING OHV'S IN THE PUBLIC LANDS WERE HUNTING, THAT ARIZONA GAME AND FISH OFFICERS WOULD BE ENCOUNTERING THEM, AND THAT WAS A LOGICAL PLACE FOR THE ENFORCEMENT TO OCCUR.
THAT'S NOT WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY.
MOST OF THE PEOPLE ARE RECREATING THAT ARE DRIVING OHV'S.
SOME OF THE MONEY WENT TO THE ARIZONA STATE PARKS IN EFFECT FOR GRANTS.
NOW, WE LEARNED ABOUT THAT THROUGH OUR STUDIES HERE AND REALIZED THAT THIS FUNDING WAS AVAILABLE FOR US OR TO ANYBODY TO MAKE APPLICATIONS AS NECESSARY.
WE HAD ALWAYS DONE ENFORCEMENT TO FORCE PATROL, AND THEN REGULAR DEPUTIES AND OUTLYING AREAS HAVE USED THE TA-HORSE OR THE VEHICLES PURCHASED BY THE COUNTY.
WE HAD PURCHASED SOME SINGLE SEED ATVS THAT WE HAD USED FOR SOME OF THESE THINGS.
BUT AS THINGS HAVE GONE ON AND THE OHV EQUIPMENT, THE RESPONSE EQUIPMENT HAS REALLY BEEN DEVELOPED INTO RESCUE EQUIPMENT LIKE THE POLIS EXPEDITION OR THE CANNONS OR WHATNOT.
THAT IS A MUCH BETTER PLATFORM FOR SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING, WHETHER IT'S EXISTING DEPUTIES THAT WE HAVE THAT ARE WORKING FORCE PATROL THAT CAN USE THAT TO GET OUT INTO SOME OF THESE AREAS FOR THESE OPERATIONS, OR VOLUNTEERS WHO ARE DOING SEARCH AND RESCUE OPERATIONS.
THESE UNITS ARE NEEDED AND NECESSARY.
WHEN WE MADE THIS APPLICATION TO PURCHASE THESE, THEY COME WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU NEED TO START YOUR OPERATIONS,
[01:00:03]
GET THEM GOING, BE ABLE TO DRIVE OUT THERE, BE ABLE TO GO TO A PROACTIVE OHV ENFORCEMENT AND WHATNOT.WE HAVE TRAILERS, WE HAVE VEHICLES TO PULL THEM WITH.
WE HAVE VOLUNTEERS TO DRIVE THEM.
ANY ASSOCIATED COSTS THAT WOULD COME WITH THEM, I BELIEVE WOULD BE NEGLIGIBLE.
MAYBE WE NEED TO PURCHASE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ARE RELATED TO SEARCH AND RESCUE, BUT I JUST DON'T SEE THAT THIS MOMENT A BIG EXPENSE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM.
>> DO YOU SEE IT USED IN SEARCH AND RESCUE PRIMARILY AND/OR OUT OF THAT UNIT OR IS IT GOING TO BE OUT OF FORESTS PATROL?
>> I SEE IT IN BOTH. I SIT IN SEARCH AND RESCUE, BUT I ALSO SEE IT IN BOTH.
IT'S VERY HARD TO GET A FOUR-WHEEL DRIVE TAHOE ONTO THE OHV TRAILS WHERE A LOT OF THESE VIOLATIONS ARE OCCURRING.
THEN WHEN YOU'RE OUT THERE, YOU NEED A VEHICLE THAT HAS THE FUNCTIONS LIKE A LAW ENFORCEMENT VEHICLE, THAT'S WHAT THESE ARE.
BUT ALSO WHEN YOU'RE GOING INTO CERTAIN AREAS, THERE'S A OHV CRASHES, THERE'S LOST PEOPLE, THERE'S WHATEVER.
THESE ARE MUCH QUICKER IN THEIR RESPONSE AND MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE.
ONCE AGAIN, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALWAYS TRIED TO DO AT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, IS LOOK FOR FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES THAT DON'T INVOLVE THE GENERAL FUND AT THE SHERIFFS OR AT THE COUNTY.
>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT.
>> MOTION BY SUPERVISOR BROWN.
SECOND BY SUPERVISOR MICHAELS.
>> MOTION CARRIES. THE NEXT ONE WILL BE NUMBER OF 35 AND SHERIFF,
[35. Sheriff - Approve acceptance of a Funding Award in the amount of $2,108,000.00 from the Office of Justice Programs, through the Bryne Discretionary Community Project, for the purchase of a helicopter for law enforcement related activities, and request the establishment of a new Fund Number. YC Contract No. 2023-405]
YOU MIGHT WANT TO STAY UP THERE.THIS WAS PULLED BY SUPERVISOR OBERG.
THAT'S APPROVE ACCEPTANCE OF FUNDING AWARD IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,108,000 FROM THE OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS THROUGH THE BYRNE DISCRETIONARY COMMUNITY PROJECT TO PURCHASE A HELICOPTER FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT RELATED ACTIVITIES. MIKE SCHOBER.
>> THANK YOU SHERIFF FOR COMING IN TODAY.
GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON THIS I LIKE TRYING GET CLARIFIED.
HOW DO WE ACQUIRE THIS FUNDING, WAS IT DIRECTED OR WAS IT REQUESTED FROM US?
>> CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTED FUNDING.
WE MADE THE APPLICATION TO SENATOR MARK KELLY'S OFFICE.
>> SO THIS IS BASICALLY FEDERAL FUND?
>> OKAY. HOW MANY PILOTS ARE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO SUPPORT THIS AIRCRAFT?
>> WELL, SINCE THEY'RE PART-TIME OR ON CALL, AS MANY QUALIFIED PILOTS AS WE CAN GET, BUT YOU DEFINITELY NEED A COUPLE.
>> ARE THESE VOLUNTEERS OR PAID?
>> YES, THEY ARE. THAT'S AN OXYMORON.
VOLUNTEERS ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT PAID.
WE HAVE AN AVIATION PROGRAM, A HELICOPTER PROGRAM, AND THE HELICOPTER SPIN DOWN NOW FOR ABOUT A COUPLE OF YEARS, YEAR-AND-A-HALF OR SO AND WE WANT TO UPGRADE AND THE THE MANNER THAT WE WERE USING BEFORE WERE CONTRACT PILOTS SO WHEN THEY WERE FLYING, WE WERE PAYING THEM A CONTRACT RATE, BUT THEY WERE NOT FTES ARE FULL-TIME EQUIVALENTS OF THE AGENCY.
>> YOU'RE GOING TO USE THESE CONTRACT PILOTS AGAIN?
>> AND YOU HAD THE FUNDING TO SUPPORT THAT?
>> WE HAVE ANOTHER REQUEST OF CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTED MONEY THAT IS PENDING THAT WE'RE VERY OPTIMISTIC ABOUT, THAT WILL COVER OPERATIONAL COSTS.
NOW, WE HAD BUDGET CAPACITY PRIOR TO WHEN WE HAD THE OTHER HELICOPTER PROBLEM PLATFORM, THE ROBINSON 44 THAT WE WERE USING TO PAY THOSE PILOTS.
YES, WE HAVE TWO MANNERS THERE TO PAY FOR THEM. YES.
>> IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE THIS FUNDING AND THEN HAVE THIS HELICOPTER, HOW WOULD YOU GET HELICOPTER SUPPORT AND IS THAT BASICALLY YOU WOULD REQUEST THAT FROM DPS?
>> IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THE FUNDING OR WE DIDN'T HAVE A HELICOPTER, WE DO USE THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY.
I GOT TO TELL YOU, THEY ARE BEING USED ALL THE TIME ALL OVER THE STATE.
YOU HAVE ONE IN FLAGSTAFF, TWO IN PHOENIX, TWO IN TUCSON, ONE IN KINGMAN, AND THEY ARE AIRBORNE A LOT.
THE PRIORITIES THAT THEY HAVE FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE, SEARCH AND RESCUE AND WHATNOT, THE THRESHOLD IS MUCH HIGHER THAN REALLY WHAT WE NEED HERE IN YAVAPAI COUNTY.
WHEN WE WERE FLYING THE ROBINSON 44, IT WAS AIRBORNE A LOT ON A LOT OF MISSIONS.
NOW THAT IT'S NOT, WE'RE NOTICING THE LOSS OF THAT CAPABILITY HERE,
[01:05:02]
WHICH WHEN R44 WENT DOWN AND IS NO LONGER USABLE.IT'S GOING UNDER REFURBISHMENT, WE WANT TO SELL IT, WE WANT TO BRING THAT MONEY BACK INTO THE OPERATIONAL PROGRAM HERE.
BUT THIS IS THE TIME TO UPGRADE THE CAPABILITIES, AND THIS IS THE TIME TO GET A BETTER AIRCRAFT, A BETTER AIRFRAME THAT HAS MORE CAPABILITIES.
YOU CAN DO LONG LINE LOADS, YOU CAN DO LONG LINE RESCUES.
YOU CAN FLY IFR, YOU CAN FLY VFR, ALL THE THINGS THE I KNOW YOU KNOW ALL ABOUT FLARE, NIGHT VISION, THESE KIND OF THINGS SO YOU CAN BE FLYING AT 24 HOURS A DAY.
WELL, IT WOULDN'T BE AIRBORNE 24 HOURS A DAY, BUT IT COULD BE OPERATIONAL 24 HOURS A DAY.
THAT ROBINSON WAS A DAYTIME ONLY HELICOPTERS.
WE'RE LOOKING TO SIGNIFICANTLY UPGRADE OUR CAPABILITIES AND PUBLIC SAFETY HERE, OUR ABILITY TO RESPOND TO SEARCH AND RESCUE, OUR ABILITY TO DO PROACTIVE PATROL OPERATIONS.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S EXPENSIVE TO GET STARTED AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE MADE THE REQUEST FOR THE CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTED MONEY.
>> WHAT IS THE ANTICIPATED OPERATING COSTS EACH YEAR FOR FUEL AND MAINTENANCE.
DO YOU CURRENTLY HAVE THAT IN YOUR BUDGET?
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THAT'S GOING TO CAUSE?
>> JUST FUEL AND MAINTENANCE, IS THAT WITH STAFF? ABOUT $1 MILLION.
>> PENDING ANY OTHER FURTHER DISCUSSION, I MAKE A MOTION TO GO AHEAD AND ACCEPT THIS.
>> I'LL SECOND, BUT I HAVE ONE QUESTION.
>> HEY, LET'S FIRST GET THAT. GO AHEAD.
>> QUESTION IS BACK AND I REMEMBER BACK IN IT WAS EARLY THIS YEAR WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BUDGET ITEMS, YOU HAD MENTIONED YOU WERE GOING TO GO FORWARD WITH A ATTEMPTING TO GET A BURN GRANT FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
THIS IS THE ONE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT AT THE TIME, I BELIEVE.
BUT WE THEN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BUDGET AND DIDN'T PUT IN SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT WE KNEW WE WOULD NEED IF A BYRNE GRANT WAS AWARDED TO US.
I BELIEVE THIS WAS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT GOES ALONG WITH THE ACTUAL HELICOPTER ITSELF AND SOME OF THE OTHER NEEDS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE.
I THINK THOSE WERE IN CONTINGENCY, WERE THEY NOT?
>> WELL, MR. CHAIRMAN, SUPERVISOR BROWN, I DID MAKE THOSE STATEMENTS AT THAT TIME, BUT I CHOSE NOT TO MAKE ANY BUDGET REQUESTS AT THAT TIME BECAUSE I REALLY DIDN'T HAVE ACCURATE INFORMATION.
>> I DIDN'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE WOULD NEED AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF MORE CONGRESSIONAL HE DIRECTED MONEY WOULD BE COMING TO THE COUNTY TO SUPPORT THE OPERATIONS OF IT.
FRANKLY, I DON'T KNOW WHEN WE'RE GOING TO GET ONE.
THESE THINGS ARE EXTRAORDINARILY HARD TO COME ACROSS.
YOU'RE WORKING DIRECTLY WITH THE MANUFACTURER.
YOU CANNOT JUST GO PURCHASE ONE.
THERE IS A LONG WAITING LIST OF AGENCIES TO PURCHASE THESE PUBLIC SAFETY HELICOPTERS.
THEY ARE COMING IN OFFLINE FROM PUBLIC SAFETY AGENCIES.
THEY GO THROUGH A REFURBISHMENT PROCESS AND THEN THEY GET PUT BACK OUT.
WE'RE ON THE LIST TO GET ONE OF THOSE.
BUT WE DON'T HAVE A TIMELINE OF WHEN THAT'S GOING TO OCCUR.
UNTIL WE GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE TYING BUDGET CAPACITY THAT I KNOW THAT I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO BE ABLE TO SPEND.
>> GOOD IDEA. GOOD POINT, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD ADD IS THAT I FULLY SUPPORT THE OPPORTUNITY AND PLAN TO GO FORWARD WITH A HELICOPTER.
YOU KNOW, I LIVE IN AN AREA WHERE YOU GUYS ARE CONSTANTLY WITH SEARCH AND RESCUE OUT, GETTING SOMEBODY OFF A BELL ROCK AND OUR PUBLIC LANDS NOW ARE CHALLENGED BY GETTING A OHV ROLLOVERS TO A HOSPITAL.
JUST THE DAILY USE OF THIS INSTRUMENT OR TOOL FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, I THINK IS ESSENTIAL AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT YOU GET IT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.
>> THANK YOU. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK BE BACK AT 10: 20.
[2. Board of Supervisors - Discussion and possible action to approve a letter of support by the Board in regards to the U.S. Forest Service pending Federal Land Exchange with the Yavapai-Apache Nation. ]
GOT IT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THE AGENDA AROUND A LITTLE BIT.WE'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY START OFF WITH NUMBER TWO.
IT'S BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION
[01:10:01]
TO APPROVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT BY THE BOARD IN REGARDS TO THE US FOREST SERVICE PENDING FEDERAL LAND EXCHANGE WITH THE ABA PIKE COUNTY NATION.CHAIRMAN LEWIS, IF YOU DON'T MIND COMING UP AND THIS OVERALL, IT'S A GOOD THING.
THEY'RE TRADING I THINK IT'S OVER 4,000 ACRES AND THERE ARE ONLY GETTING 3,200 ACRES AND IT'S GOOD FOR THE TRIBE AND IT'S GOOD FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND IT INCREASES CAPACITY FOR YOU GUYS TO RUN YOUR RESERVATION DOWN HERE IN THE VERDE VALLEY.
CHAIRMAN, DO YOU HAVE ANY WORDS?
>> THANK YOU [LAUGHTER] GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN.
GREGORY, VICE-CHAIRMAN OBERG AND COUNTY SUPERVISORS.
I THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY HERE I'M GOING TO INTRODUCE MYSELF AND MY LANGUAGE AS I WAS RAISED.
I WAS ACTUALLY BORN AND RAISED IN CLARKSDALE.
THIS TO ME, THIS IS MY HOME AREA AND I'LL INTRODUCE MYSELF IN MY LANGUAGE.
IT IS THE APACHE LANGUAGE THAT I HAVE BEEN TAUGHT BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT TO OUR PEOPLE.
[FOREIGN] WHICH I SAID, GOOD MORNING.
I'M THE CHAIRWOMAN FOR THE YAVAPAI APACHE NATION.
I WAS BORN AND RAISED IN CLARKSDALE.
I AM THE DAUGHTER OF THE LATE LINEMAN AND ETHYL LEWIS, WHICH I GREW UP THERE AND CLARKSDALE WITH THEM.
MY MOTHER IS HERE FROM YAVAPAI APACHE NATION.
MY FATHER IS A FULL BLOODED SAN CARLOS APACHE FROM THE GLOBE AREA.
IT WAS REALLY GOOD TO SEE THE PROCLAMATION FOR THE SAM CLEMENS CELL SCHOOL.
MY FATHER DID GO TO SCHOOL, SO MY PARENTS WERE RAISED HERE.
THIS IS A VERY EXCITING TIME, A GREAT TIME FOR THE ALPHA PI APACHE NATION AS SHARED BY CHAIR GREGORY THAT YES, THIS IS BEN DECADES IN THE WORK FOR THOSE WHO WERE BEFORE ME AND THOSE WHO ARE NO LONGER WITH US.
SO IT IS AN HONOR TO STAND HERE AND SPEAK ON BEHALF OF MY YAVAPAI APACHE PEOPLE, WHICH I'M ELECTED TO REPRESENT THEM WITH HONOR AND PRIDE AND DIGNITY.
AS SHARED YES WE ARE EXCHANGING 4,780 ACRES OF OUR LAND TO THE FOREST SERVICE, WHICH WE WILL GAIN 3,200 ACRES CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW, I'LL GIVE YOU JUST A SMALL HISTORY BRIEF.
WE INITIALLY STARTED AT ABORIGINAL LANDS, GO 40 MILES AND EAST TO WEST OF THE VERDE RIVER.
YOU CAN IMAGINE THAT'S OUR ABORIGINAL LANDS.
IN 1875 OF COURSE WE WERE 1871 EXCUSE ME, WE WERE ASSIGNED 575,000 ACRES OF LAND, WHICH IS 20 MILES EAST AND WEST OF THE VERDE RIVER.
THAT IS OUR ABORIGINAL LANDS, WHICH WAS IN OUR HOMELANDS, WHICH WAS TAKEN FROM US IN 1875, WHICH WE BECAME PRISONERS OF WAR.
MY TRIBE IS PRISONERS OF WAR, WHICH WE WERE FORCED MARCHED BY THE MILITARY TO SAN CARLOS, WHICH SOME OF US STAYED THERE AND SOME OF US MADE THE JOURNEY HOME.
WHEN WE CAME HOME, WE HAD A HANDFUL, WHICH IS OUR MIDDLE VERDE AREA IN THE CAMP VERDE DISTRICT, WHICH WE HAD WAS OUR ORIGINAL LANDS.
SO OUR CLARKSDALE, OUR TUNE LEE, OUR CAMP VERDE, LOWER CAMP VERDE AND RIM ROCK PARCELS OUR NATION HAD TO BUY BACK.
WE HAD TO PURCHASE GRADUALLY AS WE WENT.
SLOWLY WE PUT THEM INTO TRUST FEES, WHICH IS HELD THROUGH THE BIA.
THIS IS AN EXCITING TIME WITH THIS EXCHANGE.
RIGHT NOW WE CURRENTLY HAVE 1800 ACRES.
WE'VE GONE FROM 575,000 ACRES TO 1800 ACRES THAT WE HAVE TODAY.
WITH THE 3,200 THAT WE ARE EXCHANGING OUR PROPERTY FOR, THAT'LL TAKE US JUST OVER 5,000 ACRES.
THIS IS A HUGE ACCOMPLISHMENT AND THIS IS A HUGE MILESTONE FOR OUR PEOPLE IN WHICH WE HAVE HOUSING NEEDS.
WE HAVE A LOT TO DIVERSIFY OUR ECONOMY.
NOT ONLY DOES IT DO IT FOR OURS, IT DOES IT FOR THE VERDE VALLEY IS WHERE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND STUART'S TO OUR NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES AS WELL, AND ALSO CONSTITUENTS THE YAVAPAI COUNTY.
THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY AND I APPRECIATE IT.
>> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR MICHAEL'S PORTION OF YOUR DISTRICT TOO.
>> IT'S JUST WITH SUCH GREAT PLEASURE.
I FEEL LIKE I KNOW I'VE GOTTEN OLDER.
I'VE I'VE KNOWN CHAIR LEWIS FOR 30 YEARS AND HER WORK, WHAT AN EXTRAORDINARY PERSON YOU ARE AND WHAT A GREAT MOMENT IN YOUR SOVEREIGN NATION'S HISTORY FOR YOU TO BE IN THIS LEADERSHIP AT THIS TIME, WHEN YOU HAVE RETURNED TO YOUR OWN LANDS BY
[01:15:02]
YOUR PERSEVERANCE AND NEGOTIATION AND COLLABORATION.IT'S JUST AN HONOR TO BE ABLE TO CALL YOU FRIEND AND PARTNER AND I SAW CELEBRATE THAT THIS IMPORTANT HISTORIC MOMENT.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE AND I TOLD OUR CHAIR LEWIS JUST YESTERDAY FOR US TO HAVE A DELEGATION GO TO WASHINGTON AND CHEER THIS MOMENT IN OUR STATE'S HISTORY, IS IMPORTANT AND I HONOR THE HARD WORK I CAN ONLY IMAGINE, AFTER THE CONDITIONS BY WHICH YOU CAME HOME, YOU WERE ABLE TO NOT ONLY GET A TOEHOLD, BUT BECOME EFFECTIVE IN THE COMMERCE OF OUR AREA.
YOU ARE THE UNDERPINNING OF A RESILIENT VERDE VALLEY, WHICH I HAVE LONG SUPPORTED AND I HOPE WE GET TO WORK TOGETHER FAR INTO THE FUTURE CONGRATULATIONS.
>> HOW DO THIS GET ON THE AGENDA? NOBODY HAS DONE A PRESENTATION TO ME OR ANYBODY I'M AWARE OF THAT SHOWS ME WHERE THIS LAND EXCHANGE TAKES PLACE.
SO I'M SUPPOSED TO SIT HERE AND VOTE ON A LETTER OF SUPPORT.
NOT UNTIL I KNOW THE INFORMATION WILL I VOTE ON ANY A LETTER OR SUPPORT AND ACTUALLY WOULD SAY SOMEBODY IS DERELICT AND INFORMING THE BOARD IN REGARDS TO WHAT THIS ACTION IS.
I'M SORRY TO PUT IT ON HOLD, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT NEEDS TO BE UNTIL THAT INFORMATION IS GATHERED AND DISSEMINATED.
>> IT'S A LETTER OF SUPPORT AND IF YOU DON'T WANT TO VOTE FOR IT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO VOTE FOR IT.
BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M VOTING ON. WHERE IS IT?
>> WAS IT ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA OR DO WE KNOW?
>> IT WAS ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA.
WITH THAT, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> I MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE AND SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR MICHAEL'S.
>> I WILL SAY AYE BUT ONLY WITH THE CAVEAT THAT IT'S IN RESPECT TO THE APACHE NATION.
WE'RE GOING TO GO TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR,
[4. Sheriff - Approve agreement with Code 3 Technology for the purchase of mobile data computers (MDCs) in the amount of $163,370.13, with $33,710.13 from County contingency funds to be added to ITS budget. YC Contract No. 2023-413 ]
APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH CO3 TECHNOLOGIES FOR THE PURCHASE AND MOBILE DATA COMPUTERS IN A MOUNT OF $163,370.13 WITH $33,710.13 CENTS FROM CONTINGENCY FUNDS TO BE ADDED TO THE ITS BUDGET.>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR GREGORY, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, [INAUDIBLE], ITS.
THE ADDITIONAL DOLLAR AMOUNTS ARE NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEW VEHICLE MOUNTING HARDWARE THAT'S GOING ALONG WITH THE NEW MDCS FOR THE EQUIPMENT.
DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS, THERE WAS A LINE ITEM IN THERE WAS CONSIDERED ONE TIME.
IT WAS REMOVED AND WE NEED TO HAVE IT ADDED BACK IN.
>> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? WITH THAT I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> OKAY. I MADE THE MOTION SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR MICHAELS.
>> MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU PAT.
>> ITEM NUMBER 3 HAS BEEN PULLED BY THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
WE'RE GOING TO WORK OUR WAY BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 1.
[1. Board of Supervisors - Consider such action as may be required regarding an appeal to the Board of Supervisors of Administrative Hearing Officer Case No. 23-001086, County of Yavapai v. Rollie Stevens Diehl and Kathleen Meek.]
CONSIDER SUCH ACTION MAY BE REQUIRED REGARDING AN APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER CASE NUMBER 23-001086, COUNTY OF YOU YAVAPAI.ROLLY STEVENS DEAL AND KATHLEEN MEEK.
>> OKAY. SORRY. I WAS MISTAKEN.
IT WASN'T LIT UP. ANYWAY. MR. CHAIR, VICE CHAIR,
[01:20:01]
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, MY NAME IS JASON MOORE.I'M A DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY AT THE NAVAJO COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
PROBABLY BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION, I SHOULD EXPLAIN TO YOU AND THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE WHY I'M IN FRONT OF THE BOARD FOR THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM.
THE YAVAPAI COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REPRESENTS YAVAPAI COUNTY AND THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT IN THIS MATTER AND REPRESENTED THEM BELOW IN FRONT OF THE HEARING OFFICER.
THIS IS AN APPEAL THAT THE LANDOWNER IS ENTITLED TO MAKE UNDER THE RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR HEARINGS IN FRONT OF THE HEARING OFFICER.
BECAUSE YAVAPAI COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE COULD NOT BOTH ADVOCATE FOR THE YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND PROVIDE YOU IMPARTIAL LEGAL ADVICE FOR THIS MATTER.
CONFLICT COUNSEL MYSELF HAS BEEN ENGAGED TO COME SPEAK TO YOU TODAY ABOUT THIS MATTER. THAT'S WHY I'M HERE.
BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION, I'LL JUST GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE APPEAL.
IT INVOLVES A 187 ACRE PIECE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 34100 SOUTH CONSTELLATION ROAD IN YAVAPAI COUNTY.
THAT'S PARCEL NUMBER 204-21-0209.
THE CASE BEGAN AS A RESULT OF AN ANONYMOUS COMPLAINT BY A CITIZEN.
YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DID AN INSPECTION ON THIS PROPERTY ON JANUARY 31ST, 2023.
A NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED ON MARCH 2023, WHICH WAS SERVED BY CERTIFIED IN FIRST-CLASS MAIL.
IT NOTED THAT THERE WERE SEVERAL VIOLATIONS ON THE PROPERTY AND ASK THAT THOSE BE CORRECTED.
A HEARING WAS HELD BEFORE THE HEARING OFFICER ON MAY 9 OF 2023.
AT THE HEARING, THE YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPEARED.
THE PROPERTY OWNER DID NOT APPEAR, AND THAT RULING LIVES FROM THE HEARING OFFICER WAS IN FAVOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
A $5,000 FINE WAS IMPOSED BY THE HEARING OFFICER WITH DUE WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE JUDGMENT, AS WELL AS A POTENTIAL 100,000 DOLLAR CIVIL PENALTY THAT COULD BE SET ASIDE IF 11 DIFFERENT CONDITIONS WERE MET ABAITING THE VIOLATIONS ON OR BEFORE JUNE 20 OF 2023.
THE PROPERTY OWNER NOW APPEALS THAT DECISION AS THEY ARE ENTITLED TO DO UNDER THE RULES.
BOTH SIDES HAVE PRESENTED A MEMORANDUMS TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR ITS CONSIDERATION.
THOSE WERE AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF YOUR BOARD PACKETS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW PRIOR TO TODAY'S HEARING.
THE STANDARD OF REVIEW UNDER THE RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR LAND USE AND BUILDING SAFETY VIOLATIONS PROVIDES THAT YOUR REVIEW OF THIS MATTER IS LIMITED TO DETERMINING WHETHER THE DECISION OF THE HEARING OFFICER WAS REACHED IN A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL MANNER.
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS LIMITED TO CONSIDERING ONLY THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO THE HEARING OFFICER AND NO NEW EVIDENCE IS ALLOWED.
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS REQUIRED TO MAKE A DECISION WITHIN 15 DAYS UNLESS IT DECIDES TO EXTEND THE TIME FRAME TO UP TO 30 DAYS, THE WRITTEN DECISION MUST BE PROVIDED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE BOARD'S DECISION.
YOU'RE RULING IN THIS MATTER WILL BE FINAL.
THE PROCEDURE THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THROUGH TODAY IS WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW BOTH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO PRESENT ANY REMARKS THAT THEY WANT TO PRESENT TO THE BOARD ABOUT THE MATTER.
AFTER BOTH SIDES HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT, I WILL COME BACK TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
AS YOU KNOW, I REACHED OUT, PROVIDED YOU A CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL MEMORANDUM ABOUT THIS MATTER.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE I TURN IT OVER, I CAN ANSWER THOSE NOW.
IF NOT, I CAN WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE PRESENTATIONS.
>> ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? WE CAN WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE PRESENTATION.
>> WE'LL START WITH THE APPELLATE.
IF WE CAN EACH MEMBER I GUESS THEY CALL IT THE APPELLATE.
IF WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU FIVE MINUTES TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS IF YOU WISH, AND THEN WILL ALLOW THE COUNTY TO MAKE ADDITIONAL FIVE MINUTES IN COMMENTS.
THEN WE'LL OPEN COMMENTS TO THE BOARD.
WE'LL START OFF WITH WOULD BE ROLLY STEVENS DEAL OR KATHLEEN MEEK.
DO YOU WANT TO MAKE ANY STATEMENTS REGARDING THIS ISSUE?
>> WE'LL HAVE THE, THEY'RE NOT PRESENT.
DO WE HAVE ANY GREEN SHEETS ON THIS ITEM?
>> IT SO LET'S BRING UP DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
[01:25:06]
IF YOU CAN JUST GIVE US AN OVERVIEW.>> MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? MY NAME IS BENJAMIN KURTZBERG.
I'M A DEPUTY YAVAPAI COUNTY ATTORNEY AS MR. MOORE DESCRIBED I'VE BEEN REPRESENTING YAVAPAI COUNTY IN THIS MATTER.
ALSO AS MR. MOORE DESCRIBED, THE KEY POINT HERE IS THAT NO EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED TO THE HEARING OFFICER, AND THEREFORE, UNDER THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, THIS BOARD SHOULD NOT CONSIDER ANY NEW EVIDENCE OR ANY NEW ARGUMENTS.
IT APPEARS THAT MR. DEAL AND MISS.
MEEK HAVEN'T APPEARED TODAY, SO THEY'RE NOT EVEN PRESENTING ARGUMENTS, BUT IN THEIR MEMORANDUM, THEY ATTEMPTED TO ADD ADDITIONAL ARGUMENT AND EVIDENCE THAT IS NOT PROPERLY BEFORE THE BOARD.
THAT RULE EXISTS FOR A GOOD REASON SO THAT THEY CAN PRESENT THEIR ARGUMENT BELOW AND CREATE A GOOD RECORD FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER.
THIS FORUM IS NOT THE PROPER ONE FOR THEM TO DEVELOP THAT RECORD.
FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COUNTY WOULD ASK THAT YOU AFFIRM THE HEARING OFFICER'S DECISION BELOW.
>> WE GOT A MOTION BY SUPERVISOR BROWN, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR MICHAELS, BUT DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS VICE CHAIR BURKE, THIS IS YOUR DISTRICT.
>> [INAUDIBLE] I THINK THIS IS PRETTY CUT AND DRIED, SO I AGREE WITH THE MOTION.
[1. Development Services - Approve a Use Permit to allow for a second 320-sq. ft. steel storage container, exceeding the 400 sq. ft. maximum limit, on an approximate 2-acre parcel in the RCU-2A (Residential; Single-family; Rural – minimum 2-acre parcel size) zoning district, subject to the conditions of approval. Project Name: Greear 2nd 320-Sq. Ft. Steel Container Use Permit; Owner/Applicant: Michael & Melinda Greear; APN: 304-01-261; PLA23-000054. The property is located at 2900 West Saber Way in the community of Paulden, Arizona. Section 19, Township 18 North, Range 02 West. G&SRB&M. Staff: Susan Hébert (District 4 - Supervisor Brown)]
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVE A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW 320 SQUARE FOOT STEEL STORAGE CONTAINER EXCEEDING 400 SQUARE FOOT MAXIMUM ON APPROXIMATELY TWO ACRES IN RCU-2A ZONING DISTRICT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND THIS IS IN PAULDEN.>> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN GREGORY, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
MY NAME IS SUSAN ABARE, PLANNER OF THE YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
I'LL BE PRESENTING THE GREER SECOND STEEL CONTAINER USE PERMIT APPLICATION.
THE PROPERTY IS IN DISTRICT 4 UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF SUPERVISOR BROWN.
IT'S LOCATED IN THE COMMUNITY OF PAULDEN, AND THE ZONING THERE IS RCU2A.
THAT'S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY RURAL, WITH A MINIMUM TWO-ACRE LOT SIZE, AND IT'S SURROUNDED BY OTHER RCU2A ZONE PARCELS.
IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS ENCOURAGED IN THIS GROWTH AREA.
THE PROPERTY IS RIGHT HERE WITH THIS ICON, AND LAND USE IN THE TAN AREA HERE IS DESIGNATED FOR 0-1 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE ON LOTS OF 1-5 ACRES.
THIS PARCEL IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USAGE.
THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN.
THE TWO EIGHT BY 40 STEEL CONTAINERS ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW.
WHILE MORE THAN ONE CONTAINER WOULD BE ALLOWED, TYPICALLY, THE MAXIMUM ALLOWANCE WOULD BE FOR 400 SQUARE FEET AND THESE TWO TOTAL 640 SQUARE FEET.
THE APPLICANTS PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN 2018.
THEY OBTAINED PERMITS FOR A MANUFACTURED HOME, DETACHED GARAGE AND SHED.
THE CONTAINERS ARE RIGHT HERE IN THE CENTER.
THEY BEGAN MODIFYING THE CONTAINERS TO BE USED AS WORKSHOP SPACE BEFORE APPLYING FOR PERMITS.
LAST OCTOBER, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RECEIVED A COMPLAINT THAT THE CONTAINERS ARE BEING USED WITH UNPERMITTED ELECTRIC UTILITIES.
AFTER DISCUSSING WITH LAND USE CODE ENFORCEMENT, THEY DID CONTACT US AND BEGIN THE PROCESS OF APPLYING FOR ALL REQUIRED PERMITS.
HERE'S SOME MORE IMAGES OF THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS LOOKING NORTH, AND THIS IS TO THE EAST, LOOKING SOUTH AND TO THE WEST.
DURING THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS, THE APPLICANTS RECEIVED SIX COMMENTS OF SUPPORT FROM SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.
THOSE ARE IN THE GREEN ICONS, AND ONE COMMENT OF OPPOSITION FOR THIS APPLICATION WAS POSTED ONLINE THROUGH THE SURVEY AND SHOWN IN WITH THAT RED ICON.
SOMEONE LIVING ON A NEARBY PARCEL ALSO
[01:30:01]
SPOKEN OPPOSITION AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, BUT THE NOTIFIED PROPERTY OWNER FOR THAT PARCEL NEVER SUPPLIED COMMENTS TO STAFF.IN SUMMARY, CONSIDERATION OF USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR TWO STEEL CONTAINERS TOTALING 640 SQUARE FEET WHICH IS 240 SQUARE FEET OVER THAT 400 SQUARE FOOT LIMIT ON A TWO-ACRE PARCEL IN THE RCU2A ZONING DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
THOSE ARE THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
FOR CONSIDERATION, DURING THE PREVIOUS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, CONDITION NUMBER 3 WAS AMENDED AND THE CHANGE WAS FOR TWO YEARS IS NOW GOING TO BE ONE YEAR TO ALLOW FOR ALL THE PERMITS TO BE APPLIED FOR.
THERE WAS A SPLIT DECISION FOR THIS APPLICATION WITH TWO COMMISSIONERS VOTING AGAINST THE RECOMMENDATION.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THE APPLICANT MELINDA GREER IS ALSO HERE AND AVAILABLE, AND COMMISSIONER LINDA BUCHANAN IS HERE REPRESENTING PLANNING AND ZONING.
>> SUPERVISOR BROWN, THIS IS YOUR DISTRICT.
HOW LONG HAVE BOTH OF THESE CONTAINERS BEEN THERE?
>> WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, I BELIEVE, SOON AFTER THE CONTAINERS WERE PLACED ON THERE, THEY ARE ALLOWED TO REMAIN THERE FOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS DURING CONSTRUCTION PROCESS, BUT THEN THEY HAVE NOT BEEN REMOVED.
THERE WERE THREE, AND NOW THERE ARE TWO.
>> TWO THOUSAND EIGHTEEN IS WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY.
I'LL LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER THAT THEN.
>> FIVE YEARS. THEY'VE BEEN IN VIOLATION FOR FIVE YEARS, RIGHT?
>> YES. AS LONG AS THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS HAS BEEN COMPLETED.
>> ARE EITHER OF THESE CONTAINERS HOOKED UP TO ELECTRICITY OR WATER OR ANY OTHER KIND OF SERVICE?
>> PREVIOUSLY, THE APPLICANT SAID THERE WAS NO WATER HOOKUP.
THE ELECTRIC PERMITTING WAS NOT OBTAINED, BUT THAT IS WHAT LED US HERE, THAT USE OF ELECTRIC.
>> SO IT'S ONE OF THE VIOLATION WHICH WE HAVE?
>> THEY'RE NOT BEING USED IN ANY WAY FOR HOUSING UNITS, ARE THEY?
>> NO, IT WAS STARTED TO BE MODIFIED FOR WORKSHOP SPACE.
SO I BELIEVE THAT'S THEIR INTENTION FOR BOTH, AND WE CAN ASK ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR USE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE ELECTRICAL SERVICES THAT TO CODE?
>> THE ELECTRIC SERVICE HAS NOT BEEN REVIEWED.
THEY WOULD NEED TO HAVE ENGINEERING DONE FOR THE MODIFICATIONS MADE IN ANY UTILITY HOOKUPS.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? SUPERVISOR MICHAELS.
>> WHAT WERE THE COMMISSIONERS' RATIONALE? THE TWO THAT OPPOSED.
>> COMMISSIONER BUCHANAN IS HERE FOR YOU.
>> I'D LIKE TO DEFER THAT QUESTION THEN TO THE COMMISSIONER.
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS LINDA BUCHANAN.
I'M A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONER REPRESENTING DISTRICT 2.
WE DID HAVE A COMPLEX DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS.
THERE'S CONCERN ALWAYS WHEN A PROPERTY OWNER CHOOSES TO OVERTLY AVOID THE PERMITTING PROCESS.
THIS CAUSED CONCERN WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN THAT THE NEIGHBORS BECOME DE FACTO CODE ENFORCEMENT.
IT'S HARD ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S HARD ON THE STAFF, AND THE CONCERN I THINK OR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS WE SEE THIS HAPPEN MORE AND MORE, IS THAT THERE MAYBE ALMOST A RURAL LEGEND THAT IT'S OKAY TO JUST PROCEED WITHOUT THE PERMITTING AND IF YOU GET CAUGHT THEN GO THROUGH THE HOOPS TO GET IT SQUARED AWAY.
THIS IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN SOMEONE WHO BUYS AN EXISTING PROJECT AND FINDS OUT AFTER THE FACT THAT THINGS THAT HAPPENED BACK IN THE '80S OR '90S OR EARLIER WEREN'T DONE CORRECTLY.
THERE'S MUCH TO ADMIRE ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND THE INTENT OF THE PROPERTY ON IT TO CREATE AND USE THEIR PARCEL TO GREAT ADVANTAGE, BUT WITH THE CONSIDERATION OF ELECTRICAL AND WATER AND ALL THE OTHER ELEMENTS, WE HAD TWO COMMISSIONERS, I WAS ONE OF THEM, THAT WAS DISSENTING ON THIS, NOT FOR THE CAPACITY TO ACTUALLY SEE THE PROJECT THROUGH TO FRUITION AND DO IT CORRECTLY, BUT THEY WERE EGREGIOUSLY OVER THE ALLOWABLE LIMITS AND
[01:35:05]
JUST SEEMINGLY CHOSE TO PROCEED IN THIS FASHION WITH IT.>> IF I MAY MR. CHAIRMAN, A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION.
ARE THEY NOW COMMISSIONER WORKING TOWARD BECOMING IN COMPLIANCE OR ARE THEY COOPERATING WELL WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY HAVE CAUSED THIS INFRACTION UPON THEMSELVES?
>> IT APPEARED TO US AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT THEY WERE NOW WORKING DIRECTLY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE AND THEY HAD MADE A SIGNIFICANT EFFORT, CERTAINLY MET THE LEGAL MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR NOTIFYING THE NEIGHBORS BUT THERE WERE NEIGHBORS THAT APPEARED BEFORE US THAT WERE OUTSIDE OF THE OFFICIAL NOTIFICATION AREA THAT HAD CONCERNS AS WELL.
>> WITH THAT QUESTION WOULD BE THAT BASICALLY AS HERE IN FRONT OF US, IS SO THAT THEY CAN GET A PERMIT TO SAY THAT ALL OF THE THINGS THAT THEY DID WHICH ARE OUT OF PERMIT OR OUT OF EVEN OUT OF THE REALM OF PERMIT.
THEY WANT US TO SAY, FORGIVE THEM AND MOVE FORWARD.
AM I CORRECT? IS THAT WHAT IT IS?
>> I WOULD DEFER TO THAT APPLICANT TO SPEAK TO THEIR ACTUAL INTENT BUT THAT IS CERTAINLY, AS IT APPEARS WHEN WE SEE THESE CASES COME FORWARD.
WHERE THEY HAVE PERMITTED FOR THE RESIDENTS THERE.
THERE ARE KEENLY AWARE OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THE STAFF PROCESS, AND THEN THIS COMES BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS A MEA CULPA.
THEY'RE DIFFICULT FOR US, AS YOU CAN TELL FROM OUR SPLIT DECISION AT THE COMMISSION LEVEL.
WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY AT SOME POINT TO TURN IT OVER TO OUR HIGHER POWER, WHICH IS YOU.
MAYBE THERE'S AN UNDERLYING COMPONENT THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, NOT SPECIFIC TO THIS PROPERTY BUT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES OF AVOIDING THE PERMITTING PROCESS SIGNIFICANT TO BE ENOUGH TO BE A DETERRENT.
WHY IS OUR PUBLIC CHOOSING AVOIDANCE RATHER THAN THE APPLICATION PROCESS? AGAIN, I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT WE AREN'T IN A POSITION TO BE CONSIDERING ANY PRECEDENT SETTING THING.
WE EXAMINE EACH CASE ON THE MERITS.
THE GREAT STAFF WORK THAT BRINGS THE PACKET TO US.
BUT THEN WE ALSO ARE ALWAYS GRATEFUL TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC.
WHEN WE SEE PICTURES AND DOCUMENTATION FROM THE NEARBY AND THE IMPACTED PROPERTY OWNERS AND IT'S DIFFERENT.
THAT RAISES THE SPECTER OF CONCERN FOR US AT THE COMMISSION LEVEL 2.
WE'VE ADDED IT AS THOROUGHLY AS WE AS WE COULD AND WE BRING IT FORWARD TO YOU WITH THE MAJORITY VOTE RECOMMENDING FOR APPROVAL.
THOSE TWO ELEMENTS OF CONCERN.
>> MR. OBERG DO YOU HAVE COMMENTS?
>> YES, MR. CHAIRMAN. I GUESS IT'S FOR THE PLANNER THE ADDRESS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
CONDITION APPROVAL 1, WAS PERMANENT AND TRANSFERABLE.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE I HAVE SOME DIFFICULTY THAT IF THEY SELL THE PROPERTY THAT ALLOWED US TO HAVE THOSE CONTAINERS WOULD TRANSFER TO A NEW PROPERTY OWNER.
THEREFORE, THAT'S ONE REASON WHY I'M PROBABLY NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS BECAUSE IT IS A PERMANENT AND TRANSFERABLE.
ALSO I DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO REALLY LOOK THIS OVER, BUT IS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT THEY WILL COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH PERMITTING FOR ACCEPTABLE ELECTRICAL SERVICE?
>> YES. THEY WOULD NEED TO APPLY FOR ALL APPROPRIATE PERMITS SINCE THEY ARE ALTERING THE CONTAINERS TO BE USED AS WORKSHOP.
THAT'S THE REASON WHY THE PERMANENT AND TRANSFERABLE IS THERE.
BECAUSE IT'S JUST LIKE ANY STRUCTURE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN USED FOR WORKSHOP.
TYPICALLY THAT WOULD STAY ON THE PROPERTY.
THEY WOULD NEED TO HAVE ENGINEERING.
THEY DO NEED TO HAVE APPROPRIATE ELECTRICAL WORK DONE AND IT DOES NEED TO PASS ALL INSPECTIONS.
>> IT'S A PERMANENT STRUCTURE, IT'S AIDS WITH THE PROPERTY.
>> THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THAT, YES.
>> BY-SHARED, WE GOT GREEN SHEETS?
>> YES, I DO. FIRST ONE IS SUSAN LYNNE, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK BUT SHE HAS A COMMENT THAT CONTAINERS IN QUESTION ARE NOT A PROBLEM VISUALLY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND WILL BE USED AS WORKSHOP.
[01:40:05]
NEXT ONE IS MICHAEL LIN, WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE ISSUE. CAN YOU COME ON UP?>> REMIND ANYBODY THAT'S SPEAKING THAT YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES MAXIMUM AND THERE'S A TIMER OVER HERE FOR YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT THEM.
KEEP YOURSELF KNOWING WHAT TIME YOU GOT.
MY NAME IS MIKE LIN. I DO LIVE IN PAULDEN.
BEEN NEIGHBORS WITH THE GREER'S FOR CLOSE TO FIVE YEARS.
EVERYTHING THEY'VE EVER DONE, THEY'VE DONE WELL AND THEY'VE DONE ABOVE BOARD AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.
THERE'S NEVER BEEN ANY AN EYESORE THAT I'VE EVER SEEN.
THEIR LANDS ALWAYS NEAT AND CLEAN.
THE CONTAINERS THAT THEY HAVE OUT THERE NOW MATCH THE HOUSE.
I MEAN, IT DOESN'T. TRUST ME, I WOULD TELL YOU IF IT WAS AN EYESORE AND IT'S NOT.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THEM ADDING THE WORKSHOP OR CONTAINER ON THEIR PROPERTY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR LISTENING TO ME.
>> NEXT WE HAVE SIR DANIEL DE RU, I THINK IS.
WISHES TO SPEAK OPPOSED TO THE ISSUE. CAN YOU COME ON UP?
>> GOOD MORNING, BOARD. MY NAME IS DANIEL DE RU AND I AM ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS WITHIN 1,000 FEET OF THE PROPERTY THERE.
MY ISSUE IS THAT, THEY HAVE BEEN DISINGENUOUS THROUGHOUT THEIR WHOLE POINT OF LIVING THERE.
THEY HAVE NOT APPLIED FOR PERMITS.
THEY HAD THREE CONTAINERS, THEY SOLD ONE OF THE 40 FOOTERS AND THEN JUST MOVED IN A SHED.
THEY HAVE ILLEGALLY PUT ELECTRICITY INTO THE WORKSHOP, WHICH FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND AND I KNOW IT'S JUST HEARSAY THAT IT IS ALSO A GUEST HOUSE.
HAS ELECTRICITY, HAS AIR CONDITIONING, IT HAS EVERYTHING.
THEY'VE DONE THE ELECTRICITY THEMSELVES.
THEY ARE NOT ROC CERTIFIED IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA OR CALIFORNIA WHERE THEY MOVED FROM OR THE STATE OF UTAH WHERE THEY ALSO OWN PROPERTY.
NEITHER ONE OF THEM ARE ROC CERTIFIED.
THEY DID THE ELECTRICITY INTO THE SHED AND THE DISINGENUOUS TO THE COUNTY BECAUSE THE GARAGE CLEARLY SAID, NO UTILITIES.
WELL, THEY PUT IN THE ELECTRICITY AND THE PLUMBING INTO THE GARAGE.
EVERY STEP OF THE WAY THEY KNEW THAT THEY NEEDED PERMITS, BUT THEY DIDN'T WANT TO WASTE THEIR MONEY AND DOING IT THE CORRECT WAY.
THEY TELL ALL THE OTHER NEIGHBORS, HEY, DON'T WORRY ABOUT GETTING A PERMIT.
IF YOU GET CAUGHT THE COUNTY OR JUST SLAP YOU ON YOUR HAND, YOU HAVE TO JUST PAY THE PERMIT COST AND THAT'S IT.
THE OTHER NEIGHBORS THAT ARE AROUND US HAVE FOLLOWED SUIT, AND HAVE DONE THINGS WITH THEIR PROPERTY WITHOUT A PERMIT, BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT IN THE END THAT THEY'RE JUST GOING TO GET A SLAP ON THE WRIST.
INSTALLING YOUR OWN ELECTRICITY IS A DANGEROUS THING IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
MY PROPERTY IS ADJACENT TO FEDERAL LAND AND STATE LAND, WHICH IS VERY DRY.
A FIRE WOULD IMPACT THE ENTIRE VALLEY POTENTIALLY, BUT DEFINITELY THE NEIGHBORS.
I'M JUST REQUESTING THAT YOU PUT SOME TEETH IN BEHIND, NOT ALLOWING THEM TO KEEP THE CONTAINER.
FORCE THEM TO REMOVE IT, FORCE THEM TO HAVE AN ENGINEER COME IN AND CHECK OUT THE CONDITIONS, FORCE THEM TO HAVE AN ROC PLUMBER COME IN, THEY UP TO THE PLUMBING LINE AND INSPECT TO SEE IF IT'S UP TO CODE AND TO DO THE SAME WITH THE ELECTRICITY THAT THEY PUT UNDERGROUND THAT THE CAPTAIN TO THE APS BOX ILLEGALLY WITHOUT APS HAVING ANY INPUT INTO IT.
THE DISINGENUOUS COMPLETELY TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, EVEN THE COMMISSIONER EVEN SAID THAT THEY WERE DISINGENUOUS, DISHONEST WITH THE COMMISSION, DISHONEST WITH THE COUNTY, AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE DISHONEST WITH YOU.
THEY DON'T CARE BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT YOU WILL JUST SLAP THEM ON THE WRIST AND THEY CAN BE ON THEIR WAY.
I BELIEVE IN SETTING THE EXAMPLE.
>> NOWHERE. IN EXAMPLE, THEY DON'T.
THEIR EXAMPLE IS BY-PASS ALL THE RULES BECAUSE THEY DON'T APPLY TO THEM.
I HOPE TO SUPERVISORS, YOU'LL TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.
>> NO, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT'S IT FOR THIS ITEM.
>> ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD?
>> YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD SO THAT WE CAN ASK THEM SOME QUESTIONS?
[01:45:09]
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS MELINDA GREER.
YES, WE DO HAVE, LIKE I SAID, THE PROPERTY THERE IN PAULSON.
WHEN WE DID MOVE THERE FIVE-YEARS AGO WITH THE CONTAINERS THAT WE HAD OUR STORAGE OR THINGS IN IT WHILE WE HAVE THE HOUSE BUILT, WE DID SELL ONE OF THEM.
ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS I TOLD THE PERSON BEFORE YOU HAUL IT OFF MY PROPERTY, GET YOUR PERMIT.
BECAUSE WHEN WE FIRST MOVED IN, LIKE I SAID, FIVE YEARS AGO, BEFORE THE BIG BOOM OF EVERYBODY MOVING IN.
ALSO, WE WERE TOLD BY LOCALS, CONTRACTORS, AND ALSO SOME OF THE INSPECTORS.
WE'VE HAD SPECTERS ON OUR PROPERTY.
THEY SAID, BEING IN THE RURAL AREA, THE GENERAL RULE OF THUMB IS, FIRST FIGURE OUT BUILDINGS.
IT'S NOT UNTIL SOMEBODY COMPLAINS THAT YOU WOULD REALLY HAVE TO DO SO.
I'M JUST SAYING THIS IS WHAT WE WERE TOLD AND THIS IS JUST WHAT WE'VE BEEN GOING BY.
YES, WE WERE WRONG. I GET THAT.
BUT LIKE I SAID, WE SOLD THE ONE BECAUSE I FIGURED IT'D BE EASIER TO FIGHT FOR JUST KEEPING THE CONTAINER.
WE SOLD OUR ACTUAL STORAGE CONTAINER AND WE PUT IN A WOODSHED.
WE ALSO PUT IN FOR ELECTRICAL.
WE'VE BUILT OUR HEALTH BEFORE.
IT WAS AN OWNER BUILDER OF OUR FIRST HOUSE THAT WE HAD.
WE HAVE SOME KNOWLEDGE WHEN MY HUSBAND HAS A LOT OF KNOWLEDGE AS FAR AS ELECTRICAL AND ALL OF THAT THINGS.
WE HAVE THE INSPECTOR COME OUT AND INSPECT THE ELECTRICAL FOR OUR SHED THAT WE PUT IN.
IT DID NOT PASS BECAUSE YOU SAID NOW INSTEAD OF JUST USING THE GFI BREAKERS, YOU HAVE TO USE THE AFI GFI BREAKERS.
WE WENT AHEAD AND HAD HIM LOOK IN MY SHOP THAT I HAVE AND TELL ME WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO FOR THAT.
IT IS NOW UP TO CODE AS FAR AS THE ELECTRICITY GOES AND SO IS THE SHED.
I THINK WE HAVE THE INSPECTOR COMING OUT AGAIN TOMORROW.
>> MY QUESTION WHEN I ASKED YOU TO COME UP AS AN APPLICANT, DID YOU ACTUALLY TAP IT TO THE APS POWER LINE WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE THAT THAT WAS ILLEGAL?
>> WE HAVE POWER THERE ON OUR POWER BOX.
>> AT THAT TIME, DID YOU BELIEVE THAT WAS LEGAL OR DID YOU KNOW THAT TAKING POWER WITHOUT IT BEING NOTED AS REGISTERED AND PAID FOR MIGHT CONFLICT WITH WHAT STANDARDS ARE?
>> IT'S MY REGULAR ELECTRICAL BOX THAT'S ON MY PROPERTY.
BUT WE JUST TOOK POWER TO OUR WORKSHOPS AND UP TO THE SHED.
>> KNOWING THAT IT WAS ILLEGAL TO DO THAT AND NOT GET PERMITTED?
>> I HAVE NO WORDS FOR THAT, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
>> I JUST TRYING TO GET TO THE ANSWER.
I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A DIFFICULT CONVERSATION TO HAVE, BUT I'M TRYING TO GET TO THE POINT OF WHERE ARE YOU NOW WITH COMPLIANCE AND WHAT IS YOUR INTENT IN THE FUTURE? OUR ROLE IS TO HELP PEOPLE GET IN COMPLIANCE.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO BE COPS HERE.
IT'S COMPLETE DRIVEN, BUT I'M SERIOUSLY CONCERNED WHEN YOU PUT A NEIGHBORHOOD AT RISK TO SAVE MONEY.
>> NOT NECESSARILY. NO, BECAUSE WE ARE BRINGING EVERYTHING INTO COMPLIANCE.
[OVERLAPPING] WE'VE ZONE THE SHED WE BROUGHT IN WERE GETTING THE ELECTRICAL DONE.
I WAS TRYING TO ZONE MY WORKSHOP THE EXISTING ONE, BUT I WAS TOLD TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE USE PERMIT HEARING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
ALL OF MY ART BUILDINGS ON THE PROPERTY WILL BE BROUGHT UP TO CODE.
IT WILL BE AFTER GOING THROUGH THIS, MY RECOMMENDATION TO ANYBODY WHO IS DOING ANYTHING WHO COMES UP AND SAYS JEAN, WHAT DO YOU THINK? I SAY, WE'VE LEARNED OUR LESSON.
>> SUPERINTENDENT BROWN, FIRST, YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR FIRST HOUSE.
YOU GOT A PERMIT TO BUILD IT, DIDN'T YOU NOT?
[01:50:02]
>> OBVIOUSLY, YOU'RE GETTING POWER FROM SOMEBODY THAT'S BASICALLY ALREADY PRE SUPPLIED BY APS, WHICH I'M ASSUMING YOU'VE GOT A PERMIT FOR THAT?
>> DID ANYBODY EVER TELL YOU THAT YOU ARE ONLY ALLOWED ONE CONNECTS CONTAINER?
>> WHY DIDN'T YOU SOLVE A THIRD ONE?
>> BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN WE WERE WHEN A NEIGHBOR REPORTED US FOR HAVING THREE CONTAINERS. I WENT AHEAD.
>> DURING THIS PROCESS WHEN YOU WERE ADVISED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THERE ARE ALL THESE THINGS WERE IN VIOLATION.
DIFFERENT ISSUES WERE IN VIOLATION.
HAVE YOU RE-CHANGED ANY OF THEM? HAVE YOU BROUGHT ANY OF THEM TO CODE AT ALL?
>> YES. MY WORKSHOP, I'D LIKE TO SAY AS SOON AS THIS IS TAKEN CARE OF, THE ELECTRICAL HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP TO CODE.
WE WENT AHEAD AND WE DID ALL OF THAT AFTER THE GENTLEMAN WAS THERE, THE INSPECTOR WAS THERE, AND HE TOLD US WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO.
>> WAS THERE A PERMIT ISSUED FOR THAT?
>> NOT JUST YET, BECAUSE I WAS TOLD TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE USE PERMIT BEFORE I CAN DO THAT, I'D PULLED THE ELECTRICAL PERMIT FOR MY SHED. THAT'S OUT BACK.
>> DIDN'T HAVE A PERMIT WHO INSPECTED IT?
>> WHEN THE INSPECTOR WAS THERE INSPECTING THE ELECTRICAL FOR MY SHED OUT BACK, MY HUSBAND SAID, CAN YOU COME IN AND TELL ME.
>> WHO INSPECTED IT? WE DO THE INSPECTIONS.
>> NO. THIS WAS A YAVAPAI COUNTY INSPECTOR.
HE CAME OUT TO INSPECT THE ELECTRICAL THAT WE DID ON THE SHED.
WE NEEDED TO ADD THE DIFFERENT BREAKERS OR THE DIFFERENT OUTLETS.
>> YES, THOSE WORK BECAUSE IT WAS REGULAR GFI AND WE NEED THE AFI GFIS.
WE ASKED HIM WOULD YOU PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT MY SHOP AND TELL ME WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO BRING IT UP TO CODE, WHICH WE DID, WE CHANGED OUT.
HE SAYS, YOU NEED TO HAVE A SWITCHABLE OUTSIDE LIGHT AND THOSE THINGS.
WE'VE TAKEN CARE OF ALL OF THAT.
AFTER THIS HEARING OF MY USE PERMIT FOR MY STORE, FOR THE CONTAINERS, THE STEEL CONTAINERS, THEN WE WILL GO THROUGH AND EVERYTHING WILL BE BROUGHT UP TO YOUR CODE.
>> YEAH. I HAVE TO SAY IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING TO JUST THINK THAT THERE AREN'T ANY REGULATIONS IN THE COMMUNITIES THAT WE LIVE IN TODAY BECAUSE THERE ARE.
EVERYWHERE WE GO, THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS, PERMITS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
EVERYBODY IS LIVING CLOSE TO EACH OTHER.
NOW, WHAT USED TO BE OPEN SPACE ISN'T OPEN SPACE ANYMORE.
THAT'S WHY FIRE IS SUCH AN ISSUE ANYMORE.
EVERYBODY IS CONCERNED BECAUSE IF A FIRE BREAKS OUT, IT'S GOING TO BE REAL QUICK TO GRAB UP A WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
TO TAP INTO ELECTRICITY, KNOWING THAT'S DOING IT ALL WRONG IS VERY ALARMING. IT'S DISAPPOINTING.
I'M JUST SAYING GOING FORWARD, I HOPE THAT HOWEVER, THIS IS ENDS UP HANDLING THAT YOU WILL NEVER GO FORWARD TO DO ANYTHING WITHOUT REACHING OUT TO THE COUNTY TO GET THE PERMITS THAT YOU NEED AND DO NOT LISTEN TO OTHER PEOPLE.
YOU NEED TO GO TO THE LAWS AND THE REGULATIONS OF THE COMMUNITY WHERE YOU GET WHAT YOU NEED TO KEEP EVERYTHING LEVEL AND YOU DON'T LISTEN TO OTHER PEOPLE.
>> EXACTLY. LIKE THIS HAS BEEN A HUGE LESSON LEARNED AND I DO APOLOGIZE.
BUT WE ARE BRINGING EVERYTHING UP TO CODE.
WE HAVE OUR PANEL ON OUR PROPERTY AND LIKE I SAID, WE DID RUN IT THE WAY IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE RUN.
WE JUST MISSED THE PART ABOUT PERMITTING. I APOLOGIZE.
>> YOU SAID IT AND MADE A COMMENT EARLIER THAT ONE OF OUR INSPECTORS
[01:55:02]
TOLD YOU HAVE A PIKE COUNTY INSPECTORS TOLD YOU, DON'T WORRY.>> WELL, LIKE I SAID, WE'VE HAD OUR INSPECTORS ON HER HOUSE OR ON OUR PROPERTY DOING OUR HOUSE.
THEY WOULD JUST SAY, WELL, YOU GUYS ARE SO FAR OUT HERE.
WE'VE HAD THE GARAGE, WE'VE HAD OUR PATIOS, EVERYTHING HAS BEEN PERMITTED AND STUFF.
THEY'D GO A LOT OF TIMES, NOTHING BEING TAKEN CARE OF UNTIL LIKE I SAID, THERE IS A COMPLAINT.
NOW I'M TRYING TO MAKE EVERYTHING RIGHT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS IS PROBABLY FOR THE PLANNER.
WHERE IS THE SHED WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT?
>> THOSE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED STRUCTURES ARE THE CONTAINERS AND THEN ABOVE HERE IN THE NORTH IS THE SHED THAT WAS RECENTLY BROUGHT ON.
>> WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT 400 SQUARE FEET, DOES THAT INCLUDE THE SHED OR IS THAT A SEPARATE ISSUE?
>> THAT'S ALREADY DONE AND PERMITTED.
THE CONTAINERS ARE THESE TWO, 8 BY 40 CONTAINERS.
JUST TO CLARIFY, IF THEY HAD BEEN 8 BY 20 CONTAINERS, THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED UNDER OUR ORDINANCE.
IT'S THAT EXTRA 240 SQUARE FEET THAT IS WHAT IS BEING REQUESTED FOR THIS USE PERMIT.
OBVIOUSLY, THE STRUCTURE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PERMITTED, BUT THE AVENUE THAT THE APPLICANTS WOULD NEED TO PURSUE IS COMING INTO COMPLIANCE AFTER THE VIOLATION HAS BEEN REGISTERED.
AT THIS POINT, THE ONLY REASON WE'RE HERE FOR THE USE PERMIT IS FOR THAT EXTRA 240 SQUARE FEET.
>> QUICK QUESTION. IF WE SAY OKEY-DOKEY TO THE PERMIT, THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE TO FIX ANYTHING, DO THEY?
>> IF YOU APPROVE THE USE PERMIT THEN THEY WOULD NEED TO CONTINUE ON IN THE PROCESS FOR PERMITTING EVERYTHING AS THEY WOULD HAVE BEFORE.
IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A PERMIT FOR THOSE TWO CONTAINERS.
>> THEY HAVE TWO CONTAINERS, IN AND OF ITSELF IS A VIOLATION OF ORDINANCE, CORRECT?
>> THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TWO CONTAINERS AS LONG AS THE 400 SQUARE FOOT LIMIT IS MET.
>> BUT IN THIS CASE, THAT'S FAR BEYOND THAT.
>> RIGHT. AN EXTRA 240 SQUARE FEET.
>> SUPERVISOR BROWN, THIS IS YOUR DISTRICT.
>> I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE USE PERMIT.
>> MOTION BY SUPERVISOR BROWN TO DENY THE USE PERMIT AND SECONDED BY CHAIR OBERG.
>> MAY L MAKE A COMMENT FIRST BEFORE WE GO TO THE VOTE?
>> [LAUGHTER] SORRY, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THIS IS DIFFICULT AND I'M SURE OUR COMMISSIONERS REALLY STRUGGLED WITH IT.
I REALLY NEED TO SEE, AND I THINK I HEARD IT, A GENUINE, AUTHENTIC APOLOGY.
JUST BECAUSE NOBODY IS WATCHING YOU WHEN YOU GO BUY A SPEED LIMIT SIGN DOES NOT GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO BREAK THE LAW, AND YOU PUT LIVES AT RISK.
I'M JUST GOING TO TELL YOU LIKE IT IS, AND I WANT, OF COURSE, COMMUNITIES TO BE WHOLE, AND I DON'T WANT YOU TO LOSE YOUR BUSINESS.
THAT'S NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COUNTY, UNDERPINNING OUR ROBUST ECONOMY.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT I HOPE THIS NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN, AND THAT YOU DO INDEED, JEAN, BECOME THE POSTER CHILD FOR INFORMING THE REST OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND EVERYONE YOU MEET ABOUT THIS EXPERIENCE BECAUSE IT'S NOT A GAME.
>> ANY FURTHER COMMENT? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
NEXT ITEM IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVE A PERMANENT AND TRANSFERABLE USE
[2. Development Services - Approve a permanent and transferrable Use Permit to allow for a waiver of Section 516; Density District 70, to grant a reduction of the required 50-foot rear setback by 50-feet to allow for a rear setback of zero feet for an existing attached garage, on approximately 1.27 acres in the R1L-70 (Residential; Single-family limited to site-built structures only; 70,000 square foot minimum parcel size) zoning district, subject to the conditions of approval. Owner/Applicant: Carruthers Family Living Trust, Gary & Nathalie Carruthers Ttees; Agent: Permit Pushers by James Gardner; Project Name: Carruthers Garage Use Permit; APN: 407-17-018B; PLA23-000041. The project is located at 9900 East Garden Lane, in the community of Cornville, Arizona. Section 10, Township 15 North, Range 04 East. G&SRB&M. Staff: Stephanie Johnson (District 2 -Supervisor Gregory)]
PERMIT FOR A WAIVER OF SECTION 516 DENSITY DISTRICT 72, GRANT REDUCTION OF 50 FOOT, ALLOW THE REAR SETBACKS TO ZERO ON EXISTING ATTACHED [INAUDIBLE] GOOD MORNING, STEPHANIE.GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
I'M STEPHANIE JOHNSON, PLANNER WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
I AM HERE TODAY TO PRESENT TO YOU THE CARRUTHERS REQUEST FOR A USE PERMIT FOR THEIR ATTACHED GARAGE.
[02:00:03]
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID HAVE A SPLIT VOTE ON THIS ACTION AS WELL.IT WAS A 6-1 VOTE WITH ONE BEING OPPOSED, AND COMMISSIONER BUCHANAN WILL BE HERE TO SPEAK TO THAT WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT.
THIS SUBJECT PARCEL IS LOCATED IN DISTRICT 2 SUPERVISOR GREGORY'S DISTRICT.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 9,900 EAST GARDEN LANE IN THE COMMUNITY OF CORNVILLE.
THE SUBJECT PARCEL IS ZONED R1L70, THAT'S RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY, LIMITED TO SITE BUILT ONLY STRUCTURES WITH A MINIMUM 70,000 SQUARE FEET LOT SIZE.
THIS PARCEL IS APPROXIMATELY 1.27 ACRES AND THE PARCEL IS SURROUNDED BY DEVELOPED R1L70 ZONED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
THIS PARCEL IS SUBJECT TO FLOOD CONTROL REGULATIONS.
THE FLOOD CONTROL DEPARTMENT PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS.
THE BUILDING IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CURRENT FLOOD CONTROL ELEVATIONS.
FLOOD WOULD HAVE NO ISSUE WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE PROVIDED THERE IS A PERMIT AND THE SISD COMPLETED AND IT MEETS THE UNDER 50% RULE.
IT MAY REQUIRE ENGINEERING AND CERTIFICATE OF NO-RISE.
IF GARAGE HAS MORE THAN 50% OF THE STRUCTURE'S VALUE THEN THE HOME WILL EITHER NEED TO BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE OR THE PERMIT WILL NOT BE APPROVED.
IN ADDITION TO THE INFORMATION THAT I PRESENTED AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, YOUR PACKET NOW INCLUDES THE SISD FORMED FROM FLOOD CONTROL, AS WELL AS THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT THAT WAS AGREED TO BY THE APPLICANT AND FLOOD CONTROL.
FLOOD CONTROL HAD ALREADY ENTERED THEIR APPROVAL ON THIS BUILDING, BUT THAT BUILDING PERMIT HAS NOW EXPIRED BY LIMITATIONS WAITING FOR THIS USE PERMIT PROCESS TO HAPPEN.
IF THEY DO GET A FAVORABLE VOTE, THEN THEY WILL NEED TO REAPPLY FOR THOSE BUILDING PERMITS.
HERE IS A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED WITH THE APPLICATION.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONSIDERATION OF A PERMANENT AND TRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT AS THIS IS ATTACHED TO THE HOME AND WOULD BE A PERMANENT STRUCTURE TO THE HOME.
THEY'RE ASKING THAT IT BE PERMANENT AND TRANSFERABLE TO ALLOW FOR A WAIVER OF SECTION 516, THE DENSITY DISTRICT 70, TO GRANT A REDUCTION OF THE REQUIRED 50 FOOT REAR SETBACK, AND THIS WAS MODIFIED AT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO REDUCE IT BY 50 FEET AND ALLOW FOR A ZERO FOOT SETBACK.
THERE IS SOME QUESTIONABILITY ON HOW CLOSE IT REALLY IS TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
THEREFORE, THROUGH CONVERSATION WAS DECIDED TO REDUCE THAT TO A ZERO FOOT SETBACK FOR THIS STRUCTURE ONLY WITH THE CAVEAT THAT NO FURTHER ENCROACHMENTS BE ALLOWED FOR ANY OTHER STRUCTURES.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAD REQUESTED THAT THE APPLICANT OBTAIN A SURVEY TO VERIFY THAT LOCATION, AND DUE TO THE ONE MONTH TIMEFRAME BETWEEN P&Z AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, IT WAS JUST NOT A POSSIBILITY TO OBTAIN A SURVEYOR IN THAT SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME TO HAVE THAT COMPLETED.
LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT SOME PHOTOS OF THIS SITE.
HERE IS A CLOSE-UP OF THE POSTING AT 9900 GARDEN LANE ADVERTISING BOTH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HEARING AS WELL AS THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HEARING.
IN THIS PHOTO, IT'S A VIEW OF THE 9900 GARDEN LANE AND 9920 GARDEN LANE DRIVEWAYS.
THEY ARE SIDE-BY-SIDE HERE, PRETTY CLOSE TO SIDE-BY-SIDE.
IN THIS NEXT PHOTO, YOU'RE LOOKING INTO THE 9900 GARDEN LANE DRIVEWAY, INTO THE SUBJECT PARCEL WITH THE ATTACHED GARAGE VIEWABLE.
HERE WE'RE LOOKING WEST FROM THE 9900 GARDEN LANE DRIVEWAY.
THIS IS LOOKING EAST AT THE CUL-DE-SAC FOR THE GARDEN LANE ROADWAY.
THIS IS LOOKING SOUTH ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE DRIVEWAY OF 9900 GARDEN LANE.
IN THIS VIEW, IT'S JUST GIVING YOU ANOTHER LITTLE BIT MORE IDEA OF HOW THESE DRIVEWAYS ARE SITUATED.
WE HAVE 9920 GARDEN LANE HERE, 9900 GARDEN LANE, AND THE ATTACHED GARAGE VIEWABLE IN THE BACKGROUND.
A LITTLE BIT CLOSER PICTURE OF THAT ATTACHED GARAGE, AS WELL AS THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER THAT IS LOCATED ON THE SIDE OF THAT GARAGE.
ANOTHER VIEW THROUGH THAT GARAGE.
[02:05:02]
THIS IS IN-BETWEEN THE FENCE AND THE GARAGE SHOWING WHERE THAT FENCE LINE IS.THIS FENCE LINE DOES NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE PROPERTY LINE.
IT WAS STRICTLY TO SHOW WHERE THAT FENCE IS LOCATED IN REGARDS TO THE GARAGE.
HERE AGAIN, THE GARAGE, THAT FENCE, THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER, AND YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE THE VIEW IN BETWEEN HERE BUT ON THIS NEXT SLIDE YOU CAN SEE WHERE WE'RE AT.
THIS IS WHAT BROUGHT IN THE QUESTION FROM PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THAT THAT CANNOT POSSIBLY BE EIGHT FEET, BUT I ALSO CANNOT VERIFY THAT THIS FENCE IS ON A PROPERTY LINE.
SO THIS IS THE WAY IT IS POSITIONED, AND THIS IS WHERE THE FENCE IS AND WHERE THE GARAGE IS.
THE SITE PLAN, WHICH THEY DID HIRE HELP FOR, DOES INDICATE THAT THERE IS EIGHT FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE GARAGE.
HERE WE HAVE AN OVERHEAD VIEW FROM THE GOOGLE IMAGERY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU CAN SEE HOW UNIQUELY SHAPED THIS PARCEL PETERS OFF TO THIS REAL THIN PORTION IN THE BACK, AND THEN THIS IS THE NEIGHBORING LOT THAT IS MUCH LARGER IN THAT BACKEND.
>> STEPHANIE, WHAT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT GARAGE?
>> IT'S JUST OPEN SPACE, LAND.
>> NO BACK BEHIND IS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
THERE IS A SHED THAT'S BACK THERE.
THEN OTHER THAN THAT, IT'S PRETTY MUCH OPEN DOWN TO THE RIVER BOTTOM.
>> THE GARAGES IS ON THE TOP PORTION OF IT?
>> THE GARAGE IS LOCATED RIGHT HERE.
>> IS THERE ANOTHER PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT TO IT OR IS IT JUST OPEN SPACE FLOODPLAIN?
>> YES, THIS IS PART OF A PROPERTY.
THIS IS PART OF ANOTHER PARCEL AND I DO HAVE.
LET ME SEE IF I CAN GET HERE A LITTLE BIT BETTER VIEW OF THAT ON THIS SLIDE.
WHILE EITHER OF THESE, THIS IS THAT SUBJECT PROPERTY WHERE IT GOES INTO THE LITTLE TINY NARROW END.
THE NEIGHBORING 9920 THAT HAS THE LARGE BACKYARD.
THIS IS SOMEBODY WHO'S PARCEL THAT HAS A HOME LOCATED AT THIS END OF THE PROPERTY.
I THINK IF WE GO BACK TO THE OVERHEAD GOOGLE IMAGERY.
THIS OVER HERE IS THE HOME OF THAT LARGER PROPERTY.
>> IS THIS ANOTHER ONE WHERE THEY JUST BUILT IT AND NOT PERMITTED IT?
>> THE PREVIOUS OWNER NOW BUILT IT.
WE DID RECEIVE A COMPLAINT, THAT'S WHAT BROUGHT US IN.
THAT GOES RIGHT INTO MY NEXT LITTLE PORTION HERE.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RECEIVED A COMPLAINT THAT THERE WERE SOME REMODEL WORK BEING DONE IN MARCH OF 2022.
MR. TODD WAS THE PROPERTY OWNER AT THAT TIME WHEN THE COMPLAINT WAS RECEIVED.
MR. TODD HAD STARTED THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS, BUT WAS UNABLE TO COMPLETE THAT PROCESS DUE TO THE ENCROACHMENT IN THE REAR SETBACK.
TYPICALLY, A REAR SETBACK, YOU CAN ENCROACH WITHIN FIVE FEET FOR A NON HABITABLE STRUCTURE.
THE FACT THAT IT'S ATTACHED TO THIS HOME TAKES IT INTO THE PRIMARY BUILDING SETBACKS AND YOU CAN NO LONGER ENCROACH BECAUSE IT IS ATTACHED TO THE LIVABLE HOME.
THAT RULE DOESN'T APPLY IN THIS SITUATION.
>> THE NEW OWNERS TRYING TO MAKE IT RIGHT WITH.
>> CORRECT. THE NEW OWNER HAS COME IN.
THE CARRUTHERS ACQUIRED THIS PARCEL IN JANUARY OF 2023.
THEY BEGAN THE USE PERMIT PROCESS THAT WE ARE IN RIGHT NOW IN MARCH OF 2023 TWO MONTHS AFTER OBTAINING THE PARCEL.
THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. TODD HAS EXPIRED AND WILL NEED TO BE RESUBMITTED SHOULD THE CARRUTHERS RECEIVE A FAVORABLE OUTCOME FROM THIS PROCESS.
THE PLANNING UNIT IS NOT ABLE TO APPROVE THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE ATTACHED GARAGE DUE TO THAT ENCROACHMENT.
THEREFORE, CREATING THE NEED FOR THIS USE PERMIT.
THE AS-BUILT GARAGE IS TALKED TO BACK ON THE PARCEL AND CANNOT EASILY BE SEEN FROM THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE HAS SIGNIFICANT NATURAL VEGETATIVE SCREENING, BLOCKING THE VIEW OF THE GARAGE.
THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY LIFE SAFETY ISSUES WITH GRANTING THIS REQUEST.
STAFF, HOWEVER, IS RESPECTFULLY TAKING A NEUTRAL POSITION TO THIS REQUEST.
THE PARCEL IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH OUR COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THAT IT IS LOCATED IN AN AREA DESIGNATED AS RESIDENTIAL, 0-1 DWELLING ACRES.
THIS PARCEL IS APPROXIMATELY 1.27 ACRES AND PROVIDES FOR LARGE LOT COMMUNITIES WITH ONE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING.
[02:10:04]
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. I'M SORRY YOU MIGHT HAVE SAID.
BUT YOU SAID IT WAS A SPLIT VOTE, SO WHAT WAS THAT?
>> IT WAS NOT SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE.
>> MR. TODD IS THE ORIGINAL OWNER, BUILD HER ON THIS PROPERTY, APPARENTLY, CORRECT?
>> THE NEW FOLKS HERE BOUGHT BASICALLY CAME IN AND BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY FROM MR. TODD, CORRECT?
>> MR. TODD KNEW IT WAS IN VIOLATION PROBABLY?
>> BECAUSE THAT GARAGE IS NOT TO CODE, IS IT?
THAT WOULD BE DETERMINED DURING BUILDING SAFETY IS REVIEW FOR CODE COMPLAINTS.
>> THAT BACKS ARE DEFINITELY QUESTIONABLE.
>> ABSOLUTELY. THEY ARE NOT BEING MET.
THE REQUIRED WOULD BE 50 FEET AND THEY ARE NOT 50 FEET.
>> I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY AND IN MOST REAL ESTATE DISCLOSURE, YOU MUST DISCLOSE WHAT IS NOT BEEN DONE BY PERMIT AM I MY CORRECT?
>> IF YOU DON'T DO THAT, YOUR REAL ESTATE AGENT OR BROKER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT FAILURE TO DISCLOSE.
>> THAT WOULD ALSO MAKE MR. TODD RESPONSIBLE BECAUSE HE DID NOT DISCLOSE IT TO THE BUYER.
>> THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING TO LET THE APPLICANT ADDRESS YOU.
I DO BELIEVE THEY WERE AWARE OF THIS ISSUE WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY.
>> THAT WAS THE NEXT QUESTION.
WERE THEY AWARE? THEY WERE AWARE SO THEY SAID IT WAS OKIE DOKIE TO BREAK THE LAW AND NOT HAVE IT PERMITTED UNTIL SOMEBODY COMPLAINED, CORRECT?
>> I BELIEVE THEY HAD SOME AGREEMENTS DURING THE PURCHASE BUT I WOULD NEED TO LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK TO THAT.
BUT I BELIEVE THAT THEY HAD SOME AGREEMENTS IN PLACE WITH REGARD TO HOW THEY WERE GOING TO HANDLE THE UNPERMITTED ISSUE.
I THINK THEY TOOK CARE OF THAT DURING THE SALE PROCESS.
>> YOU'RE WELCOME. LET'S TALK CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOR JUST A MOMENT.
THE APPLICANTS AND PRE-APPLICATION LETTERS TO ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1,000 FEET OF THIS PARCEL AS IT'S OVER AN ACRE, AND THAT'S WHAT IS REQUIRED BY THE ORDINANCE.
THE APPLICANT ALSO HELD AN ON-SITE MEETING ON MARCH 21ST, 2023.
THE APPLICANT HAS INCLUDED FIVE LETTERS OF SUPPORT AND NO LETTERS AND OPPOSITION THAT CAME OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS.
THOSE WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.
TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED ONE EMAIL IN OPPOSITION OF THIS USE PERMIT FROM A NEIGHBOR WITHIN THE 1,000 FOOT RADIUS.
STAFF HAS ALSO RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM CHARLES CRICK WHO IS JUST OUTSIDE OF THE DISTRIBUTION RADIUS.
HE DID NOT INDICATE INITIALLY WHETHER HE WAS IN OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT.
NOW THAT WE'VE DONE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HEARING.
I DO KNOW THAT HE IS IN OPPOSITION AND HE'S ALSO HERE TODAY.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES POSTED A SURVEY FOR THIS APPLICATION ON OUR WEBSITE ON SURVEY 1, 2, 3, JULY 13TH OF 2023.
AS OF THIS MORNING, WHEN I DOUBLE-CHECKED THERE ARE STILL NO RESPONSES ON THE SURVEY.
>> THE NEIGHBOR IMPACTED THE MOST IS IN SUPPORT OF IT WITH THE ADJOINING PROPERTY. HE'S NOT.
>> THE WRONG WAY HERE. I CAN'T VERIFY THAT THAT WOULD BE WHO IS IMPACTED THE MOST.
IT MIGHT PHYSICALLY BE WHO'S CLOSEST.
BUT I DON T KNOW THAT THAT'S WHO'S IMPACTED THE MOST.
>> WELL, WHOSE PROPERTY THE ADJOIN OR THAT.
>> THIS IS THE 9920 THEN THAT NEIGHBORING DRIVEWAY AND THEY DID SUPPORT THE PROJECT.
THEN THE OTHER THREE CLOSE NEIGHBORS HERE SUPPORTED THE PROJECT.
WE HAD ONE OPPOSITION FROM HERE THAT THAT WAS THE EMAIL THAT I HAD RECEIVED THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET.
>> YES. JUST JUST ONE, SO THE SURVEY IS NOT IN YET.
>> THE SURVEY OF THE LOT AND THE LAND, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO BE COMPLETED.
THE APPLICANT CAN LET YOU KNOW THEIR EFFORTS IN TRYING TO OBTAIN A SURVEYOR.
>> WOULD NOT IT MAKE SENSE FOR US TO HAVE THE SURVEY BEFORE WE ACT ON THIS MATTER?
>> I BELIEVE THAT'S WHY THE COMMISSIONERS ASKED TO MODIFY THAT CONDITION OF APPROVAL REGARDING THE SETBACK BEING.
THE INITIAL REQUEST WAS TO REDUCE THE SETBACK FROM 50 FEET AND REDUCE IT BY 42 FEET TO ALLOW FOR EIGHT FEET.
[02:15:04]
BASED ON THE PHOTOS AND THE INFORMATION IN THE DISCUSSION IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE EIGHT FEET.WE DON'T HAVE A SURVEY THAT VERIFIES WHERE THAT PROPERTY LINE IS SO THE COMMISSIONERS FOUND THAT IT'D BE THE BEST WAY TO PROCEED, WOULD CHANGE THAT TO ZERO.
THAT WAY IT TOOK AWAY ANY QUESTION IF THERE HAPPENS TO BE THREE FEET, THAT'S GREAT.
BUT ALSO PUTTING IN THAT CAVEAT THAT NO FURTHER ENCROACHMENTS BE ALLOWED FOR ANY OTHER STRUCTURES.
>> THANK YOU FOR REMINDING ME OF THAT. YES.
>> DO WE HAVE ANY GREEN SHEETS?
>> I STILL HAVE JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE HERE, JUST.
I KNOW YOU'VE PROBABLY HEARD ENOUGH ALREADY BUT JUST WANT TO PUT UP HERE THE SUGGESTED STIPULATIONS.
I REALIZE THOSE ARE SMALL THERE.
I'M HAPPY TO READ ANY OF THEM THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ABSOLUTELY.
SUGGESTED STIPULATIONS ARE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
ONE WOULD BE A PERMANENT AND TRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT TILL ALLOW FOR A WAIVER OF SECTION 516 DENSITY DISTRICT 70 TO GRANT A REDUCTION OF THE REQUIRED 50 FOOT REAR SETBACK.
BY 50 FEET TO ALLOW FOR A ZERO FOOT SETBACK FOR AN EXISTING ATTACHED GARAGE.
NO FURTHER ENCROACHMENTS ALLOWED.
PROPERTY TO BE MAINTAINED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LETTER OF INTENT AND THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED WITH THIS APPLICATION.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES, REGULATIONS, AND ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS.
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE TO BE ISSUED WITHIN TWO YEARS OF BOARD SUPERVISOR APPROVAL, CONFIRMING THAT ALL STIPULATIONS HAVE BEEN SATISFIED.
THE USE IS OPERATING IN CONFORMANCE WITH ALL APPROVALS.
ALL BUILDING PERMITS HAVE BEEN ISSUED AND THE USE IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE COUNTY, STATE, AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS.
OR THEY USE PERMIT WILL BECOME NULL AND VOID.
IN THE EVENT THE OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FILES A CLAIM UNDER ARS SECTION 121134, REGARDING THIS USE PERMIT, THIS USE PERMIT SHALL BECOME NULL AND VOID.
WITH THAT, THAT BRINGS ME TO THE END OF MY PRESENTATION.
I DO HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
I'LL BRING UP ANOTHER GREEN SHEET.
>> YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, ONE OF THE THINGS I'M LOOKING AT IS, IF THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT FOR A 50 FOOT SETBACK, DOES THAT INCLUDE ALSO THE HOUSE?
>> ACTUALLY, WE'RE DOING AND NOT ONLY FOR THE GARAGE, WE'RE DOING IT FOR THE HOUSE.
>> THE HOUSE WAS PERMITTED AND APPROVED IN ITS LOCATION.
NO, WE'RE NOT REVIEWING THE HOUSE.
IT IS THE ADDITION OF THE GARAGE.
>> BUT APPARENTLY WHEN THE HOUSE IS BUILT, IT DIDN'T HAVE THE SUFFICIENT SETBACK.
>> ANY OTHER FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? GREEN SHEETS BY CHAIR OBERG.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT YET OR YOU WANT TO SAVE THAT?
>> RIGHT NOW, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
WE MIGHT HAVE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS, BUT JUST LISTEN TO THE GREEN SHEETS.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN. FIRST ONE IS CHARLES CRICK.
WISHES TO SPEAK OPPOSED TO THE ISSUE.
>> PLEASE MAKE SURE TO STATE YOUR NAME.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.
I'M A NEIGHBOR OF THE PROPERTY, I LIVE AT 1125 SOUTH TRAILS END, WHICH IS THE SECOND PIECE OF PROPERTY ON LAWYER ROAD.
I AM FOUR PROPERTIES AWAY FROM THIS.
I'M UP ON THE UPPER LEFT AND ANY WAY, I'M OPPOSED TO THIS BECAUSE THERE NEVER WAS A BUILDING PERMIT REQUESTED OR PERMITTED TO THIS MR. TODD, WHO PURCHASED THE PROPERTY FROM OUR NEIGHBOR, WHO HAD TO SELL A HOUSE.
IN A DISTRESSED SALE, HE HAD TO SELL IT BECAUSE HIS WIFE IS IN HEALTH CARE AND SO THIS MR. TODD BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.
HE LIVES IN PRESS KIT VALLEY AT THE TIME HE TOLD THE NEIGHBORS THAT HE WAS A GENERAL CONTRACTOR, WHICH HE WASN'T, HIS LICENSE HAD BEEN DENIED, HAD BEEN REVOKED BY THE REGISTRAR CONTRACTORS.
HE WAS A SUBCONTRACTOR OF A DIFFERENT TRADE.
ANY WAY, THIS THING WAS NEVER PERMITTED.
RIGHT NOW ON THE PROPERTY HAS AN E7 DESIGNATION WHICH IS ON THE OAK CREEK FLOODWAY, NOT THE PLANE THE FLOODWAY, WHICH IS A MAJOR PORTION OF OUR CREEK.
I'M AFFECTED BY IT AS WELL OF OTHER NEIGHBORS UPSTREAM BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY, THE WHOLE GARAGE, WHICH THE ORIGINAL BUILDING WAS A 50 FOOT SETBACK.
NOW WHAT'S NOW ENCROACHED TO IT.
THERE WAS A TOTAL REMODEL OF THE WHOLE HOUSE.
[02:20:01]
THIS HOUSE HAD BEEN FLOODED BEFORE, THE BASEMENT HAD BEEN FLOODED BEFORE.BUT NO ONE SAID NOTHING ABOUT IT.
THAT'S A BIRD CONSERVATORY RIGHT NEXT TO IT OR THE NORTHERN PARCEL OF THAT PROPERTY WHERE THAT GARAGE SETS A BIRD CONSERVATORY AND NOBODY FROM PNZ OR NOBODY ELSE MENTIONED THAT.
NOBODY CONCLUDED THAT IT WILL HAPPEN.
WHY DIDN'T HAVE DOCUMENTATION? BECAUSE I'M STILL WAITING ON ADQ.
THEIR APPROVAL OF THIS BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTIONS BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW THAT YOU ARE GOING TO PROVE THIS TODAY.
I DIDN'T RECEIVE A COMBINED TO TRY TO GET ONE OF YOUR AGENDAS AND IT WASN'T POSTED I CAME BY YESTERDAY MORNING.
THANK YOU, DR. MICHAELS, HER OFFICE FINALLY TEXT ME ONE IN THE AFTERNOON, WHICH WAS TOO LATE FOR ME TO RESPOND TO A ADQ ABOUT THIS.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTY TO NORTH THAT DISAPPROVED OF IT.
SHE HAS BEEN GOING THROUGH A LONG PROCESS BECAUSE SHE HAD A MOBILE HOME CONSTRUCTED ON THAT PROPERTY AND IT HAS TEN FOOT PILLARS, EIGHT FOOT PILLARS ABOVE THE FLOODWAY.
IT DOESN'T ENCROACH THE FLOOD.
IT DOESN'T PUSH ANY WATER TOWARDS US.
IT WAS APPROVED AND SO THERE STILL HASSLE ABOUT WHO'S GOING TO FINISH WELDING AND TIGHTEN IT DOWN.
IT'S BEEN ANOTHER NINE MONTH PROCESS FOR HER.
I HAVE NEIGHBORS DOWNSTREAM WHO STILL CAN'T GET A PERMIT BECAUSE THAT'S A LEGAL WAY.
ARE WE GOING TO SET A PRECEDENCE HERE AND TELL EVERYBODY, LET'S NOT BOTHER GETTING A PERMIT.
LET'S JUST LET THEM BUILD LET THEM REMODEL AND ANYWAY MR. CROWD, THERE'S PAID CASH FOR THIS AND HE SAID IT AT THE LAST MEETING THAT HE HAD NO CLUE.
HE WASN'T DISCLOSED THAT IT WAS ON THE FLOODPLAIN.
I THINK HE'S SMARTER THAN THAT.
HE HAS VINEYARDS AND OAK CREEK CANYON ARE PAID SPRINGS WHICH ARE ON THE FLOODPLAIN.
IF YOUR PROPERTY SETS RIGHT AGAINST THE CREEK, I THINK IT WOULD BE DISCLOSED TO YOU OR I WOULDN'T PAY A MILLION TOO FOR BEING ON THE FLOODPLAIN.
I WISH YOU AND PRAY THAT YOU WON'T LET THIS THING GO ON.
I'M AGGRAVATED BY IT. THANK YOU.
>> LOOKS LIKE CAROL MACKLER, WHICH IS THE SPEAKING OPPOSED TO THE ISSUE.
>> GOOD MORNING. AS MR. CRICK, AS A RESIDENT OF CORNVILLE FOR OVER 30 YEARS.
I'VE BEEN THROUGH FLOODS DOWN THERE.
I AM UPSTREAM FROM THIS PROPERTY AND IT SEEMS INTERESTING TO ME THAT YES, THERE'S NO PERMIT, THERE'S NEVER BEEN A PERMIT.
BUT THAT THE NEIGHBOR CONSTRUCTING A LEGAL PERMITTED STRUCTURE HAS TO BUILD AND I THINK MR. CRICK HAD A LITTLE BIT ON INCORRECT INFORMATION.
IT'S 14 FEET IN THE AIR ACCORDING TO FEMA.
IF 150 FEET OR 200 FEET NORTH OF SAID PROPERTY HAS TO BUILD 14 FEET, HOW COULD THIS APPLICANT WANT TO BUILD ON THE PROPERTY LINE ADJACENT TO A NATURE CONSERVANCY AND ZERO SETBACK AND ON THE GROUND? THIS MAKES NO SENSE.
IT'S A LITTLE STRANGE THAT YOU COULD MAYBE GIVE HIM THE PERMANENT.
WHEN IT GETS TO FEMA, HOW COULD FEMA SAY ONE NEIGHBOR HAS TO BE 14 FEET AND HE CAN BE ON THE GROUND.
THIS WHOLE PROCESS IS CADDY WIPERS.
I HAVE LIVED ON THE EDGE I'VE LIVED IN THIS LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR OVER 30 YEARS.
I'VE WALKED THE CREAK AFTER THE FLOODS AS WITH A NEIGHBOR AND THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.
IF THIS WAS A CAR PORT, IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE.
BUT HE WANTS TO PUT A GARAGE WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE BUILDING.
HE IS THEN IMPEDING THE FLOW OF WATER WHICH COMES STRAIGHT THROUGH THERE AND I DID GO LAST TIME AND I DID SHOW STAFF EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
THEY COULDN'T SEEM TO FIND THE ORIGINAL INFORMATION IN THEIR SYSTEMS, BUT IT IS OUT THERE AND IT'S IN COUNTY RECORDS.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER, BUT I'VE BEEN THERE THROUGH FOR FLOODS. THANK YOU.
>> MS. MACKLER, WHERE DO YOU LIVE UP [OVERLAPPING]?
>> THE SECOND ONE AND PREVIOUS TO THAT, I WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF BROOKE SIDE ON FIVE ACRES.
[02:25:03]
I'VE BEEN THERE SINCE THE WEEK BEFORE THE FLOOD OF '93.I'VE BEEN THROUGH ALL THESE FLOODS.
WHAT HAPPENS IS THE PEOPLE DOWNSTREAM INADVERTENTLY KEEP BUILDING UP THEIR PROPERTY.
THEREFORE, WHEN THE CREEK DOES GO THROUGH AND IT JUMPS, THE PARK COMES DOWN THROUGH THE BACK.
IT IS THEN BACK WASHED INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN.
THE CREEK UPSTREAM GOES THROUGH WINDMILL PARK, JUMPS THE PARK GOES THROUGH SOME PROPERTIES, WHICH IS MR. CRICK LIVES RIGHT UP HERE.
IT GOES TO THE PROPERTIES AND THEN BECAUSE OF THE BUILDING OF OTHER PEOPLE ON GARDEN LANE, IT NOW BACK WASHES INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
EVEN THIS LAST, THE DATE OF THE CARRUTHERS OPEN HOUSE WAS, I BELIEVE MARCH 21ST AND IF I BELIEVE I WAS TRYING TO KEEP WATER OUT OF MY PROPERTY ON THAT DAY, SO I DID NOT ATTEND TO THE OPEN HOUSE, ALTHOUGH I DO KNOW THE STRUCTURE.
I WALKED THE STRUCTURE RIGHT ON THE CREEK.
>> THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
>> MAKE SURE YOU STATE YOUR NAME.
>> HI, THERE. MY NAME IS JAMES GARDNER.
I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE FORMER PROPERTY OWNER, CHRIS TODD, AND HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER, GARY CARRUTHERS.
I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY, BOARD AND CHAIRMAN.
>> MY CONCERN IS IT MR. TODD'S HERE TODAY, YOU WERE A CONTRACTOR AT ONE TIME.
>> THIS IS ACTUALLY MR. CARRUTHERS WHO'S HERE.
>> CARRUTHERS. I THOUGHT YOU SAID TODD WAS HERE.
YOU JUST PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY?
>> YES. MY NAME IS GARY CARRUTHERS, I AM THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER? YES. WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, TOOK POSSESSION ON THE 1ST OF FEBRUARY.
>> DID YOU KNOW THAT PART OF THAT UNPERMITTED PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME OF THE SALE?
>> WE KNEW THAT THE PROPERTY WAS BEING IN THE PROCESS OF BEING PERMITTED.
WE SAW THE APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT.
>> RIGHT NOW TRY AND JUST CLEAN UP EVERYTHING ONCE YOU MOVED INTO THE PROPERTY?
>> I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
>> GO AHEAD, SUPERVISOR MALLORY.
>> WHEN YOU ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF PURCHASING PROPERTY, THERE'S USUALLY A DOCUMENT CALLED THIS BUDS.
DID YOU EVER SEE THAT? IT WOULD BE THE PREVIOUS OWNER. DID YOU SEE THAT?
>> ON THAT DOCUMENT, DID THEY STATE ON THERE ALL THIS UNPERMITTED?
>> THEY DIDN'T. THAT'S A VIOLATION OF THAT.
>> WE DISCOVERED THE OUTSTANDING PERMANENT.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY, JUST EDUCATE ME.
HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO BUILD WHERE YOU'RE IMPEDING WATER? AREN'T THERE CONDITIONS THAT HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED WHEN YOU KNOW THAT THE WATER IS FLOWING THAT WAY AND THE BUILDING THAT IS COMING OUT OF THE GROUND IS GOING TO IMPEDE IT AND AFFECT OTHERS IN DOING SO.
>> SORRY, I'M NOT A FLOOD CONTROL SPECIALISTS.
>> WE'LL THAT THAT IS MY QUESTION TOO.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IN THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION AND MAYBE YOU HAVE SOME INFORMATION ON WHAT THAT IS, THAT THEY HAD ALREADY RECEIVED SOME INFORMATION FROM LINKEDIN.
>> STEPHANIE CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT SO I KNOW WHAT THE RULES REALLY ARE HERE.
>> YES. THAT'S THE POINT THAT I HAD BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE SISD AND THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, THAT IS FLOOD CONTROLS TOOLS THAT THEY USE FOR THEIR REGULATIONS.
THEY HAD EVALUATED THE COST OF THIS PROJECT IN COMPARISON TO THE VALUE OF THE HOME AND THEIR CALCULATIONS FOR THAT 50% RULE IN THE BUILDING PERMIT, FLOOD CONTROL HAD ENTERED THEIR APPROVAL OF IT BEFORE IT EXPIRED BY LIMITATIONS.
IT WAS PLANNING AND ZONING WHO COULD NOT INTERN APPROVAL BECAUSE THE ENCROACHMENT.
BUT APPARENTLY THEY PROVIDED SUFFICIENT INFORMATION ON THE COST OF THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT THAT THEY, FLOOD CONTROL FOUND THAT IT MEANT THAT 50% RULE AND MATTER OF FACT, IN YOUR POCKET ON THAT SISD, THEY WERE PUSHING EXTREMELY CLOSE.
[02:30:01]
IT SAID THAT THERE WAS 3.76% REMAINING.ANYTHING MORE IS PROBABLY GOING TO MAKE IT THE WHOLE STRUCTURE HAVE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT.
>> THAT FLOOD CONTROL SEEN THE PERMIT FOR THE HOUSE.
>> THE HOUSE WAS PERMITTED A LONG TIME AGO.
THIS WAS THE PERMANENT THAT TODD HAD SUBMITTED.
>> BUT THE PERMIT FOR THE GARAGE, THAT'S WHEN FLOOD CONTROL APPROVED.
>> THERE WAS AN APPLICATION SUBMITTED.
THE PERMIT PROCESS HAD STARTED.
IT JUST DID NOT GET COMPLETED BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T GAIN ALL APPROVALS.
>> DURING THAT RECENT PROCESS WITH THE GARAGE, THAT GRANT WAS OR THE PERMIT OR FLOOD CONTROL APPROVE THE GARAGE?
CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SPEAK BRIEFLY TO THIS FLOOD ISSUE.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE FLOOD DIRECTORS NOT PRESENT AT THE MEETING TODAY.
BUT WHAT THEY'RE INDICATING OR WHAT THEY'RE SPEAKING TO IS THIS 50% RULE THAT DETERMINES WHETHER OR NOT THE STRUCTURES ELIGIBLE FOR INSURANCE UNDER NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM.
IT'S NOT CERTIFYING IT'S APPROPRIATE.
IT'S NOT CERTIFYING THE LOCATION OR ANYTHING ELSE.
IT JUST DETERMINES WHETHER THAT CAN BE ADDED ON AND THE PROPERTY STILL QUALIFIES FOR COVERAGE OR WHETHER THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE NEEDS TO BE REBUILT, BUT IT'S NOT A STAMP OF APPROVAL AS TO THE PROPOSED ADDITION.
THE OTHER THING I WOULD NOTICE HAS ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED IS YOU DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE THE RESULT OF A SURVEY WHICH WOULD TELL YOU THE ACTUAL AMOUNT OF SETBACK THAT IS REQUIRED.
IT'S A MATTER OF HOW MUCH EXISTS.
>> IT WOULD TELL YOU HOW MUCH OF A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENT THE BOARD WOULD BE ACTUALLY GRANTING RATHER THAN JUST AUTOMATICALLY TAKING IT TO ZERO BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REAL NUMBER ACTUALLY IS.
UNFORTUNATELY, AGAIN, THE FLOOD INSURANCE DIRECTORS NOT PRESENT IF INFORMATION FROM THE DIRECTOR WOULD BE HELPFUL AND INFORMATION FROM THE SURVEY WOULD ALSO BE HELPFUL.
THE OTHER OPTION IS FOR THE BOARD TO PUT THE SILVER TO A DATE SPECIFIC, IT WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE REPUBLISHED.
THE BOARD COULD GET THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN THE MEANTIME AND THEN MAKE A DECISION AT THAT TIME.
>> WELL, THAT WAS ABSOLUTELY MR. CHAIRMAN MIKE, CONCERN THESE TWO AREAS THAT ARE LEFT OUT THERE UNANSWERED AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE A DECISION WITHOUT THAT INFORMATION.
>> HOW MUCH TIME FRAME WOULD YOU NEED TO GET THE SURVEYOR IN THERE TO LOOK AT THE PROPERTY LINE?
>> I DO HAVE ONE MORE LITTLE THING TO ADD.
THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HAS OUTSTANDING ITEMS THAT HAVE TO BE MET IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO SIGN OFF ON THE PERMIT, STATING THAT THEY'RE OKAY WITH THE END RESULT.
THAT'S WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT IS.
SOMETIMES IT'S A CERTIFICATE OF NO RISE.
SOMETIMES IT'S VARYING INFORMATION.
THAT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT WAS IN PLACE.
IT'S NOW NULL AND VOID BECAUSE BECAUSE THE APPLICATION EXPIRED BY LIMITATIONS.
BUT A SIMILAR PROCESS WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN IF THEY GOT A FAVORABLE OUTCOME AND PURSUED BUILDING PERMITS.
THEY WOULD AGAIN HAVE TO ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT WITH FLOOD CONTROL, AS WELL AS PROVIDE THAT SISD INFORMATION.
>> WHAT ABOUT THE SURVEY ITSELF? ONE OF THE SURVEY SHOWS THAT IT'S ON THE PROPERTY LINE OR OVER PROPERTY LINE, OR JUST GUESSING ON WHAT THE SETBACKS IS GONNA BE.
I WOULD FEEL A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE HAVING A SURVEY DONE KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT THE SETBACKS ARE.
WHY DON'T WE TABLE THIS? WHAT WOULD BE A GOOD TIME? HOW MUCH TIME WOULD YOU NEED TO GET A SURVEY AND GET THAT INFORMATION BACK?
>> THE PRIOR PROPERTY OWNER HAS ENGAGED AT SURVEYOR WHO ESTIMATES TEN WEEKS.
I WOULD GO MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN THAT, SEEING HOW BUSY SURVEYORS AND ENGINEERING FIRMS ARE.
I WOULD SUGGEST SOMETHING CLOSER TO 12-14 WEEKS.
>> WE'LL REPUBLISH IT AND WE'RE GOING TO TABLE THIS UNTIL YOU GET THAT INFORMATION BACK TO US. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THAT WOULD BE A NON DATE SPECIFIC?
>> YES. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? EVERYBODY AGREE? PUSHING THROUGH.
>> LAST ITEM. DEVELOPMENT SERVICE APPROVED A ZONING MAP CHANGE FROM THE R1L-175,
[3. Development Services - Approve a Zoning Map Change from the R1L-175 (Residential; Single-family limited to site-built structures only; 175,000 square foot minimum lot size) zoning district to the RMM-175 (Residential; Single family; site built, factory built, and Multi-Sectional Manufactured Homes, no single-wide manufactured homes; 175,000 square foot minimum lot size) zoning district, subject to the conditions of approval. Owner: Cody & Audra Moore; Applicant: Audra Moore; Project Name: Moore Zoning Map Change; APN: 402-13-016T; PLA23-000079. The project is located at 2451 South Crossfire Road, west of Orme Road. Section 16 & Section 17, Township 13 North, Range 02 East. G&SRB&M. Staff: Stephanie Johnson (District 2 -Supervisor Gregory)]
[02:35:04]
RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY LIMITED SITE BUILT STRUCTURE ONLY 175 SQUARE FOOT, MINIMUM SIZE LOT ZONING DISTRICT TO RMM-175, RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY SITE BUILT, FACTORY BUILT, AND MULTISECTIONAL MANUFACTURER HOMES, NO SINGLE WIDE MANUAL FACTOR HOMES, 175,000 SQUARE FEET, MINIMUM LOT SIZE, ZONING DISTRICTS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MRS. IN MY DISTRICT COME FORM [INAUDIBLE]. GO AHEAD, STEPHANIE.
>> WE'RE STILL AT GOOD MORNING.
GOOD MORNING AGAIN, CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
WE GOT ALL OF OUR HARD WORK OUT OF THE WAY.
THIS APPLICATION WAS VOTED UNANIMOUSLY FOR A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO THE BOARD.
I'M STEPHANIE JOHNSON, PLANNER WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY.
THE SUBJECT PARCEL IS LOCATED IN DISTRICT 2 SUPERVISOR, GREGORY'S DISTRICT.
THE SUBJECT PARCEL IS LOCATED AT 2451 SOUTH CROSSFIRE ROAD, WEST OF ARM ROAD.
THE PARCEL IS CURRENTLY ZONED R1L-175, WHICH IS THE LIMITED DISLIKE BUILT-ONLY STRUCTURES.
THE PARCEL IS APPROXIMATELY 14.85 ACRES.
THE PARCEL DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH IS ALSO UNDEVELOPED.
THE NEXT TWO SOUTHERN PARCELS HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED AND HAVE MANUFACTURED HOMES ON THEM.
EVEN THE PARCEL TO THE NORTH AND NORTHWEST HAS A MANUFACTURED HOME, EVEN THOUGH IT'S AN R1L ZONING.
IT WAS BECAUSE THE MANUFACTURED HOME WAS PLACED PRIOR TO ANY OF OUR BUILDING PERMITS.
[LAUGHTER] IT WASN'T AN OVERSIGHT BY OUR OFFICE, IT HAPPENED PRIOR TO REGULATIONS.
IN THIS SITE PLAN SUBMITTED WITH THE ZONING MAP CHANGE APPLICATION DATED JUNE 1ST, 2023, SHOWS WHERE THEY WOULD LIKE TO PLACE THE MANUFACTURED HOME ON THE PROPERTY.
THERE ARE NO WAIVERS WITH THIS REQUEST, THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
I PUT THE POSTING AT THE JUNCTURE OF CROSSFIRE ROAD AND MED BAR ROAD AS THAT WAS THE MORE VIEWABLE POSITION TO POST IT IN.
IF I POSTED IT DIRECTLY ON THE PROPERTY, IT WOULDN'T BE VIEWABLE BY VERY MANY PEOPLE, SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT OPPORTUNITY WAS OUT THERE.
HERE'S ANOTHER VIEW OF THAT POSTING.
WE'RE LOOKING SOUTH FROM MED BAR ROAD, UP CROSSFIRE ROAD.
CROSSFIRE ROAD IS WHAT NOW LEADS INTO THE DRIVEWAY FOR THE PROPERTY.
HERE IS THAT ENTRANCE GATE, THE DRIVEWAY FOR THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS AGAIN, ANOTHER SOUTH VIEW, LOOKING DOWN CROSSFIRE ROAD.
WE CAN'T EVEN SEE TO THE NEXT PARCEL YET.
IT'S ALL STILL ON THEIR PARCEL.
IT'S A LARGE PARCEL, 14.85 ACRES.
HERE'S LOOKING NORTH TOWARD THAT PROPERTY ENTRANCE.
THEY OBVIOUSLY HAVE SOME REALLY HEALTHY COWS THAT ARE OUT THERE.
THERE WAS A LOT OF EVIDENCE OF THERE BEING CLOSE BY [LAUGHTER], AND THEY LOOK HEALTHY.
IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO SEE, BUT TUCKED DOWN IN HERE, THE PROPERTIES ARE DEVELOPED AND THERE'S MANUFACTURED HOMES DOWN IN THERE AS WELL.
IN SUMMARY, THIS SUBJECT PARCEL WAS SPLIT FROM THE PARCEL TO THE SOUTH IN 2010.
IT DID NOT REQUIRE A MINOR LAND DIVISION PERMIT BECAUSE IT WAS OVER TEN ACRES.
THE THREE PARCELS TO THE SOUTH OF THIS OBJECT PARCEL, WERE PART OF A ZONING MAP CHANGE FROM THE R1L-175 ZONING DISTRICT TO THE RMM-175 ZONING DISTRICT.
THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY THE BOARD IN 2014.
STAFF SUPPORTS THE ZONING MAP CHANGE REQUESTS AND RESPECTFULLY RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION.
IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORING PARCELS.
TO GO OVER CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOR A MOMENT, THE APPLICANT SENT A PRE-APPLICATION LETTER TO ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1,000 FEET ON JUNE 1ST, 2023.
THE APPLICANT STATED IN THEIR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION REPORT THAT THAT SHE RECEIVED AN E-MAIL IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL, ABBIE NELSON.
[02:40:03]
TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO LETTERS OR EMAILS IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION OF THIS APPLICATION.I CHECKED THIS MORNING OUR SURVEY 1, 2, 3 RESULTS, AND WE HAVE NO SUPPORT, NO OPPOSITION ON THE SURVEY 1, 2, 3, EITHER.
THIS PARCEL IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THAT IT IS LOCATED IN AN AREA DESIGNATED AS RESIDENTIAL RANCH.
THIS PARCEL IS OVER THREE ACRES AND PROVIDES FOR AN AGRICULTURAL LIFESTYLE WITH LARGE OPEN SPACES AND A PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT.
ON THE OVERHEAD OR THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, SHOULD YOU CHOOSE TO GIVE A FAVORABLE OUTCOME FOR THIS APPLICATION? AGAIN, THIS IS SMALL.
I'M WORKING ON THESE FOR MY FUTURE SLIDES SO THAT YOU CAN READ THEM, BUT I'LL LET YOU KNOW WHAT THEY ARE HERE.
HEARING APPLICATION PLA23-000079, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, A ZONING MAP CHANGE FROM THE R1L-175 ZONING DISTRICT TO THE RMM-175 ZONING DISTRICT.
PROPERTY TO BE DEVELOPED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ZONING DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS AND ALL APPLICABLE CODES, REGULATIONS, AND ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS.
IN THE EVENT THE OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FILES A CLAIM UNDER ARS SECTION 12-1134, REGARDING THIS USE PERMIT, THIS USE PERMIT SHALL BE NULL AND VOID.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF YOU'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM HER.
AGAIN, THIS WAS UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORTED BY P&Z.
>> THE CLERK OF THE BOARD, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS?
>> SUPERVISOR OBERG, DO WE HAVE ANY GREEN SHEETS?
>> NO, MR. CHAIRMAN, NOT ON THIS ITEM.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? WITH THAT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> I MADE THE MOTION, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR MALLORY.
>> AT THIS TIME, WE'LL DO CALL THE PUBLIC.
[ CALL TO THE PUBLIC: Individuals may address the Board for up to three (3) minutes on any relevant issue within the Board's jurisdiction. Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.01(H), Board members shall not discuss or take action on matters raised during the call to the public. The Board may direct staff to study the matter or direct that the matter be rescheduled for consideration at a later date.]
INDIVIDUALS MAY ADDRESS THE BOARD FOR UP TO 3 MINUTES ON ANY RELEVANT ISSUES WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURISDICTION PURSUANT TO ARS 308431.01H.BOARD MEMBER SHALL NOT DISCUSS OR TAKE ACTION ON MATTERS RAISED DURING THE CALL TO THE PUBLIC.
THE BOARD MAY DIRECT STAFF TO STUDY THE MATTER OR THAT MATTER TO BE RESCHEDULED FOR CONSIDERATION AT A LATER DATE.
VICE CHAIR OBERG, IS THERE ANY GREEN SHEETS?
>> YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, WE HAVE TWO.
FIRST ONE LOOKS LIKE VICKI NICELEY, WISHES TO SPEAK.
I'LL REMIND ANYBODY THAT YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES, AND THERE'S TIMER OVER THERE.
>> GOOD MORNING. STILL, MY NAME IS VICKI AND NICELEY, I LIVE IN CHINO VALLEY, AND WE ARE ASSUMED TO BE AFFECTED BY A PROPOSED AGGREGATE MINE.
I'M JUST GOING TO READ A LETTER FROM ONE OF OUR CONCERNED CITIZENS TO YOU TODAY.
IT SAYS, I'M A PROPERTY OWNER AT THE CEDAR HEIGHTS LOCALE FOR 13 YEARS, THIS COMMUNITY HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR OVER 40 YEARS AS A QUIET RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY WITH CLOSENESS TO THE OUTDOORS, CLEAN AIR, AND BEAUTIFUL WILDERNESS.
I HAVE SEEN NEW RESIDENTS BUILT THEIR DREAM HOMES MANY TIMES WITH THEIR OWN HANDS AND OTHERS WITH A VERY SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL INVESTMENT.
SORRY, I'M A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS.
TOWARD THE END OF AUGUST OF 2023, THE CEDAR HEIGHTS COMMUNITY LEARNED THAT A PROPOSED MINE WAS GOING TO BE BUILT ON 18.3 ACRES WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY.
THIS NEW NEIGHBOR, ROCK SUPPLY LLC, MATERIAL SOURCE, WHOSE OWNER AND ASSOCIATED PARTNERS ARE NOT THEMSELVES SUBJECT TO THE BELOW SIDE OF DAMAGES AS THEY DO NOT LIVE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
ADDITIONALLY, THE COMMUNITY WAS DEPRIVED OF THE RIGHT TO VOTE OR RECEIVE ANY DAMAGE COMPENSATIONS ON THIS MATTER.
WE HAVE ALSO BEEN DEPRIVED OF ANY VOICE REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR COMMUNITY.
ANY STATE LAWS THAT ALLOW SUCH CEDAR HEIGHTS CITIZENS' RIGHTS VIOLATIONS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AND THE LAW APPLICATION WOULD BE DEEMED AS INVALID.
THE FOLLOWING IS AN ABBREVIATED LIST OF DAMAGES AND RIGHTS VIOLATIONS BEING INFLICTED UPON THE COMMUNITY BY THE PROPOSED MINE.
VERY INTRUSIVE NOISE, SHOTGUN VIBRATIONS, EXPONENTIAL INCREASE OF DUST, NEW TOXIN EXPOSURE, ENDANGERMENT OF OUR FRAGILE WATER SUPPLY.
THE MINE WILL MOST LIKELY CONSUME MORE GROUNDWATER THAN ALL THE CURRENT RESIDENTS COMBINED AND STRESS OUR WATER SUPPLY.
GROUNDWATER AVAILABILITY IS ALREADY A PROBLEM AROUND CHINO VALLEY.
[02:45:03]
HIGH PROBABILITY ARE WELLS WILL RUN DRY.LOTS OF LOSS OF PROPERTY VALUE AND ENJOYMENT OF ITS USAGE.
NOBODY WANTS TO LIVE AROUND NOISE, EXPLOSIVE SHOCK, HAULAGE TRUCKS HOGGING THE ROAD AND POLLUTION.
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF OUR REAL ESTATE VALUE WOULD BE LOST.
THERE ARE OTHER VIOLATIONS THAT CAN BE CITED.
THIS WAS WRITTEN BY ROBERT HELM BRECHT.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY, SITTING HERE FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF HOURS, I'VE HEARD SO MANY WORDS AND PHRASES THAT SEEM TO APPLY TO SO MANY PEOPLE, BUT NOT US.
I'VE HEARD OF STEWARDSHIP OF OUR LAND.
RECOGNIZING THE RIGHTS OF MINORS AND MINDS, WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO MILES, BUT THIS MINE IS IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE WOULD ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN ANY WAY THAT IT CAN BE PROVIDED. THANK YOU.
>> HEY, MR. CHAIRMAN. NEXT ONE IS LAUREN HIGGINS.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS. MY NAME IS LAUREN HIGGINS.
I'M A CEDAR HEIGHTS RESIDENT AS WELL.
HOW CAN THEY EVEN COME TO OUR AID MAYBE? I SAT HERE TO THIS WHOLE THING AND I URGE YOU ALL AGREE WITH A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT BLM SAID.
CORRECT? WITH THAT SAID THAT SAME ISSUES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I THINK IT'S TABLE ROCK?
>> YES, SIR. THANK YOU. TABLE MESSIER.
WITH ALL THE ACTIVITY THAT'S GOING TO GO ON, WITH ALL THE DUST, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO TO MOTHER NATURE, ALL THAT COMES TO A FACT.
WELL, GUESS WHAT? IT AFFECTS US TOO IN CEDAR HEIGHTS.
THAT SAME THING THAT YOU WANT TO HELP AFFECTS US AS WELL.
IT'S NO DIFFERENT, A RECREATION HOMES.
I THINK OUR HOMES, WHICH WE PAY YOU GUYS, GOOD MONEY, ALL OUR TAXES, I THINK WE SHOULD BE IN CONSIDERATION ALONG WITH PUBLIC LAND AS WELL, IF NOT MORE SO WE ARE THE TAXPAYER.
WE ARE THE PEOPLE. I KNOW SUPERVISOR BOUND YOU'RE OUT THERE IN POLYGON, WE WERE THERE WITH YOU AS WELL, SIR.
WE APPRECIATE YOU SHOWING UP, BUT WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO ALL TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AWARD FOR WHAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH.
I KNOW SUE RISBON, YOU KNOW HOW CLOSE THAT IS.
I UNDERSTAND SOME OF YOUR CONCERNS AND A PUZZLES AND AGREEMENTS WITH IT.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IT IS OUR HOME AND IT'S GOING TO LITERALLY SIT RIGHT ABOVE US.
WE KNOW HOW MUCH WE NEED IT, WE KNOW HOW MUCH WE NEED MINES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, NOT JUST HERE IN ARIZONA.
WE ALL NEED IT AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT BY GOLLY, NOT IN OUR BACKYARD.
IF YOU WANT TO GO OUT THERE BY THE DRAKE, YOU WANT TO BUY THE FORESTRY AND YOU WANT TO START DRILLING OUT THERE AND DOING IT, GREAT.
THAT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE.
THE DEER MAY NOT MIND IT, BUT WITH US, WE DO.
WE'RE JUST LIKE YOU'D TAKE THAT IN CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.
>> ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC?
>> YES. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO FILL OUT A GREEN SHEET AFTER YOU GET DONE SPEAKING.
>> BOARD MEMBERS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
HE'S BEEN VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE.
I'M ALSO A CHINO VALLEY RESIDENT OUT AT CEDAR HEIGHTS.
I'M AT WHAT WE'RE CALLING GROUND ZERO.
THE PROPOSED AREA LAYOUT THAT THEY WANT TO DO IS THE ROCK QUARRY.
THE PROPOSED SITE WHERE THEY WANT TO CRUSH THE ROCK IS 230 FEET FROM MY HOUSE.
SPEAKING ABOUT DUST FROM ATVS, THAT'S GOING TO BE RIGHT IN OUR YARD AND WHERE THEY WANT TO BLAST ON THE HILL IS PROBABLY LESS THAN 1,000 FEET.
THIS IS FOR ME AND MY TWO NEIGHBORS THAT ARE THE CLOSEST.
THIS IS A VERY SCARY TIME RIGHT NOW. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.
WE'VE BEEN REACHING OUT TO [NOISE] OUR LEADERS FOR HELP.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE MINING UMBRELLA IS A LOT
[02:50:02]
DIFFERENT THAN BEING UNDER COUNTY SUPERVISION.WE'RE ASKING FOR WHATEVER HELP WE CAN GET OUT THERE.
IT'S A LITTLE 18 ACRE PROPOSAL THAT THEY WANT TO WORK ON BY A FIRM THAT'S NEVER BEEN IN THE MINING BUSINESS, SO [NOISE] WE'RE JUST PLEADING FOR HELP. THANK YOU.
>> MAY I I GET YOUR NAME PLEASE.
>> MY NAME IS DANNY BRUMETT, B-R-U-M-E-T-T.
>> THEN WE'LL JUST HAVE YOU FILL OUT A GREEN SHEET AND THEN GIVE IT TO HER ONCE YOU'RE DONE SO, WE CAN JUST TRACK IT.
>> WELL, DID YOU FILL OUT A GREEN SHEET? WE'LL HAVE TO FILL ONE OUT. COME ON UP.
>> YEAH. JUST FILL IT OUT AFTER.
COME ON UP. YOU GOT THREE MINUTES ONCE YOU START SPEAKING.
CAME OUT ABOUT THE BOTTOM MINE.
I'M SHOCKED BECAUSE THE WAY THAT WE'RE LEARNING THAT THE BASICALLY ANYBODY WHO HAS FIVE ACRES CAN OPEN MY AGAR AT MINE.
I'M NOT AGAINST MINING EITHER.
JUST LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE TWO MINES IN OUR AREA IN CHINO.
WE HAVE THE PERKINS FEEL MINE AND THE ARROWHEAD MINE, BUT THEY'RE NOT RIGHT SMACK DEAD IN THE MIDDLE OF A SUBDIVISION.
MY WIFE AND I, WE MOVED THERE 15 YEARS AGO.
[NOISE] WE'RE JUST SHOCKED. WE WERE NOT AWARE.
JUST LIKE A LOT OF PEOPLE, WE'RE LEARNING THAT SOME OF THESE AGENCIES.
RATHER WE'RE NOT AWARE ABOUT SOME, BUT I FIND IT A LITTLE BIT HARD TO BELIEVE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN DOING RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET THIS IS EVEN AN ISSUE IN MARICOPA COUNTY.
LET'S SAY IT'S STATEWIDE AND NOT AGAINST MINES.
THIS REALLY BE IN REALITY, A MINE DOES NOT BELONG.
IT'S RIGHT SMACK DEAD INSIDE OF A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
I TOOK IBW BECAUSE A LOT OF ELECTRICAL STUFF THAT'S TALKED ON THE INTERNET, SOME ISSUES EVEN WORK BEING FROM HERE.
I TOOK THE IBW APPRENTICESHIP, MASSIVE LECTURES AND LESSON INSPECTOR AND DIFFERENCES COMING FROM CERTAIN STATES IN THE MIDWEST, WE HAVE TO TAKE APPRENTICESHIPS AND GO THROUGH AND TAKE STATE EXAMS. I HAD TO TAKE STATE EXAMS, FINISHED MY APPRENTICESHIP.
I TAKE STATE EXAM TO BECOME A MASTER ELECTRICIAN. THEY'RE TOUGH EXAMS. ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS FAIL THEM AND ALSO ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR.
[NOISE] WHEN WE MOVE THERE 15 YEARS AGO, WE PURCHASED A BANK DOME HOME BRAND NEW.
THEN MISS MICHAELS, YOU'RE WORRIED ABOUT SAFETY AND ELECTRICITY.
EVEN I'VE BEEN INTO THE INSPECTION DEPARTMENT DOWN THERE IN CHINO.
NUMBER 1 IS GROUNDING IT'S SAFETY THAT AROUND THE WHOLE COUNTRY.
IF THAT'S NOT DONE RIGHT, ELECTROCUTION, DEATH, FIRES.
PERMITS WERE PULLED ON THE BRAND NEW PASS INSPECTION, IT'S NOT EVEN DONE.
NO WORRIES. IT SHOULDN'T NEVER PASS INSPECTION.
WE HAVE A BRAND NEW HOUSE BUILT IN 2007.
I DID MY DUE DILIGENCE BECAUSE I WAS ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR FROM THE MIDWEST.
[LAUGHTER] IN MY SUGGESTION WHEN I GO TO THE PERMANENT AND SAY MY SUGGESTION BECAUSE WHEN I BROUGHT MY CONCERNS EVEN TO GO TO THE PERMANENT AND THE BUILDING DOWN BY THE CAR DEALERS FOR EXAMPLE, MY SUGGESTION IS THAT WE NEED THE HIGHER.
LIKE WHEN WE WERE COMING TO THE MIDWEST, YOU HAVE ELECTORAL INSPECTOR, A PLUMBING BECAUSE IF I GET DOWN THERE WHEN I SHOWED THEM THE STUFF AND EVEN THEY WERE VERY POLITE DOWN THERE.
THEY SAID THE PROBLEM IS YOU GUYS ONLY BUDGETED FOR, LIKE HE EVEN SAID THE TERM.
THE INSPECTORS ARE LIKE A JACK OF ALL TRADES, BUT A MASTER OF NONE.
MY SUGGESTION IS THAT SOMEDAY, LIKE POSSIBLY BUDGET SOME FRESH LENS BECAUSE WHAT I SEE, BUT I HEARD TODAY, BELIEVE ME, THERE IS A LOT OF STUFF NOT BEING DONE RIGHT AND IT'S A TWO WAY STREET.
YOU CAN REALLY COUNT THIS OR JUST BLAME THE PEOPLE AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
MY SUGGESTION IS, SOMETIME CONSIDER BUDGETING.
[02:55:02]
WE ARE GETTING TO BE A BIG ENOUGH COMMUNITY AND STUFF LIKE THAT, YOU ARE THE GUYS.I SAID, THEY'RE VERY NICE DOWN IN THERE.
EVEN LIKE I SAID, I'VE TALKED TO THE BOSS AND HE KIDDED.
HE SAID, THERE IS A BUDGET, YOU GUYS ARE THE BOSSES OF THE PERMANENT BUILDING.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
REAL QUICK. MY SUGGESTION IS CONSIDERING THE FUTURE, GET A PLUMBING INSPECTOR, ELECTORAL INSPECTOR.
NOW, THE HOUSE IS BEAUTIFUL, THE CARPENTER IS BEAUTIFUL, BUT IT'S THE MECHANICS WHERE THE PROBLEM WAS.
WE GOT BRAND NEW HOUSE, PLUMBING PROBLEMS AND ELECTRICAL.
THANK YOU FOR GOING OVER, BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT'S A PRETTY SOME OF THE STUFF CONSIDERING SINCE THE COMMUNITY IS GROWING AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
>> ANY OTHER FURTHER COMMENT? DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
>> AGAIN, A MOTION BY VICE CHAIR ALBRECHT, SECOND BY SUPERVISOR MALLORY.
>> MEETING ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.