Nov 05, 2025 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE.

>> VICE CHAIR COMPTON.

>> CONSENT ITEMS 1-30 WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM NUMBER 11, HAVE BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR CHECK.

[11. County Attorney - Approve a contract with Complete Care Partners to ensure continuation of care for diversion program participants, and increase the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 County Attorney General Fund expenditure budget in the amount of $126,000.00, to supplement the loss of an Arizona Criminal Justice Commission grant. YC Contract No. 2025-445]

[00:25:03]

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY, DENNIS MCGRAIN, TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS.

ESSENTIALLY, MY REASON FOR PULLING THIS ITEM IS TO UNDERSTAND IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

ANYTIME POSITIONS ARE FUNDED THROUGH SOFT MONEY OR GRANT FUNDING.

I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT WHEN THAT GRANT FUNDING GOES AWAY THAT THE BOARD FULLY EVALUATE THE ESSENTIALNESS AND THE FUNCTION OF WHAT THAT POSITION WAS CARRYING OUT, SO THAT WE CAN CONSIDER IT ESSENTIALLY A NEW POSITION IN THE NEXT YEAR.

HAVE IT GO THROUGH THAT COMPETITIVE PROCESS.

BUT I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION IS, THIS IS FOR THE REST OF THIS FISCAL YEAR TO APPROVE A CONTRACT WITH COMPLETE CARE PARTNERS.

IT WAS DUE TO THE LOSS OF A GRANT FROM THE ARIZONA CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION.

I JUST WONDERED, ARE WE GOING TO REAPPLY FOR THIS GRANT? WHY DID THIS FUNDING GO AWAY? WHAT ARE THE PROSPECTS? THEN ALSO WHAT'S THE FUNCTION THAT THIS FUNDING SERVES.

>> FAIR ENOUGH, FIRST OF ALL, I'M DENNIS MCGRAIN, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.

THIS WASN'T A STATE APPROPRIATION FOR RURAL COUNTIES IN TERMS OF DIVERSION PROGRAM.

WE HAD APPLIED FOR IT.

WE HAD IT FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

WE ACTUALLY STARTED IT WITH SEED MONEY FROM THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT THROUGH A STATE APPROPRIATION.

THEN IT GREW INTO A LARGER APPROPRIATION FOR MORE COUNTIES.

WE'RE NOT THE ONLY COUNTY IN THIS POSITION.

I KNOW NAVAJO FOR SURE IS IN THE SAME POSITION, BUT I THINK THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHERS THAT ARE IN THE SPOT.

WE WERE NOT NOTIFIED THAT THE APPROPRIATION HAD LAPSED AND THAT WASN'T GOING TO BE RENEWED, AND SO IT STUCK UP ON EVERYBODY.

THERE IS A SCRAMBLE, OF COURSE, BUT THE LEGISLATURE'S OUT OF SESSION, AND IT'LL BE THE NEW SESSION THAT WE'RE GOING TO APPROACH AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

I'M NOT HOLDING MY BREATH, BUT THERE ARE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES OUT THERE, BUT THIS IS NOT THE TIME FOR GRANTS.

APPARENTLY, IT'S THE SPRINGTIME FOR THOSE FAMILIAR WITH GRANTS, AND SO WE'LL BE SEEKING OPPORTUNITIES THERE.

>> GREAT.

>> LET'S SEE. DID I ANSWER ALL YOUR QUESTIONS SO FAR? BECAUSE I DO HAVE A BRIEF POWERPOINT.

I KNOW THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE HERE AVAILABLE FOR NOT SURE IF THEY JUST WANT TO SPEAK OR THEY WANT TO ANSWER QUESTIONS OR WANT TO SPEAK.

YES. GOT YOU.

I HAVE ONE PERSON I'D LIKE TO SPEAK THAT IS ACTUALLY A PARTICIPANT FROM THE PROGRAM AND SUCCESSFUL GRADUATE.

REAL BRIEFLY, I WILL TELL YOU THAT THIS POWERPOINT WAS DRAFTED A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN I THINK THE AGENDA ITEM.

I'M GOING TO BE POLITE WHEN I SAY SOME BUREAUCRATS GOT A HOLD OF IT, CHANGE MY AGENDA ITEM.

[LAUGHTER] IT'S WORDED A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY, AND I'LL MENTION IT WHEN I SPEAK.

THE PROGRAM GOALS ARE TO ENHANCE PUBLIC SAFETY.

I'M A BIG PROPONENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, OBVIOUSLY, IN MY POSITION.

I DIDN'T WANT A PROGRAM THAT PUT THE PUBLIC AT RISK, AND I THINK THIS MINIMIZES THAT.

OF COURSE, EVERYTHING WE DO IS SOME RISK, THIS MINIMIZES THAT.

THE PROGRAM HOLDS PARTICIPANTS ACCOUNTABLE, REDUCES RECIDIVISM THROUGH REHABILITATION.

ONE OF THE SLIDES TOUCHES ON THIS, WE'VE HAD OF THE 406 SUCCESSFUL, WE'VE HAD SIX THAT HAVE BEEN REARRESTED, WHICH IS A VERY HIGH SUCCESS RATE.

IT REDUCES COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES OF CONVICTIONS, AND WE KNOW THAT JOBS, HOUSING, ETC.

IT DOES SAVE TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

IT'S OUR POSITION THAT THESE PEOPLE CAN GET REDIRECTED INTO PRODUCTIVE TAX PAYING MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

THAT'S ULTIMATELY WHERE WE WANT THEM TO BE.

WITHOUT THE NEED FOR IMPRISONMENT.

IN TERMS OF DETAILS, WE'RE ONLY LOOKING AT LOW LEVEL OFFENSES, SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT MURDERS AND CHILD MOLESTERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LOW LEVEL OFFENDERS THAT CAN BE STEERED IN A BETTER DIRECTION.

I HAD TO LOOK THIS UP.

THE SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH.

THESE ARE NON MEDICAL FACTORS THAT IMPACT HEALTH AND LONGEVITY.

IN MY MIND, THIS WAS THE THING I KNOW I MENTIONED BEFORE IN SPEAKING TO THE BOARD.

IN MY MIND, ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THE SUCCESS OF THE PROGRAM.

IT'S NOT JUST LOOKING AT, HEY, HE WAS CAUGHT WITH METH, LET'S DEAL WITH THE METH PROBLEM.

WHEN I WAS TALKING TO MY ATTORNEY LAST NIGHT, SHE SAID, WE ACTUALLY HAD SOMEBODY THAT WAS CAUGHT WITH METH, BUT THAT WASN'T HER PROBLEM.

IT WAS OTHER THINGS RELATED TO SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH, AND THEY ADDRESSED IT.

THOSE ARE THINGS LIKE, ARE YOU LIVING IN A CAR? ARE YOU HOMELESS, ARE YOU JOBLESS? NOW, THEY DON'T TAKE CARE OF THOSE THINGS, BUT THEY DEAL WITH THE RESOURCES THAT HELP ADDRESS THESE PROBLEMS.

[00:30:03]

IT'S HELPING THEM ESTABLISH THEMSELVES, SO SOME OF THE PRESSURES THAT ARE PUT ON THEM THAT HELP THEM REVERT OR CAUSE THEM TO REVERT TO SUBSTANCE ABUSE ARE ADDRESSED.

MENTAL HEALTH IS OBVIOUSLY A HUGE PROBLEM, ALSO WHAT DO THEY CALL IT A DUAL DIAGNOSIS, MENTAL HEALTH PLUS SUBSTANCE ABUSE, THEY ARE OFTEN A COMMON THEME.

LET'S SEE. NOW, THE PARTICIPANTS PAY FOR THE PROGRAM ON A SLIDING SCALE.

IF THEY CAN AFFORD IT, THEY PAY THE FULL COST, $1,000.

THEY CAN GET UP TO 80% BASED ON THEIR FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

THEY ALSO HAVE TO PAY FOR THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE TESTING.

THERE'S ACCOUNTABILITY AND MONITORING, WHICH IS A HUGE THING FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.

AGAIN, FROM THE PUBLIC SAFETY PERSPECTIVE.

THEY'RE NOT JUST TURNED LOOSE ON THE COMMUNITY.

THERE IS SOME ACCOUNTABILITY IN MONITORING.

I MENTIONED THE FIRST ONE, SECOND ONE, THIRD ONE, FOURTH ONE.

AGAIN, I THINK THERE'S A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION TO SOCIETY BY STIRRING THESE PEOPLE IN THE CORRECT DIRECTION WHERE WE WANT THEM TO BE.

I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLE THAT WE HAVE TWO COMPETITORS IN THE INDUSTRY, POLARA AND SPECTRUM THAT PARTNERED TOGETHER AND SUBMITTED A PROPOSAL ON THIS.

WE LITERALLY HAVE POLARA AND SPECTRUM THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE COMPETITORS HAVE GOTTEN TOGETHER, FORMED COMMUNITY CARE PARTNERS AND ARE OPERATING THIS PROGRAM.

IT'S HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL.

I CAN'T SPEAK HIGHLY ENOUGH ABOUT IT.

THIS IS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT.

THE STATE GRANT PAID FOR AN ATTORNEY AND A LITIGATION SPECIALIST, AND THE FEES FOR OPERATING THAT WE'RE OBVIOUSLY NOT COVERED BY THE PARTICIPANTS THEMSELVES.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.

THE IDEA ORIGINALLY WAS TO MOVE FROM GRANT FUND TO GENERAL FUND.

I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING PRESENTLY IS JUST USING SALARY SAVINGS THROUGH THIS CURRENT BUDGET YEAR TO FUND THOSE TWO POSITIONS.

WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR BASICALLY TODAY IS THE CONTINGENCY FUNDS OF 126,000 TO FINISH THE FISCAL YEAR FOR COMMUNITY CARE PARTNERS.

THAT'S JUST THE CONTRACT MAXIMUM, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT'S WHAT THEY'LL SPEND, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE NEED.

>> AGAIN, WE WILL BE APPLYING FOR GRANTS, BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE TO SEE IF WE CAN CONTINUE TO FUND THAT.

I WOULD WANT TO POINT OUT ONE THING THAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT.

THERE'S TWO WAYS TO LOOK AT THESE PROGRAMS, THE SOFT MONEY, AS YOU CALL IT.

ONE IS, IT'S AN EXPERIMENT, AND WE WANT TO SEE HOW THE PROGRAM GOES, ETC.

DIVERSION HAS BEEN SHOWN TO WORK, AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL WAS ONE OF THE MOST COMMON QUESTIONS I GOT WAS, DO YOU HAVE A DIVERSION PROGRAM, HOW DOES IT WORK? THEN GENERAL APPLAUSE FOR HAVING SUCH A PROGRAM? THE ONE WAY TO LOOK AT IT IS, IF THE PROGRAM FAILS, IT SHOULD BE WASHED OUT.

I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE WITH THAT.

OR IF IT BECOMES OUTDATED, YOU UPDATED, TURN TO SOMETHING ELSE.

I THINK THIS IS A HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM, AND DO NOT WANT TO TURN AWAY FROM IT.

THE SECOND WAY TO LOOK AT IT IS, WE'RE GOING OUT AND GETTING MONEY FOR A PROGRAM THAT THE BOARD SHOULD BE FUNDING.

LOOK AT THIS, I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THIS AS SAVINGS TO THE COUNTY SINCE 2020, I THINK IS WHEN WE STARTED WAS MAY OF 2020.

LOOK AT THIS AS SAVINGS TO THE COUNTY.

I PROMISE WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO TRY TO DO THAT TO GO OUT AND GET MONEY.

BUT IF UNSUCCESSFUL, I'M GOING TO BE TURNING TO THE BOARD FOR THAT CONTINUED EFFORT.

>> THANK YOU. THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION VERY NICELY. THANKS.

>> HOLD ON, DENNIS. MR. BURDON.

>> VICE CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, I JUST WANT TO ADD THIS IS A VERY GOOD AND IMPORTANT PROGRAM AS PART OF YOUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM TO PROVIDE EFFICIENCY, REDUCE JAIL POPULATION, AND ACTUALLY HELP THE COMMUNITY.

I AGREE WITH THAT. IT'S ACTUALLY BEEN DISCUSSED FOR A LONG TIME.

MY MEMORY BACK LAST, LIKE, OVER TEN YEARS.

I'M GLAD THAT'S IN PLACE.

I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THE REASON THE AGENDA ITEM WAS CHANGED IS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS WOULD NOT BE MOVED INTO THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR UNLESS THERE WAS BOARD ACTION.

I WOULD WORK WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY DURING THE BUDGET, HOPEFULLY, IF THE FUNDING IS NOT CHANGED.

I AM A LITTLE BIT DISAGREEING ABOUT WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS KIND OF ACTIVITY.

AS THE BOARD JUST RECENTLY WAS AT

[00:35:02]

THE LEGISLATIVE SUMMIT WITH THE COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION, WE'RE LOOKING TO THE STATE TO TRY TO PROVIDE MORE FUNDING AND THE APPROPRIATE FUNDING FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT SYSTEM.

THIS IS A GREAT PRODUCT, BUT IT ALSO MIGHT BE BETTER SERVED BEING FUNDED AS IT IS THROUGH A GRANT FUND RN.

NOW, BETTER SERVE BEING A PERMANENT FUNDING THROUGH THE STATE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE FUTURE.

SO HOPEFULLY, WE'LL WORK TO THAT, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CLEAR TO THE BOARD THAT THE CHANGES IN THE AGENDA ITEM WERE TO MAKE IT SO THAT THIS WOULD BE FUNDED THROUGH SALARY SAVINGS THIS YEAR, BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD IF IT WENT TO GENERAL FUND DOLLARS NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LETTING ME SPEAK ON THAT.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT GOING FORWARD, WE DEFINITELY, AS A BOARD, WE NEED REAL CLEAR AND JUST DIRECT INFORMATION ON WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH.

THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HELP US MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS FOR EVERYBODY THAT'S GOING TO BE INVOLVED.

I'M GOING TO REACH OVER TO THE VICE CHAIR.

>> WELL, I CERTAINLY SUPPORT THE PROGRAM, AND I APPRECIATE YOU COMING HERE TODAY GIVING US THE PRESENTATION FOR A BETTER UNDERSTANDING.

I MIGHT HAVE A DISAGREEMENT WITH YOU ON WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FUNDING, BUT THAT'S FINE.

>> HEY, IF I CAN GET IT FROM THE STATE, WE'RE SAVING PEOPLE FROM GOING TO PRISON.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT, RIGHT? I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.

>> BUT ONE THING, SINCE THESE COMPANIES HAS MERGED, COULD YOU FORWARD TO MY OFFICE OR COULD STAFF FORWARD TO MY OFFICE AND THE OWNERS OF THIS NEW COMPANY PARTNERS.

>> THE COMPANY, THEY HAVE NOT MERGED.

THERE'S JUST A PARTNERSHIP IN THIS PROGRAM.

>> WELL, I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHO WE'RE INVOLVED WITH.

IF I COULD GET STAFF, IF YOU COULD GET ME THAT INFORMATION, I'D APPRECIATE IT. FAIR ENOUGH.

>> I DO HAVE JESSICA, RIGHT? JESSICA GOT.

CAN JESSICA COME UP AND SPEAK FOR A FEW MINUTES ABOUT HER SUCCESS IN THE PROGRAM? SURE. APPRECIATE IT.

>> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR A COMMENT?

>> I JUST SAID I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A COMMON THEME MOVING FORWARD TODAY AND IN THE FUTURE THAT AS GRANTS DRY UP, NO MATTER HOW WORTHY THE PROGRAM IS, CAN WE AFFORD TO KEEP DOING IT? MY QUESTION WOULD BE, WHY DID THE STATE NOT CONSIDER IT WORTHY OF FUNDING? WHY DID THEY CUT THE FUNDING? DO YOU KNOW?

>> I DO NOT. NO. IT'S SNUCK UP ON EVERYBODY.

>> WELCOME. HELLO. JUST BE SURE TO STATE YOUR NAME.

>> MY NAME IS JESSICA COX.

I'M SORRY IF I SEEM NERVOUS.

>> IT'S OKAY.

>> I'M NERVOUS WHEN I GOT HERE.

MY NAME JESSICA COX.

I'M A PROGRAM SPECIALIST WITH THE YAVAPAI REINJURY PROJECT NOW.

I WORK FOR MATT FORCE.

I HAVE THAT JOB BECAUSE OF THESE PEOPLE.

SORRY, I GET A LITTLE EMOTIONAL.

IT BAFFLES ME THAT THIS PROJECT LOST ITS FUNDING BECAUSE IT ISN'T JUST MORALLY RIGHT TO FUND THIS PROJECT.

IT'S THE MOST RESPONSIBLE THING TO DO.

OVER HALF $1 MILLION IT TOOK FOR OVER THE SPAN ABOUT 12 YEARS TO HOUSE ME IN INCARCERATION.

I SPENT 20 YEARS ADDICTED TO DRUGS AND IN AND OUT OF JAIL AND PRISON AND INCARCERATION.

I GOT IN TROUBLE IN SIX DIFFERENT COUNTIES.

I'VE BEEN ON PROBATION MY ENTIRE LIFE, LIKE, LITERALLY SINCE I WAS 13.

YAVAPAI COUNTY IS THE FIRST COUNTY I EVER GOT IN TROUBLE IN THAT I GOT HELP IN, LIKE, A REAL HELP.

THE DIVERSION PROGRAM SAVED MY LIFE.

SAVED MY FAMILY. I'M SORRY.

IT'S NOT VERY OFTEN THAT SOMEONE LIKE ME WITH THE BACKGROUND THAT I HAVE GETS A FULL CIRCLE MOMENT LIKE THIS WHERE I GET TO COME AND TALK AND PRESENT WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT.

WITH A ROUGH ESTIMATE, IT TAKES ABOUT $27,000 A YEAR TO HOUSE ONE PERSON, AND THAT'S ON A LOW END.

HOUSE ONE PERSON IN THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OR EVEN JAIL.

IT'S ABOUT $74 A DAY.

THAT'S NOT INCLUDING THE MEDICAL EXPENSES, THE TRANSPORTS, THE COURT FEES, AND ALL OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT GO WITH IT.

THAT'S JUST THE HOUSING.

THAT'S JUST TO FEED AND CLOTHE AND PUT THE ROOF AND THE GATE AROUND THE INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL.

WHEN YOU BREAK IT DOWN TO NUMBERS, THEIR PROJECT, HE SAID, 400 PEOPLE, ONLY SIX.

SIX HAVE HAD RECIDIVISM.

[00:40:03]

IF YOU THINK ABOUT 400 PEOPLE AND $27,000 A YEAR FOR EACH PERSON.

I MEAN, JUST THE AMOUNT, IF YOU WENT OVER ONE YEAR, THAT'S OVER $8 MILLION.

THAT'S WHAT IT'S COSTING ALL OF US, ALL OF YOU, ALL OF US TO HOUSE EVERYBODY.

BUT WHEN THEY HAVE A SUCCESS RATE WHERE THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING BACK TO JAIL, I HAVE NOT RECIDIVIZED WHICH IS HUGE FOR ME.

I DON'T REMEMBER A SPAN OF MORE THAN ONE YEAR OF MY LIFE NOT BEING IN JAIL AT SOME POINT.

NOW IT'S BEEN ALMOST SIX YEARS NOW.

NOW I'M DOING THINGS IN THE COMMUNITY, THAT ARE LIKE, HUGE, AND I'M ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE, AND I'M HELPING PEOPLE ON MY CASELOAD.

I'VE HAD OVER 110 PEOPLE, AND OUR RECIDIVISM RATE FOR THE YAVAPAI REINJURY PROJECT, WE HAVE A 97% SUCCESS RATE AS WELL.

I HAVE A HUGE PART IN THAT.

IT'S BECAUSE OF COMMUNITY CARES AND THE A YAVAPAI DIVERSION GROUP THEY WALKED ALONGSIDE ME AND NOT JUST WALK ALONGSIDE ME, BUT THEY CHECKED IN ON ME.THEY HELPED ME GET TO APPOINTMENTS.

MY QUALITY OF LIFE WAS SO DIFFERENT WHEN I MET THESE PEOPLE.

ERIN IS ONE OF MY CLOSEST FRIENDS.

SHE'S THE PERSON I CALL FOR EVERYTHING.

THEY'RE LIKE THAT FOR EVERYBODY.

IT WASN'T JUST ME. IT'S THE MOST RESPONSIBLE.

IT'S JUST THEY SHOULD HAVE THEIR FUNDING. THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED.

IT BLOWS MY MIND THAT THAT THIS IS WHAT'S GOING ON THEY'RE SAVING LIVES.

THEY'RE CHANGING LIVES. THEY'RE HELPING OUR COMMUNITY, FINANCIALLY, PERSONALLY.

THIS IS A HUGE PROJECT, AND IT'S SO SUCCESSFUL.

YAVAPAI COUNTY TO BEGIN WITH, EVEN WORKING IN THE COMMUNITY NOW AND SEEING ALL OF THE COALITIONS AND ALL THE PARTNERS AND ALL THE PEOPLE COMING TOGETHER IT'S SO BEAUTIFUL AND IT'S LIFE SAVING.

I'M JUST SO PROUD TO BE HERE AND SO HONORED.

>> WELL, WE ARE VERY HONORED TO HAVE YOU HERE. THANK YOU.

>> YOU ARE ALWAYS WELCOME.

DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT AND CONGRATULATIONS.

I'M HAPPY FOR YOU AND WHERE YOU ARE IN YOUR LIFE. GOOD JOB.

>> YOU WILL HELP MANY PEOPLE GOING FORWARD.

I KNOW THERE'S A PLAN HERE.

>> THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR STORY.

>> GOD BLESS YOU.

HONESTLY, THANK YOU BOTH FOR YOUR TIME.

I KNOW WE HAVE A BUSY SCHEDULE TODAY, BUT THIS WAS REALLY HELPFUL FOR ME.

AS WE ADVOCATE WITH THE STATE LEGISLATURE FOR FUNDING THAT REALLY MATTERS, I THINK YOU'VE REALLY ADDED TO WHAT WE CAN DO TO ADVOCATE FOR THIS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION, AND WE HAVE A SECOND.

CAN WE CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> CONSENT ITEM NUMBER 11 IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> YES. WHEN IT COMES TO THE COURT SYSTEMS, THE COUNTIES ARE THE PAYERS OF THE COURTS.

THAT IS PART OF OUR BUDGET. WE PAY.

THERE IS FUNDING THAT IS RECEIVED BY THE COURTS, BUT THAT'S DUE TO FEES AND FINES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT THOSE ARE MORE OR LESS USERS THAT ARE IN THE SYSTEM AND THEN THEY HAVE TO PAY BACK TO THE COURTS.

BUT THE COUNTIES ARE THE PAYERS, AND WE SHARE THAT RESPONSIBILITY WITH THE STATE.

WE DEFINITELY COULD USE SOME MORE HELP FROM THE STATE.

I SO APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.THANK YOU, DENNIS, VERY MUCH.

>> I CAN ASSURE YOU I'LL BE DONE WITH THE LEGISLATURE LOBBYING FOR THIS, SO THANK YOU.

>> TAKE CARE. WE'RE MOVING ON TO ACTION.

[1. Board of Supervisors - Accept $1,000,000.00 in state revenue to be utilized for costs related to the construction of a public safety facility in southwest Yavapai County. ]

ACTION ITEM NUMBER 1.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

STATE REVENUE TO BE UTILIZED FOR COSTS RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY IN SOUTHWEST YAVAPAI COUNTY.

GOOD MORNING, MR. BURDON.

>> GOOD MORNING. CHAIR MALLORY, VICE CHAIRMAN COMPTON, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, PHIL BOURDON, COUNTY MANAGER.

THIS ITEM STRAIGHTFORWARD IS TO ACCEPT $1 MILLION IN STATE REVENUE.

IT'S GOING TO BE UTILIZED FOR COSTS RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY IN SOUTHWEST YAVAPAI COUNTY.

THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATION BY THE STATE OF ARIZONA AS PART OF THEIR STATE BUDGET.

IT INCLUDES THAT APPROPRIATION OF $1 MILLION.

IT WILL BE DISTRIBUTED TO YAVAPAI COUNTY FOR THE COSTS RELATED TO THIS CONSTRUCTION.

AGAIN, LOOKING FOR ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I WANT TO POINT OUT REAL QUICKLY THAT WE HAVE SHERIFF RHODES IN THE AUDIENCE.

[00:45:01]

I KNOW HE WAS AN ADVOCATE FOR THIS, ALSO, AS WELL AS OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

BUT WE HAVE STATE REPRESENTATIVE QUAN WAYNE HERE.

HE MAY WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM OR ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT HE HAS ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE THERE'S SOME MAJOR APPROPRIATIONS THAT ARE COMING THROUGH TODAY, AND I KNOW REPRESENTATIVE QUAN WAYNE HAS A BUSY SCHEDULE.

I MIGHT ASK THE BOARD, I THINK THE SHERIFF IS ASKED TO SPEAK ON THIS, AND WE MIGHT WANT TO INVITE A REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE TO SPEAK.

I KNOW HE HAS A COUPLE OF MEETINGS TODAY.

I AM HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS ON IT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ME.

THIS IS A VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD ACCEPTANCE OF $1 MILLION FOR CONSTRUCTION IN YAVAPAI COUNTY.

>> NO, I HAVE NO QUESTIONS.

I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE.

WE'LL HEAR FROM THE SHERIFF.[LAUGHTER]

>> GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING, SHERIFF.

>> CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

I JUST WANTED TO TAKE A MINUTE TO TALK ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY, SUPERVISOR COMPTON HAS BEEN WORKING ON WITH US FOR OVER A YEAR NOW, EVEN BEFORE HE WAS SEATED.

CHIEF BOMAR PEOPLE'S VALLEY FIRE IS HERE.

THIS IS PART OF THE RURAL SERVICES MASTER PLAN, I SUPPOSE.

WE ARE LOOKING TO COLLABORATE CENTRALIZED SERVICES IN THE RURAL PARTS OF THE COUNTY.

THIS WAS SEED MONEY THAT WAS APPROPRIATED TO YAVAPAI COUNTY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING IN THE SOUTHWEST PART OF THE COUNTY, INTENDED TO LEAVE IT FLEXIBLE.

BUT THIS WAS PART OF REPRESENTATIVE SALINA BLISS' POT OF MONEY THAT SHE WAS ESSENTIALLY GIVEN WITHIN DAYS OF THE STATE BUDGET CLOSING JUNE 30 OF THIS YEAR.

WE WORKED TOGETHER WITH REPRESENTATIVE BLISS AND REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE TO FIGURE OUT HOW THESE DIFFERENT APPROPRIATIONS WERE GOING TO BE DISHED OUT HERE IN YAVAPAI COUNTY.

YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT AND SOME OF THE OTHER ACTION ITEMS TODAY.

BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BOARD UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS WAS A SHARED VISION AMONG NUMEROUS ELECTED OFFICIALS AT THE COUNTY AND AT THE STATE LEVEL TO BRING THIS MONEY IN SO THAT WE CAN GET STARTED ON THIS PROJECT, SUPERVISOR COMPTON AND I HAVE BEEN VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT GETTING THIS THING GOING.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY THOSE FEW THINGS, AND IF REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE HAS ANYTHING THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO ADD, I KNOW HE WAS PART OF THOSE NEGOTIATIONS AS WELL.

>> WELCOME, SIR.

>> MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK FOR A FEW MINUTES.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT DAVID RHODES, SHERIFF RHODES, HAS MADE MY LIFE PRETTY EASY WHEN YOU GET AN APPROPRIATIONS, AND YOU SPEND IT WISELY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, IT MAKES MY JOB SUPER EASY TO GO DOWN THERE AND TALK TO THE SPEAKERS AND THE PRESIDENT AT THE LEGISLATURE AND SAY, CAN I HAVE MORE MONEY? I'M HERE TO SUPPORT EVERYTHING THAT SHERIFF RHODES SAID.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE BEEN DOING A LOT IS TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT PUBLIC SAFETY, AND THAT MEANS GETTING MONEY BACK TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SO ON.

WITH YOUR PERMISSION, WELL, FOR TWO THINGS, I HAVE A BOOKLET HERE THAT DOES THE COMPLETE REPORT OF WHAT WE'VE DONE IN 2025, THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT PUBLIC YET UNTIL NEXT MONDAY, BUT I GOT PERMISSION FROM THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE TO GET A COPY TO YOU IF I CAN. MAY I APPROACH?

>> YES, ABSOLUTELY.

>> CAN SHARE THIS AMONG YOURSELVES.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> FOR 2026, IF I MAY SAY, RIGHT NOW, I GOT A LIST OF SIX ITEMS ALL FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY, AND IT'S ABOUT $35 MILLION.

WE'RE LOOKING AT A PRETTY SAD SITUATION COMING UP IN 2026, POSSIBLY $1 BILLION UPSIDE DOWN.

BUT I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR GETTING MORE MONEY BACK TO YAVAPAI COUNTY BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW THAT WHEN WE DON'T SPEND MONEY UP HERE, SPEND IT DOWN THERE IN MARICOPA COUNTY OR THE STATE OF MARICOPA, I'D LIKE TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

I KNOW, MADAM CHAIR, YOU ASKED FOR $4 MILLION FOR THE 89 AND 89A HIGHWAY INTERCHANGE, THAT IS ON THE LIST RIGHT NOW.

FOR ALL THE ELECTED OFFICIALS IN HERE, IF YOU DON'T CALL ME AND YOU DON'T ASK ME, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ON THE LIST BECAUSE I CAN'T READ MINE SO I WOULD LIKE TO BRING MORE MONEY UP HERE, BUT YOU NEED TO CALL ME.

THERE'S $50 MILLION FOR THE SMART PROGRAM, WHICH IS A FEDERAL MATCHING PROGRAM FOR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTIONS, AND THAT MAY BRING BACK AS MUCH AS $100 MILLION OF FEDERAL MATCHING.

I'M PUSHING FOR $15 MILLION FOR THE SMART FUND.

$10 MILLION IS GOING TO BE

[00:50:02]

FOR A SHARE OF ROADS ON NORTHERN ARIZONA REGIONAL TRAINING ACADEMY.

I ALSO GOT A CALL FROM YAVAPAI COLLEGE FOR $5 MILLION FOR THE COLLEGE HEALTH SCIENCE PROJECT.

$500,000 TO THE PRESCOTT VALLEY PD DIGITAL FORENSIC UNIT AND INVESTIGATIVE SOFTWARE, AND $250,000 FOR THE TOWN OF WILLIAMS PD.

I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO, YOU KNOW, CONCENTRATE ON TRYING TO BRING MONEY BACK UP HERE.

BUT IT'S ALWAYS DIFFICULT BECAUSE GUYS LIKE ME DON'T GET TO BE IN THE CAGE TO FIGHT FOR THE BUDGET.

IT'S ALWAYS BETWEEN THE GOVERNOR, THE PRESIDENT, AND THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, AND ALL I CAN DO IS SUBMIT A LIST AND I'M ACTUALLY THE FIRST ONE TO SUBMIT THE LIST THIS YEAR.

BUT SO FAR, I'M BATTING 1,000, DON'T HOLD ME TO IT.

VEGAS ODDS IS ALWAYS BETTER. ANYWAY, THANK YOU.

>> BUT WE APPRECIATE YOU SO VERY MUCH.

I KNOW THE VICE CHAIR HAS SOMETHING THAT HE'D LIKE TO SAY.

>> YEAH, I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO CHIEF BOMAR, TO THE SHERIFF AND TO YOU AND REPRESENTATIVE BLISS FOR HELPING OUT DISTRICT 1 AND FOR GETTING THIS APPROPRIATION, I SENSE I'M SUPPOSED TO ASK, I'D LIKE ANOTHER 2 MILLION, PLEASE.

[LAUGHTER].

WE ASKED FOR THREE OR FOUR, BUT IF YOU GO FOR, PUT HER ON THE LIST, WE NEED IT.

>> WELL, OFFICIALLY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WRITE ME A LETTER.

>> I'LL DO THAT.

>> JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS.

>> I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.

>> I'M A YES. I'LL MOVED TO APPROVE.

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> THANK YOU, REPRESENTATIVE.

>> ACTION ITEM 1 IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> I'D LIKE TO EXTEND A VERY WARM THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR FOR THE WORK THAT YOU PUT INTO THIS, AND IT'S VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

>> THAT'S MY JOB. THANK YOU FOR THE RECOGNITION.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> THANK THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY.

THAT'S WHO'S HELPING ME DO MY JOB.

>> THEY'RE HELPING ALL OF US DO OUR JOB, FOR SURE.

IN FACT, THAT'S HOW WE GOT HERE.

IT'S FROM THE COMMUNITY.

WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM 2.

[2. Board of Supervisors - Approve acceptance of the Growing Water Smart Technical Assistance Grant in the amount of $12,500.00 for the creation of the Yavapai County Water Resources and Open Space Committee, establish a new fund number, approve a budget adjustment, and approve a letter to be sent from the Board of Supervisors to potential members of the Committee. YC Contract No. 2025-443]

APPROVE ACCEPTANCE OF THE GROWING WATER SMART TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANT. WELL, GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING, AGAIN, CHAIR VICE CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

I'LL JUST GIVE A BRIEF BACKGROUND ON THIS ITEM FOR THOSE LISTENING THAT MAY NOT BE FAMILIAR.

THE BOARD HAS EXPRESSED INTEREST TO CONVENE A WATER RESOURCES AND OPEN SPACE COMMITTEE TO BE FILLED WITH ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES FROM CITIES AND TOWNS, TRIBES.

YOU HAVE A PLAN, OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, POTENTIALLY AS THIS MOVES FORWARD.

THE SONORAN INSTITUTE HAS GRANTED US $12,500, WHICH IS THIS GRANT AGREEMENT BEFORE YOU, TO GO TOWARDS FACILITATED MEETINGS FOR THAT COMMITTEE.

THE FACILITATION WOULD BE DONE BY A GROUP CALLED SOUTHWEST DECISION RESOURCES.

THIS AMOUNT BEFORE YOU TODAY WILL PAY FOR PHASE 1 OF THAT SCOPE AND THE FACILITATION.

HOWEVER, I SHOULD SAY THAT WE EXPECT TO BEGIN THOSE SESSIONS WITH THE COMMITTEE IN JANUARY OF 2026.

WE'VE RECEIVED GOOD NEWS RECENTLY, UNFORTUNATELY, NOT IN TIME FOR THIS MEETING, BUT IT'LL BE ON YOUR NEXT AGENDA.

ANOTHER GRANT HAS COME IN FROM THE NATURE CONSERVANCY FOR $12,500 AS WELL, WHICH WOULD PAY FOR PHASE 2 OF FACILITATED SERVICES, SO WE'RE GETTING THAT READY FOR YOUR APPROVAL HERE IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

WHAT THIS ITEM DOES, YOU RECEIVE A GRANT FOR 12,500 FROM THE SONORA INSTITUTE, THIS ALSO GOES TOWARDS YOUR STRATEGIC PLAN AND YOUR GOAL OF FORMING A COMMITTEE AND A GROUP TO LOOK AT THESE IMPORTANT ISSUES, CREATE GOALS, AND YOU GAVE US THE GOAL TO DO THAT BY JULY 1 OF NEXT YEAR SO I'D SAY WE'RE A LITTLE AHEAD OF SCHEDULE, WHICH IS GREAT, AND WE'RE MAKING GOOD PROGRESS.

THIS ALSO ESTABLISHES A NEW FUND TO RECEIVE THE MONEY, A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT TO SPEND THE MONEY, AND IT ALSO APPROVES A LETTER, A DRAFT LETTER, BEFORE YOU TO BE SENT TO THOSE POTENTIAL MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> WELL, I HAVE TO SAY IT'S EXCITING WHEN YOU HEAR THE GOVERNMENT SAYING THAT WE'RE AHEAD.

>> WE'RE A LITTLE AHEAD. SURPRISING.

>> WE'RE MOVING FAST.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

DID ANY OF THE SUPERVISORS HAVE QUESTIONS?

>> I JUST WISH TO MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.

WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS POTENTIAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMITTEE SINCE JANUARY AND THERE'S A LOT OF I WOULD SAY, PEOPLE ARE EXCITED TO SEE WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE.

THE HISTORY ON THIS IS THAT THERE WAS ONCE AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMITTEE CALLED THE WATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

IT WAS DISBANDED IN 2014, AND IT'S EXCITING TO GET ANOTHER CHANCE AT THIS.

I'LL SAY THE POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT IS REALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHEN THAT COMMITTEE WAS DISBANDED IN 2014, ADWR, THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, WHICH MANAGES GROUNDWATER OFFICIALLY IN ARIZONA HAS BEEN REALLY, REALLY ACTIVE.

I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE COME BACK TOGETHER,

[00:55:02]

IDENTIFY AREAS OF AGREEMENT SO THAT WE CAN REALLY HAVE OUR COLLECTIVE REGIONAL VOICE HEARD AT THE STATE LEVEL.

IT'S REALLY EXCITING TO BE ABLE TO INVITE PEOPLE INTO THIS PROCESS AND HOPEFULLY MAKE IT A REALLY PRODUCTIVE COMMITTEE MOVING FORWARD.

THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS TO US TODAY.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ACTION ITEM 2.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION, WE HAVE A SECOND.

CLERK, YOU CAN CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE.

>> ACTION ITEM 2 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

IS CENTRAL YAVAPAI METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 3.

[3. Central Yavapai Metropolitan Planning Organization - Approve the agreement between Central Yavapai Metropolitan Planning Organization (CYMPO) and Tidewater Transit, LLC for operation of the YavaLine transit system utilizing Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grant funds in an amount not to exceed $6,388,795.00 over three (3) years.]

ALSO, YAVAPAI PLAN, Y PLAN.

GOOD MORNING, VINNIE. YOU KNOW I HAD TO GET THAT IN.

>> I DO. GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN, GOOD MORNING MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

I'M GLAD YOU ASKED THAT QUESTION THIS MORNING, WHY PLAN? WE'VE BEEN PLANNING FOR WELL OVER 20 YEARS.

IN THE 2000 CENSUS, WAY BACK WHEN, THAT'S WHEN THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION WAS COMING TO BEING, IT WAS ABOUT 2003 THAT THE GOVERNOR ESTABLISHED US, AND EVER SINCE THEN, WE'VE BEEN ASKING THAT QUESTION, WHY PLAN HIGHWAY 69? WHY PLAN TRANSPORTATION? AGAIN, A REMINDER, OUR MISSION IS THE SAFE AND EFFICIENT MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE GOODS AND SERVICES THROUGH ALL MODES OF TRANSPORTATION.

AGAIN, VEHICLES, BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, TRAILS, PUBLIC TRANSIT.

TODAY, OUR FOCUS IS ON PUBLIC TRANSIT.

I'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE, I'VE GIVEN YOU ANNUAL UPDATES ON ALL THE BOOK OF BUSINESS WE'RE DOING.

TODAY WE'LL FOCUS ON PUBLIC TRANSIT.

SINCE DAY ONE IN 2003, WE HAVE BEEN RECEIVING PUBLIC TRANSIT PLANNING FUNDS.

WE'VE USED THOSE TO REALLY PLAN FOR WHERE WE ARE TODAY.

THERE IS ONE PARTICULAR TYPE OF TRANSIT FUNDING THAT WE HAVEN'T RETAINED, THAT'S OUR TAX DOLLARS; IT'S THE OPERATIONS OF PUBLIC TRANSIT.

I HEARD MENTION, I THINK, REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE MENTIONED THAT IF WE DON'T FIND WAYS TO USE IT HERE, IT GOES SOMEWHERE, AND IT IS UTILIZED.

WE ESTIMATE FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS OUR TRANSIT TAX DOLLARS WENT TO THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, WENT TO OTHER COMMUNITIES TO INVEST IN THEIR PUBLIC TRANSIT PROGRAM.

WE WERE JUST IN FLAGSTAFF A FEW MONTHS AGO, AND THEY GAVE US A TOUR OF A NEW DOWNTOWN FACILITY THAT SHARED WITH THE COMMUNITY THAT ESTIMATED COST IS AROUND $17 MILLION OF WHICH OUR DOLLARS WENT TO SUPPORT THAT.

OVER THE LAST YEAR, YOU, AS YAVAPAI COUNTY, HAVE PUT OUT A SURVEY.

THAT SURVEY HAD A RESPONSE OF AN AREA FOCUSED ON ALL MODES OF TRANSPORTATION, BUT IN PARTICULAR, PUBLIC TRANSIT.

THAT WAS A HIGHLY RECOGNIZED THING, AND I KNOW THAT'S NOW PART OF YOUR STRATEGIC GOALS.

I APPRECIATE WORKING WITH STAFF RECENTLY, TYLER, A FACILITATOR AND YOUR STAFF TO BE ABLE TO BRING FORWARD TO YOU HOW AGAIN, WE CAN PROVIDE MORE SERVICES COUNTY-WIDE.

CITY OF PRESCOTT DID A SIMILAR SURVEY ABOUT A YEAR AGO, SAME THING.

PUBLIC TRANSIT CAME UP ON THE TOP THREE LIST OF THINGS OF NEED.

OUR HEALTH DEPARTMENT, DOES A COMMUNITY HEALTH IMPACT PLANNING PROCESS.

ONE OF THOSE OBSTACLES TO QUALITY OF HEALTH IN YAVAPAI COUNTY IS PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, SO THIS COMES UP ON A REGULAR BASIS.

JUST RECENTLY, SUPERVISOR KUKNYO WAS IN THE TOWN OF ASH FORK, AND ONE OF THE CITIZENS, HIM AND I'LL BE MEETING THIS SATURDAY IN ASH FORK.

HE'S PROVIDING TRANSIT BETWEEN ASH FORK AND SELIGMAN.

THESE ARE SERVICES THAT COME UP ON A REGULAR BASIS.

ONE OF THE ROLES OF YAVAPAI PLAN IS TO BE STEWARD OF OUR RESOURCES, TO REALLY LOOK AT WHAT IS AVAILABLE TO US AND HOW WE UTILIZE THAT, AND THAT'S WHY THIS HAS BEEN A CONVERSATION FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF DECADES.

WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE WE HAVE A SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY FOR THE LAST 12 YEARS.

PART OF THAT IS THE FINANCIAL AGREEMENT WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY AND YAVAPAI PLAN, AND THIS PROVIDES ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT OF PROCUREMENT TO ENSURE THAT EXCUSE ME, ALL OF OUR CHECKS AND BALANCES ARE MET.

FIRST AND FOREMOST, WE GO THROUGH THAT PROCUREMENT PROCESS WITH ADO, WITH THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE MEETING ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, AND THEN SECONDLY, IN THAT AGREEMENT WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY.

WHAT WE HAVE TODAY IS WE HAVE A CONTRACT THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE YAVAPAI PLAN BOARD TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH AN ORGANIZATION AT SHORT VIA, YOU HAVE THE FULL NAME IN YOUR PACKET, BUT THE NAME OF THE COMPANY IS V-I-A, VIA.

THE CONTRACT THAT'S EXISTING HAS EXPIRED, AND THAT IS THROUGH NEW HORIZONS DISABILITY EMPOWERMENT CENTER, THAT WAS THROUGH THE TOWN OF PRESCOTT VALLEY,

[01:00:01]

OF WHICH THAT ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITY HAS SHIFTED TO YAVAPAI PLAN.

OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS OF NEW HORIZONS OPERATING PUBLIC TRANSIT IN OUR REGION, THEY'VE PROVIDED 100,000 RIDES.

I'M GOING TO WRAP UP BY SAYING ONE OF THE PROGRAMS WE'RE MOST PROUD ABOUT IS NAMES THAT WE'VE HEARD TODAY.

WE HAVE A PARTNERSHIP WITH US VETS.

RIGHT NOW, THAT IS A FLOURISHING PROGRAM THAT GETS US VETS TO THE VA FOR MUCH-NEEDED HEALTH CARE.

WE ALSO HEARD TODAY REFERENCE POLA HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH, THAT'S ALSO A PARTNERSHIP THAT WE HAVE WITH PUBLIC TRANSIT THAT'S PROVIDING MUCH NEEDED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO THOSE OF MENTAL HEALTH.

MOVING FORWARD, WE'RE LOOKING FOR PUBLIC TRANSIT TO BE REGIONAL.

WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO CONNECT ALL OF YAVAPAI COUNTY FROM ASH FORK TO DEWEY HUMBOLDT TO PAULDEN BUT WE'RE GOING TO DO IT THROUGH STEWARDSHIP.

WE'RE GOING TO BE VERY MINDFUL OF THOSE TAX DOLLARS AVAILABLE.

HOW DO WE PROVIDE THE GREATEST SERVICE THAT WE CAN WITHIN REASON? WITH THAT SAID, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

YOU DO HAVE THE CONTRACT IN YOUR PACKET, AND WE APPRECIATE THE RELATIONSHIP WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, VINNIE, I'LL REACH TO SUPERVISORS QUESTIONS.

>> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE NAME BECAUSE THE CONTRACT IS SIMPO AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE GOING BY YAVAPAI PLAN OR Y PLAN, I JUST WONDERED JUST THE DETAILS ON IF WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO DRAFT CONTRACTS WITH SIMPO OR ARE WE MOVING LEGALLY TO YAVAPAI PLAN?

>> I APPRECIATE THAT. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND SUPERVISOR CHECK, AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY COUNSEL I WAS GOING TO POINT TO.

BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW, I'VE TALKED WITH OUR ATTORNEY, SO WE'RE FINE.

OBVIOUSLY, OUR NAME HISTORICALLY HAS BEEN SIMPO AND WE'RE ALSO GOING TO BE DOING BUSINESS AS LEGALLY AS YAVAPAI PLAN, SO THE ATTORNEYS HAVE REVIEWED THAT, AND THE LEGAL LANGUAGE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED THROUGH THE LEGAL REVIEW.

>> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, YOU SIT ON YAVAPAI PLAN.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME.

YOU A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE COUNTY?

>> YEAH. I THINK IT'S JUST TRYING TO PUT ALL THESE PIECES TOGETHER, AND THEY'RE VERY GRANT DEPENDENT, WHICH IS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, SO HOPEFULLY THAT'LL CONTINUE BECAUSE THERE IS A NEED OUT THERE, AND WE'RE TRYING TO PUT THE PIECES OF THE PUZZLE TOGETHER.

WE'RE STILL LACKING A LITTLE BIT IN THE PAULDEN AREA.

WE GOT TRANSPORTATION FROM CHINO IN, WE HAVE A GENTLEMAN THAT'S A PRIVATE SECTOR GUY THAT HE REFERENCED THAT HE'S MEETING WITH FRIDAY, AND HE CONNECTS SELIGMAN, ASH FORK, AND WILLIAMS. WELL, IF WE COULD GET HIM, WORK WITH HIM ON THE PRIVATE SIDE AND CONNECT TO A HUB AND ASH FORK, THEN YOU COULD GET PEOPLE IN.

WHEN YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT WHAT THE NEEDS ARE FOR TRANSIT IN THE RURAL AREAS COMPARED TO OUR AREAS, THEY DO VARY A LOT, BUT THEY SHARE SOME SIMILAR THINGS.

THEY NEED TO GET TO THE VA.

THE OUTLYING AREAS, THEY NEED TO GET TO SHOPPING.

THERE ARE NO REAL GROCERY STORES IN ASH FORK, THERE ARE NO REAL GROCERY STORES IN SELIGMAN.

THERE'S A SMALL ONE THAT I REALLY LIKE IN PAULDEN, BUT STILL PEOPLE WANT TO COME IN AND DO THEIR SHOPPING TO GET THE BASIC ESSENTIALS.

SOME OF THESE AREAS ARE REALLY STRUGGLING IN THE OUTLINE, AND I'D LIKE SEEING THIS BOARD FOCUS ON THAT.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO TRANSIT, I THINK WORKING WITH OTHER PEOPLE, WORKING WITHIN OUR OWN THIS PRIVATE COMPANY THAT'S GOING TO COME IN, WE DON'T HAVE TO BUY THE BUSES, THEY JUST COME IN AND OPERATE THE SYSTEM.

IF WE HAVE TO SCALE BACK OR MOVE DOWN, IT'LL BE EASY FOR US TO DO.

REALLY, THIS IS A GOOD THING, IT'S ALREADY BEEN FUNDED, WE'RE JUST CATCHING UP FROM PREVIOUS YEARS ON THIS FUNDING.

IT SHOULD BE A DECENT SYSTEM, I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING HOW THEY OPERATE.

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

>> WELL, VINNIE, I APPRECIATE ALL THAT YOU AND THE ORGANIZATION, YOUR STAFF, DOES.

I WILL TELL YOU WHILE I WAS SITTING IN THAT VERY LONG LINE OF TRAFFIC FROM 89A TO WHEREVER I WAS TRYING TO GET TO HERE, I WAS DOING A LOT OF PLANNING AND SO I HAVE A LOT OF IDEAS.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MEETING WITH YOU, AND WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO BUILD ROADS.

THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL I KNOW.

EVEN WITH THE TRANSIT, THEY NEED SOMETHING TO DRIVE ON.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ITEM 3.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ACTION ITEM 3.

>> WILL SECOND.

>> ACTION, ITEM 3 IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> THANK YOU, VINNIE.

>> ITEM 4, ACTION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

[4. Development Services - Approve a six (6) year contract with Vertosoft for OpenGov in the total amount of $1,199,599.00 for a new online permitting platform that will replace the existing CitizenServe platform. YC Contract No. 2025-168A2]

[01:05:05]

APPROVE A SIX-YEAR CONTRACT.

GOOD MORNING, MARK, HOW ARE YOU?

>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR.

>> GOOD MORNING, MADAM CHAIR, VICE CHAIR BOARD MEMBERS.

I'M MARK LUSSON. I HAVE PIKE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ASSISTANT DIRECTOR.

BEFORE YOU, WANTING TO TAKE UNDER YOUR CONSIDERATION AN UPGRADE TO OUR CUSTOMER PERMITTING SYSTEM TO OPEN AND GOV.

WE'RE CURRENTLY WITH CITIZENSERVE.

OPENGOV IS ONE THAT'S DEDICATED TO PERMITTING AND LICENSING.

WE DON'T DO LICENSING, BUT WE DO FOCUS ON THE PERMITTING SIDE, INSPECTION SIDE AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

AS PART OF THE COUNTY'S ONGOING EFFORTS TO BE INNOVATIVE WITH ITS COUNTY SERVICES, AND ENHANCED CUSTOMER CITIZEN EXPERIENCE, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS ASKING TO UPGRADE ITS PERMITTING SOFTWARE.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE HEARD SINCE IN MY 3.5 YEARS WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS THE LACK OF USER ABILITY WITHIN CITIZENSERVE OUR PERMITTING SYSTEM.

I'VE HEARD IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN, HOW CUMBERSOME THIS CURRENT PERMITTING SYSTEM IS THAT WE USE.

WE USE THAT AS A WAY TO INCREASE OUR CUSTOMER SERVICE, AND WE STARTED GOING OUT AND ASKING FOR, WHAT ARE OUR OTHER OPTIONS? WE'RE NO LONGER UNDER CONTRACT FOR CITIZENSERVE.

LET'S SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING BETTER OUT THERE.

WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, WE DID DEMO SEVERAL COMPANIES OVER THE LAST 14 MONTHS FOR WHAT WE ARE ACTUALLY WANTING FOR OUR OPERATION.

OPENGOV WAS FOUND TO BE THE BEST SUIT THE NEEDS OF OUR CUSTOMERS, THE DEPARTMENT AND ALSO THE COUNTY.

WHY ARE WE LOOKING FOR THIS? WHAT MAKES OPENGOV, THE BEST ONE THAT WE DEMOED? GIVES A REAL TIME STATUS TRACKING FOR APPLICATION PROGRESS.

I HATE TO COMPARE IT TO ANOTHER COMPANY, BUT IF YOU'VE EVER ORDERED DOMINOES ONLINE, IT HAS YOUR PIZZA TRACKER.

THIS ACTUALLY DOES THE SAME THING, BUT FOR YOUR PERMIT.

YOU CAN ACTUALLY FOLLOW YOUR PERMIT ALONG THE PROCESS AS IT GOES FROM OUR CUSTOMER SERVICE UNIT TO THE PLANNING UNIT, TO THE BUILDING SAFETY UNIT, ENVIRONMENT, AND ALL THAT.

YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE WHERE IT'S AT.

>> MARK, CAN I INTERRUPT YOU? BECAUSE THE HOSPITAL HAS THE SAME TRACKER THING.

IT SAYS, YOU CHECKED IN.

NOW YOU'RE OVER HERE. NOW YOU'VE DONE THIS. ANYWAY.

>> YOUR SHOT IT'S ON HIS WAY? [LAUGHTER]

>> THERE'S NO HELP FOR YOU? [LAUGHTER] ANYWAY, GO AHEAD. SORRY TO INTERRUPT.

>> NO WORRIES. IT ALSO OFFERS A 24/7 SELF SERVICE ACCESS TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS TO PAY YOUR PERMITS, AND ALSO TO CHECK ON THE STATUS OF YOUR APPLICATIONS.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I REALLY LIKED WITH IS HAS A BUILT IN MESSAGING SYSTEM.

IF YOUR PERMIT IS UNDER REVIEW WITH A PLANS EXAMINER, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CUSTOMER CAN ACTUALLY INSTANT MESSAGE THAT PLAN REVIEWER AND ACTUALLY SEE, K, THIS IS WHAT'S HOLDING IT UP.

HERE'S THE UPDATE TO IT.

HERE'S A QUESTION THAT I HAVE.

IT GIVES THAT DIRECT COMMUNICATION TO OUR STAFF.

THROUGH THAT AUTOMATION, IT ASKS FOR FASTER TURNAROUND TIMES.

IT ACTUALLY STREAMLINES IT.

IT GOES TO ALL OF THE DIFFERENT UNITS THAT HAVE REVIEWS SIMULTANEOUSLY.

IT'S NOT BASED ON EACH OTHER'S REVIEWS.

IT HAS A MODERN USER FRIENDLY INTERFACE.

IT GUIDES THE CUSTOMERS THROUGH THE PROCESS.

ONCE YOU SUBMIT IT, IT'S NOT A QUESTION THAT THE CUSTOMER WOULD ASK, WELL, NOW, WHAT DO I DO? I'LL ACTUALLY SPELL OUT WHAT THAT NEXT PROCESS IS FOR YOU.

THROUGH THAT INTERACTIVE REAL STATUS TRACKING, IT HELPS THE CUSTOMERS ALONG THE WAY.

IT ALLOWS FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO RECORDS THROUGH PARCEL SEARCHES ALL AT THEIR FINGERTIPS, SO THEY CAN SEE THEIR NEIGHBORS PARCEL, THEIR PARCEL, WHAT THEIR APPLICATION HISTORY IS, ANY PERMITTING RECORDS, ANY ZONING RECORDS.

IT'S ALL KEPT WITHIN THIS DATABASE.

IT ALSO IS AN UPDATE TO OUR PAYMENT PROCESSING.

WE'RE CURRENTLY WITH EGA.

THIS HAS A BUILT IN PAYMENT PROCESSOR OF STRIPE, WHICH THEN INTEGRATES WITH CREDIT CARD AND ACH PAYMENT PROCESSING.

THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ADVANTAGES FOR OUR CUSTOMERS.

THERE'S ALSO BENEFITS TO COUNTY STAFF AS WELL.

THIS WILL BE A UNIFIED SYSTEM FOR EASE OF USE WITH COUNTY STAFF.

THIS INTERFACE IS ALREADY USED BY MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS, FINANCE AND PROCUREMENT BEING ONE OF THEM.

WE HAVE SEVERAL REPORTS THAT WE PROVIDE TO FINANCE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS FOR DIFFERENT REVENUE REPORTS.

FINANCE WILL ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO ACCESS THESE WHEN THEY WANT.

THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE A TWO, THREE, FOUR WEEK DELAY AS WE GENERATE THESE REPORTS.

[01:10:03]

THEY'LL ACTUALLY HAVE THAT IN REAL TIME.

UNLIMITED USER LICENSES FOR COUNTY STAFF AND OUTSIDE AGENCIES.

THIS IS A BIG SELLING POINT FOR US BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE ARE ON A LICENSING BASED PROGRAM TO WHERE IF WE NEEDED TO ADD SOMEONE, WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT ADDITIONAL LICENSE.

THIS GIVES US UNLIMITED USER LICENSES THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY AND THROUGH THE OUTSIDE AGENCIES.

NOW, THE ADVANTAGE TO THAT IS WHEN WE HAVE AN OUTSIDE FIRE DISTRICT THAT NEEDS TO REVIEW A PERMIT, RIGHT NOW IT'S CURRENTLY BEING ONE SIGN IN FOR A, FIVE OR SIX DIFFERENT FIRE DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVES WHO ARE REVIEWING THESE PERMITS.

THIS WILL ACTUALLY GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASSIGN THAT TO THAT PARTICULAR FIRE REVIEWER.

THEY'LL BE ABLE TO REVIEW THAT PERMIT UNDER WHAT THEY WERE REVIEWING IT FOR, AND THEY'LL BE ABLE TO PUT THEIR NAME ON IT.

IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS IN THE FUTURE FOR WHY WAS THIS APPROVED DISAPPROVED FOR SOMETHING WITH FIRE, WE CAN ACTUALLY REACH OUT TO THEM DIRECTLY.

THERE'S AN EASE OF USE WITH CONFIGURABILITY AND A CLOUD BASED SYSTEM.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE DEPENDENT ON SUPPORT STAFF FROM THE DATABASE TO MAKE CHANGES FOR US, CHANGE VERBIAGE ON THE PORTAL, ANYTHING.

THIS IS A DRAGON DROP SYSTEM THAT STAFF WOULD ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO CUSTOMIZE BASED ON FEEDBACK AND EVERYTHING FROM CUSTOMERS AND THROUGH OUR OPERATIONS.

THE BIG BRASS TAX OF THIS IS, HOW MUCH IS THIS GOING TO COST? IT IS GOING TO BE AN INCREASE OVER WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY ENCUMBERED WITH CITIZENSERVE.

I HAVE A SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON.

ONE THING I WANT TO POINT OUT FOR TERM 1, FOR OPEN GOV, IT IS A AFTER TAX, AN 84 THAN DOLLAR UPFRONT PAYMENT THAT WE'RE MAKING TO START THE INTEGRATION PROCESS.

THE OTHER HALF OF THAT INTEGRATION IS COMBINED WITH TERM 2.

WE WERE ABLE TO FIND BUDGET CAPACITY SAVINGS SO FAR THIS FISCAL YEAR TO PAY FOR THIS.

EVEN THOUGH THIS WASN'T A BUDGETED ITEM, WE STILL HAVE THE FUNDS TO PAY FOR THIS THROUGH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUDGET.

OVER THE COURSE OF THESE SIX YEARS, THE TOTAL AMOUNT FOR OPENGOV OVER THAT SIX YEAR TERM IS JUST SHY OF $1.2 MILLION.

THAT IT DOES HAVE SOME PARTICULAR SHOCK TO IT WHEN YOU SEE THAT.

HOWEVER, I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IT IS REPLACING THE $947,000 SIX YEAR COST FOR CITIZENSERVE.

LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENCE, WE'RE LOOKING AT $391,000.

HOWEVER, 130,000 OF THAT IS THE IMPLEMENTATION COST.

ONCE YOU MINUS THAT FROM THE 391, IT'S ABOUT 250 $260,000 MORE OVER THE TERM OF THE SIX YEAR CONTRACT.

ABOUT $50,000 A YEAR INCREASE IN OPERATIONAL COSTS, WHICH WE DO HAVE ENCUMBERED THROUGH FINANCE.

OVERALL, IMPLEMENTING OPENGOV IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

IT'LL BRING SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS TO THE YAVAPAI COUNTY RESIDENTS, STAFF AND LEADERSHIP.

WITH MODERN END USER FRIENDLY INTERFACE, AUTOMATION CAPABILITIES, DATA DRIVEN REPORTS, OPENGOV IS AN IDEAL SOLUTION FOR ENHANCING OUR PERMITTING AND REPORTING PROCESSES.

WITH THAT, I CAN BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

>> THE ONE THING I'D LIKE TO ASK, MARK, IS I KNOW THAT WHEN WE DID CITIZENSERVE, WE HAD A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH THAT FOR A WHILE.

I JUST WANT TO KNOW, ARE WE PRETTY MUCH GOING TO BE MAYBE SMOOTHER, YOU THINK ON THIS?

>> I FORESEEABLY, THIS SHOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY SMOOTHER.

PART OF OUR CONTRACT NEGOTIATION IS SEVEN ADMINISTRATIVE CERTIFICATION SEATS.

THEY WILL ACTUALLY SEND US TO TRAINING TO GET BECOME SUPER USERS FOR THE SYSTEM ITSELF.

THEY'LL BE SEVEN OF US WITHIN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO PROGRAM THE INTERFACE.

>> BECAUSE WE WILL HEAR FROM MISS GRIFFINS, IF IT'S NOT SMOOTH.

>> TO THE GUY. [LAUGHTER]

>> NOT OUT THERE.

>> TO THE CHAIR'S POINT, HAVE YOU TAKEN UP FOR TEST DRIVE? IS THAT BASICALLY WHAT SHE'S ASKING? HAVE YOU LOOKED AT IT? DO YOU LIKE IT? YES. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S UNIQUE ABOUT WHY WE WENT WITH OPENGOV IS, YES, I DID DEMO.

I WENT THROUGH A FEW DIFFERENT DEMOS.

BUT ONE THING THAT WE WANTED IS WE WANTED THE ENTIRE STAFF TO LOOK AT IT TO DEMO IT.

WE HELD ABOUT FIVE OR SIX DIFFERENT DEMOS WITH EACH OF OUR UNITS AND GOT ALL THAT INPUT.

ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS, GOT A LOT OF BRAT ANSWERS.

>> QUESTIONS?

>> I JUST WANT TO SAY, I WAS OUT IN PAULDIN SPEAKING AND I TALK ABOUT YOUR PROGRAMS ALL THE TIME,

[01:15:02]

BECAUSE I THINK REALLY MOST OF OUR CALLS THAT WE GET FROM CITIZENS ARE CONCERNING YOUR DEPARTMENT AND ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE IT SMOOTHER.

I THINK THEY REALLY EMBRACE THE INSTANT PERMITS.

THEY REALLY LIKE THAT YOU GUYS ARE OFFERING THAT NOW AND THE VIDEO INSPECTIONS.

WHEN YOU THINK THAT SOME OF OUR RESIDENTS ARE AN HOUR AND A HALF AWAY FROM HERE JUST TO COME IN TO TAKE CARE OF SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE OVER THE INTERNET OR SIMPLE.

I REALLY LIKE THAT WITH THIS NEW SYSTEM.

IT SOUNDS LIKE ALL THAT STUFF WILL JUST INTEGRATE, AND THEY OFFER THE SAME THING.

I JUST DON'T WANT TO LOSE THAT MOMENTUM THAT WE GOT.

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR KOKO.

THIS WOULD ACTUALLY BE AN ENHANCEMENT TO THE SURFACES THAT WE ALREADY OFFER.

>> GREAT.

>> I FEEL LIKE MISS JENKINS, SUPERVISOR JENKINS IS OUT THERE.

I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T WANT YOU TO THINK THAT WE FORGOT YOU, BUT DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> YES, THANK YOU. I DID RAISE MY HAND.

I HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS.

DOES OPENGOV HAVE A MODULE FOR CODE COMPLIANCE AND CODE COMPLAINTS THAT AUTOMATE THAT, OR WHAT ARE YOU CURRENTLY USING? IT SEEMS LIKE I'M FAMILIAR WITH THAT MODULE.

>> WE'RE CURRENTLY USING CITIZENSERVE, WHICH ENCOMPASSES ALL OF OUR SIX UNITS WITHIN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WITH REVIEW AND PERMITTING CAPABILITIES WITH FLOOD DEPARTMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS AS WELL.

THIS POTENTIAL REPLACEMENT WITH OPENGOV WOULD STILL ENCOMPASS THOSE SAME ASPECTS WITH ESSENTIALLY A STEROID SHOT TO THE ARM TO REFERENCE THE HOSPITAL EXAMPLE THAT MADAM CHAIR GAVE EARLIER.

BUT IT DOES HAVE EACH SYSTEM.

>> GO AHEAD, MARK. I'M SORRY.

>> EACH ONE OF THOSE UNIT HAS ITS OWN CATERED SYSTEM PERTAINING TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE, BUILDING SAFETY AND PLAN REVIEW, AND ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT AS WELL, AS LONG AS WELL AS PLANNING AND ZONING.

>> ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU'LL BE UTILIZING TWO DIFFERENT SYSTEMS. CITIZENSERVE FOR SOME THINGS AND OPENGOV FOR OTHERS?

>> NO, GREAT QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR ASKING THAT.

THIS WOULD BE A REPLACEMENT TO CITIZENSERVE.

THE REASON FOR THE HALF YEAR ASK TO GO NOW RATHER THAN IN JULY IS BECAUSE THAT INTEGRATION TAKES ABOUT SIX MONTHS TO DO.

WHAT OUR PLAN IS IS WE'LL GET TO THAT POINT WHERE'RE READY TO GO LIVE WITH OPENGOV AND ACTUALLY FLIP THE SWITCH OFF FOR CITIZENSERVE ON JULY 1ST AND TURN THE SWITCH ON TO GO LIVE WITH OPENGOV THAT SAME DAY.

>> THANK YOU. I AM FAMILIAR WITH OPENGOV.

I FOUND IT EASY TO USE.

I LIKE THE IDEA THAT YOU CAN MODIFY DASHBOARDS TO COMPLY TO EITHER REPORTING ISSUES OR JUST TO MAKE IT MORE USER FRIENDLY AND SPECIFIC.

GOOD CHOICE. I HOPE IT WORKS OUT. THANK YOU.

>> BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS A PAINFUL TRANSITION WHEN YOU CHANGE SOFTWARE, I JUST WONDERING HOW LONG WE USED CITIZENSERVE FOR.

>> OUR GO LIVE WITH CITIZENSERVE WAS BACK IN 2019.

WE'RE HITTING THAT ALMOST SEVEN YEAR MARK.

>> VERY GOOD. THEN ONE OTHER QUESTION.

DO YOU KNOW IF THE ACH PERCENTAGE PER TRANSACTION IS COMPARABLE, WAS THERE A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT? BECAUSE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT GOES TO CREDIT CARD COMPANIES IS INTERESTING IN THOSE PER PAYMENT SITUATIONS, AND YOU MAY NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION, BUT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT IT.

>> I DON'T HAVE THE SPECIFICS AS FAR AS PERCENTAGES GO, BUT I KNOW WITH THE REPLACEMENT OF EGOV, ONE IN FINANCE, WAS VERY HAPPY THAT THEY WERE USING STRIPE, WHICH IS GOING TO BE COMPARABLE TO WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY PAYING AND EGOV IS SUPPOSED TO BE INCREASING IN THE NEXT YEAR, I BELIEVE.

>> GREAT. THANK YOU. WELL, THE ONLY THING I WANT TO SAY IS THERE WAS ONE MESSAGE THAT I MADE A JOKE ABOUT WHERE IT SAID ON THE HOSPITAL, WELL, THERE'S NO HOPE FOR YOU.

THAT MESSAGE CAN'T BE IN OUR SYSTEM.

WE CAN'T BE SAYING THOSE THINGS.

[LAUGHTER] NOT THAT THEY SAID IT EITHER, BUT JUST SAY IT.

>> I'LL MAKE A NOTE OF THAT.

>> MAKE A NOTE OF THAT. WELL, WE'RE HERE TO GO ON THIS JOURNEY WITH YOU.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE ACTION ITEM NUMBER 4.

>> SECOND?

CAN YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> SUPERVISOR [INAUDIBLE].

>> YES. ACTION ITEM NUMBER 4 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> THANK YOU, MARK.

WE ARE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND WE WILL RESOLVE INTO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

>> ITEM NUMBER 5.

[5. Flood Control District - The Board of Supervisors will resolve into the Board of Directors of the Yavapai County Flood Control District, and following consideration of this item will reconvene as the Board of Supervisors - Approve a contract with Westwood Professional Services, Inc., in the amount of $200,030.00 for the Spring Valley Area Drainage Master Study. YC Contract No. 2025-435 (District 2 - Director Jenkins)]

FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT.

[01:20:01]

OF THE YAVAPAI COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT.

GOOD MORNING, LYNN.

>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR MALLORY. VICE CHAIR COMPTON.

I'M LYNN WHITMAN. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

I'M LYN WHITMAN, THE DIRECTOR OF THE FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT.

THIS IS THE LAST OF FIVE GRANTS WE RECEIVED FOR DRAINAGE STUDIES.

THIS ONE IS IN SPRING VALLEY.

IT'S JUST OVER $200,000, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE ON ACTION ITEM.

HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

>> SUPERVISOR JENKINS, I'LL REACH OUT TO YOU.

IF YOU HAD ANY COMMENTS, THIS IS IN YOUR DISTRICT.

>> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU, LYNN FOR MAKING THIS A PRIORITY.

CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY?

>> YES, ABSOLUTELY.

>> AS MOST OF YOU KNOW, SPRING VALLEY HAS CHRONIC FLOODING ISSUES, SO I'M VERY HAPPY TO START TO ADDRESS IT BY THIS GRANT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? BE HAPPY TO LISTEN TO THEM. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR.

I DO NOT SEE.

I'D BE GLAD TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT ITEM NUMBER 5.

COULD WE CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> SUPERVISOR JAKE?

>> YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS.

>> HAPPILY AYE.

>> HAPPILY, YES.

IT'S BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> ACTION ITEM NUMBER 5.

>> THANK YOU, LYNN. ITEM NUMBER 6.

[6. Sheriff - Approve an increase to the Sheriff’s Office, New Fund revenue and expenditure budgets in the amount of $500,000.00 and an offsetting reduction in the Board of Supervisors, Budget Capacity - Grants Fund revenue and expenditure budgets for the allocation of the Satellite Communications Pilot Program (SB1735 118-35).]

SHERIFF. APPROVE AN INCREASE TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

NEW FUND REVENUE, AND EXPENDITURE BUDGETS.

GOOD MORNING, AGAIN, SHERIFF.

>> GOOD MORNING, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

THIS IS A $500,000 APPROPRIATION, WHICH WAS SUPPORTED BY PART OF SENATOR MARK FINCHEM'S GENERAL APPROPRIATIONS THAT HE HAD TO ALLOCATE AT THE ARIZONA SENATE THIS YEAR.

THIS IS SPECIFICALLY FOR A SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS PILOT PROGRAM.

AS YOU KNOW, PARTICULARLY IN THE RURAL PARTS OF THE COUNTY, OUR SHERIFF'S DEPUTIES AND ALL FIRST RESPONDERS FOR THAT MATTER, HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT TIME COMMUNICATING IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS.

POLICE RADIOS JUST DON'T WORK THAT WELL OUT THERE BECAUSE OF THE TERRAIN, THE LACK OF TOWERS.

REALLY, IT'S NOT A MATTER OF BUILDING MORE TOWERS.

YOU COULDN'T BUILD ENOUGH TOWERS TO HAVE GOOD RADIO COMMUNICATIONS OUT THERE.

OF COURSE, THE CELL PHONES DON'T WORK THAT WELL OUT THERE EITHER.

WE HAVE DEPUTIES WORKING IN REMOTE AREAS OF THE COUNTY THAT HAVE, AND THIS HAS BEEN MY ENTIRE CAREER 30 YEARS, BUT IT'S VERY DANGEROUS.

WE SAW AN OPPORTUNITY.

SENATOR FENCHEM AND I AND OTHERS SAW AN OPPORTUNITY TO POTENTIALLY UTILIZE THE NEW EMERGING TECHNOLOGY AROUND SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS.

IF ANYBODY'S USED THE STARLINK, YOU CAN TELL THAT THOSE THINGS ARE AMAZING.

BY PLACING STAR LINKS ON THE PATROL VEHICLES AND ALLOWING WHAT VOICE OVER IP, POLICE RADIOS CAN HIT THOSE PATROL VEHICLES OR STARLINK ON THE PATROL VEHICLES AND THEN SPEAK DIRECTLY TO THE COMMUNICATION CENTER, POTENTIALLY USING THAT TECHNOLOGY.

NOW, THIS IS A PILOT PROGRAM THAT'S BEING RUN THROUGH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

CAPTAIN JOHN JOHNSON, WHO, IF ANYBODY KNOWS HIM, IS AN AMAZING TECH WIZARD, IF YOU EVER HAVE A OPENING FOR DIRECTOR OF ITS, I'M NOT GOING TO LET HIM GO, JUST AN FYI.

BUT THIS IS A REALLY GOOD DEAL.

NO COST TO THE COUNTY.

WE CAN FIND OUT IF THIS WORKS AND HOW WELL IT WORKS.

WE BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO WORK VERY WELL, AND WE BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO MAKE OUR DEPUTIES AND EVENTUALLY ALL FIRST RESPONDERS MUCH MORE SAFE, PARTICULARLY IN THE RURAL PARTS OF THE COUNTY.

>> THANK YOU, SHERIFF. IF WE DEFINITELY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT'S BEST INTEREST AS THEY ARE OUT THERE WITH OUR BEST INTERESTS, FIGHTING EVERY DAY TO KEEP US SAFE.

IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT IS VERY WELL RECEIVED.

I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT HERE.

IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? NO. YES.

>> WHEN I DID A RIDE ALONG WITH THEM OUT THERE AND THEY WERE CHECKING ALL THEIR RADIOS, IT BECAME REALLY APPARENT.

ONE OF THEM DIDN'T EVEN WORK, AND THAT WOULD BE SCARY IF I WAS A DEPUTY, ANY KIND OF MONEY THAT WE CAN PUT INSIDE THOSE TRUCKS TO MAKE IT BETTER AND SAFER FOR THE DEPUTIES I LIKE.

MY QUESTION IS, IS ANYONE ELSE DOING THIS SHED? IS ANY OTHER SHERIFFS DEPARTMENTS OR POLICE DEPARTMENTS DOING THIS? WOULD THIS TIE IN IF WE EVER HAD REGIONAL COMMUNICATION CENTER WITH THE OTHER AGENCIES?

[01:25:09]

>> ANSWER TO THE FIRST QUESTION, MADAM CHAIR, SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, I DON'T BELIEVE ANYBODY IS DOING THIS YET, MAYBE SOMEWHERE NATIONALLY, BUT I BASE THAT OPINION ON THE FACT THAT MOTOROLA, WHICH IS OUR RADIO COMPANY DIDN'T EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT THEIR EQUIPMENT HAD THE CAPABILITY TO FUNCTION IN THIS WAY UNTIL CAPTAIN JOHN JOHNSON EXPLAINED THAT TO THEM.

THEN THEY SAID, OH, YES, IT DOES, YOU'RE RIGHT.

I DON'T THINK IF MOTOROLA DIDN'T KNOW, THAT MEANS THAT PROBABLY NOBODY ELSE IS ASKING ABOUT IT.

THAT'S THE ANSWER TO WHAT WAS THE SECOND QUESTION AGAIN?

>> WILL THIS WORK WITH THE OTHER?

>> IF THIS PROVES SUCCESSFUL, WILL MAYBE PRESCOTT PD, DPS, ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE WOULD INTEGRATE WITH THEM.

>> MADAM CHAIR. YES, ABSOLUTELY.

THAT'S THE WHOLE IDEA BEHIND THIS IS TO UTILIZE IT ACROSS ALL FIRST RESPONDER SERVICES IF IT WORKS.

HOPEFULLY, WE'RE ABLE TO HAVE COMMUNICATIONS.

I KNOW WE HAVE A NEW TO ADD ON TO YOUR QUESTION.

WE HAVE A NEW CITY COUNCIL AT THE CITY OF PRESCOTT AS OF THIS MORNING, AND I'M HOPING TO REVISIT COMMUNICATIONS WITH THEM OR COLLABORATIONS MAYBE ABOUT A REGIONAL COMMUNICATION CENTER.

I MENTIONED THAT WITH YOUR NEW COUNTY MANAGER, OLD COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, MR. BORDEAU, JUST YESTERDAY.

>> HE'S NOT THAT OLD, BUT THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT. VICE CHAIR. DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION?

>> NO, I WAS JUST GOING TO MAKE A MOTION.

>> ABSOLUTELY, GO AHEAD.

>> I MOVED TO APPROVE ACTION ITEM NUMBER 6.?

YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE.

>> SUPERVISOR JAKE?

>> ACTION ITEM NUMBER 6 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> CHAIR. IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE GONNA STAY UP HERE FOR THREE MORE TIMES, AT LEAST.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN,

[7. Sheriff - Approve an increase to the Sheriff’s Office, SB1823 School Safety Program Fund revenue and expenditure budgets in the amount of $600,000.00 and an offsetting reduction in the Board of Supervisors, Budget Capacity - Grants Fund revenue and expenditure budgets for the allocation of State revenue (SB 1735 127-C.9).]

APPROVE AN INCREASE TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

>> YES, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

THIS IS A $600,000 APPROPRIATION FOR OUR SCHOOL SAFETY PROGRAM.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I BROUGHT BEFORE THE BOARD ORIGINALLY THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO, THAT WAS AN APPROPRIATION FROM THE LEGISLATURE FOR SOFTWARE, THAT ESSENTIALLY, IT DOES A NUMBER OF THINGS.

BUT THE BIGGEST FEATURE IS THAT IT PROVIDES A PARALLEL 911 SYSTEM FOR SCHOOLS AND REALLY ANY OTHER VENUE THAT WE WANT TO.

BUT WE'VE LOCATED IT IN A NUMBER OF SCHOOLS AROUND THE COUNTY ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE COUNTY, ON THE EAST SIDE.

I SAW SUPERINTENDENT KING HERE.

HE WAS AN ORIGINAL CHAMPION OF THIS PROJECT.

THE SOFTWARE WAS PURCHASED, PARALLEL 911 SYSTEM, MEANING, IT HAS A PANIC ALARM.

WE CONTRACTED WITH A COMPANY NAMED MUTUAL LINK.

MUTUAL LINK PUTS A PANIC ALARM ON CELL PHONES OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS AND TEACHERS.

IT'S JUST A BUTTON, AND YOU PUSH THAT BUTTON AND IMMEDIATELY IN YOUR PSAP OR YOUR 911 CENTER, IT WILL COME UP THAT YOU ARE GETTING A PANIC ALERT FROM A SCHOOL.

WHY THAT IS IMPORTANT.

IN THE MOST SCARY AND DIFFICULT TO CIRCUMSTANCES.

IF THERE IS A CRITICAL INCIDENT AT A SCHOOL OR ANYWHERE, THE NUMBER OF 911 CALLS THAT WILL START TO COME IN WHEN YOU HEAR SHOTS FIRED QUICKLY OVERWHELMS THE DISPATCH CENTER.

BUT THE DISPATCH CENTER, THE 911 OPERATORS WILL NEED TO BE TALKING TO THOSE TEACHERS OR SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THAT ARE IN THE FACILITY TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, TO GET DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SUSPECT, ANYTHING LIKE THAT, MEDICAL RESPONSE, ALL OF THAT.

THE CURRENT 911 SYSTEM JUST DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

YOU ANSWER THE PHONE, WHO AM I TALKING TO? IT'S A SCARED PARENT WHO GOT A TEXT MESSAGE FROM THEIR KID AND THEY'RE CALLING 911, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION THAT'S A VALUE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON.

THIS ALLOWS THE SCHOOL OFFICIALS, TEACHERS, ADMINISTRATORS TO SPEAK DIRECTLY WITH THE 911 OPERATORS AND CUT OUT THAT NOISE.

IT ALSO ALLOWS CAMERAS TO BE TAKEN OVER.

THE 911 OPERATORS CAN SEE WHAT'S ON THE CAMERA OF THE CELL PHONE OF THE PERSON THAT'S CALLING.

[01:30:03]

YOU CAN POINT YOUR CELL PHONE AT THE SCENE AND THE 911 OPERATORS CAN BEGIN TO SEE THEM.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SCHOOLS THAT ALSO HAVE OPTED INTO ALLOWING THE 911 CENTER TO VIEW THEIR OWN INTERNAL SECURITY CAMERAS IN THE EVENT OF A CRITICAL INCIDENT.

WHICH IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO WHEN SECONDS MATTER, EVERY SECOND, SOMEBODY COULD BE PULLING THE TRIGGER.

ANOTHER PERSON COULD BE DYING.

YOU NEED TO GET GUNS, LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO THAT SHOOTER AS FAST AS POSSIBLE.

BEING ABLE TO SEE WHERE THEY'RE GOING, WHAT THEY'RE WEARING, WHAT TYPE OF WEAPONS THAT THEY HAVE, THESE THINGS IS CRITICAL TO AN EMERGENCY RESPONSE IN A SCHOOL AND ANYWHERE THAT YOU HAVE THIS TYPE OF INCIDENT.

BUT WE PARTICULARLY ARE INTERESTED IN PUTTING THIS TECHNOLOGY.

THIS $600,000 IS A RENEWAL OF THOSE CONTRACTS TO CONTINUE THIS SERVICE.

IT WAS AN APPROPRIATION ONCE AGAIN THAT CAME FROM ARIZONA LEGISLATURE, INTENSE LOBBYING EFFORTS ON BEHALF OF MYSELF, OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT OUR THREE ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES AT THE STATE LEVEL, SENATOR MARK FINCHEM, REPRESENTATIVE KUANG WEN, AND REPRESENTATIVE SALINA BLISS, WHO HAVE ALL BEEN TREMENDOUS ALLIES AND ADVOCATES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY HERE IN YAVAPAI COUNTY AND STATEWIDE.

>> THANK YOU, SHERIFF. WE SURELY APPRECIATE OUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES.

THEY ARE ALWAYS RIGHT THERE WHEN WE GIVE THEM A CALL, AND THEY'RE REALLY HELPING THE LAW ENFORCEMENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> I WOULD JUST MAKE A COMMENT.

MY SON'S SCHOOL HAD A FALSE ALARM FOR LOCKDOWN THIS YEAR.

I THINK THIS TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY REALLY COULD HAVE HELPED PREVENT THAT.

MY SON SPENT 20 MINUTES WITH HIS CLASSMATES IN A COMPLETE PANIC WAITING FOR SYSTEM PROBLEMS TO BE WORKED OUT.

THANK YOU FOR ALWAYS BEING AT THE CUTTING EDGE, AND ALSO JUST REALLY THANK YOU FOR BEING SUCH AN EFFECTIVE ADVOCATE FOR OUR NEEDS WITH THE LEGISLATURE AND OTHER GRANT OPPORTUNITIES SO THAT YAVAPAI COUNTY CAN REALLY CONTINUE TO BE A LEADER WITH PUBLIC SAFETY. GOOD JOB.

>> MADAM CHAIR, SUPERVISOR JAKE.

I'M SORRY TO HEAR ABOUT YOU.

THOSE ARE INTENSELY SCARY AND TRAUMATIC EVENTS GIVEN THE STATE OF THE COUNTRY.

THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMPLIMENTS.

>> DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, SUPERVISOR KUKNYO?

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ACTION ITEM.

WHICH NUMBER ARE WE ON SEVEN?

>> YES. SEVEN.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

CAN YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> SUPERVISOR JAKE.

>> YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS?

>> ACTION ITEM NUMBER 7 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> SHERIFF. LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 8,

[8. Sheriff - Approve an increase to the Sheriff’s Office, New Fund for SB1735 118-34 revenue and expenditure budgets in the amount of $950,000.00 and an offsetting reduction in the Board of Supervisors, Budget Capacity - Grants Fund revenue and expenditure budgets.]

APPROVE INCREASE IN THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, A NEW FUND.

>> MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, THIS IS ANOTHER $950,000 GENERAL APPROPRIATION, WHICH WAS DIRECTLY FROM REPRESENTATIVE KUANG WEN.

I'LL JUST SAY, AFTER WORKING IN THE STATE BUDGET ARENA FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.

I'M SO GRATEFUL FOR THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE HERE AT THE COUNTY BECAUSE THAT YOU HEARD REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SAY, HE DOESN'T GET INTO THE CAGE TO FIGHT FOR THE BUDGET.

THAT'S LITERALLY WHAT IT IS.

IT ALL HAPPENS IN A MATTER OF DAYS, USUALLY AT THE END OF SESSION.

YOU REALLY HAVE TO BE PAYING ATTENTION AND WORKING HARD TO GET YOUR NEEDS MET DOWN THERE.

HE DID THAT. ONCE AGAIN.

THIS IS $950,000 GENERAL APPROPRIATION, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO USE TO UPFIT OUR HELICOPTER.

IF YOU RECALL, A FEW YEARS AGO, WE UPGRADED OUR HELICOPTER FROM A ROBINSON 44 TO A USE 600 USING A CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING APPROPRIATION THAT WE OBTAINED FROM SENATOR MARK KELLY.

I THINK IT WAS A LITTLE OVER $2 MILLION.

THE PLATFORM OR THE ACTUAL HELICOPTER ITSELF IS INCREDIBLE, AND IT HAS A LOT OF CAPABILITIES THAT IMPACT PUBLIC SAFETY, NOT JUST FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY, BUT THE ENTIRE REGION.

DIDN'T HAVE ALL OF THE FEATURES THAT IT NEEDED.

I NEEDED A SPOTLIGHT.

IT NEEDED A FLARE UNIT, WHICH IS YOUR HEAT SEEKING.

IT NEEDED NIGHT VISION.

IT NEEDED A COUPLE OF INSTRUMENTS SO THAT YOU CAN FLY AT INSTRUMENT FLIGHT RATING AT NIGHT.

WE ALSO WANTED TO BUY WHAT WHAT'S CALLED A BAMBI BUCKET.

THE BAMBI BUCKET IS BECAUSE THIS HELICOPTER CAN SLING LOAD ABOUT 2,500 POUNDS.

[01:35:07]

THE BAMBI BUCKET WILL ALLOW US TO DIP WATER AND DROP ON FIRE.

WHICH IS A REALLY NICE FEATURE BECAUSE THE HELICOPTERS THAT NORMALLY DO THAT FOREST SERVICE HELICOPTERS CAN BE HUNDREDS OF MILES AWAY AND YOU HAVE A FIRE THAT'S STARTING RIGHT IN A NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE REALLY DON'T HAVE THAT CAPABILITY HERE IN THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW TO JUST FLY IN THERE AND DROP SOME WATER ON SOMETHING AND GET IT OUT BEFORE IT TURNS INTO SOMETHING.

THIS $950,000 IS GOING TO BE PRIMARILY USED TO PURCHASE ALL THAT EQUIPMENT TO PUT ON THE HELICOPTER SO THAT WE HAVE GREATER FUNCTIONALITY.

YOU CAN FLY AT NIGHT. YOU CAN FLY A SPOTLIGHT, YOU CAN DROP WATER, WE CAN SLING LOAD THINGS, A LOT OF THINGS.

OF COURSE, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THIS OF USE TO ALL OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY AGENCIES IN THE COUNTY.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I WILL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT ITEM NUMBER 8.

>> HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE.

>> SUPERVISOR JAKE.

>> YES. CHAIR.

>> MALLORY.

>> ACTION ITEM NUMBER 8 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU. SHERIFF, ITEM NUMBER 9.

[9. Sheriff - Approve an increase to the Sheriff’s Office, New Fund revenue and expenditure budgets in the amount of $2,000,000.00 and an offsetting reduction in the Board of Supervisors, Budget Capacity - Grants Fund revenue and expenditure budgets to operate a Criminal Information Intelligence Analysis Coordination Center (SB1735 118-30).]

I JUST HAVE TO TELL YOU, WHAT AN AMAZING JOB, ALL OF THIS MONEY YOU AND THE REPRESENTATIVES ARE BRINGING FORWARD AT THE COUNTY TO HELP WITH ALL THE SAFETY FOR THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FOR EVERYBODY IN OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU FOR THAT FIGHT.

>> HELPING US. IT MEANS A LOT TO US WHEN IT COMES TO BUDGET TIME.

BUT ANYWAY, ITEM NUMBER 9, SHERIFF.

>> MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

ITEM NUMBER 9 IS A $2 MILLION APPROPRIATION FOR A REGIONAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER, AND IT'S SEED MONEY REALLY FOR THE CENTER.

>> THIS IS AN APPROPRIATION THAT CAME FROM SENATOR MARK FINCHEM.

I BELIEVE HE ACTUALLY WROTE YOU A LETTER ABOUT IT, STATING WHAT HIS DESIRES WERE AND WHATNOT, AND IN PARTNERSHIP WITH EMBRY-RIDDLE UNIVERSITY AND THEIR CYBERSECURITY TEAM THAT'S OUT THERE.

YAVAPAI COUNTY DEFINITELY BENEFITS FROM THE ECONOMIES OF SCALE.

WHEN LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE ABLE TO SHARE RESOURCES AND BUILD THINGS TOGETHER THAT EVERYBODY CAN UTILIZE TO MEET EVERYBODY'S NEEDS, THE TAXPAYERS ARE TRULY THE WINNERS IN THAT.

THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THAT.

WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD A REGIONAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER, AND WHAT GOES INTO THAT CENTER IS GOING TO BE MULTIFACETED AND NUANCED.

REAL TIME CRIME REPORTING, WHICH IS INTELLIGENCE ABOUT CRIMES THAT ARE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW OR HAPPENED VERY RECENTLY, AND WE'RE ABLE TO GET INTEL INTO THE CENTER AND DISSEMINATED OUT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT ON THE STREET SO THAT YOU CAN CATCH SOMEBODY.

PERHAPS IT'S A BURGLARY, AN ARMED ROBBERY OR A HOMICIDE OR SOMETHING, AND YOU'RE TRYING TO CATCH A VEHICLE BEFORE IT GETS OUT OF TOWN OR BEFORE SOMEBODY DITCHES IT, AND YOU'RE TRYING TO GET INTELLIGENCE ABOUT WHAT THAT VEHICLE IS AND GET THE DEPUTIES OR THE LAW ENFORCEMENT WHERE THEY NEED TO BE.

THAT'S ONE FUNCTION OF THE INTELLIGENCE CENTER.

FINANCIAL SURVEILLANCE AFTER SEARCH WARRANTS HAVE BEEN ISSUED OF CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE.

THE COLT GRILL INVESTIGATION IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT.

THAT REQUIRED INCREDIBLE AMOUNTS OF FINANCIAL SURVEILLANCE, OTHER TYPES OF SURVEILLANCE TO BUILD THAT CASE AND DISMANTLE WHAT ESSENTIALLY WAS HUMAN TRAFFICKING RING IN THE COUNTY.

THAT'S ONE OF THE FUNCTIONS THAT YOU WILL SEE IN THE INTEL CENTER.

AN ANALYSTS, PEOPLE THAT SPEND THEIR TIME DIGGING THROUGH THE INFORMATION AND HELPING PUT TOGETHER CASES AND THEN HANDING IT TO YOUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS SO THAT THEY CAN GO OUT AND SOLVE CRIME.

THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WILL BE IN THE INTEL CENTER.

I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT ABOUT ALL OF THIS MONEY AND WHAT I APPRECIATE ABOUT ALL OF YOU, ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, THE PRIOR BOARD, AND THIS BOARD, AS WELL AS OUR REPRESENTATION, AND OUR ADVOCATES.

FRANKLY, SENATE PRESIDENT WARREN PETERSEN HAS BEEN ONE OF OUR STRONGEST ADVOCATES DOWN THERE, IS THAT WE RECOGNIZE AREAS LIKE YAVAPAI COUNTY WHERE YOU HAVE EXPONENTIAL GROWTH OVER A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME,

[01:40:01]

SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE TEND TO LAG, AND YOU SEE THAT BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THE ROADS.

PUBLIC SAFETY IS ONE OF THOSE THAT TENDS TO LAG.

IF YOU WAIT TO ADD CAPACITY TO THINGS THAT YOU KNOW THAT YOU'RE GOING TO NEED UNTIL THERE'S A PROBLEM, YOU NEVER GET CAUGHT UP.

THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT, IS CONTINUING TO BUILD ON OUR CAPACITY TO MEET THE FUTURE DEMANDS WITHOUT WAITING UNTIL WE'RE SO FAR BEHIND THE CURVE THAT IT WOULD TAKE AN EXPONENTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY AND A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME TO MEET THOSE NEEDS.

THAT'S WHAT THIS APPROPRIATION IS ABOUT.

>> THANK YOU, SHERIFF.

>> I'D JUST LIKE TO CONCUR WITH CHAIR MALLORY.

THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO.

IT IS CERTAINLY APPRECIATED, AND THIS GRANT MONEY IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. AGAIN, THANK YOU.

>> MADAM CHAIR, SUPERVISOR COMPTON, IT'S A TEAM EFFORT, AND OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE OTHER PUBLIC SAFETY PARTNERS IN THE AREAS AS WELL AS THE STATE REPRESENTATION MAKES IT ALL POSSIBLE. THANK YOU.

>> DO YOU KNOW WHAT I ALWAYS TOLD PEOPLE? I SAID, I ALWAYS TELL THEM YOU LIVE IN YAVAPAI COUNTY.

YOU UNDERSTAND WHO YAVAPAI COUNTY IS.

WE ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT.

WE SUPPORT EVERYTHING THAT IS ALL ABOUT OUR GREAT COUNTRY.

>> I JUST HAD A QUESTION. YOU SAID THIS IS SEED MONEY, 2 MILLION BUCKS.

IS THAT GOING TO COVER THIS YEAR, OR IS THAT GOING TO COVER MOVING ON? HOW MUCH DO YOU SEE THIS COST IN THE FUTURE? BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS ON IS BUILDING A LOT OF FACILITIES THAT REALLY NEED TO BE BUILT.

WE JUST GOT TO FIGURE OUT IF WE CAN'T AFFORD IT.

IS THIS GRANT THAT WE'RE GETTING GOING TO ACTUALLY NOT JUST GIVE US SEED MONEY, BUT GIVE US FUTURE OPERATIONS MONEY.

>> WELL, MADAM CHAIR, SUPERVISOR COMPTON, IT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

IT'S ALWAYS A CONCERN.

I'VE ALWAYS TAKEN THIS PHILOSOPHY WITH GRANTS, APPROPRIATIONS, THESE TYPES OF THINGS.

TO ANSWER THE FIRST PART OF YOUR QUESTION, SENATOR FINCHEM IS COMMITTED TO CONTINUING GETTING STATE APPROPRIATIONS TO FUND THE INTELLIGENCE CENTER.

WE'VE BEEN SEEING THAT IN OTHER AREAS, LOCAL BORDER SUPPORT, WHATNOT.

WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF MONEY THAT'S FUNDING A LOT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.

BUT HERE'S THE BOTTOM LINE.

WE GO OUT, WE PURSUE MONEY FOR THESE THINGS THAT WE BELIEVE THAT WE NEED, BUT YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE THEM.

YOU BUILD THEM, YOU PUT THEM TOGETHER, YOU WORK WITH YOUR PARTNERS, YOU COLLABORATE, YOU BRING IN THE MONEY WHERE YOU CAN BRING IT IN, BUT YOU HAVE PROOF OF CONCEPT.

YOU HAVE TO PROVE THAT IT ACTUALLY WORKS, THAT IT ACTUALLY MATTERS.

THAT'S THE FIRST THING THAT HAS TO HAPPEN.

IF IT DOESN'T WORK, THEN IT SHOULD BE SENT AWAY.

WE SHOULD DO AWAY WITH IT, NOT FUND IT ANYMORE LIKE THAT.

YOU ALWAYS CONTINUE TO GO OUT AND GET THIS EXTRA MONEY.

IF THE EXTRA MONEY OR THE MONEY THAT COMES IN, DOESN'T HAPPEN THEN THAT'S A CONVERSATION THAT I THINK THE SHERIFF OR ANY OF THE ELECTED OFFICIALS NEEDS TO HAVE WITH THE BOARD AT THAT TIME.

IS THIS TURNED INTO SOMETHING THAT IS AN ACTUAL PRIORITY? DO WE NEED TO DO IT? DO WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO FUND IT? IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN IT'S A NEGOTIATION? HOW MUCH ARE WE GOING TO FUND? WHAT'S IT GOING TO LOOK LIKE? BUT ALL THESE OTHER THINGS HAVE TO HAPPEN FIRST BEFORE YOU CAN REALLY ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

I KNOW YOU GUYS GET HOOKED FOR WE GOT A GRANT, AND IT RUNS OUT IN THREE YEARS, AND NOW IT'S AN INCREASE TO THE COUNTY'S BUDGET.

I DON'T NECESSARILY LOOK AT IT THAT WAY.

WE NEED TO KNOW THAT IT'S WORTHWHILE VALUABLE AND ADDING VALUE TO THE COUNTY BEFORE WE EVEN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

>> WELL, YOU'VE PROVEN THAT IT ADDS VALUE.

I LOOK AT IT LIKE I NEED A NEW SET OF TIRES, BUT I CAN'T AFFORD A NEW SET OF TIRES.

WE JUST GOT TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT ALL WORK AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ASK THE PUBLIC TO SUPPORT.

>> 100%. WHEN WE ALL AGREE THAT SOMETHING IS IMPORTANT, AND WE WANT TO GO TOGETHER AND ASK THE PUBLIC TO SUPPORT IT, I'LL BE RIGHT THERE WITH YOU.

>> GREAT. THANK YOU.

>> [INAUDIBLE], CHAIR, THANK YOU FOR THIS EXPLANATION.

I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE HAVING AS MUCH INFORMATION AS THEY CAN GET THEIR HANDS ON TO HELP SOLVE CRIMES AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

UNLIKE CAPTAIN JOHNSON, I'M NOT A TECHNOLOGICAL WIZARD.

>> NONE OF, SIR.

>> BUT AN ISSUE DID ARISE IN SEDONA WITH THE USE OF FLOCK CAMERAS FOR LICENSE PLATE READING.

[01:45:04]

THE ONE CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT THE POSSIBILITY THAT NEFARS OR FOREIGN ENTITIES COULD ALSO BE ACCESSING THIS INTELLIGENCE THROUGH A TECHNOLOGICAL BACK DOOR.

AGAIN, I'M NOT THE EXPERT, BUT I JUST WONDERED, WHAT YOUR PLAN AND HOW TO KEEP ALL OF THAT INFORMATION REALLY SECURE.

I TRUST THAT YOUR INTERNAL OPERATIONS HAVE GOOD BACKSTOPS TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF IT'S USED APPROPRIATELY INTERNALLY.

BUT MAYBE WE CAN CHAT ABOUT THAT ANOTHER TIME.

>> WELL, I COULD JUST SAY ONE QUICK COMMENT, MADAM CHAIR, SUPERVISOR CHECK.

MY PLAN FOR PREVENTING BAD ACTORS FROM ACCESSING OUR INTELLIGENCE IS TO PARTNER WITH EMBRY-RIDDLE UNIVERSITY AND THEIR CYBERSECURITY TEAM TO ADVISE AND HELP US BUILD THE FIREWALLS AND DO THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO.

THE SITUATION WITH FLOCK AND SEDONA, I UNDERSTAND BOTH SIDES OF THAT.

THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY.

THERE WERE SOME PROBLEMS WITH THE CONTRACT, AND THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT WERE GOING ON.

THAT, HOWEVER, IS AN INCREDIBLE TOOL THAT HAS HELPED SOLVE SOME MAJOR CRIMES AND PUT SOME REALLY BAD PEOPLE IN JAIL.

WHOLE OTHER CONVERSATION, BUT I RESPECT WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THAT.

>> WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'LL GLADLY MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 9.

>> CAN WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE.

>> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

>> HI.

>> ACTION ITEM NUMBER 9 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> SHERIFF, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR EVERYTHING AND TO ALL OF YOUR DEPARTMENTS.

WE ALWAYS ARE HERE FOR YOU.

>> THANK ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT. TAKE CARE.

>> BEFORE WE GO INTO THE HEARINGS, WE'D LIKE TO TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK.

ACTUALLY, WE'LL JUST GET BACK HERE BY 11 O'CLOCK.

IT'S 10:47. THANK YOU.

WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GET BACK INTO OUR MEETING.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE OFF THE AGENDA JUST A LITTLE BIT ON THE HEARINGS.

[10. Public Works - Approve Resolution No. 2169 regarding the Abandonment of a portion of the public right-of-way for Granite Gardens Loop in the Granite Gardens Unit Two subdivision in Prescott. (District 4 - Supervisor Kuknyo)]

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ITEM NUMBER 10 UP TO THE FRONT.

GET THAT ONE OUT OF THE WAY AND WE'LL GET RIGHT BACK TO WHERE WE NEED TO BE. GOOD MORNING, ROGER.

>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR MALLORY, VICE CHAIR COMPTON, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

ROGER MCCORMACK, DIRECTOR OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.

BEFORE YOU TODAY, WE HAVE A HEARING ITEM TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2169.

THIS IS REGARDING THE ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY FOR GRANITE GARDENS LOOP.

THIS IS IN THE GRANITE GARDENS UNIT 2 SUBDIVISION IN PRESCOTT, WHICH IS IN SUPERVISOR KUKNYO DISTRICT 4.

THE WAY IN WHICH WE ARE DISPOSING OF THIS PUBLIC OR PROPOSING THAT THIS WOULD BE DISPOSED IS BY THE ABANDONMENT PROCESS.

THE REASON BEING IS BECAUSE THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR NORTH GRANITE LOOP ROAD WAS ACQUIRED BY DEDICATION OF A SUBDIVISION PLAT.

THEREFORE, THAT IS THE APPROPRIATE METHOD IN WHICH WE SHOULD ABANDON THIS.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH RESOLUTION NUMBER 2046 AND A.R.S 28-6701, MR. RIORDAN HAS SUBMITTED A PETITION FOR THE ABANDONMENT OF THAT RIGHT OF WAY ON GRANITE GARDENS LOOP.

THE REASON FOR THE PETITION IS TO COMBINE THE TWO PARCELS.

HE OWNS THE PARCELS THAT ARE ACROSS FROM EACH OTHER ON THIS ROADWAY.

YOU'D LIKE TO COMBINE THOSE WHICH ARE SEPARATED BY THIS RIGHT OF WAY SO THAT HE CAN DO SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO HIS DRIVEWAY.

THIS IS A VICINITY MAP.

RIGHT HERE, YOU HAVE THE DELL'S AREA.

YOU CAN SEE THE TWO LAKES WATSON AND LAKE HERE.

IT'S RIGHT THERE LOCATED BY THAT BLUE STAR.

THIS IS A CLOSE UP OF WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.

HERE IS GRANITE GARDENS LOOP ROAD.

[01:50:01]

THIS IS A NON-MAINTAINED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

THE COUNTY DOES NOT MAINTAIN THIS ROADWAY THROUGH HERE.

HE WOULD BE PROPOSING THAT WE ABANDON THIS HALF OF THE RIGHT AWAY THAT ABUTS THIS PARCEL, AND THEN THIS HALF OF THE RIGHT AWAY OVER HERE THAT, BUT OTHER PARCEL ON THIS SIDE.

THIS IS JUST AN AERIAL VIEW TO GET A LITTLE BIT OF BETTER BEARING ON WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.

YOU HAVE HIS RESIDENCE RIGHT HERE, THIS IS HIS DRIVEWAY THAT GOES UP THROUGH THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY HERE.

HE DOES OWN THIS PIECE ON THIS SIDE.

THERE'S A LOT OF GRANITE BOULDERS IN THIS AREA THAT REALLY MAKE THIS.

YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING ROAD STOPS ON THIS END AROUND THIS AREA, AND THEN IT GOES TO THIS POINT HERE.

THIS IS SOME CHALLENGING TERRAIN THROUGH THIS AREA AND REALLY WOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR A ROADWAY TO GO THROUGH THIS AREA.

THIS IS PROBABLY WHAT I WANT TO SPEND THE BULK OF THE DISCUSSION HERE ON TODAY.

AT THE TIME OF MR. RIORDAN'S INQUIRY ABOUT THE ABANDONMENT, THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DEPENDS HEAVILY UPON THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE TO DO EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE ABANDONING.

TALKING WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, THEY INITIALLY VALUED THIS PROPERTY AT THIS NUMBER RIGHT HERE, $28,761, WHICH IN TALKING WITH MR. RIORDAN, HE WAS ABLE TO WORK WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ON THAT VALUATION AND BASED UPON THE TERRAIN AND THE SLOPES AND THE CONDITIONS OF THE AREA, WORK ON A REDUCED VALUE THAT THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE AGREED TO OF THE $14,671.

THAT REDUCED VALUE IS WHAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT GOES OFF OF WHEN WE COME BEFORE THE BOARD, AS FAR AS OUR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD.

HISTORICALLY, THAT HAS BEEN WHAT THE BOARD HAS UTILIZED WHEN DETERMINING WHAT THE PRICE SHOULD BE IN RELATION TO THE ABANDONMENT OF THIS PROPERTY.

WITH THAT SAID, MR. RIORDAN DID GO OUT AND PROCURE ON HIS OWN DOLLAR CERTIFIED APPRAISER, RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE APPRAISER, THAT LOOKED AT COMPARABLE VALUATIONS WITHIN THE AREA.

WE HAVE A COPY OF THAT APPRAISAL.

THAT WAS INCLUDED WITH THE AGENDA ITEM.

THROUGH THAT APPRAISAL, THEY WERE ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT THE VALUATION COULD BE $8,600.

THAT WAS THE SUMMARY IN WHICH THAT APPRAISER GAVE FOR THEIR REPORT.

MR. RIORDAN SUBMITTED THAT TO THE COUNTY IN SUPPORT OF A REDUCED REQUEST THAT HE HAS AS PART OF THIS ABANDONMENT.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, AND MR. RIORDAN'S OPINION, HE SUGGESTS THAT THE VALUE OF THE RIGHT AWAY IS ACTUALLY MUCH LESS JUST BECAUSE OF THE TRAIN AND THE ROCKS AND THE DIFFICULTY THAT THAT WOULD BE FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO USE.

IN HIS OPINION, HE'S REQUESTING A FURTHER REDUCTION DOWN TO $5,000 FOR THE VALUATION OF THE PROPERTY.

THAT WILL BE SOMETHING IN WHICH IF THERE'S ACTION TODAY IN WHICH YOU DECIDE TO APPROVE THE ABANDONMENT, WE WOULD NEED TO INCLUDE WHAT YOU GUYS FEEL WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE VALUE FOR THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY.

>> HE SHOULD GET ANOTHER APPRAISAL, AND MAYBE WE'LL OWE HIM MONEY TO TAKE IT.

[LAUGHTER]

>> BUT LIKE I SAID, THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, JUST TO BE CLEAR, IN THE PAST AND WORKING WITH THE BOARD, HEAVILY DEPENDS UPON THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE FOR THE EVALUATION, AND THAT'S WHAT WE USUALLY GO WITH AS FAR AS WHAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BRINGS BEFORE YOU GUYS.

>> ROGER, JUST TO CONFIRM, THAT'S HOW OTHER CITIZENS HAVE BOUGHT.

>> CORRECT.

>> PROPERTY IS THROUGH THE EVALUATION OF WHAT THE ASSESSOR HAS GIVEN US?

>> EVEN THOUGH THE COUNTY WOULD BE ABANDONING THE OWNERSHIP IN RELATION TO PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY FOR ROAD PURPOSES, ANY EXISTING UTILITY EASEMENTS THAT ARE IN THAT AREA IN RELATION TO WATER, SEWER, ELECTRIC, THAT THING, THOSE WOULD CONTINUE ON AFTER THE ABANDONMENT.

[01:55:03]

THOSE ARE NOT DISSOLVED.

OUR FINAL ANALYSIS HERE IN RELATION TO THE ABANDONMENT WOULD ALLOW THE PETITIONER TO ACCOMPLISH HIS GOAL OF COMBINING HIS PARCELS AND IMPROVING HIS DRIVEWAY.

IT WOULD NOT DENY ANY OTHER PROPERTY OWNER IN THE AREA LEGAL ACCESS TO HIS OR HER PROPERTY, AND IT WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH ANY CURRENT OR FUTURE COUNTY ROAD MAINTENANCE PLANS BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A COUNTY-MAINTAINED ROADWAY.

IT'S JUST A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY THAT'S RESERVED FOR THE PUBLIC'S USE.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO GRANTING OF THIS PETITION, AND IF SO, THEN WE WOULD BE APPROVING RESOLUTION 2169 AS PART OF THAT.

THE ONLY CONDITION THAT WE HAVE IS THAT THE PETITIONER COMPLETE THE PROCESS, WHICH INCLUDES RECORDING A PLATE OF THE ABANDONMENT WITH THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE WITHIN 120 DAYS.

THEN, OF COURSE, PAYING THE FEE THAT'S INVOLVED.

THEN IF THAT'S NOT COMPLETED IN 120 DAYS, THEN THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD AND APPLY AGAIN.

I WILL MENTION THAT THE APPLICANT, MR. RIORDAN, IS IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY.

IF THERE'S FURTHER QUESTIONS IN RELATION TO THE VALUATION OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, HE'S AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU, ROGER. I KNOW THIS IS A HEARING, AND SO AT THIS TIME, I WOULD ASK THE VICE CHAIR, DO YOU HAVE ANY GREEN SHEETS ON THIS ITEM?

>> NO, CHAIR.

>> HANK YOU. CLERK OF THE BOARD, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER EMAILS OR ANY COMMUNICATIONS THAT'S COME THROUGH YOUR OFFICE?

>> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO NEIL, IT'S IN YOUR DISTRICT.

DO YOU HAVE SOME QUESTIONS?

>> I JUST TOLD THE BOARD THAT THIS AREA HAS GOT A FEW OF THESE THINGS GOING ON, WHERE OVER TIME, WHEN THEY DID THE DEVELOPMENTS, WE HAVE COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAYS, COUNTY EASEMENTS, AND PEOPLE ARE WONDERING WHY WE HAVEN'T TURNED THEM INTO ROADS OR WHATNOT, AND IT'S A LOT BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT NEVER REALLY CAME AND HAPPENED LIKE IT DID.

THE ONLY THING I SAW IS I THINK HE HIRED AN APPRAISER, AND HE'S WELCOME TO SPEAK ON THIS, AND THE APPRAISER SAID IT WAS 8,600.

THAT APPRAISER SHOULD HAVE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT DEVELOPMENT COSTS, EVERYTHING THAT WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT LAND.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT DROPPING IT TO 5,000, BUT IF A REAL ESTATE APPRAISER CERTIFIED SAID 8,600, I THINK THAT'D BE AN ACCEPTABLE VALUE FOR THIS PROPERTY.

I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM HIM IF HE'D LIKE TO SPEAK.

>> IF YOU WANT TO COME ON UP, MR. RIORDAN.

>> GOOD MORNING. GREG ARDEN, THANKS FOR HEARING THIS.

IT'S JUST GOING TO GIVE ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO MARRY MY PARCELS TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE ACREAGE AND MORE MARKETABILITY FOR MY HOME.

ALSO, WHAT I FOUND OUT IT WILL REDUCE MY PROPERTY TAXES.

ULTIMATELY, IT'S A WIN FOR THE COUNTY BECAUSE THIS ROAD WILL NEVER BE TAKEN CARE OF ANYWAY. THERE IS A FINGER.

THE MAPS ARE NOT UP THERE, BUT THERE'S GRANITE GARDENS LOOP IS A COMPLETE DIRT ROAD, AND THEN IT TURNS INTO TAR.

THE COUNTY DOES TAKE CARE OF IT.

I'M GOING TO BE TAKING CARE OF THAT EVENTUALLY WITH THE RESIDENTS WHO OWN THOSE PROPERTIES TO TRY TO GET THAT TARD AND SEALED AND SHIPPED.

I'M JUST TRYING TO IMPROVE THE AREA WHERE I LIVE.

>> WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT AGREEING WITH THE APPRAISER?

>> I THINK IT'S A LITTLE HIGH. I AGREE WITH YOU, CHRIS, THAT CONSIDERING WHAT IT IS, THOSE BIG GRANITE ROCKS, AND IT GOES TO A RAVINE DOWN TO THE LOWER PARCELS, IT WOULD BE VERY CHALLENGING FOR ME TO PUT ANYTHING THROUGH THAT.

MARKETABILITY AND USABILITY IS REALLY ZERO.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS?

>> WELL, I WOULD JUST SAY IT'S NOT ANYTHING, BY ANY MEANS.

I'M JUST GOING TO STICK WITH WHAT THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE CAME UP WITH, BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN OUR PROCEDURES.

FOR ME, THAT'S JUST WHERE I'M AT. GO AHEAD.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. VICE CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

JUST FOR CLARIFICATION'S SAKE.

WHAT ROGER STATED IS CERTAINLY TRUE, THAT HISTORICALLY, THE VALUE SET BY THE ASSESSORS' OFFICE HAS BEEN THE VALUE RELIED UPON BY THE BOARD AND UTILIZED FOR PURPOSES OF DISPOSING OF RIGHT AWAY.

I WOULD JUST NOTE, JUST SO THE BOARD HAS COMPLETE INFORMATION, THAT THE RESOLUTION ON THIS SUBJECT ADOPTED BY THE BOARD ALLOWS THE PERSON REQUESTING THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY TO SUBMIT AN APPRAISAL.

SPECIFICALLY SPELLED OUT IN THE RESOLUTION THAT THAT OPTION IS AVAILABLE, SO TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT INFLUENCES THE BOARD'S DECISION,

[02:00:03]

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BOARD WAS AWARE OF THAT FACT.

>> I KNOW, I UNDERSTAND.

>> IS THE ASSESSOR HERE? NO. BECAUSE I THINK WHEN YOU'RE SELLING PROPERTY, WHICH IS BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING, WE'RE ABANDONING IT, BUT WE'RE SELLING IT TO YOU.

THAT'S DIFFERENT WHEN IT COMES TO MARKETABILITY, WHICH IS WHY I THINK WHEN YOU HAD THAT APPRAISER COME IN. HE'S LOOKING AT IT.

HE KNOWS, LIKE, WHAT WOULD THEY SELL ON THE OPEN MARKET? HE'S LOOKING AT COMPS IN THE AREA.

HE'S LOOKING AT USABILITY.

I WOULD THINK THAT THE COUNTY NUMBER, I THINK, WOULD BE A LITTLE HIGH, CONSIDERING THE WORK THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE, THE ROCKS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE BLASTED, THE WORK THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO IN.

I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION GOING THE OTHER WAY, BUT WE'LL SEE WHAT THE REST OF THE BOARD HAS TO SAY.

>> IT IS A HEARING. I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU HAD ANY MORE YOU'D LIKE TO ASK.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT ABOUT I THINK IT WAS JANUARY OF 24, I BOUGHT THAT WEST SIDE PARCEL THAT IS JUST MASSIVE BOULDERS FOR 15,000.

TO PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS HALF OF THAT SIZE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY. IF WE TOOK.

>> GO AHEAD, SIR.

>> NOW, IF WE JUST LOOKED AT IT APPLES TO APPLES, SAME ROCK, SAME MARKETABILITY, SAME USAGE, HALF TO HALF, THAT'D BE SEVEN GRAND OR 7,500 BUCKS.

>> DID YOU PAY THE PRICE ON THAT, ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE?

>> NO. THAT WAS A PRIVATE PARTY.

>> OH, IT WAS PRIVATE.

>> JANUARY 24, I BELIEVE.

>> I'M SORRY, WHAT YEAR?

>> MADAM CHAIR, I'M COMFORTABLE, HOWEVER WE WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS, BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY ON THE RECORD THAT SOME PEOPLE VALUE THOSE GRANITE DELLS.

>> I DO, AS WELL.

>> I THINK THAT THEY ARE INHERENTLY OF VALUE.

THERE'S A LOT OF OPEN SPACE EFFORTS, AND DOLLARS HAVE GONE TO PRESERVE THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE VERY SPECIAL, AND LUCKY YOU GET TO LIVE AMONG THEM.

>> SUPERVISOR JENKINS, I UNDERSTAND. I'M SORRY.

I CAN'T ALWAYS SEE THAT HAND RAISED UP THERE.

I JUST GOT THE MESSAGE THAT YOU HAVE A QUESTION. GO AHEAD, PLEASE.

>> NO WORRIES, CHAIR. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

I GUESS THIS IS A QUESTION REGARDING THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, AND IN MY MIND, WHAT I'M TRYING TO GRASP IS THAT THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE VALUES PROPERTY DIFFERENTLY THAN A REALTOR, OBVIOUSLY.

HOW DID THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE'S ORIGINAL ESTIMATE FROM 28,000 DROP ALMOST IN HALF? IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE STAFF THAT COULD PUT SOME PERSPECTIVE ON SUCH A HUGE DECREASE ON THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT? > I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH JEFF MCNEESE, AND HE WAS A STANDARD $3 AND CHANGE PER SQUARE FOOT, AND THAT'S HOW THEY CAME WITH THAT VALUATION.

THEN THEY CAME BACK AND SAID, WELL, WE THINK IT'S HALF THAT, REALLY.

THAT WAS THE ESSENCE OF THE CONVERSATION.

THERE WASN'T ANY FURTHER PROGRAMMING; IT WAS A STRAIGHT CALCULATION.

>> THEY SAID HALF THE 28?

>> THEY CAME BACK AND SAID IT WAS LIKE 1.4 SOMETHING PER SQUARE FOOT.

I HAVE IT IN AN EMAIL I COULD SHARE WITH.

>> NO. THAT'S FINE.

>> I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.

>> THE REASON WHY REALLY WASN'T CLEAR.

THEY JUST SAID THEY CAME BACK AND RECONSIDERED.

>> ROGER, MAYBE YOU COULD HELP US UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT, PLEASE.

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN REALLY SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE.

BUT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THERE WAS TWO DIFFERENT AREAS.

ONE'S ADJACENT TO THE PARCEL ON THE WEST SIDE, AND ONE'S ADJACENT TO THE PARCEL ON THE EAST SIDE.

IN LOOKING AT THOSE TWO AREAS, THEY ACTUALLY HAD DIFFERENT PER-SQUARE-FOOT VALUES ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, ORIGINALLY.

ONE WAS $5.18 PER SQUARE FOOT, THE OTHER WAS $2.75 PER SQUARE FOOT.

THEN THEY REDUCED THAT FROM $5.18 DOWN TO 2.29, AND THEN ALSO TO $1.68.

BASED ON THE CONVERSATIONS I THINK THEY HAD WITH MR. RIORDAN, THEY REALIZED THAT PERHAPS THE INITIAL EVALUATION THAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT FOR COMPARABLES WITHIN THAT AREA THAT THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE USES TO DO THOSE EVALUATIONS WAS A BIT HIGHER THAN WHAT THEY THOUGHT IT SHOULD BE AFTER THE CONVERSATIONS WITH MR. RIORDAN.

THAT'S WHEN THEY WERE ADJUSTED DOWN TO THE 14,000 THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER.

[02:05:07]

>> THEY ADJUSTED IT DOWN TO THE 14,000, THEN WE WENT OUT AND GOT ANOTHER EVALUATION.

DID WE HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE ASSESSOR REGARDING THE $8,000 THAT CAME BACK?

>> WELL, AS MARTY WAS SAYING OVER THERE.

THE RESOLUTION DOES ALLOW FOR THE APPLICANT TO DO AN INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS OF THE EVALUATION, AND SO THE BOARD CAN CONSIDER THOSE EVALUATIONS AS PART OF WHAT YOU'RE DECIDING HERE TODAY IN RELATION TO WHAT SHOULD BE COMPENSATED TO THE COUNTY FOR THE PROPERTY.

THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, WHEN THEY LANDED ON THEIR 14,000, THAT'S WHAT THEY GAVE PUBLIC WORKS IN RELATION TO THE VALUATION THAT THEY GAVE TO US.

BUT THE PROCESS DOES STILL ALLOW FOR THE APPLICANT TO GET A SEPARATE APPRAISAL IF THEY STILL DON'T AGREE WITH IT.

>> WHAT I GUESS I'M TRYING TO ASK IS, DID YOU LET THEM KNOW THAT THIS OTHER APPRAISAL THAT WAS COME BACK WAS NOW AT 8,000? WAS THERE A COMMUNICATION?

>> THAT I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO.

I'D HAVE TO ASK OUR RIGHT AWAY SPECIALIST, JEFF MCNEESE, TO SEE IF HE HAD THOSE CONVERSATIONS AFTERWARDS.

I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT SUPERVISOR. CHAIR MALLORY, I'M SORRY.

>> I WOULD JUST SAY THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE PEOPLE'S MONEY IN THE PEOPLE'S LAND.

BUT TO THE POINT, WHENEVER YOU'RE TRYING TO SELL SOMETHING, WHAT IS IT WORTH? WELL, A MAN JUST BOUGHT THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR FOR 15 GRAND, THAT IS TWICE THE SIZE.

I GET WHERE THE APPRAISAL CAME FROM.

IN THE LOWER APPRAISAL.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO KNOWS THE DISTRICT AND WHATEVER HE'D LIKE TO DO, BUT I THINK HE JUST BOUGHT THE PROPERTY A LITTLE BIT AGO, AND WE HAVE AN APPRAISAL, AND THAT'S JUST MY VIEW ON.

>> I GUESS THAT I THINK FROM THIS POINT ON, MAYBE IN THE FUTURE, AS WE DO THESE.

I THINK THAT I'LL JUST SAY IT ON MY PART.

I THINK I'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND TALK TO THE OFFICE A LITTLE MORE BEFORE WE ACTUALLY HAVE, BECAUSE I'M VERY CURIOUS TO KNOW, WE WENT FROM 28, THEN WE WENT TO 14.

JUST BACK AND FORTH ON THE NUMBERS.

I DON'T SEE ANY, LIKE REAL, AND THEN HE WENT OUT AND GOT SOMEONE ELSE AND CAME UP WITH THIS.

THAT'S PUT A BIT OF A [OVERLAPPING].

>> WE CAN DEFINITELY FOLLOW UP WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE AND CIRCLE BACK WITH YOU IN RELATION TO SOME OF THAT HISTORY AND WHY THEY REDUCED IT DOWN LIKE THEY DID.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT. I'D LIKE TO KNOW IT NOT ONLY FOR THIS POINT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN ACTION HERE, BUT I'M TALKING FOR THE FUTURE.

WHERE WE ALL OF A SUDDEN 28, WE DROPPED DOWN TO 14, THEN THIS GENTLEMAN GOES OUT.

HE DOES HIS FOOTWORK, AND WHAT HAVE YOU, AND NOW WE'RE AT EIGHT.

BUT THAT'S FINE. WE'RE GOOD.

WE'RE HERE NOW. WE'VE ARRIVED.

I THINK UNLESS THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM.

I WOULD CONSIDER THIS A CLOSED HEARING AT THIS POINT, AND THEN AT THAT TIME, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2169 REGARDING THE ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR GRANITE GARDENS LOOP AND THE GRANITE GARDEN UNIT TWO SUBDIVISION IN PRESCOTT AT THE APPRAISED VALUE OF $8,600.

CAN YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> HEARING ITEM NUMBER TEN HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,600.

>> HAVE A GOOD DAY. ITEM NUMBER 2, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, APPROVE A NON-TRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT FOR A PERIOD OF EXCUSE ME.

I AM GOING ON. WAIT. I'M SORRY. ITEM NUMBER 1.

YES. THANK YOU. THAT WAS 10.

THERE WAS A ONE IN 10, BUT YEAH, WE'RE GOING OVER.

>> GOT IT. NEVER MIND. HI, MATT.

ITEM NUMBER 1, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES [LAUGHTER]. I HAVE TO LAUGH.

[1. Development Services - Approve minor text amendments to Section 1.1 (Comprehensive Plan Purpose) and Section 2.6 (Land Use Categories) of the Yavapai County Comprehensive Plan 2032 to incorporate statutory requirements in compliance with A.R.S. §11-804(E).]

I'M SO SORRY. IT'S MY FAVORITE APPROVED MINOR TEXT AMENDMENTS.

YES. HI, MATT.

I WASN'T TRYING TO SKIP OVER YOU BY ANY MEANS. FORGIVE ME.

[02:10:04]

>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR MALLORY, VICE CHAIR COMPTON AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

MY NAME IS MATT BLAKE.

YOUR PLANNING MANAGER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

THIS REQUEST COMES TO YOU FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF FOR CONSIDERATION OF TWO MINOR AMENDMENTS PROPOSING TO ADD NEW LANGUAGE TO SECTION 1.1, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PURPOSE, AND SECTION 2.6 LAND USE CATEGORIES TO INCORPORATE THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH ARS 11-804E.

>> THOSE ARE THE TWO SECTIONS.

IT'S TWO MINOR AMENDMENTS REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATUTE.

A QUICK RECAP.

WHEN THIS ITEM APPEARED BEFORE THE COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 18, 2025, THE MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

AT THE MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 1ST, 2025, THE BOARD VOTED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO BE HEARD AT THE NOVEMBER 5TH MEETING, WHICH BRINGS US TO TODAY.

I WILL NOTE THAT CHAIRMAN STEWART WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS IN ATTENDANCE, IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION AT THAT MEETING.

GIVEN THAT STAFF PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED MUCH OF THIS APPLICATION TO YOU ON OCTOBER 1ST, I'M WONDERING IF THE BOARD, CHAIRWOMAN, WOULD LIKE TO SKIP AHEAD TO THE PROPOSED MINOR AMENDMENTS.

>> I WILL REACH OUT TO MY FELLOW COLLEAGUES.

I'VE GOT A THUMBS UP HERE.

WE'RE ON IT. MOVE AHEAD.

>> BACK ON THE FAST TRACK, SINCE WE'VE COVERED A LOT OF GROUND PREVIOUSLY.

THIS IS THE FIRST OF THE TWO MINOR AMENDMENTS.

YOU'LL SEE IN BOLD AT THE BOTTOM, THE LANGUAGE THAT'S NOT IN BOLD IS THE EXISTING CURRENT LANGUAGE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGARDING SECTION 1.1, THE PURPOSE.

THESE ARE KIND OF YOUR INTRODUCTORY STATEMENTS.

THE LANGUAGE IN BOLD IS THE LANGUAGE WE'RE PROPOSING TO ADD.

WHICH IS REALLY MEANT IF YOU READ THAT SENTENCE, ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES ARE DESCRIBED, SECTION 2.6.

THAT'S JUST DIRECTING THE READER OF WHERE TO GO FOR MORE INFORMATION, WHICH ACTUALLY BRINGS US TO THE NEXT SLIDE, REALLY THE MEAT OF THE PROPOSAL FOR THE AMENDMENTS.

HERE, NOW THAT BRINGS US TO SECTION 2.6 REGARDING LAND USE CATEGORIES, WHICH USING OUR OWN LANGUAGE, VETTED INTERNALLY WITHIN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, IS MEANT TO INCORPORATE THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATUTE, ARS 11804, SUBSECTION E. THERE'S THE LANGUAGE IN BOLD.

I CAN READ IT. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INCORPORATES ARS 11-804E, AND ALL OF THE FOLLOWING LAND USE CATEGORIES ARE SUBJECT TO IT.

ALL PARCELS DESCRIBED AS OPEN SPACE, RECREATION, CONSERVATION, OR AGRICULTURE, INCLUDING THE CATEGORIES, AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURAL HOSPITALITY, AND OPEN SPACE.

CONSERVATION RECREATION MAY ALSO BE USED TO ALLOW AT LEAST ONE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING PER ACRE AS REQUIRED BY ARIZONA LAW.

SUCH USE MAY BE CONDUCTED CONSISTENTLY WITH THE YAVAPAI COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING ORDINANCES PROCEDURES AND ZONING DISTRICTS.

LAND OWNERS MAY CONTACT YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO ADDRESS ANY ISSUES RELATED TO ARS 11-804E.

INCORPORATION OF THIS LANGUAGE REALLY DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING BECAUSE THE STATUTE IS WHAT IT IS.

SO AN APPLICANT COULD MOVE FORWARD WITH A REQUEST FOR REZONING TODAY.

THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DO SO TOMORROW WITH OR WITHOUT THIS LANGUAGE INCORPORATED INTO THE PLAN.

THAT BRINGS US TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION.

WE CONDUCTED THE NORMAL PROCESS FOR AN AMENDMENT.

WE REACHED OUT INTERNALLY TO THE FIRE DISTRICTS EXTERNALLY, COMMUNITY MEMBERS, YCC, OTHERS.

WE HAVE AN EMAIL LIST THAT WE SEND THESE OUT TO FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, PUBLICATION, COUNTY NEWSPAPER, WEBSITE, ONLINE SURVEY.

AGAIN, TYPICAL PROCESS THAT WE DO FOR THESE.

WE DID RECEIVE ONE COMMENT THROUGH OUR ONLINE SURVEY 123.

IT WAS A COMMENT OF OPPOSITION FROM THE BEAVER CREEK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, WHICH WAS FORWARDED TO THE BOARD, I BELIEVE TWO DAYS AGO, SO THAT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO YOU.

IN SUMMARY, THE REQUEST FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF IS FOR APPROVAL OF MINOR TEXT AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 1.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PURPOSE, AND SECTION 2.6 LAND USE CATEGORIES WITH ADDITIONAL CHANGES AS PROPOSED BY STAFF TO INCORPORATE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH ARS 11-804 SUBSECTION E. THE ONLY CHANGE

[02:15:06]

THAT WAS MADE WAS AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

IT WAS JUST TO ADD TWO WORDS AGRICULTURAL HOSPITALITY THAT DIDN'T SHOW UP IN THE LEGAL AD.

>> WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MATT.

AGAIN, HEARING ITEM, VICE-CHAIR, DO WE HAVE ANY GREEN SHEETS?

>> NO, CHAIR.

>> THE CLERK OF THE BOARD, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMUNICATIONS FROM YOUR OFFICE?

>> THE BOARD RECEIVED ONE COMMENT, THE SAME COMMENT REFERENCED BY MR. BLAKE.

>> FANTASTIC. WE'RE IN THE AUDIENCE.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM RIGHT NOW THAT WE ARE HEARING? I DON'T SEE ANYTHING. THE BOARD. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY? WELL, THIS HEARING IS CLOSED, SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ACCEPT.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT HEARING ITEM NUMBER 1 FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO APPROVE MINOR TEXT AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 11, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PURPOSE IN SECTION 2.6 LAND USE CATEGORIES OF THE YAVAPAI COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2032 TO INCORPORATE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH ARS 11-804E.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. WE CALL FOR THE VOTE.

>> VICE-CHAIR COMPTON?

>> HEARING ITEM NUMBER 1, IT'S BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> THANK YOU. NOW I'M GOING TO GO TO ITEM 2.

[2. Development Services - Approve a nontransferable Use Permit, for a period of 5 years, for APN 205-17-259, to allow for the long-term occupancy of an RV, and to allow for a storage shed and interior fencing before establishing a primary residence on a 1.71-acre parcel, subject to the conditions of approval. Owner/Applicant: Moby Prather & Hiedi Hart. Application No. PLA25-000034. Located in the community of Wilhoit. (District 1 - Supervisor Compton)]

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

MATT, YOU'RE UP AGAIN.

>> GOOD MORNING AGAIN, CHAIR MALLORY, VICE-CHAIR COMPTON, AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

MY NAME IS MATT BLAKE, PLANNING MANAGER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PRESENTING THE APPLICATION FOR THE PRATHER RV USE PERMIT.

BECCA SERRATOS, OUR SENIOR PLANNER PRESENTED THAT CASE PREVIOUSLY BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

SHE COULD NOT BE HERE TODAY, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE APPLICANT AWARE THAT I'LL BE PRESENTING THEIR CASE IN HER STEAD TODAY.

I WILL ALSO NOTE THAT CHAIRMAN STEWART, FROM THE COMMISSION IS ALSO PRESENT TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM, SHOULD THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AS TO THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.

AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING THAT THEY HELD ON THIS ITEM, THE BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THIS USE PERMIT REQUEST.

I'LL QUICKLY GO THROUGH THE SLIDES.

THIS IS IN SUPERVISOR DISTRICT 1, SUPERVISOR COMPTON'S DISTRICT.

HERE'S AN AREA MAP OF THE SUBJECT, PROBABLY NOT THE BEST MAP, BUT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE WALDEN VILLAGE UNIT 4 SUBDIVISION IN THE COMMUNITY OF WILHOIT.

HERE'S A ZONING MAP.

THE SUBJECT AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE CURRENTLY ZONED RCU2A, WHICH ALLOWS AS A MATTER OF RIGHT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ACCESSORY USES SUCH AS SHED AND INTERIOR FENCING, WOULD ALSO BE PERMITTED.

STORAGE OF AN RV WOULD BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT ONCE A PRIMARY RESIDENCE IS PERMITTED AND ESTABLISHED.

THAT'S REALLY THE CRUX OF THIS PROPOSAL BECAUSE CURRENTLY THERE IS NO PRIMARY RESIDENCE THAT'S BEEN APPROPRIATELY ESTABLISHED AND PERMITTED, AND SO YOU HAVE THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE RESIDING IN THEIR RV ON THE PREMISES.

THE APPLICANTS PURCHASED THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN OCTOBER 2020, SO A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND.

IN MARCH 2023, THE COUNTY LAND USE UNIT RESPONDED TO COMPLAIN OF UNPERMITTED STRUCTURES, SEPTIC SYSTEM, AND LONG TERM OCCUPANCY OF AN RV.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS PLACED IN VIOLATION FOR USE OF THE RV AND FOR THE UNPERMITTED SEPTIC SYSTEM, FENCING, SHED, AND SOLAR ARRAY ON THE PROPERTY.

THE PROPERTY OWNERS MADE PROGRESS BY OBTAINING A SITE INVESTIGATION FOR THEIR SEPTIC IN DECEMBER 2023, AND AN AS BUILT WASTEWATER PERMIT WAS APPROVED AND FINALED IN APRIL OF 2024.

THAT PIECE, THAT PROCESS HAS MOVED FORWARD, AND THE SEPTIC SYSTEM HAS BEEN APPROVED.

AT THIS POINT, THE APPLICANTS HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THE PLANNING UNIT TO RESOLVE THE REMAINING VIOLATIONS BY APPLYING FOR A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THEM TO USE THE RV FOR LONGER TERM OCCUPANCY AND RETAIN THEIR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.

THIS IS ACCORDING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE SUBJECT AREA IS SIGNAL FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, SO IT WOULD BE CONSISTENT TO THAT EXTENT.

CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN NOT AN ISSUE HERE.

[02:20:01]

NOW WE'LL GET TO THE SITE PLAN.

HERE'S A SITE PLAN SHOWING THE EXISTING USES ON THE PROPERTY, YOU'LL SEE AN AERIAL TO THE RIGHT, A LITTLE BIT MORE EASY TO TEASE OUT THE USES THE GRAVEL DRIVEWAY EXTENDING FROM CLARE ISLAND DRIVE.

BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT THE PROPERTY, THE SUBJECT IS SURROUNDED IN RED, SO THAT'S THE PARCEL, YOU CAN SEE THE RV UNIT, THE SHED, THE FENCE SURROUNDING IT, AND THEN JUST ABOVE IT, YOU CAN SEE THE OUTLINE OF THE SOLAR ARRAY.

THOSE ARE ALL UNPERMITTED.

AGAIN, THE SEPTIC SYSTEM IS FUNCTIONING AND PERMITTED SO THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE.

THIS IS LOOKING NORTH, SO YOU CAN SEE THE FLAVOR.

WE CALL IT A SUBDIVISION, BUT IT'S ONE OF OUR OLDER ONES, SO IT'S IN A RURAL AREA, AND, IT'S A LARGER LOT SUBDIVISION IN A VERY RURAL CONTEXT.

HERE'S THE ENTRANCE AGAIN FROM CLARE ISLAND DRIVE.

YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THE RV UNIT, THE FLAG, LOOKS LIKE THE ROADWAY CLARE ISLAND DRIVE IS PAVED.

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION.

NOTE, WE DID RECEIVE FOUR LETTERS OF SUPPORT AS PART OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION REPORT.

ONE OF THOSE LETTERS FROM A NEIGHBOR, THEY REVERSED THEIR POSITION OF SUPPORT TO A NEGATIVE.

THAT NOW TAKES US TO TWO LETTERS OF OPPOSITION.

SO AT THIS TIME, WE HAD THREE LETTERS IN SUPPORT.

YOU CAN SEE THOSE IN GREEN ON THE MAP.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS A STAR.

THE 1,000 FOOT RADIUS IS THE YELLOW CIRCLE AROUND THE AREA, AND TWO OPPOSITION, ONE IS OUTSIDE OF THAT 1,000 FOOT RADIUS, BUT IT DOES APPEAR THE IMMEDIATE PROPERTIES ADJACENT.

THERE SEEMS TO BE SUPPORT OR NON RESPONSIVE.

STAFF CONCERNS, WE WOULD RAISE THIS WITH ANY TYPE OF REQUEST IN THIS INSTANCE.

WE WOULD NOTE THAT THE LONG TERM OCCUPANCY OF AN RV EXCEEDING THREE YEARS IS NOT ALLOWED USE IN ANY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

THUSLY, IN REVIEWING THE REQUEST, IT'S IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER WHAT PARAMETERS ARE APPROPRIATE TO PLACE ONTO A RESIDENTIAL PERMIT APPROVAL.

SUCH AS THE RECOMMENDED DECREASE FROM A 10 YEAR USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO A FIVE YEAR USE PERMIT APPROVAL.

REALLY WHAT THIS IS SAYING IS THAT THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED, THEY WERE ASKING FOR 10 YEARS TO GIVE THEMSELVES TIME TO ESSENTIALLY EFFECTUATE LOCATING AND PERMITTING A PRIMARY RESIDENCE ON THE PROPERTY AND THEY WANTED TIME TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

WHEN THIS ITEM WENT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THE COMMISSION FELT, WELL, THAT'S A LITTLE LONG.

THEY MADE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT'S NOW BEING CARRIED FORWARD TO THIS HEARING TODAY FOR FIVE YEARS.

IT IS OF A TEMPORARY NATURE.

ALL OF THIS WOULD GO AWAY IF THE APPLICANT IS UNSUCCESSFUL IN PERMITTING AND ESTABLISHING A PRIMARY RESIDENCE WITHIN FIVE YEARS AS PROPOSED.

SO IN SUMMARY CONSIDERATION, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR LONG TERM OR LONGER TERM OCCUPANCY OF AN RV, AND TO ALLOW FOR A STORAGE SHED AND INTERIOR FENCING PRIOR TO ESTABLISHING A PRIMARY RESIDENCE PRIOR TO A PRIMARY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE BEING ESTABLISHED IN THE RCU-2A ZONING DISTRICT.

YOU CAN SEE PER THE SUGGESTION, RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THAT WAS CHANGED FROM APPLICANT REQUESTED 10 YEAR PERIOD TO FIVE YEARS.

MADAM CHAIR, IF YOU WOULD LIKE, I'D BE HAPPY TO READ THROUGH THE CONDITIONS.

>> YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M GOING TO DEFER TO THE VICE CHAIR HERE.

>> I'M HAPPY TO SPEAK TO THE ISSUE IF WE JUST WANT TO GET TO THE CRUX OF THE MATTER.

>> WHENEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO, SIR.

>> FIRST, I'D LIKE TO THANK STAFF.

STAFF WORKED WITH ME VERY HARD ON THIS TO GET THE PEOPLE INTO COMPLIANCE.

THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

THE APPLICANT HAS PUT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT INTO COMING INTO COMPLIANCE.

I SPENT MANY HOURS WITH THEM AND WITH STAFF.

I'M HAPPY TO SEE STAFF WORKING TOGETHER WITH THE RESIDENTS IN MY AREA THAT THEY'RE SO RURAL THAT IT'S HARD TO COMPREHEND SOMETIMES.

I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THIS BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THIS FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS.

I WOULD NOTE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING WAS UNANIMOUS, AND THERE WAS AN EXTENSIVE HEARING.

ON THIS ISSUE, I TRUST THEIR JUDGMENT ON THAT AND I CERTAINLY I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS, BUT I'M HAPPY TO HEAR CONCERNS OF ANY OF MY FELLOW SUPERVISORS.

>> THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR.

IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE SUPERVISORS?

>> I THINK WHEN WE HEARD THIS ITEM BEFORE, MY QUESTION WAS IF THERE WERE PLANS TO BUILD A PRIMARY RESIDENCE.

[02:25:04]

I DIDN'T HEAR AN AFFIRMATIVE ANSWER IN OUR LAST HEARING.

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR CHECK.

I WILL NOTE THAT MR. PRATHER, THE APPLICANT IS IN ATTENDANCE, AND I THINK IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AS TO THEIR LONG TERM INTENTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY.

>> MAYBE THEY COULD COME UP.

>> MR. PRATHER, COME ON UP. GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> JUST GOOD A SPEAKING TO.

>> PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

>> YES, SIR.

>> MOBY PRATHER.

THIS IS MY WIFE, HEIDI PRATHER.

>> I ALWAYS GET THAT WRONG.

THE A FOR THE ARMS. I APOLOGIZE.

>> YES, SIR. MADAM CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, GOOD MORNING.

AS FAR AS BUILDING A PRIMARY STRUCTURE, YES, WE DO HAVE PLANS TO DO THAT.

OUR PROBLEM IS MONEY. WE HAVE NO MONEY.

I SERVE AT CHURCH, THAT'S WHERE I WORK.

SHE SERVED THE COMMUNITY AT SAFEWAY FOR 34 YEARS.

OUR STUFF IS WE'VE RAN INTO PROBLEMS FINANCIALLY AS FAR AS HIRING ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS AND SCIENTISTS AND ALL OF THE REGULATIONS THAT COME ALONG WITH THIS.

WE LIKE TO GO TO WORK, SPEND A FEW DOLLARS AT HOME DEPOT, AND BUILD A FENCE.

IT TOOK US 14 MONTHS TO BUILD THAT FENCE.

WE BUILT THAT FENCE FOR OUR ANIMALS AND SO MY WIFE FELT SAFE OUT THERE.

SO FAR, WE FEEL SAFE FROM EVERYONE EXCEPT YAVAPAI COUNTY.

SUPERVISOR COMPTON HAS BEEN AMAZING, BARBARA HAS BEEN AMAZING.

>> IT'S BEEN A NIGHTMARE FOR US.

IT'S AFFECTED OUR SLEEP.

IT'S AFFECTED OUR MARRIAGE.

IT'S AFFECTED OUR LIFE.

AND I LIKE HOW THIS MEETING STARTED, JESUS CHRIST, BECAUSE WE'RE JESUS PEOPLE, AND WE'RE AMERICANS.

AND I WAS TELLING HER WHEN WE TOOK A BREAK, I SAID, I FEEL LIKE I FIT IN THERE WITH THE OPENING OF THIS THING, THIS HEARING.

UNTIL THEY STARTED TALKING ABOUT ALL THAT MONEY.

THEN I'M LIKE, WOW, I'M OUT OF PLACE.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS.

WE DON'T NECESSARILY EVEN HAVE THE CAPACITY, I CAN GO DOWN AND PAY FOR A PERMIT.

WE CAN SAVE A COUPLE OF HUNDRED DOLLARS.

IT SAVED US THREE WEEKS TO SAVE FOR THIS PERMIT.

BUT AS FAR AS $1,500 FOR ENGINEERS FOR MY SHED THAT'S 4 " TOO BIG AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WE DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY.

WE WORK PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO DO IT.

WE LOVE GOD, AND WE LOVE OUR COUNTRY.

>> THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT PART, YOU'RE HAPPY TO DO IT.

YOU'VE COME INTO COMPLIANCE, AND YOU'RE WORKING HARD TOWARDS IT. THAT'S THE EFFORT.

>> AND I SHOP AT THAT SAFELY, EVERY DAY.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I'VE BEEN A PART OF YAVAPAI COUNTY SINCE 1999.

I MOVED UP HERE FROM MARICOPA.

BEEN WITH SAFEWAY FOREVER.

AND FOUR OUT OF FIVE OF MY CHILDREN WORK FOR SAFEWAY CURRENTLY.

THEY HAVE TURNED AROUND AND SERVED THEIR COMMUNITY AS WELL.

I HAVE A DAUGHTER WHO'S A SERGEANT IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY.

SHE'S PART OF A FORWARD SURGICAL DETACHMENT, AIRBORNE SURGICAL DETACHMENT.

I'M SUPER PROUD OF MY BABIES AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO RAISE THEM IN THIS SPECIAL COMMUNITY.

IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T WANT TO BE COMPLIANT, WHERE WE'VE CHANGED OUR PLAN FROM BUILDING A LITTLE CABIN TO POSSIBLY PURCHASING A MANUFACTURED HOME.

OUR PROBLEM IS WE'RE NOT GOING INTO DEBT.

WE'VE STOOD ON THAT PRINCIPLE, AND SO WE DO SPEND THE MONEY THAT WE EARN TOWARDS OUR PROPERTY.

AND I'D LIKE TO RETIRE SOON. THAT'S IT.

WE DON'T HAVE OODLES OF MONEY PILED UP, AND WE'RE NOT GOING INTO SOMETHING WHERE THE BANK OWNS OUR PROPERTY.

THAT HAS BEEN OUR GOAL, OUR DREAM, OUR LIFE, LIBERTY, AND PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.

I FEEL LIKE SOME OF THIS IS AN INFRINGEMENT ON MY LIBERTY, AND IT'S A GOVERNMENT OVERREACH.

>> WE'RE DOING OUR BEST.

>> BUT YOU'RE IN IT NOW.

ALL'S GOOD. SUPERVISOR COOP, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> WELL, JUST WHAT WAS THE GIST OF THE LETTERS OF OPPOSITION?

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

I THINK THAT IT HAS TO DO WITH ALWAYS ABOUT CONTEXT.

IT'S A SUBDIVISION YOU COULD SEE BY THE IMAGES.

THIS IS A VERY DIFFERENT TYPE OF SUBDIVISION THAT YOU AND I WOULD TYPICALLY PICTURE AS A MORE SUBURBAN SUBDIVISION.

EVERYONE IS BUILDING A HOUSE, HAS HOUSES THAT ARE ON THESE LOTS.

SOME OF THE LOTS ARE VACANT, AND SO THERE PROBABLY IS A DESIRE TO KIND OF MAINTAIN THAT AESTHETIC OF HAVING HOMES AND NOT RVS.

[02:30:04]

IT MIGHT BE JUST THE MAINTENANCE OF THAT UNIFORMITY.

I THINK IT MIGHT BE ONE OF THE MAIN CONCERNS.

I DID HEAR AT THE LAST MEETING, ONE OF THE CONCERNS IN THE OPPOSITION WAS THE 10 YEARS.

AND SO IT MAY BE THAT SOME OF THAT CONCERN MAY BE REDUCED BEING THAT AS, CURRENTLY PROPOSED, THIS USE PERMIT WOULD BE TEMPORARY.

IT WOULD BE FOR 5 AND NOT 10 YEARS.

BUT AGAIN, I THINK IT'S CONTEXT, AND IT'S THE DESIRE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THAT UNIFORMITY OF THE SUBDIVISION.

>> MY BIGGEST CONCERN WAS A SEPTIC TANK, ALWAYS BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE.

I MEAN, THIS HAS COME BEFORE US.

AGAIN, IT'S BECOMING MORE AND MORE COMMON WHERE PEOPLE ARE SETTING UP, AND A LOT OF TIMES IT'S SNOWBIRDS THAT COME DOWN FOR THE WINTER, AND THEY JUST WANT TO HAVE A PLACE TO PARK THEIR RV AND GO AWAY.

AND I HOPE THAT OUR ZONING STUDY THAT WE'RE DOING TAKES INTO ACCOUNT ALL THESE NEW THINGS.

AND WITH OUR COUNTY BEING SO DIVERSE IN LAND USE.

I MEAN, WE HAVE ULTRA URBAN, AND WE HAVE VERY, VERY RURAL.

AND I THINK THESE DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS REFLECT DIFFERENT ATTITUDES ON HOW THEY WANT TO LIVE, HOW MUCH CONTROL THEY REALLY WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO HAVE OVER HOW THEY LIVE.

I THINK AS WE MOVE FORWARD, WITH THE ZONING SAID, WE GOT TO TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT.

AND TO THE EARLIER PART OF OUR MEETING, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS WERE HERE AT THE BEGINNING.

WE HAD A GPA HOUSE.

THERE'S PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT ARE WORKING EVERY DAY THAT ESSENTIALLY ARE HOMELESS.

YOU'RE LIVING IN AN RV.

AND ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP YOU SAVE UP, AND I GET IT BECAUSE I HATE OWING MONEY TO THE BANK.

ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP THAT OUT, I'D BE IN FAVOR OF, AND I SUPPORT SUPERVISOR COMPTON BECAUSE I KNOW HE'S DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH ON THIS, TOO.

THAT'S ABOUT ALL I GOT ON THAT.

BUT THANK YOU GUYS FOR HANGING IN THERE.

GOOD LUCK ON BUILDING THE HOUSE.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. DON'T WE ALREADY? I'M JUST ASKING.

I'M PRETTY SURE PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO GO AHEAD AND START BUILDING A HOUSE, BUT ALSO STAY ON THE PROPERTY WITH AN RV.

ISN'T THERE? IS IT THREE YEARS?

>> THAT IS CORRECT, MADAM CHAIR.

IT'S INITIALLY FOR TWO YEARS, THEN YOU CAN APPLY FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE EXTENSION FOR UP TO A YEAR, AND IT ALLOWS FOR THE SITING OF AN RV HOME ON THE PREMISES WHILE THE HOME IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION, AND THAT WORKS FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE.

IT DOESN'T WORK FOR EVERYBODY, OF COURSE.

>> WELL, I'M JUST SAYING, YOU SAY FIVE YEARS, BUT WE ALREADY HAVE IN OUR RULES AT LEAST TWO YEARS.

SO, IN REALITY, THEY'RE JUST ASKING FOR REALLY AN EXTRA THREE YEARS.

AND I USED TO WORK AT ALBERTSON'S, JUST SO YOU KNOW.

I LIVE PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK, TOO.

IT'S NOT EASY OUT HERE THESE DAYS, AND IT'S HARD ON EVERYBODY.

IT'S HARD. EVERY TIME YOU TURN AROUND, SOMETHING ELSE IS GOING UP.

BUT ANYWAY, I ALREADY KNEW WE DID GIVE AN ALLOWANCE, SO IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE ASKING FOR A WHOLE LOT.

WE ALREADY HAVE THAT.

AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE MONEY THAT YOU HEAR, THAT'S JUST WHAT TAKES IT.

THAT'S JUST WHAT TAKES TO RUN YOUR COUNTY. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THAT'S WHAT YOUR TAX IS PAID FOR.

IT PAYS FOR THOSE SHERIFFS, HIS DEPUTIES, ALL OF IT.

SO WE ARE FOREVER GRATEFUL THAT WE HAVE THE PEOPLE HERE THAT STEP UP, THEY WORK HARD, THEY PAY THEIR TAXES, AND WE HAVE A GREAT COMMUNITY.

AND YOU ARE A PART OF THAT.

AND, WHAT YOU HEARD IN THE BEGINNING IN MY HEART IS WHO YAVAPAI COUNTY IS.

SO DON'T EVER LOSE FOCUS OF THAT.

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> BECAUSE WE'RE ALL HERE TOGETHER.

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> WE HAVE GREEN SHEETS, MADAM CHAIR. NONE.

>> NONE. ALL RIGHT. AND I ALREADY CHECKED WITH THE CLERK.

THERE WAS ONE LETTER THAT CHANGED FROM A YES TO A NO.

>> THERE WAS ONE LETTER OF OPPOSITION RECEIVED.

I WAS DISSEMINATED TO THE BOARD YESTERDAY.

I DO NOT HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THAT POSITION HAS CHANGED.

>> OKAY. I DID GET THAT LETTER.

ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? IF NOT, WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE UP THE HEARING.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY COMMUNICATIONS GOING, SO WITH THAT, I CLOSE THIS HEARING.

>> I MOVED TO APPROVE HEARING ITEM NUMBER 2.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND.

YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS?

>> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO. YES. CHAIR MALLORY. YES.

>> HEARING ITEM NUMBER 2, IT'S BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> ALL RIGHT. WELL, GOD BLESS YOU, GUYS. ALRIGHT.

>> TAKE CARE.

THAT'S CORRECT, ITEM 3. HI.

[02:35:01]

>> ITEM NUMBER 4.

>> YOU'RE TRYING TO.

>> I AM LIKE GIVEN AHEAD.

I'M ALL MESSED UP. I STARTED AT THE BACK END.

I SHOULD HAVE JUST STARTED GOING 1098 AND WORKED MY WAY UP TO THE FRONT.

GO AHEAD. WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER THREE.

[3. Development Services - Approve a nontransferable Use Permit, for a period of 5 years, for APN 500-05-049, to allow for the development of a business to rent and sell steel storage containers on a 5.11-acre parcel, subject to conditions of approval. Owner: Joshua Bleak. Applicant/Agent: Tim Steadman, All Star Storage and Containers. Located in the community of Cordes Junction. Application No. PLA25-000056. (District 2 - Supervisor Jenkins)]

>> WHICH I BELIEVE IS ALL STAR STORAGE USE PERMIT.

GOOD MORNING, BJ RATE.

ONE OF THE PLANNERS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

GOOD MORNING, CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, SUPERVISORS.

THIS MORNING, I'LL BE PRESENTING A REQUEST FOR A USE PERMIT FROM ALL STAR STORAGE.

THIS USE PERMIT WAS HEARD BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 2.

IT RECEIVED UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OR RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.

CHAIRMAN STEWART IS HERE TO SPEAK IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR DELIBERATION.

JOSHUA BLEAK IS THE OWNER, TIM STEDMAN IS THE APPLICANT.

HE IS HERE ALSO TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROJECT.

THIS IS IN THE SUPERVISOR JENKINS AREA.

THE USE PERMIT IS TO REQUEST A NON-TRANSFERABLE FIVE-YEAR USE PERMIT TO DEVELOP AND OPERATE A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS TO RENT AND SELL CONTAINERS.

TO HAVE THIS USE, IT WOULD NEED TO BE WITHIN A ZONED AREA OF EXCUSE ME, INDUSTRIAL, M 1, WHERE THIS WOULD BE.

AND THIS IS RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY, HENCE THE NEED FOR THE USE PERMIT.

AGAIN, WHEN THE APPLICANTS ORIGINALLY CAME IN, THEY WERE ACTUALLY ASKING FOR A REZONE FOR THIS PARCEL.

HOWEVER, DUE TO ISSUES OF LANGUAGE WITHIN THE COMP PLAN, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO MOVE THAT FORWARD, SO WE RECOMMENDED THE USE PERMIT PROCESS.

WE RECOMMENDED A FIVE-YEAR USE PERMIT.

GENERALLY, USE PERMITS COME IN FOR THE FIRST TIME AT FIVE OR TEN YEARS, BUT WE WENT WITH FIVE YEARS DUE TO THE LONGSTANDING VIOLATION ON THIS PROPERTY.

THAT IS WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDED.

THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN SUPERVISOR JENKINS IN THE CORTIS JUNCTION AREA.

IT IS ACCESSED OFF OF I 17 ONTO STAGE COAT, AND THEN LICHTEN LANE, WHICH IS A PRIVATE EASEMENT UNIMPROVED.

IT IS A LITTLE OVER FIVE ACRES.

THE ZONING OF THIS PARCEL IS RCU-2A, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S A PRETTY ECLECTIC ZONING IN THIS AREA, AS YOU GUYS KNOW FOR CORDS.

LOOKING OUT, IT GETS EVEN MORE ECLECTIC WHEN YOU LOOK A LITTLE BIT FURTHER OUT.

WHAT I WILL POINT OUT IS WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE AREA.

TO THE NORTH THERE, WE HAVE LOVES TRUCK STOP TO THE NORTH AND TO THE WEST, JUST A LITTLE BIT.

WE HAVE ASHURA HEALTHCARE.

DOES THIS WORK? THERE WE GO.

AHURA HEALTHCARE.

THEN COMING DOWN, WE HAVE A STORAGE, ME, NOT ALL STAR STORAGE.

THIS IS EXTRA SPACE SELF STORAGE, WHICH IS ACROSS STAGECOACH, ALMOST ACROSS THE ROAD HERE FROM IT.

THIS IS OUR SUBJECT PROPERTY.

C2 HERE IS ACTUALLY ALL RESIDENTIAL, WHICH IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT, AND C1 AND C2.

THESE AREAS TO THE EAST ARE ALL RESIDENTIAL, PRIVATE RESIDENCES, AND THEN WE HAVE PILOT TRUCK STOP, AND THEN SOME HOSPITALITY.

THERE'S AN RV PARK CAFE HERE, AND THEN OF COURSE, MCDONALD'S AND CHEVRON. THERE.

>> THIS PROPERTY CAME TO US OR THIS PROJECT CAME TO US IN VIOLATION.

THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE ANY DEVELOPMENT PERMITS.

IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN VACANT.

WHAT WE CAME THROUGH, THIS PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED IN DECEMBER OF 2023 BY THE CURRENT OWNERS.

WE RECEIVED THE INITIAL VIOLATION IN FEBRUARY WITH A LARGE NUMBER OF CONTAINERS BEING PUT ONTO THE PROPERTY.

OVER THE LAST 18 MONTHS OR SO, THAT THOSE CONTAINERS HAVE MIGRATED AND MOVED AROUND, THE PROPERTY WAS CLEARLY BEING UTILIZED.

SOMETIMES THERE WAS 12 OR BETTER ON THERE.

MOST OF THE TIME WHEN STAFF WENT AND LOOKED AT IT, THERE WERE 60-PLUS CONTAINERS ON THERE, AND THEY'VE BEEN MOVING.

IT WAS NEVER ALWAYS THE SAME, THAT WAS NOT A STATIC.

HOWEVER, AFTER BEING NOTIFIED OF THE VIOLATION, THE PROPERTY OWNERS DID CONTACT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND STARTED THROUGH THE PROCESS.

IT DIDN'T MOVE VERY FAST.

THEY HAD THEIR FIRST PRELIMINARY PLANNING MEETING WITH THE PREVIOUS PLANNER, TIM OLSON IN DECEMBER OF 2024, AND THEN NOTHING MUCH HAPPENED WITH IT.

IT WAS TRANSFERRED TO ME IN LAST SPRING.

AND WHEN I REACHED OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS, WE SCHEDULED A SECOND PRELIMINARY PLANNING MEETING, AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE BEEN WORKING VERY WELL WITH ME TO MOVE IT FORWARD INTO THIS USE PERMIT PROCESS.

I AM DELIGHTED TO SAY THE PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE.

ABOUT ONE WEEK RIGHT AT ONE WEEK BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE WITH PLANNING AND ZONING, THE PROPERTY CAME FULLY INTO COMPLIANCE, SO IT'S IN COMPLIANCE TODAY.

SO I'M VERY PLEASED TO LET YOU GUYS KNOW THAT. ALL RIGHT.

[02:40:02]

HOWEVER, DUE TO THE LONG STANDING VIOLATION ON THE PROPERTY AND THE OBVIOUS USE OF THAT WAS GOING ON TO THE PROPERTY, STAFF PROPOSED ANOTHER CONDITION THAT WAS NOT IN THE INITIAL PACKET WHICH BASICALLY SAYS, AND WE GO OVER THE LANGUAGE WHEN WE GET TO THE CONDITIONS.

>> BUT BASICALLY, WHAT WE SUGGESTED IS ANOTHER CONDITION THAT SAYS, IF ANYBODY'S USING THE PROPERTY FOR THE PROPERTIES GETTING UTILIZED PRIOR TO APPROPRIATE PERMITS AND THOSE PERMITS BEING FINALIZED, THEN SHOULD THIS USE PERMIT BE APPROVED, THEN THE USE PERMIT WOULD BECOME NULL AND VOID IF THE PROPERTY STARTS BEING UTILIZED BEFORE APPROPRIATE PERMITS AND THEY'RE FINALIZED.

SO THAT'S THE GIST OF THAT ONE.

ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THAT BEFORE I JUMP INTO WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE SUPERVISORS? OKAY. SUPERVISOR JENKINS, SORRY.

YES, MA'AM. THIS IS YOUR DISTRICT.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON?

>> NO, I'LL LET BJ GO THROUGH IT.

I ASKED QUITE A FEW QUESTIONS OF STAFF, AND I BELIEVE THEY'RE GOING TO COVER THEM IN THE PRESENTATION. THANK YOU.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME.

>> THANK YOU. GO AHEAD.

>> THIS SITE PLAN SHOWS, AGAIN, THE PROPERTY IS A LITTLE OVER FIVE ACRES.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY'RE ACTUALLY ONLY PROPOSING TO USE ABOUT 50% OF IT.

THIS IS THE SITE PLAN THAT THIS IS THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL THAT THEY WILL USE ABOUT 50% OF THE PARCEL.

THEY ARE PROPOSING TO USE TO ONLY BRING ON A MAXIMUM OF 115 CONTAINERS.

THAT'S THEIR PROPOSAL.

THEY WOULD ONLY DOUBLE STACK THE 20-FOOTERS, SO IT WOULD BE A MIXTURE OF 20 AND 40 FOOTERS.

THEY WOULD ONLY DOUBLE-STACK THE 20S.

THE 40S WOULD NOT BE DOUBLE-STACKED.

AND THEN ONE OF THE OTHER ONE OF THEIR SUGGESTIONS OR THEIR APPLICATION IS THIS LINE HERE, THEY WANT TO USE THE CONTAINERS AS A FENCE.

THERE WOULD BE A LINE OF CONTAINERS OUT HERE TO BE UTILIZED AS THE ACTUAL FENCING RATHER THAN STANDARD TYPE FENCING.

THAT'S THEIR PROPOSAL.

AND THEN THEY WOULD ALSO WOULD BE UTILIZING A MODIFIED CONTAINER AS THE ACTUAL OFFICE.

AND THAT CAN BE APPROVED THROUGH ADOH.

SO ONCE THE STAFF HAS NO ISSUE WITH THAT, WITH THE APPROPRIATE APPROVALS.

>> THE CONTAINERS THAT ARE BEING USED AS FENCING WOULD NOT BE FOR SALE, OR THEY WOULD BE FOR SALE.

>> I WOULD I WOULD LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

>> THERE WAS A LOT OF TECHNICAL REVIEW BECAUSE SOME OF WHAT THEY'RE SUGGESTING IS NOT ALLOWED BY ORDINANCE.

THERE WAS A LOT OF TECHNICAL REVIEW.

WE HAD BUILDING SAFETY AT THE P&Z AND ANSWERED A LOT OF QUESTIONS.

THEY HAVE ALSO APPLIED FOR WHAT THEY CALL PRE-CODE, WHICH IS, SHOULD THIS BE APPROVED, THEN THEY WILL HAVE TO GO OR THEY'RE VOLUNTEERING TO GO THROUGH A PRE-CODE, WHERE AGAIN, THEIR PLANS ARE REVIEWED WITH ALL OF THE EXPERTS TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THEM FEEDBACK SO THAT THEY CAN HAVE GOOD PLANS TO SUBMIT TO GET THEIR PERMITS.

THEY WERE NOT PROPOSING.

I'LL DEAL BRIEFLY WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT.

THEY DID NOT WANT TO PUT A SEPTIC SYSTEM ON THERE.

BUILDING SAFETY IS ADVISING US THAT YOU WILL NEED TO PUT A RESTROOM IN THAT BUILDING.

FOR AN OFFICE, YOU CANNOT UTILIZE PORTA JOHNS, WHICH WAS WHAT THEIR SUGGESTION WAS, AND SO THEY WANTED JUST USE PORTA JOHNS AND NOT PUT A SEPTIC ON.

BUILDING SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HAS ADVISED THAT WILL NOT MEET CODE.

THAT WILL HAVE TO BE DEALT WITH THROUGH THE PROPER PERMITTING PROCESSES.

WHICH REALLY BROUGHT IT THEN TO MANY OF THE PLANNING ISSUES WAS GOING ON, AND I'LL MOVE THROUGH THESE QUICKLY.

THE ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR 10% LOT COVERAGE.

WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE DEALING SPECIFICALLY WITH CONTAINERS.

THAT ORDINANCE IS DEALING WITH CONTAINERS AS STORAGE.

ONE OF THE DIFFERENCES ON THIS PROJECT IS THE CONTAINERS ARE NOT BEING UTILIZED TO STORAGE, THEIR PRODUCT, THEY'RE AN INVENTORY, THAT IS THEIR PRODUCT THAT THEY'RE SELLING RATHER THAN YOU AND I PUTTING A CONTAINER ON OUR PROPERTY FOR STORAGE, AND OUR ORDINANCE DOESN'T DEAL WITH THAT.

ORDINANCE ONLY DEALS WITH IT AS A STRUCTURE USED FOR STORAGE.

THAT'S JUST IT'S NOT IN OUR ORDINANCE.

TO UTILIZE THIS AREA, TO UTILIZE THE CONTAINERS AS A FENCE, THAT'S UTILIZING A STRUCTURE AS A FENCE, AND THAT DOESN'T MEET ORDINANCE.

PLANNING WOULD NOT PERMIT THAT.

THE USE PERMIT CAN ALLOW IT, THOUGH, THROUGH ONE OF THE WAIVERS.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES.

THE OTHER THING IS, AGAIN, THROUGH THE ORDINANCE THAT A PROPERTY, EVEN A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY CAN ONLY COVER 10% OF THE PARCEL WITH CONTAINERS.

AGAIN, THAT'S BY ORDINANCE.

WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS ACTUALLY RIGHT A 10%.

A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY CAN PUT USED CONTAINERS ON THEIR PROPERTY AND CAN COVER UP TO 10% OF IT.

WITH THIS SQUARE FOOTAGE, THAT MEANS THEY CAN HAVE 69 OF THE 40 FOOTERS OR 139 OF THE 20 FOOTERS, THEY'RE REQUESTING 115, WHICH IS RIGHT IN LINE THERE.

WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING IS RIGHT ALONG IN THAT.

I WILL SAY THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTUALLY INCREASED THAT, AND THEY SUGGESTED TO MODIFY THE CONDITIONS TO GO FROM 10% TO 40%.

THAT'S WHAT THE CONDITIONS ARE COMING TO YOU AS FROM THE P&Z.

THEY WILL ONLY BE ALLOWED THE RESIDENTIAL LIGHTING BECAUSE IT IS AN RCU-2A PARCEL,

[02:45:04]

SO THEY WILL ONLY HAVE THE 5,000 LUMENS.

>> WELL, THEY BE ALLOWED TO STACK.

>> THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO STACK THE CONTAINERS.

THEY'RE PROPOSING THEY WILL AND IT'S WITHIN THE CONDITIONS.

THEY WILL ONLY BE ABLE TO ALLOWED TO STACK THE 20 FOOTERS, NOT THE 40 FOOTERS.

>> HOW HIGH?

>> THAT WOULD BE SOMEWHERE 20 AND 25 FT.

CONTAINERS ABOUT 10 FOOT AND HIGH.

>> TWO NOT FOUR?

>> CORRECT.

>> JUST TWO. YES. AGAIN, STEEL CONTAINERS DON'T MEET THE ALLOWANCE OR A DEFINITION FOR A FENCE.

BUILDING SAFETY AND WE BOTH HAD QUITE A FEW COMMENTS ON THAT BY ALLOWING THEM TO BE UTILIZED AS A FENCE, THAT MEANS THE FENCE IS GOING TO BE 10 PLUS FEET TALL BECAUSE THAT'S THE HEIGHT OF THE CONTAINER.

ALLOWABLE BY ORDINANCE, RESIDENTIAL FENCE CAN BE 6 FOOT, CAN BE PROPOSED TO BE 8 FOOT, AND MOST COMMERCIAL FENCES ARE ABOUT 8 FOOT.

THIS IS STILL GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN A STANDARD COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, IF THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED.

AGAIN, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT DEFINITION AND THAT THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T DEAL WITH CONTAINERS ONLY AS A STORAGE STRUCTURE, NOT AS INVENTORY AND AN ITEM TO BE SOLD AND RENTED.

JUST A DIFFERENCE WITHIN OUR ORDINANCE.

ANY QUESTIONS ON SOME OF THAT?

>> ANY QUESTIONS? SUPERVISOR JENKINS, I'M JUST REACHING OUT TO YOU IF YOU HAD ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT HAVE COME UP.

>> I'M NOT SURE AT WHAT POINT.

I HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS REGARDING THE FENCING AND STACKING THE CONTAINERS TOGETHER, BUT THEN A CONTAINER EVENTUALLY WOULD BE SOLD OR MOVED, AND THEN YOU HAVE A GAP IN THE FENCE.

BJ, IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THAT.

>> I CAN.

>> I'M VERY GRATEFUL TO STAFF BECAUSE WORKING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, THERE WAS VERY FEW GUIDELINES WITHIN THE CODE THAT WERE APPLICABLE TO THIS APPLICATION.

THANK YOU STAFF IN TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR BRINGING FORWARD ALL OF THE CONDITIONS THAT BJ WILL GO OVER. THANK YOU.

>> I'LL GO BACK AND I'LL JUST PULL UP THIS PLOT PLAN OR THEIR SITE PLAN AGAIN.

WHAT IS PROPOSED IS THE FENCE WOULD ONLY BE A SINGLE STACK OF THE CONTAINERS.

THAT WOULD MAKE IT ABOUT A 10 FOOT HIGH FENCE IF THIS WAS TO BE ALLOWABLE OF STANDARD FENCING.

I BELIEVE AND I'LL LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THIS WOULD THEN BE A PERMANENT FIXTURE.

THEY WOULD NOT BE MOVING, BUT I WILL LET THE APPLICANT CLARIFY THAT.

ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES IS THAT A CONTAINER, AGAIN, BY ORDINANCE, HAS TO MEET THE PRIMARY SETBACK OF THE PARCEL.

THAT MEANS CONTAINERS CANNOT SIT ON THE BOUNDARY LINES.

SHOULD THIS BE ALLOWED, WE WILL HAVE THERE'S ANOTHER WAIVER IN THERE TO ALLOW IT THAT WAY, BECAUSE THE CONTAINERS HAVE TO BE 25 FOOT AWAY FROM ANY BOUNDARY LINES ON THE SIDES, 50 FOOT FROM THE REARS.

THAT'S ANOTHER WAIVER REQUEST THAT WILL BE IN HERE THAT CAME OUT OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

YES, SIR, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAD A QUESTION.

>> NO.

>> I WAS DEVELOPING ONE.

>> ACTUALLY, IT WAS WHEN THEY MOVED THESE THINGS, THEY'RE PRETTY LONG.

IS THERE ACCESS TO MAKE SAFE TURNS IN AND OUT OF THIS PLACE?

>> FIRE HAS REVIEWED THIS AS IS BUILDING SAFETY, AND I BELIEVE THAT THIS SITE PLAN GENERALLY MEETS THEIR PARAMETERS. YES.

>> I HAVE A COMMENT. I'M NOT SURE WHEN THE RIGHT TIME TO BRING IT UP IS, BUT I RECENTLY LEARNED OF A PREVIOUS CASE WHERE SOMEONE WAS NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE A SHIPPING CONTAINER BY THEIR HOUSE UNLESS THEY PAINTED IT TO BE THE COLOR OF THEIR HOME OR A SIMILAR COLOR.

IN THIS CASE, I'M SEEING A LOT OF SHIPPING CONTAINERS THAT ARE DIFFERENT COLORS, AND I THINK THE SALE OF THESE WITHIN YAVAPAI COUNTY COULD PUT A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE OUT OF COMPLIANCE.

I'M NOT BRINGING THAT UP BECAUSE I THINK THAT ALL OF THESE NEED TO BE PAINTED EARTH, BUT RATHER I'D PREFER TO SEE THAT CLEANED UP ON OUR END BECAUSE I THINK IF YOU WERE TO SURVEY IN GENERAL, THE NUMBER OF SHEDS OR STORAGE CONTAINERS THAT ARE OUT OF COMPLIANCE ALREADY.

THERE'S PROBABLY A DIFFERENT PROBLEM ON OUR HANDS.

I KNOW IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA TO TALK MORE ABOUT THAT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO FLAG THAT AND TELL YOU MY PREFERENCE.

>> YES. YOU WOULD BE CORRECT, IT IS WITHIN OUR ORDINANCE THAT CONTAINERS NEED TO BE PAINTED NEUTRAL TO MATCH THE SURROUNDING TERRITORY.

SUPERVISOR JENKINS, HAVE I ADDRESSED YOUR QUESTIONS? I THINK ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WAS, HOW MANY CONTAINERS ON THE PROPERTY? THEY ARE PROPOSING 115 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, ACTUALLY, THROUGH THEIR RECOMMENDATION TO GO FROM 10% ALLOWANCE WOULD ACTUALLY GRANTED THEM A MUCH GREATER ABILITY TO GO TO 40% LOT COVERAGE OF CONTAINERS.

[02:50:03]

>> THAT'S CONCERNING.

I WAS CURIOUS, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING IS THERE.

WHY DID THEY CHOOSE TO INCREASE IT ABOVE WHAT THE APPLICANT ASKED FOR? I WOULD LIKE THAT QUESTION ANSWERED AT SOME POINT.

REGARDING THE FENCE, EVEN IF THOSE CONTAINERS AREN'T MOVED, ARE THEY GOING TO BUTT THEM UP AGAINST EACH OTHER, SO IT'S A CONTINUOUS FENCE, OR IF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO USE THEM FOR STORAGE, I GUESS, THEY COULD DO IT THAT WAY.

I WOULD LIKE CLARIFICATION ON CONTINUOUS FENCING.

>> I'LL ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS THOSE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, MA'AM.

>> I THINK WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT COME ON.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO FINISH [OVERLAPPING] SO WE'RE DONE?

>> I'M SORRY.

IT'S VERY TECHNICAL BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE COMMENTS AND STUFF.

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION.

THEY DID A CITIZEN PARTICIPATION.

THEY RECEIVED ONE PHONE CALL, A LETTER.

THEY ACTUALLY HELD A VIRTUAL MEETING.

NOBODY CAME TO THEIR VIRTUAL MEETING.

WE'VE DONE OUR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND NOTIFIED PEOPLE WE RECEIVED ONE LETTER VIA SURVEY 123, WHICH WE TRANSMITTED TO YOU YESTERDAY.

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THIS IS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.

THEREFORE, IT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED WITHOUT THIS USE PERMIT BEING GRANTED.

HOWEVER, WE ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ROBUST CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE.

IN SHORT, THE CONSIDERATION OF A NONTRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS TO RENT AND SELL STEEL STORAGE CONTAINERS ON A 5.11 ACRE PARCEL IN THE RCU ZONING DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

NOW, I'VE GOT THE CONDITIONS, AND IF YOU'D LIKE, I CAN HOLD OFF ON SOME OF THE CONDITIONS UNTIL WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, BUT STAFF DOES HAVE SOME CONCERNS.

THE FENCING IS SOME OF OUR CONCERN.

THAT DOESN'T MEET ANY OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW.

JUST THE ECLECTIC AREA.

THIS IS A USE THAT WOULD GENERALLY BE ONLY IN AN INDUSTRIAL AREA IN THE ECLECTIC AREA.

THERE'S SOME CONCERN THERE FROM STAFF.

THEN ALSO PUBLIC WORKS IS GOING TO REQUIRE A TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THAT TURNING LANE TO GET IN THERE.

AGAIN, WE WOULD RESERVE SOME JUDGMENT ON THAT.

THAT THEN TAKES US INTO THE CONDITIONS.

WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO GO ON TO THE CONDITIONS AS THEY STAND OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT?

>> JUST GO AHEAD AND FINISH.

>> WE PROPOSE A NONTRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT FOR FIVE YEARS.

THIS IS WHERE PLANNING AND ZONING MADE A LOT OF CHANGES.

A LOT OF OUR CONDITIONS THAT WE INITIALLY PUT INTO THEM, THEY HAVE CROSSED OUT THROUGH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THINGS LIKE CONTAINERS WILL NOT BE USED AS A FENCE.

LOT COVERAGE NO GREATER THAN 10%.

THESE WERE ALL CROSSED OUT, AND INSTEAD, WE HAVE WAIVER REQUESTS THAT ARE IN HERE.

HOWEVER, WHAT DID RETAIN IN HERE IS THAT CONTAINERS 20 FOOT OR LESS MAY BE DOUBLE STACKED, ANYTHING LARGER CANNOT BE DOUBLE STACKED.

ALSO THE ONSITE OFFICE WILL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE REST ROOMS. IF USING THE STEEL CONTAINER FOR AN OFFICE, THEN THAT CONTAINER HAS TO BE APPROVED BY ADOH.

THERE'S A PROCESS FOR THAT.

ALL OF THEIR BUILDING PERMITS WILL NEED TO COME INTO PLAY, ALL OF THE STANDARD PERMITS.

THEY'LL HAVE TO GET FINALIZATION OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR THE OFFICE BY ADOH.

THEN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITHIN TWO YEARS, AND IF THEY WERE TO FILE UNDER PROP 207, THEN THIS WOULD BE NULL AND VOID.

THOSE ARE THE STANDARD CONDITIONS.

SOME OF THE WAIVERS, WAIVER OF SECTION 301, WHICH DEFINES FENCE.

THIS WOULD ALLOW THE CONTAINERS TO BE UTILIZED AS A FENCE.

WAIVER OF SECTION 564, AGAIN, THIS IS WHERE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WENT FROM ALLOWABLE TO 10% TO GO AS HIGH AS 40%.

WAIVER OF 564 TO ALLOW STEEL CONTAINERS STORED ON THE PARCEL AS INVENTORY AND AS A FENCE, NOT TO MEET THOSE PRIMARY SETBACKS.

THIS WAS THE ONE THAT STAFF ADDED THAT BASICALLY ANY USE OF THE PARCEL PRIOR TO GETTING EVERYTHING PERMITTED PROPERLY.

IF THIS PERMIT WERE TO BE GRANTED, THEN THAT THIS PERMIT WOULD BECOME NULL AND VOID IF THE USE OF THE PROPERTY TAKES UP AGAIN BEFORE ALL OF THE PERMITS ARE DONE.

THEN THE LAST ONE, DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC WORK REQUIREMENTS AND A TRAFFIC STUDY FOR [INAUDIBLE] ROAD.

>> WHEN YOU SAY THAT, IF THEY DON'T FOLLOW THE PROCEDURES CORRECTLY AND WHAT HAVE YOU, IT'S GOING TO BE NULL AND VOID.

DOES THAT MEAN AT THAT TIME, THEY NEED TO CLEAR THAT WHOLE PIECE OF PROPERTY OFF AND EVERYTHING LEAVES?

>> I WOULD SAY YES, BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT PERMITS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED,

[02:55:01]

SO THAT JUST LIKE ANY OTHER PROPERTY, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO USE IT UNTIL THE PRIMARY USE HAS BEEN PERMITTED AND FINALIZED.

>> HOW LONG DID THIS PROPERTY GO BEING USED OUT OF AN APPLIANCE?

>> OUT OF APPLIANCE. IT WAS IN VIOLATION OF ALMOST 18 MONTHS.

>> EIGHTEEN MONTHS. THANK YOU.

DO YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? ANYONE? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT?

>> YES, BUT I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE ONE COMMENT.

I KNOW THAT BJ HAS STATED QUITE OFTEN THAT THIS IS RESIDENTIAL AND IT IS A UNIQUE AREA.

THIS PARCEL IS ADJACENT TO I17.

IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO HAVE A COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL USE.

CERTAINLY MANY OF THESE ZONING ISSUES WERE GOING TO BE COVERED IN COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND ZONING AS WE GO FORWARD.

I DO REALIZE IT IS RESIDENTIAL, BUT IT'S VERY CLOSE TO I17, SO IT DOES MAKE SENSE THAT IT WOULD BE AN INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL USE AS THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT ON THE QUESTIONS PROPOSED BY MYSELF AND THE BOARD.

>> JUST TO ADD ON TO THAT, I THINK YOU SAID THAT THOSE RESIDENCES NEXT TO THE PROPERTY ARE ACTUALLY ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.

>> THEY ARE C2 PARTS.

>> THEY BUILT IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONING.

>> RESIDENTIAL ON C1 AND C2 IS ALLOWABLE BY RIGHT. YES.

>> THE PLANNING AND ZONING, WAS IT UNANIMOUS?

>> YES, IT WAS UNANIMOUS?

>> UNDER THESE CONDITIONS?

>> UNDER THE CHANGED MODIFIED CONDITIONS WAIVERS.

>> GREAT. THANK YOU. TIM, GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> TIM STEDMAN, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ALL STAR STORAGE.

>> STATE YOUR NAME.

I APPRECIATE YOU HERE IN OUR CASE TODAY.

IF YOU'D LIKE, I CAN JUST HIT SOME OF THE HIGH POINTS THAT WERE DISCUSSED AND THEN ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ANYONE MAY HAVE.

THE FIRST THING I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS IS THE ISSUE OF THE PROPERTY BEING IN VIOLATION.

OBVIOUSLY, IT WAS IN VIOLATION.

HOWEVER, AT THE BEGINNING OF WHEN THOSE CONTAINERS WERE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY.

IT WAS AN UNFORTUNATE SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE SOME THINGS WERE CHANGED WITH ONE OF OUR CLIENTS, AND THEY JUST NEEDED TO BE PUT SOMEPLACE.

MY FIRST CONTACT WITH PLANNING AND ZONING WAS WITH MR. OLSON, WHO APPARENTLY IS NO LONGER WITH THE DEPARTMENT.

AT NO TIME DID HE SAY, YOU NEED TO REMOVE THOSE OFF THE PROPERTY.

HE SAID, LET'S WORK THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS.

LET'S GET YOU A USE PERMIT.

LET'S DO, BUT THERE WAS NEVER AN INSTRUCTION TO REMOVE THE CONTAINERS FROM THE PROPERTY.

TIME GOES FORWARD. WE HAD THE INITIAL MEETING.

HE PROMISES THAT HE'S GOING TO SEND ME THE DOCUMENT SO THAT WE CAN MOVE THE PROCESS FORWARD, THAT NEVER HAPPENS.

I FOLLOW UP, I FOLLOW UP, IT NEVER HAPPENS.

FINALLY, BJ BECAME INVOLVED, AND IT BECAME CLEAR THROUGH DEALING WITH HER AND THROUGH OTHER MEMBERS OF STAFF THAT WE NEEDED TO CLEAR THE PROPERTY AND BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE.

WELL, WE'VE DONE THAT. IT TOOK A LITTLE TIME BECAUSE THEY'RE LARGE METAL BOXES AND REQUIRE SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT TO MOVE, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN MOVED OFF OF THE PROPERTY.

WE MOVING FORWARD, CERTAINLY, DON'T WANT TO BE IN THAT SITUATION AGAIN.

WE'VE COME THIS FAR AND WE CERTAINLY PLAN ON COMPLYING WITH ALL OF THE RULES GOING FORWARD.

THE ISSUE OF THE CONTAINERS BEING USED AS A FENCE.

THE AESTHETIC OF OUR BUSINESS OBVIOUSLY IS THAT WE SELL SHIPPING CONTAINERS, AND SO THE FENCE WOULD BE MADE OUT OF CONTAINERS.

THE FRONT GATE IS MADE OUT OF CONTAINER DOORS THAT ARE WELDED TOGETHER AND HUNG FROM CONTAINERS AND OPEN AND CLOSE.

IT JUST GOES WITH THE BUSINESS, AND THE CONTAINERS THAT ARE USED AS A PERIMETER FENCE WOULD NOT BE FOR SALE.

THEY WOULD BE PAINTED EARTH TONES TO MATCH THE SURROUNDINGS, AND THEY WOULD BE PERMANENTLY PLACED.

THE CONTAINERS THEMSELVES ARE 9.5 FEET TALL, SO THAT WOULD BE THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE.

THE STACKING OF THE CONTAINERS.

ONLY THE 20 FOOTERS CAN BE STACKED WITH THE EQUIPMENT THAT WE HAVE.

THERE'S EQUIPMENT THAT CAN BE USED TO STACK 40 FOOTERS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT.

THE 20 FOOTERS ARE ACTUALLY A FOOT SHORTER, SO THEY'RE 8.5 FEET TALL, SO THE DOUBLE STACK WOULD BE 17 FEET TOTAL.

>> WITH RESPECT TO THE USE, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION OF CONTAINERS BEING ALLOWABLE IN INDUSTRIAL ZONING USES AND I THINK WE SEE THAT AROUND IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS BUT IN REALITY, THIS IS A RETAIL USE.

THIS IS SALES AND RENTALS OF THESE CONTAINERS.

I THINK THE CONTAINERS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH A VARIETY OF TYPES OF INDUSTRIAL USES, BUT THAT'S REALLY NOVEL WE'RE DOING.

THIS IS REALLY A RETAIL BUSINESS AND I DON'T RECALL IF THERE WERE ANY OTHER ISSUES THAT CAME UP, BUT I'M CERTAINLY HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ANYONE HAS.

>> SUPERVISOR JENKINS, DID YOU HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

[03:00:02]

>> I WANTED HIM TO ADDRESS HIS REQUEST FOR THE NUMBER OF UNITS VERSUS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONS INCREASE TO THAT REQUEST.

>> YES. THANK YOU.

I THINK THE 115 UNITS IS JUST WHAT'S ON THE SITE PLAN AND THAT WAS PREPARED BY OUR ARCHITECT, AND SHE JUST LAID SOMETHING OUT.

IF WE WERE RESTRICTED TO ONLY 10% USE OF THE PROPERTY, IT WOULD REALLY BE VERY DIFFICULT TO RUN THE BUSINESS.

WE CAN'T HAVE ANYTHING APPROACHING 100% COVERAGE BECAUSE WE NEED SPACE FOR HEAVY EQUIPMENT TO MOVE AROUND THE PROPERTY, TO MOVE THESE CONTAINERS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

BUT THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT DISCUSSION OF THIS ISSUE AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, AND WE ARRIVED ON THE 40% NUMBER AS AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF SPACE THAT WE COULD COVER AT ANY GIVEN TIME.

THE REALITY IS THAT THE CONTAINERS COME AND GO AND SO THERE'LL BE TIMES WHEN THERE'S THAT MUCH COVERAGE, THERE'LL BE TIMES WHEN THERE'S MUCH LESS, AND THE IDEA WAS JUST TO GIVE US THAT FLEXIBILITY.

BUT AT NO POINT WOULD WE BE ABLE TO GET ABOVE 50% JUST BECAUSE OF THE SPACE REQUIRED TO MOVE AROUND ON THE PROPERTY AND TO MANEUVER THE CONTAINER.

>> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR JENKINS, DID YOU GET ALL THAT?

>> YES. BUT I WOULD LIKE WHEN WE ARE THROUGH WITH ASKING QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING CHAIRMAN ALSO TO RESPOND TO THAT.

>> THEN, I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.

DOES ANY OF THE BOARD? I DON'T SEE ANY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH SIR.

APPRECIATE IT. I'LL HAVE THE CHAIRMAN COME UP FROM PLANNING AND ZONING.

>> [FOREIGN] ON THE CONTAINERS.

>> TO STATE YOUR NAME IN.

>> JIM STEWART, PLANNING AND ZONING, CHAIRMAN.

ON THE NUMBER OF CONTAINERS, THIS COMPANY LEASES TO WALMART SO AT CERTAIN TIMES OF THE YEAR, WE SEE ALL THESE CONTAINERS AT SETTING AND WALMART'S PARKING LOT.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN THERE.

LOOKING AT 10%, WE WOULD HAVE THEM IN VIOLATION VERY EASILY SO THAT WAS THE REASON THAT WE LOOKED AT INCREASING THAT.

THE SAFETY, THE FENCE, AGAIN, IT IS TO BE NON SELLABLE.

IT WOULD BE A SOLID STRUCTURE.

THEY WOULD BE PAINTED.

SAFETY OF BEING ABLE TO MOVE AROUND WITHIN THERE WITH EQUIPMENT WAS A MAJOR CONCERN.

THE 20 FOOT CONTAINERS COULD BE STACKED, 40 FOOT NO.

SAFETY ISSUES. HOPEFULLY, THAT THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION.

>> YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THAT WAS VERY HELPFUL. THANK YOU.

>> VERY GOOD.

IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, SUPERVISOR JENKINS, I'M GOING TO MOVE ON WITH GREEN SHEETS IF THERE'S ANY AND THINGS LIKE THAT. ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT?

>> YES, CHAIR. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. VICE CHAIR.

>> NO GREEN CHEESE.

>> THANK YOU. CLERK OF THE BOARD.

ANY COMMUNICATION BESIDES WHAT WE'VE RECEIVED?

>> NO ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATION.

>> AS I REACH OUT TO THE AUDIENCE, I ALWAYS NEED TO ASK, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT MIGHT LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM RIGHT NOW THAT WE ARE HAVING A CONVERSATION ON? SEEING, NONE. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THIS HEARING AT THIS TIME AND SO NOW WE WILL MOVE FORWARD.

I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER 3.

>> MOVED HEARING.

I MOVED TO APPROVE HEARING AGENDA ITEM 3.

>> WE HAVE MOTION AND A SECOND.

CLARK, CAN YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> HEARING ITEM NUMBER 3 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> IN OUR ZONING STUDY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A STACK OF JUST SHIPPING CONTAINER POLICY MOVING FORWARD.

IT'S GETTING OBVIOUS WE NEED TO DO THAT.

>> EVERY TIME I GO BY WALMART NOW, I'M GOING TO KNOW WHERE THOSE CONTAINERS COMING FROM CAUSE THAT PARKING LOTS FULL OF THEM.

I GET IT. WISH YOU THE BEST?

>> THANK YOU, TOO.

>> WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 4.

[4. Development Services - Approve a nontransferable Use Permit, for a period of 10 years, for APN 201-10-003D, to authorize a five-site RV Park, two guest homes, two steel storage containers, and an increased category A animal allotment of 30 animals, including waiver requests, on a 7.91-acre property, subject to the conditions of approval. Owner: Ruth Ann & Wayn Bernard Artz. Applicant/Agent: Morgan Busby, Busby Permits. Located in the community of Wickenburg East. Application No. PLA25-000071. (District 1 - Supervisor Compton)]

>> GOOD. I'M ON TRACK NOW.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE A NON TRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS. HI.

>> BJ RATLIFF AGAIN, PLANNER FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

THIS USE PERMIT REQUEST.

ALSO, WAS A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 2ND, WHERE IT ALSO RECEIVED UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.

CHAIRMAN STEWART IS HERE TO SPEAK.

[03:05:01]

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THEIR DELIBERATIONS.

THIS PROPERTY IS OWNED BY MR. AND MRS. ARTS WHO ARE HERE TODAY IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, AND I THINK THEY DO HAVE SOMETHING TO SHARE WITH YOU.

THE APPLICANT WAS ACTUALLY A PERMIT COMPANY MORGAN BUSBY.

SHE'S NOT HERE, BUT THE ARTS ARE HERE.

THIS AREA IS LET ME BACK UP.

THE APPLICATION REQUEST IS FOR A NON TRANSFERABLE 10 YEAR USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A 5-SITE RV PARK TO GUEST HOMES.

I'VE GRADE OUT THOSE GUEST HOMES BECAUSE UNDER THE NEW ARS STATUTE THAT'S COMING IN, THOSE ARE PROBABLY GOING TO BE PERMITABLE AS THEY ARE COME JANUARY.

HOWEVER, TODAY, THEY ARE NOT ALLOWABLE, THEY CAN ONLY HAVE ONE GUEST HOME, SO THATS WE'RE IN THIS IN BETWEEN PERIOD RIGHT NOW ON THAT.

BUT IT'S FOR THE 5-SITE RV PARK TO GUEST HOMES, TWO STEEL STORAGE CONTAINERS, WHICH ARE NOT ALLOWED WITHIN THE R1L ZONING, AND ALSO TO INCREASE THE ANIMAL ALLOTMENT FROM THE ALLOWABLE 16-30 OF THOSE CATEGORY A ANIMALS HORSES AND CATTLE.

WITH THIS COMES SEVEN WAIVER REQUESTS.

THIS AREA IS LOCATED IN WICKENBURG, EAST COMMUNITY, DISTRICT 1, SUPERVISOR COMPTON.

IT IS ACCESSED OFF OF US 93 ON THAT NORTHEAST CORRIDOR OF WICKENBURG, COMES OFF OF 93 THERE, AND THEN ONTO SCENIC, AND THEN ONTO MOONLIGHT MESA.

IN THIS AREA HERE, THE PAD AND THE YELLOW HERE, THIS IS ALL WICKENBURG, THIS IS OUR COUNTY AREA, THIS IS THE PARCEL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THE ZONING HERE IS R1L ON EITHER SIDE OF IT, RCU HERE, AND I'VE USED THIS A LITTLE BIT TRANSPARENCY SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THIS IS A FULLY BUILT OUT NEIGHBORHOOD.

THERE'S HOMES ON ALL THE PROPERTY SURROUNDING IT.

THIS PROPERTY ALSO CAME TO US IN VIOLATION.

WE RECEIVED A COMPLAINT IN JANUARY OF 26, WHERE THE OWNERS WHERE THE COMPLAINT SAID THEY WERE RENTING OUR V SITES AND DUST ON THE ROAD.

THE ONLY PERMIABLE THING ON THE PROPERTY WAS THE HOME, LITTLE OVER 2000 SQUARE FOOT AND THE SEPTIC TANK.

THAT'S THE ONLY THING PERMIABLE ON THE PROPERTY.

SINCE THEN, THESE OWNERS WORKED WITH THIS VERY AGGRESSIVELY.

THEY STARTED IMMEDIATELY WORKING TO BRING THINGS INTO COMPLIANCE.

THEY STARTED GETTING THE FENCES AND THE CORALS PERMITTED.

THEY NOW HAVE SUBMITTED THE AS BUILT PERMITS FOR THE GUEST HOMES.

THOSE WERE SUBMITTED, I THINK, JUST A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO.

THEY HAVE ALSO APPROVED A VERY LARGE SEPTIC SYSTEM WHICH WILL HANDLE THE GUEST HOMES AND THE 5-RV SITES.

THEY BEGIN WORKING THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS ALREADY ON THAT.

THEY'RE WAITING NOW THIS APPLICATION IF THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE REST OF THE PERMITTING OR NOT, DEPENDING ON WHAT HAPPENS TODAY.

WHAT THIS IS, IS IT'S BASICALLY WE HAVE TWO UNPERMITTED GUEST HOMES THAT WERE CONVERTED FROM STORAGE AND GARAGE SPACE, AND THEN 5-RV SITES.

THEY ARE ON THE PROPERTY.

AGAIN, SEVEN DIFFERENT WAIVERS.

AGAIN, THEY'VE WORKED VERY AGGRESSIVELY WITH THIS ON US.

THINGS ARE STILL IN VIOLATION, BUT DEPENDING ON WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE USE PERMIT TODAY IS WHERE THEY CAN MOVE TO CLEAN UP THE VIOLATIONS ON HERE.

THIS IS THE SITE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS AN AERIAL IMAGE OF IT.

THIS IS WHERE WE GO? THIS IS OUR PROPERTY HERE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

YOU CAN SEE THERE'S SEVERAL OTHER ARENAS IN THE AREA DOWN THERE.

WHAT I WANT TO SHOW YOU WITH THESE IMAGES IS THIS AREA DOWN HERE IS DOWN HERE IN THIS VERY LARGE WASH THAT YOU CAN SEE.

THERE'S A BIG TOPOGRAPHY CHANGE HERE.

THIS IS ACTUALLY THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HERE.

THESE ARE THE CONTAINERS WE'RE SPEAKING ABOUT, AND YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A BIG HILL.

ONE OF THE POINTS ON THIS IS YOU CANNOT SEE THESE CONTAINERS FROM THE HOMES BECAUSE DOWN IN THIS VERY LARGE AREA WHERE THE ARENAS ARE LOCATED.

AGAIN, SO THEY'RE REQUESTING A WAIVER TO ALLOW 240 FOOT STORAGE CONTAINERS TO BE ON THE PROPERTY NEAR THE ARENA.

THERE CONTAINERS THERE.

THEN IT COMES TO AN ENTRY FEATURE WHEN WE GO ONTO A PROPERTY AND SOMETHING'S IN VIOLATION, THEY ACTUALLY LOOK AT EVERYTHING AND WHAT WE ALSO DISCOVERED HERE ON THIS ONE IS THIS ENTRY LEVEL FEATURE OR THIS ENTRY FEATURE HAS NOT BEEN PERMITTED.

THE HEIGHT IS FINE, BUT IT'S SITTING ON THE BOUNDARY LINE.

ACCORDING TO OUR ORDINANCE, THAT HAS TO BE SET AS TALL AS THE ENTRY LEVEL FEATURE IS.

THIS ONE'S ABOUT 15 FEET TALL, SO IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SET BACK 15 FEET AND IT'S SITTING ON THE PROPERTY LINE.

BECAUSE WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE USE PERMIT PROCESS, WE'RE REQUESTING A WAIVER ON THAT ONE SO WE CAN GET THAT PERMITTED.

THAT BRINGS US TO THE HORSE PINS.

HORSE PINS BY RIGHT AND BY ORDINANCE, TO HOUSE A HORSE OR LIVESTOCK ANIMALS, THEY NEED TO MEET THE PRIMARY SETBACKS.

FOR THIS AREA, THAT MEANS THAT IT SHOULD BE AT 25 FEET HERE ON THE SIDE, AND HERE.

[03:10:06]

AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE PENS ARE ACTUALLY RIGHT ON THE BOUNDARY ALMOST WITHIN FIVE FEET.

YOU CAN SEE THESE PENS HERE ARE ON THIS BOUNDARY RIGHT HERE, THEY'RE WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE BOUNDARY.

BY RIGHT, THEY NEED TO BE THE OR EXCUSE ME, 25 FEET.

THEY'RE REQUESTING THE WAIVER TO ALLOW THEM TO REMAIN THERE AT FIVE FEET.

>> WHERE'S THE CLOSEST RESIDENCE TO THAT?

>> THE CLOSEST RESIDENCE.

YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE IT IN THIS PICTURE.

THESE ARE THE PENS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, AND YOU CAN SEE THE HOME NEXT DOOR HERE.

THERE IS SOME VEGETATION, THAT VEGETATION IS ACTUALLY ON THE OTHER PERSON, THE NEIGHBORING PERSON, BUT THE HOME IS I'M NOT SURE, 20 PLUS FEET AWAY.

NO NEIGHBORS HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT THIS, BUT AGAIN, STAFF HAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT IT BECAUSE NEIGHBORS CHANGE.

THE CURRENT NEIGHBORS DON'T SEEM TO HAVE AN ISSUE, BUT NEIGHBORS CHANGE SOMETIMES.

THAT TAKES US THEN TO THE 5-RV SITES. WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE? THIS AERIAL IMAGE DOESN'T SHOW EXACTLY THE CONFIGURATION TODAY.

THEY'RE ACTUALLY IN A U SHAPED TODAY.

BUT THESE ARE THE TWO GUEST HOMES THAT THEY CONVERTED THAT THEY'RE WORKING TO GET PERMITTED, AND THEN THE 5- RV SITES.

THIS IS WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE TODAY, AND WHAT THE OWNERS HAVE DONE IS THIS IS NOT WHERE THEY BRING IN WHERE I BRING MY RV AND HOOK UP AND STAY.

THEY'VE ACTUALLY PURCHASED RVS, THEY'RE PERMANENTLY ON SITE, AND SO PEOPLE CAN RENT THE RV AND STAY THERE.

>> THAT'S LIKE DOWNTOWN PRESCOTT RIGHT NOW.

>> YEAH.

>> EXACT SAME THING.

>> ONCE AGAIN, SEPTIC.

HOW ARE THEY HANDLING THE WASTE?

>> THE WASTE, THEY HAVE APPROVED A VERY LARGE.

IT'S A 900 GALLON SEPTIC SYSTEM THAT ACTUALLY, I THINK IS BEING CONSTRUCTED NOW. IT'S GOING IN.

>> WOULD IT HANDLE THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD TAKE IN ALL THOSE DWELLINGS?

>> THIS HAS BEEN APPROVED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

YES. THEY GOT APPROVED, ASSUMING THIS USE PERMIT WOULD GO FORWARD, SO THEY SIZED IT FOR WHATEVER THE MAXIMUM THIS USE PERMIT MAY ALLOW.

YES, SIR. THEY'RE IN A U SHAPE TODAY.

THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE SITTING.

WHAT I WANT TO POINT OUT HERE IS THIS HAYSTACK.

THIS IS THE NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR NOW TO WHERE WE'RE AT TO THE SOUTHEAST HERE.

ONE OF THE WAIVERS, THERE ARE SEVERAL WAIVERS WITH A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, YOU HAVE TO HAVE LANDSCAPING WITH THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, AND WITH AN RV PARK, YOU NEED SCREENING IE A FENCE OR ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING TO BUFFER BETWEEN NEIGHBORS.

THIS IS ONE OF THE ISSUES WITH THIS ONE, AND AGAIN, STAFF IS A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ON IT.

THIS PARTICULAR RV IS THIS ONE SITTING RIGHT HERE.

THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY IS PROBABLY THIS LINE RIGHT HERE.

YOU CAN SEE THE T POSTS HERE, A LITTLE BIT OF VEGETATION.

THAT'S PROBABLY THE PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN THIS AND THE NEIGHBOR.

IT'S PRETTY CLOSE AND THERE'S NOT A LOT OF VEGETATION THERE BUFFERING IT.

AGAIN, THIS NEIGHBOR IS ACTUALLY FULLY SUPPORTING THIS, BUT NEIGHBORS CHANGE.

THE OTHER ONE IS THIS PART OR THIS RV HERE.

NOW I'M ACTUALLY STANDING BACK HERE NOW AT THE BACK OF THIS.

I'M STANDING AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TOWARDS THAT HAYSTACK.

THIS IS THAT PROPERTY LINE.

IT'S VERY CLOSE WITHIN 7-10 FOOT OF THAT PROPERTY LINE.

>> BUT IT'S STILL OKAY.

IT'S CLOSE, BUT IT'S STILL OKAY.

>> IT'S CLOSE. WITH THE WAIVERS, THIS WOULD BE ALLOWABLE.

THEN THE ANIMAL REQUEST, CURRENTLY, THIS PARCELS ALLOWED 16 OF THE LIVESTOCK ANIMALS.

THEY ARE REQUESTING A WAIVER TO GO TO 30 ANIMALS.

STAFF HAS ACTUALLY PROPOSED THAT THIS INCREASE WOULD ONLY BE TAKING PLACE IN THE WINTER SO THAT THE CONDITIONS SAY THAT THEY CAN ONLY HAVE IT BECAUSE THAT'S THE ROPING SEASON.

THEY CAN ONLY HAVE THAT INCREASE DURING THE ROPING SEASON, WHICH IS WHAT IS PRIMARILY HAPPENING ON THE PROPERTY.

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION.

AGAIN, THEY SENT LETTERS OUT.

THERE'S 100 FOOT RADIUS THAT THEY'VE SENT IT OUT.

THEY RECEIVED ONE EMAIL.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SENT OUT THE SIMILAR SET OF LETTERS, LETTING PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT IT.

WE'VE RECEIVED TWO OPPOSITION LETTERS FROM THESE TWO NEIGHBORS HERE AND AGAIN, THE CONCERN IS ABOUT DUST ON THE PROPERTY, THE PEOPLE COMING AND GOING WITH RVS AND THE LARGE STOCK TRAILERS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE RECEIVED.

UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AGAIN, AS A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, THE COMMERCIAL USE OF AN RV PARK WOULD NOT BE ALLOWABLE ABSENT THIS USE PERMIT.

WE HOWEVER, WE ARE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE.

THEREFORE, COMING OUT OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THE REQUEST IS FOR CONSIDERATION OF A NON TRANSFERABLE PERMIT FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS TO ALLOW A 5-SITE RV PARK, TWO GUEST HOME, TWO STEEL STORAGE CONTAINERS, AND AN INCREASED ANIMAL ALLOTMENT FROM 16-30 FOR THE PURPOSES OF SEASONAL ROPING ACTIVITIES ON A 7.91 ACRE PARCEL IN THE R1L ZONING DISTRICT,

[03:15:03]

SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND THE SEVEN WAIVER REQUESTS.

AGAIN, STAFF HAS SOME CONCERN WITH KEEPING LIVESTOCK SO CLOSE.

AGAIN, THE CURRENT NEIGHBORS DON'T SEEM TO HAVE AN ISSUE, BUT THOSE NEIGHBORS CAN CHANGE.

LIKEWISE, WITH THE SCREENING OF THE RVS, AND THE VEGETATION IS VERY SPARSE BUFFERING BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

ALSO, FINALLY, THAT AN RV PARK IS REQUIRED BY THE ORDINANCE TO HAVE TWO ENTRANCES.

THERE'S ONLY ONE ENTRANCE INTO THIS PROPERTY.

STAFF DOES ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS HAS PROBABLY BEEN GOING ON.

IT WAS ACTUALLY GOING ON WITH THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNER, NOT THESE FOLKS.

SOME OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS WERE DONE BY A PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNER.

THEY PURCHASED IT AND THEN DID A LITTLE BIT MORE DEVELOPMENT ON IT, BUT THE 5-RV SITES WERE ALREADY THERE WHEN THEY PURCHASED IT.

>> SAYING THAT, THEN THAT WASN'T PERMITTED, EITHER?

>> CORRECT. YOU WOULD BE CORRECT.

IT'S BEEN ONGOING FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

HOWEVER, IT IS ALSO IN AN AREA OF R1L FULLY BUILT OUT, AND AGAIN, THAT INCREASED TRAFFIC OF LIVESTOCK TRAILERS AND RVS AND STUFF COMING AND GOING.

STAFF HAS SOME CONCERNS.

THAT THEN TAKES US INTO THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS, WHICH I'M HAPPY TO GO THROUGH OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANTS.

ARE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND MR. STEWART. CHAIRMAN PLANNING.

>> GOOD MORNING. CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

>> I'M RUTHIE ARTS.

>> WAYNE ARTS. CHAIRMAN MALLORY, VICE CHAIRMAN COMPTON AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

THANK YOU FOR HEARING US TODAY.

MY NAME IS WAYNE ARTS, AND THIS IS MY WIFE RUTHIE ARTS.

WE LIVED SIX MONTHS OF THE YEAR IN WEST CENTRAL NORTH DAKOTA TWO AND A QUARTER MILES FROM THE CANADIAN BORDER.

WE ARE RETIRED FARMERS AND RANCHERS.

WE TRAVELED 1,700 MILES TO WICKENBURG WITH OUR HORSES AND DOGS.

WE BOUGHT OUR PLACE IN 2020 AND IMMEDIATELY BEGAN WORK ON IT.

THE PREVIOUS OWNER WAS A MAN NAMED JOHN HARRELL.

OUR PLACE HAD NOT BEEN OCCUPIED FOR THREE YEARS, AND HE HAD DEMENTIA BEFORE THAT.

WE'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK ON THIS PLACE WITH MANY IMPROVEMENTS.

OUR FIRST GUESTS WERE FROM TEXAS, AND THIS WILL BE THEIR SIXTH YEAR WITH US.

THEY WILL COME DECEMBER 1 AND STAY FOR ABOUT EIGHT DAYS AND THEN GO TO VEGAS TO ROPE IN THE WORLD SERIES.

THIS WILL BE OUR BUSIEST TIME.

WE'RE PRETTY MUCH CRAMMED THEN, BUT NOTHING ELSE IN THE YEARS LIKE THAT.

WE WILL THEN BE EMPTY UNTIL EARLY JANUARY AND FAIRLY BUSY UNTIL MARCH 15, AND THEN ROPING SEASON IS ABOUT DONE.

OUR SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUIRES A NEW SEPTIC WHICH IS BEING INSTALLED TODAY AS WE SPEAK, OUR TANK IS GOING IN THE GROUND.

WE ALSO HAVE PUT DOWN ASPHALT MOLDINGS TO MITIGATE THE DUST FROM THE ROAD, AND WE'LL COMPLETE THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMIT.

THE PENS WERE THERE AGAINST OUR NEIGHBORS FENCE, AND WE REPLACED THEM WITH SOME NEW ONES AND ACTUALLY MOVED THEM AWAY 5', NOT KNOWING THE REQUIREMENTS OR ANYTHING, BUT OUR BORDERING NEIGHBORS DIRECTLY ON EITHER SIDE, DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT WE DO AND WE'VE SPOKEN TO BOTH THEM AS RECENTLY AS YESTERDAY.

WE BELIEVE WE PROVIDE A MUCH NEEDED SERVICE OVER A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.

I'VE HEARD ABOUT 40,000 TEAM ROPERS COME TO ARIZONA IN THE WINTER, 10,000 OUT OF CANADA AND WICKENBURG IS THE CENTER OF THAT.

WE USE OUR INCOME TO SERVICE THE MORTGAGE, PAY OPERATING EXPENSES, AND FOR UPKEEP AND IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY, AND WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. I APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT AND THE FACT THAT YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING TO MITIGATE THE DUST CONTROL AND THAT YOU'VE AGGRESSIVELY BEEN WORKING TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE ONCE YOU WERE NOTIFIED OF THE VIOLATIONS IS IMPORTANT, AND THAT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO THE WICKENBURG AREA AND THE IMPACT THAT ROPING HAS IN THE WICKENBURG AREA.

I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE DOING, AND APPRECIATE YOUR WILLINGNESS TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE.

>> I GUESS WE WERE ARE NAIVE, BUT WE JUST LOOKED AROUND WHAT THE NEIGHBORS WERE DOING, AND WE THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT YOU DID. ANYWAYS.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN.

>> PLANNING AND ZONING WAS UNANIMOUS.

OBVIOUSLY, IT WAS AFTER MANY CONDITIONS AND LOOKING AT MANY DIFFERENT THINGS.

CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE PROCESS OR WHAT THE [OVERLAPPING].

>> I'M GOING TO USE COMMISSIONER RV.

>> SUPERVISOR CHECKS.

[03:20:01]

>> SUPERVISOR CHECKS AREA.

WE'VE GOT AN RV PARK AS WE COME INTO COTTONWOOD.

A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO, WE REQUIRED THEM TO PUT UP A SCREENED FENCE.

YOU'RE LOOKING RIGHT DOWN ON THAT AS YOU COME IN.

AT FENCE DOES ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD WHATSOEVER FOR ANYTHING.

WHEN WE LOOK AT THESE PROPERTIES LIKE THIS, I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT INTO CONSIDERATION AS FAR AS SCREENING.

>> THE TOPOGRAPHY, WHERE IT'S DOWN IN THE DEPTH.

>> TOPOGRAPHY IS A BIG, BIG CONCERN.

AGAIN, WE HAD A BIG, BIG DISCUSSION ON THAT.

THE OTHER WAS THE DOUBLE ENTRANCE THAT CAME UP AS A CONCERN, AND I BELIEVE THAT WE'LL HAVE TO GO BACK.

THEY HAD A NEIGHBOR THAT WOULD POSSIBLY ALLOW FOR AN EXIT IF NEEDED, WAS THAT NOT CORRECT?

>> I'M NOT SURE.

>> WELL, I'VE TALKED THAT ONE NEIGHBOR THAT WE TALKED ABOUT ON THAT ONE SIDE THERE.

BUT ANYWAY, IT IS SOMETHING THAT WAS A CONCERN WAS JUST THE IN AND OUT OF THE PROPERTY.

THERE IS PLENTY OF ROOM FOR A SERVICE VEHICLE TO COME IN AND MAKE THAT TURN.

BUT WITH FIRE, WE JUST WANT TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT WE HAVE A INGRESS EGRESS ESCAPE ROUND.

>> WELL, THANK YOU, MR. STEWART. I APPRECIATE IT.

I APPRECIATE THE COMMISSION'S EFFORTS ON THIS AS WELL.

>> FINE. THANK YOU.

>> MY VIEW ON IT IS ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE IN A RURAL AREA, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING INTO COMPLIANCE.

WE'RE GOING TO BE RUNNING INTO IT FOR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS, AND I'M HAPPY TO SEE THAT AT LEAST FOUR YEARS, 3.5, AND THAT PEOPLE WILL BECOME GETTING PEOPLE INTO COMPLIANCE, WHICH IS DIFFICULT IT IS.

AGAIN, I'LL HAND TO STAFF FOR WORKING WITH EVERYBODY TO BRING THEM INTO COMPLIANCE.

IT'S ONGOING, BUT CERTAINLY IT SAYS A LOT THAT THEY'RE AGGRESSIVELY COMING INTO COMPLIANCE FROM ME, BUT HAPPY TO HEAR FROM MY FELLOW SUPERVISORS, AND MADAM CHAIR, WE DO HAVE TWO GREEN SHEETS.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE GREEN SHEETS.

>> HEIDI HERMAN KERR, PLEASE.

I WAS GOING TO SAY GOOD MORNING. GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> MY NAME IS HEIDI HERMAN KERR.

I LIVE TWO DOORS DOWN AT THE BEGINNING OF WHERE THIS ROAD SPLITS.

IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THAT ROAD RIGHT THERE FROM THE POINT OF THE SPLIT WHERE I HAVE TWO DRIVEWAYS BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO ENTRANCES.

MY FIRST DRIVEWAY GOING DOWN, THIS IS NOW A PRIVATE ROAD, PRIVATE MANAGEMENT.

FIRST OFF, I WANT TO SINCERELY EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK, MADAM CHAIRMAN TO YOU AND TO THE BOARD AND JUST TO BE ABLE TO VOICE SOME CONCERNS AND SOME OPINIONS.

WE PURCHASED OUR PROPERTY IN MAY OF 2023.

WE'VE LIVED THERE FOR A FEW YEARS.

WE ARE HERE SIX MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR AND HAVE A RESIDENCE IN SOUTH DAKOTA.

WE'RE CLOSE TO THEM, BUT ONE STATE DOWN.

I WILL SAY IN MY LETTER OF DISSENT, I NEVER ONCE MENTIONED DUST AS AN ISSUE.

WE LIVE IN ARIZONA.

THERE'S DUST EVERYWHERE.

WHEN WE FIRST MOVED IN, THERE WAS A LITTLE DUST GOING ON SO WE GRAVELED IN FRONT OF OUR PROPERTY, AND MY HUSBAND BROUGHT IN THE TRACTOR AND THERE'S NEVER BEEN ANY DUST IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE, YOU CAN ALWAYS SEE A CAR COMING FROM ANYWHERE.

I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE AN ISSUE AND I WILL SAY THIS IS EXTREMELY SOCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE'RE ALL FRIENDS.

WE ALL JUST REALLY LOVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S QUIET. IT'S ALL RESIDENTIAL.

DESPITE WHAT SOME PEOPLE HAVE SAID, THERE IS NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD TAKING A PENNY OF INCOME.

NOBODY ELSE IS RENTING RV SPOTS OR STALLS OR ANYTHING ELSE.

THAT IS 100% FALSE.

UNFORTUNATELY, I'M THE ONLY PERSON WHO WAS ABLE TO BE HERE TODAY TO STATE THAT.

EVERYONE ELSE IS AS SNOWBIRDS, AND THEY ARE UNFORTUNATELY NOT HERE.

ONE TRIED TO BE HERE, BUT SHE'S IN JURY DUTY IN TEXAS, SO UNFORTUNATELY.

IN GENERAL, WE ARE VERY FRIENDLY AND NOBODY WANTS TO KNOCK ON SOMEBODY'S DOOR AND SAY, YEAH, WE DON'T WANT TO COMPLAIN, WE TRY TO BE NICE.

HAS ANYBODY VOICED ANY VERBAL COMPLAINTS? WELL, NOT REALLY.

WE TRY TO BE NICE ABOUT IT.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THERE AREN'T SERIOUS CONCERNS.

I PERSONALLY, I WILL GO ON RECORD TO SAY, I WAS ONE OF THREE PEOPLE WHO LODGED AN INITIAL COMPLAINT.

ONE REASON IS BECAUSE WE DON'T LIKE LOOKING AT THIS EYESORE.

[03:25:04]

IT LOOKS TRANSIENT.

IT DEFINITELY INTERFERES WITH THE QUIET NICENESS OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WHEN I WAS WALKING THROUGH, THESE PHOTOS WERE SHOT WITH A ZOOM I WAS NOT TRESPASSING ON SOMEBODY'S PROPERTY, BUT I LITERALLY SAW THE RV HOOKUPS WERE RUNNING EXTENSION CORDS ACROSS DIRT AND PROPPED UP ON PIECES OF ROCKS, I GUESS, AND SEPTIC BEING RUN ACROSS AND THEN PUMPED DOWN.

I WENT AND TALKED TO MR. TIM OLSON, AND HE SAID, FILE A COMPLAINT.

I WANTED TO DO IT ANONYMOUSLY BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO CREATE ANY PROBLEMS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I SPOKE TO A COUPLE OTHER PEOPLE.

THEY EXPRESSED THEIR CONCERN SO OUT OF SOLIDARITY, THREE OF US AGREED TO HAVE A ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS.

WE ALL THREE DID IT AT THE SAME TIME.

BUT THAT'S WHAT KICKED ALL THIS OFF.

TO ME, IT WAS SAFETY.

I DON'T WANT MY NEIGHBORHOOD BURNT DOWN BECAUSE OF UNPERMITTED ELECTRIC.

WE ARE ALL ON WELLS RIGHT NOW.

I DON'T WANT THE WATER TABLE CONTAMINATED BY THINGS NOT BEING PROPERLY DONE.

THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF THINGS BEING PERMITTED AND INSPECTED IS THEN WE KNOW EVERYTHING IS BEING IN COMPLIANCE AND PROPERLY DONE.

AS I LOOK AT THIS, AND I HAD TO DO A LOT OF RESEARCH ON THIS TO BE HONEST, I PRINTED OUT THE ENTIRE YAVAPAI COUNTY ZONE TO RESEARCH IN AND LOOK, BECAUSE IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A WAIVER, I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE RULE THAT'S IN PLACE AND WHY IS THE WAIVER BEING REQUESTED?

>> I APPRECIATE, BUT OUR TIME IS UP FOR.

BUT I DO APPRECIATE YOU COMING UP AND VOICING THAT AND WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE HEARD WHAT YOU HAD TO SAY.

>> MADAM SHARE ONE MORE SYDNEY MAY.

GOOD AFTERNOON. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

>> WELL, I'M SYDNEY MAY.

>> IT'S ALIVE.

>> I LIVE JUST OUTSIDE THE CIRCLE OF WHERE THEY HAVE TO NOTIFY FOR THE HEARINGS.

WE BOUGHT OUR PROPERTY A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, JUST DOWN FURTHER SCENIC LOOP.

THERE IS COMMERCIAL WHERE THEY RENT OUT STALLS.

IF THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, OUR NEIGHBORS ARE DOING IT, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT DOING IT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

WE HAVE PADS FOR FAMILY OR US OR OVERFLOW RELATIVES, BUT WE AREN'T RENTING OUT AND CHARGING.

THE NEIGHBORS DOWN THE STREET ARE AND THAT'S MY BIG CONCERN THAT WE ARE WE BOUGHT IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE WANTED TO STAY RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, GO DOWN THE ROAD, BUYING COMMERCIAL AREAS, OPEN YOUR ROPING CAMPS, WHICH ARE SO PROFITABLE AND SUCH A NEED IN WICKENBURG, BUT WE HAVE SO MANY OF THOSE.

I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S A STRIP MALL THAT'S GOING TO GO VACANT, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE STUCK WITH THIS TRANSIENT LOOKING TENT CITIES THAT IS NOT A NEIGHBORHOOD FEEL.

THAT'S WHY CERTAIN DISTRICTS ARE ZONED RESIDENTIAL.

OTHER DISTRICTS ARE ZONED COMMERCIAL FOR THAT APPROPRIATE USE.

MAYBE THEY WERE BOUGHT UNDER THE WRONG PRETENSE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN GOING ON, BUT IT NEEDS TO CHANGE.

I ALSO DON'T THINK THE MAP REALLY INDICATES THE STEEPNESS OF THOSE GRADES.

I WORRY SAFETY WISE AS A FIRE TRUCK OR AN AMBULANCE IF SOMETHING WERE HAPPENING IN THAT A ROPING ARENA, HOW YOU'RE GOING TO GET DOWN THERE, ESPECIALLY WITH ONE ENTRANCE AND TO GET IN FROM ANOTHER ENTRANCE, COMING IN FROM THE WASH.

I'M NOT A FIRE TRUCK DRIVER OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE HARD TO GET IN THERE.

PRIMARILY, THE EXISTING LOT IS HAVING ALL THE LIVING SPACE UP FRONT, WHICH THERE WAS ALSO SOMETHING ABOUT THE 5,000 LUMENS, AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

I WOULD PROBABLY BE ABLE TO SEE IT FROM MY HOUSE.

THAT'S A BIG LIGHT TO ILLUMINATE, AND I'M NOT EVEN NEXT DOOR.

I KNOW THERE'S OTHER PEOPLE'S CONCERNS, BUT THEY ARE VERY WORRISOME ABOUT CREATING BAD VIBE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

NO ONE WANTS TO BE THE COMPLAINER OF THE LIGHT,

[03:30:01]

OF THE LACK OF VEGETATION, WHICH I THINK IS SO IMPORTANT TOO FOR EROSION, FOR AESTHETICS, FOR BUFFERING OF SOUND.

THERE'S GOING TO BE THAT MORE PEOPLE, THAT MANY MORE ACTIVITIES, BRINGING DOGS, WHATEVER.

>> A QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU FROM BOTH OF YOUR STATEMENTS.

DID YOU KNOW IT WAS THERE WHEN YOU BOUGHT YOUR PROPERTY? BECAUSE IT WAS OPERATING WHEN YOU BOUGHT YOUR PROPERTY.

THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING FROM PLAN.

>> YES, AND I DID ONLY BECAUSE SOMEBODY ASKED ME WHO ASKED ANOTHER FRIEND, DO YOU KNOW ANYONE RENTING PLACES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT CAME UP ON FACEBOOK THAT THERE WAS A RENTAL.

WE WENT DOWN AND CHECKED IT OUT FOR SOMEBODY ELSE.

I'M LIKE, HOW THE HECK ARE YOU GOING TO GET AN RV DOWN THAT STEEP AREA.

BUT I'M LIKE, IT'S THERE, BUT I PERSONALLY WOULD.

>> THAT'S FINE. I JUST THAT YOU WERE AWARE. THAT IT WAS THERE.

>> AFTER.

>> WHEN YOU WERE BUYING YOUR PROPERTY?

>> WHEN WE WERE BUYING THE PROPERTY, NO.

AFTER WHEN WE WERE LIVING THERE, SOMEBODY CONTACTED ME, DO YOU KNOW?

>> THAT WAS QUESTION.

>> BECAUSE STARTS DOWN THERE.

>> HAD ASKED THE QUESTION. THANK YOU.

THERE ARE NO MORE GREEN SHEETS, MADAM CHAIR.

THEN CLERK OF THE BOARD.

DO YOU HAVE ANY THING COMING FROM THE OFFICE?

>> THE AUDIENCE, ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM, THIS ITEM THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW.

I DON'T HAVE ANY INTEREST ON THERE.

I'M GOING TO GO LOOK TO YOU.

>> BRINGING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR ME BECAUSE OF THE AREA THAT I REPRESENT AND HAVING THEM COME INTO COMPLIANCE, AND THEY'RE PUTTING THE SEPTIC IN THE GROUND NOW, ADDRESSING A LOT OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED ON THE GREEN SHEETS IN REFERENCE TO SAFETY AND THE ELECTRICAL AND GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF CONDITIONS PLACED ON THE PROPERTY AND THE TIME OF YEAR THEY'RE OPERATING, I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE HEARING ITEM NUMBER 4.

>> THE SECOND? I DON'T KNOW.

>> CAN I HAVE DISCUSSION IN THERE OR DO WE ALREADY.

>> I NEED A SECOND FOR A DISCUSSION, AND THEN WE HAVE A DISCUSSION, AND THEN WE COULD CALL FOR THE VOTE, HOWEVER THAT GOES.

OTHERWISE, IT FAILS WITHOUT A SECOND.

I HAVE NO SECOND.

THIS HAS FAILED. I'M SORRY.

>> YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SECOND. CAN I ASK.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> STEP OUTSIDE.

>> MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 5,

[5. Development Services - Approve a transferable Use Permit for a period of 5 years for APNs 302-08-002F and 302-08-002G to allow for the outdoor display and sale of portable sheds, including waiver requests, on two parcels totaling 0.85 acres, subject to the conditions of approval. Owners/Applicants: Steven & Michelle Hoskins. Located in the community of Ash Fork. Application No. PLA23-000116. (District 4 - Supervisor Kuknyo)]

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVE A TRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS. HELLO.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIR MALLORY, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

I'M JUST GOING TO LOAD UP THIS SHOW HERE.

I'M SUSAN ABER PLANNER WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THE PROPERTY IS IN SUPERVISOR DISTRICT 4 IN THE COMMUNITY OF ASH FORK.

IT'S ZONE C2 COMMERCIAL ON LEWIS AVENUE, WHICH IS A ONE-WAY STREET, AND IT HAS A COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT GIVES A SNAPSHOT OF WHAT WAS ON THE PROPERTY IN JANUARY, BUT THE INVENTORY OF PORTABLE SHEDS THERE DOES FLUCTUATE.

SINCE THE RECOMMENDATION TO OUTLINE A DEFINED DISPLAY AREA WAS DECLINED BY THE APPLICANT, WE ARE GOING TO COUNT THE ENTIRE LOT AS THE DISPLAY AREA.

THAT WOULD ONLY LIMIT THE LOCATION OF THOSE SHEDS BY THE 20-FOOT FRONT SETBACK, A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN SHEDS AND A 50% LOT COVERAGE.

WITH LIMITED STAFF REVIEW, THAT WOULD LEAVE THE APPLICANT TO SELF MONITOR THOSE CONDITIONS.

TWENTY REQUIRED PARKING SPACES WERE CALCULATED FROM THAT LOT SIZE,

[03:35:01]

BUT THERE DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE A NEED FOR 20 SPACES WITH THIS BUSINESS, SO THAT IS ONE OF THE REQUESTS THAT WE'LL HAVE.

THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW.

THE DRIVEWAY IS SHOWN IN BLUE THERE.

IT'S ACTUALLY A SEPARATE PARCEL THAT'S OWNED BY EIGHT.

IT'S AN EIGHT HOT RIGHT AWAY, SO THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO APPLY FOR ACCESS THROUGH THAT.

IT'S SHARED WITH THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR, SO IT'S A VERY WIDE DRIVEWAY.

ADO DID PROVIDE SOME REVIEW COMMENTS AFTER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

THEY LET THE APPLICANT KNOW ABOUT THEIR REQUIREMENT FOR THAT LEGAL ACCESS, AND THEY DIDN'T WANT THOSE SHEDS TOO CLOSE TO THE CURB, BUT THOSE WERE THE ONLY COMMENTS, REALLY.

BUSINESS CAME TO OUR ATTENTION IN 2022 WHEN A COMPLAINT WAS RECEIVED FOR THIS.

THERE WAS A PORTABLE SHED BEING USED AS AN OFFICE WITH NO UTILITIES, BUT A GENERATOR WAS IN CONSTANT USE.

THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR A USE PERMIT IN 2023 BECAUSE OUTDOOR DISPLAY LOTS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, IT'S ACTUALLY AN INDUSTRIAL USE.

C2 TYPICALLY REQUIRES ITEMS FOR SALE TO BE IN AN ENCLOSED STRUCTURE SHOTS THERE.

THIS PHOTO WAS TAKEN FROM LEWIS AVENUE AS YOU ENTER INTO ASH FORK ON THE EAST SIDE OF TOWN.

CONTINUING DOWN LEWIS, YOU CAN SEE SEPTIC, WHICH WAS PERMITTED FOR AN OFFICE THERE, AND THIS SHOWS THE UNPERMITTED SIGN.

THIS IS THE FRONTAGE, AND THAT REQUIRED 20-FOOT FRONT SETBACK DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE MET RIGHT NOW WITH THOSE SHEDS THAT ARE ON PROPERTY, AND THE SAME WITH THE SEPARATION BETWEEN BUILDINGS.

>> I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT.

ARE THEY OUT OF COMPLIANCE AT THIS TIME?

>> YES. THEY'VE BEEN IN VIOLATION BECAUSE THEY HAVE NEVER ESTABLISHED THIS BUSINESS, SO THEY HAVE WORKED WITH THE LAND USE SPECIALIST TO GO THROUGH THIS USE PERMIT PROCESS.

>> HOW LONG IN VIOLATION?

>> IT'S BEEN SINCE 2022.

>> IT'S BEEN A VERY GOOD, AND THIS IS BEHIND THE BUILDINGS.

THIS IS WHERE THE PARKING IS PLANNED TO BE LOCATED.

IT HASN'T BEEN SET UP YET, BUT IT WOULD BE FOR THREE SPACES THERE, AND A FEW MORE.

THIS IS AN OLDER IMAGE OF THE DRIVEWAY THAT'S SHARED, SO THE APPLICANT HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES FROM THEIR NOTIFICATIONS THAT THEY SENT OUT.

THEY HAD AN OPEN HOUSE MEETING IN AUGUST, BUT NO ONE ATTENDED THAT, AND NO COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

FOR STAFF CONCERNS.

ONE OF THE MAIN ONES IS INCLUDING THAT LACK OF AN ONSITE ATTENDANT.

PEOPLE STOP WHEN THEY SEE THOSE SHEDS ON DISPLAY, AND THERE'S NO ONE THERE TO OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE, SO THEY TEND TO JUST PARK WHEREVER AND WANDER AROUND.

THERE'S ALSO SOME CONFUSION ABOUT WHERE TO PARK, SO THERE'S A VERY LARGE PARKING AREA NEXT TO THIS BUSINESS WITH THAT SHARED DRIVEWAY, AND PEOPLE TEND TO END UP PARKING IN THAT AREA WITH THIS PARKING BEHIND THAT FRONT ROW OF SHEDS, SO IT'S A LITTLE CONCERNING.

THE LOCATION OF THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS IS MAYBE LESS APPROPRIATE IN THIS DOWNTOWN AREA, EVEN THOUGH THE BUSINESSES AROUND IT ARE NOT ALL BEING UTILIZED AT THIS TIME.

IT'S MORE OF SOMETHING TO BE ON THE EDGE OF TOWN, INDUSTRIAL AREA, SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.

THEN DURING THE COMMISSION MEETING, CONCERNS WERE NOTED ABOUT THE STATE OF WEED GROWTH AND THAT GRAVEL LOT, THE GENERAL LACK OF UPKEEP, AS WELL AS PUBLIC SAFETY ON THE LOT WITHOUT REGULAR OVERSIGHT.

THE COMMISSION DIDN'T ADJUST ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BUT THEY WEREN'T IN AGREEMENT WITH THESE WAIVERS THAT WERE REQUESTED, SO WE'VE MADE SOME MODIFICATIONS.

THE REQUESTS ARE FOR A REDUCTION IN REQUIRED PARKING FROM 20 SPACES TO THREE, INCLUDING 180 A ACCESSIBLE SPACE, AND FOR THE ALLOWANCE TO USE THE EXISTING SHARED DRIVEWAY THAT IS ABOVE THAT MAXIMUM WIDTH FOR A DRIVEWAY.

THE WAIVERS THAT DIDN'T HAVE MUCH SUPPORT, THOSE WE WOULD LIKE TO STRIKE OUT, THAT WOULD MAKE SURE THAT THEY FOLLOW THE TYPICAL STANDARDS FOR AN OUTDOOR DISPLAY LOT.

THAT WOULD NEED TO BE PAVED TO COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS, AND THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A SIX FOOT LANDSCAPING STRIP IN FRONT.

THEN FOLLOWING THE COMMISSION MEETING DISCUSSION, WE WILL JUST STICK TO THOSE REQUIREMENTS, I THINK.

IN SUMMARY, THE ORIGINAL REQUEST IS FOR A TRANSFERABLE USE PERMIT FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS TO ALLOW FOR OUTDOOR DISPLAY LOT UP

[03:40:01]

TO 18 PORTABLE SHEDS AS TO THE ORIGINAL REQUEST IN THE C2 ZONING DISTRICT.

HEY. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE APPLICANT DIDN'T REQUEST ANY SPECIFIC WAIVERS.

THOSE WERE JUST PUT IN TO ALLOW THEM TO CONTINUE USE AS IT HAS BEEN OPERATING, AND AGAIN, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL.

THE APPLICANT WASN'T AVAILABLE.

THEY WEREN'T PRESENT TO DISCUSS IT WITH THE COMMISSION, SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT IT WAS JUST DENIED AT THAT TIME.

THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE CHANGING HERE, WE WOULD HAVE AN ADJUSTMENT FROM 18 SHEDS TO 12 SHEDS THAT MIGHT HELP MANAGE THAT OVERCROWDING.

THEY WOULD ALSO NOT HAVE THAT WAIVER REQUEST FOR THE GRAVEL LOT.

BUT THE THINGS THAT WOULD NEED TO STAY WOULD BE THE THREE PARKING SPACES.

THERE'S NO ROOM FOR 20 PARKING SPACES ON THE LOT, AND THE SHARED DRIVEWAY REALLY CAN'T CHANGE AT THAT POINT, SO THAT WOULD BE A WAIVER REQUEST THAT WOULD BE NEEDED.

THOSE TWO WAIVER REQUESTS ARE GOING TO BE BASICALLY WOULD BE CONSIDERED, AND I THINK THE ONLY OTHER THING WAS CHANGING THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE.

INSTEAD OF HAVING TWO YEARS TO HAVE THAT ISSUED, WE WOULD REDUCE THAT TO ONE TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN A LITTLE BIT SOONER, AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

>> BUT IT WAS STILL DENIED?

>> YES. IT WAS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.

THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

>> IF IT WAS DENIED. WHY IS IT HERE?

>> THE COMMISSION MADE THE RECOMMENDATION, SO IT'S STILL THE DECISION WOULD BE UP TO YOU.

>> I'M FAMILIAR WITH THIS, AND ON THREE PARKING SPOTS, I DON'T EVEN SEE ANYBODY THERE WALKING AROUND THOSE SHEDS.

I MEAN, THEY PRETTY MUCH HAVE THEM LAYING OUT THERE, AND I GUESS THERE'S A PHONE NUMBER TO CALL IF YOU WANT SOMEONE TO COME AND BUY IT.

IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE NOT TALKING WITH US, GETTING BACK.

>> WE STILL HAVE CHRIS, I'M SORRY.

WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF GREEN SHEETS, AND I DIDN'T TELL YOU THAT, SO I'M SORRY.

>> I DON'T THINK LIKE WHEN YOU SAID IT DOESN'T FIT, IT WOULD BE MORE ON THE OUTSIDE OF TOWN, SOMETHING, I COULD SEE THIS BEING WHERE IT'S AT, AND THE SHEDS ARE ALL IN GOOD REPAIR.

THEY'RE THERE FOR BEING SOLD.

LET'S HEAR FROM THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES.

>> WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GO TO THE GREEN SHEETS.

>> STEVE HOSKINS.

>> WE DIDN'T KNOW WE HAD TO FILL OUT GREEN SHEETS OR WE TALK.

>> THESE ARE GREEN.

>> I'M ARE THE GREEN SHEET

>> YOU'RE THE GREEN SHEETS I KNOW.

>> I HAVE NO IDEA.

>> IT'S OKAY, SIR.

>> IT'S BEEN VERY HARD.

>> THAT'S BOTH OF THE GREEN SHEETS.

>> WE'VE COVERED ALL THE GREEN SHEETS.

>> ALL THE FACE.

>> I DO HAVE ADA AFDA, THE TOWN COMMITTEE APPROVAL PAGE THAT I SWORE.

I BELIEVE I UPLOADED TO ALL THE DOCUMENTS AND A BUNCH TO SIGN APPROVALS FROM TOWN MEMBERS AND OTHER COMMUNITY LEADERS.

>> THAT'S THE ASH FORK DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, AND THEY'RE SLOW CHAMBER DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT UP THERE.

>> CORRECT. I CAN READ IT IF YOU WANT.

>> SURE.

>> IT SAYS, TO WHO MAY CONCERN, THE ASH FORK DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS ITS STRONG SUPPORT FOR STEPHEN AND MICHELLE HOSKINS.

PROPRIETORS OF FREEDOM SHEDS IN THEIR COMPLIANCE FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

FREEDOM SHEDS IS SEEKING PERMISSION TO OPERATE THEIR BUSINESS, WHICH INVOLVES THE DISPLAY AND SALES OF SHEDS ON PARTIAL NUMBER 302-80-002F AND 302-080-002G.

STEPHEN AND MICHELLE HAVE DEMONSTRATED THEIR COMMITMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH AND THEIR BUSINESS ALLIANCE POSITIVELY WITH THE LOCAL ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY INTEREST.

AFDA BELIEVES THAT GRANTING THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WILL NOT ONLY BENEFIT STEPHEN AND MICHELLE HOSKINS, BUT IT WILL SUPPORT LOCAL ECONOMY OF ASH FORK.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS REQUEST.

>> YOU GUYS STILL GOT A LOT OF HOOPS TO JUMP THROUGH WITH ADO, TOO.

>> THE REASON WHY NOBODY'S THERE IS BECAUSE OF THIS.

I DIDN'T WANT TO CAUSE ANY MORE ISSUES.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. I ASK YOU QUESTION.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> DID WE HAVE THIS PIECE OF PAPER AT ALL?

[03:45:02]

>> NO WE DON'T.

>> THIS WAS NOT PART OF PLANNING AND ZONING, AND THEN SINCE 2022, IT HASN'T BEEN IN COMPLIANCE. THANK YOU.

>> INITIALLY, TIM ALSO CAME AND SAID THAT WE NEEDED TO START GETTING INTO COMPLIANCE, WHICH WE INITIATED AND STARTED DOING, AND THEN IT MOVED ON TO BECKY SHRINK, AND THEN I CONTINUED TO TRY TO ASK HER AND SHE WAS GONE.

THEN THAT'S WHEN SUSAN CAME IN, AND I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH SUSAN EVER SINCE.

>> CAN I SAY SOMETHING?

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> THIS IS MICHELLE HOSKINS.

THIS IS NOT TO COMPLAIN IN ANY WAY, BUT I WANT TO SHARE THE FRUSTRATION THAT WE HAVE DEALT WITH WITH EMAIL AFTER EMAIL OVER THE YEARS, REQUEST, AFTER REQUEST.

WE HAVE PHYSICALLY COME DOWN HERE AND STOOD AT THE DESK AND BEEN WALKED AWAY FROM.

WE HAVE TRIED HARDER THAN THERE IS ANY WAY OF EXPLAINING, AND THIS HAS BEEN OUTRAGEOUSLY FRUSTRATING.

WE ARE WILLING TO COMPLY.

WE WILL JOYFULLY COMPLY WITH ANYTHING YOU ASK OF US.

THIS IS OUR LIVELIHOOD.

WE MOVED TO ASH FORK FOR A DIFFERENT LIFE WITH OUR FAMILY.

WE ARE TRYING, AND WE WILL DO WHATEVER YOU ASK US TO DO.

>> WHEN YOU GOT THOSE EMAILS, I WISH YOU WOULD HAVE TALKED TO ME.

I'M AT ALL THOSE ASH FORK DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION MEETINGS NEXT TIME.

>> HE'S ON THE BOARD.

>> I RECENTLY BEEN ELECTED FOR THE KW, AND THAT'S THE THING.

GOING UP HERE WAS ABOUT COMMUNITY.

WE TOOK OUR KIDS FROM THE CITY TO COME UP HERE. WE HAVE FIVE KIDS.

WE GOT 40 CHICKENS, TWO GOATS.

LIKE, WE CAME UP HERE FOR THIS.

I'M A PART OF THE ASH FORK ACTION PLAN COMMITTEE.

I'M A PART OF THE AFDA NOW, AND WE'RE LOCAL RESIDENTS.

I'M A LOCAL PASTOR AT ASH FORK.

I'M THE MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL BASKETBALL COACH.

LIKE, WE ARE POURING INTO THIS COMMUNITY AS MUCH AS WE CAN, AND IT MIGHT NOT LOOK AS PRETTY AS SOME OF THE OTHER ONES, BUT IT'S THE SAME SITUATION.

WE'RE TRYING TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO BECOME COMPLIANT AND ALL OF THE THINGS THAT ARE RECOMMENDED RIGHT.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY JUST HAVE TO BE MOVED BACK A LITTLE BIT MORE OFF THE ROAD.

IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY NEED TO HAVE SOME OFFICE WITH SOME FACILITIES WITH A TOILET.

WHAT IS THE MAIN CRUX OF GETTING INTO COMPLIANCE?

>> IT WOULD BE THE PLACEMENT OF THE SHEDS.

THE NUMBER OF SHEDS WOULD JUST BE SETTLED ON HERE WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BUSINESS WOULD NEED TO HAVE A PERMIT, A CHANGE OF USE PERMIT FROM A VACANT LOT.

OTHERWISE, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR AN OFFICE.

IT'S JUST A CONCERN THAT WE HAVE FOR HAVING NO ATTENDANCE, BUT IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU GUYS ARE READY TO DO THIS STUFF?

>> ALREADY.

>> IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD TABLE FOR ONE MONTH AND COME BACK AND SEE IF IT'S BEEN COMPLETED? WOULD ONE MONTH BE ENOUGH TIME?

>> IT ACTUALLY WOULD NEED APPROVAL TO GO FORWARD.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO APPROVE THAT, THEN THE PROCESS FOR APPLYING FOR THAT CHANGE OF HIS PERMIT IS ALL THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO DO AFTERWARDS, SO THE ONLY REQUIREMENT FROM ADO WAS THAT ACCESS PERMIT?

>> IT SOUNDED LIKE FOR TWO SEPARATE PARCELS, TOO.

>> FOR THE REAL ESTATE OFFICE NEXT DOOR, THAT'S.

>> DOES YOUR NEXT DOOR I HAVE JAKES OR SOMETHING?

>> JAKES. I THINK WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS THAT THE LOT THAT WE HAVE THEM ON ARE, YES, TWO INDIVIDUAL LOTS, F&G THE REAL ESTATE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS SECTION.

SINCE THEY PHOTO, ALL OF THOSE SHEDS HAVE BEEN NICE AND PRETTY.

I PAID THE SON OF THE DELIVERY GUY TO SPEND TWO HOURS TO MAKE IT LOOK PRETTY BECAUSE I WANT THAT.

I FIGHT WITH THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS, AND AS FOR THE NUMBER OF 12, I HAVE A FOUR BY FOUR CHICKEN COOP.

THAT NUMBER WOULD REALLY HURT.

I UNDERSTAND 18 MAY HAVE SOUNDED LIKE A LOT, BUT NO MORE THAN 40% IS, I BELIEVE WHAT IT WAS IN ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS WHEN IT WAS DURING THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE IS THAT WHAT IT WAS, WAS NO MORE THAN 50%.

WE GET A TRAILER IN AND OUT OF THERE.

NO PROBLEM. THERE'S NO DISRUPTION TO TRAFFIC.

WE HAVE SOLD OVER 300 OF THESE AT AT THIS LOT BECAUSE IT'S A NEED FOR THE COMMUNITY.

IT IS SOMETHING THAT'S NEEDED ONE IN A RURAL AREA PEOPLE DON'T HAVE STORAGE.

WE DON'T HAVE STORAGE.

WE HAVE A MANUFACTURED HOME THEY LITERALLY HAVE NO STORAGE YOU GET THE CLOSET FOR THE BEDROOM.

THERE'S NO EXTRA PLACE TO PUT ANYTHING, SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS TRULY NEEDED IN THIS COMMUNITY, AND WE'RE FINE WITH ALL THOSE CONDITIONS. WE'RE FINE WITH THAT.

[03:50:01]

WE COULDN'T MAKE IT, AND WE APOLOGIZE DEARLY, WE HAD A CRISIS AT HOME, AND WE COULDN'T MAKE IT.

WE JUST COULDN'T MAKE IT, AND I TRULY BELIEVE THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY IT WAS DENIED.

>> IF WE APPROVE TODAY, HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT THIS COMPLIANCE COMES INTO COMPLIANCE?

>> THEY WOULD HAVE ONE YEAR TO HAVE AN ISSUED CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE.

THEY WOULD NOTIFY US ONCE THEY'VE COMPLETED THE PERMITS, AND THEN WE WOULD JUST MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING THAT WAS IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, ALL OF THOSE ITEMS HAVE BEEN MET, AND THEN THEY WOULD BE ISSUED THE COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE.

>> HEARING THIS AND KNOWING THAT THAT LETTER EXISTS OUT THERE, WOULD THAT HAVE CHANGED THE P&Z'S MIND?

>> WE CAN ASK CHAIR SEWARD TO SPEAK UP

>> THAT'S WHY I'M LOOKING RIGHT AT HIM.

RIGHT UNDER THAT BIG COWBOY HAT.

>> IT'S BEEN SUNNY HERE LATELY.

JIM STEWART, PLANNING AND ZONING.

A COUPLE OF THE CONCERNS.

LET ME JUST KIND OF ADDRESS WHAT WE AGAIN, NOT BEING ABLE TO ASK THE APPLICANT WHEN THEY WERE NOT PRESENT AT THE MEETING.

THE CONCERNS WAS LACK OF ONSITE ATTENDANT FOR WALK AND ASSISTANCE THAT WAS A CONCERN THAT WE HAD.

THERE WAS ALSO A CONCERN FOR THE PARKING BECAUSE IT'S HIDDEN BACK BEHIND THE SHEDS.

>> THERE'S A NEIGHBOR'S DRIVEWAY THERE THAT WAS A CONCERN.

WE DIDN'T WASN'T ABLE TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS, BUT THOSE WERE SOME OF THE CONCERNS.

THEY HAVE BEEN AT THAT MEETING AND ASKED SOME OF THOSE.

YES, I THINK WE COULD HAVE WORKED WITH THEM.

>> DO WE HAVE ANY COMMUNICATION OR MAYBE I ASKED THIS ALREADY FROM YOUR OFFICE, THE CLERK OF THE BOARD?

>> THE BOARD RECEIVED ONE COMMENT THAT WAS DISSEMINATED YESTERDAY FROM A PERMIT TECHNICIAN WITH ADOT.

>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER WITH THAT.

THEY GOT ANOTHER HOOP TO JUMP THROUGH WITH A DOT.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENT FROM THE BOARD? IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM THAT WE HAVE HERE? WITH THAT, I GUESS WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE HEARING THANK YOU.

YOU HAVE A SEAT, AND WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR WORK HERE SO WE'RE CLOSING THE HEARING.

YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS HAS HAD TO LEAVE.

WITH THAT, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION AFTER WHAT WE'VE HEARD TODAY TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 5, APPROVING A TRANSFER OF USE PERMIT FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS FOR AP AND 302080 02F AND 302080 02G TO ALLOW FOR THE OUTDOOR DISPLAY AND SALE OF PORTABLE SHEDS, INCLUDING WAIVER REQUESTS ON TWO PARCELS TOING 0.85 ACRES, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, OWNER APPLICANTS, STEPHEN AND MICHELLE.

>> CAN I HAVE A MOTION? DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> A SECOND.

>> CAN I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, CAN WE CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> YES, VICE CHAIR COMPTON? SUPERVISOR JENKINS? MY APOLOGIES SUPERVISOR?

>> ITEM FAILS DUE TO A TIE.

>> NO.

>> WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 6.

[6. Development Services - Approve Rezoning for APN 302-11-007 from the C2 zoning district to the C3 zoning district, including waiver requests, on a 0.61-acre parcel, subject to the conditions of approval. Owners/Applicants: Daniel & Esther Bustamante. Located in the community of Ash Fork. Application No. PLA25-000008. (District 4 - Supervisor Kuknyo)]

THIS IS ALSO IN DISTRICT 4 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, APPROVE REZONING.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIR MALLORY, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

THIS ITEM IS FOR REZONING, AND SUSAN ABER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

FOR THIS ITEM, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION.

AGAIN, IT'S IN ASH FORK AND ZONE FOR C2 COMMERCIAL ZONING.

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ALSO HAS THAT COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION, AND THE CHANGE THE REZONING FROM A HIGHER TO A LOWER RANK OR LESS RESTRICTIVE ZONE WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH THAT COMPREHENSIVE DESIGNATION.

THERE'S A LOT OF MARKUPS ON THIS SITE PLAN, SO TO MAKE IT A LITTLE EASIER TO SEE.

WE'VE GOT THE BUILDINGS, THE STRUCTURES THERE.

THERE'S A SHED, A CANOPY, AND A GARAGE.

THEN THREE RVS ARE CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY ON THE RIGHT SIDE.

BUT AFTER DISCUSSION AT THE COMMISSION MEETING, ONLY ONE WOULD REMAIN AS THE CARETAKER'S RESIDENCE.

[03:55:04]

ANOTHER CHANGE RECOMMENDED SINCE THE COMMISSION MEETING WOULD BE REMOVAL OF THE ROW OF CARS, THAT'S NEXT TO THAT CANOPY.

IT DOESN'T MEET THE 20 FOOT SETBACK AND WE WOULD LEAVE THE REQUIRED WALL ON THE SIDE FACING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ACROSS THE STREET, WHICH IS JUST A REQUIREMENT FOR THAT DISPLAY LOT.

THAT REDUCES THE SALES LOT SIZE, AND WOULD LEAVE A NEAT ROW OF THOSE SIX SPACES FOR THE USED CAR SALES, OR THE CONFIGURATION CAN CHANGE DEPENDING ON WHAT IS PREFERRED.

FINALLY, A DOT WILL REQUIRE CURB WORK TO CLEAN UP THE DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES.

ONLY ONE ENTRANCE OF A TYPICAL WIDTH WOULD BE ALLOWED ON LEWIS AVENUE AND ONE ON PARK AVENUE.

THAT WOULD TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE THERE AND THAT WOULD REDUCE THE NEED FOR THE WAIVERS THAT WERE REQUESTED PREVIOUSLY.

HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW, YOU CAN SEE THE LARGE EIGHT AT RIGHT OF WAY CURVES AROUND THE TOP OF THE PROPERTY.

THERE WERE FOUR RVS WHEN THIS SATELLITE IMAGE WAS TAKEN AND THAT IS WHAT LED TO THE COMPLAINT ON THIS PROPERTY.

THEY WERE USING FIVE RVS AT THE TIME WITH OUTSIDE STORAGE OF OTHER VEHICLES, FURNITURE AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS.

THE APPLICANTS DECIDED TO PURSUE A REZONING REQUEST TO MORE CLOSELY FIT IN WITH THE ALLOWED USES.

THIS WOULD BE A CONDITIONAL REZONING, SO THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE WAIVERS FOR THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS TO OPERATE.

THIS PHOTO IS FROM PARK AVENUE, ENTERING ASH FORK ON THE WEST SIDE, AND THIS IS THE OTHER CORNER FROM LEWIS, AND THEN JUST GOING BACK DOWN PARK AVENUE YOU CAN SEE THE CARETAKERS RESIDENCE THERE.

HERE WE'RE LOOKING FROM 7TH STREET AND OVER TOWARDS LEWIS AVENUE.

REMEMBER TWO OF THOSE RVS WOULD BE REMOVED.

ANY REMAINING OUTSIDE STORAGE WOULD NEED TO FOLLOW TYPICAL SCREENING REQUIREMENTS LIKE ANY OTHER RESIDENTS? THE ROW OF SIX USED CARS WOULD BE PARKED BEHIND THAT TREE.

THE APPLICANT RECEIVED ONE NEUTRAL RESPONSE FROM A NEIGHBOR ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ZONING CHANGE PERMITS, AND RV USE ON THE PROPERTY.

NO PUBLIC COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

THEN CONCERNS FOR THIS WERE ABOUT THE NUMBER OF RVS, BUT SINCE THAT HAS CHANGED, A CARETAKER'S RESIDENCE IS ALLOWED WHEN THERE'S A PERMITTED BUSINESS ON THE PROPERTY.

ANOTHER CONCERN UNIQUE TO THE PARCEL, IT'S SURROUNDED BY ROADS, TWO OF THEM ONE WAY ON EITHER SIDE, WHICH MADE THAT ACCESS A LITTLE BIT UNCLEAR, BUT SINCE ADO'S COMMENTS WILL REQUIRE THAT CHANGE TO ONE ENTRANCE ON EACH SIDE, THAT SHOULD CLEAR THINGS UP.

THE LAST CONCERN REMAINS, BUT HOPEFULLY SOME OF THE CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN WILL HELP WITH THE ORGANIZATION ON THE LOT.

THE ONE REMAINING PARKING WAIVER IS A REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF CUSTOMER PARKING SPACES 11-41 ADA ACCESSIBLE SPACE.

MOST OF THE PARKING ON THAT LOT WOULD BE FOR THE USED CARS ON ONE ROW, THE REPAIR VEHICLES, VEHICLES WAITING TO BE REPAIRED ON ONE ROW.

THE CARETAKERS RESIDENTS WOULD HAVE A ROW OF PARKING.

THEN THE FOUR REMAINING SPOTS WOULD BE FOR ANY CUSTOMERS THAT DIDN'T COME IN TO HAVE THEIR CAR REPAIRED.

THE WAIVERS FOR OUTSIDE DISPLAY LOTS WOULD INCLUDE REMOVING THAT REQUIREMENT FOR SCREENING.

IT'S BECAUSE OF THE LAYOUT OF THE LOT, THEY WOULD NEED TO SCREEN ALL THE WAY AROUND TO MEET THAT REQUIREMENT.

THAT WOULD BE A WAIVER REQUEST TO AVOID THE SCREENING FOR NON OPERABLE VEHICLES AND THE LANDSCAPE BORDER AROUND THE DISPLAY AREA, ALTHOUGH THERE IS THAT EIGHT RIGHT OF WAY THAT PROVIDES A SMALL BUFFER THERE.

>> THE NON OPERABLE VEHICLES ARE WAITING TO BE REPAIRED? THEY'RE NOT THERE PERMANENTLY.

>> THAT'S CORRECT AND FINALLY, A WAIVER IS REQUESTED TO ALLOW WORK ON VEHICLES OUTSIDE OF AN ENCLOSURE OR PERMITTED STRUCTURE.

THEN THAT SECOND SCREENING WAIVER IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME AS THE FIRST.

IN SUMMARY, THE REQUEST IS FOR REZONING FROM THE C2 ZONING DISTRICT TO THE C3 ZONING DISTRICT, AND THAT INCLUDES WAIVERS FOR PARKING, OUTDOOR DISPLAY, AND VEHICLE REPAIR REQUIREMENTS.

THOSE WAIVERS HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY HALF SINCE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

AGAIN, THAT VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION.

THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL HERE ARE OVER SEVERAL SLIDES,

[04:00:05]

AND I CAN PULL THEM UP TO MAKE ANY OTHER CHANGES YOU MIGHT LIKE, BUT CONDITION NUMBER THREE SAYS THAT THERE WOULD BE NO, EXCUSE ME, THAT A NEW BUSINESS, ANY NEW BUSINESS THAT WOULD COME IN WOULD NEED TO FOLLOW TYPICAL C THREE ZONING REQUIREMENTS IF IT'S REZONED TO THAT C3 ZONING.

IF THEY NEEDED WAIVERS TO OPERATE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF BUSINESS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SIMILAR PROCESS.

>> BUT THEY WERE ALREADY OPERATING UNDER C3.

>> THEY WERE OPERATING I MEAN, AS IF THEY WERE C3 UNDER C2.

>> EXACTLY, WAS THIS OUT OF COMPLIANCE, TOO?

>> YES, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PERMITTED AS A BUSINESS SINCE THEY BEGAN OPERATION.

THEY WOULD NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT CHANGE OF USE AS WELL.

THE CHANGE OF USE WOULD PERMIT THE BUILDING TO BECOME THE REPAIR GARAGE.

I THINK IT HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN A FEW THINGS IN ITS PAST SERVICE STATION REPAIR GARAGE.

BUT I THINK THE MOST RECENT THING WE HAVE ON FILE IS A REAL ESTATE OFFICE.

THEY STILL HAVE THE REAL ESTATE SIGN UP, IT HASN'T BEEN CHANGED THROUGH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SINCE THAT TIME.

>> BUT THIS GOES BACK TO LIKE ROUTE 66 SAYS WHERE THESE GUYS HAD IT AS A GARAGE.

>> THAT'S CORRECT, IT'S GONE THROUGH A SO, WHY WOULD THE ZONING NOT KEEP UP WITH THAT?

>> THE ZONING ALLOWS FOR THE USE OF THE GARAGE, NOT THE USED CAR SALES.

THAT BUT THE USED CAR SALES WOULD BE OKAY UNDER C2.

IT'S THE GARAGE THAT MAKES IT C3.

>> IT'S ACTUALLY THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

THE GARAGE WOULD BE ALLOWED UNDER THE C2 ZONING.

YOU NEED TO BE IN C3 TO HAVE AN OPEN DISPLAY LOT.

WOULD WE BE DOING SOME OF THIS CLEANUP IN THE FUTURE WITH OUR WHOLE ORDINANCES AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING? THE ZONING ITSELF WOULD PROBABLY STILL HAVE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE C2 AND C3 OR A SIMILAR COMMERCIAL DIFFERENCE.

C2 IS GENERAL SERVICE AND SALES, USUALLY IN ENCLOSED BUILDINGS IS ITS MAIN FEATURE.

THEN ONCE WE GO TO A MORE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HEAVY COMMERCIAL USAGE, THAT'S WHEN IT GETS TO C3, WHICH WOULD SPILL OUT ONTO THE LOT OUT OF THOSE ENCLOSURES.

THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENCE PROBABLY REMAINING BECAUSE THIS AREA IS MOSTLY ZONED C2, AND THEN RIGHT TO THE WEST AS YOU'RE LEAVING TOWN, IT SWITCHES OVER TO THE INDUSTRIAL USAGE SO THEY'RE ON THE BORDER.

THAT'S WHY WE WOULD SUPPORT THAT REZONING BECAUSE IT'S THOSE INDUSTRIAL USES THAT ARE ALL AROUND AS WELL.

THEN THE REMAINING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, WE'RE JUST TAKING OUT THE WAIVERS THAT WOULD NO LONGER APPLY TO REMOVING THAT ROW, THE 20 FOOT SETBACK REDUCTION, THE LANDSCAPE BORDER.

WE WOULD STILL REQUEST A WAIVER FOR THAT, BUT WE WOULD HAVE THE SOLID WALL REMAIN AS A REQUIREMENT.

THEY DON'T NEED ANY OF THESE OTHER WAIVERS BECAUSE OF THAT CHANGE, THAT REMOVAL OF THE PARKING SPACES CHANGES A LOT ABOUT WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR A PARKING LOT.

THEY WOULD NO LONGER NEED TO HAVE 6% COVERAGE OF LANDSCAPING.

THEN THE EIGHT DOT REQUIREMENTS OR MAYBE I DIDN'T COVER THOSE CLEARLY.

BUT A DOT SINCE THEY WILL HAVE RE CURBING DONE ALL ALONG LEWIS AND PARK AVENUE, THEY WOULD NOT NEED TO BE SO CLOSE TO THE EDGE OF THE STREET WHERE THE CROSS STREET OF 7TH STREET WAS NOT MEETING THE REQUIREMENT OF 30 FEET AWAY.

THAT CAN BE REMOVED AS A WAIVER REQUEST AS WELL.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE I MEAN, WE'RE ALMOST BUMPING INTO OUR NEW REQUIREMENTS AGAINST HISTORICAL PRESERVATION TO SOME DEGREE, BECAUSE THAT AREA RIGHT THERE HAS ALWAYS OPERATED LIKE THAT.

I ALWAYS LOOKED LIKE THAT, BUT NOW WE'RE GOING TO INSTITUTE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, WALLS BEING CONSTRUCTED.

I MEAN, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE DO YOU GET THAT FEELING WITH THIS PROJECT?

>> SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS ARE BECAUSE OF THE RESIDENTIAL USE THAT'S ACROSS THE STREET ON PARK AVENUE AND THAT'S WHERE THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINTS CAME IN.

THAT WALL, I THINK WILL DO A LOT TO HELP WITH JUST HAVING A SMALL SCREEN, JUST A SEPARATION FROM THE PARKING AREA, AND THEN THE GARAGE, IS STILL IN OPERATION.

IT WOULD STILL CONTINUE IN OPERATION AS IT HAS BEEN.

THEN REMOVING THE RVS, I THINK WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO RESOLVING THOSE COMPLAINTS AS WELL.

> YOU BET.

>> THAT IS THE ONE THING THAT WAS ADDED AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING WAS REMOVING THOSE TWO AND ONLY LEAVING THAT CARETAKER RESIDENTS RV.

THEY WOULD HAVE TWO YEARS TO HAVE THEIR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ISSUED.

THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION, IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

[04:05:01]

>> NO, GREEN SHEET? NO.

>> NO GREEN SHEET, SORRY, AIR.

THAT'S ALL RIGHT, IT'S BEEN A LONG MORNING AND NOW WE'RE ROLLING INTO THE AFTERNOON.

IT HAS BEEN LONG CLERK OF THE BOARD.

ANY COMMUNICATIONS FROM YOUR OFFICE IN REGARDS TO THIS ITEM?

>> YES, MA'AM. ONE COMMENT WAS RECEIVED AFTER THE DEADLINE FROM THE PERMIT TECHNICIAN WITH EIGHT.

>> AUDIENCE. ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? BEFORE I GO AHEAD AND CLOSE UP THIS HEARING, I WOULD ASK ANY CONVERSATION FROM ANY OF THE SUPERVISORS OR SUPERVISOR CONVERSATION NO WELL, HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.

NOW WE WILL MOVE ON TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 6, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVING THE REZONING OF APN 30211 07 FROM C7 ZONING TO THE C3 ZONING DISTRICT, INCLUDING WAIVER REQUEST ON A 0.61 ACRE PARCEL, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL.

>> I HAVE A SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND.

YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE. PLEASE?

>> HEARING ITEM NUMBER SIX HAS BEEN APPROVED.

>> GREAT. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. NUMBER 7.

[7. Development Services - Recommend approval to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control of series 10 Beer and Wine Store Liquor License Application #357659 without protest, submitted by Lauren Kay Merrett for Las Posadas located at 26 Avenida De Piedras in Sedona. (District 3 - Supervisor Check)]

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSE.

SHOULD BE A PRETTY EASY ONE. GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR.

VICE CHAIR, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

MARK LUAN ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF YAPI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

BEFORE YOU IS THE CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF AN ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSE SERIES 10, FOR LAS POSADAS, LOCATED AT 26 AVENA DAY PAGA IN SEDONA, DISTRICT THREE SUPERVISOR CHECKS DISTRICT.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT FOR THIS.

I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANY GREEN SHEETS, VIE CHAIR?

>> NO GREEN SHEETS.

>> THANK YOU. CLERK OF THE BOARD.

ANY COMMUNICATIONS?

>> AGAIN, I ALWAYS HAVE TO ASK THE AUDIENCE, WOULD YOU ANYONE LIKE TO TALK TO THIS? THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR CHECK.

I WILL TURN TO YOU.

>> LIQUOR LICENSES ARE GOOD FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, KEEPING PEOPLE IN BUSINESS.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS ONE, SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE HEARING ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AT A SECOND.

YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> ITEM IS APPROVED. NUMBER 8,

[8. Development Services - Recommend approval to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control of series 12 Restaurant Liquor License Application #358232 without protest, submitted by Lauren Kay Merrett for Doc’s BBQ and Whiskey located at 6101 State Route 179 STE D&E in Sedona. (District 3 - Supervisor Check)]

MARK, SUPERVISOR CHECKS, DISTRICT 3.

WE HAVE A LIQUOR LICENSE.

>> HELLO, AGAIN, MARK LUAN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

BEFORE YOU IS YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE SERIES 12 FOR DOCS BARBECUE AND WHISKEY LOCATED AT 6101 STATE ROUTE 179 IN SEDONA IN DISTRICT 3, SUPERVISOR TEX DISTRICT.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY LETTERS OF OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT REGARDING THIS LIQUOR LICENSE.

I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE.

>> NO.

>> NO GREEN SHEETS.

>> NO GREEN SHEETS? WE LITERALLY HAVE NO GREEN SHEETS.

CLERK OF THE BOARD. DO WE HAVE ANY COMMUNICATION FROM YOUR OFFICE?

>> THEN ANY CONVERSATION FROM SUPERVISORS? AUDIENCE, ANYBODY TALK TO THIS ONE? NO. WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THIS ONE DOWN AND WE COULD LITERALLY LOOK FOR A MOTION.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE HEARING ITEM NUMBER 8.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. CALL FOR THE BOT, PLEASE.

>> HEARING ITEM NUMBER EIGHT HAS BEEN APPROVED.

>> GREAT. NUMBER 9.

[9. Development Services - Recommend approval to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control of series 14 Club Liquor License Application #360521 without protest, submitted by Benjamin Scott Emery for American Legion Post 123 Forrest C. Longwell located at 22255 W. Picacho Ave. #1096 in Seligman. (District 4 - Supervisor Kuknyo)]

THIS NOW IS A LIQUOR LICENSE MARK OUT OF SUPERVISOR CUGNIOS DISTRICT AFTER THIS LONG DAY, WE'RE GOING TO NEED LIQUOR LICENSES.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR.

>> THIS IS THE LAST ONE I SWEAR.

MARK LUAN ASSISTANT DIRECTOR WITH THE YAPI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

BEFORE YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, THE APPROVAL OF A LIQUOR LICENSE CONTROL SERIES 14 FOR AMERICAN LEGION POST 123 LOCATED AT 22255 WEST PACOTRON AVENUE IN SALGMAN.

[04:10:06]

IT'S DISTRICT FOUR, SUPERVISOR COKES DISTRICT.

AS OF TODAY, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY LETTERS OF OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT FOR THIS LIQUOR LICENSE, AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

>> QUESTIONS. GREEN CHEESE?

>> NO GREEN CHEESE. CLERK OF THE BOARD.

>> OF COURSE, I HAVE TO ASK.

ANYBODY YOU WANT TO TALK TO THIS ITEM? WELL, IT'S NOT HAPPY HOUR YET, BUT WE'RE WORKING ON IT.

ANYWAY, WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WILL CLOSE THE HEARING, AND I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 9, AND A LIQUOR LICENSE FOR THE AMERICAN LEGION POST 123 IN SALGMAN, ARIZONA.

>> A SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

>> SUPERVISOR CHECK.

>> HEARING ITEM NUMBER NINE IS APPROVED.

>> WE'RE MOVING ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

YOU WILL HAVE 3 MINUTES. CALL THE PUBLIC.

INDIVIDUALS MAY ADDRESS THE BOARD FOR UP TO 3 MINUTES ON ANY RELEVANT ISSUE WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURISDICTION.

PURSUANT TO ARS 38-431 DECIMAL 01.

BOARD MEMBERS SHALL NOT DISCUSS OR TAKE ACTION ON MATTERS RAISED DURING THE CALL TO PUBLIC.

THE BOARD MAY DIRECT STAFF TO STUDY THE MATTER OR DIRECT THAT MATTER BE RESCHEDULED FOR CONSIDERATION AT A LATER DATE.

>> MADAM CHAIR, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR A QUICK 5 MINUTES.

IS THAT POSSIBLE, OR DO YOU WANT TO MOVE ON?

>> I'LL GIVE YOU 5 MINUTES.

I'M NOT MOVING, IT'S ALL YOU.

THESE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WAITING SINCE 9:00 O'CLOCK THIS MORNING.