[ CALL TO ORDER]
          [00:00:52]
          >> DISTRICT 2. 
          >> SUPERVISOR COMPTON, DISTRICT 1. 
          >> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, DISTRICT 4. 
          >> SUPERVISOR CHECK, DISTRICT 3. 
          >> SUPERVISOR MARY MALLORY, DISTRICT 5. 
          >> JEREMY DYE, DIRECTOR FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. 
          >> PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONER BUCHANAN, DISTRICT 2. 
          >> I'M DAN [INAUDIBLE] FOR DISTRICT 4. 
          >> I'M [INAUDIBLE] COMMISSIONER DISTRICT 5. 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] COMMISSIONER DISTRICT 3. 
          >> JIM STEWART, COMMISSIONER, DISTRICT 1. 
          >> BOB ONE COMMISSIONER DISTRICT 2. 
          >> RANDY RODOCHIO, DISTRICT 3 COMMISSIONER. 
          >> RAY RAY PAIZ DISTRICT 1 COMMISSIONER. 
          >> PIKE EASTWOOD, DISTRICT BOARD COMMISSIONER. 
          >> FANTASTIC. THANK YOU, EVERYONE. 
          CLERK OF THE BOARD, DID YOU GET ALL THAT? 
          >> YES, MA'AM, AND YOU HAVE A QUORUM. 
          >> FANTASTIC. WITH THAT BEING SAID, A SUPERVISOR CHECK HAS A LITTLE BIT OF A SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT TO MAKE, SO I'LL ROLL INTO THAT, AND THEN WE'LL ROLL INTO THE REST OF THE MEETING. 
          IT'S RANDY GARRISON'S BIRTHDAY, SO I WOULD LIKE TO SING HIM HAPPY BIRTHDAY [LAUGHTER]. 
          >> LEAD US. 
          >> HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU. 
          [LAUGHTER]. HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU. 
          HAPPY BIRTHDAY, DEAR RANDY. 
          HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU. [APPLAUSE]. 
          >> SORRY, RANDY. [LAUGHTER]. 
          >> WELL, WE APPRECIATE YOU CELEBRATING YOUR BIRTHDAY WITH US. 
          >> YEAH. 
          >> IT'S ALL ON RECORD NOW. 
          [LAUGHTER] BUT THAT BEING SAID, 
          [ STUDY SESSION - The Board of Supervisors will meet in joint session with the Yavapai County Planning & Zoning Commission for discussion only of the following items: ]
WE ARE IN A STUDY SESSION TODAY. 
          WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND HAVE THIS JOINT SESSION WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS YESTERDAY, NOT EVERYBODY GOT TO GO, BUT I WAS ABLE TO GO TO ARIZONA TOWN HALL, AND IT WAS ACTUALLY PUT ON BY COMMISSIONER GRIFFIS, AND ALSO THE ARIZONA TOWN HALL COMMITTEE. 
          IT WAS VERY GOOD. IT HAD A LOT OF INFORMATION IN IT. 
          THERE WAS A LOT OF TALK ABOUT ORDINANCES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHICH REALLY WAS GREAT THAT WE WERE HAVING THIS MEETING TODAY. 
          I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE IT MIGHT HAVE GIVEN SOME OF US HERE THAT DID ATTEND SOME NEW QUESTIONS AND IDEAS HOW WE MOVE FORWARD IN THE COUNTY. 
          ANYWAY, WE HAVE MR. BURDON THAT IS OUR COUNTY MANAGER UP THERE ON THE DIAS. 
          ANY REMARKS AT ALL, MR. BURDON FROM YOU? 
          >> NO, CHAIR, MALLORY. 
          JUST LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING THE GOOD INFORMATION COMING TOGETHER AT THIS MEETING. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU, AND OF COURSE, I WILL HAVE OUR CONSULTANTS INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, AND THEN I'LL LEAD IT OVER TO JEREMY DYE. 
          >> THANK YOU, CHAIR MALLORY. 
          FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO I HAVEN'T MET OR DON'T KNOW AS WELL, ROGER EASTMAN CONSULTANT WITH LOGAN SIMPSON. 
          I'VE BEEN WITH LOGAN SIMPSON NOW ABOUT 18 MONTHS, BUT PLANNING IN ARIZONA FOR OVER 35 YEARS, MOST OF THAT TIME, WRITING AND REWRITING ZONING CODE. 
          DELIGHTED TO BE HERE WITH YOU THIS MORNING TO TALK ABOUT THE ZONING CODE UPDATE AND THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS UPDATE. 
          BEHIND ME, I'LL LET HIM INTRODUCE HIMSELF TO IS DANNY CORT FROM ELLIOTT D. POLLACK AND COMPANY. 
          GOOD MORNING, DANNY CORT. 
          I'M ONE OF THE PARTNERS AND SENIOR ECONOMIST AT ELLIOTT D. POLLACK AND COMPANY. 
          I WAS ABLE TO MEET SOME OF YOU AT THE TOWN HALL MEETING YESTERDAY. 
          [00:05:03]
THAT WAS GOOD TIME. 
          I'M ALSO FILLING IN RICK MERRITT IS THE PRINCIPAL AUTHOR OF THE REPORT THAT I'M GOING TO PRESENT TODAY, SO BUT HAPPY TO BE HERE. THANK YOU. 
          >> ONE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE OF THE GROUP IS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE THE CONSULTANT GO AHEAD AND DO ALL OF THE INFORMATION AND THEN WAIT FOR QUESTIONS, OR SOME PEOPLE LIKE TO ASK QUESTIONS AS THINGS GO ALONG. 
          THAT'S AN OPTION. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY PREFERENCE? I'M OKAY WITH ASKING AS WE MOVE ALONG. 
          >> I WOULD PREFER THAT. 
          >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT WE'LL DO. 
          WE WILL INTERRUPT THE CONSULTANT, AND WE'LL [LAUGHTER] GET OUR QUESTIONS OUT, AND IT'LL BE A GOOD THING. 
          WITH THAT, MR. DYE. 
          >> THANK YOU, CHAIR MALLORY, AND VICE CHAIR COMPTON, AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. 
          MY NAME IS JEREMY DYE, THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. 
          I JUST WANTED TO TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TOO TO INTRODUCE MY TEAM AS WELL. 
          WE HAVE OUR TEAM OVER HERE, OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR MARK LUSSON. 
          I THINK BEHIND ME HERE IS MATT BLAKE, OUR PLANNING MANAGER. 
          ALSO, WE HAVE SOME MEMBERS OF OUR PLANNING TEAM HERE, SENIOR PLANER, BECCA SERAKAS, OUR PLANNER, MICHELLE PARENT, OUR PLANNER SUSAN ABER. 
          OUR NEW SENIOR PLANNER RECENTLY PROMOTED BJ RATLIFF. 
          WE'RE EXCITED TO HAVE HER. 
          WE ALSO HAVE IN THE AUDIENCE HERE, DAMIEN CAMPBELL, HE IS OUR LAND USE SUPERVISOR. 
          AS WE TALK ABOUT UPDATING OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, ONCE THAT HAPPENS, DAMIAN AND HIS TEAM ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ENFORCING THAT. 
          HE'S OVER OUR LAND USE DIVISION. 
          ALSO IN THE BACK, ANDREA SHELTON AND SUZANNE JORDAN AS WELL. 
          WE'RE EXCITED TO BE HERE, AND I'D LIKE TO WELCOME YOU TO OUR 2025 JOINT SESSION, WHICH IS ALWAYS AN EXCITING OCCASION HERE. 
          THESE ARE THE SESSIONS WHERE WE REALLY TALK ABOUT PLANNING FOR YAVAPAI, FOR OUR COUNTY AND THE FUTURE OF YAVAPAI COUNTY. 
          WHEN WE HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS TWICE A YEAR, THIS IS WHERE REALLY THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD BECAUSE IT REALLY SETS THE STAGE FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR COUNTY HERE. 
          AS YOU KNOW, THIS HAS BEEN QUITE A MILESTONE YEAR FOR US BECAUSE ALL OF US HERE IN THIS ROOM HAVE UNDERTAKEN THIS UNPRECEDENTED AND MONUMENTAL STEP OF REALLY UPDATING THE 1968 ZONING ORDINANCE. 
          THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ALL BE PROUD OF RIGHT NOW, AND I THINK WE'RE ALL GOING TO BE VERY PROUD OF IT WHEN THE PROJECT IS COMPLETE. 
          WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE ORDINANCE, JUST IN GENERAL TERMS BACK IN OUR SPRING JOINT SESSION, BUT TODAY IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. 
          WE'RE GOING TO BE DIVING INTO THE NUTS AND BOLTS. 
          OUR CONSULTANTS ARE GOING TO BE TALKING A LOT ABOUT THEIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT, WHICH IS GOING TO DRIVE THE CONVERSATION, ESPECIALLY IF YOU WERE ABLE TO ATTEND THE HOUSING SESSION YESTERDAY. 
          REALLY WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING TO YOU FOR SOME GUIDANCE ON WHAT YOUR VISION IS FOR THIS ORDINANCE AND FOR OVERALL PLANNING IN YAVAPAI COUNTY. 
          AT THAT POINT, WE'RE GOING TO REALLY WANT TO PUT OUR THINKING CAPS ON AND REALLY PARTICIPATE IN A VERY GOOD DISCUSSION. 
          TYPICALLY, AT JOINT SESSIONS, WE ALWAYS START WITH A DEPARTMENT UPDATE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION, AND JUST GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT TODAY WITH OUR ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE, WE'LL DISPENSE WITH OUR NORMAL POWERPOINT PRESENTATION. 
          BUT I WANTED TO PROVIDE A COUPLE OF HIGHLIGHTS OF WHERE WE'RE AT FOR THIS YEAR. 
          BECAUSE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, IS THE HUB OF THE WHEEL. 
          BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE DEVELOPMENT REALLY HAPPENS. 
          THAT'S WHERE WE SEE THE DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING IN YAVAPAI COUNTY. 
          FOR THIS LAST YEAR, DEVELOPMENT CONTINUES TO BE VERY ACTIVE IN THE COUNTY, AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS BEEN VERY BUSY AND CONTINUES TO BE BUSY. 
          YOU'VE SEEN A LOT OF THAT COMING BEFORE YOU IN THE FORM OF USE PERMITS, PERMITS, DIFFERENT PUBLIC HEARINGS, THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          YOU'VE SEEN A LOT OF THAT ACTIVITY TAKING PLACE THIS YEAR AS WELL. 
          BUT JUST A COUPLE OF NUMBERS, STATISTICS HERE. 
          SINCE JANUARY 1ST OF THIS YEAR, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS ISSUED 4,422 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS. 
          AMONG THAT WE'VE CONDUCTED 30,386 BUILDING INSPECTIONS, AND AMONG THAT 4,400 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS, 412 OF THOSE WERE FOR NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AND 222 OF THOSE WERE FOR MANUFACTURED HOMES. 
          OVER 630 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING BRAND-NEW PERMITS, 
          [00:10:02]
SO BRAND-NEW HOMES BEING BUILT IN THE COUNTY. 
          THAT DRIVES PROBABLY OUR HOUSING ASSESSMENT DISCUSSION HERE IN JUST A FEW MINUTES AS WELL. 
          ALONG WITH THAT, GOOD FENCES MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS. 
          OUR LAND USE DIVISION HAS ALSO CONDUCTED 1,889 CODE ENFORCEMENT COMPLAINTS, TOO. 
          THEY'VE BEEN VERY BUSY AS WELL. 
          IN ADDITION TO THAT, JUST A FEW OF OUR INITIATIVES THAT WE'VE WORKED ON. 
          OUR EXPRESS PERMITS PROGRAM. 
          YOU'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THAT. THAT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL. 
          WE'VE ISSUED 192 OF THOSE EXPRESS PERMITS THIS YEAR. 
          WE'RE PROUD OF THAT. 
          THAT'S OUR PROGRAM WHERE OUR PROPERTY OWNER WANTS TO DO SOMETHING VERY SIMPLE ON THEIR PROPERTY. 
          THEY SIMPLY UPLOAD THEIR PERMIT INFORMATION, MAKE THEIR PAYMENT, AND THE PERMIT IS AUTOMATICALLY ISSUED TO THEM. 
          SOMETHING WE'RE PRETTY PROUD OF, 192 OF THOSE HAVE BEEN ISSUED. 
          ALONG WITH THAT, WE'VE ISSUED 53 CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY FOR HOME OF MY OWNS. 
          REALLY NICE, 53 FAMILIES LIVING IN OUR HOME OF MY OWN HOME PLANS. 
          WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THAT, TOO. 
          THIS YEAR, WE'VE ALSO EXPANDED THAT PROGRAM TO INCLUDE THE TOWN OF CLARKDALE, THE TOWN OF PRESCOTT VALLEY, AND ALSO THE CITY OF PRESCOTT. 
          A LOT OF ACTIVITY. 
          FINALLY, OUR VIEW SPECS VIDEO INSPECTION PROGRAM SAVED OUR BUILDING INSPECTORS 237 TRAVEL HOURS DRIVING FROM ONE LOCATION TO THE NEXT AND 10,001 VEHICLE MILES. 
          WE'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK, BUT WE'VE FOUND A LOT OF WAYS TO BE MORE EFFICIENT WITH OUR WORKLOAD AS WELL THIS YEAR. 
          IT'S NEEDLESS TO SAY, BUT I'LL SAY IT ANYWAY. 
          I'M VERY PROUD OF THE TEAM THAT WE HAVE IN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AND I HOPE YOU ARE, AS WELL. 
          THAT SAID, I'LL TURN THE PLANNING DISCUSSION OVER HERE. 
          THE GOAL OF OUR DISCUSSION TODAY IS REALLY JUST TO GIVE YOU THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JUST AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE ARE WITH OUR ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE, AND START TO SEEK YOUR INPUT ON SOME OF THOSE IMPORTANT ITEMS AS WELL. 
          WE'LL BE COVERING A LOT OF GROUND THIS MORNING. 
          FOLLOWING THIS DISCUSSION TODAY IS WHERE YOU'RE REALLY GOING TO START SEEING THE TANGIBLE WORK TAKING PLACE. 
          THIS IS WHERE WE MAKE SOME DECISIONS, WE MOVE FORWARD, AND REALLY THE REAL WORK OF REWRITING THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS GOING TO START HAPPENING IN FULL GEAR AFTER THIS DISCUSSION TODAY. 
          YOU'LL BE SEEING THOSE THINGS COMING BEFORE YOU IN THE NEXT YEAR AND THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS. 
          THIS IS AN EXCITING OCCASION FOR US. 
          THAT BEING SAID, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO ROGER TO START TALKING ABOUT THE UPDATE HERE. 
          >> SURE. I'M SORRY. 
          I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU JUST TO MENTION ABOUT THE HOME OF YOUR OWN. 
          WOULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT IS IT THAT THE COUNTY DOES? SOME PEOPLE, A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW, BUT MAYBE THEY DON'T KNOW. WHAT IS OUR INITIATIVE? BECAUSE THAT WAS A THING MENTIONED YESTERDAY. 
          WHAT IS IT THAT YOU'RE DOING TO HELP WITH THE HOUSING PROJECT? COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT IT IS THE COUNTY CONTRIBUTES TO HELP THAT MOVE FORWARD A LITTLE BIT EASIER? 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY, THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. 
          OUR HOME OF MY OWN PROGRAM IS SOMETHING THAT WE STARTED FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AGO. 
          OUR DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS ALWAYS HAD PRE DESIGNED PLANS FOR SIMPLE THINGS LIKE GARAGES, FOR COVERED PATIOS, DECKS, THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          THEY'RE STANDARD DESIGNS THAT ANYBODY CAN TAKE AND MAKE AVAILABLE. 
          WHAT WE DID WAS WE REALLY EXPANDED ON THAT SIMPLE CONCEPT, AND WE MADE AVAILABLE. 
          WE HAD A LOCAL ARCHITECT DRAW UP INITIALLY, THREE HOME PLANS, A ONE BEDROOM, A TWO BEDROOM, AND A THREE BEDROOM PLAN, AND MADE THOSE AVAILABLE AS STANDARD PLANS THAT WERE AVAILABLE TO ANYONE WITHIN UNINCORPORATED YAVAPAI COUNTY FOR FREE OF CHARGE. 
          THE FACT THAT THEY WERE ALREADY PREDESIGNED, PRE REVIEWED HELPED TO REDUCE THEIR PERMITTING COST, AND IT SPED UP THE PERMITTING PROCESS, BUT IT ALSO SAVED THE PROPERTY OWNER THE MONEY OF HAVING TO HAVE AN INDEPENDENT ARCHITECT OR A DESIGNER DRAW UP THEIR HOME FOR THEM. 
          IT SAVES MONEY IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS. 
          THAT WAS OUR ANSWER OR AT LEAST A SOLUTION THAT WE PROVIDED FOR THE REGIONAL HOUSING PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE. 
          BY REGIONAL, I MEAN, AT LEAST AT THE VERY LEAST STATEWIDE. 
          [00:15:01]
WE HAVE THE STATEWIDE HOUSING CRISIS RIGHT NOW. 
          THAT WAS HOPEFULLY ANOTHER TOOL IN THE BOX TO ADDRESS THAT PROBLEM. 
          OVER TIME, AS WE WENT THROUGH THE PANDEMIC, THERE WERE LABOR PROBLEMS, LABOR SHORTAGES, MATERIAL SHORTAGES, MATERIAL FLUCTUATIONS IN PRICES, THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          THEIR AFFORDABILITY HAS CHANGED OVER TIME, BUT WE STILL MAKE THOSE PLANS AVAILABLE AT NO COST TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. 
          LIKE I SAID, INCORPORATED MEMBERS OR RESIDENTS OF UNINCORPORATED YAVAPAI COUNTY, AND ALSO THOSE IN THE INCORPORATED TOWNS OF PRESCOTT VALLEY, PRESCOTT AND CLARKDALE. 
          AT THE VERY LEAST IT SAVES SOME MONEY. IT SAVES SOME TIME. 
          IT'S MORE CONVENIENT, AND THEY'VE GOT A SET OF PLANS THAT PEOPLE CAN DOWNLOAD IMMEDIATELY AND SUBMIT FOR A PERMIT. 
          BECAUSE OF THE SUCCESS OF THOSE INITIAL THREE PLAN SETS, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS LAST YEAR AUTHORIZED US TO DRAW UP ANOTHER THREE SET OF PLANS. 
          WE ACTUALLY HAVE SIX SETS OF PLANS, TWO, ONE-BEDROOM OPTIONS, TWO, TWO-BEDROOM OPTIONS, AND TWO, THREE-BEDROOM OPTIONS. 
          PEOPLE HAVE SEVERAL OPTIONS, SEVERAL CHOICES THAT THEY CAN CHOOSE. 
          WE DESIGNED THOUGH THAT SECOND ITERATION OF PLANS BASED ON COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WERE LOOKING AT THE FIRST ITERATION OF PLANS. 
          WE MADE SOME CHANGES, SOME MODIFICATIONS, SOME IMPROVEMENT BASED ON THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC THERE. 
          THAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL. 
          >> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH. 
          I THINK IT'S A GREAT PLAN. 
          IT'S A WAY THAT WE ARE TRYING TO HELP WITH THE HOUSING CRISIS, AND THAT WE'LL CONTINUE TO EVALUATE AS WE MOVE FORWARD INTO THIS MEETING TODAY. THANK YOU AGAIN. 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY. 
          >> YES. I'D LIKE TO MAKE COMMENT TO MR. DYE, PLEASE. 
          MR. DYE IN AS MUCH AS YAVAPAI COUNTY AS THE POSTER CHILD WITH THE HOME OF MY OWN, PLEASE SHARE THAT OUR OTHER JURISDICTIONS HAVE STEPPED ON BOARD AND THAT THERE ARE IGA AGREEMENTS WHERE THE TOWN OF PV AND THE CITY OF PRESCOTT ARE FOLLOWING IN YOUR FOOTSTEPS. 
          >> YES, COMMISSIONER GRIFFIS, THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          YES. WE HAVE IT'S ATTRACTED SOME ATTENTION, OUR PROGRAM, AT LEAST IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, AND AS YOU MENTIONED, WE'VE ENTERED INTO AGREEMENTS WITH THE TOWNS OF PRESCOTT VALLEY, THE CITY OF PRESCOTT, AND THE TOWN THE TOWN OF CLARKDALE. 
          ALL OF THOSE ARE HAVE THOSE PLANS AVAILABLE TO THEM AS WELL, AND TO THEIR RESIDENTS. 
          IT'S AN INTERESTING THING. 
          THE PROGRAM ITSELF HAS ATTRACTED ATTENTION THROUGHOUT THE STATE. 
          I KNOW THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION DID NOT ELECT TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH US, BUT THEY STARTED THEIR OWN PROCESS, AND THEY HAVE THEIR OWN PROGRAM MOVING FORWARD AS WELL. 
          IT'S ATTRACTED ATTENTION, AND HOPEFULLY, I KEEP MENTIONING, HOPEFULLY IT'S ANOTHER TOOL IN THE BOX TO ADDRESS THE HOUSING CRISIS THAT WE'RE FACING. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. 
          >> ARE YOU READY? 
          >> WITH YOUR PERMISSION, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE CONSULTANT ROGER. 
          >> THANK YOU AGAIN, EVERYBODY. 
          ROGER EASTMAN WITH LOGAN SIMPSON. 
          WHAT WE'LL DO TODAY IS COVER A LOT OF GROUND. 
          I ASK FOR YOUR INDULGENCE. 
          WELCOME QUESTIONS AS WE GO ALONG THE WAY. 
          WE'LL DO A QUICK INTRODUCTION TO THE PROJECT. 
          THEN DANNY FROM ELLIOTT POLLOCK WILL PICK UP AND TALK ABOUT THE HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS. 
          AT SOME POINT IN HERE, I KNOW WE'LL HAVE A BREAK. 
          THEN I'LL CONTINUE WITH THE DISCUSSION ON THE ZONING CODE AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT REPORT, SOME OF THE KEY FINDINGS. 
          THROUGHOUT THE PRESENTATION, WE'RE PRESENTING INFORMATION. 
          WE'RE ALSO OFFERING SOME BACKGROUND FOR NEW CONCEPTS OR CONCEPTS THAT MIGHT BE NEW TO SOME OF YOU, AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION AT SOME POINT AS WELL. 
          WE'LL WRAP UP AT THE END OF THE MORNING WITH NEXT STEPS. 
          WITH THAT, JUST A REALLY HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT. 
          AGAIN, LOGAN SIMPSON, 35 YEAR FIRM BASED IN TEMPE, ARIZONA, LEADING THIS WORK, SUPPORTED BY ELLIOTT D. POLLACK, AND THE JORDAN LAW FIRM, DOUG JORDAN HAS BEEN IN THE STATE WORKING AS A LAND USE ATTORNEY FOR OVER 40 YEARS, AND HE'S PROVIDED US AND COUNTY STAFF WITH LEGAL ADVICE ON THIS PROJECT. 
          THE ADURA GROUP, FORMERLY SHEPHERD WEST CESTER, WILL BE ASSISTING AS NEEDED THROUGHOUT THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, 
          [00:20:01]
AND IF THERE'S ANYTHING TO DO WITH STORMWATER AS WELL TO SUPPORT LYNN AND HER CREW. 
          AS YOU'VE HEARD, THIS IS A 1968 ZONING ORDINANCE THAT THE COUNTY CURRENTLY USED. 
          I'VE HEARD DIRECTOR I TALK ABOUT IT BEING BAND AIDED OVER THE YEARS, AND I THINK THAT'S A VERY ELEGANT DESCRIPTION OF AN OLD CODE, BUT I'VE SAID THIS IN A NUMBER OF TOWN HALL. 
          SHOUT OUT TO YOUR PLANNING STAFF. 
          THEY'VE TAKEN THIS REALLY ANTIQUATED CODE AND MADE IT WORK SO FAR AND I KNOW THEY'RE EXCITED AS ARE WE ARE PRESENTING YOU WITH AN UPDATED CODE THAT REALLY WILL TAKE THE BAND AIDS OFF AND GIVE YOU A TOOL THAT WILL HELP TO IMPLEMENT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 
          THE OBJECTIVES OF THE CODE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A LOT, BUT IT'S ESSENTIALLY A MAJOR REFRESH OF YOUR EXISTING CODE TO INTRODUCE COUNTY BEST PRACTICES, AND TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, SOME IDEAS THAT COME OUT OF CITIES AND TOWNS THAT WOULD WORK IN APPROPRIATE AREAS OF THE COUNTY. 
          OVERALL, THE INTENT IS TO MAKE IT USER FRIENDLY SO THAT ANY HOME OWNER WHO'S NOT SKILLED IN PLANNING MATTERS CAN PICK IT UP AND READ IT. 
          ANY DEVELOPER DOESN'T HAVE TO COME DOWN TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO ASK QUESTIONS. 
          IT SHOULD BE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE SELF EXPLANATORY, RICH WITH ILLUSTRATIONS AND SO ON. 
          MOST IMPORTANTLY, IT NEEDS TO IMPLEMENT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 
          THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE COUNTY IS FACING LOTS OF GROWTH ISSUES. 
          AS WE'VE HEARD, THERE'S A NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT GROWTH, BUT THIS IS A RURAL COUNTY. 
          HOW DO WE FIND THAT BALANCE BETWEEN MAINTAINING OUR RURAL CHARACTER THAT WE ALL LOVE AND ENJOY AND FIND OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE HOUSING TYPES AND BALANCING THE NEED FOR GROWTH AS WELL. 
          IN TERMS OF THE SCHEDULE, WE'RE AT 0.2 WITH THE STARS ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE THERE. 
          WE'VE DONE ALL THE FOUNDATIONAL WORK WITH INTERVIEWS AND MEETINGS WITH COUNTY STAFF AND KEY STAKEHOLDERS. 
          WE'VE LAUNCHED THE WEBSITE. 
          WE'VE ATTENDED BETWEEN COUNTY STAFF AND MYSELF, A LOT OF TOWN HALLS ACROSS THE COUNTY. 
          WE'VE PREPARED THE ASSESSMENT REPORT, WE'VE COMPLETED THE HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS. 
          TODAY IS, PRESENTING ALL OF THAT INFORMATION, AND THEN STARTING AS SOON AS NEXT WEEK OR TWO, WORKING WITH OUR STAFF, WE'LL BE WORKING ON THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. 
          WE'VE ALREADY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY AT A RECENT TAG MEETING TO TALK ABOUT THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, THE NEXT STEPS WITH COUNTY STAFF. 
          WE'RE GET UP AND READY TO GO AND REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THAT. 
          ULTIMATELY, WE'RE LOOKING FOR ADOPTION OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS ABOUT THE SUMMER OF NEXT YEAR. 
          BEFORE ADOPTION OF SUB BREAKS, WE'LL START ON THE ZONING CODE AND HOPE TO WRAP UP THE ZONING CODE BY DECEMBER OR SO NEXT YEAR. 
          THERE'LL BE A GREAT THANKSGIVING AND CHRISTMAS GIFT TO, I THANK TO ALL OF US. 
          >> MR. EASTMAN. 
          >> YES, MA'AM. 
          >> I HAVE A QUESTION. 
          TO YOUR OUTREACH, I WAS A LITTLE BIT TAKEN BACK THAT WHO WE HEARD FROM WAS ONLY EIGHT YOU CONDUCTED ONLY 18 IN PERSON AND VIRTUAL INTERVIEWS, AND YOU SENT OUT 77 EMAILS. 
          I'M SHOCKED THAT THOSE NUMBERS WERE SO LOW. 
          >> WELL, COMMISSIONER GRIFFIS, WE'RE WORKING WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF OUR BUDGET. 
          WE MET WHEN WE SAID WE SENT OUT EMAILS. 
          THAT WOULD BE AN E MAIL TO A GROUP AND WE GOT LOTS OF RESPONSES TO THOSE EMAILS WHEN WE WERE CONDUCTING INTERVIEWS, EVEN THOUGH WE MAY JUST RECORD IT AS ONE INTERVIEW, THERE WERE SOMETIMES A NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THOSE INTERVIEWS. 
          FOR EXAMPLE TWO PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AND ONE BOARD MEMBER. 
          THAT'S FAIRLY CONSISTENT WITH A TYPICAL PROJECT LIKE THIS. 
          THE PUBLIC OUTREACH WILL CONTINUE. 
          THIS IS REALLY JUST GETTING A SENSE OF WHERE WE NEED TO GO, AND AS WE CONTINUE INTO WRITING SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, WILL BE WORK SESSIONS, AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC INPUT. 
          >> THOSE NUMBERS IN THAT INFORMATION HOPEFULLY WILL INCREASE, BECAUSE WE ONLY HAD NUMBER THREE RESPONSES FROM DEVELOPERS. 
          I MEAN, THEY ARE SO CRITICAL TO THESE ZONING CODES AND ORDINANCES. 
          IF I NEED TO GO OUT AND BEAT THEM OVER THE HEAD, YOU LET ME KNOW. 
          >> COMMISSIONER GRIFFIS, WE'LL CERTAINLY LET YOU KNOW, BUT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WE FACE, AND THIS IS TRUE IN ALL OF OUR WORK. 
          WE CAN CREATE THE INVITATION, WE CAN CREATE THE EXCITEMENT, BUT IF PEOPLE DON'T RESPOND, WE'VE AT LEAST TRIED. 
          >> I UNDERSTAND. 
          >> YEAH. 
          [00:25:01]
          >> I HAVE TO SAY, I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HER. 
          [LAUGHTER] WHAT THINKING ABOUT DOING. YES, SO YOU KNOW. 
          >> WITH THAT, UNLESS THERE'S ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, I'LL STEP AWAY AND LET DANNY PRESENT ON THE HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT. 
          >> I HAVE ONE MORE. MR. EASTMAN. 
          IT SAYS ON PAGE 3 THAT THIS REPORT INCLUDES RECOMMENDED EDITS PROVIDED BY THE TAG GROUP. 
          I COULDN'T FIND THEIR RECOMMENDED EDITS IN MY PACKAGE. 
          >> BY THAT STATEMENT, WE MEAN WE WORKED WITH TAG, AND THEY PROVIDED INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS AND SOMETIMES GROUP COMMENTS THAT WERE JUST ADDED INTO THE REPORT. 
          SOMETIMES THERE WERE MINOR TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS. 
          WE DO HAVE AN ENGLISH MAJOR ASSISTING US IN THE TAG [LAUGHTER] SOMETIMES THERE WERE SUBSTANTIAL EDITS. 
          SOMETIMES THERE WERE A LOT OF REALLY GREAT IDEAS THAT DIDN'T MAKE IT INTO THE REPORT, BUT THEY'VE ALL BEEN CAPTURED IN AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET SO THAT WHEN WE'RE WORKING ON THE SUB LAGS OR WORKING ON THE ZONING CODE, WE HAVE ACCESS TO ALL THOSE IDEAS. 
          >> WILL WE BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE IDEAS AS WELL? 
          >> ABSOLUTELY. EVERYTHING'S PUBLIC, SO YES. 
          >> WE NEED TO MAKE A REQUEST? HOW DO WE OBTAIN THAT, MR. DYE? 
          >> CHAIR. 
          >> COMMISSIONER GRIFFIS, A LOT OF THAT INFORMATION IS GOING TO BE PUT ON OUR WEB PAGE. 
          WE HAVE A WEB PAGE FOR A ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE AND WHATEVER IS NOT THERE, YOU'RE CERTAINLY WELCOME TO EMAIL ANY ONE OF US OR CALL ME AT ANY TIME? 
          >> WILL DO. 
          >> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE, DANNY CORT, WITH ELLIOT D POLK AND COMPANY, FILLING IN FOR RICK MERRITT. 
          THIS IS THE HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY, FOCUSING ON BOTH UNINCORPORATED AREAS AND INCORPORATED AREAS. 
          THIS PRESENTATION HAS OFTEN BEEN DESCRIBED AS BLEAK, BUT I PREFER THE TERM EYE OPENING. 
          IF YOU JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND, AND I'M GOING TO DELIVER IT WITH A SMILE. 
          WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, THERE'S A LOT OF BUZZWORDS, MARKETING TERMS REALLY FOR AFFORDABILITY. 
          YOU MIGHT HEAR THINGS LIKE GOALS TOWARDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ATTAINABLE HOUSING, WORKFORCE HOUSING, OR MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING. 
          THESE ARE ALL PRETTY MUCH SYNONYMOUS WITH EACH OTHER. 
          WHEN YOU HEAR ONE WORD OR THE OTHER, THE FOCUS IS REALLY ON THE SAME THING, WHICH IS, WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO FIND AND BUILD HOUSING AT A PRICE POINT THAT MAKES IT SO THAT HOUSEHOLDS ARE PAYING NO MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR INCOME TOWARD THEIR HOUSING. 
          THAT'S WHAT THE OFFICIAL FEDERAL DEFINITION OF AFFORDABILITY IS, AND SO EVERY OTHER WORD IN THERE IS AN APPROACH TO FINDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, OFTENTIMES FOR SPECIFIC GROUPS OF PEOPLE. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR? 
          >> YES, SIR. 
          >> I HEARD YOU SAY THAT YESTERDAY. 
          I THINK THERE IS A DIFFERENCE WHERE AT LEAST IN THE CITY OF PRESCOTT, I BELIEVE WORKFORCE COMES WITH ITS OWN BUCKET OF WATER. 
          IS THAT RIGHT, SANDY? THERE'S WATER DEDICATED TO EITHER WORKFORCE OR LOW INCOME, I THOUGHT IN THE PORTFOLIO. 
          >> YES. 
          >> I WAS WRONG. I'LL AMEND THAT. 
          WORKFORCE DOES HAVE A SPECIFIC DEFINITION IN TERMS OF WHAT INCOME RANGE IT IS. 
          WORKFORCE IS USUALLY I MAKE BETWEEN 60% OF THE AREA'S MEDIAN INCOME TO 120%. 
          THAT'S THE INCOME RANGE. 
          BELOW 60%, NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LOW INCOME HOUSING. 
          YES, WORKFORCE AND MISSING MIDDLE ARE MORE OF THE SAME IN TERMS OF WHERE THEY SLOT IN THE INCOME RANGE. 
          THAT'S WHAT I HAVE UP HERE, JUST FOR REFERENCE HERE. 
          WHEN YOU GET INTO AFFORDABLE HOUSING TYPE OF ANALYSIS, YOU START TO HEAR THE WORDS AMI, WHICH IS AREA MEDIAN INCOME. 
          THEN IT'S A PERCENTAGE OF THAT. 
          IF THE MEDIAN INCOME IN YAVAPAI COUNTY IS $70,000, WHEN SOMEONE SAYS, I'M TARGETING HOUSING AT 50% AMI, THEY'RE TARGETING FOLKS MAKING $35,000 A YEAR OR LESS, 
          [00:30:04]
BECAUSE THAT'S 50% OF THE 70,000. 
          YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR THOSE PERCENTAGES AND THAT AMI AREA MEDIAN INCOME A LOT. 
          THESE AND IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOUR HOUSEHOLD SIZE IS. 
          THIS IS KIND OF A MATRIX OF WHAT ARE THE INCOME LIMITS AT THESE DIFFERENT LEVELS? IF YOU'RE WHEN WE SAY 30% AMI, THAT'S EXTREMELY LOW INCOME. 
          WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOLKS FAMILIES MAKE $25,000 OR LESS. 
          THAT'S USUALLY A PUBLIC HOUSING TYPE OF INITIATIVE, WHERE A MUNICIPALITY OR A GOVERNMENT HAS BUILT HOMES IS HAVING SOMEONE MANAGE THEM, AND THOSE HOUSEHOLDS ARE JUST PAYING 30% OF WHATEVER THEY MAKE. 
          IF IT'S ZERO, IT'S ZERO, IF IT'S $20,000, THEY PAY 30% OF THAT, AND AND IT'S MANAGED BY EITHER A NONPROFIT OR A GOVERNMENT THEN YOU GET INTO 40 TO 60% AMI, SO THAT'S VERY LOW TO LOW INCOME THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW 25 TO $50,000 IN HOUSEHOLD INCOME THAT WOULD QUALIFY FOR THESE TYPES OF UNITS. 
          YOU'LL HEAR THE TERM LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT OR LTECH. 
          THAT IS A FEDERAL PROGRAM THAT'S ADMINISTERED BY THE STATE HOUSING DEPARTMENT, WHERE THERE'S A COMPETITIVE ROUND OF APARTMENT DEVELOPERS THAT SUBMIT APPLICATIONS ALL ACROSS THE STATE ABOUT 10 OF THEM PER YEAR ARE APPROVED. 
          THE TYPICAL SIZE IS ANYWHERE 25-70 OR 80 UNITS, SO THEY'RE SMALLER THAN A TRADITIONAL APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU'RE SEEING GOING UP IN LIKE PRESCOTT AND PRESCOTT VALLEY. 
          THEY'RE USUALLY SMALLER THAN THAT JUST BECAUSE OF THE FINANCING THAT IT TAKES TO BUILD UP THE FINANCE STACK FOR THEM, BUT ANYWAY, THOSE ARE PROJECTS THAT YOU ACCOMMODATE THOSE MAKING $25-50,000. 
          THEN YOU GET INTO WORKFORCE AND MISSING MIDDLE. 
          HERE'S WHERE THE RUB IS IS, YOU MAKE ABOVE 60% AMI. 
          NOW YOU'RE NOT QUALIFY. 
          YOU CAN'T QUALIFY TO BE A TENANT OF ONE OF THESE GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIZED PROJECTS, AND YOU DON'T MAKE ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD A MARKET RATE UNIT. 
          WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOLKS, AGAIN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE NUMBERS, THAT'S ANYONE MAKING $50-100 THOUSAND. 
          IT'S KIND OF INCREDIBLE TO THINK, I MAKE $100,000. 
          I NEED HELP AND BUT THAT HAS BECOME THE CASE IN TERMS OF HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, AND SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TRYING TO ADDRESS ALL AREAS OF INCOME. 
          UP TO THE POINT THAT WHERE THE MARKET IS JUST TAKING CARE OF ITSELF. 
          WE ALSO HAVE A NUMBER OF RESIDENTS THAT MAKE ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO PURCHASE A HOME OR RENT AN APARTMENT IN THE COUNTY, BUT AFFORDABILITY HAS DEGRADED SUBSTANTIALLY. 
          >> BEFORE YOU MOVE FROM THAT SLIDE. 
          WOULD YOU JUST CLARIFY THAT SAY A FAMILY OF SIX COULD BE A SINGLE PARENT WITH FIVE CHILDREN UNDER THE MAJORITY OR IT COULD BE THREE GENERATIONS WITH FOUR ADULT INCOME EARNERS. 
          THERE'S NO IT'S JUST SIMPLY. 
          >> YES. 
          >> INDIVIDUALS THE NUMBER OF UNDER THE ROOF? 
          >> YES. NUMBER OF PEOPLE THE HOUSEHOLD. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THIS. 
          THIS IS JUST GOING TO AGE ME, BUT THAT'S OKAY. 
          YESTERDAY, WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THIS, I WROTE DOWN SOME FACTS ABOUT MY BASIC CHILDHOOD, SO 1971-1977, MY MOM AND I, OUR MONTHLY INCOME WAS AROUND $600 A MONTH. 
          OUR YEARLY INCOME WAS AROUND $7,200 A YEAR. 
          WE DID NOT HAVE ANY ASSISTANCE IN OUR APARTMENT THAT WE RENTED. 
          IT WAS IN A VERY NICE AREA, AND I KNOW WHAT THE RENT WAS BECAUSE I WOULD GO AROUND AND TAKE CARE OF THINGS. 
          THE RENT WAS AROUND $125 A MONTH, PAY THE UTILITIES, AND THEN WE STILL HAD ENOUGH TO BUY FOOD. 
          I'M NOT SAYING IT WAS A LOT, BUT WE, MY MOM AND I DID NOT MANAGE TO LEVEL INTO AN AREA WHERE WE WOULD GET ANY HELP. 
          WE WEREN'T THAT THAT OFF. 
          WE WEREN'T, BUT WHEN I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT YESTERDAY, AND I'M LOOKING AT THIS, I REALLY JUST, LIVING IN AN APARTMENT BACK IN THOSE YEARS, WE JUST HAD AN APARTMENT. 
          WE DIDN'T HAVE POOLS, WE DIDN'T HAVE DOG PARKS. 
          >> WE WERE BLESSED TO HAVE A ROOF OVER OUR HEAD, AND THAT WAS A ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT, BY THE WAY AND ALSO THE WATER WAS INCLUDED IN THAT. 
          [00:35:06]
JUST A PERSPECTIVE OF THE TIME AND I JUST HAD ONE OF OUR KIDS BUY A HOUSE IN SAN CLEMENTE. 
          IT'S THEIR FIRST HOUSE, $4.5 MILLION. 
          THAT'S NOT THAT MANY YEARS, 1977. 
          REALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          ALL OF OUR KIDS HAVE BOUGHT HOUSES AND THERE ARE A MILLION AND PLUS. 
          NOTHING REAL FANCY EITHER. 
          >> WE'VE TOUCHED ON THIS, WORKFORCE HOUSING 60-120% OF AREA IMMEDIATE INCOME. 
          WE'VE SHOWN YOU THAT ON THE CHART, THESE ARE FOLKS THAT MAKE BETWEEN $50 AND $100,000. 
          THEY'RE OFTEN REFERRED TO AS OUR ESSENTIAL WORKERS, CRITICAL SERVICE PERSONNEL, TEACHERS, POLICE, FIREFIGHTERS, CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, HEALTH CARE WORKERS ALL FALL INTO THIS RANGE. 
          REALLY, IT'S A LOT. 
          I THINK I SHARED YESTERDAY, THE HOUSEHOLD IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, THAT MAKE BETWEEN $50 AND $100,000 IS LIKE 40% OF THE ENTIRE COUNTY. 
          IT'S A HUGE MAJORITY OF FOLKS THAT ARE IN THIS RANGE. 
          MEDIAN AGE IN THE COUNTY IS 55 AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE JUST OVER TWO, IT'S ABOUT EQUAL FOR OWNER OCCUPIED AND RENTER OCCUPIED UNITS. 
          ALL OF THOSE THE AGE EXCEEDS THAT WELL EXCEEDS THAT OF THE STATE WIDE AVERAGE AND CORRELATED TO THAT, SMALLER HOUSEHOLD SIZES. 
          WE ALSO HAVE A MUCH LOWER LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE. 
          THIS IS ANYONE THAT IS WORKING AGE THAT IS IN THE WORKFORCE, EITHER LOOKING FOR A JOB OR HAS A JOB. 
          ONLY 48% IN YAVAPAI COUNTY VERSUS 60% ACROSS THE STATE. 
          THIS HAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IMPLICATIONS. 
          HOW DO WE RECRUIT NEW EMPLOYERS WHEN THEY SEE DATA LIKE THIS, AND THEY'RE GOING TO ASK THE QUESTION, WHERE IS MY WORKFORCE GOING TO COME FROM? WHERE DO I FIND WORKERS? THEN IS THAT TIED INTO ANYTHING TO DO WITH HOUSING AFFORDABILITY? ARE THERE REASONS WE ARE NOT IMPORTING YOUNGER RESIDENTS? 
          >> CHAIR. 
          >> YESTERDAY, THE QUESTION WAS BROUGHT UP. 
          DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH OF OUR HOUSING MARKING IS BEING EATEN UP BY AIRBNBS? I DIDN'T SEE ANY DISCUSSION IN THE MATERIAL. 
          >> I AM NOT SURE ACTUALLY IF THAT'S WITHIN THIS REPORT OR NOT AND I CAN GET AN ANSWER FOR YOU, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE IS INFORMATION AVAILABLE THAT WE CAN. 
          I KNOW WE DID THAT FOR CITY OF SEDONA, BUT I WILL GET AN ANSWER FOR YOU ON THAT. 
          BUT YEAH, THAT WAS A GREAT POINT. 
          THE SHORT TERM RENTAL MARKET DEFINITELY LIMITS THE SUPPLY OF AVAILABLE RESIDENT LONG TERM RESIDENTIAL UNITS. 
          THE COUNTIES ALSO FORECASTED TO CONTINUE TO GROW. 
          THERE'S BETWEEN 2010 AND 2024, WE'VE SEEN OVER 40,000 NEW RESIDENTS INTO THE COUNTY, AND THAT'S EXPECTED TO CONTINUE SO BETWEEN 2024 AND 2040, WE'RE EXPECTING ANOTHER 47,000 RESIDENTS IN THE COUNTY ACROSS VARIOUS BOTH INCORPORATED AND UNINCORPORATED AREAS. 
          FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS NEARLY 15,000 NEW RESIDENTS. 
          WHEN YOU TRANSLATE THAT INTO HOUSING DEMAND, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE NEED FOR COUNTY WIDE AND ADDITIONAL 21,500 HOUSING UNITS AND JUST IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA, WOULD BE 6,700 NEW HOUSING UNITS. 
          >> CHAIR. 
          >> HOW DID YOU FACTOR IN THE DEMAND? 
          >> WE ARE JUST TAKING THE FORECAST OF POPULATION GROWTH AND DIVIDING IT BY AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE. 
          >> BECAUSE WE'RE SEEING SOME PRESENTATIONS ABOUT ALL THE GROWTH IN NORTH PHOENIX WITH THE CHIP MANUFACTURERS AND SUCH GOING IN AND JUST THERE ALONE, THEY'RE PROJECTING THE NEXT 5-10 YEARS AN INCREASE OF 53,000. 
          I DIDN'T KNOW IF OUR NUMBERS ARE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT. 
          >> THE POPULATION FORECAST WAS PRODUCED BY THESE ARE OFFICIAL STATE FORECASTS, AND THOSE WERE PRODUCED IN 2023. 
          THAT WOULD BE PROBABLY BEFORE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS OF TSMC. 
          >> I KNOW IT'S ALL CRYSTAL BALL STUFF. 
          >> THESE ESTIMATES ARE THE FORECASTS ARE PRODUCED EVERY THREE YEARS, SO WE ARE EXPECTING NEW FORECASTS TO COME OUT NEXT YEAR. 
          THERE COULD BE A CHANGE. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF TSMC MOVES THE NEEDLE ENOUGH TO INCREASE 
          [00:40:05]
POPULATION FORECAST FOR SOME OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS IN SOUTHERN YAVAPAI COUNTY OR NOT VERSUS OTHER COMPONENTS, BUT IT'S WORTH WATCHING. 
          >> THAT SOUNDS REALLY LOW TO ME. 
          I HAVE TO THINK THAT MAYBE IT HASN'T INCLUDED THE SHORTAGE THAT ALREADY EXISTS. 
          I THINK SEDONA IS 2,100 UNITS SHORT, THE VERDI VALLEY 3,600 UNITS SHORT. 
          THAT WOULD NOT INCLUDE THE SHORTAGES THAT ALREADY EXISTS. 
          >> WELL, THE SHORTAGE IS WHAT RESTRICTS THE POPULATION GROWTH. 
          THIS IS JUST IF THE POPULATION INCREASES, AS THE OFFICIAL STATE PROJECTIONS SAY, IF THIS MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE COMING IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, THAT'S HOW MANY HOMES THEY'LL NEED. 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY? 
          >> YES, MA'AM. 
          >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. COURT IN A STATEMENT. 
          I TRACK ALL OF THE SINGLE FAMILY PERMITS, AND I'VE BEEN DOING THAT FOR MANY YEARS THROUGH OCTOBER OF 2025 OUR FOUR COUNTIES OR CITIES AND TOWNS HAVE ISSUED 986 SINGLE FAMILY PERMITS. 
          PRESCOTT VALLEY, THE CITY OF PRESCOTT, CHINO VALLEY, AND YAVAPAI COUNTY. 
          LOOKING AT THE HOUSING DEMAND FOR 2025, IT'S STATES, WE NEED 2,080 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          WE ARE BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL AND WHEN YOU GO DOWN TO YAVAPAI COUNTY UNINCORPORATED, IT SAYS WE NEED 728 THROUGH OCTOBER, YAVAPAI COUNTY HAS ISSUED 401. 
          WE ARE SO FAR BEHIND THE DEMAND, AND I DON'T KNOW WHY. 
          IS IT MATERIAL PRICES, IS IT INTEREST RATES? IS IT PEOPLE NOT WANTING TO MOVE IN? ARE WE BEING HAM STRONG WITH CODES AND REQUIREMENTS? THAT'S THE ANSWERS THAT WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT TO GET OUR HOUSING STOCK SUPPLY UP. 
          BECAUSE WE'RE IN BAD SHAPE. 
          >> I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE STUDY DOES. 
          ARE WE ATTEMPTING TO DIRECT THAT? 
          >> WE NEED TO SERIOUSLY ATTACK AND DIRECT THAT. 
          >> I DON'T BELIEVE BY YOU SAYING. 
          >> I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING BECAUSE I TRACKED THOSE NUMBERS AND HERE'S PROOF. 
          >> I'D JUST LIKE TO MAYBE ADD TO THAT, ARE THEY AFFORDABLE? ARE THEY ATTAINABLE? ARE THEY ALL OF THOSE WORTH TO USE? 
          >> THEY'RE NOT. 
          >> WE STILL ARE IN TROUBLE? 
          >> YES, BEYOND THAT. 
          >> WE ONLY HAVE SO MUCH LAND. 
          >> AS YOU CAN SEE A MAJORITY OF THE GROWTH IN TERMS OF HOME DEVELOPMENT IS OCCURRING IN THE PRESCOTT AND PRESCOTT VALLEY AREA. 
          THAT'S NOT JUST WITHIN THE INCORPORATED MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES, BUT IN THAT REGION. 
          I THINK THIS IS ALONG WITH THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS, IS IT AFFORDABLE? THE ANSWER IS NO. 
          SINGLE FAMILY HOME PRICES SINCE 2016, YOU COULD BUY A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ANY YAVAPAI COUNTY FOR $300,000 NINE YEARS AGO, AND THAT IS NOW EXCEEDED 700,000. 
          I THINK I SHARED YESTERDAY, THAT MEANS THAT IN 2016, IF YOU MADE $60,000 AS A HOUSEHOLD, YOU COULD AFFORD A HOME IN THE AVERAGE PRICED HOME, AND THAT IS NOW $160,000 THAT WOULD BE A REQUIRED HOUSEHOLD INCOME TO AFFORD THAT $700,000 HOME. 
          TOWN HOME CONDOMINIUM PRICES ARE MORE AFFORDABLE THAN SINGLE FAMILY. 
          ALSO HAVE SEEN A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE UP 46% JUST SINCE 2019, BUT THOSE ARE STILL SITTING UNDER 500,000 AS OPPOSED TO 700,000 FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, AND THEN THE MOST AFFORDABLE OWNERSHIP PRODUCT RIGHT NOW IS IN THE MANUFACTURED HOME SECTOR. 
          THOSE HAVE ALSO INCREASED AND THEY CONTINUE TO INCREASE, BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT MY EYES ARE FAILING ME, BUT IN THE MID $200,000 RANGE. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR. 
          >> YES. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> YOU SAID YOU WEREN'T GOING TO TALK ANYMORE. 
          [LAUGHTER]. 
          >> MR. COURT AND MR. DYE, BASED ON WHAT MR. COURT JUST SAID ABOUT MANUFACTURED HOMES, WHAT ARE WE DOING IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE TO MAKE THAT 
          [00:45:05]
MORE READILY AVAILABLE TO CHANGE OR DO SOME OVERLAY WHERE MANUFACTURED HOMES CAN GO? BECAUSE THAT SEEMS TO BE, RIGHT THERE, A POTENTIAL SOLVABILITY PROBLEM. 
          >> COMMISSIONER GRIFFIS, VERY GOOD QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          WHAT I'M GOING TO SUGGEST IS WE PUT A PIN IN THAT QUESTION FOR THE MOMENT BECAUSE WHEN WE GET TO THE ZONING UPDATE DISCUSSION, WE ACTUALLY DO HAVE A FEW MORE TOOLS THAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO USE TO ENCOURAGE THAT TYPE OF HOUSING. 
          I THINK THAT QUESTION IS GOING TO BECOME MORE IMPORTANT IN THE NEXT DISCUSSION. 
          >> THANK YOU, MR. DYE. 
          >> YES, MA'AM. 
          >> THIS CHART HERE IS JUST SIMILAR DATA, BUT WE'VE JUST BIFURCATED IT BETWEEN THOSE HOMES THAT ARE WITHIN INCORPORATED CITIES AND TOWNS AND THOSE ARE WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS. 
          INTERESTINGLY, THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS ARE ACTUALLY, I MEAN, AS A WHOLE, MORE EXPENSIVE THAN IF YOU AGGREGATE THE CITIES AND TOWNS. 
          NOW, WE ALL KNOW THE GEOGRAPHIC SIZE OF YAVAPAI COUNTY AND ALL OF THE DIFFERENT UNINCORPORATED AREAS, CITIES, TOWNS, CENSUS DESIGNATED PLACES, AND OTHER PLACES WHERE THIS AVERAGE IS NOT TELLING THE WHOLE STORY. 
          WE HAVE A TABLE WITHIN THE REPORT THAT DISCUSSES THERE ARE CERTAIN AREAS OF THE COUNTY THAT ARE MUCH MORE AFFORDABLE, WHERE THE AVERAGE PRICE IS UNDER 300,000 PLACES LIKE ASH FORK, LIKE YARNELL, SELIGMAN. 
          THERE ARE AFFORDABLE PLACES. 
          WE DO THIS WORK IN PINAL COUNTY ALL THE TIME, AND WE SAY THAT'S YOUR CALLING CARD IS IF YOU DO HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SOMEWHERE IN THE REGION, THAT THAT SHOULD BE A MARKETING PIECE TO SAY THERE IS A COMMUNITY HERE WHERE WE DO HAVE AFFORDABLE PRICES WHERE YOU CAN MAKE LESS THAN $100,000 AND AFFORD TO BE A HOMEOWNER. 
          THERE ARE PLENTY OF PLACES WITHIN THE COUNTY THAT ARE INEXPENSIVE BEING OFFSET BY OTHER AREAS OF THE COUNTY THAT ARE EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE TO BE AN OWNER. 
          >> BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE ENOUGH MONEY IN THOSE COMMUNITIES TO EVEN AFFORD THE LOWER PRICE HOUSE. 
          I MEAN, WHEN YOU GOT A COMMUNITY SIG LIGMAN, 40, 50 MILES FROM A POPULATION CENTER WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO WORK. 
          THAT'S NOT EVEN REALISTIC. 
          I MEAN, SURE, WE GOT A TON OF PEOPLE DRIVING TO PHOENIX, BUT TO THINK THAT YOUR CALLING CARD IS SELIGMAN FOR A PRESCOTT VALLEY WORKFORCE IS JUST DIFFICULT. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S A HARD SELL. 
          >> IT IS DIFFICULT. I AGREE. 
          I JUST THINK THAT THESE ARE THE DECISIONS THAT HOUSEHOLDS ARE GOING TO BE MAKING. 
          DO I WANT TO OWN A HOME? IF THIS IS ALL I CAN AFFORD, AM I GOING TO ACCEPT A ONE HOUR EACH WAY COMMUTE TO WORK? IT IS HAPPENING. 
          IT HAPPENS IN THE PHOENIX AREA, OR AM I GOING TO BE DOUBLING UP IN HOUSEHOLDS? AM I GOING TO LIVE IN AN OVERCROWDED CONDITION? AM I GOING TO JUST FIND A PLACE THAT'S A DUMP AND THAT SUBSTANDARD? THESE ARE DECISIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING TODAY TO CREATE AFFORDABILITY. 
          THE OTHER ONE IS THAT PEOPLE VOTE WITH THEIR FEET AND WHEN WE DO THIS ANALYSIS ON A STATE WIDE BASIS EVERYBODY SAYS, ARIZONA IS A GROWTH STATE, IT'S A CALLING CARD. 
          WE HAVE ALL THIS NET IMMIGRATION. 
          WHEN WE LOOK AT THE PLACES THEY'RE COMING FROM, IT'S CALIFORNIA AND WASHINGTON. 
          THEY'VE NEVER SEEN A HOUSE SO CHEAP. 
          IT'S WONDERFUL FOR THEM BUT WE ALSO LOSE POPULATION EVERY YEAR, TOO. 
          JUST WE'RE HAVING MORE PEOPLE MOVE HERE THAN MOVE AWAY, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE DO MOVE AWAY. 
          WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHERE THEY'RE MOVING, THEY'RE MOVING TO THE SOUTH AND THE MIDWEST, WHERE HOUSING IS CHEAPER. 
          IT'S A DYNAMIC MARKET WHERE EVERYBODY HAS THESE CHOICES AND OPPORTUNITIES, AND THEY START TO VOTE WITH THEIR FEET. 
          >> BUT TO HIS POINT, I THINK YOU'RE CORRECT. 
          I THINK THE SOLVING PROBLEM UP THERE IS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CLOSER IN THOSE OUTLYING AREAS. 
          IF YOU REALLY LOOK AT THE END OF THIS PACKET, YOU SEE PRESCOTT EXPLODING, YOU SEE PRESCOTT VALLEY EXPLODING, BUT WHO'S IN THIRD PLACE? IT'S PALDEN. 
          THAT'S WHERE ALL THE WORKFORCE IS GOING OUT THERE TO PUT OUT THE MANUFACTURED HOMES, GET A LITTLE PIECE OF LAND AND TRY AND COMMUTE IN, AND THAT'S A MORE REASONABLE COMMUTE. 
          IT SHOCKED THE HECK OUT OF ME, IF YOU GUYS WERE READING THIS, THAT I THINK IT WAS 35% OF OUR WORKFORCE COMMUTES TO PHOENIX. 
          THAT'S AN HOUR AND A HALF THROUGH HELL. 
          I'D RATHER DRIVE THE SELIGMAN AND GO WORK AT THE SNOW GAP. 
          >> THERE IS AN OPENING. [LAUGHTER]. 
          [00:50:11]
          >> JUST TO PUT SOME PERSPECTIVE ON WHEN WE TALK ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          THE MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN YAVAPAI COUNTY IS $66,000. 
          IF SOMEONE MADE THE MEDIAN INCOME, WHAT WOULD BE AN AFFORDABLE HOME PRICE FOR THEM? IT'S $240,000? THAT IS EVEN LOWER THAN THOSE AFFORDABLE HOME PRICES THAT WE SAW IN 2016. 
          THAT'S REALLY A FUNCTION OF THE HIGH INTEREST RATE ENVIRONMENT THAT WE'RE IN. 
          THERE IS A COMPONENT HERE WHERE IF WE COULD SEE AND THERE IS LONG TERM FORECASTS THAT WILL SEE SOME INTEREST RATE RELIEF OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS, THAT WILL HELP SUBSTANTIALLY. 
          IT WILL HELP PEOPLE AFFORD A HIGHER PRICED UNIT, BUT IT'S NOT IN AND OF ITSELF GOING TO SOLVE THE ISSUE, SO THIS CHART WOULD MAYBE GO $240-315 THOUSAND IF WE HAD LOWER INTEREST RATES FOR MORTGAGES. 
          AGAIN, HOW DO WE BUILD TO THAT? WHEN WE LOOK AT JUST RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, HOW MANY OF THEM ARE OVERBURDENED BY RENT? THAT'S THAT THRESHOLD OF 30% OF THEIR INCOME OR MORE, AND THAT'S THAT OUTLINED RED BOX THERE. 
          THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY AREA, THERE'S NEARLY 3,000 HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE SPENDING MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR INCOME TOWARD RENT, SO THAT'S 35% OF ALL RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA. 
          THERE'S ALSO A STATISTIC OF 50%. 
          ONE OUT OF EVERY TWO PAYCHECKS PER MONTH IS GOING TOWARDS THEIR RENT, SO THAT'S 1,400 HOUSEHOLDS IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA, 04,600 HOUSEHOLDS ARE SPENDING AT LEAST 50% OF THEIR INCOME TOWARD RENT IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS, AND SO COUNTY WIDE, WE HAVE 11,800 RENTER HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE SPENDING MORE THAN 30% AND OF THEM, 06,000 OF THEIR HOUSEHOLDS. 
          MORE THAN HALF OF THOSE HOUSEHOLDS ARE PAYING MORE THAN 50% OF THEIR INCOME TOWARD THEIR RENT. 
          IT JUST BEGS THE QUESTION, HOW LONG IS THAT SUSTAINABLE BEFORE THEY'RE LOOKING FOR AN ALTERNATIVE BECAUSE THAT'S TOO EXPENSIVE. 
          THEN THE WORST CASE SCENARIO IS THESE ARE THE HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE MOST AT RISK OF HOMELESSNESS IF THERE WERE TO BE ANY ECONOMIC DISRUPTION IN THEIR LIFE. 
          IT'S THAT LAST PAYCHECK, THAT LAST $200, IF THAT DOESN'T COME IN, WHAT'S THEIR ALTERNATIVE? WHEN WE LOOK ACROSS, THIS DOESN'T COVER THE ENTIRETY OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS, BUT THE CENSUS DOES COVER A LOT OF UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES. 
          THIS IS JUST THE DISTRIBUTION OF THOSE RENT BURDENED HOUSEHOLDS, SO A LOT OF THAT HAPPENING IN VILLAGE OF OAK CREEK, THE VERDE VILLAGE, WHERE THERE'S HIGHER POPULATION, BUT REALLY ACROSS ALL THE COMMUNITIES IN THE UNINCORPORATED THERE ARE RENTERS WHO ARE OVERBURDENED. 
          THERE ARE ALSO OWNERS WHO ARE OVERBURDENED BY THEIR HOUSING COSTS. 
          OWNERS DO HAVE A FEW MORE OPTIONS AT THEIR DISCRETION. 
          IF THEY HAVE EQUITY IN THAT HOME, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO SELL, TAKE EQUITY, MAYBE DOWNSIZE OR FIND A RENTAL UNIT. 
          THERE ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE WIGGLE ROOM AMONG THOSE OWNERS, WHICH IS WHY WE FOCUS SO MUCH ON RENTERS BECAUSE THEY ARE MOST AT A RISK, BUT THERE ARE ALSO OWNERS OUT THERE THAT ARE OVERBURDENED BY THEIR HOUSING COSTS. 
          ACROSS THE COUNTY, WE HAVE 41% OF RENTERS WHO ARE OVERBURDENED BY THEIR RENT, AND WE HAVE 24% OF OWNERS WHO ARE OVERBURDENED BY THEIR HOUSING COSTS. 
          IN TOTAL, WE HAVE JUST OVER 31,000 HOUSEHOLDS IN THE COUNTY THAT ARE FACING THIS HOUSING OVERBURDENED SITUATION. 
          IF WE THEN EXTRAPOLATE THAT TO THE POPULATION THAT MIGHT BE COMING IN, THAT FORECASTED POPULATION, IF THEY REFLECT THE CURRENT INCOME DISTRIBUTION THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IN THE COUNTY, THIS IS THE TYPE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WOULD BE NEEDED WHEN WE LOOK FORWARD FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA. 
          IF WE NEED 7,000 HOUSING UNITS BETWEEN NOW AND 2040 IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA, IF WE WANT TO CREATE AN AFFORDABLE SITUATION, 02,500 OF THOSE WOULD NEED TO BE BASICALLY A RENT SUBSIDIZED APARTMENT UNIT. 
          THOSE FOLKS THAT ARE MAKING LESS THAN $50,000. 
          FOR THOSE MAKING 50,000-100,000, 
          [00:55:02]
SOME OF THAT CAN BE ACCOMMODATED IN MARKET RATE APARTMENT RENTS, AND THE OTHER WOULD BE POTENTIALLY AN OWNERSHIP OPTION. 
          BUT AGAIN, IN A SUBSIDIZED MANNER, ARE THERE FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE? ARE WE DEVELOPING A COMMUNITY LAND TRUST AND FINDING AND OFFERING BELOW MARKET RATE TYPE OF HOUSING, THINGS LIKE THAT, SO THERE COULD BE AN OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY THERE OR THAT NEEDS TO BE MARKET RATE RENTAL UNITS. 
          THEN ABOVE 100,000, WE BELIEVE THAT THE MARKET CAN ACCOMMODATE THOSE FOLKS TO BE ABLE TO FIND A HOME, EITHER RENT OR OWN. 
          BASICALLY A THIRD, A THIRD, A THIRD, AND A THIRD NEEDING TO BE HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED RENTS, A THIRD, EITHER MARKET RATE RENTS OR A SUBSIDIZED OWNERSHIP PROGRAM AND A THIRD MARKET RATE, WHERE THAT'S GOING TO HANDLE ITSELF. 
          THOSE ARE THE HOMES THAT ARE BEING BUILT TODAY. 
          WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SOLVING THIS AND PROVIDING IT, WE REALLY LOOK AT THE FACT THAT THERE ARE LIMITED GOVERNMENT RESOURCES, LIMITED DOLLARS TO BE ABLE TO INVEST AND SUBSIDIZE HOUSING TO MAKE IT AFFORDABLE. 
          WHEN THE MAJORITY NEEDS TO BE ACCOMMODATED IN THE PRIVATE MARKET, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? THAT IS USUALLY DENSITY. 
          WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INCREASING DENSITY ABOVE WHAT WE'RE SEEING TODAY, MEANING MAYBE IT'S A DUPLEX OR A TRIPLEX OR A FOUR PLEX, SMALLER LOTS, SMALLER FOOTPRINT TYPE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, CLUSTER TYPE PRODUCTS, WHERE YOU'RE FITTING, NOW WE'RE GETTING UP INTO THE SIX, EIGHT, 10 UNITS PER ACRE, OR AN ATTACHED TOWN HOME OR CONDOMINIUM TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. 
          STEPPING UP OUR DENSITY FROM THE TRADITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY LOT DEVELOPMENT AND ACCOMMODATING SOME MORE DENSITY WHICH WILL DRIVE AFFORDABILITY. 
          ALSO, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS OR ADUS, CASITAS, AND GUEST HOMES WITHIN SOMEBODY'S SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOT, AND AS WELL AS MANUFACTURED HOMES, WHICH WE POINTED OUT IS STILL THE MOST AFFORDABLE OWNERSHIP TYPE PRODUCT THAT EXISTS TODAY. 
          THEN ALL THE WAY UP TO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN PRESCOTT VALLEY, A TRADITIONAL MARKET RATE, THREE, FOUR STORY APARTMENT, AS WELL AS ASSISTED LIVING FOR OUR AGING POPULATION. 
          WE DO WANT TO POINT OUT, MODERATE TO HIGH DENSITY HOUSING CAN ONLY BE BUILT WHERE THERE'S ACCESS TO A COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM. 
          THERE ARE MANY PLACES THROUGHOUT THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY THAT CANNOT ACCOMMODATE, EVEN IF YOU WANTED TO BUILD AT A HIGHER DENSITY, YOU DO NEED THAT WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM, SO THAT EXCLUDES THE VERDE VILLAGE, WHICH THEY'RE SERVED WATER BY COTTONWOOD, BUT ARE ALL ON SEPTIC, SO THEY DON'T HAVE THAT. 
          THEN COMPARE THAT WITH VILLAGE OAK CREEK, WHICH DOES HAVE WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, AND YOU SEE ALL THE TYPES OF DENSITY AND HOUSING, THE HOTELS, AND THE APARTMENTS, AND THE TOWN HOMES THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          INFRASTRUCTURE IS REALLY KEY. 
          DO WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THAT HIGHER DENSITY? OTHERWISE, WE'RE MORE LIMITED TO HAVING THE INCORPORATED CITIES AND TOWNS REALLY TAKE ON THAT HOUSING TYPE. 
          WE TALK ABOUT HOME OF MY OWN IN ALL OF OUR OTHER HOUSING ASSIGNMENTS ACROSS THE STATE AS ONE OF THE MOST INNOVATIVE AND FORWARD THINKING INITIATIVES FOR A COUNTY TO DEVELOP AND ADOPT AND EXECUTE. 
          THE FACT THAT YOU GUYS DID THIS BEFORE EVERYONE WAS RINGING THE BELL THAT THERE REALLY WAS A HOUSING CRISIS. 
          THIS IS A GREAT PROGRAM THAT WE HOPE TO CONTINUE AND IF THERE'S ANY WAY TO DOUBLE DOWN AND ENHANCE. 
          WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF IDEAS FOR THAT. 
          THERE ARE A LOT OF ALSO STATE LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES THAT COUNTIES ARE NOT SUBJECT TO, BUT CITIES AND TOWNS ARE, BUT WE THINK THAT THEY'RE WORTH CONSIDERING AS EITHER ADOPTING OR CONFORMING MORE TO BECAUSE THE GOALS OF THESE ARE ALL TO ADDRESS AFFORDABILITY AND DRIVE AFFORDABILITY WITHIN THE CITIES AND TOWNS. 
          UPDATING POTENTIALLY THE ADU PROVISIONS FOR CONSISTENCY, THERE'S HOUSE BILL 2928. 
          SB 1162 TALKED ABOUT BASICALLY ESTABLISHING MAXIMUM TIMELINES FOR REZONING CASES, 
          [01:00:08]
SO THAT'S A CONSIDERATION AS WELL IN TERMS OF MAKING IT EASIER TO DEVELOP, MAKING IT LESS COSTLY TO DEVELOP ON THE ZONING AND ENTITLEMENT TIMELINE FRONT, POTENTIALLY AMENDING SUBDIVISION APPROVAL PROCESSES SO THAT PLATS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO PUBLIC HEARINGS, SO IT'S DONE AT AN ADMINISTRATIVE LEVEL. 
          THEN WE TALKED AN ADAPTIVE REUSE POLICY FOR OBSOLETE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. 
          ARE THERE ANY OPPORTUNITIES FOR OBSOLETE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL AREAS THAT COULD ACCOMMODATE A REUSE TO RESIDENTIAL? 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY, IF I COULD JUST INTERRUPT FOR JUST A MOMENT, IF WE COULD GO BACK TO THAT PREVIOUS SLIDE ABSOLUTELY. 
          JUST TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SECOND BULLET POINT, THEY'RE UPDATING THE ADU PROVISIONS FOR CONSISTENCY WITH HB 2928, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WILL SEE ON YOUR NEXT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING NEXT WEDNESDAY. 
          WE ARE MOVING AHEAD IN THAT DIRECTION AS IT IS. 
          WE'RE LOOKING AT SOME OF THESE OTHERS AS WELL, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'LL SEE ON THE NEXT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY, IF I MAY. 
          OVER TO YOU. 
          >> REGARDING SEVERAL OF THESE POINTS HERE ON THESE RECOMMENDATIONS, SOME OF THEM ARE IN CONFLICT OR COULD BE IN CONFLICT WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLANS IN VARIOUS PARTS OF THE COUNTY. 
          WE'RE LOOKING AT, HOW DO WE CHANGE THOSE ITEMS. WE'VE ALREADY HAD A DISCUSSION PREVIOUSLY ON HOW TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MAJOR AND MINOR. 
          THAT WAS A PIECE OF WORK THAT PLANNING TEAM REALLY HAD TO GET THROUGH, AND SUBSEQUENT TO THAT, THE BOARD AS WELL AS THE ADU PROVISIONS THAT WE JUST DEALT WITH, THAT'LL BE COMING TO THE BOARD SOON. 
          THEY DO CONFLICT WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 
          ADDITIONAL THOSE CHANGES, IF APPROVED, ARE GOING TO BRING ADDITIONAL STRESS TO COUNTY SERVICES AND LOCAL SERVICES. 
          TREAD LIGHTLY OR VERY CAREFULLY THROUGH THAT PROCESS THERE. 
          THE SUBDIVISION APPROVAL PROCESS, I THINK, PERSONALLY HAVE AN EXPERIENCE WITH IT IS ADEQUATE. 
          IT BRINGS A LOT OF CONFLICT WITH IT, BUT IT GETS THE PUBLIC INVOLVED, WHICH IS WHAT WE WANT. 
          I UNDERSTAND WE'RE LOOKING AT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND HOUSING AVAILABILITY, NOT JUST ONE OR THE OTHER, BUT BOTH. 
          HOW DO WE ADDRESS THAT IN THIS COUNTY? WELL, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. 
          BUT IT'S A LOT MORE COMPLEX THAN WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED HERE. 
          IT'S A LOT MORE COMPLEX. 
          WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT LONGER, I THINK TO GET THROUGH THAT PROCESS. 
          THOSE THINGS ARE FOREMOST IN MY MIND WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BECAUSE THERE ARE RURAL COMMUNITIES OUT THERE THAT ARE GOING TO FIGHT YOU EVERY STEP OF THE WAY TRYING TO GET THROUGH ALL OF THOSE PROCESSES. 
          THERE'S MY COMMENT. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. CHAIR MALLORY, RAYMOND, I THINK THAT'S AN EXCELLENT POINT. 
          I PERSONALLY WOULD REALLY HOPE THAT BECAUSE THIS IS SUCH A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS THAT WE REMAIN OPEN TO REVISITING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 
          I THINK THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE BEFORE US, WE DON'T WANT TO LOSE THROUGH JUST LOOKING AT THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 
          I'M ABSOLUTELY INTERESTED IN SOLVING PROBLEMS AND THINKING BIG HERE. 
          I THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE TO GO BACK AND SEE REALIGN BOTH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO A NEW VISION THAT WE'RE TAKING SO MUCH TIME TO CULTIVATE NEW STRATEGIES OF HOW WE CAN SOLVE BIG PROBLEMS. 
          >> I THINK AGREEMENT TO YOUR POINT WITH THIS ADU, WITH THE INTENTIONS OF PROVIDING WORKFORCE HOUSING. 
          I THINK THE BOARD JUST SUPPORTED RETURNING LOCAL CONTROL FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS. 
          I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE ADU TURN INTO EVERYONE HAVING A HOTEL IN THEIR BACKYARD. 
          I'M AFRAID A LOT OF THAT MIGHT HAPPEN. 
          THEY HAVE TO PUT ANOTHER SEPTIC SYSTEM IN BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER FAMILY LIVING IN ANOTHER UNIT IN YOUR PLACE. 
          YOU DON'T WANT TO JUST TAP IN YOUR EXISTING WHAT WHICH PERMITTED FOR FOUR PEOPLE TO USE. 
          NOW YOU'VE GOT EIGHT PEOPLE TO USE IN IT. 
          >> [INAUDIBLE]. 
          >> SORRY, IN REGARD TO THE ADU, I KNOW IN CLARKDALE, WE FOUGHT A ZONING CHANGE RIGHT NEXT TO THE SCHOOL ACROSS FROM MOUNTAIN GATE. 
          [01:05:07]
THE DEVELOPER THERE DECIDED THAT THERE WAS TOO MUCH PUBLIC OPPOSITION TO A HIGHER DENSITY THAN WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY ZONED. 
          THAT DEVELOPER DECIDED TO DO IS GO WITH THE PRESENT ZONING, WHICH WAS ONE FAMILY, AND THEN BUILD ADUS, ON EVERY SINGLE LOT OF THE SUBDIVISION, AND THAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW. 
          THERE'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK IT'S A PROBLEM. 
          >> TO ADD ON TO WHAT RANDY SAID IS TO PUT SOME NUMBERS TO IT. 
          WE GOT TO HEAR THAT YESTERDAY AT OUR MEETING ON TRANSPORTATION IS THAT THAT AREA WAS SET UP FOR A PAD AND THEY WANTED 140 HOUSES, I BELIEVE, IN THAT AREA, AND THE COMMUNITY LASHED OUT AGAINST IT. 
          THEY HAD ALL CONCESSIONS BUILT INTO THAT. 
          MELVER STEPPED BACK AND SAID, WE'RE GOING TO GO AROUND THE COMMUNITY, AND WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR ENTITLEMENT, WHICH WAS 54 LOTS. 
          BUT THEY'RE PUTTING, AS RANDY SAID, THREE HOUSES ON EVERY LOT BECAUSE THEY'RE DOING A HOUSE IN TWO ADUS. 
          THEY'VE NOW KICKED THAT UP TO 160 UNITS THAT ARE GOING IN AN AREA THAT BY RIGHT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE 50. 
          ONE OF THE PROBLEMS [INAUDIBLE] IS, WE HAVE A HUGE INFLUX OF RETIREES. 
          YOU THINK THAT BY ADDING ALL THESE ADUS, YOU'RE TAKING CARE OF A WORKFORCE HOUSING ISSUE. 
          BUT YOU'RE NOT AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU'RE BRINGING IN MORE RETIREES, WHICH PUT MORE PRESSURE ON THE SERVICES THAT ARE ALREADY BEING PROVIDED. 
          NOT OFFSETTING THOSE PRESSURES WITH MORE WORKERS. 
          THERE'S NO WAY OF GETTING AHEAD OF IT RIGHT NOW. 
          IT'S JUST IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY TIME YOU DO SOMETHING YOU THINK IS GOING TO BE A SOLUTION TO A PROBLEM, JUST ACTUALLY MAKES THE PROBLEM BIGGER. 
          >> COMMISSIONER GARRISON, A COUNTERPOINT TO THAT, THERE REALLY IS A LOT OF WORKFORCE, ESPECIALLY IN THE HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY AND EDUCATION, THAT ARE USING THOSE ALTERNATIVE DWELLING UNITS. 
          AS SOMEONE WHO'S HAD FAMILY MEDICAL WHERE WE NEEDED OR COULD HAVE BENEFITED FROM HAVING LIVE-IN HELP ON OUR PROPERTY, OR AS PARENTS ARE AGING OUR STUDENTS THAT MAYBE ARE STILL IN COLLEGE, OR A PROFOUNDLY DISABLED YOUNGSTER IN THE FAMILY THAT COULD STILL LIVE SOMEWHAT INDEPENDENTLY. 
          IT'S A SPECTRUM, AND I RESPECT THAT CONSIDERATION THAT MOUNTAIN GATE MAY FILL UP WITH THREE TIMES AS MANY RETIREES, BUT I REALLY BELIEVE THERE'S A BALANCE THERE, AND WE NEED TO SEEK THAT IN OUR PLANNING PROCESS. 
          >> JEREMY, MAYBE THIS IS FOR YOU, BUT SUPERVISOR KUKNYO MENTIONED ABOUT THE SEPTIC TANK AND THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO PUT ANOTHER ONE IN BECAUSE OF THESE OTHER FACILITIES, OTHER HOUSES. 
          WELL, IF YOU ONLY HAVE SO MUCH PROPERTY, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SPACE AREA WITH THESE SEPTIC TANKS. 
          I'M JUST ASKING, IT SPARKED A QUESTION IN MY HEAD THERE. 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY, THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. 
          ABSOLUTELY. THE NEW STATE LEGISLATION ALLOWS FOR ONE DETACHED ADU AND ONE ATTACHED ADU. 
          AGAIN, THAT EFFECTIVELY TRIPLES THE DENSITY ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY. 
          IF SOMEONE WERE TO EXPAND ONTO THEIR PROPERTY OR BUILD AN ADU, WELL, THAT INCREASES THE CAPACITY OF THE SEPTIC SYSTEM. 
          THE NEED FOR THAT SEPTIC SYSTEM. 
          THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE TO HAVE ENOUGH PROPERTY TO EXPAND THAT SEPTIC SYSTEM IN EITHER THROUGH THE LEACH FIELD OR THROUGH SOME KIND OF A PONY TANK OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR SOME OTHER ALTERNATIVE SYSTEM THAT DOES TAKE UP MAYBE A LITTLE BIT LESS SPACE, BUT THAT IS STILL A REQUIREMENT. 
          ACCORDING TO THE STATUTE, THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD STILL HAVE TO HAVE AN APPROPRIATELY SIZED WASTEWATER SYSTEM FOR THE ADUS. 
          >> TO MALLORY? 
          >> YES. 
          >> MA'AM. 
          >> YES. 
          >> IN ADDITION TO WHAT WAS JUST MENTIONED THERE WITH REGARDS TO THE ADUS, 
          [01:10:03]
THIS NEW STATE REGULATION UNDER STATE ARS THAT WE JUST DEALT WITH LAST WEEK, IN A ONE-ACRE PARCEL PERMITS UP TO FOUR ADUS PLUS A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING. 
          WE'RE LOOKING AT DENSITIES INCREASING ACROSS THE COUNTY. 
          AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS IS THAT LACK OF HOUSING. 
          WHAT CAUSES THAT LACK OF HOUSING? PRICING. WHAT CAUSES THAT PRICING? SOMETIMES OUR REGULATORY MECHANISMS, OF WHICH WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADD MORE, BECAUSE IT'S THAT CONUNDRUM OF WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT? DO WE REGULATE AND DRIVE THE PRICE UP, OR DO WE DEREGULATE DRIVE THE PRICE DOWN AND INCREASE THAT DENSITY? PERSONALLY, I'M OPPOSED TO HIGH DENSITY, ESPECIALLY IN RURAL AREAS, BECAUSE WE CAN'T SERVICE IT. 
          WE DON'T HAVE THE LAW ENFORCEMENT, PUBLIC SAFETY, EMS, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CAPABILITY OR CAPACITY TO SERVICE THAT. 
          HOW ARE WE GOING TO GET AROUND THAT? MY TAKE ON THIS NEW ARS, IT BLEW OPEN WILDCATTING IN YAVAPAI COUNTY. 
          YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF WILDCATTING CAPABILITY. 
          IN ESSENCE, IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO DO. 
          YOU TAKE 2-5 1-ACRE PARCELS AND YOU PUT FIVE HOUSES ON THEM. 
          THAT'S A WILDCAT DEVELOPMENT. 
          NOW WE'RE FACED WITH HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH WATER? HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH SEPTIC? THEY'RE NOT ON A PUBLIC SYSTEM. 
          UNLESS WE REQUIRE IT, WHICH DRIVES THE PRICE UP. 
          I'M ALL FOR REQUIRING IT PERSONALLY, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO BE THE DECIDING FACTOR HERE. 
          WE HAVE TO DECIDE THAT AS A WHOLE IN THE INTEREST OF DEVELOPING THIS COUNTY REASONABLY. 
          >> YES, THANK YOU FOR THAT SUPERVISOR CHECK. 
          I REALLY THINK THIS ADDS ANOTHER REASON WHY WE MAY WANT TO REVISIT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE THE ADU SITUATION AND THE LACK OF THE STATE'S, OF COURSE, RECENTLY REMOVED FROM MUNICIPALITIES, PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS ON LAND USE CHANGES. 
          I THINK THAT DRASTICALLY CHANGES THE SITUATION AND THE PRESSURE. 
          IN MY MIND, IT'S CLEARLY A RESPONSE TO BASICALLY THE LACK OF POLITICAL WILL TO SET ASIDE AREAS FOR HIGH DENSITY. 
          WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AND A REAL REASON TO START TO PLAN FOR HIGH-DENSITY AREAS. 
          USING THE MATRIX OF ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED, COMMISSIONER, LET US TAKE THIS TIME TO IDENTIFY AREAS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE FOR HIGH DENSITY SO THAT WE CAN START TO FUNNEL AND GUIDE DEVELOPMENT IN A WAY THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          WE NEVER REALLY MAYBE HAVE HAD THAT REASON OF WHY WE REALLY OUGHT TO DO THAT WORK UNTIL THIS YEAR. 
          I REALLY DO HOPE THAT THAT'S AN OUTCOME OF THIS WORK AND THIS PROCESS IS TO VERY CLEARLY IDENTIFY ON THE MAP WHERE ARE THE AREAS THAT WE SEE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIGH-DENSITY DEVELOPMENT AND INDUSTRIAL, AND COMMERCIAL, AND ALL OF THAT TOO. 
          >> YOU WILL GO TO THE OTHER END OF THE SEPTIC ON THE WATER COMING IN. 
          I KNOW THE CITY OF PRESCOTT ASSIGNED YOU COULD HAVE FOUR HOMES PER ACRE FOOT OF WATER. 
          WELL, NOW YOU ESSENTIALLY TRIPLED THAT. 
          WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE WATER? I THINK WE'RE STARTING TO IDENTIFY, AND WE SHOULD BE SCARED OF WHAT THE ADU COULD BRING WITH IT. 
          >> REAL QUICK, JEREMY, AS SUPERVISOR CHECK MENTIONED ABOUT THIS HIGH DENSITY, WOULD THAT NOT BE AN AREA OF SOME TYPE OF ZONING, SAY THIS AREA COULD BE THE HIGH DENSITY AS TO WHERE THIS PART IS NOT? SET THAT DIRECTION. AGAIN, AS POLITICAL WILL, AS WAS MENTIONED, WE DEAL WITH A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE GET IN FRONT OF THE BOARD WHERE PEOPLE COME BEFORE US BECAUSE THEY MAY NOT LIKE WHAT THE GUIDE IS, AND THEY PULL A USE PERMIT. 
          THE POLITICAL WILL WOULD HAVE TO BE TO FOLLOW WHAT WE ARE PUTTING FORWARD AND SAY NO, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING. 
          THIS WAS THE DIRECTION, AND WE'LL NEED TO STAY THAT COURSE. 
          IS THAT A CORRECT STATEMENT AT ALL? 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY AND SUPERVISOR CHECK. 
          TO YOUR POINT WE DO HAVE THOSE CAPABILITIES NOW IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE. 
          WE HAVE ZONING DISTRICTS FOR MULTI-FAMILY, AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          WE HAVE THE PAD PROCESS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF ZONING, WE HAVE THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF ZONING. 
          THOSE ARE OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE. 
          LOOKING AHEAD, TOO, AND I THINK TO YOUR POINT, SPECIFICALLY, AS WE GO THROUGH THIS ZONING ORDINANCE PROCESS, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REOPEN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND REVISIT THAT BECAUSE AS WE MOVE FORWARD IN THIS PROCESS, 
          [01:15:03]
WE'RE GOING TO FIND AREAS THAT ARE GOING TO NEED TO BE BETTER ALIGNED WITH OUR NEW ORDINANCE VERSUS THE EXISTING ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE. 
          WE ARE TAKING A LONGER-TERM, LONGER VISION APPROACH WITH THIS. 
          IN FACT, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN THIS LAST BUDGET APPROVED US TO HAVE THIS NEW BRAND-NEW SENIOR PLANNER POSITION, WHICH IS EFFECTIVELY GOING TO BE FOCUSED ON THE LONGER-RANGE TYPE OF PLANNING PROJECTS. 
          ONCE WE FINISH UP WITH OUR ZONING ORDINANCE HERE, THE SENIOR PLANNER, BJ, AS IT IS NOW, IS GOING TO BE FOCUSED ON, WHERE DO WE NEED TO START CLEANING UP AND REOPENING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO REVISIT SOME OF THESE TO BETTER ALIGN WITH THE NEW ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE? THERE'S A LOT, BUT WE'RE TAKING A LOOK AT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT THIS FROM A MUCH LONGER-TERM APPROACH AS WELL. 
          >> I'LL QUICKLY JUST ADDRESS THE COMMISSIONER'S INITIAL QUESTION ON ENACTING OR ADOPTING SOME OF THESE. 
          THIS SLIDE IS AN OVERSIMPLIFICATION OF WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE, WHICH IS BASICALLY TO GIVE CONSIDERATION TO THEM, AND I THINK THAT YOU GUYS ARE ALREADY WELL ON THE PATH OF CONSIDERING THEM. 
          IS THERE ANYTHING IN THIS STATE-WIDE LEGISLATION THAT IS WORTH HAVING THE COUNTY'S REGULATIONS CONFORM MORE TO, OR IT CAN BE JUST BINARY? YES, THAT WOULD BE GREAT, OR NO. 
          THAT DOESN'T WORK FOR US, BUT JUST TO GIVE CONSIDERATION TO THESE INITIATIVES THAT ARE HAPPENING ON THE STATE LEVEL. 
          WE ALSO LOOKED AT POTENTIAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING TOOLS. 
          THE GPLET, THE GOVERNMENT PROPERTY LEASE EXCISE TAX, IS USED QUITE EXTENSIVELY WITHIN CITIES AND TOWNS, NOT SO MUCH ON THE COUNTY LEVEL, BUT MARICOPA COUNTY AND PIMA COUNTY HAVE USED GOVERNMENT PROPERTY LEASE EXCISE TAX. 
          IT'S A WAY TO BASICALLY LOWER THE PREVAILING PROPERTY TAX RATE OF A CERTAIN PROPERTY. 
          IT WOULD LOWER THEIR TAX BURDEN, WHICH WOULD LOWER THEIR OPERATING COSTS, AND IT CAN BE USED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND IT HAS BEEN USED. 
          THAT IS A MECHANISM THAT IS AVAILABLE THAT COULD BE USED AS AN INCENTIVE TO ATTRACT AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO THE COUNTY. 
          YOU ALSO HAVE THE YAVAPAI COUNTY IDA. 
          THERE'S FINANCING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          YOU COULD PERHAPS FIND FUNDS THERE FOR A DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM THAT COULD BE TIED TO THE HOME OF MY OWN PROGRAM. 
          THEY'RE USING THAT, AND PERHAPS THERE'S MAYBE A DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM THROUGH THAT. 
          YOU DO HAVE CDBG, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS COMING TO YOU. 
          THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING USED. 
          I THINK THE MAJORITY IS FOR REHABILITATION. 
          THOSE FUNDS ARE ALSO, CAN BE USED FOR OTHER AFFORDABLE HOUSING INITIATIVES, LIKE DEVELOPING PROPERTY OR CONTRIBUTING TO THE NEXT BULLET POINT THERE, WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY LAND TRUST. 
          I JUST LEARNED YESTERDAY THAT THE VERDE VALLEY IS ABOUT TO KICK ONE OFF A COMMUNITY AND TRUST. 
          THESE ARE REALLY INTERESTING MODELS WHERE, TYPICALLY, IT'S A NONPROFIT. 
          THERE ARE LIKE THE ONE THAT COMES TO MIND THAT'S REALLY ACTIVE IN THE MARICOPA COUNTY REGION IS NEWTOWN, BUT A NONPROFIT HOLDS TITLE TO LAND, WHICH PRESERVES AFFORDABILITY. 
          INSTEAD OF SOMEONE THAT BUILDS A HOME THAT OWNS THE LAND AS WELL, YOU'RE LEASING THE LAND FOR 99 YEARS, SO EFFECTIVELY FOR THE ENTIRE TIME, THAT THE ECONOMIC LIFE OF THAT HOME. 
          THEN THAT LAND LEASE IS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN $25-$75 A MONTH. 
          THAT SUBSTANTIALLY LOWERS THE COST TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP AND OWN A HOME. 
          A LOT OF TIMES THESE COMMUNITY LAND TRUSTS WILL JUST GO AND PURCHASE HOMES, EXISTING HOMES, PUTTING INTO THE TRUST, AND THEN THEY CAN EITHER RENT THOSE HOMES OR THEY CAN SELL THE HOME AT BELOW MARKET. 
          THEN THAT INCLUDES A CONTRACT THAT LIMITS THE APPRECIATION THAT THAT HOME COULD HAVE. 
          MAYBE, WHEREAS WE SAW 50% APPRECIATION IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS, YOU COULD BUY ONE OF THESE HOMES AT BELOW MARKET, SO IT'S AFFORDABLE TO A MODERATE-INCOME HOUSEHOLD, AND PERHAPS THEIR CONTRACT SAYS THAT THIS HOME CAN ONLY AT A MAXIMUM INCREASE IN VALUE BY 3%. 
          YOU CAN SELL THIS HOME LATER, BUT AT A CAPPED APPRECIATION RATE, WHICH MAINTAINS THE AFFORDABILITY OF THE HOMES WITHIN THE TRUST, BUT ALLOWS SOMEONE TO OBTAIN HOMEOWNERSHIP, 
          [01:20:03]
BUILD EQUITY, AS THEY PAY A MORTGAGE, AND BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT AT A LOWER PRICE. 
          THE COMMUNITY LAND TRUST HAS A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY, IT NEEDS TO BE CEDED BY DONATIONS OF LAND OR DONATIONS OF MONEY TO BE ABLE TO EITHER TO GO BUY LAND OR BUY HOMES. 
          THESE COMMUNITY LAND TRUSTS CAN ALSO DEVELOP PROPERTIES. 
          THEY CAN BUILD HOMES THROUGH THEIR MONEY, AND THROUGH THESE GRANTS, THEY COULD BUILD APARTMENTS. 
          THEY COULD PARTNER WITH PRIVATE DEVELOPERS TO BUILD THOSE HOMES OR APARTMENTS. 
          THERE'S LOTS OF THINGS THERE. 
          AGAIN, THIS GOES BACK TO WHAT ARE THE RESOURCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE, BUT COMMUNITY LAND TRUST, TO ME, IS AT LEAST A PATHWAY FOR AFFORDABLE HOME OWNERSHIP, AS OPPOSED TO A LOT OF THE OTHER GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS THAT ARE PROMOTING RENTAL HOUSING. 
          THIS IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE INITIATED AND FUNDED AND CEDED TO AT LEAST ON THE MARGINS AND INCREMENTALLY START TO CHIP AWAY AT AN AFFORDABLE HOME OWNERSHIP MODEL. 
          JUST TO ROUND THIS OUT, THERE'S ALWAYS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR FEE WAIVERS, EXPEDITED PLAN PROCESSING THAT COULD BE TARGETED TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          YOU QUALIFY FOR WITHIN OUR REGULATIONS AS AN AFFORDABLE TYPE OF PROJECT, YOU GET EXPEDITED PLAN PROCESSING, YOU GET FEE WAIVERS, AND THAT HELPS LOWER THEIR INITIAL CAPITAL COSTS, WHICH CAN KEEP THE PRICE OF THE HOMES OR THE RENTS LOWER. 
          THEN, AGAIN, PROVIDING RESOURCES AT THE COUNTY LEVEL STAFFING THAT ARE SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED, THOSE STAFF MEMBERS SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE AND ADMINISTER AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAMS AROUND THE COUNTY. 
          THAT'S ALL I HAVE. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? [LAUGHTER] 
          >> ALL THOSE OUT. [LAUGHTER] 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY, I WANTED TO JUST BRING UP ANOTHER IDEA AS FAR AS WHAT'S LIMITING HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND THAT IS THAT NOT ALL HOMES OR PARCELS PERK FOR A SEPTIC SYSTEM. 
          RIM ROCK, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE VERDI VALLEY, IS A LOT OF LANDS THAT ARE READY FOR DEVELOPMENT, BUT THE SOILS ARE INADEQUATE FOR PERKING ASEPTIC. 
          I THINK THE HOUSING CRISIS IS TO THE POINT WHERE PEOPLE MIGHT CONSIDER, IF I'M ABLE TO OWN A HOME, AM I WILLING TO USE A COMPOSTING TOILET? I THINK THE ANSWER TO THAT MIGHT BE YES, BUT THERE'S STILL A STATE REQUIREMENT THAT YOU HAVE A SEPTIC SYSTEM TO DEAL WITH UNDER THE SINK WATER, ESSENTIALLY. 
          THAT ISSUE, PAIRED WITH THE NUMBER OF CESSPOOLS THAT WE HAVE. 
          HOW MANY CESSPOOLS DO WE POSSIBLY HAVE, AND YOU HAVE AT PIKE COUNTY? 
          >> TO ESTIMATE A LOT. 
          [LAUGHTER] 
          >> A LOT. 
          >> I HEAR THE SUPERVISOR CHECK WAS ABOUT 5,000. 
          >> POSSIBLY UP TO 5,000 CESSPOOLS. 
          THAT BOTH OPENS UP LANDS THAT ARE READY FOR DEVELOPMENT, BUT ARE UNABLE TO BE. 
          THEN ALSO PEOPLE WHO ARE IN HOMES THAT ARE THREATENED BY THEIR EXISTING CESSPOOL SITUATION. 
          I KNOW IT'S NOT A COUNTY LEVEL DECISION, BUT THERE ARE UNDER SINK DIGESTERS THAT ARE CAPABLE OF BASICALLY TAKING CARE OF THE CONCERNS INVOLVED THERE, AND I THINK THAT IT'S WORTH THINKING ABOUT. 
          I THINK WHERE THE STATE IS AT, EVERYONE IN THE STATE IS THINKING ABOUT HOW TO MOVE FORWARD ON HOUSING. 
          IT MIGHT BE TIME TO START TO THINK ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO MOVE FORWARD, AND DEVELOPING PARCELS WITH NO SEPTIC SYSTEMS. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, SUPERVISOR CHECK. 
          I'VE WORKED IN AREAS WHERE WE HAD ENCOUNTERED IN MY PAST THE SAME EXACT POSITIONS WHERE SEPTIC SYSTEMS WERE NOT FUNCTIONING PROPERLY, FAILING CONSISTENTLY OR JUST WERE NOT ABLE TO BE INSTALLED. 
          THOSE AREAS THAT I WORKED IN THEN REQUIRED A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM. 
          I THINK THERE HAS TO BE A TIME WHERE THIS COUNTY HAS TO PUT THEIR FOOT DOWN AND SAY, THIS IS OUR REQUIREMENT NOW. 
          IF YOU WANT TO BUILD HERE IN THESE NUMBERS AND MAKE IT AFFORDABLE, THAT'S ONE OF THE WAYS YOU CAN DO IT. 
          BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE TO FIND THE FUNDING TO MAKE THOSE THINGS HAPPEN. 
          THE FUNDING IS OUT THERE. 
          FEDERAL DOLLARS, OF COURSE, YOU GOT TO WAIT FOR THEM. 
          BUT THAT WAS THE ANSWER IN SOME OF THESE OTHER COMMUNITIES. 
          IT'S SOMETHING I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT, FOR EXAMPLE, RIM ROCK. 
          WE'RE FACED WITH THAT IN SEVERAL OTHER AREAS OF THE COUNTY. 
          [01:25:03]
JUST MY $0.02 WORTH ON HOW WE COULD ADDRESS THAT. 
          WASTEWATER RECLAMATION SYSTEMS WORK, AND THEY ADDRESS A NUMBER OF PROBLEMS. THANK YOU. 
          >> YES. 
          >> TO TILE ON TO THAT, AND ALSO, TO WHAT NIKKI WAS SAYING. 
          IN THE VERDI VALLEY, WE HAVE VERDI VILLAGE, WHICH IS AN AREA THAT ACTUALLY HAS A HIGHER DENSITY THAN THE CITY OF COTTONWOOD, NOT BY MUCH ANYMORE, BUT IT STILL HAS A HIGHER DENSITY, HIGHER POPULATION. 
          BUT THE LOTS ARE VERY SMALL, TYPICALLY VERY OLD TRAILERS. 
          WE DO HAVE HOUSING IN THERE, BUT THERE IS A LOT OF TRAILERS, AND THE AREAS WHERE THE TRAILERS ARE ARE THE SMALLEST LOTS, AND IT'S WHERE YOU'RE HAVING THE HIGHEST FAILURE RATE FOR SEPTIC SYSTEMS. THERE'S NO PLACE LEFT ON THAT PROPERTY TO PUT A SEPTIC SYSTEM BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY TAKEN UP BY THE TRAILER OR THE EXISTING SYSTEM. 
          THERE'S BEEN A PUSH FOR YEARS TO START WORKING COTTONWOOD'S WASTEWATER SYSTEM OUT INTO THAT AREA TO PICK THAT UP. 
          BUT BECAUSE OF THE TOPOGRAPHY, WHICH ISN'T FLAT AT ALL, AND BECAUSE OF THE LINTH BETWEEN THE AREAS WHERE SEWER IS AND THE WAY AREAS WHERE IT'S NEEDED, IT'S SO COST PROHIBITIVE FOR THE RESIDENTS TO DO IT BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE TO CREATE A SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT IN ORDER TO GO OUT THERE AND DO IT, AND YOU'RE TELLING PEOPLE, IT'S GOING TO COST YOU FIVE GRAND TO HOOK UP TO THE SEWER SO WE CAN GET IT OUT THERE, AND THAT'S WITH A HEALTHY FEDERAL INPUT OF FUNDING TO GET IT THERE. 
          THEY'RE GOING, I CAN'T AFFORD FIVE GRAND, BUT THEN THEY TURN AROUND AND A YEAR LATER, THEY CAN'T LIVE IN THEIR TRAILER BECAUSE THEIR SEPTIC FAILED, AND THEY CAN'T PUT ANOTHER ONE IN BECAUSE IT'S 20 GRAND TO MOVE THE TRAILER OUT TO PUT ANOTHER SEPTIC IN. 
          THERE'S GOT TO BE A POINT IN TIME WHERE COTTONWOOD HAD TO GO TO THE SEWER BECAUSE EPA SAID YOU'RE PUTTING TOO MUCH PRESSURE ONTO THE VERDI RIVER AND THE LOCAL AREAS. 
          THEY MADE COTTONWOOD PUT IN A SEPTIC SYSTEM. 
          WELL, IT WAS A MUNICIPALITY. 
          IT WAS ABLE TO TAX BUT VERDI VILLAGE CAN'T TAX, YOU CAN TAX. 
          I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THAT POINT SOONER OR LATER WHERE THE COUNTY IS GOING TO HAVE TO SAY, THIS IS ACTUALLY IMPORTANT, IN ORDER TO PROTECT THOSE AREAS WHERE YOU HAVE SUCH HIGH DENSITY, AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE HIGHER DENSITY WITH THIS ADU THING GOING THROUGH, THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO START ACTUALLY FUNNELING MONEY INTO DOING INFRASTRUCTURE WHERE THE COUNTY'S ALWAYS BEEN, WELL, THAT'S A CITY PROBLEM, WE'RE RURAL, AND IT'S NOT OUR ISSUE, BUT IT'S BECOMING OUR ISSUE. 
          >> I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH THAT. 
          RANDY, AS YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT THOSE COUNTY ISLANDS, AND THEY ABSOLUTELY HAVE TRAILERS IN THERE. 
          THEY'RE AT LEAST 50 YEARS OLD. 
          SAME SITUATION, SEPTICS FAILING, TRAILER CAN'T BE MOVED, IT'S TOO OLD, THE LOTS TOO SMALL. 
          IT IS A MESS. THESE COUNTY ISLANDS BACK RIGHT UP TO YOUR MUNICIPALITIES. 
          IT IS A VERY BIG SITUATION, AND DEFINITELY, AS YOU SIT HERE AND WE TALK ABOUT ALL OF THIS, WHAT USED TO BE IN YAVAPAI COUNTY BACK IN 1968, HOW WE STARTED ALL OF THESE, WE HAVE TO TURN THE CORNER, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE OUR WAYS. 
          THE OTHER PART TO THAT IS THAT WHEN WE DO MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE THESE DECISIONS ON WHAT ARE THESE GUIDELINES THAT THIS BOARD SAYS, THE COMMISSION BOARD, ALONG WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, SAYS, THIS IS THE GUIDELINES FOR THE COUNTY. 
          THIS IS WHAT WE AGREED UPON. 
          THIS IS WHAT IS THE BEST FOR THE COUNTY IN THE FUTURE. 
          WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE STICK TO THOSE RULES AND FOLLOW THEM VERY CLEARLY AND DIRECTLY. 
          >> BUT HERE'S ONE PROBLEM AND I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE HOUSING ISSUE IS, WE HAD THE LEGISLATURE COME IN AND SAY, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE AIRBNBS A POPULAR THING FOR OUR STATE BECAUSE WE'RE A SHARING ECONOMY. 
          ALL OF A SUDDEN, IT DOESN'T CAUSE A PROBLEM IN PHOENIX, DOESN'T CAUSE A PROBLEM IN MARICOPA COUNTY, BUT SEDONA DECIMATED THE HOUSING AVAILABILITY. 
          THEN UP THERE, WE ALSO HAVE A HIGH USE. 
          PEOPLE SAY, WELL, YOU HAD 8,000 HOUSES IN SEDONA, YOU ONLY TOOK AWAY 2,500. 
          YOU STILL GOT A LOT OF HOUSES BUT THEN THEY DON'T REALIZE THAT HALF OF THE HOUSES THAT ARE THERE ARE SECOND FAMILY OR SECOND HOUSES. 
          [01:30:01]
THERE'S NOT EVEN PEOPLE LIVING IN HALF OF THE HOUSES THAT YOU THINK YOU HAVE FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING AND SO WE DIDN'T GET A CHOICE ON AIRBNB. 
          NOW, THEY'RE HITTING US UP WITH ADUS. 
          IT'S NOT LIKE WE CAN CREATE A ZONING TO DEAL WITH THAT, BECAUSE THE STATE SAID, YOU CAN'T DEAL WITH IT. 
          WE'RE TAKING IT OUT OF YOUR CONTROL. 
          WE CAN'T SAY, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO SET THIS AREA ASIDE FOR HIGH DENSITY, AND WE'RE GOING TO SET THIS AREA ASIDE FOR LOW DENSITY. 
          WE'RE ACTUALLY PRIME FOR HIGH DENSITY EVERYWHERE BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO ACRE MINIMUMS IN OUR COUNTY. 
          THE STATE OF MARICOPA WHEN THEY CAME OUT WITH THESE RULES, THEY DIDN'T EVEN CONTEMPLATE THAT PEOPLE HAD MORE THAN AN ACRE, LET ALONE TWO ACRES, AND THEY SAID, NOW YOU CAN PUT FOUR HOUSES ON ONE ACRE. 
          WELL, THAT'S RIDICULOUS, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE WATER, YOU DON'T HAVE SEWER, YOU DON'T HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE, YOU DON'T HAVE PAVED ROADS, YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN THESE RURAL AREAS, WHERE NOW THE LAND IS CHEAP ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO PUT FOUR HOUSES ON A LOT. 
          BUT WE'RE GOING TO BE NOW IMPACTED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, THE WORST IS GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH, HOW DO YOU FIT THESE PEOPLE IN? THEN THE WHOLE IDEA, WITH WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER WITH CLARKDALE, HAVING WHAT I SEE AS THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTY THAT ACTUALLY IS USING ADUS AS A CAPACITY TOOL. 
          IT'S JUST CRAZY, WHAT'S COMING NEXT. 
          THEY GIVE YOU THESE IDEALS THAT YOU HAVE TO CHANGE AND MODIFY YOUR STUFF TO. 
          WE HAD AIRBNBS CHANGE OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT. 
          NOW, WE HAVE ADUS CHANGING OUR ZONING AND OUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES, WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT. 
          WHAT I'M MOST NERVOUS ABOUT GOING THROUGH WITH THESE PROCESSES OF UPDATING OUR ZONING, UPDATING ALL THESE POLICIES AND ORDINANCES, IS WHAT'S COMING NEXT THAT WE'RE ALSO NOT GOING TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT BECAUSE IT'S LEGISLATED DOWN TO US. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR. 
          >> YES. 
          >> TO WHAT RANDY AND RAY ARE SAYING, I THINK WITH THIS ADU, WE GOT TO WATCH BECAUSE THE BUILDERS WILL BE ALL OVER IT, AND THE WILDCATS WILL GO CRAZY. 
          I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO PUSH TO REQUIRING MORE PADS, SOMEHOW MAKING THAT A REQUIREMENT. 
          I'LL EVEN GO FURTHER THAN HAVING WASTEWATER TREATMENT. 
          I THINK WASTEWATER TREATMENT HAS TO COME WITH RECHARGE. 
          I HAVE SOME BIG DEVELOPMENTS IN MY AREA, AND THEY TAKE ALL THAT WATER AND THEY PUT IT ON A GOLF COURSE. 
          WHEN WE START HAVING THREE GIANT DEVELOPMENTS, THAT WATER SHOULD BE SOMEHOW RECHARGING. 
          WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH ALL THESE THINGS WE'RE DOING, I THINK TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE WITH THE STUFF THAT THE STATE IS HANDING US. 
          IF IT MAKES SENSE, AND WE ALL AGREE THAT SOMETHING HAS TO CHANGE, AND IT MAKES SENSE, LET'S IMPLEMENT IT NOW. 
          LET'S NOT WAIT TILL 2029. 
          IF IT MAKES SENSE, LET'S DO IT RIGHT AWAY. 
          >> WELL, IF WE DON'T IMPLEMENT IT NOW, YOU MAY BE FORCED INTO A MORATORIUM CONDITION WHERE YOU CAN'T BUILD IT. 
          YOU WANT TO, YOU CAN AFFORD TO, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE THE SUPPORT FOR IT, THE INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          >> WHICH IS WHAT WILLIAMS WENT THROUGH. 
          >> EXACTLY. IF YOU GET PUSHED INTO A CORNER, THE M WORD MAY BE THE ULTIMATE ANSWER, AND I HATE TO USE THAT BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE THE AFFORDABILITY AND AVAILABILITY CRISIS THAT WE'RE FACED WITH. 
          UNTIL WE GET THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE, WE'RE ONLY HURTING OURSELVES AND PUSHING OURSELVES FURTHER BACK. 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY AND COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          I'VE BEEN JUST LISTENING TO THE CONVERSATION AND TAKING A FEW NOTES WHILE WE'RE TALKING. 
          THE ONE THING THAT PIQUED MY INTEREST WAS SUPERVISOR KUKNYO'S COMMENT JUST NOW ABOUT ADDRESSING SOME OF THESE ISSUES RIGHT AWAY. 
          I THINK YOU'VE PROBABLY SEEN THAT IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, THE ADU ORDINANCE IS A VERY GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT BECAUSE WE ARE MOVING ON THAT RIGHT AWAY. 
          WE RECOGNIZED THAT THAT WAS A PRIORITY THAT NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED IMMEDIATELY. 
          IN FACT, THERE WAS A STATE MANDATED DEADLINE IN ORDER TO GET THAT MOVED FORWARD. 
          THAT'S WHY YOU'RE GOING TO BE SEEING THAT NEXT WEEK. 
          AS THOSE REALLY IMMEDIATE PRIORITY ISSUES COME UP, WE ARE ADDRESSING THOSE. 
          IN FACT, YOU'VE SEEN THAT WE HAD QUITE A FEW HEARINGS LAST WEEK OR TWO WEEKS AGO, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR GRACE AND PATIENCE WITH THOSE, BUT PART OF THE REASON FOR THAT IS THOSE ARE SOME OF THE PRIORITY ISSUES THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING. 
          JUST A REMINDER TOO THAT WE'RE NOT IN A SILO HERE. 
          [01:35:01]
THESE ARE STATEWIDE PROBLEMS. EVERY COUNTY AND EVERY CITY IN TOWN ARE DEALING WITH THE SAME ADU ISSUE, THE SHORT TERM RENTAL ISSUE. 
          THE SHORT TERM RENTAL LEGISLATION WAS PASSED SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND THIS IS JUST MY PERSPECTIVE, BUT THAT SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCED THE INVENTORY OF THE HOUSING MARKETS EVERYWHERE. 
          SUBSEQUENTLY SEVERAL YEARS LATER, THE ADU LEGISLATION WAS PASSED JUST RECENTLY, AND ONE COULD MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT ONE LEGISLATION DROVE THE OTHER, AND BOTH OF IT WAS TAKING AWAY THAT LOCAL AUTHORITY. 
          WE REALLY DO HAVE THOSE ISSUES, AND TO COMMISSIONER GARRISON'S POINT, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES ARE GOING TO BE LIKE IN THE FUTURE, EITHER. 
          THOSE ARE THINGS THAT, AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS UPDATE OF OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, WE DO HAVE TO STAY ALERT TO THOSE AND THAT POTENTIAL LEGISLATION THAT COMES DOWN NEXT YEAR, THE YEAR AFTER, THAT TRIES TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE OTHER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, TOO, AND WE HAVE TO BE FLEXIBLE TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THOSE IN THE BEST POSSIBLE MANNER. 
          >> THERE'S A LOT OF IDEAS THAT DIDN'T SHOW UP IN HERE BUT I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST STUDIES THAT WE'VE HAD SO FAR THAT I'VE SEEN COME THROUGH. 
          BUT I COULD SEE CHAPTER 3, CHAPTER 4, CHAPTER 5, HAVE MAYBE EVEN SIX MEETINGS IN AMONGST THEMSELVES TO DISCUSS THINGS. 
          THERE'S NOTHING IN HERE. 
          ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW GOLF COURSES TO BE BUILT IN YAVAPAI COUNTY? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW BECAUSE OF OUR WATER SITUATION? I THINK WE COULD BREAK SOME OF THESE DOWN, AND THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD IDEAS AND THE EXPERIENCE IN THIS ROOM. 
          YOU'VE GOT THE CONTRACTORS REPRESENTED. 
          YOU GOT EVERY ASPECT OF WHAT'S LIVING HERE REPRESENTED. 
          I COULD SEE US DIVE IN AND DEEP BECAUSE ON THE TIMELINE, IT SHOWED, WE GOT THIS DONE, NOW WE'RE GOING TO START WRITING CODES. 
          DO WE REALLY HAVE ALL THE INPUT IN HERE TO START WRITING CODES? JUST A THOUGHT. 
          >> WELL, I APPRECIATE ALL THE CONVERSATION. 
          I THOUGHT I'D GO AHEAD AND WE COULD TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK. 
          WE DO HAVE LUNCH AT 11:30 SO WE'LL TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK. 
          WE'LL GET BACK HERE AND GET GOING ON THERE. 
          SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, I'M ALL ABOUT MINIATURE GOLF. 
          [BACKGROUND] EVERYBODY WANTS TO GO AHEAD AND GRAB THEIR SEATS, AND WE'LL TRY TO START MOVING FORWARD WITH THE NEXT PART OF THIS AND GET INTO IT A LITTLE BIT. 
          [BACKGROUND] 
          >> I HAVE JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY. 
          IF I GO AHEAD AND GET A LITTLE STARTED WITH THIS, JEREMY. 
          I'M SURE THE COMMISSIONER WILL BE BACK. 
          WELL, WELCOME, AND WE'LL LET YOU TAKE THE SHOW FROM HERE, SIR. 
          >> THANKS VERY MUCH, EVERYBODY. 
          GREAT CONVERSATIONS SO FAR THIS MORNING. 
          LOOKING FORWARD TO MORE CONVERSATION, NOW FOCUSING MORE ON THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. 
          I SEE THERE'S MULTIPLE COPIES OF OUR REPORT IN FRONT OF YOU. 
          HOPE YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO READ IT. 
          WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH ALL OF IT. 
          IT'S JUST WAY TOO MUCH IN THERE, BUT I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE KEY PARTS OF THAT REPORT. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S ORGANIZED INTO EIGHT BASIC CHAPTERS WITH A SERIES OF ATTACHMENTS AT THE END. 
          WHAT I WANT TO DO THIS MORNING WITH YOU ALL AND WITH STAFF JUMPING IN AS NEEDED IS REALLY TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HIGHLIGHT SOME KEY AREAS AND TO EXPLAIN SOME KEY CONCEPTS, EXPLAIN SOME IDEAS, GET SOME PRELIMINARY THOUGHTS ON YOU. 
          I'VE ALREADY PICKED UP THROUGH THE PREVIOUS CONVERSATION SOME IDEAS THAT WE'RE GOING TO CARRY FORWARD. 
          THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THIS WHOLE EFFORT IS TO MAKE THE CODE USER FRIENDLY, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE. 
          WE'VE THOUGHT ABOUT HOW WE COULD REORGANIZE THE CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE IN A WAY THAT'S JUST A LOT MORE LOGICAL, 
          [01:40:05]
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE SLIDE UP THERE. 
          WE BREAK IT UP INTO DIFFERENT PARTS AND REORGANIZE THE TABLE OF CONTENTS IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT BECOMES LOGICAL AND EXPANDABLE. 
          THERE'S BREAKS IN THE NUMBERING SYSTEM, FOR EXAMPLE, SO THAT IN THE FUTURE A SECTION CAN BE ADDED IN THE RIGHT PLACE RATHER THAN JUST TACKED ON AT THE END OF THE CODE OR PUT IN SOME WAY WHERE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. 
          THIS IS VERY TYPICAL OF WHAT WE SEE IN MODERN ZONING CODE TODAY, AND THE IDEA IS TO, AS I SAY, MAKE IT FLEXIBLE, TO MAKE IT USER FRIENDLY, AND WE'LL ALSO INCLUDE LOTS OF TABLES, ILLUSTRATIONS, MAKE SURE THAT THE RULES OF MEASUREMENT ARE EASY, TALKING TO STAFF. 
          THEY STRUGGLE WITH SIMPLE THINGS LIKE, HOW DO YOU DETERMINE FLOOR AREA OR LIGHT COVERAGE OR BUILDING HEIGHT? THESE ARE SIMPLE SOLUTIONS FOR THAT, AND WE'RE REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO DOING THAT WITH THE RIGHT ILLUSTRATIONS AND UPDATED DEFINITIONS AS WELL. 
          ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT WE'VE SPENT QUITE A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT AND DISCUSSING WITH STAFF WAS THE ZONES, AND ESPECIALLY THE RCU-2A ZONE, WHICH AS YOU KNOW, COVERS 80 SOME PERCENT OF THE COUNTY. 
          THERE'S LOTS OF REASONS FOR WHY THAT IS IN PLACE. 
          ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS I SUGGESTED TO COUNTY STAFF WAS, WHAT IF WE TOOK OUT ALL THE PUBLIC LANDS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ZONED RCU-2A? WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? THE ANSWER IS THIS. 
          NOW, I KNOW IT'S SMALL AND IT'S HARD TO SEE THE DETAILS. 
          BUT ON THE LEFT IS THE EXISTING ZONING MAP, AND YOU CAN VERY CLEARLY SEE WHERE ALL THE RCU-2A ZONING APPLIES. 
          BUT THEN WE PULLED OUT ALL OF THE PUBLIC LANDS, EXCEPT FOR STATE TRUST LANDS. 
          THE STATE TRUST LANDS ARE THE BLUE COLOR, AND THE GREEN COLOR IS ALL FEDERAL OR STATE OR MILITARY, OR IN SOME CASES IN SMALLER AREAS, CITY OR TOWN, PUBLIC LAND. 
          WHAT A DIFFERENCE TO THE ZONING MAP FROM THAT ONE SIMPLE ACT? WE CAN TAKE IT FURTHER THAN THAT, BUT THE REASON WE SHOWED ARIZONA STATE TRUST LANDS SEPARATE FROM THE GREEN OF PUBLIC LANDS WAS THAT TECHNICALLY STATE TRUST LANDS CAN BE DEVELOPED, SO WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS HIGHLIGHTED ON THIS PARTICULAR MAP. 
          BEFORE WE GO FURTHER THOUGH, I WANT TO PAUSE AND TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT PROPOSITION 207 THAT ENTERED OUR LIVES BACK IN 2006. 
          I THINK YOU'RE ALL PROBABLY VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE CONCEPT OF EMINENT DOMAIN. 
          IT'S A LEGAL PRINCIPLE THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE IN OUR COUNTRY FOR MANY YEARS, AND IT DEFINES THE GOVERNMENT'S POWER TO TAKE PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE. 
          HOWEVER, THERE HAS TO BE COMPENSATION. 
          GOVERNMENT CAN'T JUST TAKE LAND AND NOT COMPENSATE FOR THAT LAND. 
          PROPOSITION 207 PUTS A FINER POINT ON IT, AND IT REDEFINED THE RIGHTS OF A PROPERTY OWNER WHEN A STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXERCISES ITS EMINENT DOMAIN POWER. 
          WHAT IT REALLY SAYS IS THAT IF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, COUNTY, CITY, TOWN, CHANGES A LAND USE LAW, WHICH IS A DEFINED CONCEPT IN THE ARIZONA STATE SECTION, THEN THAT PROPERTY OWNER IS ABLE TO FILE A CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION IF THE LAND USE LAW REDUCES THAT PROPERTY'S VALUE. 
          THERE'S A NUMBER OF WAYS OF LOOKING AT WHAT THAT REDUCTION IN VALUE MIGHT BE AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE GREEN BOX, CHANGING THE ALLOWED USE FROM OFFICE TO SINGLE FAMILY THEORETICALLY CHANGES THE PROPERTY VALUE OF THE PROPERTY, REDUCING DENSITY OR CHANGING THE ALLOWABLE BUILDING HEIGHT, ALL POTENTIALLY ALLOWS A PROPERTY OWNER TO SAY, HEY, YOU'VE TAKEN AWAY MY DEVELOPMENT RIGHT, UNDER PROPOSITION 207, I CAN FILE A CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION. 
          WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE STATE SO FAR IS, AS FAR AS I KNOW, NO CITY TOWN OR COUNTY HAS ACTUALLY PAID THAT COMPENSATION TO A PROPERTY OWNER IN THE EVENT OF A DISPUTE. 
          WHAT THEY'VE DONE IS THE COUNTY OR THE CITY OR TOWN HAS ISSUED A WAIVER, AND IT SAID, YOU'RE RIGHT, WE WANT TO REALLY CHANGE HEIGHT FROM 65 FEET TO 35 FEET ACROSS THE ZONE. 
          IT'LL APPLY TO EVERYBODY WHO ACCEPTS THAT, AND IF YOU DON'T WANT IT, WE'LL GIVE YOU THE WAIVER AND THEN YOU STILL MAINTAIN YOUR 65 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT. 
          JUST AS A BACKGROUND TO THIS NEXT CONVERSATION HERE, WE ALSO MAPPED THE PARCELS ACROSS THE COUNTY THAT WERE IN PRIVATE OWNERSHIP, NOT FEDERAL OR STATE. 
          [01:45:02]
THIS INCLUDED THE STATE LANDS PARCELS, AND BY DIFFERENT COLORS, WE SHOWED WHAT PARCELS WERE ORGANIZED IN DIFFERENT AREA CATEGORIES. 
          THE DARKER BLUE REPRESENTS THE LARGEST PARCELS, OVER 400 ACRES. 
          THIS ALLOWS US THEN TO CONSIDER A CONVERSATION ABOUT OUR RURAL CHARACTER IN THE COUNTY. 
          NOTWITHSTANDING, WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THAT IS YET, AND I'M GOING TO HOPEFULLY IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS START INITIATING A PUBLIC POLL TO JUST START TO GET A SENSE OF WHAT COUNTY RESIDENTS THINK ABOUT WHAT RURAL CHARACTER REALLY IS. 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. 
          IF WE ENACTED THIS ZONING CHANGE TODAY, DO PEOPLE HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME TO FILE A CLAIM OR IS THAT LIMITED OR FOREVER? 
          >> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, IT'S A GREAT QUESTION. 
          AS I REMEMBER, IT'S THREE YEARS. 
          >> THREE YEARS. 
          >> YEAH. THE QUESTION THAT WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT HERE, ESPECIALLY IF WE WANT TO RETAIN THE RURAL OPEN SPACE NATURE OF THE COUNTY, SHOULD WE CONSIDER A LARGER LOT SIZE THAN TWO ACRES IN CERTAIN PARTS OF THE COUNTY WHERE IT MAKES SENSE TO DO SO? IF IT'S A RANCHING AREA OR IT'S AN AGRICULTURAL AREA. 
          COULD WE NOT DO SOMETHING LIKE KINGS COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, WHERE THERE'S A MINIMUM 40 ACRE THRESHOLD IN THEIR AGRICULTURAL ZONE? IT'S AN A-40 ZONE. 
          WE COULD DO AN A-100 ZONE. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS, BUT PHILOSOPHICALLY, IT MAKES SENSE TO ME THAT SOME PARTS OF THE COUNTY SHOULD HAVE A LARGER LOT AREA THAN TWO ACRES AS A STATUTE MINIMUM. 
          NOTICE THOUGH, THAT'S WHERE THAT PROP 207 QUESTION COMES IN. 
          THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO BE COGNIZANT OF AS WE MOVE FORWARD, AND THE COUNTY STAFF AND YOU AS ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS WILL HAVE TO WORK WITH YOUR COUNTY ATTORNEY AND ASSESS THE LEVEL OF RISK THERE. 
          IF WE DO CHANGE THAT TO SAY AN A-40 ZONE, AND A PROPERTY OWNER SAYS, NO, I STILL WANT TO MAINTAIN MY TWO ACRE MINIMUM, YOU CAN ISSUE A WAIVER. 
          THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES READY FOR STAFF, HOW MUCH EXTRA WORK IS THAT GOING TO BE ON THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT? THERE'S ISSUES JUST TO THINK THROUGH, BUT I THINK PHILOSOPHICALLY, I NOTICED A NUMBER OF NODDING HEADS, THE IDEA OF A LARGER LOT SIZE IN THE RURAL PARTS OF THE COUNTY TO PROTECT RURAL CHARACTER, TO PROTECT WHAT'S VALUED OUT THERE, IT MAKES SOME SENSE. 
          >> I'M SORRY. THE BENEFIT WOULD BE TO THAT PROPERTY OWNER THAT THEY WOULD RETAIN THE RURAL ENVIRONMENT MORE SO RATHER THAN ALLOWING THE TWO ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT? 
          >> CORRECT. YES, SIR. 
          >> THE CHANGE OVER WOULD BE, WELL, IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN THE CHANGE OVER BECAUSE IT'S STILL CONFUSING IN MY MIND, WHAT THAT CHANGE FROM TWO ACRES TO YOUR PROPOSED OR EXEMPT 40 ACRE PARCEL. 
          DOES THAT MEAN ONE RESIDENT PER 40 ACRES? 
          >> YES, SIR. 
          >> I GET IT NOW. I SEE THE BENEFIT TO IT. THANK YOU. 
          >> I AM IN SUPPORT OF THAT CONCEPT TO THE DEGREE THAT COMMUNITIES WANT TO SEE IT ENGAGED. 
          WE HAVE A COUPLE OF OPPORTUNITIES TO REALLY PRESERVE SOME RURAL AREAS THAT I THINK COMMUNITIES WOULD BE INTERESTED IN PURSUING THAT. 
          I WONDERED IF YOU COULDN'T JUST SPEAK TO HOW WE DO THAT IN THE ZONING MAP BECAUSE OF THE RESTRAINT ON AGRICULTURAL ZONING AND THE STATE STATUTE THAT MAKES THINGS DIFFICULT FOR THAT. 
          >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION, SUPERVISOR CHECK. 
          HONESTLY, WE HAVEN'T GOT DOWN INTO THE DETAILS OF HOW TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT. 
          I KNOW STAFF, BJ IS WORKING ON AN AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTIONS AMENDMENT THAT WILL BE COMING FORWARD TO THE BOARD, I THINK LATER THIS YEAR. 
          BUT WE'LL BE BUILDING ON THAT AND WORKING WITH STAFF AND JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT TO DO. 
          BUT AS YOU'LL SEE LATER ON IN THE PRESENTATION, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AS A CONCEPT, AN AGRITOURISM ZONE, AND AGRITOURISM IS A USE, SPECIFIC TO, FOR EXAMPLE, THE GAS RANCHES DOWN NEAR WICKENBURG, THE WINERIES, IN THE VERDE VALLEY AND PAGE SPRINGS, AND OTHER SIMILAR TYPE USES THAT HAVE AGRICULTURE AS THEIR BASIS. 
          I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO OFF TRACK WITH IT, BUT THE IDEA IS, RATHER THAN REGULATING MY INDIVIDUAL USES, RESTAURANT, BED AND BREAKFAST, WINERY, TASTING ROOM, LUMP IT ALL TOGETHER AS ONE THING. 
          [01:50:01]
THAT ALL PLAYS INTO THAT WHOLE AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION QUESTION AND HOW WE THINK ABOUT RANCHING AGRICULTURAL ZONES ACROSS THE COUNTY. 
          AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RETHINKING ZONES, WE'VE TAKEN A LOOK AT ALL OF THE ZONES IN THE CURRENT CODE ORDINANCE, AND NOTICE THAT THERE'S A LOT OF DUPLICATION, AND THAT THERE'S THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMBINE AND RENAME AS MANY ZONES AS WE CAN. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE AN R1-2A ZONE, WE HAVE AN RCU-2A ZONE, ALL ALLOWING TWO ACRE DEVELOPMENT, WE HAVE AN R1-70, WHICH ALSO ALLOWS TWO ACRES, RCU-70 AND RMM-70. 
          ESSENTIALLY, FIVE ZONES REGULATING TWO ACRES OF PROPERTY. 
          WELL, THERE'S AN ARGUMENT TO BE MADE FOR CONSOLIDATING THOSE. 
          NOTE THOUGH THAT NO USES WOULD NECESSARILY CHANGE, WHERE MAY BE USES ADDED, NONE TAKEN AWAY, AND STANDARDS WOULD REMAIN UNCHANGED, MAYBE RELAXED, BUT NOT MADE MORE RESTRICTIVE. 
          THE SAME IS TRUE FOR AN R1-175 ZONE, WHICH IS FOUR ACRES, AND AN R1-4 ACRE ZONE. 
          THEY COULD VERY EASILY BE COMBINED TOGETHER, AND THERE'S NO NET LOSS TO A PROPERTY OWNER OR TO THE COUNTY. 
          IT JUST MAKES FOR A SIMPLER ZONING MAP AND A SIMPLER CODE. 
          HERE YOU SEE TOO THIS NOTION OF THE AGRITOURISM ZONE. 
          WE HAVEN'T WORKED OUT THE DETAILS YET, BUT IN THE FEW TOWN HALLS WHERE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT, THERE SEEMS TO BE A RECEPTIVITY TO THIS NOTION. 
          THERE ARE ALSO SOME VERY INTERESTING STRUCTURAL ISSUES WITH YOUR ZONING MAP. 
          REAL CREDIT TO YOUR GIS STAFF FOR MAINTAINING VERY ACCURATE DATA THAT WE WERE ABLE TO MINE AND WORK WITH. 
          I JUST SELECTED TWO AREAS UP IN THE NORTHERN PART OF THE STATE JUST NORTH OF INTERSTATE 40 UP NEAR SELIGMAN THAT I WANTED TO DRILL DOWN INTO. 
          YOU CAN SEE AS I ZOOM IN HERE, THESE ARE ALL PLATTED SUBDIVISIONS, AND ALMOST ALL OF THOSE LOTS ARE OWNED BY INDIVIDUALS, WHETHER IT'S ARIZONA INDIVIDUALS OR ELSEWHERE. 
          THE POINT OF THIS EXERCISE WAS TO JUST REALLY LOOK AT, THIS IS WHAT THE ZONING MAP SAYS IN TERMS OF ZONING, AND IT SHOWS IT'S VERY HARD FOR YOU TO SEE UP THERE, RCU-2A IS THE MAJORITY OF THOSE PARCELS. 
          THE DARKER BLUE COLOR IS CALLED C-2, GENERAL SALES AND SERVICES, SO THAT'S YOUR HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONE. 
          THEN THE LIGHTER COLOR AROUND IT IS THE RS ZONE, WHICH IS A RESIDENTIAL SERVICE ZONE. 
          BUT YOU'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE. 
          COMPLETELY UNDEVELOPED, NO SERVICES. 
          YOU CAN SEE THOSE ATTRACTS. 
          THERE'S NO ROADS THERE. 
          A FEW PEOPLE HAVE BUILT THEIR HOMES, BUT THEY DON'T REALLY NEED THAT LEVEL OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY. 
          IF WE BACK UP A LITTLE BIT AND WE LOOK AT EACH ONE OF THOSE SQUARES, THE STATE LANDS ARE IN BETWEEN THEM, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S LOTS OF PROPOSED COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY OUT THERE AS IT'S ZONED. 
          BUT PRACTICALLY, HOW LOGICAL IS IT TO ACTUALLY HAVE THOSE ZONES OUT THERE? NOW, WE CAN'T TAKE THOSE AWAY. 
          PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE THAT RIGHT. 
          BUT HERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE RS AND THE C-2 ZONE SURROUNDED BY RCU-35 IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE. 
          THE QUESTION TO THE COUNTY IS, DO WE WANT TO CONSIDER REZONING THAT? IN THIS CASE, TAKING AWAY THE RS AND THE C-2 ZONING AND MAKING IT RCU-35, OR R-135. 
          OR DO WE LEAVE IT? DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE PROP 207 THING, AND PUT THIS INTO WHAT WE WOULD CALL A LEGACY ZONE. 
          THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS MAINTAIN THEIR RIGHTS AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, WHO KNOWS? MAYBE THEY COULD DEVELOP IT AS A COMMERCIAL USE. 
          BUT WE PUT IT IN A LEGACY ZONE THAT WOULD JUST BE A BANK, IF YOU LIKE. 
          THAT NOBODY COULD RE-USE THAT ZONE. 
          WE'D HAVE AN EQUIVALENT ZONE ELSEWHERE THAT IS ACTUALLY AN ACTIVE ZONE. 
          THIS WOULD BECOME AN INACTIVE ZONE UNTIL SOMEBODY PULLED A BUILDING PERMIT. 
          >> BUT YOU COULD ALSO CONSIDER THIS FORWARD THINKING AS WELL, BECAUSE THAT MAP UP THERE LOOKS LIKE PRESCOTT VALLEY IN 1976. 
          >> CERTAINLY. 
          >> THE QUESTION THOUGH IS, 
          [01:55:02]
YOU'RE LOOKING PROBABLY BEYOND MY LIFETIME, BUT HOW DO YOU GET WATER AND SEWER OUT THERE? 
          >> WE'RE WORKING ON IT. [LAUGHTER] 
          >> THAT'S JUST ONE OF THE ISSUES TO LOOK AT, AND DO WE LEAVE IT? MAYBE WE DO, BUT I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT FORWARD AS A QUESTION. 
          >> WHEN YOU CHANGE THE ZONING FROM RCU-2A, BECAUSE THAT LETS YOU PUT MANUFACTURED HOME, [NOISE] WHEN YOU CHANGE THAT NAME, DOES THAT MAKE IT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SITE BUILT ONLY? 
          >> NO. 
          >> IT KEEPS ALL THE DIFFERENT USES ON RCU-2A? 
          >> IF WE CHANGE THE NAME, WE'RE CHANGING THE NAME BUT THE USES AND THE STANDARDS WOULD STAY THE SAME. 
          THERE'S A SIMILAR ISSUE UP IN THE POLDEN AREA, AND ACTUALLY THIS OCCURS IN MANY PLACES ACROSS THE COUNTY WHERE WE HAVE UNDERSIZED PLATTED LOTS IN THE RCU-2A ZONE. 
          IF WE ZOOM IN ON THIS PARTICULAR AREA, WHICH IS CALLED HOLIDAY LAKE ESTATES, PLATTED BACK IN 1961, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ORIGINAL ZONING WAS AT THE TIME THIS WAS PLATTED. 
          BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THOSE LOTS ARE ABOUT 7,000 SQUARE FOOT EACH. 
          THE RIGHT SIZE LOT IS SHOWN ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE ILLUSTRATION IS A TWO ACRE LOT. 
          BACK TO THIS QUESTION, DO WE LEAVE THIS UNCHANGED? IT IS NON CONFORMING RCU-2A OR R-2A, IF WE DO RENAME IT? OR DO WE RENAME THIS AS THE R-1 ZONE, WHERE THE LOT SIZE NOW CONFORMS TO ITS TITLE? AGAIN, WE'RE NOT CHANGING USE, WE'RE NOT CHANGING STANDARDS, JUST CHANGING THE NAME TO MATCH WHAT'S ON THE GROUND. 
          WHAT'S NOT REFLECTED UP THERE, OF COURSE, IS THE ISSUE OF SERVICES. 
          HOW DO YOU ENSURE THAT THIS AREA GETS BUILT? I ASSUME IT'S NOT BEING BUILT NOW BECAUSE OF WASTEWATER AND WATER CONCERNS, BECAUSE THERE'S LOTS ARE TOO SMALL FOR BOTH A WELL AND A SEPTIC SYSTEM. 
          ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT AS WE MOVE FORWARD. 
          AS A BEST PRACTICE IN THE USE REGULATIONS, RATHER THAN AS YOU HAVE IN YOUR CURRENT ZONING CODE NOW, A LIST OF USES IN ONE ZONE. 
          THEN THE NEXT ZONE REFERS BACK TO THAT LIST OF USES AND ANOTHER ZONE REFERS BACK TO THEM, LET'S JUST CONSOLIDATE IT ALL INTO A SIMPLE TABLE. 
          THIS IS ACTUALLY FROM A KINGMAN CODE THAT I WORKED ON A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO, WHERE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL ZONES IN THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION, YOU'VE JUST GOT ALL THE USES IN LOGICAL CATEGORIES DOWN THE LEFT SIDE, AND THEN IN A TABLE, YOU SAY WHETHER IT'S PERMITTED, WHETHER IT NEEDS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR NOT ALLOWED. 
          YOU WOULD DO THIS FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND SO ON, [INAUDIBLE]. VERY SIMPLE. 
          A PROPERTY OWNER CAN SEE EXACTLY WHAT THEY CAN DO WITHIN THEIR PROPERTY, WHAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT DO. 
          THINKING A LITTLE DEEPER INTO THE USE REGULATIONS AND FOCUSING ON HOUSING, AND DANNY EARLIER DID A REALLY GREAT JOB OF LAYING OUT THE ISSUES WITH HOUSING. 
          DISCUSSING THIS WITH STAFF, WE JUST WANT TO THROW OUT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO YOU. 
          AT THE LATEST ARIZONA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE, I WAS TALKING TO SOME OF MY FRIENDS FROM COCONINO COUNTY AND LEARNED THAT THEY ADOPTED A FEW YEARS AGO PROVISIONS IN THEIR CODE THAT ALLOW PEOPLE TO LIVE PERMANENTLY IN RVS. 
          THERE'S REGULATIONS FOR THAT ABOUT WHAT YOU DO WITH WASTEWATER AND WATER AND SO ON. 
          IT'S VERY CLEARLY PUT INTO THEIR CODE. 
          SOMETIMES IT'S ALLOWED AS A PERMITTED USE, ESPECIALLY IN THE MORE REMOTE PARTS OF COCONINO COUNTY, BUT WHERE YOU HAVE THE ZONE WHERE ARTERIES ARE ALLOWED TO BE USED AS A RESIDENCE CLOSER INTO FLAGSTAFF OR OTHER COMMUNITIES, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS. 
          WHAT DO WE THINK? IS THAT A STUPID IDEA, OR IS THAT SOMETHING TO EXPLORE AS AN OPTION IN THE COUNTY? AGAIN, NOTHING YOU HAVE TO DO, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT COCONINO COUNTY HAS PUT INTO THE CODE. 
          THEY HAVEN'T DONE A LOT OF THESE AS USE PERMITS OR PERMITTED USES, BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE ELECTED TO DO IT. 
          WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT ADUS, ALREADY REQUIRED BY STATE LAW AND BOARD WILL BE CONSIDERING THAT NEXT WEEK. 
          THEN TINY HOMES. 
          I SPENT SOME TIME TALKING TO YOUR BUILDING OFFICIAL, AND TINY HOMES ON WHEELS ARE REALLY NOT ALLOWED IN THE COUNTY UNDER CURRENT BUILDING CODE, BUT MAYBE THEY COULD BE. 
          SITE BUILT TINY HOMES, LIKE YOU SEE IN THESE ILLUSTRATIONS HERE ARE BECOMING MORE AND MORE POPULAR. 
          I'VE LEARNED OF A PROJECT IN CAMP VERDE. 
          [02:00:03]
SUPERVISOR JENKINS WHO WAS SHARING THAT WITH ME. 
          THERE'S A PROJECT COMING INTO CLARKDALE. 
          THIS IS A VERY SUCCESSFUL, TINY HOUSE VILLAGE IN FLAGSTAFF. 
          THESE UNITS SELL FOR $230,000. 
          IT DOES PROVIDE A MUCH MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT, VERY HIGH DENSITY. 
          YOU DON'T HAVE A LOT OF PRIVACIES AND A LOT OF OPEN SPACE, BUT IT DOES PROVIDE A HOUSING OPTION, AND THEY WAS SNAPPED OUT PRETTY QUICKLY. 
          >> I'VE EXPRESSED MY INTEREST IN THIS. I'M SORRY, CHAIR. 
          >> NO, GO AHEAD. 
          >> THIS FOR A LONG TIME, I WAS JUST SPEAKING WITH COMMISSIONER GARRISON ABOUT IT. 
          I LOVE CONTAINER HOMES. 
          I REALLY DO, AND I'D LOVE TO HAVE THEM HERE AND HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT. THAT'S IN YOUR AREA. 
          >> NO. 
          >> ONE OF THEM. 
          >> NOT THIS ONE. [OVERLAPPING]. THIS IS NOT THE PICTURE OF THE ONE IN CAMP VERDE. 
          >> NO, BUT I'M FOR IT. I CAN TELL YOU THAT. 
          >> IS THE LAND GO WITH THE HOUSE? 
          >> IN THIS CASE, YES. 
          >> THEN THAT'S COOL. I LIKE THAT. CHAIR? YES. 
          >> I JUST WANT TO STEP BACK TO LIVING IN RVS. 
          THE REALITY IS, PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN RVS. 
          WHEREVER YOU SEE SUBSTANTIAL RV PLACES WHERE PEOPLE COME FOR THE WINTER, I CAN SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE IN THE TOWN OF CAMP VERDE THAT HAS SOMETHING BETWEEN EIGHT AND 10 RV PARKS. 
          THERE IS A MAJORITY OF THOSE SPACES THAT PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN THEM PERMANENTLY. 
          I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT, BECAUSE THAT IS THE REALITY OF RVS. 
          PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD HOMES SO THEY ARE LIVING IN RVS. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, I AM IN AGREEMENT. 
          I THINK THERE'S AREAS THAT COULD BE SOMETHING CLOSE TO CONSENSUS THAT LIVING IN RVS IS A PERMANENT WAY IS AN APPROPRIATE USE. 
          BUT I THINK THE ARGUMENT THAT MIGHT BE MADE BY NEIGHBORS IS THAT ALLOWING THEIR NEIGHBORS TO HAVE MULTIPLE RVS AS RESIDENCES WOULD THEN LOWER THEIR PROPERTY VALUE. 
          THAT GETS BACK TO THE PROP 207 QUESTION. 
          I JUST WONDERED HOW COCONINO COUNTY MIGHT HAVE NAVIGATED THAT. 
          >> GREAT QUESTION, SUPERVISOR CHECK. 
          THEY NAVIGATED THAT BY REQUIRING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SO THE PUBLIC HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN. 
          AS I UNDERSTOOD IT IN TALKING TO JAY, A LOT OF THOSE CUPS WERE ULTIMATELY DENIED. 
          BECAUSE OF THAT ISSUE, HEY, I'VE JUST SPENT A HALF $1 MILLION, WHATEVER ON MY NEW HOUSE, I DON'T WANT SOMEBODY LIVING IN AN RV ON PROPERTY NEXT TO ME. 
          HENCE, THAT'S WHY THEY REQUIRED THE CUP IN THOSE MORE DENSE AREAS OF THE COUNTY. 
          ARE THEY IN THE RURAL AREAS, WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE, THAT'S WHERE THEY HAVE SIGN OFFS, BUT THAT'S WHEN IT GETS A LITTLE MORE EXPENSIVE TO PUT IN THE RIGHT WASTEWATER SYSTEMS AND THE RIGHT WATER SYSTEMS, BUT IT'S AN OPTION. 
          >> ADDITIONALLY, MADAM CHAIR, ON THE TINY HOMES, THEY CALL THEM SITE BUILT AND THEY'D HAVE TO BE BECAUSE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF AREAS IN THE COUNTY THAT HAVE CC&RS THAT ARE IN PLACE RESTRICTING WHAT TYPE OF BUILDING YOU'RE GOING TO PUT THERE FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES. 
          IN OUR NECK OF THE WOODS, THAT CONTAINER HOME WOULDN'T BE PERMITTED BY CC&R. 
          HOW DO WE GET AROUND THAT? DO WE ASK THE HOMEOWNER GROUP TO COME BACK IN AND MODIFY THEIR RESTRICTIONS? OR DOES THE COUNTY ESTABLISH A POLICY WHERE YOU CAN OVERRIDE THAT? THERE'S ISSUES THERE, AND THE CC&RS WERE ESTABLISHED A LONG TIME AGO BEFORE ANYBODY EVEN OWNED THE PLACE. 
          >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BAYES. 
          TYPICALLY, THE COUNTY WON'T GET INVOLVED WITH CC&RS. 
          THAT'S A PRIVATE COVENANT BETWEEN THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE OWNERS IN THE HOME. 
          WHAT THESE RULES WOULD DO IS ALLOW OPPORTUNITIES. 
          MAYBE NOT IN AN EXISTING SUBDIVISION WITH EXISTING CC&RS, BUT FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT MOVING FORWARD, THIS NOW BECOMES A LOGICAL OPTION. 
          >> IF WE ALLOW RVS TO BE ON A LOT, CAN THEY HAVE THREE MORE ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS ON THAT LOT? [LAUGHTER] DO YOU GET INTO THAT? WE JUST HAD SOMETHING COME BEFORE US THAT HAD FIVE RVS FOR TEMPORARY HOUSING ON ONE SINGLE LOT. 
          >> COMMISSIONER KUKNYO, HAVE A GREAT QUESTION, AND I THINK THE ANSWER IS, IT DEPENDS HOW WE WANT TO WRITE THE REGULATIONS. 
          WE COULD SAY ONE RV PERIOD AND CUT IT OFF AT THAT. 
          THAT'S CERTAINLY WHAT COCONINO COUNTY DID AS PART OF THEIR CODE. 
          [02:05:04]
          >> [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BECAUSE IT'S NOT CONSIDERED AN ADU, IT'S STILL AN RV REGISTERED AND SO ON. 
          AGAIN, AS DANNY TALKED ABOUT THINKING ABOUT OTHER HOUSING TYPES IN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE, SUCH AS THE DUPLEX. 
          AGAIN, I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL HERE. 
          THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY A SOLUTION THAT APPLIES ACROSS THE WHOLE COUNTY. 
          IN THE MORE RURAL AREAS, WE WANT TO KEEP THE RURAL CHARACTER OF A RANCH HOUSE OR WHATEVER HOUSE, AND A LARGER PIECE OF LAND, BUT IN THE MORE SUBURBAN PARTS OF THE COUNTY, BUTTING UP AGAINST EXISTING CITIES AND TOWNS, A DUPLEX SEEMS TO BE A REASONABLE SOLUTION. 
          I WAS MEETING WITH THE REALTOR IN COTTONWOOD RECENTLY, AND THAT HOME THAT YOU SEE IN THE LOWER LEFT OF THE PHOTOGRAPH WAS RIGHT ACROSS FROM HIS HOME. 
          I SAID, "THAT'S INTERESTING. 
          WHAT IS THAT?" BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE UNIT ON THE LEFT WAS ADU, BUT ACTUALLY IT'S A DUPLEX. 
          YOU WOULDN'T KNOW IT WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THAT HOME, AND SO IF THE DUPLEX IS DESIGNED TO HAVE THE SCALE AND FORM OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, I THINK THAT'S A REASONABLE SOLUTION FOR US TO CONSIDER IN THE RIGHT PARTS OF THE COUNTY. 
          SIMILARLY, SMALL LOT SUBDIVISIONS. 
          NOW, THIS IS A DRAWING THAT CAME FROM A HOUSING DEVELOPER DOWN IN SURPRISE, WHERE THEY ARE PROPOSING VERY SMALL HOMES. 
          THESE ARE ON LOTS OF JUST OVER 3,000 SQUARE FOOT IN AREA. 
          I THINK THAT'S TOO SMALL FOR YAVAPAI. 
          BUT IF IT'S 5,000- 6,000 SQUARE FOOT, START LIKE THIS, THESE HAVE NO GARAGES OR CARPORTS. 
          IT'S JUST TANDEM PARKING ON THE SIDE OF THE HOME. 
          BUT IF YOU LOOK CAREFULLY AT THIS, AND IF YOU LOOK IN THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION, YOU CAN SEE EACH OF THE ELEVATIONS HAS A DIFFERENT FACADE, SO IT HAS A LOT MORE CHARACTER. 
          SOME COMMUNITIES IN THE AREA ARE PROVIDING A LOT OF THESE SMALL LOT SUBDIVISIONS, PRESCOTT VALLEYS, BUILDING A LOT OF THEM. 
          BUT I THINK WE COULD DO IT BETTER BY HAVING BETTER ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS TO ALLOW FOR MORE VARIETY IN HOUSE SIZE AND ELEVATION TO GIVE A LITTLE MORE INTEREST TO THE STREET. 
          THAT PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY REALLY FOR ESSENTIALLY TWO CLASSES OF PEOPLE. 
          THOSE STARTING OUT, WANTING TO GET THEIR FOOT IN AND DO WITH HOME OWNERSHIP AS A STARTER HOME. 
          THEN THOSE OF US NOW WITH MORE GRAY HAIR ON THE HEAD THAN WE USED TO HAVE, WHO WANT TO DOWNSIZE FROM OUR CURRENT HOMES TO SOMETHING SMALLER. 
          THIS IS AN OPTION THAT A LOT OF COMMUNITIES ARE EXPLORING, BOTH URBAN AND SUBURBAN AND IN RURAL AREAS. 
          KITTITAS COUNTY, FOR EXAMPLE, IS CONSIDERING THIS. 
          >> MR. EASTMAN, MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE. 
          >> YES. 
          >> THIS SLIDE SAYS, ALLOW SMALL LOT SUBDIVISIONS. 
          I SUPPORT THAT. 
          HOWEVER, LIKE DISTRICT 5, RARELY WOULD A SUBDIVISION BE BUILT IN DISTRICT 5. 
          HOW WOULD WE CONSIDER ALLOWING SMALL LOT DEVELOPMENT ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS IN, LET'S SAY, DISTRICT 5, WHERE WE CANNOT BUILD A SUBDIVISION. 
          CAN WE CHANGE OUR MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR PARTICULAR QUADRANTS? 
          >> WHAT WE'RE SUGGESTING HERE, COMMISSIONER, IS THE IDEA OF ALLOWING A LOT SIZE UNDER A NEW ZONE OF SAY R5 OR R6, WHATEVER WE DECIDE, CREATING THAT ZONE AND THEN ALLOWING A DEVELOPER TO APPLY THAT ZONING TO LAND AND BUILDING THESE AS A NEW SUBDIVISION, WHEREVER IT IS. 
          IT'S NOT LIKELY TO HAPPEN IN THE MORE RURAL PARTS OF THE COUNTY AGAIN, BUT IN THE MORE URBAN SUBURBAN PARTS, CERTAINLY. IT'S ALSO CONTINGENT. 
          YOU'RE NOT GOING TO PUT A WELL AND SEPTIC SYSTEM ON EACH OF THESE LIES. 
          WE'RE THINKING NOW ABOUT, ARE WE CONNECTING TO MUNICIPAL WATER SEWER SUPPLY? ARE WE THINKING ABOUT COMMUNITY SYSTEMS FOR PROJECTS LIKE THIS? 
          >> WE'RE CONSIDERING THESE AS A SUBDIVISION AND NOT SMALLER INDIVIDUAL LOTS? 
          >> THAT IS CORRECT, YES. IT'S BOTH. 
          IT'S A NEW ZONE WITH SMALLER LOTS THAT WOULD BE APPLIED TO A SUBDIVISION. 
          >> AGAIN, YOU USED THE WORD SUBDIVISION. 
          DISTRICT 5, WHERE CHAIR MALLORY IS, 
          [02:10:01]
WE CAN'T BUILD A SUBDIVISION IN DISTRICT 5. 
          THE LAND IS NOT AVAILABLE. 
          CAN WE DO SMALL LOTS LESS THAN THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE? WOULD THAT BE AN OPPORTUNITY? 
          >> ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTY WHERE IT MAKES SENSE, YES. 
          >> SO IT WOULD BE. 
          >> ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THAT MIGHT BE IN DISTRICT 2, WHERE SUPERVISOR JENKINS AND I BOTH LIVE AND WORK AND THE OUTLYING SALT MINE ROAD AREA, WHERE A COUPLE LARGER RANCHES WERE PURCHASED BY ONE OF THE STATE'S MAJOR UTILITY PROVIDERS, AND THERE HAS BEEN SOME COMMUNITY PLANNING CONCEPTS AROUND THESE POCKET NEIGHBORHOODS OR A COURTYARD VILLAGE OR SOMETHING, THE LAND, THE PARCEL ITSELF MIGHT BE 50 ACRES OR 75 ACRES, BUT THERE COULD BE SOME INTENSE CLUSTERED DEVELOPMENT THAT ALLOWS FOR ALL AMENITIES AND TARGETING IT TO, FOR INSTANCE, THE PUBLIC SECTOR, EDUCATION, FIREFIGHTERS. 
          WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN CAMP VERDE IS THAT A HUGE PERCENTAGE OF OUR PUBLIC SERVICE SECTOR NO LONGER LIVES IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          THEY'RE COMING IN FROM AS FAR AWAY AS QUEEN CREEK, AND CERTAINLY FROM ANTHEM AND ELSEWHERE AND WHEN PUBLIC SERVICE SECTOR NO LONGER LIVES AMONGST YOU. 
          IT FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGES THE NATURE OF WHAT COMMUNITY IS. 
          WE HAVE SOME REAL OPPORTUNITIES IN DISTRICT 2, AND PROBABLY EVEN SOME VERY SUPPORTIVE AND GENEROUS FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO TRY IT. 
          IF WE'RE WILLING AT A VISIONARY LEVEL TO EMBRACE THE CONCEPT, I THINK WE HAVE SOME VERY MARKETABLE AND FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE OPPORTUNITIES. 
          I HOPE WE DO ADDRESS IT THAT WAY. 
          >> I THINK WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHEN WE START CUTTING PEOPLE OUT TO GIVE THEM PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT, ESPECIALLY WHEN A COMMUNITY HAS TO SUPPORT GOVERNMENT-GOVERNMENT WORKERS, AND WE'RE GOING TO SUBSIDIZE THAT. 
          WHAT ABOUT THE PERSON WORKING THE MIDNIGHT SHIFT AT CIRCLE K? WHAT ABOUT THE GUY WHO'S TRYING TO ATTRACT GARBAGE TRUCK DRIVERS TO HIS COMPANY? I THINK WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHEN WE SAY, WE'RE GOING TO BECAUSE WE'RE DOING THAT FOR TEACHERS TO ATTRACT THEM. 
          WE'RE GIVING THEM SPECIAL TREATMENT, SPECIAL HOUSING. 
          BUT WHAT ABOUT THE PERSON THAT BUILDS WIDGETS? HOW ARE THEY GETTING PEOPLE TO? SO I THINK- 
          >> CAN BE A PERCENTAGE AS WELL THAT PART OF THE WHOLE PLANNING CONCEPT ALLOWS FOR A PERCENTAGE THAT IS, IF NOT RESTRICTED, AT LEAST TARGETED FOR PUBLIC SERVICE. 
          I AGREE WITH YOUR POINT. 
          IT'S VERY DIFFICULT WHEN IT'S DONE. 
          >> WE JUST HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHEN YOU'RE DOING THAT. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, I REALLY LIKE THIS IDEA, CREATING, SAY YOU CREATE A GEOGRAPHIC AREA WHERE YOU COME UP WITH A USE OF CONDITIONS THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO COME IN WITHIN THAT AREA AND DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS. 
          I THINK THOUGH, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT SEWER AND WATER, AND IT SEEMS LIKE IF WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT BECOMES A POSITIVE FOR OUR WORKFORCE HOUSING ISSUE. 
          WE ALSO HAVE TO TAKE IN ACCOUNT THAT WE HAVE TO CREATE SOME RESTRICTIONS ON ALLOWING PEOPLE TO DO THAT THAT REQUIRE WATER AND SEWER TO BE PART OF THE ABILITY OR THE ENTITLEMENT TO DO THAT. 
          YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING A MASSIVE TINY HOUSE SUBDIVISION AT THE END OF SALT MINE. 
          I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE WHAT THE- 
          >> I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT MASSIVE, AND IT WOULD INCLUDE THE SEPTIC. 
          >> THE 500 ACRES IS MASSIVE. 
          >> I SAID 50 ACRES. 
          THERE ARE A COUPLE PARCELS THAT HAVE BEEN PURCHASED WITH THE INTENT TO RETURN MORE WATER TO THE VERDI RIVER. 
          THERE'S ALREADY THE OWNERSHIP CONCEPT THERE. 
          THEY HAVE EXTENSIVE WATER RIGHTS THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO SURRENDER OR RE APPROPRIATE TO SOLVE OTHER ISSUES. SO. 
          >> NO, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT PLAN. 
          I THINK WHEN YOU GIVE AN ENTITLEMENT, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE PUT ENOUGH CLAWS ON IT TO ALSO TAKE CARE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES THAT ARE GOING TO COME WITH THAT AND TRANSPORTATION IS PART OF THAT. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR. CAN THAT BE TIED TO IT AS A CONTINGENCY, AS FAR AS IF WE CREATE A NEW HIGH DENSITY ZONE, THAT THAT ZONE IS MANDATED TO HAVE A- 
          >> ABSOLUTELY. 
          >> GREAT. WELL, I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. 
          >> SHIFTING GEARS A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT'S BECOMING A VERY CHALLENGING ISSUE ACROSS SO MANY COMMUNITIES. 
          BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS ARE NOT AS DIFFICULT A USE TO CONTROL AND REGULATE AS IT USED TO BE. 
          [02:15:03]
JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND. 
          I WORKED WITH THE CITY OF BUCKEYE RECENTLY, AND WE WERE PROPOSING NEW STANDARDS FOR BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS, AND SOME DEVELOPERS GOT INVOLVED AND REALLY HELPED FINE TUNE THE REGULATIONS. 
          WHILE THEY TAKE UP SOME LAND AREA IN THE RIGHT PLACE, THEY ARE FAIRLY EASY TO REGULATE. 
          DATA CENTERS, AI FACILITIES, AND UTILITY SCALE WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS COME WITH HUGE ISSUES. 
          I DON'T KNOW YET. 
          I HAVEN'T SPENT ENOUGH TIME WITH STAFF TO UNDERSTAND IF THERE'S PRESSURE ON YAVAPAI COUNTY TO ALLOW FOR DATA CENTERS YET. 
          IF NOT, MAYBE IT'S COMING. 
          IS THAT SOMETHING WE WANT TO ADD TO THE CODE AS SOMETHING TO REGULATE, OR FRANKLY, TO JUST SAY, NO, WE DON'T WANT THEM? THAT'S A POLICY DECISION THAT AT SOME POINT, WE'LL HAVE TO REALLY THINK ABOUT. 
          I KNOW YOUR CODE INCLUDES, I THINK IT'S SECTION 608, UTILITY SCALE SOLAR FACILITIES. 
          DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THE NEXT STEP AND ALLOW UTILITY SCALE WIND? THESE ARE BIG BEASTS, NAVAHU COUNTIES JUST RECENTLY APPROVED A BIG ONE. 
          OPEN QUESTIONS, HONESTLY, BUT JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT AS WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD INTO THE CODE. 
          >> I THOUGHT WE MIGHT STOP THERE AND HAVE OUR LUNCH AND THEN WE'LL GET RIGHT BACK. 
          LET'S SAY. I DON'T KNOW. 
          DOES 20 MINUTES SOUND GOOD FOR YOU FOLKS TO HAVE LUNCH OR DO YOU WANT 30? TWENTY. GOOD. MY SON SAYS IN THE ARMY, THEY HAVE ALL THE FOOD THAT THEY CAN POSSIBLY HAVE, BUT THEY ONLY HAVE THREE MINUTES TO EAT IT. 
          [LAUGHTER] WE'LL BREAK FOR LUNCH. TWENTY MINUTES. 
          THANK YOU.ALL RIGHT, EVERYBODY. 
          WE ARE BACK. I HOPE EVERYBODY ENJOYED THEIR LUNCH. 
          AND WE THANK DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FOR THE LUNCH? WAS IT YOU? 
          >> I THINK SO. 
          >> YOU THINK SO. CHECK YOUR INVOICE, WHEN YOU GET BACK. 
          ANYWAY, NO WORRIES. HERE WE GO. 
          >> THANKS SO FAR FOR THE GREAT INPUT WE'VE RECEIVED. 
          SHIFTING GEARS TO MORE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS WE HEARD IN THE INTERVIEWS AND DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF AND ACTUALLY GOING BACK TO THE FIRST JOINT WORK SESSION BACK IN APRIL. 
          LANDSCAPING AND THE NEED FOR ENHANCED LANDSCAPING STANDARDS, PROMOTING ZERO SCAPE LANDSCAPING, NOT ZERO SCAPE, BUT ZERO ESCAPE. 
          SO DROUGHT TOLERANT PLANTS THAT USE MINIMAL WATER, AND YOU CAN SEE UP THERE, I ADDED NEW IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS. 
          SOMETHING WE DID IN FLAGSTAFF WAS REQUIRE NEW NATIVE OR ADAPTIVE PLANTS TO BE PLANTED WITH A LANDSCAPE SYSTEM THAT AFTER THOSE PLANTS ARE ESTABLISHED CAN BE TAKEN OUT. 
          MAYBE IN PERIODS OF EXTREME DROUGHT, YOU NEED TO IRRIGATE, BUT FOR THE MOST PART, YOU WANT TO HAVE SOME IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS TO ENSURE THE PLANTS SURVIVE AND THEN LET THEM BE ON THEIR OWN. 
          ONE OF THE OTHER COMMENTS I REMEMBER COMING FROM ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WAS THE IDEA OF PRESERVING EXISTING VEGETATION ON THE SIDE. 
          RATHER THAN CLEAR CUTTING A PROPERTY, KEEP WHAT YOU CAN, PRESERVE IT SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO REVEGETATE IT AFTERWARDS. 
          >> THAT WAS ME BRINGING THAT UP BECAUSE THERE'S OTHER COMMUNITIES, AND I FORGET WHERE IT WAS. 
          I WISH I WOULD HAVE WROTE IT DOWN, WHERE 80% HAS TO BE EXISTING VEGETATION. 
          WHAT DRIVES ME NUTS, AND I THINK EVERYBODY NUTS IS WHEN THEY RIP EVERY LIVING THING FROM THE GROUND AND THEN REPLACE IT WITH PLANTS THAT NEED IRRIGATION. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WRITE THAT INTO OUR CODE, BUT I THINK THAT NEEDS TO END. 
          >> NOTED. THANK YOU. 
          >> I THINK, MADAM CHAIR AND ROGER THAT AND SUPERVISOR COCONINO. 
          WE NEED TO BE EXTREMELY CAUTIOUS THAT WE'RE NOT GOVERNMENT TAKING OVER AND TELLING PEOPLE HOW TO PLANT AND MANAGE THEIR YARD, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO ENFORCE AND PUT IN SOME RULES, BUT WE CANNOT BE HEAVY HANDED WITH THIS. 
          >> I WOULD AGREE. 
          >> THANK YOU, SIR. 
          >> WHAT I FAILED TO MENTION IS THAT AT LEAST AS WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS WITH STAFF, LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS WOULD ONLY APPLY TO MULTIFAMILY OR RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS. 
          YOU WOULDN'T NECESSARILY REQUIRE IT FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES UNLESS THAT WAS A POLICY DECISION ON THE PART OF YOUR. 
          >> I SUPPORT REQUIRING IT FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          [02:20:01]
          >> I DON'T. 
          >> I DO. [BACKGROUND] 
          >> AS I'M LOOKING I AGREE. 
          PAGE 29, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDSCAPING AND FOR PLANTS. 
          PARKING LOTS AND WHATNOT. 
          THAT'S AN AREA THAT WE COULD REDUCE GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT AND PROBABLY ACHIEVE WATER SAVINGS THERE TOO. 
          SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. 
          >> VERY MUCH SO. THAT EXAMPLE ON PAGE 29 IS FROM THE COCONINO COUNTY LANDSCAPE CODE. YES. 
          >> AGAIN, ROGER, EVERY TIME WE PUT SOME RULE AND REGULATION IN PLACE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CODE OF ENFORCEMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE INVOLVED. 
          >> THAT'S RIGHT. 
          >> WHAT ARE WE REALLY TRYING TO DO WITH THIS? AGAIN, I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY CAUTIOUS IN WHAT WE'RE PUTTING FORTH. 
          >> ARE WE GOING TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT WATER? BECAUSE WHEN YOU SEE A SUBDIVISION USING UNDER 2 MILLION GALLONS A MONTH IN JANUARY AND 8.5 MILLIONS IN JULY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT PRESCOTT VALLEY THAT SHOULD HAVE GRASS THAT'S ABOUT A FOOT AND A HALF HIGH, AND ESSENTIALLY, IT IS NOW A FOREST. 
          ARE WE GOING TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT WATER OR ARE WE NOT? ARE WE JUST GOING TO KEEP GOING UNTIL WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING? 
          >> AGAIN, WE'VE REQUIRED SO MANY FENCING REQUIREMENTS THAT HAD VEGETATION, AND YET YOU LOOK AT IT A YEAR LATER AND IT'S DEAD. 
          AGAIN, WE JUST NEED TO BE CAUTIOUS AS WE START PUTTING THINGS RULES AND REGULATIONS OUT THERE. 
          >> I THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT PLACE TO BRING THIS UP AS FAR AS PARKING LOT REQUIREMENTS. 
          ONE THING IN OUR MORE RURAL AREAS THAT'S NOTABLE IS THAT IF POSSIBLE, THE MORE LOCAL BUSINESSES ARE REALLY TRYING TO HAVE GRAVEL PARKING LOTS BECAUSE IT HELPS MAINTAIN THE RURAL EFFECT AND SO WHEN YOU SEE THE DOLLAR STORE THAT POPS IN, AND THEY HAVE THAT BLACK ASPHALT PARKING AREA. 
          IT LOOKS OUT OF PLACE AND SO I'D LOVE TO SEE THAT INCLUDED. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A PART OF THE LANDS LEASE. 
          >> NUMBER 5. 
          >> NUMBER 5. [LAUGHTER] I'M IN FAVOR OF THAT. THANK YOU. 
          >> THE RUNOFF. 
          >> VERY IMPORTANT CONVERSATION. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT SUPERVISOR JYSON. 
          >> I JUST HAD A QUESTION. 
          IT MADE ME THINK COMMERCIAL PUTTING IN THE GRAVEL PARKING LOTS, HOW DOES THAT WORK FOR THE ADA TYPE PARKING AND ALL OF THAT? WHERE DOES THAT FALL IN? MAYBE THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE THAT PARKING LOT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE ACCESSIBILITY OF WHEELCHAIRS OR WHAT HAVE? 
          >> TYPICALLY, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS THAT THE PARKING LOT MAIN AREA AND THE DRIVEWAYS CAN BE GRAVEL OR SOME OTHER PREVIOUS MATERIAL, BUT THE ADA PARKING SPACES AND THE ACCESSIBILITY RAMP BETWEEN THEM INTO THE BUILDING WOULD BE A HARD SURFACE, WHETHER IT'S ASPHALT OR CONCRETE OR SOME OTHER PRODUCT. 
          >> THEY MAYBE JUST PUT IN A COUPLE OF PARKING SPOTS, THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE THAT? THANK YOU. 
          >> GOOD QUESTION FOR YOU, MADAM CHAIR, ROGER, ON THE ZERO ESCAPE RECOMMENDATION. 
          WAS THAT FOR COMMERCIAL ONLY OR COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL? 
          >> WE'RE SUGGESTING AT THIS POINT, MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL ONLY. 
          PUBLIC FACILITIES, TOO. 
          >> NOW, I'M SORRY, RENNIE IF I TO FOLLOW THAT UP IN SUBDIVISIONS, IS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION FOR REQUIRING IT AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL THERE? 
          >> THAT'S A POLICY QUESTION, COMMISSIONER. 
          IT CERTAINLY CAN BE. 
          >> FOR A SUBDIVISION OVER X AMOUNT OF UNITS BECAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING AT A PRETTY HEAVY WATER IMPACT IF YOU JUST ALLOW IT TO GO TO HOMEOWNER, EVERYBODY WANTS A LAWN AND BIG TREES VERSUS THE ESCAPE. 
          >> THE QUESTION COMES DOWN TO IN A PLANNED AREA SUBDIVISION, WOULD THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS APPLY TO THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS? WOULD IT ONLY APPLY IN THE COMMON AREAS AND THE STREET SCAPE WITHIN THAT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT? AGAIN, THAT'S A PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION. 
          WE NEED TO EXPLORE. 
          >> HEY, MADAM CHAIR AND MR. EASTMAN. 
          RENNIE, I'M SO SORRY. I'LL PULL BACK. 
          >> PLEASE. 
          >> AGAIN, I SUPPORT RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE WE'RE BUILDING FAR MORE RESIDENTIAL HOMES THAN WE ARE COMMERCIAL AND WATER, WE NEED TO SAVE AND CONSERVE ON WATER, 
          [02:25:01]
AND WE NEED TO HELP EDUCATE HOMEOWNERS THAT THEY CAN HAVE BEAUTIFUL LAND AND LOTS WITH MINIMUM PLANTINGS THAT ARE LOW WATER USAGE. 
          I SUPPORT RESIDENTIAL. 
          ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE STAND. 
          [LAUGHTER] 
          >> ROGER. IF YOU WENT BACK TO THE PARKING LOT, THAT'S A SLIDE. THE PAVEMENT MATERIAL. 
          WE HAVE BEEN USING MORE AND MORE PERMEABLE PAVING, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT. 
          AS NIKKI SAID, GRAVEL, THE ONLY ISSUE WITH GRAVEL IS JUST ALL THE DUST THAT POTENTIALLY CAN HAPPEN AND IN A LARGE PARKING LOT, THAT IS A PROBLEM. 
          BUT PERMEABLE PAVING RESOLVES THAT AND ALLOWS THE WATER TO FILL. 
          I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING ABOUT PERMEABLE PAVE. 
          >> ABSOLUTELY. NOTED. THANK YOU. 
          YES, THERE ARE MANY PERMEABLE ASPHALT AND PERMEABLE CONCRETE PRODUCTS AVAILABLE NOW. IT DOESN'T JUST HAVE A. 
          >> THE ONES WE'VE BEEN USING ARE EQUAL IN COST TO ASPHALT PARKING. 
          >> OH, GOOD TO KNOW. 
          >> JUST THINKING A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT PARKING, WHERE IT MAKES SENSE, REDUCING PARKING MINIMUMS, WHERE APPROPRIATE. 
          WE TEND TO OVER PARK IN OUR ZONING CODES AND HAVE TOO MUCH ASPHALT FOR PARKING AREAS. 
          THEN ADDING IN STANDARDS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND BICYCLES, OBVIOUSLY MISSING FROM THE CURRENT CODE. 
          THEN THINKING ABOUT WHERE PEOPLE MAY OR MAY NOT PARK BOATS, RVS, ATVS, TRAILERS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND INCLUDING THAT INTO THE CODE. 
          >> CAN YOU CLARIFY ABOUT THE EVS. 
          ARE THESE JUST STANDARDS THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING? WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING REQUIREMENTS. 
          >> NO. AGAIN, THAT BECOMES A POLICY QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER YOU REQUIRE IT. 
          MOST CITIES, TOWNS AND BAN COUNTIES DO REQUIRE X NUMBER OF EV PARKING SPACES IN THEIR NEW PARKING AREAS. 
          WE MAY NOT DO THAT. 
          WE COULD JUST SAY IF YOU PROVIDE IT, THESE ARE THE STANDARDS FOR DOING SO. 
          >> I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT CAN BE REALLY PAINFUL, SO I WOULD PREFER TO NOT HAVE THAT BE MANDATED. 
          >> SIGNS AND SIGN REGULATIONS IS SOMETHING WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO ADDRESS. 
          I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS SINCE SOON AFTER 2005, WORKING WITH THE INTERNATIONAL SIGN ASSOCIATION. 
          THIS REED V TOWN OF GILBERT, SUPREME COURT DECISION ESSENTIALLY SAID THAT SIGN REGULATIONS MUST BE CONTENT NEUTRAL. 
          YOU CAN'T REGULATE BASED ON THE MESSAGE THAT THE SIGN CONVEYS. 
          YOU CAN'T REGULATE A POLITICAL SIGN DIFFERENTLY THAN YOU CAN A REAL ESTATE SIGN OR A TEMPORARY SIGN OUT IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, ADVERTISING WINDSHIELD REPAIR. 
          THEY ALL NEED TO BE REGULATED BASED ON THE SIGN TYPE IN A CONTENT NEUTRAL MANNER. 
          THIS IS GOING TO BE A FAIRLY BIG COMPONENT OF THE CODE UP DATE. 
          AS WE GET INTO THIS SECTION OF THE CODE, I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE ACTUALLY DO SOME OUTREACH TO REALLY EXPLAIN WHILE WE'RE CHANGING THE SIGN REGULATIONS. 
          IT'S HONESTLY NOTHING TO BE FEARFUL OF. 
          WE'VE GOT ENOUGH EXPERIENCE NOW TO KNOW THAT YOU CAN ALLOW FOR ENOUGH POLITICAL SIGNS WITHOUT CALLING THEM AS SUCH POLITICAL SIGNS. 
          >> I JUST CAN'T HELP BUT SIT HERE AND THINK OF THE SONG, SIGN SIGNS, EVERYWHERE A SIGN. 
          BLOCKING THE SCENERY. 
          >> BUT YOU KNOW WHAT THE POLITICAL SIGNS THEY COME TIME FRAMES. 
          ALSO, YOU HAVE TO APPLY THAT AS WELL? 
          >> THERE IS A WAY AROUND THAT. 
          I WORKED WITH CITY OF INDIA MANY YEARS AGO, AND THEIR ATTORNEY CAME UP WITH A VERY CREATIVE WAY OF ALLOWING POLITICAL SIGNS WITHOUT SAYING POLITICAL SIGNS. 
          WE HAVE ARS 1619, WHATEVER IT IS THAT HAS ITS OWN REGULATIONS FOR SIGNS, AND MOST CITIES AND TOWNS AND COUNTIES IN ARIZONA JUST REFER TO THAT STATE LEGISLATION SO THAT WE DON'T INCLUDE IT IN THE CODE. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, MR. EASTMAN, IT'S JUST NOT POLITICAL SIGNS AND REAL ESTATE SIGNS. 
          THE NUMBER OF INAPPROPRIATE BANDIT SIGNS THAT WE REALLY NEED TO DISCOURAGE AND FINE. [LAUGHTER] 
          [02:30:03]
          >> WHAT'S A BANDIT SIGN? 
          >> THEY'RE ILLEGAL. 
          I CALL THEM BANDIT SIGNS. 
          WHEN YOU SEE THEM ON ALL THE STREET CORNERS PAINTING. 
          I NEED GARAGE FOR A CODING LANDSCAPING. 
          >> THAT'S HOW I GOT MY CHRISTMAS LIGHTS PUT UP. [LAUGHTER]. 
          >> CHRISTMAS LIGHTS? I TOOK ALL OF HIS DOWN [LAUGHTER] SO I CALL THOSE BANDIT SIGNS. 
          >> YEAH. IT'S ACTUALLY A FAIRLY TYPICAL TERM IN CODE. 
          IT'S REALLY JUST AN ILLEGAL SIGN. 
          >> ILLEGAL. INAPPROPRIATE. 
          >> I LIKE AN OUTLAW. 
          >> YEAH, THIS IS BY COUNTY. 
          WE SHOULD CALL THEM OUTLAW SIGNS. 
          I LIKE THAT, CHECK. [LAUGHTER] 
          >> THANK YOU, ROGER. 
          >> ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURES. 
          WE'VE GOT SOME WORK TO DO WORKING WITH STAFF HERE. 
          WE'LL HAVE TO WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH THEM TO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR CURRENT PROCESSES FOR APPROVING PERMITS. 
          ONE OF THE FIRST RECOMMENDATIONS, AS YOU'LL SEE IN THE SECTION OF THE REPORT IS FLOW CHARTS, SO THAT IT'S VERY EASY FOR SOMEBODY TO FOLLOW WHAT THEY NEED TO DO. 
          IN THIS CASE, IT'S A REZONING APPLICATION OR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. WHAT ARE THE STEPS? THEN IF YOU CAN BUILD TIMELINES INTO IT, SO THERE'S TRANSPARENCY IN THE PROCESS. 
          THEN HAVE A TABLE THAT STIPULATES WHO THE REVIEW AUTHORITIES ARE FOR EACH PARTICULAR TYPE OF APPLICATION. 
          AGAIN, VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND MAKE IT AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE SUGGESTING IS SIMPLIFYING AND CLARIFYING THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS AND THINKING ABOUT A MAJOR AND MINOR REVIEW PROCESS. 
          THE MAJOR PROCESS WOULD BE A REALLY BIG APPLICATION THAT ABSOLUTELY NEEDS MORE PUBLIC REVIEW AND MORE PUBLIC SCRUTINY, AND THEN THE MINOR REVIEW CAN BE DONE ADMINISTRATIVELY. 
          WHAT THAT THRESHOLD IS? I DON'T KNOW YET, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY THINK ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF COMMERCIAL PROJECTS, UP TO A CERTAIN ACREAGE OR MULTI FAMILY PROJECTS, UP TO A CERTAIN THRESHOLD OF UNITS AS TO WHO THE REVIEW AUTHORITY NEEDS TO BE. 
          WE TALKED WITH STAFF ABOUT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, WHICH I WAS A LITTLE SURPRISED TO SEE YOU DON'T HAVE IN YOUR CURRENT CODE. 
          DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS OR FOR ME, WHEN I WAS ON THE REVIEW SIDE OF PLANNING IN BOTH FLAGSTAFF AND SEDONA, ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING THINGS TO WORK ON FOR THE LARGE PROJECTS, WORK OUT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT STIPULATES VERY CLEARLY THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE COUNTY AND THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE DEVELOPER. 
          THIS WOULD BE PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT FOR THINGS LIKE THOSE LARGE SOLAR ARRAYS IF YOU DO GET THEM. 
          OR IF WE DO GO DOWN THAT PATH, THE WIND TURBINE PROJECTS OR ANY BIG PROJECTS, EVEN IF IT'S A GOLF COURSE, HEAVEN FORBID, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          WE HAVE THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO PUT IN PLACE EXACTLY THE STIPULATIONS AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF EACH PARTY. 
          IT'S ALLOWED UNDER THE STATUTE. 
          IT BECOMES A VERY USEFUL PROTECTIVE TOOL FOR THE COUNTY IN THE LONG TERM. 
          >> DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS ARE A GREAT TOOL TO HAVE IN YOUR TOOLBOX. 
          YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE THEM, BUT THEY'RE A GREAT WAY OF WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPER AND GETTING SOME THINGS FROM THEM THAT AREN'T BUILT INTO YOUR SUBDIVISION CODES OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCES. 
          BUT I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. 
          >> YES, I AGREE WITH THAT. 
          I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT CONSIDERING WE KNOW THE GROWTH IS COMING AND HAS BEEN COMING AND MORE TO COME. 
          I THINK ALL OF THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO PUT THIS DOWN AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT YAVAPAI COUNTY IS LOOKING AT. 
          THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT. 
          THIS IS OUR ROAD MAT TO THE COMMUNITY THAT YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT COMING TO MOVE TO. YES, COMMISSIONER. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, A FEW YEARS AGO, DEVELOPER IMPACT FEES WERE ELIMINATED, AM I CORRECT? 
          >> THEY KIND OF BROUGHT THEM BACK TO. 
          >> THIS WOULD AMOUNT TO A DEVELOPER IMPACT FEE. 
          IF YOU CAME TO AN AGREEMENT, THEY'D HAVE TO PONY UP. 
          I THINK COUNSEL PROBABLY WOULD HAVE TO WEIGH IN ON WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD BE DOING HERE. I LIKE THE IDEA. 
          I'VE SEEN IT, USED MANY, MANY TIMES AND IT WORKS, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T CROSS THAT BOUNDARY WITH STATE LAW NOW. 
          I COULDN'T BELIEVE THAT THEY ELIMINATED IMPACT FEES BECAUSE THEY WERE SO USEFUL FOR US. 
          >> IF I CAN CLARIFY, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REALLY IS NOT ANALOGOUS TO A DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE. 
          DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES ARE TYPICALLY PUT IN PLACE TO PROVIDE FUNDS BACK TO THE COMMUNITY TO USE FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE. 
          YOU MIGHT HAVE A STORMWATER FEE OR 
          [02:35:01]
A PUBLIC WORKS FEE OR VARIOUS OTHER THINGS. THIS IS NOT THAT. 
          THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE DEVELOPER. 
          DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE PROJECT, IT MIGHT BE A PLANED AREA DEVELOPMENT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND THERE'S CERTAIN AGREEMENTS THAT GO INTO PLACE IN TERMS OF WHETHER A TRAFFIC LIGHT IS NEEDED OR LANE WIDENING IS NEEDED, OR IF CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PUBLIC OPEN SPACE NEEDS TO BE PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER. 
          IT ALL JUST GETS DESCRIBED AND DOCUMENTED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY? 
          >> YES. 
          >> RIGHT BEHIND YOU? 
          >> YEAH. 
          >> JUST A CLARIFICATION. 
          SORRY, JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THE OTHER DIFFERENCE THAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THAT IS IMPACT FEES ARE PAID AT THE PERMIT LEVEL BY THE PERSON THAT PULLS THE PERMIT. 
          THIS WOULD REFER IMPROVEMENTS OR FUNDING BY A DEVELOPER. 
          THAT'S THE TWO DIFFERENT AREAS I WANTED TO POINT OUT THERE. 
          WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT IMPACT FEES, AND YES, THEY WERE DRAMATICALLY DECREASED OUR ABILITY TO HAVE IMPACT FEES AT A COUNTY LEVEL. 
          BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS THE IMPACT FEE IS PAID BY THE PERMITE, NOT BY THE DEVELOPMENT NECESSARILY, AND THEN THIS WOULD BE BY THE DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU. 
          >> [OVERLAPPING] KUKNYO HAS SOME DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS IN THE PAST. 
          I DON'T THINK WE'VE HAD ANY RECENTLY, BUT TALKING ROCK RANCH WAS ONE THAT THERE WAS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PUT IN PLACE. 
          THE PROBLEM IS SOME OF THESE LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENTS ARE SO LONG TERM TO BE BUILT OUT. 
          THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ON THAT, I THINK, EXPIRED AFTER 20 YEARS, AND IT'S STILL NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING DONE WITH CONSTRUCTION. 
          WE'VE RUN INTO ISSUES ON THAT AT THE COUNTY LEVEL WHERE A CERTAIN PARTS OF THE SUBDIVISION THAT WERE BUILT UNDER A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AND THEN OTHERS THAT ARE NOW BEING DEVELOPED UNDER DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS. 
          IN FACT, IT CREATES PROBLEMS FOR THIS BODY, THE COMMISSION AND THE BOARD, BECAUSE THINGS THAT WERE AGREED TO IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WERE NO LONGER VALID, AND SO THEY GOT TO COME IN AND ASK FOR WAIVERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          PERHAPS THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE SORTED OUT ON LEGAL LEVEL, WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT JUST EXPIRES AUTOMATICALLY AFTER A TIME FRAME, IT HAS TO MEET OTHER REQUIREMENTS BEFORE EXPIRATION. 
          >> COUNTY MANAGER BODON ACTUALLY COVERED MY COMMENT. THANK YOU. 
          >> YES. DAN, I AGREE. 
          OF COURSE, THIS IS IN PRESCOTT VALLEY, BUT GRANVILLE, I'M GOING TO SAY, IT'LL BE CLOSE TO 30 YEARS, BY THE TIME IT PROBABLY FINISHES OUT. 
          I REALIZE THAT'S IN THE TOWN OF PRESCOTT VALLEY, BUT TRULY, SO MUCH DIFFERENCE HAS HAPPENED FROM THE TIME THAT IT STARTED. 
          MY HUSBAND AND I, WE'VE LIVED THERE 20 YEARS, AND WE'RE STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION. 
          IN FACT, I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT'S GOING TO END TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, BUT IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME. 
          WHATEVER THEY STARTED WITH, I'M PRETTY SURE THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, LIKE YOU WERE SAYING, DAN, IS PROBABLY NOT THE SAME AS IT WAS IN THE BEGINNING. 
          >> I WANTED TO JUST HIGHLIGHT ARIZONA REVISED STATUTE 112-60-9207 SB 1286. 
          THIS GIVES THE COUNTY THE OPTION. 
          IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT, BUT KNOWING THE LEGISLATURE, WHO KNOWS WHAT'LL HAPPEN IN A TWO. 
          THE COUNTY MAY ALLOW THE DIRECTOR STAFF TO REVIEW AND APPROVE SITE PLANS, DEVELOPMENT PLANS, LAND DIVISIONS, PRELIMINARY PATHS, AND FINAL PLANS, AND PLANT AMENDMENTS. 
          TAKING THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS OUT OF THAT DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY. 
          NOTICE THIS IS A MAY, A BIG POLICY CONVERSATION FOR THE COUNTY. 
          I THINK IT'S WORTH HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AT THE RIGHT TIME BECAUSE CERTAIN SITE PLANS MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO ALLOW STAFF TO REVIEW OTHERS OVER THAT PREDETERMINED THRESHOLD. 
          THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WOULD MAKE THAT FINAL DECISION. 
          LIKEWISE FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT, UP TO A CERTAIN THRESHOLD, STAFF OVER THAT THRESHOLD BACK TO A PUBLIC BODY. 
          SOMETHING TO BEAR IN MIND THAT THE COUNTY HAS THIS OPTION. 
          YOU SAW TOO THAT THE COUNTY HERE THAT SECOND BIG BULLET REVIEW AND APPROVED DESIGN PLANS SUBJECT TO OBJECTIVE STANDARDS. 
          I THINK DANNY MENTIONED THIS AS PART OF HIS PRESENTATION. 
          CITIES NOW ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE PRE 
          [02:40:04]
APPROVED SITE PLANS FOR CERTAIN TYPES OF HOMES ON THEIR CODES AND THEIR FILES. 
          COUNTIES DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THAT YET. 
          WON'T SURPRISE ME IF IT COMES DOWN THE ROAD, THOUGH. 
          THE OTHER ONE THAT'S INTERESTING HERE IS FOR THE COUNTY TO CONSIDER EXPEDITED PERMIT REVIEWS FOR APPLICANTS WITH A HISTORY OF COMPLIANCE. 
          ANY DEVELOPER WHO HAS A HISTORY OF BEING PROBLEMATIC FOR WHATEVER REASONS, WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE NORMAL PROCESSES. 
          BUT SOMEBODY WHO HAS DONE IT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN IN THE COUNTY, AND THAT DEVELOPER HAVE A HISTORY OF COMPLIANCE AND HISTORY OF A GOOD RELATIONSHIP, THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY OF EXPEDITED PERMIT REVIEW. 
          HOW THAT WORKS OUT AT A MANAGEMENT LEVEL FOR THE COUNTY, I'M NOT REALLY SURE, BUT AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A STATUTE AND THE OPTION. 
          [LAUGHTER] 
          >> IT DOES KIND OF SOUND LIKE A TRAP BECAUSE SO YOU'RE A GOOD GUY. 
          WE LIKE YOU. WE DON'T [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> ABSOLUTELY. I WOULDN'T DISAGREE WITH YOU, SIR. 
          [LAUGHTER] BUT AGAIN, THAT'S AN OPTION THAT THE COUNTY MAY WANT TO PURSUE. 
          >> KNOWING THAT IT'S AN OPTION, I WILL TELL YOU THAT I STRUGGLE WITH NOT HEARING THE PEOPLE'S VOICE, I GUESS IS WHERE I'M AT. 
          I REALIZE HEARINGS, THEY CAN GET UNCOMFORTABLE, THEY CAN GET INTENSE, EVERYTHING AND ABOVE. 
          BUT IN MY HEART, THAT IS WHAT OUR COUNTRY'S ALL ABOUT IS TO HAVE THAT VOICE. 
          I KNOW THAT PEOPLE DO THAT, BUT I CAN TELL YOU, I THINK, FROM THE OFFICES OF THIS BOARD, WHEN PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE WHAT STAFF DOES, NO MATTER WHAT DEPARTMENT IT IS, THEY WILL CALL THAT REPRESENTATIVE, AND MORE LIKELY THAN NOT, WE WILL END UP GOING AND TALKING WITH THE DEPARTMENT, FIGURING OUT WHAT HAPPENED. 
          THEN, YOU KNOW WHAT? A LOT OF TIMES, WE'LL MAKE IT HAPPEN. 
          JUST A THOUGHT, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THAT'S ALL. 
          I DON'T UNDERSTAND AT ALL, BUT BOY, I AM ALL ABOUT AMERICA, I GUESS, AND YOUR RIGHT TO SPEAK. 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY, I ECHO YOUR SENTIMENTS. 
          I JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS REALLY A LARGE PORTION OF OUR PURVIEW, IN MY MIND IS MANAGING LIABILITY. 
          YES, DIRECTORS MIGHT BE AUTHORIZED TO APPROVE THINGS, BUT ARE THEY REALLY COMFORTABLE DENYING THINGS? THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION, WHICH COMES WITH THE LIABILITY. 
          I WOULD PREFER TO SEE THAT LIABILITY MANAGEMENT AT THE BOARD LEVEL. 
          IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE IT DONE IN AN OPEN MEETING. 
          THAT IF THERE IS A LIABILITY ASSOCIATED WITH SAYING, NO, THAT WE'RE THE ONES THAT ARE MAKING THAT DECISION CONSCIOUSLY. 
          >> I WOULD JUST ECHO THEIR SENTIMENTS AS WELL. 
          THE BOARD SHOULD RETAIN IT. 
          I'M NOT GOING TO ACQUIESCE MY AUTHORITY TO AN UNELECTED BUREAUCRAT. 
          I AM THE PEOPLE ON THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE. 
          NO OFFENSE, JEREMY, I LOVE YOU, [LAUGHTER] BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M HERE FOR. 
          I'VE STATED THAT MANY TIMES. 
          >> LET'S GO RIGHT AHEAD. YOU'RE NOT A BUREAUCRAT. 
          [LAUGHTER] 
          >> JEREMY DYE, LOCAL BUREAUCRAT. 
          [LAUGHTER] 
          >> TRULY, FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION AS THIS LEGISLATION HAS GONE THROUGH. 
          TRULY, THAT'S WHERE STAFF PREFERS TO LEAVE IT BECAUSE WE PREFER TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC PROCESS AS WELL FOR THE PEOPLE TO BE HEARD FOR THEIR CONCERNS TO BE HEARD AND LISTENED TO. 
          IT MAY BE WORTH NOTING, THOUGH, THE STATE LEGISLATION JUST CHANGED FOR CITIES AND TOWNS THAT REQUIRES THIS TYPE OF STAFF REVIEW AT THAT LEVEL JUST THIS YEAR. 
          AS WE LOOK AT HOW LEGISLATION WORKS OVER TIME, WHAT STARTS WITH THE CITIES AND TOWNS ENDS UP TRICKLING ITS WAY UP TO THE COUNTY LEVEL, TOO. 
          IT MAY TURN INTO A MANDATE AT SOME POINT, BUT TO YOUR POINT, STAFF PREFERS TO LEAVE IT AT YOUR LEVEL AND TO RETAIN THE PUBLIC PROCESS. 
          >> IT MIGHT BE THE VERY FIRST EDGE WE'VE EVER HAD AT ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT TO HAPPEN INSIDE MUNICIPALITIES INSTEAD OF UNINCORPORATED AREAS. 
          [LAUGHTER] 
          >> INTERESTING. YOU KNOW WHAT? DON'T FORGET ABOUT OUR FILTER OVER HERE TOO, BECAUSE IT COMES THROUGH THEM FIRST. 
          I THINK WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF THINGS GET WORKED OUT. 
          WE HAD THAT AT OUR LAST MEETING WHERE YOU KNOW, THE GENTLEMAN DIDN'T SHOW UP. 
          YOU GAVE THE PERSPECTIVE, AND IT'S REALLY GOOD THAT IT HAS THAT PROCESS. 
          >> YEAH. 
          >> I MIGHT AS WELL CHIME INTO. 
          I WATCHED THIS GO THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE THIS YEAR IN MY OTHER ROLE AND WAS VERY, VERY CONCERNED. 
          [02:45:03]
WHEN IT PASSED, I JUST THOUGHT, I SO MUCH WANT TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC. 
          WHAT IF THEY DONE TO US NOW? SO I'M GLAD THAT AT THIS POINT, A SUPERVISOR, AND WE HAVE A CHOICE. 
          OUR CHOICE IS WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC, AND WE LIKE THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE TODAY. 
          BUT WE HAVE TO BE EVER [INAUDIBLE] WHAT THE STATE MAY END UP DOING. 
          WHY DID THEY DO THIS TO THE CITIES AND TOWNS AND TREAT US DIFFERENTLY. 
          THAT'S A CONCERN THAT THEY DOESN'T FILTER OVER INTO US IN THE NEXT SESSION, THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE A VOICE DOWN AT THE STATE LEVEL THAT WE WANT TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC. 
          THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. 
          THAT'S WHO ELECTS US. THAT'S OUR BOSS. 
          >> WE NEVER HAVE TO ASK, HOW DID JEREMY GET THAT NEW LAMBORGHINI? [LAUGHTER] 
          >> FOR ME, I THINK THAT IF I HAD THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS GOING TO COME THROUGH AT THE COUNTY, IF I THOUGHT THEY WERE THINKING ABOUT THIS, I WOULD PROBABLY REACH OUT AND RALLY UP TROOPS AND SAY, HEY, START SENDING THOSE LETTERS BECAUSE THAT'S JUST NOT HOW PIE COUNTY WANTS TO ROLL. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> I JUST WANTED TO SPEND A LITTLE TIME TALKING ABOUT FOUR DIFFERENT TYPES OF APPLICATIONS THAT IN MANY INSTANCES ARE SOMEWHAT CONFLATED IN YOUR CURRENT PROCESS. 
          THIS IS AN EXAMPLE I THINK OF ONE OF THE BAND AIDS THAT THE COUNTY PUT IN PLACE A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO TO DEAL WITH THE IDIOSYNCRASIES OF THE CU2 A ZONE, PARTICULARLY, WHICH APPLIES TO SO MUCH OF THE COUNTY. 
          THAT'S THE WAY THE CODE IS WRITTEN NOW AND THE WAY THE CODE IS USED TO PRETTY MUCH REQUIRE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EVERYTHING. 
          TYPICALLY, IF WE STEP AWAY FROM YAVAPAI COUNTY AND LOOK AT A BEST PRACTICE STANDARD THAT'S APPLIED MOST EVERYWHERE, YOU WOULD HAVE THESE FOUR BUCKETS AS YOU SEE UP ON THE SCREEN, WHERE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS A SEPARATE LEVEL OF REVIEW AUTHORITY ESTABLISHED IN A LAND USE TABLE AS YOU SAW EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION, WHERE YOU NEED A HIGHER STANDARD OF REVIEW BY A BODY BEYOND STAFF AT A PUBLIC HEARING SO THAT THE PUBLIC CAN BE INVOLVED. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, A BRAND NEW CELL TOWER THAT'S 100 FEET TALL IN A VERY REMOTE AREA THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT A VIEW SHED. 
          THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE. 
          >> I HAVE TO SAY THAT FAILED. 
          >> THAT SHOULD BE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BECAUSE THERE'S POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS. 
          THE NEW USE COMES IN THAT'S GOING TO CREATE DUST OR NOISE OR ODOR, SHOULD OBVIOUSLY BE UNDER A PUBLIC PROCESS. 
          BUT ANY OTHER USE SUBJECT TO THE RIGHT STANDARDS BAKED INTO THE CODE COULD BE PERMITTED BY WRITE SUBJECT TO THOSE CLEAR STANDARDS. 
          A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHOULD REALLY ONLY BE USED FOR THOSE MORE EGREGIOUS USES. 
          VARIANCE IS USED TO ALLOW FLEXIBILITY. 
          IT'S A QUASI- JUDICIAL DECISION MADE BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT THAT ALLOWS A DEVIATION FROM A STANDARD. 
          THE ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES PROVIDES VERY CLEAR FINDINGS THAT NEED TO BE MADE BY STAFF AND SUPPORTED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THAT VARIANCE TO BE APPROVED. 
          IT ISN'T JUST A BLANKET APPROVAL OF A REQUEST BY A PROPERTY OWNER THAT THEY DON'T LIKE A PARTICULAR STANDARD, THEY WANT SOMETHING ELSE. 
          THERE HAS TO BE A PROOF OF HARDSHIP FOR A VARIANCE. 
          WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM A MINOR MODIFICATION, WHERE THE DIRECTOR SUBJECT TO CLEAR THRESHOLDS BUILT INTO THE CODE CAN PROVIDE SOME FLEXIBILITY ON A PARTICULAR STANDARD. 
          IF YOU LOOK IN THE FLAGSTAFF CODE IN CHAPTER 1020, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S A BIG TABLE OF ALLOWED MINOR MODIFICATIONS THAT ARE ALLOWED BY THE DIRECTOR. 
          AGAIN, THEY'RE NOT HANDED OUT LIKE FREE CANDY AT HALLOWEEN. 
          THERE HAS TO BE SOME LOGIC TO THE REQUEST TO MODIFY THE STANDARD. 
          BUILDING IN SOME FLEXIBILITY WITHIN A CONSTRAINT, THEN FINALLY, ZONE CHANGES AND TEXT AMENDMENTS, THAT WOULD APPLY WHEN THERE'S A NEED TO CHANGE ALLOWED USES IN A ZONE OR ALLOWED STANDARDS IN A ZONE, TO CHANGE THE TEXT TO CHANGE A PROCESS THAT APPLIES TO A ZONE WITHIN THE CODE. 
          THESE ARE FOUR VERY SEPARATE THINGS, AND I WOULD SUGGEST AND RECOMMEND HONESTLY THAT WE NEED TO KEEP THEM SEPARATE. 
          THE RIGHT STANDARDS IN SUPPORT OF EACH OF THESE BACKED UP BY 
          [02:50:05]
THE RIGHT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE CODE BUILT INTO THE ZONES AND THE USES AND THE SPECIFIC TO USE STANDARDS AND SO ON. 
          IT'S SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT APPROACH TO WHAT YOU'RE DOING NOW WHERE IT'S A CUP FOR ANYTHING IF THE CODE DOESN'T WORK FOR YOU. 
          BUT ONCE YOU'VE GOT A CODE THAT ACTUALLY DOES WORK FOR YOU, A LOT OF THOSE CUPS CAN GO AWAY. 
          THE OTHER POLICY QUESTION PERHAPS TO THINK ABOUT FOR THE EGREGIOUS USES THAT WE'VE JUST TALKED ABOUT, CURRENTLY, THE BOARD APPROVES CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS. 
          THAT'S UNUSUAL. 
          NOT LEGAL, IT'S JUST UNUSUAL. 
          WE COULD BRING THAT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS THE FINAL REVIEW AUTHORITY. 
          WITH THE BOARD IS THE APPEAL AUTHORITY. 
          THAT PUB EXTRA PUBLIC PROCESS IS STILL IN PLACE. 
          BUT THAT WOULD SIMPLIFY THE CUP PROCESS SIGNIFICANTLY. 
          IF THERE'S SUPPORT FOR THE IDEA, REALLY. 
          >> ROGER, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU, THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PLANNING COMMISSION, WOULD THEY BE THE FINAL SAY, AND THEN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, IF THERE WAS AN APPEAL, THEN IT WOULD GO TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, IS THAT CORRECT? 
          >> COMMISSIONER REDA. THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION, YES. 
          >> HOW DOES THE BOARD FEEL ABOUT THAT? 
          >> IT SOUNDS LIKE THE INTENT IS AT LEAST MANY OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS THAT COME BEFORE THE BOARD TO REMEDY A VIOLATION. 
          THE THOUGHT THAT ONES THAT CONTINUE TO PASS ALL THE TIME, YOU'RE GOING TO CORRECT WITH THIS SO THAT WE SEE THAT MORE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO NOT BE IN VIOLATION, IT'S GOING TO BE AN ALLOWABLE USE THEN REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF USE PERMITS THAT WE SEE ANYWAY? IS THAT THE THOUGHT? 
          >> SUPERVISOR JENKINS, THAT'S EXACTLY THE THOUGHT. YES. 
          >> I MIGHT BE COMFORTABLE WITH EXISTING OR RENEWAL CUPS BEING RE APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION, BUT NEW CUPS, I THINK, SHOULD COME TO THE BOARD. 
          >> I CONCUR. THE ONE POINT ABOUT THAT, AND I'M NOT SAYING I'M IN FAVOR ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, IS THE TIME FRAMES OF GOING TO BOTH THE COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND ESPECIALLY IF IT DOESN'T GET TO YOU BECAUSE IT HAS TO COME BACK TO US FOR TWO OR THREE ROUNDS. 
          IT COULD TAKE SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR. 
          THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IN A NUMBER OF PROJECTS IS A PROBLEM, TIMING. 
          >> I THINK THAT'S PART OF WHY I'M REALLY INVESTED IN THIS PROCESS BECAUSE I WOULD PREFER OVERALL, TO SEE LESS DEPENDENCE ON THE CUP PROCESS THROUGH CREATING A CODE THAT REALLY EXPRESSES OUR DESIRED LAND USE. 
          THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME. 
          >> BUT TO YOUR POINT, TOO, CAUSE IT DOES ADD A LOT OF TIME. 
          I'M THINKING ABOUT THE HOT DOG GUY UP IN SELIGMAN, WHEN EVERY TIME IT ADDS ANOTHER MONTH TO HIM, IS THERE SOMETHING WE COULD CREATE THAT WE CAN FAST TRACK SOMETHING AND EVEN LIQUOR LICENSES AT THE AMERICAN LEGION? IT TOOK HIM ANOTHER MONTH, IS THERE SOME WAY THAT MAYBE IF THEY HAD SOMETHING, IF IT RAISED US, WE COULD SAY, YES, WE'D LIKE IT TO COME, OR AS A WAY TO JUST IF THERE'S NO RESISTANCE, SAY, WE ACCEPT IT? 
          >> IT'S A GREAT POINT. 
          SUPERVISOR COCKNE AND THE IDEA IS, AS SUPERVISOR CHECK JUST MENTIONED, THE CODE WOULD ALLOW THAT HOT DOG STAND IN SELIGMAN TO BE APPROVED BY PLANNING STAFF. 
          IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH A USE PERMIT, BECAUSE THE CODE IS FIXED AND ALL THE RIGHT STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES AND TOOLS ARE IN PLACE FOR IT. 
          YOU'D ONLY LAND UP WITH THE REALLY BIG CASES COMING TO THE BOARD OR THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL OR RENEWAL. 
          >> BUT TO SUPERVISOR CHECKS SOMETIMES WHEN IT GOES THROUGH THEM, IT RAISES THE AWARENESS, THE CITIZENS HAVEN'T EVEN BOUGHT THEIR TORCHES OR PITCHFORKS YET. 
          YOU KNOW, THAT'S SAVED FOR US. 
          HOW DO WE FIND THAT BALANCE? BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES THERE IS STUFF THAT COMES BEFORE US THAT'S COSTING PEOPLE TIME THAT REALLY DOESN'T NEED TO COST PEOPLE TIME. 
          >> THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO RESOLVE ISSUE. 
          FINDING THE RIGHT USES THAT NEED TO BE ELEVATED AND THOSE THAT CAN JUST BE DONE SUBJECT TO THE RIGHT STANDARDS. 
          >> AS THIS IS POSTED AND COMPLAINTS COME INTO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. 
          THAT'S WHEN THEY SHOULD KICK THAT BACK INTO A HEARING PROCESS. 
          I THINK AS WE COME THROUGH, AND WE START VETTING THIS AFTER THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES VETTED IT, IF THEY'RE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, 
          [02:55:03]
BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN PUBLIC, I CHANGED MY MIND SO MANY TIMES LISTENING TO PUBLIC INPUT. 
          ONCE YOU'VE DONE THAT, THEN IF THERE'S SOMETHING THEN THAT SHOULD BE KICKED BACK TO YOU. 
          WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS KICK BARRIERS OUT OF THE WAY AND MAKE THIS LESS TIME CONSUMING, AGAIN, HOT DOG STAND. 
          THAT SHOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED. 
          >> GO. YOU NEED A LAG. 
          >> PERHAPS THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITY HERE, GOING BACK TO SOME OF THE AUTHORITY FROM THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO MAKE SOME JUDGMENT CALLS TO PERHAPS SKIP OVER THE COMMISSION AND GO DIRECTLY TO THE BOARD FOR CERTAIN THINGS WITH SOME DISCUSSION. 
          THAT MIGHT SAVE SOME TIME THERE. 
          IT STILL LEAVES THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY WITH THE BOARD, BUT SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT CAN BE STREAMLINED, PERHAPS THE DIRECTOR MAYBE CAN RESERVE SOME RIGHTS TO DISCUSS WITH STAFF AND SKIP THE COMMISSION. 
          I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT AS A COMMISSIONER, BUT PERHAPS MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS ARE IN FAVOR OF THAT. 
          >> I THINK MY MAIN CONCERN WITH THE CUP PROCESS IS SEEING PEOPLE WHO ARE IN BUSINESS CURRENTLY REALLY FEAR FOR THE FUTURE OF THEIR ENDEAVORS AND REALLY FEAR THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE COMPLAINTS THAT MIGHT SURFACE COULD PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS. 
          THAT'S THE THING THAT I MAINLY WANT TO SEE RESOLVED AND CLEANED UP. IN THIS. 
          BUT, THERE'S SO MUCH LIABILITY THAT LANDS ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DESK THAT I WOULD REALLY NOT WANT TO OFFSET THAT AND PUT THAT ON PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION'S DESK AND POLITICIZE YOUR POSITIONS MORE THAN THEY NEED TO BE. 
          I THINK THAT'S THE REFRESHING ASPECT OF THE SYSTEM WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE GET TO TAKE THE POLITICAL HEAT, AND YOU GUYS REALLY DON'T HAVE TO NAVIGATE THAT TO THE BEST DEGREE POSSIBLE. 
          BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S A BAD IDEA WHAT COMMISSIONER CHERRY BROUGHT UP. 
          POSSIBLY, THE DIRECTOR COULD CHOOSE TO START WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND WE COULD RETAIN THE OPTION IF WE'RE UNSATISFIED TO SEND IT BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING, THAT STILL DOESN'T ADDRESS THE TIME ISSUE, BUT I REALLY DON'T WANT TO RELINQUISH THAT RESPONSIBILITY ON THINGS LIKE FIRE AND SO MANY OTHER THINGS THAT GO INTO A CHANGE OF USE. 
          >> I HAVE A THREE PART CONSIDERATION HERE WITH WHAT I'VE BEEN SEEING WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS. 
          ONE IS THE FACT THAT AS A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, WE HAVE A MORE RESTRICTIVE SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES. 
          OURS IS LAND USE FOCUSED, AND YOU HAVE BROADER PARAMETERS TO CONSIDER COMMUNITY IMPACT. 
          THERE'S THAT AND FINDING THE RIGHT BALANCE THERE. 
          I THINK THERE'S ALSO SOME SORT OF INVERSE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE BIGGER YOUR PARCEL OR THE FURTHER REMOVED YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE, THAT PEOPLE ARE CHOOSING TO NOT EVEN GO THROUGH AN INITIAL PERMIT PROCESS BECAUSE THEY'D RATHER FACE THE CONDITIONAL USE IF THEY GET HAULED IN ON A COMPLAINT. 
          IF WE TIME AFTER TIME, ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN, AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S OFTEN, IF EVER, ANY FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES FOR CHOOSING TO DO THAT. 
          WE JUST BE LIKE, WELL, YOU SHOULD HAVE. 
          BUT IN SOME JURISDICTIONS, THERE'S A DOUBLE WHAT THEIR ORIGINAL PERMIT FEE WOULD HAVE BEEN OR SOMETHING. 
          A STRUCTURE THAT ENCOURAGES TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY VERSUS JUST WINKING AND NODDING ABOUT DOING IT THE WRONG WAY, ESPECIALLY IN A COMPLAINT DRIVEN SYSTEM. 
          >> BUT ALSO WHAT WE MAY SEE AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION LEVEL IS THIS PERCEPTION THAT SAY 10 PEOPLE STAND UP TO SPEAK AND NINE OF THEM ARE AGAINST SOMETHING. 
          THE NATURE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS IS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE AGAINST IT SHOW UP TO SPEAK. 
          SO YOU CAN'T GO WITH, EVERYBODY IS AGAINST THIS. 
          THERE'S FINDING THAT BALANCE BY THOSE WHO CHOSE NOT TO SPEAK, AND TO NOT OVERWEIGHT IT, EVEN IF YOU GET A RATIONAL AND FUNDAMENTALLY IMPORTANT PERSPECTIVE ABOUT REASONS WHY NOT TO. 
          IT CAN'T JUST BE A NUMBERS GAME WITH WHO CAME TO THE SOAP BOX FOR THREE MINUTES. 
          WE REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT THE GREATER IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY AND THE RIGHTS AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. 
          THOSE ARE THREE VERY DIFFERENT THINGS THAT I THINK COME FORWARD TO US AT THE COMMISSION LEVEL WHEN WE ARE REVIEWING [INAUDIBLE] FOURTH ONE, LET ME THROW THIS ONE IN. 
          WE DON'T SEEM TO HAVE ANY KIND OF STANDARD. 
          SOME PROJECT WE'LL BE LIKE, WE'LL GIVE YOU THREE YEARS TO DO THAT. 
          SOMEBODY ELSE WILL BE LIKE, 15 YEARS TO DO THAT. 
          [03:00:01]
IT SEEMS QUITE ARBITRARY IN HOW WE SET THE TIME FRAME FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 
          I THINK WE LOWER OUR RISK AND LIABILITY IF THERE WERE SOME CONVENTIONAL STANDARDS THERE. 
          >> THAT WAS VERY WELL PUT. 
          I WAS JUST SPEAKING WITH SUPERVISOR CHECK THIS WEEK ABOUT THE ARBITRARINESS OF THE DECISIONS THAT WE'RE MAKING, AND THERE'S NO STANDARD TO IT. 
          MY GOAL IN MY AREA IS TO BRING PEOPLE INTO COMPLIANCE, NOT TO PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS. 
          THAT'S WHAT I'M RUNNING INTO AND SUPERVISOR KUKNYO NO PROBABLY AS WELL IN HIS DISTRICT THE MORE RURAL AREAS. I AGREE WITH YOU. 
          WE HAVE TO GET SOME SORT OF STANDARD. 
          ALSO, UNDERSTANDING, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE AND TO BRING THEM INTO THE FOLD INSTEAD OF BEING SO HARSH ON THEM. 
          .. WHAT SHOCKED ME TOO IS SOME OF THE STUFF WE'VE BEEN SEEING LATELY IS THEY'VE BEEN OUT OF COMPLIANCE, RUNNING A BUSINESS FOR THREE YEARS. 
          IT'S A LONG STANDING THING. 
          THE COMMUNITY'S ALMOST USED TO IT, AND REALLY JUST SOMEBODY NARCS THEM OUT, THEN WE GO UP THERE AND WE HIT THEM. IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING. 
          TYING IN JEREMY'S WISDOM AND EXPERIENCE TO MAKE SOME CALLS AND I THINK BACK TO HOT DOG MAN. 
          I THINK WE WERE SAYING HE HAD TO HAVE 30 PARKING SPACES. 
          THAT'S NOT HOW SELIGMAN OPERATES. 
          HE NEEDS THREE. BEING ABLE TO DO THAT. 
          >> EXACTLY. 
          >> THAT'S US. WE HAVE TO RESPECT OUR STAFF, AND IF WE DON'T RESPECT OUR STAFF, THEY NEED TO GO AWAY. 
          >> THE NEXT SECTION OF THIS DEALS WITH SUBDIVISIONS. 
          ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE ZONING CODE THAT YOU WANT TO THROW OUT, DISCUSS? THIS HAS BEEN REALLY HELPFUL. 
          I'VE GOT PAGES OF NOTES HERE, SO THANK YOU. 
          >> GOOD TO GO. 
          >> GOOD TO GO. SHIFTING GEARS TO THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. 
          THESE ARE MORE RECENT THAN THE ZONING CODE. 
          FORGET THE DATE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. 
          THEY'RE BETTER ORGANIZED. 
          THEY'RE MORE CONSISTENT WITH STATE STATUTE THAN THE ZONING CODE, AND HONESTLY, IT SHOULD BE LESS WORK FOR US WORKING WITH STAFF TO UPDATE THEM. 
          WE'RE USING A SIMILAR APPROACH TO THE ZONING CODE IN TERMS OF A TABLE OF CONTENTS, ORGANIZING IT INTO LOGICAL CHAPTERS AND SECTIONS. 
          AGAIN, WITH SOME LOGICAL BREAKS IN THE NUMBERING SYSTEM FOR FLEXIBILITY IN THE FUTURE. 
          ONE OF THE BIG THINGS THAT CAME OUT OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS REVIEW WAS THE GENERAL PROCESS OF CONCEPTUAL OR TENTATIVE PLAT, PRELIMINARY PLAT, FINAL PLAT. 
          THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH PRETTY MUCH EVERY OTHER ARIZONA COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. 
          SURE, THERE'S SOME MINOR THINGS THAT WE CAN CLEAN UP IN THERE, BUT ESSENTIALLY, IT'S GOOD. THERE'S NOT A LOT TO DO. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT WITH STAFF WAS THIS NOTION OF CLUSTERING IS A SUBDIVISION OPTION. 
          COCONINO COUNTY HAS DONE THIS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. 
          PINAL COUNTY HAS ALSO INTRODUCED A CLUSTERING SUBDIVISION PROCESS. 
          THE IDEA IS WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE ZONING, INSTEAD OF ALLOWING, AS YOU SEE ON THE LEFT, A CONVENTIONAL LARGE LOT SUBDIVISION OF, IN THIS CASE, ABOUT 28 LOTS, SPREAD ACROSS THE SITE, YOU WOULD ACTUALLY DO SOME ANALYSIS, IDENTIFY WHERE THE STEEP SLOPES ARE AND THE WETLANDS ARE, RESERVE THAT AS OPEN SPACE, AND THEN ON SMALLER LOTS, ALLOW THE SAME DENSITY OF 28 LOTS IN A SMALLER PORTION OF THE SUBDIVISION, AND THEN PROVIDE SOME BALL FIELDS, IF NECESSARY PARKS OR WHATEVER, THAT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT, BUT CERTAINLY ALLOWS FOR MORE PROTECTION OF AGRICULTURE POTENTIALLY SLOPES, SENSITIVE LAND. 
          AGAIN, IT'S THE SAME DENSITY THAT IS ALLOWED. 
          IF WE LOOK AT THIS, YOU CAN SEE I PROVIDED SOME OF THE DIFFERENT BENEFITS THAT ACCRUE FROM A CLUSTERING APPROACH, BETTER LAND PLANNING, PRESERVATION OF SENSITIVE AREAS AND AGRICULTURE. 
          THE MINIMUM DENSITY IS PRESERVED, SO THERE'S NO NET LOSS OF HOUSING IN IT, SO THERE'S NO PROPOSITION 207 CONCERNS. 
          THE TRADE OFF, OF COURSE, IS YOU'VE GOT SMALLER INDIVIDUAL LOTS. 
          THAT MAY NOT WORK IN EVERY APPLICATION DEPENDING ON CONTEXT, BUT SOME PEOPLE ARE HAPPIER TO LIVE ON A SMALLER LOT. 
          IT'S BENEFICIAL FROM A ROADS PERSPECTIVE, FIRE ACCESS, WASTEWATER PERSPECTIVE, A NATURAL RESOURCES PROTECTION PERSPECTIVE. 
          BUT THE POLICY QUESTION THEN BECOMES, IS THIS AN OPTIONAL APPROACH AS COCONINO COUNTY HAS DONE IT AND PINAL COUNTY HAS DONE IT? 
          [03:05:02]
OR SHOULD IT BE REQUIRED AS SOME OTHER COUNTIES AND CITIES IN OTHER STATES HAVE DONE? I'M NOT SUGGESTING IT SHOULD BE REQUIRED. 
          I THINK HONESTLY, FROM MY PROFESSIONAL PERSPECTIVE, IT SHOULD BE INCENTIVIZED AS THE BEST APPROACH. 
          YOU CAN INCENTIVIZE IT BY INCLUDING A DENSITY BONUS INCENTIVE. 
          IF YOU HAVE A 40 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND AND YOU'RE ENTITLED TO DO 20 LOTS ON IT, AND YOU CAN CLUSTER YOUR 20 LOTS IN ONE PORTION OF THE SITE TO KEEP THE REST AS OPEN SPACE, ADD THEN A DENSITY BONUS THAT ALLOWS MORE UNITS TO MAKE THAT DEVELOPMENT MORE ATTRACTIVE TO DEVELOPERS. 
          THIS WOULD THEN OBVIOUSLY HELP WITH THAT COMMUNITY WELL PERHAPS OR THAT COMMUNITY WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM. 
          IT WOULD CERTAINLY HELP IN TERMS OF FIRE PROTECTION BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT YOUR HOUSING UNITS IN A SMALLER AREA OF THAT OVERALL PARCEL THAN IF THEY WERE SPREAD OUT ALL OVER THE PLACE. 
          AS I WAS TALKING TO THE COCONINO COUNTY STAFF, NOBODY'S ACTUALLY DONE THEIR CLUSTERED SUBDIVISION YET, AND THEY'RE WAITING FOR SOMEBODY TO DO THAT. 
          THERE JUST HASN'T BEEN A WHOLE LOT OF SUBDIVISION ACTIVITY IN COCONINO COUNTY. 
          I THINK GIVEN THE VAST AREAS OF THIS COUNTY THAT ARE UNDER POTENTIAL FOR DEVELOPMENT, A CLUSTERED SUBDIVISION OPTION COUPLED WITH, AS WE HEARD FROM SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, EARLIER THIS MORNING TO TALK ABOUT A PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT, I THINK THESE TWO TOOLS TOGETHER WOULD REALLY HELP MANAGE THE GROWTH IN THE COUNTY. 
          SHOULD A CLUSTER SUBDIVISION BE ALLOWED EVERYWHERE? MAYBE NOT. 
          I THINK THAT'S A POLICY CONVERSATION FOR US TO HAVE, BUT I THINK THERE'S TREMENDOUS BENEFITS THAT COULD RESULT TO THE COUNTY FROM CLUSTERING. 
          >> HOW WOULD WE WEIGH THAT AGAINST THE ADU REQUIREMENT? BECAUSE I THINK IN MY MIND, THIS IS A GREAT WAY TO COUNTER THE ADU ARGUMENT, BUT I THINK THE ARGUMENT COULD BE MADE THAT WE ARE COUNTERING THE ADU ABILITY. 
          I THINK IT'S A GREAT WAY TO MAYBE REEL THAT IN A BIT, BUT I THINK WE COULD ALSO END UP WITH A FIGHT. 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> I DO LIKE THE CLUSTERING, AND I'M TRYING TO THINK THAT SEEMS LIKE WE HAD ONE COME THROUGH US THE OTHER DAY THAT YOU GUYS TURNED DOWN, THAT WAS A CLUSTERING IDEA OF CREATING SMALLER BUILDABLE SPACE WITH MORE OPEN SPACE. 
          BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET SERIOUS, THE COUNTY'S GOING TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT SOMEHOW REQUIRING WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE AS PART OF DEVELOPMENT, CLUSTERING REALLY MAKES THAT AN AFFORDABLE OPTION FOR EVERYBODY AND IT CONTINUES TO ALLOW OUR COUNTY TO SAY WE PROMOTE OPEN SPACE, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE 75% OPEN SPACE. 
          >> YESTERDAY AT THE ARIZONA TOWN HALL, THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT AND VERY MUCH PROMOTED, VERY MUCH WANTED THE CLUSTERING, LOOKING TOWARD THIS. 
          I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DEFINITELY TAKE A LOOK AT FOR SURE BECAUSE YESTERDAY'S CONVERSATION, AT LEAST AT OUR TABLE, AND I EVEN HEARD IT SPOKE FROM WHERE THEY WERE INTRODUCING THINGS AS FAR AS THE GROUPS AND STUFF THAT THIS WAS A TOPIC OF INTEREST FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. 
          >> ROGER, CAN YOU TELL ME THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS AND PAD? BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE A PAD TO ME. 
          >> PAD WOULD BE A ZONING TOOL TO GET YOU HERE, BUT YOU COULD DO A CLUSTERED SUBDIVISION WITHOUT DOING A PAD. 
          >> BUT YOU CERTAINLY CAN WITH OUR CURRENT PAD REGULATIONS, JEREMY, IS THAT CORRECT? 
          >> ABSOLUTELY. 
          >> THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS THEN, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OPEN SPACE? WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT? WHO MAINTAINS THAT? WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEVELOPER IS GONE, AND THE HOAS DISBANDS, AND IT'S JUST LEFT AND THEN SOMEBODY STOPS PAYING TAXES ON IT AND IT ENDS UP ON TAX ROLLS. 
          THEN SOMEONE'S DEVELOPING IT SUDDENLY. 
          OBVIOUSLY, YOU CAN PUT DEED RESTRICTIONS ON IT, BUT THESE QUESTIONS REMAIN. 
          >> THEY DO. 
          >> IT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. I'M A FAN OF IT. 
          HAVING MY BACKGROUND, IT'S A GREAT WAY TO DEAL WITH FLOODPLAINS AND WETLANDS AND STEEP SLOPES. 
          I HATE STEEP SLOPE DEVELOPMENT. 
          [03:10:02]
BUT DEFINITELY IT'S NOT FOR EVERYWHERE, BUT THIS COUNTY'S TURNED DOWN SUBDIVISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED LIKE THIS IN THE PAST. 
          WHAT'S DIFFERENT NOW? IS THERE A STOMACH FOR IT NOW BECAUSE THERE WILL BE A LOT OF OUR RURAL COMMUNITIES THAT HATE THIS IDEA. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, AGAIN, I THINK OPEN SPACE IS A BIG CONCERN FOR A LOT OF THE HEARINGS THAT WE'VE HAD, SUCH AS CHERRYROAD, WHEN WE HAD THE WINERY, THEY WERE GOING TO USE THEIR VINEYARD IS OPEN SPACE. 
          OPEN SPACE IN MY MIND, SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE USED BY THOSE THAT ARE GOING TO BE LIVING IN THAT COMMUNITY. 
          AGAIN, WHO'S GOING TO MAINTAIN IT? IS THERE GOING TO BE ONCE THAT DEVELOPER LEAVES, BUT AGAIN, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A DEFINITION FOR OPEN SPACE. WHAT IS IT? 
          >> THE NICE THING ABOUT LARGE LOTS IS YOU CAN HAVE FLOODPLAINS ON THESE LOTS AND YOU CAN RESTRICT WHAT PEOPLE CAN DO IN THOSE FLOODPLAIN AREAS. 
          YET THE MAINTENANCE OF THAT IS THE RESPONSIBLE OF THAT PROPERTY OR RESPONSIBILITY OF THAT PROPERTY [INAUDIBLE] YOU CAN SUPPORT AND ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DEVELOP THE LARGER LOTS AND GAIN SOMETHING THERE, BUT LARGER LOTS, OF COURSE, YOU'RE GOING TO END UP WITH A ADU PROBLEM AS WELL. 
          IT MAKES IT EASIER FOR THEM TO COME IN AND START PUTTING RVS OR WHATEVER IT IS WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE ALL ALLOWANCES. 
          >> EVERY DECISION WE MAKE HAS A CONSEQUENCE HERE. 
          THAT'S FOR SURE. 
          >> NOTHING IS EASY. 
          NO. THE LAST POINT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT WITH YOU ALL WAS THIS ISSUE OF WILDCAT SUBDIVISIONS, PREVALENT ACROSS ALL 14 ARIZONA COUNTIES. 
          THE ISSUES HERE ARE REALLY NOT UNIQUE. 
          THERE ARE HONESTLY NO EASY SOLUTIONS UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE CHANGES THE RULES. 
          BECAUSE UNDER ARS 1181, STAFF CAN REVIEW LAND DIVISIONS OF FIVE OR FEWER LOTS, PARCELS OR FRACTIONAL INTERESTS THAT ARE 10 ACRES OR SMALLER IN SIZE. 
          YOU WILL KNOW THIS. 
          WITHOUT THE LEGISLATURE CHANGING, A PROPERTY OWNER HAS THE RIGHT TO DO JUST AS I'VE DESCRIBED. 
          THE LAND DIVISION IS AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED IF COUNTY STAFF DON'T COMPLETE THE REVIEW IN 30 DAYS, WHICH IS VERY TIGHT REVIEW TIME. 
          THE COUNTY MAY DENY THE LAND DIVISION IF IT COMPLIES WITH THE ARS PROVISIONS. 
          I THINK THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A OPPORTUNITY FOR US HERE THOUGH. 
          SECTION B OF THE STATUTE GOES INTO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL THAT ESTABLISHES THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL. 
          MOST OF THESE ARE ACTUALLY IN THE COUNTY CODE ALREADY, HAS TO MEET MINIMUM ZONING REQUIREMENTS. 
          YOU NEED A PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT. 
          ACCESS NEEDS TO BE CLEAR, ALLOWED BY A TWO-WHEEL DRIVE VEHICLE, NEED UTILITY EASEMENTS AND SO ON. 
          WHAT'S MISSING THOUGH FROM YOUR CURRENT MINOR LAND DIVISION SECTION IN SECTION 546 OR THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS IS THIS REQUIREMENT. 
          I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WILL NECESSARILY AUTOMATICALLY CHANGE SOME OF THE PRACTICES THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING WILDCAT SUBDIVISIONS ARE DOING. 
          BUT I THINK IT WOULD PUT THEM MORE ON NOTICE IF AS A RESULT OF THIS STATEMENT BEING ON AN APPLICATION FOR MORE IN A CODE, THAT IF YOU ARE ACTING IN CONCERT TO SPLIT INTO SIX OR MORE LOTS, THAT IS ILLEGAL. 
          THAT'S THE PROBLEM THAT YOUR COUNTY FACES AND SO MANY OTHERS DO. 
          AS I SAID, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'LL JUST STOP THE PROBLEM, BUT IT PUTS PEOPLE MORE ON NOTICE THAT IF THERE CAN BE PROVEN THAT THERE'S ACTING IN CONCERT, THAT EITHER THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE OR THE COUNTY MAY INVESTIGATE AND ENFORCE, NOT BOTH. 
          IT HAS TO BE ONE OR THE OTHER. 
          I'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS WITH JEREMY AND STAFF, AND IT'S SOMETHING I THINK THAT COULD BE FAIRLY EASILY DEALT WITH RIGHT NOW. 
          BUT UNFORTUNATELY, UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE CHANGES THE RULES, THERE'S NOT A LOT WE CAN DO TO SAY, NO MORE TIME OUT ON WILDCAT SUBDIVISIONS. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, MR. EASTMAN AND CHRIS A REALTOR IN ATTENDANCE. 
          WHY WOULDN'T THE AFFIDAVIT BE ACKNOWLEDGED AND SIGNED AT TIME OF PURCHASE, 
          [03:15:09]
THAT THE PURCHASER THAT ACTING IN CONCERT TO SPLIT SIX PLUS LOTS IS ILLEGAL AND TRY TO COMBAT IT FROM THAT END AS WELL. 
          NOW THEY'RE GETTING A NOTICE AS PURCHASING, THEN IF THEY COME FORWARD THROUGH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THEY'RE ALSO SEEING THE SAME AFFIDAVIT AND WARNING SIGN. 
          >> YOU COULD PUT ANY DISCLAIMER YOU WANT ON THERE, BUT I BOUGHT THIS LOT. 
          I SOLD HALF OF IT TO MY BROTHER, NOW WE'RE BOTH SPLITTING OUR THINGS UP BY SIX. 
          I JUST THINK, DO WE ALL SEE THIS AS A PROBLEM? IF WE DO, DO WE HAVE SOMEBODY THAT CAN WRITE A BILL THAT WE COULD TAKE TO CSA? BECAUSE IF WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH IT, EVERYONE ELSE IS, TOO, CAN WE TAKE IT TO CSA AND GET THEM TO RUN WITH IT AT THE STATE LEGISLATURE? OR ARE WE JUST GOING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE STATE AND NOT ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT? 
          >> THOSE ARE GOING TO BE SOME OF MY COMMENTS AS WELL. 
          WE JUST DID THE ANNUAL COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION SUMMIT. 
          THIS WAS NOTED AS AN EMERGING ITEM. 
          I ALSO PERSONALLY LACK VERBIAGE AND SPECIFICS OF WHAT WE WOULD WANT TO SEE THE LEGISLATURE DO SPECIFICALLY. 
          IT'S A GREAT TIME TO GET THAT TOGETHER SO THAT IT COULD MOVE FORWARD NOT FOR THIS LEGISLATIVE CYCLE, BUT FOR THE NEXT. 
          >> MISS CHECK, I HELD THIS CONVERSATION WITH SELINA BLISS A COUPLE OF WEEKS BACK. 
          SHE'S VERY WILLING TO CARRY THAT FOR US IF WE PUT THE INFORMATION TOGETHER AND DEVELOP THE PARAMETERS THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE CHANGED IN THE WILDCATTING LEGISLATURE, WHICH IS 8:31, AND FIX THAT PROBLEM. 
          I'M GUESSING THAT A COUNTY-LEVEL REVIEW WOULD BE THE MINIMUM THAT WE WOULD WANT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT NOW. 
          THAT WOULD CERTAINLY PUT THE STOPS TO THAT PROBLEM. 
          WOULDN'T YOU AGREE, ROGER? 
          >> I THINK IT WOULD HELP SUPERVISOR, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO GO A LOT DEEPER THAN THAT. 
          I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE TIED TO WATER AS A POTENTIAL ISSUE. 
          >> THAT WAS ALL PART OF OUR CONVERSATION. 
          THERE'S A NUMBER OF PARAMETERS THAT NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN THAT. 
          >> EXACTLY. 
          >> BUT THE ISSUE ITSELF IS THAT THE LACK OF OVERSIGHT FOR WILDCATTING THAT WE HAVE. 
          IT'S ALL IN THE STATE'S HANDS. 
          WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF CONVERSATIONS NOW WITH OUR PLANNER, MR. BLAKE, AND HE'S WELL AWARE OF IT, AND WE JUST NEED TO KNOW WHICH WAY TO GO. 
          I THINK WE NEED BOARD'S DIRECTION ON THAT. 
          >> WHO DO WE DIRECT TO WRITE SOMETHING UP AND GET IT THROUGH US? BECAUSE THERE'S STILL TIME FOR THIS YEAR. 
          IT'S RUNNING SHORT IF THERE'S STILL TIME. 
          >> IF YOU TALK TO SELINA, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, THEN WE COULD GO AHEAD AND GET A HOLD OF HER ALSO AS SUPERVISORS AND HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. 
          HER STAFF MEMBER IS THE ONE THAT USUALLY WILL PRETTY MUCH WRITE THIS UP. 
          >> WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT PARAMETERS, FIRST AND FOREMOST, THAT THE COUNTY AND THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SEE CORRECTED. 
          ROGER, I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF THAT INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IN PUTTING THAT TOGETHER. 
          >> CAN CERTAINLY HELP, AND IF I MAY INTERJECT, THAT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT SENATOR KAVANAUGH IS ALSO VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS ISSUE, BECAUSE THAT'S A BIG ISSUE IN MARICOPA COUNTY. 
          YOU'VE ALL HEARD OF RIO VERDE STATE, NORTHEAST OF SCOTTSDALE, AND THE WATER ISSUES THERE. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S ON HIS DESK AS AN ISSUE, WHETHER IT'S A PRIORITY OR NOT. 
          I REALLY DON'T KNOW, BUT THERE'S ANOTHER AVENUE FOR THE COUNTY TO PURSUE. 
          >> WHO PURSUES IT AT THE COUNTY? WHO DO WE LOOK AT AND SAY, HEY, WRITE SOMETHING UP, WE CAN GIVE TO SELINA? 
          >> DAN. 
          >> I'M NOT GOING TO VOLUNTEER. [LAUGHTER] 
          >> NO, I KNOW YOU'RE NOT. YOU HAVE TO BRING IT ON OVER THERE. 
          >> I'M A LITTLE FUZZY AS TO WHAT EVERYBODY WANTS HERE BECAUSE CLEARLY AT THIS POINT YOU CAN SPLIT A LOT INTO FIVE. 
          SELL ONE TO SOMEONE ELSE. 
          THEY CAN SPLIT IT INTO FIVE. 
          WE HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM HERE IN THIS COUNTY THAT'S ALL DONE LEGALLY AT THIS POINT. 
          >> CORRECT. 
          >> REGARDLESS OF THIS SIX-PLUS-ILLEGALITY MATTER, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO ASK LEGISLATION TO REDUCE THAT FROM FIVE DOWN TO SOMETHING ELSE? 
          [03:20:03]
CAN WE COMBAT IT WITH REZONING? CURRENTLY, WE'VE GOT TWO ACRE FOR MUCH OF THIS COUNTY. THAT'S A BIG PROBLEM. 
          THAT'S WHAT'S LEADING TO OUR WILDCAT SUBDIVISIONS, IF YOU WILL. 
          BUT I'LL BE FIRST TO ADMIT IT'S A MASSIVE PROBLEM. 
          THE ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE ALONE FOR THESE WILDCAT AREAS IS A HUGE PROBLEM, NOT COUNTING PUBLIC SAFETY AND WHATNOT. 
          WHAT IS IT WE WANT? BECAUSE IF YOU TRY TO TAKE AWAY THE FIVE DOWN TO TWO OR THREE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR CUT IT OFF ALTOGETHER, THE STATE IS GOING TO GET EMBROILED IN LAWSUITS THAT'LL LAST FOR DECADES. 
          WE NEED TO BE REALISTIC. 
          THE OTHER THING I WAS GOING TO ASK IS, JEREMY, WHAT LEVEL DO YOU GUYS REVIEW MINOR LAND DIVISIONS AT THIS POINT? 
          >> THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE IS JUST THAT IT'S CALLED A MINOR LAND DIVISION PERMIT. 
          THAT IS BASICALLY WHAT ROGER IS DESCRIBING HERE ON THE LAST COUPLE OF SLIDES. 
          THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDES THAT INFORMATION TO US WHEN THEY GO TO SPLIT THAT. 
          THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE PUT ON FILE TO SHOW THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS SPLIT AT SOME POINT. 
          IT MAY BE SOLD OFF IN PIECES AT SOME POINT, BUT IT WAS LEGALLY SPLIT, AND IT'S ABLE TO BE BUILT ON AND DEVELOPED. 
          THE ONE PIECE THAT'S MISSING HERE, AS ROGER HAS IDENTIFIED AND READ, IS JUST THE PART THAT WE HAVEN'T REQUIRED IN THE PAST THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE APPLICANT. 
          AS ROGER MENTIONED, HE'S HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THAT WITH US, AND THAT'S A PROCESS MATTER THAT WE'RE IMPLEMENTING IMMEDIATELY. 
          IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO WAIT FOR ANY UPDATE PROCESS. 
          >> I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF HAVING THAT LANGUAGE THERE. 
          WHEN I BROUGHT THIS UP TO GAIL GRIFFITH, SHE SAID THAT'S ILLEGAL. 
          ANYBODY YOU KNOW OF THAT MIGHT BE ACTING IN CONCERT, JUST SIMPLY REPORT THEM TO THE REAL ESTATE BOARD. 
          THERE'S POSSIBLY A VIEW THAT MAYBE THE COUNTY'S NOT DOING ENOUGH TO MAKE PEOPLE AWARE THAT IT'S NOT LEGAL. 
          I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF PUTTING THAT IN THE FULLEST VIEW THAT WE CAN. 
          >> WHAT WE DID IN CLARKDALE, BACK A COUPLE OF DECADES AGO, WHEN I WAS A MAYOR THERE, WE RESTRICTED THE LOT SPLIT TO THREE. 
          I SOLD ONE TO MY BROTHER, AND HE SOLD ONE TO HIS FRIEND, WHATEVER. 
          THEY COULD NOT CONTINUE TO SPLIT THAT ORIGINAL LOT. 
          WHATEVER THE LOT SIZE WAS WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY SPLIT, IT CAN ONLY BE SPLIT THREE TIMES. 
          WHAT DAN JUST EXPLAINED IS, THAT CYCLE JUST KEEPS ROLLING. 
          AS LONG AS YOU MEET ZONING, THE ONLY WAY IN CLARKDALE, YOU COULD SPLIT IT MORE THAN THREE TIMES, IS TO CREATE A SUBDIVISION. 
          BUT THE WILDCAT THING IS OFF THE BOARD IN CLARKDALE. 
          >> THERE ARE DIFFERENT STATUTES THAT APPLY FOR TOWNS AND CITIES? 
          >> YES. 
          >> DOES IT APPLY TO THE COUNTY? 
          >> NO. THIS IS THE TOWN OF CLARKDALE. 
          >> UNDERSTOOD. TITLE 9 HAS SEPARATE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS THAN FOR THE COUNTY. 
          YOU'RE CORRECT, IT'S LIMITED TO THREE IN TITLE 9. 
          >> BUT DAN, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WHAT ARE WE ASKING FOR? I THINK IT'S A THEME WITH ALL THIS STUFF. 
          WE'RE ASKING FOR A RETURN OF LOCAL CONTROL. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. 
          >> BUT THERE HAS BEEN IN THE 50-PLUS YEARS I'VE LIVED IN ARIZONA AND WORKED IN REAL ESTATE, THERE'S A FAVORED STATUS FOR WILDCAT. 
          EVEN THE WORD, IT'S AN ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE. 
          IT'S BEEN PART OF HOW WE GET THINGS DONE, FRANKLY. 
          MAYBE WE NEED DIFFERENT LANGUAGE. 
          IT'S WINK AND NOD SUBDIVISIONS OR SOMETHING. 
          [LAUGHTER] SERIOUSLY, JUST A LITTLE HISTORY THERE. 
          >> IT GETS HUNG OVER THE COMMISSION AND THE BOARD'S HEAD AS TO, IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO APPROVE THIS, THIS IS WHAT I'M GOING TO GO DO. 
          IT'S PROVEN TO BE SUCCESSFUL ALL OVER THIS COUNTY, NO MATTER WHAT DISTRICT YOU'RE IN, EXCEPT MAYBE DISTRICT 5, MAYBE NOT SO MUCH THERE, BUT IT'S A MAJOR CONCERN. 
          WHILE I FULLY SUPPORT THIS PLAN HERE TO PUT 
          [03:25:03]
A LITTLE MORE LANGUAGE IN AND GET SOME SIGNATURES ON A SHEET OF PAPER, I'M NOT REALLY SURE THAT THAT'S THE PROBLEM. 
          IT'S LEGALLY DOING IT IN THIS COUNTY, THAT IS THE REAL PROBLEM. 
          >> RIGHT ON. 
          >> BECAUSE I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO GET TO IS WHEN YOU HAVE THIS WILDCAT STUFF, WE NEED TO ASSIGN, IF SOMEONE PUTS IN A ROAD, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMEBODY'S NAME THAT SAYS, I WILL MAINTAIN THAT ROAD FROM NOW UNTIL THE END OF TIME. 
          BECAUSE WE GOT SOME SUBDIVISIONS OUT THERE WHERE THE DEVELOPER BLOWS IN THE ROAD. 
          THE HOA TAKES OVER ALL THE ROADS ON THE OUTSIDE, AND THEN THE ROAD GOING INTO THE SUBDIVISION LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING WE BOMBED IN IRAQ. 
          I GOT THAT GOING ON IN COUNTY SPRINGS RIGHT NOW. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO GET PAST. 
          WHERE WE GET THE LOCAL CONTROL BACK TO SAY, NO, WHEN YOU PUT IN THIS ROAD FOR A SUBDIVISION, YOU WILL MAINTAIN IT, OR SOMEONE WILL, THE HOA, SOMEBODY. 
          BECAUSE THEN IT ALWAYS COMES BACK TO US, AND WE GET THE PHONE CALL. 
          I PAY TAXES. WHY AREN'T YOU PAVING MY ROAD? 
          >> MY SCENARIO IS I DEAL WITH COUNTY ROADS. 
          I DEAL WITH UNMAINTAINED COUNTY ROADS, AND THEN I DEAL WITH THE FOREST DEPARTMENT, WHO DOESN'T TOUCH THEIR ROADS, AND THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE A PLOW AND IT SNOWS. 
          IT IS A DEAL, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THEY BOUGHT A HOUSE OR BUILT A HOUSE ON A FOREST ROAD. 
          SOME OF THE FOREST ROADS ACTUALLY HAVE PERSONAL PROPERTY HOOKED INTO THEM. 
          IT IS AN UNBELIEVABLE SITUATION. 
          IT JUST CONTINUES TO UNWIND MORE AND MORE. 
          I WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND, IF ANYTHING, EVEN IF IT'S THE REALTORS ASSOCIATION, MAYBE THEY NEED TO HIGHLIGHT THIS IN THEIR PAPERWORK. 
          THIS HOUSE THAT YOU'RE BUYING, THIS HOUSE THAT YOU'RE BUILDING, THIS IS ON A FOREST ROAD. 
          THAT'S WHERE THIS HOUSE IS. 
          THE FOREST IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ROAD. 
          POINT BLANK. YOU'RE ON A COUNTY UNMAINTAINED ROAD. 
          NO ONE'S COMING, BUT YOU'RE IN THE COUNTY. 
          THEN, IF YOU'RE LUCKY, YOU GOT A ROAD IN THE COUNTY AND IT'S MAINTAINED. 
          I ADVOCATE FOR THOSE THREE STATEMENTS ALL DAY LONG. 
          >> SANDY, WHEN YOU SAY THAT, THAT STUFF IS CALLED OUT ON THE SPUDS. 
          NOW, IF PEOPLE WRITE IT OR NOT WRITE IT, THEN IT'S BETWEEN PROPERTY OWNERS, BUT THAT THERE IS WHO MAINTAINS THE ROAD. 
          >> THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, IS THE BOARD GOING TO TAKE THIS UP TO THE NEXT LEVEL IN LEGISLATION? BECAUSE IT NEEDS TO BE DONE SOMEHOW. 
          BUT WE NEED THE LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT RETURNS THAT CONTROL TO THE COUNTY LEVEL. 
          AS OPPOSED TO THE WAY IT SITS NOW. 
          >> YOU SAW YOU KICKED IT TO HERE. 
          WE KICKED IT TO THEM. 
          [LAUGHTER] 
          >> I'LL CHECK INTO THIS. 
          >> YOU ALREADY GOT IT. 
          >> I WILL. I'LL MAKE A NOTE. I'LL REACH OUT. 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY. 
          >> TALK TO SELINA. 
          >> CHAIR MALLORY. 
          >> SORRY. DO IT. 
          >> I'M GETTING SCOLDED NOW. 
          >> NO, JUST OFFERING A LITTLE ASSISTANCE. 
          I'LL LOOK INTO IT A LITTLE BIT. 
          JUST FOR REFERENCE. 
          THIS IS AN ANNUAL ISSUE THAT COMES UP. 
          I WAS JUST READING ABOUT LAST YEAR'S LEGISLATIVE SESSION REGARDING ACTING IN CONCERT ISSUES. 
          THERE WAS A PROPOSAL, WHICH I'M NOT SURE WE WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED, BUT THERE WAS PROPOSALS THAT WENT THROUGH WHERE EVENTUALLY WENT TO THE GOVERNOR'S DESK AND WERE VETOED. 
          I THINK EVEN THIS PROPOSAL THAT I'M READING, I'M NOT SURE WOULD BE SOLVING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          IT'S AN ISSUE THAT COMES UP IN THE LEGISLATURE TO EITHER ADVANCE OPENING IT UP TO ALLOW MORE LOT SPLITS OR NARROW IT DOWN EVERY YEAR. 
          I SEE THAT EVERY YEAR, AS WE HEAR ABOUT LEGISLATION COMING THROUGH, BUT I WILL WORK WITH YOUR DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AND WE WILL DISCUSS IT, AND MAYBE BRING SOMETHING FORWARD EITHER AS WE GO THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE DISCUSSION WITH CSA OVER THIS TIME OR FOR NEXT YEAR. 
          BUT LET ME LOOK INTO IT BECAUSE THERE'LL PROBABLY BE PROPOSALS YOU'LL SEE AS YOU HEAR LEGISLATION COMING THROUGH CSA. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          >> THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE FORWARD. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> MY LAST SLIDE HERE IS AGAIN, JUST A REFERENCE TO ARIZONA STATUTE. 
          WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS RELATIVE TO OTHER SECTIONS OF THE STATUTE. 
          BUT THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION IN TITLE 11 SAYS THAT IF YOU HAVE A SUBDIVISION OF 10 OR FEWER LOTS, 
          [03:30:03]
IF THE BOARD ESTABLISHES A MINIMUM LOT SIZE, THEN ONCE AGAIN, THAT APPROVAL FOR THE PREPARATION OF A PERMANENT PLAT CAN BE WAIVED, AND YOU CAN JUST PUSH IT STRAIGHTFORWARD TO A FINAL PLAT. 
          AGAIN, THAT'S A POLICY DECISION. 
          OUR COUNTY HASN'T DONE THIS YET. 
          AS WE GET WORKING WITH STAFF ON REWRITING AND UPDATING THE SUBDIVISION REGULATION, THIS IS SOMETHING WE'LL CONSIDER. 
          DO YOU WANT TO JUST DROP THE PRELIMINARY PLAT CONDITION AND GO STRAIGHT TO FINAL PLAT? PERHAPS FOR CERTAIN CONDITIONS, 10 OR FEWER LOTS, THAT MIGHT HELP WITH THE HOUSING PROBLEM, AND ALLOWING FOR SMALL SUBDIVISIONS, SMALLER LOT SIZES, GIVE THEM A FAST-TRACK PLAT PROCESS. 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, MR. EASTMAN. 
          JUST AS I SUPPORTED LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, I FEEL THAT THIS PLAT SHOULD COME BEFORE PLANNING AND ZONING FOR REVIEW AND INPUT PRIOR TO GOING TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. 
          WE NEED TO HAVE OUR INPUT, AND THERE'S SOME VERY GREAT MINDS ON THE COMMISSION. 
          I FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT TO BRING UP FORWARD TO US. 
          >> JUST TO CLARIFY, IF I MAY. 
          THIS IS NOT SAYING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOESN'T GET A BITE AT THE APPLE. 
          >> IT DOESN'T. 
          >> THIS IS SAYING THAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW. 
          >> I WANT PRELIMINARY. I WANT IT ALL. 
          >> CLEAR. THANK YOU. 
          >> WITH CREAM ALMOND. 
          >> I THINK WHAT SANDY'S GETTING AT IS THAT TYPICALLY FINAL PLATS DON'T COME TO THE COMMISSION. 
          IF YOU WAIVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, PERHAPS THE REQUIREMENT REMAINS, SO IT STILL GO THROUGH BOTH COMMISSION AND BOARD. 
          >> THANK YOU, COUNSELOR. 
          >> THAT'S AN ISSUE. 
          >> MR. EASTMAN, DID YOU GET THAT? 
          >> I DID, INDEED. NOTED. THANK YOU. 
          SANDY SAYS. 
          [LAUGHTER] UNLESS THERE'S ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION, AND I'M HAPPY TO BE HERE, AS LONG AS YOU WOULD LIKE TO BE HERE. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME SO FAR. 
          THIS HAS BEEN A REALLY WONDERFUL GATHERING, AND WE'VE LEARNED A LOT FROM YOU, SO THANK YOU. 
          >> I THINK THIS HAS BEEN A GREAT MEETING, AND THE CONVERSATIONS HAVE BEEN GREAT, AND I ALWAYS SAY THERE'S NOTHING LIKE BEING ABLE TO SIT AND LOOK EACH OTHER IN THE EYE AND HAVE THE CONVERSATION AND THE QUESTIONS THAT COME UP, AND IT ALL HELPS US BE BETTER AS WE SERVE THE COMMUNITY. 
          UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER CONVERSATION FOR ANYBODY HERE, I WOULD GO AHEAD AND CALL THIS MEETING ADJOURNED. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.