Dec 17, 2025 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

>> SUPERVISOR KUKMIA?

>> CONSENT ITEMS ONE THROUGH 22 WITH THE EXCEPTION OF NUMBER SEVEN AND 11 HAVE BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

NOW, I HAVE TO SAY, DOESN'T THAT SOUND LIKE WINNING NUMBER SEVEN AND 11.

HAD TO PULL HIM. NO WORRIES.

SUPERVISOR CHECK.

[7. Board of Supervisors - Award contract for the publication of Newspaper Advertising and Legal Notices to Prescott Newspapers Inc., designating The Daily Courier as the Official Newspaper of Yavapai County, pursuant to A.R.S. §11-255, effective January 1, 2026, through December 31, 2027. YC Contract No. 2025-504 AMEND ITEM 7 TO LIMIT THE CONTRACT TERM TO ONE YEAR INSTEAD OF TWO YEARS; APPROVED 4 TO 1, SUPERVISOR KUKNYO OPPOSED. ]

>> THANK YOU. I'VE PULLED THIS CONTRACT FOR PRINTING OUR PUBLIC NOTICES BECAUSE THERE'S AN INTERESTING COMPONENT TO THE STATE STATUTE.

I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT TO THE BOARD'S ATTENTION.

I ALSO HAVE KYLE LARSON HERE FROM LARSON NEWSPAPERS TO SPEAK ON THE MATTER.

BUT THE LANGUAGE AT LEAST REQUIRES PUBLIC NOTICES TO BE PRINTED IN THE COUNTY IN WHICH THEY'RE DISTRIBUTED, WHICH IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE OF A DIFFICULT TASK FOR NEWSPAPERS.

I THINK MANY OF YOU MIGHT KNOW THAT THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC RECENTLY WENT TOWARDS PRINTING THEIR NEWSPAPERS IN LAS VEGAS.

IT'S AN EMERGING ISSUE AND ONE THAT I THINK WE MIGHT SEE LEGISLATIVE ACTION ON A LITTLE BIT THIS YEAR.

I WANTED TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW KYLE LARSON TO SPEAK ON THE MATTER IF YOU WOULD APPROACH AND STATE YOUR NAME.

YOU HAVE TO PRESS THE GREEN BUTTON OR THE BUTTON THAT SAYS PUSH UNTIL THE GREEN LIGHT COMES ON, SORRY.

>> KYLE LARSON.

GOOD MORNING.

THANK YOU FOR PULLING THIS SUPERVISOR CHECK.

GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN AND SUPERVISORS.

I'M KYLE LARSON, GENERAL MANAGER OF LARSON NEWSPAPERS AND THE CAM VERY JOURNAL.

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK ON THE PUBLIC NOTICE AWARD CONTRACT.

AS SUPERVISOR CHECK SAID, THERE'S SOME INTERESTING ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP, AND I'M THE MOST RECENT RECIPIENT OF THIS AWARD CONTRACT ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO, BY YAVAPAI COUNTY.

THE CAMP VERDY JOURNAL WON THIS BID AS THE LOWEST AND BEST PROPOSAL AS REQUIRED BY LAW.

DAYS LATER, IT WAS THEN REVOKED BASED ON WHAT I BELIEVE IS A MISINTERPRETATION OF

[00:05:01]

THE ARIZONA STATUTES ON WHERE A NEWSPAPER IS PHYSICALLY PRINTED OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY IN THIS CASE, RATHER THAN WHERE IT'S PUBLISHED, WHICH IS CAMP VERDI RIGHT HERE IN YAVAPAI COUNTY.

I BELIEVE THIS INTERPRETATION IS INCORRECT, AND HERE'S WHY.

FIRST, THERE'S A LEGAL PRECEDENT IN THIS COUNTY SUPPORTS US.

LAST MAY, PRESIDING JUDGE JOHN NAPPER OF YAVAPAI COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, IN FACT, RULED THAT OUR SISTER NEWSPAPER, THE SEDONA RED ROCK NEWS, IS FULLY COMPLIANT FOR PUBLISHING LEGAL NOTICES IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, REGARDLESS OF ITS PRINT LOCATION.

THIS IS NOW ESTABLISHED CASE LAW AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED HERE.

SECOND, THIS IS NOT CURRENTLY HOW THE LAW IS APPLIED STATEWIDE IN OTHER COUNTIES.

STATEWIDE, THERE'S MANY COUNTIES NOW, MORE THAN JUST A FEW THAT PRINT THEIR PUBLIC NOTICES OUTSIDE THE COUNTY.

DUE TO AS SUPERVISOR CHECK SAID, ISSUES OF PRINTING PRESSES, CONSOLIDATION THROUGHOUT THE STATE, JUST THE NATURE OF THE INDUSTRY.

AGAIN, THE ARIZONA PUBLIC PRINTS MOST OF THEIR PAPER OUT INSIDE IN LAS VEGAS, NOT EVEN IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA, YET CONTINUES TO PUBLISH PUBLIC NOTICES FOR CITIES, COUNTIES, AND STATE NEWS.

WE PUBLISH, DISTRIBUTE, AND EVEN MAIL FROM CAVERT, ARIZONA. THAT'S WHAT MATTERS.

THIRD, WE MEET EVERY STATUTORY REQUIREMENT.

THE STATUTE REQUIRES THAT A NEWSPAPER BE PRINTED AND PUBLISHED WITHIN THE COUNTY.

THAT IS TRUE, IN A TRUE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW.

HOWEVER, THIS STATUTE, AS IS SHOWN IN OTHER COUNTIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE, HAS ALWAYS BEEN INTERPRETED TO MEAN THAT THE NEWSPAPER MUST BE A PRINTED PRODUCT, NOT A DIGITAL ONE, NOTHING LIKE THAT, AND PUBLISHED WITHIN THE COUNTY.

THE REALITY IS ONLY FIVE OR SIX PRINTING PRESSES REMAIN IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA THAT CAN HANDLE NEWSPAPER VOLUME.

CONSOLIDATION IS AN ECONOMIC NECESSITY, BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE WHERE WE PUBLISH AND DISTRIBUTE THE INFORMATION, WHO WE SERVE, YOUR CONSTITUENTS.

THE INTENT OF THE LAW IS CLEARLY WAS NOT TO CREATE STATE SPONSORED MONOPOLIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE. THAT WOULD BE INSANE.

BY CONTINUING THIS IN THIS INTERPRETATION, THE LAW AS THE LATEST BID SHOWS, WE'RE CONTINUING THIS AND DOING THIS EXACTLY THAT, CREATING STATE SPONSORED MONOPOLIES.

FINALLY, CONSIDER THE TAXPAYERS.

MY BID BASED ON LAST YEAR'S WINNING BID FROM THE DAILY COURIER WAS APPROXIMATELY 35-40% LOWER.

OVER TWO YEARS, THAT COULD EQUATE TO TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, IF NOT $100,000 WITH ELECTIONS AND EVERYTHING COMING UP IN THIS YEAR.

PLUS, IN ADDITION TO THAT, I'M GIVING YOU GUYS 08,000 COPIES OF THE COTTONWOOD JOURNAL EXTRA AND NO EXTRA CHARGE.

THAT'S 8,000 PEOPLE IN CITIES OF COTTONWOOD, CLARKDALE, CORNVILLE, GABY COUNTY RESIDENTS THAT WILL RECEIVE YOUR PUBLIC NOTICES TO GET THAT WORD OUT TO THE STREET.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THESE WORDS GET OUT THERE.

PUTTING IT ON WEBSITES AND OTHER THINGS JUST DOESN'T COUNT.

THEY DON'T HAVE A DISTRIBUTION LIKE WE DO.

THE INTENT AND LAW THE TENT VISION OF THE LAW MATTERS, IN THIS CASE, THE IDEA IS TO GET THOSE NOTICES OUT TO GENERAL PUBLIC OF THE COUNTY, PERIOD.

I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU HONOR THE ORIGINAL BID AWARD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU. DO YOU MIND IF I REACH OVER TO MR. BRENNAN. MR. BRENNAN.

I UNDERSTAND ON SOME OF THIS.

WE DID HAVE SOME CONVERSATION WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IN THE SENSE OF I GUESS HOW THIS WHOLE STATUE WORKS IN THAT PROCEDURE.

>> YES. CHAIR, VICE CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

JUST TO CLARIFY THE RECORD, THE BID IS NOT AWARDED UNTIL THE BOARD MAKES AN AWARD.

THERE HAS BEEN NO WINNING OF THE BID OR AWARD OF THE BID.

THAT'S WHAT'S TO BE DETERMINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TODAY.

THE STATUTE REQUIRES THE BOARD TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN SELECTING THE LOWEST AND BEST BIDDER.

LIKE ANY OTHER ITEM THAT COMES BEFORE THIS BOARD, THIS HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND APPROVED.

A RECOMMENDATION HAS BEEN MADE THAT THE ITEMS SUBMITTED BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD AND THAT IT MEETS ALL LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.

IF THE BOARD HAS SPECIFIC LEGAL QUESTIONS, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT A BOARD MEMBER MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO DISCUSS THE ACTUAL LEGAL ADVICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN OPEN SESSION.

IF THERE ARE STILL QUESTIONS, THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION.

IF THE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN RESOLVED, THE BOARD WOULD CERTAINLY CAN GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THE ITEM WHENEVER YOU'RE PREPARED TO DO SO.

>> THANK YOU, MR. BRENNAN.

DO I HAVE A CONVERSATION?

>> YES. MY QUESTION WOULD BE, THIS IS A STATE STATUTE, AND THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC IS NOT ABIDING BY IT.

IT SOUNDS LIKE SOME OTHER PAPERS IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED ARE NOT ABIDING BY IT.

DO WE KNOW WHY THIS IS NOT BEING ENFORCED STATE WIDE? IS IT JUST BEING IGNORED?

>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR.

I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

IF OTHERS ARE NOT ABIDING BY IT,

[00:10:02]

I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHY THEY'RE NOT FOLLOWING STATE STATUTE OR WHY IT'S NOT BEING ENFORCED.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MEANS IT WILL NEVER BE ENFORCED, BUT CERTAINLY THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR IT TO BE ENFORCED, AND AS YOU'RE AWARE IF A COUNTY IS FOUND TO BE IN VIOLATION OF A STATE STATUTE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE CALLED ON BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE.

IT CAN AFFECT OUR ELIGIBILITY FOR FUNDING AND HAVE VERY SERIOUS RAMIFICATIONS FOR THE COUNTY.

>> WHAT'S THE DEADLINE FOR THE DATE THAT THIS HAS TO BE AWARDED?

>> THE CONTRACT EXPIRES ON THE 31ST OF THIS MONTH.

THIS IS A STANDARD PROCEDURE THAT'S BEEN DONE ANNUALLY FOR YEARS.

BIDS ARE REQUESTED. PRICING COMES BACK.

THE LOWEST AND BEST BIDDER IS DETERMINED THAT ALSO COMPLIES WITH STATE STATUTE.

IN THIS CASE, AGAIN, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS REVIEWED THIS, AND THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE CONTRACT BE AWARDED TO THE COURIER.

AGAIN, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

IF THE BOARD HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING LEGAL ISSUES, WE COULD CERTAINLY MOVE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND HAVE THOSE ADDRESSED.

>> MADAM CHAIR?

>> THANK YOU, KYLE. I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU COMING TO SPEAK TO THIS ISSUE.

I WANTED THE BOARD TO BE AWARE OF THIS DYNAMIC AND KIND OF LOOK AT IT AS AN ISSUE THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO FIND SOLUTIONS TOWARDS.

BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS WORKED DILIGENTLY TO MANAGE LIABILITY IN OUR DECISION MAKING.

I UNDERSTAND THE SWITCH, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS VERY UNFORTUNATE THAT KYLE HAD WORD THAT HE HAD BEEN AWARDED THE BID.

MY SUGGESTION, INSTEAD OF MAKING THIS A TWO YEAR CONTRACT, I WOULD PREFER TO SEE IT MOVE FORWARD AS SUBMITTED WITH AN AMENDMENT, MAKING IT ONLY A ONE YEAR CONTRACT SO THAT IN THE NEXT YEAR, HOPEFULLY THE LEGISLATURE CAN BE RESPONSIVE, AND WE CAN BRING CLARITY TO THE STATE STATUTE GUIDING US.

>> WOULD THAT BE OKAY, MR. BRENNAN?

>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. SUPERVISOR. THE BOARD COULD CERTAINLY PROVIDE THAT DIRECTION.

WE CAN GO BACK AND WORK WITH THE COURIER ON NEGOTIATION OF A ONE YEAR CONTRACT CONSISTENT WITH DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE BOARD.

>> YOU SAY, GO BACK AND WORK WITH THE COURIER.

IF I'M SORRY, YOU GO AHEAD.

>> I APOLOGIZE. YES, WE WOULD PROPOSE AMENDING THE CONTRACT TO A ONE YEAR TERM AS DIRECTED BY THE BOARD, IF, IN FACT, THAT IS THE DIRECTION OF THE BOARD, AND THAT WOULD BE THE EXTENT OF IT.

>> TODAY, WE CAN MAKE A MOTION AND A VOTE TO DO A ONE YEAR CONTRACT.

THEN THAT WOULD MOVE FORWARD, AND THEN YOU WOULD GO BACK AND TALK WITH THE COURIER, I'M GUESSING.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. PRESUMABLY, THEN A ONE YEAR CONTRACT WOULD COME TO THE CHAIR FOR SIGNATURE AND APPROVAL BY THE COUNTY BY VIRTUE OF THIS ITEM.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT.

>> MADAM CHAIR, I WISH THERE WAS ANOTHER OPTION BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING THIS.

WHY ARE THEY DOING IT? WHY ARE THEY GETTING AWAY WITH IT? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SMALL BUSINESS HERE.

THE RED ROCK NEWS HAS NEVER BEEN MY FRIEND, BUT THIS IS RIGHT AND WRONG.

>> EVERYBODY'S YOUR FRIEND.

>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE, I'D LIKE TO GET SOME ANSWERS.

DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE THAT DESIRE FOR ANSWERS FOR WHY BECAUSE THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC IS HUGE.

WHY ARE THEY PRINTING IT, NOT ONLY NOT IN THE COUNTY, BUT NOT IN THE STATE? I JUST HAVEN'T HAD AN ANSWER.

I HAVEN'T HEARD THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

WHY ARE OTHER PAPERS DOING THIS?

>> I'M THINKING THAT WHEN WE TAKE CARE OF THE BUSINESS AT HAND RIGHT NOW AND THEN WE WILL GO DOWN THAT PATH TO GET ALL THE ANSWERS THAT WE NEED MOVING FORWARD AND THEN THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE IN THAT MANNER. GO AHEAD.

>> IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE INTERPRETATION OF PRINTED IS THE CRUX OF THE MATTER HERE.

CERTAINLY, IF THE INTERPRETATION OF PRINTED MEANS WHERE THE PAPERS ACTUALLY PUT OUT IN THE LOCATION, AS STATED IN CAMP VERDI, THEN I WOULD BE ALL FOR AWARDING TO THE LOWEST BIDDER, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE LIABILITY IF THE INTERPRETATION REALLY GOES THE OTHER DIRECTION, MEANING THE PHYSICAL PRINTING.

I AGREE THE LEGISLATURE HAS TO DEAL WITH THAT BECAUSE A PAPER AS LARGE AS PHOENIX PAPERS BEING ALLOWED TO PRINT IN LAS VEGAS.

[00:15:04]

HERE WE'RE A SMALL NEWSPAPER, A SMALLER COUNTY, AND WE CAN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE LOWEST BID.

LOCALLY IS JUST REALLY DISAPPOINTING HERE.

BUT AT THE VERY LEAST, IF THE BOARD IS IN AGREEMENT, I WOULD GO FOR WHAT I THINK WE CAN ACTUALLY DO TODAY, AND THAT'S THE ONE YEAR.

THEN IF THE COURIER DOESN'T LIKE THAT, THEN WE'RE BACK HERE IN JANUARY. THANK YOU.

>> I WOULD JUST CONCUR WITH SUPERVISOR JENKINS, THE EXACT SAME THOUGHTS, AND I HAVE AN IDEA OF WHY IT'S ALLOWED IN LAS VEGAS, BECAUSE THAT'S DON RAY MEDIA.

DON RAY MEDIA OWNS THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC, ALSO OWNS THE LAS VEGAS REVIEW JOURNAL.

IT'S THE SAME CORPORATION IS PROBABLY BASED HERE.

THEY'RE USING SOMETHING IN REFERENCE TO THEIR CORPORATE WHERE THEIR CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS ARE IN ORDER TO DO THIS.

I SEE YOU NODDING YOUR HEAD.

THAT'S PROBABLY WHY THAT'S OCCURRING, BUT I'M FOR THE ONE YEAR CONTRACT.

I CAN SAY THAT. BECAUSE I WOULD MUCH PREFER TO AWARD IT TO A LOCAL COMPANY.

>> THERE'S ONE MORE POINT OF CLARIFICATION THAT I DID ASK IF THE CURRENT CONTRACT HAD A PROVISION FOR EXTENSION, AND IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT IT DOES.

THAT PUTS US ON A TIMELINE FOR PRIOR TO DECEMBER 31, SINCE WE NEED TO HAVE OUR PUBLIC NOTICES PUT OUT.

WELL, WITH THAT, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 7 WITH A SINGULAR CHANGE OF THE CONTRACT MOVING FROM TWO YEARS DOWN TO ONE YEAR.

>> SECOND.

>> THANK YOU. CLERK OF THE BOARD, WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. CAN YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE?

>> SUPERVISOR KUKMIA?

>> NO.

>> ITEM IS APPROVED 4-1 WITH AN AMENDMENT TO A ONE YEAR CONTRACT.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ACTION ITEMS,

[1. Board of Supervisors - Approve Amendment to the Human Resources Policies and Procedures Section 6.06 (Vehicle Use Policy) to allow for the Sale of Surplus Vehicles to Political Subdivisions and Solely Charitable, Social, or Benevolent organizations. STAFF DIRECTED TO ENHANCE POLICY AND RETURN IT FOR CONSIDERATION DURING BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, WITH A TARGET EFFECTIVE DATE COINCIDING WITH THE START OF THE FISCAL YEAR. ]

ITEM NUMBER 1, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE HUMAN RESOURCES POLICY AND PROCEDURES SECTION.

>> DIDN'T WE WITHDRAW? WE DID, RIGHT? GOOD.

>> HI, TYLER.

>> GOOD MORNING.

>> YOU GO RIGHT AHEAD WITH THE HUMAN RESOURCE POLICY.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. GOOD MORNING.

CHAIR, VICE CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, TYLER GOODMAN ASSISTANT, COUNTY MANAGER HERE TO PRESENT ON THIS ITEM.

IT IS KIND OF STRANGE IN THE TITLE BECAUSE WE ARE SUGGESTING AN AMENDMENT TO AN HR POLICY.

HOWEVER, THAT IS WHERE OUR CURRENT VEHICLE USE POLICY IS HOUSED.

AS WE DRAFTED THIS POLICY FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, WE THOUGHT IT BEST TO KEEP ALL THE VEHICLE RELATED POLICIES TOGETHER, SO THE RECOMMENDATION BEFORE YOU IS TO ADD A SECTION TO THAT POLICY.

JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, AS YOU KNOW, SEVERAL ITEMS IN THE RECENT PAST HAVE COME TO THE BOARD, VEHICLES TO BE SOLD TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND OTHER ELIGIBLE NON PROFITS, AND THE BOARD HAS GIVEN US DIRECTION TO DRAFT A BRIEF, SIMPLE POLICY THAT WILL HELP GUIDE THIS GOING FORWARD.

I HAVE JUST A FEW BULLET POINTS TO HIGHLIGHT THE MAJOR POINTS OF THE POLICY, AND HAPPY TO TAKE ANY FEEDBACK OR DIRECTION THAT YOU HAVE.

TO TOUCH ON THOSE, THE FIRST ITEM WOULD BE THAT DURING THE ANNUAL BUDGET ADOPTION PROCESS, THE BOARD WILL DETERMINE IF ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OR SOLELY CHARITABLE SOCIAL OR BENEVOLENT ORGANIZATIONS WITHIN THEIR DISTRICTS ARE IN NEED OF A VEHICLE.

THAT LANGUAGE COMES FROM STATE STATUTE.

SO WE ESSENTIALLY TOOK THAT AND PLUGGED IT INTO HERE TO KEEP IT CONSISTENT.

THE TOTAL NUMBER SHALL NOT EXCEED MORE THAN 10 IN A FISCAL YEAR.

AGAIN, THAT NUMBER IS AMENDABLE IF THE BOARD SO CHOOSES.

THE SECOND PIECE WOULD BE AT THAT AT LEAST 60 DAYS PRIOR TO A SCHEDULED VEHICLE AUCTION.

THE FLEET MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR WILL PROVIDE A LIST OF ELIGIBLE SURPLUS VEHICLES TO THE COUNTY MANAGER WHO WILL SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

ELIGIBLE ENTITIES WILL HAVE UNTIL 30 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF A SCHEDULED AUCTION TO EXPRESS INTEREST IN A VEHICLE, AND THIS WOULD BE DONE TO THE FLEET MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR, WHETHER THROUGH A BOARD MEMBER OR THROUGH THE COUNTY MANAGER OR TO THE FLEET DIRECTOR THEMSELVES, AND IT WOULD BE DONE ON A FIRST COME FIRST SERVE BASIS.

EACH ELIGIBLE ENTITY MAY ACQUIRE NO MORE THAN ONE VEHICLE PER FISCAL YEAR, AND NO MORE THAN TWO VEHICLES MAY BE SOLD TO ELIGIBLE ENTITIES WITHIN A SINGLE SUPERVISORS DISTRICT PER FISCAL YEAR, WHICH MAKES THAT MATH THROUGH ALL OF THESE THINGS WORK.

AGAIN, THOSE NUMBERS ARE ADJUSTABLE, DEPENDING ON THE BOARD'S DIRECTION.

THE LAST POINT I HAVE IS THAT ONLY REQUESTS THAT MEET STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS WILL BE PLACED ON AN AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE BOARD.

THESE THINGS CAN VARY QUITE A BIT, AS YOU'VE SEEN IN JUST THE LAST HANDFUL OF REQUESTS, THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING TO MAKE IT COMPLIANT AND CONSISTENT WITH OTHER STATE LAW IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION.

[00:20:01]

WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR TAKE FEEDBACK.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, TYLER.

DO I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> MADAM CHAIR, I WANT JUST A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION BECAUSE JEROME HAD A LATE REQUEST COME IN FOR A VEHICLE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, I BELIEVE.SO I WANT TO JUST CLARIFY THAT THE LANGUAGE WE HAVE HERE IS SET FOR FISCAL YEARS SO WOULD IT TAKE EFFECT IN THE COMING FISCAL YEAR, OR HOW DO YOU SEE THAT PLAYING OUT AND WHATNOT BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS LANGUAGE IN HERE AROUND FISCAL YEARS.

>> YES, SUPERVISOR, THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.

THIS CAN TAKE EFFECT AS SOON OR AS LATE AS THE BOARD DESIRES.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU WANTED IT TO TAKE EFFECT AS YOU ARE MEETING FOR YOUR BUDGET DISCUSSIONS IN THE SPRING, IT COULD TAKE EFFECT IN A FEW MONTHS FROM NOW.

BUT I WOULD SAY OR RECOMMEND THAT IT WOULD TAKE EFFECT FOR THE BUDGET CYCLE AND FOR JULY 1ST, THAT FISCAL YEAR GOING FORWARD.

BUT TO ACCOMMODATE AN ADDITIONAL REQUEST, AS YOU AND I HAVE DISCUSSED, THERE IS AN AUCTION COMING UP, I BELIEVE IN MARCH.

I'M LOOKING AT MY FLEET DIRECTOR.

JANUARY AND MARCH.

JANUARY IS A LITTLE SOON SO WE'D RECOMMEND MARCH.

THERE'S STILL A LIST OF ELIGIBLE VEHICLES THERE.

THIS COULD POTENTIALLY TAKE EFFECT AFTER THAT.

>> I WOULD SUPPORT GIVING US TIME TO WORK THROUGH THIS PROCESS THAT WE'VE DISCOVERED THIS YEAR, AND THAT IT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE AS OF NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WHICH WOULD JULY 1ST, 2026, AND WE WOULD DISCUSS THAT DURING THE BUDGET SESSION.

BUT FOR THIS YEAR, LET IT PLAY OUT HOW WE'VE BEEN WORKING IT IS MY SUGGESTION.

>> I AGREE. I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS YEAR, PARTICULARLY, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REACH INTO ALL DISTRICTS AND HELP MANY, AND SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD WAY TO GO.

AGAIN, WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE AWARE OF THE REVENUE SOURCE OF THE FACT THAT WE DO SELL THESE AND AUCTION THEM OFF, AND WE'RE JUST BEING AWARE OF WHAT WE'RE DOING.

BUT THIS YEAR, WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO A LOT TO HELP EACH DISTRICT AND SO I'M VERY THANKFUL FOR THAT.

I APPRECIATE YOU, GILL, VERY MUCH AND EVERYBODY'S SUPPORT IN HELPING THE COMMUNITIES AND ALL THE DISTRICTS OF THE COUNTY.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, I SEE YOUR GREEN LIGHTS ON, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO SAY?

>> GREEN LIGHTS ON AND NOBODY'S HOME, RIGHT?

>> I DIDN'T SAY THAT.

>> NO, I APPRECIATE MOVING THIS FORWARD.

I STARTED THIS BALL ROLLING WHEN WE TOOK SOME TRUCKS UP TO ASHWK AND THEY'VE BEEN STICKERED, AND THEY'RE IN SERVICE, AND I'M SURE THIS BOARD'S ACTION IS GOING TO SAVE LIVES BECAUSE OF THAT.

BUT I AGREE WITH SUPERVISOR JENKINS.

I THINK WE STILL NEED TO WORK ON THIS POLICY BEFORE WE APPROVE SOME KIND OF FINAL ONE.

I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE A GOVERNMENT OR PSEUDO GOVERNMENT AGENCY THAT THIS GOES TO., AND IN THE RULES, WE HAVE SOME OF THOSE PSEUDO GOVERNMENT AGENCIES OUT THERE THAT ACT LIKE THAT AS COMMUNITY TYPE GROUPS.

I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME KIND OF APPLICATION THAT THEY TURN IN.

I THINK THEY HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE THE NEED AND JUSTIFY THE NEED TO GET THIS, AND I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD BY THESE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WOULD BE RECEIVING THIS EQUIPMENT.

I THINK WE'RE ON A SLIPPERY SLOPE WITH CHARITIES, BECAUSE IS THERE A NEED OUT THERE? ABSOLUTELY. ARE THEY ALL STRUGGLING? ABSOLUTELY. BUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO PICK AND CHOOSE BETWEEN WHAT CHARITY WE SUPPORT AND WHAT CHARITY WE DON'T.

NOW, IF IT'S A GOVERNMENT AGENCY, I MEAN, I TALKED TO ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN THAT GOT A TRUCK IN DEWEY HUMBOLDT, AND THEY ARE JUST TICKLED PINK BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT STARTING IN THE MORNING.

THANK YOU, GILL, AND THEY'RE VERY HAPPY WITH THAT EQUIPMENT.

WE KNOW THAT THEIR NEED IS THERE BECAUSE THEY LACK THE COMMERCIAL REVENUE THAT DRIVES CITIES AND TOWNS? I THINK THAT WAS A VERY GOOD THING TO DO, BUT I DO THINK WHEN WE STARTED INCLUDING NON PROFITS CHARITIES, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PICK AND CHOOSE AND THAT'S GOING TO PUT US IN A BAD SPOT MOVING FORWARD.

>> THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY OTHER COMMUNICATION, IF NOT.

THIS ITEM, WE WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION THAT WE WOULD LOOK INTO, I BELIEVE, INTO THE FISCAL YEAR NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

>> CORRECT. EXACTLY. I CAN DEFINITELY TAKE THIS FEEDBACK.

WE'VE HEARD REDRAFT SOME CHANGES, BUT ALSO MAKE IT EFFECTIVE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR.

[00:25:02]

WITH THE BOARD'S DIRECTION, WE CAN BRING THIS TOPIC UP DURING OUR BUDGET MEETINGS IN THE SPRING TO KNOW IF THERE'S AN INTEREST TO ESSENTIALLY, I WOULDN'T SAY RESERVE, BUT IDENTIFY GOING FORWARD UP TO 10 VEHICLES THAT MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR FISCAL YEAR '27.

>> SOUNDS GOOD. WE'LL DO A MOTION THEN FOR THAT DIRECTION, A VOTE HERE?

>> WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THAT DIRECTION TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD TO THE FISCAL YEAR.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO CONTINUE WORKING ON THIS POLICY THROUGH THIS NEXT BUDGET POLICY TIME AND HAVE IT WITH A GOAL OF BEING EFFECTIVE IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> GREAT. WE HAVE MOTION IN A SECOND.

CLERK OF THE BOARD. YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE?

>> I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT I READ. SUPERVISOR CHECK.

>> VICE CHAIR COMPTON.

>> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

>> ITEM IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY WITH THE DIRECTION TO BRING IT BACK AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE FOR THE 2027 YEAR.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> WE DO HAVE FUN UP HERE.

WE ARE LAUGHING AND SMILING, SO IT'S ALL GOOD.

WE'RE GOING TO GO ON TO THE FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT,

[2. Flood Control District - The Board of Supervisors will resolve into the Board of Directors of the Yavapai County Flood Control District, and following consideration of this item will reconvene as the Board of Supervisors - Approve Fiscal Year 2025-2026 funding in the amount of $216,000.00, for a new Community Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the City of Cottonwood for new Drainage Improvement projects. YC Contract No. 2025-447 (District 3 - Director Check)]

ITEM NUMBER 2.

GOOD MORNING, LYNN.

>> GOOD MORNING. IF I COULD JUST QUICKLY.

GOOD MORNING, CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, LYNN WHITMAN, I AM THE DIRECTOR OF THE AVE PAKE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT.

THIS IS NOT WHERE I'M SUPPOSED TO BE STARTING.

I CAN'T GET BACK UP. THERE WE ARE.

THIS FIRST ITEM IS THE IGA WITH THE CITY OF COTTONWOOD, BUT I THOUGHT VERY QUICKLY WE COULD START WITH AN OVERALL, SINCE NOT ALL OF THE IGAS ARE COMING AS ACTION ITEMS. I THOUGHT WE COULD DO A QUICK OVERVIEW OF ALL OF THE IGAS.

AS YOU KNOW, WE COLLECT TAXES FROM EACH OF THE COMMUNITIES, AND THEN WE GIVE MOST OF THEM BACK A PORTION OF WHAT WE COLLECT FROM THEM.

SO THE FIRST COLUMN IS THE AMOUNT THAT WE GIVE BACK AS PART OF THE LEVY FROM THIS YEAR.

THE SECOND IS WHAT WE'RE GIVING BACK THIS YEAR BECAUSE THEY DON'T SPEND ALL OF THE MONEY EVERY YEAR, AND SO WE KIND OF CARRY THAT OVER FOR THEM AND SO CHINO VALLEY HAS THE LITTLE STAR BECAUSE THEY ARE SAVING UP FOR A BIG PROJECT.

THAT KIND OF GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT EVERYBODY IS GETTING THIS YEAR.

THIS PARTICULAR ITEM IS FOR COTTONWOOD.

THIS IS JUST A QUICK MAP.

THEY DID A STUDY LIKE WE DO FOR A LITTLE AREA, DRAINAGE MASTER STUDY.

THEY IDENTIFIED PROBLEM AREAS, AND THEN A BUNCH OF PROJECTS.

>> LYNN, DO YOU WANT QUESTIONS DURING OR AFTER?

>> IT'S YOUR PREFERENCE, HOWEVER YOU WOULD LIKE.

>> I WAS JUST WONDERING ON THAT FIRST SLIDE YOU HAD.

ARE YOU SAYING WHEN THE COMMUNITIES PUT IN THIS MONEY, IF THEY DON'T SPEND IT ALL AT BANKS FOR THEIR COMMUNITY, OR DOES IT GO FLOOD DISTRICT WIDE?

>> IT BANKS FOR THEIR COMMUNITY.

>> ABSOLUTELY. THE CITY IDENTIFIED 12 PROJECTS THAT THEY PRIORITIZED.

THEY HAVE COMPLETED FOUR OF THOSE PROJECTS, AND SO BECAUSE YOU GUYS ASKED THE QUESTION, I ASKED THEM, WE ARE NOT INVOLVED IN THEIR PROJECTS.

THEY HAVE TO BE DRAINAGE PROJECTS, BUT I ASKED THEM WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING WITH THE MONEY THIS YEAR.

THOSE REMAINING EIGHT PROJECTS REMAIN ON THEIR LIST.

THEY ALSO HAVE SOME COVERTS ACROSS THE CITY THAT NEED TO BE CLEANED OUT, SO THEY ASKED IF THEY COULD BUY A VAC TRAILER, THEY'RE GOING TO BE BUYING THAT.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE CLEANING OUT THOSE COVERTS, BUT THEN THE SIXTH STREET PROJECT FROM THAT STUDY IS ALSO THE HIGH PRIORITY FOR THIS YEAR.

THAT IS WHAT THIS ITEM IS ABOUT FOR THE IGA PROGRAM.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY OF COTTONWOOD? THAT'S IT. THAT'S THIS ONE. I'M JUST STILL STANDING HERE 'CAUSE I'M ALSO THE NEXT ITEM.

>> IT'S OKAY. NO WORRIES.

I DO SEE THIS AS IN SUPERVISOR CHECKS. DISTRICT.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I'M VERY EXCITED TO SEE COTTONWOOD COME UP WITH SOME MEANINGFUL PROJECTS.

I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT DRAINAGE, AND THIS IS REALLY NICE TO SEE THIS COME THROUGH, SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

I CAN MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ACTION ITEM NUMBER 2.

>> A SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

CLERK, WILL YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> VICE CHAIR COMPTON.

>> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

>> ACTION ITEM NUMBER 2 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

[00:30:02]

>> WONDERFUL. ALL RIGHT, LYNN. ITEM NUMBER 3.

[3. Flood Control District - The Board of Supervisors will resolve into the Board of Directors of the Yavapai County Flood Control District and following consideration of this item, will reconvene as the Board of Supervisors - Approve Fiscal Year 2025-2026 funding in the amount of $520,400.00, for a new Community Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the City of Sedona for new Drainage Improvement projects. YC Contract No. 2025-450 (District 3 - Director Check) ]

>> ITEM NUMBER 3. THIS IS THE SAME IGA PROGRAM THIS TIME WITH THE CITY OF SEDONA.

THEY HAVE THREE PROJECTS.

THE FIRST IS WITH IN THE EL CAMINO GRAND AREA.

THEY'RE DOING AN INVESTIGATION TO SEE IF THEY CAN DO DRAINAGE, I'M JUST GOING TO READ IT.

STAFF IS INVESTIGATING THE DRAINAGE TO SEE IF DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS CAN BE MADE TO ENABLE SHARED USE PATHWAY CONSTRUCTION IN THE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT ALIGNMENT, WHICH IS A SEGMENT IDENTIFIED IN THE GO SEDONA PATHWAY PLAN.

FOR THIS YEAR, THEY'RE DOING DESIGN, SO THIS IS THE FIRST ONE.

THEN THE NEXT TWO, THAT TOP ONE, THEY'RE GOING TO COMPLETE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION FOR IMPROVING THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM ON KACHINA DRIVE TO REDUCE OVERTOPPING OF THE SYSTEM.

YOU CAN SEE THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF SEDIMENT IN THAT INTERSECTION RIGHT THERE.

THEN THE BOTTOM ONE, YOU CAN SEE ALL OF THAT PONDING.

THEY'RE COMPLETING THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF GENERAL DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS.

THAT PROJECT IS STARTED AT THE INTERSECTION OF RODEO ROAD AND SANBORN DRIVE.

THEY ARE REALLY GOOD ABOUT GETTING THEIR DRAINAGE PROJECTS COMPLETED EVERY YEAR.

THAT'S 520 $400.

I BELIEVE AND THEY'VE CARRIED MONEY OVER FROM LAST YEAR.

THEY'RE NORMALLY $300,000.

>> FANTASTIC. THIS IS ALSO IN SUPERVISOR CHECK'S DISTRICT.

SO YOUR DISTRICT'S BUSY RIGHT NOW.

>> IT IS. UNLESS THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE BOARD, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ACTION ITEM NUMBER 3.

>>I'LL SECOND DOWN.

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

YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE.

>> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

>> ACTION ITEM NUMBER 3 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> MADAM CHAIR, CAN I ASK ANOTHER QUESTION OF LYNN?

>> SURE. I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T KNOW.

>> NO, I JUST AFTER THIS.

SO JUST GETTING MY IF THEY SPEND PAST WHAT THEY HAVE BANKED, IS THERE A WAY FOR THEM TO GET MONEY FOR A PROJECT THAT'S STILL NEEDED?

>> FOR EXAMPLE, THIS YEAR, JEROME HAD A BIGGER PROJECT THAN THEY HAD MONEY FOR.

SO THEY BORROWED FROM MONEY FROM NEXT YEAR, AND IT'S JUST BECAUSE WE HAD THE CAPACITY FOR THEM TO DO THAT.

THEY CAN DO THAT, BUT THEY JUST ASKED AHEAD OF TIME.

OTHERWISE, THEY NEED TO SPEND THEIR OWN MONEY FOR THAT.

>> ABSOLUTELY. OTHERWISE, THE COMMUNITIES, AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

>> WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, LYNN.

ITEM NUMBER 4.

[4. Public Works - Discussion and direction of accepting maintenance of a future US 93 frontage road near the Vista Royale subdivision. (District 1 - Supervisor Compton) STAFF DIRECTED TO PURSUE AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION]

PUBLIC WORKS. GOOD MORNING, ROGER.

>> GOOD MORNING. GET MY PRESENTATION UP HERE.

>> THIS IS IN SUPERVISOR OR VICE CHAIR COMPTON DISTRICT ONE.

>> IT IS. GOOD MORNING, ROGER MCCORMICK, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR.

I HAVE AN ACTION ITEM BEFORE YOU GUYS.

THAT PUBLIC WORKS IS SEEKING SOME DIRECTION ON HOW YOU WOULD WANT US TO GO.

THIS IS IN SUPERVISOR DISTRICT ONE, VICE CHAIR COMPTON'S DISTRICT.

THE DISCUSSION TODAY IS WE'RE SEEKING DIRECTION ON ACCEPTING MAINTENANCE OF A FUTURE US ROUTE 93 FRONTAGE ROAD NEAR THE VISTA ROYAL SUBDIVISION.

I'D LIKE TO START OUT HERE WITH A LITTLE MAP.

THIS LOCATION RIGHT HERE WHERE THE ORANGE DOT IS IS WHERE THE STATE HAS BEEN GIVEN SOME OPPORTUNITY THROUGH RECEIVING A GRANT THROUGH THE IFR PROGRAM TO DO SOME SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS TO US 93.

THIS IS A HISTORIC ROUTE THAT HISTORICALLY HAS HAD PROBLEMS WITH HIGH SPEED CRASHES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, AND SO THIS SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WILL LOOK AT TRYING TO CONTROL THE ACCESS TO THE US 93 ROUTE BY PROVIDING A FRONTAGE ROAD.

IF I CAN KEEP MY HAND STEADY ENOUGH HERE.

SO THERE WILL BE A FRONTAGE ROAD THAT GOES ALONG THE ROADWAY RIGHT HERE.

ONCE YOU GET TO THE END OF THE BROWN AREA RIGHT HERE, THAT'S WHERE THE FRONTAGE ROAD WOULD STOP, AND THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF HOMES, AND LET ME GET INTO ANOTHER SLIDE HERE.

I'VE ALREADY GONE OVER THE REQUEST, SO THAT WE MAINTAIN THIS FRONTAGE ROAD GOING FORWARD, BUT THIS IS A GOOD IMAGE HERE FOR EVERYBODY TO SEE.

THIS IS THE ORANGE DOT THAT I WAS POINTING OUT EARLIER, THAT'S THIS ROUNDABOUT HERE.

NINE IRON RANCH ROAD IS AN EXISTING ROAD THAT THE COUNTY DOES NOT MAINTAIN, BUT ACCESSES ONTO US 93 RIGHT NOW.

ALL OF THESE HOMES THAT ARE ALONG THE HIGHWAY RIGHT HERE.

I'M HITTING EACH ONE OF THEM WITH THE DOT AS I GO DOWN.

ALL OF THOSE HOMES HAVE DRIVEWAYS THAT DIRECTLY ACCESS ONTO THE HIGHWAY,

[00:35:02]

AND SO YOU HAVE HIGH SPEED VEHICLES GOING THROUGH HERE, YOU HAVE PEOPLE GOING IN AND OUT OF THEIR DRIVEWAYS.

IT'S NOT A SAFE CONDITION.

THE STATE, THROUGH THIS GRANT THAT THEY RECEIVED IS GOING TO PLACE A ROUNDABOUT HERE AT THIS END, AND THEN INSTALL A FRINGE ROW THAT GOES ALONG PARALLELS US 93.

>> ALLOWS THESE PEOPLE TO SAFELY GET IN AND OUT OF THEIR HOUSES IN A WAY THAT'S A CONTROLLED ACCESS TO THE HIGHWAY.

THE BLUE AREA THAT YOU SEE RIGHT HERE WOULD BE A RIGHT OF WAY THAT WOULD BE GRANTED TO YAVAPAI COUNTY.

THE STATE IS GOING THROUGH THE EFFORT TO SECURE ALL OF THAT RIGHT OF WAY AND TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF NEGOTIATING WITH THE LAND OWNERS, THE HOMEOWNERS THERE, WHEN THE PROJECTS ALL SET AND DONE THAT RIGHT AWAY WOULD BE TURNED OVER TO YAVAPAI COUNTY.

LET ME GET TO THE NEXT SLIDE HERE SO SOME OF THE HIGH POINTS.

AS I SAID, THERE'S 11 PROPERTIES THAT DIRECTLY ACCESS US 93.

THIS WOULD MOVE THEIR ACCESS ONTO THE CONSTRUCTED NEW FRONTAGE ROAD.

YOU HAVE A YAVAPAI COUNTY IS BEING ASKED TO MAINTAIN APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE.

IT'S RIGHT UP AT THE VERGE OF HITTING ONE MILE, NOT QUITE, BUT IT'S 0.08 MILES ON THE NINE IRONS RANCH ROAD, AND THEN 0.91 OF THE NEW FRONTAGE THAT WOULD PARALLEL US 93.

THE FRONTAGE ROAD CONSTRUCTION DESIGN CRITERIA DOES MEET WHAT THE COUNTY REQUIRES FOR MINIMUM COUNTY STANDARD IN ORDER FOR US TO TAKE A ROAD OVER FOR MAINTENANCE.

THE CONSTRUCTION INCLUDES THE APPLICATION OF A SURFACE TREATMENT ON TOP OF THE NEW ASPHALT SO ADOT WOULD PUT A CHIP SEAL ON TOP OF THE NEW PAVEMENT AS THE FIRST PRESERVATION MAINTENANCE TYPE ACTIVITY THAT WOULD HAPPEN RIGHT AWAY AS PART OF THE PROJECT SO THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY REALLY MAINTENANCE NEEDS THAT WOULD COME IN FROM THE GET GO.

IT WOULD PROBABLY GIVE US ABOUT SEVEN YEARS BEFORE THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO DO ANYTHING TO THIS ROADWAY.

BEING THAT THE VISTOR ROYAL SUBDIVISION IS IN THERE, WE WOULD SCHEDULE THAT MAINTENANCE TO HAPPEN AROUND THE SAME TIME SO THAT WE ARE IN THE AREA WITH A CONTRACTOR.

CURRENTLY ACROSS THE ROAD, YAVAPAI COUNTY, IF I GO BACK TO THIS SLIDE HERE, THIS IS THE VISTOR ROYAL SUBDIVISION ON THIS SIDE SO WITHIN THIS SUBDIVISION HERE, WE HAVE 11 ROADS, TOTALING ABOUT 5.5 MILES IN LENGTH.

LASTLY, I KNOW THAT ADOT IS IN THE ROOM TODAY HERE.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO THEM.

ANTHONY BROZICH, THE DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR IS HERE.

SO IF THERE'S ANY PARTICULAR QUESTIONS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO ASK OF THEM, HE'S HERE TO DO THAT.

BUT I KNOW THAT THEY DO VALUE LOCAL PARTNERSHIPS, AND THIS IS A WAY IN WHICH THE COUNTY CAN SHOW THAT WE'RE AT THE TABLE AND WHEN WE GO TO ASK ADOT FOR SOME PROJECTS AND THINGS IN THE FUTURE, THEY CAN LOOK BACK AND SEE THAT THE COUNTY WAS VERY MUCH A PARTNER IN A PROJECT LIKE THIS.

THE LAST REQUEST IS IS THAT YOU GUYS WOULD JUST GIVE US APPROVAL IF YOU SEE FIT TO DO SO FOR THE COUNTY TO TAKE THIS MAINTENANCE ON.

WE WOULD MOVE FORWARD AS THE NEXT STEPS TO OBTAIN AN IGA FROM THE STATE.

WE WOULD THEN TAKE THAT IGA BACK TO THE BOARD FOR APPROVAL, AND COUNTY WOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH HELPING WITH THIS PROJECT.

>> CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION WHEN YOU HAVE.

IF YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT THAT SHOWS THE HOMES.

ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY HOW ARE THOSE HOMES ACCESSING 93 ON THE OTHER SIDE?

>> RIGHT NOW THEY'RE COMING IN OFF OF THIS ROAD HERE.

I THINK IT'S CALLED CAVALERO DRIVE IS KIND OF THE MAIN AXIS THAT GOES INTO VISTOR ROYAL SUBDIVISION.

>> IZ AND DC ON THAT?

>> I'M NOT SURE IF THERE IS.

>> YOU'LL NEED TO COME UP FRONT AND STATE YOUR NAME.

>> BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT JENKINS IS GETTING AT THERE WE'RE SOLVING THIS PROBLEM. WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER SIDE?

>> GOOD MORNING?

>> GOOD MORNING, ANTHONY ABROSA, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I APOLOGIZE.

I CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO THAT.

WE DO LIKE TO PUT THOSE IN TO MINIMIZE SIDE FRICTION,

[00:40:03]

WE CALL IT, TRYING TO GET TRAFFIC IN AND OUT OF SIDE STREETS.

BUT I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK THAT UP AND FOLLOW UP WITH YOU.

>> IT SEEMS LIKE ADOT HAS THIS PLAN TOGETHER ALREADY.

>> MADAM CHAIR?

>> YES. GO AHEAD.

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE COUNTY CHOOSES NOT TO TAKE OVER MAINTENANCE?

>> WELL, THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT WE TAKE IT.

THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT A FUTURE KING OR WICKENBERG, A COULD POSSIBLY TAKE IT.

BUT I DO BELIEVE THE STATUTE ALLOWS US TO GIVE IT TO YOU ANYWAYS SO THERE'S OPTIONS.

WE'RE TRYING TO GET EVERYTHING TOGETHER.

WE'VE WORKED HAND IN HAND WITH THE COUNTY TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY NEED FOR THIS TERM BACK, WHAT MAKES IT MOST ADVANTAGEOUS FOR YOU GUYS TO HAVE THE STATE HAS A PROBLEM MANAGING FINANCE ROADS WHEN IT COMES TO FUNDING SOURCE AND MAINTENANCE OF THEM.

IT'S NOT CATEGORIZED IN A NEED OF A HIGHWAY OR STATE HIGHWAY OR FEDERAL HIGHWAY.

THE FUNDING BECOMES LIMITED ON WHAT'S ACTUALLY AVAILABLE FOR IT.

WE'RE NOT REALLY SET UP TO DO THIS AS WELL.

>> AND DO WE KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY RESIDENTS THIS PROJECT WOULD SERVE?

>> WELL, DIRECTLY OFF OF THE STATE HIGHWAY, THERE'S 11 PROPERTIES THAT WOULD NOW ACCESS THAT FRONTAGE ROAD.

>> I JUST ASKED THOSE QUESTIONS BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW MORE, BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THAT ADOT'S BUDGET IN GENERAL IS CONSTRAINED AND EVEN FUNDING MAINTENANCE OF THE HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS IS VERY DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE.

I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR THESE RESIDENTS TO HAVE IT B AND COUNTY MAINTENANCE BECAUSE THERE'S A MUCH BETTER CHANCE OF IT ACTUALLY GETTING MAINTAINED INTO THE FUTURE.

>> THE COUNTY CAN DEDICATE MAINTENANCE DOLLARS TO THAT AS PART OF OUR MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.

SUPERVISOR CHECK IS A GOOD QUESTION, TOO AND JUST TO FURTHER ON THAT.

THIS NINE IRONS RANCH ROAD THAT GOES OUT THIS WAY DOES GO OUT TO QUITE A FEW HOMES.

I DON'T HAVE A NUMBER AS TO WHAT IT IS, BUT IT'S FAR MORE THAN 11.

THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE OUT THIS NINE RON RANCH ROAD THAT WOULD ACCESS THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED ROUNDABOUT, NOT NECESSARILY THE FRONTAGE ROAD, BUT THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THE NEW ACCESS AT THE ROUNDABOUT.

>> I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT, I AM VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PROJECT AND FOR BEING A PARTNER WITH ADOT.

THERE'S BEEN MANY ROADS OVER THESE PAST 25 YEARS THAT I HAVE SEEN WHERE ADOT HAS STEPPED IN AND THE COUNTY, ALONG WITH SOME OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.

WE'VE ALL WORKED TOGETHER AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE ABLE TO GET A LOT OF ROADS COMPLETED AS YOU SEE.

IT IS A PARTNERSHIP, AND I DO UNDERSTAND ADOT HAS A LOT OF FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS RIGHT NOW.

I'M HOPING AT THE STATE LEVEL THAT AS A STATE, WE WILL ADVOCATE FOR YOU AND HOPEFULLY THAT WE WILL HAVE MORE FINANCIAL FUNDING.

BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S MY POSITION.

I DO WANT TO REACH OUT TO THE VICE CHAIR THIS IS HIS DISTRICT.

>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REMIND MY FELLOW SUPERVISORS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT THIS IS KNOWN AS THE HIGHWAY OF DEATH AND THAT IT ISN'T JUST THE AMOUNT OF HOMES THAT ARE THERE.

IT'S THE PEOPLE TRAVELING ON THAT ROAD AND ALL I HEAR ALL THE TIME IS ABOUT SAFETY ON THAT ROAD AND PEOPLE DIE.

THAT I THANK ADO FOR COMING FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT FOR THE SAFETY OF MY RESIDENTS IN THAT DISTRICT, THE DISTRICT I REPRESENT.

IT'S HIGHLY IMPORTANT.

I APPRECIATE THE PARTNERSHIP AND ANYTHING TO CONTROL TO HELP WITH SAFETY OUT THERE IS JUST EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

I JUST SAY, OF COURSE, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF IT, AND I'VE HAD EXTENSIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH ROGER, AND WE GET A FREE ROAD FOR SEVEN YEARS THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO MAINTAIN.

IT'S JUST SAFETY OF RESIDENTS, PRIMARY CONCERN, AND I APPRECIATE THE COOPERATION FROM ADO.

>> ADOT DOES SO MUCH WITH SO LITTLE.

YOU GUYS ARE GETTING A LOT OF STUFF DONE.

IF THERE'S ANY MONEY LEFT OVER FROM THIS PROJECT, IT WOULD SURE DO GOOD FUNDING THE LIGHTS AT BIG CHINO AND HIGHWAY 89, BUT THAT'S A WHOLE SEPARATE ISSUE.

>> HOLD ON NOW. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I WILL JUST CHAIR.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> ACTION ITEM NUMBER 4.

>> I'LL SECOND. OH, SORRY.

>> GO AHEAD. I SAW YOU.

>> WE GOT A DOUBLE SECOND THERE.

GO AHEAD. CLERK OF THE BOARD.

>> YES. VICE CHAIR COMPTON?

>> YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS?

>> ACTION ITEM NUMBER 4 HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR DIRECTION WITH PUBLIC WORKS TO PROCEED WITH AN IGA WITH ADOT.

>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.

>> THANKS FOR YOUR TIME.

>> FANTASTIC. 9:45, AND WE'RE ON TO HEARINGS. I'M LOVING IT.

[1. Development Services - Approve a text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Section 201 (Applicability and Exemptions) and Section 505 (Agricultural Use Exemptions). Applicant: Development Services Staff. Application No. PLA25-000092.]

[00:45:03]

GOOD MORNING. HEARING ITEM NUMBER 1, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

OH, MY FATE. APPROVE A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

>> GOOD MORNING.

>> THERE WE GO. GOOD MORNING. YES, IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME SINCE WE'VE MOVED THIS QUICKLY.

GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS BJ RATLIFF, ONE OF THE PLANNERS WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY.

AND THIS MORNING, I WILL BE PRESENTING THE TEXT AMENDMENT FOR SECTIONS 201 AND 505.

THESE TWO TEXT AMENDMENTS WERE APPROVED OR RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL UNANIMOUSLY BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON NOVEMBER 20TH.

COMMISSIONER ROCIO IS ALSO HERE, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT.

IN BRIEF, AGRICULTURE IS A PROTECTED USE BY ARS, BUT THERE ARE TWO PIECES TO THAT PROTECTION, AND THIS OFTENTIMES GET CONFUSED.

SO WE HAVE BOTH US AND THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE HERE TO BE ABLE TO CLARIFY ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.

AGRICULTURAL STATUS, WHICH IS THE TERM YOU OFTEN HEAR, THAT IS THE TAX CLASSIFICATION PIECE.

THAT'S THE ASSESSORS PIECE.

WHAT WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT TODAY WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING ORDINANCE IS THE AGRICULTURAL USE EXEMPTION, WHICH IS AN EXEMPTION FROM PLANNING AND ZONING ORDINANCES.

VERY BRIEFLY, AGAIN, THIS IS WE'VE GOT TWO DIFFERENT SECTIONS.

AGRICULTURAL STATUS IS THEIR AUTHORITY COMES FROM TITLE 42.

THAT'S THE ASSESSORS SIDE OF THE HOUSE, AND THAT'S ALL ABOUT THE TAX CLASSIFICATION.

OUR PIECE THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH TODAY IS AGRICULTURAL USE EXEMPTION.

OUR AUTHORITY FOR THAT COMES OUT OF TITLE 11, AND WE PUT THE CHINESE WALL THERE BECAUSE THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SEPARATE AND UNIQUE AND COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT OF EACH OTHER.

HOWEVER, THEY ARE NOT RIGHT NOW.

AND THAT'S THE IMPETUS FOR US COMING TODAY.

ACCORDING TO OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE IS THAT TODAY, AN APPLICANT COMES FORWARD AND WE SAY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR APPLICATION FOR AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION, BUT DO YOU HAVE AGRICULTURAL STATUS THROUGH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE? AND THAT'S A CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW.

WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE TRYING TO REMOVE THAT CONFLICT AND SEPARATE THEM.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO TODAY.

WE'RE REMOVING WHAT IS REQUIRED AND ARE REQUIRING THEM TO GO TO THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE FIRST TO GET TAX STATUS SO THAT WE CAN AND SO NOW THEY CAN COME TO US, COME TO THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, THEY COULD COME IN TANDEM.

IT'S THEIR CHOICE. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY AND AS WE'RE DIGGING INTO THE ORDINANCE, WE'RE GOING TO DO SOME CLARITY AND GRAMMAR AND ALL THAT STUFF.

BUT BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THAT, THE ASSESSOR IS HERE TODAY AND HE CAN SPEAK TO AND AGAIN SHARE HIS SIDE OF THE HOUSE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THIS OFTEN GETS CONFUSED. SIR?

>> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.

CHAIR MALLORY, VICE CHAIR COMPTON. BOARD MEMBERS?

>> GOOD MORNING.

>> JUDGE SIMMONS, ASSESSOR.

WITH ME IS TAYLOR ROSSI.

SHE'S MY AG SUPERVISOR AND LAND SUPERVISOR.

I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME IN AND SPEAK ON THIS.

I KNOW THIS HAS KIND OF COME UP IN LOT OF CONVERSATIONS RECENTLY, AND THANKS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FOR ALLOWING US TO SLIP INTO THIS PRESENTATION AND APPROVAL.

I APOLOGIZE. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I MISSED THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING, SO I DIDN'T KNOW HOW IT ALL WENT THROUGH.

WE'RE GOING TO REPEAT SOME STUFF, SO I APOLOGIZE.

I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE AG STATUS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION, AND THEN I'M GOING TO PASS IT OFF TO TAYLOR TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF OUR AGRICULTURAL, DIFFERENT VALUATIONS.

AGAIN, THE AG CLASSIFICATION OR AG STATUS THROUGH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE IS A TAXATION CLASSIFICATION, AND IT'S ALL IN TITLE 42, AND IT IS BASICALLY REFERRING TO THE LAND VALUE OF THOSE PROPERTIES.

IMPROVEMENTS ARE VALUED SEPARATELY, BUT IT'S ALL BASED ON LAND VALUE AND AGAIN, FOR THE AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION WITH FELDMAN SERVICES.

THAT IS ALL IN TITLE 11, AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH ZONING REQUIREMENTS, PERMITTING, THOSE THINGS.

WHICH THEY WILL GO INTO, BUT WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH SOME ASSESSOR STUFF AND HOPEFULLY ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP IN RECENT TIMES.

I'M GOING TO SKIP AND THEN GO BACK.

AGRICULTURAL REAL PROPERTY, AND THIS IS ALL UNDER STATUTE, MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS.

AGRICULTURAL REAL PROPERTY IS THE PRIMARY USE OF THAT PROPERTY.

[00:50:03]

THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN IN ACTIVE PRODUCTION FOR AT LEAST THREE OF THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

THERE'S A REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PROFIT, AND IF NON CONTIGUOUS, ALL PROCS MUST BE MANAGED AND OPERATED ON A UNITARY BASIS.

THOSE ARE THE FOUR MAIN CRITERIA IN A NUTSHELL FOR AGRICULTURAL QUALIFICATION.

SOME OF THE PROPERTIES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, CROP LAND OF AT LEAST 20 ACRES, PERMANENT CROPS OF AT LEAST 10 ACRES, GRAZING LAND WITH A CARRYING CAPACITY OF AT LEAST 40 ANIMAL UNITS, LAND IMPROVEMENTS DEVOTED TO COMMERCIAL EQUINE, HIGH DENSITY USE FOR COMMERCIAL COMMODITIES, LANDED IMPROVEMENTS DEVOTED TO PROCESSING COTTON, WINE GRAPES, OR CITRUS, PACKING FRUIT, VEGETABLES, DAIRY COOPS, AND LAND OF AT LEAST FIVE ACRES, DEVOTED TO ALGAE.

AND THEN WE'VE GOT THIS NEW ONE AT LANDED IMPROVEMENTS DEVOTED TO AGRI TOURISM.

THESE ARE ALL STATUTORY REAL PROPERTY DEFINITIONS FOR AGRICULTURAL USE.

WE'LL DIVE INTO SOME OF THE FOUR MAIN ONES FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY, WHICH I'LL PASS ON TO TAYLOR AND THEN I'LL JUMP BACK IN, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND SO FORTH.

>> HELLO, EVERYBODY. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND READ THROUGH THE SLIDES.

IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AS I'M GOING THROUGH, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO INTERRUPT ME AT ANY TIME.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF INFORMATION.

AGAIN, INTERRUPT ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

I'M JUST GOING TO TOUCH ON ONE THING THAT JUD HAD MENTIONED IN THIS SLIDE.

THE PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN IN ACTIVE PRODUCTION OR FOR AT LEAST THREE OF THE LAST FIVE YEARS, A LOT OF TIMES WHEN PEOPLE COME TO THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE FOR THE TAX CLASSIFICATION FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES, THEY'RE JUST STARTING OFF.

THEY WANT THE AGRICULTURAL CLASSIFICATION BECAUSE THEY NEED THAT TO GET THE AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES NOW, BUT SOMETIMES THEY DON'T MEET OUR CRITERIA WITH OUR STATUTE BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT STARTED YET.

THEY WANT THE BENEFIT OF THE EXEMPTION TO NOT PAY THE PERMIT FEES TO GET THEIR OPERATION OFF THE GROUND AND RUNNING.

SOMETIMES WE HIT A WALL WITH THE CONSTITUENTS, AND THERE'S SOME FRUSTRATION ON THEIR END BECAUSE THEY DON'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, WHICH THEN DOESN'T ALLOW THEM TO REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

I JUST WANTED TO TOUCH ON THAT.

>> SO, MAY I ASK THAT.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> DOING THIS, THEN SEPARATING THESE OUT WOULD HELP THE CITIZEN OR ORGANIZATION TO MOVE FORWARD? THERE WOULD LESSEN THE FRUSTRATION?

>> IN MY OPINION, I AGREE.

SOMETIMES BECAUSE THE AGRICULTURAL CLASSIFICATION IS PRIMARILY FOR THE LAND VALUE, NOT THE IMPROVEMENTS.

>> SOMETIMES FOR THEM TO BECOME AGRICULTURE CLASSIFIED FOR THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE.

IT'S NOT ALWAYS A BENEFIT TO THEM FOR PLACES LIKE SLIGMAN, OR ASH FORK OR CONGRESS, WHERE THE LAND VALUE IS REALLY LOW ALREADY.

>> THE MAJOR AGRICULTURAL REAL PROPERTY TYPES, WE HAVE CROP LAND, PERMANENT CROPS, GRAZING LAND, AND HIGH DENSITY PRODUCTION.

WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THOSE ONE BY ONE.

>> JUST REAL QUICK.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> WHEN WE TALK ABOUT IMPROVEMENTS I THOUGHT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND, THEY DIDN'T NEED TO GET PERMITS TO BUILD, AND THEY DIDN'T GET TAXED ON THE STRUCTURES, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> DO YOU WANT ME TO ANSWER THIS? GO AHEAD.

>> THAT IS WHY WE'RE HERE IS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT PART OF IT.

THEY WILL GO OVER THAT. AS FAR AS THE TAX, IT'S ALL TAXED.

IT JUST FALLS INTO A DIFFERENT CATEGORY, AND I CAN JUMP IN.

>> IN THE STRUCTURE?

>> YES. CORRECT.

>> WE HAVE CROP LAND, WHICH REFERS TO LAND PRIMARILY USED FOR GROWING CROPS PLANTED AND HARVESTED ON A SCHEDULED ROTATION.

CROP LAND MUST CONSIST OF AT LEAST 20 GROSS ACRES.

IN THE VERDE VALLEY, WE HAVE A LOT OF THAT WITH THE PECANS.

THOSE TEND TO BE LESS THAN 20 ACRES INDIVIDUALLY, BUT THE WHOLE UNIT AS FAR AS THE PECAN GROWERS HAS 20 ACRES COLLECTIVELY.

>> WOULDN'T THAT BE A PERMANENT CROP?

>> YOU'RE RIGHT. I JUMPED AHEAD.

YES. THAT'S 10.

TEN IS PERMANENT CROP. THANK YOU.

ON TO PERMANENT CROPS, SUCH AS FRUIT TREES, CITRUS TREES, NUT TREES, GRAPE VINES, DATE PALMS, OLIVE TREES, JOJOBA SHRUBS, CHRISTMAS TREES.

WE DON'T HAVE ALL THOSE, BUT THOSE ARE SOME EXAMPLES THAT HAS TO BE AT LEAST 10 GROSS ACRES.

[00:55:04]

THAT IS THE PECAN TREES, VINEYARDS, THINGS LIKE THAT, AND THE VERDE VALLEY THAT WE RUN INTO A LOT.

GRAZING LAND HAS TWO MAIN TYPES, BASED ON MANAGEMENT.

WE HAVE RANGE LAND, WHICH IS THE NATURAL GRAZING LAND AND PASTURE LAND, WHICH IS GENERALLY IRRIGATED.

BOTH TYPES ARE PART OF PRACTICE KNOWN AS RANCHING FOR GRAZING LAND TO BE AN AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY.

IT MUST SUPPORT AT LEAST 40 ANIMAL UNITS.

IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, GENERALLY THAT TRANSITIONS INTO AROUND 3,600 ACRES FOR 40 ANIMAL UNITS, JUST BECAUSE OUR CARRYING CAPACITY IS PRETTY LOW.

WE THEN HAVE HIGH DENSITY, WHICH IS A PRODUCTION OF COMMODITIES INVOLVING INTENSIVE CULTIVATION OF HIGH YIELD CROPS OR LIVESTOCK, REQUIRING SIGNIFICANT LABOR AND INVESTMENT AND OFTEN INCLUDES FACILITIES LIKE DAIRIES AND GREENHOUSES.

IN ARIZONA, THERE'S NO MINIMUM LAND SIZE REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCH PROPERTIES.

>> I THINK THIS IS YOU. MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT BECAUSE IN THE ORIGINAL LIST OF THE STATE STATUTES, GRAPE VINES FOR WINE PRODUCTION, COTTON, AND CITRUS WERE ON THE LINE OF THEIR OWN.

A NUMBER 6 THERE.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY'RE ON THEIR OWN, BUT THAT'S HOW IT WAS SPELLED OUT IN STATUTE.

>> I'VE HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THIS FOR A LONG TIME BECAUSE THE STATE LIQUOR DEPARTMENT HAS THE SERIES 13 DOMESTIC FARM WINERY LICENSE.

IT SAYS YOU NEED FIVE ACRES OF WINE GRAPES OR WINE MAKING FACILITY TO HAVE THEIR LICENSE.

BUT THE STATE AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT HAS THIS DIFFERENT.

>> TEN ACRES.

>> IT CREATES AN INCONSISTENCY, WHICH NEEDS TO BE FIXED AT THE STATE LEVEL.

BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN BRIEFLY HOW YOU'VE WORKED WITH THE SMALLER ACREAGE WINE GRAPES ON THIS MATTER?

>> WE HAVE APPROVED SOME VINEYARDS THAT ARE LESS THAN 10 ACRES.

IF THEY CAN SHOW THEIR CAPITAL INVESTMENT, THEIR EXPECTATION OF PROFIT, THOSE THINGS.

THEN AS FAR AS, DENSITY OF THE CROP OF THE VINES, IF YOU CAN SHOW THAT YOU CAN PRODUCE AS MUCH ON A SMALLER PIECE OF LAND, THEN YES, THOSE THINGS CAN GET APPROVED.

IT JUST DEPENDS ON THE TYPE, IT'S A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

USUALLY THEY FOLLOW UNDER THE 10 ACRES OR MORE.

BUT WE HAVE A FEW THAT ARE JUST UNDER 10.

BUT THERE IS DEFINITELY A DISCREPANCY IN LAW.

THOSE ARE DISCUSSIONS THAT NEED TO BE HELD AT THE STATE LEVEL, BUT YES, IT IS POSSIBLE.

THIS IS JUST A WRAP UP.

AGAIN, AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY DOES CREATE A TAX BENEFIT, DOESN'T CREATE A TAX EXEMPTION.

IT'S A TAX BENEFIT.

THESE ARE ALL SET IN STATUTE FROM MANY YEARS AGO.

OF COURSE, IT'S REFERRING TO THE LAND IN MANY CASES.

BUT IT IS UNIQUE FOR THE ASSESSORS AND TITLE 42, BECAUSE IT'S ONE OF THE RARE PROPERTIES THAT HAS ACTUAL STATUTORY VALUATION.

ORDINARILY, IT'S SALES OR COST OR INCOME, BUT THIS IS AN ACTUAL STATUTORY VALUE.

IT'S NET OPERATING INCOME CAPITALIZED USING CAP RATES PROVIDED BY THE STATE.

IT'S ALL BASED ON LEASES.

AGAIN, IT'S CALLED STATUTORY METHOD, AND TENDS TO PRODUCE VALUES BELOW MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND, OF COURSE.

IN THE LAST COMMENT THERE, QUALIFYING PROPERTIES ARE CLASSIFIED AS AGRICULTURAL RATHER THAN COMMERCIAL.

THERE'S A LOT OF MISUNDERSTANDING THERE AS WELL.

IRONICALLY, THE COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT RATIOS HAVE BEEN DROPPING IN 2027, THEY WILL BE THE SAME AS LAND.

15% ASSESSMENT RATIO FOR COMMERCIAL AND VACANT LAND OR AGRICULTURAL LAND WILL BE THE SAME ASSESSMENT RATIO.

AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO SQUEEZE INTO THIS PRESENTATION.

WE DON'T GET THIS OPPORTUNITY A LOT, AND I KNOW THERE'S ALL THESE QUESTIONS ON AGRICULTURAL STATUS WITH THE ASSESSORS, IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.

>> YOU GUYS GOT AGRICULTURAL AND COMMERCIAL,

[01:00:01]

BUT NOW WE PUT IN THE AGRITOURISM, WHICH FLOATS RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE.

>> AGRITOURISM, THAT'S NEW.

YOU STILL HAVE TO QUALIFY AS AN AGRICULTURAL OPERATION.

YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE ALL OF THE OTHER CRITERIA, THREE OUT OF THE LAST FIVE YEARS, EXPECTATION OF PROFIT, ALL OF THOSE THINGS BEFORE YOU CAN GET AN AGRITOURISM STATUS AS WELL.

AGRITOURISM, THINGS LIKE EDUCATION, MAZES.

GOOD EXAMPLE IS MORTIMER FARMS. THEY HAVE SOME DIFFERENT EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES OUT THERE, STUFF LIKE THAT.

>> WELL, YOU BROUGHT UP MORTIMER'S FARM.

I WILL SAY, GOING OUT THERE TO THIS ONE MEETING THAT SEVERAL OF US WERE AT, IT WAS VERY INTERESTING, TO BE HONEST, HOW CHOPPED UP EVERYTHING IS.

THAT IT'S VERY ROUGH.

I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE.

>> THEY GOT A LOT GOING ON.

>> YES, THEY DO.

>> THEY'VE GOT THE RESTAURANT, THE STORES, AND THE HAY RIDES OR WHATEVER THEY DO OUT THERE.

>> YOU'VE GOT THE COWS OVER HERE.

THAT'S A DIFFERENT TAXING AS TO WHERE WE'RE SELLING THE HAMBURGERS OVER HERE.

ANYWAY, IT WAS VERY INTERESTING TO ME, AND I HAD NEVER KNOWN IT TO BE LIKE THAT, THAT WAS EDUCATIONAL.

>> I JUST WANTED TO SAY FOR SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, WE DO CURRENT USE.

A LOT OF TIMES ON AGRICULTURAL, IF THEY HAVE COMMERCIAL ASPECTS ALSO, THEY'LL BE DIFFERENT ASSESSMENT RATIOS AND DIFFERENT LAND BREAKUPS BASED ON THE USE.

>> INSIDE THAT PARCEL?

>> INSIDE THE SAME PARCEL.

MORTIMER FARMS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE.

THEY HAVE COMMERCIAL, THEY HAVE AG, THEY HAVE MEANDER LAND.

THEY HAVE LOTS OF DIFFERENT LAND LINES AND THEY DO HAVE RESIDENTIAL, CORRECT.

THEY CAN HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT USES, BUT IT'S BASED OFF OF CURRENT USE, NOT FUTURE USE, NOT PAST USE, IT'S CURRENT USE.

>> WHAT REALLY MADE ME THINK ABOUT THAT WAS REALLY EVERY WINERY IS AN AG OPERATION, BUT THEY'RE ALSO A TOURISM OPERATION AS WELL.

>> CORRECT. IN THE SENSE THAT ONCE IT GOES INTO PROCESSING AND BOTTLING, IT GOES INTO COMMERCIALS.

PAGE SPRINGS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE WHERE THEY HAVE THEIR TASTING ROOMS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

THAT'S COMMERCIAL WHILE THE VINEYARDS ON THE OUTSIDE AND WHERE THEY STORE SOME STUFF COULD BE AG.

>> IT MAKES A LOT OF WORK FOR YOU GUYS, DOESN'T IT?

>> IT'S A LOT OF SEPARATING OUT.

>> WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

I APPRECIATE ALL THAT INFORMATION.

I MAY FOLLOW UP WITH YOU, JUD, ON A LATER DATE IN REGARDS TO WHAT THE STATE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO TO HELP OUT WITH THIS FIVE ACRES THAT SUPERVISOR CHECK HAD TALKED ABOUT.

WHAT COULD WE LOOK AT THAT AND HOW COULD WE MAYBE HELP TO CHANGE THAT IN SOME SORT IF WE TALK WITH OUR LEGISLATORS.

>> SOUNDS GOOD. BE HAPPY, TOO. THANK YOU.

>> THAT ACTUALLY TAKES US BACK THEN TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION.

GOING BACK TO YOUR QUESTION, CHAIRMAN, NOW, IN THE PAST, SOMEBODY WANTED TO GET STARTED ON AN OPERATION.

UNDER TODAY'S ORDINANCE, WE WOULD SAY, WONDERFUL.

GO TALK TO THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE.

WHEN YOU GET ESTABLISHED, THEN COME BACK AND ONCE YOU GET ESTABLISHED WITH THEM, THEN YOU CAN COME BACK AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE EXEMPTION.

WITH THIS NEW ORDINANCE AND BREAKING THAT TIE BETWEEN THE TWO AND SEVERING IT THAT THEY'RE NOW UNIQUE, SOMEBODY COMES FORWARD WITH A WINERY, FOR INSTANCE, AND THEY SAY, WE'RE STARTING A WINERY, AND WE'D LIKE TO GET EXEMPTED FOR OUR LARGE BARN FOR SOME OF OUR EQUIPMENT.

NOW THEY CAN ACTUALLY APPLY FOR IT EVEN BEFORE THEY ARE TRULY GETTING STARTED AS A START UP UNDER THIS NEW ORDINANCE.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL PROBABLY BE THE BIGGEST OPERATIONAL CHANGE THAT WE SEE IS START UPS CAN NOW COME FORWARD AND ASK FOR THIS AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION, WHICH IN THE PAST, UNDER THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DO SO.

PRACTICALLY WISE, THAT'S GOING TO BE THE BIGGEST THING THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE ON THIS.

>> WELL, THAT'S GREAT. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.

VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.

>> AGAIN, SO SECTION 201 IS THE AUTHORITY.

THERE'S NOT BIG CHANGES IN THAT ONE.

THAT'S THE AUTHORITY THAT COMES OUT OF STATE LAW.

IF YOU MEET THE BASIC STATUTORY AUTHORITY, YOU'RE GOING TO GET IT.

BUT THEN SECTION 505 IS, WHAT'S THAT PROCESS THAT YOU NEED TO WALK THROUGH FOR US TO BE ABLE TO GRANT THAT EXEMPTION FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING ORDINANCE? WE HAVE DONE THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION, AND WE'VE HAD NO COMMENTS AT ALL ONE WAY OR ANOTHER ON THIS.

THEN SO I HAVE ALL OF THE TEXT.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THE TEXTS, I'M HAPPY TO RUN THROUGH IT.

OTHERWISE, I'M HAPPY TO MOVE TO LETTING YOU GUYS MAKE A MOTION AND MOVE FORWARD.

[01:05:06]

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THOUGH.

>> SUPERVISOR.

>> YOU CAN APPLY AND GET THE STATUS BEFORE YOU BUILD? GO AHEAD.

>> GENERALLY SPEAKING, STATUS IS WHAT WE REFER TO ON THE TAX SIDE OF THE HOUSE.

AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION IS THE PLANNING AND ZONING.

YES, TODAY, THEY CAN COME IN WITH A PACKAGE AND SAY, I'VE GOT THIS 10 ACRES.

I'LL USE A WINERY AS AN EXAMPLE.

I WANT TO START A WINERY, BUT I WANT TO PUT A BARN ON IT.

TODAY, YOU CAN'T USE A VACANT PARCEL WITHOUT A PRIMARY USE ON IT.

MOST OF THE TIME, THIS IS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WE'D SAY, YOU DON'T HAVE A PRIMARY RESIDENCE.

WE'VE GOT A CONFLICT.

WITH THIS CHANGE THAT WE'RE MAKING NOW BY SEVERING IT.

THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO GET THE TAX CLASSIFICATION FIRST.

THEY CAN COME FORWARD AND SAY, WE'VE GOT 10 ACRES, WHICH MEETS THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS.

WE WANT TO START A WINERY, AND THEY CAN COME FORWARD WITH THAT, COME FORWARD WITH THEIR PLANS, AND SAY, WE WANT TO PUT A BARN ON HERE, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FIVE PLUS ACRES IN VINEYARDS, AND WE CAN NOW APPROVE THEM TO HAVE AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION FOR THE USE OF THE LAND.

>> GOING IN TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SIDE, OR ARE WE NOT TALKING ABOUT THAT?

>> THAT IS THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SIDE OF IT. THAT'S OUR SIDE OF IT.

>> THE BUILDING SIDE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE TO GET PERMITS, AND THEY DON'T GET INSPECTIONS.

>> CORRECT.

>> BUT NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ECOTOURISM WHERE THE PUBLIC WILL BE INVOLVED.

HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THAT STRUCTURE IS GOING TO BE SAFE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE INSPECTIONS, AND DOES THAT FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS?

>> THAT IS GOING TO BE A GRAY AREA RIGHT NOW.

BECAUSE COMMERCIAL, GENERALLY, WE SAY, NO, IF THE PUBLIC ARE GOING TO BE THERE, THAT MEANS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO A COMMERCIAL PERMIT.

AGRICULTURAL TOURISM RIGHT NOW IS A GRAY AREA, AND IT'S NOT FULLY ADDRESSED HOPEFULLY WITHIN THE NEXT RENDITION, WE'LL GET THAT CLEANED UP.

THE FIRST IMPETUS WAS TO SEVER THE TIE BETWEEN THE TAX STATUS AND OUR PLANNING AND ZONING EXEMPTION.

YOU'RE CORRECT. WE'VE STILL GOT A LITTLE BIT OF A GRAY AREA WE NEED TO WORK THROUGH, THAT'S THE COMMERCIAL PORTION OF AN AGRICULTURAL.

>> IS TO MAKE IT SAFE. IF THE FARMER IS OUT THERE, EVERY BARN YOU SEE IS ABOUT LIKE THAT ANYWAY.

BUT WHEN YOU GET THE PUBLIC INVOLVED, YOU DON'T WANT TO WIN TO COME AND CRUSH A BUNCH OF PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE A FOUNDATION OR THEY CHOSE TO BYPASS THIS BUILDING CODE.

>> YOU ARE CORRECT. RANCHER COMES IN TODAY OR SOMEBODY WANTING TO DO CROPS.

WAS TALKING TO SOMEBODY HERE JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO THAT WANTS TO BRING A MUSHROOM FARM IN, AND HE'S GOING TO HAVE SMALL LITTLE HOOP HOUSES.

HE CAN GET STARTED.

THEY CAN BRING IN THAT APPLICATION, AND WE CAN GRANT THEM AN EXEMPTION, AND THAT THEY CAN USE VACANT LAND, BECAUSE THAT WILL BE THEIR PRIMARY USE NOW AS AG.

THEY CAN USE THAT VACANT LAND.

MOST PROBABLY IT WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE 90 PLUS PERCENT OF THE COUNTY IS RESIDENTIAL.

THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO GET STARTED ON THAT, AND WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GRANT THEM THE EXEMPTION FOR THEIR COUPLE OF HOOP HOUSES OR WHATEVER THEY'RE GETTING STARTED WITH AND WE CAN GET THEM STARTED ON THAT PIECE OF IT.

>> MADAM CHAIR. I JUST THINK THIS IS HUGE, HONESTLY.

HAVING WORKED IN THE EMERGING WINE INDUSTRY FOR 13 YEARS, I PERSONALLY WITNESSED WHAT I WOULD CALL AN IMPOSSIBLE SITUATION FOR PEOPLE.

THEY HAVE ALREADY UNDERTAKEN A LOT IN TRYING TO ESTABLISH A NEW FORM OF AGRICULTURE I THINK TO SPEAK TO SUPERVISOR KUKNYO'S CONCERNS, I THINK THIS REALLY HELPS PEOPLE COME INTO COMPLIANCE FROM THE BEGINNING.

BECAUSE IT'S MUCH MORE APPROACHABLE, IT'S MUCH MORE UNDERSTANDABLE, AND IT DOESN'T CREATE THAT TIME DELAY OF THREE YEARS, WHICH JUST MAKES IT INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE FORWARD IN THE PROPER FASHION.

THIS, I THINK, REALLY STREAMLINE THINGS.

PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY FROM THE GET GO AND BE IN COMPLIANCE FROM THE BEGINNING.

>> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, TO SPEAK TO THE AGRICULTURAL TOURISM PORTION OF IT.

I CAN SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE PRACTICALLY.

ANYBODY DOING THAT RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE GETTING THE PERMITS.

THEY WANT THE AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION SO THAT THEY CAN USE THE LAND.

BUT THEY'RE ALSO GOING AHEAD AND APPLYING FOR THE BUILDING PERMITS PRIMARILY FOR INSURANCE PURPOSES, AND FUTURE.

AGAIN, WE CHAT WITH THEM AS LIKE, THIS IS GREAT, BUT YOU UNDERSTAND FIVE OR 10 YEARS FROM NOW, IF YOU SELL THIS PROPERTY, IT GOES AWAY, THEN WE HAVE SOME CONFLICTS, AND THERE COULD BE ISSUES.

MOST PEOPLE I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH, THEY'RE MAKING THE DECISION TO GET THEM PERMITTED ANYWAYS, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S COMMERCIAL.

>> SUPERVISOR JENKINS, I'M SO SORRY.

>> OH, THAT'S FINE. MY QUESTION, AGAIN, IT WAS ALONG SUPERVISOR KUKNYO'S AGRITOURISM.

[01:10:01]

IT'S A FAIRLY NEW INDUSTRY.

I KNOW WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE DEFINITION IS AND HOW TO APPLY IT.

MY CONCERN IS THE SAME AS SUPERVISOR CHECK IN THAT IF YOU COULD WORK ON DEFINING AGRITOURISM AND WITHIN YOUR AG CLASSIFICATION, AND WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE AS THEY BUILD BUILDINGS AND HAVE TOURISTS.

I KNOW IN THE VERDE VALLEY, THERE'S A LOT OF AGRITOURISM, AND I'M SEEING IT ELSEWHERE.

BUT IT'S STILL SUCH A GRAY AREA OF WHAT'S REQUIRED.

IT'S GREAT THAT PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AHEAD AND GETTING BUILDING PERMITS, EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T NEED TO.

BUT I'D JUST LIKE TO SEE MORE DEFINITION WITHIN YOUR DEPARTMENT, WHAT THAT MEANS IN THE FUTURE SO IT'S REALLY CLEAR.

>> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. YES.

>> I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY MORE COMMUNICATIONS.

AT THIS POINT, IT'S A HEARING ITEM.

STILL OPEN, AND DO WE HAVE ANY GREEN SHEETS, VICE CHAIR ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM?

>> GREEN SHEETS, CHAIR.

>> CLERK OF THE BOARD, COMMUNICATIONS FROM YOUR OFFICE?

>> PUBLIC COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED.

>> REACHING OUT TO THE AUDIENCE, ANYONE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS ITEM THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW? YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR THAT FROM ME FOR THE NEXT FEW TIMES, TOO.

I'M GOING TO ALWAYS ASK.

ANYWAY, MOVING FORWARD, SO I WOULD SAY THAT I WILL CLOSE A HEARING, AND I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE HEARING ITEM NUMBER 1.

>> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND. CAN YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE?

>> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO?

>> HEARING ITEM NUMBER 1 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> GREAT. THE NEXT ONE IS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ALSO,

[2. Development Services - Approve a text amendment to the Subdivision Regulations Section 402 (Sketch Plan), Section 413 (Acceptance of Preliminary Plat), and Section 451 (Final Plat Submittal) to add language addressing fire authority review of a proposed subdivision plat, scheduling of a Preliminary Plat to the Commission, grammatical corrections, and to add additional lettering and numbering to these Sections for formatting clarity, in the Yavapai County Subdivision Regulations. Applicant: Development Services Staff. Application No. PLA25-000073. ]

AND IT'S GOING TO BE APPROVE A TEXT AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. AM I ON THE RIGHT ONE?

>> OKAY. I SAW A LOOK ON YOUR FACE, AND I THOUGHT, DID I MAKE A MISTAKE?

>> NO. IT WAS JUST ME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MATT.

>> THERE WE GO. GOOD MORNING, MADAM CHAIR MALLORY, AND VICE CHAIR COMPTON AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

MY NAME IS MATT BLAKE, YOUR PLANNING MANAGER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

THIS REQUEST COMES TO YOU FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FOR CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CURRENT SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TO INCLUDE MORE SPECIFICS ON THE FIRE AUTHORITY'S ROLE IN REVIEWING PROPOSED SUBDIVISIONS AT VARIOUS STAGES OF THE APPLICATION PROCESS.

THIS IS ONE OF THE PRIORITY UPDATES THAT COUNTY LEADERSHIP IDENTIFIED AS NEEDING TO HAPPEN BEFORE THE FULL UPDATE TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TAKE PLACE.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT PERTAINS TO THREE MAIN PROCESSES OF ESTABLISHING A SUBDIVISION, INCLUDING SECTIONS 402, 413, AND 451.

TO SUM IT UP IN A NUTSHELL, THE IMPETUS IS THAT WE'VE HAD A LACK OF CLARITY IN THE PAST WHEN MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS HAVE COME FORWARD WITH RESPECT TO WHAT IS OUR PROCESS FOR SOLICITING A FIRE AUTHORITY'S REVIEW AND THEN ESSENTIALLY MAKING SENSE OF THEIR REVIEW COMMENTS AND HOW WE PRIORITIZE WHOSE COMMENTS SHOULD BE CONTROLLING IN THESE SITUATIONS.

THAT'S REALLY IT IN A NUTSHELL.

MAY BE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS THAT THE BOARD MAY LOOK TO HAVE HAPPEN WITH RESPECT TO FIRE PROTECTION ISSUES THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED AS PART OF THE OVERALL UPDATE TO THE ZONING CODE AND THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS.

THIS IS REALLY JUST A LASER GUIDED FIX TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY SO THAT WE DON'T RUN INTO THAT CONFUSION WHEN WE SEE FUTURE SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS MOVE FORWARD.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL ACCOMPLISH THE FOLLOWING.

IT WILL REQUIRE STAFF TO NOTIFY ALL VOLUNTEER AND PRIVATE FIRE DEPARTMENTS AND FIRE DISTRICTS WITHIN A THREE-MILE RADIUS FROM THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION.

IT WILL OUTLINE WHICH FIRE REVIEWER COMMENTS RECEIVED OR CONSIDERED THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, DEPENDING ON WHETHER THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS WITHIN A FIRE DISTRICT OR IS CONTRACTED WITH ANOTHER FIRE AUTHORITY, BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU MAY BE IN A FIRE DISTRICT, BUT AN APPLICANT DEVELOPER MAY ACTUALLY CONTRACT WITH SOMEBODY THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THAT FIRE DISTRICT TERRITORY.

WE ADDRESSED THAT.

THEN THIS JUST INCLUDES THIS AMENDMENT INCLUDES SOME MINOR EDITS.

GRAMMATICAL CORRECTIONS ON FORMATTING CLARITY AND CONFORMANCE WITH THE OVERALL ZONING CODE DATE DRAFTING GUIDELINES.

EVERYTHING THAT WE DO, THE ZOAS, WE'RE GOING TO PUT THEM THROUGH THE OVERALL FILTER SO THAT EVERYTHING MAKES SENSE AND READS THE SAME AS PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CODE.

[01:15:07]

AT ITS MEETING ON NOVEMBER 20, THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AMENDMENT TO THE BOARD WITH A FEW MODIFICATIONS WHICH WERE VERY MINOR IN NATURE.

THE MOTION TO RECOMMEND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, AND I'LL NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER RADOCCIA IS HERE PRESENT, IF THE BOARD SHOULD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR WISH TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEIR DELIBERATION.

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WAS SENT TO INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL REVIEWING AUTHORITIES, AND NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED TO DATE.

I WILL JUST NOTE WE DID REACH OUT TO ALL OF THE FIRE AUTHORITIES, ALL OF THEM TWICE.

WE JUST WE DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING, AND REALLY BECAUSE IT REALLY JUST GETS TO WHAT OUR ROLE IS WHEN WE SOLICIT THEIR COMMENTS.

WE WEREN'T REALLY SURPRISED BY THAT.

>> EXCUSE ME, MADAM CHAIR.

SOLICITING COMMENTS.

BECAUSE I'M THINKING OF THREE-MILE RADIUS, GOING BACK TO THE SPRINGFIELD SUBDIVISION.

NOW PRESCOTT AND CAFMA WILL WEIGH IN ON A SUBDIVISION.

>> CORRECT.

>> NOW, DOES PRESCOTT DO THE SAME THING? IF THEY'RE WITHIN A THREE-MILE RADIUS, DO THEY BRING CAFMA IN TO THEIR BUSINESS?

>> NO. I APOLOGIZE. I'M NOT REALLY FAMILIAR WITH WHAT THEIR PROCESS IS.

I THINK THE IDEA HERE WAS TO CAST OUR NETS A LITTLE BIT OUT TO HAVE THAT BENEFIT BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW THAT EVERYBODY'S REVIEW COMMENTS ARE GOING TO BE THE SAME OR CREATED EQUAL.

WE WANTED THAT BENEFIT.

IN MANY CASES, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE FIRE AUTHORITIES THAT MAY BE SILENT AND OTHERS THAT MAY BE OUTSIDE OF A CERTAIN RADIUS, BUT MAYBE VERY INTERESTED IN COMMENTING.

HOW WE WEIGH THOSE COMMENTS IS REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE THEN THE QUESTION BECOMES, WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE'S A CONFLICT BETWEEN WITH THIS FIRE AUTHORITY AND THAT FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THAT FIRE DISTRICT, AND THAT CONTRACTED FIRE AUTHORITY IF THEY'RE NOT IN AGREEMENT.

ESSENTIALLY, IF YOU'RE CONTRACTED, THAT'S GOING TO BE CONTROLLING.

UNDERSTANDING THAT THE BOARD ALSO STILL RETAINS ITS ROLE UNDER THE EXISTING LANGUAGE IN THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS THAT IF THERE'S SOMETHING MISSING, THAT THE BOARD DOES HAVE DISCRETION TO REQUIRE MORE OUT OF AN APPLICANT.

THAT REMAINS THE SAME, AND THAT KIND OF GETS THERE'S MORE THAT WE CAN LOOK AT DOING AS WE LOOK AHEAD IN THIS UPDATE.

HERE'S OUR PROCESS.

THIS IS OUR INTERNAL PROCESS FOR REACHING OUT AND HOW WE WEIGH THOSE COMMENTS ONCE THEY'RE RECEIVED.

>> I'M THINKING ABOUT THERE COULD BE AN INSTANCE WHERE YOU HAVE WILLIAMSON VALLEY FIRE, CENTRAL YAVAPAI FIRE, CHINO FIRE, WHICH IS BOTH UNDER CAFMA, BUT ALL WEIGHING IN ON THE SAME THING.

EVEN DOWN IN THE VERDE, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'D BE AREAS WHERE YOU'D HAVE DIFFERENT FIRE DEPARTMENTS, LIKE THREE DIFFERENT ONES WEIGHING IN ON ONE SUBDIVISION.

IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT SHOULD BE WEIGHED IN ON WHERE IT SITS.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMENT, SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

CERTAINLY, IF YOU'RE WITHIN A FIRE DISTRICT, WE'RE GOING TO BE PAYING CLOSE ATTENTION TO THAT.

ULTIMATELY, THEN IT BECOMES A QUESTIONS, BUT WHICH SHOULD BE CONTROLLING? BECAUSE IF IF YOU'RE CONTRACTED, THEN THAT UNDERSTANDABLY, SO IS GOING TO BE CONTROLLING.

IS IT AN ARBITRARY NUMBER, AND IN A WAY IT IS? WHY DID WE PICK THREE MILES? YOU'RE PROBABLY WONDERING FOR THAT RADIUS?

>> THAT'S MY QUESTION.

>> I TRIED TO ANTICIPATE IT.

THE ANSWER IS THAT I THINK UNDER THE STATUTE WE'RE ALREADY REQUIRED WHEN WE'RE SOLICITING THAT COMMENT THAT WE'RE ALREADY REACHING OUT TO ALL MUNICIPALITIES WITHIN THREE MILES.

THAT JUST SEEMED LIKE A SAFE BED.

IT'S WORKED FOR US IN THE PAST.

IT WAS REALLY JUST USING A NUMBER THAT WE'RE ALREADY USING WHEN WE'RE SOLICITING COMMENTS.

>> MADAM CHAIR, I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS, ACTUALLY, BECAUSE IT INVITES A TRUE CONVERSATION.

WHEN WE'RE SITTING UP HERE ON THIS DIES THINKING ABOUT APPROVING A MATTER, I APPRECIATE HAVING DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES.

ALSO, I APPRECIATE THAT IT REALLY REINFORCES.

IT'S THE BOARD'S DECISIONS.

IT'S NOT THE DECISION OF THE CONTROLLING FIRE DISTRICT TO INTERPRET THE MATTER.

SOMETIMES IDEAS NEED TO BE TALKED THROUGH A LITTLE BIT MORE.

I APPRECIATE THAT THIS BOTH INVITES THAT CONVERSATION AND CLARIFIES WHO WHICH FIRE ENTITY IS THE CONTRACTED OR RESPONSIBLE ENTITY.

I REALLY APPRECIATE HONESTLY, THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE HERE.

>> MADAM CHAIR, I COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT ANY BETTER.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, SUPERVISOR CHECK. I APPRECIATE IT.

THIS BOARD IS THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY AND WE NEED

[01:20:04]

ALL INFORMATION FROM ALL AREAS TO MAKE A DECISION THAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR OUR RESIDENTS.

THIS GOES A LONG WAY TO GIVING US THE INFORMATION WE NEED TO MAKE VERY IMPORTANT DECISIONS.

I APPRECIATE WHAT THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE, AND I'M CERTAINLY IN SUPPORT OF IT.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. JUST BY INSTITUTIONALIZING THE PROCESS, I THINK WHAT WE'RE SIGNALING TO THE PUBLIC, WE'RE SIGNALING TO THE FIRE AUTHORITIES TO SAY, HEY, THIS IS IMPORTANT STUFF.

IF SOME FIRE AUTHORITY MISSED US BY 500 FEET, I DON'T THINK WE'RE NOT GOING TO CONSIDER THOSE COMMENTS, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE A REGULATION SO THAT WHEN WE ASK, THERE'S A REGULATION BEHIND US TO SUPPORT THAT ASK WHEN WE'RE SEEKING SOLICIT THOSE COMMENTS.

MOVING ON PAST CITIZEN PARTICIPATION.

THIS AMENDMENT SPEAKS TO FOUR SECTIONS WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS THAT PERTAIN TO DIFFERENT STEPS IN THE PROCESS.

THERE'S THE SKETCH PLAN THAT'S AT THE BEGINNING, THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRELIMINARY PLOT, AND THEN THE FINAL PLOT SUBMITTAL.

WE'VE SEEN THIS WITH RECENT SUBDIVISIONS.

A LOT CAN CHANGE FROM A SKETCH PLAN AND SOLICITING THE PUBLIC INPUT.

HOPEFULLY, IF APPLICANTS PAYING ATTENTION, THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE REFINEMENTS.

THERE'S GOING TO BE CHANGES ALL THE WAY TO WHEN WE GET TO THE FINAL PLAT SUBMITTAL.

WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS HAVE THAT ABILITY TO AGAIN, SOLICIT THOSE COMMENTS AND RECEIVE REVIEW COMMENT FROM THOSE FIRE AUTHORITY AT EACH OF THESE MAJOR STAGES IN AN APPLICATION PROCESS AS IT GOES THROUGH THE APPROVAL PROCESS.

THIS LANGUAGE BEFORE YOU IS REALLY THE CRUX OF THE AMENDMENT, AND IT APPEARS THREE TIMES.

IT APPEARS IN SECTION 402, 413 AND 451.

EACH TIME WE'RE GOING TO BE REACHING OUT.

IT MAY BE THAT THERE'S NO CHANGE, AND SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUSH AS HARD TO GET SOME COMMENT, AND IT MAY BE AT THE LAST ONE, THERE'S BEEN SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES, AND THEN WE'RE REALLY GOING TO PUSH TO GET THOSE COMMENTS.

WE'LL HAVE SOME INTERNAL LEEWAY AS FAR AS WHEN WE WANT TO PUT EMPHASIS ON SOMETHING, BUT RATHER THAN WALK YOU THROUGH EACH PAGE OF ALL THE DIFFERENT SECTIONS, IT GETS NOISY.

IF THE BOARD IS COMFORTABLE WITH THIS LANGUAGE, THEN WE COULD ALMOST SKIP AHEAD TO THE SUMMARY.

I WILL NOTE, HOWEVER, THAT THE COMMISSION AND STAFF DID HAVE A NUMBER OF MINOR MODIFICATIONS, BUT NOT TO THIS LANGUAGE.

IT WAS REALLY JUST WORDSMITHING AND SOME GRAMMATICAL CHANGES.

I DO SHOWCASE THAT IN THE NEXT SLIDE BECAUSE STAFF DID MAKE ONE MINOR CHANGE TO THAT LANGUAGE AS WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMISSION AT THE LAST MEETING SINCE THE MEETING THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET.

WOULD THE BOARD LIKE ME TO READ THESE TWO SECTIONS?

>> I'LL JUST SPEAK FOR MYSELF, AND I'LL ASK MY COLLEAGUES.

I'M FINE WITH NOT READING AT ALL, BUT I WOULD ASK IF ANYBODY.

>> I CONCUR WITH CHAIR MALLORY.

>> NUMBER TWO ANSWERED MY QUESTION RIGHT THERE.

>> I'M GOOD.

>> YOU'RE GOOD. SUPERVISOR CHECK YOU'RE GOOD?

>> I HAVE READ IT. THANK YOU.

>> I THANK YOU.

>> THESE WERE THE CHANGES. THEY WERE VERY MINOR IN NATURE.

AGAIN, IT DOESN'T TOUCH THAT LANGUAGE THAT WAS ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.

STAFF LATER PERFECTED ONE OF THE PIECES OF LANGUAGE THAT WAS ADDED JUST TO MAKE IT MORE CLEAR IN CONSULTATION WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COUNCIL, REALLY, NOT OF SUBSTANCE, HAS REALLY VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH THIS, WHICH REALLY IS THE IMPETUS.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE BOARD AWARE OF THAT.

IT'S IN YOUR PACKET.

NOW WE GET TO THE SUMMARY AND MY COMPLETION.

THIS REQUEST FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS FOR CONSIDERATION OF A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE FIRE AUTHORITY REVIEW REGARDING SECTIONS 402, SKETCH PLAN, 413, PRELIMINARY PLOT, AND 451, FINAL PLOT OF THE YAVAPAI COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS WITH MODIFICATIONS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AND STAFF.

THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, AND I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

>> MATT, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

I THINK WE'RE ALL GOOD UP HERE ON THE BOARD.

WE HAVE A HEARING ITEM NUMBER TWO.

ANY GREEN SHEETS, VICE CHAIR?

>> NO GREEN SHEETS, MADAM CHAIR.

>> CLERK OF THE BOARD, COMMUNICATIONS?

>> NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED ON THIS ITEM.

>> FANTASTIC. AUDIENCE? NO. WITH THAT, WE'LL CLOSE THIS HEARING.

I SAW YOU STAND UP, AND I WAS LIKE, NO.

IT IS FOR THE NEXT ONE, RIGHT? COOL.

>> IT WAS TO CLAP.

>> WE CLOSE THE HEARING.

[01:25:01]

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR HEARING.

>> APPROVE HEARING ITEM NUMBER 2 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

>> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

CLERK OF THE BOARD, YOU CALL FOR A VOTE.

>> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO?

>> HEARING ITEM NUMBER TWO HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> THANK YOU, MATT. THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT. HI, MARK. HOW ARE YOU?

>> GOOD MORNING, MADAM CHAIR. I'M DOING GREAT.

>> SO AM I? DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ITEM HEARING 3.

[3. Development Services - Recommend approval to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control of series 12 Restaurant Liquor License Application # 364812 without protest, submitted by Martin Galvez for Pago’s Pizzeria & Italian Cuisine located at 6446 State Route 179 #221, Sedona, AZ 86351 (District 3 - Supervisor Check)]

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

MARK LUSSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

BEFORE YOU IS THE CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF A ARIZONA DEPARTMENT LIQUOR LICENSE CONTROL SERIES 12 FOR PAGO'S PIZZERIA & ITALIAN CUISINE LOCATED AT 6446 STATE ROUTE 179 IN SEDONA.

THIS IS DISTRICT 3, SUPERVISOR CHECK'S AREA.

TO DATE, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY LETTERS OF OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT FOR THIS ITEM, AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

>> I JUST HAVE A COMMENT WHERE YOU CANNOT HAVE ITALIAN CUISINE WITHOUT A GLASS OF WINE.

THAT'S WHAT I DO KNOW.

BUT ANYWAY, IT'S A HEARING ITEM.

SUPERVISOR CHECK, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS?

>> I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND SUPPORT THEM FULLY.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

VICE CHAIR, DO WE HAVE ANY GREEN SHEETS?

>> NO GREEN SHEETS.

>> CLERK OF THE BOARD?

>> NO COMMENTS.

>> AUDIENCE? I'D SAY THE HEARING ITEM NUMBER 3 IS NOW CLOSED, AND I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE HEARING ITEM NUMBER 3.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT. CALL FOR THE VOTE.

>> SUPERVISOR KUKNYO?

>> HEARING ITEM NUMBER 3 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

HEARING ITEM NUMBER 4.

[4. Development Services - Recommend approval to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control of series 12 Restaurant Liquor License Application # 365178 without protest, submitted by Theresa June Morse for Willy’s Empanada House located at 7000 State Route 179 B110, Sedona, AZ 86351 (District 3 - Supervisor Check)]

AGAIN, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BEVERAGES. MARK.

>> HELLO AGAIN, MADAM CHAIR, VICE CHAIR BOARD.

MARK LUSSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

BEFORE YOU IS CONSIDERATION FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE FOR SERIES 12 RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR WILLIE'S EMPANADA HOUSE, LOCATED AT 7000 STATE ROUTE 179 IN SEDONA.

THIS IS DISTRICT 3 ALSO, SUPERVISOR CHECK'S DISTRICT.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY LETTERS OF SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION AS OF TODAY, AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AGAIN.

>> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR CHECK, ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>> I WOULD JUST COMMENT THAT THESE ARE ARGENTINIAN EMPANADAS, WHICH I THINK ALSO NEED TO BE PAIRED WITH ARGENTINIAN WINE.

>> WE'LL HAVE TO CHECK THIS OUT THEN.

>> VICE CHAIR.

>> NO GREEN SHEETS.

>> CLERK OF THE BOARD?

>> NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED ON THIS ITEM.

>> IT'S OUR LAST HEARING ITEM, ITEM NUMBER 4.

ANY COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE.

NO. WITH THAT, WE'LL CLOSE THIS HEARING ITEM, AND I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE HEARING ITEM NUMBER 4.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, SECOND.

>> I SECOND, THANK YOU.

YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE?

>> VICE CHAIR COMPTON.