[2. Board of Supervisors - Approve the appointment of Vice Chair Nikki Check as primary voting delegate, and Supervisor Mary Mallory as alternate voting delegate, to participate in the annual business meeting during the National Association of Counties (NACo), 2026 Annual Conference and Exposition in Orleans Parish/New Orleans, Louisiana on July 17-20, 2026.]

ITEM NUMBER TWO IS REGARDING OUR VOTING DELEGATE FOR THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES.

SO COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION IS OUR STATE LEVEL, COUNTY ASSOCIATION, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES OR NACO IS THE NATIONAL LEVEL.

AND I REALLY WANTED TO SEE SUPERVISOR MALLORY BE OUR VOTING DELEGATE BECAUSE SHE RECENTLY PARTICIPATED IN A NACO LEADERSHIP TRAINING AND HAS REPRESENTED US VERY WELL AT THE CSA LEGISLATIVE POLICY COMMITTEE.

AND SO THERE WAS JUST A TYPO ON THAT ONE. SO I'D LIKE TO WORD THIS DIFFERENTLY.

I'D LIKE TO APPROVE THE APPOINTMENT OF SUPERVISOR MARY MALLORY AS PRIMARY VOTING DELEGATE AND VICE CHAIR, NIKKI CHECK AS ALTERNATE VOTING DELEGATE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE ANNUAL BUSINESS MEETING DURING THE NACO 2026 ANNUAL CONFERENCE AND EXPOSITION.

SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? CALL FOR THE VOTE. VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES. CHAIR COMPTON? YES.

ITEM IS APPROVED AS STATED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ACTION ITEM NUMBER ONE. GOOD MORNING, MR. COUNTY MANAGER.

[1. Board of Supervisors - Tentative approval of the County's primary and secondary budgets for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-2027.]

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

LET ME HAVE THE PRESENTATION COME UP AND I'LL MAKE THIS AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE.

STARTING OFF YOUR COUNTY BUDGET MANAGER, KEVIN FORBES, WAS UNABLE TO BE HERE TODAY, BUT I DID WANT TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE KEVIN AND HIS HARD WORK ALONG WITH LUCY FRANK. TODAY AS A TEAM REALLY PUT TOGETHER A GREAT BUDGET PROCESS, A GREAT BUDGET DETAIL FOR YOU. AND HERE WE ARE TODAY WITH PROPOSING AND ASKING FOR TENTATIVE ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET.

SO THE WAY THIS IS FORMATTED JUST FOR CLARITY, THERE ARE TWO AGENDA ITEMS FOR ACTION.

ONE IS THE TENTATIVE BUDGET. TENTATIVE COUNTY BUDGET.

AND THEN ALSO ACTING AS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR ALL THE SPECIAL DISTRICTS.

THERE'S ANOTHER ACTION ITEM. SO AT THE CONCLUSION, WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS TWO SEPARATE VOTES APPROVING THE TENTATIVE BUDGET.

AND AS PART OF MY PRESENTATION, I WILL GO OVER THE UPCOMING SCHEDULE, SO.

OKAY, JUST LOOKING AT THE BUDGET AS A WHOLE, YOU HAVE THE TENTATIVE BUDGET AND THIS IS THE EXPENDITURES BY TYPE, BUT YOUR TOTAL BUDGET EXPENDITURE IS 491 MILLION AND SOME ODD CHANGE.

YOU CAN SEE HERE THE GENERAL FUND DISTRIBUTION, SPECIAL DISTRICTS, SPECIAL REVENUES AND ALWAYS I TRY TO POINT OUT SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT IN YAVAPAI COUNTY IS VERY LITTLE DEBT SERVICE.

THIS COUNTY IS VERY CONSERVATIVE ON THEIR DEBT SERVICE.

THAT IS THE ONE OBLIGATION YOU HAVE FOR THE DETENTION FACILITY THAT WAS APPROVED AND CONSTRUCTED PREVIOUSLY.

YOU HAVE YOUR CAPITAL BUDGET PROJECTS, CAPITAL PROJECTS ALSO IN THERE.

SO YOU CAN SEE THE DISTRIBUTION OF THESE AREAS, SPECIAL DISTRICTS, YOU TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, YOU GOT YOUR JAIL DISTRICT LIBRARY, FLOOD CONTROL, AND THEN SOME MINOR LIGHTING AND OTHER DISTRICTS THAT THE COUNTY HAS.

YOU HAVE FOUR OTHER SMALL DISTRICTS UNDER YOUR CONTROL.

YOU KNOW, SULLIVAN'S SANITARY DISTRICT. SO THAT'S WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THERE.

SPECIAL REVENUE YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK AT WHEN YOU'VE GOT SPECIAL REVENUE.

THAT'S INCLUDING THINGS LIKE REGIONAL ROADS, YOUR HERF, COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES AND YOUR CLINIC AND SOME OTHER SPECIAL REVENUES THAT FUNNEL THROUGH ALL THE DEPARTMENTS. LOOKING AT YOUR GENERAL FUND, DRILLING DOWN INTO YOUR GENERAL FUND, YOU HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT GOING TO COURTS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OVER 50%.

YOU HAVE YOUR INTERNAL SERVICES. THAT OF COURSE, IS ALL THE DEPARTMENTS THAT SERVE THE COUNTY INTERNALLY,

[00:50:04]

ITS, HUMAN RESOURCE, OTHERS. AND THEN GENERAL SERVICES ACCOUNT THAT THAT TYPICALLY IS YOUR ALL TAX ACCESS, YOU KNOW, YOUR LONG TERM CARE, YOUR HEALTH CARE THAT'S GOING TO THE STATE AND PAID TITLE 36 AND YOUR CONTINGENCY FUNDING OR IN YOUR GSA AND JUST KIND OF A CATCH ALL WHERE IT DOESN'T FIT FOR A SPECIFIC DEPARTMENT.

IT'S MORE UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE BOARD. STOP ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BOARD.

I KNOW YOU HAVE A BUSY DAY, SO I'M JUST GOING THROUGH IT.

AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, LET ME KNOW. SO THIS IS GENERAL FUND REVENUES.

AGAIN, LOOKING AT YOUR PROPERTY TAXES AS A MAJOR SOURCE OF REVENUE AS WELL AS YOUR STATE SHARED SALES TAX, THOSE ARE YOUR BIG TICKET SALES REVENUES FOR YOUR GENERAL FUND.

YOU HAVE YOUR VEHICLE LICENSE TAX AND HALF CENT SALES TAX.

SO AGAIN, THESE ARE THE REVENUES THAT COME IN TO FUND YOUR GENERAL FUND.

AGAIN, JUST TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE ISSUES AND KEY POINTS OF YOUR BUDGET, YOU HAVE COUNTY PROJECTS, YOUR CAPITAL PROJECTS UNDER YOUR FACILITIES DEPARTMENT LISTED THERE.

YOU HAVE SOME UNDESIGNATED GRANTS. WE PREPARE FOR WORKING WITH DEPARTMENTS, SHERIFF AND OTHERS TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE FUNDING BECAUSE OF EXPECTED OR SOMETIMES UNEXPECTED GRANTS THAT OCCUR DURING THE YEAR.

YOU HAVE YOUR ALT TEXT AND LONG TERM CARE, SORRY FOR THE ACRONYM.

A, YOUR ALL TEXTS AND ACCESS, WHICH IS LONG TERM CARE AND YOUR HEALTH CARE CONTAINMENT COSTS.

SO THOSE ARE BUILT INTO THE BUDGET AT ABOUT 10 MILLION.

YOU HAVE A CAPITAL RESERVE IN ADDITION TO YOUR FUNDED CAPITAL PROJECTS AT 10 MILLION.

WE ALSO DO FUND HAVE A GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY OF ABOUT $7.5 MILLION.

AGAIN, JUST TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE PREPARED, SHOULD THINGS GO DURING THE YEAR THAT YOU NEED TO FUND.

AND THE REMAINING AMOUNT, I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER THEM UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BUT WE'VE GOT THAT 4.5 MILLION IN THERE THAT YOU MAKE AN ANNUAL PAYMENT TO YOUR UNFUNDED LIABILITY FOR YOUR SHERIFF AND DETENTION OFFICERS.

JUST A SNAPSHOT ON YOUR PROPERTY TAX LEVY. YOU'RE KEEPING A FLAT TAX RATE FOR YOUR PRIMARY PROPERTY TAX.

I THINK YOU'RE $11.5 MILLION UNDERNEATH YOUR MAXIMUM LEVY FOR IT.

SO YOU HAVE A MAXIMUM LEVY BY LAW THAT YOU CAN GO AT, WHICH IS AT 81 MILLION RIGHT NOW.

THE PROPOSED FLAT RATE LEVY IN YOUR TENTATIVE BUDGET IS AT 69.6 MILLION.

THIS IS SHOWING ALL THREE OF YOUR TAX RATES. AGAIN, TWO ARE BEING KEPT AT FLAT, YOUR PRIMARY PROPERTY TAX, YOUR LIBRARY DISTRICT AND YOUR FLOOD CONTROL TAX IS DECREASING.

SO YOUR OVERALL TAXES FOR THESE THREE TAX ENTITIES THAT YOU APPROVE THE TAX RATE ON IS GOING DOWN, I THINK UNDER WHAT, HALF A CENT, A 6/10 OF A CENT.

SO YOU'RE DECREASING YOUR OVERALL TAX RATE. IN COMPENSATION, AND I WANT TO THANK THE BOARD.

THIS BOARD HAS REALLY LOOKED AFTER AND LOOKED AFTER THE BENEFITS FOR YOUR EXISTING EMPLOYEES.

YOU INCLUDED IN YOUR BUDGET THE COLA THAT WAS RECOMMENDED, THAT WAS BASED ON A TEN YEAR ROLLING AVERAGE.

IT'S INCLUDED AT 3.3% AND THERE'S A MERIT IN THERE FOR ALSO THE DISTRIBUTION TO EMPLOYEES.

SO THAT I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. JUST ALWAYS WANT TO POINT THAT OUT.

THAT WAS A THAT'S A BIG LIFT BY THIS BOARD. BUT I KNOW THE EMPLOYEES APPRECIATE IT AND IT HELPS WITH YOUR RETENTION.

SO THANK YOU. ON YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS, YOU I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER ANYONE.

WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE BUDGET ON THIS. THIS IS YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS FOR THE COUNTY THAT YOU MAKE.

AND THE LAST INCREASE THAT YOU DID MAKE WAS A MEALS ON WHEELS INCREASE FOR YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS THAT WAS INCORPORATED BY YOUR BUDGET TEAM, AND IT'S ALL IN THERE. LAST THING NEXT STEP IN THE BUDGET PROCESS.

YOU DO HAVE A TODAY, WHICH WE'RE ASKING YOU TO ADOPT A TENTATIVE BUDGET, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A THING THAT OCCURS IN ABOUT A MONTH.

ON JULY 27TH, YOU'RE GOING TO ADOPT THE FINAL BUDGET.

AND THEN YOU HAVE YOU HAVE A HEARING DURING THAT ADOPTION PROCESS.

I, WHEN I CAME ON BOARD TO HELP WITH BUDGET THIS YEAR, I INCLUDED SOME ACTIVITIES FROM PREVIOUS BUDGETS THAT WE HAD LISTED.

ONE WAS A COURTESY HEARING ON JULY 15TH. REALLY IN REVIEWING THAT, WE DON'T NEED THAT BECAUSE OF THE COMMUNICATION WE NOW HAVE BETWEEN BOARD OFFICES AND BOARD ROOMS. WE ARE, SINCE COVID, VERY ADEPT AT PROVIDING COMMUNICATION FROM THE VERDE TO THIS ROOM AND BACK AND

[00:55:02]

FORTH. SO WE'RE GOING TO PROBABLY, UNLESS THERE'S A CONCERN, WE'RE GOING TO ELIMINATE THE JULY 15TH ACTIVITY AND JUST CONSOLIDATE IT ONTO JULY 27TH.

SO IF YOU APPROVE TODAY, JULY 1ST, OUR TENTATIVE BUDGET ON JULY 27TH, WE'LL BE BACK.

WE'LL HAVE PUBLISHED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE MOUNTAIN FOR THAT HEARING.

WE'LL HEAR ANY COMMENTS THE PUBLIC HAS ON THE ADOPTION OF THE FINAL BUDGET AND MOVE FROM THERE.

AND THEN ON AUGUST 17TH, WE PUT IN FORWARD PUT FORWARD WITH THE ADOPTION OF ALL THE TAX RATES, SO, SUPERVISOR JENKINS, JUST TO BE CLEAR, CAN YOU HEAR ME? SOMETIMES I CAN'T HEAR. I CAN HEAR YOU. OKAY.

YOU'RE STILL GOING TO NOTICE BOTH I GUESS BOTH SIDES OF THE MOUNTAIN SO THAT THE ENTIRE POPULATION IS AWARE OF THE ONE HEARING.

AND THE COTTONWOOD FACILITY WILL BE OPEN. CORRECT, DURING THE HEARING.

THAT'S OVER. IT WILL BE OPEN FOR COMMENT. CORRECT.

THANK YOU. YES, WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT THAT BOARD ROOM IS OPEN AND AVAILABLE.

AND WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT IF SOMEBODY SHOWS UP THERE AND WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AND TURN IN A GREEN SHEET, WE'LL WORK WITH YOUR OFFICES TO MAKE SURE THAT'S AVAILABLE.

YES. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO. PILT WAS LOOKING REAL SHAKY.

DID THAT SETTLE DOWN AND IS THAT SOLID NOW, OR IS THAT STILL IN JEOPARDY TO FLUCTUATE FROM THE FEDS? PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES, PILT IS AN ANNUAL AMOUNT OF MONEY WE GET.

I'M JUST GIVING YOU A GENERAL OVERVIEW SO EVERYBODY KNOWS, AND IT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

IT'S AN AMOUNT WE RECEIVE FROM FEDERAL LANDS BEING IN OUR COUNTY, AND IT'S A RELATIONSHIP TO THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THEY MAKE OFF THOSE FEDERAL LANDS.

AND IT IS SHAKY EVERY YEAR. WE EVERY YEAR HAVE TO ADVOCATE FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO APPROVE PILT AND FOR US TO GET IT. AND, AND I THINK THERE IS THERE IS WORK BEING DONE TO TRY TO MAKE THAT MORE OF A LONG TERM SECURE PAYMENT, MAYBE A TEN YEAR, YOU KNOW, ADVOCATE FOR TEN YEARS AND BEING APPROVED RIGHT NOW WE DEAL WITH ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS.

BUT TO, TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, WE'VE INCLUDED IT IN OUR BUDGET BECAUSE IT GETS APPROVED EVERY YEAR, SUPERVISOR KUKNYO. IT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO ADVOCATE FOR.

BUT I'LL TELL YOU, EVERY YEAR I'VE BEEN HERE THAT'S IT'S SECURE SCHOOLS THAT WE SOMETIMES HAVE A PROBLEM WITH.

PILL SEEMS LIKE IT COMES ALONG AND WE'RE ABLE TO GET IT IN THERE.

SO CURRENTLY WE HAVE IT BUDGETED IN THERE AND WE ANTICIPATE IT BEING RECEIVED.

VICE CHAIR CHECK? BUT YOU HAVE ONGOING ADVOCACY AT THE NACO LEVEL.

I CAN JUST NOTE. THERE WE GO. I'LL JUST NOTE THAT AS OF JUNE 23RD, THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR DID STATE THAT THEY WERE PUTTING 733 MILLION TOWARDS COMMUNITIES.

WE GET ABOUT 4 MILLION IN FUNDING FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY.

SO THAT'S BASICALLY SECURED FOR THE YEAR. THANK YOU.

AND YES, THE PROBLEM WE HAVE IS IT JUST COMES AROUND EVERY YEAR.

AND, AND THAT'S THE ISSUE, IS THAT WE PUT IT IN OUR BUDGET IN THE PAST, WE SOMETIMES WOULD NOT INCLUDE IT AND WE WOULD LAG A YEAR.

BUT WE'VE CHANGED TO JUST INCLUDING IT BECAUSE THE REGULAR ACTIVITY THAT THE FEDS APPROVE IT.

THE KEY ISSUE IS, I THINK NACO AND THE COUNTY BOARD AND OTHERS NEED TO ADVOCATE FOR A LONG TERM APPROPRIATION OF IT.

CHAIR I HAVE ONE MORE. CERTAINLY, YEAH. I THINK YOU'RE GIVING US A LITTLE TOO MUCH CREDIT FOR BEING KIND AND GENEROUS, BUT THAT'S NOT NICE WHEN IT COMES TO THE RAISES.

I THINK IT WAS STRICTLY FOR RETENTION AND IT SEEMS LIKE THAT HAS KEPT AROUND BECAUSE TRAINING NEW PEOPLE, LOSING GOOD PEOPLE DOES NOT HELP US ONE BIT. SO I APPRECIATE WHAT THE EMPLOYEES DO AND I'M GLAD THAT THEY'RE BEING COMPENSATED WITH, WITH MARKET. YEAH, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO CHIME IN AND TALK ABOUT BUDGET THIS YEAR.

WHILE BUDGET IS ALWAYS DIFFICULT, WE NEED TO THANK KEVIN AND LUCY.

LUCY, I MEAN, YOU'RE JUST THIS YEAR WAS JUST SO MUCH EASIER.

AND THE INFORMATION WE WERE ABLE TO GET AND WHAT THE HOW THE BOARD COULD OPERATE BECAUSE OF YOUR HARD WORK AND KEVIN'S HARD WORK.

I GIVE SOME TO MARTY AND PHIL TOO. BUT MOSTLY KEVIN.

BUT ANYWAYS, I WANTED TO SAY THAT, SO THANK YOU.

VICE CHAIR. YEAH. I ALSO WANT TO THANK STAFF, BOTH BUDGET STAFF AND OUR COUNTY MANAGEMENT STAFF.

LAST YEAR'S BUDGET, IN MY OPINION, WENT A LITTLE BIT ROUGHER THAN I WAS EXPECTING, AND I'M VERY HAPPY TO SAY THAT WE'VE DEVELOPED A PROCESS.

OR RATHER, YOU ALL HAVE DEVELOPED A PROCESS THAT CAN BE VERY RESPONSIVE TO THE BOARD THAT'S VERY ENGAGING AND I THINK WILL REALLY CARRY US FORWARD AS A PROCESS INTO THE FUTURE NICELY. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

AND THEN THANK YOU TO THE BOARD. I REALLY THINK WE ALL PUT IN THE WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS YEAR'S BUDGET WAS EXPRESSIVE OF OUR VALUES, AND THERE'S ALWAYS TOUGH DECISIONS TO MAKE AROUND THAT.

BUT I'M PROUD OF THE WORK THAT WE DID. SUPERVISOR JENKINS.

[01:00:03]

YES, THE BUDGET PROCESS WAS JUST, I BELIEVE, OUTSTANDING THIS YEAR.

AND IT'S A CREDIT TO EVERYONE INVOLVED IN THE ENTIRE TEAM IN THE BUDGET PROCESS.

IT GAVE ME CONFIDENCE IN THE BUDGET. THE INFORMATION WAS THERE.

THE RESPONSIVENESS. I KNOW THAT I MYSELF CAN GET DOWN IN THE WEEDS WITH FINANCIAL INFORMATION, AND THE TEAM WAS EXTREMELY RESPONSIVE IN GETTING THAT INFORMATION BACK TO ME, WHICH GAVE ME CONFIDENCE IN BEING ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS BUDGET.

AND THIS BOARD, ALL THE MEETINGS THAT WE HAD, WE WORKED TOGETHER, WE WORKED THROUGH IT, AND THIS IS A GREAT BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY.

SO THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES YOUR PRESENTATION FOR ACTION ONE AND TWO.

CORRECT. OKAY. MOVE TO APPROVE ACTION ONE. SECOND.

CALL FOR THE VOTE. VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES. CHAIR COMPTON? YES. ITEM IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

MOVE TO APPROVE ACTION TWO. I'LL SECOND. CALL FOR THE VOTE.

[2. Board of Supervisors - The Board of Supervisors will resolve into the Board of Directors of the special improvement districts and following consideration of this item, will reconvene as the Board of Supervisors - Approve the tentative budgets for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-2027 for the following special and improvement districts: a. Yavapai County Flood Control District b. Yavapai County Free Library District c. Yavapai County Jail District d. Ash Fork Street Lighting Improvement District e. Seligman Street Lighting Improvement District f. Yarnell Street Lighting Improvement District g. Seligman Sanitary District ]

VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES.

CHAIR COMPTON? YES. ACTION ITEM NUMBER TWO HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU. ACTION THREE. MR. BOURDON. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

[3. Board of Supervisors - Approve a Deed of Conservation Easement for the Date Creek Ranch in the Wickenberg area, and authorize the Chair to execute the final documents. (District 1 - Supervisor Compton)]

THIS IS ACTUALLY A FOLLOW UP FROM A PRESENTATION THAT WAS MADE PREVIOUSLY JANUARY 7TH 26.

A PRESENTATION WAS MADE FROM THE CENTRAL ARIZONA LAND TRUST REGARDING ACCEPTANCE OF A DEED OF CONSERVATION FOR THE DATE CREEK RANCH AS PART OF A CONSERVATION PROJECT. WHAT I'M ASKING YOU TO DO TODAY IS TO APPROVE THE DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT FOR THIS DATE CREEK RANCH IN THE WICKENBURG AREA AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE THE FINAL DOCUMENTS.

THE REASON I'M ASKING FOR IT IN THAT FORM IS WE ARE AT A POINT WHERE WE HAVE FINAL DOCUMENTS, BUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS THERE'S SOME FINAL WORK THAT WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL.

THIS IS BEING WORKED ON BECAUSE OF A GRANT THROUGH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE FIRE MANAGEMENT, AND THE DOCUMENTS WILL BE SIGNED FINALLY BY THEM, BUT I'D LIKE TO GET THEM APPROVED BY THIS COUNTY BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY THE TRIGGER FOR THEM TO KIND OF MOVE THAT LAST BIT OF THEIR PROCESS FORWARD.

AND THEN WE WILL HAVE IT REVIEWED BY YOUR COUNTY BOARD COUNCIL, WHICH HE'S ALREADY BEEN REVIEWING IT AND SIGNED BY YOUR CHAIR.

SO THAT'S THE PLAN. AND THIS WILL CLOSE OUT THIS PROJECT FOR YOU.

ANY COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? MOVE TO APPROVE ACTION THREE.

SECOND CALL FOR THE VOTE. VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES.

SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES. CHAIR COMPTON. YES. ACTION ITEM NUMBER THREE IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. BOURDON. ACTION FOUR.

[4. Board of Supervisors - Approve an amendment to the Strategic Plan to update the goal related to a plan for open space.]

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

TYLER GOODMAN, ASSISTANT COUNTY MANAGER. THIS ITEM IS TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO YOUR STRATEGIC PLAN REGARDING THE GOAL RELATED TO OPEN SPACE AND A PLAN FOR OPEN SPACE. CURRENTLY, THE GOAL IS TO COMPLETE A PLAN FOR OPEN SPACE BY JULY 1ST, 2027.

WE'RE REQUESTING THAT WE BUMP THAT AND MAKE THE GOAL TO ACHIEVE THAT OPEN SPACE PLAN BY JULY 1ST, 2028. REALLY FOR TWO REASONS. THE FIRST IS BUDGET.

IT'S NOT CURRENTLY BUDGETED TO OCCUR NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

AND THEN SECOND, WE HAVE A LOT OF STAFF TIME AND EFFORTS RELATED TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE AND THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS.

SO WITH THAT, THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER THINGS CHURNING.

THERE'S ALSO THE POSSIBILITY WE'RE GOING TO LOOK INTO OF INCLUDING A PORTION OF THIS IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE IF WE CAN.

I CAN'T MAKE PROMISES YET, BUT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK INTO THAT.

OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD.

MOVE TO APPROVE ACTION FOUR. SECOND. CALL FOR THE VOTE.

VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES.

CHAIR COMPTON? YES. ACTION ITEM NUMBER FOUR HAS BEEN APPROVED.

THANK YOU, TYLER. THANK YOU. ACTION FIVE. COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES.

[5. Community Health Services - Approve the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS), for the Public Health Emergency Preparedness Program (PHEP), for an amount of $279,033.00 to enhance public health preparedness, improving existing planning and coordination for public health emergencies, and authorize the Community Health Services Director to execute amendments that don’t result in a fiscal adjustment. YC Contract No. 2026-230]

GOOD MORNING LESLIE. GOOD MORNING CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

I'M LESLIE HORTON, YOUR COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES DIRECTOR.

I'M UP HERE TO ASK APPROVAL TO ACCEPT A PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANT.

THIS IS A GRANT THAT'S BEEN ONGOING FOR AT LEAST OVER TWO DECADES NOW, POSSIBLY CLOSE TO THREE.

BUT IT'S A FIVE YEAR IGA, INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES.

AND WHAT THIS GRANT DOES IS ALLOW US TO PREPARE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCIES.

AND WITHIN THAT, WE DO A LOT OF THE SAME TRAINING AS THOSE IN THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER DO TO PREPARE FOR COUNTY EMERGENCIES AS WELL.

SO ANY TIME WE HAVE A FIRE OR FLOOD OR OTHER NON PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCIES, WHICH DO HAVE AN IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH TOO.

[01:05:03]

WE ARE ABLE TO JUMP IN AND HELP WITH THOSE COUNTY EMERGENCIES AS WELL, BUT IT KEEPS US EQUIPPED WITH A MEDICAL RESERVE, CORPS OF VOLUNTEERS AND OTHERS THAT CAN JUMP IN IN A PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY, WHICH OF COURSE, WE HOPE WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER ONE ANYTIME SOON.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS GRANT? SUPERVISOR MALLORY.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT IN THE FACT THAT I HAVE THE PRIVILEGE TO SIT ON THIS BOARD, AND I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE GRANTS THAT YOU GUYS ARE OUT THERE STRIVING TO GET, BECAUSE OF COURSE, IT HELPS WITH OUR GENERAL BUDGET UP HERE.

AND THIS BOARD HAS VOLUNTEERS THAT MEET MONTHLY TO HELP SUPPORT THESE ACTIVITIES THAT THIS PARTICULAR HEALTH COMMUNITY HEALTH DOES. SO AGAIN, OUR VOLUNTEERS, THEY ARE THE ONES THAT FILL THE GAP.

THE GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO ACCOMPLISH CERTAIN GOALS AND WITH THE VOLUNTEERS THAT ARE ON THE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY HEALTH.

THAT'S WHAT MOVES A LOT OF THIS FORWARD IN THIS COMMUNITY.

SO JUST MUCH THANKS TO YOU AND THE BOARD. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

I JUST MOVE TO APPROVE ACTION ITEM NUMBER FIVE.

SECOND. CALL FOR THE VOTE. VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES.

SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES.

SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES. CHAIR COMPTON? YES. ACTION ITEM NUMBER FIVE HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU, LESLIE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ACTION ITEM SIX.

[6. Information Technology Services - Approve a three-year (3) agreement with Advanced Network Management, Inc. to extend a backup and recovery solution in the amount of $789,669.16, utilizing State of Arizona Cooperative Contract No. CTR059864. YC Contract No. 2025-071A10]

ITS. JARED. GOOD MORNING SIR. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR COMPTON, VICE CHAIR CHECK, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

ACTION ITEM NUMBER SIX IS A RENEWAL, A THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT FOR OUR BACKUP AND RECOVERY SOLUTION.

WE CHOSE A THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT TO TRY AND OFFSET SOME OF THE RISING COSTS AND KIND OF MEET THAT AT THE PAST.

SO ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS THAT I COULD ANSWER.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? MOVE TO APPROVE ACTION SIX.

I'LL SECOND. CALL FOR THE VOTE. VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES. CHAIR COMPTON? YES.

ACTION. ITEM NUMBER SIX HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU, JARED. THANK YOU. LIBRARY DISTRICT.

[7. Library District - The Board of Supervisors will resolve into the Board of Directors of the Yavapai County Free Library District and following consideration of this item will reconvene as the Board of Supervisors - Approve Affiliate Library Agreements with the Town of Camp Verde in the amount of $77,397.79, and the Town of Prescott Valley in the amount of $320,917.96. YC Contract Nos. 2026-247 and 2026-248]

GOOD MORNING AGAIN COURT. GOOD MORNING CHAIR COMPTON, VICE CHAIR CHECK, CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

THIS ITEM JUST HAS TO DO WITH THE, OUR ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS THAT WE PAY TO THE MUNICIPAL PUBLIC LIBRARIES.

WE RECEIVED TWO OF THE AGREEMENTS SO FAR. WE EXPECT TO PRESENT THE REST AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING, BUT IT'S ALL BUDGETED, AND WE'RE GOOD TO GO UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I'LL MAKE A MOTION.

OKAY. PLEASE. I'LL SECOND. CALL FOR THE VOTE.

VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES.

CHAIR COMPTON? YES. ACTION ITEM NUMBER SEVEN HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU. ACTION EIGHT, PUBLIC WORKS. GOOD MORNING ROGER.

[8. Public Works - Award a contract to Asphalt Paving & Supply, Inc. in the amount of $5,989,234.30 for Beaverhead Flat Road and Cornville Road Improvement Project No. 2423728 - IFB No. 26-PW-55. YC Contract No. 2026-234 (District 2 - Supervisor Jenkins; District 3 - Supervisor Check)]

GOOD MORNING CHAIR. SORRY FOR THE CALL YESTERDAY.

THERE WAS A SNAFU. NO, THAT'S OKAY. WE LIKE THOSE CALLS.

VICE CHAIR. GOOD MORNING. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

GOOD MORNING. I'M ROGER MCCORMICK, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. BEFORE YOU TODAY WE HAVE AN ITEM TO APPROVE A CONTRACT WITH ASPHALT PAVING AND SUPPLY IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,989,234.30. THIS IS FOR THE BEAVERHEAD FLAT PROJECT TO PLACE NEW ASPHALT ON BEAVERHEAD FLAT, AS WELL AS A PORTION OF CORNVILLE ROAD.

WE RECENTLY DID A PROJECT ON CORNVILLE ROAD THAT INCLUDED A RUBBERIZED CHIPSEAL.

WE HAD A TERMINATION POINT NEAR KIMBERLYS WAY, SO THIS WILL BE THE CONTINUATION ON CORNVILLE ROAD FROM KIMBERLYS WAY TO THE I17, INTERCHANGE THERE OFF OF YEAH, I17 AND CORNVILLE ROAD.

WE PUT THIS OUT FOR BID TO THE CONTRACTING COMMUNITY AND WE DID RECEIVE FIVE BIDS BACK.

THOSE WERE FAIRLY TIGHT BIDS. THEY RANGED FROM THE 5.9 MILLION.

FOUR OF THEM WERE AT THE 6.2-6.3 RANGE. WE DID HAVE ONE THAT WENT UP TO $7 MILLION RANGE.

AND THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE FOR THIS PROJECT WAS RIGHT AT 6.3.

SO IT DID COME IN UNDER THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE, WHICH IS GOOD.

THIS IS BUDGETED AS PART OF YOUR BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 27.

AND WE WOULD ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS IN RELATION TO THIS PROJECT IF YOU HAVE ANY.

IF NOT, WE REQUEST APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT TO IMPROVE CORNVILLE ROAD AND BEAVERHEAD FLAT ROAD.

SUPERVISOR JENKINS. JACK. I HAVE NO QUESTIONS.

VICE CHAIR. THERE'S REALLY NICE WORK BEING DONE OUT THERE.

I JUST DROVE THE SECTION THAT WAS DONE NEAR KIMBERLEYS WAY AND IT'S WONDERFUL.

[01:10:02]

I'M REALLY HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ACTION ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.

SECOND. CALL FOR THE VOTE. VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES.

SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES.

SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES. CHAIR COMPTON? YES. ACTION ITEM NUMBER EIGHT HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

ACTION NINE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR ACTION ITEM NINE.

[9. Public Works - Approve Professional Services Contract No. 2559037.1, in an amount not to exceed $500,811.00, to Dibble & Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc. (Dibble) for Professional Services for the Orme Road Dirt to Black Project. YC Contract No. 2026-245 (District 2 - Supervisor Jenkins)]

WE ARE LOOKING TO GET A CONTRACT APPROVED WITH DIBBLE & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS TO DO SOME ENGINEERING DESIGN WORK FOR US FOR PAVING OF A DIRT ROAD THAT EXISTS WITHIN DISTRICT TWO. SUPERVISOR JENKINS DISTRICT.

THIS IS CALLED ORME ROAD. SO THIS GOES SOUTH OFF OF STATE ROUTE 69.

IT IS ABOUT A THREE MILE OR THREE MILE PROJECT FROM THE STATE ROUTE 169 TO THE FOREST SERVICE BOUNDARY THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL AREA. THE CONTRACT AMOUNT FOR THESE ENGINEERING AND DESIGN SERVICES IS $500,811.

THE COUNTY DID GO OUT AND REQUEST CONSULTATION SERVICES REQUESTS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO DETERMINE THAT DIBBLE WAS THE MOST QUALIFIED FIRM.

SEVEN FIRMS DID SUBMIT TO THE COUNTY, WHICH WE WERE PLEASED WITH.

IT WAS A IT WAS A GREAT RESPONSE. SOMETIMES IT'S A TOUGH DECISION BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF QUALIFIED FIRMS OUT THERE, BUT WE DID DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE AND RANKING THOSE FIRMS. WE WENT THROUGH AN INTERVIEW PROCESS WHERE WE INTERVIEWED OUR TOP THREE CANDIDATES.

AND DIBBLE DID COME OUT AS THE TOP RANKING FIRM FOR THE DESIGN SERVICES FOR THIS PROJECT.

AND IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS IN RELATION TO THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ASK, BUT WE DO REQUEST THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH AWARD OF THIS CONTRACT TO DIBBLE. SUPERVISOR JENKINS. THIS IS A PROJECT THAT'S BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR A WHILE, AND THIS IS THE FIRST STEP IN A MULTI YEAR PROJECT. SO I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT WE'RE MOVING FORWARD ON THAT ROAD AND THAT THAT STRETCH OF THE ROAD I SHOULD SAY.

YES. YEAH. THANK YOU ROGER. YOU'RE WELCOME. WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A MOTION? YES, I'D LIKE TO MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ITEM.

I'LL SECOND. CALL FOR THE VOTE. VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES. CHAIR COMPTON? YES.

ACTION ITEM NUMBER NINE HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU.

ACTION TEN. SHERIFF. GOOD MORNING, SIR. GOOD MORNING.

[10. Sheriff - Approve a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and an accompanying Business Associate Agreement (BAA) with Navajo County, through the Navajo County Sheriff's Office, to allow Navajo County to participate in Yavapai County's Reentry Program Database (RPD) as a sub-grantee of Arizona Attorney General opioid-abatement grant funds in the amount of $307,000.00, and to govern the protection of Protected Health Information (PHI) and Personally Identifiable Information (PII) exchanged between the parties. These agreements revoke and supersede any prior MOUs between the parties relating to the RPD and the Kyndryl, Inc. agreement. YC Contract Nos. 2026-232 and 2026-233]

I NOTICED THAT THIS MICROPHONE DOESN'T COME UP QUITE AS HIGH AS MAYBE IT NEEDS TO.

[LAUGHTER]. PHIL WAS HAVING THAT PROBLEM. DAVID RHODES, YAVAPAI COUNTY SHERIFF. ACTION ITEM NUMBER TEN. THIS IS A MOU MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATE AGREEMENT WITH NAVAJO COUNTY.

THIS IS SO YAVAPAI COUNTY CAN ACT AS A PASS THROUGH FOR FUNDING FOR THE REENTRY DATABASE THAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED HERE IN YAVAPAI COUNTY, BUT TO BE USED FOR ALL COUNTIES IN THE STATE.

THE APPROPRIATION CAME FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPIOID FUNDS APPROPRIATED BY THE LEGISLATURE.

$3 MILLION A FEW YEARS AGO. THAT HAS BEEN USED TO BUILD THE DATABASE AND TO BRING THESE OTHER COUNTIES ONLINE.

THERE WAS ANOTHER APPROPRIATION THIS YEAR. ACTUALLY, THE CSA REPORT WAS SLIGHTLY INACCURATE.

IT HAD REENTRY AT 16 MILLION. THAT WAS ACTUALLY 17,000,000, AND 1 MILLION OF THOSE DOLLARS WAS FOR THE ONGOING MAINTENANCE OF THE DATABASE THAT IS SUBJECT TO THIS BUSINESS AGREEMENT.

SO WE'RE ASKING FOR BOARD APPROVAL TO OF THIS BUSINESS AGREEMENT AND MOU TO PASS THROUGH $307,000 FROM OUR STATE APPROPRIATION, NAVAJO COUNTY, SO THEY CAN COME ONLINE WITH OUR DATABASE.

ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? SUPERVISOR.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I'LL SECOND. CALL FOR THE VOTE.

VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES.

CHAIR COMPTON? YES. ACTION ITEM NUMBER TEN HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU, SHERIFF. THANK YOU. HEARING NUMBER ONE, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

[1. Development Services - Consideration of a Series 010 Beer and Wine Store Liquor License Application #398381, submitted by Sebastian Ernesto Velis for TA Express Cordes Junction located at 19821 E. Arcosanti Road, Mayer, AZ 86333 (District 2 – Supervisor Jenkins)]

OKAY, THANK YOU. ONE MOMENT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

THINGS TEND TO MOVE A LITTLE TOO FAST SOMETIMES.

YES.

[01:15:12]

GOOD MORNING MARK. GOOD MORNING. CHAIRMAN, VICE CHAIR, BOARD MEMBERS.

MARK LUSSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

BEFORE YOU FOR HEARING, ITEM NUMBER ONE IS A CONSIDERATION OF A SERIES TEN BEER AND WINE LIQUOR LICENSE FOR TA EXPRESS DOWN IN CORTEDES JUNCTION, LOCATED AT 19821 EAST ARCOSANTI ROAD.

TO DATE, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY LETTERS OF OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT FOR THIS LIQUOR LICENSE.

I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. ANY, SUPERVISOR JENKINS.

IS THIS FOR THE NEW TA CENTER THERE? YES, MA'AM.

OKAY. THIS IS JUST GETTING IN PREPARATION BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION, BUT THEY JUST WANT THIS IN PLACE FOR WHEN THEY OPEN, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY. THIS IS A HEARING ITEM.

HAS ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO SPEAK? CLERK, ANYBODY, ANYTHING ONLINE? NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED. I CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I'D LIKE TO MOTION TO APPROVE HEARING ITEM ONE.

MOTION TO APPROVE HEARING ITEM ONE. SECOND. FIRST AND SECOND.

YOU CALL FOR THE VOTE. VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES.

SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES.

SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES. CHAIR COMPTON? YES. HEARING ITEM NUMBER ONE HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MARK. HEARING NUMBER TWO.

[2. Public Works - Hearing to approve a water franchise application and agreement with Walden Meadows Community Co-op, pursuant to A.R.S. §40-283 and Yavapai County Resolution No. 1262. YC Contract No. 2026-221 (District 1 - Supervisor Compton)]

PUBLIC WORKS. YEAH. GOOD MORNING AGAIN, ROGER MCCORMICK, YOUR DIRECTOR FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.

TODAY WE HAVE A HEARING IN RELATION TO RENEWAL OF A WATER SERVICE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT.

LET'S SEE HERE. OH, I'M PUSHING THE WRONG BUTTONS HERE.

THERE WE GO. ALL RIGHT. SO THIS WATER SERVICE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT IS WITH WALDEN MEADOWS COMMUNITY CO-OP.

SO THIS IS IN DISTRICT ONE DOWN IN THE WILHOITE AREA.

THE HEARING IS IN RELATION TO USE OF OUR COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY.

SO THIS ALLOWS THE WALDEN MEADOWS COMMUNITY CO-OP AND THEIR WATER SYSTEM TO UTILIZE THE COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY TO USE FOR TRANSPORTATION OF THEIR WATER UTILITY SERVICE.

ALL THE OTHER REGULATIONS IN RELATION TO THIS UTILITY ARE GOVERNED BY THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION.

JUST A LITTLE HISTORY. WALDEN MEADOWS COMMUNITY CO-OP HAS BEEN OPERATING SINCE 1976, AND THEY PROVIDE WATER SERVICE TO ABOUT 462 CUSTOMERS IN THE WILHOIT AREA. THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND ALSO RISK MANAGEMENT. AND THE NOTICE FOR TODAY'S HEARING WAS PUBLISHED FOR THREE CONSECUTIVE WEEKS TO ALLOW FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT.

THE SERVICE AREA THAT IT INCLUDES IS WALDEN VILLAGE, THUNDERBIRD MEADOWS, AND THE BURRO INN, RV PARK. AND THIS MAP HERE COMING UP CAN KIND OF SHOW THE AREA WHERE THOSE ARE LOCATED.

THAT'S THE SERVICE AREA MAP. SO WITH THAT STATED, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE APPROVAL OF THIS FRANCHISE AGREEMENT SO THAT WALDEN MEADOWS CAN CONTINUE TO OFFER THEIR UTILITY SERVICE TO THE RESIDENTS OF WILHOIT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THIS IS MY DISTRICT. I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS.

DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY CONCERNS? OKAY, THEN I'LL MOVE TO.

THIS IS A HEARING ITEM. ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO SPEAK? ANYTHING ONLINE, KIMMY? NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED.

MOVE TO APPROVE HEARING NUMBER TWO. SECOND. CALL FOR THE VOTE.

VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES.

CHAIR COMPTON? YES. HEARING ITEM NUMBER TWO HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU, ROGER. THANK YOU. HEARING THREE. TREASURER.

[3. Treasurer - Hearing to approve the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-2027 Treasurer's Fee Schedule.]

GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN. BOARD.

THIS IS OUR PUBLIC HEARING TO DO OUR FEE ADJUSTMENT SO THAT WE LAST DID IT FIVE YEARS AGO.

ALL OF THE STATUTORY FEES THAT ARE ON THE LOWER PARAGRAPH, THOSE ARE ALL SET BY STATUTE, SO WE HAVE NO ADJUSTMENT ON THOSE.

THE TOP ONE ON THE DEPARTMENT FEES WAS JUST A REASSESSMENT OF THE AMOUNT OF WORK WE PUT IN TO THE REQUESTS THAT ARE MADE FOR US, SO THAT IT'S AN EVEN WASH. SO WE'VE DONE ALL OF THE PUBLIC NOTICES, WE'VE DONE THE NEWSPAPER NOTICES AND THE WEBSITE AND WE HAVEN'T HEARD BACK FROM ANYBODY. OKAY.

ANY QUESTIONS? MARY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. OH, HOLD ON A SECOND.

[01:20:02]

IS A HEARING. THAT'S RIGHT. ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO SPEAK? ANYBODY ONLINE? NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED. FEEL FREE.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION. SECOND. GOT A MOTION? A SECOND CALL FOR THE VOTE.

VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES.

CHAIR COMPTON? YES. HEARING ITEM NUMBER THREE HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU, CHIP. THANK YOU. AND HAPPY AMERICA 250 AND HAPPY 4TH OF JULY.

YES, SIR. HEARING NUMBER FOUR, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

[4. Development Services - Approve a permanent and transferable Wireless Use Permit (WUP), on APN 306-02-510U to allow for the construction and operation of a new wireless communication facility with a 99' tall monopole wireless tower, with waivers, on a 7.94 acre parcel, subject to the conditions of approval. Owner: Reid Kruly & Marcella Matthews-Kruly. Applicant/Agent: Pinnacle Consulting, Inc. Application No. PLA26-000011. (District 4 - Supervisor Kuknyo)]

GOOD MORNING SUSAN. GOOD MORNING.

GOOD MORNING CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. I'M SUSAN HEBERT, PLANNER WITH YAVAPAI COUNTY.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. OKAY. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION.

EXCUSE ME. AND THAT VOTE WAS 7 TO 1. THIS PROPERTY IS IN SUPERVISOR KUKNYO DISTRICT FOUR, JUST WEST OF THE CHINO VALLEY TOWN LIMITS. THE PROPERTIES ARE ZONED RCU-2A AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS DEVELOPED. IT'S A NICE RURAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE MAP HERE IS GOING TO SHOW THE FLOODPLAIN AREA.

THE YELLOW STAR IS WHERE THE PROJECT WOULD BE.

IT'S IN THE FLOOD FRINGE. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES NOT HAVE ANY DESIGNATED AREAS FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES.

SO IT COULD TECHNICALLY BE IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT.

OKAY, THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. THE COMPOUND WITH GROUND EQUIPMENT IN THE TOWER IS IN HIGHLIGHTED AREAS THERE.

AND THIS BLUE CIRCLE IS THE FALL ZONE. THAT'S A DESIGNATED PREDICTED AREA.

IF THE TOWER WERE TO COLLAPSE, THAT WOULD BE THE ESTIMATED AREA OF DEBRIS.

OKAY. THE COMPOUND OR EXCUSE ME, THE PROPOSED TOWER WOULD BE A 99-FOOT-TALL MONOPOLE DESIGN.

IT WOULD HAVE A SHROUD COVER OVER THE ANTENNA ARRAY THAT WOULD BE CONCEALING THE COMPONENTS, BUT IT IS NOT A COMMON STEALTH DESIGN THAT WE SEE.

THE PLANS SHOW THE TOP ARRAY IS THE ANCHOR CARRIER, SO THAT WOULD BE BUILT FIRST.

AND THEN BELOW THAT THERE ARE TWO SPACES FOR POTENTIAL CO LOCATORS IN THE FUTURE.

THE ORDINANCE DOES RECOMMEND CO-LOCATION OVER BUILDING INDIVIDUAL TOWERS FOR EACH CARRIER, AND THIS ALSO SHOWS A PROPOSED WOOD OR METAL FENCE IN PLACE OF A CMU WALL THAT'S REQUIRED.

BUT THE APPLICANT HAS DECIDED THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO MEET THE CMU WALL REQUIREMENT.

OKAY. THAT'S JUST AN AERIAL VIEW. AND THEN WE HAVE SOME PHOTO SIMULATIONS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, AND THEY'RE AT VARYING DISTANCES.

OKAY. NOTIFICATIONS WERE SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1,000FT OF THE PARCEL BOUNDARIES.

THE APPLICANT RECEIVED EIGHT RESPONSES OF OPPOSITION WITH CONCERNS ABOUT POTENTIAL HEALTH IMPACTS TO THE VISUAL FIELD.

THE USE OF 5G TECHNOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RECEIVED 21 SURVEY COMMENTS, LETTERS OR EMAILS.

ALL OF THOSE WERE IN OPPOSITION, AS WELL AS A PETITION WITH 76 SIGNATURES OF OPPOSITION.

THAT WAS PROVIDED BY ANOTHER APPLICANT OR SORRY, ANOTHER PUBLIC MEMBER.

THE ORANGE DOTS ARE ONLY SHOWING THE SURVEY RESPONSES HERE, AND NO COMMENTS OF SUPPORT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED.

FOR STAFF CONCERNS ONE WOULD BE THE CONCEALMENT DESIGN.

IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA.

TO FIT INTO THE RURAL NEIGHBORHOOD. SOME OTHER OPTIONS MIGHT BE SOMETHING LIKE A WINDMILL, WATER TOWER, GRAIN SILO TYPE OF RURAL DESIGN.

DEPENDS ON FEEDBACK, POSSIBLY FROM THE COMMUNITY OR BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS.

ALSO, THE TOWER IS SITUATED PRETTY MUCH AS CLOSE AS THE ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW, WITH A ONE FOOT SETBACK FOR EVERY ONE FOOT OF TOWER HEIGHT.

SO THAT'S IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER. IF IT MOVES ANY CLOSER TO THE FLOODWAY, THERE MAY BE OTHER ISSUES THAT COME UP, THOUGH. AND THE MAIN CONSIDERATION IS THE LACK OF ALTERNATIVE SITE ANALYSIS.

[01:25:02]

THE APPLICANT HAS SAID NO OTHER SITES WERE AVAILABLE IN THE AREA, BUT THEY'VE ALSO PREPARED A PRESENTATION MEANT TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE IN CAPACITY VERSUS A GAP IN COVERAGE OR ACTUAL GAP AND AN ALTERNATE HEIGHT ANALYSIS FOR THE TOWER.

OKAY. AND THIS IS AN OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR WIRELESS FACILITIES AND RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

THEY MUST BE ON A MINIMUM TWO ACRE PARCEL SIZE.

THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS 60FT, WHICH IS WHY THIS USE PERMIT IS NEEDED.

TOWERS MUST BE SET BACK FROM ANY LOT LINE, ONE FOOT FOR EVERY ONE FOOT OF TOWER HEIGHT.

FULL STEALTH DESIGN TO MATCH THE CHARACTERISTICS AND COLORS OF THE SURROUNDINGS NEED TO BE MAINTAINED.

AND THEY MUST USE THE LEAST INTRUSIVE DESIGN TO FILL A SIGNIFICANT GAP IN SERVICE COVERAGE.

GROUND EQUIPMENT ALSO NEEDS TO BE CONCEALED BEHIND THAT EIGHT FOOT CMU WALL.

OKAY. AND WHILE ACCORDING TO THE FEDERAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CAN MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON THE SITING OF CELL TOWERS, THEY MAY NOT DISCRIMINATE BETWEEN WIRELESS SERVICE PROVIDERS WITH FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT SERVICES.

THEY MAY NOT PROHIBIT OR HAVE THE EFFECT OF PROHIBITING WIRELESS SERVICE.

AND THEY MAY NOT BE REGULATING BASED ON ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF FCC-COMPLIANT RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS.

SO ANY DECISION TO DENY A REQUEST DOES NEED TO BE SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE WRITTEN RECORD.

THAT'S SPECIAL TO USE PERMITS FOR WIRELESS FACILITIES.

IN SUMMARY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONSIDERATION OF A WIRELESS USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A NEW WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY WITH 99 FOOT TOWER ON 7.94 ACRES IN THE RCU-2A ZONING DISTRICT.

AND THAT WAIVER REQUEST IS NO LONGER NEEDED. AGAIN, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION VOTED TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION, WITH NO CHANGES SUGGESTED. COMMISSIONER EASTWOOD MAY BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

AND THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ARE ON SCREEN, WITH CONDITION NUMBER TWO HAVING BEEN STRUCK FOR THAT FENCE WAIVER.

OKAY, AND JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT, LOGAN WILLIAMS OF PINNACLE WEST DOES HAVE ANOTHER PRESENTATION TO SHARE.

IF THE BOARD WILL ALLOW. BUT THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO IT'S YOUR DISTRICT, DO YOU WANT TO COMMENT? ARE YOU GOING TO ALLOW THE OTHER PRESENTATION BY THE COMPANY? OH, CERTAINLY. BUT I JUST THOUGHT YOU MIGHT.

YEAH, BECAUSE I GOT A LOT TO SAY ON THIS ONE. OKAY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? OKAY. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? YOU'RE PULLING IT UP FOR YOU. PRESENTATION. JUST THE ONE THAT YOU SAID RECENTLY WITH THE ORIGINAL ONE.

I THINK THAT'S ON THERE. OKAY. GOOD MORNING SIR.

IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. YEAH. GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR. MADAM VICE CHAIR. LOGAN WILLIAMS WITH PINNACLE CONSULTING ON BEHALF OF VERIZON WIRELESS SUN STATE TOWERS. YES, WE WEREN'T ACTUALLY ABLE TO PRESENT THE RADIO FREQUENCY PROPAGATION MAPS FOR THE ORIGINAL 99-FOOT DESIGN.

WE DO HERE HAVE THE COMPARISON BETWEEN THE TWO.

IF WE WERE TO DROP IT TO THAT 60FT, PUTTING US AT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWANCE.

SO IF THAT'S OKAY, AND IF THE ORIGINAL PRESENTATION ISN'T AVAILABLE, I WOULD ASK THAT MY COLLEAGUE MR. STEVE KENNEDY CAN COME UP AND PRESENT THIS AT THE VERY LEAST, BUT.

THAT'S ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING SIR, IF YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

MORNING, MR. CHAIR, VICE CHAIR SUPERVISORS, MY NAME IS STEVEN KENNEDY.

I'M A RADIO FREQUENCY DESIGN ENGINEERING CONSULTANT.

I HAVE 36 YEARS IN THE WIRELESS INDUSTRY, AND I'M GOING TO GO OVER A HIGHLY TECHNICAL CONCEPT AND TRY TO MAKE IT JUST AS EVERY DAY AS POSSIBLE.

SO I WAS ASKED TO REVIEW THIS SITE AND DO AN ALTERNATIVE SITE ANALYSIS OR ALTERNATIVE SITE ANALYSIS TO SEE WHAT THE DIFFERENCES IN HEIGHTS MEAN FOR COVERAGE.

IF YOU COULD MAKE IT AS STREAMLINED AS POSSIBLE, IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS, THEY'RE FREE TO ASK.

UNDERSTOOD. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING'S IN THE RECORD. SO THE ALTERNATIVE HEIGHTS OR JUST REVIEW WHAT HEIGHTS ANTENNAS WORK AND HOW THEY WORK AND HOW THEY ARE ABLE TO DO THE OFF LOAD UP. THIS SITE IS NEEDED FOR INCREASED THROUGHPUT BECAUSE OF INCREASED USAGE IN THE AREA.

SO THE MORE THE MORE PHONES USING THE NETWORK, THE MORE NEED FOR NETWORK CAPACITY.

TO ZOOM PROPOSED SITES THIS IS THE EXISTING VERIZON SITES THAT SURROUND THE PROPOSED.

[01:30:03]

THE CLOSEST BEING 2.34 MILES AWAY, THE FARTHEST ONE BEING 7.78 MILES AWAY.

CAPACITY ANALOGY IS JUST LIKE A WATER PIPE. COVERAGE IS THE ABILITY FOR THE TRANSCEIVER IN THIS PHONE TO TALK TO THE TRANSCEIVER ON THE SITE AND HAVE NO DROPPED CALL.

CAPACITY, IS THE ABILITY TO SERVICE THAT PHONE.

NOW, 36 YEARS AGO, ALL WE COULD DO ON A PHONE WAS TALK.

IT DOES A WHOLE LOT MORE NOW THAT THAT NEEDS CAPACITY.

SO AN ANALOGY IS A WATER PIPE ANALOGY. IF YOU RUN A WATER PIPE DOWN A STREET, ONE PERSON TAPS THAT PIPE, THEY GET THE FULL GALLONS PER MINUTE. THEY GET 100% OF CAPACITY.

IF TWO PEOPLE TAP THAT PIPE, IT SPLITS INTO 50-50.

4 PEOPLE, 25, 8 PEOPLE, 12.5 EACH. RADIO CHANNEL ACTS LIKE A WATER PIPE.

IT IS A FINITE RESOURCE, HENCE THE NEED FOR THE CAPACITY.

SO THE OFFLOAD CAPACITY SITE TYPICALLY FITS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE OTHER SITES THAT ARE OVER CAPACITY, AND THEN OFFLOADS SITES ON CELL EDGE AND PROVIDES THAT SERVICE THAT THOSE OTHER SITES ARE UNABLE TO PROVIDE AND PROVIDE THAT THROUGHPUT OR THAT GALLONS PER MINUTE WATER IN THE ANALOGY. THE ALTERNATIVE SITES RAN WHERE THE ORIGINAL WAS 96FT FOR VERIZON AS A AS A ATTACHMENT.

THE SECOND WAS A HEIGHT OF 57FT. WITH THE LOWERING HEIGHT IT REDUCES THE AMOUNT OF CARRIERS THAT CAN ATTACH TO THAT SITE FROM 3 TO 2.

SO THIS IS A GRAPHIC OF WHAT THE SITE WOULD LOOK LIKE, OR JUST AN ANALOGY OF SHOWING WHAT THE DIFFERENT HEIGHTS AND HOW I CAME UP WITH THE CENTER LINES. THIS IS THE FOCUS ZONE. SO WE USE A PROPAGATION MODEL CALLED ATOLL.

IT TAKES AND DOES A LOT OF MATH TAKES INTO ACCOUNT TERRAIN, CLUTTER ALL SORTS OF THINGS RELATIVE TO CAPACITY, ANTENNA TYPES, POWERS, FREQUENCY BANDS, ETC..

SO I TELL THE MODEL WITHIN THIS FOCUS ZONE TO DO SOME EXTRA MATH.

AND THAT'S WHAT THE RESULTS OF THESE NEXT SLIDES ARE. SO HERE'S EXISTING SERVER FOR THE BEST SERVER FOR THE LOW BAND EXISTING COVERAGE.

YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED SITE IN THE MIDDLE IS NOT TURNED ON.

YOU CAN SEE THERE'S VARIOUS AMOUNTS OF COLOR FROM ALL OF THE ANTENNAS PROVIDING COVERAGE IN THIS AREA.

SO WITHIN THE AREA OF THE PROPOSED, THERE'S NO ONE SPECIFIC PROVIDER OF SERVICE.

OKAY, SO ALL THE MOBILES ARE OUT ON CELL EDGE AND THEY'RE HAVING A HARD TIME MAKING CONNECTION.

THEY'RE NOT GETTING AS MUCH THROUGHPUT. SO WHEN WE ADD IN THE PROPOSED SITE, ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE GOOD SOLID FIXED A SIGNIFICANT SERVER, ONE THAT PROVIDES FOR THAT AREA. SO WE SEE A DIFFERENCE IN COVERAGE.

SO THOSE OTHER SECTORS ARE NOT PROVIDING THE SERVICE.

THE NEW SITE IS PROVIDING THE SERVICE. HERE I RAN IT AT 57FT.

SO WE CAN SEE A CHANGE IN THE COLOR OR WHAT THAT SERVICE AREA IS GOING TO BE FOR THE PROPOSED VERSUS THE REDUCED HEIGHT.

SO THERE'S A CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR THE CHANGE OF CAPACITY OVERLAP.

THIS IS BEST SERVED FOR LOW BAND FOR THE 99 FOOT TOWER AND THEN FOR THE 45 FOOT TOWER OR 60, 45 AGL. THAT'S THE LOWEST POINT. THIS IS THE LOW BAND SERVER COMPARISON.

SO WE'RE SEEING ABOUT ANYWHERE FROM 12 TO 15% OF REDUCTION IN COVERAGE AND CAPACITY OVERLAP AND OFFLOAD.

SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO KEEP THE TOWER AT THE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED AND APPROVED, BECAUSE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT NEED FOR INCREASED QUALITY OF SERVICE BECAUSE SERVICE IS STARTING TO DECLINE IN THE AREA.

THE ENGINEERS HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS TWO AND THREE YEARS IN ADVANCE.

SO WHILE IT DOESN'T START TO SHOW NOW, IT'S GOING TO SHOW.

OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO.

NO QUESTIONS. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? EVERYBODY WANTS CELL SERVICE.

NO ONE WANTS A CELL TOWER. BUT THAT BEING SAID, THESE TOWERS THAT THAT COMPANIES ARE COMING IN WITH OUR BIG GIANT TOWERS IN THE MIDDLE OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. AND I'VE HAD TROUBLE WITH THIS.

IN WILLIAMSON VALLEY, I HAVE DEAD SPOTS WHERE COVERAGE IS JUST STRAIGHT LOST.

AND BECAUSE COMPANIES HAVE COME IN AND PROPOSED THESE GIANT TOWERS, IT FREAKS OUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

JUSTIFIED OR UNJUSTIFIED, IT DOES. DOESN'T GET APPROVED.

AND I STILL HAVE A DEAD SPOT THERE. SO IT'S REALLY HARD TO, IT DAMAGES THE ABILITY TO GO TO FUTURE PROJECTS.

WE ALLOW 60FT. EVERYBODY WANTS TO GO HIGHER. AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR REASONS FOR WANTING TO GO HIGHER, BUT WE ALLOW 60FT. THERE'S A PROCESS THAT NEEDS TO BE FOLLOWED AND AN EXPECTATION THAT BOXES NEED TO BE CHECKED FOR NEED AND AN IMPACT ON RESIDENTS. AND I THINK SOME OF THOSE THINGS WERE MISSED.

P&Z DID NOT RECOMMEND WITH A VOTE OF 7 TO 1. AND I HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC MOTION THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE, SO I COVER ALL THOSE BOXES. THAT'S CERTAINLY FINE.

WE HEAR THERE'S MANY PEOPLE ON THEY WANT TO WANT TO BE HEARD ON THIS ISSUE TOO.

AND IT JUST APPEARS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, YOU FAIL TO ESTABLISH THAT THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT GAP IN WIRELESS SERVICES FROM WHAT I SAW AND THAT OR THIS WAS THE LEAST INTRUSIVE, YOU KNOW, OPTION OR AND

[01:35:07]

THEN THE HEIGHT THING, THE THAT SUPERVISOR KUKNYO WAS TALKING ABOUT. SO, I MEAN, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. BUT IN TERMS OF THIS RIGHT HERE, IN TERMS OF HEARING FROM THE PUBLIC, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO VICE CHAIR CHECK, BECAUSE THERE'S MANY PEOPLE THAT WANT TO SPEAK ON THAT, AND SHE'S GOING TO HANDLE THE MEETING FROM THIS POINT FORWARD WITH THIS. THANK YOU, CHAIR.

ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A STACK OF GREEN SHEETS. I'LL CALL YOUR NAME.

YOU CAN APPROACH THE MICROPHONE HERE. AND AGAIN, MAKE SURE THAT YOU SPEAK CLOSELY INTO THE MICROPHONE.

AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. I HAVE SHARON TURNER WHO WISHES TO SPEAK OPPOSED TO THE ISSUE.

YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. YOU CAN REFERENCE OUR LITTLE STOPLIGHT GAUGE HERE.

WHAT IS IT? YELLOW IS ONE MORE MINUTE AND THEN RED IS STOP, FINISH YOUR SENTENCE.

THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS SHARON TURNER AND I LIVE AT 2650 WEST WILLOW BREEZE ROAD.

I WANT TO ADDRESS A LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS FROM PINNACLE CONSTRUCTION, EXCUSE ME, CONSULTANT IN FEBRUARY. IN THE SECTION OPERATIONAL DETAILS, IT STATES THAT THE NOISE GENERATED FROM THE EQUIPMENT ITSELF.

SO DOES THIS MEAN WE HAVE TO LISTEN TO THIS NOISE ALL THE TIME? IN SECTION COMMUNITY MITIGATION MEASURES, IT STATES THAT THE CELL TOWER WILL BE PLACED IN AN INDUSTRIAL USE AREA SCREENED BY EXISTING VEGETATION AND STRUCTURES.

THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT LOCATED IN AN INDUSTRIAL USE AREA.

THERE ARE NO STRUCTURES, NO VEGETATION UNLESS YOU COUNT WEEDS.

MR. WILLIAMS STATED TO ONE PROPERTY OWNER THAT THIS WAS AN ERROR AND THAT THE NEIGHBORS WERE NOTIFIED BY A LETTER OR PHONE CALL CONCERNING THIS MISTAKE.

I NEVER RECEIVED EITHER A PHONE CALL OR A LETTER.

THE ESTHETICS PINNACLE STATES THAT THE DESIGN AND COLOR WILL BLEND IN WITH THE SURROUNDING FACILITIES, REDUCING VISUAL IMPACT TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.

I THINK THEY'RE KIDDING. HOW DOES A 99 FOOT BROWN POLE WITH THREE PANELS ON TOP FIT ANYWHERE? THERE ARE NO FACILITIES IN THIS AREA. THERE IS ONLY THREE BARNS IN A SHED.

I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW THIS CELL TOWER WILL BLEND IN.

ALSO, I READ THAT THE TOWER CAN HAVE THE HEIGHT INCREASE TO 20FT AND FOR MORE NEW EQUIPMENT, PANELS CAN BE ADDED. WHY WASN'T THIS ADDRESSED IN THE LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS? I CAN ALMOST BET THAT PINNACLE, VERIZON AND SUNSTATE ARE PLANNING TO DO THIS.

WE HAVE A BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD. IT IS QUIET, HAS CLEAN AIR, CLEAN SIGHTLINES, AND NO UTILITY POLES.

EVERYTHING IS UNDERGROUND. ALSO, THEY ARE PLACING TOWER TO THE SPECS OF A 99 FOOT TOWER OR THE 119 FOOT TOWER.

I AM ALSO CONCERNED THAT SUN CITY WILL PLACE A 60 FOOT TOWER WITHOUT LETTING THE PROPERTY OWNERS KNOW IF THE 99 FOOT TOWER IS VOTED DOWN.

SOME OTHER CONCERNS HOW PINNACLE, VERIZON AND SUNSTATE THINK THAT IT IS OKAY TO PLACE A TOWER IN A FLOODPLAIN NEXT TO THE CHANNEL THAT CAN FILL UP AND FLOOD WHEN IT RAINS.

THE CHANNEL RUNS FROM WILLOW BREEZE TO WEST ROAD, ONE SOUTH ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTIES.

HOW THIS TOWER WILL AFFECT THE PROPERTY VALUES? I OWN APPROXIMATELY EIGHT ACRES AND THE TOWER WILL REDUCE THE VALUE OF MY PROPERTY SUBSTANTIALLY AND EVERYONE ELSE'S PROPERTY AROUND ME.

PINNACLE, VERIZON, SUN STATE AND THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO AGREED TO HAVE THE TOWER PLACED ON HIS LAND ARE MAKING MONEY AND THE REST OF US ARE LOSING MONEY.

HOW DOES THIS SEEM RIGHT? THE EMISSIONS OF RADIATION, THIS ONE SCARES ME, MY HUSBAND DIED OF CANCER AND IT WAS A HORRIBLE DISEASE.

THIS SITE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN CHOSEN FOR VERIZON, BY VERIZON AND PINNACLE.

I READ THAT PINNACLE SENT A LETTER TO THE STATE BUT DID NOT GET A RESPONSE.

DOESN'T PINNACLE HAVE THE, HAVE TO PURSUE THE STATE UNTIL THEY GET A RESPONSE? I FEEL PINNACLE AND VERIZON WENT THE EASY WAY WITHOUT ANY CONCERN OF HOW THIS AFFECTS EVERYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I SPOKE WITH A LOT OF MY NEIGHBORS, AND NONE OF US ARE HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH OUR CELL PHONES.

SO I AM NOT SURE WHY THE CELL TOWER HAS TO BE PLACED IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DOCTOR NICOLE BURDETTE WISHES TO SPEAK OPPOSED TO THE ISSUE.

HELLO, I'M DOCTOR NICOLE BURDETTE AND I THANK YOU, LORD, FOR HEARING US TODAY.

I AM SPEAKING TO STATE MY OPPOSITION TO THE CELL PHONE TOWER.

OUR PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEXT TO THE PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF THE TOWER.

OUR HOUSE IS LOCATED ON AN ELEVATED PIECE OF LAND THAT LOOKS OVER THE LOCAL AREA.

THIS TOWER WOULD DIMINISH THE ESTHETICS OF OUR BEAUTIFUL VIEW, WHICH IS ONE OF THE REASONS WE CHOSE TO MOVE HERE.

THERE ARE MINIMAL REGULATORY OVERSIGHTS IN THE UNITED STATES.

EXPOSURE LIMITS HAVE NOT CHANGED SINCE 1996 WITHOUT REVIEW OF UPDATED SCIENTIFIC REVIEWS.

THESE REVIEWS HAVE INDICATED THAT THERE ARE ADVERSE EFFECTS TO ANIMALS AND HUMANS WHO ARE EXPOSED TO THE WIRELESS RADIATION, OR, SORRY, 200 TIMES TOO HIGH FOR PEOPLE AND ANIMALS AND PUTS THEM AT RISK FOR CANCER.

THE PEER REVIEWED ARTICLES THAT HAVE HAPPENED SINCE 1996 INDICATE THAT CELL PHONE TOWERS ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH OF ALL BEINGS.

[01:40:02]

THE PLACEMENT OF THIS TOWER IS EXTREMELY CONCERNING TO ALL OF US.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES, A STUDY WAS CONDUCTED IN 2022 THAT EXAMINED STUDIES FROM 20 COUNTRIES ON PEOPLE LIVING NEAR CELL TOWERS AND CELL ANTENNA SITES, THE RESULTS INDICATED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THESE SITES REPORTED ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS, INCLUDING CANCER.

73.6 OF THE STUDIES, PERCENT OF THE STUDIES CONDUCTED INDICATED HUMAN HEALTH IMPACTS DUE TO HIGHER EXPOSURE OF RADIO FREQUENCY RADIATION THAT WAS EMITTED FROM THE CELL ANTENNAS.

KEY AREAS HIGHLIGHTED WERE AN INCREASE IN CANCER, HEADACHES, SLEEP, AND MEMORY ISSUES.

CHANGES TO BIOCHEMICAL PARAMETERS SUCH AS DNA DAMAGE AND CHANGES IN BLOOD CELLS WERE FOUND.

THE BASOPHILS, WHICH IS THE WHITE BLOOD CELLS TO FIGHT OFF ALLERGENS, PARASITES AND PATHOGENS, MONOCYTES THE WHITE BLOOD CELLS FOR IMMUNITY, AND LYMPHOCYTES, THE WHITE BLOOD CELLS TO FIGHT OFF VIRUSES INDICATED CHANGES IN THE BLOOD OF THOSE LIVING NEAR CELL TOWERS. CHILDREN ARE ESPECIALLY IMPACTED AND ACCOUNTS OUTSIDE OF THE CLINICAL RANGES OF SAFETY.

FURTHER STUDIES CONDUCTED BY DOCTOR HENRY LAI INDICATED NEGATIVE CHANGES IN OXIDATIVE STRESS, GENETIC DAMAGE, NEUROLOGICAL, REPRODUCTIVE, ENDOCRINE, AND IMMUNE CELL, IMMUNE SYSTEM HEALTH.

FURTHERMORE, RESEARCH INDICATES THAT THE PLACEMENT OF CELL PHONE TOWERS IMPACTS PROPERTY VALUES.

THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS REPORTED 94% OF BUYERS WOULD PAY LESS FOR OR AVOID HOMES NEAR CELL PHONE TOWERS OR WITHIN VISIBLE PROXIMITY, REDUCING VALUES UP TO 20%.

A GENERAL REAL ESTATE APPRAISER REPORTED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES.

WHILE THE MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT VARIES, THE STUDIES UNIFORMLY INDICATE THAT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY VALUES FROM THE INSTALLATION OF THESE TOWERS.

THE REALTOR MAGAZINE DID A STUDY OF 100, I'M SORRY, A THOUSAND SURVEY RESPONDENTS.

79% SAID THAT NO, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD THEY EVER PURCHASE OR RENT A PROPERTY WITHIN A FEW BLOCKS OF US.

IS THAT THE END? YES. THANK THOSE TOWERS. FOR THIS REASON, I OPPOSE.

THANK YOU. DWIGHT D'EVELYN WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

AND YOU DO HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, BOARD AND CHAIRMAN.

I'M GOING TO READ VERY FAST TO TRY AND BE WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT.

MY NAME IS DWIGHT D'EVELYN. FOR 22 YEARS MY WIFE AND I HAVE LIVED AT 2705 WEST ROAD ONE SOUTH.

OUR EAST PROPERTY LINE IS DIRECTLY NEXT DOOR TO THE PROPOSED TOWER SITE.

A QUICK THANK YOU TO PLANNER SUSAN FOR HER EXCELLENT COMMUNICATIONS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS.

THE ISSUES, ESTHETICS, ALL UTILITY LINES ARE BURIED IN THIS AREA.

WE ONLY SEE ROOFTOPS AND A FEW TREES FROM OUR HOME AND BACK DECK, AND THAT TOWER WOULD DEVASTATE OUR VIEW.

OUR BARN AND HORSE STALLS ARE ADJACENT TO FENCING, WHERE THE EASEMENT FOR POWER, FIBER OPTIC AND A GRAVEL DRIVEWAY IS PROPOSED.

AS YOU MAY KNOW, FEDERAL COURT CASE LAW HAS PUT FCC OVERREACH REGARDING CELL TOWER PLACEMENT ON NOTICE BY MAKING IT CLEAR THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARDS HAVE A LEGAL BASIS TO DENY TOWERS UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS.

OTHERWISE, MOUNT RUSHMORE WOULD BE LINED WITH CELL TOWERS.

ESTHETICS IS JUST ONE OF THEM. IN NOVEMBER 2025, RULING BY THE US DISTRICT COURT OF ARIZONA INVOLVING SUN STATE AND AN ADJACENT COUNTY, THE COURT DIRECTED ASSERTIONS BY SUN STATE THAT GENERALIZED CONCERNS ABOUT ESTHETICS DO NOT CONSTITUTE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

THE COURT REBUFFED AND WROTE, THE NINTH CIRCUIT HAS PREVIOUSLY RULED THAT A SET OF CONCERNS ARE LEGITIMATE CONCERNS FOR LOCALITY, INCLUDING THE HEIGHT OF A PROPOSED TOWER, THE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES AND OTHER USES, AND SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY. PROPERTY VALUES, THIS IS A QUOTE FROM YOUR ASSESSOR, JUDGE SIMMONS IN THE DAILY COURIER.

UNUSUAL OR EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES, INCLUDING CELL TOWERS, CAN CAUSE THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE TO APPLY AN ADVERSE LOCATION, ADJUST, LOCATION ADJUSTMENT ON PROPERTIES AND THE LOSS COULD BE UP TO 20% AS MENTIONED.

OUR SUBMITTED PETITION OPPOSING THE PROJECT INCLUDES MORE THAN 70 SIGNATURES REPRESENTING 40 PARCELS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND NOT ONE PERSON HAS COMPLAINED ABOUT A LACK OF CELL SERVICE.

FLOOD ZONE. THE TOWER IS LOCATED IN A FEMA DESIGNATED FLOOD ZONE.

THE ISSUES HERE ARE OBVIOUS, AND THE ONLY ACCESS TO THE SITE IS BY WAY OF AN UNIMPROVED DIRT ROAD THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE WEST FROM REED ROAD.

THIS ROAD HAS BECOME IMPASSABLE DURING FLOODING, MONSOONS AND WINTER SNOW OVER THE YEARS.

LEAST INTRUSIVE MEANS AND COVERAGE GAP DURING THE P&Z HEARING, WE LEARNED THE SITE IS NEEDED FOR AT LEAST CAPACITY ISSUES.

EXISTING TOWERS CAN BE MODIFIED TO HANDLE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC.

AND WHY IS THIS NOT SHARED? ALSO, THERE IS HIGHER GROUND, HIGHER GROUND, INCLUDING STATE LAND A QUARTER OF A MILE WEST OF THE PROPOSED LOCATION THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED. TABLE MOUNTAIN IS WITH AN UNOBSTRUCTED LINE OF SIGHT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

[01:45:03]

ACCORDING TO THE SUN STATE WEBSITE, THEY HAVE NO TOWER ON TABLE MOUNTAIN.

IN RESPONSE TO A NEIGHBOR AS TO WHY OTHER SITES WERE NOT CONSIDERED, FOCUSING ON STATE LAND, LOGAN, FROM SUN STATE REPLIED IN A LETTER THAT THEY DID NOT RESPOND TO THE SITING REQUEST, SO THEY DID. NO OTHER ANALYSIS AS PREVIOUS CASE LAW HAS CONSIDERED VERY IMPORTANT IN THESE HEARINGS.

WHY IS THE BURDEN OF AN ALLEGED CAVITY CAPACITY PLACED ON THIS NEIGHBORHOOD? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. WE'RE OPPOSED. THANK YOU.

KAREN DEMPSTER WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN VICE CHAIR SUPERVISOR STAFF.

I SEE SOME FAMILIAR FACES AND SOME NEW FACES.

MY NAME IS KAREN DEMPSTER. I RESIDE AT 2300 WEST WILLOW BREEZE ROAD, AND AS A DIRECTLY IMPACTED RESIDENT, I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE STATEMENT. I AM ENTERING MY FORMAL PERSONAL OPPOSITION TO THIS PERMIT INTO THE OFFICIAL WRITTEN RECORD FOR ALL LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE REASONS UNDER YAVAPAI COUNTY ORDINANCES AND FEDERAL LAW.

THAT BEING SAID, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GOT THIS RIGHT WITH THEIR 7 TO 1 DENIAL.

I'M GOING TO SKIP OVER THE ESTHETICS AND THE ZONING ISSUES, YOU'VE HEARD ENOUGH ABOUT THAT.

I WANT TO TELL YOU THAT PINNACLE MAY CLAIM AN AGREEMENT OR A LETTER OF INTENT FROM A CARRIER LIKE VERIZON OR AT&T, BUT THEY'RE BLUFFING YOU. A NON-BINDING LETTER IS NOT EVIDENCE OF A NETWORK EMERGENCY.

NO WIRELESS CARRIER IS A CO-APPLICANT ON THIS PERMIT.

PINNACLE CANNOT SPEAK FOR CARRIER ENGINEERS. THEY HAVE PROVIDED NO RAW, LOCALIZED DATA PROVING A CAPACITY CRISIS IN OUR SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE ALL HAVE EXCELLENT CELL SERVICE THERE, BY THE WAY.

WHEN QUESTIONED ABOUT ACTUAL NETWORK NEEDS, THEY THREW MESSY COLORED MAPS AT YOU.

THEY FAILED TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY DATA AND SIMPLY SHIFTED THEIR NARRATIVE FROM A COVERAGE GAP TO A CAPACITY ISSUE.

SPECULATION WITHOUT DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE IS NOT EXCUSE ME, WITHOUT DOCUMENTED ANALYSIS IS NOT EVIDENCE.

AND HERE'S A NEWSFLASH PINNACLE IS NOT A WIRELESS CARRIER.

THEY DO NOT OWN A CELLULAR NETWORK. THEY DO NOT HAVE RETAIL CUSTOMERS HERE, AND THEY DO NOT POSSESS A FEDERAL TELECOM LICENSE.

PINNACLE IS A SITE ACQUISITION AGENT ACTING ON BEHALF OF THEIR SISTER CORPORATION, SUN STATE TOWERS.

SUN STATE OPERATES SEVERAL EXISTING TOWERS INSIDE CHINO VALLEY TOWN LIMITS.

PLEASE SEE THE PHOTOS OF THE JUNKY INSTALLATION THEY KEEP ON ROAD ONE EAST IN YOUR PACKET THAT I GAVE TO PLANNING AND ZONING.

FURTHERMORE, I'LL JUST SAY THEY'VE COMPLETED, COMPLETELY FAILED THE LEAST INTRUSIVE MEANS LEGAL STANDARD.

THEY HAVE NOT SERIOUSLY APPROACHED THE STATE LAND DEPARTMENT, AND THEY WANT THIS RESIDENTIAL TOWER BECAUSE IT'S THE CHEAPEST OPTION FOR THEIR CORPORATE BUDGET, NOT BECAUSE IT IS A NECESSITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

SO YOU'RE ON SOLID LEGAL GROUND. DO NOT LET SPECULATIVE MIDDLEMEN REWRITE OUR COUNTY ZONING CODES THROUGH INTIMIDATION.

PLEASE UPHOLD THE 7 TO 1 DENIAL AND PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THANK YOU, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO YAVAPAI COUNTY. THANK YOU.

NICOLE FENNELL WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

HELLO, MY NAME IS NICOLE FENNELL. I LIVE AT 2845 WEST ROAD, 1 SOUTH.

MINE'S VERY SHORT. I'M JUST IN OPPOSITION. IT'S GOING TO LOWER OUR PROPERTY VALUES AT LEAST 10 TO 30%.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR. THIS IS A BIG PART OF MY RETIREMENT PLAN.

I HAVE A LARGE FAMILY THAT I SUPPORT ON MY OWN.

AND I THINK THAT THEY COULD HAVE LOOKED FOR ALTERNATIVE SITES.

I RUN A LOT IN THAT AREA. THERE ARE A LOT OF HIGHER GROUND.

THERE'S THE STATE LAND, AND I FEEL LIKE IT IS ON THEM TO DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE TO FIND A BETTER SITE THAT DOESN'T AFFECT PEOPLE SO NEGATIVELY.

THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. JANET KERLEY WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

I AM JANET KERLEY AND LIVE AT 425 SOUTH TEXAS TRAIL.

WE DO NOT NEED OR WANT A CORPORATION OPERATING A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE BY INVESTIGATING ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR PROVIDING A MEANINGFUL, MEANINGFUL COMPARISON OF VARIOUS SITES.

THE PROPOSED LOCATION FOR THE TOWER AND ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT IS AN UNSAFE FLOOD ZONE.

THE FLOOD ZONE IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE USE OF LAND FOR THIS APPLICATION.

[01:50:03]

THE TOWER NEEDS TO BE LOCATED IN AN OPEN AREA, SUCH AS THE VERY NEARBY STATE LAND.

THAT WOULD ALSO BE A LEAST INTRUSIVE SITE. WHETHER THE TOWER IS 99 OR 60FT TALL, THE FLOOD ZONE IS NOT THE BEST LOCATION THAT THE APPLICANT COULD HAVE CHOSEN.

THE APPLICANT PRESENTED PHOTOS THAT WERE SO FAR AWAY IN DISTANCE THAT THE TOWER COULD BARELY BE SEEN.

THAT IS NOT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHERE WE WOULD HAVE A CLOSE UP VIEW OF THE UNSIGHTLY TOWER EVERY DAY.

A CELL TOWER WOULD NOT BE IN HARMONY WITH ADJACENT AND SURROUNDING LAND USES.

IT WOULD NOT BE IN HARMONY WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT IS KNOWN THAT CELL TOWERS CAN NEGATIVELY AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES AND SALE PRICES.

THERE ARE MANY OF US WHO ARE DEPENDING ON THE SALE OF OUR PROPERTY TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT OUR SENIOR LIVING AND HEALTH COSTS.

A DROP IN PROPERTY VALUES WOULD BE A HARDSHIP FOR MANY, AFFECTING THE CITIZENS QUALITY OF LIFE.

OUR NEIGHBORHOOD DOES NOT EXPERIENCE POOR CELL PHONE SERVICE AND DOES NOT NEED A CELL PHONE TOWER.

THE APPLICANT HAS NOT MET THE REQUIREMENT OF CLOSING A COVERAGE GAP, AND WOULD USE THE TOWER FOR CAPACITY ISSUES.

REGARDLESS OF COVERAGE VERSUS CAPACITY. CORPORATIONS AND WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES DO NOT BELONG IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

CAROLYN FOSTER WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

HELLO. HELLO, CHAIRS AND SUPERVISORS. I'M CAROLYN FOSTER.

I LIVE AT 300 SOUTH MISTY ACRES LANE. FIRST, NEITHER I HAVE NOR MY NEIGHBORS HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH OUR CELL PHONE SERVICE.

I HAVE GREAT SERVICE. I LIVE ACROSS THE ROAD, 1 SOUTH FROM THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED CELL TOWER.

ONE OF THE REASONS WE PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY IN 1990 WAS THAT ALL OF THE UTILITIES ARE UNDERGROUND.

WE HAVE AN UNOBSTRUCTED VIEW OF THE SURROUNDING LANDSCAPE.

THE PROPOSED 99 FOOT TOWER WOULD BE A MONSTROSITY AND AN EYESORE.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS IS THE LEAST INTRUSIVE, ARE BEST SUITED LOCATION THEY COULD FIND.

99FT IS MORE THAN HALF AGAIN AS HIGH AS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED IN YOUR ZONING REGULATIONS.

AND 60 FOOT WOULD BE UNACCEPTABLE TO US. IT'S IN A FEMA DESIGNATED FLOOD ZONE.

THERE WAS A FLASH FLOOD THROUGH THIS ZONE IN JULY OF 1996 THAT SHUT DOWN ROADS.

THERE HAVE BEEN HEAVY RAINS AND SNOWFALLS OVER THE YEARS THAT HAVE MADE THE ROAD HAZARDOUS, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE, IN THAT AREA. THERE ARE OTHER HIGHER GROUND AREAS NEARBY THAT DO NOT INCLUDE RESIDENCES, INCLUDING STATE LAND, LESS THAN ONE HALF MILE TO THE WEST AND TABLE MOUNTAIN.

A VERY LARGE PART OF THEIR CAPACITY TARGET AREA IS IN STATE LANDS WITH NO RESIDENCES AND NO FLOOD ZONES. AROUND 40% OF A 12 SQUARE MILE RECTANGLE WITH OUR SQUARE MILE BEING ON THE EAST SIDE IS STATE LANDS.

I HAVE SEEN NOWHERE WHERE THEY HAVE LOOKED AT ALTERNATIVE SITES, NOR DO THEY APPEAR TO HAVE HAD MEANINGFUL DISCUSSIONS WITH THE STATE.

INSTEAD OF LOOKING FOR A HIGHER SITE THEY PLAN TO PUT THIS POLE IN A FLOOD ZONE RIGHT NEXT TO A BARN AND IN FRONT OF HOUSES.

THE YAVAPAI COUNTY ASSESSOR, JUDGE SIMMONS, STATED THAT CELL PHONE TOWERS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE VALUE OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.

REAL ESTATE AGENTS AGREE. WHY SHOULD THEY BE ALLOWED TO DO THIS? THIS PROPOSED CELL TOWER DOES NOT BELONG IN OUR RESIDENTIAL RURAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER BETTER SUITED AREAS, INCLUDING STATE LANDS, THAT COULD BE UTILIZED.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. RONALD FENNELL WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. I'M KIND OF NERVOUS BEING UP HERE, BUT I'M AN OLDER PERSON.

I HAVE A LITTLE CONCERN WITH THIS, IN FACT, A LOT OF CONCERN.

WHENEVER THEY PROPOSED IT, AT FIRST IT WAS 90FT AND WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL OF THAT FROM OUR HOMES.

[01:55:06]

I DID A LITTLE SURVEY ON MY OWN AND WENT OVER TO REED ROAD.

IT'S AT 60FT. SO BASICALLY EVERYTHING GOING TOWARDS 89A IS GOING TO BE BELOW THE 60 FOOT LEVEL. IF THEY PUT THAT IN, THE 90 FOOT WOULD PUT IT UP HIGHER, WHICH WOULD BE BENEFICIAL.

BUT TO HAVE IT THERE AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT.

AS HAS BEEN STATED BY MANY, PART OF THE REASON THAT WE LIVE THERE IS BECAUSE WE CAN LOOK 360 DEGREES, WE CAN SEE MOUNTAINS, WE CAN SEE TREES, WE CAN SEE FLAGPOLES WITH AMERICAN FLAGS ON THEM, OF PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE IN THIS COUNTRY AND BELIEVE IT'S IMPORTANT, AND TO HAVE SOMETHING STICKING UP RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT. WHEN THEY FIRST HAVE THE PICTURES THERE, THEY SEEM TO HAVE THIS LITTLE BILLBOARD THING UP AT THE TOP OF IT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE ORIGINAL PICTURE WITH JUST ONE THING FOR VERIZON, OR WHETHER THAT INCLUDES THE OTHER TWO THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING.

WHEN I ATTENDED THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, I FOUND OUT THAT THOSE OTHER THREE ARE THE THREE WOULD BE POSSIBLE.

AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HEIGHT OF THAT THREE IS.

I KNOW THAT THE WIDTH FOR THE INSIDE OF IT IS 14FT GOING ACROSS, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW TALL IT GOES.

AND THAT CONCERNS ME BECAUSE ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT A POSTAGE STAMP.

WE'RE LOOKING AT A BULLETIN BOARD THAT'S GOING TO BE SITTING ON TOP OF A POLE THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT.

I LIKE BEING ABLE TO SEE SKY. I LIKE BEING WHERE I'M AT.

AND AS MANY OF US SAID, THIS IS IMPORTANT TO ME.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MIKE EGAN WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

I WANT TO MAKE THIS AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE. HI, MY NAME IS MIKE EGAN.

APPRECIATE YOUR GUYS TIME AND EFFORT. FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS THE VIEW FROM MY HOUSE.

AND I LIVE A QUARTER HALF A MILE WEST OF THIS LOCATION ON ROAD 1, UP AGAINST STATE LAND.

FROM MY HOUSE I CAN SEE WE HAVE VIEW FROM THE INSIDE OF MY HOUSE OF GRANITE MOUNTAIN, THE BUTTES, BILLY WILLIAMS MOUNTAIN, THE PEAKS, MINGUS, BLACK MOUNTAIN.

ANY WAY, JUST A LITTLE DEAL. ACTUALLY, WHAT I WANT TO DO IS ASK YOU TO PERSONALIZE YOUR DECISION. AND THE QUESTION IS, WOULD YOU WANT TO HAVE THIS MONSTROSITY NEXT DOOR TO YOU AND IN THE MIDDLE OF YOUR VIEW FROM YOUR HOME? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. FIONA ENGLISH WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

MY NAME IS FIONA ENGLISH, AND I'M HERE TODAY TO RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO DENY THE PROPOSED VERIZON CELL TOWER IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO, I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK DIRECTLY TO YOU ON YOUR BIOGRAPHY ON THE YAVAPAI COUNTY WEBSITE, YOU SAY THAT YOU ARE COMMITTED TO SUPPORTING THE LIFESTYLE OF THE COMMUNITIES YOU REPRESENT.

I APPRECIATE THAT COMMITMENT BECAUSE IT REFLECTS EXACTLY WHY SO MANY OF US CHOSE TO LIVE IN CHINO VALLEY.

PEOPLE DON'T MOVE TO OUR COMMUNITY IN HOPES OF CREATING A CITY LIKE ENVIRONMENT.

THEY BECOME, THEY COME BECAUSE OF ITS OPEN SPACES, DARK SKIES, SCENIC VIEWS, AND RURAL CHARACTER.

THAT RURAL LIFESTYLE IS ONE OF OUR GREATEST ASSETS AND ONCE IT IS LOST, IT CANNOT BE RECLAIMED.

THIS PROPOSED 99 FOOT CELL TOWER OR ANY CELL TOWER IS SIMPLY NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT WOULD BECOME A PERMANENT VISUAL INTRUSION IN AN AREA WHERE RESIDENTS HAVE INVESTED THEIR LIVES, THEIR HOMES AND THEIR FUTURES BASED ON THE EXPECTATION THAT THE COUNTY WOULD PRESERVE THE RURAL ENVIRONMENT ESTABLISHED BY ITS OWN PLANNING POLICIES.

ALL OF US HERE UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF RELIABLE WIRELESS SERVICE.

THIS IS NOT AN ARGUMENT AGAINST TECHNOLOGY. IT'S AN ARGUMENT FOR PLACING THAT TECHNOLOGY IN A LOCATION THAT DOES NOT UNNECESSARILY IMPACT AN ESTABLISHED RURAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

THERE ARE BETTER WAYS TO IMPROVE CAPACITY WITHOUT SACRIFICING THE VERY QUALITIES THAT MAKE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD UNIQUE.

[02:00:07]

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION LISTENED CAREFULLY TO THE EVIDENCE AND THE CONCERNS OF LOCAL RESIDENTS.

I RESPECTFULLY ASK THIS BOARD TO GIVE SIGNIFICANT WEIGHT TO THAT RECOMMENDATION, AND TO THE VOICES OF THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS DECISION EVERY DAY. WE CAN ARGUE THE POTENTIAL HEALTH AND SAFETY CONCERNS SURROUNDING A CELL TOWER FOR WHICH THERE IS CONFLICTING DATA.

HOWEVER, THE PRIMARY CONCERN IS TO PROTECT OUR CHOSEN LIFESTYLE.

SUPERVISOR KUKNYO PROTECTING THE RURAL LIFESTYLE OF YOUR DISTRICT MEANS MAKING DIFFICULT CHOICES WHEN DEVELOPMENT CONFLICTS WITH COMMUNITY CHARACTER.

TODAY IS ONE OF THOSE MOMENTS. PLEASE HONOR THE COMMITMENT YOU MADE TO PRESERVE THE LIFESTYLE OF YOUR COMMUNITIES BY VOTING NO ON THIS APPLICATION.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.

KAYLEE HANLEY IS IN OPPOSITION. GAVE US AN ATTACHMENT TO READ.

WE DON'T READ STATEMENTS. SO I'M WONDERING IF KAYLEE'S HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO READ HER STATEMENT INTO THE RECORD.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN WE HAVE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT WOULD LIKE TO BE IN THE RECORD AS OPPOSED PATRICIA OPPOSED TO THE ISSUE. NANCY HARRIS OPPOSED TO THE ISSUE.

KELSEY WARD OPPOSED TO THE ISSUE. DALLAS DORIC OPPOSED TO THE ISSUE.

LEONARD CHAN OPPOSED TO THE ISSUE. AND CLARK, DID WE HAVE ANY OTHER ONLINE PEOPLE CHIME IN? THE BOARD RECEIVED SEVEN COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION.

THANK YOU. I'LL HAND IT BACK TO THE CHAIR. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

HEY, DISTRICT FOUR SHOWS UP, HUH?. I HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC MOTION TO MAKE.

AND P&Z DID PUT THIS DOWN IN THE PROCESS 7 TO 1.

I MOVED TO DENY A USE PERMIT FOR THE PROPOSED WIRELESS TOWER PURSUANT TO SECTION 605 OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING ORDINANCE.

BASED UPON THE HEARINGS BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, THE APPLICANT FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT GAP IN WIRELESS SERVICE IN THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED CELL TOWER.

THE APPLICANT FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE CELL TOWER WAS THE LEAST INTRUSIVE ALTERNATIVE TO CLOSE THE PURPORTED GAP IN SERVICE.

THE APPLICANT FAILED TO SUBMIT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT IT HAD MADE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO IDENTIFY AND EVALUATE LESS INTRUSIVE ALTERNATIVES THROUGH A MEANINGFUL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE SITES. THE APPLICANT FAILED TO ESTABLISH A NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL 39FT ABOVE THE 60 FOOT MAXIMUM TOWER HEIGHT ALLOWED IN THIS TYPE OF RURAL RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PROPOSED LOCATION WOULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE NEIGHBORHOODS BY INTRODUCING AN INCONSISTENT USE THAT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND WHICH WOULD ADVERSELY IMPACT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SCENIC BEAUTY AND RESIDENTS QUALITY OF LIFE.

THE PROPOSED CELL TOWER PRESENTS A UNIQUE RISK DUE TO ITS LOCATION IN A FRIDGE FLOOD AREA, SO MY MOTION IS TO DENY THE USE PERMIT. SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION CALL FOR THE VOTE. VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES. SUPERVISOR JENKINS? IT'S A. I'M SORRY. I JUST WANT TO.

BECAUSE THIS IS A NO VOTE, SO. AND I CAN EXPLAIN MY NO VOTE AND MY.

I VOTE ALONG WITH SUPERVISOR KUKNYO BECAUSE I BELIEVE HE HAS DONE HIS DUE DILIGENCE AND I BELIEVE IN HIS REASONS FOR DENYING THIS.

GOOD JOB EXPLAINING THE NO VOTE. AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE IN SUPPORT OF YOUR DISTRICT.

THANK YOU. NO. AS WELL. THANK YOU. OKAY. SUPERVISOR MALLORY.

NO. WE'RE ON A NO VOTE, RIGHT? YES TO. OH, YES.

YES. YES. YES TO. YEAH. YES TO. YES. I'M. YES.

YOU NEED TO CLARIFY YOURS. I'M SORRY, VICE CHAIR CHECK.

SUPERVISOR, WOULD YOU RESTATE THE FIRST PART OF YOUR MOTION, PLEASE? YES, I WILL RESEND MY PREVIOUS MOTION AND INTRODUCE THE MOTION TO DENY A USE PERMIT FOR THE PROPOSED WIRELESS TOWER. MOTION TO DENY A USE PERMIT. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO.

I WILL SECOND THE MOTION. BUT IF YOU PLEASE, ALLOW ME TO AMEND YOUR MOTION.

SURE. GO AHEAD. OKAY. PURSUANT TO SECTION 605 PLANNING AND ZONING ORDINANCE, BASED UPON THE HEARINGS BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, THE APPLICANT FAILED TO ESTABLISH THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT GAP IN WIRELESS SERVICE AND LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED CELL TOWER.

THE APPLICANT FAILED TO ESTABLISH PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE CELL TOWER WAS THE LEAST INTRUSIVE ALTERNATIVE TO CLOSE THE PURPORTED GAP IN SERVICE.

THE APPLICANT FAILED TO SUBMIT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT IT HAD MADE GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO IDENTIFY EVALUATE LESS INTRUSIVE ALTERNATIVES THROUGH A MEANINGFUL,

[02:05:07]

FEASIBLE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE SITES. THE APPLICANT FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL 39FT ABOVE THE 60 FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT TOWER ALLOWED IN THIS TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL RURAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PROPOSED LOCATION WOULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE NEIGHBORHOOD BY INTRODUCING INCONSISTENT USE THAT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, IN WHICH IT WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SCENIC BEAUTY AND RESIDENTS QUALITY OF LIFE. THE PROPOSED CELL TOWER WOULD PRESENT UNIQUE RISKS DUE TO ITS LOCATION ON A FRINGE FLOOD AREA.

SO THE MOTION IS TO DENY. AND MY SECOND IS TO DENY.

CALL FOR THE VOTE. VICE CHAIR CHECK? YES TO DENY.

SUPERVISOR JENKINS? AYE TO DENY. SUPERVISOR KUKNYO? YES TO DENY. SUPERVISOR MALLORY? YES. CHAIR COMPTON? YES. ITEM HAS BEEN DENIED UNANIMOUSLY. [APPLAUSE].

THANK YOU. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BEFORE WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT CALL TO THE PUBLIC BEFORE WE MOVE TO CALL TO THE PUBLIC, I'M GOING TO TAKE A TEN MINUTE BREAK. WE'LL BE BACK AT 11:16.

WE'RE BACK IN SESSION. MOVING ON TO CALL TO THE PUBLIC.

[ CALL TO THE PUBLIC: Individuals may address the Board for up to three (3) minutes on any relevant issue within the Board's jurisdiction. Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.01(I), Board members shall not discuss or take action on matters raised during the call to the public. At the conclusion of an open call to the public, individual members of the public body may respond to criticism made by those who have addressed the public body, may ask staff to review a matter or may ask that a matter be put on a future agenda.]

I'M HANDING OVER THE MEETING TO VICE CHAIR CHECK. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, FIRST UP, WE HAVE RICK GRAY FROM NORTHERN ARIZONA HEALTHCARE.

GOOD MORNING, CHAIR, VICE CHAIR AND SUPERVISORS.

MY NAME IS RICK GRAY. I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT AND SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR DOWN IN VERDE VALLEY IN COTTONWOOD.

I'M EXCITED TO SHARE TWO RECENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS FROM EXTERNAL VALIDATIONS CONFIRMING OUR CARE HERE IN NORTHERN ARIZONA AND YAVAPAI COUNTY.

WE FIRST RECEIVED AN AWARD FROM AN OUTSIDE GROUP.

IT'S CALLED LEAPFROG. IT'S AN OUTSIDE INDEPENDENT WATCHDOG GROUP THAT LOOKS AT SAFETY AMONG HOSPITALS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.

WITHIN THE 53 HOSPITALS IN ARIZONA, 12 WERE RATED GRADE A, MEANING THAT PATIENT FALLS.

PATIENT INJURIES AND PATIENT QUALITY AND SAFETY IN OUR HOSPITALS RECEIVED A GRADE OF A.

AND SO WE'RE HAPPY OF THAT BECAUSE IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK AND DEDICATION TO OUR TEAM AND FROM OUR TEAM TO PROVIDE THAT THAT CARE TO OUR PATIENTS.

AND SO THE SECOND ONE COMES FROM CMS HOSPITAL RATINGS.

CMS HAS A SYSTEM OF FIVE STAR SYSTEM THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY THAT RATES OUR HOSPITALS FROM 1 TO 5 STAR.