Jun 25, 2024 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting

WE GO TO NUMBER ONE, CONSENT AGENDA.

WELCOME EVERYONE.

AND, UM, MY NAME IS, UM, FERN, BE, I AM THE VICE CHAIR FOR THIS YEAR, AND, UM, WE GOT INVOCATION AND PLEDGE, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY SUPERVISOR WEISINGER, OUR KIND AND GRACIOUS HEAVENLY FATHER.

WE ARE SO GRATEFUL TO BE ABLE TO COME TOGETHER AS NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS TODAY.

WE ASK FOR THY SPIRIT TO PEACE, TO BE WITH US, THAT WE WORK DILIGENTLY, TO BE PEACEMAKERS AND TO HEAR ONE ANOTHER, AND TO BE ABLE TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT ARE SOUND ON BEHALF OF OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

HEAVENLY FATHER, WE ASK FOR THY BLESSINGS ON ALL THOSE WHO MIGHT BE IN NEED TODAY, THAT THE HAND OF GRACE BE UPON THEM, THAT THOSE WHO ARE SUFFERING AND SEEKING HELP, THAT WE MIGHT REACH OUT TO THEM AND KNOW OF THEIR DESIRE TO BE ABLE TO BE HELPED AND LIFTED UP HEAVILY.

FATHER, WE ASK THAT WE LOOK OUT FOR ONE ANOTHER, THAT WE LOOK OUT FOR OUR FRIENDS, THAT WE LOOK OUT FOR OUR NEIGHBORS, THAT WE LOOK OUT FOR OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS, AND THAT WE SEEK OPPORTUNITIES TO SERVE HEAVEN.

FATHER, WE ASK FOR THY BLESSINGS OVER ALL THOSE WHO ARE SO WHO SERVE OUR COMMUNITIES, THOSE WHO GIVE UP TIME TO BE FIRST RESPONDERS, POLICE OFFICERS, FIREFIGHTERS, AND THOSE WHO SERVE IN MANY DIFFERENT CAPACITIES THROUGHOUT OUR COMMUNITIES THAT ARE NEEDED HEAVILY.

FATHER, WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THEIR DESIRE TO SERVE AND GRATEFUL FOR THEIR DESIRE FOR THE WELLBEING OF OUR COMMUNITIES, AND WE ASK FOR THEY AND TO BE OVER THEM, THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE THE STRENGTH AND THE KNOWLEDGE TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE BEST WAY TO HELP ONE ANOTHER.

WE ASK FOR THEY BLESSINGS IN ALL THINGS.

WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE MOISTURE THAT IT THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO US AND ALL THAT IT SYMBOLIZES TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE WATER THAT WE DRINK, AND FOR IT TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE NOURISHMENT TO THE LAND AND TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE FOOD THAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO SEE SUSTAIN OURSELVES AND OUR FAMILIES.

HEAVEN.

FATHER, WE ARE SO GRATEFUL AND HONORED TO BE HERE TODAY UPON THIS EARTH AND TO BE ABLE TO FEEL THY GLORY AND STRENGTH.

HEAVENLY FATHER, WE ASK FOR YOUR BLESSINGS UPON THE DAY AND THESE THINGS WE PRAY AND THEY MIGHTY STRENGTH IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST.

AMEN.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

[1. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine or administrative in nature and will be approved in a single motion. A Board member may request for any item to be removed from the consent agenda and considered on the regular agenda:]

THESE ITEMS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE OR ADMINISTRATIVE IN NATURE AND WILL BE APPROVED IN A SINGLE MOTION.

A BOARD MEMBER MAY REQUEST FOR ANY ITEM TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA.

UH, THE SUPERVISORS HAVE THE LISTINGS AND THE LISTINGS ARE UP ON THE BOARD.

UM, ANY QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

IF NOT, ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

VICE CHAIR I MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS STATED.

ANY MORE DISCUSSION? IF NOT, THEN, UH, LET'S GO TO VOTE.

UM, ALL IN IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

WE GO TO NUMBER TWO, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, A PERSONAL SERVICE AWARDS.

ANY, ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY.

MOTION CARRIES.

[a. Personnel Service Awards: Congratulations to the following employees for their continued service to Navajo County: Briony Buchholz (WIOA) 5; Lucinda Cling (Probation) 5; Colin Henderson (Facilities) 5; Kevin Parmenter (Sheriff) 5; Lucky Warner (Facilities) 5; Marie Hayes (Jail) 5, Nathan Wilson (Probation) 5; Kirby Colelay (Jail) 5; Joseph Finch (Public Defender) 5; Kathryn Mathewson (Health) 5; Ken Dewitt (IT) 10; Katie Slack (Public Works) 15; Roxanne Pergeson (County Attorney) 15; David Clark (Public Works) 15; Glenn Hoskins (Public Works) 20; Krista Wilkinson (Holbrook JC) 20; and Kirsti Hancock (Probation) 25.]

[00:05:01]

CONGRATULATIONS TO THE FOLLOWING EMPLOYEES FOR THE CONTINUED SERVICE.

UM, WHEN YOUR NAME IS CALLED, PLEASE COME UP.

ERIC, UM, SCOTT, OUR HR DIRECTOR, WELL OFF CALL, YOUR NAME AND PRESENT.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

THIS MORNING WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE A NUMBER OF OUR EMPLOYEES FOR THEIR YEARS OF SERVICE TO NAVAJO COUNTY.

UH, THIS MORNING WE HAD A LITTLE GET TOGETHER AND, UH, EMPLOYEES WERE GIVEN A, A SMALL TOKEN OF OUR APPRECIATION, AND WE HAVE HERE SOME, SOME ROAD SIGNS TO GIVE TO THEM WITH THEIR NAME ON IT, THEIR STICKER WITH THEIR YEARS OF SERVICE, AND THEN A SHIRT AS WELL.

SO WE'D LIKE TO CALL EVERYONE UP.

UH, WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, COME ON UP AND WE'LL GIVE YOU YOUR SIGN.

WE HAVE BRIANY WITH THE WORKFORCE OFFICE.

BEEN WITH, UH, NAVAJO COUNTY FOR FIVE YEARS.

LUCINDA K CLING.

I DON'T BELIEVE SHE'S HERE THIS MORNING.

LUCINDA LUCINDA'S WITH THE PROBATION OFFICE AND BEEN WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR FIVE YEARS AS WELL.

WE HAVE COLIN HENDERSON.

COLIN COLIN IS WITH THE FACILITIES TEAM AND BEEN WITH US FOR FIVE YEARS.

WE HAVE KEVIN PARMENTER WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

KEVIN.

KEVIN'S ALSO BEEN WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR FIVE YEARS.

LUCKY WARNER.

LUCKY LUCKY'S ALSO PART OF OUR FACILITIES TEAM AND BEEN WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR FIVE YEARS.

MARIA HAYES.

NATHAN WILSON WITH PROBATION.

MARIA COME.

MARIA IS WITH THE NAVAJO COUNTY JAIL AND ALSO BEEN WITH US FOR FIVE YEARS.

I DON'T BELIEVE NATHAN'S HERE THIS MORNING.

KIRBY COLAY WITH THE, ALSO WITH THE JAIL.

KIRBY KIRBY'S ALSO BEEN WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR FIVE YEARS.

JOSEPH FINCH.

ARE YOU HERE? JOSEPH? HE MUST BE IN IN COURT.

JOSEPH IS OUR PUBLIC DEFENDER.

ALSO BEEN WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR FIVE YEARS.

CATHERINE MATTHEWSON WITH THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT.

BEEN WITH US FOR FIVE YEARS.

KEN DEWITT.

YOU KNOW, KEN'S HERE.

KEN.

HEY KEN.

KEN IS OUR IT DIRECTOR AND BEEN WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR 10 YEARS.

KATIE SLACK WITH PUBLIC WORKS.

KATIE HAS, UH, BEEN ON OUR PUBLIC WORKS TEAM FOR 15 YEARS.

WE HAVE ROXANNE PER FERGUSON, ALSO BEEN WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR 15 YEARS.

IN OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE, WE HAVE DAVID DOC CLARK IN PUBLIC WORKS.

DOC.

DOC WORKS OUT IN OUR HEBER HEBER ROAD YARD AND BEEN WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR 15 YEARS.

WE HAVE GLENN HOSKINS, ALSO WITH PUBLIC WORKS IN OUR HEBER YARD.

BEEN WITH US FOR 20 YEARS.

HE WASN'T ABLE TO MAKE IT THIS MORNING.

WE HAVE OUR, OUR JUDGE KRISTA WILKINSON WITH THE HOLBROOK JUSTICE COURT.

BEEN WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR 20 YEARS.

AND THEN LAST BUT NOT LEAST, WE HAVE KIRSTY HANCOCK IN PROBATION.

I DON'T BELIEVE SHE'S HERE THIS MORNING EITHER.

BEEN WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR, FOR 25 YEARS.

LET'S GIVE 'EM ALL AROUND APPLAUSE.

AND THEN IF, IF WE'RE ABLE TO, IF WE COULD HAVE EVERYONE COME ON UP HERE TO THE, THE, THE FRONT WITH THE BOARD AND WE'LL GET A PICTURE WITH EVERYBODY IN A BIG GROUP PHOTO.

YOU'RE WELCOME TO BRING YOUR, YOUR BAG OF GOODIES IF YOU WANT TO.

AND THEN, HI.

IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO VOLUNTEER TO STAND RIGHT IN HERE SO WE CAN GET ALL, AND THAT WAY WE, YEAH, JUST, JUST, JUST RIGHT IN.

[00:10:18]

GET EVERYONE IN THE FRAME WITH YOUR, UM, BEHIND YOU.

DO YOU WANT ME TO MOVE THE FLOWERS OUT OF THE WAY? THERE YOU GO.

UM, IF EVERYONE'S STANDING IN THE BACK COULD LIFT THEIR SIDES JUST A LITTLE BIT.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO.

JUST LIKE THAT WOULD BE PERFECT.

CONGRATULATIONS AND THANK YOU.

DON'T COVER YOUR FACE, .

AND WE CONTINUE WITH OUR AGENDA TO, TO BE PRESENTATIONS TO VALERIE SCOTT ON HER RETIREMENT FROM NAVAJO COUNTY AFTER 23 PLUS YEARS OF SERVICE PRESENTER ERIC SCOTT AND ERNIE GARCIA.

SO THANK YOU EVERYONE THAT HAS SERVED MORE THAN FIVE YEARS.

[b. Presentation to Valerie Scott on her Retirement from Navajo County after 23+ Years of Service.]

THANK YOU MADAM VICE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

WE ALSO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY THIS MORNING TO RECOGNIZE ONE OF OUR LONG TIME EMPLOYEES AND HER RETIREMENT.

VALERIE SCOTT, IF YOU WANNA COME UP, VALERIE.

VALERIE HAS BEEN WITH, UH, WITH NAVAJO COUNTY FOR OVER 23 YEARS, SERVING OVER AT THE JAIL.

WE'VE, WE'VE LOVED TO HAVE HER ON THE, THE JAIL TEAM AND WISH HER THE BEST IN HER IN HER RETIREMENT.

SHE'S ALWAYS BEEN A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH.

VERY KIND, VERY PLEASANT, JUST A GREAT, GREAT EMPLOYEE.

WE DO HAVE COMMANDER GARCIA HERE TO, TO SHARE A FEW WORDS AS WELL.

VERY FEW.

UH, IT'S TRULY BEEN AN HONOR AND A BLESSING TO HAVE VALERIE WORKING FOR US FOR THE PAST 23 YEARS.

UH, VALERIE HAS STARTED AS A DETENTION DEPUTY AND HAD MOVED INTO THE CIVILIAN RANKS THROUGHOUT HER CAREER, UM, AND HAS WORKED EVERY FACET OF THE JAIL.

AND IT IS GONNA BE VERY, VERY HARD TO REPLACE SOMEBODY LIKE THAT.

SHE'S BEEN A WONDERFUL EMPLOYEE.

UM, WE CAN'T SAY ENOUGH.

WE'RE GONNA MISS HER VERY, VERY MUCH, BUT WE ARE SO HAPPY THAT SHE IS GETTING AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEND MORE TIME WITH HER FAMILY AND ENJOYING HER RETIREMENT.

SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, .

WE GET A PICTURE OF THE BOARD? YEAH, LET'S KEEP IT.

I'VE ENJOYED MY WORK WITH, WITH THE COUNTY.

THE 23 YEARS I SPENT, I'VE SEEN A LOT.

AND LIKE DE UM, DEPUTY GARCIA SAID, I'M GONNA ENJOY MY FAMILY.

GET A PICTURE WITH YOU, VALERIE.

PRETTY, PRETTY HEAVY .

UM, CAN

[00:15:01]

PLUS YEARS.

THANK YOU SUPERVISORS, AND THANK YOU SO MUCH.

CONGRATULATIONS, VALERIE, SCOTT AND FAMILY.

AND WE GO TO ITEM TWO C, PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF THE AMENDED ORDINANCES.

[c. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration and adoption of the amended ordinance, Ordinance Number 03-11, amending Section 2 to increase the Justice Court Staffing Fee from $30 to $48 effective July 1, 2024. ]

ORDINANCE NUMBER ZERO THREE DASH ONE ONE AMENDING SECTION TWO TO INCREASE THE JUSTICE COURT STAFFING FEE.

FEE FROM $30 TO $48 EFFECTIVE JULY 1ST, 2024.

PRESENT, PRESENTED BY JASON MO.

GOOD MORNING, UH, VICE CHAIR AND, AND SUPERVISORS.

UM, THROUGH OUR BUDGETING PROCESS, WE GO THROUGH AND WE ANALYZE A LOT OF THE COUNTY'S FUNDS AND OUR ACCOUNTING SYSTEM.

AND, AND THROUGH THAT PROCESS, UM, IT CAME TO OUR ATTENTION THAT THIS ORDINANCE, UM, FOR THE JUSTICE COURT STAFFING FEE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED, UM, SINCE 2012.

AND BECAUSE OF THAT, UM, WE RECOGNIZE THAT THE, THE FEE, UM, AS REQUIRED BY THE ORDINANCE, IT ACTUALLY MENTIONS IN THE ORDINANCE THAT WE SHOULD BE REVIEWING THAT YEAR OVER YEAR.

AND THAT WE HAD NOT DONE THAT.

SO, UM, AS PART OF OUR BUDGETING PROCESS, UM, WE, WE LOOKED AT THE, THIS, UM, ACTIVITY AND THE, THE, THE, THE REVENUE THAT'S RECEIVED IN THIS FUND TO HELP OFFSET SOME OF THE COSTS THAT THE COUNTY INCURS FOR DOING THAT.

SO, UM, JUST, JUST AS A LITTLE PRECURSOR, UM, THIS FEE, UM, IS TO HELP SUPPORT, UM, EIGHT, UM, CLERICAL AND ATTORNEY POSITIONS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY.

SO SPECIFICALLY IN THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN OUR, IN OUR JUSTICE COURTS.

AND, UM, THE FEE IS BEING INCREASED FROM 30 TO $48, WHICH WE REALIZE IS A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE.

UM, HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, WE HAVEN'T INCREASED THAT FEE SINCE 2012, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING YEAR OVER YEAR INCREMENTALLY.

AND SO WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE METHODOLOGY OF HOW TO INCREASE THAT, WE, UM, HAVE ALSO KIND OF DONE SOME THINGS HERE RECENTLY WHEN WE'VE KIND OF LOOKED AT, UM, INCREASING SOME COSTS TO THE COUNTY AND, AND WE LOOKED AT THE INFLATIONARY MEASURES.

AND SO WE KIND OF USED THAT SAME PROCESS AND, AND, AND DID THIS CALCULATION LIKE THE SAME.

AND THAT'S HOW WE, WE LANDED AT THE, THE $48.

SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT, UM, IT'S ESTIMATED IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR THAT WE'RE GONNA COLLECT ABOUT $223,000.

BY INCREASING THE FEE, IT WOULD RAISE IT TO $356,000.

UM, IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF AND THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, THE, THE TOTAL COST WITH THIS ACTIVITY IS $604,000.

SO THAT'S STILL NOT COVERING THE ENTIRE COST OF THE, THE ACTIVITY.

AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT, THAT THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT THIS FEE IS MEANT TO DO, IS TO UNCOVER THE ENTIRE COST OF THE ACTIVITY.

AND SO WE DO TRANSFER, UM, FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO SUPPORT THIS AND THAT TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND, EVEN WITH THIS FEE INCREASE IS ABOUT 40%.

AND SO I DID GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE NUMBERS IN 2012.

UM, THE GENERAL FUND AT THAT POINT, UM, SUPPLEMENTED ABOUT EIGHT TO 10%.

AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE GENERAL FUND'S TAKING ON MORE OF THE BURDEN YEAR OVER YEAR, STILL WITH THE INCREASE IN FEE.

AND SO THAT'S WHY, UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THIS ORDINANCE TO INCREASE THE FEE AND THEN, UM, GOING FORWARD TO, TO TAKE A, A MORE ACTIVE APPROACH IN LOOKING AT IT YEAR OVER YEAR TO

[00:20:01]

MAKE THAT INCREASE MORE INCREMENTAL.

SO WE'RE NOT IN THIS SITUATION AGAIN, TO HAVE TO MAKE SUCH A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE FOR, FOR THE, FOR THE FEE.

AND SO AT THIS TIME, IF THE, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.

NOW, I'LL OPEN FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE, WE DID RECEIVE TWO EMAILS, WHICH I HAVE COPIED BOTH OF YOU OR ALL OF YOU ON.

UM, THERE'S ONE FROM FORMER SUPERVISOR JERRY RAMO AND ONE FROM FORMER CONSTABLE RYAN REINHOLD, AND YOU ALL HAVE COPIES OF THAT.

UH, I THINK I'LL GO AHEAD AND HAVE, UM, OUR CLERK READ THE, READ, THE ONE THAT WE SENT, UM, MARINA, THE ONE THAT WE RECEIVED.

THE FIRST ONE THAT WE RECEIVED IS FROM JERRY BROWNLOW, PINETOP LAKESIDE, ARIZONA, YESTERDAY AT 12:22 PM DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN AND BOARD MEMBERS, I READ THROUGH THE PRESENTATION TO INCREASE THE FEES FROM 30 TO 48 PER CASE.

THAT IS A BIG INCREASE.

60% IS HUGE.

A SMALLER INCREASE DEPENDING ON WHAT THAT IS, COULD HELP IN SOLVING THE REQUEST.

I WOULD ASK THE BOARD TO FIND FUNDS NEEDED IN FOR THE REQUEST IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET.

THANK YOU, JERRY BROO.

THE SECOND ONE WAS RECEIVED THIS MORNING REGARDING THE RECENT PROPOSAL TO INCREASE JUSTICE COURT SURCHARGES FROM RYAN REINHOLD PINETOP, ARIZONA.

I AM CONCERNED THAT NUMBER ONE, THE JUDICIAL BRANCH, JP COURT, THE JUDICIAL BRANCH, JP COURTS, IS INCREASINGLY FUNDING THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE, WHICH BYPASSES THE USUAL BUDGETARY PROCESS.

NUMBER TWO, THE IMPARTIALITY OF THE JP COURTS AS A SEPARATE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT COULD BE PUT INTO QUESTION NUMBER THREE.

THE FEES WOULD BE ILL LOGICALLY COLLECTED FROM PARTIES AND CIVIL LAWSUITS AND FROM MOTORIST AND CIVIL TRAFFIC CASES THAT DO NOT INVOLVE THE SERVICES OF THE PROSECUTOR.

I EM EMPHASIZE THAT I DO NOT OPPOSE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE, BUT THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE METHOD TO DO SO.

RYAN REINHOLD, THANK YOU.

OR READING THE, UM, IT DOES FUND SOME OF THE POSITIONS.

YES.

AH, ANY OTHER, UH, PERSONS TO, UH, ADD TO PUBLIC HEARING PRIOR TO, DID YOU SAY IT WAS 2000 AND BEFORE, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME UP AND STATE PRIOR, UH, TO, UM, THE PERIOD WHERE THERE WASN'T ANY INCREASE, WHAT WAS THE REGULAR AND CUSTOMARY INCREASE PER YEAR? IT JUST KIND OF, IT WAS, IT WAS MORE, IT WAS, IT WAS LESS.

I, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS NOT QUITE THE INCREASE THAT IT, THAT IT, THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING.

NOW I CAN, I CAN IMAGINE THAT , I WAS JUST WONDERING.

I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER FOR THAT.

WHAT THE HISTORICAL, UH, INCREASES HAVE BEEN.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? IF NO FURTHER COMMENTS, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE ONE PUBLIC COMMENT.

PARDON ME? I'D LIKE TO MAKE ONE PUBLIC COMMENT.

OH, I'M SORRY.

I JUST WANTED TO CLEAR MY APOLOGIES.

GO AHEAD.

I JUST WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR I DID NOT ASK FOR THIS FEE INCREASE TO FUND ME.

I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW IT DID FUND ME.

SO UNLIKE WHAT THE ONE PERSON SAID, I'M NOT BEHIND THIS THING.

I, THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO ADD.

THAT THESE FEES ARE NOT INCLUSIVE OF SUPPORTING THE ENTIRE FUNCTION OF THIS ACTIVITY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? IF THERE'S NO FURTHER COMMENTS, I'LL CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING AND, UM, I'D LIKE TO HAVE A MOTION.

UM, COULD I ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS? OKAY.

UM, JASON, IN REGARDS TO, UM, RYAN'S OR RYAN HOLD'S QUESTIONS, UH, LET'S SEE.

UM, THE FEES WOULD ILLOGICALLY COLLECT FROM PARTIES IN CIVIL LAWSUITS AND FROM MOTORISTS IN CIVIL TRAFFIC CASE THAT DO NOT INVOLVE THE SERVICES OF THE PROSECUTOR.

HOW DO WE ANSWER THAT QUESTION? CORRECT.

AND SO, UM, I, AND, AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE MR. REINHOLD IS COMING FROM AND, AND I, I AGREE WITH HIS ASSESSMENT ON THAT.

HOWEVER, HOWEVER, UM, I THINK WHAT MR. REINHOLD DOES NOT UNDERSTAND IS

[00:25:01]

AND SO WHEN WE LOOK AT IT, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S A $600,000 COST.

UM, WE'RE ONLY INCREASING FEES FROM LIKE TWO 20 TO $350,000.

AND SO, UM, ONE WAY TO LOOK AT THIS IS THAT TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND PRETTY MUCH COVERS THE, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S, THE PROSECUTOR'S SIDE OF THE, OF THE COST.

AND SO WE ARE SUPPLEMENTING, YOU KNOW, THAT TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND IS SUPPLEMENTING THAT.

AND SO YOU COULD LOOK, THAT'S ONE WAY TO LOOK AT IT, IS THAT THE, THE FEES THAT ARE COLLECTED, YOU KNOW, TO WOULD NOT REALLY IMPACT THE, THE PROSECUTOR'S SIDE OF WHAT'S BEING CHARGED INTO THIS FUND.

AND THE FEE, HOW MANY PEOPLE DO WE ESTIMATE THAT THAT'LL IMPACT? I I DO NOT HAVE THAT, THAT INFORMATION.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, IN, IN LOOKING AT THE, THE ACTIVITY, I MEAN, SO THE, THE ISSUE IS WE HAVE A SET COST, RIGHT? 'CAUSE WE, WE HAVE EIGHT EMPLOYEES THAT THIS HELPS TO, TO PAY FOR.

AND LIKE I SAID, IT DOESN'T PAY FOR ALL EIGHT EMPLOYEES A HUNDRED PERCENT.

IT'S ABOUT EVEN RAISING THE, THIS FEE, IT'S GONNA COVER ROUGHLY ABOUT 55 TO 60% OF, OF THOSE COSTS.

UM, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FROM THE REVENUE SIDE OF THINGS IS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S GONNA VARY ON THE ACTIVITY.

SO, YOU KNOW, AS YOU KNOW, THESE KIND OF CASES INCREASE OR DECREASE YEAR TO YEAR, THAT REVENUE IS GOING TO INCREASE OR DECREASE WITH THAT.

BUT I DO NOT HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER OF, OF YOU KNOW, WHAT THAT IS FROM YEAR TO YEAR.

BUT I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU.

AND HOW, UM, WAS THE NUMBER ASSESSED TO GO TO A 60% INCREASE AND WHEN WE DIDN'T MEET THE FULL, UM, THE POTENTIAL AMOUNT, I GUESS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN INCREASED.

THE STATE THAT WE WILL NOW BE SHARING SOME INCREASE OF THOSE COSTS THAT ALL HAVE TO DO WITH COURT COSTS.

HOW WAS THAT? SO, UM, THERE'S BEEN, THERE'S BEEN A COUPLE OTHER, UM, THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, UM, UM, MORTUARY SERVICES THAT, THAT WE PAY FOR.

UM, SO THE MORTUARIES CAME TO US AND SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE CONTRACTS ARE OUTTA DATE AND WE NEED TO INCREASE THE FEE.

AND SO WE WENT THROUGH A PROCESS OF LOOKING AT WHAT WE PAY OUT AND, AND IN THOSE INFLATIONARY RATES FROM YEAR TO YEAR.

AND THEN WE TOOK THAT SAME METHODOLOGY THAT, THAT WE WOULD PAY, THAT WE AGREED TO WITH THEM AND A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT, THAT WE WERE, THAT NEEDED TO BE UPDATED AND LOOKED AT THAT.

AND SO BASICALLY WE FIGURED OUT AN INFLATIONARY RATE FOR THE FIRST, YOU KNOW, FROM YEAR TO YEAR AND THEN KIND OF APPLIED THAT TO, TO THIS RATE HERE.

AND THAT'S HOW WE LANDED AT THE $48.

AND WE FELT THAT THAT WAS FAIR BECAUSE IT WAS CONSISTENT WITH HOW WE WERE BEING THAT WE'VE BEEN TREATING OTHER CONTRACTS.

IS THERE A COMPROMISE THERE? THERE'S ALWAYS A COMPROMISE.

AND SO IF WE, IF WE WERE TO SAY HALF OF THE COST, UM, SO IT'D BE $8 INCREASE.

UM, DOES, DO WE HAVE THE BUDGETARY ABILITY TO DO THAT? I THINK I WON'T GO ON.

I'LL JUST ASK THAT QUESTION.

YE YES WE COULD.

I MEAN WE, WE HAVE SOME, SOME FUNDING MECHANISMS THAT WE COULD, WE COULD, WE COULD, UM, BASICALLY IT WOULD BE REQUIRE MORE OF A TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO OFFSET THE, THE COST OF, OF WHAT'S GOING ON.

UM, LIKE I SAID, STAFFS RECOMMENDING THIS 'CAUSE IN 2012 THAT THAT COST TO THE GENERAL FUND WAS 8%.

AND EVEN WITH THIS INCREASE GOING FORWARD TO THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, THAT COST TO THE GENERAL FUND IS GONNA BE 40% OF THE COST OF THE ACTIVITY.

SO THE CURRENT COST IS $220,000.

THAT'S, THAT'S THE REVENUE THAT, THAT WE'RE PROJECTING TO FINISH UP AT THE END OF THE YEAR HERE IN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO.

AND THEN WITH THE INCREASE THAT'S ANTICIPATED AT 350 YES.

WHICH IS A, A 60% INCREASE.

THANK YOU CHAIR, VICE CHAIR.

VICE CHAIR.

CAN I ASK A QUESTION HERE? GO AHEAD.

MAKE SUPERVISOR SUM MORE.

YOU KNOW, I, I LOOK IN, IN OUR BUDGET, THERE'S MANY THINGS THAT WE DO, UH, TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT THINGS ARE COST EFFECTIVE AND, AND THINGS THAT WE HAVE GOING FORWARD, PAY FOR THEM THEMSELVES.

WE'VE ALSO BEEN, UH, WITH THE BUDGET, THE STATE BUDGET, THERE WERE SOME COSTS THAT WERE APPROPRIATED FROM

[00:30:01]

AND ALTHOUGH IT'S, UH, WE'RE BRINGING IN 200,000, 220,000 PROJECTED, WE'RE STILL SPENDING SOMEWHERE AROUND $600,000 TO, YOU KNOW, SO WE ARE SUPPLEMENTING THIS AT THE TUNE OF $400,000.

SO I AM OKAY WITH THE INCREASE.

IT IS A LARGE INCREASE, BUT IT ALSO GOES TO WHERE THOSE PEOPLE, THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY THAT FINE IF THEY'RE NOT BREAKING THE LAW.

AND SO IT'S JUST KIND OF A COST OF ASSOCIATED OR TRANSACTIONS THAT THEY'RE DOING.

AND SO WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON TOP OF THIS A LITTLE BIT SOONER, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, UH, WE'RE TRYING TO BRING YOU UP TO DATE.

AND I THINK AN $18 INCREASE IS NOT THE, IS NOT DRASTIC IN THE SENSE THAT IT IS A LARGE INCREASE, BUT YET IT ISN'T A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE'RE TALKING PER INDIVIDUAL CASE.

UM, WE STILL DON'T HAVE A MOTION.

YOU MADE A MOTION BY CHAIRWOMAN.

WE HAVE A, OH, I I JUST WANTED TO POINT A A FEW THINGS OUT 'CAUSE YOU MAY NOT BE AS FAMILIAR WITH THE JUSTICE COURTS AS I AM.

UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UM, MR. REINHOLD POINTED OUT THAT TRAFFIC CASES DO NOT INVOLVE THE SERVICES OF A PROSECUTOR.

THAT'S PARTLY CORRECT, PARTLY FALSE.

IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE NATURE OF THE TRAFFIC OFFENSE IS.

IF IT IS A CRIMINAL TRAFFIC OFFENSE, BE IT A-D-U-I-A RECKLESS DRIVING CRIMINAL SPEED, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE PROSECUTES ON BEHALF OF THE STATE.

UH, THERE HAS BEEN A SIGNIFICANT DECREASE IN CIVIL SPEED TRAFFIC CASES OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS BECAUSE OF A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO MORE FREQUENTLY USE THE TRAFFIC SCHOOL TO GET OUT OF OFFENSES.

SO IN THOSE CASES, THERE IS NO, UH, COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT 'CAUSE THEY'RE DOING IT AS ESSENTIALLY IT'S A DIVERSION OUTSIDE OF THE, OF THE COURT ITSELF.

UM, I'M NOT SURE WHY MR. REINHOLD ONLY SAID IT'S FUNDING.

THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE IS ALSO, I BELIEVE, ACCORDING TO THE, UH, ITEM ITSELF, ALSO HELPING TO DEFRAY THE COST OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE.

AND I'M NOT SURE HOW THE IMPACT OF A FEE AND IN ANY WAY IMPACTS THE POTENTIAL IMPARTIALITY OF THE JP COURT.

UH, I DON'T, THEY JUST, THEY ROUTINELY IMPOSE MANDATORY STATE FINES, FEES, SURCHARGES AS IT IS.

THEY'VE BEEN DOING THIS ONE FOREVER.

SO I'M NOT SURE HOW AN INCREASE IN WOULD CHANGE THEIR IMPROVE IMPARTIALITY.

AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT I SAID, I'D BE HAPPY TO HELP CLEAR IT UP MORE.

AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE A MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND EXCUSE? DID DARREL DARRELL SAID HE WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS A MOTION.

DARRELL, WAS THAT, UH, SUPERVISOR SEYMOUR? WAS THAT NO, IT WAS, IT WASN'T A MOTION, BUT, BUT I'LL MAKE THE MOTION.

I'LL, I'LL JUST COMPROMISE THAT.

WE MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE INCREASE THE RATE OF $45 AND THEN WE CAN LOOK AT IT NEXT YEAR IF WE NEED TO INCREASE IT AGAIN.

WILL WE HAVE A SECOND AS A CHAIR? UH, I'LL MAKE A SECOND.

I JUST WANT TO GET CLARIFICATION.

UH, SUPERVISOR SMORE SAID, UH, $45, UH, HOWEVER, ON THE ORDINANCE IT'S STATING TO $48.

WE, WE CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE.

EFFECTIVE JULY 1ST, 2024.

SO I BELIEVE THE, THE CLERK CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE AND THEN SHE CAN CHANGE THE RATE AMOUNT, UM, BEFORE IT IS SIGNED BY, UM, BY THE BOARD.

OKAY, I'LL SECOND.

OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY MORE DISCUSSION? IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, THEN UM, WE'LL HAVE, GO AHEAD AND, UM, VOTE ON THE, THE MOTION TO CHANGE THE, THE DOLLARS TO 45 THAT SHOULD SAY OF 45.

THEY, I FROM, UH, THE JUSTICE COURT STAFFING FEE FROM 35 TO 45.

LET'S VOTE.

ANY OPPOSITION? SAY NAY.

[00:35:02]

AND MOTION CARRIES.

[a. CONSENT AGENDA: The following item(s) are considered to be of a routine or administrative in nature and will be approved as a group unless a member of the Board wishes to discuss a particular item: ]

NUMBER THREE.

UM, MOTION TO INTERN TO NAVAJO COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS SESSION.

SO MOVE SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? WE GO AHEAD AND, UM, OH, I'M SORRY.

VOTE TO GO INTO, UM, NAVAJO COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE.

THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE OF ROUTINE OR ADMINISTRATIVE IN NATURE, AND WILL BE APPROVED AS A GROUP UNLESS A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WISHES TO DISCUSS A PARTICULAR ITEM.

SO, UM, SO WE HAVE THREE CONSENT AGENDA.

UH, MAY I HAVE A MOTION? OH, THAT PROPERTY, THAT'S THE ONE.

SO NUMBER ONE IS MEMBER ME MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN NAVAJO COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES DISTRICT AND INSTITUTE FOR INTERCOM ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH FOR THE USE OF THEIR FREE RED CAP DATA SYSTEM.

SO, MAY I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVE.

DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? IF NOT, UM, LET'S GO ON TO VOTE.

B, REGULAR AGENDA B ONE IS PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NUMBER ZERO ONE DASH 24.

ANY OPPOSED? SAY NA.

MOTION CARRIES.

[1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration and adoption of Ordinance Number 01-24, repealing all other ordinances concerning animal care and control and adopting this comprehensive Ordinance. ]

REPEALING ALL OTHER ORDINANCES CONCERNING AMAL CARE AND CONTROL AND ADOPTING THIS COMPREHENSIVE ORDINANCE.

UH, RHONDA KRAUS, THE PRESENTER.

CLOSE THE LOOPHOLE IN, IN BITES.

UM, GOOD MORNING, VICE CHAIR AND, AND SUPERVISORS.

THIS IS, MY NAME IS RHONDA KRAUS.

I'M THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION MANAGER.

THAT'S LIKE IN MY EYESIGHT, UM, , AND I OVERSEE, I KNOW IT DOESN'T MOVE .

UM, SO I OVERSEE THREE PROGRAMS IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH.

UH, ANIMAL CONTROL IS ONE OF 'EM.

AND THIS IS BRANDON DAMRON.

HE IS THE PROGRAM MANAGER THAT OVERSEES THE DAY-TO-DAY, UM, OPERATIONS OF IT.

GOOD MORNING, VICE CHAIR SUPERVISORS.

SO WHEN I FIRST GOT THIS POSITION THREE YEARS AGO, UH, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS I DID IS I WANTED TO REVIEW THE PROGRAMS, AND THAT INCLUDES ALL ORDINANCES, UH, CONTRACTS.

UM, AND SO WHEN I STARTED REVIEWING THIS, THIS ORDINANCE, UH, IT WAS IN COMBINATION WITH THE WHOLE TEAM, UM, LEGAL, AND WE CAME TO A CONSENSUS THAT WE NEEDED TO UPDATE THE TERMINOLOGY, UH, DEFINITIONS AND STANDARDIZATION OF THE ORDINANCE.

UM, WITH THE SPECIALTY OF MS. BUCKLEY, SHE HELPED US, UM, WE HAD MULTIPLE ORDINANCES IN THIS PROGRAM AND WE WERE ABLE TO COMBINE THEM INTO ONE.

AND WE ALSO WANTED TO ALIGN THEM MORE WITH ARIZONA REVISED STATUES.

UM, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, WANTED TO REFLECT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING.

SO THESE ARE THE THREE THINGS, THE THREE TOPICS THAT WE LOOKED AT.

WE LOOKED AT, UH, ADDING DEFINITIONS.

WE HAVE FOUR THAT WE WANT TO CLEARLY DEFINE.

WE WANTED TO ADD NEW ORDINANCES.

WE HAVE FIVE THAT WE WANTED, THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TODAY.

AND WE WANTED TO UPDATE THE FEE SCHEDULE.

BEFORE WE GO INTO THE DEFINITIONS, I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO REITERATE THAT, THAT THE NUMBER ONE GOAL OF THE ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL, UH, PROGRAM IS TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC AND TO PROVIDE AWARENESS, UM, AND BE, I GUESS ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE RUNNING INTO.

THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT WE, UH, HAVE TO ABIDE BY ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES.

THAT IS TITLE 11, CHAPTER SEVEN, ARTICLE SIX AND 6.1.

SO FOR THE AGGRESSIVE ONE, WE CHANGE VICIOUS, TOO AGGRESSIVE PURSUANT TO A RS STATUTE, 11 14 0 1, UH, FOR ATTACK.

MANY PEOPLE, WE HAD THIS ISSUE, AND THIS IS KIND OF HELPING US

[00:40:01]

MANY PEOPLE INTERPRET THE WORD ATTACK AS A PHYSICAL ALTERCATION WITH AN ANIMAL.

AND THIS IS CLEARLY DEFINED AS, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE ANIMAL ACTUALLY HAS TO PHYSICALLY COME IN CONTACT WITH YOU.

THEY COULD BE AGGRESSIVE BY GROWLING, UM, SHOWING THEIR TEETH, HAVING HAIR RAISED UP ON THE BACK OF THEIR, THEIR NECK.

THAT'S, THAT'S CLEARLY DEFINED IN THIS, IN THIS DEFINITION OF OUR ORDINANCE.

SO AS OF NOW, WE, WE CAN'T INTERVENE UNTIL A BITE HAPPENS.

THIS IS KIND OF US BEING A LITTLE BIT MORE PROACTIVE SO WE CAN ACTUALLY CITE THE PERSON FOR THE ATTACK OF HAVING THE ANIMAL AT LARGE VERSUS WHEN THEY ACTUALLY PHYSICALLY BITE THE PERSON.

SO BRANDON CAN TELL YOU A SITUATION THAT THIS IS COMMON TO US.

I'M TELL I'M TELLING THE STORIES.

SO, UM, THIS ONE'S COMMON FOR US.

WE HAD THREE LADIES WALKING THEIR CHILDREN, UM, AND THEY WERE, THERE WAS AN AGGRESSIVE, OKAY, A DOG COMING AT THEM.

UM, IT ALMOST ATTACKED HIM SHOWING TEETH GROWLING.

WELL, ADDING THIS, WE COULD, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ISSUE THE CITATION OFF OF THE ATTACK.

LIKE RHONDA SAID, WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING UNTIL THE BITE REALLY OCCURS.

UM, RIGHT NOW, ALL WE CAN DO IS ISSUE THE CITATION FOR DOG AT LARGE.

UM, SO PRETTY MUCH SUMS IT.

AND SO THIS IS KIND OF HELPING US CHANGE THAT LOOPHOLE.

UM, WE ALSO WANTED TO CLEARLY DEFINE THE COUNTY ENFORCEMENT AGENT.

WE WANTED TO CLARIFY IT PURSUANT TO A RS STATUTE, THE 11 DASH 1 0 7, AND OUR LAST ONE THAT WE WANTED TO DEFINE AS CRUELTY.

NOW, THIS DEF WE TOOK THIS DEFINITION FROM OR THE OTHER AGENCIES.

AND TO ME, I, I, I BELIEVE THAT THIS HAS A MORE CLEAR AND CONCISE DEFINITION VERSUS OUR, OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE.

SO RIGHT NOW, OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE HAS A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR ANIMAL OWNERS TO HAVE THE BASICS FOOD, WATER, SHELTER FOR AN ANIMAL.

TO ME, I THINK IT'S, IT WAS MISSING A, A LOT OF IMPORTANT ELEMENTS, ONE OF WHICH IS THE SANITARY ENVIRONMENT AND THE NEED TO PROVIDE MEDICAL CARE.

MANY OF THE ANIMAL COMPLAINTS THAT WE ARE INVESTIGATING, THE ANIMALS ARE IN DEPLORABLE CONDITIONS, WHICH CAN CAUSE DISEASE AND, AND INJURIES.

AND BRANDON WILL TELL YOU ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE'VE HAD.

ALL RIGHT, SO FOR THIS ONE, UM, WE'RE MORE LOOKING AT THE SANITARY ENVIRONMENT.

SO WE HAVE A GENTLEMAN THAT HAS OVER 40 DOGS.

THEY'RE LIVING IN TRASH AND FECES.

WELL, IN OUR ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO ANYTHING BASED OFF OF THAT 'CAUSE HE DOES HAVE THE PROPER SHELTER, WATER AND FOOD.

WE WOULD LIKE FOR HIM TO CLEAN IT UP.

WE CAN GIVE, WE HAVE A FORM THAT'S ORDER TO COMPLY, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT HE HAS TO CLEAN IT UP, UM, BECAUSE WE HAVE NOTHING TO ISSUE THE CITATION OFF OF.

WE DO HAVE AC CRUELTY LAW THAT IS BY A STATUTE.

UM, BUT THOSE ARE CLASSIFIED FELONIES.

THESE WOULD JUST BE THE CRIMINAL MISDEMEANORS UNDER THIS CRUELTY UNDER OUR ORDINANCE.

SO IT WOULD BE NICE TO PUT 'EM, GET THIS IN THERE.

AND I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT THERE IS A, RIGHT NOW FOR CRUELTY, THERE IS A, IT'S A 30 BASICALLY, UH, AMENDING THE NEW CRUELTY LAW.

IT'S 13 DASH 29 12 IN THE CRIMINAL STATUTE.

IT'S IN THE HOUSE RIGHT NOW, AND IT CLEARLY, AND IT'S ACTUALLY CLEARLY DEFINING CRUELTY, AND THEY HAVE A LOT MORE INFORMATION IN THERE.

UM, THEY HAVE THE DUTY TO REPORT, IT DEFINES ABANDONMENT, AND IT ALSO GIVES LANDLORD RIGHTS, WHICH LETS THE LANDLORD ADDRESS ISSUES WITH TENANTS ON THEIR PROPERTY.

SO THAT WAS BROUGHT TO THE HOUSE IN FEBRUARY.

SO HOPEFULLY BY THE END OF THIS CLOSURE OF THIS FISCAL YEAR IN OCTOBER-ISH, IT WILL BE PASSED.

SO NOW FOR OUR ORDINANCE, WE WANTED TO ADD FIVE NEW ORDINANCES.

OUR FIRST ONE IS KEEPING OF WILD OR EXOTIC ANIMALS.

OUR COUNTY IS VERY RURAL, AS YOU ALL KNOW, AND IT'S SPREAD OUT FOR US.

IT, IT WOULD BE NICE TO KNOW IF THERE'S ANY EXOTIC ANIMALS IN OUR COUNTY, UM, THAT COULD POSSIBLY OR POTENTIALLY BE SPREADING OTHER DISEASES OR VIRUSES THAT WE DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW ABOUT.

KEEPING OF HORSES REFERRED TO THE COUNTY ORDINANCE SECTION 3 0 2 15, WHICH GIVES THEM MORE INFORMATION ON THE SETBACKS AND THE CORRAL SIZES.

UM, IT, IT WAS KIND OF REDUNDANT TO HAVE BOTH IN BOTH, UH, AREAS.

UH, WE WANTED TO DEFINE THE QUARANTINE OF AREAS AND THE ANIMALS.

NOW THIS ONE, IT COMES FROM THE A RS STATUTE 11 DASH 1 0 0 1.

IT CLEARLY DEFINES THAT IF YOU, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO, TO, UH, TO MAKE AN AREA A QUARANTINE AREA.

UM, SO JUST A, A TIDBIT OF INFORMATION.

UH, LAST YEAR WE ONLY HAD TWO RABIES,

[00:45:01]

UH, CONFIRMED.

ONE WAS A DOG AND ONE WAS A FOX.

THIS YEAR WE'VE HAD 10.

SO, AND WE'RE NOT EVEN IN THE, THE RABIES, I GUESS HOTSPOT TIME.

OH, YEAH.

SEASON.

SEASON, YEAH.

SO FOR, FOR US, WE WANTED TO ADD THIS BECAUSE TO ME THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT.

UM, AND IT KIND OF GOES WITH THAT DEFINING WHAT A QUARANTINE IS.

AND IT ALSO CARRIES TWO STATUTES.

ONE IS THE LEASH LAW AND THE ANIMAL BITE.

THE FOURTH ONE IS THE HEARING OFFICER.

WE ADDED THE HEARING OFFICER TO OUR ORDINANCE.

AGAIN, IT WAS AN A STATUTE 1 0 0 6.

AND THIS IS TO ASSIST US IN OUR CIVIL CASES.

UM, AND THE HEARING OFFICER PROTOCOL, OUR PROCEDURES WERE, UM, APPROVED BACK IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR.

WE ARE MISSING THEM IN OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE.

AND NUMBER FIVE, WE WANTED TO ADD MORE PENALTIES FROM THE ARIZONA STATE RE REVIVED STATUTES.

SO, FOR EXAMPLE, UNDER THE KENNEL PERMITS, IF A PERSON HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF THAT ANIMAL CRUELTY LAW, WHICH IS A CRIMINAL, UM, STATUTES TITLE 13, WE CAN DENY THEM A PERMIT.

AND, UH, WE CAN ALSO CHARGE THEM A $75 FEE TO GET THAT PERMIT OR THE ACTUAL COST OF RECOVERY.

UM, AGAIN, WE'RE GONNA FOLLOW THE A RS STATUTE 11 DASH 1 0 0 5 A SIX, WHICH GIVES A CLASSIFICATION AND, UH, FOR THE VIOLATIONS.

UM, SO CIVIL PENALTIES CAN EXCEED OVER $500 PER VIOLATION.

AND THE CRIMINAL CRIMINAL PENALTIES CANNOT EXCEED A CLASS TWO MISDEMEANOR.

SO THIS IS OUR FEE SCHEDULE.

THE FIRST TWO COLUMNS.

THE FIRST ONE IS WHAT WE PREVIOUSLY HAVE.

THE SECOND ONE IS OUR PROPOSED.

UM, THE FEES WE ARE SUGGESTING ARE MODERATELY INCREASED DUE TO INFLATION, WHICH AFFECTS MARKET FORCES SUCH AS OUR DOG FOOD, OUR GAS EQUIPMENT, AND VEHICLE MAINTENANCE.

UM, I KIND OF WANTED TO FOCUS ON THE ISSUE OF DOG AT LARGE.

SO DOG AT LARGE, IT COUNTS FOR 60% OF OUR CALL VOLUME.

UH, THIS SITUATION OFTEN LEADS TO CONFLICTS AMONG NEIGHBORS.

UM, THE PROPOSED FEE WILL PLAY AN A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN REDUCING THESE ISSUES, WHICH WE'RE HOPING THAT WILL, THAT WILL SOLVE.

IT ALSO ENCOURAGES ANIMAL OWNERS TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR PETS, FOSTERING A MORE HARMONIOUS COMMUNITY.

THE SECOND ONE I WANTED TO LOOK AT WAS THE, THE KENNEL PERMIT.

AGAIN, THAT WAS AN A STATUTE.

IT, IT CLEARLY DEFINES IT IN STATUTE.

UM, BUT, BUT FOR US, THIS WILL ASSIST US IN TWO WAYS.

IT PROVIDES AWARENESS OF POSSIBLE HOARDING SITUATION LIKE BRIAN BRANDON TALKED ABOUT THE 40 DOGS.

UM, THERE'S MULTIPLE HOARDING SITUATIONS HERE IN THE COUNTY, AND THIS, I THINK WILL HELP US PINPOINT SOME OF THOSE, UM, SO THAT WAY WE CAN EDUCATE THEM AND PROVIDE THEM SOURCE RESOURCES.

UM, THE SECOND ONE, IT'LL ALSO HELP US BE PROACTIVE IN ADDRESSING ISSUES OF ODOR OVERCROWDING IN OUR SHELTERS.

UM, RIGHT NOW ALL SHELTERS IN OUR AREA ARE AT CAPACITY.

UM, I THINK HOW MANY RESCUES DO WE HAVE? 2, 2, 2.

UM, AND THEY'RE ALSO AT CAPACITY.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THAT AND HOPEFULLY, UM, SOME OF THESE FEES WILL, WILL ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE HAVING.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS THAT ANY OF YOU MAY HAVE? VICE CHAIRWOMAN? UM, I HAVE A QUESTION ON THE DOG AT LARGE.

UM, IS THIS THE DOG THAT IS RUNNING IN THE COMMUNITY OR IS THIS, 'CAUSE YOU SAID THERE'S CONFLICT WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

, I JUST, BECAUSE THERE'S A, A PROPOSAL OF 125 TO 225 BASED ON LOCATION.

UM, ACTUALLY, UH, IT'S A STATE LAW AND WE USUALLY GOVERN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS.

SO FOR THE UNINCORPORATED COMP, UNINCORPORATED AREAS, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DOG AT LARGE.

THAT MEANS THEY HAVE TO BE ON A LEASH OR THEY HAVE TO BE A WORKING DOG, OR THEY HAVE TO BE UNDER VOICE CONTROL.

THOSE ARE THE THREE TYPE THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT IN ORDER TO, UM, ABLE TO CITE FOR THAT DOG AT LARGE.

SO, UM, AND THAT'S WHEREVER YOU FIND THEM IN, IN UNINCORPORATED AREAS BECAUSE EVERY TOWN OR MUNICIPALITY HAS THEIR OWN ORDINANCES.

THANK YOU, CHAIRWOMAN.

UH, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ANY, UM, ANYONE? IF THERE IS NONE, MADAM CHAIR.

I MEAN, THERE'S AN INDIVIDUAL THAT RAISED HIS HAND IN THE, AT THE AUDIENCE.

I DUNNO IF THIS QUESTION IS RELEVANT.

UH, YOU NEED TO COME TO THE PODIUM SO EVERYONE CAN HEAR YOU.

PEAS AND EDUCATE ANIMAL LOVERS, WHATEVER OWNERS.

STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.

MY NAME IS KEN CATO.

I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS A RELEVANT QUESTION, BUT IT JUST CAME UP IN MY THINKING BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE

[00:50:01]

THAT'S FINE.

MY QUESTION IS VERY SIMPLE.

BASED ON AN EXPERIENCE THAT A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO AND SHOW A LITTLE GIRL ABOUT SIX YEARS OLD AGO, SIX YEARS OLD, WAS PULLED OUT OF A TREE BY A PET BULL AND SHE DIED AS A RESULT OF THE INJURY.

MY QUESTION IS, WHAT ORDINANCE DO YOU HAVE THAT COVERS A DOG MAIMING OR EVEN KILLING A CITIZEN IF MY DOG COMES IN YOUR YARD AND MAIMS YOU OR KILLS YOUR CHILD? DOES THE COUNTY OF NAVAJO COUNTY DID, DO THEY HAVE AN ORDINANCE ABOUT THAT? I'M SURE GO AHEAD.

RESPOND.

CAN ANSWER ALL OVERVIEW.

HAVE WE, WE HAVE CRIMINAL STATUTES THAT COVER THAT.

WE HAVE CRIMINAL STATUTES THAT COVER THAT.

SO IF A DOG KILLS A CHILD, WHAT DOES THE STATUTE SAY? THAT'S MY QUESTION.

THAT YOU COMMITTED A FELONY.

IF I CAN PROVE IT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

THANK YOU, SIR.

UM, ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC? I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT LONG, THAT, UM, ANIMAL CONTROL, WE CANNOT CITE CRIMINAL CITATIONS.

WE CAN ONLY CITE CIVIL.

DON'T, I DON'T FEEL THAT WE HAVE OVERT TRUMPED ANY OF THE OTHER ORDINANCES.

GO AHEAD.

HI.

MY NAME IS LOUISE LEGETT.

UM, MY FRIEND IS A FARMER AND SHE HAS FARM DOGS AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE COME BY AND HARASS HER FARM DOGS WHO ARE WORKING AND THEY GROWL AT THE PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY'RE COMING AND BOTHERING THEM.

BUT, UM, I KNOW THAT THERE IS RIGHT TO FARM LAWS THAT PROTECT THAT.

UM, AND THAT IS THAT COVERED WITH YOUR, DO YOU KNOW THE RIGHT TO FARM LAWS AND DO YOU INCORPORATE THAT? YES.

SO FOR ONE, LIKE I STATED EARLIER, IT WOULD BE YOU HAVE TO BE IN VOICE CONTROL OF YOUR ANIMAL OR THEY HAVE TO BE WORKING DOGS, WHICH IS COVERED.

THEY'RE WORKING DOGS.

RIGHT? RIGHT.

UM, RIGHT.

AND SO THOSE ARE THE TWO THAT WOULD OVER TRUMP THE, THE DOG AT LARGE CITATION THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO WRITE.

RIGHT.

'CAUSE SHE'S HAD A LOT OF TROUBLE WITH THE COURT BEING CALLED BY HER NEIGHBORS, BUT HER DOGS ARE DOING THEIR JOBS AND BARKING AND KEEPING THE ANIMALS, YOU KNOW, CORRAL.

RIGHT.

WHAT THEY DO.

OKAY, SO THAT WOULD TRUMPET, RIGHT? WELL, IN THAT CASE IT WOULD, YOU WOULD HAVE TO, UM, THE DOG.

THE DOG WOULD HAVE TO BE BY THE HERD.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO IF THE DOG IS OFF THE, BY THE GOATS OR WHATEVER IT IS THAT SHE'S AT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO WHY THEY'RE DOING THEIR JOB.

BECAUSE IF THEY'RE OUT IN THE ROAD, THERE'S NO THEY'RE NOT, NOT IF THEY'RE OUT IN THE ROAD.

HER PROPERTY.

UM, LET'S, UH, THAT'S THE, THAT'S WHAT IT'S, SORRY.

GO AHEAD AND ASK YOU QUESTIONS AND MAKE YOUR COMMENT.

THIS IS, UM, GETTING TO BE A MORE, OKAY.

I WAS CHECKING ON THAT.

SO YOU ARE WITH THE RIGHT FORM LAWS? MM-HMM.

OH YEAH.

IT'S AN ERROR OF STATUTE WE HAVE TOO.

ANY OTHER, UM, FROM THE PUBLIC? IF NOT, WE'LL GO, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I WOULD LIKE A MOTION FOR THIS, UM, ORDINANCE CONSIDERATION AND VICE CHAIR.

I HAVE A QUESTION, PLEASE.

SUPERVISOR, MRS. CROSS, I'D JUST LIKE TO KNOW, UH, IS THIS ORDINANCE GOING TO BE GREATER THAN ANY CITY ORDINANCE THAT IS IN PLACE? ARE WE TAKING THIS TO A LEVEL THAT IS STRONGER THAN ANY CITY IN TOWN IN THE INCORPORATED AREA? HAS? THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION.

UH, SUPERVISOR SEYMOUR? NO.

UM, SO WHEN WE LOOKED AT OTHER ORDINANCES WITH OUR, WITHIN NAVAJO COUNTY, WE TRIED TO KEEP REASONABLE.

SO THE WILD AND EXOTIC ANIMALS THAT WAS ACTUALLY TAKEN FROM PINETOP LAKESIDE.

UM, AND WE'RE TRYING TO BE NEUTRAL BECAUSE AGAIN, PEOPLE LIVE IN RURAL AREA, IN RURAL USA FOR A REASON.

UM, AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO BE, TO BE HONEST IN THAT, UM, I KNOW THE CITY OF SHOW LOW HAS AN ANIMAL ORDINANCE THAT YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF ANIMALS.

WE'RE NOT DOING THAT.

UM, FOR ONE, WE'RE TOO LARGE OF A, OF AN AREA.

AND AGAIN, PEOPLE LIKE RURAL USA FOR A REASON.

UM, AND SO I

[00:55:01]

BRANDON, WHAT DO YOU THINK? NO, I DON'T THINK SO EITHER.

I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

THANK YOU SUPERVISOR .

UM, I, I'LL GO AHEAD AND, UH, GET A MOTION VICE CHAIR I MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND A SECOND, I'LL SECOND IT.

ANY MORE DISCUSSION? AND LET'S GO AHEAD.

GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THIS.

UH, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ALL.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

MOTION TO RETURN TO REGULAR SESSION.

SO MOVED.

SECOND, I'LL, LET'S, UH, GO AHEAD AND VOTE TO GO TO BACK TO REGULAR SESSION.

UH, ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.

FOR A PUBLIC WORKS CONSIDERATION OF LAND PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY ALONG BOURBON RANCH ROAD FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES, UH, PRESENTER IS ROLLING IN PLAY.

AND ANY OPPOSED? NONE FOR MOTION CARRIES

[a. Consideration of a Land Purchase Agreement for additional Right-of-Way along Bourdon Ranch Road for drainage purposes.]

VICE CHAIRMAN ELLI AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD APPRECIATE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THIS ITEM.

BORDEN RANCH ROAD AT MILIT SWALE HAS EXPERIENCED SOME UNSAFE STORMWATER RUNOFF EVENTS DUE TO THE FAILURE OF MILIT SWALE DAM THAT'S UPSTREAM OF THE ROADWAY.

AND THE COUNTY IS CURRENTLY WORKING ON A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, WHICH INCLUDES, UM, INCREASING THE CAPACITY OF TWO CULVERTS ON BOARD AND RANCH ROAD.

THE COUNTY HAS ALL THE NECESSARY EASEMENTS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, WHICH WE'RE ANTICIPATING THE PROJECT, UH, CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT BEGINNING THE BEGINNING OF AUGUST.

THIS PROPERTY OWNER THAT, UM, WE'RE DISCUSSING IS ON THIS ITEM, HAS CHOSEN TO DEED ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY TO THE NAVAJO COUNTY FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES.

THE SIGNING OF THIS AGREEMENT WILL GRANT NAVAJO COUNTY TITLE OVER THE PROPERTY FOR ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE RECON, EXCUSE ME, FOR MAINTENANCE AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE CULVERT AT THE SWALE DRAINAGE ONBOARDING RANCH ROAD.

THE PUR PURCHASE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY WOULD BE FOR AMOUNT OF $1,800.

STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPROVAL, UM, BY SIGNING THIS LAND PURCHASE AGREEMENT IN GRANNY NAVAJO COUNTY.

ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY ON BORDEN RANCH ROAD.

ALL I WILL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME IF YOU HAVE 'EM.

ANY QUESTIONS? I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT, WE HAVE A, A MAP OF THE LOCATION.

UM, THE KIND OF PURPLE AREA IS WHERE THE, THE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY WILL BE.

IT'S ON THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THIS, THE EXISTING CULVERT THAT WE'RE GONNA BE RECONSTRUCTING.

AND THIS WILL ALLOW FUTURE MAINTENANCE OF THIS CULVERT.

THIS SHOWS THAT SHOWS WHERE THE, THE PROJECT IS.

UH, THERE'S TWO CULVERTS CULVERT ONE IS WHERE THIS ADDITIONAL RIGHT, RIGHT OF WAY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTH END.

SO VICE CHAIR, MR. SUPERVISOR SEYMOUR, I'D MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF THIS, UH, RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT FOR THE GORDON RANCH ROAD DRAINAGE SECOND.

UH, ANY MORE DISCUSSION? IF NO FURTHER DISCUSSION? UM, LET'S VOTE.

AND MOTION CARRIES.

WE GO TO FOUR B PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NUMBER ZERO TWO DASH 2 0 4, I MEAN 2 0 2 4 APPROVING THE REMOVAL

[b. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration and adoption of Ordinance Number 02-2024, approving the removal of motor vehicles, trailers, and storage containers from County-maintained rights-of-way during snow season and for the enforcement of parking restrictions by issuance of citations and/or towing.]

[01:00:01]

OF MOTOR VEHICLES, TRAILERS AND STORAGE CONTAINERS FROM COUNTY MAINTAINED RIGHT OF WAY DURING SNOW SEASON.

AND FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS BY THE ISSUANCE OF CITATION AND OR TOW TOWING.

UH, CODY COOPER WILL PRESENT.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VICE CHAIRWOMAN SUPERVISORS FOR YOUR TIME THIS MORNING.

UH, THIS ITEM, THE STAFF'S BRINGING IN FRONT OF YOU FROM PUBLIC WORKS IS FOR A, UH, SNOW OR WINTER PARKING ORDINANCE.

THIS WOULD BE IN EFFECT FROM NOVEMBER 1ST UNTIL APRIL 1ST, INCLUSIVE OF EVERY YEAR.

UM, THE INTENT OF THIS ORDINANCE IS TO PREVENT THE, THE PARKING OF VEHICLES AND TRAILERS AS WELL AS THOSE STORAGE CONTAINERS WITHIN COUNTY MAINTAINED RIGHT OF WAYS DURING OUR TYPICAL SNOW SEASON.

UH, THE REASON THIS ORDINANCE IS KIND OF COME FORWARD IN STAFF'S MIND, AND WE'RE PRESENTING THIS TO YOU IS THOSE TYPES OF VEHICLES BEING PARKED DURING SNOW EVENTS CAN, UH, DELAY OR OUTRIGHT PREVENT THE ABILITY OF OUR PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES TO GO OUT AND MAINTAIN AND DO SNOW REMOVAL ON ROADWAYS.

UM, SO THIS WOULD OFFER A MECHANISM FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO, UH, TOW FOR ANY TYPE OF OFFENSE.

AND THEN WITH FIRST OFFENSES, THERE COULD BE A FINE OF A HUNDRED DOLLARS AND 200 FOR ANY SUBSEQUENT, UM, THAT WOULD BE DISCRETIONARY AS FAR AS IT GOES.

SO THERE'S NOT THE OBLIGATION THEY'RE ABLE TO SEE IF THAT DOES ACTUALLY INHIBIT THAT MAINTENANCE.

UM, SO IT'S NOT JUST A BLANKET YOU CAN ACTUALLY APPLY WHERE THAT MAINTENANCE WOULD BE INHIBITED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS.

I WORKED WITH PUBLIC WORK STAFF AS WELL AS REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE SO THAT WE COULD REFINE THIS AND GET THIS TO A LEVEL OF LANGUAGE THAT EVERYONE WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH, BUT ALSO TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO, UH, SAFE AND TIMELY MAINTENANCE OF OUR ROADS DURING THAT WINTER SNOW SEASON.

UM, AS OF TODAY, STAFF HASN'T RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS REGARDING THIS ORDINANCE AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

UH, I'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF THERE IS NO ONE, UM, THEN I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

DOES, UH, DO THE, UH, SUPERVISORS HAVE ANY COMMENTS OTHERWISE? UH, I WOULD LIKE A MOTION VICE CHAIR.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

UM, JUST A QUESTION OF CLARIFICATION.

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

UM, SO IN THE PARTICULAR ORDINANCE, IT SAYS SNOW SEASON AND FOR ENFORCING THE PARKING RESTRICTIONS.

SO IT IS JUST SPECIFICALLY FOR THE SNOW SEASON AND NOT FOR ADDITIONAL.

UM, I KNOW THAT WE MIGHT GET CALLS WHERE WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE PARKING ON THE RIGHT OF WAY AND INDIVIDUALS WANT US TO TOW THOSE AWAY.

IT'S NOT SPECIFIC FOR THOSE ITEMS. IT'S JUST DURING WHEN WE NEED THE ROAD SNOW PLOW.

YES.

SO THIS IS ONLY RELATED FROM NOVEMBER UNTIL APRIL OF EVERY YEAR, WHICH IS OUR TYPICAL SNOW SEASON.

OF COURSE IT CAN SNOW OUTSIDE OF THAT, BUT THAT'S OUR TYPICAL EXPECTATIONS FOR SNOW.

SO THIS IS SPECIFIC SOLELY TO THAT.

THANK YOU, SIR.

UM, I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

MAY I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

ANY MORE DISCUSSION IF NO FURTHER DISCUSSION? UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE.

PRESENTER, TYLER RICHARDS.

ANY OPPOSED? SAY A MOTION CARRIES.

[1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration and adoption of Resolution Number 22-2024, approving/denying a Zone Change from R-2 to Commercial-Residential (C-R) on an approximately 0.33-acre portion of an approximately 2.28-acre parcel, located in Lakeside, along Rainbow Lake Drive. ]

AND WE GO TO FOUR C.

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NUMBER TWO TWO DASH 2 0 2 4 APPROVING DENYING A ZONE CHANGE FROM R DASH TWO TO COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL C DASH R ON APPROXIMATELY 0.33 ACRE PORTION OF APPROXIMATELY 2.28 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IN LAKESIDE ALONG RAINBOW LAKE DRIVE.

GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS, VICE CHAIR, UH, REMAINING SUPERVISORS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS MORNING.

TODAY WE HAVE OUR FIRST ZONE CHANGE OF THE YEAR, UH, ZONE CHANGE 24 0 1.

WE ARE SITTING, UH, KIND OF NORTH OF PINETOP LAKESIDE, KIND OF IN THE WAGON WHEEL AREA.

UH, THIS IS CONCERNING A SINGLE PARCEL APPROXIMATELY 2.28 ACRES IN SIZE.

UH, THE ZONE CHANGE WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY IS ONLY A 0.33 ACRE PORTION OF THAT PARCEL.

UM, IT IS CURRENTLY OWNED BY RIM COUNTRY RV PARK.

AND THE REASON THEY'RE ASKING FOR THIS ZONE CHANGE TODAY IS THEY CURRENTLY HAVE AN EXISTING 38 SPACE RV PARK ON, UH, THE LOWER SOUTHERN AND UH, EASTERN PORTION, UH,

[01:05:01]

PARCELS.

THIS RV PARK IS ILLEGAL NON-CONFORMING USE OF THE PROPERTY.

UM, AND THEY'RE SEEKING TO BRING THIS PARCEL HERE TODAY INTO COMPLIANCE SO THAT THEY CAN EXPAND THE RV PARK TO THIS PARCEL.

UM, IF THE ZONE CHANGE IS APPROVED, WE ARE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT PORTION OF THIS REQUEST.

HOWEVER, IF THE ZONE CHANGE IS DENIED, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD, MOVE FORWARD TO THE, UH, SPECIAL USE PERMIT.

SO HERE'S OUR VICINITY MAP.

UH, THAT LITTLE PARCEL UP THERE IN THE BLUE IS OUR SUBJECT PARCEL.

UH, THE AREAS HIGHLIGHTED IN RED, OUR, UM, OTHER RV PARKS THAT ARE IN THE AREA.

SO IT IS CONSISTENT IN THE USAGE WITH THE AREA.

UM, ADDITIONALLY TO THE NORTH AND TO THE EAST THERE, UH, THAT IS ZONED COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL.

UH, SO THERE ARE NO CONCERNS REGARDING SPOT ZONING.

TAKING A LOOK AT OUR ZONING MAP HERE, YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THAT R TWO PORTION, THAT 0.33 ACRE PORTION.

UM, IF THE ZONE CHANGES APPROVED TODAY, THAT WHOLE ENTIRE PORTION WILL BECOME COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL.

UH, LIKE I ON THAT TINY LITTLE PORTION UP THERE SHOWS US WE ARE IN KIND OF A CR AREA ALONG THE TWO 60.

UM, AND SO THAT SPOT ZONING CONCERN IS ELIMINATED.

HERE IS A SITE PLAN, UH, SHOWING KIND OF THE EXPANSION THAT THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO DO.

UH, LIKE I SAID, FOR THIS SPECIFIC ITEM TO ZONE CHANGE, THIS IS NOT WHAT WE ARE APPROVING, JUST KIND OF SHOWING YOU WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO ACHIEVE.

IF WE DO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS COMING TO OUR RECOMMENDATION, UM, WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONE CHANGE.

NAVAJO COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAS ALSO UNANIMOUS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION LAST MONTH.

AND I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, OR ANYTHING ELSE AT THIS TIME.

I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ANY PUBLIC WANT SPEAK.

IF THERE IS NONE, I'LL CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING AND IF THE SUPERVISORS HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, OTHERWISE I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

HI SIR.

I HAVE A COMMENT.

UM, ONE, I GUESS IN THINKING OF, UH, THANKING EVERYONE WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE CONVERSATION TO VET THIS AND BETTER UNDERSTAND MM-HMM.

, UM, THE EXPANSION.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

AND, UM, ALL OF THOSE WHO PARTICIPATED, I, UM, I WILL MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION? THANK YOU SUPERVISOR .

AND, UH, UH, GO AHEAD AND ASK FOR ANY MORE DISCUSSION.

MADAM CHAIR.

I'M SORRY.

UM, SUPERVISOR, UH, WEISINGER MADE THE MOTION.

I WAS JUST SIMPLY ACKNOWLEDGING TO SECOND.

OH, .

I DID SEE HER TOO.

OR PEACE SIGN .

UH, ANY MORE DISCUSSION? THANK YOU.

UM, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND VOTE.

MOVE ON TO PUBLIC HEARING, UH, CONSIDERATION ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NUMBER TWO THREE DASH 2 0 2 4 APPROVING DENYING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT AN RV PARK, WHAT, 38 EXISTING SPACES AND AN EXPANSION TO ADD, ADD ANOTHER 28 SPACES FOR A TOTAL OF 66 SPACES.

AND MOTION CARRIES.

[2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration and adoption of Resolution Number 23-2024, approving/denying a Special Use Permit to permit an RV Park with 38 existing spaces and an expansion to add another 28 spaces, for a total of 66 spaces.]

PRESENTER AGAIN.

AND TYLER RICHARDS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS MORNING.

VICE CHAIR SUPERVISORS.

THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.

UH, SO NOW WE ARE MOVING ON TO OUR SPECIAL USE PERMIT PORTION OF THIS REQUEST HERE TODAY.

UH, THIS IS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR AN EXISTING, UH, 38 SPACE RV PARK TO EXPAND.

THEY'RE SEEKING TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL 28 SPACES, BRINGING OUR TOTAL TO 66.

UM, ADDITIONALLY, THEY DO HAVE EXISTING SIX FOOT SOLID FENCING SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY.

UH, THEY ARE GOING TO IMPROVE EMERGENCY ACCESS ALONG LA RAINBOW LAKE DRIVE.

UH, THEY WILL BE EXTENDING THEIR GRAVEL DRIVEWAY FOR THAT ACCESS TO THOSE 28 NEW LOTS.

AND THEY ARE PLANNING ON INCLUDING OPEN AND UNDEVELOPED AREAS.

SO HERE'S OUR VICINITY MAP, AGAIN, KIND OF SHOWING WHERE WE ARE.

LITTLE NORTH OF PINETOP LAKESIDE, KIND OF IN THE WAGON WHEEL AREA.

UH, ALONGSIDE THOSE, UH, NUMEROUS RV PARKS IN THE AREA, HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW KIND OF SHOWING THE TOTAL, UH, ALL ENCOMPASSING PARCELS THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH THIS REQUEST.

UM, THE NORTHERN, KIND OF WEST, THE NORTHWEST PARCEL IS WHERE THAT EXPANSION IS GOING TO BE TAKING PLACE ON THE NOW COMPLETELY CR ZONED, UH, PORTION.

[01:10:01]

AND HERE'S OUR SITE PLAN SHOWING HOW THAT EXPANSION IS TO BE LAID OUT.

UH, THE PUBLIC ACCESS COMES IN THERE, UH, FROM THE TWO 60 KIND OF ON THIS SIDE OVER HERE.

SO THAT IS WHERE THE PUBLIC COMES IN FOR THEIR ACCESS.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN GET IT KIND OF ON THIS SIDE FOR THE PUBLIC THERE.

UM, THIS IS WHERE DOWN KIND OF, UH, THAT ENTRANCE THERE, THAT IS WHERE THEIR EMERGENCY ACCESS IS.

THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE PLANNING TO DO SOME IMPROVEMENTS THERE TO THE NORTH.

UH, WE DO HAVE THOSE ADDITIONAL 28 NEW LOTS, UM, WITH THE ACCESS, UH, GRAVEL ROADS ALL BEING ADDED, UH, FOR ACCESS THERE.

UH, COMING TO OUR ANALYSIS HERE, UM, IT DOES MEET, UH, NUMEROUS PORTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL AS OUR ZONING ORDINANCE HAS BEEN PROPERLY POSTED AND NOTICED IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW IN ARTICLE 29.

UH, IT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE PERMISSIBLE USES IN ITS ZONING DISTRICT, AND IT IS, AND IT WILL HAVE MINIMAL ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE GENERAL PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE OF PROPERTIES IN THE AREA.

UM, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

ALSO UNANIMOUS UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE 16 CONDITIONS LISTED UP THERE.

IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ON THOSE OR ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M HERE TO ANSWER THOSE AS WELL.

DO WE HAVE A APPLICANT HERE THAT WE CAN HEAR FROM? I DON'T BELIEVE WE DO TODAY, NO.

NO.

UH, I WILL OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.

ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? GO AHEAD, COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

MY NAME IS PAUL BETS.

I LIVE IN, UH, LAKESIDE.

UH, CLOSE TO THAT AREA ACTUALLY, UH, NOT TOO FAR AWAY.

UM, IT LOOKED LIKE THAT MOST OF THE ACCESS COMING AND GOING FROM THAT LITTLE DEVELOPMENT IS COMING OUT ONTO, UM, WHITE MOUND BOULEVARD.

AND I WAS JUST WONDERING IF IT'D BE LESS HASSLE AS FAR AS GETTING ACROSS TRAFFIC AND EVERYTHING IF THEY WERE TO EXIT ONTO RAINBOW LAKE ROAD.

AND THE OTHER THING IS WITH THAT MANY MORE HOMES JUST IN THAT AREA, THAT WHERE THAT UH, RAINBOW LAKE ROAD COMES OUT, THERE IS REALLY KIND OF A, UH, ANYBODY KNOWS THAT AREA.

UM, BECAUSE IT'S COMING AT AN ANGLE, IT'S A LOT OF TIMES IT'S HARD TO SEE WITH THE TR WITH THE TRAFFIC, UM, BECAUSE YOU'RE HAVING TO, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE HAVING TO LOOK AT AN ANGLE INSTEAD OF AT A T YOU KNOW, A T INTERSECTION.

I'M JUST WONDERING IF THEY SHOULD ACTUALLY COME OUT ONTO RAINBOW LAKE ROAD AND ACTUALLY HAVE A TRAFFIC CONTROL LIGHT FOR ALL THOSE PEOPLE THAT USE RAINBOW LAKE ROAD ONTO THEIR, AND THEN HAVING THIS COMMUNITY THAT CLOSE.

IT MIGHT BE BETTER.

IT'S JUST A THOUGHT.

ANY OTHER, UH, FROM THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC HEARING? IF THERE'S NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ANY COMMENTS FROM, UH, THE SUPERVISORS OR QUESTIONS? VICE CHAIR? I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

UM, THANK YOU TYLER.

UM, WERE THERE, I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANY OPPOSITION? YEAH, NO.

THERE HAVE BEEN NO COMMENTS, UH, FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT, AND IT'S THE SAME CONCERNS THAT THIS GENTLEMAN SHARED, IS TRAFFIC.

UM, SO I KNOW WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THE EXPANSION OF 28 SPACES TO 66 SPACES, THAT'S A CONSIDERABLE EXPANSION.

BE REQUIRED TO KEEP THAT AREA CLEAR.

AND SO HOW DO WE ACCOUNT FOR TRAFFIC? LET'S SEE.

SO I BELIEVE WE DO HAVE SOME CONDITIONS IN THERE THAT CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

IT'S ALL GOOD.

AND SO IT LOOKS LIKE IN MY REPORT HERE, CONDITION TWO, UM, WILL REQUIRE THEM TO COMPLY WITH ALL VISION SITE TRIANGLE RULES, UM, COMING OFF THERE FROM THE TWO 60, UM, I SOUND LIKE THERE'S CONCERNS KIND OF GETTING INTO THE ROADWAY AND THE TRAFFIC THERE.

UM, AND SO AS A CONDITION OF THIS, THEY WOULD

[01:15:01]

UM, THERE IS A SPACE IN WHICH THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PUT ANY, UH, SITE RESTRICTIONS, UM, KIND OF BLOCKING THAT VISIBILITY.

UM, AS FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL MEASURES, UH, IT'S NOT SOMETHING SUPER FEASIBLE FOR THIS PROJECT.

UM, I BELIEVE SINCE IT'S OFF THE TWO 60, THAT KIND OF BRINGS CONCERNS WITH IT BEING ADOT.

UM, AND SO FROM THERE, IT'S JUST NOT SOMETHING WE LOOKED AT OR FELT WOULD BE, UM, NECESSARY FOR THIS PROJECT.

I, I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW TO PHRASE THIS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT IN THE PINETOP LAKESIDE COMMUNITY THAT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GET FROM ONE SIDE OF THE STREET TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET.

AND I KNOW WITH THE INCREASE OF POPULATION IT JUST BE IN THE DENSITY.

, UM, JUST INCREASES THAT, UM, CHALLENGE TO BE ABLE TO, I GUESS, MANEUVER AROUND WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

AND I AM SO THAT PARTNERSHIP I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO BE ABLE TO THINK ABOUT, WELL, HOW DO WE CREATE RESOLUTION? UM, WE WANNA BE PROACTIVE OF COURSE.

BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IN THE FUTURE, HOW DO WE BEGIN TO LOOK AT OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO ASSESS THOSE PARTICULAR ROADS TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT A I IN UNDERSTANDING, UM, ONE, THE RESEARCH AND DATA.

I KNOW THAT THEY COLLECT A LOT OF INFORMATION AND SO THAT PARTNERSHIP CONTINUES TO BE REALLY IMPORTANT AND VALUABLE.

, ESPECIALLY IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS WHERE WE'RE THINKING ABOUT, UM, THE EXPANSION OF PEOPLE, WHICH MEANS MORE CARS, MORE, UM, DRIVING ON THE ROADWAYS.

AND, UM, MORE OF US, UM, TRYING TO GET SAFELY ACROSS THE ROAD.

SO, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT SAME, UM, THAT SAME CONCERN.

'CAUSE I HAVE THE SAME CONCERN JUST GETTING OUT OF MY OWN DRIVEWAY AND TO THE ROADWAY FOR SURE.

SO THAT TWO 60 IS REALLY CHALLENGING.

BUT, UM, THANK YOU FOR THAT.

YEP.

UM, WITH THAT, ANY MOTION FOR APPROVAL? I YOUR MOTION? UM, MAY I HAVE A SECOND? THANK YOU.

I'LL SECOND IT.

THANK YOU FOR THE SECOND, UM, BY SUPERVISOR PEKAY AND, UM, ANY MORE DISCUSSION? OTHERWISE, UH, LET'S VOTE.

D UH, MOTION TO ENTER INTO NAVAJO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT COURT OF SUPERVISORS.

MOTION CARRIES.

[a. Consideration and acceptance of three (3) Temporary Construction Easements over and across real property along Bourdon Ranch Road in Navajo County, for construction of drainage facilities.]

UH, SESSION.

MAY I HAVE A MOTION? I MOVE.

WE HAVE ONE, UH, MOTION AND A SECOND.

SO I'LL VOTE.

ALL ANY OPPOSED NAY.

MOTION CARRIES ONE REGULAR SESSION CONSIDERATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THREE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OVER AND ACROSS RAIL PROPERTY ALONG BOURBON RANCH ROAD IN NAVAJO COUNTY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF DRAINAGE FACILITY PRESENTED BY WILLIAM BLAKE.

GOOD MORNING AGAIN.

VICE CHAIR BENELLI AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

THIS IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PREVIOUS ITEM OF THE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY ON BOARD AND RANCH ROAD FOR THE SAME CONSTRUCTION PROJECT.

AGAIN, THERE ARE TWO CULVERTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO, UM, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FLOW THROUGH TO AS PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT.

WE'RE GONNA NEED ADDITIONAL EASEMENTS OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY TO CONSTRUCT THESE TWO CULVERTS.

THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE AGREED.

SO CONSIDERATION TODAY BEFORE YOU IS CONSIDERATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THESE THREE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS.

THERE'S, THIS IS ON CULVERT TWO, THE NORTHERN CULVERT AND THERE'S ALSO TWO ON THE CULVERT ONE, WHICH IS THE SOUTHERN CULVERT, AS YOU CAN SEE HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE THERE.

SO THESE, THESE ARE EXPAND OUTSIDE OF THE PERMANENT RIGHT AWAY, WHICH WE RECENTLY DISCUSSED.

AND, UH, OTHER EASEMENTS THAT ARE GONNA BE ON THE NEXT ITEM.

SO STAFF RECOMMENDS ACCEPTANCE OF THESE THREE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT.

I'LL TRY AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY, ANY QUESTIONS FOR, OTHERWISE

[01:20:01]

I WOULD LIKE A MOTION.

HE'S OUT.

I MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

CHAIRWOMAN.

SECOND VICE CHAIR.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY MORE DISCUSSION? OTHERWISE, UH, LET'S VOTE.

UH, ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

[b. Consideration and acceptance of two (2) perpetual drainage Easements for drainage and maintenance purposes.]

GO.

B, CONSIDERATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF TWO PERPETUAL DRAINAGE EASEMENTS FOR DRAINAGE AND MAINTENANCE PURPOSES.

AGAIN, PRESENTED BY WILLIAM.

VICE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

THESE ARE, THIS ITEM IS FOR TWO PERPETUAL OR CONTINUOUS, UM, EASEMENTS FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES, UM, WHICH WILL BE USED ON THE SAME PROJECT ON BOARD AND RANCH ROAD.

THESE EASEMENTS WILL BE USED TO FOR MAINTENANCE PURPOSES.

UM, THESE ARE PERMANENT EASEMENTS THAT WILL CONTINUE THERE AS THE COUNTY NEEDS TO MAINTAIN THESE CULVERTS.

THERE'S, THERE'S A, A LITTLE TRIANGLE ONE, UM, ON CULVERT ONE AS YOU CAN SEE.

AND THEN UP AT THE NORTH END THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL ONE ON CULVERT TWO.

SO THERE'S THESE TWO, UH, PERMANENT DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND STAFF RECOMMENDS ACCEPTANCE OF THESE TWO DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AS PART OF THIS PROJECT.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? MAY I HAVE A MOTION? I HAVE MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

ANY SECOND? SECOND.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY MORE DISCUSSION? OTHERWISE WE VOTE.

UM, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

C CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF TWO PERPETUAL DRAINAGE EASEMENTS FOR DRAINAGE AND MAINTENANCE PURPOSES IN THE AMOUNT OF $780.

MOTION CARRIES

[c. Consideration and approval of the purchase of two (2) perpetual drainage Easements for drainage and maintenance purposes in the amount of $780.00.]

AGAIN PRESENTED BY WILLIAM FLIGHT.

THIS IS THE LAST ONE, .

THIS, THESE ARE LARGER EASEMENTS FOR THE SAME PROJECT.

UM, THEY'RE LOCATED AT THE SAME COVERT LOCATIONS.

COVERT ONE AND COVERT TWO.

THESE ARE A LITTLE BIT LARGER EASEMENTS.

UM, SO WE ANTICIPATE THE PURCHASE OF THESE EASEMENTS.

UM, THIS IS A COVERT ONE.

YOU CAN SEE IT'S LARGER.

THE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT YOU CAN SEE GOES OUTSIDE THAT.

UM, BUT FOR MAINTENANCE OF THESE NEW RECONSTRUCTED CULVERTS, THESE EASEMENTS ARE REQUIRED.

UM, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS AGREED TO FOR AMOUNT OF $780 FOR THE PURCHASE OF BOTH OF THESE EASEMENTS.

WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, MAY I HAVE A MOTION? A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? SECOND.

THERE'S NO MOTION.

AND A SECOND ANYMORE DISCUSSION IF NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I'LL SAY AYE FOR APPROVAL.

UH, A MOTION TO RETURN TO REGULAR SESSION.

SO MOVE SECOND.

HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

FIVE BUSINESS UNIT UPDATE REPORTS FROM COUNTY MANAGER.

OPPOSED SAY NAY.

MOTION CARRIES

[5. COUNTY BUSINESS UPDATE: Report from County Manager, County Attorney and Board members.]

COUNTY ATTORNEY BOARD MEMBERS, UH, COUNTY ATTORNEY BRETT, HARLAN.

GOVERNMENT RELATIONS DIRECTOR.

PEKAY? UH, NOT AT THIS TIME.

SUPERVISOR SMORE.

HE IS HAVING TROUBLE HEARING THIS SUPERVISOR.

[01:25:01]

THANK YOU SUPERVISOR INGER? UM, YES, I HAVE ONE ITEM I JUST WANTED TO SHARE.

I'M TRYING TO LOOK FOR, UM, THE SPECIFIC INFORMATION.

'CAUSE I WANTED TO SHARE, UM, SOME SERVICE WORK THAT INDIVIDUALS DID IN OUR COMMUNITY IN PINETOP LAKESIDE THIS PAST FRIDAY.

UM, THERE WERE SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS WHO CAME, UH, TO THE PINETOP HISTORICAL SOCIETY AND THEY RECEIVED A GRANT FROM HOME DEPOT, UM, FOR A BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT.

AND, UM, KIRK WEBB, UH, WAS THE ONE WHO INITIATED AND LED.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAD COUNCILMAN OR VICE MAYOR BUS, WHO ALSO WAS AN ATTENDANCE AND ALSO A BOARD MEMBER OF THE, UH, HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

SO LOTS OF GREAT INITIATIVE AND CERTAINLY THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY WHO CAME OUT TO VOLUNTEER.

UM, YOUR COUNTY TREASURER IS A HARD WORKER.

SHE WAS THERE THE ENTIRE TIME, UM, SLINGING BAGS AND UM, UM, MAKING SURE THAT WE WERE DOING WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO.

SO THANK YOU TO CARRIE.

UM, UH, THAT'S IT.

UM, THANK YOU VICE CHAIR.

THANK YOU SUPERVISOR.

UH, WEINGER.

AND THEN I DON'T HAVE A REPORT THIS TIME AND CHAIRMAN WHITING IS NOT HERE TODAY.

[6. CALL TO THE PUBLIC: Individuals may address the Board on any relevant issue for up to 3 minutes. At the close of the call to the public, Board members may not respond to any comments but may respond to criticism, ask staff to review a matter or ask that a matter be placed on a future agenda.]

AND NUMBER SIX, CALL TO THE PUBLIC INDIVIDUAL MAY ADDRESS THE BOARD ON ANY RELEVANT ISSUE FOR UP TO THREE MINUTES AT THE CLOSE OF THE CALL TO THE PUBLIC BOARD.

MEMBERS MAY NOT, MAY NOT RESPOND TO ANY COMMENTS, BUT MAY RESPOND TO C CRITICISM AS STAFF TO REVIEW MATTER OR ASK THE MATTER, BE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA AND, UM, AT CALL.

THE BOARD WILL NOW MOVE TO CALL TO THE PUBLIC.

ANY CITIZENS DESIRE TO SPEAK ON A MATTER THAT IS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR MAY DO SO AT THIS TIME.

COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER PERSON AND SHALL BE ADDRESSED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR AS A WHOLE AND NOT TO ANY INDIVIDUAL MEMBER.

PURSUANT TO ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES SUBJECTION 38 DASH 4 31 0.01, THE BOARD MAY NOT DIALOGUE, DISCUSS, CONSIDER OR DECIDE ON ANY ISSUE RAISED DURING THE CALL TO THE PUBLIC AT THIS TIME AT THE CLOSES OF THE CALL TO THE PUBLIC BOARD.

MEMBERS MAY NOT RESPOND TO SUBSTANCE OF COMMENTS, BUT MAY RESPOND TO CRITICISM MADE BY THOSE WHO HAVE SPOKEN AND MAY HAVE DIRECT AND MAY ALSO DIRECT STAFF TO REVIEW THE REVIEW.

AN ITEM, THIS IS A PUBLIC MEETING AND SUCH PROFESSIONAL THE DECORUM IS EXPECTED.

THIS INCLUDES NO FOUL LANGUAGE, NO SHOUTING, MAINTAINING A CIVIL DEMEANOR AND TREATING EVERYONE WITH RESPECT.

SPEAK.

SPEAKERS WHO CHOOSE TO VIOLATE ANY OF THESE GUIDELINES WILL BE GIVEN A WARNING.

AND IF THE CONDUCT CONDUCT PERSISTS, THEY WILL BE ASKED TO LEAVE THE ROOM.

SPEAKERS ARE ASKED TO REFRAIN FROM REPEATING COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN SHARED.

RESIDENTS OF THE COUNTY ARE ALWAYS WELCOME TO SHARE ADDITIONAL CONCERNS WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OUTSIDE OF THE CALL TO THE PUBLIC BY PROVIDING WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR MELISSA BUCKLEY.

WE APPRECIATE HEARING FROM THE MEMBERS OF OUR NAVAJO COUNTY COMMUNITIES AND LEARNING OF YOUR PERSPECTIVES AND CONCERNS.

THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING.

AND WE GO AHEAD AND, UM, GO TO THE FIRST PERSON, UH, DANIELLE EARL STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.

I'M DANIELLE EARL AND I LIVE IN LINDEN.

I'M HERE TODAY TO DISCUSS THE I 40 TRADE PORT CORRIDOR.

I AM ADDRESSING YOU TODAY, NOT ONLY AS A NAVAHOE COUNTY CITIZEN, BUT ALSO ACTING AS VOICE FOR HUNDREDS OF OTHERS WHO FEEL THE SAME WAY I DO, WHO IS RESIDENTS OF WINSLOW MAY BE MORE IMMEDIATELY AFFECTED BY THIS TRADE PORT CORRIDOR AND THE DECISIONS CURRENTLY BEING MADE.

BUT ULTIMATELY ALL OF US IN THIS COUNTY WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS TRADE PORT CORRIDOR.

I'M SUBMITTING FOR YOU TO REVIEW 14 LETTERS FROM RESIDENTS OF LYNN WINSLOW, THE PARCEL SUMMARY REPORTS AND UNOFFICIAL WARRANTY DEEDS FOR THE NINE PROPERTIES OWNED BY ATLAS GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT

[01:30:01]

GROUP, INC.

THE 46 PAGE DOCUMENT FROM THE MASTER DEVELOPER ATLAS GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC.

THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO WINSLOW CITY COUNCIL IN APRIL, 2024, ENTITLED WINS WINSLOW'S COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIAL PARK PAD AND THE TEXT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S RAISE GRANT PROGRAM, WHICH STANDS FOR REBUILDING AMERICAN INFRASTRUCTURE WITH SUSTAINABILITY AND EQUITY.

MY MAIN PURPOSE TODAY IS TO GIVE YOU A GENERAL OVERVIEW AS DETAILED AS I CAN IN THREE MINUTES AND BEG YOU TO NOT APPROVE THE ANNEXATION OF PROPERTIES WITHIN THE NAVAJO COUNTY TO THE CITY OF WINSLOW.

THE CITY OF WINSLOW HAS ON THEIR AGENDA FOR TONIGHT'S CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO APPROVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO COUNTIES AND A VILLAGE IN NEW MEXICO.

WINSLOW AND KINGS KINGMAN KINGMAN IN ARIZONA AND TRADE PORT DEVELOPMENT LLC AS WELL AS LOBBYIST SERVICES TO SECURE RAISE GRANTS FOR THE I 40 TRADE PORT CORRIDOR AND THE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WINSLOW AND ATLAS GLOBAL.

AS PART OF THIS OVERALL TRADE PORT PLAN, THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR OF WINSLOW WANT TO HAVE A BYPASS ROUTE DIVERTING TRUCK TRAFFIC FROM THE I 40 DOWN SOUTH AND LOOP EASTWARD TOWARD THE 87.

THIS IS THE STATED REASONING FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE RAISED GRANT.

I DON'T HAVE TIME TODAY TO DE TO ADDRESS ALL THE RED TAPE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS GRANT.

ATLAS GLOBAL HAS BEEN BUYING UP PROPERTY IN THIS AREA IN THE HOPES OF DEVELOPING A 3,750 ACRE INDUSTRIAL MEGA SITE.

ON PAGE SIX, THEY DESCRIBED THE EXISTING SITE CHARACTER AS PRIMARILY VACANT LAND WITH INTERSPERSED RESIDENTIAL PARCELS.

THE FUTURE OF THIS AREA, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE COVER, WHICH I'LL GIVE TO YOU, IS BUILT TO BUILD HOTELS, HANGERS, LIGHT, INDUSTRIAL, INDUSTRIAL COMMERCE PARK, AND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING.

THIS AREA WOULD NEED TO BE ANNEXED TO THE CITY AND ZONED COMMERCIAL TO FULFILL ATLAS GLOBAL'S PLAN FOR THE AREA.

THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THE PESKY INTERSPERSED RESIDENTIAL PARCEL STANDING IN THE WAY.

THE RESIDENTS OF THOSE PARCELS HAVE BEEN LOUDLY PROTESTING THE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY ATLAS GLOBAL'S PLAN FOR THE AREA AND TYPES OF COMMUNITIES OR COMPANIES THEY'RE TRYING TO ATTRACT AND WHAT THEY SEE AS ULTIMATELY LOSING THEIR RIGHTS AND PROPERTY THROUGH THE EMINENT DOMAIN TO FURTHER THE AGENDA OF THIS PROJECT.

AS A CO COUNTY PROPERTY OWNER, YOUR ONLY RECOURSE IS TO ADDRESS THE COUNTY.

THAT IS WHAT I'M HERE DOING TODAY.

PLEASE PROTECT THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OF THE OWNERS WITHIN THE COUNTY.

THEY DO NOT WANT THIS PROPERTY ANNEXED TO THE CITY.

THIS WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE, THEIR WAY OF LIFE, AND THE VALUE OF THEIR PROPERTY.

NEXT IS, UH, TIM HAD COME HERE.

NEXT.

UM, GORDON LANE.

THANK YOU MADAM VICE CHAIRMAN, THE BOARD.

MY NAME IS GORDON LANG.

I LIVE AT 70 72 MOON CREEK CIRCLE IN THE COUNTY.

AND I WANT TO JUST ADDRESS, UH, THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE IN MANY OF MY, UH, FELLOW CITIZENS IN THAT AREA ABOUT ELECTION INTEGRITY.

WE ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE ELECTION MACHINES, THAT THERE IS SO MUCH DIFFICULTY THAT WAS, UH, OBSERVED IN THE LAST SELECTION WITH THEM PERSONALLY.

I OBSERVED WHEN I MADE MY BALLOT AND PUT MY BALLOT INTO THE MACHINE, I HAD TO DO IT THREE TO FOUR TIMES BEFORE IT, UH, ACTUALLY TOOK THE BALLOT.

MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT OTHER DISTRICTS HAD SIMILAR PROBLEMS WITH THESE MACHINES.

MY CONCERN IS THAT WE SHOULD GO TO A HAND BALLOT WITH OBSERVERS OR CAMERAS OBSERVING THE INTEGRITY OF THE ELECTION PERIOD.

UM, THE MACHINES HAVE HAD A HISTORY AND, UM, MY UNDERSTANDING OF LAWSUITS AGAINST THESE MACHINES AND ANY CORRECTIONS AS LONG AS THEY'RE INTERNET RELATED CAN BE HACKED AND THESE MACHINES ARE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT.

MY CONCERN IS THAT THE BOARD TAKE A SECOND LOOK AT THESE MACHINES AND CONSIDER NOT EVEN USING THEM AND GOING TO A HAND COUNT AND PROVIDING EITHER THROUGH THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT OR THROUGH A SPECIAL TRAINING OF, UH, QUALIFIED OBSERVERS TO OBSERVE THE ACTUAL COUNT, HAND COUNT OF THE BALLOTS SO THAT WE DO HAVE ELECTION INTEGRITY AND THAT THEY CAN BE REVIEWED AT A LATER DATE.

THAT IS MY COMMENT.

YOUR NEXT ONE IS DONNA SHERWIN.

[01:35:04]

STATE YOUR NAME AND .

MY NAME IS DONNA SHERWIN.

I LIVE IN PINETOP.

AND, UM, I'M HERE BECAUSE I, UM, AS I HAVE SAID IN THE PAST, UH, IN 1998, THE ARIZONA VOTERS PASSED CITIZENS CLEAN ELECTION ACT, WHICH IS A RS TITLE 16 CHAPTER SIX, ARTICLE TWO, AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO AIM TO ROOT OUT CORRUPTION AND PROMOTE CONFIDENCE AND PARTICIPATION IN OUR POLITICAL PROCESS.

UM, I THANK YOU FOR ELIMINATING THE DS TWO HUNDREDS.

UH, I WASN'T ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, UH, BUT I DID READ AN ARTICLE IN THE NEWSPAPER, UH, AND HEAR FROM, UM, I GUESS IT'S, HE'S YOUR FAVORITE FAN, PETER ISHARE.

UM, WHICH THE ARTICLE WAS FULL OF HOLES AND I REALLY WISH THAT HE WOULD RETRACT THAT ARTICLE OR AT LEAST CORRECT IT 'CAUSE IT WAS NOT CORRECT INFORMATION THAT WAS STATED IN HIS ARTICLE.

UM, BUT I THINK THAT, UH, AT THIS POINT NOW THAT WE'RE GONNA ELIMINATE THE DS TWO HUNDREDS, I THINK, UH, PUTTING ONE HAND, ONE, UH, MACHINE AT THE COUNTY HEADQUARTERS IS, UH, STILL QUESTIONABLE.

I DON'T KNOW WHY WE CAN'T RETURN TO HAND COUNTING.

UH, ANOTHER THING, ELIMINATING THE 17 DROP BOXES, UH, THAT ARE AROUND OUR COUNTY, UH, THAT IS ONE DROPBOX PER 588 SQUARE MILES.

THAT'S NOT VERY AMPLE COVERAGE.

I THINK WE SHOULD JUST ELIMINATE THOSE PERSONALLY.

UH, THAT WOULD BEING THAT THEY NEED TO BE MONITORED AND MANAGED 24 7, UH, TWO PEOPLE, ONE FROM EACH PARTY.

THAT WOULD BE, UH, $5,616,000 EXTRA, UH, FOR THE COUNTY TO, UM, INCUR AS A COST TO BE ABLE TO MAN THOSE 24 7.

AND THAT WOULD BE FROM THE BEGINNING OF JULY 3RD, EARLY VOTING UNTIL THE 30TH OF JULY WHEN THE PRIMARY ELECTION HAPPENS.

SO INSTEAD OF PAYING $5,616,000 FOR THE EXTRA MANPOWER TO COVER THE 17 DROP BOXES THAT ARE CURRENTLY AROUND THE COUNTY, I, UH, SUGGEST THAT WE USE THAT MONEY TO HIRE PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO DO A HAND COUNT IN THE, UH, COUNTY.

AND, UM, THE TRAINING HAS BEEN OFFERED TO YOU.

THE, UH, STATE OF MISSOURI HAS PUBLISHED A HAND COUNT MANUAL AND IT'S BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE STATE OF MISSOURI.

SO, UM, IF YOU WOULD LIKE, I CAN FORWARD THAT TO, UH, ALL FIVE OF YOU, UH, AND ALSO MAYBE BRIAN LEIGHTON, THE COUNTY, UM, MANAGER SO THAT WE CAN MAYBE PURSUE THAT, UM, AND BE ABLE TO HONOR THE FACT THAT THE CITIZENS CLEAN ELECTION ACT AIMS TO ROOT OUT CORRUPTION AND PROMOTE CONFIDENCE.

AND THERE'S NOT A LOT OF CONFIDENCE IN OUR COUNTY RIGHT NOW.

I KNOW THAT YOU ALL FEEL THAT THERE'S NO PROBLEMS AND YOU STATE THAT THERE'S NEVER BEEN ANY CORRUPTION WITHIN THE COUNTY, BUT, UM, IT'S BEEN PROVEN AND, UM, THE VERY FIRST PERSON WHO WALKED INTO THE PRES PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE ELECTION IN WHITE RIVER WHEN I WORKED THE POLL ON THE 16TH OF MARCH WAS TOLD SHE DIDN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO VOTE BECAUSE SHE HAD ALREADY VOTED.

AND THAT RIGHT THERE IS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF WHERE THE CORRUPTION IS.

SO I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY AND I HOPE YOU'LL CONSIDER RETURNING TO HAND COUNTING.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

UH, NEXT IS, UH, PAUL S BELT SENIOR.

YES, YES, PAUL.

MY NAME IS PAUL BETS.

I LIVE AT 5 2 5 1 MUGGY ON RIM DRIVE, LAKESIDE, ARIZONA, FULL-TIME, UH, RESIDENT.

UM, I ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT, UH, THE VOTING MACHINES.

AND I KNOW THAT, UM, THE INTEREST IN, UM, BEING PART OF HAN COUNTY IS STARTING TO SPREAD MYSELF, MY NEIGHBORS AND SOME OF OUR FRIENDS IN CHOLO HAVE ALREADY REGISTERED TO GET INVOLVED WITH THE ELECTION PROCESS.

UM, THERE IS A LOT OF INTEREST IN IT.

UM, I THINK IT IS, UM, IMPORTANT THAT WE ALL ON BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE HAVE, UH, TRUST IN THE SYSTEM.

AND IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, THE, THE TRUST IN AMERICA ALL ON BOTH SIDES HAS REALLY DROPPED.

AND, UM, THERE'S TOO MUCH, UM, UH, STUFF THROUGH THE INTERNET AND EVERYTHING WHERE IT CAN BE, UM, COMPROMISED.

AND I THINK THAT, UM, HANDS-ON IS A BETTER WAY TO GO.

AM I ALLOWED TO BRING UP ANOTHER SUBJECT? I NO, YOU HAVE THAT.

I'VE WRITTEN IT ON A DIFFERENT PIECE OF PAPER.

THE USE OF BALLOT DROP BOXES IN COUNTY ELECTIONS.

UM, WE HAVE, UH, JERRY HUBBARD.

UH, GOOD MORNING, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

MY NAME IS JERRY HUBBARD AND I LIVE IN OVERGUARD.

MY COMMENTS TODAY ARE AGAIN CONCERNING

[01:40:01]

IT'S ALREADY BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT BALLOT DROP BOXES ARE NOT COVERED IN SECTION 16 OF THE ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES.

AND SO IT IS REASONABLE FOR A YAVAPAI COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE TO RULE THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS NOT REQUIRED THAT THESE DROP BOXES ALWAYS BE MONITORED.

HOWEVER, THE USE OF BALLOT DROP BOXES IS CLEARLY SPELLED OUT IN THE ELECTION PROCEDURES MANUAL IN SECTION I NUMBER ONE, LETTER C, THAT BALLOT DROP BOXES QUOTE MUST BE MONITORED BY A PROPERLY TRAINED EMPLOYEE OR DESIGNEE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OR OFFICER IN CHARGE OF ELECTIONS AT ALL TIMES THAT THE LOCATION OR DROPBOX IS ACCESSIBLE BY THE PUBLIC.

THAT SEEMS VERY CLEAR TO ME.

AND YET WHEN COUNTY MANAGER LEIGHTON QUESTIONED THE SECRETARY OF STATE CONCERNING THIS, HIS REPLY WAS THAT THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT DROP BOXES BE CONTINUOUSLY MONITORED EITHER IN PERSON OR BY CAMERA.

THE ELECTION PROCEDURES MANUAL OR EPM IS PRODUCED BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICE AND COVERS IN GREAT DETAIL MOST ELECTION PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES.

THE ANSWER THAT MANAGER LAYTON RECEIVED IS A DIRECT CONTRADICTION TO THE STATED REQUIREMENT IN THE EPM.

HOW CAN THE COUNTY RECONCILE THIS CONTRADICTION FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE? SINCE THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION AFFECTS NAVAJO COUNTY ELECTIONS, IT WOULD SEEM OBVIOUS TO ASK THE RESPONSIBLE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY FOR THE COUNTY, THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, AND THAT IS WHAT WE WILL DO.

AS A FINAL COMMENT, IF ELECTIONS WERE DONE WITH PAPER BALLOTS WITH IN-PERSON VOTING ON ELECTION DAY, HAND COUNTED AT EACH POLLING PLACE, THEN AT LEAST 80% OF THE ELECTION PROCEDURES MANUAL COULD BE COMPLETELY ELIMINATED LIKE OUR GRANDPARENTS TOLD US.

SIMPLE IS BEST.

AND NEXT IS BELINDA QUEST.

THAT'S CLOSE ENOUGH.

OH, LOOKS LIKE AN SRJ OR BELINDA COG, UH, CHOLO.

UM, GOOD MORNING.

UM, NOW THAT YOU'VE DECOMMISSIONED THE DS TWO HUNDREDS, THE ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT SHOULD AT THE VERY LEAST SET UP A HAND COUNT OF ALL BALLOTS AND ALL VOTES AT THE POLLING CENTERS.

THE PROCESS IS SIMPLE, EFFICIENT, AND THE COUNT IS FINISHED AND DONE THAT DAY AND THE BOARD HAS BEEN PUT ON NOTICE ABOUT ADVERTISING FOR POLL WORKERS TO FILL THESE POSITIONS.

BUT WE STILL HAVE A HUGE PROBLEM WITH THE DS FOUR FIFTIES AND THE EIGHT FIFTIES.

THE COUNTY'S ALSO BEEN PUT ON NOTICE FOUR MONTHS ABOUT DOING A FULL SECURITY ASSESSMENT ON THE MACHINES, THE COUNTY.

UM, THE COUNTY COULD HAVE NOTIFIED US ABOUT THE LOGIC AND ACCURACY TEST THAT THEY HAD YESTERDAY.

UM, WE JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT IT ON A WHIM BY JUST CALLING UP THE ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT.

THEY GO, OH, BY THE WAY, WE'RE HAVING A LOGISTICS TEST.

SO, UM, THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE WEBSITE.

AND MY QUESTION IS, IS WHERE'S YOUR TRANSPARENCY? YOU KNOW, WHY WASN'T THAT POSTED? UM, WE COULD HAVE EASILY DONE AN ASSESSMENT AND THEN WE COULD HAVE PROVEN TO YOU AND TO THE PUBLIC WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON WITH THESE MACHINES AND PROVIDES METHODS TO CORRECT IT.

A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF MY OBSERVATIONS OF THE LNA ARE A HIDE A HARDWIRED SYSTEM TO ANY SYSTEM THAT HAS A MODEM IS NOT SECURE.

EVEN AS SIMPLE AS A WIFI BROTHER PRINTER, YOUR PASSCODE SECURITY IS PRIMITIVE AT BEST.

YOUR USB SECURITY IS PRIMITIVE AT BEST.

YOUR TEST DECK WAS ONLY WITH A SHARPIE AND SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED A BALLPOINT PIN.

YOUR SOFTWARE SECURITY IS PRIMITIVE AT BEST.

THE TRUTH IS, IS YOUR CURRENT LOGIC AND ACCURACY TEST ONLY COVERS THE PROCESS AND NONE OF THE VULNERABILITIES.

SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT ACCURACY, YOU HAVE ZERO IDEA THAT THERE ARE ISSUES WITH OPEN BACK DOORS, NOT ONLY ON THE TABULATORS, BUT IN THE ENTIRE ELECTION ECOSYSTEM.

SO YOU'RE ONLY GUESSING BLINDLY TRUSTING THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND ES AND S'S WORD FOR IT.

IF YOU REALLY WANT TO BUILD COMMUNITY TRUST IN HAVING HONEST SELECTIONS, YOU WOULD HAVE AN INDEPENDENT SECURITY ASSESSMENT DONE BY A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT.

THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN REQUESTING FOR MONTHS.

ALSO, YOU GUYS HAVE BLIND FAITH IN THE VOTERS RULES, WHICH WE HAVE PROVEN TO YOU ARE MANAGED BY THIRD PARTY COMPANIES AND YOU SHOW A LACK OF CONCERN OF THAT.

YOU'VE ALSO BEEN PUT ON NOTICE TO HAVE EMERGENCY BACKUP FOR,

[01:45:01]

UM, OUR ELECTIONS.

AND RIGHT NOW YOUR ONLY RECOURSE IS TO GATHER BALLOTS AND TAKE 'EM BACK TO CENTRAL.

SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, WHAT IS YOUR BACKUP PLAN AT CENTRAL? ALSO, THE COUNTY'S FAILURES TO SECURE DROP BOXES.

FURTHER, IT FURTHERS THE CITIZEN'S MISTRUST IN THE COUNTY'S INABILITY TO CONDUCT HONEST ELECTIONS.

YOU CHOOSE IF YOU CHOOSE TO SECURE THE DROP BOXES, YOU COULD AND YOU WOULD IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO IT, BUT YOU DON'T CHOOSE TO DO IT.

AT THE VERY LEAST, THE COUNTY SHOULD HAVE A BACKUP HAND COUNT IN PLACE FOR OUR UPCOMING ELECTIONS.

NEXT IS KIM KETO.

MY NAME IS KEN KETO FROM SHOW LOW AND ONE DAY I WAS TALKING TO MY SON AND HE LOOKED AT ME WITH GREAT TREPIDATION.

HE SAYS, DAD, HE SAID, OUR COUNTRY'S GOING TO HELL IN A HANDBAG.

HE SAYS, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO ABOUT IT, ? SO I INSPIRED ME.

I'VE BEEN READING CONSTITUTION AND SO FORTH, AND AS A VOTER I'M ASKING YOU THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, SIMPLE QUESTION.

BASED ON GOING BACK TO THE STATE, THE SECRETARY, I GUESS STATE AND ATTORNEY GENERAL SENT LETTERS TO ALL THE COUNTIES SAYING, THAT'S THE LAW.

YOU MUST HAVE A VOTING MACHINE, A TABULATOR TO COUNTER VOTES.

A LOT OF DISCUSSION AREAS, PEOPLE ARE RECOMMENDING THE HAND COUNT, SO FORTH.

MY QUESTION IS, IF YOU, YOU ALREADY HAVE THAT MACHINE AND THE ELECTION'S RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER, THE MOST CRITICAL ELECTION IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY, ARE YOU CONFIDENT THAT VOTER INTEGRITY, UH, WILL BE STRIVED FOR? AND I'M ASKING A SIMPLE QUESTION.

ARE YOU, HAVE YOU, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON OVER HERE, BUT HAVE YOU OR ARE YOU PUTTING INTO PROCESS SOME SAFEGUARDS TO MAKE THIS THE VOTING SYSTEM SAFER? HONEST, EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN OF ANY CAST VOTE, THEY WANNA, OH, I, I WANT TO VOTE TODAY AND I KNOW MY VOTE WILL BE COUNTED ONCE .

SO MY QUESTION IS, WHAT IS NAVAJO COUNTY DOING? 'CAUSE I'M CONFUSED ABOUT HAND COUNTING AND WHAT YOU'RE GONNA HAND COUNT OR MACHINE OR DO SOMETHING ELSE.

BUT UH, I THINK THE PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW O EDUCATE THE PUBLIC.

COMPELLING NEED FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO PROMPTLY CONDUCT A COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT AND TO ENSURE ENHANCEMENTS TO OUR CURRENT SYSTEMS. IT IS ESSENTIAL TO FORTIFY THE INTEGRITY OF OUR SYSTEMS AND THE VOTING PROCESS HERE IN NAVAJO COUNTY.

NEXT IS, UH, JACQUE ALLEN.

GOOD MORNING BOARD AND AUDIENCE.

UM, PREVIOUSLY TWO WEEKS AGO, I WAS UNABLE TO COMPLETE MY, MY PRESENTATION BECAUSE OF TIME CONSTRAINTS.

I'M JACK GARRETT ALLEN.

I LIVE IN SHOW LOW.

I ALSO AM A PC FOR THE SHOW LOW AREA.

HISTORICALLY, BEFORE THE LAST ELECTION, MY HUSBAND RECEIVED THE 90 DAY NOTICE FROM THE REGISTRAR VOTERS.

HE WAS INFORMED THAT HIS, HIS REGISTRATION WAS NOW GOING TO BE MAIL-IN BECAUSE HE HAD SELECTED THAT HE HAS NEVER SELECTED MAIL-IN.

WE'VE ALWAYS VOTED IN PERSON.

ADDITIONALLY, OUR DAUGHTER RECEIVED THREE MAIL-IN BALLOTS.

SHE HAD NEVER ASKED FOR MAIL-IN BALLOTS, BUT SHE RECEIVED THEM.

SHE ALSO VOTES IN PERSON.

THE A RS REVISED STATUTES STATES AS TO THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO ADMINISTER, PREPARE, CONDUCT, TALLY, FEDERAL, STATE, AND COUNTY ELECTIONS.

I'M COMPELLED TO HIGHLIGHT THE SIGNIFICANCE CONCERNS REGARDING OUR REGISTRATION AND ELECTIVE SYS ELECTION SYSTEMS. THERE HAVE BEEN REPORTED MANY IRREGULARITIES IN THE SYSTEMS AND IT'S APPARENT AND IT ALSO INDICATES DEFICIENCIES IN OUR ELECTION MANAGEMENT, THE PROCESSES AND THE RESPONSES FROM THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS.

GOING BACK WHEN I HAD CONTACTED THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS REGARDING MY DAUGHTER'S ISSUES AND MY HUSBAND'S ISSUES, THE RESPONSE WAS, THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE.

THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE.

IT MUST BE A PRINTING ERROR.

THESE CHALLENGES UNDERSCORE, UH, THE

[01:50:01]

I TRUST THAT THE PROFOUND IMPLICATIONS OF THESE ISSUES ARE DULY RECOGNIZED BY THE BOARD AND I RESPECT AND URGE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO PRIORITIZE THIS MATTER WITH THE UTMOST DILIGENT AND EX EX EFFICIENCY.

ANYWAY, THANK YOU AGAIN.

I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

LAST OUT HERE IS UH, ROGER L GORES.

GOOD MORNING, VICE CHAIR AND OTHER SUPERVISORS.

MY NAME IS ROGER LI LIVE AT 3 5 5 7 WILDFLOWER DRIVE IN HEBER.

MY PURPOSE TODAY IS TO GIVE MY EVALUATION OF YESTERDAY AFTERNOON'S L AND A TEST IN THE ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT AND TO RECOMMEND SEVERAL ACTIONS THAT COULD ELIMINATE MY MOST IMPORTANT REMAINING AREAS OF CONCERN REGARDING YESTERDAY'S LNA 2:30 PM TEST.

I WANNA COMPLIMENT THE ELECTION DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES FOR THEIR PROMPT, COURTEOUS, AND PROFESSIONAL MANNER.

ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK AS ANSWERS TO MY REMAINING QUESTIONS COULD NOT BE FOUND ON THE COUNTY WEBSITE.

TITLED, ELECTION QUESTIONS IN NAVAJO COUNTY DATED APRIL 20TH, 2024.

AND I CANNOT REPEAT THEM HERE TODAY DUE TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS POLICY, I PLAN TO SUBMIT THEM TO MY COUNTY COMMISSIONER WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SOLVING THE MOST IMPORTANT CONCERNS I HAVE.

I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU SIR.

AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

AS A REMINDER, STATE STATUTE DOES NOT ALLOW THE BOARD TO RESPOND TO INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS OR DISCUSS TOPICS DISCUSSED DURING THE CALL TO THE PUBLIC.

AS WE NOTED PREVIOUSLY, BY LAW, WE ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO RESPOND TO PERSONAL CRITICISM OR REFER MATTERS TO STAFF OR FOLLOW UP.

WE APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND WE'LL GIVE THEM OUR CONSIDERATION.