2017 REPRECINCTING COMMUNITY FEEDBACK REPORT.DOCX

Summary of Public Comments the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office has received on the 2017
Re-precincting Process as of September 21, 2017.
A summary of comments and responses is included below, organized by topic:
 Questions About Re-Precincting
 Changing/Renaming Precincts
 Request For Info/Other Comments
 Individuals That Support the 2017 Re-Precincting
 Individuals That Oppose the 2017 Re-Precincting
 Staff Comments
QUESTIONS ABOUT RE-PRECINCTING
(Comments submitted in writing via comment card, e-mail, or web page.)
 If approved per schedule when will the new precincts be effective? Is it likely they will be in
effect for the 2018 elections? (Commenter: Daria Lohman) STAFF RESPONSE: Responded.
 I do not find my precinct on your map and when I look up Precinct Demographics, I am unable to
find Olney. For #0448, Mohawk is listed, so have you eliminated me and my precinct?
(Commenter: Debi Young, PC for Olney Precinct #0448) STAFF RESPONSE: Responded.
 Why is Mustang being redrawn? (Commenter: Mary Ryan lives in LD 23 Mustang Precinct)
 Thank you for the excellent presentation tonight at PVCC. You all were very knowledgeable and
helpful while being professional. I agree that the re-precincting is local and needs to be done.
However, I got the impression from a few individuals, who raised repetitive questions, felt it not
necessary as they voiced their angry opinions and questions. Can you please tell me if re-
precincting should be a political issue and will it help do away with 'gerrymandering? Thank you
for your transparency and information. (Commenter: Yvonne M. McLellan)
 It looks like Carriage Lane precinct is adding voters from Dobson Ranch, even though Carriage
Lane already has more voters than Dobson Ranch. Why is that? (Commenter: Daniel Kucenski)
STAFF RESPONSE: Responded.
 Don't you have more important things that can be done than sending a letter about re-
precincting? 5000 fewer registered voter? Were they illegals that voted last time and left? Re-
precincting is always political driven issue. I voted for McCain and he voted against the health care
legislation. Totally disgusted in the fake system. Make America Great Again. (Commenter: William
Musik)
 I'm a transplant from Chicago. Why do you have to get cute and give precincts names? What is
wrong with precinct numbers? Has worked in Chicago forever. Giving names to precincts is way
to yuppiefied and at what cost? I really do not want to see my tax dollars spent giving precinct
names. Not a good use of tax dollars. How much staff time is this taking? How much is it project
costing? There are better uses for tax dollars. (Commenter: Donna Bennewitz)
Page 1 of 16

 Dear Mr. Fontes, I am writing to let you know of my concerns with the draft re-precincting. My
concerns are as follows: 1) The 2020 Census is only two years away. It seems a waste of money to
re-precinct now and again after the Census. 2) Serious time and administrative effort on the part
of district officers will be spent reorganizing precincts since a great number of PCs would be moved
into a new precinct. 3) Per A.R.S. each precinct is allowed one PC. Additional PCs, one for each 125
Republican voters as registered by midnight March 1st of the General Election year may be elected
or appointed. Since LD 20 is losing nine (9) precincts, we will automatically lose the "one PC" so
the loss is 9 PCs from the start. I would appreciate knowing why each of the nine precincts in LD
20 are being consolidated. 4) Voting Centers instead of neighborhood locations removes the sense
of "community." 5) Senior Citizens need voting centers close to home. Some do not drive. I do
appreciate all of the time, effort, and staff training that you have provided. Those that I have
spoken with, Peg, Chatham, Gary and Christine, have been very helpful. (Commenter: Colleen
Lombard, Chairman, LD 20)
STAFF RESPONSE: Hi Colleen, thank you for your feedback. I'm writing to address your concerns
about re-precincting specifically. The reason why the voting precincts were reduced in your area
is due to the low number of voters in those precincts as well as the adjacent ones. Where possible,
those precincts were absorbed into adjacent precincts to better make use of resources.
o Voting Precinct 0071 - Calavar currently only has about 1,600 voters.
o Voting Precinct 0088 - Caron currently only has about 2,700 voters.
o Voting Precinct 0142 - Country Gables currently only has about 1,450 voters.
o Voting Precinct 0385 - Mandalay currently only has about 3,150 voters.
o Voting Precinct 0411 - Michelle currently only has about 1,550 voters.
o Voting Precinct 0426 - Moon Valley currently only has about 2,700 voters.
o Voting Precinct 0498 - Poinsettia currently only has about 1,050 voters.
o Voting Precinct 0529 - Riviera currently only has about 1,800 voters.
o Voting Precinct 0620 - Sunburst currently only has about 2,140 voters.
o Voting Precinct 0659 - Turf Paradise currently only has about 1,250 voters.
Regarding Precinct Committeemen, I took a look and there are currently 104 Republican PCs and
47 Democrat PCs in LD 20. In the draft plan, the quota for Republican PCs is 394 and Democrat PCs
is 318, so there will be slots available for the current Precinct Committeemen as well as space for
additional. If there is anything else I can help with, please let me know. -Gary Bilotta, GISP-
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM COMMENTER: Hi Gary, thank you for your detailed email to
address my concerns. Are the number of voters referred to below the number of registered
Republican voters, or the number of Republicans that do vote? Although the draft quota is 392,
according to the ARS, in each election precinct, there shall be one PC PLUS one additional PC for
EACH 125 registered Republicans or major fraction thereof as reported registered by midnight of
March 1 of the year in which the general election is held. So by “losing” 9 precincts (those being
“absorbed” by other precincts) we will be denied the one PC per election precinct. I am not sure
the email address above is correct for County Recorder. I would appreciate your help in making
sure Mr. Fontes gets a copy of this email. Your help in facilitating the re-precincting process is
appreciated. Sincerely, Colleen Lombard P.S. May be have the precinct name of “Michelle” back?
STAFF RESPONSE: Hi Colleen, the number of voters listed for the voting precincts are total active
(DEM, REP, LBT, GRN, OTH) voters. Yes, the email address for Mr. Fontes is correct. Also, I have
made the change to the combined Michelle and Anderson voting precinct. It is now named
Michelle rather than Anderson. Please let me know if there is anything else I can help with. Thank
you, Gary Bilotta, GISP
Page 2 of 16

CHANGING/RENAMING PRECINCTS
(Comments submitted in writing via comment card, e-mail, or web page.)
Airline / Palmbrook / Wigwam Creek Precincts
 I noticed on the LD/precinct map that there is one section of LD19 Palmbrook precinct that cuts
into LD29 Wigwam Creek/Airline Canal precincts. Can this small section be moved to LD29 either
Wigwam Creek or Airline Canal to keep the LD lines straight on Indian School Rd. (Commenter:
Diana Jones)
Canterbury / Moon Valley Precincts
 Moon Valley was combined with Canterbury. Why? If valid change name of the new precinct back
to Moon Valley as this is the community of Moon Valley. (Commenter: Wesley W. Harris) STAFF
RESPONSE: Sherwood – Pioneer Park?
Cave Creek Precinct
 I am disappointed that you are splitting our precinct. I would like to make a suggestion though. I
understand that you are doing this because of school districts, however, I don't see any changes
on the precincts on the lower boundaries of Cave Creek school district. Why just Cave Creek? I
would like to make a suggestion also with respect to the boundary of the Cave Creek Precinct to
the north. There is a little precinct that is called Spur Cross with about 600 voters. They about the
Tonto National Forest land and have been thrown in with a congressional district to the north that
they have no affiliation with at all. They are also a part of the Cave Creek School District. I would
like to propose since you are making changes that you combine Spur Cross into Cave Creek. I am
sure it would cut costs. The Cave Creek district is being made smaller any way. I would like to be
advised of any meetings or discussion about redistricting. My email is sales@mohrhomes.com and
my phone number is 602.980.7653. This would be ANY and ALL meetings of redistricting. Thank
you! (Commenter: Janet Mohr, Precinct Captain in Cave Creek)
Cordova / Lopes Precincts (Suggest no name change & keep the name Cordova)
 Do not rename the Cordova precinct "Lopes." It is an affront to the residents and the history of
the area. GCU has not had a track record as a strong, positive community partner, instead causing
the shrinking enrollment in the Cordova Elementary School, leading to the closure of a school. GCU
has also attempted to pass their property taxes onto the neighbors, instead of covering it
themselves as a for-profit entity. Additionally, they have annexed part of a city park under wraps,
bullied homeowners, and now have a state sponsored police force with enforcement powers over
a majority Latino community. This is a "cute" change, but one that serves as a major point of
disrespect to the resident and neighbors. (Commenter: Adam Lopez Falk)
 As a longtime (33 years) resident homeowner in the Cordova Neighborhood, I strongly prefer the
use of the name "Cordova" for proposed Precinct No 0117. We have long identified our
neighborhood with Cordova School, where most families in this area send their children. Indeed,
some of our families have four generations of attendance at Cordova School. Out of respect for
the history of this neighborhood we request that you use the name Cordova for voting precinct.
(Commenter: Lawrence H. Fallis)
Page 3 of 16

 I am a long time resident of the Cordova neighborhood and I strongly prefer to keep the old
Cordova name. The name represents this neighborhood and we embrace it just the way it is. The
Lopes name does not represent a neighborhood. GCU is in the Cordova neighborhood. Please
keep Cordova as is. It had served us well and it still does. Thank you. (Commenter: Mrs. Bernardita
Fallis)
 A rumor is flying through the neighborhood that Grand Canyon University is requesting that the
name of the precinct that is currently CORDOVA be changed to LOPES in honor of GCU's athletic
events. Please do not make a change. Is this true? The name Cordova is the school in the area
and everyone in that neighborhood regard that title as part of their history. Thank you.
(Commenter: Donna Homsher)
 I don't want my neighborhood name changed from Cordova to the LOOPS. This is our
neighborhood. Not GCU!! They are already taking advantage of our People and Property. Thank
you. (Commenter: Emmett Post)
Desert Oasis / Hedgehog Precincts (Suggest Hedgehog be named Saguaro View)
 I am in the proposed "Hedgehog" district/precinct, at 155th Ave & Dixileta. I would like to see it
keep the name "Saguaro View." Thank you. (Commenter: Helen M. Cauthen) STAFF RESPONSE:
Saguaro View
 I currently live in the Desert Oasis Precinct, Surprise, AZ 85387. I live east of 163rd Avenue and
your office is proposing to name that precinct Hedgehog 0316." The largest HOA in that precinct
is Saguaro Views. Please name the precinct after the largest community in the area, as the
previously did when it called our precinct "Desert Oasis." We do not want to be called "Hedgehog.
Thank you." (Commenter: Jack W. Harper) STAFF RESPONSE: Saguaro View
 You are proposing to change the name of the district I live in to hedgehog. I absolutely think you
are nuts to choose this name. There are NO Hedgehogs in this area. Where do you get your names
from I don't, but I bet you wouldn't name your district hedgehog. I am asking you to make the
district name Saguaro View. Thank you. (Commenter: Jacqueline Ng)
 "I currently live in the Desert Oasis Precinct, Surprise, AZ 85387. I live east of 163rd Avenue and
your office is proposing to name that precinct Hedgehog 0316." The largest HOA in that precinct
is Saguaro Views. Please name the precinct after the largest community in the area, as the office
previously did when it called our precinct "Desert Oasis." We do not want to be called "Hedgehog"
but rather "Saguaro Views Precinct. Thank you." (Commenter: Sonja Haldeman)
 "I currently live in the Desert Oasis Precinct, east of 163rd, Surprise, AZ 85387. Your office is
proposing to name that precinct Hedgehog 0316." The largest HOA in that precinct is Saguaro
Views. We agree with neighbors that the precinct should be named after the largest community
in the area, as the office previously did when it called our precinct "Desert Oasis." We do not want
to be called "Hedgehog" but rather "Saguaro Views Precinct." Thank you. (Commenter: Patrick and
Carrie Shelley)
Page 4 of 16

 Please rename our voting area (east of 163rd Avenue & Jomax in Surprise, AZ) to Saguaro Views,
not Hedgehog, who came up with this name, ugh!! (Commenter: Rhonda Kleinsteiber)
 I would like our area to be called Saguaro Views Precinct. Not Hedgehog. (Commenter: Carol
Shove)
 "I currently live in the Desert Oasis Precinct, Surprise, AZ 85387. I live east of 163rd Avenue and
your office is proposing to name that precinct Hedgehog 0316." The largest HOA in that precinct
is Saguaro Views. Please name the precinct after the largest community in the area, as the office
previously did when it called our precinct "Desert Oasis." We do not want to be called "Hedgehog"
but rather "Saguaro Views Precinct. Thank you." (Commenter: Martin Rankin)
Desert Sky Precinct (Suggest name change to Troy)
 Please change "Desert Sky" to "Troy." Thanks. (Commenter: Adrian Fontes, Maricopa County
Recorder)
Escalante / Kush (Suggest Kush be named Shalimar) / Daumler / Rolling Hills Precincts
 I am a Republican precinct committeeman in the current Escalante Precinct in LD 26. I would be
in the 0372 Kush precinct under the newly proposed precincts. I would like to recommend that
the proposed new 0372 Kush precinct be named "Shalimar" instead of giving that name to the
proposed 0607 precinct. The proposed 0372 precinct contains both the Shalimar country club and
golf course and the Shalimar Neighborhood Association. When people talk about the "Shalimar"
neighborhood of Tempe, they typically refer to the area within the proposed 0372 precinct that is
located south of Broadway. The 0607 precinct has no real connection to the Shalimar name, other
than being part of the current "Shalimar" precinct, and is separated from the Shalimar
neighborhood by the 101 freeway. I propose that precinct 0607 be instead given the name
"Daumler." "Daumler" is the name of a Tempe City Park located in that precinct. Alternatively, it
could be named "Evergreen' or "Broadway Palms" after the names of neighborhood associations
located within that precinct. I don't think "Kush", presumably derived from former ASU football
coach Frank Kush, is a particularly descriptive name for either precinct. Additionally, I think giving
the northern boundary of the proposed 0659 "Sun Devil Precinct" devil horns is very silly. Equally
silly is giving the proposed 0525 precinct the name "Pitch Fork." Almost all of the proposed 0525
precinct is the same as the current "Rolling Hills" precinct, which is named after the nearby Rolling
Hills Golf Course. The proposed 0525 precinct should keep the "Rolling Hills" name. (Commenter:
Brian Knight, Republican Precinct Committeeman, Escalante Precinct in LD 26) STAFF RESPONSE:
Royal Palms
Fremont / Strada Precincts
 I request that precinct 0655 Strada be combined with 0260 Fremont as it was before. It is an odd
small piece. Thus eliminating Strada and leaving 26 precincts. It is just across the road from
Fremont and almost contiguous. The rest is great so far as our real problem Desert Haven 0189
has been resolved. (Commenter: Jerry Clingman, LD 16 Chair)
Page 5 of 16

Freedom / Marbella Precincts
 Suggested Precinct Name change to Proposed New Precinct Area: LD 12, Current Marbella Precinct
#0388 Current Proposal: Under the current plan Marbella is divided into two new precinct. New
Marbella #0416 and Freedom #0259 Suggested Alternate Precinct Names: #0259 Marbella or
Freedom #0416 Seville or Freedom (not Marbella) Suggest Change Logic: To avoid confusion /
Marbella is the name of a subdivision in the area of the new Freedom Precinct #0259. It would be
less confusing to the residents of those precincts if the precinct name Marbella matched that
subdivision area, instead of covering an area that goes by another name. New Precinct #0416
covers a very large subdivision (covering almost the entire boundary of the new precinct area)
which is named Seville, not Marbella. I am a current PC Captain in Marbella Precinct #0388 in LD
12. I live in the new #0416 area. I have lived in this precinct for 4 years. I am excited about these
new changes and the equalizing of the precinct sizes. Thank you! (Commenter: Mickie Niland)
Groves Precinct
 I agree with the proposed re-precincting of the Groves. The precinct currently encompasses the
growing community of Lehi Crossing and canvassing in the Groves has become a challenge due to
the large number of homes and large geographic area. Thank you for the opportunity to provide
input. (Commenter: Jessica Gronberg)
Michelle / Anderson Precincts (Suggest no name change & keep the name Michelle)
 Dear Gary, please note that on the draft precinct map, Michelle has been absorbed by Anderson.
I would like the “new” precinct to be known as Michelle instead of Anderson. Precinct
Committeemen, at present, do not exist in Anderson. Michelle does have many volunteers and
would like the courtesy of keeping the Michelle name. Thank you for your consideration.
(Commenter: Colleen Lombard) STAFF RESPONSE: Hi Colleen, I have made the change to the
combined Michelle and Anderson voting precinct. It is now named Michelle rather than Anderson.
Please let me know if there is anything else I can help with. Thank you, Gary Bilotta, GISP
Martin / Tartesso / Tonopah Precincts
 Martin and Tonopah precincts should be able to be combined. They were split when the state LD
went down 355th. As well as White Tanks and Salome. I never understood why they carved
Tartesso out of the White Tanks. I don't think there are any districts in Tartesso that are not
included in White Tanks. Though White Tanks has several school districts, fire districts in and out
and City of Buckeye. (Commenter: Paul Roetto)
Melrose Gardens / Rose Precincts
 Rose precinct 0536. Move boundary to the south canal border. Currently, the neighborhood
Melrose Gardens is split between two and would be logical to include this neighborhood in the
Rose precinct. (Commenter: Larry Herrera) STAFF RESPONSE: Too large if expanded.
Page 6 of 16

Onyx Precinct (Suggest name change to Christy Cove)
 Change ONYX to Christy Cove. That is the main park in the area and makes the name easy to
remember. (Commenter: Joseph Nutaro)
Pinnacle Peak / Troon Precincts
 Adjustments in precinct boundaries are appropriate according to numbers. My reading of new
boundaries show that the actual Pinnacle Peak Mountain will be in the new Troon precinct (0705)
although the new precinct will include Troon North community. Also it seems that Troon Village
and Windy Walk Mountain (known by some as Troon Mountain) will now be in the new Pinnacle
Peak precinct (0520). Just thinking that comments will arise. (Commenter: Jean Miyake) STAFF
RESPONSE: Changed
Power Ranch Precinct
 Would it be possible to include all of the Power Ranch development in the Power Ranch Precinct?
There's a small piece missing, south of Germann and west of Ranch House Parkway. This has
caused some voter confusion. Thanks! (Commenter: Jim Kresse) STAFF RESPONSE: 5,200 voters in
current Power Ranch / 1,642 NON Pevl *Too large to add more.
Red Mountain / Summit Precincts (Suggest Red Mountain be named Summit)
 Please maintain the current "Red Mountain" precinct as "Red Mountain" precinct. The new
proposed "Red Mountain" precinct should instead be renamed "Summit" precinct. Thank you!
(Commenter: Dennis S. Wikfors) STAFF RESPONSE: Switched Red Mountain; changed Summit to
Ridgeview instead.
Sky View Precinct
 District 0623 (Sky View) seems a little weird. The area to the north/west of the 101 and Grand is
not easily accessible from the area on the other side of the 101. (Commenter: Jonas Bush) STAFF
RESPONSE: Emailed.
SMP 1, 2, and 3
 Gary and Kristi, regarding SMP1, 2 and 3 - how about combining them into a single precinct. That
will help to anonymize the people who live there and you will still meet the requirements of the
IRC on district lines. (Commenter: Mike Schiller)
Tierre Este Precinct
 I am a resident of the Tierre Este Precinct. I've recently received the proposed precinct map and
was very surprised by the changes proposed for our neighborhood. The section they have sliced
out of our precinct is a very high density area of low income housing, with a high proportion of
rental properties that see a great deal of resident turnover. I don't believe that precinct will
function well as an independent organization, supplying volunteers for polling places, working to
get out the vote, etc., without the existing infrastructure and support of the remaining portion of
Page 7 of 16

Tierre Este precinct. Likewise, I see that a section North of Brown road has been added to our
precinct. That is a very politically active section of the city and deserves its own representation in
the political parties. The south side of Brown has a district sense of community involvement and I
feel our views would be underrepresented if combined with that area north of Brown. Our
precinct, currently confined to one square mile, functions very well with polling places within our
neighborhood and a great feeling of community. Please consider not removing one small section
of our community that honestly needs the support of the rest of the neighborhood, in order to add
a section north of Brown Road that is not a good fit for the neighborhood south of it. And there
are so many active voters north of Brown Road, there's got to be a way to make its own precinct
or two out of that square mile. Respectfully, (Commenter: Colleen Wheeler)
Tuthill Precinct (Suggest name change to Verrado)
 Verrado is a master planned community in Buckeye, currently called "Tuthill" in LD 13. New
precincts located OUTSIDE of Verrado are labeled "Verrado." This is illogical and not conforming
to guidelines. The Tuthill name could be changed to Verrado while new precincts should be called
by a street name. Please consider a name change for Tuthill while creating new names for new
precincts. (Commenter: Barbara Wodrich) STAFF RESPONSE: Changed
 Please put the major section of the Verrado Community, the Verrado precinct not Tuthill.
(Commenter: Cathleen Bohnlein) STAFF RESPONSE: Changed
Multiple Precincts: Ahwatukee, Base, Biltmore, Desert Star, Esplanade, Herberger, Hopi, Kokopelli,
Lonesome, Lux, Mondo, Montara, New World, Oaktree, Osuna Park, Papago Park, Perry Park, Rancho,
Rovey, Seldon, Silverado, Simis, Solcito, Sunny High, Varney Park, Western Star, Westgreen Park, Whitter,
and Wilder
 Hello Gary, attached are the new precincts I've drawn on the Recorder's map along with a
description. Thanks again. (Commenter: Hayden Samples)
o Rovey - Along with Hall and Rancho, the new Rovey will become a rectangle in shape and
will fall between Bethany Home Rd and Maryland Ave from the 51 Freeway all the way to
7th Ave, taking into account that small section on Rose Ln that belongs to the Martlette
Precinct.
o Solcito - From Maryland Ave to Glendale Ave following the same length as Rovey. Reason
for both this shape is to account for a larger voting population that covers a larger area
than the proposed revisions to Rovey, and Solcito.
o Wilder - I am surprised this wasn’t taken into account seeing as from 11th Ave and
eastward of the current Glenn precinct falls out of West-Mec District 2. This is just done to
make the overall number of styles easier for the recorder’s office.
o Simis - The precinct does not change other than to remove everything east of the canal.
This is done to increase the size of the new Palmarie precinct.
o Seldon - Following along Northern Ave from 15th Ave to where the canal meets.
o Sunny High - This precinct is half in West-Mec 2 and Phoenix Union 3. This is new Sunny
High precinct is drawn to make less styles for the recorder’s office.
o Silverado - This former rectangular precinct gets reshaped between the canal up north,
the 17 Freeway in the west, Grand Ave in the southern region and ending along 19th Ave
to the east.
Page 8 of 16

o Whitter - Basically, Cambridge and the eastern end portion of the old Whitter precinct
come together. This precinct is so underpopulated in terms of voters, it wouldn’t be too
difficult if more than one style existed in this new precinct.
o Perry Park - Simply put, Holly and Perry Park come together to increase in size, taking out
unnecessary space.
o Lux - This is my favorite idea. I believe this to be a perfect fit because it evens out the
unnecessary gap in the Biltmore precinct and comes around into a more attractive and
demographically diverse precinct.
o Hopi - Combine the northern portion of Kaibab with the entirety of Hopi, why? Both parts
of those older precincts are in the neighborhood of Arcadia, and it would only make sense
to combine the areas together.
o Western Star - Drop this area further down into the south mountain area of northern
Ahwatukee.
o Ahwatukee - Everything enclosed by the Warner-Elliot Loop.
o Base - This area consists of the entire St. Francis precinct, then takes the northern part of
the Papago Park Precinct.
o Papago Park - All of the old Gardens precinct plus the southern chunk of the old Papago
Park Precinct.
o Kokopelli - Remaining southern portion of the old Ahwatukee precinct, plus Magic Stone’s
eastern region.
o Rancho - Same as the old one, however, include everything south of W Medlock Dr and
include the block around the restaurant of Southern Rail.
o Lonesome - Old Lonesome plus southern Pena, making a better-shaped precinct and
decreasing the need for the Pena precinct.
o Desert Star - Weldon, Cora and north Pena all combine. Same reason for this as the new
Lonesome precinct, taking down 4 unneeded precincts and bringing it down to two.
o New World - South of Olive Ave in order to fill in the open space over the Butler precinct.
o Herberger - All of the Piccadilly precinct and then the southern half of Kaibab.
o Osuna Park - Shapes into a better-looking and more diverse precinct.
o Varney Park - Controls a large portion of central Peoria that provides a diverse new
precinct.
o Westgreen Park - Adds more voters into the smaller proposed Boll precinct.
o Montara - Adds both old Rivera and Copperwood precincts and makes a cubed, voter
precinct.
o Mondo - Same concept as Montara, but with Beryl and Caron.
o Biltmore - A lot of thought has gone into this precinct. It will include all areas of the actual
Biltmore neighborhood, in Biltmore, Bethany, and Madison Heights. The new proposed
Biltmore, I feel has too many voters. This area would also include Biltmore Heights in the
south-east.
o Oaktree - This idea may not be considered simply for the fact that it cuts between 2
different high school districts. If that is the case, then:
o Orange - This L-shaped precinct, has a compact and active amount of voters that suit well
enough to form one singular voter precinct; plus it remains in one over school ward, thus
lowering the overall number of ballot styles needed.
o Espalande - While not as vastly populated as the proposed Orange precinct, it still has a
decently active voter population that allows for a new voter precinct. I also do not feel that
this precinct is fairly represented if it was added to the proposed Biltmore precinct due to
geographic and demographic differences.
Page 9 of 16

REQUEST FOR INFO/OTHER COMMENTS
(Comments submitted in writing via comment card, e-mail, or web page.)
 Hello, I was wondering if the public could have access to a map that would allow us to draw our
own voter precincts, with a key that shows communities of interests and other factors? Thank you.
(Commenter: Hayden Samples) STAFF RESPONSE: Very complicated.
 Are there maps we can draw our own precincts on? Or is it easier to take screen-shot images of
the precincts we draw on the recorder's website? Thank you. (Commenter: Hayden Samples)
STAFF RESPONSE: Hello, it would be easier to take screen shots of the precincts from the Recorder’s
website. Thank you. –Gary Bilotta, GISM-
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM COMMENTER: Hello Gary, it was great meeting with you last
Tuesday, here are some of the ideas I had. Please bear with me as this will be about several
continuous emails. Attached are the new precincts I've drawn on the Recorder's map along with a
description. Thanks again, Hayden Samples (NOTE: Mr. Samples’ ideas are listed under
‘CHANGING/RENAMING PRECINCTS’ in this report.)
 Where can I find a map of the proposed changes to the precincts in LD 17? (Commenter: Linda
Boothe) STAFF RESPONSE: Emailed.
 Would you please post the current precinct demographics so we can understand how they will be
improved? (Commenter: Linda Ellen Rizzo) STAFF RESPONSE: Emailed.
 To whom this may concern, I have spoken with Kristi Passarrelli concerning my interest in becoming
a Precinct Committee Person. I am unfamiliar with the various positions within the Party. I want
to be effective. I recently retired, and am a Mediator and Hearing Officer in Maricopa County.
According to Ms. Passarelli, I live in Sentry Precinct, LD 23. Would you kindly contact me and begin
the process for my involvement. With many thanks. (Commenter: Margaret Jean Law)
 A slight improvement. The precincts should not have crazy irregular boundaries. Loosen up the
goals and use census tracts as much as possible please. This would aid voting and precinct work.
(Commenter: John Zimmer)
 Your proposal for the Sparky shaped district isn't fun or cool, it is childish. Instead of trying to make
districts like cute college mascots maybe you could focus on shaping districts to accurately
represent demographics? Thank you. (Commenter: Steve La Rosa)
 I appreciate having this opportunity to give feedback. Since the Arizona Independent Redistricting
committee drew up new Legislative and Congressional Districts skewed heavily to more liberal and
unfair groupings, I have lost interest in being involved in meetings on a district level. My area is
now severed from my town, my schools, and my community of friends. I, along with several
citizens, pressed a lawsuit against the left leaning liberal committee which intentionally attempted
to break up our conservative district. I'm disgusted and disinterested. Very bad legislation put the
Redistricting committee in place. Very sad for us. (Commenter: Lina Hatch)
Page 10 of 16

 People had a hard time digesting the info. Dumb it down. Simpler examples. Hold questions to
the end of presentation. More info on what wait times were in last election and expected with
these changes. Love the new machines. More stats. (Commenter: Edward Williams, 24 Precinct)
 Would like reports of voting trends of those who vote outside PC so can see "hot spots" (e.g. lives
in Queen Creek votes in Phoenix) Suggest 'I voted today' sticker online for self-printing at home.
(Commenter: Jana Lynn Granillo, Balboa Precinct)
 Today July 27 is the first time I have seen this information about precinct maps being changed.
And not because you all sent me the information it was because someone from another district
forwarded me an email they had received. The County Recorder's office had emailed me earlier in
the year asking for time for the County Rec- to attend our meetings, yet you didn't have the
courtesy to send us the IMPORTANT INFORMATION about proposed new maps when our precincts
are greatly affected. I have no choice but to give you all very low marks for your inability to
communicate effectively with the leaders of district the changes that affect their districts. I
question all the changes in LD 28 and expect to receive from you a detailed report justifying the
changes to each precinct, the number of voters in each precinct before and after, the Party
registration breakdown in each precinct before and after, and the precinct committeeman count
in each precinct before and after. Thank you. (Commenter: Kathryn Petsas, LD 28 Republican
District Chairman)
 In addition to being a Precinct Committee person, during the last election, I was a poll watcher.
The poll at which I was a watcher was just north of the ASU campus. For the most part we had a
steady flow of voters and sometimes lines that were so long they may have discouraged some
voters who arrived at our location. My point is, be careful to avoid overflowing locations so much
that voters leave because of the long wait. Additionally, I was surprised about how many
prospective voters were turned away because they were not properly registered even though they
had voted while living at their current address previously. Several of them delved further into what
led to their being "not properly registered" and were told that '...it may have been that at least
two mailings sent to you by the Office of the Recorder (or whomever keeps the eligible voter roll)
were returned marked "no longer" or "not at" this address. If a person is taken off the registered
voter list if two such mailings to them are returned so marked, please let me know by leaving a
message at my home number. (Commenter: Dan McNeill)
 I wanted to let you know that it is disturbing to learn about the Maricopa County Recorder and
“re-precincting” and their request for new electronic voting equipment to be implemented before
the 2018 elections. No sooner was Mr. Fontes elected that he started holding The Citizens
Academy’s on the “new voting system” I accidentally found about the first one held June 5th at the
MCTEC office. It was advertised on Eventbrite, nothing on the Maricopa County Recorders
website. Out of approximately 150 people in attendance, there were only about 6-7 Republicans
that I know of at this meeting. As I sat there all I could see where the “Red Flags” in this new
system. At the end of the meeting, we all lined up to vote using computer laptops and scanners. I
voted using my driver license and the person next to me did not have ID and we both voted the
same way and a ballot was printed on demand and given to us to vote. I did not see a difference
in the way the two ballots were handled. The second meeting was to become a Deputy Registrar,
to be able to property register people to vote which I have done for years, more “Red Flags” and
concerns as of how this was going to work. Using the Federal Registration Form to register voters
at the colleges did not seem like a good ideal. This could be used to register in the student’s home
Page 11 of 16

state and get a mail-in ballot and then in AZ to also vote because there is not a way to cross check,
they could technically vote in two states. I have worked in most areas of the voting process, poll
worker, hand counter, etc. Several years ago, we went through a series of classes with True the
Vote on voter fraud issues so I recognized so many areas where vote fraud could take place. One
of those places is the MVD. It appears that they are trying to steer the voting process through the
MVD. In my opinion, the Deputy Registers are being used in a way to help Democrats register more
Democrats with programs like the upcoming National Voter Registration Day. I would urge the
Board of Supervisors to take a very strong look at what the Maricopa County Recorder’s office is
trying to be implemented in Arizona, you have the final authority to approve the “re-precincting”
and the money for the County Recorder. At the least take the time and hold off until after the 2020
census. There is absolutely no rush to get this done before the 2018 election. Voting is one of our
most important rights as American citizens and should be protected at all costs. The Board of
Supervisors holds the key and I am sure you will do the right thing in this matter. Thank you for
your consideration. (Commenter: Vera Anderson, PC, State Committeeman, LD 20 Secretary)
 I have reviewed the current precincts and proposed precinct changes for the City of Mesa and feel
most, if not all of the precinct boundary concerns we have were addressed. My only feedback at
this point is that there be improved communication to City and town Clerks regarding upcoming
election changes. The great majority of City and Town Clerks are unaware of the current re-
precincting process. (Commenter: Dee Ann Mickelsen)
 Thank you for communication via letter to PC's, meeting, and website. About the first of August
requested an LD 13 map showing re-precincting and Gary printed it for me. Great service! Kenosha
came to LD 13 meeting (Democrat). (Commenter: Pamela Haack, Tuthill Precinct in Verrado, LD 13)
 Note for Adrian Fontes: I want to thank your dad for his postcard. I wanted the book. Your office
wouldn't give me one. (Commenter: Debra Crosslin, Tempe Precinct)
 As a member of the League of Women Voters, I am basically interested in good government and
the decision making of those who determine our voting precincts. (Commenter: Sue Ellen Davis)
 Thank you for answering questions. Speeding up the voting process. Preserving paper ballots.
(Commenter: Thomas J. Gadd, 0472 Precinct)
 I would like to express my deep concern about this process being undertaken by the Maricopa
County Recorder's office to update precinct boundary lines. First, the letter sent in July was
confusing and seemed to come out of left field. It was also rather hit and miss as my neighboring
precinct (Modoc) PC did not receive the letter and it turns out the proposed plans have her precinct
joining mine to become one. Second, much of the determination for the line adjustments seems
to rest on the PEVL. The PEVL is of great concern to me due to no good method for keeping if clean
and current. It seems backward to not require voters to confirm they want to remain on the list
by ALWAYS RETURNING the form, rather than just doing nothing. There are several reasons why a
form may not be returned and only one of them is that the voter wishes to remain on the PEVL.
The voter may have moved or died. In either case, the recorder's office is not informed and the
ballot is mailed out. Finally, I don't trust a Democrat in a position of some authority to act in a way
that treats Republicans fairly. I mean no offense by this comment, but the last election cycle made
me pretty jaded showing that Democrats will do anything to win. I had so many campaign signs
Page 12 of 16

stolen from my yard, that it became absurd. Further reinforcing this view is what happened after
the 2010 election and the redrawing of the congressional districts. If it is to go forward, I sincerely
request broad and bipartisan oversight for the process to guarantee is done in a fair and equitable
manner. (Commenter: Carmela Barna)
INDIVIDUALS THAT SUPPORT THE 2017 RE-PRECINCTING
(Comments submitted in writing via comment card, e-mail, or web page.)
 Appreciate the wonderful job you are doing especially your outreach to the voting public.
(Commenter: Judith Moor)
 Sensible, logical, and informative, and I believe you all are showing (trying) transparency.
OPINION: Several guests were repetitive with questions and felt they were very partisan possibly.
Their concerns were about breaking up their precincts and I'm not sure which precincts but got
impression it's very political. I don't want to wait for census. Must be done as soon as possible.
Possible no funding for census. Thank you all! (Commenter: Y. McLellan)
 Note for Adrian Fontes: Good job! Great meeting. (Commenter: William Crosslin, Tempe Precinct)
 Great job! Looks like your team has really done a lot of good work! We appreciate it!
(Commenter: Todd Child, 24 Precinct)
INDIVIDUALS THAT OPPOSE THE 2017 RE-PRECINCTING
(Comments submitted in writing via comment card, e-mail, or web page.)
 This is a ridiculous waste of my money. We will have statewide redistricting prior to the 2020
election. That will be fine. In the meanwhile, simply do your job. We will tell you when to
redistrict. (Commenter: Larry Sorenson)
 I cannot understand why you are doing this now when it is to be done again in 2020!! Why is
taxpayer money being used so foolishly? Wait until 2020 to do it! (Commenter: Anna Jean
Goncalves)
 Why create confusion and unnecessarily spend the money when it will be done again in three years
- 2020? (Commenter: Frank Johnson)
 Re-precincting at this juncture seems like a waste of taxpayer money which I oppose. In two years
Arizona Legislative body will review to establish precinct boundaries so why does Adrian want to
do this. Looks to me like another political maneuver that is unnecessary spending taxpayer money
for political gain. (Commenter: James A. Keller)
 I strongly disagree with re-precincting as we are close to 2020 redistricting plans. It will be
extremely costly to mail new voter ID cards, especially if they have to be done again in 2020. There
are many apartments still being built and we do not yet know the full distribution of voters within
existing precincts. Re-precincting will be confusing and disruptive for precinct committeemen in
being unsure in which precinct they would be working. Voters need no more confusion about
where to vote, especially after the 2016 March primary. Please give it a rest till the 2020
redistricting. You will save taxpayer money in the process. (Commenter: Barbara Marie Dickerson)
Page 13 of 16

 I strongly oppose any re-precincting especially in LD 23! Your big idea will only cause excessive
work for unpaid member of the public namely precinct captains and fellow committeeman. Also,
nonessential expenses in printing costs and reregistration efforts taking up more time as well. Your
ideas, from your point of view is fine for you and your paid staff...who have nothing of more
importance to do apparently. Leave well enough alone! (Commenter: Thomas D. Botos, LD 23
Grayhawk Precinct Captain)
 We totally disagree with your plan to re-precinct any LDs for your proposed date of 2018, for a
variety of reasons. 1) This plan is a wasteful expenditure of financial, human, and planning
resources. 2) Your office will need to issue new Voter Registration Cards. 3) Your office will need
to obtain new polling places necessitating expenditure of taxpayer dollars for voting machines,
signage, sign-in hardware, and personnel. 4) All this just to be redone in 2 years after the 2020
census. 5) This census will far more accurately report the number of school-age children for school
districting and population numbers for fire department and police substations. 6) Precinct
Committeemen will be gathering signatures from neighbors who have no idea what is happening
in their area. In summary, we urge you to reconsider your plans until after the Independent
Redistricting Commission has completed its work based on the 2020 census. (Commenter: Paula
and Bruce Linker, LD 23 Mustang Precinct)
 I oppose the plan for redrawing the precinct lines, as it appears that would be money wasted at
this time. I believe that this redrawing is going to be done in the next several years, and feel it is
unnecessary to be done at this time. (Commenter: Sandra K. Jaeger)
 I oppose the plan for redrawing the precinct lines as it will be money wasted, especially when
considering it has to be done in a few years anyway, and probably differently. Please consider not
redrawing the lines at this time and save the money. (Commenter: Howard Jaeger)
 I object to this redistricting. This should be done regularly and orderly after a census is taken.
(Commenter: Glen Lavy, PC State Committeeman, Pine Valley Precinct)
 Redrawing precinct lines at this time is an unnecessary expense for taxpayers for the following
reasons: In two years the state undergoes state-wide legislative re-districting (to be done in 2020).
It appears needless to draw new precinct boundaries at this time, incur the cost of assigning and
mailing new voter registration cards to all Maricopa County voters in their new precincts, then
have to turn around two years later and have to do the same thing for new legislative district
boundaries. If we are being fiscally responsible, it makes more sense to wait to review precinct
boundaries when re-districting has been accomplished. (Commenter: Corinne Haynes)
 Hi Karen, I tried to access the 'feedback form' according to this information but only accessed the
new precinct map: The goals (where practicable) for voting precinct re-precincting are: Between
4,000 and 5,000 voters in each voting precinct. *2,000 or less voters within each voting precinct
who have not signed up for the permanent early voting list. *Minimizing the number of potential
ballot styles for each precinct. This is accomplished by having as few jurisdictional district types
(cities, school districts, fire districts, etc.) as possible in each precinct. *Not splitting communities
of interest (homeowners' associations, retirement communities, Native American Communities).
The proposed precinct lines and feedback form are available on the County Recorder's website.
Page 14 of 16

Contact: Karen Loschiavo 602.506.2825 kloschiavo@risc.maricopa.gov Can you help? I would like
to give feedback regarding Deadman Wash Precinct. Thank you. (ATTACHMENT: Deadman Wash
Precinct New Splits.png) Ironically, this is a reversal to what the area looked like before
consolidating into one big Deadman Wash precinct to save money. If it must be split according to
the below map, then keep the county voters (new 0746) in "Deadman Wash" and call the precinct
for the Phoenix voters as it used to be: Tramonto. This map shows the Tramonto voter precinct
being called 'Deadman Wash'. This will be very confusing to the public since only a few years ago
their precinct was called Tramonto. It will be very confusing to Deadman Wash voters who have
been in their Deadman Wash precinct since 2010 and it is so unnecessary to change that. The
'new' 0746 area new Joy Ranch Road is actually closer to the Deadman 'Wash' and is rural whereas
the 0145 precinct including Phoenix voters (south of Cloud) is more commercial and apartments.
Again, keep new 0746 as "Deadman Wash" and revert the 0145 Phoenix precinct back to
Tramonto. I think the 'new 0794' also used to be Tramonto, which makes perfect sense and cause
less confusion. (Commenter: Cathy Schwanke, Precinct Committeeman Captain, Deadman Wash
Precinct)
 I am opposed to the redrawing of the precincts at this time. We have a new census in just a few
years and the redrawing of the precincts should be done at this time. This is a waste of time and
money of the elections department and should not be done. (Commenter: Ian Murray)
 I honestly do not see a reason for why we need to change precinct boundaries before redistricting.
If the Recorders states objective is to go all-mail- elections then I am not sure I understand the
reasoning behind changing boundaries now because I thought the reasoning was to minimize lines
of precincts that have a big election day turnout and/or clean up boundaries between precincts
that split jurisdictional boundaries. e.g.: Look at precincts Whittier, McDowell Three Little Birds; I
don't understand why we're breaking up the existing precincts here. There is not interceding
school district boundary split here, no council district split in this area. Yet Whilshire still continues
to have a split precinct between Phoenix Elem and Osborn. I may be alone on this but I beg you
and the Recorder to leave the precincts alone or if you must change a few (necessary) then keep
them to a minimum. (Commenter: John Glenn)
 Karen, I was told you wanted comment on precinct lines. The only precinct that I see may be a
problem in the West Valley is 0433 (New 0767). Facts you should be aware of include: 1) there is
NO roadway traveling North/South in this (North/South precinct). All transportation routes go
East/West along the corridors of Peoria Ave, Olive Ave, Northern, Ave, Glendale Ave, Bethany
Home...(those at or below Indian School Road tend to drop down to Interstate 10). 2) 5% of the
population in this precinct is located in the top 25% of the geography. 3) There is ZERO population
(and no roads) west of 0720 Waddell (60% of the geography). 4) 95% of the population is living in
the bottom 15% of the geography and can only access roads from Indian School Road/I-10. 5) This
precinct crosses 3 municipal boundaries (Surprise on North, Unincorporated Maricopa County in
middle, and Buckeye to the South) I could be wrong but it will also cover 18 different school
districts. Since most of population is in south let’s assume a voting location will also be in the south
end. For someone voting living in the north 20% of the precinct (Surprise); they will have to travel
east three miles to the 303 then south seven miles to the 10 then west again three miles to vote
(25 minute trip one way). Recommendation - Dissect geography at Bethany Home Road and make
the geography below Bethany Home the precinct. All the existing precincts to the East of the
geography need to extend their northern and southern boundaries to the west and absorb the
remaining (unpopulated/low density geography) of this proposed precinct. Two tools that may
Page 15 of 16

help you are: 1) Understand why Aguafria School District redistricted east and west with new
school #5 (blue area) http://www.aguafria.org/Page/4808 2) Satellite map showing desert and
lack of roads and population in north. (Commenter: Mike Albertson)
 I strongly employ you to leave the precinct boundaries as they are until redistricting. I simply do
not understand why the upheaval is necessary especially if the recorder's office is actively pursuing
an all-mail in ballot system/voting centers. I realize we're reducing a few ballot styles (like 92) but
you still have 1,177 different styles! It’s not like we're taking a big bite out of that 1,777 number.
I just think a more comprehensive study as we do redistricting can be more substantive and less
disruptive. We are going to do this exercise for the 2018 election and then again right after the
2020 election. PLEASE just wait and do it once during redistricting. At that point in time, we can
have a bigger more substantive overhaul rather. I think if your objective is to reduce ballot styles
than that is a little in conflict with the desire to not have over populated precincts. If you really
want ballot styles it seems to me that consolidating a bunch of precincts would get you there but
then that consolidation is in conflict with the desire to not have over population. Again let’s have
this discussion after 2020 and do it in sync with AIRC. Thank you. (Commenter: John Glenn) STAFF
RESPONSE: Emailed.
 I do not believe there is sufficient need for changing the voting precincts at this time. On the
contrary, I think this will be counterproductive. I think the boundaries should remain unchanged.
(Commenter: Anastasia Ginzbursky)
 I don't see any benefit to the plan at this time which is just an unnecessary expense when you
consider within the next couple of years the Fed will be redrawing the map due to new census
they'll take and then we'll have to go through the process all over again, the government must be
more efficient and less political in making these decisions. God Bless You All. (Commenter: Clair
Van Steenwyk)
STAFF COMMENTS
Common themes heard about the Re-Precincting process:
 Concerns about Precinct Committeemen; specifically regarding allocations and being
disconnected from currently assigned areas.
 Interest in waiting until after census results are released in 2021.
 Happy with the presentation and the openness of the Recorder’s Office.
 Pleased with the changes in the Southeast Valley; Precinct Committeemen will no longer have
such a large area to cover with so many voters.
 Pleased the process does not take into account voter’s political parties.
 Pleased the process is data driven.
 Pleased the maps are logical and easy to understand.
 Concerned there may be cost to taxpayer for revising precinct maps.
 Wondering why there is so much controversy after seeing presentation.
Page 16 of 16