021214SB.DOC

Special Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, February 12, 2014 Board Members
10:00 AM Denny Barney, Chairman, District 1
Steve Chucri, Vice Chairman, District 2
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Andrew Kunasek, District 3
Maricopa County, Arizona Clint Hickman, District 4
(and the Boards of Directors of the Flood Control Mary Rose Wilcox, District 5
District, Library District, Stadium District, Improvement
Districts, Housing Authority of Maricopa County,
Housing Authority of Maricopa County and/or Board of County Manager
Deposit) Tom Manos
Clerk of the Board
Fran McCarroll
"The mission of Maricopa County
is to provide regional leadership
and fiscally responsible, Meeting Location
necessary public services to its Supervisors' Conference Room
residents so they can enjoy 301 W. Jefferson, 10th Floor
living in healthy and safe
communities” Phoenix, AZ 85003
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
The Board of Supervisors of Maricopa County, Phoenix, Arizona, convened in Special Session at
10:00 AM on Wednesday, February 12, 2014, in the Supervisors' Conference Room, 301 W.
Jefferson, 10th Floor, Phoenix, AZ 85003, with the following members present: Denny Barney,
Chairman, District 1; Steve Chucri, Vice Chairman, District 2; Andrew Kunasek, District 3; Clint
Hickman, District 4; Mary Rose Wilcox, District 5. Also present: Fran McCarroll, Clerk of the Board;
Tom Manos, County Manager; and Cynthia Kelley, Legal Counsel. Minutes compiled by Shirley
Million, Minutes Coordinator. Votes of the members will be recorded as follows: aye, nay, absent,
abstain.
Government Relations
1. FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
Presentation regarding the Proposed 2014 Federal Legislative Agenda. At the conclusion of the
presentation, approve Proposed 2014 Federal Legislative Agenda. (C-20-14-022-P-00)
Amanda Nash, Legislative Analyst
Chris Cushing, Nelson Mullins Public Strategies Group
Jennifer Pharaoh, Nelson Mullins Public Strategies Group
Chris Cushing and Jennifer Pharaoh introduced themselves and informed the board
that the 2014 legislative agenda had been compiled. Mr. Cushing said he had met with
representatives from and with various departments to learn their needs and priorities.
~ Chairman Barney left the meeting and passed the gavel to
Vice Chairman Chucri ~
Supervisor Wilcox asked Mr. Cushing to keep her informed with regards to Immigration
reform and to update her at NACo saying she would have some key people with her.
Supervisor Wilcox commented on the transportation bill and projects she expects to be
approved this year.
Mr. Cushing explained that they will focus, or continue to focus, on several things this
year including rural roads; utilities within some strict rules from the Environmental

Special Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Page 2 of 8
Protection Agency, and expediting transportation approvals on several projects.
Supervisor Hickman asked about obtaining 49 sites for radio towers for the new radio
network, and if the Board could do anything to facilitate this.
Tom Manos said some sites are on federal land which should make them inexpensive
but anything regarding federal land transactions often takes a considerable amount of
time.
Also discussed was the government shutdown: healthcare issues related to the
Affordable Care Act for those incarcerated, which can only be controlled to the extent
the County can direct policy in Washington D.C.: Care and upkeep of Arizona dams;
and, one of the biggest challenges the County faces – high ozone levels.
Mr. Cushing presented the suggested federal legislative agenda as follows:
2014 FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
Local governments play a critical role in the American federal system of government.
As the level of government closest to the people, they are responsible for the delivery of
the majority of government services. Whether it is public safety, transportation,
community planning, environmental stewardship, affordable housing, mental health and
substance abuse treatment, child and family assistance programs, watershed
management, or countless other services; individuals look to local governments to
provide it. Broad policy and funding decisions made at the federal level directly affect
the manner in which local governments function. It is therefore important for the
Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to articulate positions and concerns to
Washington on those issues affecting local government and the residents Maricopa
County serves.
Relationship Building
A key to articulating positions and concerns is the County’s relationships with Arizona’s
Congressional delegation and the Executive Branch, so it is imperative that County
officials work to maintain and enhance these relationships. The National Association of
Counties (NACo) legislative conference in March is a great opportunity for Board
members and staff to personally interact with the delegation and Executive Branch.
Guiding Principles
Although Government Relations will brief the Board of Supervisors of activities as they
occur during the 113th Congress and seek guidance regarding important bills and
amendments and activities within government agencies, Government Relations asks
that the Board consider supporting the following guiding principles to help the
Government Relations team focus its efforts on issues of greatest concern:
.
Fiscal Strength and Responsibility
Maricopa County urges the federal government to recognize the unsustainable nature
of the rising national debt and its potential impact on the economic vitality of the nation.
Maricopa County urges the federal government to use a balanced approach to reduce
the national debt that does not burden counties by shifting costs of programs to
counties.
Local Authority
Maricopa County urges the federal government to allow for flexibility that empowers

Special Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Page 3 of 8
local communities, recognizing that locally elected officials best understand the needs
of constituents.
Growth & Economic Development
Maricopa County urges the federal government to seriously consider the negative
economic impact of rules and regulations before implementation while continuing to
support programs that have a proven track record of supporting economic development,
such as transportation funding.
2014 Federal Legislative Priorities
As the guiding principles provide general direction, Government Relations asks that the
Board consider highlighting these specific issues to address community needs.
1. Clean Air Act – Environmental Protection Agency Exceptional Events Rule for
PM-10
The County is significantly affected by the manner in which EPA interprets and
implements Clean Air Act provisions for addressing high levels of particulate matter
(PM-10) air pollutants due to high winds. The EPA’s Exceptional Events Rule that
implements those CAA provisions is flawed.
Government Relations proposes that Maricopa County continue working
closely with local partner agencies, the Governor's Office, the local business
community, and the Arizona congressional delegation to send a consistent
message to EPA to revise its rule to provide more clarity and flexibility to
states in working with exceptional event demonstrations, better ensure
cooperation between EPA and the County, and assure reasonable and
consistent implementation of the rule by EPA, so that the County will not face
continual, reoccurring nonattainment due to exceptional events beyond its
control.
2. Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT)
PILT provides payments to counties and other local governments to offset losses in
tax revenues due to the presence of substantial acreage of federal land in their
jurisdictions. In July 2012, President Obama signed into law PL 112-141, the
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). Included in the
legislation was additional mandatory funding for the Payment in Lieu of Taxes
(PILT) program for fiscal 2013. After implementation of the Budget Control Act
(sequestration cuts), counties received roughly $400 million in fiscal 2013. PILT is
currently authorized at $425 million for fiscal 2014. The recently adopted fiscal
2014 budget resolution included a deficit neutral reserve placeholder for PILT.
Western Senators failed in a recent effort to fully fund the program at the authorized
level of $425 million for fiscal 2014 in the fiscal 2014 omnibus spending measure.
In response, Rep. Kirkpatrick introduced a bill that would permanently authorize and
fund the PILT program and ensure that counties are not left in budget limbo every
year due to the uncertainty of the Congressional budget process. However, the bill
does not have bi-partisan support, nor does the corresponding bill in the Senate
that was introduce by Colorado Senator Mark Udall. Therefore, most hope is
pinned on the FY 2014 funding being included in another bill such as the Farm Bill.
Government Relations proposes that Maricopa County consider encouraging
Congress find a solution to provide a consistent and stable source of funding
for counties with federal lands in their jurisdictions.

Special Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Page 4 of 8
3. Water Resources Development Act
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) authorizes the projects and programs
of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and provides an opportunity for Congress to
articulate program priorities. Typically, a WRDA is passed every two years, but the
last WRDA was passed in 2007. Programs that are typically addressed in a bill
include the National Levee Safety program and the National Dam Safety program,
which includes grant assistance for dam repairs and removal.
During the first session of the 113th Congress, the House and the Senate each
passed their versions of this bill. Negotiators hope to have a compromise bill
completed in early 2014. Both versions include provisions designed to accelerate
project reviews, but the bills differ greatly in their approach. The Senate version
created a set of criteria that allows automatic project approval, but the House
insisted on greater oversight. Therefore, the House bill authorizes 23 projects and
establishes a process to select new projects that begins at the local level with
submission to the Army Corp of Engineers. If a submission meets defined criteria, it
would be included in an annual report for Congress to consider funding.
Last year, Maricopa County focused on new start funding for McMicken Dam, but
depending on which version of the bill prevails, Maricopa County may need to alter
its course. For instance, Maricopa County may want to focus more on project
review funding because Maricopa County recently had to pay for an expedited
review of a Corps project that the Corps did not have funds to review. The project
was Corps project that Maricopa County simply operates.
Government Relations proposes that Maricopa County consider supporting
the Corps using a balanced approach that completes projects at the same
time it begins the approval process for new projects, so the pipeline has a
constant flow of projects, including new starts and Corps projects.
4. Transportation Funding – Expedite Review of Local Government Federal-aid
Projects
Despite continuing discussion and proposal of streamlining of environmental and
other processes, the reality is the requirements are actually increasing and delays
in approving federal projects are increasing. More resources are needed to
decrease the time needed to process local government federal-aid project reviews
and approvals, because states are inadequately funded and staffed to complete
reviews in an expeditious manner. When real projects get “out the door”, they
provide jobs and fuel economic growth. States, local governments, consultants,
contractors and the general public all benefit.
Government Relations proposes that Maricopa County consider supporting
the creation of a federal funds pool that would be dedicated solely to fund
state DOT reviews and approvals of local federal-aid projects.
5. Transportation Funding – Highway Trust Fund
With MAP-21 expiring on September 30, 2014, the Congress is facing a need to
reauthorize the federal surface transportation programs. A key issue identified by
NACo and others is funding. The new authorization must be adequate to address
transportation needs and make the Highway Trust Fund solvent. The American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the
Associated General Contractors of America (AGC), National Conference of State
Legislatures (NCSL), National Association of Counties (NACo), National League of
Cities (NLC), the League of Arizona Cities and Towns (League), the Arizona Farm

Special Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Page 5 of 8
Bureau Federation (Bureau), Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS) and
the American Trucking Associations (ATA) have all offered potential solutions. The
following table depicts the various methods these organizations support as a means
of increasing federal funding:
Credit
Increase Annual Public- Assistance Other
Federal Highway Vehicle Private Tax Innovative
Gas Tax User Miles Partner- Incentives, Funding
Organization & Motor Vehicle Traveled ships Financing Mechanism
Agency Fuel Tax Fee (VMT Fee) (PPPs) Tools s
AASHTO X X X X
AGC X X X X X
ATA X
NACo X X
NCSL X
NLC X X X X
Transportation Reauthorization acts since 1991 have focused largely on
metropolitan areas and urban needs. Therefore, rural communities’ needs have
steadily increased over time, including rural areas adjoining metropolitan areas
such as unincorporated Maricopa County.
Government Relations proposes that Maricopa County consider supporting
the reauthorization of the federal transportation program and for components
to include the streamlining of federal environmental and project review and to
increase the role of local officials in funding decisions.
6. Federal Lands During Government Shutdowns
On October 1, 2013, the federal government shut down. Therefore, Tonto National
Forest officials shut down several locations that Maricopa County residents
regularly use for recreational activities. National Parks officials also closed the
Grand Canyon. The economic impact on tourism was significant and the State of
Arizona had difficulty getting the federal government to refund it when it covered the
expenses related to re-opening the Park.
Government Relations proposes that Maricopa County consider supporting
legislation that would, during a federal government shutdown, allow local
governments to enter into agreements under which the federal government
may accept funds to reopen a local National Park, National Wildlife Refuge, or
National Forest, and require the federal government to reimburse local
governments for related expenses upon reopening of the federal government.
Issues to be Monitored
The first session of the 113th Congress was dominated by highly visible and extremely
controversial issues, including gun control legislation, immigration reform and the
implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Ultimately, a very polarized climate
developed and resulted in a federal government shutdown in October. Therefore,
several issues Maricopa County watched develop during the 112th Congress did not
receive any significant attention and therefore, no viable solutions developed. With
elections in November and a rather limited legislative calendar, these issues may
remain in the shadows. Therefore, Government Relations will watch the following
matters closely and brief Board members if viable solutions begin to gain traction:

Special Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Page 6 of 8
1. Waters of the United States
We are awaiting the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) publication of a
proposed rule that will clarify which U.S. bodies of water are protected under the
Clean Water Act (CWA). In April 2011, the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers issued guidance designed to implement the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling
in Rapanos v. United States, in which a highly divided court pared back the
agencies’ jurisdiction under the CWA. Despite the ruling, the agency said it would
be able to increase its jurisdiction over federally protected waterways under the
guidance. After receiving hundreds of thousands of public comments — many of
them critical — the agency decided to undertake a formal rulemaking based on the
guidance. Publication of draft rules was expected in 2012, but did not occur. The
forthcoming rules could face challenges in Congress and the courts, with concerns
that they could give the EPA and the Army Corps increased discretion under
sections 401 and 404 of the CWA, which require permitting for dredging, filling, and
discharging into federal waters.
2. Sequestration - Defense Spending Cuts
In 2012, estimates indicated sequestration of non-defense discretionary spending
could have led to approximately $9.4 million in cuts to Maricopa County programs.
Cuts were not that severe but programs did see cuts, including Head Start
programs, Low Income Home Energy Assistance programs. Housing and Urban
Development vouchers, Community Development Block Grants, and Workforce
Investment Act Grants. Last year, Maricopa County focused its attention on
Homeland Security Grants and Justice Program Grants such as JAG grants,
Juvenile Accountability Block Grants, and Second Chance Act funding because
these programs have the greatest impact on public safety. Government Relation
will monitor any budget deals that could impact any of these County programs.
3. Sequestration - Non-Defense Discretionary Spending Cuts
Sequestration is a result of the Budget Control Act that became law in August of
2011. The Budget Control Act was a compromise that helped avoid the first-ever
federal government debt default by raising the debt ceiling. The bill created the joint
Congressional committee that came to be known as the “Super Committee” and
charged it with finding at least $1.2 trillion in spending reductions. The required
super majority of the Committee failed to agree to reductions, so $109 billion
across-the-board spending cuts were scheduled to occur automatically in January
2013, with a total of $1.2 trillion in cuts equally divided between defense and non-
defense discretionary spending over 10 years; this is the a mechanism referred to
as “sequestration.”
The budget deal that Congress passed in December 2013 provided some relief
from sequestration by restoring about $63 billion in funding over fiscal years 2014
and 2015. Recognizing that defense spending is a significant part Maricopa
County’s economy, Government Relations will continue to monitor sequestration,
paying special attention to any potential cuts that would negatively impact the F-35
mission at Luke Air Force Base and/or Arizona’s defense contractors.
4. Healthcare Coverage for Incarcerated Individuals
According to the National Commission on Correctional Health Care, a substantial
number of people that are booked into county jails have serious behavioral and/or
medical needs. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) allows individuals who are
incarcerated, but pending disposition of charges, to remain on health insurance
provided through healthcare exchanges until convicted. This could be a great cost
savings to Maricopa County, so Government Relations will continue to monitor the

Special Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Page 7 of 8
implementation of the ACA.
5. Clean Air Act – Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Regional Haze
In November 2012, the EPA reduced the limit of nitrogen oxide power plants may
emit each year beginning in 2017. Although the three power plants impacted by
these regulations are not in Maricopa County, energy within Maricopa County could
rise as result of this regulation. A fourth power plant outside of Maricopa County is
facing similar regulations that could increase water costs to Maricopa County
residents through an increase in energy costs for the Central Arizona Project. In
addition, the utilities that depend on these four power plants may have to increase
the production within Maricopa County, which could have an impact on air quality.
6. Clean Air Act –Transport of Air Pollution
Currently, the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that EPA review each national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS) once every five years. EPA will be proposing a
revision to the ozone standard this year that we anticipate will make the standard
stricter. As the standard is ratcheted down, transport of ozone pollution from other
areas becomes an issue in the valley and for other areas in the West. For example
under certain meteorological conditions, ozone generated in California and across
the border in Mexico drifts into the county and contributes to high ozone episodes
here. On many days as much as 50% of our ozone problem comes from outside the
county. In turn, Nevada and Colorado both point to the Phoenix ozone plume as a
contributor to their high ozone episodes.
These circumstances will require more regional cooperation if we are eve to have a
chance at meeting the standard. In addition, EPA leadership and action on
federally controlled sources such as fuels, vehicles, and lands are absolutely
essential—as these sources are outside state and local control. Note—if the county
is unable to meet this standard, a number of negative consequences ensue. Under
the structure of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the county will be subject to even more
onerous controls. In addition, the CAA imposes lower permit thresholds each time
the county fails to meet its attainment date and these lower permit thresholds
impose complex permitting requirement on even smaller sources. This makes the
county less attractive to new business. Under the CAA, if the county fails to meet
these requirements or fails to meet attainment dates, it imposes sanctions such as
withholding federal highway funds, increasing major source (new permit) offset
ratios and higher emission fees for larger sources. Ensuring EPA recognizes
western as well as eastern issues in that rulemaking will be critical for Maricopa
County.
7. National Dam Rehabilitation Program
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) National Dam Rehabilitation
Program (The Watershed Rehabilitation Program), authorized by Congress in 2000,
applies to the Flood Control District’s 16 Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NCRS) sponsored dams.
To date, NRCS has funded $31 million for the overall rehabilitation of three NRCS
dams managed by the Flood Control District (one completed, two in progress)
under Project cost share agreements. Three additional NRCS dams managed by
the District are also currently planned for rehabilitation/replacement under this
Program. The additional funding need under this federal dam rehabilitation
program to complete the work on these dams is currently estimated at $80 million.
The District has found that these dams prioritize very highly in funding allocations

Special Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Page 8 of 8
from the national budget for this program. The reason for this is primarily because
of the significant number of people protected by the dams (thousands vs. tens for
most NRCS Dams). However, the funding of this national program over the last
several years ($15 million to $20 million per year nationally) has been significantly
lower than the national need. Therefore, if this underfunding of the national
program continues, it is expected that significant federal underfunding for the
District’s dam rehabilitation projects would occur.
8. Immigration Reform
Both the President and the Senate proposed comprehensive immigration reform
plans in 2013. Elements of the plans included creating a pathway to citizenship for
undocumented immigrants, increasing availability of visas to skilled workers,
implementing an employer verification program, and creating a guest-worker
program for laborers and agricultural workers.
There were several potential impacts on Maricopa County, including increase costs
in County jails and court system, but none of the plans became law due to ongoing
political fights. However, in December, Speaker of the House John Boehner hired
Senator John McCain’s former Chief of Staff to lead House immigration efforts, so
this could indicate the issue will be back on the House agenda in 2014.
Motion to approve the Proposed 2014 Federal Legislative Agenda by Supervisor
Wilcox, seconded by Supervisor Kunasek.
Ayes: Wilcox, Kunasek, Chucri, Hickman
Absent: Barney
MEETING ADJOURNED
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.
________________________________
Denny Barney, Chairman of the Board
ATTEST:
______________________________
Fran McCarroll, Clerk of the Board