Extracted text (via pymupdf)
24731 characters
Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 9:30 AM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Maricopa County, Arizona (and the Boards of Directors of the Flood Control District, Library District, Improvement Districts and/or Board of Deposit) "The mission of Maricopa County is to provide regional leadership and fiscally responsible, necessary public services to its residents so they can enjoy living in healthy and safe communities” Board Members Thomas Galvin, Chairman, District 2 Kate Brophy McGee, Vice Chair, District 3 Mark Stewart, District 1 Debbie Lesko, District 4 Steve Gallardo, District 5 County Manager Jen Pokorski Clerk of the Board Juanita Garza Meeting Location Supervisors’/ Sullivan Conference Room 301 W Jefferson, 10th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85003 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Chairman Galvin called the meeting to order and asked the Clerk to call the roll. The Board of Supervisors of Maricopa County, Phoenix, Arizona, convened in an Informal Session at 9:30 AM on Monday, October 20, 2025, in the Supervisors Conference Room 301 W Jefferson, 10th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85003, with the following members present: Thomas Galvin, Chairman, District 2; Kate Brophy McGee, Vice Chair, District 3; Mark Stewart, Supervisor, District 1; Debbie Lesko, Supervisor, District 4; Steve Gallardo, Supervisor, District 5 (entered meeting late). Also present: Juanita Garza, Clerk; Mia Vargas, Minutes Coordinator; Jen Pokorski, County Manager; Brooke Worcester, Legal Counsel. PRESENTATION AND ACTION 1. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE AD HOC TASK FORCE FOR THE MARICOPA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT ON PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS Presentation of the final report and recommendations of Environmental Services’ Ad Hoc Task Force on process improvements. The action requested is to consider the recommendations, accept the report, whole or in part, as submitted by the Ad Hoc Task Force, and to provide guidance and direction to staff. Andy Linton, Environmental Services Director Ox Auxier, Subcommittee Chair Doug Kobrick, Subcommittee Chair (C-88-26-011-X-00) Chairman Galvin introduced the item and asked the presenters to come forward. Andy Linton, Environmental Services Director; Ox Auxier, EPS Group, Process/Permit Center, Subcommittee Chair; and Doug Kobrick, Hazen & Sawyer, Subcommittee Chair came forward. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 2 of 19 Mr. Linton gave a brief overview explaining the purpose of the presentation to the Board. He expressed enthusiasm in presenting recommendations from the Ad Hoc Stakeholders Task Force, established by the Board of Supervisors to evaluate service levels and processes within the Environmental Services Department, particularly the water and wastewater treatment and subdivision programs. Mr. Linton noted that a diverse group of stakeholders was convened to identify opportunities for improvement in these areas. On the slide above, Mr. Linton noted that after a kickoff meeting on June 17, 2025, two Subcommittees were formed. He explained how it led to the development of 40 recommendations that would be outlined in todays presentation. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 3 of 19 Mr. Linton introduced the two Subcommittee Chairs who also presented, Ox Auxier and Doug Kobrick. Mr. Auxier thanked his Subcommittee peers for their valuable contributions and recognized Maricopa County staff, including Andy Linton, for their support. He stated that he would present several recommendations for the Board of Supervisors’ approval. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 4 of 19 Mr. Auxier reviewed Issue 01 and the recommendations as outlined in the slide above. Mr. Auxier reviewed Issues 02 and 03, explaining that Issue 02 was a straightforward recommendation to establish a process deferring environmental infrastructure reviews within the City of Phoenix to the City’s health delegate, except where applicable codes require otherwise. On Issue 03, Mr. Auxier pointed out that during preparation for construction approval, there was no documentation defining the allowable design tolerances for construction. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 5 of 19 Supervisor Lesko asked Mr. Auxier to clarify the meaning of tolerances. Mr. Auxier explained that tolerances allow acceptable construction deviations, such as slight variations in sewer line slopes, while still ensuring proper functionality. Supervisor Lesko further clarified that different construction categories would have defined plus-or-minus tolerances, which Mr. Auxier confirmed. Vice Chair Brophy McGee raised concerns about overlapping jurisdictions and questioned whether decisions should be deferred to the City of Phoenix. Mr. Auxier explained that approval authority for environmental infrastructure is delegated to the City of Phoenix by Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) and the state, making the city the sole authority when projects cross jurisdictions. Mr. Linton confirmed that Phoenix holds the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) delegations, so the County is not involved and routing approvals through the city will speed the process. County Manager Jen Pokorski added that the infrastructure is owned by the City of Phoenix. Supervisor Lesko wanted to confirm that the delegation applied only to the City of Phoenix and no other jurisdictions, which Mr. Linton confirmed. She also asked what percentage of the property falls within Phoenix versus Maricopa County. Mr. Auxier explained that because the infrastructure is owned by the City of Phoenix, the city will operate and maintain it even though it crosses a jurisdictional boundary. Mr. Linton added that this was a unique situation involving a county-owned road adjacent to or passing through Phoenix, and that 100% of the review would be handled by Phoenix. He noted that while Phoenix would still submit to MCESD for an underground pipeline in a county-owned road, the recommendation is for the review authority to rest solely with the City of Phoenix. Ms. Pokorski noted that the property would likely be a narrow strip limited to the right-of-way. Vice Chair Brophy McGee asked how the County would ensure that the City of Phoenix will properly review work on Maricopa County property. Mr. Linton replied that the County would have no jurisdiction and that it would be under the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), which has identical engineering standards, and the same state codes apply to both city and County. Ms. Pokorski added that the city would still need to obtain a right-of-way permit from Maricopa County’s Department of Transportation to cross the county right-of-way. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 6 of 19 Mr. Auxier briefly reviewed the recommendations outlined in Issues 04 and 05 which included training, for staff to communicate with the public. The purpose and role of the Community Liaison to better support residents. Mr. Auxier noted plans to develop a procedure guiding staff on when they should initiate customer assistance. Chairman Galvin asked how the relatively new Permit Center is performing and what feedback has been received. Mr. Auxier said it was a new experience for him, and Mr. Linton noted the system has been in place for about a year and feedback is still being collected. Discussion ensued on how human interaction is vital and has improved customer service by helping resolve issues more effectively. Supervisor Lesko asked about the user’s perspective on the Permit Center and the need for human contact. Staff explained that while customers can contact County staff through the Permit Center, it could be improved. Mr. Linton noted that feedback shows customers want easier access to a real person, though some positive feedback was also received. Ms. Pokorski noted that the new system brings all document submissions into one place, unlike the previous system, and that it includes a human element, which the old system did not have. Vice Chair Brophy McGee asked whether the Task Force conducted an unrestricted deep dive into the Permit Center. Staff responded that the Task Force had full access, including an administrator testing the process to give feedback and improvement recommendations. Vice Chair Brophy McGee offered suggestions for the new Community Liaison role in improving customer communication. The Board and staff discussed the future of the Task Force after updates to the Permit Center, with Mr. Linton noting plans for annual meetings to continue to review progress. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 7 of 19 Mr. Auxier reviewed Issues 06 and 07 regarding Approval of Construction (AOP) and Approval of Proposed Plan (AOPP). Chairman Galvin raised concerns about utility capacity for data center development, asking when a Capacity Assurance letter should be required. Mr. Linton clarified that the Capacity Assurance letter discussed applies to wastewater treatment capacity, not electrical power, and would be required upfront of the approval-to-construct stage. Mr. Auxier reviewed the recommendations for Issue 07. He highlighted the third recommendation, developing a procedure for drafting approval-of-construction letters that enables providers to operate within their existing approvals when repairs are required. Supervisor Stewart asked, regarding Items 6 and 7, whether the committee had identified any regulations, they would recommend the County raise to ADEQ or other state-level agencies to eliminate redundancies that may slow the process. Mr. Linton said that Doug Kobrick has a specific recommendation about wastewater treatment plants and will present it on an upcoming slide. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 8 of 19 Mr. Auxier reviewed Issues 08 and 09 on the slide above. He noted that Issue 09 highlights the need to establish an online failure notification procedure for utility owners and operators to report treatment process failures that temporarily affect normal operations, and to gather stakeholder feedback before finalizing the procedure. ~ Supervisor Gallardo entered the meeting ~ Mr. Auxier concluded by reviewing Issue 10 and the two recommendations. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 9 of 19 Doug Kobrick, the Subcommittee Chair, introduced himself and noted his involvement with the engineering standards for the next listed issues. Mr. Kobrick reviewed Issue 01, explaining that much of the infrastructure built in the 1980s and 1990s is aging and needs rehabilitation or replacement. He noted confusion over whether equipment replacements require an Approvals To Construct (ATC) and clarified that the recommendation would not require that process for simple rehabilitation of existing facilities. He emphasized that this applies only to projects that do not increase facility capacity, preserving the integrity of the planning process. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 10 of 19 Vice Chair Brophy McGee inquired about maintenance backlogs. Mr. Linton responded that there are no review backlogs in Environmental Services and noted that the reviews proposed for removal would still mostly be conducted by ADEQ, adding that the current process is duplicative because engineers must submit the same plans to both ADEQ and MCES. Supervisor Lesko asked whether Maricopa County would waive its regulatory process for simple rehabilitation, which Mr. Kobrick confirmed. He clarified that rehabilitation means replacing existing equipment with similar equipment, while major process changes would require an ADEQ permit modification. Mr. Linton added that ADEQ retains authority over process changes and that Environmental Services should continue reviews for projects affecting the MAG 208 plan, such as new facilities or capacity expansions. Mr. Kobrick reviewed Issue 02 concerning Engineer Bulletin 11, a 1978 document that contains outdated and now-prohibited treatment processes and omits many modern methods. Although ADEQ no longer recognizes the bulletin as regulatory, MCES has continued to use it as review guidance. He noted because engineering guidance and textbooks have been applied inconsistently, a new group will be formed to establish and standardize the guidance for future reviews. Vice Chair Brophy McGee asked if ADEQ lacks a list of acceptable standards references. Mr. Kobrick explained that although no single list exists, ADEQ relies on regulatory programs, discharge standards, and aquifer protection permits. He noted it includes best available demonstrative control technology requirements, noting that the requirements in Bulletin 11 are partially obsolete and no longer enforced. Vice Chair Brophy McGee expressed the expectation that ADEQ would be cooperative, and Mr. Linton confirmed ADEQ’s willingness to participate in developing updated standards. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 11 of 19 Mr. Kobrick reviewed and discussed Issues 03 and 04. He explained that Issue 03 involves construction delays due to limited well-drilling availability, which can cause projects to miss deadlines and have their New Source Approvals expire before completion. Vice Chair Brophy McGee asked whether the requirement is currently in place, noting well issues in her District. Mr. Linton responded that it is in place and it applies specifically to public water systems, meaning the requirement applies when a well is part of a public water system. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 12 of 19 Mr. Kobrick reviewed Issue 05 and stated that a recommendation not listed on the slide is for the same County reviewer to manage both the initial review and any extension requests. He noted that assigning new reviewers for extensions has led to added requirements not part of the original approval. Chairman Galvin asked whether the automated emails from Permit Center would be sent to a list of applicant contacts, including multiple points of contact. Mr. Linton responded that the system allows multiple contacts and notifications to be sent to all listed contacts. Chairman Galvin also suggested following up with a phone call to ensure someone acknowledged the email. Mr. Kobrick reviewed Issue 06 and stated that both recommendations are currently in process and expected to be completed shortly. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 13 of 19 Mr. Kobrick reviewed Issue 07 and the final recommendation. Mr. Linton reviewed the Action Requested for the Board’s consideration. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 14 of 19 Chairman Galvin thanked staff for the presentation and recognized the committee members for their work, expressing appreciation on behalf of the Board of Supervisors for their service to Maricopa County and state agencies while balancing full-time jobs. Vice Chair Brophy McGee made the motion to accept, the report from the Maricopa County Environmental Services Treatment and Subdivision Ad Hoc Stakeholder Task Force and direct staff to proceed with implementation of recommendations as contained in the report. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Mark Stewart. Ayes: Thomas Galvin, Kate Brophy McGee, Mark Stewart, Debbie Lesko, Steve Gallardo 2. 2026 LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE Presentation regarding the Proposed 2026 Legislative Package. At the conclusion of the presentation, approve Proposed 2026 Legislative Package. Michelle Hindman, Director, Government Relations Danny De Hoog, Senior Manager, Governmental Relations (C-20-26-005-X-00) Chairman Galvin introduced the item, and he asked Michelle Hindman, Director, Government Relations and Danny De Hoog, Senior Manager, Governmental Relations, to come forward to present. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 15 of 19 Ms. Hindman and Ms. De Hoog introduced themselves. Ms. Hindman briefly reviewed the general timeline of Important Dates listed on the slide above. Vice Chair Brophy McGee, asked about the current legislative policy on strikers. Ms. Hindman explained they are allowed but rarely succeed if bypassing a Committee Chair. Vice Chair Brophy McGee noted the 7-bill deadline can be misleading and emphasized proper routing to Committee Chairs. Ms. Hindman added that strikers remain at risk during the session but cannot be offered on the floor. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 16 of 19 Ms. Hindman turned it over to Ms. De Hoog to talk about Air Quality. Ms. De Hoog noted that the first proposal was from Air Quality. She said that the Air Quality proposal builds on a 2017 bill and would expand current law to allow voluntary emission reduction credits for nonstationary sources. She explained that this change would help large Title V businesses that need emission offsets to relocate or start operations by allowing businesses to voluntarily create and sell credits to support business growth and expansion in the state. Ms. Hindman discussed the Environmental Services—Cold Plunges proposal. She explained that cold plunge devices are becoming more common in communities, especially in wellness clinics. She noted that some single-use, bathtub-style units could be considered spas under current law and require regulation. She stated that the proposal could follow the Utah model by exempting certain devices from regulation while requiring safety signage. Supervisor Lesko asked for clarification on cold plunges, and Ms. Hindman explained they are a trend where people submerge in cold water. Ms. Hindman noted that multi-user, inground cold plunges are already regulated, but the newer single-use, bathtub-style plunges are not. Andy Linton, Environmental Services Director, noted that current regulations would require costly upgrades for wellness centers, and that single-use cold plunges pose lower health risks than multi-user spas. Mr. Linton noted that they are considering an exemption, though sequential use of the same water still requires disinfection. Vice Chair Brophy McGee asked about signage, disinfection for cold plunges and enforcement. Mr. Linton explained that they are proposing certain requirements in order to be exempt, such as signage and a disinfection system, with no enforcement unless health concerns arise. Chairman Galvin asked whether the County should impose costly requirements on cold plunge spas. Mr. Linton responded that applying current rules would force many facilities to close or make significant, expensive upgrades. Supervisor Stewart expressed concern that costly upgrades could hurt business owners and lead them to remove cold plunges. Mr. Linton responded that, based on consultations with Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 17 of 19 national experts, there is no documented history of health issues with single-user spas or cold plunges. Supervisor Lesko expressed concerns about cold plunges due to reused water and suggested placing some rules. Mr. Linton noted that any rule changes would occur at the state level through ADEQ, and that they are awaiting guidance on those rules. Supervisor Lesko also suggested removing cold plunges from the proposal. County Manager, Jen Pokorski, recommended the Board consider two separate motions: one for the other three proposals and a second for the cold plunge. The Board shared their views on cold plunge use, and Ms. Hindman requested guidance on specific language to move forward. Chairman Galvin asked if their position could be modified in future meetings, and Ms. Hindman confirmed it could. Supervisor Gallardo commented on cold plunges and asked how other counties are addressing the issue. He suggested it would be valuable to discuss this at the County Supervisors Association (CSA) to learn how other counties are handling it. Ms. Hindman talked about the Flood Control District—Stormwater Recharge item, noting ongoing legislative discussions and several related bills from last year may be reintroduced. She requested authorization to engage with stakeholders and involve the Flood Control District, potentially modifying previous bills to better suit the County’s interests. Ms. Pokorski added that this issue could significantly impact affordable housing and that it was mentioned in the Chairman’s speech. Ms. De Hoog discussed the Office of the Medical Examiner—Supervising Forensic Pathologists, proposel noting the current gap between receiving licensure or board certification and being able to supervise or conduct autopsies. She explained that a related bill previously advanced through the process but fell in the Senate, and they plan to reintroduce it. Supervisor Lesko stated she supports all proposals except the Cold Plunges. She expressed concern that including the County’s name in the CSA meeting could imply support for cold plunges. She asked the Vice Chair to make a motion to exclude cold plunges so it could be voted on separately. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 18 of 19 Supervisor Lesko noted that she would like to discuss in the future setting a cap on penalty fees for volunteer school board members who fail to file their quarterly campaign finance reports. Supervisor Stewart echoed Supervisor Lesko’s comments regarding campaign finance reports. Supervisor Gallardo added that campaign finance fines increased after the legislature removed the cap. He stated that discussing cold plunges at CSA would not require the County to introduce to legislation, adding that differences between small and large counties are common and it is appropriate to raise issues when other counties show interest. Supervisor Kate Brophy McGee made the motion to approve, the proposed 2026 Legislative Package for Air Quality, Flood Control District and Office of the Medical Examiner. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Debbie Lesko Ayes: Thomas Galvin, Kate Brophy McGee, Mark Stewart, Debbie Lesko, Steve Gallardo ~ The following second motion was made ~ Supervisor Kate Brophy McGee made the motion to approve, the Environmental Services 2026 Legislative Package as presented. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Mark Stewart. Ayes: Thomas Galvin, Kate Brophy McGee, Mark Stewart, Steve Gallardo Nay: Debbie Lesko Each Supervisor explained their vote. Supervisor Lesko emphasized that the reuse of water is not healthy and should be regulated under health standards and stated that Maricopa County should not be promoting or advancing the cold plunge issue. Supervisor Lesko said for these reasons she voted no. Supervisor Stewart expressed appreciation for Supervisor Lesko’s approach and thanked Mr. Linton for researching potential health issues related to cold plunges. He stated his support for the proposal, noting it would help businesses while requiring signage to inform the public about reused water. Supervisor Gallardo expressed support for the issue and thanked Supervisor Lesko for raising public health concerns. He noted that while he is not very familiar with cold plunge facilities, he would like to monitor any potential public health issues in the future. Vice Chair Brophy McGee expressed support for the issue but suggested examining how other counties handle cold plunges. She noted that other environments practice submersion and recommended exploring language to inform the public to engage with caution. Chairman Galvin thanked Supervisor Lesko for her comments, explained his support, and commented on the use of reused water. He spoke about the County’s enforcement regarding underground bathtubs and the outcomes of legislation related to cold plunges. Chairman Galvin thanked Ms. Hindman and Ms. De Hoog for their presentation. 3. EXECUTIVE SESSION Vote to convene in Executive Session to consider the items on the Executive Agenda dated Monday, October 20, 2025, for Board of Supervisors and relevant Special Districts pursuant to the statutory authority listed for each item. Informal Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2025 Page 19 of 19 Motion to approve by Supervisor Kate Brophy McGee, seconded by Supervisor Mark Stewart Ayes: Thomas Galvin, Kate Brophy McGee, Mark Stewart, Debbie Lesko, Steve Gallardo MEETING ADJOURNED After discussion of the items listed on the Executive Session agenda and there being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned. _______________________________ Thomas Galvin, Chairman of the Board ATTEST: ___________________________ Juanita Garza, Clerk of the Board