March 18, 2026 Judicial Advisory Board

City of Mesa — City Council Study Session (2026-05-04)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 18802 characters
JUDICIAL ADVISORY  
BOARD MINUTES 
 
March 18, 2026 
 
The Judicial Advisory Board of the City of Mesa met in the Study Session room at City Hall, 20 East 
Main Street, on March 18, 2026, at 7:47 a.m. 
 
BOARD PRESENT 
BOARD ABSENT 
STAFF PRESENT 
 
Theo McCalvin, Chairperson 
Keith Berkshire 
Kent Cattani 
Kelli Flinchbaugh 
Sonia Martinez 
Joshua Rogers 
 
 
Kelley Durham, Vice Chair 
 
 
 
Lisa Anderson 
Kristin Hooker 
Britanee Hudson 
 
1.  
Meeting called to order and roll call.  
 
Chairperson McCalvin called the meeting to order at 7:47 a.m. and conducted a roll call. 
 
Chairperson McCalvin excused Vice Chairperson Durham from the entire meeting. 
 
2. 
Approve minutes from the February 11, 2026 Judicial Advisory Board meeting. 
It was moved by Boardmember Martinez, seconded by Boardmember Berkshire, that the 
February 11, 2026, Judicial Advisory Board meeting minutes be approved. 
 
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed: 
 
AYES – McCalvin–Berkshire–Cattani–Flinchbaugh–Martinez–Rogers 
NAYS – None 
 
ABSENT – Durham  
 
Chairperson McCalvin declared the motion carried unanimously by those present. 
 
3. 
Convene an Executive Session. 
It was moved by Boardmember Martinez, seconded by Boardmember Rogers, that the Board 
enter into an executive session at 7:48 a.m. 
 
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed: 
 
AYES – McCalvin–Berkshire–Cattani–Flinchbaugh–Martinez–Rogers 
NAYS – None 
 
ABSENT – Durham  
 
Chairperson McCalvin declared the motion carried unanimously by those present.

Judicial Advisory Board  
March 18, 2026 
Page 2 
 
a. Discussion or consideration of employment, assignment, appointment, promotion or 
resignation of a public officer, appointee, or employee of the City [A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(1)]; 
discussion or consideration of records exempt by law from public inspection, including the 
receipt and discussion of information or testimony that is specifically required to be 
maintained as confidential by state or federal law [A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(2)]; and discussion 
or consultation for legal advice with the attorney(s) for the public body [A.R.S. § 38-
431.03(A)(3)] for the following: 
 
i. 
The reappointments of Presiding Magistrate Stephen Umpleby, Magistrate Alicia Lawler, 
and Magistrate David Allen. 
ii.   The recommendation of candidates for the City Magistrate vacancy. 
 
(At 8:03 a.m., the executive session adjourned, and the Board reconvened the regular meeting.) 
 
4. 
Conduct a public hearing to receive comments on the reappointments of Presiding Magistrate 
Stephen Umpleby, Magistrate Alicia Lawler, and Magistrate David Allen. 
 
Chairperson McCalvin announced that this was the time and place for a public hearing 
regarding the reappointments of Presiding Magistrate Stephen Umpleby, Magistrate Alicia 
Lawler, and Magistrate David Allen.  
 
Lauren Ramirez, Gilbert Municipal Court judge, spoke in support of Magistrate David Allen’s 
reappointment. She stated that she has appeared before Judge Allen in her role as a prosecutor 
and commended his professionalism and ability to clearly articulate rulings and decisions. She 
further shared that, after becoming a Judicial Officer in 2022, Judge Allen made himself 
available to offer guidance and share his experience, which she said benefits not only the 
citizens of Mesa but also the broader judicial community throughout the State of Arizona. She 
added that Judge Allen serves as a mentor to new judges and is deeply committed to fairness 
and justice. 
 
Judge Ramirez also expressed support for Presiding Magistrate Stephen Umpleby and 
Magistrate Alicia Lawler.  She said that, during her time as a practicing prosecutor, she has had 
the privilege of appearing before all three judicial officers and recommended each of them for 
reappointment. She voiced confidence in the Board’s selection of highly qualified judicial officers 
and stated her belief that the Board would continue to make strong appointments. She 
respectfully requested that the Board reaffirm its prior decisions and recommend the 
reappointments of Magistrate Allen, Presiding Magistrate Umpleby, and Magistrate Lawler.  
 
Chairperson McCalvin thanked Judge Ramirez for her comments.  
 
There being no additional public comment, the Chairperson declared the public hearing closed.  
 
5.  
Conduct an interview of Presiding Magistrate Stephen Umpleby. 
 
The members of the Judicial Advisory Board posed selected interview questions to Presiding 
Magistrate Stephen Umpleby.  
 
6.  
Conduct an interview of Magistrate Alicia Lawler.

Judicial Advisory Board  
March 18, 2026 
Page 3 
The members of the Judicial Advisory Board posed selected interview questions to Magistrate 
Alicia Lawler. 
 
7.  
Conduct an interview of Magistrate David Allen. 
 
The members of the Judicial Advisory Board posed selected interview questions to Magistrate 
David Allen. 
 
 
8. 
Convene an Executive Session. 
 
It was moved by Boardmember Berkshire, seconded by Boardmember Cattani, that the Board 
enter into an executive session at 9:17 a.m. 
 
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed: 
 
AYES – McCalvin–Berkshire–Cattani–Flinchbaugh–Martinez–Rogers 
NAYS – None 
 
ABSENT – Durham  
 
Chairperson McCalvin declared the motion carried unanimously by those present. 
 
a. Discussion or consideration of employment, assignment, appointment, promotion or 
resignation of a public officer, appointee, or employee of the City [A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(1)]; 
discussion or consideration of records exempt by law from public inspection, including the 
receipt and discussion of information or testimony that is specifically required to be 
maintained as confidential by state or federal law [A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(2)]; and discussion 
or consultation for legal advice with the attorney(s) for the public body [A.R.S. § 38-
431.03(A)(3)] for the following: 
 
i. 
Reappointment of Presiding Magistrate Stephen Umpleby to a second two-year term.  
ii. Reappointment of Magistrate Alicia Lawler to a four-year term.  
iii. Reappointment of Magistrate David Allen to a four-year term. 
 
 
 
 
(At 9:50 a.m., the executive session adjourned, and the Board reconvened the regular meeting.) 
 
9. 
Discuss and approve recommendations to the City Council related to the reappointments of 
Presiding Magistrate Stephen Umpleby, Magistrate Alicia Lawler, and Magistrate David Allen, 
and granting Chairperson McCalvin the authority to draft a letter to the City Council regarding 
the reappointment recommendations. 
 
 
 
Boardmember Martinez stated that Presiding Magistrate Umpleby not only appears to manage 
the Court efficiently but also demonstrates a strong awareness of the City of Mesa’s goals and 
key performance indicators. She noted his commitment to ensuring the Municipal Court 
operates in alignment with the City’s objectives and serves the needs of Mesa residents. She 
further expressed appreciation for his organizational leadership and efforts to ensure 
coordination among judges in meeting the needs of the community.  
 
 
Boardmember Cattani reported that general feedback regarding Presiding Magistrate Umpleby’s 
performance has been overwhelmingly positive. He stated that Judge Umpleby performs 
exceptionally well in the courtroom, provides strong administrative leadership, and takes a 
forward-looking approach while supporting the professional development of fellow judges.

Judicial Advisory Board  
March 18, 2026 
Page 4 
 
Boardmember Rogers shared that, based on courtroom observations, Presiding Magistrate 
Umpleby demonstrates an excellent judicial demeanor, conducts proceedings efficiently, and 
treats litigants with professionalism and respect.  
 
 
It was moved by Boardmember Martinez, seconded by Boardmember Cattani, that Presiding 
Magistrate Stephen Umpleby be reappointed. 
 
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed: 
 
AYES – McCalvin–Berkshire–Cattani–Flinchbaugh–Martinez–Rogers 
NAYS – None 
 
ABSENT – Durham  
 
Chairperson McCalvin declared the motion carried unanimously by those present.  
 
Boardmember Martinez expressed appreciation for Judge Lawler’s interview and noted that, 
based on the recommendations received, Judge Lawler is regarded as a strong judicial officer 
who performs well on the bench with no significant concerns identified. She further highlighted 
Judge Lawler’s role in specialty court, such as Serious Mental Illness (SMI) court, which 
requires a high level of skill and dedication, and indicated her understanding that Judge Lawler 
fulfills this role effectively. She indicated her support for the reappointment of Judge Lawler.  
 
Boardmember Berkshire reported that, based on a courtroom visit, Judge Lawler conducted 
proceedings in a professional and appropriate manner and managed the courtroom effectively.  
 
Boardmember Cattaini stated that Judge Lawler provided strong responses during the interview, 
demonstrated significant experience, and is considered an asset to the Court.  
 
It was moved by Boardmember Berkshire, seconded by Boardmember Martinez, that Magistrate 
Alicia Lawler be reappointed. 
 
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed: 
 
AYES – McCalvin–Berkshire–Cattani–Flinchbaugh–Martinez–Rogers 
NAYS – None 
 
ABSENT – Durham  
 
Chairperson McCalvin declared the motion carried unanimously by those present.  
 
Boardmember Berkshire stated that Judge Allen’s responses to the Board’s questions were 
extremely professional and reflected a genuine level of care and commitment. He noted that, 
while survey feedback identified concerns regarding timeliness, such concerns are preferable to 
issues involving due process violations or professional ethics. He expressed the view that Judge 
Allen is an asset to the bench.  
 
Boardmember Cattani reported that based on his courtroom observation, Judge Allen handled 
the courtroom in a professional manner and provided thorough explanations. He mentioned that 
Judge Allen appears to be aware of feedback regarding timeliness and is actively working to 
improve in that area. He recommended the reappointment of Judge Allen.  
 
It was moved by Boardmember Berkshire, seconded by Boardmember Rogers, that Magistrate 
David Allen be reappointed.

Judicial Advisory Board  
March 18, 2026 
Page 5 
 
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed: 
 
AYES – McCalvin–Berkshire–Cattani–Flinchbaugh–Martinez–Rogers 
NAYS – None 
 
ABSENT – Durham  
 
Chairperson McCalvin declared the motion carried unanimously by those present.  
 
It was moved by Boardmember Berkshire, seconded by Boardmember Flinchbaugh, that 
Chairperson McCalvin be granted the authority to draft a letter to the City Council regarding the 
reappointment recommendations of Presiding Magistrate Stephen Umpleby, Magistrate Alicia 
Lawler, and Magistrate David Allen.  
 
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed: 
 
AYES – McCalvin–Berkshire–Cattani–Flinchbaugh–Martinez–Rogers 
NAYS – None 
 
ABSENT – Durham  
 
Chairperson McCalvin declared the motion carried unanimously by those present.  
 
10. 
Conduct a public hearing to receive comments from interested members of the public on the 
appointment of candidates for the City Magistrate vacancy. 
 
Chairperson McCalvin announced that this was the time and place for a public hearing 
regarding the appointment of candidates for the City Magistrate vacancy. 
 
Kristin Culbertson, Superior Court judge, spoke in support of candidate Kevin Breger for the 
magistrate vacancy, citing his strong legal acumen, professionalism, and ability to approach 
cases with fairness and sound judgment.  
 
There being no additional public comment, the Chairperson declared the public hearing closed.  
 
11. 
Conduct public interviews with selected candidates for the City Magistrate vacancy. 
 
 
The Judicial Advisory Board members posed selected interview questions to candidates Kevin 
Breger and Laura Frye. 
 
 
(Chairperson McCalvin declared a recess at 11:35 a.m. The meeting reconvened at 12:32 p.m.) 
 
 
The Judicial Advisory Board members posed selected interview questions to candidates Joan 
Sinclair and Alexia Sedillo. 
 
 
(Chairperson McCalvin declared a recess at 1:42 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 1:47 p.m.) 
 
 
The Judicial Advisory Board members posed selected interview questions to candidates Jacob 
Brown and Dane Paulsen.  
 
12.  
Convene an Executive Session.

Judicial Advisory Board  
March 18, 2026 
Page 6 
It was moved by Boardmember Flinchbaugh, seconded by Boardmember Berkshire, that the 
Board enter into an executive session at 2:30 p.m. 
 
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed: 
 
AYES – McCalvin–Berkshire–Cattani–Flinchbaugh–Martinez–Rogers 
NAYS – None 
 
ABSENT – Durham  
 
Chairperson McCalvin declared the motion carried unanimously by those present. 
 
a. Discussion or consideration of employment, assignment, appointment, promotion or 
resignation of a public officer, appointee, or employee of the City [A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(1)]; 
discussion or consideration of records exempt by law from public inspection, including the 
receipt and discussion of information or testimony that is specifically required to be 
maintained as confidential by state or federal law [A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(2)]; and discussion 
or consultation for legal advice with the attorney(s) for the public body [A.R.S. § 38-
431.03(A)(3)] for the following: 
 
i. 
Appointment of City Magistrate. 
 
 
 
 
(At 3:15 p.m., the executive session adjourned, and the Board reconvened the regular meeting.) 
 
13.  
Discuss and take action on a recommendation to the City Council identifying, in alphabetical 
order, the three best qualified candidates for the vacant City Magistrate position, and the 
granting of Chairperson McCalvin the authority to draft a letter to City Council regarding the 
recommendation of candidates. 
 
 
Boardmember Berkshire discussed Ms. Sinclair’s extensive judicial experience, highlighting her 
service on the bench and her ability to manage a significant caseload. He stated that she is an 
extremely competent judicial officer with an excellent professional reputation, and that she is 
highly respected within the legal community. He expressed the view that she would be a strong 
fit for the Messa Municipal Court and recommended her for appointment.  
 
 
Boardmember Martinez concurred with Boardmember Berkshire’s remarks and added that, 
during the interview, Ms. Sinclair demonstrated an awareness of the differences between her 
prior judicial experience and the Municipal Court bench. She appreciated Ms. Sinclair’s 
acknowledgement that additional training would be necessary to address new subject matters 
and noted her openness to that transition. She voiced confidence in Ms. Sinclair’s ability to 
adapt effectively.  
 
 
Boardmember Rogers reported that Ms. Sinclair has a strong reputation among her colleagues 
and expressed the view that she would work well with the existing bench at the Mesa Municipal 
Court.  
 
 
Boardmember Martinez commented on Mr. Breger’s breadth of experience, mentioning his 
many years of service within the City of Mesa in a general sense, also the work he does in the 
Mesa Municipal Court, and that he has worked in all different facets of multiple municipal courts. 
She said that Mr. Breger demonstrated a genuine commitment to his work. She noted that, 
while she felt he used the phrase “fair shake” more than she preferred, she otherwise 
appreciated his approach to the law and to the bench.

Judicial Advisory Board  
March 18, 2026 
Page 7 
 
Boardmember Berkshire stated that Mr. Breger received very strong recommendations from 
former colleagues, members of the legal community, and individuals associated with the Mesa 
Municipal Court, reflecting a high level of respect for his work.  
 
 
Boardmember Cattani remarked that Mr. Breger possesses a well-rounded background, having 
worked in multiple areas of the court system. He emphasized that serving as a judge has been 
a longstanding professional goal for Mr. Breger and that his experience has prepared him well 
for the position. He conveyed the view that Mr. Breger would serve effectively on the bench. 
 
 
Boardmember Cattani stated that Mr. Brown performed very well during his interview, 
mentioning that his responses were clear, concise, and direct. He further commented that Mr. 
Brown demonstrated a solid background and relevant experience and indicated he would be 
comfortable supporting his nomination. 
 
 
Chairperson McCalvin concurred, noting Mr. Brown’s confidence during his interview.  
 
 
Boardmember Martinez highlighted that, although Mr. Brown’s primary courtroom experience is 
in another jurisdiction, he maintains strong ties with the City of Mesa, having grown up in the 
community and currently residing in Mesa. She pointed out his understanding that judicial 
decisions extend beyond the courtroom and have a direct impact on the community and noted 
her appreciation for his perspective.  
 
 
Boardmember Rogers commented on Mr. Brown’s enthusiasm for the position and his genuine 
interest in serving in the role.  
   
 
Boardmember Flinchbaugh agreed and added that Mr. Brown demonstrated a strong passion 
for the law. 
 
It was moved by Boardmember Berkshire, seconded by Boardmember Martinez, that Kevin 
Breger, Jacob Brown, and Joan Sinclair be recommended to the City Council as candidates for 
the vacant City Magistrate position, and that Chairperson McCalvin be granted the authority to 
draft a letter to the City Council regarding the recommendation of candidates. 
 
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed: 
 
AYES – McCalvin–Berkshire–Cattani–Flinchbaugh–Martinez–Rogers 
NAYS – None 
 
ABSENT – Durham  
 
Chairperson McCalvin declared the motion carried unanimously by those present. 
 
14.  
Discussion and approval of granting Chairperson McCalvin the authority to review and approve 
the minutes from today’s meeting and forward to the City Council for acknowledgment. 
 
It was moved by Boardmember Berkshire, and seconded by Boardmember Flinchbaugh, to 
grant Chairperson McCalvin the authority to review and approve the minutes from today’s 
meeting and forward to the City Council for acknowledgement.  
 
 
15.        Scheduling of meetings and general information. 
 
Next meeting:

Judicial Advisory Board 
March 18, 2026 
Page8 
16. 
May 20, 2026, 7:45 a.m. - If needed 
City Hall • Study Session Room 
20 E. Main Street 
Adjourn. 
Without objection, the Judicial Advisory Board adjourned at 3:23 p.m. 
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Judicial 
Advisory Board meeting of the City of Mesa, Arizona, held on 1 a• day of March 2026. I further certify 
that the meeting was duly called and held a 
that a quorum was present. 
THEO MCCALVIN, CHAIRPERSON 
vw/la