[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6217944,"mediaKeyId","3638104-8610b0ca45a1bdc40df8edbd986719c6","parentId",3638104,"title","Mohave County supervisors adopt modified tentative budget, set June 16 public hearings","audioSeconds",6966,"startMs",679000,"endMs",7645000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3638104-8610b0ca45a1bdc40df8edbd986719c6&start=679&end=7645","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3638104-8610b0ca45a1bdc40df8edbd986719c6/thumbnail_679000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6217944/Mohave-County/Arizona/Mohave-County-supervisors-adopt-modified-tentative-budget-set-June-16-public-hearings","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6217944-6272cb899e7efb07562377e54c68afaa/orig.mp4?Expires=1771136831&Signature=EXgRs6JKr4rwVbElh-lxhdC8vPNbQUkuZvF-JW2NomzMqAmm1xydCPibyVlnmWKeD1h9S4Adlke5DMNsflEMPWt4pbY~NA8M~oJ7DjdSOURlkmxJcGNOseIeFMIaUBAY~xQplVw2xLwMAmmf~db~unKCAHKnGPyOnWeAZwuM0TDyxDIWwpAf1~nCpQYIDc~II~nxN0a5LmhKwFegjy-ou31jBhcQouor-jVoKE7YSq1yzum0VYTaf9lT5M9dovBCZ-wJ7-AnLt~z2wHgGORKnCb~TpghcwtS6yOMXVdhcDL8dFc1i5HjKJjRUMsOzWpGaiMKKqbtdiKkMqn96MWsuQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Mohave County, AZ ","date","2025-06-03T08:37:10Z","article","The Mohave County Board of Supervisors on a unanimous vote adopted a modified tentative FY26 budget Wednesday, approving a package based on the manager's recommended option that funds many departmental requests while setting public hearings on the final budget and tax levies for June 16.

The board's action adopted the county's recommended option (Option B as presented by finance staff) but approved a modified Option C spending envelope in motion, adding $113,000 for a previously frozen county attorney position, $15,000 for digital evidence storage software, $600,000 earmarked as a capital placeholder for a District 3 office, and $4 million as a placeholder for a county morgue. Supervisors also asked staff to schedule Truth-in-Taxation hearings for the county's primary property tax rate and the flood control district levy and to hold a special board meeting for final budget adoption on June 16.

The budget presentation opened with county manager Sam Elders and finance director Luke Morneon, who described revenue adjustments since the April budget workshop and outlined three budget options. Morneon told the board the recommended option remains \"structurally balanced\" across a five-year forecast but noted several post-workshop changes: about $200,000 additional PILT revenue, roughly $55,000 from updated special district fee allocations, and a $70,000 transfer from the general fund to public health to partly cover reduced grant funding and keep the county's mobile health unit operating through FY26. Morneon also reported department purchase-order rollovers and said two sheriff capital radio upgrades (about $550,000) had been removed after the sheriff said the office would piggyback on Lake Havasu City's digital radio network for substantially lower cost.

Supervisors pressed staff on contingency, fund balances and specific program costs. Morneon said contingency is being budgeted at 10% of operating expenses and that the county typically taps contingency for unforeseen department needs. Supervisor Lettman questioned larger increases in the IT contingency and supply lines; IT director Nate McDaniel explained those changes reflected fund-balance rollovers and planned multi-year capital needs.

Public health funding and the county's mobile health unit drew sustained scrutiny. Supervisor Gould said she wanted to avoid creating ongoing general-fund obligations with ARPA- or grant-funded programs and asked whether the mobile unit was an efficient use of county dollars. Elders and Morneon said the ARPA-funded portion of operations will be exhausted in coming months (estimated around September), that the public health department is reporting usage monthly, and that staff recommended a one-time $70,000 transfer from the general fund to cover a FY26 shortfall so the unit can continue operations while departments pursue other grant funding. Morneon warned the grant picture remains fluid.

Courts and law-and-justice funding factored into the debate. The board's modified package included funding (about $430,000 in FY26) for the equivalent of one full-time court commissioner (the board briefed that two commissioners would be phased in across FY26 and FY27), as well as additional detention and deputy FTEs and compensation steps requested by the sheriff's office. The modified option C includes funding to complete Phase 2B of the historic courthouse remodel ($6 million in one-time funding) while preserving an overall five-year plan, the finance director said.

At the end of deliberations, Supervisor Lettman moved to adopt Option C as the tentative budget with the additions described above. A motion to modify and expand that adoption to include the District 3 office placeholder and the morgue placeholder passed; the board then voted in favor and directed staff to return on June 16 for the required Truth-in-Taxation hearings and to present the final budget for adoption.

What happens next: staff will publish the tentative budget, hold the Truth-in-Taxation hearings and a special meeting on June 16 to adopt a final budget and the county's property tax rates if required. Morneon also said he will bring back a draft fund-balance policy for the board's consideration at a subsequent meeting.

Budget numbers and clarifications presented to the board
- Additional revenue: roughly $200,000 in PILT and about $55,000 from finalized special district fees.
- General-fund transfer to public health: $70,000 to help keep the mobile health unit operating in FY26.
- Sheriff radio capital requests removed: roughly $550,000; sheriff reports an alternative solution costing about $15,000 in equipment.
- Contingency calculation: budgeted at 10% of operating expenses.
- Modified Option C recurring shortfall: staff estimated a FY26 recurring structural deficit of roughly $1.5'$2.1 million before and after last-minute adjustments; adopting the modified motion uses portions of surplus fund balance as placeholders for one-time projects.

Officials quoted
- \"Our recommendation has not changed. It's still that option B that was presented in April,\" Finance Director Luke Morneon.
- \"We are pursuing other opportunities [for grants]. Having funds in the budget just as a placeholder is good,\" County Manager Sam Elders.

Ending: The tentative budget moves the county into a final budget phase with public hearings on June 16. The board's additions reflect a mix of immediate operational concerns (attorney staffing and digital evidence storage) and larger, one-time capital placeholders (District 3 office, courthouse work, a possible morgue) that will require subsequent procurement and formal contract awards before money is spent.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board of Supervisors Meeting - 06/02/2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Mohave County Board of Supervisors on a unanimous vote adopted a modified tentative FY26 budget Wednesday, approving a package based on the administration's recommendation and setting Truth-in-Taxation and final-budget hearings for June 16.","taxTitle","Mohave County, Arizona","taxId",4183,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6217935,"Board repeals county pet-grooming inspection provisions after public comment",427,9658000,10085000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3638104-8610b0ca45a1bdc40df8edbd986719c6&start=9658&end=10085","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3638104-8610b0ca45a1bdc40df8edbd986719c6/thumbnail_9658000.jpg","/articles/6217935/Mohave-County/Arizona/Board-repeals-county-pet-grooming-inspection-provisions-after-public-comment","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6217935-36227098bd868229a8cb2ce755854670/orig.mp4?Expires=1771136831&Signature=abxSZtIDwYE4qI-dqI885lc1xhTcQI9fzWp0vPweFT80erDz93youQoPFCoZ~IdOXRK0hYOOveshZuyTrfwlEVsAOWcMIWA4HmaD1bW7h8V-y~JhOPsCycDNxnh8wqpwb51RdfwFV4dIE8DOiT5QWq14W9theLUuhi3NLIvCGzuy5O5~C1upTOa37ZP7dmwV-3bI7kBhwhwgqj0SvO7R7a1BT5twleZP~QtDEVt7snLtKZoRqrKSZDc1~R3O5u7QxJFLxBRmlkVabGVPm-2F6lFmbDXEiX1ELwzUOwWhUZ8rJJFcWVcXOIjq9fv2-ntcKBVuCW6h6KgXM8MB92dkcg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Mohave County Board of Supervisors voted Wednesday to repeal parts of a county ordinance requiring annual health inspections or related regulation for pet shops and dog groomers.

The repeal followed public comment from Jennifer Esposito, a longtime groomer and former industry participant, who told the board the county's rules were an \"absurd overreach\" and not tied to human public-health risks in Arizona. Esposito said federal-state public-health programs and market forces already expose poorly run businesses, and she urged supervisors to end the county's inspection requirement.

Supervisor Gould moved to repeal the ordinance provisions; another supervisor seconded the motion and the board approved it. During discussion, board members noted the state does not require county-level regulation of grooming shops and that the county first adopted the regulation in 2007. Supporters of repeal said building code and routine business licensing already cover many structural and safety concerns and that social media and consumer reviews provide additional accountability.

The board did not replace the county rule with new countywide requirements; the action removes the local inspection requirement as written in the ordinance language under review. County staff confirmed the measure is not a statewide mandate and that municipalities and the county had discretion over local regulation.

Quote from public comment
- \"This is the only place I have ever seen such an absurd overreach, an unnecessary overreach of government,\" Jennifer Esposito said during public comment.

Ending: The repeal takes effect as an ordinance change; county staff will update department procedures and the public-facing code documents to reflect the change.","The Mohave County Board of Supervisors voted to repeal portions of a county ordinance that required regular health inspections for pet shops and dog groomers. Supporters of the change said the regulations were an unnecessary public-health overreach not mandated by the state; opponents had urged keeping consumer protections.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6217939,"Supervisors press staff on flood-control projects, Horizon 6 water booster and Mohave Valley septage repairs",357,2110000,2467000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3638104-8610b0ca45a1bdc40df8edbd986719c6&start=2110&end=2467","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3638104-8610b0ca45a1bdc40df8edbd986719c6/thumbnail_2110000.jpg","/articles/6217939/Mohave-County/Arizona/Supervisors-press-staff-on-flood-control-projects-Horizon-6-water-booster-and-Mohave-Valley-septage-repairs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6217939-041ae54d1e9f1572febaaf515746aa98/orig.mp4?Expires=1771136831&Signature=oAoi4v3djd7pUgj-FM29nRvOxrn8zjLsglDyHsQDEvuE3XXdO7iETDCA4KJZje4~zVyptr-9X43JttphpdXa5lTLV4i4-3Ifx9eTKjme~zHlDhENKGP8QvIsWSnClxsTkHR8on8Tn1Pnmve7mM3KujBLNvTXo-FFSWhsvPkyb8JtT9PZTM2ueFZ28zsUMJcxVLbGfAyAwJ1xwXW7-OFzHBtcgnog98uZqrgwoMZDbnqiHcoiM6gZE2vWmCQJ9wrkhevS0ofHdWbFPKZEr~W1n2oPkOJ9wTKPDtwbt1oYJs-~Dc6F8afBBzKcpUeDAuyJmsITaFLOrIOuBVUOwG9t7A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Mohave County supervisors pressed Public Works and finance staff Wednesday about a string of water and flood-control projects across the county, including congressional funds for Bank Street drainage, a proposed repair to Mohave Valley's septage ponds and pending upgrades to the Horizon 6 booster station.

Public Works director Richard Letowski and other staff told the board several projects are driven by long-standing drainage problems and public-safety needs. Letowski said a Bank Street drainage project qualifies for congressionally designated funding and the county received roughly $1.25 million for the work; staff said the flood control district would cover any additional local match required to finish the project.

The board discussed a county request for roughly $450,000 earmarked to respond to potential storm remediation across the Golden Valley/Lake Havasu/Bullhead areas. More detailed design work, staff said, would justify individual expenditures, and the flood control district fund is the normal revenue source for these regional projects.

Mohave Valley septage ponds: staff told the board the county has had septage-disposal ponds at the Mohave Valley landfill out of service since April 2020; repair and reconstruction work for those ponds was presented to supervisors at an estimated cost staff described in the meeting as about $2.45 million. Public Works said private haulers have been using a private facility in the area and hauling to Sarbat Landfill as alternatives, which increases hauling distances and costs. Staff also noted the U.S. EPA and state statutes require a public entity to provide septage disposal and that local disposal needs to be reasonably convenient to property owners in the county.

Horizon 6 booster station: board members queried the Horizon 6 water fund (an improvement district supported by a monthly maintenance/reserve fee remitted through Lake Havasu City). Public Works reported a period-10 (April) fund balance of $142,254 and annual revenues of roughly $80,000. Staff noted a prior WIFA grant budget placeholder had been carried into FY26 despite the county not receiving the earlier award; they said the FY26 budget would be adjusted if the grant does not materialize. Supervisors raised public-safety concerns: parts of Horizon 6 now meet pipe capacity requirements but the booster station lacked sufficient redundancy and modern pumps to provide required fire flows; staff said additional pump work remains necessary.

Funding and legal constraints: staff emphasized that projects within improvement districts (such as Horizon 6) cannot be funded from the county general fund unless the board dissolves the district or changes financing; the normal local funding sources are district rates, assessments or grants. Several supervisors urged staff to pursue federal and state grant opportunities and to consider whether private operators could be required to assume certain construction obligations under landfill operating contracts.

Next steps: staff will revise the FY26 budget to reflect current grant outcomes where applicable, prepare procurement packages if grants arrive, and return to the board with more refined cost estimates and financing options for the septage-pond reconstruction and Horizon 6 booster work.

Quoted
- \"Bank Street drainage problems have existed for decades'... we applied for and received 1.25 million dollars [congressionally designated funds],\" Public Works staff.
- \"The septage ponds went inoperable in April of 2020... we've spent $90,000 generating the design and it's almost ready to go out for bid,\" Public Works staff.

Ending: The board requested updated cost and grant-status reports and asked staff to return with procurement options; supervisors stressed the importance of pursuing grants and clarified the county's limited ability to use general-fund money inside special improvement districts.","Board members pressed Public Works and finance staff for details about flood control projects, septic septage ponds at Mohave Valley Landfill, and Horizon 6 booster upgrades; staff said some costs are eligible for federal or state grants while statutory limits restrict use of general fund money for improvement districts","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Mohave County supervisors adopt modified tentative budget, set June 16 public hearings

Board repeals county pet-grooming inspection provisions after public comment

Supervisors press staff on flood-control projects, Horizon 6 water booster and Mohave Valley septage repairs