[{"_1":2,"_122":-5,"_123":-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",[32,75,87,98,110],{"_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",6521111,"mediaKeyId","5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3","parentId",5114138,"title","At a glance: Key Pima County Board votes from the July meeting","audioSeconds",3964,"startMs",3964000,"endMs",-1,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3&start=3964&end=0","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3/thumbnail_3964000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6521111/Pima-County/Arizona/At-a-glance-Key-Pima-County-Board-votes-from-the-July-meeting","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6521111-c4e754bbf878c02bc3fb4e0346d6639c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771065332&Signature=HB5EvEvPVX3-J9YPfRyVxuMOhCW7Gx6BY1qvpRAMvouv3f2Dwb9tYPH3QLkmjZ96VC9ZI3YYoyvZ3jLbbn55ALn7QdcYZx~A~83heqfwWaG2LNaUz~zelWnLHLLGz0DISuv6TSsQ~ZTvEIH0-A5wS-Qu~BZqZcGSVH0FGOrP5mt3jf6nmHFg7MOkQO8GtJFK0xV9zBBsqSxJ-B7XoHVXnIuwuFjiyY~xKM~FW87DCDZ7mD4MWELCDqJW6sGolkQtvBqD2KKt2wu0fpx-WDqsSIVs9Xvlbv5n4ky1vYM0EMVqJ9TORJnFu~K1VXbS4esTMk9TUxXx8Rh4J6qnF4ao4A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Pima County","date","2025-07-02T07:47:13Z","article","Here are the principal formal actions recorded during the Pima County Board of Supervisors meeting (votes and descriptive details taken from the meeting record):

Votes at a glance

- Humane Borders, Inc. Amendment No. 2 — Approve contract amendment to provide water distribution services in remote areas; extend term to June 30, 2026; contract amount $30,000. Vote: 3–1 (Supervisor Christie opposed). (Agenda item 23)

- Job Path, Inc., Amendment No. 2 — Provide workforce development services and job training; extend contract to June 30, 2026; contract amount $600,000. Vote: 4–0. (Agenda item 18)

- DM50 (Davis-Monthan advocate) Amendment No. 1 — Economic development support; extend to 06/30/26; contract amount $50,000. Vote: 4–0. (Agenda item 31)

- Building-code ordinance (Ordinance 2025‑15) — Adopt building and construction code updates recommended by staff and the joint code committee. Vote: 3–1 (Supervisor Christie opposed). (Hearing item 56)

- Impact-fee ordinance and five-year phase-in (Ordinance 2025‑16) — Approve streets facility development fee study and five-year phase-in schedule. Vote: 4–0. (Hearing item 57)

- Memorandum of Understanding extension with AFSCME (addendum) — Extend the meet-and-confer MOU through Sept. 30 while parties meet for a new agreement. Vote: 4–0. (Addendum item 4)

- Chamber of Southern Arizona contract (addendum item 5) — Consideration postponed to July 15 after tied roll-call votes on competing motions about the county’s contribution level and reporting requirements. (Postponed)

Other actions (select)

- Several conditional-use permits, rezoning time extensions and other planning and zoning hearing items were approved on the consent calendar or through hearings; where recorded, those items carried unanimous approval (4–0). (Hearing items 53, 54, 55, 56 and others)

- The board approved the consent calendar and a number of single-item contracts and revenue/lease adjustments (multiple agenda items) by voice vote, generally recorded as 4–0 where a full quorum participated.

Notes on procedure and follow-up

- For items requiring substantive follow-up, staff were asked to return with greater detail: Humane Borders (other county support), Chamber contract (reporting metrics and accounting), Project Blue-related procedures (environmental-review and NDA policies due Sept. 2), and building-code implementation outreach to local builders.

- Actions that were postponed or tied will return to the board at a future meeting, as recorded on the agenda statements.

Ending: The meeting record shows several unanimous technical approvals and a few contested policy items that the board asked staff to revisit with additional detail before a final vote.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Pima County Board of Supervisors Meeting - July 1, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of the board’s recorded votes and next steps from the meeting: contracts for humane-water distribution and workforce training passed, a building-code update was adopted, impact fees were approved with a phase-in, and the county postponed consideration of a large Chamber contract after a tie vote.","taxTitle","Pima County, Arizona","taxId",2570,"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},6521121,"Pima County adopts updated building-code package; homebuilders warn on added costs",486,2903000,3389000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3&start=2903&end=3389","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3/thumbnail_2903000.jpg","/articles/6521121/Pima-County/Arizona/Pima-County-adopts-updated-building-code-package-homebuilders-warn-on-added-costs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6521121-e2ad4358afa40c1830fa0e34222214d6/orig.mp4?Expires=1771065332&Signature=mWCoNYhtp8W-dJDOU3SeIrDKBte~tXaFQpXjzQKKoq6fWjhjKHUCxy9XxWko4YbpebN33MC091aL3ZR7WT0nJv~3anca04D80N4iF5a2VA8XJRsJnI-zbgpXB-Iz7IxccEGmFD9LRj1TKHqrs9RyJlcltWuzQQxfvjC6dtkLi7JIDaIjCgYr-wnJX4vidWqO6yMkrdKEqVd-wy2cRziGmceQiaSsHOXuPxB2HBc3jLwptDS25TvzHiBrIXXMWJd9fGZEAO~A3Yx8Mgh1aMA5d8iNBIaGmE0JD1KKtPUgaPn3mQP-D412X5kjgtBWrblJImnwlBOG9psfzQ4LKITAoA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Pima County Board of Supervisors adopted a building-code text amendment, Ordinance 2025‑15, after public and stakeholder comment and debate.

Staff recommended the county adopt the uniform code package to align county rules with the City of Tucson. Supervisor Cano moved to close the public hearing and adopt the ordinance; the motion passed 3–1, with Supervisor Christie recording the lone dissent.

Industry pushback: The Southern Arizona Home Builders Association (SAHBA) urged the board not to adopt two proposed changes relating to receptacle placement — countertop/work-surface receptacles and receptacles near bathtubs and showers — arguing the changes would add cost and inconvenience for homeowners and should remain optional. At the hearing, SAHBA government affairs director Gerald Lyons said delaying or omitting those items would save roughly $3,000 per home and asked the board to direct staff to continue stakeholder discussion.

Staff response: County staff and code committee members told the board the outlet-placement changes were recommended by the joint code committee and already adopted by the city; staff advised the county remain consistent with those standards. Staff also confirmed that the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) was not being recommended for adoption at this time, accommodating part of SAHBA’s request.

Board discussion and vote: The board discussed the value of uniformity across jurisdictions and the code committee’s deliberations. Supervisor Christie said he could not support the adoption absent removal of the receptacle provisions; Supervisor Allen said SAHBA had a standing seat on the joint code committee and the recommended changes had been vetted there. The motion to adopt passed 3–1.

Outcome: Adopt Ordinance 2025‑15 (building and construction code updates) — approved 3–1; Supervisor Christie opposed.

Ending: Staff said they would continue stakeholder outreach on implementation details; the county will now have consistent code language with the city of Tucson for the adopted provisions.","Pima County adopted a package of building-code updates (Ordinance 2025‑15) to align county rules with the city of Tucson after a 3–1 vote, despite objections from the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association over receptacle-placement provisions.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6521126,"Pima County delays $550,000 contract decision with new Chamber of Southern Arizona after split vote",0,6140000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3&start=6140&end=6140","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3/thumbnail_6140000.jpg","/articles/6521126/Pima-County/Arizona/Pima-County-delays-550000-contract-decision-with-new-Chamber-of-Southern-Arizona-after-split-vote","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6521126-b22f082d175ccb4eb92de41cc7fe3032/orig.mp4?Expires=1771065332&Signature=FZZd7O69R9S3U4xQ0hGb2zyjiRhLI2zfxwm3zZUXpmr0Wb7BPxD1gVK4NZtZcei4OEml19eIWXsMZEN7natIoJsRbZ5SUY7RvDtcr8Ksrzbbmp29XTp1--UlJb6mNwmsE3XpVRILPPVodSW8S1ZtwJ4HQs~BO7m2j~scnJOxKpERd8VUoSdjQFJT6~EOGdjFbWWYA8GVmNd9ugYXLlhNhaQy6W98yTfoea5d3ijm~kdGat308Ze~cjT6cQ437f2cUxq99DKUT7LB5QTC1D-gN2wXflDasbbpVayRkaNIT9qyY7XBcQWcYR5sE9rE7hWTApNeYFoMaph3hdiNThMKNw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Pima County Board of Supervisors postponed a decision on a $550,000 contract with the newly merged Chamber of Southern Arizona after a series of motions and roll-call votes produced a tie.

The contract — a continuation and re-scoped regional partnership formerly funded under Sun Corridor International — was presented for renewal covering July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026. Chair Scott moved approval of the full $550,000 contract; Supervisor Allen offered a substitute motion to reduce the county’s contribution to $300,000 and redirect $250,000 to the county’s economic development department. Supervisor Cano seconded Allen’s substitute. The substitute motion resulted in a tie on a roll call and therefore failed to pass; a subsequent roll-call vote on the administrator’s original recommendation also split 2–2, producing a tie and prompting the board to defer consideration to the next regular meeting on July 15.

Why it matters: The contract is the county’s principal direct financial support for the chamber’s regional economic development work. County staff and chamber leaders described the merged organization as a regional convener that combines business attraction (former Sun Corridor) with the chamber’s small-business and member services. Supporters argued the county’s funding is leverage for a larger private-sector budget and confidential recruitment work; critics on the board said more county-controlled economic development capacity is needed.

Chamber leaders pushed back against cuts at the dais. Chamber president Joe Snell described the county’s award as vital marketing dollars and said the county’s funding represents about one-seventh of the organization’s newly combined budget. “Our clients require confidentiality; if our name leaks, we lose the client,” Fletcher McCusker, the chamber’s treasurer, told the board, adding the county’s dollars are routed primarily to marketing and site-selector outreach.

Board concerns focused on measurable outcomes and transparency. Supervisor Cano said she wanted stronger reporting and accountability measures and praised staff for offering quarterly reporting. Supervisor Allen called for more county-driven economic development capacity tied to local values and asked that some funding be directed to the county’s economic development team.

Legal and procedural notes: County staff and the county attorney's office confirmed nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) are common practice in economic development and typically run through procurement and the county’s business-transactions template. After public discussion — including several residents who raised Project Blue and broader concerns about environmental review and NDAs — the board directed staff to draft policies on environmental impact reviews and on the county’s use of NDAs; both policy items were adopted separately on the addendum (see related article).

Outcome: Original motion (approve $550,000) — roll-call resulted in a tie; action postponed to July 15, 2025. Substitute motion (reduce to $300,000, redirect $250,000 to county economic development) — tie vote, failed to pass. The board instructed staff to return with the contract on the July 15 agenda.

Ending: Chamber leaders said they can provide more detailed accounting of expenditures and are willing to increase transparency; the board postponed final approval to allow staff and supervisors additional time to negotiate reporting and scope details.","Supervisors split over renewing $550,000 in county funding for the newly merged Chamber of Southern Arizona. A substitute motion to cut county support to $300,000 and redirect $250,000 to county economic development tied the board, and the original motion was then postponed to the board’s next meeting.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6521131,"Pima County extends $30,000 contract to Humane Borders to maintain desert water stations",354,3622000,3976000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3&start=3622&end=3976","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3/thumbnail_3622000.jpg","/articles/6521131/Pima-County/Arizona/Pima-County-extends-30000-contract-to-Humane-Borders-to-maintain-desert-water-stations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6521131-22ccafb9741c415e9d2e8177a75a2235/orig.mp4?Expires=1771065332&Signature=l0ukQH4VdkMMUaMI8rswNX8v0P-BQkcAPFA2f6VyEvoFqnF1lnoHCJHg4QsujanLbqvbKPkkorNB~5oeTEcBjEWbK2I1uhhRWZtvhxEN-jFtSAfuHAthpJFX8hR9K8~0S3IVsR6TSBDB4eVAlFRGjmesDWV~6yTsw8lYVLquDPhtEgTQnSvXeKGVSV90H3W3d~SJi-fkLMdFjRjY8KeJYYA7anamBsoh-pS-Y0ZLGdjt2ScxFbP8bwwAtlPye4ZJFriDejs6yR3rhAt87jWtGFElR8JBxHfurHNJhoDH9I9v7F4bQUoAR2M1LiZuR1ctfpDTMT5O3SWidF75cEl7sg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Pima County Board of Supervisors voted 3–1 to amend and extend a contract with Humane Borders, Incorporated to support water distribution services in remote areas of the county.

The board approved Amendment No. 2 to allow continued operation of water stations and to extend the contract term to June 30, 2026, with a contract amount of $30,000. Chair Scott moved the item; Supervisor Allen seconded it. The motion passed with Supervisors Allen, Cano and Chair Scott voting yes and Supervisor Christie voting no.

Why it matters: Speakers and witnesses described the county’s desert as a frequent site of death by dehydration. Humane Borders places and maintains water stations to reduce those deaths; public testimonies at the meeting stressed the program’s role in public health and humanitarian relief.

At the meeting, volunteer Kirk Astrath described the group’s mission and cited the Humane Borders death map, noting over 4,300 deaths recorded in the desert area. “Humane Borders provides life-saving water at stations in the desert for everyone, not just migrants,” Astrath said. Board members and clergy attending called the work compassionate public health work that reduces deaths and medical examiner workload.

Supervisor Allen, who represents a border-area district, framed the vote as a regional responsibility and cited Pima County’s 130 miles of shared border with Mexico when urging support. “Putting out barrels of water is not enough to convince people to leave everyone that they know, their homelands, their families behind. So I support the efforts of Humane Borders,” Allen said.

Several speakers — including Humane Borders board chair Laurie Cantillo and Reverend Jessica Braxton — urged the board to renew and sustain funding. Cantillo said the group receives no federal funding and is powered largely by volunteers and private donations; Braxton called the water barrels “hope made visible” and said the program affirms human dignity.

Board direction and next steps: Administrator Lesher told the board staff would follow up with Humane Borders leadership to outline other county support over the last 25 years and report back. The board asked county staff to provide more detail on existing county support beyond the contract before future decisions.

The vote: Amendment No. 2 (Humane Borders, Inc.) — moved by Chair Scott; second by Supervisor Allen — approved 3–1. Supervisor Christie recorded the lone opposing vote.

Ending: The board’s action keeps the small, volunteer-driven program funded for the coming year while staff prepare a memo detailing broader county support and any additional needs.","The Pima County Board of Supervisors approved a $30,000 contract amendment to fund water distribution by nonprofit Humane Borders, extending the contract to June 30, 2026. The board voted 3–1 after public comments urged continued support for lifesaving desert water stations.",{"_33":111,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":112,"_41":113,"_43":114,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":117,"_51":118,"_53":119,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":120,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":121,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6521116,"After Project Blue debate, Pima County directs staff to draft environmental-review and NDA policies",5606,1580000,7186000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3&start=1580&end=7186","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5114138-d85559e79aed71f20b6d14d3033095a3/thumbnail_1580000.jpg","/articles/6521116/Pima-County/Arizona/After-Project-Blue-debate-Pima-County-directs-staff-to-draft-environmental-review-and-NDA-policies","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6521116-553558b0ce8f632be06ee740506b418f/orig.mp4?Expires=1771065332&Signature=nXBd~0k8dS0QhdeeFyv1lRh3ga3goQ5Q7EM9umjgKaiFnfmhkSS7cXcamvsxLCIcTB~Oy6gsklbIptxYVSjmzcTh1-pzrvFzy8h4T3LRY8DTAsT6CE-XmhRZrDu5MycnuTtVJ3KgZRSgFdB2gUPd41lkMp60S6agRuOsBh1oXa~XRvxLG1JgARVyhs~VPTcxujzP4tbkgvf-mYRKw221u42AKFOaX-KLd213ThN-X0rNmkevQUkuIx032HNt7VLUaPViXcgKWBv7xMABQC2eAN3HP9ul4GHPht6DhKyi0bTRY2JIJuTvAUiEbp892KgwTZ0spp6DJzBskYm-ktUiQw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Pima County Board of Supervisors directed the county administrator and county attorney to develop two policies — one defining when environmental impact reviews should be required for economic-development prospects and a second limiting and standardizing the county’s use of nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) — after public criticism and board debate stemming from a recent confidential-recruitment project frequently referenced in public comment.

Public comment: Multiple residents criticized the earlier handling of a proposed “Project Blue” data center during the meeting’s public-comment period. Vivek Barathan urged supervisors to scrutinize environmental impacts, writing that “the desert is no place for a water-guzzling, energy-draining, heat-generating monstrosity of a data center.” Several faith leaders and nonprofit representatives also urged the board to prioritize humanitarian and environmental concerns in economic-development decisions.

Board action: Supervisor Lehi Allen introduced a motion directing the administrator and county attorney to present proposed policies by the board’s September 2 meeting. The requested environmental-impact-review policy should define triggers for review and who conducts the analysis, and require reviews be made available together with any economic-analysis materials provided to the board. The NDA policy should explain how NDAs reflect the county’s transparency commitments and ensure sufficient public information for policy decisions and public comment.

Rationale and staff response: County staff and legal counsel explained NDAs are a common tool in economic development and are often processed through procurement; staff also acknowledged a need for clearer, formalized procedures. County Deputy Administrator Debonis said internal departmental review already occurs early in recruitment efforts, but the board requested a more formal, documented process that will route environmental and regulatory inputs to the board in writing rather than relying on ad hoc email or verbal briefings.

Vote and next steps: Both directives were approved by 3–1 votes, with Supervisor Christie opposing. Staff were asked to return to the board with draft policies on environmental reviews and NDA use by September 2, 2025. The board also asked that draft policies balance the county’s need to remain competitive for economic prospects with its obligations for transparency and public participation.

Ending: The board’s action formalizes an instruction to staff to create documented, consistent practices for environmental analysis and confidential recruitment agreements; staff said they will consult other jurisdictions and stakeholders while drafting the policies.","Following public concern about a proposed data center project and the county’s use of nondisclosure agreements, the Board directed staff to return with formal policies on when environmental impact reviews are required and how NDAs will be used in economic-development projects. Both directives passed 3–1.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

At a glance: Key Pima County Board votes from the July meeting

Pima County adopts updated building-code package; homebuilders warn on added costs

Pima County delays $550,000 contract decision with new Chamber of Southern Arizona after split vote

Pima County extends $30,000 contract to Humane Borders to maintain desert water stations

After Project Blue debate, Pima County directs staff to draft environmental-review and NDA policies