Pinal County staff outline $190 million facilities package and bond plan; financing would add roughly $11–12 million annual debt service

Pinal County staff and their financial adviser presented supervisors with a package of six capital projects and a preliminary financing road map that would, if the board authorized full funding, rely on tax‑exempt bonds and add an estimated annual debt‑service burden in the low‑to‑mid‑tens of millions.

Deputy County Manager Himanshu Patel described the six projects under consideration: a 125,000‑square‑foot administration building (estimated $73,000,000) to replace older campus buildings; a 30,000‑square‑foot facilities management office and warehouse (about $17,000,000); a 78,000‑square‑foot fleet and radio shop (about $32,000,000); a 28,000‑square‑foot PCSO reentry program addition adjacent to the adult detention facility (about $16,500,000); the juvenile court complex (three stories, ~70,000 square feet, presented at roughly $43,000,000 in the facilities briefing); and a two‑story Apache Junction campus addition (~7,500 square feet, $8,500,000). Patel summarized a combined estimate near $190 million and noted operations-and‑maintenance impacts would add roughly $900,000 annually if all projects were built.

Finance adviser Mark Reeder of Stifel walked supervisors through market context and a sizing example. Reeder said a 30‑year amortization would be a sensible match to durable building lives and estimated a planning interest cost in the mid‑four percent range; using a conservative scenario at 4.75% produced a planning‑level annual debt service estimate of roughly $11 million to $12.2 million for a roughly $190 million financing. Reeder told the board the county has bonding capacity and staff indicated the county budget could support the projected debt service.

Reeder also reminded supervisors of parallel refunding opportunities the county is pursuing: a refinancing of certain road bonds that staff estimated would save roughly $300,000 annually and a pension (ASRS) refunding whose previously communicated net present value savings were discussed in staff briefings. Reeder recommended a statutory public‑notice and hearing calendar: publish notice in early April, hold a public hearing in late April, and consider a May resolution to proceed if the board directed staff to move forward.

County finance director Angie Woods and budget staff said revenue projections being developed for the budget season assume conservative revenue growth and existing levy assumptions; the county would plan debt service to fit within those conservative forecasts and sought to maintain reserves and other fiscal policy goals. Woods said staff will return with detailed budget modeling showing the operational and revenue assumptions necessary to support any bond program.

Supervisors asked about delivery method and cost‑control strategies; staff said the county intends to use construction‑management‑at‑risk and other procurement tools to seek value engineering and reduce construction risk. No formal funding decision was made at the work session; staff asked for direction on which projects, if any, to prioritize and asked the board to confirm whether to begin public‑hearing and statutory‑notice steps for the proposed package.