Four meetings in one morning, all wrapped up in about an hour.
The Board set $851 million in property tax levies, corrected two school district levy errors, and retreated into executive session for 16 items including litigation, personnel salaries, and RICO expenditures.
Every vote was unanimous 5-0. Every motion was made by Debbie Lesko.
This was a textbook example of how Maricopa County does its fiscal business: public votes on the numbers, private discussion on the mess.
Board Attendance
| District | Supervisor | Special Exec | Special | Informal | Executive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | Kate Brophy McGee (Chair) | Present | Present | Present | Present |
| 4 | Debbie Lesko (Vice Chair) | Present | Present | Present | Present |
| 1 | Mark Stewart | Present | Present | Present | Present |
| 2 | Thomas Galvin | Present | Present | Present | Present |
| 5 | Steve Gallardo | Present | Present | Remote | Present |
Also Present: Juanita Garza (Clerk), Mia Vargas (Minutes, remote), Jen Pokorski (County Manager), Brooke Worcester (Legal Counsel)
Meeting 1: Special Executive (9:00 AM)
Single Item: Board Authority and Responsibility Regarding Property Tax Levy
Presenters: Joe Branco (County Attorney), Michael Hunter (Chief Deputy Treasurer), Jordan Dale (Chief of Staff, Treasurer)
This was a Special Executive session on the tax levy — a precursor to the public vote. No minutes available (executive sessions aren’t recorded).
Meeting 2: Special (9:00 AM)
Single Item: Vote to convene in Executive Session
Procedural. The Special meeting formally voted to enter executive session at 9:00 AM before the regular Executive at 9:30 AM. This appears to be a scheduling workaround to allow early executive discussion on tax levy matters before the public Informal session.
Meeting 3: Informal (9:30 AM) — The Public Business
Item 1: Alhambra Elementary Cash Deficit Levy — $72,550
Approved 5-0 | Motion: Lesko | Second: Stewart
Alhambra Elementary School District #68 requested a cash deficit levy because of a property tax roll “deviation” — a large property’s classification changed, affecting the district’s tax base. The Board followed legal counsel’s recommendation to limit the levy to what was allowable under statute.
The tension: Supervisor Gallardo, participating remotely, asked what recourse Alhambra has. CFO Mike McGee confirmed there’s no appeals process through the school superintendent’s office or PTOAC. Gallardo noted he’d received no outreach from the district. Lesko, by contrast, said she’d received “extensive outreach from Alhambra and their lobbyists and their school district officials.”
What this means: A school district in financial distress tried to get the Board to approve a larger levy than the law allows. The Board followed legal advice and said no. But the disparity in outreach — Lesko flooded with lobbyist contact, Gallardo hearing nothing — raises questions about whose voice gets heard.
Item 2: Levy Corrections for Two School Districts
Approved 5-0 | Motion: Lesko | Second: Stewart
The July 15 levy calculations had errors. Two districts needed correction:
| District | Original | Corrected | Variance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Higley Unified | $75,518 | $72,518 | -$3,000 |
| Kyrene Elementary | $638,612 | $683,612 | +$45,000 |
Contract: C-37-27-002-X-01
The corrections net to +$42,000. The fact that two districts had incorrect levies on the original approval raises quality control questions for the County School Superintendent’s office.
Item 3: FY 2027 Property Tax Levy Resolution
Approved 5-0 | Motion: Lesko | Second: Gallardo
The big one. The Board set property tax rates and levies for FY 2027:
| Entity | Rate (per $100) | Levy Amount |
|---|---|---|
| Maricopa County (Primary) | $1.1463 | $735,915,140 |
| Flood Control District (Secondary) | $0.1428 | $85,901,765 |
| Library District (Secondary) | $0.0462 | $29,660,019 |
| TOTAL | $851,476,924 |
Contract: C-18-27-008-X-00
Constitutional note buried in the resolution: The levy includes desegregation expenses in the primary tax, per the Arizona Tax Court’s ruling in Pima County v. State of Arizona (TX2018-000737). The legislature had tried to put desegregation costs in the secondary tax; the court said that violates the Arizona Constitution. This isn’t small change — desegregation funding affects multiple school districts and hundreds of millions in tax allocation.
Item 4: Adoption of Full Cash Value for Bond Calculation
Approved 5-0 | Motion: Lesko | Second: Galvin
Sets the 2026 Full Cash Value used to calculate bond limits for cities, towns, and school districts. The actual values aren’t in the summary — they’re in an attachment not publicly posted.
Contract: C-12-27-003-X-00
Item 5: Executive Session
Approved 5-0 | Motion: Lesko | Second: Galvin
The Board voted unanimously to move to the Sullivan Conference Room for the Executive session. Meeting adjourned.
Meeting 4: Executive (9:30 AM)
16 items, all closed to the public. No minutes. No transcript. Here’s what the agenda says was discussed:
Legal Advice Items (14)
| # | Topic | Statutory Basis |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | RICO Expenditure Applications FY27 Q1 | §38-431.03(A)(3) |
| 2 | Chief Deputy County Attorney Salary | Personnel + Legal |
| 3 | Chief Deputy Sheriff Salary | Personnel + Legal |
| 4 | Competition Impracticable Procurement for Cooper and Kirk PLLC | Legal Advice |
| 5 | Deferred Compensation Contract Review | Legal + Litigation |
| 6 | Houck v. Maricopa County (2:23-CV-00068) | Legal + Litigation |
| 7 | Lisa Yearick v. Robert Leatham (CV2019-015407) | Legal + Litigation |
| 8 | Constable Vehicle Upgrades | Legal Advice |
| 9 | Board Authority re: Constable Vehicle Upgrades | Legal Advice |
| 10 | American Multi-Cinema v. Maricopa County (TX2022-000365) | Legal + Litigation |
| 11 | Air Quality Emission Reduction Credits | Legal Advice |
| 12 | Air Quality PM 2.5 Non-Attainment Designation Appeal | Legal + Litigation |
| 13 | Release of Judgment Lien (Apache Junction) | Legal Advice |
| 14 | Zoning Violations at 8229 E 6th Ave, Mesa | Legal + Litigation |
Flood Control District Items (2)
| # | Topic |
|---|---|
| 15 | Floodplain Violations at 27626 N 44th St, Cave Creek |
| 16 | Floodplain Violations at 25926 N 153rd Ave, Surprise |
Notable Observations
Personnel in the shadows: Two executive items involve setting salaries for the Chief Deputy County Attorney and Chief Deputy Sheriff. These are among the highest-ranking law enforcement and legal officials in the county. The public will never know what was discussed or decided.
RICO money: Item 1 involves RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) expenditure applications. This is forfeiture money — assets seized from criminal investigations. The Board approves how it’s spent, but citizens don’t get to see the discussion.
Outside counsel proliferation: Multiple items reference external law firms:
- Tully Bailey, LLP (RICO matters)
- Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, PLC (Sheriff procurement)
- Fisher Phillips LLP (Houck litigation)
- Hiser Burggraff Curtis (Air Quality)
When the county’s own attorney’s office can’t handle the workload, the cost goes to taxpayers — but the discussion happens behind closed doors.
AMC lawsuit: American Multi-Cinema (AMC Theatres) is suing Maricopa County over property tax assessment. This is a commercial dispute with a major corporation that could affect tax revenue.
Air Quality under pressure: Two items involve air quality — emission reduction credits and a PM 2.5 non-attainment designation appeal. Maricopa County has struggled with federal air quality standards. The appeal suggests the county is fighting EPA designation.
Vote Record
| Item | Description | Moved By | Seconded By | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alhambra Cash Deficit Levy | Lesko | Stewart | 5-0 |
| 2 | School District Levy Corrections | Lesko | Stewart | 5-0 |
| 3 | FY 2027 Property Tax Levy | Lesko | Gallardo | 5-0 |
| 4 | Full Cash Value Adoption | Lesko | Galvin | 5-0 |
| 5 | Executive Session | Lesko | Galvin | 5-0 |
Pattern Analysis
Motion Dominance: Lesko 100%
Debbie Lesko made all five motions. This continues a pattern observed since at least May 2026:
| Meeting Date | Lesko Motions | Stewart Motions | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-06 | 7/7 | 0 | 7 |
| 2026-05-18 | 2/2 | 0 | 2 |
| 2026-06-10 | 3/3 | 0 | 3 |
| 2026-06-22 | 8/8 | 0 | 8 |
| 2026-08-03 | 1/1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2026-08-17 | 5/5 | 0 | 5 |
Mark Stewart, the nominal Chair for District 1, has not made a motion in any of the recent meetings on record. Lesko, the Vice Chair, controls the procedural agenda entirely.
What This Means
In parliamentary procedure, the motion-maker controls what gets voted on. If one supervisor makes every motion, they effectively control the framing of every decision. The other supervisors can only vote yes or no — they can’t reframe, amend, or propose alternatives unless someone seconds a competing motion.
This isn’t illegal. It’s not even unusual in boards where one member is more experienced or assertive. But in a body with five members, zero motion diversity suggests either:
- Pre-meeting coordination: Decisions are made before the meeting, and Lesko is the designated spokesperson.
- Procedural capture: One supervisor has established de facto control over the agenda.
- Deference: Other supervisors are comfortable letting Lesko handle motions.
The third explanation is the most charitable. The first two warrant closer attention.
Red Flags
| Flag | Severity | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Lesko 100% Motion Control | Medium | All 5 motions made by Lesko; Stewart 0% since May |
| Gallardo Remote for $851M Levy | Low-Medium | Participated remotely for major fiscal decisions |
| Alhambra Dispute / Lobbyist Gap | Medium | Lesko received extensive lobbyist outreach; Gallardo received none; unclear appeal path for district |
| 16 Executive Session Items | Medium | 7 litigation matters, 2 personnel salaries, RICO spending — all hidden from public |
| Levy Calculation Errors | Low | Two districts had incorrect levies on original July 15 approval; corrected retroactively |
| Outside Counsel Dependence | Low-Medium | 4 external law firms engaged across multiple departments |
| Constable Vehicle Upgrade Talks | Low | Potential future expenditure being discussed in executive session |
Citizen Takeaways
- Your property taxes are set. $1.1463 per $100 for the county, plus $0.1428 for flood control and $0.0462 for the library. If your home is assessed at $300,000, you’re paying roughly $4,012 in county-level property taxes before city and school district levies.
- The desegregation tax shift matters. The Tax Court ruled that desegregation costs must be in the primary tax, not secondary. This sounds technical but affects how much of your primary property tax goes to schools vs. other county services.
- $851 million approved with minimal public scrutiny. The Informal meeting lasted about 12 minutes based on the transcript. Five votes, unanimous, done. The bulk of the morning — the Executive session — happened in private.
- School district levies are fragile. Two districts already had errors corrected. Alhambra’s cash deficit suggests financial stress. The levy system depends on accurate property valuations, and when those valuations shift, districts can end up short.
- Motion dominance is a pattern, not an anomaly. Debbie Lesko has controlled the procedural agenda in every recent meeting on record. Citizens should ask: who’s setting the agenda before the meeting, and why isn’t the Chair (Brophy McGee) or the District 1 supervisor (Stewart) making motions?
