🔍 Political Maneuvering and Climate Alarms: April Highlights from Pima County Board
A look at how budget discussions reveal political priorities, affecting marginalized groups amidst looming economic threats.
😽 Keepin’ It Simple Summary for Younger Readers
👧🏾✊🏾👦🏾
At a recent meeting, leaders in Pima County made important decisions that could affect the community. They talked about adding a new leader, Andres Cano, without residents voting for him. People are worried about lots of things, including the weather getting hotter 🌡️🔥, meaning more super hot days 🌞. Some leaders want to fix these problems by spending money wisely 💰, like helping people find affordable homes 🏠. They're also using funds to help those affected by opioids 💊, but they need to be careful to make sure the money is spent wisely. Community members can speak up and work together 🤝 to ensure leaders do what's best for everyone.
🗝️ Takeaways
🤝 Power Dynamics: The appointment of Andres Cano to District 5 raises concerns about political lineage and the lack of democratic input.
💡 Public Tensions: Community frustrations, exemplified by Mr. Score's fervent outcry, highlight underlying societal and safety concerns.
🏥 Economic Warnings: Federal and state cuts threaten Pima County's safety nets, affecting healthcare and services for vulnerable populations.
🌍 Climate Crisis: Increasing extreme heat days pose health risks, demanding urgent mitigation for disadvantaged communities.
🌿 Environmental Delays: Long-standing environmental justice issues, like the Spanish Trail property, require immediate action.
📊 Budget Priorities: Competing fiscal concerns expose the political values of supervisors, emphasizing public health and justice reform.
⚖️ Justice Initiatives: The INVEST program shows promise in reducing recidivism, though limited in scope relative to systemic needs.
💊 Opioid Settlement: Strategic allocation of funds aims to combat opioid impacts but requires clear metrics for accountability.
🚨 Housing Crisis: Urgent affordable housing discussions are delayed, highlighting procedural hurdles against bold proposals.
🤔 Community Action: Residents are encouraged to engage, form coalitions, and ensure transparency for effective governance.
Power Shifts and Backroom Politics: A Critical Analysis of the April 15 Pima County Board of Supervisors Meeting
The April 15, 2025, Pima County Board of Supervisors meeting revealed a concerning mix of political calculation, looming economic challenges, and institutional decisions that will reshape our community for years to come. From the calculated appointment of a new supervisor to the budget discussions directly affecting marginalized communities, this meeting's implications stretch far beyond the walls of the county building.
Political Reshuffling: The Andres Cano Appointment to District 5
In one of the meeting's most consequential moments, the Board appointed Andres Cano to represent District 5, filling the seat vacated by Supervisor Grijalva. This appointment wasn't merely administrative—it represented a carefully choreographed political calculation that will reverberate through future election cycles.
Supervisor Allen nominated Cano, who focused on his experience rather than his commitment to the democratic process: "I think right now at this particular moment, we need somebody in the seat who can hit the ground running with experience around the board of supervisors, experience around the complexities of budget, and experience navigating difficult moments and difficult times."
Supervisor Heinz quickly seconded the motion, emphasizing urgency over deliberation: "We have a lot facing us right now... what our job is right now, what this board must do is seat someone who is ready at this moment with as much knowledge as possible to be voting on a budget in a few weeks."
Chair Scott completed the unanimous endorsement, noting: "When I spoke with Mr. Cano, it was as if I was engaged in dialogue with someone who was already a supervisor. Such was the extent of his extensive knowledge and obvious preparation."
The vote was swift and decisive: 3-0 in favor of appointing Cano. Within minutes, Judge Danielle Liskey administered the oath of office, transforming Cano into a supervisor without a single vote being cast by the residents he now represents, nor a commitment to not run for re-election with his new “incumbent” advantage.
In his acceptance speech, Cano traced his political lineage through the corridors of power: "15 years ago, I entered this very hearing room as a 14-year-old intern in the County's Summer Youth Employment Program... then in the County Administrator's office, and finally, the District 5 office under Supervisor Richard Elias."
He paid tribute to Elias, saying the former chair "shaped not just my career, but my heart," and thanked Supervisor Grijalva for her "trailblazing leadership." The appointment continues a pattern of political lineage in District 5, raising questions about democratic accessibility and the power of political networks in determining who governs our communities.
The Silenced Public: Call to the Audience Reveals Anger and Frustration
The call to the public featured one particularly agitated speaker, identified only as "Mr. Score," whose angry testimony revealed the simmering tensions beneath the surface of county politics. His grievances centered around Tesla vehicles being vandalized and what he perceived as the Board's failure to condemn such actions.
"What you guys need to bring attention to is these clowns out attacking Tesla's vehicles, other people's property," he declared. "They have no right to come by and try to vandalize my Tesla. And this is going to lead to people getting badly hurt."
His testimony quickly escalated to more alarming rhetoric: "As you bring criminals into our county, you let our roads get destroyed, you're destroying our community. You basically become the definition of the enemy within. What am I going to do when you guys let lawbreakers go loose? What if one of them hurts, rapes, or kills one of my grandkids?"
Mr. Score complained about microphones being cut off "for being offensive when we're getting attacked," and claimed that "people creating jobs in the city have their places vandalized, destroyed." He concluded with a threat: "If anybody wants to go vandalize the Tesla, I'll point them towards mine. Because that'll be the last one you vandalize."
Economic Warnings: Federal Cuts Threaten Vulnerable Communities
Senior Advisor Davis delivered a sobering report on federal and state actions affecting Pima County, revealing the growing threats to our community's safety net. Her data showed an alarming acceleration of federal executive actions: 124 executive orders issued (up from 112 recently), alongside 192 legal actions (up from 178).
Of particular concern were the impacts on Arizona's Medicaid program (AHCCCS), where a $122 million state budget shortfall in the Division of Developmental Disabilities threatens services for 60,000 Arizonans, including approximately 10,000 in Pima County. Davis revealed that 25-30% of Pima County's population relies on AHCCCS coverage, with 37% of those enrolled being children aged 0-18.
The federal workforce has experienced dramatic reductions, with U.S. employers announcing over 275,000 job cuts in March 2025 alone—a 205% increase compared to the same month last year. Davis reported that 80% of these cuts are tied to "Department of Government efficiency actions."
"Department of Labor's data suggests that claims for unemployment is as high as it was in November of 2021," Davis noted, adding that the unemployment rate has increased from 4% to roughly 4.2%, rising slightly every month. This economic pressure falls hardest on marginalized communities, yet the Board's response remained procedural rather than urgent.
Climate Crisis: "One Extra Month of Summer" Threatens Public Health
Melissa Davis presented a stark climate outlook for Pima County, revealing that 2024 was the hottest year on record, with an average of 35 extra days of 100+ degree weather compared to historical norms. This represents a 75% increase in extreme heat days, equivalent to "one extra month of summer."
"Between 2019 and 2024 alone, every year we had an extra week of 100-degree days," Davis noted. "It's really important to bring it to light now because October through December is the fastest warming quadrant of the year."
This climate reality disproportionately impacts those without access to consistent air conditioning, secure housing, or adequate water, primarily low-income communities and communities of color. Yet the Board's climate action plan, while comprehensive on paper, lacks the urgency and funding commitments that the crisis demands.
Environmental Justice Delayed: Spanish Trail Property Remediation
Supervisor Heinz raised an urgent environmental justice issue concerning the abandoned Spanish Trail property in South Tucson: "I mean, we don't have Visit Tucson here, but holy crap, it looks terrible. It's in my district still. I've been at this for over four years and working closely with Mayor and Council in the City of South Tucson."
Heinz described it as "a public health and safety risk" that was "just on fire the other day," advocating for up to $1.5 million in one-time funding to remediate this long-standing blight. The property represents how environmental hazards concentrate in historically marginalized communities, with Heinz noting that government entities can request EPA mitigation funds for asbestos removal that private owners cannot access.
Administrator Lesher acknowledged that county staff "have been talking with folks in South Tucson for several years now," yet little tangible progress has been made. This exemplifies how environmental justice concerns in lower-income communities remain perpetually "under study" while more affluent areas see swifter remediation action.
The Board unanimously approved directing staff to develop a plan for remediation, but the years of delay underscore systemic inequities in how environmental hazards are addressed across our county. South Tucson residents deserve more than studies and plans—they deserve immediate action on dangers that wealthy communities would never be expected to tolerate.
Budget Battles: Competing Priorities Reveal Political Values
The budget discussion exposed each supervisor's political values and priorities. Supervisor Heinz advocated for holding the Sheriff's Department budget steady rather than expanding it: "I would really like to see, unless it's impacting public safety... that we kind of not increase that department budget and work to improve retention and other efficiencies."
He noted the department's massive size—"it's like 27% of the amount of dollars that we can manipulate at all"—with a base budget of $189 million and 1,500 employees. This challenge to the carceral system's growing budget represents a crucial debate about resource allocation in our community.
Supervisor Heinz further prioritized public health funding, specifically for the Office of Noncommunicable Diseases: "The vast majority of people who are dying, our community is dying from cancer, heart disease, complications, and diabetes... We have a health department that relies on approximately half of the health department's budget on grant funding. It is under siege and under attack."
Supervisor Allen emphasized protecting the health department against "attacks on our funding, which is an attack on the health, the safety, the well-being of our community and our economy." She also prioritized housing needs to prevent another foreclosure crisis, supporting workforce development, continuing eviction prevention work, advancing the transition center to reduce jail populations, and strengthening air quality enforcement.
Newly appointed Supervisor Cano prioritized "employee classification and compensation," housing, neighborhood infrastructure, and open space conservation. He also emphasized maintaining a robust Board Contingency Fund, noting: "I believe that we can make a fiscally responsible decision to perhaps modify that amount, but we also, I believe that's a perfect opportunity for us to invest in some of these cuts that are going to be coming our way."
Criminal Justice Reform: The INVEST Program Shows Promise Amid Systemic Failures
A presentation on the INVEST program revealed promising outcomes for breaking cycles of justice involvement through targeted interventions. This randomized control trial exceeded its 20% recidivism reduction target by about 55%.
Matt Paite, a program leader, explained the program combines forensic peer support (using people with lived experience), the Freedom Management curriculum (helping participants understand their thoughts and behaviors), and critical time intervention (capitalizing on "sentinel events" like jail booking to promote change).
Key findings showed that successful participants:
Experienced 20 fewer days in jail
Had two fewer rebookings
Achieved greater stability in the community
83% attended at least 20 Freedom Management classes
"Successful INVEST participants are expensive to us. Unsuccessful participants are expensive to the community," Zach Stout noted, explaining that while successful participants cost about $8-10,000 to serve, unsuccessful participants cost the community approximately $22-23,000 in jail costs alone for a six-month period, not counting court costs, patrol costs, and treatment.
Despite these promising results, the program remains limited in scope relative to the massive scale of our carceral system. Paite noted that "about half of the jail has a co-occurring condition" of mental health and substance use diagnoses, and "about a quarter of the jail at any point in time would be within our target population." This represents thousands of individuals who could benefit from this approach but remain trapped in a punishment-oriented system.
Opioid Settlement: Following the Money
Dr. Theresa Cullen presented a plan to deploy $8 million in opioid settlement funds across seven priority areas:
Youth Prevention: $1.5 million
Peer Navigation: $2 million
Transitional Wraparound Support Services: $1.5 million
Law Enforcement Co-Response: $1 million
Mobile MAT Services: $800,000
Innovation: $800,000
Sobering Center Implementation Plan: $100,000
PCHD Staffing: $330,000
These funds represent a fraction of the estimated $24 million settlement pool, with potential total settlement funds of $80-90 million if pharmaceutical companies don't declare bankruptcy. Dr. Cullen emphasized that Pima County had strategically combined its settlement funds with the City of Tucson, City of South Tucson, and Marana.
While the Board unanimously approved the plan, critical questions emerged about metrics and accountability. Supervisor Allen pressed for specific success measures: "Is it possible, feasible, conceivable to come up with like three metrics, four metrics... So that there is some yardstick to know whether we're moving the needle?"
Supervisor Cano highlighted concerns about inclusivity: "Does the City of Tucson have its own bucket of money or is this the regional allocation?" and "The applications for this $8 million would be nonprofits only. So tribal entities, if jurisdictions have a program that works right now, the proposal in front of us is just community-based nonprofits, right?"
Housing Crisis: A Bold Proposal Deferred
In a potentially transformative proposal, Supervisor Heinz introduced a policy to dedicate three cents per year of property tax rates to affordable housing over the next 10 years. The plan would generate approximately $207 million to address the affordable housing shortfall, potentially creating more than 12,000 units.
"During my time on the board, I have supported borrowing money to help accelerate road projects. I get that. That's an important priority too. But at the same time, as a hospital physician, I know people are struggling. My patients are struggling with their housing," Heinz argued, highlighting the human cost of the housing crisis.
Citing a study showing a need for 36,000 affordable housing units over the next decade, Heinz argued that current funding of $5 million annually is woefully insufficient: "I sometimes see our ER colleagues and sometimes myself... have to discharge people to the street because they're struggling with housing."
Despite initial support for the concept, supervisors voted unanimously to continue the discussion to the May 6th meeting. This delay on urgent housing needs exemplifies how procedural caution often trumps bold action on our most pressing crises, leaving vulnerable community members without shelter while discussions continue.
International Relations: Workforce Strategy or Corporate Subsidy?
Supervisor Heinz proposed developing a strategic engagement plan with Mexico to address workforce shortages, particularly in healthcare. Based on his recent visits to Mexico City and Aguascalientes, he reported finding "tremendous desire for engagement" despite federal trade tensions.
While framed as addressing critical needs—"hospital systems working together to encourage an effort for us to attract the talent we need so that we don't have our healthcare system, frankly, fall apart in about 10 years or so"—the proposal raises questions about whether importing healthcare workers addresses root causes of staffing shortages like inadequate compensation and poor working conditions.
Vote Breakdown: Who Benefits from Each Decision?
The Climate Crisis Intensifies: Quantifying Our New Reality
The climate data presented at the meeting deserves specific attention, as it quantifies how dramatically our local environment is changing:
2024 was the hottest year on record
112 days of 100+ degree weather in 2023
75% increase in extreme heat days compared to historical norms
"One extra month of summer" each year
An additional week of 100-degree days each year from 2019 to 2024
April and October are becoming "hot months"
The driest winter on record
October through December is the fastest-warming period
This data reveals how climate change is not a future threat but a present reality reshaping life in Pima County, with the heaviest burdens falling on those without resources to mitigate extreme heat.
Demanding Better: How Communities Can Respond
The April 15th Board of Supervisors meeting reveals how deeply political calculations, budgetary constraints, and powerful interests influence our local governance. Yet even amid these structural challenges, there remain opportunities for community action and democratic engagement:
Show Up in Person: Board meetings include public comment periods where community voices can directly challenge official narratives. The current Board clearly responds differently to in-person pressure than to written communications.
Form Accountability Coalitions: Single voices are easily ignored, but organized groups advocating consistently on specific issues—like affordable housing, climate action, or environmental justice—can shift the political equation.
Track the Money: Many decisions, from opioid settlement funds to budget priorities, involve significant public resources. Community oversight of these allocations can ensure they serve public needs rather than political convenience.
Support Independent Media: Mainstream coverage often accepts official framing of issues. Independent journalism that interrogates power dynamics and centers marginalized voices is essential for democratic accountability.
Connect Local to Global: The Board addressed many issues—from climate change to healthcare access to housing—that connect to broader structural injustices. Building solidarity across these struggles strengthens each one.
The power to change our community's direction doesn't reside solely with five supervisors in a county building—it lives in our collective willingness to demand that our government truly serve the people, especially those most marginalized by current systems.
What issues from this meeting do you think deserve more community attention and organized response?
How can residents effectively challenge the political calculations that seem to drive many Board decisions while still advocating for needed resources and services?
The struggle continues, pero juntos podemos más.
Have a scoop or a story you want us to follow up on? Send us a message!
