From approving a new downtown library site purchase to passing a new $250 million affordable housing proposal and revisiting a high-profile internal investigation, the Pima County Board of Supervisors tackled a packed agenda at their latest Tuesday meeting.
We broke down the three major developments into summaries.
1. The board votes for more money for affordable housing initiatives
The board of supervisors passed two agenda items spearheaded by District 2 Supervisor Matt Heinz, meant to address affordable housing in the county.
To funding boost over the next 10 years, the county will consider a proposed annual increase of up to three cents on the primary property tax rate above the previous year’s allocation — to begin in fiscal year 2026/27. The measure passed 3-2, with Democrat District 1 Supervisor Rex Scott and Republican District 4 Super Steve Christy voting against.
The new policy is projected to raise more than $200 million over the next decade, for the construction and preservation of affordable housing and homelessness prevention efforts.
The goal is to support the development or preservation of approximately 12,235 affordable housing units — roughly one-third of the county’s projected need for households earning below 60% of the area median income.
This proposal follows the ECOnorthwest Housing Needs Assessment which showed that 116,000 additional housing units are needed over the next 20 years “in order to overcome more than a decade of underproduction, meet the demands of those who are currently housing-cost burdened or experiencing homelessness, and meet the demands of future population growth as well.”
Scott said he didn’t vote for the increase as he preferred to wait until fall, after receiving the draft plan from the Regional Affordable Housing Commission.
“We can, in November, right before we start talking about the overall county budget, also talk about how to fund the plan that is going to be presented to us by the Regional Affordable Housing Commission,” he said.
A second proposal which would increase the affordable housing budget by $3.5 million for a total of $8.5 million, passed 4-1, with Scott voting in favor and Christy against.
The meeting memo specifies that the $3.5 million “is the amount of additional revenue for Affordable Housing ($3.5M) that would have been raised by an additional 3 cents in the Primary Property Tax Rate this coming year, but this proposal keeps the property tax rates exactly where they are as per the Adopted Tentative Budget adopted by the Board of Supervisors on May 20, 2025.”
That means the additional $3.5 million will come from savings, extra revenues or budget reductions — not a property tax increase.
The full $8.5 million will be allocated through the Regional Affordable Housing Commission, which will provide two sets of recommendations to the Board: one in early fall on how to split the funding between gap financing and housing retention programs, and another by Jan. 31, 2026, detailing specific gap-funded projects.
Christy, who opposed both measures, asked for a substitution of the $3.5 million proposal, which would redirect the county funds to the Regional Affordable Housing Commission, with listening sessions.
“I’m still just amazed that we’re going to have a 10-year plan here designed to go over that amount of time. No public hearing, no public input, no public discussion. I think that as a great injustice to the people that are paying for this whole program,” Christy said.
District 5 Supervisor Andrés Cano spoke in support of both proposals.
“I want to underscore that the taxpayers are already paying for the lack of affordable housing. We are paying by not investing in affordable housing,” he said. “Through law enforcement efforts, through our hospitals, by employers, when people lose their jobs, they can’t get to work. When they lose their homes, they don’t get to work. Schools, our mental health, social service agencies, we are already paying for it.”
Cano emphasized that taxes would not increase in the current fiscal year.
District 3 Supervisor Jennifer Allen agreed with Cano.
“They are not asking for handouts. They’re asking for a fair shot at a stable home, a livable neighborhood, and a future rooted in dignity,” Allen said.
2. The county buys a new library location
The Pima County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 to buy the Wells Fargo building in downtown Tucson for $6.2 million to serve as the new main library.
The bank is located at Alameda Street, across Stone Avenue from the aging Joel D. Valdez Main Library. The total costs to renovate the current building was estimated at $86 million. County officials reasoned it would be more economically feasible to invest in a new library location.
Christy was in vocal opposition to the purchase and blamed the current library’s condition on the “type of use it’s getting.”
“It seems to be a gathering place for homeless people, transients, all sorts of folks that are really not there to use it what it its intended purpose was, and that was for a library and meeting rooms,” he said during the discussion, adding that he’d hate for the Wells Fargo building, with its “storied and elegant past,” to face the same fate.
Christy said he’d rather the county use a building they already own.
County Administrator Jan Lesher said they looked at repurposing other county-owned buildings downtown but concluded that the bank location purchase remained the best option.
“When we looked at the build-out costs, ultimately it was determined that this would be more cost effective not only in those initial tenant improvements that would be necessary but in ongoing operations and maintenance in the organization,” Lesher said at the meeting.
Allen spoke in favor of the purchase.
“I actually think putting the library in an important historic building is a perfect fit. It is a way to ensure that the integrity of the building and the history is valued and lives on,” she said.
The purchase of the Wells Fargo building comes after nearly a year of debate over the future of Pima County libraries set off by a draft report published last summer. In it, library administration said local libraries were facing a staffing and facilities crisis, and proposed closing multiple library branches.
Among the issues noted was the physical state of the Valdez Main Library, a downtown landmark for 34 years. The building, owned by the city of Tucson, is in desperate need of repairs, the report said. Among them are a need for new elevators, a new roof and a new heating and air conditioning system.
Even as the purchase moves ahead, questions remain about how quickly the move will be made. At the Library Advisory Board’s May meeting, board member John Halliday asked when serious problems at Valdez like sewage leaks and elevators breaking would be addressed.
“Even if the library moves to the Wells Fargo building it seems like it’ll be several years from now, so will we go ahead and make some improvements at the current main library or what?” he asked.
Library administration said they had $1 million for repairs for the Valdez building this fiscal year that could be used to address those needs.
Read more about the purchase here.
3. Arizona attorney general to review the Pima County Sheriff’s Department’s internal investigation
Lesher told the board she plans on sending a letter to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office taking them up on their offer to assess an internal affairs investigation by the Pima County Sheriff’s Department. The investigation looked into the sexual assault of a deputy by Sgt. Ricardo Garcia during a work holiday party in late 2022.
Heinz, who put the discussion item on the agenda, said they’ve received more than 100 pages of material from the sheriff’s department’s investigation.
“This is an issue of great concern. We have a duty to ensure all county employees are safe,” Heinz said.
Lesher said she’s working on redacting names before sending the letter with the report attached. Once it’s sent, Lesher said, it becomes public record.
She added that they hope to send the letter by the end of the day June 3.
In September 2023, the Pima County Deputy’s Organization claimed that Sheriff Chris Nanos failed to launch an investigation into how the leadership in the victim’s department handled the sexual assault. The union representing sheriff’s department employees said Nanos was slow to start the investigation and then put it on hold.
Those claims led to the supervisors requesting the Arizona Attorney General’s Office to look into the matter. After an 11-month review, the office found no criminal wrongdoing in Nanos’ investigation, but attorneys with the state office listed four possible violations of the department’s own policies.
Those possible violations include:
- That all members of the department are required to take appropriate police action to aid a fellow officer who is exposed to danger. “This policy may have been violated by command staff who were notified of the situation and/or responded to the scene, but provided limited or no assistance to department members dispatched to the scene.”
- All officers must act in an official capacity whether on or off-duty if they witness an incident that requires police action and time is essential to preventing a crime. “This policy may have been violated by a sworn police officer who was off duty, but on scene, and failed to immediately report the incident or observed conduct to emergency dispatch or on-duty department members.”
- Officers must submit supplemental reports to document their involvement in incidents involving law enforcement activities. “This policy may have been violated by command staff who were on scene or received direct reports from witnesses involved in this incident but failed to document their involvement with reports.”
- Unless otherwise approved by a supervisor, all property and evidence must be packaged and secured as evidence prior to the end of an officer’s shift. “This policy may have been violated by a detective failing to properly secure evidence with the Property and Evidence Unit prior to the end of the detective’s shift.”
Reporters John Washington and Yana Kunichoff contributed to this article.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print.
