The San Tan Valley Town Council met Sept. 2 for a full agenda. Here is everything the council did.

The sales tax is not active yet, and some businesses are charging it anyway

The council adopted its tax rates on July 1 in two 6-1 votes, with Councilmember Gia Jenkins opposed, but the Arizona Department of Revenue has to actually switch the tax on, and it has not. The town hopes that happens in October.

Until it does, Town Manager Brent Billingsley told residents that a town sales tax appearing on a San Tan Valley receipt right now is not valid, and to go back to the vendor and ask for the money back.

The 6.7 percent shoppers already pay is legitimate and stays. That is Arizona's 5.6 percent state rate plus Pinal County's 1.1 percent. Once the town's 2.25 percent takes effect, purchases inside town limits will total 8.95 percent, while unincorporated San Tan Valley stays at 6.7 percent. Billingsley said claims of a 10.3 percent rate, or that San Tan Valley has the county's highest sales tax, are wrong; at 2.25 percent the town's own rate will be the second lowest in Pinal County behind Casa Grande.

Business owners inside town limits should expect two letters, one from the town covering the coming business license process and one from the Department of Revenue.

The town owns zero parks, for about 100,000 residents

Billingsley told the council the town began with zero square feet of parks, zero facilities and no land at all. He put real numbers in front of the room: land now runs $120,000 to $150,000 an acre, a single lighted ballfield $600,000 to $850,000, a community center $20 million to $50 million. The town projects $37 million in general fund revenue against a $55 million budget.

Rather than buy land it cannot afford, the town is pursuing four tracks: practice space from Florence Unified and J.O. Combs, early talks with the Boys and Girls Club of Pinal County, dual-use flood basins including HOA-owned ones, and agreements with large developers.

San Tan Valley Little League told the council it has 388 players this fall, up 30 percent, expects about 500 in the spring, and keeps getting displaced from fields. "I'm not gonna put these kids on a dangerous field," league president Ali Day said. "It is the safety of our children."

The council gave staff unanimous direction to proceed.

The town says it has never had a Flock camera agreement

Billingsley devoted part of his report to correcting what he described as incorrect information circulating on social media over the previous two weeks, and Flock was first.

"The town has zero agreements with Flock," he said. "We've never had an agreement with Flock, nor have we had an application provided to us from Flock."

Flock Safety sells automated license plate reader cameras. Two separate approvals would be needed before one could go up inside town limits: a contract approved by the council, and a right-of-way use agreement allowing cameras on town property. The town holds neither, and has never received an application.

The cameras residents have seen belonged to the Pinal County Sheriff's Office, and that arrangement is ending. SanTanValley.com reported on Aug. 5 that Sheriff Ross Teeple had ended the county's Flock camera contract, citing Fourth Amendment concerns, and that the county Board of Supervisors then voted 4-1 on Aug. 12 to issue a 180-day termination notice ending Flock's permission to keep equipment in county rights of way. SanTanValley.com also reported on PCSO's earlier briefing to this council on the cameras. Billingsley said the Sheriff's Office's right-of-way permits have been revoked and that it will let its Flock contract expire rather than renew it.

The sheriff's office contract for the cameras ends Sept. 29. The separate right-of-way agreement, the one the county board voted to terminate, ends on a 180-day notice.

Oliver also asked the town to get ahead of the technology in its own code. She left a proposed ALPR ordinance from Chandler with the town clerk for the town attorney to review, and suggested that if Flock does not want its mounting poles back, the town keep them and hang banners on them. No council action was taken on either idea.

And the rest of the meeting

Development impact fees are coming out at essentially zero

The council held the second and final public hearing on the town's proposed development impact fees. No action was taken. The adoption vote is scheduled for Oct. 7, and if it passes the fees take effect in December 2026.

The unusual part is the number. State law requires the town to offset impact fees against construction sales tax it already collects, and the council adopted a 5 percent construction rate. Once that offset is applied, the fees come out to essentially nothing for both parks and transportation. Town Manager Brent Billingsley told the room the town would "probably have the lowest development impact fees in the state of Arizona." Areas with mobile homes are the exception, because those are not treated as traditional development.

He gave two reasons beyond the offset. A parks impact fee is very hard to justify when the town owns no land. And impact fees can only be charged for new impact beyond existing conditions, which means the town is on the hook for the service gap that already existed. To collect $2.5 million in parks impact fees, he said, the town would first have to put up $19 million of its own general fund money. Transportation is different, because the town inherited Pinal County's roads at incorporation and already owns millions of dollars of that infrastructure.

A legislative change this year also bars the town from collecting on anything Pinal County had already approved here, which is 6,000 to 7,000 lots, for 24 months.

Zero is not necessarily permanent. The council asked staff to revisit the numbers after 24 months of sales tax data, and it can shift the balance between the construction tax rate and impact fees at that point. If the construction rate came down from 5 percent to 2.25 percent, Billingsley said, the impact fee would work out to about $6,167 per single-family home.

One council member explained why the split matters: construction tax revenue goes into the general fund, while impact fee money has to be spent on the specific type of project it was collected for.

Jeannie Stockton, a Johnson Ranch resident, asked whether the town could use a construction sales tax as a lever to control the pace of growth. The response from the dais was that the town does not want to over-regulate construction, and that the two rates balance out to the same dollars either way.

Council adopts a pre-approved housing plan program, and says so out loud that it is mostly a formality

The council voted unanimously to adopt Resolution 2026-53, creating a pre-approved housing design program. The town is complying with Senate Bill 1529, now in state law at A.R.S. 9-461.19 and 9-461.20, which requires every Arizona city and town to maintain an online library of pre-reviewed residential building plans.

The program covers single-family homes of 800 to 2,000 square feet, duplexes of 400 to 1,000 square feet, triplexes and accessory dwelling units.

For a resident who owns a lot outside a subdivision and wants to build on it, the pitch is real savings. Billingsley described the normal path as hiring an architect for roughly $15,000 to $20,000 and then waiting through a review that typically runs about 45 days. Picking a plan from the library instead means paying the designer a fee, permit fees at about half the custom rate, and a permit in roughly a week.

He was also candid that the program may not amount to much. Designers have to build the plans and pay for review on the hope that someone eventually picks theirs. When he checked Maricopa, Queen Creek, Casa Grande and Fountain Hills, none had any plans posted at all.

"I don't think at this point these programs have been as successful as the legislature had hoped," he said.

A council member put it more plainly, calling it appeasing the statute. Any plans in the library still have to comply fully with town zoning and design code, and they expire whenever building codes are updated, which happens roughly every six years. A typographical error in the resolution's statutory reference was corrected before the vote.

A water and sewer line protection offer may reach your mailbox, and it will carry the town's logo

The council heard a presentation from HomeServe on an optional service line protection program, took no vote, and directed staff to bring the marketing agreement back at a future meeting.

If the town signs on, residents would be able to buy coverage for external water lines at $5.99 a month, external sewer lines at $8.49, and in-home plumbing at $10.99. The external plans pay up to $12,000 per incident and the in-home plan up to $3,000, with no deductibles, service fees or limits on claims, plus up to $1,250 toward a hotel and $500 toward pet boarding if a repair leaves a home without water or sewer. The company said it works with more than 1,300 municipalities nationally and 30 in Arizona, and that it would build a local, vetted, background-checked contractor network with a four hour call-back and 24 hour on-site target.

There would be no cost to the town, which would receive 10 percent of premiums annually plus $39,000 spread over the first three years. The agreement would run three years with one-year renewals, would not be exclusive, and could be terminated for convenience. Marketing is by direct mail, capped at three campaigns a year, with the town approving the materials.

The detail that drew the sharpest comment was the envelope. Mailings carry the town's logo.

Karen Oliver, a Pecan Creek South resident, told the council about her mother in Michigan, who saw the City of Royal Oak's logo on a similar offer and signed up. "She said I have to buy this, and she paid for 18 months and she didn't need it," Oliver said. "I'm not saying I'm against it or for it. It's just that we need to consider our elderly population."

Karen Mooney, another resident, raised the related question of what liability the town takes on by lending its logo to a private company's offer.

Vice Mayor Tyler Hudgins was more direct. "So just so I can know that I heard you right, you're going to help our residents, we don't pay anything, and you're going to pay us," he said. "All right, sign us up."

Regional group makes its pitch, and confirms an EPCOR change

Craig McFarland, CEO of Pinal Partnership and a former Casa Grande mayor, presented on the regional economic development group. It has about 210 member businesses reaching roughly 2,000 people, and its members include every municipality in Pinal County, the county itself, and utilities including SRP, APS and EPCOR.

Two upcoming events were named. A First Friday breakfast on Sept. 11 in Eloy will feature the ASU Decision Theater's county transportation model, a scenario tool built over the past year. An October breakfast will take on data centers, with experts on both sides.

McFarland said the transportation plan's eventual goal is a countywide vote in November 2028, after constituent input.

He also confirmed that EPCOR is now a designated water provider, which removes the requirement to hold a 100-year water certificate for continued growth. He noted that the Arizona Department of Water Resources has not issued such certificates in roughly eight years, and said much of the area's growth would not be happening without the designation.

McFarland apologized that San Tan Valley is not on the group's current map and said a new one is being produced. The council noted its dual membership in the Phoenix East Valley Partnership and directed staff to pursue the collaboration. A council member requested a Phoenix East Valley Partnership presentation as a future agenda item.

Also from the meeting

A November ballot item on spending limits. Billingsley clarified that the Permanent Base Adjustment question going to voters in November is not a tax increase and does not authorize new debt. It removes a spending cap set by state law in 1980 based on the area's 1979 population and expenditures, back when, as he put it, there were "a few dairy cows out here and a lot of cotton plants." Cities and towns are still required by law to balance their budgets.

The town now owns its brand. The town received trademarks for its branding, including its colors, fonts and logos, meaning others need permission to use them.

A Sheriff's Office reorganization for San Tan Valley. Billingsley said Pinal County Sheriff Ross Teeple will shortly announce a reorganization to benefit San Tan Valley, naming two lieutenants as command staff here. More significantly, the Sheriff's Office is creating a dedicated San Tan Valley criminal investigations unit, rather than sharing investigators across the whole county.

Regional committee seats filled. The town confirmed its membership in Central Arizona Governments and named its representatives to the regional council, management, transportation advisory, environmental planning and economic development strategy committees.

Training for new council members. The League of Arizona Cities and Towns holds a new elected officials training session on Dec. 10, 10:30 a.m. to noon.

The incorporation anniversary. A celebration pancake breakfast is set for Saturday, Sept. 19, from 7 to 10 a.m., with Rural Metro assisting. Billingsley also corrected the town's own timeline during the meeting break: the incorporation vote was held in August 2025, and the canvass on Sept. 17, 2025 is what made it official.

Consent agenda. Items 7a through 7e were approved in a single motion with nothing pulled for separate discussion.

Requests left with staff at the call to the public. Mooney asked how many schools are closing and under which option, and what role the town would have over school grounds; said the fields at a school near her home are overrun with gophers with no pest control; and asked the council to review the sign code, calling the current five square foot limit too small next to what large retailers have, and the 20 foot driveway length standard, which she said does not fit a standard pickup truck. Stockton suggested the town look at buying one of the closing schools for use as an administrative building, and asked for the status of the Hancock development and the Highway and BlackRock rezoning, both approved with a multi-residential component, which she has been told stalled over water. A council member requested updated numbers on the town's multi-housing inventory, including how many units are rented or leased.

The council convened into executive session on three items and adjourned.

We will keep following the council. Watch SanTanValley.com for what happens with the impact fee vote, the service line agreement and the parks partnerships.