Cave Creek approves hospital zone change and Phoenix water interconnection agreement unanimously
CAVE CREEK, ARIZONA — July 16, 2019

Cave Creek approves hospital zone change and Phoenix water interconnection agreement unanimously

Cave Creek council approved hospital zone change and major water interconnection agreement while addressing urgent wildfire prevention needs and budget process transparency concerns amid community debate over Spur Cross/Harmony Hollow conservation preservation.

Cave Creek Approves Hospital Zoning and Phoenix Water Interconnection While Wrestling with Wildfire Prevention and Budget-Process Fairness

The Town of Cave Creek's July 16, 2019 regular council meeting delivered three major votes—a hospital zone change, a transformative water-service agreement with Phoenix, and a contested FY2020 budget—against a backdrop of escalating wildfire danger and resident demands for more transparent fiscal governance. The 6–0 approval of both the hospital zone and water interconnection marked significant infrastructure wins, while the 5–1 budget vote exposed rifts among council members over process integrity and personnel justification.

Wildfire Prevention: Resident Eileen Wright's Urgent Call for Emergency Ordinance

The evening opened with resident Eileen Wright delivering what amounted to a public-health emergency declaration. She brought a physical sample of dried globe chamomile—the invasive South African weed now endemic to the Cave Creek area—and held it aloft to illustrate the fire hazard.

"I have brought a sample of something this is the absolute what it looks like now the desert chamomile which was green with yellow balls now is dried and dead and I've learned a great deal about wildflowers fires lately from chief Kratz. Each one of these little balls is equivalent to a thousand match heads that's how flammable this is." — Eileen Wright, resident

Wright reported that Chief Kratz had informed her that fires in the area have moved at speeds up to 45 miles per hour—faster than residents can escape by vehicle. She noted that most man-made fires in the area originate from sparks generated by dragging chains, vehicle trailers, or metal grinding and welding, not cigarettes. Drawing on that analysis, Wright urged the council to immediately adopt an emergency wildfire prevention ordinance and distributed a draft ordinance of her own design.

Town Manager Kerry Cichocki responded with a detailed briefing on existing mitigation measures: the town had published a webpage with defensible-space guidelines, fire-resistant-materials recommendations, and links to a two-page "cheat sheet" handout covering zones and clearing recommendations. She noted the town's participation in a countywide emergency-management program and mutual-aid agreements with neighboring fire departments, and cited recent large fires south of town—including a 300-acre fire on Phoenix's west side.

However, the council did not adopt an emergency ordinance on the spot. Instead, Mayor Robert Morris moved to direct staff to:

Robert Morris proposed placing a future agenda item to coincide with immediate action, targeted for the August 5, 2019 meeting. The motion passed, but no emergency ordinance was enacted that evening—a compromise that left Wright's core demand (immediate adoption) unmet.

Hospital Zone Change: First Reading Approved 6–0 with Three-Year Performance Condition

Town Case Z-19-01 sought to rezone approximately 4 acres south of Carefree Highway, between 52nd and 53rd streets, from Desert Rural Residential (DR-43) to General Commercial (GC) zoning to facilitate a micro-hospital facility with emergency room and inpatient beds.

Project Details:

The applicant's outreach was praised by Council Member Troy Roy:

"I have to say that I'm duly impressed by the due diligence that was done by gamma Jim Burnham by having information sent to all residents within a half a mile of the property by hosting an open house for all of those residents and other people to provide comments on this process. I have to say I don't know how else we could have done a better job in informing our public and informing our community and getting feedback from the people who live in that neighborhood which by the way only 14 people attended and only three people were opposed so I think overwhelmingly if I'm not mistaken the community is in support of this project." — Council Member Troy Roy

However, two residents from nearby 52nd Street raised concerns about traffic impacts. Michael Johnson, a resident of 52nd Street directly south of the project, noted:

"I'm a resident of 52nd Street which is the street straight south and we already get a lot of traffic that's bypassing carefree highway and Cave Creek Road. I think with the increased congestion around that intersection we're only going to get more speeders down our street." — Michael Johnson, 52nd Street resident

Johnson asked for assurances about scope: "I would be kind of interested to know what's definitely in scope what's definitely out of scope" regarding hospital uses.

Julie Goldammer, also on 52nd Street, echoed the traffic concern and raised a second issue: the risk that the parcel would be rezoned to GC but then left as general commercial if the hospital did not materialize.

"I think we need to be concerned a little bit about it not just staying a general commercial zone if they don't move in because I think general commercial in general could be kind of a disaster for that whole area and our neighborhood as well." — Julie Goldammer, 52nd Street resident

Attorney Luke Simms (also involved in town counsel) offered a solution: the council could impose a condition of approval requiring that a building permit for a hospital facility be issued within three years of site-plan approval, or the property would automatically revert to DR-43 zoning. Teman agreed to the stipulation on behalf of the applicant. The council refined the language to reference "hospital facility" or "medical care facilities" with emergency-room services rather than the narrower term "micro hospital," to allow for evolution of the facility type.

Timeline:

Council Member Roy stated:

"I think there's some people in the town they're a little concerned about us changing the zoning on this and then it just becoming whatever a theme park or whatever the heck." — Council Member Troy Roy

And later:

"I think it would be a wonderful addition to our community I think it's desperately needed I think most of us have to drive a good 20 minutes to get to Thompson Peak I think this will be valuable for all of us in this community at all ages our school system whenever they have emergencies I'm I'm really looking forward to it." — Council Member Roy

A second reading and site-plan approval (currently under review by Planning Department) is scheduled for August 15 planning-commission hearing, with council consideration anticipated in September.

Harmony Hollow Conservation Preservation: Community Campaign Exceeds 400 Members

A 30-acre parcel within the Spur Cross Conservation Area—locally known as Harmony Hollow—became the focus of an emotional and sustained preservation effort. The property, currently for sale, is bounded on three sides by Spur Cross and holds significant ecological and cultural value.

Key speakers and advocates:

Paxton described the property's history: the area had been mined in the 1800s, with cyanide extraction and removal of large hardwood trees. Over 150 years, the riparian corridor had naturally restored itself, becoming home to diverse wildlife (Gila monsters, coyotes, javelinas, fruit bats) and regrown cottonwoods and sycamores. She cited economic research showing that Colorado mountain towns (Pine, Evergreen) earn $4–$12 in tourism revenue for every dollar spent on preservation—a case for conservation as economic investment, not merely environmental idealism.

Paxton acknowledged that the Desert Foothills Land Trust, the primary preservation vehicle, was constrained by non-profit appraisal rules: it could not pay more than the appraised value, and appraisals in 2016 and 2018 fell short of the owner's asking price. She called on the town council, local attorneys, and the community to explore creative solutions—tax incentives, partnerships, or state or county funding.

Vicki Preston confirmed the Land Trust's dilemma:

"As a non-profit we are bound by the appraisal. The appraised value we were able to in 2016 to work with the land owner to get an appraisal and unfortunately we just were missing on the numbers." — Vicki Preston, Executive Director, Desert Foothills Land Trust

Preston added:

"So we're kind of as a Land Trust a little bit stuck and that's why what Melissa is doing is so important because she's getting moving the ball forward where we can't right now." — Vicki Preston

Linda Bear testified to the property's beauty and rarity:

"I have lived my life in the Sonoran Desert and have been an avid hiker for about forty seven years now. I have seen a lot of the desert one day my dog and I headed out to find the end of spur crossroad when I stopped when I topped the hill above the site now known as the jewel of the creek I skidded my car to a dusty stop as my mouth dropped wide open stretched out before me was the most stunning view of a pristine in classic Sonoran Desert riparian valley I have ever seen." — Linda Bear, resident

Tom Seligson, a long-time volunteer and original Spur Cross ranch advocate, spoke in depth about the preservation effort's history and the value of volunteerism in Cave Creek:

"Everything that's ever been good about Cave Creek or ever worked has not really started in Town Hall it has started with the volunteer." — Tom Seligson, community volunteer

Seligson framed the preservation as the final piece of a 20-year jigsaw puzzle:

"Harmony Hollow by local definition but how could not be squirt cross ranch it is the perimeter and border of the watershed that comes through the community that frames all of the more than 2,000 acres that have been preserved for more than twenty years to not preserve it would be like not having cappuccino after an expensive dinner it's been a great experience that we need to finish off this last effort." — Tom Seligson

Hilda Huntress, a 40-year resident and concierge-resort manager, emphasized emotional connection and tourism value:

"I have lived in Cave Creek probably in 40-plus years I have brought up two children here. I have enjoyed this area I live off of spur crossroad for many years I have written all over spur cross I have enjoyed the jewel of the creek with my dog and I have brought many visitors here. I have European relatives that come here and enjoy this but I've also been a concierge resort for 15 years so I have said excuse me I have sent many tourists of all sorts from I'm gonna say from our wonderful restaurants to our hiking areas to our horseback riding facilities so I just want to say that this property means a lot to me." — Hilda Huntress, resident

Outcome: The council expressed strong support for preservation but took no formal vote or immediate action. The sentiment was clear: council would explore partnerships, creative funding, and partnerships with the Land Trust and community advocates. No resolution was passed, but council members affirmed commitment to investigation and collaborative problem-solving.

Phoenix Water Interconnection: Landmark 6–0 Approval Hailed as "Grand Slam Home Run"

Resolution R2019-13 authorized the Town Manager to approve an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between Cave Creek and the City of Phoenix for water-service interconnection, backup service, and underground storage and recovery of the town's Colorado River Compact (CAP) water entitlement.

Project Details:

Town Manager Kerry Cichocki and water-system manager Shawn outlined the agreement's three core components:

  1. Water delivery: Phoenix will treat and deliver a portion of Cave Creek's CAP allocation through their lines to the town's interconnection point.
  2. Emergency backup: 90 days of water under emergency conditions (eliminating single-point-of-failure vulnerability).
  3. Water banking: Phoenix will annually recharge unused CAP water, allowing Cave Creek to build long-term storage credits and beneficial use of entitlements otherwise unused.

Shawn described the town's parallel capital project: a three-year study, site acquisition, and design of a booster and reservoir facility to receive Phoenix water and integrate it into Cave Creek's system. The town will mirror Phoenix's four-year timeline, ensuring completion of interconnect infrastructure coincides with Phoenix's water-line extension.

Timeline:

Council Member McGuire stated:

"I have a couple this is a long time coming and it's it's the best work the town's done absolutely it is a grand slam home run for the town it is a dramatic improvement when the facilities are in it's a dramatic improvement in reliability and reduction in the risk the town has for water outage it may not be quite as apparent but having Phoenix as a backup it's like building additional tanks because instead of having one day of time before the town is dry we could have two three four five six days depending on the season of the year." — Council Member McGuire

Council Member Roy, who championed the recharge element, said:

"I'm so grateful for the work that you did because it did take a lot of strategy and execution and it's all because of you so thank you it's the first step I look forward to I'm setting up a meeting with c.a.p to investigate other opportunities for recharge as well I know it will cost a lot of money I don't think we can spend our money on anything more important than our water supply." — Council Member Catherine Roy

A public commenter, "Catherine Roy, 5450 Desert Greek Lane," offered:

"This is one of the most beneficial resolutions to come before council and I can't remember the last one and it is largely through the efforts of a couple of people at first I'd like to acknowledge the effort of the town manager she spent days weeks negotiating with the 800-pound gorilla called Phoenix and that is not an easy task second day I'd like to ignore the efforts of Councilwoman Catherine Roy a weird with the town manager to initiate a much-needed recharge program congratulations to both of them." — Public commenter (identified as Catherine Roy, 5450 Desert Greek Lane)

FY2020 Budget Approved 5–1 Amid Process Transparency Criticism

The FY2019-2020 final budget, totaling $30.397 million, represented a 73 percent increase over the prior fiscal year. The vote (5–1, with Robert Morris opposed) approved the expenditure limitation and fund allocations, but the vote masked significant discord over process transparency and personnel justification.

Budget Overview:

Public Comment and Process Critique:

Eileen Wright raised concerns about budget-process fairness:

"Many of us as your residents have always enjoyed the input we got to give as residents to the budget process this year there was none we asked why there was no public input allowed or it was completely excluded and we were told on May 21st 2019 by our finance director at the time there were it was a time factor that is not correct because by law you have until today to approve the tentative budget Arizona law adopted tended to budget a RS 42 one 7101 we had all those three months that we there could have been a meeting scheduled where in the council would have allowed the citizens to have input or to learn about the budget." — Eileen Wright, resident

Wright cited Arizona Revised Statutes §42-17101, arguing that the state law allows a three-month window and does not mandate a specific final-adoption date (since Cave Creek has no property tax). She contended that the exclusion of public budget workshops was not legally necessary but was a choice made by town staff or council.

Council Discussion and Dissent:

Robert Morris voted against the budget and articulated a detailed critique. He accepted many projects as legitimate but objected to the process and personnel increases:

"I felt that the process this year having a subcommittee of the council working on this was flawed I will oppose it in the future I think we all would have had the same information and the same input in the budget process so I think it was a flawed process." — Robert Morris elaborated:

"Now I'm gonna vote against this consistent with my previous vote but the tentative budget we're gonna spend about 17 and a half million dollars this year we're targeting thirty point four million dollars last year I agree that number of these things are needed there's are a lot of legitimate projects in here that need to go forward one of the fine thinks this budget is the number of dollars we've gotten in grants the employees have done a wonderful job there and those show up as increases and those and not that's that's something we all ought to applaud but a 73% increased in a budget much of it in the water area." — Robert Morris core objection was lack of staffing analysis:

"The second one is we have spent millions of dollars on the water system efficiencies already to improve staffing efficiencies let me just list some look at all the lines we've replaced all over Black Mountain and all over town there are more millions in the budget coming forward we've automated the meter reading we used to do it by hand we're putting in SCADA systems which increases efficiency we're spending five million dollars on the cap system supposedly going to improve efficiency and reduce maintenance we put in three or four pump stations those things were all done basis a anecdotal we're going to save maintenance well now the time has come to recognize that where is that recognized in this system when your input in crease in manpower that much it's not now I might still vote in favor of manpower increases personnel increases excuse me if there'd been a demonstrated need to do that and there was not." — Council Member Morris

Vice Mayor Smith also criticized the subcommittee process:

"I'm gonna make a statement here there may be someone in the town that has been a big it's big an advocate of the water system as I am though I'm also an advocate of efficiency and cost control because some day these numbers are going to hit the rates we are headed for a day when we're going to look people in the eye and say we've got to raise rates and that rate increase will be a monument to any bad decisions that have made in the past." — Vice Mayor Smith (noted as participating in budget subcommittee review)

However, Vice Mayor Smith ultimately voted in favor:

"After three and a half hours of discussion and it wasn't really answered so that it just isn't the way to do business fairly for each council person so that's all I have to say first of all there's a lot of things that haven't been done over the years because we were afraid of what it looked like in public to spend money when we had it showing up and we had a little surplus it than in the accounts last July into July last year at the end of last fiscal year there was twenty million dollars in the bank about twelve million or so of it was actually available to the town for spending but not budgeted." — Vice Mayor Smith

Council Member Clancy offered context:

"I've got to agree with Eileen having sat through the process a couple of times this years was flawed and you're absolutely right because I happen to sit at the same time with mr. Robert Morris and the process was with a small group of people who had greater understanding than it was by the time it got to us who were not part of that process." — Council Member Clancy

Attorney Luke Simms defended the public-hearing process but acknowledged the absence of budget workshops:

"I recall multiple public hearings and so there is I think there has been some and that no idea what happened at the staff level but I do know you all approve the tentative budget in a file budget they've been and so it has been public airing I don't know the conversation mayor council fight if I may qualify with some information in the past not always but in the past we have had budget workshops earlier in the budget process those budget workshops we have main open to the public and they we just didn't have the budget workshop sessions that I believe that's what she's referring to." — Luke Simms, town attorney

Council Member Roy's Support (with Transparency Commitment):

Council Member Catherine Roy, who participated in the budget subcommittee, voted in favor but committed to improved process:

"I agree I am also feel very grateful that I was involved in the budget process I attended three days worth of meetings and listened to the staff presentations and requests but I must agree that transparency is critical with our public and our community and that we need to do a better job to have our budget workshops next year we need to start earlier if it was a timing issue we need to involve and give our community and opportunity to voice their opinions and so with that I do support the budget." — Council Member Catherine Roy

Vote Breakdown:

(Individual votes were not read aloud in the transcript; vote count was announced as 5–1 with Robert Morris noted as voting against.)

Other Notable Items

Dark Skies Initiative Community Event: Bruce Ireland announced a Dark Skies community event scheduled for July 22, 2019 at the library, featuring Dr. Jeff Hall (director of Lowell Observatory) and Dr. John Barentine (International Dark Skies Association). The event aims to educate residents on designated dark-skies community standards and is expected to draw a large crowd. Council members and the mayor expressed support for potential designation as a certified dark-skies community in partnership with Flagstaff, Sedona, and Fountain Hills.

Controversies & Context

Process Opacity and Subcommittee Structure: The primary controversy was the use of a small council subcommittee (rather than full council) to develop the budget, followed by limited public workshop opportunities. Residents (Wright) and council members (Robert Morris, Smith, Clancy) criticized the compressed timeline and lack of public input. Attorney Simms clarified that Arizona law does not mandate a specific adoption date (given the town's lack of property tax), undermining the "time factor" explanation given by the finance director. The council committed to earlier, fuller budget workshops next year.

Personnel Increases Without Staffing Analysis: Robert Morris dissent centered on personnel additions (mostly in the water area) that lacked documented staffing studies or demonstrated need. Robert Morris cited prior efficiency investments (SCADA systems, automation, pipeline replacement) and questioned why manpower increased if those systems reduced maintenance burden. He opposed the budget as a protest against process and analytical rigor, despite acknowledging that many individual projects were meritorious.

Hospital Zoning and Regulatory Creep: Residents on 52nd Street (Johnson, Goldammer) feared that rezoning to GC would enable general-commercial uses if the hospital did not materialize, creating a precedent for further development pressure. The three-year performance condition negotiated by Simms and Teman partially addressed this concern, but uncertainty remained about what "hospital facility" means and whether future amendments might broaden permitted uses.

Wildfire Prevention and Deferred Action: Despite Eileen Wright's urgent plea for an emergency ordinance, the council deferred formal code adoption to a future meeting and tasked staff with assessment. This approach—study first, then recommend—may be prudent, but it did not meet the resident's request for immediate action in a season of extreme fire danger.

Duration