Council Workshop — Buckeye, AZ
Date: 2026-05-20

CITY OF BUCKEYE
 COUNCIL WORKSHOP
 MAY 19, 2026
 MINUTES

City Hall - 1st Floor / Executive Conference Room
530 East Monroe Avenue
Buckeye, AZ 85326
3:30 p.m.

1. Call to Order/Roll Call
Mayor Orsborn called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.

Members Present: Councilmember Youngker (arrived at 4:21 p.m.), Councilmember Berry,
Councilmember Heustis, Vice Mayor Goodman, and Mayor Orsborn.

Members Absent: Councilmember Beard and Councilmember HagEstad.

Departments Present: City Manager Doug Sandstrom, Deputy City Manager Dave Roderique, Deputy
City Manager Jared Askelson, City Attorney Tosca Henry, Deputy City Clerk Summer Stewart,
Development Services Director Brian Craig, Economic Development Director Suzanne Boyles, Water
Resources Director Terry Lowe, Fire Chief Jake Rhoades, Human Resources Director Cindy
Camarata, Chief Financial Officer Keith Fallstrom, Police Chief Robert Sanders, Community Services
Director Miranda Gomez, Communications Director John O'Halloran, IT Deputy Director Alan
Eubanks, and Aviation Director Scott Gray.

2. Workshop Items

2.A Report and presentation on results from the 2026 Community Survey from Polco
 representatives.
 Staff Liaison: John O'Halloran, Communications Director

Mr. O’Halloran presented information regarding the results of the 2026 community survey.
The National Community Survey is conducted every few years to gather resident feedback and
benchmark Buckeye’s performance against 400 cities nationwide. It covers all aspects of livability,
including mobility, public safety, and economic development. Buckeye’s results improved compared
to the 2023 survey, and the team is presenting this year’s update. Sonya Wytinck, Executive Vice
President of Data and Insights at Polco, explained that Polco specializes in empowering resident
voices and supporting local governments with tools for strategic planning, budgeting, and
performance tracking. She described the National Community Survey as a standardized,
comprehensive tool used to assess resident opinions across ten facets of community livability, which
align with municipal departments. The survey was conducted using a random, unbiased sample of
5,000 addresses, resulting in 487 completed responses and a margin of error of 4.4 percent.
Demographics were weighted to ensure representativity, and an additional open participation survey
was offered, though the main presentation focused on the mail-based responses. Ms. Wytinck
highlighted the value of benchmarking Buckeye’s results against hundreds of other communities,
noting that most ratings were similar to national averages, with some areas below benchmark—such
as health and wellness, culture and arts, and transportation. She discussed the importance of
quality-importance gap charts to identify priority areas, and reported that Buckeye showed

May 19, 2026 Council Workshop Minutes
improvements in many facets compared to previous years, especially in community identity, safety,
inclusion, and economic vitality. Residents rated Buckeye highly as a place to live, felt safe, and
were likely to recommend the city. Transportation, particularly public transit, remained a challenge,
while arts, culture, and education showed progress but still lagged behind benchmarks. Economic
health was mixed, but cost of living and housing options were strengths. The survey results are used
to inform budget decisions, strategic planning, and departmental priorities, and Buckeye can
continue engaging residents through Polco’s platform for ongoing input. Vice Mayor Goodman asked
if there was an opportunity for open-ended responses in the survey. Ms. Wytinck answered that
open-ended responses were not included in the main survey, as more people participate when
questions are prepared, but they encourage follow-up surveys with open-ended formats. Vice Mayor
Goodman asked about the comparison between open participation survey responses and the mail-
based survey. Ms. Wytinck replied that the open participation responses were similar but slightly
lower rated, and there were no significant duplicates between the two samples. Vice Mayor
Goodman inquired about the distinction between transit and transportation in the survey results. Ms.
Wytinck explained that while overall transportation was rated below benchmark, travel by car,
walking, and biking were on par, and the lower scores were mainly due to public transportation. Vice
Mayor Goodman asked about the wording of the question related to open space or natural areas.
Ms. Wytinck clarified that the question asked residents to rate the availability of natural areas. Based
on questions from Mayor Orsborn regarding transit and transportation, Ms. Wytinck replied that the
survey shows that public transit is the only low‑scoring mobility item; driving, parking, walking, and
biking all scored fine. Because residents think of transportation as the whole system, the poor transit
ratings pull down the overall transportation score. Councilmember Heustis asked if responses could
be broken out by area or district and whether there were differences between regions. Ms. Wytinck
representative said Polco tracked districts and could provide that information, noting there was a
good distribution of responses but would follow up with more detail. Vice Mayor Goodman asked
how the City will utilize the community survey data related to City operations and planning. Mr.
Sandstrom explained that the data is used during the budget process, especially to guide spending
priorities such as streets and new construction. The survey is conducted every two years, and the
results are shared with all department heads so they can apply findings relevant to their areas. Staff
also noted they are watching for how new retail—like Verrado Marketplace—will influence future
survey results, and emphasized that the information helps shape decisions and long‑term planning.

2.B Presentation on the findings from the City Hall Envisioning Project (CIP Project No.
 109570 – Task 1), including key themes identified through stakeholder and community
 engagement efforts and surveys, to discuss those findings, and provide direction to
 staff on next steps.
 Staff Liaison: James Braveboy Jr., Project Manager

Mr. Braveboy recapped the City Hall envisioning project by explaining that Council had tasked staff
with exploring what a new city hall would look like, where it should be located, and what functions it
should serve. He described how the Smith Group was selected as the architectural consultant,
emphasizing Buckeye’s unique growth and the need to plan for both current and future needs,
including employee growth and technological changes. Mr. Braveboy highlighted that extensive
community and stakeholder engagement was conducted, including interviews, workshops, focus
groups, and surveys with residents, business owners, and developers. The findings revealed that
residents rarely visit City Hall and prefer virtual engagement for most services, but highly value
community programs and gathering spaces. There was no consensus on the need for a new city hall,
with opinions split between preserving the historic downtown location and concerns about access
and government spending. Business owners and developers also showed low frequency of visits,
with developers preferring in-person meetings but not concerned about location. Based on these
insights, James presented recommendations to make services more convenient through a hub-and-
spoke model, optimize existing space, and prioritize community gathering needs. He concluded that
now is not the right time for a new city hall, suggesting instead to proceed with a facilities master plan

May 19, 2026 Council Workshop Minutes
to address growth, service delivery, and future space requirements, while integrating findings with
concurrent studies on parks and arts. Mr. Braveboy introduced Kerri McShea, Lead Strategist with
Smith Group, Madeline Dunsmore, Lead Strategist with Smith Group, and Chris Ledwith, Project
Manager with Smith Group. Ms. McSheaexplained that their approach to the City Hall envisioning
project began with understanding Buckeye’s rapid growth and future needs, including employee
expansion and technological changes. She described a comprehensive engagement process
involving interviews with council members and the mayor, public workshops across different city
regions, focus groups with diverse perspectives, and surveys of residents, business owners, and
developers. Ms. Dunsmore highlighted that residents rarely visit City Hall, preferring virtual or digital
engagement for most services except community programs, which they value highly. The role of City
Hall is evolving from transactional to connection-based, with a strong desire for community gathering
spaces. Survey responses showed no consensus on the need for a new city hall, with opinions
divided between preserving the historic downtown and concerns about access and government
spending. Business owners and developers also visit infrequently, with developers favoring in-person
meetings but are indifferent to location. Based on these findings, the Smith Group recommended a
hub-and-spoke model to decentralize services, optimize existing space, and prioritize community
gathering needs. They advised against building a new city hall at this time, suggesting instead to
proceed with a facilities master plan to address growth, service delivery, and future space
requirements, while integrating these insights with concurrent studies on parks and arts.
Councilmember Heustis asked whether it would be a good suggestion to purchase land in different
areas of the city now, while it is less expensive, for potential future facilities as Buckeye grows. Ms.
Dunsmore answered that this would need to be worked out in the facilities master plan as part of a
long-term real estate strategy, considering whether to pursue a leased or owned approach,
evaluating potential locations, and prioritizing with other capital investments. Ms. Dunsmore noted
that an owned strategy seems best for the long term, but emphasized the need for careful evaluation
and planning. Councilmember Berry expressed the importance of building a multi-generation
recreation center. Vice Mayor Goodman supported the hub-and-spoke and outpost model,
suggesting that lease space in existing or future commercial developments could be considered.
Based on questions from Mayor Orsborn, Smith Group representatives and City staff responded,
explaining that the timing for needing more space would be determined in the next phase through a
facilities master plan, which would analyze growth rates and service needs. It was noted there was
no strong consensus among residents or employees about consolidating all staff in one location, with
some preferring to keep City Hall downtown and others concerned about costs and priorities like
roads. Survey results showed residents do not want a grand, expensive City Hall but rather
functional facilities and community spaces, and there is mixed sentiment about moving City Hall from
downtown. Most residents rarely visit City Hall and prefer digital services, while developers visit often
and are flexible about location. The Smith Group advised solving immediate administrative space
needs with flexibility for future expansion, possibly purchasing land, and keeping City Hall downtown
for now while planning for eventual consolidation or campus development, emphasizing efficiency,
adaptability, and alignment with community preferences and operational requirements. Vice Mayor
Goodman provided input emphasizing the importance of considering how people work and
leveraging technology when planning future City Hall facilities. He noted that the pandemic changed
work patterns, with many employees working remotely, and suggested that efficiency may not always
require physical co-location. He advocated for a flexible approach, recommending that the master
planning effort should not be constrained by assumptions about physical space needs, but instead
should examine how jobs are performed, what services require in-person presence, and how
technology can facilitate both customer and employee interactions. Mr. Sandstrom stated the next
phase involves developing a facilities master plan that will analyze growth rates, employee needs,
and service requirements to determine whether to build a large, expensive City Hall or more standard
office complexes. The main takeaway is that residents prefer functional, appropriately located
facilities rather than a single grand building, so the plan will focus on placing facilities where they
make sense as the City grows. General discussion was held regarding next steps.


May 19, 2026 Council Workshop Minutes
3. Adjournment.
There being no further business to discuss, Mayor Orsborn adjourned the meeting at 5:02 p.m.

 ______________________________________
 Eric W. Orsborn, Mayor

ATTEST:

_____________________________________
Lucinda J. Aja, City Clerk

I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the Council Workshop held
on May 19, 2026. I further certify that a quorum was present.

_____________________________________
Lucinda J. Aja, City Clerk




May 19, 2026 Council Workshop Minutes