2003-2004 ANNUAL REPORT

About the District

Table of Contents
About the District

Before the Flood Control District's inception in 1959,
severe flooding occurred throughout much of the
County, primarily during the winter rains and
summer monsoon. By establishing the District, the
Arizona State Legislature created an organization
charged with keeping County residents safe from
flood hazards and established an independent
funding source for essential projects. Today,
through effective engineering, dam and channel
construction, regulation, and public education,
massive flooding is less of a hazard. The District, as
created, is a municipal corporation and political
subdivision of the State of Arizona. The Maricopa
County Board of Supervisors also serves as the
District's Board of Directors, who in turn receive
counsel from the Flood Control Advisory Board,
comprised of county citizens. Under the state's
enabling legislation, the District is designated as a
special taxing district, and as such, is given the
authority to levy a secondary property tax on parcels
within Maricopa County. Additional revenue are
derived from other sources including the sale or
lease of rights-of-way, fees that developers and
individuals are required to pay to obtain building
permits within Maricopa County and cost-sharing
arrangements with the State of Arizona, County,
cities and other agencies.

1
Chairman's Message
2
Flood Control Advisory Board
2
Flood Control Board of Directors
3
Chief Engineer and General
Manager's Message
4
Mission and Vision
5
District Programs
5
Division Highlights
6 and 7
Financial Commentary
8 and 9
Statement of Revenues and
Expenditures
10
Capital Improvement
Expenditures
11
About Maricopa County
12

Governing Boards
Chairman's Message
The work of the Flood Control District continues to preserve
many of our natural resources while helping to rejuvenate
and revitalize some lost assets. The District has recognized
that rivers are a unique and valued aspect of our
communities and to the industries dependent on water. As
riverbeds in Arizona have become endangered, they have
become less and less inviting.
Through the diligent work of the District, rivers throughout
Maricopa County are being restored to maintain their flood
carrying capabilities and public amenities are being created
and preserved for the enjoyment of future generations.
Through responsible land planning and creative
development Maricopa County residents will be able to
enjoy the many wonders of the native desert environment.
The District has established goals above and beyond the
basics of flood control while maintaining its original mission.
Staff members have been progressive yet fiscally
responsible in their efforts to protect and educate county
residents and resources while establishing multiuse facilities.

Andrew Kunasek
District 3

The County's future is bright as the District works hard to
enhance the environment. Through its environment
friendly projects the District will create multi-use areas that
will be embraced and enjoyed by our great-grand children.

Flood Control District
of Maricopa County
2004 Board of Directors Chairman

Flood Control Advisory Board

Scott Ward
District 1

Melvin Martin
District 5

Kent Cooper
District 2

Hermant Patel
District 3

Paul Cherrington
Salt River Project

Shirley Long
District 4

Tom Callow
City of Phoenix

The Flood Control District Advisory
Board (FCAB) acts in an advisory role to
the Board of Directors on flood control,
floodplain management, drainage and
related matters. The FCAB reviews
planning, operations and maintenance
of flood control facilities, reviews
program priorities and new policies,
and recommends an annual budget to
the Board of Directors that includes a
five-year Capital improvement
program (CIP).
The FCAB consists of seven members.
Five are appointed by the Board of
Supervisors for five-year terms. In
addition to those five members, the
Salt Rover Project and City of Phoenix
appoint representatives who are ex
officio members of the board. The
FCAB members also serve as members
of the District Floodplain and Drainage
Review Boards.

Don Stapley
District 2
Fulton Brock
District 1

Flood Control District

Board of Directors

Andrew Kunasek
District 3

Max Wilson
District 4

The Flood Control District is governed by a fivemember Board of Directors, who also serve as the
Board of Supervisors for Maricopa County. The
Board of Directors exercises all the powers and
duties in the acquisition and operation of District
properties, contracting, and carrying out regulatory
functions as ordinarily exercised by governing
bodies. Board members elect a new chairman each
year. The chairman conducts the meetings of the
Board of Directors, which generally follow the
meetings of the Board of Supervisors.

Mary Rose Wilcox
District 5
3

General Manager’s Message

The Flood Control District of Maricopa County (District) was
formed 45 years ago to specifically address flooding issues
throughout the County. Even though we live in a desert,
floods occur due to the unique character of the desert and
two distinct rainy seasons that occur in the summer and
winter. In fact, some portion of Maricopa County generally
experiences flooding at least once a year.
The District has made a lot of progress over the years, yet
work remains as the County continues to be one of the
fastest growing in the United States. Unprecedented growth
has resulted in development beyond the flood control
structures built during the 1960s and 1970s. As the District
strives to stay ahead of development, it faces new issues and
opportunities.
Historically, the District has focused on building dams, basins
and channels. As we move forward, and our population
continues to grow, we will use dynamic flood education
programs to inform the public of this hazard potential;
identify specific hazard areas so residents will make better
decisions about where to build; and control development
that directly impacts rivers and washes through our
mandated drainage administration and flood plain
management regulation program. As we build flood control
structures throughout the County and within our client cities,
we have been challenged to move away from the traditional
hardened, concrete lined structures, to softer more aesthetic
channels and basins that provide quality open space and
multi-use opportunities coincident with flood protection.
Our challenge is to make the most of all of these programs
while minimizing our costs.
In the finest tradition of the Flood Control District, we will
continue to respond to the threat of significant rainfall, runoff
and potential flooding by expanding our efforts to provide the
public protection; loss of life and loss of property, from major
storm events

Tim Phillips, PE
Acting Chief Engineer and General Manager

4

Mission and Vision
The mission of the Flood Control District of Maricopa
County is to provide regional flood hazard
identification, regulation, remediation, and
education to Maricopa County residents so that they
can reduce the risk of injury, death, and property
damage from flooding, while still enjoying the
natural and beneficial values served by floodplains.
The District's vision is for the residents of Maricopa
County and future generations to have the
maximum level of protection from the effects of
flooding through fiscally responsible flood control
actions and multi-use facilities that complement and
enhance the beauty of our desert environment.
We pledge to be responsive to our clients in an
efficient, effective, and fiscally responsible manner.
We will show personal integrity and professionalism
in all our actions, and display continuous
improvement, innovative thinking, and technical
expertise. We will be stewards of the environment
and the public’s trust, and we will be concerned
about the effects of our actions on not only the
current, but also future generations.

District
Programs
The Flood Hazard Education program
supplies usable information to the public enabling
them to be more knowledgeable about the risks of
floods and flood hazards, and the Flood Control
District projects, studies, and activities that will
affect them.
The Flood Hazard Identification
program provides for the identification of, and
alternative solutions for flood hazards, and flood
warning data to public and private organizations
allowing them to incorporate this information of
flood hazards into their plans within presently
developed and future urban growth areas.

The Flood Hazard Regulation program
offers guidance, direction, and enforcement to the
public so that they can avoid causing adverse
impacts to floodplains, and use their property safely
and in compliance with applicable state and
federal laws.
The

Flood

Hazard

Remediation

program protects members of the public from flood
hazards through structural mitigation and buyout so
that they can live with an lower risk of loss of life or
property due to flooding.
5

2003-2004 Flood Control District Highlights
The District continues to place emphasis on creating more community friendly facilities through cost-sharing
arrangements with cities and developers, and recently completed the first phase of assessing the safety of its 22
dams, which provide critical flood protection.

Digital Flood
Insurance Rate
Maps Project

Division Highlights
Engineering Division
In-house engineering staff, for two jobs that were put out to bid, completed
plans and Specifications for construction:
ACDC Skunk Creek Low Flow Channel, Bids opened July 2003

The federal government has been
struggling for years to keep flood maps up
to date for over 19,000 communities in
the US. Currently more than two-thirds of
the maps are at least ten years old. To
alleviate this problem, Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) created a
partnership program that would use local
resources in the production of the maps.
The District decided to be a Cooperating
Technical Partner (CTP) to FEMA for the
production of Maricopa Digital Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM). The
decision was made in July of 2003 and the
GIS started the generation of new DFIRM
maps with the help of all other divisions.
The project entailed the digitization and
production of over 300 flood insurance
maps, the printing of the maps according
to FEMA specifications and the delivery of
the digital data according to FEMA's
database standards. After six months the
maps were completed and ready to be
distributed to the rest of the communities
in Maricopa County for review.
Since then, FEMA has updated the
standards and changed the specifications
for the maps. The District is currently in
the process of updating the maps to
reflect the new data required by FEMA.
By having the DFIRM, the District will be
providing benefits to a broad array of
stakeholders such as community
planners, local officials, builders and
developers, insurance agents,
companies, lending institutions and
mainly home and business owners that
will have the information available at their
fingertips via the internet.

6

Hawes Road Channel Improvements, Bids opened October 2003

Information Technology
Data Distribution
The District acquires large quantities of information every year for ADMS and
floodplain delineation studies. Data includes aerial photography, topographic
mapping and other information that is received and stored by the GIS
branch.
This data is very valuable to the engineering/consulting community, the real
estate community, college students and regular citizens of Maricopa County.
The GIS branch generated approximately $240K dollars in revenue during FY
2004 by selling and providing this information. We have received many
letters from individual citizens, the consulting community and academia,
thanking the District for the excellent job we are doing providing this
information in a very timely manner and with savings to all people involved.

Lands and Right-of-way
Through the District's Property Management Branch, a comprehensive
enforcement agreement was worked out with the City of Phoenix Parks
Department, Phoenix Police Department, the District, and County
Environmental Services, toward getting control of illegal trespass use of the
Cave Buttes Dam impoundment area. Much of this trespass activity was
creating dust and air quality problems that had placed the District on notice
regarding non-compliance with EPA standards for dust particulates.
Through this collaborative effort, control of the property has been restored.
Vegetation is once again growing. Law enforcement action has deterred offroad vehicle and other non-authorized uses which had previously denuded
surface areas and caused monetary damage to many of the structures at this
project. The success of this pilot law enforcement partnering has surpassed
expectations, and will serve as the model for future efforts at other projects.
The District's Acquisition staff successfully completed the purchase of 72
residences in Phoenix, for the Bethany Home Outfall Channel project. Of the
72 homes purchased, only one home had to be acquired via condemnation,
and that was only because of a complicated title question, not due to any
contention on behalf of the owner. The District also successfully completed
the acquisition of several basin sites in the East Valley which are now being
planned for construction in upcoming years, and are being negotiated with
local jurisdictions for multiple use opportunities.

Web Site

Operations and Maintenance

Web Site General Statistics

Completed 70 percent of work orders issued, a 9 percent increase over
the previous year.

Hits Entire Site (Successful)
Average per Day
Home Page

Planning and Project Management

Page Views
Page Views
Average per Day
Average per Unique Visitor
Document Views

850,670
2,324
16
850,653

Visits
Visits
Average per Day
Visits Referred by Search Engines
Visits from Spiders

282,420
771
360
17,685

One major project was completed:
Carefree Drainage Master Plan June 2004
Three ADMS/ADMP projects continue:
Rio Verde, started May 2002
Wittmann, started April 2003
Buckeye/Sun Valley, started June 2003
Continuing WCMPs
Lower Hassayampa, started May 2004
El Rio, started August 2002
CIP projects currently in Construction:
Doubletree Ranch Road, Phase I & II, started March 2004
Bethany Home Outfall Channel, started January 2003
Laveen Area Conveyance Channel, started August 2004
43rd Avenue/Southern Avenue Basin, started November 2003

Regulatory
Completed four floodplain delineation studies for 450 miles of
watercourses within the county providing the basis to regulate
growth in flood hazard areas
Floodplain Management
Delineations Begun:
New River West Tributaries FDS, January 2004
Lower Hassayampa River Watercourse Master Plan, May 2004
Lower Centennial Watershed Tributaries Zone A FDS, June 2004
Delineations Completed and sent to FEMA:
North Scottsdale FDS, September 2003
Bullard Wash FDS Upstream of Indian School Road, September
2003
Camelback Road Wash FDS, December 2003
Jackrabbit Wash Watershed FDS Phase 2, February 2004
Durango ADMP FDS, April 2004
CLOMR for Bullard Wash Channel Improvements, May 2004
Carefree ADMP FDS, June 2004

12,382,810
33,832
163,482

Visitors
Visitors Unique Visitors
51,260
Visitors Who Visited Once
37,695
Visitors Who Visited More Than Once 13,565

Flood Detection & Data Collection
New ALERT Gauges

4

Gauge Repair Visits

944

Alert Page Visits
Warning Messages & Alerts

19,222
456

Drainage Administration
Inspections Conducted
Miles driven by inspectors
Permits reviewed

14,993
135,517
8562

Total plan reviews completed

815

Drainage complaints

343

Floodplain use Permits Approved

177

Floodplain Clearances Approved

275

Floodplain Management
Delineations Begun

3

Delineations Completed

7

Floodplain Use Permits
Phone Requests
Walk-in Customers
Flood Hazard Info Requests
Flood Hazard Info Notices

177
2451
774
6,137
30
7

Financial Commentary
Management Discussion and Analysis
Improvement in the national and local economy experienced
during the District's 2004 Fiscal Year had a direct and favorable
impact upon the District's financial operations. The Operating
and Capital Improvement Program financial results of operations
showed a significant improvement over that achieved in Fiscal
Year 2003.
Continuing growth in the housing and business development
construction sectors of the economy allowed for increased
District revenue without the need for an increase in the Flood
Control Secondary Property Tax Rate. The increased revenue
was utilized, in part; to continue to fund the District's statutorily
mandated responsibilities of education, regulation, floodwater
mitigation and existing infrastructure maintenance. Evidence of
the District's continuing commitment to its mandated
responsibilities can be seen in increased FY 2004 funding for the
Planning, Floodplain Delineation, Regulation, Maintenance and
Dam Safety Programs. (Please see chart)
The improving local economy allowed the District's Capital
Project Cost Share Partners (municipalities, state agencies,
developers, etc.) to commit funding to several infrastructure
design and construction efforts that had been on hold pending
greater assurance of future tax revenues. Prior District
management of Capital Project planning and prioritization placed
the District in position to participate in these efforts as local
funding became available.

Fiscal Year 2003/2004
Year End Expenditure Comparative
Preliminary & Unaudited
Title/Description

Actual
FY 2004

Flood Warning
$693,981
Delineations
$1,545,990
Regulation of Floodplains
$511,309
Floodplain Hydrology Computer Modeling $308,823
Regulation of Drainage
$1,792,245
Water Quality
$592,395
Hydrometeorolgy
$382,687
District Land Management
$737,635
Planning Studies
$2,795,058
Dam Safety Investigations
$683,031
Structures Maintenance
$3,478,579
Capital Improvement Program
$40,773,261
Other Direct Service Expenses
$1,275,873

$832,029
$1,367,979
$846,703
$95,878
$1,761,223
$424,795
$507,396
$456,682
$5,862,108
$768,680
$4,317,406
$47,719,674
$2,716,390

$55,570,867

$67,676,943

$5,046,140
$1,122,858

$5,091,889
$1,136,127

$61,739,865

$73,904,959

Administration
Control Service Alloc

Total Expenditures
8

Actual
FY 2003

Revenue

Capital Improvement Program

The District recorded Fiscal Year total revenues
of
$70,729,165 was 93.1% of the total
budgeted amount of $75,992,743. The variance
to budget was primarily the result of a District
management decision not to sell certain excess
land parcels during FY 2004, but to retain the
land assets in anticipation of improved real
estate conditions in future fiscal years. This
decision was made with consideration to the
District's forecasted Fund Balance position and
FY 2005 funding requirements.

During Fiscal Year 2004, the District utilized approximately 91% of
the Capital Funds available for the design, construction and land
acquisition required for capital infrastructure projects. This
performance compares very favorably to the 84% utilization rate
achieved during FY 2003. Several major flood mitigating projects
that had been delayed as the result of the sluggish economy were
significantly advanced during the year and are anticipated to carry
into FY 2005.

All other categories of revenue collection closely
approximated FY 2004 budgeted expectations
and showed a significant improvement over the
results achieved in FY 2003. This was
particularly true for Intergovernmental Cost
Share revenue (an increase of $1,922,696) and
License and Permitting revenues (an increase of
($241,014).

Flood Control District
Treasury Fund Balance
The District's FY 2004 ending Treasury Fund Balance of
$30,052,736 represents a decrease of $3,110,854 from the
beginning fund balance of $33,163,590. The decrease is the result
of management's determination to continue an aggressive Capital
Program under favorable conditions while simultaneously
advancing the District's mandated responsibilities. The ending
fund balance of $30,052,854 places the District in a highly
favorable financial position to continue this policy.

Operating Expenditures
FY 2004 total Operating Expenditures of
$26,185,285 represent 95.3% of the total year
budgeted expenditures of $27,484,663. The
95.3% funds utilization rate favorably compares
to the 96% rate achieved during FY 2003 and
continues the District's financial history of
aggressively funding its statutorily mandated
responsibilities. During FY 2004 expenditures
for the Flood Warning System, Planning
Studies, Hydrometeorology Studies,
Infrastructure Maintenance and the Dam Safety
Program were materially increased, while
spending for administrative overhead was held
essentially flat compared to FY 2003.

65.24%
Capital
Improvement
Program

Fiscal Year 2004 Treasury Fund Balance Analysis
Preliminary & Unaudited

FY 2004 Beginning Fund Balance
Add FY 2004 Revenue Collections
Total Funds Available for Operations

$33,163,590
$70,729,165
$103,892,755

Less FY 2004 Expenditures
Operating Expenditures

-$26,185,285

Capital Improvement Program

-$47,719,674

Total FY 2004 Expenditures
Fiscal Year Closing Adjustments
Ending Treasury Fund Balance

5.75%
1.07%
6.38%
0.88%
0.66%
0.75%
2.62%
0.3%
1%
2.15%
1.13%
1.67%
7.47%
2.94%

-$73,904,959
$64,940
$30,052,736

Structures Maint
Dam Safety Investigations
Planning Studies
District Land Mgmt
Hydrometeorolgy
Water Quality
Regulation of Drainage
Floodplain Hydrology Computer Modeling
Regulation of Floodplains
Delineations
Flood Warning
Cntrl Srvc Alloc
Administration
Other Direct Service Expenses

Fiscal Year 2004 Statement of Revenues and Expenditures
Preliminary and Unaudited
FY 2004 Budget
As Revised**

FY 2004
Actual

$51,153,993
$137,612
$1,800,700
$16,554,000
$391,606
$5,954,832

$50,550,367
$152,557
$2,000,338
$16,405,251
$326,565
$1,294,087

-$603,626
$14,945
$199,638
-$148,749
-$65,041
-$4,660,745

$75,992,743

$70,729,165

-$5,263,578

$8,283,976
$324,533
$39,050
$2,409,250
$0

$8,643,777
$226,658
$80,958
$2,287,384
$32,580

-$359,801
$97,875
-$41,908
$121,866
-$32,580

$11,056,809

$11,271,357

-$214,548

$0
-$229,529

$71,058
-$480,147

-$71,058
$250,618

-$229,529

-$409,089

$179,560

$833,605
$144,985
$45,054

$968,606
$153,479
$106,451

-$135,001
-$8,494
-$61,397

Total Supplies Expense

$1,023,644

$1,228,536

-$204,892

Legal Expense
Professional Services
Other Services
Inter-County Service Charges
County Central Cost Allocation

$346,000
$10,513,909
$870,116
$1,696,584
$1,206,127

$456,980
$9,306,807
$782,109
$1,687,465
$1,136,127

-$110,980
$1,207,102
$88,007
$9,119
$70,000

$14,632,736

$13,369,488

$1,263,248

$65,353
$802,450
$133,200

$6,126
$594,544
$124,323

$59,227
$207,906
$8,877

$1,001,003

$724,993

$276,010

27.6%

$27,484,663

$26,185,285

$1,299,378

4.7%

$2,296,000
$5,380,000
$20,863,000
$23,804,000
$301,000

$1,759,692
$6,445,364
$16,905,146
$22,609,472
$0

$536,308
-$1,065,364
$3,957,854
$1,194,528
$301,000

$52,644,000

$47,719,674

$4,924,326

9.4%

$80,128,663

$73,904,959

$6,223,704

7.8%

Variance

Variance
%

REVENUE
Secondary Property Taxes
Payments in Lieu of Taxes
Licenses & Permits
Intergovernmental Revenue
Fund Balance Interest Earnings
Miscellaneous Revenue
TOTAL REVENUE

-6.9%

OPERATING EXPENSE
Salaries and Wages
Temporary Labor
Overtime Pay
Employee Benefits
Other Personnel Expenses
Total Payroll
Personnel Transfers - In
Personnel Transfers - Out
Total Personnel Transfers
General Supplies
Equipment Fuel
Non-Capital Equipment Acquisitions

Total Outside Service Expense
Capital Equipment Acquisitions
Capital Vehicle Acquisitions
Capital Lease Payments
Total Capital Acquisition Expense

TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE

-1.9%

N/A

-20.0%

8.6%

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Force Account Labor
Engineering (Outside Services)
Land Acquisition Expense
Construction
Project Reserve
TOTAL CAPITAL PROGRAM EXPENSE

TOTAL FY 2004 EXPENDITURES

** Budget was amended through the Agenda Item Process during the course of Fiscal Year 2004
10

Capital Improvement Program Expenditures
Project
Central Chandler Area
City Of Scottsdale

Force Acct
Labor

Relocation &
Construction

Total

$904,597

$985,470

$1,813
$10,869

Dam Safety Program

$56,271

South Phoenix Drainage

Land
Cost

$80,873

Town Of Guadalupe

Alma School Drain

Outside
Services

$1,813
$2,904

$29,764

$579,047

$635,318

$1,053
$412,265

$314,499

Paradise Valley, Scottsdale, Phoenix $82,508

$77,293
$109,755

$43,537

$493,631

$94,000

$95,053

$7,555,551

$8,775,946
$159,801

East Maricopa Floodway

$58,279

$5,335,256

$66,500

$5,569,789

Salt/Gila River

$13,814

Arlington Valley

$11,252

$124,115

$985,510

$1,120,877

McMicken Dam

$53,715

$690,053

$3,552

$747,320

$13,814

Buckeye/Sun Valley ADMP

$3,880

$3,880

Cave Buttes Dam

$6,962

$6,962

Skunk Creek Channelization

$60,381

$4,090

$501

$4,438

$2,500

$8,183

$15,121

Skunk Creek/New River

$46,827

$412,951

$4,600

$464,378

Spookhill Watershed ADMP

$16,135

$26,774

$2,137,993

$2,180,902

Southeast Mesa ADMP

$160,767

$151,706

$620,960

Glendale/Peoria ADMP

$44,224

$101,367

$1,500

$147,091

White Tanks ADMP

$159,168

$1,141,759

$2,767,255

$4,068,182

Queen Creek ADMP

$46,224

$503,606

$305

New River Dam

$1,112,457

$2,591,130

$976,450

$3,524,563

$1,526,585

Higley ADMP

$6,624

Adobe Dam ADMP

$1,456

$133,002

$31,558

$304,472

$2,024,287

ACDC ADMP

$153,025

$70,671

$75

$4,921,227

$5,144,998

Maryvale ADMP

$218,584

$1,588,386

$2,517,685

$4,357,797

$8,682,451

$27,568

$98,477

Durango ADMS

Metro ADMP

$949

$1,177,428

$7,573
$134,458
$2,360,317

$126,044

$1,759,692 $6,445,364 $16,905,146 $22,609,472 $47,719,674

11

About Maricopa County
Established: Feb 14, 1871
Population: approximately 3,200,000
Budget: $2.5 Billion (02-03)
Size: 9,226 square miles
4th most populous county in US
14th largest county in the US

Maricopa County, named after the Maricopa Tribe, was
created from portions of Pima and Yavapai counties in
1871. It was the fifth county formed in Arizona, and
eventually portions were used to create Gila and Pinal
counties. In the late 19th century, citizens living far south
of Prescott, the territorial capital and site of the Territorial
Legislature, petitioned for a more local seat of
government. Residents of the Salt River Valley and the
Gila River area wanted a new county in their respective
locations. After weighing both proposals, the Legislature
agreed with the Salt River Valley group and created
Maricopa County.

This metropolitan area is home to the state capitol as
well as high-tech, manufacturing, service and
agricultural industries, 15 institutions of higher
learning, various cultural and professional sports
attractions; major league professional basketball
(Phoenix Suns and Phoenix Mercury), football (Arizona
Cardinals), hockey (Phoenix Coyotes) and baseball's
2001 World Champion Arizona Diamondbacks.
Today Maricopa County measures 9,224 square miles,
21 square miles of which is water. Five major river
systems flow through the county draining an area of
approximately 57,000 square miles, which includes
portions of New Mexico and Mexico. Thirty-one percent
of this area is owned individually or by corporation, and
41 percent is owned by the U.S. Bureau of Land
Management. The U.S. Forest Service and the State of
Arizona each control 11 percent of the County; an
additional one percent is owned publicly. Almost four
percent is Indian reservation land. Parts of western
Maricopa County has 11 designated Enterprise Zones as
well as central and southern areas in the City of Phoenix.

Nearly 60 percent of Arizona's population resides in
Maricopa County, which includes the cities of Phoenix,
Tempe, Mesa, Chandler, Scottsdale, Glendale, Peoria,
and Gilbert. The County has been consistently one of
the fastest growing counties in the country during the
last decade.

Monthly Average Temperatures
Maricopa County enjoys an average annual daily temperature of 72 degrees with 300 days of
sunshine per year.
Jan
Avg temp (F)
53
Avg max temp (F) 66
Avg min temp (F) 41

Feb
57
71
45

Mar
62
76
49

Apr
69
85
55

May
78
94
64

Jun
88
104
73

Jul
93
106
81

Aug
91
104
79

Sep
85
98
73

Oct
74
88
61

Nov
61
75
49

Dec
54
66
42

Aug Sep
1.0 0.7

Oct
0.6

Nov Dec
0.6 0.9

Monthly Average Rainfall
Maricopa County has an average rainfall of only 7.6 inches per year
inches
12

Jan
0.8

Feb
0.7

Mar Apr
0.9 0.2

May Jun
0.1 0.1

Jul
0.8

Flood Control District
of Maricopa County
2 8 0 1 We s t D u ra n g o S t re e t
Phoenix, Arizona 85009
(602) 506-1501
www.fcd.maricopa.gov