BISBEE — Ann English, who was elected to the Cochise County Board of Supervisors last November and was recently sworn in, is receiving additional responsibilities.

Ann English was named chairwoman of the Cochise County Board of Supervisors. (Ted Morris•Wick News Service)

On Tuesday, she was selected by the three-member Board of Supervisors to serve as its chairwoman, effective at the board’s Feb. 10 regular meeting.

Supervisor Pat Call nominated English for the chair. She accepted. Current chairman Richard Searle seconded the nomination, and the vote was unanimous.

English, who serves District 2, succeeding Paul Newman, and the other supervisors had plenty of other business on their plates Tuesday morning with a 2 1/2-hour, 21-item-agenda, meeting.

One of those items was the supervisors’ unanimous adoption of an ordinance that amends fee schedules for the county’s Planning and Zoning and Highway and Floodplain departments.

Planning Manager Susana Montana explained that complex projects, such as the Bowie power plant, require many hours of review by county staff.

An example of the new fee schedule for the Highway and Floodplain Department’s drainage reports, under the amended ordinance, establishes a fee of $350 for the first and second reviews, and then $116 for each subsequent review, by county staff.

A new traffic impact analysis fee will cost applicants $320 for the first and second reviews, and $107 for each additional revision. Montana said this fee schedule takes into account the hours spent by the county’s transportation planner in analyzing the traffic impact of a development project.’’

English asked if there was any sort of sliding fee, based on the size of subdivisions.

“We’re encouraging the small builder, the small subdivider, and so for 27 lots or less there is no fee for the initial application for review of the plat,” Montana said.

English said, “I do believe that this is a cost of doing business. … It really should pay for itself. That shouldn’t be a tax burden, I do not believe.”

Montana added, “The approach you’re taking is that it’s a user fee …”

Searle said it appears to be reasonable to pass on outside costs when using an outside consultant, which the county does. But he expressed concern over the “open-endedness of what those fees may be.”

The supervisors considered establishing a cap on fees but ultimately did not, because some projects are open-ended in their complexity. The supervisors instead directed the county administration to inform applicants more effectively how the fee schedules will be applied.

Mike and Helen Jackson from the McNeal area made comments during the public hearing, as they have in the past, protesting what they feel are the county’s improper procedures. However, Britt Hanson, the chief civil deputy county attorney, advised the supervisors they are acting in accordance with the law.

The Jacksons, whose views are fully articulated on their Web site at littlebigdog.net, feel that taxes collected by the county should suffice in paying for services rendered by the county. The Jacksons feel the county government should not be assessing and increasing fees on top of taxes.

“If the department has a deficit, do what people do. Examine your expenses and see what can be cut,” Helen Jackson said in her comments that also included this remark: “My real worry is, who’s next on their list? If you allow them to charge developers for staff time that’s already covered by taxes, how are you going to say no if they come back to ask to charge applicants, individual applicants, for staff time spent in meetings going over house plans? I oppose the increased fees. Thank you.”

Call and Searle echoed English’s earlier comments.

“The county should not subsidize development,” Searle said.