Following the May 6 public safety candidate forum, Tena Dugan submitted written responses on public safety policies, pedestrian and bike safety, privacy concerns, technology, recruitment, retention, and support for police and fire personnel.
The responses below reflect Tena’s written answers to the questions submitted following the forum. They are shared here so residents can review her positions directly and better understand how she approaches public safety, staffing, technology, privacy, and long-term planning.
1. Public Safety Sick Leave and Modified Duty Policies
Question
Police officers are commonly described as “industrial athletes” because their professions require ongoing physical conditioning both on and off duty in order to maintain a higher level of physical readiness to safely perform the essential functions of their job. That training, combined with the cumulative wear and tear of public safety careers, creates increased injury risk that differs substantially from most other city departments.
Currently, the City of Maricopa denies modified-duty opportunities for non-work-related injuries and provides sick leave accruals that are proportionally identical across all departments. Yet public safety employees often require substantially longer recovery periods before returning to full operational duty because of the physical demands and liability concerns associated with their positions.
Do you believe city policies should distinguish between public safety personnel and other municipal employees, who are not exposed to the same occupational risks, when it comes to sick leave accruals and modified-duty policies? If so, what changes would you support, and if not, how do you justify applying the same standards to jobs with dramatically different physical demands and recovery timelines?
Response
I do believe there needs to be a distinction.
Public safety jobs are not the same as other city jobs. Police officers and firefighters have physical demands, liability concerns, and recovery requirements that most civilian positions simply do not have. Treating everyone the same may sound fair on paper, but in practice, it can create an unfair outcome.
A simple example would be a city employee who injures their knee outside of work. If that employee works in an office setting, they may be cleared to return to work quickly because they can sit at a desk, answer phones, work on a computer, attend meetings, or handle paperwork.
That same injury for a police officer or firefighter is very different. They may not be cleared to chase someone, restrain a suspect, climb stairs in full gear, lift a patient, respond to a structure fire, or safely perform the physical duties of the job. They may be capable of doing modified duties, but not fully operational duty.
If an officer or firefighter has a non-work-related injury and is physically capable of contributing in another way, it makes no sense to force them to sit at home and burn through sick leave when modified duty may be available. That hurts the employees, their family, and the department.
I would support looking at what other municipalities in the Phoenix region are doing and using that as a starting point. We should review modified-duty policies, sick leave accruals, and recovery timelines for public safety positions specifically.
This should not just be pushed off until the next MOU negotiation. That may be part of the process, but it should not be the only place this conversation happens. When we know a policy may be creating an unfair situation, we should be willing to look at it and work toward a solution.
Public safety employees carry a different physical burden. Our policies should recognize that.
2. School Zones, Crosswalks, Sidewalks, and Bike Safety
Question
What is a proper action plan to correct the degraded and mismarked school zones and crosswalks and enhance safety for pedestrians and bikes on roadway and sidewalks with considerations for handicap individuals?
Response
That is a great question, and my first question would be: who is currently responsible for monitoring and maintaining school zones, crosswalks, sidewalks, signage, and markings?
If there is already a process in place, then we need to review it and see where it is falling short. If there is not a clear process, then we need to create one.
There is no one-size-fits-all answer because every location is different. Some areas may need repainting. Some may need better signage. Some may need ADA improvements. Some may need better lighting, flashing beacons, sidewalk repairs, or a full safety review.
The first step should be identifying the most serious safety concerns, especially around schools, high-traffic areas, and places where pedestrians, bikes, and individuals with disabilities may be at greater risk.
Just like the city uses a CIP to plan for major projects over several years, this is a perfect opportunity to create a similar tracking plan for pedestrian and bike safety improvements. It should identify the problem areas, rank them by priority, assign responsibility, and include ongoing maintenance.
As Maricopa has grown, some things may have been unintentionally overlooked. We have seen that with missing bike lanes in different areas of the city. That does not mean anyone failed on purpose. It means growth creates pressure, and we need systems that keep up.
So, my answer is simple: review the current process, fix the gaps, identify the most critical areas first, create a long-term maintenance plan, and follow through with regular oversight.
3. Flock Cameras, Data Sharing, and Fourth Amendment Concerns
Question
What can be done to protect citizens’ Fourth Amendment rights from being violated through FLOCK cameras, including concerns regarding data sharing and reasonable expectations of privacy?
Response
This is an area where I believe we must be very careful.
Flock cameras can be an extremely useful tool for law enforcement. They can help identify stolen vehicles, locate suspects, assist with Amber Alerts, and provide information that may help solve crimes. I understand why police departments use them.
But as an elected official, I would also have a responsibility to protect the privacy and constitutional rights of our residents.
My concern is that no city policy can fully erase the fact that this data is collected, stored, and managed through a private company. That creates real questions about who has access to the information, how long it is stored, who it is shared with, and what safeguards are in place.
I would support a full review of the city’s agreement, data retention policy, audit process, and sharing practices. Residents deserve to know how long the data is kept, who can access it, whether other agencies can search for it, whether warrants are required in certain situations, how often the system is audited, and what happens if the data is misused.
I also believe there should be clear public reporting, without compromising active investigations. If a tool is being used in our community, residents should not have to guess how it works.
For me, the answer is balance. We should give law enforcement tools that help them keep people safe. But we cannot ignore Fourth Amendment concerns or reasonable expectations of privacy.
Public safety matters. So does public trust. And once trust is lost, no camera system is going to fix that.
4. Gunshot Detection / Triangulation System
Question
What is your business plan, or budget line item, to support a triangulation system to detect shots fired in the city?
Response
My first step would be to ask whether this is truly the best public safety investment for Maricopa right now. Gunshot detection systems can be useful. They are designed to detect gunfire, identify an approximate location, and alert law enforcement quickly. I understand why this type of technology is worth discussing.
But this is not a small purchase, and it should not be treated like a shiny new public safety tool we buy just because it sounds impressive. Before I would support creating a budget line for it, I would want to see the data.
I would also like to know exactly what system we are talking about. Some gunshot detection systems are stand-alone tools. Others can be part of a larger private vendor platform, such as Flock Raven. Flock Raven is separate from the regular Flock license plate reader cameras, but it can connect into the same larger system.
That matters because it brings us right back to the same privacy concerns, I have with Flock cameras. If gunshot detection connects with license plate readers, video, or other data, then we are no longer only talking about detecting gunfire. We are talking about how data is collected, connected, stored, searched, audited, and shared.
How many verified shot-fired calls are we having? Where are they happening? Are residents reporting them through 911? Are officers having trouble locating evidence, suspects, or victims? Would this system change outcomes in Maricopa? And what would we not fund if we found this instead?
Maricopa is still a relatively safe city. As we grow, we need to continue planning, but every dollar has a job. If our most urgent needs are staffing, officer retention, training, vehicles, dispatch support, school safety, or other technology we already know we need, then we must weigh this tool against those priorities.
I would not take it off the table. Other cities are using or testing this type of technology, and it may be something Maricopa should continue to evaluate. But I would not rush into it either. My answer would be to keep it in conversation, study the actual need, compare it to our other public safety priorities, review how it is working in other cities, and make sure we fully understand the privacy and data-sharing concerns before deciding whether it belongs in the budget.
Public safety spending should be proactive, but it also must be practical. We should invest in the tools that solve the problems we have, while also protecting the privacy and constitutional rights of our residents.
5. Home Purchase Loans or Housing Incentives for New Officers and Firefighters
Question
The intent is retention. The city has set precedent by loaning money for city employees. Will this same policy be provided to those “new” officers and firefighters to purchase a home in Maricopa?
Response
I would not support the city loaning money to new officers or firefighters to purchase a home in Maricopa.
I understand the intent is retention, and I absolutely support finding ways to recruit and keep strong public safety employees.
But I do not believe the city should be in the business of loaning money to employees for home purchases.
There are other cities and programs that offer housing incentives to officers, firefighters, teachers, and EMTs, but many of those are tied to specific goals, such as encouraging public safety employees to live in targeted revitalization areas. That is very different from what we are talking about here.
Maricopa is also still one of the more affordable housing markets in the region. Our home prices are lower than in many surrounding areas, and we still have a lot of new builds offering financing incentives, closing cost help, and rate buy-down options.
If the goal is retention, I think there are better ways to invest city dollars.
I would rather focus on competitive pay, strong benefits, overtime opportunities, career growth, promotion opportunities, specialty assignments, training, equipment, and making sure our public safety employees feel valued and supported.
Those are long-term retention tools.
Helping an employee buy a home may sound helpful, but we also must ask if it is the best use of taxpayer dollars, if it would be offered fairly, and where that line would end.
I support public safety. I support retention. But I believe our focus should be on compensation, career paths, staffing, leadership, and working conditions. Those are the things that will help keep good people here.
6. Keeping New Recruits From Leaving After Two Years
Question
What method would you use to keep our new recruits from leaving after their two years on the job, or transferring out? And to current council members: Why haven’t you done it?
Response
I think the first step is asking why they are leaving.
We can assume it is pay and pay absolutely matters. But retention is usually bigger than one issue.
One of the biggest issues is whether new recruits can see a future here.
If someone comes to Maricopa, gets trained, gains experience, and then realizes they have limited opportunity to promote, move into specialty positions, grow their career, or increase their earning potential, we should not be surprised when they leave for another agency.
That is taxpayer money walking out the door.
To keep new recruits, I would focus on competitive pay that does not fall behind before it is even implemented; a clear career path so employees can see a future here; promotion opportunities; specialty assignments; strong leadership and workplace culture; reasonable staffing levels so burnout does not become the normal schedule; good equipment, training, and support; and regular check-ins before people are already halfway out the door.
Retention cannot just be a conversation after someone turns in their notice. By then, we are usually too late.
Maricopa is growing, but our public safety departments also must grow in a way that creates opportunity for the people we are hiring. If we want officers and firefighters to stay, they need to know they can build a real career here, not just get two years of experience and move on.
So, my answer is simple: find out why they are leaving, compare ourselves honestly to other cities, fix what we can control, and create a workplace where public safety employees can see a future here.
Tena Dugan
Tena Dugan is a lifelong Arizonan and proud Maricopa resident since 2013. A licensed REALTOR® with West USA Realty, seven-year HOA Board President, and community advocate with over two decades of civic involvement, Tena knows what it takes to show up and get things done. She has served on the City of Maricopa Parks, Recreation and Library Board, the Citizen Transportation Tax Oversight Committee, and the Pinal County Transportation Board. As a wife, mother of four Maricopa High School graduates, and grandmother, she is deeply invested in the future of this community. Tena is running for Maricopa City Council because she believes every resident deserves a seat at the table — and your vote is your voice.
