Flash Flood Warning Extended for Central Pima County Through Monday, August 31
The National Weather Service has extended a Flash Flood Warning for central Pima County and part of Pinal County until 7 a.m. Monday, August 31.
3 reports on this incident · first at Aug 31, 2026, 8:49 a.m. ET
Hazard products are revised and cancelled as conditions change. Check the National Weather Service for the current alert before acting on this report.
We last searched for new coverage of this at Aug 31, 2026, 9:37 p.m. ET — checked 10h ago.
Earlier reports
Aug 31, 2026, 8:52 a.m. ET
Flash Flood Warning Issued for Central Pima County
A Flash Flood Warning has been issued for central Pima County and a small part of Pinal Counties, according to kold.com. The warning is in effect until 7 a.m. Monday, August 31, 2026.
The alert was prompted by strong storms that marched through Tucson’s northwest, through Marana, kold.com reported. The warning replaces an earlier watch, meaning flooding is imminent or occurring in the warned areas.
Aug 31, 2026, 8:49 a.m. ETFirst report
Flash Flood Warning Issued for Central Pima County
A Flash Flood Warning has been issued for Central Pima County and a small part of Pinal County, according to KOLD. The warning is in effect until 7 a.m. Monday, August 31, 2026.
Strong storms moved through Tucson's northwest and through Marana, according to KOLD. The warning was reported by KOLD.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 131 Aug 2026, 12:52current
First published.
- Version 131 Aug 2026, 12:49current
First published.
- Version 131 Aug 2026, 12:52current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.