Golden Valley residents oppose Dorado project amid zoning changes and transparency concerns

In a heated session at the Mohave County Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on July 9, 2025, community members voiced strong concerns over proposed developments that could significantly alter the landscape of Golden Valley. The atmosphere was charged as residents gathered to express their frustrations about a lack of communication regarding changes to zoning plans, particularly the controversial Dorado project.

The meeting opened with a passionate plea from a local resident advocating for the necessity of sidewalks in the area, emphasizing their importance for accessibility, especially for individuals with disabilities. “Sidewalks are necessary and part of a community,” the speaker asserted, highlighting the need for infrastructure that accommodates all residents. This sentiment resonated with many in attendance, who echoed the call for improved community planning.

As discussions progressed, the focus shifted to the Dorado project, which proposes the construction of approximately 3,000 homes in an area already grappling with water pressure and traffic issues. Residents expressed their alarm over the potential doubling of the population without adequate infrastructure to support such growth. “We already have traffic problems. We do not need this,” one resident lamented, underscoring the community's apprehension about the project's impact on their quality of life.

The commission faced accusations of failing to properly notify residents about changes to the general plan, with several speakers claiming that their voices had been overlooked in favor of developer interests. “Your job is not to make changes to benefit individual people or corporations,” one resident asserted, calling for transparency and accountability from the commission. The frustration was palpable as community members demanded to know why their concerns had seemingly fallen on deaf ears.

In response to the outcry, the commission acknowledged the complexities of the proposed developments, particularly the challenges posed by the area's topography and existing infrastructure. However, the tension between development and community needs remained a central theme throughout the meeting. As the public hearing concluded, the commission moved to approve the proposed plans, but not without dissent from those who felt their community's needs were being sidelined.

The meeting highlighted a critical juncture for Golden Valley, where the balance between development and community welfare hangs in the balance. As the commission prepares to move forward, the voices of concerned residents serve as a reminder of the importance of inclusive planning that prioritizes the needs of all community members. The future of Golden Valley remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: the community is watching closely, ready to advocate for their interests in the face of rapid change.