Yuma County planning staff presented a proposed text amendment Aug. 4 intended to update county rules for mobile food vendors and mobile food units, including new definitions and a section that would set operating limits and controls on noise‑making devices.

“Maggie, this applies to mobile units that move from site to site,” Yuma County planners clarified during the meeting; development staff said the draft relies on the state enabling language in A.R.S. § 11‑269.24 that authorizes counties to regulate mobile vendors.

Several mobile‑food operators and vendors addressed the board. Jake Long, owner of Odd Duck Food Truck, said staff proposals could put many vendors out of business if applied as written. “At 7 p.m., they’re gonna tell us, ‘Oh, you’re too loud. You have to close down,’ ” Long said, arguing existing county pamphlet rules and noise limits are already in place.

Other food vendors and supervisors urged a more tailored approach. Supervisor Erin Soe said the draft as presented could “literally take out every coffee vendor that starts at 5 a.m.” and recommended a targeted approach rather than broad, across‑the‑board limits.

Maggie Castro, Development Services director, explained the proposed new wording would apply to truly mobile vendors that set up temporarily on private property or at events and would not replace special‑use permitting for permanent outdoor entertainment venues that remain on a site indefinitely. Castro also noted staff would verify consistency with health‑department requirements.

Board members asked for more information about enforcement and whether existing county‑issued guidance (a county pamphlet for food vendors) already covers complaints staff has received. Supervisors and vendors recommended the county convene a work session so vendors, staff and the health department could provide input.

County staff agreed to consult the health department about any conflicts between the department’s guidance and the proposed text and to return the item to the planning and zoning commission after a work session with vendor representatives. The board did not vote on the amendment at the meeting and instead directed staff to pursue further stakeholder engagement and revise the draft.