Hearing officer takes zoning case against Church of Common Good under advisement after dispute over RVs and religious use

The Coconino County hearing officer took under advisement an administrative zoning-violation case against the Church of Common Good on July 10, 2025, following a contested hearing in Winslow, Arizona, over alleged long-term recreational-vehicle occupancy and unpermitted structures at 47775 BNSF Railroad Frontage Road.

The county’s code enforcement division said inspections from 2024 through June 2025 documented multiple recreational vehicles, travel trailers, unpermitted structures, piles of secondhand materials and tires, and what the county described as likely ongoing occupancy. “The church’s use appears to be for what the county would describe as a recreational vehicle resort,” said Mark Stento, Code Enforcement Officer for Coconino County, in closing remarks during the hearing.

The Church of Common Good, represented at the hearing by Pastor Andrew “AJ” Stevens, disputed the county’s account and said the property is used as a transient spiritual retreat and for limited agricultural activity such as a chicken coop and food pantry storage. Stevens told the hearing officer, “we intend to fight this with the religious land land use and institutionalized persons act,” citing protections for religious uses.

Why this matters: the dispute turns on land use classification and whether the county’s zoning regulations limit the church’s described religious activity on a parcel the county classifies as G (General) residential. The county contends the observed pattern of vehicles and structures is inconsistent with single-family/rural residential performance standards and that certain temporary-occupancy or commercial-type uses require different permits or zoning. The church contends its religious practices and transient ministerial activities are protected and that county evidence does not show current public-health threats.

Key facts established at the hearing

- Case and property: zoning violation citation PCC240097, County of Coconino v. Church of Common Good; property listed as 47775 BNSF Railroad Frontage Road, Winslow, AZ 86047; Parcel ID 40685018; lot size 56.6 acres. The county identified the parcel’s zoning as G (General residential).

- Ownership and prior notices: county testimony and documentary exhibits show the property was owned by JMC (JMC Land/JNC Land in the record) during parts of 2024 and that a recorded warranty deed reflecting Church of Common Good ownership was filed in January 2025. The county said certified mail sent to the statutory agent was returned unclaimed on June 23, 2025, and that a code enforcement officer (John Cole) made personal service of a notice to appear on Andrew Stevens in May 2025 (the officer’s body-cam footage is in the county exhibits).

- County allegations and evidence: Code enforcement described multiple inspections (documented as county exhibits) that noted occupied RVs and travel trailers, secondhand materials and a makeshift wooden structure, abandoned or unregistered vehicles, and prior records of a welfare check in 2024. The county acknowledged a 120-day temporary RV permit application had been started by the church but was not completed and returned for corrections; the county said that only limited RV occupancy is permitted under the ordinance and that the church’s described use may be inconsistent with the parcel’s zoning and applicable development standards.

- Church’s position: Pastor Andrew Stevens testified the church is a ministry that hosts transient congregants who travel in vans, buses and RVs; he said the property functions as a spiritual retreat and storage for ministry supplies and food distribution. Stevens denied that the property presents an ongoing public-health threat, said some cited materials (notably tires) had been removed, and disputed that vehicles on the parcel were inoperable or unregistered. He repeatedly asserted the church’s activities are protected under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) and argued the county had not shown a present public-safety violation.

Procedural and evidentiary notes

- The hearing officer reserved ruling on whether to admit certain county exhibits into the evidentiary record; the officer allowed testimony and said he would consider the exhibits in issuing a written decision.

- County witnesses referenced a partial transcript of body-cam footage and multiple dated inspection photos; the church disputed some service and evidence details, asserting it had not been properly served through the statutory agent and that it had not owned the property at some earlier inspection dates cited by the county.

Outcome and next steps

The hearing officer declined to rule at the hearing and said a written decision would follow. “I will take this matter under advisement, and I will issue a written ruling as soon as possible,” the hearing officer said. The officer told both sides they may continue respectful dialogue and asked the county to notify the officer if the parties reach an agreement before a written order is issued.

Discussion points not resolved

- Whether the observed activities constitute an ongoing public-health or safety hazard under county code.

- Whether the church’s temporary-transient ministry model is protected under federal religious-land-use law in a parcel zoned G (General) residential, or whether land-use approvals or rezoning would be required for the church’s intended pattern of use.

- The adequacy of service on the statutory agent and whether procedural defects exist in the county’s method of notice.

The hearing record is now closed; the hearing officer signaled he will issue a written ruling and that ruling will be served on the parties. The factual record in the transcript and exhibits will determine the scope of any order and whether the county may refile enforcement actions or require permits or zoning changes for the church’s proposed use.