Advisory group debates definitions, local agriculture, microgrids and county renewable goals

Members of the Coconino County advisory group reviewed the sustainability, resilience, energy and climate draft and pressed staff for clearer definitions, more concrete implementation strategies, and corrected terminology before broader public review.

Advisory members asked for an explicit definition of “conservation” in the chapter and requested that definitions and glossary terms be consistent across all plan chapters. Staff said a glossary is being developed and that definitions will be hyperlinked into the draft.

Food and agricultural resilience drew sustained comment. One participant urged removal of the phrase “small-scale” from a policy supporting agriculture and ranching, arguing the county should support farming and processing at any scale. The group discussed local meat-processing capacity and USDA inspection requirements: participants noted few USDA‑inspected slaughter facilities are available in the region, and that facilities inspected only under state or local (non‑USDA) inspection regimes cannot sell product broadly for restaurant use. The advisory group asked staff to leave policy language supporting agriculture and ranching in the draft while noting the county currently lacks direct implementation programs.

On energy, participants discussed renewable projects, power purchase agreements and whether locally produced renewable electricity “stays” in Coconino County. County staff explained that power purchase agreements allow utilities to allocate renewable generation across their portfolios and that electricity flows on the regional grid rather than being physically tied to a single local buyer. Advisory members asked staff to add a table clarifying buyers or purchasers listed in the renewable-energy table and to add a final column showing whether projects have purchase agreements and, if known, with which utilities (SRP, APS, Tucson Electric were discussed).

The advisory group also raised the idea of community-scale microgrids and local electric co‑ops. Staff and participants noted Arizona Corporation Commission rules limit who can sell electricity and that forming local distribution co‑ops or retaining generation locally would likely require state-level policy changes. Participants recommended the chapter note the regulatory constraints and the potential benefits of community-scale resiliency projects.

Finally, staff proposed adding language to an organizational policy to “continue expanding county renewable energy infrastructure” rather than committing the county to a specific net‑zero target. Staff said several county buildings already have solar installations and that the county has an EPA grant application in process for a building in Tuba City that would include solar PV.

Staff said revisions will be posted online, the glossary will be developed and linked, and implementation strategies will be collected across chapters into one document for the advisory group to rank for priority in a later meeting.