The Prescott Valley Town Council on Jan. 8 voted 5–2 to adopt Ordinance No. 2026-974, changing about 39.7 acres at the Government Tank Rock Harvest site from RL-70 residential zoning to IG industrial limited zoning to permit sand-and-gravel extraction. Mayor Pagoda presided over the meeting where the council heard more than a dozen public commenters and questioned applicant representatives and staff.

Why it matters: The ordinance authorizes a specific extraction site that proponents said would reduce truck traffic on town roads compared with an alternative Stoneridge location, while opponents warned of silica dust, noise, groundwater impact and declining property values for nearby residents.

What happened: Staff introduced the item and the applicant’s counsel and representatives (Bill Alley and Tiffany Bosco) were present to answer questions. Several council members asked about reclamation timelines and contract terms after public commenters raised concerns about a development agreement and tax rebate language. As audit partner Michael Lazon had noted earlier in the meeting, the town’s processes were under review for several administrative improvements; those conversations framed some council questions about contract enforceability and vesting.

Public comment: Seventeen registered speakers addressed the council during call to the public. Patricia Betts and Carolyn Cern reviewed public records and alleged that the town manager and elected officials had engaged early in site advocacy; Cynthia Neeby, Randy Bossberg and others described health and dust concerns tied to silica and asked the council to reconsider the decision. Supporters including Vic Paulson, Chris Russo and Joe Colosimo argued Government Tank is the least-disruptive option and urged residents not to pursue a referendum. A recurring theme from both sides was whether a successful referendum would stop mining entirely or merely shift the operation to the Stoneridge site.

Council decision and vote: After deliberation the council called the roll on Ordinance No. 2026-974. Council member Keogh voted No; the ordinance passed 5–2. The ordinance, as read into the record, will take effect 30 days after passage and approval in accordance with state law.

Next steps: The ordinance becomes effective as provided by law and, as councilmembers noted in discussion, a referendum petition drive could move the matter to a townwide vote. Council and staff also discussed monitoring nearby well and environmental data and enforcing conditions contained in the recorded development agreement.

Source attribution: Direct quotes and attributions are drawn from public comment and council exchanges recorded at the Jan. 8 council meeting. Excerpted quotes include Pastor Mike Cannon’s invocation and residents’ remarks during the public-comment period. The vote tally and ordinance number were read on the record by the clerk.