Mohave County denies special‑use permit for proposed White Hills private cemetery after neighbors raise groundwater, notice and use concerns
Loading...
Summary
After extensive public comment and legal review, the Mohave County Board of Supervisors voted to deny a special‑use permit for a proposed private cemetery in White Hills. Neighbors cited lack of notification, groundwater risk, and uncertainty about the applicant’s status; the applicant said the site would follow Arizona Department of Health Services setbacks.
The Mohave County Board of Supervisors voted to deny a request for a special‑use permit to allow a private cemetery on a 9.55‑acre parcel near White Hills.
Supervisor Borelli opened the board’s review of item 32 by flagging procedural and jurisdictional questions about the applicant, which is listed on county records as “Las Vegas Muslims.” Borelli said his staff could not locate a valid IRS employer identification number for the group and urged more state‑level review before the county acted.
During the public hearing, dozens of nearby residents told the board they had not received personal notice of prior meetings and raised repeated concerns about groundwater contamination, property values and the potential for expansion beyond a family‑use cemetery. Resident Douglas Myers said he lives about a quarter mile from the proposed site and that “we weren't properly notified” of prior meetings. Several speakers reported wells within roughly a quarter mile and asked how burial practices that do not use coffins or concrete vaults would be reviewed for public‑health risk.
Applicant Mohammed Faraz Akbar said the parcel was chosen for availability and affordability and that the proposal would comply with Arizona Department of Health Services setback and public‑health regulations. “We are fully committed to complying with Mohave County and Arizona regulations,” he said, adding the donors and parcel owner intended the site to provide affordable, dignified burial.
County legal staff and development services clarified that some state licensing and perpetual‑care trust requirements commonly applied to commercial cemeteries do not apply to private or religious‑affiliated cemeteries under the statutes cited to the board. Director Holtry said development services focuses on land‑use appropriateness and deferred health‑safety determinations to the Arizona Department of Health Services.
Supervisor Martin asked whether county staff had received any direct guidance from ADHS about the site’s proposed burial practices; public‑health staff present said ADHS handles those technical determinations and the county’s public‑health office does not review cemetery burial methods. After discussion, board members said they needed more documentation regarding public‑health compliance, title and tax‑record questions and neighborhood notification.
A motion to deny the special‑use permit was moved and seconded before the public hearing was opened; after public comment and discussion the board voted verbally in favor of the motion. The board’s action removes county approval for the permit as presented and sends the applicant back to resolve the procedural, title and health‑compliance questions raised during testimony.
The board did not adopt an alternative conditional approval; supervisors said they expect the applicant to return with clearer documentation about ADHS approvals, proof of organizational registration, and clearer site‑management plans if it re‑applies.
