Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Participation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Navajo County to pause Article 12 wind ordinance, say they were denied meaningful notice
Summary
Multiple residents and the Civic Integrity Alliance presented a formal grievance alleging inadequate notice and premature adoption of Resolution 17-2025 (zoning Article 12 changes), requested the board pause implementation and conduct a major amendment process, and said they have contacted the Arizona Ombudsman; the board encouraged them to meet with staff for procedural clarifications.
Several residents spoke during the July 24 call to the public to present a formal grievance and to ask the Board of Supervisors to pause implementation of changes to Navajo County’s zoning Article 12 (Resolution 17-2025), which commenters said allow expanded wind-energy development.
Nani Jacobson of the Civic Integrity Alliance said she and other residents submitted a certified grievance alleging the county failed to provide adequate notice and public opportunity before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the board acted. “What is the meaning of your silence? Why do you hold us in contempt? We don’t matter to you,” Jacobson said, summarizing a timeline of repeated requests to be placed on agendas and to obtain information.
Evangeline Adkins, also representing the Civic Integrity Alliance, argued the scale of the changes met the county’s own tests for a ‘‘major amendment’’ to the comprehensive plan and cited ARS 11-8-05(j) and the county comprehensive-plan process; she told the board that neighbors had not been directly contacted and that public-notice practices had been insufficient.
Lisa Vincenti said the grievance had not received acknowledgement by letter, email or phone and that local Facebook groups showed high public interest; she asked the board to pause Article 12’s implementation and let a major planned amendment process run. Speakers said they have contacted the Arizona Ombudsman’s office and asked the board to reopen discussions and notification processes.
Chair and other board members responded that public-notice procedures and the public record are available through staff and encouraged the groups to meet with planning staff for documentation of notices and outreach efforts. The chair said staff could explain where the county believes it complied with legal notice requirements and how the county recorded public input.
The board did not take immediate action to pause or reopen the ordinance at the meeting; staff and the public were advised to follow up directly to resolve procedural questions.
