Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Navajo County over Real AZ branding and renewable projects; critics allege continued operation after nonprofit dissolution
Summary
Public commenters accused county staff and officials of continuing the Real AZ economic-development operation after the nonprofit's alleged 10/17/2024 dissolution, calling for rescission of recent renewable-related resolutions and for a moratorium on industrial-scale projects; county staff said they are formalizing an intergovernmental partnership, updating branding, and not operating a separate legal entity.
The county's economic-development presentation prompted sharp public comment accusing the county's Real AZ program (formerly Real AZ Corridor/Relay Z) of operating after the nonprofit's purported dissolution and of using county resources and NDAs improperly. Lisa Vicente of Civic Integrity Alliance said the Real AZ nonprofit was dissolved on 10/17/2024 and alleged county officials and staff had continued transactions and agreements, naming specific deeds and NDAs she said were executed after dissolution.
Belinda Quogue and other public commenters tied Real AZ operations to the county's treatment of renewable-energy projects, noting the county is entertaining roughly 18 renewable projects that could produce an estimated 8.6 gigawatts if all approved (as stated by a commenter). They urged the board to rescind recent resolutions (referenced in comments as "1-20-25" and "17-20-25") that commenters said weakened protections in the county's renewable-energy rules, and some called for an immediate moratorium pending review.
County presenters and board members defended staff work and described a different procedural picture. Brian Layton (economic-development staff) told the board that after the nonprofit was dissolved the county reverted economic-development operations to an intergovernmental regional partnership; staff recommended formal agreements among participating governments, elimination of lingering nonprofit meeting conventions, and updated branding to clarify the partnership is not a separate legal entity. The county emphasized economic-development activities under this model do not make land-use, zoning, or permit decisions.
Chair and staff also told the public that the county had in effect paused permitting for a period and that amendments to ordinances and permit pathways were intended to add protections such as development agreements with decommissioning, setback, and financial-revenue mechanisms. Public speakers disputed that characterization and pressed for reversals, stricter setbacks and a moratorium.
What comes next: staff said they will pursue formal intergovernmental agreements and branding changes to clarify the partnership's role; public groups said they will press for rescission of recent resolutions and for a moratorium on utility-scale renewables. The transcript records both the allegations and the county's stated corrective steps.
