Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Regulation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Cochise County planning panel backs update to 2024 I‑Codes, with one commissioner dissenting

Cochise County Planning and Zoning Commission · July 9, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning & Zoning Commission recommended that the Board of Supervisors adopt 2024 International Building Code series and the 2023 NEC (retain 2012 energy code); staff said the update improves safety and aligns Cochise County with neighboring jurisdictions. One commissioner voted no, citing insufficient information about impacts on average residents.

The Cochise County Planning & Zoning Commission voted to recommend that the Board of Supervisors adopt updated building codes—the 2024 International Building Code suite and the 2023 National Electrical Code—while retaining the 2012 energy code for now.

Development Services Director Christine McLaughlin and Building Official Paul Esparza said the update is the result of nearly a year of technical review, stakeholder outreach and advisory‑board input. McLaughlin said the newer codes provide a modern safety framework and help the county coordinate with fire and emergency responders; she described the move as necessary to address newer technologies such as utility‑scale solar, battery storage and data centers.

"This update is important because development we're reviewing is changing," McLaughlin said, framing the change as a technically driven safety measure. Staff recommended an implementation date after Board approval of September 1 to give the building community time to prepare; applications submitted before that date would be reviewed under the current codes.

Not all commissioners agreed. At voice vote one commissioner said she could not support the recommendation without clearer information on the cost and effects for average residents, particularly potential additional design or plan‑preparation expenses. The motion to forward the update carried despite that dissent.

Next steps: staff will forward R2603 with the commission’s recommendation to the Board of Supervisors; the building department plans outreach and updated guidance for applicants and contractors prior to implementation.