Pinetop-Lakeside Lions Foundation seeks mixed-use zoning for 344-acre planned development amid referendum challenge
PINETOP-LAKESIDE, ARIZONA — January 25, 2023

Pinetop-Lakeside Lions Foundation seeks mixed-use zoning for 344-acre planned development amid referendum challenge

Lions Foundation discusses contested land use map for 344-acre former Forest Service property in Pinetop-Lakeside, with community referendum opposing planned development designation in favor of low-density zoning and potential strategic relocation of Camp Tatiyatada.

Lions Foundation Defends Mixed-Use Vision for 344-Acre Forest Service Exchange Against Low-Density Referendum Challenge

In a radio-broadcast discussion format, the Lions Foundation's leadership defended its advocacy for mixed-use planned development zoning on a 344-acre former Forest Service property in Pinetop-Lakeside, directly addressing a community referendum that has suspended the town's approved land-use map designation. The debate hinges on whether the newly annexed property should remain low-density residential—preserving forest character—or evolve into a mixed-use development with selective commercial components that generate tax revenue while maintaining aesthetic integrity.

The property, acquired through a 25-year land exchange completed in October 2018, represents the largest annexation in Pinetop-Lakeside's history and includes the venerable Camp Tatiyatada (serving disabled children) and Camp Grace facilities. The Lions Foundation's stance reveals an organization at an inflection point: considering relocation of its flagship camp facility within 5–15 years to pristine Forest Service land elsewhere in Arizona, while positioning the current 344-acre holding as a long-term lease-revenue generator to fund the new facility and nonprofit operations.

Key Speeches

"When you're the parent of a disabled child or adult, it's 100 percent dependent on you 24/7. It's critically important to continue the dream and the purpose of a camp that serves disabled kids in a forest or camping environment in the woods. Because of the encroachment of commercial development from the Show Low side, as Pine Top will grow, the camp is going to lose its allure being surrounded by big box stores and home items and traffic on the highway." — Sandy, Lions Foundation representative

"The best use of this land is probably to preserve a lot of things and tell the story, but it probably is not to continue as the camp. It's almost unrealistic to think that the camp could continue to serve, but the concept of running a business to help disabled kids in the forest is easy to do somewhere else. Where it is now has evolved in the area as I've just explained." — Sandy

"I personally believe that it should be planned zoning. Low density was what it was originally zoned for, but to say that it all has to be low-res or low-density residential makes no sense to me at all. It's not my job to tell the town what they have to do. Everybody wants to keep it as though it's the forest, and the answer is, it isn't the forest anymore. It doesn't belong to the Forest Service, and it shouldn't be just open forest. This is now part of the Town. It becomes part of your tax base." — Paul Randall, Lions Foundation treasurer

"I'd love to see rather than urban planning, I like to see a beautiful quiet community that still has the amenities and the trees and the rim trail. I'd love to maintain that. That's important to me. We are trying to think of what would we love to see 20 years from now." — Sandy

Timeline

Forest Service Restrictions and Easements

Paul Randall, who served as the primary negotiator for the Lions Foundation throughout the 25-year exchange process, clarified that the Forest Service imposed minimal land-use restrictions on the 344-acre parcel. According to Randall, the agency required adherence to utility easements (electrical and water infrastructure) and granted conditional use permits allowing Camp Tatiyatada and Camp Grace to continue operating on their respective parcels post-exchange.

"The only thing they required is that we work within the easements," Randall stated. "We also had to agree to allow Camp Grace to acquire their land, which we did. They acquired the land a year after the exchange was completed. And in effect, they said we had to allow Camp Tatiyatada to exist on their land—both Lions—but that was because they did have use permits for both of them. They wanted to make sure that they had the opportunity to either acquire or continue staying on the land."

Randall emphasized that the Forest Service explicitly refrained from mandating density or development patterns on the remaining ~280 acres. "There was no restrictions put on from the Forest Service whatsoever, other than the fact it was going to be eventually—and has been—absorbed into the town of Pinetop-Lakeside. So I'd have to follow whatever zoning requirements that the town had, but the Forest Service didn't put any restrictions on," he said. He also noted that the Forest Service deliberately wanted to divest itself of the property because it constituted an isolated enclave within the national forest boundary, making integration into municipal control more efficient.

The Camp Relocation Argument

Sandy articulated a candid assessment of Camp Tatiyatada's viability under intensive commercial encroachment. The speaker, identifying himself as a parent of a disabled son who has attended the camp since age 8 (now 16), framed the relocation option as a preservation of mission rather than an abandonment of it.

The core rationale centers on environmental and experiential degradation. As Show Low expands and Pinetop-Lakeside urbanizes, the quiet forest setting that defines the camp's therapeutic value would erode. "The peacefully quiet as we all knew growing up" would give way to commercial corridors, chain retailers, and highway traffic—fundamentally altering the camp's ability to serve children with disabilities seeking respite in a natural, low-stimulation environment.

Sandy presented Forest Service partnerships as a viable path to relocation. Unlike acquiring private land or developing greenfield property, the Forest Service maintains special-use permit frameworks allowing nonprofits to operate camps and recreational facilities on federal land with minimal capital outlay:

"The federal government obviously is highly regulated and restricted, and they want to make sure that their forests are protected. A lot of people love the forest to remain the way it is. So if you're going to do any development in the forest, it's got to be a special use, and that's why they sign a contract that it must be occupied 100 percent of the time. Any development has to be approved by the government. As long as you're using it for kids like this in a special camp, there are other areas within the Forest Service and different forests within Arizona where you could find a similar footprint and grow a brand new camp with new codes to serve the needs of this population." — Sandy

The timeline for camp relocation remains fluid. Randall cautioned that the decision is not imminent: "The timing on when and if the camp moves is one of those things we just have to take a long hard look at, right, because it's been well entrenched. It does a marvelous job in Pinetop and Cholla or in Lakeside. But five years from now, ten years from now, it may be the right time to move. Who knows? But obviously, that's a major transaction as far as moving the camp and finding some other place to do it. And whether we sell or lease the land and things like this, those are things that we would be looking at over the next literally the next five or ten or fifteen years, depending upon how things develop within the town."

Land-Lease Revenue Model and Foundation Sustainability

Under the Lions Foundation's proposed scenario, retaining the 344-acre parcel as leased land rather than selling it would generate revenue streams to fund:

  1. Construction and operations of a relocated camp facility on Forest Service land elsewhere in Arizona.
  2. Ongoing Lions Foundation (Arizona) operations and mission activities.

As Sandy stated: "Rather than holding the land or thinking of selling the land, that makes no sense. What makes sense is find a new place where we can open a new, improved, and better camp similar to this one, and then hold this land as it's developed around us. Be good partners, help the community of Pinetop-Lakeside. That's important to us because we've invested a lot of our time, our dollars, and our lives into the community."

This strategy reflects recognition that fundraising pressures are unlikely to ease, and asset-based revenue (through land leasing) provides more sustainable funding than donor solicitation alone.

Zoning Designation vs. Low-Density Mandate

A critical distinction emerged in the discussion: the town's approval designated the property for "planned development" zoning—not a specific land-use class but rather a designation that planned, mixed-use projects could be considered—whereas the referendum opposition demands strict low-density residential zoning that would restrict development intensity.

Paul Randall reframed the choice as one of town authority and efficient land-use stewardship:

"I believe it should be planned zoning. Low density was what it was originally zoned for, but to say that it all has to be low-res or low-density residential makes no sense to me at all. It's not my job to tell the town what they have to do. Everybody wants to keep it as though it's the forest, and the answer is, it isn't the forest anymore. It doesn't belong to the Forest Service, and it shouldn't be just open forest. This is now part of the Town. It becomes part of your tax base." — Paul Randall

He argued that when Pinetop-Lakeside annexed the Forest Service property pre-exchange, it automatically defaulted to low-density residential zoning as a placeholder—a standard practice for unincorporated or non-town-controlled land brought into municipal jurisdiction. However, he contended, the town now has the opportunity and obligation to make deliberate land-use decisions on 344 acres, the largest single annexation in municipal history.

The Mixed-Use Development Vision

Sandy and the Lions Foundation partners (identified as including the Coat family and other land-management specialists) are advocating for a modified vision: mixed-use development with selective commercial components, avoiding big-box retail and urban sprawl while preserving forest aesthetics and the renowned rim-trail experience.

"If you talk to people that have developed in and around Pine Top or even Show Low, it would be a lucrative use to just build a couple hundred homes with nice big lots, bring in all the utilities amenities roads, and you'd lose the feel of the forest and it would not really stay the beautiful place that Pine Top is—the jewel that it is up there above Show Low. So my thought is we have tried to court and work—we, being the Lions Foundation, are partners, people that understand land management like the Coat family—and the people that our partner is looking to acquire the land from. What is the use of theirs? And so, I'm not in favor of low density. And so that's why we, together with our partners and the other people who are on the property like Camp Grace, successfully went and said we'd like to make it a partial commercial but it's not for like big boxes and so on. It's for smaller things." — Sandy's 20-year vision emphasizes curb appeal and forest preservation:

"I'd love to see rather than urban planning, I like to see a beautiful quiet community that still has the amenities and the trees and the rim trail. There will be commercial development where there aren't trees and there will be buildings put up, but will it be attractive? Will it fit the right look and feel that everybody wants within Pinetop? How can you do that? We are trying to think of what would we love to see 20 years from now." — Sandy

This suggests selective infill development and architectural compatibility standards rather than sprawl-pattern residential subdivision.

Project Details

Controversies and Context

The referendum challenge reflects broader tensions across small-to-midsize mountain communities in Arizona navigating growth, preservation, and fiscal sustainability.

Forest Character Preservation: The opposition coalition (unnamed in the transcript but evident through the referendum) prioritizes environmental aesthetics and forest ambiance. Their concern is that allowing planned development will inevitably lead to density, infrastructure sprawl, and commercial clustering that transforms Pinetop-Lakeside into a suburban outpost of Show Low—eroding the "jewel" character that distinguishes it.

Tax Base and Municipal Obligation: Randall articulated the counterargument: once land is annexed, it becomes part of the municipal tax base and is subject to town governance. Leaving 344 acres zoned low-density residential, when it could generate tax revenue through strategic, aesthetically compatible development, represents an opportunity cost and potential fiscal strain on municipal services.

Nonprofit Mission vs. Real Estate Strategy: The Lions Foundation's implicit position shift—from indefinite operation of Camp Tatiyatada to potential relocation and land-lease revenue strategy—may trigger sentiment among stakeholders who view the camp as a permanent community institution. However, the speakers reframe relocation not as abandonment but as preservation of mission under changing environmental conditions.

Land-Use Planning Complexity: The dispute reveals confusion or deliberate ambiguity around "planned development" designation. It is not a zoning class but a planning framework allowing flexibility. The referendum opposition's demand for "low-density residential" zoning is a more restrictive and prescriptive alternative.

Duration

The transcript does not indicate the total meeting length or the specific duration of this discussion segment. The discussion is presented as "the second segment of a series," suggesting this is one component of a broader radio broadcast or community forum.

Other Notable Items

The transcript includes reference to a "third edition" of the Lions Foundation's land-use discussion series already available, implying ongoing public communication and engagement with the zoning controversy.