Prescott Valley approves major zoning overhaul, delays Lakeshore 650 referendum to November 2026
PRESCOTT VALLEY, ARIZONA — November 26, 2024

Prescott Valley approves major zoning overhaul, delays Lakeshore 650 referendum to November 2026

Prescott Valley town council approved major 46-year zoning code overhaul and voted 4-2 to delay Lakeshore 650 referendum from May 2025 to November 2026 election, sparking conflict over costs and public participation timing.

Prescott Valley Approves Historic Zoning Code Overhaul; Council Splits 4–2 on Lakeshore 650 Referendum Delay

The Prescott Valley Town Council approved the first reading of a sweeping 46-year overhaul of its zoning code and voted 4-2 to postpone a highly contested referendum on the Lakeshore 650 annexation by 18 months, prioritizing a claimed $75,000 cost savings over residents' demand for a faster vote. The November 14 meeting—which lasted over three hours—highlighted tensions between fiscal discipline, administrative efficiency, and what opponents characterized as circumventing public will.

Key Speeches

On the zoning code's preliminary development plan (PDP) requirement, which ties developer promises to approved rezonings:

"If you want a rezoning to R1 to RL a residential zoning and you're showing pretty pictures of how this development is going to be those pretty pictures are the preliminary development plan that gets approved with your rezoning and if you want to change it after your zoning is approved and it's substantially different from what you presented at Council you have to come back and get that approved so that there's no surprises in the process." — Frank Cassidy, consultant attorney

On manufactured homes and conditional use permits, Vice Mayor Hunt argued:

"I agree that instead of it being a su P which is the same requirement for a wind farm that it should be a cup um which is more closer to a building permit because otherwise you know homes that are really nice in residential zones these kind of homes individually for infill would have to come to council right just like a wind turm cor does." — Vice Mayor Hunt

On the Lakeshore 650 referendum timing, Matt Zurcher stated his reasoning:

"I hear both of that arguments as well but I've also heard the other side and we were asked to have this be delayed anyway so that the new four people that were elected in this last election could have more of a voice so coming up with it in May and the cost being $100,000 that's a lot of money to me I'm sure everybody thinks that you can do a lot of things with $100,000." — Councilman Zurcher

Councilman Reynolds summarized the trade-off debate:

"There's the pros and the cons to all these options right and I've been sitting around and I've been thinking all week in regards to what's good what are the pros what are the cons... you have those individuals who went out and worked hard and got signatures and those people maybe fresh on their mind on what they have going on they might want to just rip off the Band-Aid and just say hey we're done let's just let's vote." — Councilman Reynolds

Timeline

Zoning Code Update (Chapter 13)

Lakeshore 650 Referendum Election Timing

Opposition

Number of speakers against referendum delay: 2 (Tim Reynolds, Councilman; Karen Rolls, resident)

Number of speakers against zoning code changes: 3 (Patricia Betel; Louise Weeks; general public comment on driveways/garages)

Main concerns on Lakeshore 650 referendum timing:

  1. Democratic participation: Over 4,000 citizens collected signatures; forcing them to wait 18 months (to November 2026) denies them timely voice on major development.
  2. Impatience cost: $100,000 is substantial savings but should not override right to vote promptly on decision already under way for months.
  3. Community uncertainty: Longer delay extends speculative period; residents deserve clarity sooner on whether town endorses 3,500+ unit annexation.
  4. Voter turnout: May 2025 special election may have lower turnout than general election, but cost and speed matter.
  5. Applicant fairness: Jason Geisei (applicant) waits another year-plus without resolution.

Main concerns on zoning code:

  1. Manufactured homes elevated to council level: John Roosa (Southwest Homes) objected to manufactured homes with design requirements treated as "special use permit" (same as wind farms/solar farms), making infill homes face council review rather than expedited conditional use permit; argued modular homes costly and impractical in Arizona; only 2 buildable MH lots in town.
  2. Conditional use permits reduce public comment: Patricia Betel warned that staff-level cup approvals (vs. council-level decisions) eliminate public comment on hospitals, clinics, and other impactful uses; health-care facilities run 24/7 with ambulances and high-intensity operations.
  3. Speculative rezoning concerns: Patricia Betel criticized preliminary development plan requirement as hidden change; town presents "pretty pictures" but binds developers to them, potentially favoring applicants over public input.
  4. Lot-size reduction impacts: Betel opposed reduction from 10,000 sq ft to 5,000–8,000 sq ft minimums, claiming it increases density without community buy-in; residents already "close enough to hear them brushing teeth next door."
  5. Accessory dwelling units not discussed: Patricia Betel expressed concern that ADU allowances were not explicitly debated during zoning hearings.
  6. Parking and paving restrictions: Betel objected to blanket unpaved-surface prohibitions on two-acre lots; DG (decomposed granite) is affordable alternative; over-regulation limits private-property rights.
  7. Hydrocarbon spillage rule too broad: General commenter (Steve Caros) objected to owner requirement for paved driveways and prohibition on oil/gasoline spillage; penalizes owners doing vehicle maintenance on rural property.

Most compelling arguments:

Organized opposition:

Support

Number of speakers supporting zoning code: 2 (John Roosa on manufactured housing, Steven Pulk, Dignity Health, on nursing homes and clinic definition)

Number of speakers supporting referendum delay: 2 (Councilmembers Dickinson and Kendall Schumacher)

Main support arguments for zoning code:

  1. Factory-built homes meet code standards: Roosa and Cassidy both affirmed that factory-built and manufactured homes with design standards (garage, eaves, permanent foundation) are equivalent to stick-built homes; now FHA/VA/USDA financed (as of February 2024).
  2. Attainable housing alignment: Zoning update pursues task-force recommendations; lower density minimums and cu permits support affordable housing without expensive full rezonings.
  3. Simplified code aids developers and planners: Frank Cassidy emphasized consolidated use tables, clearer definitions, and streamlined procedures benefit all stakeholders.
  4. Dignity Health endorsement: Steven Pulk praised Cassidy's expertise, Frank Cassidy Land Use Law treatise; nursing homes and ambulatory-care definitions clarify intent, reduce litigation risk.
  5. Preliminary development plans prevent surprises: Cassidy and Vice Mayor Hunt both noted PDP ties developer promises to zoning approval; reduces "bait-and-switch" rezoning scandals.

Support for referendum delay:

  1. Budget constraint: $75,000–$100,000 savings significant in town budget; already budgeted in contingency; no additional risk or harm to applicant or public.
  2. New council representation: Dickinson and Kendall Schumacher argued that newly elected council members (elected in November 2024) deserve voice on Lakeshore 650 before May 2025 vote; November 2026 aligns decision-making with newly installed representatives.
  3. No applicant harm: Town Attorney Legler confirmed no liability to applicant for delay; no entitlement clock running; applicant can still develop county property with wells/septic if town annexation vote fails.
  4. Improved voter participation: General election (November 2026) historically draws higher voter turnout than special election (May 2025); larger voting population hears both sides' messaging more thoroughly.

Most compelling support arguments:

Organized support:

Project Details

Zoning Code Overhaul (Chapter 13, Ordinance 2024-947)

Key changes from 1978 code:

  1. Simplified use tables: Consolidated ~30–40 pages of use lists into 2-page tables; uses organized by letter progression (Animal A → B → C) from least to most intensive.
  2. Factory-built homes: Now explicitly permitted in all stick-built residential zones (equivalent to site-built construction standards).
  3. Manufactured homes in residential zones: If designed to resemble site-built homes (garage, eaves, permanent foundation), allowed via special use permit (council approval) in RL, RS, MU districts; also permitted via conditional use permit (staff-approved, appealable to council) in manufactured-home districts.
  4. Manufactured home parks: Now allowed in RM/MH zones via special use permit or rezoning (previously restricted to RM/MH only; no park allowance in residential).
  5. Multifamily housing in commercial: CN/CG/CI zones now allow residential as primary use (not just accessory to commercial) via special use permit or rezoning.
  6. Minimum lot sizes reduced: Standard single-family zones (R1 L5–L8) now allow 5,000–8,000 sq ft minimum lots (down from 10,000 sq ft); accommodates density designations without full PAD process.
  7. Planned Area Developments (PADs) minimized: Reduced minimum acreage from 40 acres to 5 acres; simplified process; PADs now either primary or overlay zoning designation.
  8. Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) required for all rezonings: Developer-submitted master plan (site plans, architectural renderings, infrastructure) approved as part of rezoning ordinance; becomes recorded public record; any substantial change requires re-approval.
  9. Conditional use permit (CUP) vs. special use permit (SUP) distinction: CUPs (staff-approved, noticed to 300-ft neighbors, appealable to council) used for lesser-impact uses; SUPs (planning commission recommendation + council approval) for higher-impact uses (telecom, utilities, solar farms, wind turbines).
  10. Manufactured home design standards: Must include garage, eaves, permanent foundation, and meet design guidelines (under development); manufactured homes with full site-built appearance eligible for residential zone approval via CUP.
  11. 180-day rezoning shot clock: State law requirement (effective end of 2024); town must issue rezoning decision within 180 days or applicant may pursue appeal.
  12. Land splits (Chapter 13 only): Retained in zoning (not shifted to Chapter 14) pending full subdivision code update.
  13. Hydrocarbon spillage prohibition: New provision prohibiting oil, gasoline, and hydrocarbon spills on paved or unpaved surfaces; enforcement mechanism for improper vehicle maintenance.

Vote Breakdown

Zoning Code Chapter 13, Ordinance 2024-947 (First Reading)

Final: Unanimous (6-0; Michael Greer absent)

Yes: Mayor Pgoda, Vice Mayor Hunt, Councilmember Dickinson, Kendall Schumacher, Councilmember Searcher (listed as Searcher in transcript; likely Scheuer), Kenneth Freund

Abstentions/Absences: Michael Greer (absent)

Individual amendment votes (all unanimous):

Lakeshore 650 Referendum Election Timing (Resolution 2024-25)

Final: 4-2 (November 2026 general election approved over May 2025 special election)

Yes: Mayor Pgoda, Vice Mayor Hunt, Councilmember Dickinson, Kendall Schumacher

No: Councilmember Reynolds, Kenneth Freund

Abstentions/Absences: Michael Greer (absent)

Outcome & Next Steps

Zoning Code

Decision: First reading of Ordinance 2024-947 (comprehensive Chapter 13 update) approved unanimously with four individual motions:

  1. Clinic definition amended to "ambulatory health services, <24 hours."
  2. Skilled nursing facilities allowed via conditional use permit in CG, CI, PM zones.
  3. Manufactured homes with design standards (garage, eaves, permanent foundation) allowed in residential zones via conditional use permit.
  4. Hydrocarbon spillage prohibition added to nuisances section.

Final adoption: Second reading scheduled December 11, 2024; effective 30 days post-approval.

Implementation: Staff will begin processing rezonings and use applications under new Chapter 13 rules upon adoption. Residential and commercial design guidelines (referenced throughout new code) scheduled for council consideration early 2025.

Lakeshore 650 Referendum

Decision: Referendum on Ordinance 2024-938 (Lakeshore 650 annexation, 652 acres, 3,500+ units) placed on November 2026 general election ballot (not May 2025 special election).

Cost savings: Estimated $75,000–$100,000 (special election avoided; question piggybacks on general election already budgeted).

County notice: Town directed to notify Yavapai County Election Department by November 25, 2024 (180-day deadline) that town will not participate in May 2025 special election date.

Outcome: Voters will decide Lakeshore 650 annexation and development approval in November 2026, 18 months from signature verification (November 7, 2024). If referendum fails, applicant Jason Geisei may develop property as county use (wells/septic, lower density restrictions) without town annexation benefits.

Controversies & Context

Lakeshore 650 Referendum Timing Dispute

The 4-2 split exposed a core tension: fiscal restraint vs. democratic responsiveness.

Stop Lakeshore 650 framed the delay as council ignoring 4,000+ citizen signatures; Patricia Betel and allies claimed the town had already "invested" $100K+ in legal fees to raise referendum signature thresholds (a claim referenced but not detailed in council discussion). Mayor Pgoda and Vice Mayor Hunt countered that cost-conscious budgeting is sound governance; the applicant is not harmed; and waiting 18 months allows newly elected council members to share responsibility for a 3,500-unit development that will reshape town character. Councilmembers Reynolds and Kenneth Freund sided with voters' "right to vote promptly."

Unresolved context: Town Attorney Legler's interpretation of referendum signature requirements (stated by speaker Steve Caros as raising required signatures from X to 4X) was characterized as costing taxpayers $100K+ in legal fees but not explained in detail. Councilman Reynolds called it "gross incompetence" and demanded Legler be offered retirement. The council did not respond to or address this accusation during the November 14 meeting.

Zoning Code Speculative-Rezoning Concern

Patricia Betel and others characterized the new preliminary development plan (PDP) requirement as "disingenuous" hiding major code changes (accessory dwelling units, lot-size reductions, density increases) under the guise of "simplification."

Frank Cassidy defended the PDP as anti-speculation safeguard: developers show designs, council approves them as binding record, subsequent changes require re-approval. This reverses prior practice where rezoning was generic and final site plans diverged from council's expectations. However, Betel remained skeptical that promising to tie developments to PDPs actually prevents speculative rezoning or protects neighborhoods from unintended densification.

Manufactured Housing Political Friction

John Roosa (Southwest Homes) objected that requiring manufactured homes to go through special use permit (council-level, like wind turbines and solar farms) defeats attainable housing goals. Vice Mayor Hunt agreed, voting to elevate manufactured homes to conditional use permit status (staff-approved, appealable). The change reflects a broader manufacturing-housing advocacy effort in Arizona, where HUD-standard homes are cheaper but historically stigmatized. Frank Cassidy's code allows design-standard manufactured homes in residential zones, signaling acceptance—but the cup vs. sup debate shows political divisions even among pro-housing councilmembers.

Water Resources & Infrastructure Concerns

Multiple speakers (Sandy Graham, Tom Steel, Patricia Betel) raised unresolved water supply and storm-water infrastructure issues:

Council response: Minimal. Mayor Pgoda acknowledged water as strategic priority; council directed staff to review comments. No specific action or study authorizations announced.

New Council Member Social Media Controversy

Former councilwoman Lucy Lea raised concerns about newly elected council member posting photos of Mayor Pgoda's home and family on social media with critical comments, alleging corruption without filing police reports. Lea called the behavior "borderline criminal" and urged council to censure the councilman-elect.

Council response: Mayor Pgoda and others acknowledged social-media civility concerns; no formal action taken. Councilman Dickinson offered general remarks about respecting the office and considering "the other side of the story" (interpreted by some as deflection). Resident Louise Weeks raised related concerns about alleged harassment of Town Manager Davidson over open-meeting law and council retreat procedures.

Duration

Other Notable Items

Jasper Phase 3 Final Development Plan (FDP 22-2): Approved 5-1 (Michael Greer absent; one no vote, name not identified). Applicant Jason Geisei committed to per-unit school-district contribution; 272 units on 130 acres; updated traffic impact analysis required as condition. Jasper master plan (3,587 units, 1,245 acres) originally approved 2014; phase 3 subjected to updated TIA to assess cut-through traffic on Jasper Parkway South arterial now opening.

Park Development Design Standards & Guidelines (Resolution 2024-239): Approved unanimously; updated standards adopted for park development and facility design.

ARPA Funds Reallocation ($775,000): Approved unanimously to tear out and replace ADA playground surfacing at Mountain Valley Park and install flexible workspace pods in library; addresses heavy utilization and staff workspace efficiency.

Urban Camping Restriction (Ordinance 2024-946): Second reading approved unanimously; effective 30 days post-passage.

Calavera's Bar and Grill Liquor License (Series 12): Approved unanimously; no public opposition noted.

2025 Legislative Guiding Principles: Approved unanimously with amendment adding homelessness supportive services as lobbying priority (Mayor Pgoda's motion).