Oro Valley Votes to Appeal Its Own Planner's Ruling on the Rancho Vistoso Parcel Next to Safeway

Oro Valley Votes to Appeal Its Own Planner's Ruling on the Rancho Vistoso Parcel Next to Safeway

ORO VALLEY — The Town Council voted 6-0 Wednesday to appeal a planning and zoning administrator's Aug. 21 decision on what can be built in the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development, after two executive sessions and a 7-0 vote to hire the Tucson law firm Mesch Clark Rothschild as outside counsel. The council took the action without public comment: Mayor Joseph C. Winfield said at the top of the meeting that he would not accept speaker cards on the item because it would be handled in executive session with no presentation.

Vice Mayor Melanie Barrett, who requested the item with the mayor, said she learned from a council report that the administrator had issued a decision on how certain uses are defined and allowed in the Rancho Vistoso PAD. The property at issue is parcel 5U, "the one we've been talking about regarding the Safeway Plaza entrance," she said, where the council has recently discussed traffic — and the decision would also apply to other properties in the PAD. State law gives 20 days to appeal such a decision, which is why the item came to Wednesday's meeting. TDB reported Aug. 12 that the town's traffic modeling for a new signal on Rancho Vistoso Boulevard assumed a potential assisted-living project on 5U, and that the town engineer said staff would need to examine what the town could require "if 5U develops commercially without needing council approval."

The council went into executive session with the town attorney and town manager to discuss hiring counsel, returned to vote 7-0 for Mesch Clark Rothschild, then went back into executive session with the firm's David Hindman to discuss the appeal itself. When the council reconvened, Barrett first moved to appeal "the Board of Adjustment's ruling," then corrected herself: the motion is to appeal the planning and zoning administrator's decision to the Board of Adjustment. It passed 6-0, with Council Member Dr. Harry "Mo" Greene II recorded as absent for the vote; he had been present earlier in the meeting.

The item drew a rebuke during Call to Audience from Greg James, an Oro Valley resident, who said neighbors had handed out flyers for the meeting only to be told by others that it had been canceled. The last council meeting on a nearby development, he said, had left the chambers "standing room only." He said finding out "that the city council does not have oversight over this" was "absolutely nightmarish," that he "had never heard of a sanatorium going in" there, and that the item being closed to comment was "absolutely unacceptable." Winfield said after the outside-counsel vote that "some of you are probably feeling pretty frustrated."

The mayor also announced that a separate agenda item, a 59-lot single-family subdivision south of Moore Loop, had been pulled from the agenda by the applicant and may return at a future meeting.

The council voted 7-0 to adopt a five-stage Budget Stabilization Plan, putting in writing a shortfall-response framework that Chief Financial Officer David Gephart said staff had already been following informally.

The plan sets graduated responses keyed to general fund revenue shortfalls: Stage 1, "minor," for shortfalls up to 2%, roughly $1.2 million under the current budget; Stage 2, "moderate," 2–5% ($1.2 million to $3 million); Stage 3, "significant," 5–10% ($3 million to $6 million); Stage 4, "major," 10–15% ($6 million to $9 million); and Stage 5, "crisis," above 15%, or more than $9 million. Actions taken at each stage carry into the next. Gephart said the town was in the moderate stage last fiscal year, when transaction privilege tax revenue fell short of budget expectations.

The council adopted the plan as a "policy and planning document" rather than through the resolution on the agenda. Barrett, who made the motion, said the resolution's language directing the town manager and other officers to take "all steps necessary" to carry out the plan could grant staff authority they don't currently have. Council Member Mary Murphy, who seconded, said she raised the idea 18 months ago after learning the town was already following the process without a written document: "It's good to finally see something in writing." Council Member Josh Nicolson questioned why the plan is tied to revenue shortfalls rather than to economic indicators like consecutive quarters of falling GDP, and said the town has faced a shortfall "every single year I've been on council." He pointed to threats to state shared revenue, including San Tan Valley's incorporation and the possibility of Casas Adobes or Catalina Foothills becoming municipalities, as reasons the pressure won't let up.

The council voted 7-0 to dissolve the year-old Tourism Advisory Commission effective immediately.

Winfield, who requested the item with Council Member Joyce Jones-Ivey, gave three reasons: four of the commission's five members have resigned, the staff responsible for tourism has turned over, and the town now has an approved leisure travel management plan "that needs time to be implemented and evaluated." He also noted the commission had been seated to multiyear terms immediately before the coming council transition, and said dissolving it lets the next council decide how to engage residents on tourism. The motion directs staff to implement and evaluate the plan and report to the council quarterly, bringing any significant change in tourism strategy back for direction. Murphy recalled that the town had earlier hired a Texas firm to work on a travel plan and that the economic development director had convened a strategic planning group before the commission was created; the commission's work fed the leisure travel management plan the council approved unanimously this summer.

Assistant Town Manager Karl Shaddock, newly promoted, told the council the 2026 legislative session was "largely defensive" for cities: 2,190 bills were introduced, 264 became law, and roughly 100 touch cities and towns.

Oro Valley formally tracked 46 measures and asked the mayor to engage directly on five, Shaddock said. Four new laws require operational changes: the statewide primary moves to the second-to-last Tuesday in July, with related election-calendar changes; a new method satisfies certain statutory publication requirements online; tax, assessment and fee proposals can no longer be placed on a consent agenda; and municipal courts can no longer impose fees for appointing a public defender, which means amending the town code provision that sets that fee at $125. On the money side, Shaddock said Rep. Juan Ciscomani helped advance roughly $4.2 million in federal community project funding for police technology modernization and $7 million for bridge replacement, and that state next-generation 911 funding should offset about $50,000 in public safety communications costs. Jones-Ivey said the "defensive" framing concerned her and asked what is driving the Legislature's push for more control over local decisions.

Also discussed:

• A planner presented the state-mandated Community Model Homes Program, which took effect July 1 and offers three pre-approved accessory dwelling unit designs from 156 to 1,000 square feet. Staff said 85–90% of Oro Valley homes are in HOAs, whose own design rules typically govern.
• Senior Planner Kyle Packer presented the OV Trails Connect interactive trail and path master plan website, published in June.
• Jones-Ivey asked for an October update from the water director on recent Central Arizona Project developments and their effect on the town's water supply. The mayor seconded.
• Town Clerk Mike Standish announced the Water Utility Commission meets Sept. 16 at 6 p.m. in council chambers.