Subcommittee presses for rewritten housing, water and map sections in Prescott general plan draft

The Prescott City General Plan Subcommittee devoted extensive discussion on April 8, 2026 to edits to the June 24, 2025 draft general plan, emphasizing the need to update or clarify chapters on housing, water management, taxes, airport planning and maps before the consultant finalizes the draft.

Members repeatedly flagged the downtown specific area action plan (adopted in 1997) as likely outdated and recommended the consultant incorporate more recent downtown and historic-preservation work. Several speakers urged reorganizing plan chapters from thematic sections into element-by-element sections that align with Arizona Revised Statutes to improve readability for staff, the council and the public.

The subcommittee questioned multiple data points in the housing section: missing or mismatched graphs (references to 2022 data while charts end at 2020), repeated national statistics that committee members said are less useful for local decisions, and language that could unfairly characterize community attitudes toward multifamily housing. Committee members also recommended shortening and substantially reworking the workforce housing material while adding recent local accomplishments (members cited a turnkey partnership that produced 82 units at no cost to taxpayers).

Housing-supply drivers discussed included the local rehab industry and short-term rental (vacation rental) activity; members said those factors can absorb housing stock that might otherwise serve local workers. The subcommittee asked staff and the consultant to quantify these impacts when possible and to avoid overstating national trends.

On fiscal sections, members asked the plan to display the city's current sales-tax rate and a clear breakdown of what the city retains for roads, public safety and the general fund. They asked staff to relabel "intergovernmental revenues" as "state shared revenues" and to note that impact fees are for new-growth infrastructure and are reassessed periodically.

The airport section also drew attention: members asked the consultant to update references to the control tower, planned runway extension and current carriers and routes; they suggested stronger language about the airport's economic role and better signage for the industrial air park.

Committee members requested the consultant correct inconsistent names and dates, update graphs to at least 2025 where feasible, and trim redundant or speculative national comparisons. They asked staff to circulate the revised draft to the Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe for historic-section input and for the consultant to prepare a draft citizen-participation plan that explains how the 60-day public comment period will be conducted and summarized.