The ongoing lawsuit by a number of Red Rock Loop Road-area residents against Yavapai County and a New Age religious group is now well into its third year of litigation. A trial is not anticipated until January 2024.

The county entered into a settlement with the Global Community Communications Alliance over the permitted uses of its Camp Avalon property off Upper Red Rock Loop Road in February 2020.

The New Age group was formerly known as the Aquarian Concepts Community and its more than 100 members lived at the site, then called Avalon Gardens, before the community collectively moved to the Tumacacori area south of Tucson in 2007 and 2008.

Following the 2020 settlement, two groups of nearby residents, Residents of the Red Rock Loop and the Smoke Trail Ranch Property Owners Association, filed suit against the county for violating state open meeting law when approving the settlement agreement and seeking to have that agreement voided in February 2021.

Motions, countermotions and discovery in the lawsuit continued throughout 2021 and 2022. As of Aug. 9, 2022, Presiding Judge John D. Napper had scheduled a trial for May 26, 2023.

Yavapai County moved for summary judgment on Feb. 7, 2023, in a filing arguing that “the board’s actions were fully consistent with the open meeting law. Furthermore, plaintiffs’ suit is barred by the doctrine of laches.”

Laches is the principle of equity that prohibits an aggrieved party from claiming damages after an unreasonable amount of time has passed. The county’s filing stated that while the members of the Smoke Trail and Red Rock Loop associations had been aware of the settlement as early as March and April of 2020, they had delayed in filing their claim until Feb. 18, 2021.

“This case has continued to proceed without great haste,” the motion added. “It is now nearly two years since this case was filed, and almost three years since the meeting at issue. Based on the foregoing, the court should find as a matter of law that plaintiffs have unreasonably delayed bringing their claims in this matter.”

On Feb. 28, the parties in the case agreed to extend the time to reply to March 27 for the plaintiffs and April 11 for Yavapai County. The notice of extension was filed at 5:02 p.m. on Feb. 28. Fifty minutes later, Residents of the Red Rock Loop and Smoke Trail filed a countermotion for summary judgment against the county.

The plaintiffs’ countermotion described Camp Avalon as a “commercial campground” and an “ongoing nuisance” and repeated the argument that the county had entered into a “secret settlement agreement” with GCCA involving a secret payment of public funds by failing to give sufficient notice of the possibility of that decision in its posted notice for the meeting.

“No reasonable human would have understood that the ‘action’ [referred to in the agenda] would include the county’s complete capitulation to Global’s demands,” the motion stated. The plaintiffs also pointed out that while the county had argued that posting proposed settlement agreements in advance would “grind government to a halt,” in previous instances when the county had settled litigation, it had made the full details of the proposed settlements available on its website.

“The county would have the court believe that the one and only time it failed to provide detail of a contemplated settlement on its agenda was perfectly benign and within bounds,” the motion read.

On March 2, the plaintiffs and GCCA made a joint motion for an amended scheduling order, and on March 8, an oral argument in the case at which the amended order could be put together was scheduled for May 24. However, on March 23, Napper issued an amended scheduling order instructing the parties to make their final disclosures by July 3, attempt private mediation no later than July 30 and make their final motions by August 30. Failing successful mediation, he scheduled a trial-setting conference for Sept. 11 to finalize a proposed trial date of Jan. 15, 2024. The trial is expected to last nine days.

The plaintiffs responded to the county’s motion for summary judgment on March 27, requesting that the court deny the motion on the basis of its “strawman arguments, hyperbole and inapposite precedent.”

The county’s motion, the residents said, “sidesteps the facts.”

The response also rejected the county’s claim that the suit should be barred by laches on the grounds that the doctrine is subordinate to statutory provisions, that laches is typically applied only in time-sensitive election cases and that, given the time necessary for the plaintiffs to explore possible remedies, which was lengthened by the COVID-19 pandemic, “there was no delay.”

Yavapai County’s response on March 29 declared that “there was nothing sinister or secretive about the board’s decision to settle,” and reiterated the arguments that the agenda was sufficient and the plaintiffs had failed to act with urgency.

The county’s response cited Baker v. City of Farmers Branch, in which the Texas Court of Appeals held that a notification that a settlement will be discussed is sufficient to satisfy the provisions of open meeting law even if the full details of the settlement are not disclosed. The county’s response did not address the plaintiffs’ argument that its treatment of the GCCA settlement agreement had been abnormal compared to its usual procedure in discussions of litigation.

In reply to the plaintiffs’ assertion that insufficient disclosure on an agenda would force citizens to “show up every time the litigation appeared on the agenda,” the county wrote, “That is correct. A citizen desiring to be kept apprised of litigation involving the county should be expected to show up every time the litigation appears on a board agenda. The burden of attending is minimal.”

The plaintiffs responded to the county’s motion for dismissal again on April 10, repeating their previous claims, and the county countered with more of the same on April 11.

On May 24, Napper issued an order taking the county’s motion for dismissal under advisement following oral arguments by counsel.