A New Vision for Benson:
Protecting Property Rights While Truly Safeguarding Public Safety
For decades, residents of Benson have lived under a growing web of land-use regulations, zoning rules, permitting requirements, and bureaucratic oversight. Many of us, homeowners, small business owners, farmers, and families, have felt the frustration of being told what we can and cannot do with our own property, often by unelected staff in Planning & Zoning or Building Departments.
As a member of the Benson City Council, I believe it’s time for a better approach. One that respects the fundamental right to own and use private property, focuses government on real harms instead of preemptive control, and delivers genuine public safety, starting with a functioning fire department. This is not about eliminating all rules. It is about returning to a smarter, more accountable system rooted in common-sense principles that have protected communities for generations.
The Limits of 100-Year-Old “Police Power”
Modern zoning and planning emerged in the early 20th century under the broad legal doctrine called “police power.” Courts allowed cities to regulate land use in the name of health, safety, morals, and general welfare. The 1926 Euclid v. Ambler decision gave this approach constitutional blessing, and cities across America built elaborate rulebooks around it.The result in many places, including small towns like Benson, has been layer upon layer of restrictions: minimum lot sizes, rigid setbacks, use tables that dictate what activities are allowed where, aesthetic guidelines, lengthy permitting processes, and fees that add thousands of dollars to any project.While some of these rules address legitimate concerns, many go far beyond preventing harm. They reflect preferences for how officials or planners think a town “should” look and feel. Over time this creates a system where unelected administrators hold more day-to-day power over private land than elected representatives. Even when the mayor appoints staff, the bureaucracy develops its own momentum and institutional interests. This is the 100-year-old control mechanism I want to reform.
Arizona’s Powerful Response: Proposition 207
In 2006, Arizonans overwhelmingly passed Proposition 207, the Private Property Rights Protection Act. Sparked by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Kelo decision (which allowed governments to seize private homes for economic development), Prop 207 did two critical things:
- It sharply limited eminent domain abuse.
- It created strong protections against regulatory takings: If a new regulation reduces the value of your property, the city must either compensate you or grant a waiver allowing you to proceed under the old rules.
Importantly, Prop 207 preserved exceptions for legitimate public health and safety concerns and for traditional public nuisances. This gives us the legal foundation to shrink overreach without creating chaos.
The Better Path: Nuisance-Based Regulation with Real Accountability
Instead of trying to micromanage every possible future use through zoning maps and thick code books, we must return to a core principle: Government should prevent one person’s actions from substantially harming their neighbors or the public. This is the traditional law of nuisance, both private (neighbor vs. neighbor) and public. Examples of real, actionable nuisances include:
- Redirecting drainage so that stormwater floods neighboring properties
- Creating excessive noise, dust, or odors that make nearby homes unlivable
- Allowing structures to deteriorate to the point they threaten to collapse onto public rights-of-way
- Activities that create genuine fire hazards capable of spreading to adjacent buildings
- Septic or waste systems that contaminate shared groundwater
Under this approach, enforcement would focus on documented complaints and evidence of actual harm rather than speculative “what if” scenarios or design preferences. Where serious public safety is at stake, we can still act decisively, but through clearer standards and greater involvement of elected officials. I believe the Cochise County Sheriff, an elected constitutional officer directly accountable to voters, should play a stronger role in public nuisance abatement inside city limits where appropriate. This is preferable to relying solely on appointed code enforcement staff who answer to an administrative chain. Accountability to the ballot box matters.
Fire Protection: The Perfect Opportunity for Balanced Progress
Benson’s current fire department is a combination of one full-time Chief, 4 Full time, and dedicated volunteers. Response times suffer because volunteers must leave work, travel to the station, and gear up. Insurance companies are already penalizing property owners with higher premiums or dropped coverage due to slow response. Improving fire protection is not optional. It is a core public safety responsibility. A stronger department with more full-time staffing and potentially a second station would:
- Save lives and property
- Lower insurance costs for every homeowner
- Support responsible growth
- Strengthen our ability to claim we are serious about genuine safety
Here is the opportunity: Fire protection is one of the clearest areas still protected under Prop 207’s health-and-safety exception. We can, and should, move aggressively to fund and staff a professional-level response. At the same time, we can use this moment of shared priority as the foundation for broader reform. Real safety improvements give us credibility to say: “We are delivering on the things that actually protect the community, now let’s reduce the rules that don’t.”
Why This Matters: The Promise of Responsible Liberty
Shifting toward nuisance-based standards and greater elected accountability offers several powerful benefits:
Greater Personal Freedom
Property owners regain the ability to use their land productively without asking permission for low-impact activities.
Lower Costs
Fewer permits, shorter review times, and reduced bureaucracy save money for families, builders, and the city itself.
Better Targeting of Resources
Staff and budget focus on real problems instead of paperwork and minor infractions.
Stronger Community Accountability
When enforcement is tied more closely to elected officials and evidence of harm, decisions become more transparent and responsive to residents.
Economic Vitality
Easier development of housing, small businesses, and agriculture encourages investment while still protecting neighbors.
Improved Trust in Government
When rules feel fair and focused on preventing clear harms, people are more likely to support necessary public services, including a first-rate fire department.
This is not deregulation for its own sake. It is smarter, more principled governance that honors both individual rights and communal responsibilities.
A Call to Benson Residents and Fellow Leaders
If you own property in Benson, run a business here, or simply want a more prosperous and free community, I invite you to engage.
- Ask questions about specific regulations that feel burdensome.
- Share examples of rules that seem to go beyond preventing real harm.
- Support efforts to fund fire department improvements.
- Hold all of us on the Council accountable for delivering both better safety and restored property rights.
I intend to bring forward discussion items that pair fire department staffing and facilities upgrades with a comprehensive review of our zoning and land-use ordinances. The goal is clear standards that protect neighbors without unnecessary control. This vision is practical, lawful under Arizona’s strong property rights framework, and long overdue. It replaces a century of accumulating bureaucracy with a focus on liberty, responsibility, and genuine public safety. The promise is a stronger Benson, where families and businesses can thrive, where the government stays within its proper bounds, and where we solve real problems like fire response without creating new ones through overregulation.
I look forward to the conversation.
Benson City Council Member
Mark Boyle