Editor's Note: On Thursday, Governor Katie Hobbs and the Arizona State Land Department took the action to terminate the state land leases held by AgTech LLC and related entities.
AgTech LLC responded:
“Legal counsel is reviewing the materials to prepare the appeal and pursue other available legal actions. A quick read of the renewal-denial letters shows that the Arizona State Land Department violated the due process provisions of its own leases and the statutory protections granted under the Regulatory Bill of Rights.”
—_
It’s a quarter past 8 on a summer morning, and the temperature is already climbing toward 94 degrees.
At the Lemon Grove, Tyler Woodman is waiting at the door.
Woodman owns the Lemon Grove and Grove 95. He is vice president of the Yuma Mesa Fruit Growers Association and a board member of the Arizona Research Citrus Council for the governor’s office. He has also become one of the most visible voices in Yuma County’s growing debate over biosolids.
Woodman says his public work began with curiosity about how things work.
“I truly find life interesting,” he said. “I see a soda machine, a soda fountain at a gas station and I kind of wonder how that works. That’s kind of what I try to do with my page is I explain Yuma, Yuma’s history, Yuma’s importance.”
More recently, Woodman has used his platform to document what he describes as persistent odors, unusually large fly populations and the movement of biosolids onto nearby state trust land.
“The last couple of years, for the first time ever, it started to actually hit parts of town that it hadn’t hit before,” Woodman said.
“But it was so bad here, out on our farms, and for our workers and for everybody, even my business that it was just like, ‘This is unbearable.’”
He also points to soil studies conducted in 2017 and 2018 by the University of Arizona and the Yuma Pest Abatement District. Woodman said he believes the findings raise questions about the source of the flies and odors.
“Scientific evidence is saying that it is coming from south of 19th,” he said.
When Woodman refers to “it,” he means the flies and odors he associates with biosolids applied south of 19th Avenue. His claims have not established that biosolids caused specific illnesses or environmental harm, but he is calling for additional testing.
“Why can’t we get some additional scrutiny to see if we really are poisoning ourselves?” Woodman said. “That’s kind of my whole argument. No one has come out conclusively and said, ‘Yes, everybody is safe,’ or, ‘No, everybody is not safe.’”
This is Part 2 of The Cost of Waste, a closer look at the people living with the possible consequences, the workers defending their livelihoods and the unanswered questions surrounding health.
Woodman is asking for independent testing to determine what is in the soil and whether residents are being exposed to potentially harmful substances.
“It’s like an elephant walk, you know, of semi-trucks full of feces, sewage byproduct,” he said.
But exposure may not occur only through the soil. Dust generated during the handling, transport or application of biosolids could also be a concern, particularly for people living or working nearby.
Dr. Juanita Mora, an allergist and immunologist and a national medical spokesperson for the American Lung Association, said airborne particles can irritate the eyes and respiratory system.
“When we’re talking about biosolids and respiratory health, they basically go in through the nose, through the eyes as well,” Mora said. “A lot of people get irritated eyes, burning eyes. It goes in through the nose, causing nasal congestion.”
As particles move deeper into the respiratory system, Mora said, they can irritate the airways and contribute to phlegm buildup.
According to USAFacts, 24% of Yuma’s population is underage, while approximately 46,900 residents are 62 or older. Mora said children and older adults may be especially vulnerable to respiratory irritants.
“Children’s lungs don’t finish developing until 9 to 11 years of age, so their airways are very immature and more apt to wheeze or have bronchospasm,” she said.
Older adults and people with underlying conditions, including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cystic fibrosis, heart disease or diabetes, may also face increased risks from respiratory irritants, Mora said.
She added that biosolids may contain endotoxins, fungal spores and microorganisms. However, Mora emphasized that identifying a possible exposure is not the same as proving that exposure caused a particular illness.
“If people are having recurrent symptoms, nasal congestion that won’t go away, where they can’t really breathe out of their nose, a new-onset cough that has now become a chronic cough and has been going on for more than six weeks, or new-onset wheezing, this is the time to talk to your doctor,” Mora said.
“You can be having complications from basically observing and smelling and inhaling all these particles,” she said.
Mora recommended that residents document persistent odors, dust, fly activity and health symptoms and share that information with their doctors, local health departments and public officials.
City says biosolids meet standards
While medical experts such as Mora say more data is needed to evaluate potential respiratory risks, the city of Yuma maintains that biosolids management is a longstanding and regulated practice.
Jeremy McCall, the city’s director of utilities, said the public debate over AgTech is disconnected from the technical realities of the city’s operations.
The Yuma City Council recently approved a contract to continue sending the city’s biosolids to AgTech for another year, with options to extend the agreement.
“It means nothing new,” McCall said. “This is a practice that we have been undertaking for 40 years.”
The city has generated biosolids for decades, McCall said, and the council’s agreement includes a one-year term with the option of four additional years, depending on performance.
“Do our biosolids have any pollutants of concern? No. They meet all EPA standards. They have for decades,” McCall said.
McCall acknowledged that emerging contaminants exist but said they are not currently regulated and that the city monitors its waste stream.
“Even if they were, we’re on top of it, making sure that those wouldn’t be in our community’s waste stream,” he said.
That position reflects the heart of the divide in Yuma County. Municipal officials point to regulatory compliance and decades of use. Residents and growers point to flies, odors and health concerns as signs that the current system may not be addressing every risk.
Veterinarian reports concerns
In July 2026, Yuma residents gathered at the Yuma Civic Center to voice concerns about biosolids. Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes listened to residents, including Dr. Danielle Opfenring Amavisca, a large-animal veterinarian.
Amavisca treats horses and cattle throughout the region. She said her practice has observed what she described as an anecdotal increase in flies and insect-related conditions.
“Our practice is on County 4E, in between County 13th and 14th,” Amavisca said. “We are also seeing an anecdotal increase in fly- and insect-related pathologies.”
She said domestic flies can contribute to conditions in horses, including migrating habronema and granulomatous lesions.
“We’re seeing an increase in that problem,” Amavisca said. “We are also seeing an increase in potential infectious cases, though of course we are a private practice, and all of this is just what we’re seeing on a case-by-case basis.”
Amavisca said the concern extends beyond individual animals. Yuma County is a major agricultural region and produces a significant share of the nation’s leafy greens.
“Even though this is a human community issue with the flies, I think there are also some deeper considerations that we need to make in terms of our own health and safety, but also that of those people who consume the products that come out of this area,” she said.
“That includes animal products, animal feed and human-intended products,” she said.
Her observations are anecdotal and do not establish that biosolids caused the conditions she described. Still, she said they underscore the need for more information.
Workers defend AgTech
The biosolids system is not only about soil or public health. It is also a source of employment.
Truck drivers, plant workers, equipment operators and other employees depend on AgTech for their livelihoods. That perspective was visible at the July town hall, where workers came forward to defend the company and the work they do.
Rodolfo De Anda, a truck driver who attended the meeting, said that for workers like him, defending AgTech also means defending their jobs.
“Well, I’m trying to protect my job,” De Anda said. “These people are trying to leave more than 100 families without a job.”
De Anda said many families in Yuma County rely on biosolids-related employment.
“A lot of families have been living off working with biosolids, and they’re getting misinformation,” he said. “Biosolids are not dangerous. I don’t see old people with cancer or anything like that here in town.”
He urged residents to consider the potential economic consequences of shutting down the operation.
“Think about this: more than 100 families,” De Anda said. “That means 100 homes in Yuma County that are going to be without a job because these people are giving misinformation.”
Arizona State Land Department ends AgTech leases
Gov. Katie Hobbs and the Arizona State Land Department terminated one state land lease held by AgTech LLC and declined to renew four others in Yuma County. The state said one lease was in default and that four others were not renewed because of concerns about biosolids application rates, odors, dust, flies, debris and impacts on nearby agricultural operations.
The state said AgTech applied more than 68,000 dry metric tons of biosolids in 2025, with about 97% coming from California utilities. Officials said the company applied approximately 140 dry metric tons per acre, compared with an average of about 7 dry metric tons per acre.
Hobbs said the action was intended to protect the Arizona State Land Trust, which provides revenue for public beneficiaries, including K-12 education. The state emphasized that the decision applies to AgTech’s leases and does not affect other responsible biosolids applicators.
AgTech said it was surprised and disappointed by the decision. The company said it has acted as a responsible steward and cited testing conducted through the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
The company is reviewing the state’s notice with legal counsel and has said it intends to appeal under Arizona law.
Woodman welcomed the state’s action.
“I think it is a great step on the road to accountability,” he said.
In the middle of us reporting this series, a decision landed.
Governor Katie Hobbs and the Arizona State Land Department took the action to terminate the state land leases held by AgTech LLC, but what does this actually mean? And what is Ag.Tech responding? In part 3 of the cost of waste, we’ll look into next steps.
