Above is the supposed contact list for the DRB and Planning Commission. If these links fail to work, blame the board members for participating in the super-secret government run my Manross and Dolan.

If you have any questions concerning any planned projects, don't hesitate to contact the ones above who make the decisions.

(Return to Top)

Has the City Staff stacked the deck against meaningful input from the rank and file citizens of Scottsdale? We have heard and witnessed this frustrating situation since the Manross administration came on the screen and it raised it’s ugly head again this last week with information and questions which are printed in this edition of the Activist.

One might say, "Ah ha, that can’t be because they just asked Nancy Cantor to serve on a committee and have had other so called activists serve on various committees etc." But, who else has been appointed to those committees or groups to counter the questions and discussions to make sure the side of the administration outweighs that of the opposition 2 to 1? Having served on many such "adventures", I can tell you that it’s more the case than not.

That being said, I was surprised to receive in the mail, a letter from Mayor Manross, inviting me to participate in a "one-time Focus Group as part of the City of Scottsdale’s "Destination Scottsdale Tourism Visioning Project." Facilitated by the Arizona Town Hall process "in conjunction with Scottsdale’s Economic Vitality Department," this meeting is to take place Friday, July 18, 2008.

Recent news stories about the failure of Scottsdale’s retail and commercial venture’s, especially in the Waterfront area, not being able to capitalize on the Super Bowl festivities were greatly disappointing.

While some of us have questioned the wisdom behind the concentrated development on the canal banks at Scottsdale and Camelback Roads, no one wants to see sincere business efforts fail.

Scottsdale’s economic stability depends upon tourist dollars and tourists look for something unique to attract their attention and their money.

We will be focusing on "perceptions, attitudes and opinions from a broad cross-section of the community regarding the tourism industry in Scottsdale."

As always, I turn to you all for input on important questions about the business of the people of Scottsdale.

Things we are to be considering include the importance and role of tourism in Scottsdale’s overall economy.

Let me back up here because it important to know what "synergies" means in this instance. In this place we refer to

Thank you, Webster’s. This refers to businesses, events, venues, etc. that complement and promote one another as unique to Scottsdale.

When I moved here as a kid Old Town closed up pretty much during the summer and every body went to Michigan until October. Now we have the comfort of our air conditioned caves. What is it that would draw you out of your cave in this day and age of rising gas prices? During the more mild winter months what would draw you to want to mix and mingle with the out of towners?

You can send me an email at nancyanncantor@cox.net .

I will be happy to receive your input and share it at the Tourism Town Hall.

Nancy Cantor
Chair, Scottsdale Coalition

Free of Charge, Candidates are strongly encouraged to send the Scottsdale Activist a Candidate Campaign Statement including factual and verifiable information concerning their candidacy they wish to have included in the Activist in the July 19^th edition. The Activist will not make any corrections or change the copy in any way other than formatting it for the website. Should we find non-factual information or half-truths, we reserve the right to make editorial comments about those items outside the body of the candidate’s contribution.

Free of charge, All Candidates will be allowed a maximum of 1,500 words and one (1) color picture which will be included in the all-encompassing report to the citizens by the Scottsdale Activist in the July 19^th edition. All Candidate Campaign Statements must be computer generated in MS Word in Ariel font and 12 point type with one (1) inch margins. Current website addresses or flyers will not be accepted or published in this portion of the Scottsdale Activist. Photos should be either .bmp or .jpg format.

If a candidate cannot provide a computer generated product, please call 480-326-2475 and arrangements will be made to pick up a typewritten product which can be scanned to the proper product necessary for use in the Activist, again at no charge.

Candidates who choose not to participate in this free campaign promotion will be short-selling their candidacy as something not taken seriously by said candidate, and will only be represented by the information generated and written by the staff of the Activist.

We would hope that ALL Candidates would participate so our 20,000+ readers each week and 80,000+ readers a month can get an in-depth look at each candidate.

Questions? 480-326-2475

(Return to Top)

 ~ Candidates and Incumbents Discriminate?

It may surprise some of you to know that in Scottsdale we actually have some residents who struggle to put food on their tables. They are the working poor, those trying to survive a devastating family disaster, and the elderly residents of Scottsdale.

I have heard it said, by some candidates and incumbents running for City Council, that we, the citizens of Scottsdale, should pre-determine the "type of people that we want to have live here" and make development decisions based upon that predetermination.

Isn’t that direct discrimination? Isn’t that an illegal act? If this is the mentality of any candidate for any Scottsdale elected office, where has the humility and concern for our fellow human beings and residents gone, and do we really want them serving as our representatives?

Those candidates and incumbents who make these careless and insensitive comments clearly have no idea what it takes to create a good, balanced city and probably couldn’t care less.

Scottsdale was, at one point, a farming town. There were olive trees, alfalfa fields and orange groves as far as the eye could see and lots of open space. Horses were ridden up and down what is now the bustling and busy main drag of Scottsdale Road. The city limits were nothing more than a couple miles one end of town to another. People took pride in their land ownership as well as their ability to raise their families in this city and talk with their neighbors over the back fence.

Scottsdale’s residents were then and still are, an eclectic bunch; artists, developers, real estate agents, consultants, teachers, laborers, activists, social workers, doctors, work-at-home moms, single mom’s and dad’s, small and large business owners, police, firefighters, and retired property owners on fixed incomes.

Perhaps these candidates and incumbents have lost not only their respect for Scottsdale and its citizens past and present, but also their perception of reality. Their prejudicial, discriminatory attitude toward our citizen base is disheartening, to say the least. Who are they to judge?

We cannot legally "choose" who lives in Scottsdale, nor can we predetermine that factor by excluding those who reside or desire to reside here through bogus zoning, height and density rules. We cannot develop to attract just one or two types of citizens – how generic a town would we become? How does a city survive without diversification?

We can and should embrace the contribution to our citizenry and honor these diverse individuals for their choice of residency. Each new resident of Scottsdale brings with them culture, personality, individuality, opinions and ethics that are as different as the new dawn rising.

Scottsdale was built on that eclectic mix – on character, uniqueness and quality of life. To discriminate against those residents because of their occupation, perceived lack of status, or financial wherewithal would be making a mockery of the very foundation of this great city. Yet, some candidates and incumbents would like you to believe that we can establish our own identity here in Scottsdale by excluding those who they consider inferior. Again, who are they to judge?

The next time that you hear a candidate or incumbent say that they’d like to exclude those residents who struggle to put food on their tables because they do not, according to them, fit the stylistic mold if a Scottsdale resident, or say that they desire to change our citizen base and our citizen identities merely by developing higher end real estate, please correct them.

Please tell them that black, white, brown or yellow, rich or poor, our city has always opened its doors to those who wish to live and work here, even if that means neighbor helping neighbor to survive. Clearly these candidates and incumbents do not know what makes a city, like Scottsdale, a successful place. It’s the people, the diversity and the mix.

Those candidates and incumbents, who are most certainly wrapped up tightly in their self-serving pompous discriminatory attitudes, with their supportive special interests in tow, surely do not care about the real people of Scottsdale and therefore should not be elected to our city council.

Isn’t it time we changed the city for the better by allowing the "Common Man" a say in whom and what we are and where we go in the future?

(Return to Top)

It is amazing to watch the endorsement process for any election. Nine times out of ten, people endorse a candidate because they have voted in a way to benefit them or their special interest.

You don’t find many candidates being voted into office for good government and open processes of government. Both of those elements are necessary for the survival of a representative democracy (Republic).

Some may consider this year’s mayoral and council election a shoe-in for incumbents. Many more do not.

Let us hope that no one has a lock. Let us hope that all the cards are on the table.

In 2003, residents of the mature neighborhoods requested from this Mayor, former City Manager Dolan and the City Council that a vision be created for the redevelopment of the mature neighborhoods.

Residents, tired of the stagnation and dwindling opportunities for shopping and services, wanted sound development with guidelines for developers so that they, the residents, were not constantly traumatized by developer proposed projects that were not a good fit in either design or function.

What we got from the Mayor, City Manager and Council was nothing. No reply, no response, zip, Zero, ZILCH.

Today the community is faced with the task of choosing more of the same.

The current Mayor and Council majority have promised much and delivered little. Oh, you can count in dollars the investment in redevelopment, but does that development do what it is required by the General Plan?

The average citizen does not know much about the General Plan, and that is not necessarily a bad thing because this is supposed to be a "Representative Republic, based on Democracy." We elected people to know, understand and make sure that the General Plan functions for the good of the whole community.

We "harp" a lot on the General Plan because that document holds the driving principles for quality development/redevelopment for all of Scottsdale. We "harp" a lot on the General Plan because it is not being implemented the way it is supposed to according to the community vote in 2001.

We especially "harp" on it because the Mayor and Council are allowed to approve "exceptions" to it for every plan that comes to them.

No matter how hard the planning staff scrutinizes every project they have no say over how the Mayor and Council vote regarding the exceptions.

The Mayor and Council have less expertise than the planning staff, and less time to do the research and dialogue with developers and community.

What it all boils down to is the whole thing is at the mercy of politics.

We need to make sure that every candidate understands what we require of them and that they are willing to forego "politics as usual" and make every effort for open, orderly government with goals and objectives clearly stated.

From what we have seen so far during this election season, there is a ray of hope, and a sliver of light spawning a new day that a new, non-political course of action might be on the horizon for Scottsdale on September 2nd.

Pay close attention to the upcoming Scottsdale Activist on July 19^th which should "separate the wheat from the chaff" in our current crop of mayoral and council member "wanna be’s" and has beens.

(Return to Top)

 ~ Early Ballot Mail Out Date Changed

Expect to receive your early ballot in the mail sooner than the original August 7th mailing date. Remember that about 60% of the registered Scottsdale voters have requested absentee or early ballots so the election could be won or lost before the September 2^nd election date.

(Return to Top)

Obviously, no one on staff (strictly directed by the mayor) or Council will admit to stacking the forums and workshops chosen to discuss (?) or suggest solutions (?) to certain projects or city problems. It will be a hard thing to prove, and their "Craven Weasel clause" will be that the invitation was open to the public and they accepted whoever expressed interest in participating.

Of course the type and where the invitation was offered or advertised could be very suspect also couldn’t it historically speaking?

However;

1. The person contracted to run the forums and compile the results is an architect (Angela Dye).

2. Both the Current Planning and Advance Planning staff owe their jobs to development. If there were no development, there would be very little planning.

3. By Advance Planning's own statistics, 25% of participants in the forums and workshops were development professionals of some sort (developers, architects, real estate agents, etc.). Obviously, these folks have a financial interest in development. This percentage is not even close to reflecting the much lower fraction of these professions in the general population.

4. Again, by statistics provided by Advance Planning, a full 37% of participants were NOT Scottsdale residents.

5. From personal participation in a few of the events, it was very clear to me that there was no mechanism in place to capture which participants contributed which opinions to the process. So, it is possible (and I would guess VERY likely) that a MUCH higher percentage of non-development-employed residents expressed opinions contrary to
those indicated by the pro-development, pro-height, pro-density summary documents. We believe that this is an even more important indicator of flawed process than whatever "stacking" took place, because it buries the effect of stacking within the compilation mechanism.

6. From the experience of many others, pro-density statements that participants never expressed verbally were frequently inserted into the summary documents. On the flip side, MANY of the concerns of the non-development residents were NOT included in summary documents.

These are the experiences and observations of many average citizens. Draw your own conclusions.

We seriously doubt that the Manross Administration would dare, or even be able dispute these accusations with facts, simply because they probably don’t exist.

Could this be still another case of the oft demonstrated Manross Administration penchant for secrecy and "fixing" a problem or plan to the benefit of their developer, power broker friends and campaign contributors?

It’s time for a serious change and direction in Scottsdale City government.

(Return to Top)

 ~ Make or Break Council Vote July 8th !

This Tuesday, July 8^th, is the final City Council meeting prior to their summer break.  A very important item is on that last agenda. 

The neighborhood communities near 68th Street and Indian School Road have challenged the City Council to stop the proposed re-location of a SRP electrical substation to that gateway-to-our-city intersection.  You know the current location of the long-time substation at the NE corner of Camelback Rd and Scottsdale Road on the eastern side of the canal, it even had horses there for years, that is the agenda item. 

Many local organizations fully support all the efforts of Pat Lamer as the lead spokesperson for the multiple neighborhoods in the 68th and Indian School area in their effort to stop the moving of the SRP electrical distribution sub station. 

You are encouraged to email your supportive comments to Council members at citycouncil@scottsdaleaz.gov, attend the Council meeting, or to speak at the microphone on the 9th.  If you can't attend, please watch on the city Channel 11 at 5 PM.   But...we know that the vast majority of you have email so let the mayor and those Council members know that you support fellow residents. Just a quick sentence or two will be a tremendous impact. 

(Return to Top)

From: Dodds, Pat

Sent: Thu 7/3/2008 6:00 PM

To: Drake, Betty; Ecton, Wayne; Lane, Jim; Littlefield, Robert; Manross, Mary; McCullagh, Ron; Nelssen, Tony

Cc: Little, John C.; Rodbell, Alan #855; Schwartz Manock, Bridget; O'Connor, Mary; Ellison, David L; Cornell, Janet; Duggan, Sean #425; Gesell, Steve L.; Porell, Paul; Frey, Clifford; Santaella, Luis; Robberson, Deborah

Subject: End of DPS photo enforcement agreement

Mayor and Council:

The attached letter notifies DPS that the City is not extending the Loop 101 photo enforcement agreement beyond July 1, effectively ending the agreement immediately.  The letter, which is from Acting City Manager John Little to the DPS director, was sent late today.

The letter cites two reasons for ending the agreement:

The city will continue processing citations issued through June 30, but will not process any received after that date.

The letter also urges DPS to increase patrols along the Scottsdale segment.

We do not know whether DPS will make any announcements about the status of the program right away.  We wanted to make sure you were informed if they chose to do so.

Please let me know if you have any questions.  I am available by cell over the weekend at 602-228-1599.

Have a great July 4th holiday!

-- Pat Dodds
 

(Return to Top)

Mayor Manross and her council majority conned taxpayers out of $1.2 million by hiring "consultant" Charlie Hales to perform Scottsdale's Transportation Master Plan study.

The report ended up being a complete farce and waste of tax dollars because Charlie Hales heard the outrage from the residents and saw the writing on the wall concerning his dismal failure in convincing the taxpayers of the need for light rail.. 

Visit the American Dream Coalition website http://americandreamcoalition.org, and you can read the latest fact sheet published in 2008. At the end, there is a paragraph about Charlie Hales, the same Charlie Hales that was paid to "study" and write Scottsdale's new transportation master plan which any elementary school child could have written with a small amount of parental help.

HDR and Charlie Hales just finished in April 2008 the "study" for Tempe which recommends 90 feet building heights along the Tempe rail line.

Do you think Tempe and their city government will pay any attention? We doubt it because they have already ignorantly committed to Light Rail after "drinking the poison Kool-Aid" and now they have to pay the outrageous price.

(Return to Top)

When Mayor Drinkwater suggested moving forward in creating the Neighborhood Enhancement Commission in the early 90's this was one of the issues that he saw a need for the City to get a handle on.

Unfortunately, there does not seem to be an implementation process that allows plans and issues like these to go before the NEC today. Is this also why the neighborhood elements of the General Plan are never included in discussions for projects like Hanover? Why can’t sound scrutiny and the community voice be heard before the City is plunged into situations like the one boiling around Waterview and the substation relocation?

When NEC first met as a commission one of the issues we took on was making electric substations a good neighbor, esthetically and in delivery of power.

SRP worked with us to look at designs, landscape/buffering walls, different techniques for making the substations less obvious including consolidating the site. We, SRP and the City of Scottsdale, shared funding for doing these projects.

Make no mistake about it, the Camelback Rd. site at the canal was discussed and SRP provided preliminary guidelines for enclosing and dropping the equipment below grade. Since there were no plans what so ever for that area in the early 90s that project was set aside.

Perhaps SRP and/or the City "records storage" still hold those plans.

NEC had them at one time, but that was when we were more closely aligned with the Planning Department and included in planning discussions.

If the philosophy is that this substation, when moved to the Indian School location, is not "ugly," then surely SRP and Wanninger can come up with a design that would not be considered "ugly" and keep it right where it is.

This is a serious infrastructure issue and has been treated much too casually by leadership.

Once again, our Mayor and Council have inflicted undue stress and expenditure of money because of the lack of forethought on important redevelopment/development elements.

Nancy Cantor
Chair, Scottsdale Coalition

(Return to Top)

Where does MAG get off basically endorsing any candidate for any office in Scottsdale, then appointing them to the chair of their organization for the next two years?

Was this an ethical move for MAG to make, and for the mayor to accept?

This is not a county election issue and the county should butt out of Scottsdale city business!! Manross must really be running scared if she had to get MAG to endorse her lame candidacy.

We smell a nasty snake in the grass here which could possibly be called named "Blackmail", very similar to the stench emitted by the very odiferous sewer at the Waterfront which is just doors away from the "Pink Taco", one of the mayor’s favorite watering holes.

These are the kinds of shenanigans that really upset voters and bode poorly for the recipient of such undue support which could be the straw that breaks the camels back in the Manross run for a third term as mayor of Scottsdale.

Manross already spends far too much of her time away from our city on "business" which isn’t really city related or if so, in a very minor and non-constructive way, or to receive an "award" she or her staff had to ask or apply for. She certainly hasn’t done anything to win the vast majority of the "awards" she has "won" according to our inside sources.

If the mayor would spend just 25% of the time meeting and working with local organizations as she does "politicking" out side the city and state, the city would be in far better shape and she would have at least some sense of the needs of the residents and possibly earn the respect she thinks we owe her.

Since her election 8 years ago, she has spent less than ½ % of that time working with any citizens at the citizen organization level and that time was not at a local community meeting.

(Return to Top)

Could it be that the developer (Wanninger) of WaterView (Solis) could be using his winning bid for State Trust Land to buy leverage with the city council to trade the council approval of the 64^th Street and Indian School property for use by SPR for the land the city wants for the Preserve entry point?

It certainly wouldn’t be a bad business move for the developer but it sure would start a firestorm with the citizens that would most probably end with any incumbents voting for such a proposal being thrown unceremoniously from office in the September 2^nd election.

(Return to Top)

Below are the city links to the Campaign Finance Reports for all candidates for the September 2^nd election. To get past page one, click on the small right/left arrows where the page designator is located in the upper center portion of the form.

We think it’s very important for all voters to look at who the contributors are and what their occupation is. Be aware that just because they say they are retired, doesn’t mean they are not working for someone or representing someone who could possibly expect special considerations from the city council.

As an example, Incumbent councilman Ron McCullagh has a majority of contractors, builders and developers as his major contributors while others have none of those types of contributors, so who would you suspect would have the least political pressure on them if elected? The candidate with lots of builder/developer/mover & shaker contributions, or the candidate with little or no contributions from that group?

Another example would be the paper work of the Manross campaign which is so messy, it cannot be read in many cases. Was this done because of pure sloppiness and lack of attention to detail, or deliberately so readers wouldn’t be able to determine who the contributor actually is?

Many contribute to a number of candidates and others contribute to only one or two. To decide who is collecting what from whom, look for the bigger dollar donations (^$100 or more) and note if those contributors are part of the developer or builder community, a political entity, or some other organization where "having a friend on the council" might be a good thing.

Just because a candidate has collected a lot of money doesn’t mean they are the most popular or most qualified. It could mean that there is a lot of political pressure there or that possibly favors could be expected. It’s also important to note whether the contributor has been in front of the council asking for something such as special zoning, height and density, or some other issue falling outside the current General Plan.

As has happened in the past, just because a candidate has a lot of money doesn’t mean they win. In a number of cases, they have lost because of their poor or questionable performance or to whom they are connected by their campaign contributions.

Be very careful and study the candidates and who they might be representing if elected, other than the taxpayers of Scottsdale.

Lisa Borowsky

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/clerkpacs/viewer.aspx?n=4693589&v=9507678&t=TIFF

Joel BramOweth

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/clerkpacs/viewer.aspx?n=4692777&v=9506054&t=TIFF

Oren Davis

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/clerkpacs/viewer.aspx?n=4690027&v=9500549&t=TIFF

Betty Drake

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/clerkpacs/viewer.aspx?n=4693592&v=9507684&t=TIFF

Tom Giller

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/clerkpacs/viewer.aspx?n=4693304&v=9507108&t=TIFF

Suzanne Klapp

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/clerkpacs/viewer.aspx?n=4690695&v=9501890&t=TIFF

W. Jim Lane

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/clerkpacs/viewer.aspx?n=4668118&v=9456564&t=TIFF

Mary Manross

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/clerkpacs/viewer.aspx?n=4693419&v=9507338&t=TIFF

Ron McCullagh

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/clerkpacs/viewer.aspx?n=4679748&v=9479908&t=TIFF

Nan Nesvig

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/clerkpacs/viewer.aspx?n=4690605&v=9501715&t=TIFF

(Return to Top)

8912 East Pinnacle Peak Road, PMB 275 ● Scottsdale, AZ 85255

email: COPPeak@coppeak.org                    website: www.COPPeak.org

The July meeting of the Coalition of Pinnacle Peak will be on Thursday, July 17, at 7:00 p.m. at the Legend Trail Community Center.

On the Agenda: City Council Candidates’ Forum: Each candidate will be asked to present a brief opening statement identifying what they believe are key issues facing Scottsdale. After the introductory statements, candidates will be asked to comment on a limited number of issues we believe will impact the future well being and quality of life for Scottsdale residents. Following the discussion of each issue, questions from the audience will be permitted. We will ask the audience to write down their questions while the discussion is in progress and forward it to someone who will consolidate similar questions for ease of handling. The forum will be moderated by Coalition President, Bob Vairo.

Members of the public are welcome to attend.

Directions to the Community Center: Go north on Pima Road approximately 1.5 miles past Lone Mountain to Legend Trail Parkway. Go right on Legend Trail Parkway approximately 1.5 miles to the Community Center which is on the right.

(Return to Top)

Wednesday 16 July 2:00 p.m. 1st Arizona Republic Mayoral Forum. -- City Cable 11 studios on the second floor of the Scottsdale Center for the Performing Arts. This one-hour forum would focus on the key issues facing Scottsdale. The program would start airing soon after the taping on City Cable 11 and there would be coverage in the Scottsdale Republic, The Arizona Republic and on the Republic Web sites. No guests will be allowed in the studio.

Mike Ryan moderates. mike.ryan@pni.com (602) 444-5810.

Thursday 17 July 7:00 p.m. COPP Forum for all Mayoral and Council candidates. The forum will be at the Legend Trail Community Center, 34575 North Legend Trail Parkway, Scottsdale, AZ 85262, Pima Rd, N of Lone Mountain. Coalition of Pinnacle Peak, www.coppeak.org.

Directions to the Legend Trails Community Center will be repeated in future Scottsdale Activist editions if you miss it here.  North on Pima Road beyond Lone Mountain (a couple miles north of Pinnacle Peak Road).  Turn east at the traffic light at Legend Trails.  Proceed around the curve---the community center is on your right.  There will be COPP signs to assist you to the front door and meeting room.  Come early---it is expected to be a full house.

Tuesday 22 July 6:00 p.m. Scottsdale Tribune’s Mayoral Candidates Forum. Broadcast live on City Cable Channel 11 from 6 to 7 p.m. Tuesday, from the Kiva of Scottsdale City Hall. Mark Scarp will moderate, accompanied by a fellow Tribune editor to be determined. It is to be rebroadcast on Channel 11 at 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. on these dates:

(The City Council candidate forums will be broadcast live from 7:30 to 8:30 p.m. July 22 and replayed on the above three dates at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m.)

Conversational style with no set time limits, although, time permitting, you will each be asked to give a one-minute closing statement at the end of the forum. Questions will provide candidates to give their views on a range of city issues. We will also ask about candidate qualifications as well as similarities and differences in candidates’ approaches. Some questions will be for all candidates while others will be directed at particular candidates. Many will be compiled from Tribune staff; however, during the next four weeks we hope to also gather questions from among our readers.
 You may direct questions during that period to city editor Bill Bertolino at bbertolino@evtrib.com or by calling (480) 970-2352. We’re looking forward to a detailed and lively discussion.

Mark J. Scarp moderator, mscarp@scottsdaletribune.com (480) 970-2351, Columnist/editorial writer, East Valley & Scottsdale Tribune Thursday 7 August 7:00 p.m. Scottsdale Area Association of Realtors Forum At the Kiva, 6 pm for Council candidates 7 pm for

Mayoral candidates, www.saaronline.com Bill Gray moderator.
Contact John Packham, john@saaronline.com, 480.945.2651, SAAR Government Affairs Director.

Wednesday 13 August 8:00 a.m. Heart of Scottsdale Realtor's Tour Group (Heart of Scottsdale covers from Cactus Rd. & Thomas/112th to Scottsdale Rd). Realtors, Finance people, Inspectors, and Title people (about 50 of us) will hear why you think you're the best candidate for the Council and what you most want to see happening in our great city of Scottsdale!!! at the McCormick Ranch Golf Club---networking at 8:00....speakers at 8:30

https://www.saaronline.com/marketing/residential.php?id=1   or

http://heartofscottsdalehometours.com/tours.htm

Contact Sue Murray, smurray@russlyon.com, 480-560-7706, Director.

Monday 18 August 2:30 p.m. Second Arizona Republic Mayoral Forum
City Cable 11 studios. This half-hour forum would likely be one of the last times to discuss the issues with voters leading up to election day. This program will start airing soon after the taping on City Cable 11 and there will be coverage in the Scottsdale Republic, The Arizona Republic and on the Republic Web sites. No guests will be allowed in the studio.
Mike Ryan moderates. mike.ryan@pni.com (602) 444-5810.

Just received word that the Hanover Referendum court appeal was denied. 

For the 3,000 plus citizens who signed the Referendum requesting denial of the massive Hanover Project that the Council approved, you are needed ONE MORE TIME.

The HAD Political Committee and Chairperson personally put themselves in debt $10,000 to take this case to the appeal stage. They are $3,000 short of funds to pay their appeals attorney. They've used a home equity loan and reduced family funds to continue the citizens' drive.  They sorely need ANY funds ($10? $20..more?) to pay off the legal fee. Make your check out to: Height and Density PC and mail it to 6847 E. Lafayette Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ 85251.

You must carefully study the political position of each candidate on issues of importance to you.  If they are an incumbent then you have a voting record to evaluate.  If they are new to the ballot then you want to know

(Return to Top)

~Letters to the Editor  

 ~ Open Letter to the Council…..

To: Mayor Manross, Vice Mayor Littlefield and City Council members:

Re: 9 ZN 2007 and 8-AB-2007 Waterview at Scottsdale aka Solis Scottsdale Hotel and Residences

The hundreds of residents in five major in-town subdivisions plus Mr. Tom Anderson (as "Advocate for the surrounding commercial business operators and owners"), have asked this City Council to support their position that an electrical substation should NOT be re-located to the NE corner of Indian School Road and 68^th Street. The Coalition of Greater Scottsdale strongly states that they deserve support from every business and property owner in Scottsdale and every citizen organization.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

However, there will never be public support when existing businesses and residential neighborhoods plus one of our Gateways to Scottsdale are so negatively impacted.

Respectfully submitted,

For the Board of Directors,
The Coalition of Greater Scottsdale
Sonnie Kirtley, Chair www.cogsAZ.org
cellular: 602 717 3886 anytime"

(Return to Top)

While growing up, many years ago, my parents taught me two words to live by:  Love & Respect.

This message is for the Scottsdale Mayor and those Council members that it applies to - and you know who you are.

Respect being shown is essential to your employer or you soon won't have a job.

Mayor and select Council members, this applies to you.  We are your employer, we pay your benefits and you don't give a darn.  We pay your salary and still you do what ever you please.  You refuse to live by the Scottsdale Charter, which is the rule book of this City.

How can any of us respect your blatant misuse of powers as our employees?

It is not necessary to love someone in order to respect them, although it sure helps.  I am not talking about "in love".  I am talking about love - meaning CARING about someone.  But how can we "care" about you, our employees when you spit in our faces.

Vote by vote, "you" are destroying "our" city.  The height and density is an eye sore.  And those buildings are slowly but surely loosing occupants.  You will not allow your employer to vote on any of the issues.  But...our vote will come in September.  That vote you will not be able to push aside.

You have voted to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on "beautifying" Scottsdale Road, but all this time you are pushing to have light rail installed and totally waste all that money.  At the same time you will be destroying all the businesses along Scottsdale Road along with many homes that will be reduced in value to virtually 0 dollars.

You continue to close your doors and not allow any of your employers to participate.

As your employer, we want to know what is going on behind those closed doors.

These past years have been a disaster to many Scottsdale residents and the locations where they have their homes.  Thank God we only have a few more months to live with this careless attitude of the Mayor and certain Council members.

Lee Tannenbaum
Scottsdale

(Return to Top)

  Living in the Land of Oz

I want you to remember these words Ozites, as stated not that long ago by a planning commissioner or two, during the recent discussion we had about another property that wanted to re-zone from C-S (Regional shopping center) to C-3, the highest and most intense commercial use allowed near residential neighborhoods.

Remember, the last time the city approved this kind of change it was to allow for a "drive through" restaurant that the developer had no tenant to occupy.

We re-zoned an entire site to one of the most intense uses located against a residential community just so they could have a "drive through restaurant" which increased the value of the land by leaps and bounds.

The City Council approved, with little thought to the future for what can be built on that site now, new zoning.

The planning commission of Oz made it clear that doing this was going to create a bad precedent and guess what, it has already started.

We now have case 9-zn-2008 looking to shift from C-S zoning to what else, C-3 zoning, and all for what? An animal hospital located on 87^th Street north of McDowell Road of all things because we have no other zoning classification for this type of use other than

C-3.

Now with this issue I have no problem with the land owner and what he is trying to do other than lease out a building that has sat vacant for some period of time and I understand he held meetings with residents and has 80 signatures. But did he tell the residents behind this parcel what could result in the future if the zoning gets changed to C-3? Did he explain that the C-3 zoning is the most intense commercial zoning you could get in the area? I seriously doubt that as that would have turned some heads.

Did he even know what he was setting the neighborhood up for down the line?

Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with the use being requested and the animal hospital in question has been a member of our community for many years and has always been a good neighbor. I can understand the reason for them moving to a busy corridor where they can get more exposure and more business. Amen to them for being able to obtain this spot.

The problem is the request of such a HUGE up-zone for this parcel and what it could mean for the future of the site if they move from there and what can then go in that spot.

Yeah I know, it is called advanced planning and after realizing that the only thing our advanced planning department could come up with to help developers build higher and denser is a regression back to post World War II zoning.

Yes, I am referring to the recent passage by the planning commission for a text amendment for none other than PUD zoning.

With the last zoning issue, our Council sold the residents down the tubes again by granting the C-3 zoning with a "development agreement." That doesn’t amount to a hill of beans if the design never pans out and a new owner comes in with different plans.

Come on Southern Ozites! You know this crap won’t happen up North. Every one of our council members threw us under the bus in that latest episode of stupidity.

It is either that or the grand plan is playing out to allow such zoning changes to happen now so they can build higher and denser in the future and maybe that is their advanced planning scheme.

I say since our illustrious planning gurus can only come up with rezoning the parcel in question to a future use that could negatively harm the community behind it.

Let’s see if we can help them out with another idea, and I know how hard this concept may be for them to understand, but the bigger dunces we need to float it to are the majority of morons we have as elected leaders.

Okay, let’s say we think about the issue like this. The only issue between both parties is that the use is not permitted in C-S and we already know that there are not that many C-S zonings anymore.

C-3 is the only zoning that allows this use, and we all know how outdated some of our zoning is (and advanced planning is sending us even farther back in time), so lets consider this brainstorm.

If the owner of the property is not happy with that then we know something is wrong with the picture.

Once it gets to the council, offer the same thing, a text amendment or denial of the up-zoning.

Since our future in South Scottsdale is uncertain, and we have no plans for what we are looking to do in any of the southern corridors, my interpretation of advanced planning, at this time, is amending the text instead of changing the zoning. Let’s see what the future holds when the city has a clue; if they ever do.

When in the history of Scottsdale elections have you ever had to see the Maricopa Association of Governments stick their noses into Scottsdale Mayor and Council elections????????? NEVER THAT’S WHEN!!!!!!!! Apparently, the troops are starting to get antsy.

Ladies and Gentlemen of MAG the citizens of Scottsdale request that you stand down! It is none of your business who we chose as Mayor. Butt out.

You don’t live here. You do not have to put up with the problems our city must deal with daily.

How would you like Mayors of other Valley of the Sun municipalities butting into your elections?

We know you placed our current Mayor as your chairperson, but surely your bylaws allow for succession if she is not re-elected and surely you have other qualified persons on your board to step into the slot.

You all must really want that light rail up Scottsdale Road!

An election for Mayor and Council is not business as usual and that seems something that you and the Chambers of Commerce do not care to address. At least the Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce does not care to address issues that are important to residents. Their only interest is their profit margin, not the good and welfare of the whole community.

And heaven knows not good government.

It is obvious that Mayor Manross is getting perturbed with the number of "citizen petitions" coming to Council, but it is part of her job to graciously accept them and not ridicule the citizens.

Now, if she was really concerned about the issues and the petitions representing those issues, she would be asking herself "why" are there so many of them. Could it be that the citizens do not feel included in the process? Or do the citizens feel that Councils ‘too casual attention’ to important issues pertaining to infill redevelopment requires more serious open discussion?

A good leader is not afraid of identifying problems and rooting out the solutions to provide sound, effective policies and procedures.

Oops! I forgot Scottsdale’s leadership has told us we have no problems.

Hm-m-m…….

Please note Council and Mayor……..the first problem you have is that your rose colored glasses are welded to your faces and your hearing aid batteries need changing.

Residents and developers are not real impressed with the redevelopment process. You don’t follow your own General Plan and you do not look beyond the Dais to include communication with staff, boards and commissions, developers or the general citizenry.

Deep breathe you seven; this has been Fourth of July week, give the "town hall" form of government a bit of thought, because that is what got this whole country started.

We are very excited that it only took you all two years to recognize the efficiency of the Trolley. Baby steps are good……there is not a whole lot to be said because the "Scottsdale Activist" has been promoting the Trolley for some time.

We know it is hard for you to accept that positive support for anything having to do with transportation can come from those associated with the "Scottsdale Activist". But, then remember that all you want us to see is light rail and nothing else. (Note to MAG: this is another Scottsdale issue you can butt out of.)

Light rail has been handed to our City’s leadership so that they do not have to think about transportation and all of its impacts and they have been willing to sell Scottsdale Road down the river to placate MAG and the Arizona Department of Transportation and the Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce.

Once again, a big thank you to Margaret Dunn, the driving force behind the Trolley program.

by Nancy Cantor for Michael Merrill
nancyanncantor@cox.net

Now that the empty heads in the pathetic media have pontificated about the narrow Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, let’s take a moment on this Independence Day for an intelligent discussion of something that trumps Heller’s gun.

First, as backdrop, the essence of the Heller decision is that citizens have a right to keep an assembled gun in their house for self-defense. As Porky Pig used to say at the end of his cartoons, "That-that’s all, folks." Of course, because Supreme Court justices are on a piecework pay system in which they get paid for the number of highfalutin words they produce, the Heller decision produced pages of words to say what Porky could have said in one sentence, even with his stuttering.

If the Supremes had decided that citizens didn’t have the right to keep an assembled gun, I would have said the hell with them and kept my two pistols assembled and ready to fire. The odds of federal and local agents finding out would be nearly zero, just as it was nearly zero when my grandpa said the hell with Prohibition and made booze in his cellar. Unenforceable laws that run counter to human nature and natural rights are laws that will be broken and will make the government look like the overbearing buffoon that it is.

There is a very low probability of a bad guy taking my property. But there is 100 percent certainty that federal agents will take my property. The Heller decision says that I have a right to defend my property in the first instance, which I would have done anyway, regardless of what the Supremes had ruled. On the other hand, a decision known as Helvering v. Davis says that I have no right to defend my property in the second. In other words, I have a right of self-defense where the probability of harm is nearly zero, but I have no right of self-defense where the probability of harm is 100 percent.

You won’t hear the pathetic media pontificating about this bizarre situation and gross violation of rights.

What is the Helvering v. Davis decision? Made in 1937, it said that Social Security was constitutional and that the "general welfare" meant anything that Congress wanted it to mean. The Court would not have ruled this way if it were not for Herr Franklin Delano Roosevelt putting a gun to the Court’s head by threatening to stack the court with justices loyal to him. FDR’s attorneys helped the emperor in democratic clothing by confusing the scaredy-cat justices with gibberish about Social Security taxes being insurance premiums instead of taxes.

The net result is that 71 years later, the nation is bankrupt, if "bankrupt" is defined as having more IOU’s than the ability to pay the IOU’s. The IOU’s for just Social Security and Medicare are over $60 trillion, or more than $700,000 for each American under the age of 18. Amazingly, the pathetic media is largely silent about this and thus lets both presidential candidates get by with fiscal hogwash that will increase the bills while decreasing the value of the dollar bill.

Even more alarming, well over half of Americans are either dependent on the government for handouts or subsidies, or live in a household where the breadwinner works for the government or works in a private-sector job that is dependent on government regulations. Thanks to Helvering, the tipping point was crossed long ago.

Once politicians were allowed to define the general welfare, politicians defined it for the welfare of politicians, ensuring that they would be reelected. The illustrious members of our national and state legislatures invited leeches, ticks, mosquitoes and every other species of bloodsucker into their offices to feed off the body politic -- all in the name of the general welfare.

If wealthy farmers want a subsidy, it’s for the general welfare. If horny retirees in big Buicks want free Viagra, it’s for the general welfare. If Barack Obama wants free goodies for his favorite charities in order to buy votes in South Chicago, it’s for the general welfare. If George W. Bush wants taxpayers to build a stadium for his baseball team, it’s for the general welfare. If John McCain wants taxpayers to fund the elections of politicians they hate, it’s for the general welfare.

And on a personal level, if Tom, Dick and Harry want government agents to take the Cantoni family’s silverware for their own benefit, it’s for the general welfare. Unfortunately, because Helvering trumps Heller, I can’t shoot the bastards.

An author and columnist, Mr. Cantoni can be reached at ccan2@aol.com.

 ~ Council and Mayoral Candidates Information

(Return to Top)

The Scottsdale Activist is published, and edited in Scottsdale AZ ~ 480-326-2475