~Attorney Irvine Fires Off Letter to Council

Today, Attorney Tom Irvine sent each member of the City Council a letter which in layman’s terms tells them they cannot vote on City Council Meeting Agenda Item 34A from the July 8^th Council meeting, which is scheduled to be heard this coming Monday which states: (Click here to see Tom Irvine's letter)

"The August 18th Agenda item must be removed from the Agenda and not considered or debated"

This concerns the corner of Indian School Road and 68^th Street which is owned by the developers of Solis (formerly called WaterView) on the east side of the canal from Camelback north. This owner(s) have paid over 7 million for the Indian School site and are willing to pay another 12+ million to have SRP relocate the electrical distribution station.

Irvine calls the request for a council up or down vote just a Political stunt by Littlefield.

Littlefield is doing EXACTLY what the residents have DEMANDED he do: make the current council majority make a decision, one way or the other without a bunch of Mumbo Jumbo!

If anyone is pulling a political stunt, it’s Irvine and his cronies including the Council Majority!

SRP wouldn’t need any more power if the density in the downtown area wasn’t being pushed to the sky and they have indicated as much!!

Attorney Tom Irvine is again pulling funny looking rabbits out of a hat trying desperately to save not only the developer who has offered over 20 million for a decision in his favor (How much profit will he make?), who is apparently paying his bill, but also the developers zoning attorney John Berry, close associate and confidant and perennial Congressional Candidate Susan Bitter Smith of Technical Solutions, as well as the endorsed mayoral (Manross) and council candidates (Drake, McCullagh and Klapp) of the Scottsdale Area Chamber of Commerce fame!

He is also seems to be trying very hard to vindicate and save the work (and possibly money) of his dear friend Susan Bitter Smith and her company Technical Solutions and that of John Berry along with the political careers of Manross, Drake and McCullagh wouldn’t you think?

It would also appear Irvine is attempting to make the Chamber endorsees look whistle clean and good in the process doesn’t it? Suzanne Klapp has NEVER been to a citizen sponsors meeting unless it as a council candidate from what we can find, but belongs to most of the fraternal or membership types of organizations which usually don't bother or participate in local issues.

Wasn’t Susan Bitter Smith and her company Technical Solutions the ones who did the so called "Public Outreach" on the WaterView development and many other projects which the citizen have been complaining about, and those projects are all slowly going in the dumper?

Aren’t Tom Irvine and John Berry very close long time friends of Susan Bitter Smith, and don’t both handle all her problems and vise versa according to the public records?

Wasn’t John Berry the attorney who represented the legal interest of this developer and others knowingly requesting items and zoning that was outside of the current general plan and current designated downtown area because he knew that Manross and Company were most probably in his pocket?

Isn’t Tom Irvine the same attorney who handled the Hanover referendum defeat over a very minor error which had almost 3,000 citizen signatures when all the citizens asked for was a public vote?

Isn’t Tom Irvine the Attorney who handled the Dust Ordinance referendum defeat which also had almost 3,000 citizen signatures when all the citizens asked for was a public vote to take it back to the council for a better, in depth review?

Hasn’t Tom Irvine’s name been tied to both Berry and Bitter Smith for decades and especially with these out of code and out of the general plan deals which have started falling apart because of public outcry?

Wasn’t Tom Irvine the Attorney who Kevin Osterman gave the official disk of signatures to which bounced Nan Nesvig out of the last election (right or wrong)? Maybe we should have checked Osterman’s signatures when he ran. As we remember he didn’t have all that many either. Could it be that the teaming up of Irvine, Osterman and a shill named Karl Kulich was facilitated by Susan Bitter Smith?

Isn’t Judy Eisenhower, a close long time friend and confidant of Bitter Smith, the person who wrote the glowing letter about Susan in the Scottsdale Tribune today (Friday)?

Isn’t she also an equally close long time friend and confidant of the infamous Karl Kulich who was the supposed plaintiff in the case against Nesvig?

It just seems like there are too many seemingly coincidental things that have happened that Bitter Smith, Berry, and Irvine have been involved in over the last few years and don’t they all seem to go AGAINST the requests and needs of the everyday citizens of Scottsdale?

You add all these things together and the combination seems to smack of contempt as well as the signature secret "smoke and mirrors" Manross way of doing business in Scottsdale doesn’t it?

Did the Candidates either give to or give permission for the use of their personal photos on the huge fold out Chamber flyer?

Would the Chamber kindly show us the dated and written words of permission to use these pictures?

If you think that the candidates listed on that flyer didn't know about it, you must live in a cave. Klapp is one of the main people at the Chamber; it's as simple as putting 2 and 2 together for crying out loud isn't it??

It has been reportedly been said more than once publicly by those persons in high places affiliated with the Chamber that "we have access to about a million corporate dollars" to guarantee that our candidates win this election.

Where is the PAC which should be registered to do this type of flyer?

Some say it isn’t needed because they "aren’t pushing any one candidate". Really?? Isn’t the flyer clearly stating "… Candidates Who Support Scottsdale’s Quality of Life" either a blatant lie or an open suggestion that they are the chosen candidates?

As we see it, MOST of the candidates support Scottsdale’s quality of life, but they don’t see it in quite the same light as the Chamber, their endorsees or the monied developers do, do they?

Gee, could that be that because the vast majority of the residents want Scottsdale to be the family friendly town it used to be instead of the town built on fads, bars and weird architecture which is what the Chamber is pushing? Are all of those residents wrong? We don’t think so.

The voters of Scottsdale have been denied the right to vote on issues to date that directly affect the public on four (4) separate occasions and all were denounced or rebuked by the current Council Majority of Manross, Drake, McCullagh and Ecton and helped along by the trio of Irvine, Bitter Smith and Berry.

Three of the offending Council Majority are up for re-election and are scarred to death that ANY public vote on any of the four issues was to make it to the ballot, there would be a mass turnout of voters which would guarantee their landslide LOSS at the ballot box.

This is so vitally important and very scary to Manross that she made personal phone calls to those running the referendums to please stop running them, but couldn’t give any reason why they needed to stop their actions.

Mary Manross clearly stated in her 8-08-08 Election Profile Article in the Scottsdale Republic:

Madam Mayor, if you would have attended even one citizen sponsored meeting, which you haven’t in the last 8 years you have been mayor, you wouldn’t have to ask such a stupid question.

We don’t see ANYWHERE in any of material from Manross, Drake, McCullagh or Klapp where the words "residents" "citizens" "workforce housing" or any other words describing the needs of common everyday citizen living in Scottsdale, be it north, central or south.

It’s incumbent upon you to make Scottsdale all it can be with sustainable, reasonable, planned and "green" growth.

It doesn’t take rocket science to see who can achieve those goals for us, except it doesn’t appear to be the current council majority does it??

There are only two (2) council candidates who have never changed their message from day one and they are Nan Nesvig and Tom Giller.

 More to come in the next Scottsdale Activist Late next Saturday, August 16th.

==========================================

There was a spill at the Hualapai Water Effluent Treatment Campus on 31 July which was between 150, 000 and 200,000 gallons of effluent.

These were the questions we had after hearing of the spill. Knowing that this was a sewer treatment plant, and knowing that extremely hazardous chemicals could have come into play because of the spill, timing was of the essence to get some concrete answers.

With that in mind, we contacted the City of Scottsdale and scheduled a meeting to tour the Hualapai Facility with General Manager of the Water Resource Department Marshall P. Brown and a Project Director Chris Perkins for the Water Resource Department.

The meeting was very pleasant, educational and an eye-opener to say the least. We learned where the sewage comes from ("inflow") and what steps it goes through for cleaning and where the end products ("outflow") end up. Below is a city supplied aerial photo of the spill area.

Now for some answers:

The spill originated at the facility where the "B+" water is again filtered to gain the water quality of "A+" which is the best level of recycled effluent. The tank from which the spill overflowed was class B+ backwash water used to clear the filters when they become clogged with sediment and need to be cleared. (See note concerning types of recycled water) All water that escaped had already been treated with a 12% solution of Chlorine suspended in a neutral liquid solution. (Compare this solution with pool Chlorine which is 5 to 10% in solution). This concentration of Chlorine will kill Giardia Lamblia, Escherichia coli and Cryptosporidium and many other dangerous waterborne organisms. http://www.ifixh2o.com/organisms.htm

The fluid released was a partially treated Class B+ effluent (outflow) which can, by law, be used for the irrigation of golf courses, etc. The city of Scottsdale routinely ships only fully treated Class A+ effluent outflow to the golf courses, etc. (Click here for effluent discussions)

For a couple of reasons:

Yes, it is something to be very concerned about. Any effluent that leaves a treatment facility is deemed to be dangerous unless it’s exact source and level of fecal or other contamination is immediately available by continuous tests of the effluent at the spot of the leak if it cannot be contained quickly in a very safe and reasonable manner.

We were very pleased with Mr. Brown and his no holds or questions barred approach to educating Nancy Cantor and I on this very complicated process and the spill. We also felt very welcome and were greeted with grace and professionalism which we find is generally expected and adhered to by most competent Scottsdale employees.

We handed Mr. Brown a series of relevant questions which he has agreed to answer for next weeks Activist.

We have concluded that this particular spill was benign but could have well been otherwise being that there really isn’t adequate specifically designated storage space within the contained facility area in the case of a big storm and a lot of effluent inflow at the same time.

It could be argued by the city that the small number of incidents does not justify building a specially designated storage area. We adamantly disagree; One mistake could cost the city far more than the cost of the storage/collection basin many times over.

It should be noted here that storm water is not a part of, or collected by this system but does infiltrate the system through manhole covers, etc. during heavy monsoon storms which can be considerable.

Nancy and I want to thank Marshall Brown, Chris Perkins, and Pat Dodds and Interim City Manager John Little, for allowing us to "See for ourselves" what had happened and what was being done to alleviate or better, eliminate the problem in the future.

We also want to thank them for their candor and understanding that there is a definite need to be open and provide residents with prompt and complete information.

George Knowlton, Scottsdale Activist Editor
Nancy Cantor, Chair Scottsdale Coalition

It is well known that, in the upcoming race between incumbent Mary Manross and challenger Councilman Jim Lane, I differ sharply with both candidates on issues that I care about deeply, such as how best to preserve Scottsdale’s special character and high quality of life.  So it is tempting for me to just sit this race out and not take sides.

It is tempting, but it would be a mistake.  The bottom line is that, at the end of the day one of these two candidates is going to be the Mayor of the city I love.  Who that Mayor is will make a huge difference to Scottsdale’s future.

With those high stakes in mind I will be marking my ballot for Jim Lane for Mayor and I urge all Scottsdale voters to do the same.

One reason for this is money.  Over the next few years our city will be facing a slowdown in revenues and increase in costs.   Scottsdale will desperately need budgetary discipline from the Mayor and Council members to keep our finances healthy. 

In the four years that Jim Lane has been on the Scottsdale City Council he has been the most consistent fiscal conservative on the Council.  He has always opposed throwing taxpayer dollars away on subsidies to favored special interests. And he has fought for setting responsible budget targets in advance of budget development, true zero-based budgeting, and appointing an independent City Treasurer as a full-time watchdog for taxpayer dollars.

But the biggest reason that I am voting for Lane is that he has consistently supported greater openness and accountability in city government.  For example, when Manross and her allies voted to spend your taxpayer dollars on legal fees to keep you from seeing performance documents about your top city officials, Lane, Councilman Nelssen and I fought to have those documents made available to the public, which a judge ultimately ordered the city to do. 

In a Jim Lane administration citizens would not have to fight their own representatives to see how the business of their city government is done.

For the above reasons, I will be marking my ballot for Jim Lane for Mayor and I urge all Scottsdale voters to do the same.

Bob Littlefield
Scottsdale City Council
bob@boblittlefiled.com

(Return to Top) 

The Activist reported several months ago on the campaign of intimidation paid for by Hanover Corporation, the downtown Scottsdale developer, against a local citizens group, Height And Density (HAD), which gathered more than 3,000 signatures against Hanover’s tall and poorly designed downtown development plan. As reported, Hanover, through Technical Solutions, a firm run by Susan Bitter Smith, a former member of the Scottsdale City Council and a perennial Congressional candidate, hired Lee Petitions, a signature gathering group, to conduct a campaign of intimidation and harassment against HAD’s volunteers in violation of state and federal law.

Hanover’s campaign consisted of having Lee’s employees surround HAD’s volunteers, yelling at them and everyone who approached them to sign their petitions. One of Lee’s employees kicked a truck in which a HAD volunteer was sitting while another called Scottsdale Police to report that HAD’s volunteers were "pedophiles" and should be arrested. By mistake, Lee’s employees accosted the wife of a mayoral candidate and the wife of a former member of the City Council.

The way things work in Scottsdale, Attorney and Special Interest Lobbyist-in-Chief John Berry, does the legal work for developers who want to evade the zoning code and build the highest buildings possible, thereby increasing congestion and overwhelming the City’s infrastructure. Berry, in turn, hires long time friend Susan Bitter Smith (Technical Solutions) to do the community "out reach" which includes hiring thugs like Lee Petitions for their mutual clients when needed. John Berry always denies the dirty work done by Bitter Smith, but his clients’ funds are behind it. Ever hear of "plausible deniability?"

Another old Bitter Smith friend, Tom Irvine, represents Berry’s clients in court when their projects are challenged by citizen petitions. In the Hanover case, Bitter Smith found a new weapon to promote the interests of Berry’s clients: Lee Petitions. Lee Petitions is new on the scene in Scottsdale, but has been active this year. Not only did it provide thugs to intimidate and harass HAD’s volunteers, it also collected signatures for City Council candidates Betty Drake and Susanne Klapp. What was that old saying about being "known for the friends you keep."?

As to Bitter Smith, a legitimate question arises as to whether her conduct is the type that qualifies her for election to Congress—a position which she is again seeking this year. She is running in a crowded primary seeking to be nominated as a Republican in opposition to former Tempe Mayor and Democrat Harry Mitchell in Arizona’s Fifth Congressional District.

Although the County Attorney has been disinterested in enforcing complaints against elected officials in Scottsdale involving conflicts of interest, The Activist has learned that prosecutors will have another opportunity to demonstrate their resolve to enforce the law and protect citizens against well funded and politically influential special interests that control the City of Scottsdale. The Activist has learned that a complaint has been filed against Hanover Corporation, Lee Petitions and Bitter Smith’s Technical Solutions, alleging the violation of HAD’s legal and constitutional rights. The complaint also reportedly alleges that the intimidation was government sponsored based on the refusal of the Scottsdale Police Department to enforce state law against the intimidation of HAD’s volunteers, something which experienced observers feel was most likely ordered by Mayor Mary Manross.

Further conduct of potential interest to voters in the Republican Congressional primary was the reported intimidation of a HAD volunteer on February 26 by Bitter Smith herself at an event at the Scottsdale United Methodist Church. In a confrontation with a HAD volunteer, Bitter Smith reportedly "came up to me in a very confrontational, angry tone and told me this was a private meeting and I had to move out to the street. I told her it was a public meeting—the sign in front of the church said ‘Open House.’ This angered her further. She cut me off several times. She moved in close to me, literally inches from my face, and was trying to intimidate me. I backed away from my table to get out of her way. Eventually she left."

The Activist is not a partisan organ and Scottsdale elections are not partisan. However, the question needs to be asked: "Is Susan Bitter Smith qualified to be a Member of Congress?" That question will be answered by voters soon.

Hopefully, some day, the legal system will itself answer to the public and act to protect voters against the likes of Hanover, Technical Solutions and Lee Petitions.

I have never read such a crock of Bull Dung as Kidder unsuccessfully spewed in the Saturday Scottsdale Tribune.

The headline, "Critics of Chamber shouldn’t blame messenger" is a classic joke to anyone who has even a faint clue about what the Chamber is trying to pull over the eyes of Scottsdale residents, non-member businesses and readers.

Let’s face it. Rick (I’m the King) Kidder, Virginia (I DESERVE a subsidized hotel) Korte, Mary (I’m THE Queen) Manross, the (It’s OUR legacy) council majority, and the (we OWN this city) power brokers (who also control the Chamber) have a plan and as an honest and caring councilman has said over and over in a number of ways for a number of years;

It’s past time to STOP paying any attention to this sorry group of tunnel-visioned, over reaching power brokers. What have they done for the residents in the last few years? NOTHING POSITIVE!!!

The Chamber needs to remember that without the money residents spend, they and the businesses they represent don’t have anything! If the residents aren’t spending where the Chamber thinks they should at local businesses, the Chamber better take another look at the direction they are trying to push the businesses they represent and the city they have no business trying to control.

Since when does ANY Chamber of Commerce drive a city’s destiny? Isn’t the Chamber supposed to support the businesses and residents by being a non-partial, non-partisan organization that supports, within reason, the needs and desires of the residents who patronize their business members, not the other way around? If the Chamber doesn’t agree with the residents or voters of Scottsdale, they should take a long walk off a short pier or leave town.

It’s time the voters and residents decided how they want their city to grow by electing those candidates who have carried the same message from the beginning of the campaign season and who promote sustainability for Scottsdale through controlled and "green" growth without excessive height, density and streets no one can use because they are too narrow.

We DON’T NEED expensive and excessive height and density to make Scottsdale self- sustaining. We DO NEED a city council that sees reality and that reality is what the residents want and need reasonable areas to shop, dine and to have some entertainment such as theaters or other venues without having to pay ridiculous, up-scale prices for those simple amenities. Wouldn’t a Walmart Super Center, a nice movie theater and a Luby’s Cafeteria be a nice start?

The McDowell corridor is a great place to start that planning, especially with the majority of car dealers leaving (we don’t need acres of used car lots either). We think a new council majority based on reality instead of pipe dreams and rose colored "Mary" glasses will ask the residents for some ideas and plans which accomplish what is needed by the residents for a change. It’s time to listen to the residents, not the developers or power brokers.

When Chandler and Gilbert replaced Scottsdale as the best family friendly cities in Arizona, we knew something had gone terribly wrong and it sure isn’t because of the residents.

We can all thank "Queen" Mary, "Bull Patty" Rick, and the "It’s OUR legacy" council majority for the demise of Scottsdale as we once knew it if the current administration is put back into office.

It’s time to throw the bums out and get back to making Scottsdale the World Class City it once was and envied by all.

VOTE  on or before September 2nd!!

(Return to Top) 

Have you all noticed as many others have that only 2 council candidates have not changed their campaign message since the beginning of the election season? Many readers have pointed that out to us over the long campaign and the calls and notes have been getting stronger and more prevalent as the other candidates have tried to cash in on the success of those 2 steadfast and visionary candidates.

What it boils down to is that many candidates did not really know or have any clue as to what the residents wanted or the city needed from the get-go and have had to make up a new campaign as they went along trying to win public support. This happened only after the message of Nesvig and Giller was seen resonating strongly with the residents from day one.

Isn’t it a shame that the other candidates needed to steal Nesvig and Giller’s message rather than being innovative, intuitive, visionary and in-touch enough with the residents to come up with something of their own the residents wanted as Nesvig and Giller did?

Doesn’t this demonstrate that the other candidates really don’t know what’s going on, have a vision for Scottsdale’s future or what’s needed by Scottsdale residents? We think that to be the truth.

What candidates have talked the talk but never walked the walk? All but 2 from what we have seen and are being told by our readers. When did you ever see Lisa Borowsky, Suzanne Klapp, Oren Davis, Betty Drake, or Ron McCullagh at a citizen community meeting where local issues were being discussed? We only remember seeing Nan and Tom at those meetings with Joel at a few. What about Joel B you might ask. Joel B has been out there for 2 years campaigning and has a great heart but his message has not been taken well by many sectors of the population, especially about a public vote not being necessary on citizen interest items or referendums and his ideas concerning the way the northern portion of the city is populated or built out which angered many.

It’s time we supported the candidates who have kept the same message since day one of this long, grueling campaign season; Nan Nesvig and Tom Giller.

Remember. You don’t have to vote for 3 council candidates. You can vote for none, 1, 2 or 3 candidates. You need to decide on which 1, 2 or 3 will do the job you want and vote only for them. If it’s only 1 or 2 candidates, it’s OK to vote for just that 1 or 2 you consider best.

Just VOTE on or before September 2^nd.

(Return to Top)

The Scottsdale Republic ran a Council Candidate question today (Saturday 8/9/08): "What must Scottsdale do to relieve traffic congestion?"

The answers were very revealing to say the least.

Lisa Borowsky: She seemed to be upset about the city spending ^$29.4 million on the bridge over the Indian Bend Wash making Indian Bend Road a 4 lane all-weather roadway and a major East-West, freeway connected arterial for that area of the city which will help reduce traffic on McDonald and Chaparral. This shows that Lisa seriously needs to do her homework on city history. For everyone’s information, that bridge was funded by the voters in 1979-80 and never finished because the money was spent somewhere and no one can tell us where. She is dead on correct concerning the Manross giveaway of the 77¢ to other cities when we have a serious transportation problem….. or do we in reality? It would be nice if we took care of our city first with out own money, don’t you think?

Joel BramOweth: Joel apparently hasn’t noticed that the turning lanes, bus stops and other associated amenities are already in progress on any new arterial capital projects. He is correct in saying that anytime there is a venue which will be heavily attended, the traffic will be bad. That’s normal and highways and byways cannot be built to accommodate those issues due to expense and the huge amount of land necessary, which would be totally unnecessary. Attendee just need to plan ahead and there won’t be any problem.

Betty Drake: We cannot be as kind as Mike Merrill. Betty has had 4 years to make a stand on transportation and she is a strong advocate of reduced traffic access and considerably more bike and pedestrian traffic which the residents don’t want which means she’s not in touch with the residents. A prime case is in south Scottsdale where Transportation Director Mary O’Connor has placed traffic tables and eliminated the bike paths. Where was Betty on this one? Her suggestions will eat up roadway rights of way which means less roadway for vehicular traffic, more pollutants for the residents, pedestrian and bikers and longer drive times. Betty has talked the talk but isn’t walking the walk when it comes to taking care of the residents with what they want and have asked for. This is Scottsdale Arizona located in the hottest metropolitan area in the United States. We don’t need to install what was "popular" in New York, Seattle, Portland or Cleveland simply because we ARE NOT any of those cities and don’t have their climate.

Tom Giller: He has been on target concerning the Transportation problem since day one. We cannot continue to build "up" without paying a terribly costly price for the lack of safe, affordable and reasonable transportation. Excessive height and density causes severe traffic problems when the height and density occurs in an already developed community. Tom is a student of strict planning and controlled growth through citizen input and reasonable expectations for the future.

Suzanne Klapp: Her concerns seem to be the morning and evening work and business traffic. We agree that Light Rail on the SR-101 is an excellent option and the Park-n-Ride program with shuttles (such as the DASH system in Phoenix) is something that has been advocated for some time. Suzanne seems to forget the residents and those of us who "live-work-play" in the central and southern portion of the city (Indian Bend Rd and south) have problems during the regular day and that needs to be changed. That change needs to be wider roadways with the bus turnouts and right turn lanes currently being constructed with the new projects.

Ron McCullagh: Ron, as with Betty Drake has had 4 years to make a difference and neither one has stepped up to make that difference. They constantly talk the talk but have never walked the walk. Now Ron suggests limited vehicular access with expanded pedestrian and bicycle access. He also subscribes to the "Mary Plan" of being solidly tied to the Regional transportation plan. Well, that depends on what you mean. We have Valley Metro busses and the Scottsdale Trolley to handle our transportation needs. Do we really need Light Rail up Scottsdale Road? Do we need bums, gang members, criminals and thieves using the regional transportation system to easily slip in and out of Scottsdale without having to change their mode of transportation? The n’er do wells listed above will never get off one venue of the system to take a bus or trolley to commit a crime in Scottsdale because of the time factor, while a tourist would find it a novelty and pleasant change to take the trolley. It would be far less expensive and far more prudent to use some of that 77¢ to expand our city arterials and fund expanded trolley routes don’t you think?

Nan Nesvig: Nan is a true visionary who can see far beyond today or even into tomorrow. She knows that excessive height and density will cause transportation chaos and mayhem if not planned well in advance. She knows all infrastructure south of Shea is in dire need of upgrade or replacement before any plans for more height and density are advanced. She is also realistic and knows that the residents as a whole are not going to give up their vehicles is Scottsdale, especially in the summer, to ride a bus or trolley unless it’s for reasons of entertainment and novelty. Exact planning and attention to "Green" is the key to building a successful, sustainable city.

Editorial Comments:

It’s very interesting how the incumbents have been "SOLD" on reducing vehicular traffic and forcing residents and tourists to use bikes and pedestrian walkways. Who are they to tell any of us we cannot take our vehicle to any place we want to go? Have any of them taken into consideration those who need to take their vehicle based on their health and ambulatory abilities? We are a retirement community too and those people need to be able to get where they need to go without the hassles of public transportation, and public transportation will ALWAYS be a hassle because that’s the way it is and will always be.

Betty’s comment, something to the effect, If you don’t like the traffic move to Ajo, is indicative of those who think they have a better plan but are leaving the residents out of the process which happens far too often in "Mary’s" Scottsdale.

Transportation is a problem in Scottsdale but not nearly as bad as other cities and we can still make the necessary changes to alleviate the major bottlenecks without reducing lanes or anything of that nature. Height and density are the nemesis here and need to be property controlled through citizen based input sessions and reasonable actions based on reality, sustainability and proper planning.

Success and sustainability cannot be achieved by just looking through rose-colored glasses and listening to unplanned pipe dreams dreamed up by developers while building still more Bars and high-rises downtown which are nothing more than a fad which will be gone within 5 to 7 years.

Just VOTE on or before September 2^nd.

(Return to Top)

We have now had 5 calls from city employees and Board and Commission members claiming they are receiving Manross Campaign Propaganda on their work (city) emails from Mary Manross's private email address.

Isn’t this is a direct violation of Election Law to use city employee lists for campaigning if it is true?

Unfortunately, Manross has all five callers are afraid for their jobs or positions and they will not give us copies of the emails for fear they will be found out by Manross and be fired.

We are still working with 2 of them and hopefully we can get something concrete before the next Activist come out.

If any readers of the Activist can help us nail this charge(s) down with copies of the Manross propaganda acquired through an email to your city email address, you can call me or send an anonymous email (forward the email if you can) to the Activist and we guarantee you will never be named in any way shape or form.

If what we are hearing is true, we need to clean up this mess once and for all, and before the election.

We won’t need a County or State investigation for this one, it’ll be the Federal Government prosecuting this case if it exists.

If it isn’t true, we need to know that too with written proof.

Usually though, when there is smoke there's fire, isn't there? Hasn't it proved to be true with Manross many times before? We think so...............

(Return to Top)

 ~ More Traffic Calming, &%$#@!!!  

Transportation Director Mary O'Conner is in her glory again. She has chucked another traffic table in the way of our already reasonably speed zone controlled traffic on Granite Reef and Oak while putting bike riders and pedestrians in dire danger of being hit by wiping out the bike lane.

This was done again with ZERO citizen input or discussion.

Here we sit with curbs, gutters and sidewalks going to hell in a hand-basket all over the southern portion of the city and this supposedly smart city official is blindly putting in these stupid and very costly speed tables in our streets, basically without the permission or knowledge of the local residents.

What is it going to take to get this Nimnals head out from where the sun doesn't shine?

It's OUR TAX MONEY Damn It, not yours!! Fix things before you install costly stupidity in our neighborhoods!

It really strange when we ask for actual figures as to what it costs to install and maintain these money pits that she can't find any numbers to give us.

The anual costs to maintain neighborhood entry islands, roundabouts and other street furniture has got to be far in excess of 2 to 3 million dollars a year. How many sidewalks, curb and gutters could we repair with those re-occurring funds?

We got rid of Dolan: We got rid of Gray. It's time to get rid of O'Connor to get the costs of the transportation department back under the control of the residents.

Read Living in the Land of Oz  for more information.

VOTE  on or before September 2nd!! When we get rid of Manross and Company, we can get rid of O'Connor, Robberson and Shearer!!

(Return to Top)

The Scottsdale Area Association of Realtors hosted a great forum last night. Bill Gray is a terrific moderator. There were good questions and, for the most part, good flow. The Council forum was the best so far, and the Mayoral forum was right up there with the Republic forum that was played on Channel 11. The SAAR forum was recorded and I will try to find out the broadcast schedule so I can post it here.

My summary of the SAAR forum is this: All candidates have polished their presentations, and are much better than in forums. The only thing lacking was lack of opportunity or motivation for the candidates to go after each other.

Tom Giller got the laugh of the night commenting on parking meters in Downtown: "An incredibly bad idea," classic dry understatement from a guy who is much funnier than a politician should be. Nan Nesvig spoke passionately about the issues that brought her to the campaign. Tom and Nan both continue to give citizens hope we can all have a voice in the destiny of OUR Scottsdale.

McCullagh and Drake both gave us the usual party line. They were flipping so fast they looked like they were at a Saturday morning pancake breakfast. Drake in particular has completely flip-flopped on whether the new Downtown Plan is bad...which she now says it is, and she says Jan Dolan led the planning staff to hijack the outreach effort.

Yeah, right. Betty Drake, Ron McCullagh, Wayne Ecton, and Mary Manross hijacked the outreach effort. Betty is now pandering to inattentive Downtown and South Scottsdale citizens who haven't watched her slip the knife into our backs at every turn. She is the epitome of everything that is bad about politics and campaigning. Well, at least she's in a tie with Manross...more on that in a minute.

McCullagh must have paid a lot of money to have someone write his little monologue about "pawn shops, check cashing stores, and graffiti, and he feels like he needs to get his money's worth. He sounds like a broken record. Again, pure pander and fear mongering aimed at South Scottsdale.

Lisa Borowsky is trying to straddle the fence without touching it. She's opposed to Manross's secrecy in government practices, yet she's in favor of height and density. I'm sure Lisa is a nice person, however, she's not who we need looking out for us on City Council.

Suzanne Klapp...I'm going to have to go back and watch the recording of the forum, because I can't figure out if there are any nuggets of wisdom in their or not. I do find it amusing that she goes to great pains in her campaign literature to identify herself as a Republican, yet the Mayor only attacks HER opponents for organizing a Republican political committee against her.

Oren Davis was not present. I presume his son is still recovering from his accident. I like Oren and would like to hear more of what he has to say, but at this point he's not making much of a race of it.

Joel BramOweth definitely brings the most passion to the discussion. Unfortunately, you have to dig through the passion to get to the few nuggets of wisdom. He does have a few good things to say, but on balance--as hard as he has tried--I can't vote for him.

Now for the Mayoral forum: Manross is her typical self. Bragging about all the good stuff (for most of which she deserves little or no credit) and expressing outrage that anyone would criticize her for the bad stuff (for most of which she is directly responsible). Lane did a good job of staying on point and--as always--presenting facts to back up his criticism.

Crawford was the wild card. He got Manross going a few times, so he's made a good contribution to the campaign! However, his hammering on the lost Ellman stadium gets pretty old. On balance, the stadium would have been a very bad thing for the area, and it has not been all that it was advertised it would be for Glendale. Here's an article from an old Reason magazine about stadium economics. I know a few residents on the McDowell corridor thought it would be a good thing, If you still feel that way after you read this, let's talk.

Crawford has a plan to put a stadium venue on the reservation east of us, maybe in coordination with the Pima casinos. I have to give him credit for thinking outside the box. I've never heard this before. I'm not sure economic reality is suspended just because something is built on the reservation, and I certainly wouldn't support spending any of our tax dollars on the gamble (and that's what it is) that revenue would offset both costs and impacts to traffic.

Bill's quote in the Republic about wanting light rail on Scottsdale Road pretty much blows his credibility as a candidate. Even Manross has given up on the idea. Obviously, she can't just simply say she's going to oppose it because she has too much political capital invested in promoting it. Still, if Bill can't see the light on THIS issue, he's not in touch with reality.

Even though Bill brought up some good points and harassed Mary pretty well, I'd have preferred to see a real debate between the two candidates who have a chance of winning. That's why I got out of the race.

Undecided voters or those close to one edge or the other need to see the Mayor for who she really is, and to see that Lane is not that.

I know this may sound hypocritical, but...Bill, please get out.

John Washington

(Return to Top)

~ Development on the SRPM Reservation.......

Would it be so hard for the Chamber of Commerce and the leadership of Scottsdale to follow the lead of the Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community? They have lived here longer than any of us and they apparently understand the issues very well.

 ~ Candidates Corner

It was an honor to serve in the Arizona State Legislature for ten years representing residents in Tempe, Ahwatukee, Scottsdale and parts of Chandler. I served on the Appropriations, Education, Health, and Human Services Committees.

I believe that government should work for the people and worked during my tenure as a state representative, to help those who cannot help themselves with a hand up, not a hand out. I spearheaded the ticket to work program to keep the disabled in the workforce, additional home and community-based services for seniors and the disabled, and fought for funding increases for the Arizona School for the Blind.

I worked desperately to streamline the bureaucratic Children’s Delivery System and Child Protective Services and fought for grandparent’s rights to serve as foster parents so children could stay with their families.

Also known as a fiscal conservative in the legislature, I chaired both the Appropriations Committee and Joint Legislative Budget Committee. I also spearheaded a ^$390 million income tax reduction through the Legislature in 2006 effectively lessening the tax burden on Arizona’s working families and small businesses. The cut was the largest income tax rate reduction in the state’s history.

In the private sector, I am the executive director of United Families International. As the executive director, I represent family issues at the United Nations in New York and participate in international delegations.

Prior to my election to the Legislature, I was the executive director for the Arizona Consortium for Children with Chronic Illness advocating for children with special needs. My passion for children’s issues continues through volunteer opportunities in the community. My husband Robert and I reside in Tempe where we raised 6 children and love and adore 8 grandchildren.

I will make it my business to do the bidding of the people not special interest, fight for a balanced budget amendment and transparency in government, and make sure our borders are secure, have a common sense energy policy and work on our educational needs.

Please visit my website for more details on my positions – www.lauraforcongress.com.

Thank you for listening. I would appreciate your vote on or before September 2.

Sincerely,

Laura Knaperek

(Return to Top)

~ Miscellaneous but Important City Information

Do you own a Southern Scottsdale Business ? (that would be anything south of Indian Bend Road)  Please check out this website and sign up for one of the repeating forums Aug 21st, and Sept 11th at various locations--hosted by the city.

www.scottsdaleaz.gov/planning/areaplans

Can you host candidates in your home? Candidates need the opportunity to speak with you and your neighbors. Door-to-door isn't the best answer in 110F heat. Would you gather 5 to 15 people and invite a candidate?....or invite 2 or 3 and stagger their arrival and departure times?  We recommend that your priority be "new faces" rather than incumbents. Council meeting history already informs you on the incumbents.  Give the 5 new faces a chance to share their positions on issues in your informal setting.  Thanks! email cogsaz@cox.net if you need any contact phone numbers.

New Issue Brewing?  The City of Scottsdale has no formal noise ordinance. As new residential projects are approved in the downtown core, as existing neighborhoods nearby are impacted, and as new liquor and nightclub licenses are approved----abusive noise levels are an increasing problem for local residents.  We have one COGS member who reports that a nearby club plays live music until 2 AM with their doors open.  The level of noise is unlivable---and unsleepable in their home. They have received no enforcement from the police department. 

Thursday July and August nights ==DOGS AND JAZZ... From 7 to 9 PM on 7111 5th Avenue bring your dog and hear good jazz music. There will be dog fashions, gift items, ladies' jewelry and an "animal rescue" raffle. For more information call 480 970 1894 or www.classy-jazzy.com.  ...and finally....Free Fridays at the Scottsdale Museum of Contemporary Art 10 am to 5 PM

CITY BUSINESS.........

The Museum of the West public hearing schedule.....August 13th Planning Commission hearing, September 9th City Council decision. Further information

http://www.scotsdaleaz.gov/projects/projectsinnews/SMW.asp and

http://eservices.scottsdaleaz.gov/cases/casesheet.aspx?caseid=35143   

Camelback and Indian School Road construction continues....82nd Street will close briefly at Indian School Rd...Camelback Rd east of Scottsdale Road will reduce to one lane in each direction from now to October for a new water and sewer line. 

Southern Area Business Focus Groups...If you own a business south of Indian Bend Road, please attend one of these 6 to 8 PM events: August 21st at Granite Reef Senior Center, September 11th at Kerr Cultural Center.  Call 480 312 7990 or www.scottsdaleaz.gov/planning/areaplans

(Return to Top)

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.

(Return to Top)

 ~ Candidate Endorsement Announcements

 Check the Candidate section for the latest endorsements for Council and Mayoral candidates. You might be surprised who has endorsed who adn who hasn't been endorsed.

(Return to Top)

~Letters to the Editor  

 ~ Forked Tongues Speak

I am so sick of the baloney Manross, Drake and McCullagh keep spouting that I wonder how they sleep at night. Could it be that maybe they know what they've been promised to receive should they get re-elected?

Then for Manross to say she's never seen Osterman for months makes me laugh out loud and it's not even one bit funny and laughing makes me cough. Osterman collected over 10 sheets of signatures for her and she hasn't seen him? Please!! Sorry, I may be old but I didn't fall off the melon truck yesterday.

Then I remember reading in the Activist a few months back that that flaky petition signature gathering service Bitter Smith used for that Hanover thing was used to get signatures for Drake and Klapp. Boy if that doesn't tie them to Susan Bitter Smith and what I hear are her shady ways of getting residents to agree to stuff, nothing does.

So, the way my old feeble mind works is that Manross is tied to Bitter Smith and Osterman, and I guess to Drake and Klapp also. I call that guilt by association, don't you?

After listening to all the hoopla, it appears that Jim Lane, Nan Nesvig and Tom Giller are the only ones who I trust to run our city. If I had to pick a third council candidate, it would probably be Borowsky, but I only voted for Lane, Nesvig and Giller because I am not required to pick three.

I am also very impressed with Laura Knaperek who used to be in the State legislature. She did a wonderful job and she loves to work with children and others who have problems. To me that is the kind of person I want representing me in Congress; someone who has shown by example that she really cares.

So, I have voted Jim Lane for Mayor, Nan Nesvig and Tom Giller for City Council, and Laura Knaperek for Congress. I may not get to vote again due to my age but by golly I'll do my part this time.

I strongly suggest you do the same.

E Slocomb
Scottsdale

(Return to Top)

Ms. Cavanaugh:

I appreciate your early response to my request for information.

The tenor of your communication is such that I believe you will be successful in your position as Superintendent. Although, I have not heard from Mr. Price, I can only assume that you and he communicate, have discussed my request(s), and that is the reason you suggested I contact him and keep in touch with you.       

I will do so early next week when I structure my questions in an appropriate form conducive to further follow up.

It has been obvious to many that John Baracy overstayed his term in office. His lack of cooperation, posturing and outright lies on the funding for Overrides, made him marginal in any administrative capacity. His only saving grace was to clearly gull others in assuming he was professional. (To gull: To cheat, deceive, or trick; to sucker.)

I am certain by your intelligent first steps that you will not repeat his sorry performance.

Hopefully there will be changes in The Mayor's Office and City Council that will allowyou to do your job without pandering to city officials or the weak local press.

Sincerely,
Steve Rivero-Lowen

(Return to Top)

  Living in the Land of Oz

Ozites on occasion have sent me e-mails asking me how I can write this column every week, and if you noted last week I needed a break. Not because I had nothing to write about, but because the issues are repeated over and over again with more stupidity always in the mix. Still, our city leaders sit on their patoots and do nothing. Well, this week we have another case in point, and again the city elected officials will sit on their patoots and again do nothing. They will not even bother to question the issue.

If you think back to last year when I wrote about an issue with the Transportation Department placing a "traffic calming" speed hump on Camelback Road just East of Hayden. With that situation it was clear that the process was never followed. The city had no documentation of required outreach, sign notification, or even commission approval to have installed the speed hump.

It is still sitting there today, however after the last rain I have not checked to see how much of it is still there since it sits in the middle of a wash. More bright planning on the city’s part by none other than Transportation Director Mary "It’s my money and I don’t have to ask anybody anything" O’Connor.

Now we have the same exact issue on Granite Reef and Oak where this time the sidewalks were "improved," as long as you don’t ride a bike or walk with your child in a stroller. We’ve got a design that does not match one single sidewalk pattern in the southern section of the city and it stands out like a sore thumb from the rest of the areas sidewalks (or are there scores and scores of these to come?).

Please note the two white lines that are now ending at the jutted curb line which narrows the bike path to nothing and forces bikers to engage an even smaller and more constricted intersection placing them at risk. Did we really need this meaningless island effect or is it more of the continual overkill the city Transportation Department thinks is so grand? It also matches nothing of our curb features in the entire community and sticks out like a sore thumb. So will this be done to all of our sidewalks in the community so we have an even and proper aesthetic look for the community?

Now here is the kicker in this issue as the city can do what they did with the sidewalks without informing the community. It is still a bad idea to go forward with no input.

The jutted island would have been/should be removed to maintain the bike path we all use to get to the park on the other side of Hayden. I mean the reality is that the entire community of either bikers, walkers, all the way to skateboarders, uses this route to get to the park.

We were never asked about this plan.

What you see above is what the city now calls a "speed table" and is classified by the city in its own documentation as a traffic calming device.

Now since this has taken place right down the street from my house, and I travel this road every day, and I am well aware of the process that has to be followed to do this, I can attest, yet again, that the city never followed any process. Again, they have just started plopping down this crap in a community without consent or input from the community.

Sound familiar?

So, what will your elected leaders do about the issue? Better yet, what will the Transportation Commission do about this issue?

Well the answer is clear, as usual in this city, not a damned thing. In order for this to have been placed on this street the city would have had to follow the same process that they dreamed up just a few short years ago, or is it that the city is above having to follow their own policy?

Yes, I know where we live and I know who our band of misfit leaders are, and nothing will come of this. No reprimand, no public comment to the residents expressing an apology for again not following the process. Not a damn thing other than an unwarranted pay raise for somebody that our tax dollars provide.

It is not that I disagree with the project or even the speed table, but there are some issues that never got addressed such as the curb issue for those of us that use the bike lane and are now exposed to the problem of being forced to merge with moving traffic.

It is the fact that again the city never followed the process that is required to follow to even begin considering placing the speed table there in the first place.

There are strict guidelines for that action that many citizens have worked on for a number of years.

When you go to vote I applaud anyone who ignores COPPS endorsement of the city leader who supports and stands by this type of action that has pissed off residents over the last 8 years!

As the Chairman for Citizens for Responsible Redevelopment and having a commitment to residents of Southern Scottsdale regarding how we become "redeveloped" under existing city standards and plans, we endorse the following candidates for elected office:

We endorse Jim Lane for office of Mayor on the basis that Mary "light" is better than the "Full Monty Mary"! We believe that Bean Counter Jim has finally started calculating all the costs associated with the grand new plan for how the city will grow and has realized, FINALLY, that if we do not start planning within the "realm of reality" for the future, in short order Scottsdale will fall into being another Mesa, Arizona. Lost in blind debt, cutting city services, trying to figure out how to pay outrageous bond debt and not raise taxes will be a challenge. I hope bean counter Jim can live up to the task and tell us more of how bad off this city really is finically than some of you may think.

We support the following candidates for office of Council, and some of you will be surprised.

Nan Nesvig – We chose her for her support and involvement in community issues that span the entire city, and her responses of having "managed growth" and "real sustainability" growth. Even though Nan and our group’s views do not always mesh, Nan has shown a willingness to listen and consider another point of view on issues that affect our communities.

Tom Giller -- For his commitment to Downtown issues that have a negative impact to the style and heart of the city, as well as his commitment to stand up for residents rights as they become impacted by development and developers. Again Tom and our group do not always see eye to eye, but we have recently seen Tom as being able to split hairs with issues that benefit the city as long as there is a clear public and taxpayer benefit.

Okay, here is where it may get weird for some of you and I know I will catch crap for this but our group has its reasons also and as usual, it is in the city’s best interest.

Our selection for the third seat in council is Betty Drake.

Yeah, Yeah, I can hear the gasps of Ozites now, but like I said, we have our reasons for this. I believe in the "benefit of the doubt" that Betty was blinded by Manross dreams and even got a pair of Manross blinders, but only where’s them part time.

We believe that keeping Betty, without having the Manross sledge hammer over her head, may actually work well with the concepts for this city’s future, as long as she can keep up with Tony on history and character of the city she says she cares about.

The fact is Betty is very talented and has a great deal of experience that could, and hopefully will, help in the way this city grows and keeps its character. She will need to be enlightened to what Oz really is, and can be, under responsible growth that she claims to support.

Think about it Ozites, who else is running that is actually a person talented enough to hold office in development? And when she is wrong we can vote her out with a majority as long as we have Tony, Bob, Nan and Tom to keep things real.

We have no problem with Betty getting a learning curve and considering the alternatives of (Klapp) a Chamber of Oz Maiden, (Joel B. at the realtors forum) a person who has publicly stated he does not endorse a citizens vote, (Davis) a person we have no clue about period, and someone (Borowsky) who carries to much baggage and cannot relate to the balance of history, and character, as well as no hope of understanding growth issues and planning in the next 4 years.

We do not need to start from scratch for one candidate, therefore the only logical solution for the city as a whole is Betty.

 ~ Council and Mayoral Candidates Information

~ Congressional Candidate Information

(Return to Top)

~ So you think you know OIL . . . Maybe not

Here we are with a new week and another round of posturing, politicking, and punditry regarding the price of petroleum. As happens when folks do a lot of talking, very little is said.  I hang around educated and talented people.  Each individual has at least one university degree.  Most read, watch, or listen to more than one news source every day.  They span generations with ages ranging from the 20s to the 70s.  Yet, not a single person among them knew the answers to some basic questions pertinent to the growing discourse regarding the rising price of oil.  A few knew some of the answers, and some knew a few of the answers.  To be fair, I had to look up the answers, or else I would have been among the shoulder shruggers. 

For instance, how big is a barrel?  Answer: 42 gallons.  So, now you know that when the price for a barrel of crude oil hits ^$140, that's the same as ^$3.33 a gallon. 

What nation supplies the most crude oil and petroleum products to the United States?  Answer: The United States.  According to the Energy Information Agency (www.eia.doe.gov), our country supplied 41 percent of the oil we consumed in March of this year.

What nation, other than the U.S., supplies the most crude oil and petroleum products to our country?

Answer: Canada.  Our northern neighbor accounts for 12 percent of our nation's oil and 20 percent of all the oil we import.  The rest of the top five include Saudi Arabia (7 percent and 13 percent); Venezuela (6 percent and 11 percent); Nigeria (6 percent and 10 percent); and Mexico (5 percent and 8 percent).

How much oil do we import from Persian Gulf countries?  I'm glad you asked.  Persian Gulf countries accounted for only 16 percent of our foreign oil imports each year from 2005 to 2007.  In fact, our Persian Gulf imports declined most of this decade, from a 15-year high of a little more than 1 billion barrels in 2001 to 791.9 million barrels in 2007. 

What's the difference between crude oil and petroleum products? Answer: Crude oil provides, among other products, gasoline, diesel and jet fuels, heating oil, liquefied petroleum gas, lubricants, asphalt, plastics, synthetic fibers, detergents, fertilizers, ink, crayons, bubble gum, deodorant, tires, and heart valves.   One barrel of crude oil (which is 42 gallons, remember?), yields about 19.6 gallons of gasoline.  The other 22.4 gallons go into the products just mentioned.

How much of the cost of oil goes into the price of gasoline?  Answer:  A bunch.  We consumed about 390 million gallons of gas a day last year in our cars, trucks, recreational vehicles, boats, farm implements, and construction and landscaping equipment.  Back when crude was $68 a barrel (that was just last year), it accounted for about 58 percent of the price of a gallon of gasoline.  The rest of the price came from refining costs (17 percent), federal and state taxes (15 percent), and distribution and marketing (10 percent).  By the way, the price of crude accounts for about 77 percent of the cost of gas at $4 a gallon.

Here's a little something you may not have considered.  What products that you buy on a regular basis are sold with tax included?  Answer:  Gasoline.  For everything else, you add the tax at checkout.   The folks in California pay 63.9 cents a gallon in state and federal fuel taxes, the most in the nation.  That's just the base, though.  Motorists there also pay an additional 6-percent state sales tax, with some paying another 1.25-percent county sales tax plus applicable local sales taxes.  Same in Illinois, where Chicago motorists pay 12.75 cents per gallon on top of the 57.9 cents per gallon in state and federal taxes.   Some Illinois motorists also pay a 6.25 percent sales tax.

Politicians, pundits, and other TV talking heads don't like to provide these answers, because facts get in the way of positions that pander to the mob.  We don't point fingers at Canada, because it's de rigueur to paint the Saudis with the broad brush of blame.

Folks float the idea of a moratorium on state and federal gasoline taxes without explaining its minimal impact on gas prices or without mentioning the $3 sales tax some motorists pay on top of a $50 fill up.   Policymakers don't explain that oil trades in the dollar, which is weak vis-a-vis the Euro, because that would require solutions for strengthening the greenback. 

And, it's easier for simple minds to convince simpler minds to impose windfall-profit taxes on pension funds and owners of Individual Retirement Accounts who invest in oil companies than to take on credit card issuers charging double and triple-digit interest rates to the millions of people using plastic to pay for food and fuel.  Talk about irony.  And, we sure wouldn't want to impose a windfall-profit tax on someone who goes from making $56,000 a year as, say, an Illinois legislator, to $165,000 a year as, say, a U.S. senator, an increase of nearly 200 percent (not counting book deals or real-estate related loans).  Mundus vult decipi (and as my magician friends add: decipiatur)

 (Return to Top)

~ Information You Can Use

Just click on the logos below to go to these websites.

Send our Brave Troops "Something from Home", Click on  Links below.

Gathering of  Eagles Website was launched 2/9/07. Click on the Logo above for more information on how they are protecting America's Memorials.

~ UPDATE!! A "Must See" for All Americans

Every American should check out all of these websites to learn more about what the American population is about to have to deal with.

This is NOT for Children.

I don't normally allow anything but Scottsdale information in the Scottsdale Activist but after receiving many emails about this and viewing it, I think that it's imperative that every adult at least look at what's offered here if for  nothing more than their own education and to have everyone stop and think about the future of our country. Click on the link below,

 www.obsessionthemovie.com

If you don't have Adobe Flash, install it from the bottom of the page that comes up after you click on the link above. You should be able to view all available links within the main page.

The website below is of great interest as seen from a Lebanese point of view:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8fa9yKQeTY

The website below gives some history of Terrorist attacks:

http://patriotfiles.org/civilizationcalls.htm

This website tell you what REALLY happened:

http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened

(Return to Top)

~ Arizona Tax Revolt

(Return to Top)

~ View Past City Council Meetings

We can now access the city council meetings by clicking on the following link:

If you have any problems, check your firewall and other safety features which could block access to the city site.

~Continuing Light Rail Information

The Scottsdale Citizens Transportation Study Committee invites you to view their website for more questions and answers at  www.norailforscottsdale.com .

================================================================

Simply click on the links below to get all the information you'll ever need concerning Light Rail.

     Goldwater Institute Report

     American Dream Coalition

    The Public Purpose

If you have any questions about light rail, send them to editor@scottsdaleactivist.com and we'll get the answers to you as soon as we can.

(Return to Top)

 

~ For Continuing Information on Photo Radar,
Click on the Logo below.

(Return to Top)

 ~Are Red-Light Cameras Fair to Drivers?

These modern-day robocops make ticketing easier and can be huge moneymakers for local governments. But critics question their accuracy and fret over privacy issues.

Click on the link below , then scroll down to read the article:

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourCar/AreRedLightCamerasFairToDrivers.aspx

(Return to Top)

The Scottsdale Activist is very pleased to announce an effort on the behalf of the residents and taxpayers of the city of Scottsdale to promote open, honest and accountable city government. The Scottsdale Legal Defense Fund (SLDF) has been created to take legal action to hold the City accountable when its actions are contrary to state law, the City Charter, City ordinances or the public interest.

The most necessary ingredient to make the SLDF work will be confidential contributions from concerned Scottsdale citizens who are willing to help their community.  By contributing, we can change the way City Hall does business and insure that our tax dollars will be spent wisely.

No funds from the SLDF will or can be used for any political purpose.

Contributions shall be kept confidential as permissible by law and can be made in any Washington Mutual Bank to account number 3114165786 for the Scottsdale Legal Defense Fund. Branch locations are listed below. Contributions are not tax deductible.

The SLDF has retained the law firm of Miller LaSota & Peters, PLC, in connection with the patently illegal action taken by the Mayor and Council appointing the most recent Scottsdale City Attorney, while ignoring the residency requirement of the Scottsdale City Charter even though the new City Attorney’s contract (according to Scottsdale Republic reporter Laurie Roberts) requires that she reside in Scottsdale.  The City Council action was based on a legal opinion which was reportedly rendered during a closed door Executive Session of the City Council by a subordinate to the then acting City Attorney, who was subsequently appointed to the City Attorney position by a vote during a public City Council meeting. The opinion has been requested as a public document under state law, but the City has not yet provided it. The SLDF will take other appropriate legal actions based on the conduct of the Mayor and Council.

Washington Mutual Bank Locations at which contributions to the SLDF can be made are:

72^nd & Shea                    7337 E. Shea Blvd #120                480-609-8524
Hayden & Chaparral     7908 E. Chaparral # C-113            480-949-0069
Horizon                            14854 N Frank Lloyd Wright         480-614-6660
Scottsdale Ranch          10155 E. Via Linda Blvd #131       480-767-2060
Kierland Village              6501 E. Greenway Pkwy #133     480-315-2905

There are many other branches throughout the Valley.