Follow-Up Letter to Scottsdale Republic editors Mike Ryan and Robert Leger:

Well Mr. Ryan I have to tell you, sometimes I read your papers Editorials and have to wonder to myself how your folks seem to come up with this stuff.

Have you read the contract between Redflex and the city?

Just to bring your noble talent up to speed, the contract number is 2002-072-COS-A1 and if Mr. Leger has on his reading glasses he would note page 2 of the contract.

If you read the second sentence in the second paragraph Mr. Leger, it reads as follows.

You see Mr. Leger, the staff does not want to point out these factors to the council and honestly I am not sure if the council has the time to look at these things which is why the council ALWAYS gets poked in the eye by the public about staff lying to them.

No where does the contract state anything but the 9 month program, it does not state that the city will expend another ^$50,000.00 for another 3 month period where the city hopes they can talk the state into picking up the Redflex photo radar system, and no where does the contract state that we were going to expend another ^$75,000.00 of tax payer money for this so called "independent" study.

The third paragraph of the same page if you still have your glasses on states the following.

Again it goes on to state that the vendor is required to remove all devices and restore the freeway surface at their own costs.

The city council was in no way obligated to continue to pay Redflex for the devices in the road for another 3 months and the contract never stated that we would (pee) away that money for the obvious reason that everyone knows people will go back to driving like they did before.

The same excuse the city will use to say that we need to keep them up there even if the Scottsdale Taxpayers have to foot the bill.

Bull crap Mr. Leger, I, like to many others are tired of footing the bill for the councils, staffs and Mary O'Conner’s great plans of stupidity.

The fact is the city council was under no obligation by the contract to do anything that they did do and since staff sure as (heck) won’t tell them this, they do not know any better and sit up there like a bunch of kid's thinking they have all the information they need.

That is why in the next election if they do not get their act together, you will see some of them getting bounced out on their rears.

I mean really, how many times do we have to point out to the council that staff just fed them a load of BS and then we have to turn around and read editorials that are so full of boloney we have to think that you and the staff must work in conjunction to make the council look stupid.

And yes my friends on the council, yet again you were lied to and you all looked stupid.

When are you folks up there gonna learn?

So you see, a contract is a contract but unfortunately you are the ones who do not understand it Mr. Leger, and the weenie boys strike yet again.

Mike Merrill

We always wondered where all the BS cleaned out from behind the Dias in the Kiva was stored after the council meetings were over. We just found piles of it had been returned and unloaded behind City Hall to be used by Parks and Recreation to make the winter grass grow greener.

By the small size of the pile, it would appear that they either haven't cleaned out the mayor’s office because of the locked doors, or they were afraid the stuff would scorch the new lawn.

(Return to Top)

On the 25^th of April 2006, the City Council authorized the mayor to sign contracts with CSA subject to final negotiations and scope which the council never saw or heard about. There was no indication of the CSA’s qualifications or the service procurement procedures employed. There was typically, in "Manross style", only a broad view and vague explanation of how these federal and City funds were to be employed through CSA.

Why did the council approve this without more information given the way Manross does her shady business?

"Slick Mary" very quietly signed the contracts with CSA on June 22^nd 2006 without even one public outreach meeting or council consultation. We have since found out that one contract spelled out CSA’s scope, methodology and locations in the use of these funds for the purchase, rehab and future building of this Belleview "affordable housing". Unfortunately for the taxpayers, this was never brought to the attention of the Council or the public. CSA was awarded ^$1.159M of the available ^$1.187M Federal CDBG/HOME and City general funds without a whimper.

Since 2002, Scottsdale taxpayers have given nearly ^$2.5 million dollars in block grants to CSA to build counter productive efforts to revitalization efforts of the residents by paying for rent controlled housing and basically low income housing projects in an area of the city that already needs everything but that.

Here is a great comforting kicker for residents of that area. Our beloved "Slick Mary" Manross is quoted as saying she is confident that whatever is built there will compliment SkySong. That doesn’t say much for SkySong does it?

The Mayor sent the Council an email on the September 28^th saying that since she had talked with the Scottsdale Tribune reporter Brian Powell, who broke the CSA scandal wide open, that she was looking into the subject to get more information on the deal. If you think for one stupid New York second that this politically savvy and super slick woman "needed more information on the deal", I’ll sell you ocean front property in Payson just below the Rim overlooking the entire valley!

The fact that the rest of the Council nor the public was never informed of the specific provisions of the three contracts the Mayor signed with CSA on June 22^nd indicates a serious concern on the Mayor’s part about not creating any closer ties between the several political and financial strategies she was employing in the area to suit her personal plans for the area.

We feel strongly that the Prop 401 fight was in stark reality, an effort to get the cabaret businesses out of the area it but also was to have the effect of devaluing their business and thus those properties and other properties in that area. This devaluation of those properties plays into the City’s "quiet" partnership with CSA, via Manross, in the use of funds for more publicly subsidized much more dense housing in the area. Of course the sham was that the Mayor’s supposed battle for the "Yes" vote on Prop 401 was based on the higher-minded arguments of family values and public safety.  Yeah, Sure……. We sure bought into that little spoof didn’t we?

Could the fact that Jamie Capobres with her and her husband Steve’s apparent ties with CSA who also just happened to head the Mayor’s favored "YES on 401" committee cause some to speculate as to their conflicting roles and motivations? Does it take rocket science to see this picture clearly in 3D? Which brings up another point: was it Steve or Jamie Capobres who was actually running for council during the 2002 election? Hmmmmm…

Isn’t it very possible the Mayor was easily motivated to be extremely stealthy with any specific CSA contract information on the subsidized housing before the Prop 401 election and at the time ASU Foundation’s SkySong was looking for a lease contract amendment to put in high end apartments there? It would have simply complicated matters much more for her and made it more difficult for her in those struggles had the information been released.

How "High End" do you think those SkySong apartments, or the office buildings at SkySong for that matter, are now with subsidized, low income housing next door and build-to-suit commercial properties at Via de Ventura and the 101 freeway closer to the high end of the city?

Could it be that ASUF knows what it may do to them and they may want to keep it quiet from their investors and lenders? Could that be why the Scottsdale Republic has not said not one single word about any of this? Typical Scottsdale Republic: support the administration at any cost to the city and it's citizens.

We feel for the private group of  ^$100 million investors who have rolled up the properties at fair prices to the east in hopes of a "complimentary" high-end mixed use development to Skysong. God knows what they’ll ask from the city to make it economically viable now.  

This is just another "Manross under–the-table done deal" now unless the council can be convinced to pay the loan monies back to the Feds and take control of the project by using the City Council, DRB, and the Planning Commission to reverse the decision, reassess the area requirements, and make the adjustments necessary to make the project more viable and anything but another future "Holiday Park".

Here is some final bad news for Belleview residents; unless the City Council pays the feds back that money, the restrictions are held to that property so there is really nothing that can be done other than stopping the city from allowing this to continue. The total is astounding for the city of Scottsdale as we already have over ^$130 million in subsidized housing costs in SkySong and all of it is in an area the city is promoting as a revitalized southern section of the city.

How could "Slick Mary" Manross present everything conceptually in just the right way in April that put it just off the council’s radar screen? Why didn’t an astute council person knowing the mayors slick and slimy ways, either ask more questions or not give her the authorization to sign anything. It was an authorization for Federal CDBG and HOME funds applied for and to be used in the standard fashion … Section 8 vouchers etc. 

Could the above assessment be correct so far? There is no way excusing or condoning these strategies and tactics by the council and much more importantly, the mayor and her developer friends.  If the mayor’s attempt was to put something over on the Council still again, she did another excellent "Slick Mary" job. Sadly, the taxpayers are not being well served, and open government took another serious hit due to the devious Manross plan. 

Whether people want to define it this way or not, this type of government is created by the wrong philosophical approach to both governing and political tactics. It’s damaging and creates even more taxpayer distrust in an already closed door and seemingly secret city government.

Don’t you get the distinct message here that the mayor is again trying to play God with "Mother Real Estate Market" without so much as a public outreach meeting or council meeting to explain what’s happening in the area? Where is the general overlay for the area? How does any of this play into the general plan, revitalization, or redevelopment? ……and the taxpayers will pay a pretty price for the mayor and the majority of the council following this omnidirectional path to destruction.

"Slick Mary’s" expressed goal is to bring high density to the south because she knows very well that it would never fly in the north. High density will continue to give her the cash she needs to keep other pet projects she and city manager Dolan are bound and determined to build: Million dollar round-about’s, traffic circles, traffic calming, street furniture, and wider bike and pedestrian paths for the citizens to use during the months of May through October when the temperatures hover at well over 100 degrees. Yup, that’s sure going to work to fill the bike ways and sidewalks while narrowing the street lanes and emptying the roadways isn’t it………..?

With this turn of events, do you really think that any "high end" global research company is going locate in SkySong and ask their employees to live in subsidized or low income housing? Boy, that sure tells the story of what will happen to the apartments at SkySong doesn’t it? They will rent at "Market Value". Market value is always established by the base rental prices of like properties in the local geographical market area. So, how will ASUF get away with charging anymore than CSA will charge for the low income housing across the alley? ....By welcoming ASU and SCC students just as Mike Merrill and many others warned the taxpayer from the time of the announcement of the ASUF apartment scandal.

Subsidized housing proponents pontificate about how great it will be for Police officers, Firemen and women, nurses, and teachers to have affordable rental housing available locally. Let’s get real folks. Would you live in a low income housing project or purchase a home in another area where you can build equity? That’s not rocket science either is it?

You ask why we are so hard on "Slick Mary" Manross and her private majority on the council? If the above doesn’t convince you that she is paying ZERO attention to the needs of the residents and taxpayers while seemingly paying 100% of her attention to her legacy and her developer friends, you are in bad shape, have tragically been "Manrossed", and our heirs will all pay a dear price for up to 198 years for doing so.

Final question: Would any of this be tolerated anywhere north of Camelback Road? The simple answer is, have you ever heard of the Shoot Out at the OK Corral?

With everything being said here, why does the City Council continue to give "Slick Mary" Manross the permission to sign anything without a full and unabridged report and schedule on every aspect of any and all projects presented? That practice needs to be stopped post haste!

 ~ ....And We Get Funny Anonymous USPS Letters too!

Mr. Editor: I doubt you will print this, but here it goes anyway. I agree with a previous reader that you and Mr. Merrill should run for Council. After all, you are just like many who have ever run for Council. They didn't get their way on some issue so they figured they would force that change on the organization/community from the Council Chambers. Nobody runs for Council anymore without a personal agenda. Nobody really puts the community first. We better get use to it. All Politicians do it. They put selfinterest first, just like you do. You did not create this website to inform and help the community, but rather to ridicule, embarrass, and threat those you don't like or agree with. Change can be made. However, it takes a more constructive adult dialogue to do so. Sometime it takes more powerful tools (i.e.-recall, public meetings, etc) to be done. Quit the high school macho man tactics and educate those about how to really make change in their community. There usually isn't anything the Council does that can't be undone.

A concerned citizen/employee

Editors Note: Absolutely I'll print the letter, and I couldn't help but put this letter in the Editorial section of the webpage for good reasons.

After I quit laughing wildly at some of the ridiculous statements and reread the letter, it seemed very probable to me that a very high level elected/appointed official or their spouse actually wrote this letter.

I am charged with putting self-interest first, yet I spend 40 to 60 hours a week to make sure the citizens know what the council and mayor are up to through the citizen letters and the editorials in the Scottsdale Activist. If I have an agenda, it is to clean up this messed up city government with the help of the majority of citizens in this city. I have no political aspirations of any kind.

Look at the areas I highlighted. Don't they seem rather self-serving and don't they closely fit some people we possibly have representing us currently who just might be trying to wishfully justify their existence on the council or a high appointed position by attacking a person or persons who have no other agenda than cleaning up city hall and putting the city on a proper and safe financial footing for the future? 

Wasn't it our cagy mayor who publicly claimed that the new Ethics Code would keep many people from volunteering for city boards, commissions, committees, etc? Why? Because they wouldn't be able to parlay their position into political power or increased business profits through city connections?

How does any publication ridicule, embarrass or threat (I'm sure they meant threaten) anyone unless they are doing something that they know is wrong, is underhanded, not in the best interest of the city, or totally out of line politically, morally or possibly illegal? How else can you be any of those things any other way? Getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar can cause some sticky problems too, can't it?

"More constructive adult dialogue" is an interesting and loaded statement. How much more constructive adult dialog can you have than a Kiva full of citizens eloquently and fervently pleading for fairness and equity while testifying at a city council meeting. Only to have the council majority vote 100% the other direction. What the heck happened to Constructive adult dialog in all of those cases on the part of the council and staff?

Saying that "There usually isn't anything the Council does that can't be undone." is one of the biggest jokes in the entire anonymous note, unless you take into consideration that this note came in exactly as printed here with grammatical, punctuation, paragraphical, and spelling errors included.

Finally, I'd much rather be accused of using "high school macho man tactics" which are very direct and honest to a fault, than be someone who wheels and deals behind closed doors then denies that anything ever happened or swears they knew nothing about it.

(Return to Top)

~ Home of the Week

Pride of Ownership in North or Central Scottsdale? Cactus/Shea Corridor?  Arabian Park Area? Nope!! It's one of those lovely mature beauties nestled snuggly into the Caballo Ranchos in what's now considered Southern Scottsdale under mature shade trees which I believe was originally part of the Goettel Ranch. These homes are all situated on approximately one acre in the heart of the city with full irrigation privileges and are seldom for sale, and for good reason.

The spacious exterior and well laid out open interior of this cozy home are beautifully kept, neat, painted, well trimmed and just plain lovely to look at and appreciate. Flood irrigation is still being used to irrigate the which is very efficient for the size of the property.

There are many wonderful and beautiful neighborhoods within the city of Scottsdale. Do yourself a favor and take the long way home sometime and see what other home owners are doing to improve their neighborhoods. How does your home compare?

If you know of an outstanding home which you feel should to be honored by having the picture displayed in the Scottsdale Activist, send the address to editor@scottsdaleactivist.com .

We have been asked why we don't include homes in HOA controlled subdivisions. We are looking for exceptional homes in areas where the homeowner has to be the driving force behind the beautiful home, not the HOA rules and regulations. We would definitely look at any home in a HOA controlled area that is exceptional and owner maintained rather than by a lawn or landscape service, but so far, we haven't been advised of any that meet that criteria.

(Return to Top)

 ~ View Past City Council Meetings

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

http://scottsdale.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=3

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

(Return to Top)

 ~ Citizen Says CSA Deal Done Under the Radar?

Some residents in the south Scottsdale area find it odd, to say the least, that Councilman Littlefield and his activist supporters, Mike Merrill, George Knowlton and Nancy Cantor have not commented on the latest outrage to be foisted off on the long suffering residents of the area - CSA's purchase of properties along the long blighted Belleview street, a street adjacent to the Skysong site.

According to Friday's Tribune, CSA has been quietly purchasing these properties and plans to turn them into affordable, work force, rent controlled housing. Belleview is a street that many, including some police officers in this area, had hoped would be revitalized as over the years this street has been a source of blight and crime. Belleview Street has been a source of more harmful secondary effects than the 2 strip clubs located in this area. This street has been made up of affordable housing units for many years and most residents had hoped that revitalization of this area would bring a new "vision " for this community as Belleview street was a street most in need of a complete and total makeover.

 Mr. Merrill and his fellow activists as well as several councilmember’s expressed great concern that the apartments at Skysong would become dorms - a non-issue. . More residents are concerned that this new "housing " proposed for Belleview will one day become another blight on the surrounding community. Many of us are not uninformed enough to believe that affordable housing will assist in the areas revitalization. We are simply not buying Ms Cantor’s, a member of the housing board, claim that this type of housing will improve the area and be a positive. Ms Cantor, all affordable housing was new at one time. Everything is a "positive "when new. I recently took a drive through the Holiday Park area off of 68th street, an area that years ago was made up of well maintained apartments that over the years have become low rent properties with some being managed by CSA. I certainly encourage anyone to take a trip through this area, possibly not at night.

The city and police have spent much time and effort both in this area and Belleview Street attempting to clean it up. I have been advised that their efforts often do not last for a long period of time. Possibly one of you need to research how much it has cost the city and PD in terms of man hours to clean these areas up repeatedly as you love to uncover city waste.

The spin is that this type of housing will be inhabited by teachers, police officers etc. It would seem that most of these people will be living in homes in areas that are more affordable than Scottsdale. After all, why live in a rent controlled apartment when you can live in a home? Residents of the area have a right to know how much more of this type of housing can be expected to be built in this area. CSA or the city has an obligation to advise people as many have spent a great deal of money to improve their own homes and our naturally concerned about their property values. CSA’s Bryan Swanton admitted that they hoped to keep this plan off the radar screen - translation - they hoped to slip it through with the assistance of elected officials with no debate or input from the surrounding neighborhoods. This housing is intended for low income families not seniors who have been disappointed by the lack of affordable housing options for them - look at the senior housing on McDowell that most seniors cannot afford. Further, most of us agree that this project will not complement the surrounding area, assist in revitalization efforts or in attracting the types of businesses we should be attempting to attract. Rather, we may see an increase in more undesirable uses.

 More disturbing to some of us is the fact that the always vocal Councilman Littlefield, the self proclaimed champion of the south, and his supporters have remained curiously silent on this issue - they did not even uncover this scam - something they always pride themselves on doing.  Surprising considering this was the biggest scam of them all - and no one commented on it - slipped it right by the residents of the area. So much for your pledge of open and responsive government.

Apparently this is a platform you support when it suits your convenience and as Ms. Cantor and the rest supported you, you apparently gave her a pass as did the rest of the council. It should also be mentioned that you were all strong supporters of an ethics code. What a shame some of you don't know how to spell the word. The unholy alliance that you and your supporters have formed is no better than the "Manross machine "that you are so intent on destroying.

When we see affordable housing integrated into all areas of the city rather than concentrated in the south we will consider that a positive. .  We have for too long been the dumping ground for things others did not want in their back yards. Yes affordable housing is needed. However, when this type of housing is distributed throughout the city, then we may be able to support it.  When we see CSA building housing next to your home Councilman Littlefield, then we'll talk. Many are very aware of the games you all play.

Michelle Little
Scottsdale

(Return to Top)

 ~ Councilman Littlefield Responds

Mrs. Little:

The Editor of The Scottsdale Activist forwarded your email to me for my response.

The reason that I did not "uncover this scam" is simple -- the Mayor and City Manager did it without telling me about it.  One of the downfalls of being in the opposition is that the administration in power simply keeps those of us who are not part of the "team" -- myself, Jim Lane, Tony Nelssen and, occasionally, Ron McCullagh -- out of the information loop.  My biggest complaint about the City Manager is that she has taken sides and acts like she works for the Mayor rather than for all of the Council members, particularly those of us who are not considered part of the "team." Like, so much that happens at City Hall, the administration in power made this a done deal before the rest of us could oppose it or at least modify it.

There is only one solution to this problem, which is to change the balance of power at City Hall in the 2008 election.  If you really want reform you need to get involved to help us (Merrill & Knowlton, among others) make that happen.

As for being "the self proclaimed champion of the south," I won in the runoff election by a margin of 8% in South Scottsdale.  I think that proves that most voters in South Scottsdale have decided that my 4+ year record on the Council proves that I am trying to do positive things for that part of our city as opposed to just giving it lip service.

Councilman Bob Littlefield

(Return to Top)

 
~Nancy Cantor Addresses Little's Concerns

It was recently announced in an article in the Scottsdale Tribune, that Community Services Arizona has purchased properties on Belleview Street immediately south of the SkySong site, formerly known as Los Arcos.

Having lived in Scottsdale for over forty five years I have had friends and relatives who have lived on that street, and yes, up until three years ago my sister lived on that street. We are keenly aware of the issues that created blight and serious safety issues for the residents of Belleview and the neighborhoods around there.

My sister worked with the Police Department and the Neighborhood Services representative for the area, Decima Seiver, to organize neighbors and work with the City to remedy some of the problems. Sadly, getting a community to address its’ own problems is not an easy task, and while the people living on Belleview Street have been receptive to the outreach attempts, most of the landlords have not been.

Why is that? The majority of the properties on Belleview have been bought and sold over the last 8 years by "speculators" eager to take advantage of announced plans for the "old Los Arcos" property. We all know how many plans were placed on the table and the length of time they were dangled before us.

While some of those properties were improved, most were not. Complaints to the powers that be went relatively unnoticed for the most part. Perhaps if we had the tenacity of Merrill and Knowlton, or the shrill voices of others we would not have had problems arise. More power to them for hanging in there and standing before Council.

Affordability ceased to be an issue with those apartments as the landlord speculators never intended to allow them to function as affordable housing. They all had their eyes on assembling the area to redevelop. Buy a property; barely take care of it, pay no attention to community issues and you effectively drive down the property values of surrounding properties, so that you can buy them up at a lower price.

With the cost of land today, especially in Scottsdale, this is a weapon/tool that developers, can and will continue to use in Scottsdale, because there is no impetus to apply standards or effectively enforce existing property maintenance codes.

Those who are concerned need to look at the properties CSA does own and speak with CSA about what is required to live in their units. A drive through Holiday Park is not going to do it.

CSA is a responsible landlord and requires tenants to be responsible members of the community. If you know the properties on Belleview that CSA has purchased, you know that they must be extensively renovated in order for people to live in them.

CSA is required to march to a far more stringent standard than the previous owners were ever required to maintain.

Holiday Park is currently going through a "neighborhood assemblage process." If you check the County Recorder’s files you will see what is going on. Property managers in that area have spoken to city staff and to some us "activist" about the purposeful neglect and the lack of response to their concerns.

Residents are too frightened to complain about problems because they can’t afford to move anywhere else and the landlords cancel the rental agreements immediately of those who do complain

To set the record straight my opposition to SkySong’s residential element had to do with the way it came about, knowing full well that residential would exist as part of development from the beginning.

Let’s get one thing very straight. Redevelopment of the southern/mature neighborhoods, residential and business will include higher density housing. We have nothing on the books to stop it and we have no language currently on the books to control it. Furthermore, there is no intention on the part of the Mayor and Council and City Manager to take up the creation of standards for infill residential projects or the compatibility of commercial infill projects with the existing residential neighborhoods.

Most people assume that the City knows what it is doing. All things being equal, that might not be the wisest thing to do.

I don’t intend to take it upon myself to classify all those who might be living in the CSA properties as worthless evil doers, bent upon bringing the neighborhood to a slum.

I do know that many disabled, elderly and single parent families occupy apartments on Belleview Street because of it’s proximity to public transportation and to churches, medical offices and grocery stores. More than likely there will be more whether it is CSA or SkySong.

If we had a "Village Planning Process" like they have in Phoenix, these issues would see the light of day and we, individually and as a community, would have a chance to address openly, the concerns and fears of all residents.

No one on the Council, past or present as seen fit to address these concerns.

Nancy Ann Cantor
Scottsdale

(Return to Top)

 ~ Editor's Reply to Mrs. Little's Letter

Thank you for the heads up. We were made aware of a "situation" that was going on there and have had to find out who has been behind this all along and is actually doing the dirty work. You can guess who it is, but more on that later after we factually nail down those who are involved and we're almost there.

I have been warning for over 10 years that what you are saying is coming and not just to your area but to many in the southern reaches of the city including mine. The powers that be cannot continue to spend money if they don't have constant building going on because the development money they are using won't be there. There are areas though out south Scottsdale where "they" are trying very hard to change the zoning or give special permits or "considerations" to allow up to 60 ft structures in residential neighborhoods under the guise of if being "residential".

Until the voters in the south show up at the polls in the numbers needed to stop this nonsense, it will continue to progress until the entire city, just that portion south of the CAP of course, will be high-rise at 60 ft or more.

It may seem like we haven't seen what's been going on there when in reality, we have but there are only a handful of us trying to cover all subjects and we have had to dig deep to find out who the real culprit is in this underhanded plan and I think we finally found them.

Sadly, this administration has its fingers in so many "quiet" issues that none of us are able to keep up. I put over 50 hours or more of my own time into this stuff every week and I know that Mike and Nancy spend a lot of time also as well as do others. Bob has probably the hardest time because of all the ways he gets pulled by the administration on "hot" issues which turn out to be nothing more than a smoke screen to cover up stuff like what’s going on in the Belleview area.

This administration has less than 2 years to do all the things they are dead determined to do before they get thrown out of office with your help so we have many things to cover with the very few interested people who will get out and do the hard investigative work.

Again, thanks for reading the Activist, for your letter, and we appreciate your help and your comments!

Editor

(Return to Top)

As soon as we look like San Francisco with all our trolley cars, maybe the mayor will bring back horses and buggies.

She gets all the praise for spending billions of dollars over the years for the improvement of OUR city but do the residents realize that the money she is using is OUR TAX DOLLARS!

Look at the money wasted on Belleview Street and it still looks like a dump and the mystery curtain guards the still vacant property around Los Arcos.

No need to rush as by the time something is built it will be obsolete and scheduled as condemned property.

Richard Graham
Scottsdale

(Return to Top)

 ~North-South Divide Council/Staff Created

The tired debate over whether North Scottsdale receives favored treatment over South Scottsdale will never end, that is so long as North Scottsdale in fact continues to receive favored treatment from City staff.

A North Scottsdale fire station move, designed to REDUCE RESPONSE TIME BY TWO MINUTES, is tabled as North Scottsdale residents complain about noise and a potential but unsubstantiated drop in property values (and the City loses a $15,000 non-refundable deposit to boot).

The City spends $10million to upgrade the TPC Golf Course, but drags its feet on a $2 million purchase of the defunct and dilapidated Villa Monterey golf course in the South, finally and reluctantly caving into public pressure.

The City holds a public open house on October 4 to discuss several projects in the City's northern neighborhoods; while quietly allowing Community Services of Arizona, with Scottsdale-granted Community Development Block Grants, to purchase properties along Belleview Road in the South for conversion into low-income housing.

The City's transportation consultant, HDR Inc., comes up with a half-dozen options for rapid transit on Scottsdale Road, all of which options confine light rail to the southern portion of Scottsdale Road, with buses or streetcars suggested for northern Scottsdale Road.

Is it any wonder that South Scottsdale activists are so extraordinarily vigilant in their quest to promote fairness and integrity in City governance?

Michelle Aubert
Scottsdale

(Return to Top)

From www.newspaper.com

Arizona: Speed Cameras Rigged for a Comeback
Scottsdale, Arizona officials have already decided to bring back the Loop 101 speed cameras before the test is officially complete.

The test of the Loop 101 freeway speed cameras in Scottsdale, Arizona will not conclude until October 23, but already city officials are preparing to declare the program a success and re-introduce ticketing as early as January. Although the city claims that it will not make the final decision whether to continue the program until a committee evaluates the program, city staff are already working on a contract renewal with Redflex, the Australian vendor that operates the program. The current contract expires June 30, 2007.

As of August 31, the camera system had issued 110,962 tickets worth at least $17,421,034. The funds processed to date have paid the Australian vendor that operates the program, covered the initial investment in equipment and generated a significant profit. The state also takes a 47.4 percent cut of the revenue.

During an "evaluation" period that will result in a report on January 1, 2007, the city council will pay Redflex $2761 a month at each camera location to keep the pavement sensors functional while the cameras are idle. The city will also pay $75,000 for the report document which is compiled solely from information provided from the camera vendor and the police.

Accidents had already been on a sharp decline months before speed cameras were activated. There were 403 collisions on the Scottsdale portion of Loop 101 in 2004, a number which dropped to 297 the following year.

 www.newspaper.com

(Return to Top)

(Return to Top)

(Return to Top)

(Return to Top)

(Return to Top)

~THE CORRECT WAY TO FORWARD E-MAILS

These are excellent rules of etiquette for using an email system.

A friend who is a computer expert received the following directly from a system administrator for a corporate system. It is an excellent message that ABSOLUTELY applies to ALL of us who send e-mails.

Please read the short letter below, even if you're sure you already follow proper procedures.

Do you really know how to forward e-mails? 50% of us do; 50% DO NOT.

Do you wonder why you get viruses or junk mail? Do you hate it? Every time you forward an e-mail there is information left over from the people who got the message before you, namely their e-mail addresses and names. As the messages get forwarded along, the list of addresses builds, and builds, and builds, and all it takes is for some poor sap to get a virus, and his or her computer can send that virus to every E-mail address that has come across his computer.

Or, someone can take all of those addresses and sell them or send junk mail to them in the hopes that you will go to the site and he will make five cents for each hit. That's right, all of that inconvenience over a nickel! How do you stop it? Well, there are several easy steps:

• When you forward an e-mail, DELETE all of the other addresses that appear in the body of the message (at the top). That's right, DELETE them. Highlight them and delete them, backspace them, cut them, whatever it is you know how to do. It only takes a second. You MUST click the "Forward" button first and then you will have full editing capabilities against the body and headers of the message. If you don't click on Forward" first, you won't be able to edit the message at all.
   

• Whenever you send an e-mail to more than one person, do NOT use the To: or Cc: fields for adding e-mail addresses. Always use the BCC:(blind carbon copy) field for listing the e-mail addresses. This is the way the people you send to will only see their own e-mail address. If you don't see your BCC: option click on where it says To: and your address list will appear. Highlight the address and choose BCC: and that's it, it's that easy. When you send to BCC: your message will automatically say "Undisclosed Recipients in the "TO:" field of the people who receive it.
   

• Remove any "FW :" in the subject line. You can re-name the subject if you wish or even fix spelling.
   

• ALWAYS hit your Forward button from the actual e-mail you are reading. Ever get those e-mails that you have to open 10 pages to read the one page with the information on it?

• By Forwarding from the actual page you wish someone to view, you stop them from having to open many e-mails just to see what you sent.

Have you ever gotten an email that is a petition? It states a position and asks you to add your name and address and to forward it to 10 or 15 people or your entire address book. The email can be forwarded on and on and can collect thousands of names and email addresses.

A FACT: The completed petition is actually worth a couple of bucks to a professional spammer because of the wealth of valid names and email addresses contained therein. If you want to support the petition, send it as your own personal letter to the intended recipient. Your position may carry more weight as a personal letter than a laundry list of names and email address on a petition. (Actually, if you think about it, who's supposed to send the petition in to whatever cause it supports? And don't believe the ones that say that the email is being traced, it just ain't so!)

Some of the other emails I hate include:

Before you forward an 'Amber Alert', or a 'Virus Alert', or some of the other emails floating around nowadays, check them out before you forward them. Most of them are junk mail that's been circling the net for YEARS! Just about everything you receive in an email that is in question can be checked out at Snopes. Just go to  www.snopes.com .

It's really easy to find out if it's real or not. If it's not, please don't pass it on.

So please, in the future, let's stop the junk mail and the viruses.

Finally, here's an idea!!! Let's send this to everyone we know (but strip my address off first, please). This is something that SHOULD be forwarded, so do it.

Amen!

~ Just for Giggles 
 

  ~ The Baptist Cowboy

A cowboy, who is visiting Wyoming from Texas, walks into a bar and orders three mugs of Bud.  He sits in the back of the room, drinking a sip out of each one in turn. When he finishes them, he comes back to the bar and orders three more.

The bartender approaches and tells the cowboy, "You know, a mug goes flat after I draw it.  It would taste better if you bought one at a time."

The cowboy replies, "Well, you see, I have two brothers.  One is in Arizona, the other is in Colorado.  When we all left our home in Texas, we promised that we'd drink this way to remember the days when we drank together.  So I'm drinking one beer for each of my brothers and one for myself."

The bartender admits that this is a nice custom, and leaves it there. The cowboy becomes a regular in the bar, and always drinks the same way. He orders three mugs and drinks them in turn.

One day, he comes in and only orders two mugs.  All the regulars take notice and fall silent.  When he comes back to the bar for the second round, the bartender says, "I don't want to intrude on your grief, but I wanted to offer my condolences on your loss."

The cowboy looks quite puzzled for a moment, then a light dawns in his eyes and he laughs.

"Oh, no, everybody's just fine," he explains, "it's just that my wife and I joined the Baptist Church and I had to quit drinking."

"Hasn't affected my brothers though."

(Return to Top)

Q: Name the four seasons.
A: Salt, pepper, mustard and vinegar.

Q: Explain one of the processes by which water can be made safe to drink
A: Flirtation makes water safe to drink because it removes large pollutants like grit, sand, dead sheep and canoeists.

Q: How is dew formed?
A: The sun shines down on the leaves and makes them perspire.

Q: How can you delay milk turning sour? (brilliant, love this)
A: Keep it in the cow.

Q: What causes the tides in the oceans?
A: The tides are a fight between the Earth and the Moon. All water tends to flow towards the moon, because there is no water on the moon, and nature hates a vacuum. I forget where the sun joins in this fight.

Q: What are steroids?
A: Things for keeping carpets still on the stairs.

Q: What happens to your body as you age?
A: When you get old, so do your bowels and you get intercontinental.

Q: What happens to a boy when he reaches puberty?
A: He says good-bye to his boyhood and looks forward to his adultery.

Q: Name a major disease associated with cigarettes
A: Premature death.

Q: What is artificial insemination?
A: When the farmer does it to the bull instead of the cow.

Q: How are the main parts of the body categorized (eg. abdomen)
A: The body is consisted into three parts - the brainium, the borax and abdominal cavity. The brainium contains the brain; the borax contains the heart and lungs, and the abdominal cavity contains the five bowels, A, E, I, O, and U.

Q: What is the fibula?
A: A small lie.

Q: What does "varicose" mean? (I do love this one...)
A: Nearby.

Q: Give the meaning of the term "Caesarean Section"
A: The Caesarean Section is a district in Rome.

Q: What does the word "benign" mean?'
A: Benign is what you will be after you be EIGHT.

(Return to Top)

~ Here & There

~TRAFFIC RESTRICTIONS IN SCOTTSDALE

Oct. 5, 2006

The following is a partial list of road construction projects and traffic restrictions taking place in Scottsdale Oct. 6-15. For more information, contact mphillips@ScottsdaleAz.gov

SHEA BOULEVARD RESTRICTIONS
** The following lane closures will take place on Shea Boulevard at 75th Place through Tuesday, Oct. 10, to permit work on water lines: The east- and westbound median lanes will be closed from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. daily; two of three westbound lanes will be closed from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. nightly.
** The westbound curb lane on Shea from 85th Place to Scottsdale Road will be closed from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. daily through Oct. 27 to permit utility work in manholes.

GAS LINE PROJECT ON SCOTTSDALE ROAD:
These road sections will be closed during the following time periods through Oct. 15 to permit installation of a gas line:
** Northbound curb lane on Scottsdale Road from McDonald Drive to Indian Bend Road from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. daily
** Two northbound lanes on Scottsdale Road from McDonald Drive to Indian Bend from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. nightly.
** The westbound curb and left-turn only lane on McDonald Drive from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. nightly.
** No right turns for westbound traffic and no left turns for eastbound traffic from Rose Lane on to Scottsdale Road from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. nightly.
** Lane closures in both directions at times on Lincoln Drive at Scottsdale Road from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. nightly.

SCOTTSDALE/McDOWELL ROADS INTERSECTION
The Scottsdale/McDowell Road intersection will be reduced to one lane in all directions from 10 p.m. to 5 p.m. nightly Monday and Tuesday, Oct. 9-10, to permit water line work.

OTHER SCOTTSDALE ROAD RESTRICTIONS
** Lane restrictions will take place at times in both directions of Scottsdale Road at Williams Road from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. daily Friday, Oct. 6, to permit pothole repairs.
** Lane restrictions will take place at times in both directions of Scottsdale Road at Dale Lane from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily through Saturday, Oct. 7, to permit utility line work.

MILLER ROAD/McDONALD DRIVE AREA
These lane closures will take place in the Miller Road/McDonald Drive area to accommodate a water line project:
** Flaggers will direct traffic on Miller Road north of McDonald through Friday, Oct. 6.
** Traffic will be reduced at times in both directions on McDonald Drive at Miller Road through Friday, Oct. 6.  

PINNACLE PEAK ROAD RESTRICTIONS
** Pinnacle Peak Road will be reduced to one open lane in each direction from Scottsdale to Miller roads from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. daily through Friday, Oct. 6, for pothole repairs.
** Pinnacle Peak Road from Scottsdale to Pima roads will be restricted to one lane in each direction from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily starting Monday, Oct. 9, through Oct. 13 to permit repaving work.
** Traffic restrictions, including lane closures, will take place at times on Pinnacle Peak Road between 81st to 83rd streets through October to permit work on a sewer line project.

PIMA ROAD RESTRICTIONS
** The southbound curb lane on Pima Road, from Via de Ventura to Inner Circle Drive, will be closed through Oct. 16 to permit road work.
**Northbound Pima from Thompson Peak Parkway to north of Haulapai Drive will be reduced to one lane from 5:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. daily through October to permit road widening.
All work is scheduled for completion in November. For more information on the project visit:
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/capitalprojects/proj_report.asp?proj=S2104&status=S2104

CACTUS ROAD RESTRICTIONS
Traffic will be reduced to one lane in each direction on Cactus Road at Hayden Road through October to permit road widening and other improvements. Restrictions are part of the Hayden Road widening project. For more information on the project, visit:
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/capitalprojects/proj_report.asp?proj=S2103&status=S2103

McDONALD DRIVE AT HAYDEN ROAD
The median lanes in both directions of McDonald Drive at Hayden Road will be closed from 6 a.m. to 3 p.m. daily starting Monday, Oct. 9, through Oct. 13 to permit asphalt work.
More information on the project is available at:
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/capitalprojects/proj_report.asp?proj=S0305&status=S0305

HAYDEN ROAD RESTRICTIONS:
** The Hayden Road/Cactus Road intersection is reduced to one lane in all directions through November to permit road improvement work. Redfield at Hayden will be restricted to one lane in each direction through November. For more information on the Cactus Road widening project, visit:
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/capitalprojects/proj_report.asp?proj=S2103&status=S2103
** The southbound curb lane on Hayden Road, north of Via De Ventura will be closed from 7:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. daily Friday and Saturday, Oct. 6-7, to permit work on utilities.

HAWKNEST ROAD AT 86TH PLACE
Short sections of Hawknest Road will be completely closed from roughly 86th Place to 87th Street from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily starting Monday, Oct. 9, through Oct. 23 to permit sewer line installation. Flaggers will be directing traffic in the area during closures.

HIGHLAND AVENUE AT SCOTTSDALE ROAD
The westbound curb lane of Highland Avenue at Scottsdale Road will be closed starting Monday, Oct. 9, through Oct. 23 to permit road work.

CAMELBACK ROAD, 64TH TO 68TH STREETS
Traffic will be reduced to one lane in each direction on Camelback Road from 64th to 68th streets through Nov. 11 to permit street improvements.
More information on this project is available at:
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/capitalprojects/proj_report.asp?proj=S0301&status=S0301

DOWNING OLSEN DRIVE, EAST OF PIMA ROAD TO 89TH PLACE
Downing Olsen Drive will be completely closed to traffic from east of Pima to west of 89th Place through early December for work on water lines. The recommended alternative route is 94th Street south to Bell Road.
More information on this project is available at:
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/capitalprojects/proj_report.asp?proj=S2104&status=S2104

EXETER BOULEVARD, WEST OF 66TH STREET TO EAST FO 64TH STREET
Exeter Boulevard will have restrictions, including a complete closure at times, from west of 66th Street to east of 64th Street through Oct. 13 to permit utility trenching.

(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.

Proposition 100; Bail for undocumented immigrants

– Would give Judges the authority to deny bail to illegal aliens when there is convincing evidence that they've committed a serious felony, class 4 or higher or Aggravated DUI.  Recognizing they pose a great flight risk and are already in violation of federal law of entering and remaining in the U.S. Illegally. We have thousands of illegal aliens that have committed serious crimes and fled to Mexico and the Mexican Government has refused to extradite them back to the U.S. (25 people killed each day by illegal aliens; 13 by DUI and 12 by stabbings and shootings). 

Proposition 101; 2006 Taxpayer Protection Act

- Would amend the Arizona Constitution to require, beginning in 2007, that counties, cities, towns and community college districts determine their primary levy limit based on the actual tax levy in 2005. This proposition would be a step forward towards controlling liberal governments by limiting the ability of a municipality to tax its citizens by basing the municipal tax increases on the previous year’s collections.  Even further, some municipalities have a maximum allowable tax levy growth of 21.6%, which is outrageously high.  This proposition would limit that growth to 8.3%. 

Proposition 102; Standing in Civil Actions

- Would amend the Arizona Constitution to prohibit an illegal alien from being awarded punitive damages in the courts of Arizona. This is a proposition that I worked on as part of my larger immigration reforms.  It was my intention to protect the rights of legal U.S. Citizens by not allowing frivolous law suits brought by illegal aliens to result in punitive damage awards.  We have to ensure that our judicial system is not allowing those who break the law profit at the expense of U.S. Citizens. 

Proposition 103; English as the Official Language

- English must be designated the official language of the state of Arizona. Like President Theodore Roosevelt once said, "We have one language here, and that is the English language, and we intend to see that the [assimilation] crucible turns our people out as Americans. Former Colorado Governor Dick Lamm wisely observed that "a nation needs a common language just as it needs a common currency." A common language promotes unity and understanding among the citizens of a nation. By making English the official state language we provide an even greater incentive for all immigrants to learn English, apply for citizenship, and become empowered and productive Americans, (this referendum is Official English not English Only makes appropriate exceptions for trade, tourism, communication purposes, emergencies, etc.) By making English the official language, we also eliminate the wasteful spending used to translate millions of state documents into hundreds of languages.  

Proposition 104; Municipal Debt

- Would amend the Arizona Constitution to allow incorporated cities and towns to exceed their debt limit by up to 20% for: public safety, law enforcement, fire and emergency service facilities, streets and transportation facilities. This proposition plain and simple opens the door for municipalities to potentially increase taxes.  It would allow cities to incur additional debt to pay for certain services.  This debt will have to be passed on and paid for by its citizens through increased tax rates.  

Proposition 105; State Trust Land Reform

- Would amend the Arizona Constitution to allow urban state trust land to be conveyed to a county, city or town for permanent conservation, and up to 400,000 acres of rural state trust land to be conveyed for permanent conservation to the county in which the land is located. All provisions are dependant on Arizona voter approval in November 2006 and the US Congress must amend the Arizona-New Mexico Enabling Act by 12-31-08. This proposition streamlines the process for selling and leasing State Trust Land, without creating any unneeded bureaucracy.  The money created from these transactions exist for the sole purpose of benefiting Arizona’s schools. 

Proposition 106; Conserving Arizona’s Future

- Would amend the Arizona Constitution to permanently conserve and protect 690,000 acres of land and provide a classroom funding stream though improved planning and management of trust land. All provisions are dependant on Arizona voter approval in November 2006 AND the US Congress must amend the Arizona-New Mexico Enabling Act by 12-31-08.  This is a proposition that might as well have been written by the Sierra Club.  The measure creates a new bureaucracy designed to grant environmentalist an enormous amount of trust land as low cost.  The more land that is granted to the environmentalist will directly correlate with a decrease in funds for the education community. 

Proposition 107; Protect Marriage Arizona

- Would amend the Arizona Constitution to define marriage as only consisting of the union of one man and one woman, and would prohibit the state and its political subdivisions from creating or recognizing any legal status for unmarried persons that is similar to that of marriage. This proposition protects the sanctity and tradition of marriage the enactment of this proposition would also ensure that independent cities or towns could not infringe on the moral will of the voters by enacting an immoral definition of marriage. 

Proposition 200; Arizona Voter Reward Act

- Would amend state laws to establish a voter reward random drawing every two years with a first prize of $1M or more. Voters who cast ballots in the primary or general elections will be eligible to win and the money will come from the Arizona Lottery and private donations.  This is an absurd measure that equates the civic duty of voting with the media ploys used on television games shows like "Who wants to be a Millionaire."  Voting is a privilege and right granted to each citizen of this country.  We should not patronize nor trivialize our civic duty. 

Proposition 201; Smoke-Free Arizona Act

- Would amend state laws to prohibit smoking in all enclosed public places and places of employment.  Prohibiting smoking in all public and private businesses establishment tramples the private property rights of the business owners.  The founding fathers viewed the right to own private property as one of the most important issues protected by the Constitution.  A government should not have the right to take the legal act of smoking and make it illegal to do on ones private property.  

Proposition 202; AZ Minimum Wage Act

- It would impose a state minimum wage of $6.75, and would create a new politically appointed "Commission" to oversee minimum wage and employment practices in AZ, which would have no term limits and wouldn’t be accountable to the legislative branch or the voting public.  The Commission would have full access to all records of any employer.  It would grant any labor union or special interest group the power to access employment records.  

Proposition 203; First Things First for Arizona’s Children

- Would amend state laws to use an increased sales price (an additional $.80) on tobacco to provide funds for early childhood education for children ages 0-5. This proposition is a further expansion of all day Kindergarten, an issue championed by Governor Napolitano.  This proposition would create a new source of revenue for state subsidized daycare.  The new source of revenue would be in the form of tax increases amounting to more than $188 million per year. 

Proposition 204; Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act

- Would amend state laws to provide six years for the state to adopt more human practices regarding pigs during pregnancy and calves raised for veal.  This forces the agricultural community to adopt nonsensical standards regarding the way that they raise there privately owned life stock. This is an initiative pushed by out-of-state animal-rights activists, which would ban common practices used by livestock producers to house breeding pigs and veal calves (even though there is no veal production in Arizona), and subject farmers to as much as $20,000 in fines and six months in jail. 

Proposition 205; Your Right to Vote

- Would amend state laws to provide that all registered voters automatically receive a mailed ballot from the election official before every election and that a limited number of county-wide polling places shall remain open on election days for on site voting. This proposition is an attempt to circumvent the voter enacted and protected standards established by Proposition 200.  This is achieved by eliminating almost all polling places thereby negating the need for legal citizens to present identification when voting.  Mail in ballots are currently readily available to any registered voter who requests that they be sent this paper work.  Why would we want to make it more difficult for the already small percentage of people who do vote to do so? 

Proposition 206; AZ Non-Smoker Protection Act

- This smoking ban proposition is less costly for business owners and tobacco consumers than Prop. 201, because it would allow smoking in bars and does not include a tax increase.  It recognizes private property rights.  Signs must notify patrons and employees where smoking is permitted.  Still prohibits minors in smoking areas.  

Proposition 207; Private Property Rights Protection Act

- Would amend state laws to define public use and declare that the public benefits of economic development, including increased tax revenues and employment, shall not constitute a public use. This proposition is an effort to protect Arizona citizens from infringement and regulatory taking of private property like recently happened in Connecticut.  In that case the state government stole private property from its citizens for the purpose of increasing its tax base.  This proposition on the most basic of levels protects the rights of private property owners from the unlawful takings of land by dominating governments and additionally protects these owners from government facilitated attempts to diminish the value of private property.  

Proposition 300; Public Program Eligibility

- Would amend state laws to require recipients of certain state-funded services to be legal residents in the United States and would direct the entities that provide these services to report on the number of people who applied to participate and the number who were not eligible for those programs due to their non-legal status.  After the back door veto of 2004’s Proposition 200, by Governor Napolitano and Attorney General Terry Goddard, this proposition would once again allow the voters to demonstrate there willingness to protect social services by ensuring that only legal U.S. citizens have access to tax payer funded services. By offering these services to illegal aliens, it increases the burden on our state programs and robs our own citizens of services they’ve paid for with their taxes.  Above all, free state services for all takes away the incentive for illegal aliens to become citizens and legitimate members of American society. It is vital that we spend our tax dollars on helping Arizonans and not aid and abet illegal aliens. 

Proposition 301; Probation for Methamphetamine Offenses

- Would amend state laws to prevent a person convicted of drug charges involving methamphetamine from being eligible for probation under the Drug Medicalization, Prevention, and Control Act of 1996.  This proposition recognizes the methamphetamine epidemic that has swept the nation and closes loopholes currently available for those individuals convicted of methamphetamine related drug offences.  

Proposition 302; State Legislators’ Salaries

- Would authorize the Scottsdale Unified School District Governing Board to adopt a capital outlay budget which exceeds the District’s capital outlay revenue limit by not more than ^$11,800,000 per year for seven (7) years.

shoutandspout@scottsdaleactivist.com