And so the saga of the ^$15 million Dolan boondoggle continues………

We were told specifically by the city managers office that the EPA could impose a ^$20 million dollar fine if the city didn’t move to have the new water plant at least under construction by January 23, 2006, the date set by law with a firm completion date.

Sources stated that EPA and ADEQ personnel would never impose a penalty of ^$20 million dollars on any city or public water provider unless all avenues of constructive discussion and cooperation had come to a halt within a reasonable time frame. In addition, if the current circumstances had been discussed with EPA or ADEQ,  ADEQ/EPA has indicated that there WOULD be extensions allowed for compliance, but ONLY if the regulated entity shows good faith in addressing the issue early and not waiting until the deadline approaches. 

Therefore, the city could very possibly have been allowed to wait the six or seven months necessary to acquire the necessary property from the State as long as the plans and contracts for the plant were reviewed and complete as well as an approved secondary set of plans in case the land in question became unavailable were reviewed and approved by ADEQ/EPA .

On Monday evening (12-11-06), we wrote an email to Jan Dolan and Roger Klingler to get the pertinent information from which they claim to have made their very questionable decision as follows:

As of today, five (5) days after the email arrived (12-16-06),  I have not received an answer or even an acknowledgement of the email being received from either party which speaks loudly to the problem by not wanting it discussed publicly or any answers to be revealed by the city manager or any of her staff which could possibly show mismanagement on any level.

Could it be that answering the email would uncover more of what we have already uncovered, that they really screwed up royally with no acceptable excuse for the ^$15 million dollars this will massive error cost the taxpayers??

For anyone within the city of Scottsdale government to make such an outrageous and as far as we can determine an untrue statement concerning the fine is perpetrating a totally unacceptable hoax on the citizens and is nothing more than an overflowing truck load of bull crap to cover their incompetence in dealing with their flagrant and very costly and inexcusable error in judgment.

The threat of such a penalty is generally used by municipality management to bully city councils to do as they are asked.  Only, this time, they didn't even ask anyone including the legal department. They made the decision without consulting the city council. How arrogant, possibly unethical, and unprofessional is that?

In the Scottsdale Tribune article on December 11^th, Jay Duschoff was named as the Attorney for Hualapai LLC. City Manager Jan Dolan, City Attorney Deb Robberson as well as the city legal department should take heed: Some very qualified legal sources inform the Activist that Attorney Jay Duschoff has a reputation for "taking no prisoners" and that the expectation is that the City will not only have to pay ^$1 million in rent for the next nine years, but will also have to pay for the land, or face losing the entire investment in its water treatment facility.

In discussions with chemical engineers dealing specifically with water purity, I came to find out that reportedly most potable water in Scottsdale averages between 13 and 24 ppb of arsenic which is almost at the newly required levels already. The allowable limit was as much as 50 ppb before the Federal Government changed the limit to 10 ppb which was implemented in 2001 after Jan Dolan was hired.

The city council approved the construction of the necessary arsenic removal water plant in 2001. For some reason, the location of the plant was placed within a 100 year flood plain for which there is some citizen questions and concern.

Being that this plant was approved in 2001 by the city council, what took City Manager Jan Dolan and her staff until 2005 to take action? The most outrageous statement of all comes straight from the city manager herself when she claims in the December 11^th Scottsdale Tribune "that she was never told about the lease and it was handled by other staff". That comment, in my opinion, smacks of incompetence, arrogance, and a total lack of respect for the system which is suppose to protect the taxpayers.

In talking with some who knew Dolan in Menlo Park CA where she served as City Manager before coming to Scottsdale, they were quoted as saying:

"I remember Jan as being very competent, with a slightly prickly personality, so I'm sure if she were directed to create a plan ……………., she'd get it done promptly and with no apologies."

"………………. municipal governments are run according to the principles of democracy. If Scottsdale has created a city government where the city manager acts as dictator, the good citizens may want to contact the ACLU for help, as I'm pretty sure that's unconstitutional."

Having worked with Ms. Dolan over the years she has been in Scottsdale, she has always been a "hands on" manager and was always fully involved in any and all projects which were even as miniscule as alley trash, incidental code enforcement problems and other small issues. For her to try to claim that she didn’t know about this crucial lease and it’s ramifications, in my opinion, is far beyond belief and definitely not in character for her or those who spoke about her in Menlo Park, CA. It would seems that she knows she’s been caught with her hands in the proverbial "cookie jar" and is trying desperately to dump on a subordinate to get out of the situation as unscathed as possible.

 ~Some Backup Information

The federal Safe Drinking Water Act (42 USC s. 300f et seq.), as most recently amended in 1996, specifically requires EPA to revise the existing Maximum Contaminant Level (i.e., drinking water standard) of 50ppb (parts per billion) which was set in 1942.  On January 22, 2001, EPA adopted a new standard that requires public water systems to comply with a new MCL of 10ppb starting on January 23, 2006.  Arsenic is naturally occurring and is common in the granite formations that exist in Arizona and that hold much of Arizona's groundwater.    EPA's "Arsenic Rule" was reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences, the National Drinking Water Advisory Council and EPA's Science Advisory Panel.

A "part per billion" is the equivalent of ^$1 single dollar in ^$1 billion dollars.  Ten parts per billion is a very, very small number and it is very expensive to treat water to assure that the standard is not exceeded. 

Drinking water protection dates back to the late 1800's and early 1900's and dealt, originally, with the causes of dysentery, typhoid and cholera.  The Interstate Quarantine Act in 1893 provided the federal government with authority to establish drinking water standards.  In 1914, Congress created the Public Health Service to create drinking water standards.  Dysentery, typhoid and cholera were brought under control by the 1930's.

Based on monitoring data indicating that a large share of American water systems did not provide safe water, Congress enacted the Safe Drinking Water Act in 1974--and significantly modified it in 1977, 1979, 1980, 1986 and 1996.  The EPA is responsible for implementation of the SDWA, but can delegate management of the program to state agencies when a state enacts implementing legislation and petitions EPA for "primacy.  This has occurred in Arizona with the Department of Environmental Quality.  In turn, ADEQ has delegated management and enforcement of the program to Maricopa County.

Arsenic is a known cause of cancer and, thus, has been studied for decades.  The major health risks relate to bladder cancer, lung cancer, skin cancer and heart disease.

What Is The Compliance Date For The Revised MCL.

The compliance date for the revised arsenic MCL is January 23, 2006 (40 CFR 141.6(j)).  [See:  Implementation Guidance for the Arsenic Rule, EPA, August 2002, page I-5.]

Below are useful EPA and ADEQ links for the arsenic rule which I welcome you to investigate.

Toward the bottom of one of the links, there is a link to state primacy rules.  We believe that ADEQ will take primacy, but are not totally sure due to the lack of time for even more in depth research.

Most citizens are under the impression that the City Manager and City Attorney have retained their positions with probable salary increases due to the positive body language and smiles on their faces by the two charter officers in question after the Monday City Council Executive Sessions. We understand that Executive Sessions are, by law, not to include votes or even a mutually agreed upon consensus by the assembled city council.

Ask some former council members and they will never tell you that votes weren't taken nor that agreed upon consensus were not a part of the meetings during the Manross years, but they cannot tell you that agreed upon consensus or casual votes were a part of the meetings for obvious legal reasons. With that being said and knowing how Manross historically demands mutual consensus prior to a council vote to avoid public embarrassment (remember the 5-2 vote on SkySong that required a minimum 6-1 vote when she blew her top which caused the motion to fail?), I would venture to say that there WAS a majority agreed upon consensus which would explain the positive body language and initial smiles of Jan Dolan and Deb Robberson at Monday's City Council meeting.

But WAIT, it's not a done deal folks.

The council still has to vote publicly to give these two the apparent raises they discussed behind closed doors as well as the continuation of their contracts. If any four council members should decide that the ^$15 million Dolan boondoggle as well as other questionable decisions by Jan Dolan should have never happened and that she is the responsible person, they could just as easily vote to deny the raise as well as dismiss her as the city manager effective immediately for possible malfeasance in office without using malfeasance as the reason.

Why would an appointed official not want any performance or annual evaluation put in their personnel file unless they feared that what they had done during their tenure could somehow be made public and cause them great consternation and possible loss of a new job?

Personally, I would be extremely suspect of any appointed city official who requested such an action, especially if they felt it could affect their chances of getting another job which could be the only reason for such a request as I see it with 40+ years of management experience.

The City Manager supposedly gives her Department Directors an annual Performance Evaluation which goes directly into their personnel files. The same for the employees of the different departments.

So, Why shouldn't the city manager be treated equally? Why has she only had two (2) evaluations since being hired about six (6) years ago?

What funds has Dolan been using for the infrastructure at SkySong? Have the bonds been sold to cover the costs or is Dolan again quietly  moving money around or taking it from the General Fund as she can as both the City Manager and the City Treasurer? Where has the money gone that was dedicated to the new parks in the north?

This is the EXACT reason why the City Managers position and the City Treasurer positions should be held by separate, qualified city residents. Without the two Charter Officer positions being separated, the "Balance of Power" needed for a vigilant oversight is totally skewed and should never have happened.

Why does Dolan continue to work projects on a "project by project" basis rather than by using the general plan and a residential/commercial overlay with strict height limits as suggested and requested many times by citizens for years from all areas of the city?

It's time Jan Dolan accepted the blame for the ill-conceived ^$15 million Dolan major boondoggle, apparent questionable SkySong spending, poor planning practices, and other apparent miscues as lessons learned in her actions of possible malfeasance, then resign before she's fired. Ms. Dolan can then move on hopefully remembering the lessons learned in Scottsdale hopefully not repeating them elsewhere.

The Scottsdale Activist will pursue the problems surrounding Dolan until they are rectified with Dolan's removal or resignation, because there is plenty more to uncover from what we can currently see and are hearing from our Scottsdale city government insiders.

 ~ DMB Pulls Request for Height Variance

It would appear that DMB has finally succumbed to the pressure put on them and the council by the combined efforts of citizens from the north, south and central part of the city. It's rather apparent that the citizens city-wide have come together as one to stop being overrun on this and other issues by an out of touch mayor and council majority (see letters to the editor).

The citizens have finally figured out that the mayor has been the main person causing the divide between the north and south, not the issues as she tried to tell everyone. Manross and her minions have been exposed as the culprits by citizens city-wide who have looked beneath the cloak of secrecy to find the problem which has been skillfully hidden since Manross took office.

Now, we need to stop any thought of another subsidy by DMB or anyone else supported by Manross and Company.

(Return to Top)

~ Fifth "McOsterman" Update

Prior to Monday's council meeting, I again asked Councilman McCullagh why he wasn't sending me the simple note I needed to get off his back. He said I didn't need it, his verbal word was enough.

It's rather apparent that Councilman Ron "McOsterman" McCullagh still has zero interest that everyone is watching how he handles this situation.

It is also very sadly obvious that he really couldn't care less which is really sad because Ron is actually a very likeable, intelligent, and honest person; just misguided on this subject and a couple of others.

I guess we'll have to assume the city did pay......... Unless, of course Mr. "McOsterman" sends something verifiable in writing stating otherwise.................

We will continue to wait patiently, with weekly updates, for him to come to his senses.

(Return to Top)
 

 ~ Republic's Wright Deserves Big Ugly Dunce Cap

If Lesley Wright of the Scottsdale Republic want's to call ALL activists in the city of Scottsdale "Rabble Rousers", that might be barely acceptable or laughable, but to call just those in one area of the city such a name is a reporters serious misuse of a phrase and a huge error in judgment which didn't endear her or enhance her credibility, or that of the Scottsdale Republic Editors Robert Leger and Mike Ryan for that matter, with any city activists in the, north, south or central area of Scottsdale.

Maybe Ms. Wright and the Scottsdale Republic will think twice before they uses words that are inflammatory and discriminatory in describing any group trying very hard to make their city a better place through rare but dedicated citizen involvement.

(Return to Top)
 

 ~ A Picture Worth a Thousand Words??

(Return to Top)

~ Guest Editorial(s)

We are not going to stop shouting about precedent setting development or redevelopment including high rise building plans seeking exceptions to established guidelines. That includes lack of planning for higher density infill housing, lack of commitment to preservation of the mature residential neighborhoods by addressing construction of residential over commercial projects along our major thoroughfares.

Such projects will be important to address Scottsdale’s continued growth, but with definite language in the planning process, the unity we have seen from all parts of Scottsdale regarding DMB’s "One Scottsdale" will echo loud and strong.

Our City admitted that they had neglected the Downtown portion of the General Plan for over 20 years. Well, take a look at the neighborhoods that were not part of the City when they were built prior to 1960. 

Declaring certain streets and neighborhoods to be part of the historic preservation program is wonderful, BUT it does not do anything about what can and should be built around them. It does nothing for traffic and transportation issues and nothing for infrastructure, the water supply, sewers, electricity, telephone, emergency services, etc.

Why leadership cannot understand that exceeding height standards for any construction sets more than one precedent and carries negative impacts is beyond belief. 

It is not just the height, but we have had this conversation before.

Why develop a standard, criteria or guideline, if we can so easily throw it out the window?

Our City Council works, or should, for everyone. In order to conduct good government they need to be forward thinking (including being prepared for plans that deviate from a standard that was put together for the good of the community) developing long range planning.

Redevelopment is different from development. When redevelopment looms, it guarantees major changes to an area that has existed for many, many years. It causes an automatic clash between past and future, yesterday and tomorrow, in every way imaginable.

Setting precedent needs to be a serious concern, and needs serious deliberation and discussion.

We are beginning to see this happen with the One Scottsdale project impacting established areas of North Scottsdale and with every new project injected into mature neighborhoods south of Indian Bend Road.

I am not willing to place all of the blame on DMB. Leadership needs to accept a good portion of blame.

At an October 2006, City Council meeting Councilman McCullough discussed development along the Waterfront and the pedestrian access to areas where restaurants had sought additional space for outdoor dining. The point of the discussion was that previous Councils had approved the process and plans for the project and the current Council is bound by their approval vote.

So it is for building heights.

Drew Brown is a member of the Urban Land Institute and that venerable organization’s website for its Urban Plan, a high school program states:

The mission of the Urban Plan Program is to:

This is what the residents of South Scottsdale have asked for years and we have not been heard.

This is what an aging community, and we are growing up, needs to do to maintain the quality of life all Scottsdale residents have come to enjoy, without anger, conflict, displacement, or destruction.

Nancy Cantor, Co-Chair
Scottsdale Coalition

(Return to Top)

Bob,

I am glad to see that DMB has withdrawn their request and will stick with what was originally agreed upon and that is still yet to be seen, so I am sure you will continue to keep an eye on this project.

I am even more pleased to see that both the North and the South have finally made headway in coming together in supporting some issues that I believe we should have joined together on about 5 years ago, that in itself really makes me happy and gives me hope that we can continue to keep this city as special as we all feel it is.

I will indeed be at the meeting Monday to help further make those ties we have formed stronger.

Regards,
Michael Merrill
Citizens for Responsible Redevelopment

 (Return to Top)

~Christmas Decoration Photos

~ Home of the Week

 ~ Questions?

Many readers have asked why we don't expose those nasty, ugly rundown trashy properties we wish City Code Enforcement would cite and force to cleanup. We feel that it is much better to show the examples of homes that show pride of ownership rather than those trash piles and filth holes we all know about. If you have one of those "nasty" homes in your neighbor hood, email  rkeagy@scottsdalaz.gov  giving him all of the pertinent information including address, and you don't need to leave your name, unless you want to be contacted.

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

 ~ Where in Scottsdale is this Environmental Beauty?

Again, I ran across this beauty while looking for holiday decorated homes I could go back to photograph at night. This is another example of the highly desirable Park Scottsdale homes that have withstood the test of time and style changes over the years. We are very lucky to have these quality homes available for the residents of our World Class city.

Wouldn't it be a shame if those in power would railroad the residents into accepting the higher densities which will eventually eliminate these beautiful homes?

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)

Up here in the Northern Plains we just recovered from a Historic event--- may I even say a "Weather Event" of "Biblical Proportions" --- with a historic blizzard of up to 44" inches of snow and winds to 90 MPH that broke trees in half, knocked down utility poles, stranded hundreds of motorists in lethal snow banks, closed ALL roads, isolated scores of communities and cut power to 10's of thousands.

FYI:

• The President did not come.
• FEMA did nothing.
• No one howled for the government.
• No one blamed the government.
• No one even uttered an expletive on TV.
• Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton did not visit.
• Our Mayor's did not blame Bush or anyone else.
• Our Governor did not blame Bush or anyone else either
• CNN, ABC, CBS, FOX, or NBC did not visit - or report on this category 5 snow storm nobody demanded $2,000 debit cards.
• No one asked for a FEMA Trailer House.
• No one looted.
• Nobody - I mean Nobody demanded the government do something.
• Nobody expected the government to do anything either.
• No Larry King, No Bill O'Rielly, No Oprah, No Chris Mathews and No Geraldo Rivera.
• No Shaun Penn, No Barbara Streisand, No Hollywood types to be found.
• Nope, we just melted the snow for water.
• Sent out caravans of SUV's to pluck people out of snow engulfed cars.
• The truck drivers pulled people out of snow banks and didn't ask for a
• penny.
• Local restaurants made food, and the police and fire departments delivered it to the snow bound families...
• Families took in the stranded people - total strangers.
• We fired up wood stoves, broke out coal oil lanterns or Coleman lanterns.
• We put on an extra layers of clothes because up here it is "Work or Die".

We did not wait for some affirmative action government to get us out of a mess created by being immobilized by a welfare program that trades votes for 'sittin at home' checks.

Even though a Category "5" blizzard of this scale has never fallen this early, we know it can happen and how to deal with it ourselves.

"In my many travels, I have noticed that once one gets north of about 48 degrees North Latitude, 90% of the world's social problems evaporate." It does seem that way, at least to me. I hope this gets passed on..

Maybe SOME people will get the message ... The world does Not owe anyone a living.

(Return to Top)

~ Information You Can Use

~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)
 

(Return to Top)
 

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

(Return to Top)

 ~ "Obsession" A "Must See" for All Americans

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.

(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.