Volume '07-02
Published Saturdays Jan
13, 2007
The Scottsdale Activist
will not publish unsubstantiated allegations, libelous
statements, profanity, or personal attacks without a verifiable basis.
All letters, columns, pictures, or political cartoons submitted must
include the authors or artists name, address, daytime phone number, and
email. All personal information except the author, photographer, or
artists name will remain strictly confidential without being released,
sold or distributed in any manner. We assume no responsibility for the
contents of letters, columns, or cartoons and reserve the right to—at
our discretion—edit or refuse to print any submissions or parts thereto without the need
for justification. Opinions expressed herein are solely those of the named authors/artists and not necessarily the opinions of
The Scottsdale Activist
.
To send our
Brave Troops "Something from Home",
Click
on Any of the
Links below.
==================================================
This a
"No Cost"
website
dedicated to the Citizens of
Scottsdale who care enough about their city
to get involved.
Just Click the Sign up Button iiii
This is your personal palette from which you may "Paint the Tone" of the Scottsdale picture as YOU see it!
==========================================
Just click on the logos below to go to these websites.
==================================
Point to an Article you wish to read, then Just Click
~ Weekly Editorial -- Staff
-
DMB "Winners and Losers" Revisited -- Bob Littlefield
-
Scottsdale Canal Development LLC Blocks Views -- Nancy Cantor
-
Open Letter to Scottsdale Republic
-- George Knowlton
~ Shout and Spout, Ellman gets Money Grubbing Hooks into Scottsdale & More
~ Thought for the Week -- Joseph Warren
~ Quote(s) of the Week -- Various
~ Food for Thought - Take It or Leave It
~ Information You Can Use
Other Stuff of Interest
~ Look up Prior Editions? Click a on date to open.
~ Raises Not Deserved By Dolan, Robberson
It would appear that the Scottsdale City Council has fallen into the Manross, Dolan, Robberson trap of giving raises that are not warranted, deserved, or earned by two of the four Charter Officers up for raises.
City Manager Jan Dolan
: Let’s look at the record of Ms. Dolan who is up for an 8% raise plus more perks while at the same time she is solely responsible for a failure to perform her Charter Officer duties as required as follows:$
15 million Dollar Boondoggle: Allowed and approved a huge and ongoing $15 million dollar boondoggle and lawsuit against the city concerning the Hualapai Water Treatment Plant in North Scottsdale for which the taxpayers will pick up the bill for both the boondoggle and the legal fees thereto, and for which Dolan is the ultimate, hands-on Charter Officer responsible.$
10 million dollar lease: Allowed or asked the mayor to sign the $10 million dollar lease with the State Land Trust without City Council or City Legal Department approval that could have simply waited a mere 6 months, with the approval of EPA, until the land auction that the city could have easily won. No city official or employee will admit or take responsibility for handing the Lease to the mayor for a signature.Code Enforcement Department Out of Control: A Code Enforcement Department, under the ultimate direction of City Manager Dolan, that is so out of control that a recent city audit found 25 fully acknowledgeable points of wrong doing and missteps, 10’s of thousands of dollars in fines and assessments lost or uncollected, enforcement files lost, or failures to perform as required.
There are other non-audit problems including how employees were hired and how Job Descriptions were rewritten by department heads after the fact to accommodate persons who had been hired who didn’t meet the requirements. There are also strong suggestions that some employees are working second jobs, some while on city time using city equipment, and some without the proper AR 350 forms being filed after approval by management.
Personal Promises Not Kept: Ms. Dolan personally promised a number of city residents as well as a couple of city council members in a meeting at the home of a citizen that Code Enforcement would become proactive instead of reactive which it did for a short period of time. We seem to no longer have any proactive work being done, and personal contact with the residents seems to have ceased to exist entirely unless initiated by the citizen involved. We also no longer have neighborhood sweeps which would curtail or even cure many of the problems that exist today in the city
Scottsdale a "Sick" city? We now hear that costs to the city for medical insurance for city employees will reportedly increase over 30% this coming year. Increases in medical coverage are most always caused by heavier use of medical services by city employees. Increases in industry insurance rates are purportedly proportionate to the increase in the use of medical services rendered. We now hear, although not yet confirmed, that there has been a recent unreleased City Health Audit where the City of Scottsdale was found to be considered "Sick" by the professionals who reportedly performed the audit.
The "sickness" has reportedly been caused by large increased cases of employee depression and back pain primarily caused by depression, extreme stress, and low morale. Employee morale is directly controlled by the way the city is run and the way employees are treated. Being that Ms. Dolan is the Charter Officer in charge of most departments and being she is the City Manager, she again has the sole responsibility to make sure these kinds of things don’t occur and to fix them post haste when there is any evidence that they are occurring. If that means firing Department General Managers, so be it.
This condition could well explain the reason so many city employees are resigning to get away from and not be associated with a "Sick" Scottsdale City Government.
It has been noticed by many that the City Manager is far more attentive to the City Council and much less attentive to the citizens who are paying the bills. Could it be that she’s trying very hard to keep them from firing her?
She used to tell the citizens that she would get to the bottom of a problem and get back to them. She now pawns the problem off onto others who then pawn it off again on someone else. These actions or lack of same is indicative of a person who is over her head and has lost control of her charges.
Dolan Needs to Get it Together, Resign or be Fired: Ms. Dolan, although a generally very likeable person with a sometimes "prickly" personality, does not deserve a raise of any kind. Instead she either needs to be put on notice that she has 6 months to get the city back in order without a raise and without losing any more employees, or she needs to resign or be fired immediately. Corporate America would never put up with such tomfoolery as we have seen in this city over the last few years.
Former Police Chief Bartosh was fired for spending many millions of dollars less than Ms. Dolan has cost this city which is a point made very strongly by scores of citizens which needs to be taken into consideration during the City Council meeting concerning these unwarranted, undeserved, and unearned raise recommendations.
City Attorney Deb Robberson:
Charter Officer or not a Charter Officer?
When asked who made that all important request for the legal opinion, all members of those in the know or possibly were involved quickly stated "I didn’t" or "I don’t know". What does that tell you?
On numerous occasions, the City Attorney herself has referred to her position as that of a Charter Officer. Her Employment Contact with the city, signed by the mayor and other officials names the City Attorney as a Charter Officer in both the title and the "boilerplate". If she is, in fact as stated by the city and by contract language, a Charter Officer, she needs to be forced to immediately move into the city of Scottsdale without any further compensation or resign her position.
A private law firm hired by a concerned citizen strongly suggested that the decision by the City Council to claim that the City Attorney was not a Charter Officer was incorrect and was legitimately backed up by a number of Arizona Court cases. Unfortunately for the citizens of the city and those that come after all of us, said outside legal opinion was ignored by the City Legal Department, the City Council, and all officials thereto so that the mayor could have the person she wanted, rather than the highly qualified person the city needed.
Robberson Never takes a Firm Legal Stand in Opposition to the Council: Although many citizens have witnessed many times where the city attorney should have admonished the mayor or council members on illegal or questionable procedures, Ms. Robberson sits placidly in her chair and says nothing. If the mayor or a council person wants to do something questionable, she asks them what they want to do rather than telling them the best legal way to accomplish their goals, or tell them that they cannot do what they want to do under the law.
New Ambulance Contract: Ms. Robberson had to ask the attorney for the losing Ambulance service how the new contract should be written for the new service during a televised public meeting. There have been many times during her tenure when her inability to make a decision has been publicly noted and questioned which would not happen to a qualified and competent City Attorney.
Robberson never intervened in Hualapai:
Robberson never intervened in the questionable lease of the
State Land Trust, the negotiations, or the auction which the city
lost to Hualapai LLC. She apparently never asked to review the Lease
before the mayor signed it and apparently never looked at the
potential for a huge loss based on the lease being signed the mayor
without City Council approval. Any and all legal paperwork should be
reviewed by the City Attorney under all conditions without
exception.
These kinds of apparent lackluster actions on the part of the City
Legal Department are under the direct control, supervision, and
responsibility of the City Attorney, Deb Robberson and are not being
properly addressed or controlled.
The Sole Charge of the City Attorney: The City Attorney is a Charter Officer by Charter Mandate whose sole charge is to delineate the legality of any and all actions of the City Council, other Charter Officers, and city officials without interference from those she is charged to protect. Ms. Robberson is charged to protect the city from lawsuits.
Since the Manross administration has been in power, it seems that the "modus operandi" has been to make a decision and let the damaged party sue the city being that the city has deeper pockets than the average Scottsdale citizen. So instead of "let’em eat cake", we’re all hearing "let’em sue us".
Unprecedented Local Press Lawsuits: This City Attorney Deb Robberson has been a major party to, as well as have the mayor and majority of the council, to an unprecedented number of legal actions by the local press because they city was illegally keeping public information from the local press which has cost the city taxpayers hundreds of thousands of unnecessary dollars just to have it ordered released anyway by the courts.
The "Bending" of the Laws and Ordinances: There are many instances; some discussed herein, where city laws and ordinances as far as many citizens are concerned, were "bent" to suit the Mayor or the City Manager. This is one of the things the City Attorney is charged with stopping; all laws are to be followed to the letter or changed for the better for all citizens, not just a select few which seems to be occurring on a more frequent basis.
Largest City Legal Department: Why does Scottsdale have the largest legal department in the valley per capita if there aren’t serious problems within the department and the sloppy way the city handles their affairs?
Robberson Needs to Move into the City of Scottsdale as required of all Charter Officers and proactively call the law as written, not as others want it interpreted for their own use. If Ms. Robberson cannot agree to these changes or is unable to carry them out, she needs to resign immediately or step down to a position not requiring tough decisions. There should not be a raise offered to MS. Robberson for the reasons stated above, she needs to be required to find a residence in the city of Scottsdale without further city compensation within 30 days, and she should either resign, step down or be reprimanded and put on a one (1) year probation to prove she has taken strong and fair control of the City Legal Department.
City Clerk and City Auditor:
We feel that the City Clerks Office is very well run, very efficient, provides Superior Customer Service, and an excellent example of how departments should be directed. Therefore we agree with the raise for the City Clerk, Carolyn Jagger.
We also feel that the City Audit Department is well run, very efficient, provides Superior Customer Service and is another example of a well run and disciplined department. There fore we agree with the raise for the City Auditor, Cheryl Dreska.
Below is the link to the actual City Council Agenda as well as the proposed raises:
City Council Meeting Agenda Item 29
~Where Do We Go and How Do We Get There?
Many of us, who have been at odds regarding our hometown's growth and development, have come together with the goal of accomplishing good government.
Our first taste of Scottsdale City government came when the ADOT announced the Pima Freeway alignment in 1986 that would have taken around 2000 Scottsdale homes south of Shea Boulevard. It would have put that freeway in my Dad's back yard, as well as eliminating a goodly amount of the affordable housing stock so precious in Scottsdale.
Parents at Hohokam Elementary School, that same year, took on the issue of a "topless bar" opening overnight in the neighborhood and the ensuing negative impacts: it was located right where the Middle School bus stop situated (took some of those kids hours to walk home from the bus); patrons of the bar transacted business with dancers from the backseat of their cars which were parked in the neighborhood; patrons of the bar relieved themselves in the parking lot, alley, and against the walls of homes; patrons who had wa-a-a-a-y too much to drink passed out in parking lots of businesses adjacent to the bar and in the side yards and front yards of homes in the immediate area; plus there was an element of organized crime activity taking place.
At that time Mayor Herb Drinkwater made it very clear to our neighborhoods and City staff that there were no questions too troublesome, no issues too trivial, and no positive action without discussion and partnership between residents and those they vote into office and City staff.
Those were just the first two of many issues that impacted the older neighborhoods of Scottsdale as rapid growth and master planned communities took the lead in development.
The STEP Committees of the City in the 60's and 70's worked to bring community and consensus as we were growing in geographic size and population. They helped to provide a place for all points of view to be heard.
There is no official arena for those voices and partnerships in Scottsdale today.
The needs of our population have a different dynamic than they did in the 60's., 70's, 80's or 90's. The challenges to good government are great and the responsibility to make sure good government is lasting lays with all who live, work, and play in Scottsdale.
~ Planning Commission Still Doesn't Get It
After watching the Planning Commission last Wednesday, I really can't understand why they cannot understand the depth and importance of the 1st Amendment to our U.S. Constitution.
First, Steven Steinberg tried to say that, even though ugly or worse in some minds, Henry Becker has no right to have his sign or Kokopeli's on his property even if they are all absolutely legal under city, county, state, and federal laws controlled by Supreme Court decisions concerning 1st Amendment rights. Mike Merrill tried to explain to Mr. Steinberg that whether he liked them or not, neither he or the planning commission, or anyone else for that matter could take away Mr. Becker's 1st Amendment Rights to which Mr. Steinberg got very hostile and agitated and couldn't seem to understand or want to understand Mr. Merrill's points at all which were 100% correct.
We wonder what Mr. Steinberg thinks of the ugly 10 foot tall flowers and picket fence called "Art" the city wants to plant at the entry to the "Cox Heights Flower Garden" in south Scottsdale? Some may call it "Art" but many call it junk and a gaudy mess they don't want anywhere near their neighborhoods. Those flowers are as bad as the ugly dark brown building with the rusty pipe the mayor calls "art" but most neighbors call a nasty rusty junk pile that should have been painted to blend into the neighborhood without the rusty pipe and the brown diapers waving in the wind.
It's also very disconcerting that our apparently out of touch City Legal Department would even allow consideration of any total sign ban in the public rights of way being that there are a number of Supreme Court Cases which protect the use of those areas for political signage.
All anyone asked for was reasonable control over the time political signs were allow to be up, how they are arraigned and how fast they must come down, and how much to fine those who didn't follow the rules.
George Knowlton presented what we thought was a fair plan as well as another paper which mentioned the reasons why the signs needed to be allowed but heavily controlled which follows:
A Reasonable Sign Discussion
· The discussion needs to be divided into two parts and handled separately: Temporary Political signs as one discussion, and all other signs as a separate discussion.
· The taking of or the reducing of 1st Amendments rights are very hard to defend if the appearance that those rights are being taken away or are being abridged exists in any manner.
· A ban on any and all temporary signage in or on public Rights of Way takes away the public’s way of addressing issues by signs in reasonable, legal, and affordable manner where the public will safely see them thereby peaking interest.
· How about using the mail system you say: To mail 20,000 pieces of one color, single campaign card which only covers about 20% of the registered voters would cost 60 cents each for a total of $12,000 dollars per mailing.
· 4 x 4 double-sided one color signs would cost approximately $25 each with supports, so 100 signs would cost about $2,500 which is much more affordable and legally and strategically placed signs attracts conservatively 50 to 100 times the attention of any mailer sent out just once. 2 X 4 signs would be half that price.
· By allowing signs in a controlled manner only on private property allows for discrimination by property owners who could “Sell” sign positions to favored or monied candidates on their private property and deny others any place for a sign.
· An easily controlled system which pays its own way would be a happy medium which would satisfy all the needs of the incumbents and the new candidates to the political system. It allows all to participate reasonably on a somewhat more level playing field.
· A sign ban is very effectively an “Incumbent Protection Act”.
Being that we need a lot more participation in both candidates and voters, by eliminating signs in a heavily controlled manner within designated public rights of way would eliminate all but the most well heeled candidates which would be a total disservice to the public and the city which already has what some citizens consider questionably qualified council members now. The elimination of those signs would also reduce the number of voters because it is a fact that signs do bring out the voters in much larger numbers.
Concerns about the Scenic Corridors are well founded but as many candidates found out, when citizens start raising hell with the candidates about their signs being in the Scenic Corridors where they didn't belong, the signs were quickly removed and apologies were made to those who had the guts to call the candidates directly. So much for that problem.
We need to have a strong political sign ordinance with teeth so that all areas of this discussion can take something good from the discussion.
~ Commission, Boards, and
Committees Need a Reality Check
It seems of late that a number of members of the Boards, Commissions, and Committees have taken it upon themselves to make decisions which the public does not agree with. A prime example is the DMB project at the 101 and Scottsdale Road. This debacle help to solidify the need for a new organization called Coalition Of Greater Scottsdale consisting of activist and non-activist alike from all over the city who are upset with the direction this city as well as the city council is headed.
The other thing the members of Boards, Commissions, and Committees are forgetting is that they represent the citizens, not themselves and not the developers, city staff, or the city council. They represent us, the citizens, who are paying the unnecessary bills for all of the nonsense we have been seeing lately.
If members of these entities can't serve with that specific point, understanding, and rationale in mind, they need to step down immediately so we can replace them with some citizen who do understand who they represent. Just because someone has a certain expertise or is in a similar business does not mean that their decision is better than anyone else's. What it should do is allow that member to incorporate their expertise into making a better decision based on what the citizens want.
We feel it's time to start cleaning up our Boards, Commissions, and Committees before everything we now know as Scottsdale is transformed into an unwanted urban jungle which will force out out friends, neighbors, and probably all of us too.
~ "Art" is in the Eyes of the Beholder
We who have lived in Scottsdale for decades have seen both good and bad "art" come and go over the years. We have seen the beautiful horse sculptures, and we have seen the abstracts, we have seen the "art" in the arts district of the city and have appreciated most of it over the years.
Now comes the Dark Brown Blob with brown wings and rusty open-ended pipes which the mayor admires as "art" at Hayden and McDonald, the huge, strange looking single fat yellow flower without leaves or a stem off of Brown in the downtown area. Then you have the weird, thin rusty iron wings sticking 4 feet out of the ground on Hayden north of Cactus off the sides of the road which will chop someone's head off should they be in an accident and end up against one of those things. Then of course we have the new signage for the park system that are dangerous for children because of the sharp edges and their climbability.
Now the city wants to install 10 foot tall polls with flowers on the top reminiscent of Henry Becker's Kokopeli's in the north as well as a picket fence called "Art" the city wants to plant at the entry to the "Cox Heights" in south Scottsdale? Some may call it "Art" but many call it junk and a gaudy mess they don't want anywhere near their neighborhoods. When is this city going to start communicating with the citizens about things like this instead of leaving it up to those who don't know the neighborhoods or the citizens who live there.
~ City Council
Jumps Off Deep End, Yet Again
How can total bans on political signs in the Public Right of Way balance free speech?
Let’s face it, Political Signs are exactly what this is about if you attended the Planning Meeting and is exactly what 6 council members cautioned they would not support, but is what the staff brought forward.
While I may be wrong about the editorial of January 13th, but the letters to the editor that I saw for the most part did not say ban them, I noted that many of them said FINE them.
The majority of the letters I read in the Scottsdale Republic had our residents making some very worthwhile comments about changes in the process and heavy fines and as always with this city staff and council, it seems we just go straight for the jugular of an issue like this with just calling for a total ban.
It is not that long ago that the residents of this city also saw this same action take place against the Strip Clubs and now again, the city, and of all entities, the Republic, are now both advocating the further erosion of the First Amendment.
Since when did we become the city that does not look for solutions to try before we jump off the deep end with just banning everything?
While having no love for the clutter I saw this year, I also note that the city has not tried to make the necessary changes in the way we allow signs to be posted, the amount of time they can be posted, enforcement of the fines, enforcement of the rules or anything that many of your own writers had suggested that sounded feasible and just.
Instead, the only thing we can come up with from one council member up for re-election and the city staff is to ban them, period, end of story, and that is wrong when you will not even look for solutions and try solutions first.
Maybe if we fixed the political sign problems with changes, we could focus on how to get rid of all those homebuilder signs that litter the North end of the city that have been posted for years with no action from the city and maybe we should change the rules to ban those instead.
At least the political signs do go away after a period of time, a period of time that needs a huge reduction instead of a ban.
Are we as a city more willing to find solutions to our issues of political sign problems that the city does not want to address, as usual, or do we as a city think it is just best to ban everything and further erode our Constitutional Rights because it’s the easy way to deal with the problem?
Maybe they've forgotten the Supreme Court Rulings on 1st Amendment Rights takes major precedence over city rules.
|
~Letters to the Editor ~
letters@scottsdaleactivist.com ~DMB "Winners and Losers" Revisited -- Bob Littlefield Recently a column appeared in the Scottsdale Republic ("Who are the Winners & Losers After DMB Withdraws Bid?") calling me a "loser" and criticizing me for my role in defeating a powerful developer’s request for a height variance and a $50 million subsidy to build an upscale shopping center at Scottsdale Road and Loop 101. It pleases me when critics of my positions attack me personally, because by stooping to that level they are conceding that they cannot win the debate on the merits of their arguments. There is no better example of that than this "Winners & Losers" column, which gets it wrong about every aspect of this controversy. The biggest error in this column is the claim that this was a popular project that was derailed by the noisy opposition of a few north Scottsdale naysayers. The facts are that the vast majority of resident input that the Council received on this issue – from residents in all parts of our city – was opposed to it. Even more telling, the meeting called to organize an effort to refer the height variance and subsidy to a vote of the people (had they been approved) was attended by concerned citizens from all parts of Scottsdale. They all understood that, had the Council approved the height variance and subsidy, it would have set a bad precedent for all of Scottsdale. That is why these residents were willing to volunteer their unpaid time and effort to defeat this proposal. In fact, one big win that has emerged from this controversy is the uniting of concerned citizens from all parts of our city to work together to protect Scottsdale’s quality of life. These citizens want to put a stake through the heart of this supposed north-south Scottsdale divide, a "divide and conquer" tool that has long been used by powerful special interests to minimize resident opposition to their plans to "redevelop" Scottsdale into a denser, more urban place. Another error in this column is the claim that giving developers increased building heights will result in increased sales tax revenues for the City of Scottsdale. Retailing – the activity that produces sales tax revenues -- is an activity that takes place on the lower floors of a project. If we grant developers permission to build more floors in their project those higher levels will contain offices and condos. Because those offices and condos will (ironically) have better views, the developer will be able to sell them at a premium. The result will be heftier profits for the developer but not a dime of extra sales tax for the Scottsdale taxpayers. The claim by those lobbying for height variances that added height will make the project more "distinctive" is totally inconsistent with their other claim that we have to grant developers along Scottsdale Road north of Loop 101 greater heights "because Phoenix is doing it." How can a project in Scottsdale be more distinctive from one in Phoenix if we make it more like the one in Phoenix? The heights that Phoenix plans to allow in this area are a mistake and we on the Scottsdale City Council would be doing our constituents no favors by blindly imitating that error. The biggest error in this column was the writer’s portrayal of the outcome of this controversy as a debacle. On the contrary, when the Scottsdale City Council says "no" to a powerful developer to protect the interests and wishes of our constituents I count that as a victory. Councilman Littlefield can be reached by email at bob@boblittlefield.com. ~ Light Rail According to the Chinese -- Craig J. Cantoni I’ve always thought that fears of China overtaking us economically were overblown. But after watching a segment on the PBS NewsHour yesterday evening about a light-rail system being constructed in the major metropolis of Chongquing, I now wonder if the Chinese are indeed smarter and more capitalistic than us. My hometown is metro Phoenix, where a light-rail line is being built at grade level in the middle of streets with oodles of public money. Because trains will interfere with automobile traffic and pedestrians, the line will increase traffic congestion, fatalities and pollution. This is as foolish as putting an airplane runway on a school playground. The system in Chongquing is the opposite. Trains run on elevated tracks or at ground level on their own right-of-way. Because that makes the trains faster than buses, passengers are willing to pay a fare that is twice as much as bus fare. In Phoenix and other American cites, commuters have to be seduced with huge subsidies to ride light rail, which is living proof that the systems are slow and uneconomic. Even more fascinating is the fact that the Chongquing system is being built mostly with private capital. To paraphrase what a Chinese transit official said, "That way we will not be wasting public money if the system doesn’t work as planned."? Of course, Chongquing is much more conducive to mass transit than Phoenix, because like all Chinese cities, the massive influx of peasants from rural China has led to the construction of a warren-den of high-rise apartments. Mass transit doesn’t pay off without such high-density development. No doubt, when the Chinese become as wealthy as Americans, they will desire detached homes in the suburbs, just as our forebears left the noise and squalor of city tenements for suburbia. Ironically, urban planners in America want to go against natural development cycles and economic forces by creating subsidized Disney-like downtowns where the upper-class can live in high-rise apartments and condominiums. Although the new housing is being built near light-rail lines, it usually has underground parking for the luxury cars and SUVs that the inhabitants drive to suburbia to play golf and shop at swank malls, thus leaving light rail and its high crime rate to the proletariat. Will the Chinese eventually overtake us economically? I don’t know the answer, but based on their approach to light rail, I’m going to continue investing my money in China. Author and columnist, Mr. Cantoni can be reached at ccan2@aol.com.
Those developers who purchased those properties north of Camelback and West of Minnezona, did exactly what we have warned everybody they would do - neighborhood assemblage. As they bought up the apartment complexes they barely maintained them and let properties run-down in order to drive down surrounding property values. Many families, some long time residents, have been displaced from affordable rental properties to build luxury housing and hotels. The new owners or the developers should be required to provide relocation assistance to those people who live and work in this City and now must make longer commutes from outside of the City due to the lack of local affordable housing. Many of those people work in the service sectors, restaurants and hospitals. This is another reason why Scottsdale is so concerned about transportation. So many of these people must move out of the City and travel back here to work. They are not welcome as residents, just really needed as employees. What about the impact of the high rise buildings on the single residential houses that are still there in that neighborhood north of Camelback Rd. east of Minnezona and west of Miller? Is this the beginning of the end of those residential neighborhoods? Is there a hope that homeowners will give up their properties and move away to avoid having high rise neighbors "looking down on them," literally and figuratively, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Once again we see mature affordable neighborhoods falling victim to the whim of the City Manager’s and Mayor’s philosophy of "We will take everything on a project by project basis." Could it be that Code Enforcement was given direct orders by the City Managers Office not to write Code Violations on those affected properties which would have cost the sellers while allowing the devaluation of the properties still more? We also see height ordinances being violated while the developers attorney, John Berry is asking for still more height up to 72 feet (plus Mechanicals) as well as having the city pay for upgrades to the electrical and other services. Enough already!! This entire project needs to be stopped in its tracks!! A responsibility of good government is to look out for the well being of ALL residents, not just those with six or seven figure incomes. We no longer have a resident friendly government in Scottsdale and that needs to change ASAP. To read about the proposed project in the Scottsdale Republic, click the link below and scroll down about 21 headlines to "New Project for Downtown" : http://www.azcentral.com/community/scottsdale/scottsdale_more.html Nancy Cantor Co-Chair Scottsdale Coalition
~Steinberg Way off Base and Owes Apology -- Anne Hickie To say that I could "spit bullets" after
reading Steven Steinberg's MY TURN in the Scottsdale Republic is
to put it mildly! Where are the long range plans that would have citizen input and some measure of accountability? Where is the Planning Commission's accountability in approving this height request without a long range plan to back it up? Activists serve a purpose, and I for one thank them for questioning the powers that be. I happen to know some activists and I have great respect for their dedication to a cause and/or causes. The ranks of the activist are swelling
because of people like you, Commissioner, who feel they alone
know what is good for Scottsdale. I believe Steven Steinberg owes the people of Scottsdale an apology. Anne C. Hickie ~ I Own The Property But Cannot Vote? -- Merlin Gindlesperger I am submitting a transmission of a voice mail message left on my cell phone, by Lisa Haskell, who is currently the President for the Board of the Palo Verde Condominium Homeowner's Association. This message was left in response to a letter I wrote to the HOA Management Company and to the Board of Directors. The letter was in regard to questions rising from a letter dated May 23, 2006 whereupon I questioned a notice of the upcoming Homeowners annual meeting and the election of officers to serve on the HOA Board of Directors. The upcoming meeting notice stated: "This notice is being sent to all homeowners and those wanting to submit their name for the Board of Directors, you must live on the property and be current with your association to be able to run or vote." Since I, Merlin Gindlesperger own a unit at the Palo Verde Condos, I believed it to be my right as an owner to vote and to run for office on the Board of Directors if I so desired, whether or not I reside at the condo. I live elsewhere in Scottsdale, yet have a vested interest in the condo property. Currently my granddaughter lives in the condo. In that letter to the Management Co. and to the Board of Directors I stated: " I am unaware of any stipulation either in the CC&R's or recorded Amendments that forbids an owner the right to vote or to run for office because he may live elsewhere. I am willing to entertain any valid written and properly recorded amendments that tend to deny rights as so stated in the meeting notice." I also stated that I believed this to be an important matter and a possible infringement on my rights and the rights of others as property owners and would take whatever action needed to assure those rights. TAKING ACTION TO ASSURE THOSE RIGHTS IS ANOTHER MATTER THAT I WAS SOON TO FIND OUT. The Board of Directors( w/ Lisa Haskell as president) has the Management Company, the Attorneys, and the Association moneys to use at their(her) discretion. An individual Condo owner has the power to obtain his own legal help and his own money to work against the Association money (which is some of his own). In the past Lisa Haskell's heavy handed actions, demeaning and humiliating treatment of condo owners who desired to participate in the process have caused some to sell and move, and others to withdraw from any participation with the Home Owners Association. Some withdrew out of fear of reprisals from the Lisa and the board, justified or not. I believe this to be the same Lisa Haskell who is the "Scottsdale Activist" whom so many people have read newspaper editorials, has an activist committee etc. Perhaps some enlightenment as to the nature of the individual by her own word is helpful when one reads the editorials or participates actively in local matters. The following is the transcript. I have a tape recording of the voice mail. When heard it gives a stronger flavor to the message. Transcription: Lisa Haskell: "Let me tell you why we amended our by laws, and we did send you a copy of those. You will be receiving a response from our attorney, because if you are threatening legal action, apparently some of you do not understand, that some of the stupidity around here, that some of you have caused, have cost the association a great deal of money. The reason we amended our CC&R's, Merlin, and the reason most associations have done the same thing, or amended our bylaws, rather, was that people who do not live on the property can not take the same care and that's what we've ran into for years around here and that's why the majority of the board felt it was a good idea most associations I've been in contact with, that was their requirements. The Management Company we had at the time said all that was required at the time was an amendment of the bylaws, which we voted on. We will now spend some association money. We'll have the, our, um, attorneys look it over, make sure everything's legal and you'll be receiving a response from them. And I don't know exactly what your problem is or what's you be you got your mind about the whole thing. But we did it because we live on the property, we live with some of this stuff we see it everyday, and those of you who don't do not, and um, so you can make sure I will check with the attorney and you're going to be receiving a response from him, so I don't know what action you are threatening, but I can damn well assure you that it is not the best interest of the property and I am so sick of some of you that all you can do is stir up trouble and I don't know if because you didn't get um, elected council member, you don't have anything else to do except this, I don't know but, I'll get the attorney out again and we'll go at it again. Thanks for your concern." Note: I have the audio tape as evidence that this conversation took place, and I have no idea what Lisa is referring to when she says "we'll go at it again", or "sick of some of you that all you can do is stir up trouble". Gives to mind that some troubling things may have occurred before my time? Merlin Gindlesperger Scottsdale |
~ Open Letter to Scottsdale Republic
-- George KnowltonGood morning Mr. Ryan & Mr. Leger,
We really need to do something about the misreporting going on in your Scottsdale Republic of late. I don't mind being quoted if the quote is complete and I don't mind being tied to something if either I have been personally contacted for verification or have been listed in writing and verified as connected which I have not, BUT your article which clearly stated.......
"The point of COGS - organized by Bob Vairo and Linda Whitehead of the north's COPP and southern activists Mike Merrill and George Knowlton - is to bring the might of north and south together."
.........is totally erroneous concerning my position in COGS and that needs to be corrected.
Although I agree 100% with the organizing of the group, and also fully support 100% the goals of the COGS organization, I am not, and have not had anything to do with the organization of this group nor am I a member.
Your reporters Thomas Ropp and Carol Sowers need to be much more careful concerning what they write.
Those working with Bob Vairo & Linda Whitehead are the very capable and very intelligent Nancy Cantor and Rita Saunders-Hawranek among others of the south and central Scottsdale area who have lived and been involved with city affairs for decades. I think that with this combination of talented citizens from the north, central, and south working together as a group who leave their egos at the door when they enter a meeting, there is a great new understanding and dawning for Scottsdale citizens under the tutelage of these people and many others who are or will be members.
Although I cannot speak for Mike Merrill, I don't believe he was one of the organizers either but you should check with Mike on that.
Because I regularly contribute to the Scottsdale Activist, I don't feel it's proper for me to belong to or help organize any new group which could either help or hinder their success in Scottsdale due to my association with the Scottsdale Activist.
I would appreciate some public clarification and correction on this issue post haste.
Respectfully,
George Knowlton
Scottsdale
~ Politics of "NO" a Figment of Imagination
-- Mike MerrillAfter reading Lisa Haskell’s letter to the editor on January 10th regarding the "Politics of No", I had to stop and think for a second and then start laughing.
When does the city of Scottsdale really ever say "No" to anything?
If the council is as whipped as she claims and being led around by the nose by local activist and in fear of referendums than she needs to explain to me how it is all of these things are getting approved?
Look at the following examples in just downtown that have been given the green light by the Council.
·
The Water Front Project·
The Optima Project·
The "W" Hotel·
The Valley Ho·
The Lofts·
Scottsdale/ASU Center·
Lowes Home ImprovementMost of what Ms. Haskell complains about are issues that have yet to even hit the council for a decision and the issue of Transportation has only shown non-support for Rail Transit down Scottsdale Road and has never objected to anything else as of yet.
As for subsidies I think Ms. Haskell must not have good memory retention as ASU is heavily subsidized to the tune of $160 million, the Car Dealers on Motor Mile are subsidized to the tune of over $300,000 per year with no strings, the downtown bars get money, heck, even the Waterfront has a $5 million dollar subsidy and truth be told, if you hold your hand open wide enough in this city, the Council will surely drop in some money for you.
The politics of "NO" in Scottsdale seems to be a figment of her own imagination.
Michael Merrill
Scottsdale, AZ. 85257
"Our country is in danger, but not to be despaired of. Our enemies are numerous and powerful; but we have many friends, determining to be free, and heaven and earth will aid the resolution. On you depend the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important question, on which rest the happiness and liberty of millions yet unborn. Act worthy of yourselves."
-- Joseph Warren (Boston Massacre Oration, 6 March 1775)
"Every Mighty Oak tree started out as a couple of nuts who stood
their ground and fought off the squirrels."
--Author Unknown
"I suppose, indeed, that in public life, a man whose political principles have any decided character and who has energy enough to give them effect must always expect to encounter political hostility from those of adverse principles."
-- Thomas Jefferson 1808
The quote of
the month is by Jay Leno:
"With hurricanes, tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding,
severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another, and
with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks, are we sure this is a
good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?"
~ Food
for Thought, Take it or Leave it
Two friends were walking through the desert. During some point of the journey, they had an argument, and one friend slapped the other in the face. The one who got slapped was hurt, but without saying anything wrote in the sand:
"Today my best friend slapped me in the face".
They kept on walking until they found an oasis, where they decided to take a bath. The one who had been slapped got stuck in the mire and started drowning—but the friend saved him.
After he recovered from the near-drowning, he wrote on a stone:
"Today my best friend saved my life".
The friend who had slapped and saved his best friend asked him, "After I hurt you, you wrote in the sand and now, you write on a stone. Why?"
The other friend replied: "When someone hurts us, we should write it down in sand where winds of forgiveness can erase it away. But, when someone does something good for us, we must engrave it in stone where no wind can ever erase it.
Learn to write your hurts in the sand and to carve your benefits in stone.
~What Thomas Jefferson learned from the Muslim book of jihad
U.S. Veteran Dispatch
January 2007
Democrat Keith Ellison is now officially the first Muslim United States congressman. True to his pledge, he placed his hand on the Quran, the Muslim book of jihad and pledged his allegiance to the United States during his ceremonial swearing-in.
Capitol Hill staff said Ellison's swearing-in photo opportunity drew more media than they had ever seen in the history of the U.S. House. Ellison represents the 5th Congressional District of Minnesota.
The Quran Ellison used was no ordinary book. It once belonged to Thomas Jefferson, third president of the United States and one of America's founding fathers. Ellison borrowed it from the Rare Book Section of the Library of Congress. It was one of the 6,500 Jefferson books archived in the library.
Ellison, who was born in Detroit and converted to Islam while in college, said he chose to use Jefferson's Quran because it showed that "a visionary like Jefferson" believed that wisdom could be gleaned from many sources.
There is no doubt Ellison was right about Jefferson believing wisdom could be "gleaned" from the Muslim Quran. At the time Jefferson owned the book, he needed to know everything possible about Muslims because he was about to advocate war against the Islamic "Barbary" states of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Tripoli.
Ellison's use of Jefferson's Quran as a prop illuminates a subject once well-known in the history of the United States, but, which today, is mostly forgotten - the Muslim pirate slavers who over many centuries enslaved millions of Africans and tens of thousands of Christian Europeans and Americans in the Islamic "Barbary" states.
Over the course of 10 centuries, Muslim pirates cruised the African and Mediterranean coastline, pillaging villages and seizing slaves.
The taking of slaves in pre-dawn raids on unsuspecting coastal villages had a high casualty rate. It was typical of Muslim raiders to kill off as many of the "non-Muslim" older men and women as possible so the preferred "booty" of only young women and children could be collected.
Young non-Muslim women were targeted because of their value as concubines in Islamic markets. Islamic law provides for the sexual interests of Muslim men by allowing them to take as many as four wives at one time and to have as many concubines as their fortunes allow.
Boys, as young as 9 or 10 years old, were often mutilated to create eunuchs who would bring higher prices in the slave markets of the Middle East. Muslim slave traders created "eunuch stations" along major African slave routes so the necessary surgery could be performed. It was estimated that only a small number of the boys subjected to the mutilation survived after the surgery.
When American colonists rebelled against British rule in 1776, American merchant ships lost Royal Navy protection.
With no American Navy for protection, American ships were attacked
and their Christian crews enslaved by Muslim pirates operating under the
control of the "Dey of Algiers"--an Islamist warlord ruling Algeria.
Because American commerce in the Mediterranean was being destroyed by
the pirates, the Continental Congress agreed in 1784 to negotiate
treaties with the four Barbary States. Congress appointed a special
commission consisting of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin
Franklin, to oversee the negotiations.
Lacking the ability to protect its merchant ships in the Mediterranean,
the new America government tried to appease the Muslim slavers by
agreeing to pay tribute and ransoms in order to retrieve seized American
ships and buy the freedom of enslaved sailors.
Adams argued in favor of paying tribute as the cheapest way to get
American commerce in the Mediterranean moving again. Jefferson was
opposed. He believed there would be no end to the demands for tribute
and wanted matters settled "through the medium of war." He proposed a
league of trading nations to force an end to Muslim piracy.
In 1786, Jefferson, then the American ambassador to France, and Adams,
then the American ambassador to Britain, met in London with Sidi Haji
Abdul Rahman Adja, the "Dey of Algiers" ambassador to Britain.
The Americans wanted to negotiate a peace treaty based on Congress' vote
to appease.
During the meeting Jefferson and Adams asked the Dey's ambassador why
Muslims held so much hostility towards America, a nation with which they
had no previous contacts.
In a later meeting with the American Congress, the two future presidents
reported that Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja had answered that
Islam "was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in
their Quran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their
authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war
upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they
could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be
slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise."
For the following 15 years, the American government paid the Muslims
millions of dollars for the safe passage of American ships or the return
of American hostages. The payments in ransom and tribute amounted to 20
percent of United States government annual revenues in 1800.
Not long after Jefferson's inauguration as president in 1801, he
dispatched a group of frigates to defend American interests in the
Mediterranean, and informed Congress.
Declaring that America was going to spend "millions for defense but not
one cent for tribute," Jefferson pressed the issue by deploying American
Marines and many of America's best warships to the Muslim Barbary Coast.
The USS Constitution, USS Constellation, USS Philadelphia, USS
Chesapeake, USS Argus, USS Syren and USS Intrepid all saw action.
In 1805, American Marines marched across the dessert from Egypt into
Tripolitania, forcing the surrender of Tripoli and the freeing of all
American slaves.
During the Jefferson administration, the Muslim Barbary States,
crumbling as a result of intense American naval bombardment and on shore
raids by Marines, finally officially agreed to abandon slavery and
piracy.
Jefferson's victory over the Muslims lives on today in the Marine Hymn,
with the line, "From the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli, we
will fight our country's battles on the land as on the sea."
It wasn't until 1815 that the problem was fully settled by the total
defeat of all the Muslim slave trading pirates.
Jefferson had been right. The "medium of war" was the only way to put
and end to the Muslim problem.
Mr. Ellison was right about Jefferson. "He was a "visionary"
wise enough to read and learn about the enemy from their own Muslim book
of jihad."
~ Information You Can Use
~ UPDATE!! A "Must See" for All Americans
Every American should check out all of these websites to learn more about what the American population is about to have to deal with.
This is NOT for Children.
I don't normally allow anything but Scottsdale information in the Scottsdale Activist but after receiving many emails about this and viewing it, I think that it's imperative that every adult at least look at what's offered here if for nothing more than their own education and to have everyone stop and think about the future of our country. Click on the link below,
If you don't have Adobe Flash, install it from the bottom of the page that comes up after you click on the link above. You should be able to view all available links within the main page.
The website below is of great interest as seen from a Lebanese point of view:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8fa9yKQeTY
The website below gives some history of Terrorist attacks:
http://patriotfiles.org/civilizationcalls.htm
~ 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=3If you have any problems, check your firewall and other safety features which could block access to the city site.
~Continuing Light Rail Information
The Scottsdale Citizens
Transportation Study Committee invites you to view their website for
more questions and answers at
www.norailforscottsdale.com .
================================================================
Simply click on the links below to get all the information you'll ever need concerning Light Rail.
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.
~
For Continuing Information
on Photo Radar,
Click on the Logo below.
~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
~ Scottsdale Legal Defense Fund
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:
72nd & 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.
shoutandspout@scottsdaleactivist.com
~ Thank you, Thank you for publishing the Code enforcement audit and chilling accounts of mis-management. My how things have gone downhill in the last few years. Does anyone remember the manager who visited the casinos? Now we have one who can't mind the shop. All under the same direction of Keagy and Register. Time for some house cleaning.
~ I see Steve Ellman DID get his money-grubbing, money-hungry, balding ponytailed hooks into Scottsdale anyway as quoted in the Scottsdale Republic: "Developer Steve Ellman did not specify relocation aid for residents. But CSA officials said they would help the tenants either buy into the new project or move to one of about two dozen affordable apartment complexes they manage around the Valley." Bloody Bast---s, Big Deal, "Somewhere in the Valley" could be Sun City, Sunny"Slop", or South Phoenix and I can't afford that drive! So much for fairness from Scottsdale Government! All "Let'em Eat Cake" Manross, and "Salute me, I'm the Boss" Dolan want is ultra high density, money, light rail, more money, to hell with the employees who serve their meals at restaurants, do their laundry, wash their cars, park their cars, clean their houses, do their yards, etc. Am I angry??? Who me??
~ Us employees heard there was a city health audit and the city was listed as sick. Do you know anything about it? Is that why our med costs are going up?
~After reading about the Dolan 15 mil Boondoggle, can't just one more of you wimpy council members give the council the 4th vote necessary to fire Dolan?
~ Went to CASS meeting, not impressed at all. Sounds like Virginia and Susan are up to something. Duh!! Could it be Urban high rise and light rail without anyone saying so right now? Too many cagy political connections for my mind.
~ Remove Gawf, Register, Keagy, Hankins, and anyone else who can't do their job in Code Enforcement properly. Maybe code'll get back on track after some one gives some real training with direction and then cracks the whip when needed.
~ I've got a sneaking hunch that Bitter-Smith and Berry are up to their eyeballs in the new condos near the Villa Monterey subdivision. Will COGS help us stop these ridiculous new height and density requests?
~ Whomever isn't AACE certified in Code needs to go. Bring in some real people to people Code employees and get rid of the executives as well as the uncertified slugs.
~ Planning Commission doesn't have a clue except for maybe Schwartz - and then just sometimes. And Jeffery, you're dead wrong on the DMB project. The 1st Amendment lives and hopefully the PC and the City Council aren't stupid enough to try and challenge the U.S. Supreme Court 'cause they'll lose BIG.
~ When is the next COGS meeting? Will the public be invited? We need to get going before this council buries us completely in urban density. I wasn't impressed with CASS.
~ Is it true that Code Enforcement Director Keagy is not AACE certified but his agents are required to be? What's wrong with that picture? I guess it's no worse than Register being a librarian and not certified, but still totally unacceptable on both counts. Is Hankins AACE certified? They all need to be replaced.
~ You've got to be kidding me! Dolan and Robberson to get raises? Is the city council smoking weed or something? Those 2 need to be fired, not given raises.
~ Let's dump all the commissioners and start over. Couldn't be any worse than it is now. They don't listen to anyone anyways except the developers.
~ The Code Enforcement Audit was no surprise. Have you ever watched those people do their work? Have you ever been able to talk to Hankins or Register? The workers are probably mostly good people but they look to have had zero training and are afraid to talk to anyone unless they have to.
~ Have you heard about the "Health Care Audit" done on the city by an outside firm? We've asked if we could see it but they said What Audit, but we know it happened. Hear tell they said the city was "Sick" and morale need a serious boost. Gee, if they would fire Dolan, Register, Traaen, Robberson, and Gawf, morale would probably start turning around very fast.
~So John Berry and Company want to raise the height on some new condos S/E of the canal and north of Camelback? The answer from the council had better be "NO" or they will have another DMB situation on their hands. I live in the Villa Monterey subdivision and will go door to door if I have to in preserving my views and privacy of our subdivision.
~ With all the bad stuff and mistakes done by Robberson and Dolan, how can the City Council with any semblance of knowledge and good conscience give these negative achievers any raise other than out of their chairs and out the door? What a bad Joke is being played on the citizens by this ignorant city council.
Hello All,
This seems to work well. Click on the link below to Check it out. Helpful hint! Just plug in your zip code and it tells you which gas stations have the cheapest prices (and the highest) on gas in your zip code area. It's updated every evening.
Be a good neighbor and pass this along.
|
~
Scottsdale Development Update
~ ~ Report a Problem ~ ~ City Services ~ ~ Mayor & Council ~ ~ City Council Members ~ ~ Mary Manross ~ ~ Betty Drake ~ ~ Wayne Ecton ~
~
WJ "Jim" Lane ~ |
~
Important City Meetings
~ ~ Website Contacts ~ ~ Shout & Spout ~ ~ Editor ~
~
Webmaster
~ |
The Scottsdale Activist is published, and edited in Scottsdale AZ ~ 480-326-2475