Volume
'07-12 Published
Saturdays
March
24, 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
.
Send our Brave Troops "Something from Home", Click on Links below.
Gathering of Eagles Website was launched 2/9/07. Click on the Logo above for more information on how they are protecting America's Memorials.
==================================================
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.
=======================================
Pick the Article you wish to read, then Just Click
~ Weekly Editorial -- Staff
~ Guest Editorial -- Nancy Cantor
~ Food for Thought - Take It or Leave It
~ Shout and Spout, Budget??? What Budget???
~ Thought for the Week -- John Marshall
~ Quote of the Week -- James Wilson
~ Information You Can Use
Other Stuff of Interest
~ Look up Prior Editions? Click a on date to open.
~
"Us Against Them" is Alive and Well
There is a definitive "us against them" approach to issue resolution at City Hall. "Us", the citizens versus "Them", the City government. At times, its prevalence is overwhelming and downright depressing. Still, as citizens, we owe it to ourselves and to our beautiful City to keep up the fight.
I attended the Coalition of Greater Scottsdale meeting last Tuesday evening, with guest speaker, Betty Drake. Her speech dealt with the Villages concept of citizen and area representation in Scottsdale. Betty is no stranger to city planning or urban development. Most of her career, she has done just that. So, one might ask themselves, when, Betty, did it all go terribly wrong for you? Judging by her decisions concerning our development in Scottsdale, something very bad must have happened years ago, which altered her thinking with regard to development in our City!
Betty touted the Villages concept as a means by which the citizens could take ownership of their designated sector of the City and basically tell the Staff and Council how they envision development in their areas. Villages would entitle them to historical preservation, limited neighborhood development, enhanced safety features, etc. While that all sounds fabulous, the truth of the matter is that the cooks in the City kitchen will never allow the citizens to control their own neighborhoods, or tell them how to run this City. Staff, Planning and DRB all talk a blue streak about having citizens involved in the decision making process, but in the end, the final pen to paper always belongs to them, not the citizens. It leaves the citizens asking – why bother?
When pressed for answers about how a program like Villages might succeed given the "us against them" mentality in Scottsdale, Betty could not formulate a response. Instead she said we’ll just have to do it, tell them what we want and that’s the way it has to be. Nice that Betty thinks things should change. To date, no one Council member has been able to stand up to Staff or any other City department heads to effectuate a good result. Instead, we get empty promises and a Staff or Planning member on every committee who routinely trump citizen input and ultimately make the final decisions on projects. Most committees are stacked with Manross associates who control the votes. No wonder our citizens are tired of fighting.
The Villages concept has not worked well in Phoenix. Instead, council members and developers have used Villages as base for political clout. Why would Scottsdale be any different? Follow the money…those who control the money win. Perhaps one might think that my view of Villages is skewed by the past foibles of our City’s government. Qualifying that remark is easy…history has a nasty way of repeating itself. In the past, citizen committees appointed by the City to provide input and guidance on critical projects have not succeeded. Since the days of Mayor Drinkwater's Scottsdale, the City has flatly refused to relinquish that control. Clearly, City Staff knows that the citizens oppose nearly all projects they bring to the table. And for good reason.
All of this begs the question…can’t we just all get along? The answer is no. So long as the Manross-Dolan regime is in place…absolutely not. What Betty forgets is that Mother Mary and her development friends will never let the "Village" representatives have their say in anything as they did in Menlo Park, CA. Dolan lost her clout because of that concept and she won't let that happen here.
Frankly, I don’t know how Betty intends to drive the Villages concept into a position of reality. She stated that we have the requisite Staff in place now to make it happen. Would that be "making it happen" for Betty's own personal agenda or for the citizens? From where I sit, when you take a good look at it, it still sounds a lot like "us against them."
Last week we ran an article concerning some alleys in Scottsdale and problems associated with them and the way the city administers the control, or lack thereof, of all city alleys and needed abandonment’s thereto as well as who gets what and why.
Since that time we have been questioned about our article and about the situation and, in talking with Frank Gray, General Manager of the City Planning Department, we have learned more about one of the alleys of interest as follows, but have some interesting questions about how that alley situation was handled at the end of the article as well as some suggestions as to how the situation could be cleaned up:
The alley in question reportedly:
Was deeded to the city years ago by the
property owners on the south, east, and west side of the
subdivision alley, with none deeded to the city by those on the
north (opposite) side of the alley.
Is no more than 12 feet wide on the length
and 16 feet wide on one short end leg and 12 feet wide on the
other short leg. With utility poles, etc. within that 12 feet
making the actual usable width about 9 feet on the long leg
which will only allow a standard or substandard sized vehicle to
pass after many trees and shrubs are cleared away eliminating
the pleasant ambiance they provide.
Has reportedly never seen legal vehicular
traffic in 40 years, until recently when it was used illegally.
Had been used for children to play and for
others to take quiet walks among the trees and other flora which
eventually overgrew the alley which made it an easy pace to find
solitude and quiet for many. The city apparently never did any
upkeep on the alley over the years, yet they forced one of the
neighbors to clear his portion of the public alley at a cost of
$500.
The neighbors who deeded the alley formally
asked the city to abandon it in it’s entirety for security and
other reasons including them personally maintaining the alley as
a place of solitude and a safe place for the children to play
without interruption.
Some neighbors objected, especially one
neighbor on the north side who had not deeded any property to
the alley at all.
No property owner on the north side of the alley is now or reportedly ever has used access to the alley until the owner of the new guest house requested legal access. The others on the north side have signed off on any use of this alley in the current abandonment agreement as it is written today and per the city council approval as we write this article.
With the above information now coming forward, we then learned:
A neighbor on the north side of the alley,
who never contributed to the alley, applied for and received a
building permit for a guest house at the back of their property
(with questionable set backs, heights, and wall heights) based
solely on the apparent access to the alley and apparently
through the efforts of a very prominent law firm and attorney
very familiar with city zoning codes but reportedly without any
negotiations with the affected neighbors during the preliminary
planning and permit process, and prior to the start of building
of the guest house.
Said prominent law firm is currently in
negotiations with the three or four affected neighbors to allow
the alley to be abandoned with those neighbors who originally
deeded the land regaining their land but with neighbor on the
north gaining access to the alley through an Private Use
Agreement to run from the north neighbors newly built guest
house on his property to the east passing the rear of five
residences on the south, then to the city street. The alley
would be totally abandoned and deeded back to the property
owners west of the property with the guest house without any
easements or encumbrances, but with stipulations to be resolved
with the Exeter neighbor.
Included in the Use Agreement would be a
clause which states that the property owner with the guest house
gaining the access, and therefore a Use Agreement to their guest
house and would pay for upgrades the guest house owner desires
for the alley as well as the electronically controlled gate at
the entrance and upkeep/maintenance for perpetuity, or until the
guest house owner or the future owner of the subject property
waives any and all rights to use the Use Agreement at which time
it would revert to the original property owners agreeing to the
use agreement.
The neighbors who will give the Use Agreement
will also have access to the alley which would have a secure
electronically controlled gate at the city street entry with
primary access and use also to the guest house owner. We’re told
that none of the neighbors currently on the alley with the
exception of the neighbor on the north side, have any need to
use the alley for access or for any backyard uses at this time.
The owners giving the proposed Use Agreement
to the neighbor on the north would continue to be entitled to
quiet enjoyment of their property, which would include the
subject alley.
Sadly, now that the guest house has been built and given access to the alley through the city by default, the only thing the offended neighbors can do is agree to the Use Agreement offered by the guest house owners attorney to allow the use of the alley on the east side, or see the entire alley opened from one end to the other as a public thoroughfare with security problem from day one and no gate for controls over its use.
We have strongly suggested that the affected property owners sign the Use Agreement for their own safety even though we strongly disagree with the process used by the city and the attorney to get to this point in the process. That being said, the attorney and the law firm were only doing what they were hired to do to the best of their ability as is their fiduciary duty and legal obligation under the agreement they have with their client and under the laws of "jurisprudence".
Now for the questions being asked by many:
If the guest house was to be built without
any problems or objections from the neighbors, why was a very
prominent and high powered code and zoning attorney retained
(hired) to get things pushed through the city process?
Why didn’t the property owner utilize the
driveway on the front (north side) of his property as access as
everyone else has done instead of disturbing and making enemies
of long time friends in an entire neighborhood by asking for
something they knew would cause a ruckus?
Being that this neighborhood has from 1
million to 12 million dollars homes contained therein, why
didn’t the city openly and constructively (by mail, email, and
phone) address the proposals for the alley and then the building
of a guest house with each and every one of the neighbors PRIOR
to the permits ever being issued with regular updates and public
conversations?
Were city rules, ordinances, and regulations
bent, ignored, or overlooked to accommodate the owner as well as
the builder of the guest house without the knowledge of the
affected neighbors?
Were any other neighbors on the north side of
the alley privileged to what was going on but didn’t tell anyone
for fear of the deal being stopped?
Is the property with the new guest house
allowed (zoned) to have two (2) separate and independent living
quarters situated on the same property?
Why would the city, who never spent a single
dime on the alley, suddenly and quietly agree to allow a
building (secondary living quarters) with its only access
through an unused alley instead of abandoning the alley as
requested by the vast majority of those who deeded the alley to
the city in the first place?
Is it fair for the city to put neighborhoods in this kind of a position which turns neighbor against neighbor for a design that doesn’t fit the rest of the neighborhood?
We feel this failure to communicate is symptomatic of how the city is currently being run by City Manager Jan Dolan and Mayor Mary Manross on a "need to know" and "project by project" basis only.
Now for our own questions:
How long will the citizens of Scottsdale
allow these types of decisions to be made without the full and
unabridged acknowledgement of all information to be disseminated
to ALL of the affected parties without it being sneaked through
until it can no longer be stopped?
How long are the citizens of Scottsdale going
to put up with staff making up rules (or lack of) as they go
along on a project by project basis as practiced by Jan Dolan
and Company?
How long are we going to allow attorneys to continue to apparently "run" the city of Scottsdale staff to get what they or their clients want, no matter who gets hurt in the process, or what the zoning codes and ordinances allow?
Isn’t it time that some alleys were all abandoned to save the city money if:
They are not used for city services (refuse
collection, etc)?
Are not being used by those whose backyards
back up to the alley for access to their back yards?
Do not meet the legal width and turning
radius or turnaround requirements for an alley?
They have become a place for illegal and
illicit thing to quietly take place?
The utilities are overhead power poles or
underground services, sewer, and cable TV service?
The majority (not 100%) of those backing up to the alley are in agreement to abandon said alley? Objectors must have very strong and viable reason why abandonment must not occur because abandonment would add value and security to all of the subject properties involved.
The Guest Editorial by 47 year Scottsdale Resident Nancy Cantor in this week’s Scottsdale Activist deals directly with Jan Dolan’s "Project by Project" problem as well as density and says it like it is.
~ Ultra High Density & Danger on Our Doorstep
Ultra high density is on the doorstep of the historically low density
residential areas of the city of Scottsdale. The map from the Scottsdale
Tribune on Friday, March 23rd edition clearly defines the areas which
are on the fringe of the downtown area which, in our opinion, is
allowing the "camels nose under the tent" into the historically low
density residential areas of the city and this encroachment needs to be
stopped in it's tracks.
Condos and the such are fads which come and go with time and then become the home of multiple families living in a single unit. These units are otherwise known to many as potential slums such as those on Belleview in South Scottsdale became and those where WaterView wants to locate with their height and ultra high density. Both of these properties were assemblages gained by allowing adjoining properties to become rundown to lower the market value which made them prime and planned targets for assemblage by developers.
Definition:
Assemblage
The combining of two or more adjoining properties. Usually used to
piece together several properties for it to be able to be developed in
some fashion for profit.
The combining of two or more parcels of land. For example, suppose someone buys two Adjoining properties of land for $10,000 each. The large unified tract is worth $25,000. The process is called assemblage which is quite profitable for developers but costly for unsuspecting property owners whose property adjoins properties already unknowingly purchased by the developer who have allowed them to run down.
Many times, the owners of properties are not made aware that the purchaser is an "assembler" because they more often than not, do not divulge the name of the new owner or their connections to local or national developers until the close of escrow, and even then the new owner may not be divulged or could be different individuals working for the same investor or developer/builder. In addition, adjoining properties as they are purchased, are allowed to become run down which brings down the property values of adjoining properties so the hidden developer can get a lower price from the unaware property owner/seller which is what happened in the Historic Minnezona neighborhood subdivision east of the canal north of Camelback.
In many cases, representative of the unknown developer "visit" the neighborhood sweetly trying to sympathize with, then seduce the property owner into selling because "your property values will continue to decrease due to the deteriorating neighborhood so you might want to think of getting out while you can still make a profit on your property".
This is a well used and convincing ploy to get property owners to sell: don't be fooled, get professional help from an outside and neutral third party who will be able to check on what's happening in your neighborhood and advise you as to the other avenues you may want to consider, if any.
With all of the proposed development scheduled for Scottsdale, property owners need to be fully aware of this process and force the city and Code Enforcement as well as the other property owners to keep their properties up to code and well kept so the values don't drop to favor the Assemblers, developers, and builders.
Low density single family residences with a garage or carport as well as a front and back yard for families to enjoy one another are the staples and the backbone of every community and need to be the predominant housing units in any successful community. Scottsdale is no exception to that rule and we need to make sure the ultra high density is limited to the downtown area with the new heights articulated from 30 feet to the maximum allowed height over a reasonable distance with full set-backs from the established low density single family residential areas to preserve views of the surrounding mountains, skies, and beautiful Arizona sunrises and sunsets for the residents living in those low density residential areas of the city adjoining these ultra high density areas.
Isn't it time the city took a better look at the livability and safety of the residents of Scottsdale instead of the taxes generated or the profits to the developer/builders?
Many of the apartment to condo conversions are 30 to 60 years old and have not had the utilities within the walls of the former apartments (water lines, electric lines and sewer connections) replaced nor has the city required that these conversions have a fire suppression (sprinkler) systems installed as other new homes or remodels are required to have due to the complaints of excessive costs by those developers/builders doing the conversions.
These units are a disaster waiting to happen and the owners of the properties just might be looking at deaths from people who are not aware of the problems with these conversions.
Isn't it time the city took a better look at the livability and safety of the residents of Scottsdale instead of the taxes generated or the profits to the developer/builders?
~ City Staff Unresponsive to
Citizens Requests
It seems that our city staffs, with identifiable exceptions of course, feel that they don't need to accommodate the citizens of Scottsdale (See letter to the editor from Alita Arnold).
Why is it that City Manager Jan Dolan and many others on staff with Scottsdale take credit for the good thing that happen but totally deny or stubbornly refuse to take any responsibility with things that they don't want to happen or don't want to deal with?
Richard Klingler is most probably going to be "hung out to dry" as the responsible person on the $16 million dollar Hualapai water plant fiasco because Dolan doesn't have the cajoñes to take responsibility for something she did, or should have been totally involved in.
Some may want to have Craig Clifford's head for the budget situation except he too is only doing as he's been ordered to do by the City Treasurer.
Project Manager, Mr. Vivec Galav of the Capital Improvements Department who is in charge of the Indian Bend Wash Improvement Project totally blew off a city resident who spend days researching and building/drawing her concept of what should be put in the Indian Bend Wash as compatible with the local flora and fauna, flood control, as well as the neighbors bordering on the new project.
I tried to talk to Mr. Vivek and met with immediate animosity and a reluctance to take responsibility for his own actions while attempting to blame Ms. Arnold for starting a rumor that the crushed cars would be a part of the so called "Art" which would be the farthest from the truth after talking to the lady after receiving her letter to the editor.
Is this the way city staff should treat the citizen taxpayers who pay the staffs wages which feed their families?
We think not and the practice needs to stop immediately. Apologies don't cut it after the fact or anytime for that matter.
Staff members who do such things should be held accountable and demoted or relieved of their duties entirely and immediately so no further incidents occur.
Being that the City Manager is where the buck stops, maybe she should get involved in this case.
~Flood
Control Dist. Unhappy with Dolan & Scottsdale
We now hear that the Flood Control District as well as the State Land Department is upset with the way Scottsdale does business.
We can only guess that Dolan or her staff under orders from Dolan, give ultimatums of sorts to those agencies which is a real stupid way to get things done. Hualapai and the big land sale in the north are prime examples of the city attempting to overreach their authority and the bounds of good manners during professional business deals.
If Dolan and the city had been dealing with problems as they arose instead of continuing to try to appease developer/builders on future projects as well as flitting from one thing to another, we would be a whole lot better off as a city and our costs of operation would plummet accordingly.
The Scottsdale General Fund is running out of funds due to apparent poor spending decisions on the part of the City Treasurer which is why the mayor wants a bond issue to cover the mess.
Gee, could that be why the City Manager/Treasurer has pulled the review of her budget back for revision?
We need less traffic circles, roundabouts, etc, and more total accountability for the over the top spending. Families have to live within their means and the city needs to follow suit immediately.
Don't be fooled citizens, we need to stop this ridiculous spending binge the city has been participating in.
To see a nasty website about Scottsdale by someone who obviously didn’t get what he wanted or thought he should get or be given when he moved here (Waaa Waaa), go to the following link, then send him emails expressing your opinion if you’re so inclined.
Apparently, our Scottsdale women saw through the "California Charm (?)" he must have tried to exude(?) in vain.
Be aware he apparently only prints the negative ones about Scottsdale and her residents.
http://nevercoldcall.typepad.com/scottsdale_sucks/2007/03/index.html
His name is Frank Rumbauskas and you can contact him directly at fjr@nevercoldcall.com
Funny thing: He’s so busy that he claims he only answers his stuff a couple of times a week.
~ $500,000 Potty Stops???
Only in Scottsdale!!
The words in RED are those of the author of the article.
Per your request, we are sending you expenditure-to-date information relating to Capital Improvement Projects D0601-Civic Center Mall Restroom Renovation and D0207-WestWorld Restroom Facility:
D0601 Civic Center Mall West Restroom. This project is in design. Total project budget to cover all design, construction and management costs is $467,000. Only $18,957 have been billed and paid to date. A design contract was awarded by Council for an amount not to exceed $122,530, but very little has been invoiced for payment to date.
Design for toilets costs this much? Have you all lost your minds?
Half a million "taxpayer dollars" for design and construction of an out house? You HAVE to be kidding me????D0207 WestWorld Restroom Facility
. This project is complete and the following costs represent final costs for design and construction of project:Design services-
$80,840, Construction: $540,165. This paid for a building of over 2,000 square feet and which had to comply with stringent architectural design guidelines. It also had to pay for over 600 feet of new water, sewer and electrical line to serve the building, and to remove and rebuild an electrical transformer and pad that conflicted with the master planned location for the restroom. Almost $30,000 of this cost paid for a solar hot water system for the showers which will reduce future energy usage and associated costs.Project management:
$48,208. This includes paying for city staff time for project management, contract administration, construction inspection, plan review and approval and other related costs.This all came from Park Bond money folks and I have to tell you I find it appalling that it costs this much money to build a place for people to use a restroom.
Sorry, Scottsdale cannot build more parks because we are low on funds, but we can offer you some rather expensive outhouses to use instead. Makes you wonder if we are paying
$20,000 for a toilet seat and $50,000 for a nail.Please let me know if you have any further questions.
Thanks,
Sylvia Romero
City of Scottsdale
~ Guest Editorial
by Nancy CantorSustainable development, Smart Growth/Plus, whatever term applies to addressing our growing communities and land use, we can't opt out. It is mandated by the Growing Smarter Legislation passed by the Arizona State Legislature in 1998. In fact, in 2000, Scottsdale voters went to the polls and voted to amend the General Plan as directed by Growing Smarter. Those amendments included "Neighborhood Area Planning" and Character Area Planning."
The stipulations of the General Plan as the City looks at individual projects might be addressed, but the charge to address the, then, future development, has not been addressed even adequately.
Apparently City Hall forgot to read the ballot and follow through as the vote directed. Many of us have said that they are way too comfortable letting "master planned community developers" do the job of addressing growth in Scottsdale.
An excerpt from the Growing Smarter Act states:
"The purpose of this act is to more effectively plan for the impacts of population growth by creating a more meaningful and predictable land planning process, to increase citizen involvement in the land planning process, to directly acquire and preserve additional open space areas within this state through necessary reforms to the master planning and open space conservation programs of the state land department......."
To be fair, Scottsdale has worked very hard to address preservation of open space with the creation of the McDowell Sonoran Preserve. A most important issue for conservation of open space as we grow and build out.
The residents of the mature neighborhoods are entitled to participate in the discussion of how dense, how high, how much parking, how much open space, neighborhood assemblage issues, incentives, safety and infrastructure.
Since 2003, the Scottsdale Coalition has been formally asking for these elements to be addressed by the City Manager and the City Council. Until the request for a look at the "village/community planning process," suggested by Council members Drake, Littlefield, Nelssen and Lane, last fall, the City Manager was content to go on a "project by project" basis in defiance of the stated General Plan elements listed on the City's web site.
As the S.T.E.P. Committees of the late 60's and 70's, and the Visioning Process of the 90's, residents can prepare to participate in the planning process for their neighborhoods and all of Scottsdale.
Nancy Cantor, Co-Chair
Scottsdale Coalition
Scottsdale
|
~Letters to the Editor ~ letters@scottsdaleactivist.com
Early in the morning, Saturday Oct.7th 2006, a public meeting about the Public Art Concept for Indian Bend Wash Improvement Project was held and horse’s heads and crushed cars ideas were presented. The crushed cars idea was not accepted by the crowd that attended and the horse head fountains barely got a luke-warm but not overwhelming possibility. Cards were on a table for all of us to submit any other ideas and or alternatives. On October 18, 2006 I presented my ideas for the Indian Bend Wash Art Project in a folder with pictures and drawings to Mr. Vivek Galav as he was the Project Manager. Mr. Galav looked at the folder and said he would make sure it got to the Art Concept Department. I emailed and left phone messages several times to no avail. No returned calls or emails. My email was given because I work afternoons and evenings and am not available at night. I have not heard about any further public meetings to see others opinions or ideas that may have presented from that Oct meeting. Now I'm hearing from my neighbors that the art work for the project has been decided. WHAT! WHO decided on the changes without public input???- Especially all of us that live off Indian Bend Road on McCormick Ranch. We were not contacted on any meeting or to review any new designs that may have been presented. What about my ideas? I was an art
major in college and a wildlife lover! What about other ideas submitted? My idea may not the best idea but it
should have been at least considered and discussed. Why were my ideas "pigeon holed" by someone supposedly responsible who said he would deliver them immediately but didn’t? Where does this city get off on pushing through their own agenda without any public notification, public vote or at least give the citizens of this area involved (McCormick Ranch/Scottsdale) the RIGHT to have a say as well as present their ideas and opinions on what WE feel is appropriate art work that would enhance the beauty of the wash and keep all the wild life there. The viewing platform is not just for watching the wash run ONLY three times a year. The wild life is part of the beauty of the area incorporated into the Art Design Project. There should be a PUBLIC meeting where an exchange of all the new ideas can be addressed and a Representative from the Flood Control District should also attend. Allowing politics into this Wash Basin Beautification Project as well as many other city projects is destroying our city. Citizens, what do you have to say about this? Thank you, Alita Arnold ~ Sign Legislation to Senate Rules Committee Dear members of the Senate Rules Committee; Coming before you is House Bill 2369 which started off when the city of Scottsdale illegally ticketed (criminal citation) a person who was holding a sign in the public right of way promoting a car dealership sale (Jet Media) and has since last night turned into a vote of 4 of our city council members to ban all signs in the public right of way. http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/council/Agendas/2007/Mar/032007/Item18.pdf Most of you may not consider this as an infringement of our Constitutional Rights but the fact is the vote that came about last night was all about "political signs" in the public right of way and was even stated to as being the reason for the ban since the city already bans most signs in the public right of way except for political campaign signs and has one of the strictest sign codes in the Country, and Councilman Ron McCullagh made that very clear in his comments last night. Another interesting note is that 3 of the four people who voted to ban the signs are up for re-election in 2008 and one of them is the Mayor of this city who will face her first real challenge to her throne in her last term of a legacy seeking career. My conversations with the city attorney also leads me to believe that the council was warned against adopting any of the 3 options that were presented to them by the Planning Commission and there was no staff recommendation on this action to the council in their packets. The reason is the city attorney knows that if legally challenged, the ordinance would be struck down as un-constitutional because it is not content neutral and allows Realtors and special privileges; mixing commercial and political free speech within the same ordinance has been repeatedly struck down as unconstitutional by Federal Courts as giving special consideration to one type of sign over another. These rulings have been handed down after organizations such as the Institute for Justice and the ACLU have gotten involved. Furthermore to the issue of being an unconstitutional act is the fact that they have removed the words "political signs" from its original "singular" class and decided to lump it in with non-commercial signs in the attempt to water down the free speech protections afforded to the rights of the citizens to participate in our election process on the basis of blight which again has been repeatedly struck down by courts as unconstitutional. An excerpt from the most recent case found unconstitutional, and is the exact same copy of what Scottsdale has done is dated 03/13/07 and is from The Napa Valley. "Magistrate Joseph Spero of the San Francisco-based U.S. District Court for Northern California ruled in favor of Maguire on March 1, concluding that American Canyon "presented no evidence that justifies treating political campaign signs differently from other types of signs for all but 90 days prior to the elections." Spero also concluded that American Canyon’s restriction on placement of political signs on public right-of-way or on public property is unconstitutional, noting that "non-political signs" may be "posted on public property, including real estate signs, directional signs and special event signs." Here is my problem; I do not have $80,000.00 to fight the city for doing something they already knew was an unconstitutional action. They were presented with evidence of their actions being deemed "unconstitutional" in multiple court rulings that I provided them with. I know our city attorney warned them as we chatted about this issue and I attended the council meeting and also warned the council about their actions and the Citizens Constitutional Rights and below is the reply from our city attorney that leads me to my conclusions. "Oh. . . I thought, until the very end, you were just going to "agree to disagree." You know, we have an "I told you so" stamp that we get out occasionally, too. Just bring bagels if you come by. :) I appreciate your thoughts and input. You might be surprised by my legal advice, but as you know that's not something I will share outside of with my clients. See you tonight. Be nice! Debby" Michael Merrill I thought I'd seen it all until I watched the totally lame and uninformed vote to ban signs from the public rights of way on the internet last Tuesday night. What a total farce and charade!! How stupid does Manross and her majority think we are? This was strictly about a political sign ban to help Councilman McCullagh keep his seat and to offset any state or national signage from either party which could help those who would be ready to unseat an ineffective and clueless mayor and at least one RINO. This stupid and inane stunt will not be forgotten come election time and I plan to make sure, to the best of my feeble and aged ability, that the issue stays in front of the public. Scottsdale is a non-partisan city as far as elections are concerned and it needs to stay that way. I am going to laugh my tired and wrinkled butt off and rub the court decision into the faces of the loser council members if someone files a 1st Amendment Rights lawsuit against the city because their inane stupidity will affect the entire state and set a precedent here which is sorely needed to stop the deterioration of our precious U.S. Constitution. God Bless America and Scottsdale without Manross and her council majority!!!
E. Slocomb |
~"An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation."
-- John Marshall (McCullough v. Maryland, 1819)
"Far from being rivals
or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual
assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine
law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential
part of both."
-- James Wilson
~ Food
for Thought, Take it or Leave it
~Packing
Your Parachute
Charles Plumb was a US Navy jet pilot in Vietnam. After 75
combat missions, his plane as destroyed by a surface-to-air
missile. Plumb ejected and parachuted into enemy hands. He was
captured and spent six years in a communist Vietnamese prison. He
survived the ordeal and now lectures on lessons learned from that
experience.
One day, when Plumb and his wife were sitting in a
restaurant, a man at another table came up and said, "You're Plumb!
You flew jet fighters in Vietnam from the aircraft carrier Kitty
Hawk. You were shot down!"
"How in the world did you know that?" asked Plumb.
"I packed your parachute," the man replied. Plumb gasped
in surprise and gratitude. The man pumped his hand and said, "I
guess it worked !" Plumb assured him, "It sure did. If your chute
hadn't worked, I wouldn't be here today."
Plumb couldn't sleep that night, thinking about that man.
Plumb says, "I kept wondering what he had looked like in a Navy
uniform: a white hat; a bib in the back; and bell-bottom trousers. I
wonder how many times I might have seen him and not even said 'Good
Morning, how are you?' or anything because, you see, I was a fighter
pilot and he was just a sailor."
Plumb
thought of the many hours the sailor had spent at a long wooden
table in the bowels of the ship, carefully weaving the shrouds and
folding the silks of each chute, holding in his hands each time the
fate of someone he didn't know.
Now, Plumb asks his audience, "Who's packing your parachute?"
Everyone
has someone who provides what they need to make it through the day.
He also points out that he needed many kinds of parachutes when his
plane was shot down over enemy territory -- he needed his physical
parachute, his mental parachute, his emotional parachute, and his
spiritual parachute. He called on all these supports before reaching
safety.
Sometimes in the daily challenges that life gives us, we miss
what is really important. We may fail to say hello, please, or
thank you, congratulate someone on something wonderful that has
happened to them, give a compliment, or just do something nice for
no reason. As you go through this week, this month, this year,
recognize people who pack your parachutes.
I am sending you this as my way of thanking you for your part
in packing my parachute.
By Craig J. Cantoni
The following is being printed as a pamphlet by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons for mailing to all of its members. I wrote it months ago, but after rereading it, I’m even more alarmed by the numbers. I keep beseeching various newspapers to periodically print indices and/or charts on their news pages showing the increase in government dependency, spending and taxes, but I might as well stand on my porch and howl at the moon. Tellingly, the cost of gasoline is front-page news, but not the cost of government.
The Dependency Index published by the Heritage Foundation shows how dependency on the federal government has grown over the decades.
The results are alarming.
Using 1980 as a benchmark of 100, the Index hit 238 in 2005, or a 138 percent increase in 25 years.
As sobering as the Index and its accompanying statistics are, I believe that Heritage has underestimated dependency. But let's start with Heritage's numbers.
Heritage calculates that 18 percent of Americans are dependent on handouts, transfer payments, and subsidies from the federal government. It also calculates that dependency increases to 25 percent if federal and state employees are included in the estimates.
In terms of absolute numbers, the 25 percent translates to 81.7 million Americans who are dependent on the government, an increase of 141 percent over the 33.9 million in 1962. That increase is 2.5 times greater than the increase in the U.S. population during the same period.
The underestimate stems from the fact that Heritage did not include three other groups in the 81.7 million total.
First, it did not include dependents of government employees. Assuming that each government employee has, on average, 1.8 other people in the household, there are approximately an additional 38 million people who are dependent in whole or part on the government for their household income and thus have a stake in bigger government. Adding the 38 million to Heritage's total of 81.7 million gives a revised total of 119.7 million.
Second, Heritage did not include the many Americans who hold private-sector jobs that owe their existence to the regulatory state. The 53,000 tax preparers are an obvious example. Not so obvious are the 150,000 human resources specialists, many of whom administer and interpret labor, payroll, and benefits regulations. Similarly, many of the 10 million "health care" workers administer and interpret the 100,000 pages of Medicare regulations.
A complete list of government-dependent private-sector occupations would fill this page and include such occupations as software writers who develop recordkeeping systems required by the government, sales people who sell the systems, paper companies that make and sell the paper on which mandated reports are printed, consultants who advise companies on regulatory compliance, lawyers who defend companies accused of violating regulations, lobbyists who try to influence politicians and government regulators, and scores of other occupations. Unfortunately, it's impossible to get an accurate count of how many private-sector workers hold such occupations, but it's a safe guess that they number in the millions and possibly as high as 10 million.
Third, as Heritage admits, the Index does not include Americans who are dependent on state-funded or municipal-funded handouts and subsidies. Estimating the total number is beyond the scope of this article, but I have estimated how many Americans are in the largest subsidy program at the local level.
I'm referring to the estimated 100 million parents who have children in K-12 public schools. Although they don't see public education as a subsidy program, it is indeed highly subsidized. It is subsidized by the 20 percent of Americans who remain childless all their lives, by the one million parents who home-school their children, and by the approximately 10 million parents who send their children to private schools.
The doubling of state and local per-pupil spending in real dollars over the last 30 years attests to the price-insensitivity caused by subsidies. Also, according to Heritage, federal educational subsidies have risen 127 percent since 1980, including a whopping 21 percent in 2005 alone.
As I calculated in another article ("Has the USA reached the point of no return?"), 84 percent of the voting-age population is dependent on the government for all or part of their livelihood, retirement, or children's education.
Whether you use Heritage's figures or mine, the dependency trend is alarming, not just from a cost perspective, but also from the perspective what it portends for the nation's culture, freedom, competitiveness, politics, savings rate, wealth, and industriousness.
The nation may not be doomed, but if the trend isn't checked, it will be increasingly difficult to avoid a political, social and economic nightmare.
A detailed explanation of the Index and accompanying charts and analysis can be found at:
www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/cda06-11.cfm
For other AAPS commentaries on a range of subjects, including health care reform, go to www.aapsonline.org.
An author and columnist, Mr. Cantoni can be reached at ccan2@aol.com.
~"Our nation’s top military officer, a veteran decorated with no less than forty-eight military awards and a very distinguished career, made a startling revelation [last] week: He has moral convictions...
General Peter Pace commented in a wide-ranging interview with the Chicago Tribune, ‘My upbringing is such that I believe that there are certain things, certain types of conduct that are immoral. I believe that military members who sleep with other military members’ wives are immoral in their conduct, and that we should not tolerate that.’
But then Pace went on to tell the Tribune, ‘I believe that homosexual acts between individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts.’
Well, stop the presses. Of course, all that the radio, news, and television outlets have focused on since General Pace’s comments are his remarks on homosexuality. Never mind that he puts immorality of all kinds on equal footing...
We are basically saying that if you are the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, you are not allowed to express your moral or religious views—especially on matters of sexual preference and behavior.
This is another sign that we live in an age that no longer believes in objective truth or a moral order. Moral relativism is the rule, and personal preference trumps all. And government is there to ensure that no one place any restraint on the pursuit of our own desires."
—Chuck Colson
shoutandspout@scottsdaleactivist.com
~Under the new Sign ordinance(?) it would seem that political/campaign signs can be left up forever on private property. I know public opinion would make it self limiting in terms of benefit to a candidate or specific issue. It would seem political signs could go up earlier and not have to be removed in a timely manner. It seems clear that the city council majority didn’t care about any signs but the political one’s and didn’t research that very well either. A typical action (or in reality, a non-action) for the council majority.
~I have had some very bad experiences dealing with Kevin O’Neill from the Planning Commission. He seems to think that, at his age and experience level, he knows everything there is to know about Scottsdale development. His arrogance is going to get this City into trouble. One minute he will tell you that the Planning Commission oversees projects that are brought to it then the next, he will say they have been GIVEN the task of entirely PLANNING this city’s development. Someone needs to dethrone this pompous, inept individual now! Who made him God’s right hand advisor…Dolan?
~I fully expect to read Mr. Cantoni's pledge via The Activist that he will not accept either Social Security nor Medicare when he reaches the age of 65.
~Freeway crashes resulting in injuries and deaths are predominantly caused by speed variance and lack of lane courtesy (that includes driving slow in the left lane, failure to signal, and so on). The vast majority of crashes are not caused by speeding - I mean, over in Germany people do 150 mph every day with an accident and fatality rate that is a mere fraction of ours. Why? Because people drive fast, but they drive nice, and the most severe ticket you can get in Germany is for driving slow in the left lane and refusing to yield to faster traffic. Which, incidentally, is the #1 cause of freeway crashes in the US. I guess Germany has learned from our mistakes.
~I was so happy to see Carla get the boot from the City’s committees. That woman was completely out of hand. It’s one thing to take pride in Scottsdale and work well with your team of committee members to make it a great place to live, but her views of Scottsdale’s preserve was way out of hand. Every time I’d listen to her speak, it seemed that she wanted to be in control of everything but her attitude always left me feeling like she’s a few tacos short of the combination plate! Who would want a dictator like that on our preserve committees? Not me! Have a nice life, Carla.
~Have you heard that support for Jim Derouin as a mayoral candidate is building at a very fast pace? We are all ready to jump on the bandwagon to get that guy elected. It would be so nice to have an intelligent, well-spoken, non-cue-card-reading mayor who could actually relate to people and want to help them! Where do I sign his petition and how much money can I give to his campaign?
~ I was out of town and missed what happened to the Citizen Ombudsman petition. Do you know if they did anything about it? Editors note: They apparently didn't address it but must be addressed within the 30 day period allowed. Manross and the council majority would never allow such a reasonable and useful tool for the citizens; you know better than that!
~ I just read that Carla has been removed, oh, excuse me, resigned from all committees to devote all of her time to the completion of the preserve at any cost. We also hear that she wants to limit who and when citizens can use the trails, wants to eliminate the ability for people to take their dogs or bicycles on the trails, and also wants a separate bond issue to pay for the Discovery Center she proposes for the Preserve. It's as if this is her private project but she forgets it was all our tax dollars that bought what we have so far, not hers. If such a bond were to be passed by the voters, which is a long shot at best, where would the money come from to operate the center? The general fund? The bond only provides the money to build the center, not operate or maintain it and Dolan and Manross, with their pet projects, have drained the General Fund well into the future.
~What’s up with the traffic plan here in Scottsdale? I have heard so many different stories about what’s going on. First, we have commissioned a consultant to do a plan. Then the parameters of the plan are so narrowly skewed that it makes no sense to implement it. Finally, they are getting more direction from citizens but those I have talked to on the Transportation committees say the City isn’t even listening to them. So, is this just smoke and mirrors again? Around and around we go…no end in sight.
~The City told the people of the Chaparral Road area that they would not widen that road. I heard Mary Manross say those exact words at a City Council meeting. But, if I were the residents, I’d worry big time. Putting Optima and the other developments so close to their housing district begs for widening of that road. How else do they expect to move traffic through that area? ... and of course Manross has never lied to anyone in the city....... yeah, sure, and we're going to win the lottery this weekend.
~ I see in the Trib that many of the new high density projects are being pushed through the city by Berry and Bitter-Smith. In addition they are all on the outskirts of the downtown area which allows the "Camel" to get it's nose into the tent of the traditionally and historically low density residential areas of the city. Should any of them be approved as the Earll project was (Councilman Lane will pay for his vote on the Earll thing), they can kiss their Townhouses and HOA goodbye because they too will be swallowed by the Manross/Dolan onslaught of ultra high density all the way to Hayden with Chaparral being widened to 6 lanes from Hayden to Scottsdale Road, not 4 lane as currently proposed.
~We are getting a street project on McDonald, between Hayden and Scottsdale Roads. The proposed changes are aesthetic, with a big fence to separate property from the street and a brightly colored fence along the roadsides where the canal is located. Didn’t anyone talk to the people who use the transition from south McDonald to north McDonald along the canal before they planned this project? What we need is a bridge that goes OVER McDonald from south to north. People run right out into the middle of the street to cross to the other side of the canal – you take your life in your own hands! The area where they run is a blind spot. The City is wasting money with all the glam they are putting into aesthetics – why not be practical for once? We need a bridge!
~Why isn’t the City enforcing CCR’s within our neighborhoods? They are approving revitalization and rebuilding projects for homes that don’t mesh with the neighborhood. They are allowing heights and facings that are not within the CCR’s for the area. It creates a mish-mash effect in the neighborhoods. Editors note: CC&R's are private agreements agreed to by the initial purchasers of a property when it was built and are totally different for every subdivision. Therefore they cannot be enforced by the city because they were initiated by the developer/builder and are not the responsibility of the city. If subdivisions organized and had the required number of property owners agree to enforce the CC&R's, they would first have to update them to fit current laws and ordinances, vehicle changes and uses of the properties relating to modern day situations, as well as a multitude of other issues which most property owners would not agree to. If a full and definable majority of the property owners in a specific subdivision went to any planning commission, DRB, or city council meeting and demanded that the CC&R's be followed, they would have something to hang their hat on. Anything less would not be acceptable or admissible.
~Is there ever a good time to travel on our 101 freeway anymore?? I avoid rush hour at all cost, but it seems that, these days, every driving moment is rush hour in Scottsdale. Every road is massively congested even post construction to alleviate that problem and forget the 101 – it’s a parking lot. Is this the Dolan plan? To make us all so stressed to that we agree to any idea she wants for mass transit? She did that same thing to those poor people in Menlo Park! How does she sleep at night? Maybe on $180K plus for salary, pretty darned well! She makes me physically ill.
~I agree that we should get rid of our current city Staff. They are so worthless. I tried to get a building permit for a fence and it took more than 2 months. The City website is misleading on this issue. They diddled around for more than a month saying that they would come out and approve the initial foundation and didn’t. I finally finished the fence myself and let them come out a month later to inspect it. They really don’t want to work with us, do they?
~Maybe we need a massive letter-writing campaign to Dolan and Manross explaining that police departments are intended to serve and protect, not to generate revenue and extort. Not that it would matter though. If opening those letters won't make them money, they won't do it, and we already know Manross totally ignores her constituents anyway but loves the thoughts of more money.
~ The article in the Activist is correct! Why do we need to have a professional staff of people who do business with the city regularly as members of both the Planning Commission and the DRB when we have a highly paid city staff to do the job? Why don't we have regular citizens on both the Planning Commission and the DRB who can legitimately question the actions and decisions of both the PC & DRB for a change. Currently, we have the foxes watching the hen houses; What's wrong with that picture? It's called high density without representation.
~What’s with the sign ordinance? I think the City could have handled that whole issue a lot better. They agreed on some very limited provisions for the ordinance, which may violate Constitutional rights. Again, they listened to Staff’s inept opinion of how Staff thought it should go. Who runs this town anyway?
~ I'm excited about Derouin running for mayor. When will we hear from him? We really need to know before someone stupid and out of touch says she'll definitely run again.........
~Didn’t Wayne Ecton state that one of his re-election goals was to work with Phoenix to create an agreement for shared revenue? The recent announcement that Phoenix has offered a $100M subsidy in the North to the City-North development trumps Scottsdale’s plans to get their lion’s share of the revenue in that area of our adjacent border. How’s that main campaign focus going for you now, Wayne??? Another disappointment on the City Council.
~Why doesn't Scottsdale support live cops on the freeways? Probably for the same reason I never saw cops patrolling my neighborhood in Scottsdale like I always did in Phoenix, despite Scottsdale's higher burglary rate: it simply isn't profitable. The City of Scottsdale puts their cops and their resources where they can make money, and not necessarily where they can protect the public safety.
~ I pray to God that someone challenges the new sign ordinance in court. That would eliminate the entire new sign ordinance and put the old one in jeopardy as well. There was a very good alternative offered by a citizen whose name I don't remember but is a city activist. His proposal would have cleaned up the mess, added fees and cut the time the signs were up. The four who voted for the new ordinance don't respect or understand the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, and it seems understand nothing about responsible and responsive government either. Their ONLY interest is setting the city up for the '08 election for the incumbents. If they tell you anything else, they're lying through their teeth, as usual. Funny, 3 of the 4 who voted for it are up for re-election and the other is a Manross Puppet.... Hmmmm, that says something about all 4 of them doesn't it?
~ Information You Can Use
|
|
Prop13Arizona
|
|
|
Executive Guidance Committee Sen. Ron Gould Sen. Jack Harper Rep. Russell Pearce Hon. David Smith Jeff Greenspan, Chairman Lynne Weaver, Vice Chairman
|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 1, 2007, 12:00 PM MST |
|
|
Prop 13 Style Property Tax Reform Coming To Arizona Prop 13 Arizona, a coalition of elected officials and citizen activists, has organized to bring California Prop 13 style reform to Arizona. Prop 13 Arizona brings together elected state officials, citizen activists, taxpayer, industry and other political interest groups to form the definitive statewide property tax reform coalition in Arizona. Over the next year, representatives of various stakeholder groups will be working together with elected officials and citizen activists to create comprehensive, transformational property tax reform bills and initiatives to include: · Eliminating classes of property · Resetting the property tax rate back to no more than 1%, the maximum allowed in the Arizona Constitution · Setting a 2% annual limit to valuation increases after a property is purchased · Rolling back current valuations to 2001 “Prop 13 Arizona: …comprehensive, transformational property tax reform... “ Prop 13 Arizona will: · Provide comprehensive reform for driving future economic growth and prosperity · Enable businesses and individuals to plan and budget their tax requirements · Attract new business to the state The work has already begun. New stakeholders join Prop 13 Arizona each week. Bills and initiatives are being drafted. The first initiative, C-01-2008, a portion of the reform language, has been filed with additional filings to follow. Stakeholders from around the state are providing their input in order that the bills and initiatives appeal to the widest segment of the population, amenable to business owners, industry and individuals. Look for more from Prop 13 Arizona in the coming weeks and months. |
||
~ 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.
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