Volume
'07-14
Published
Late Saturdays
April 7, 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
.
==================================================
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!
==========================================
Troop Gift Info, A Gathering of Eagles site, and other Local Websites and Newspaper links formerly located here have been moved to the "Information You Can Use" section of this website.
=======================================
Check out our "Sister" Website For Scottsdale Citizens!!! Just Click on the Logo below!!
Pick the Article you wish to read, then Just Click
~ Weekly Editorial -- Staff
~ Guest Editorial -- Nancy Cantor
~The City Budget, a Primer
~ Food for Thought - Take It or Leave It
~ Shout and Spout, Budget??? Illegal Alley?? Carla???
~ Thought for the Week -- Benjamin Rush
~ Quote of the Week -- James Madison
~ Information You Can Use
Other Stuff of Interest
~ Look up Prior Editions? Click a on date to open.
~ Caught Red-Handed in Hualapai Cover Up
Do City Council members care that, at a minimum, its top two appointed Charter Officers either did not inform them of a $10 million lease or, at a maximum, mislead them by covering up the actual facts relating to the land on which the City’s expanded Central Arizona Project Waste Water Treatment Hualapai Plant now sits?
For most City Council members, this will be the first time they see material which the City Manager has been keeping from them since 2002!
demanding accountability for the expensive and mismanaged situation described below and
By NOT
By NOT taking strong action
City Council members are, in effect, saying that;
they just don't care that the actions of the City Manager and City Attorney that could cost city taxpayers more than $10 million in unnecessary expenditures,
they accept massive incompetence,
they accept not being asked to authorize, much less even being told about, a $10 million contract and
-
they accept not having all facts about the Hualapai matter disclosed to them at critical meetings.
Investigation Needed
After reading the documentation contained herein, you very well may feel as we do that there needs to be a thorough outside investigation by a neutral third party chosen by the City Council, excluding the mayor, to get to the bottom of this entire situation.
We have advised readers for months that the City Staff was in the process of covering up a very expensive financial boondoggle concerning the attempted purchase of three (3) pieces of land totaling 6.9 acres from the Arizona State Land Department for the completion of a water plant in the north Scottsdale area.
[boon·dog·gle = Informal n. 1. An unnecessary or wasteful project or activity.]
We did some checking and after receiving plenty of inside information from very upset city employees, we were provided with City documents that confirm that contracts were signed on behalf of the City without ever being presented for City Council approval and, as a result, the City is liable for up to $16 million in damages and legal costs. City staff, however, continues to deny that a problem exists!
Needing more information to fill in the holes missing from the records we had already located, we asked the City Manager for the complete and unabridged documentation on the entire process behind the Hualapai Water Treatment plant on Union Hills and Hualapai off Pima Road in North Scottsdale.
Under notice from City Manager Jan Dolan, Assistant City Manager Roger Klinger responded with a large box full of documents. Much of the information was next to useless and probably included to try to confuse and discourage us from digging too deeply into the entire box. Undeterred, we went forward and perused every sheet of paper in the box. [Peruse: to examine or consider with attention and in detail]
Background Information
(Click Here to see the City's Right of Way Summary by Date)As background, the City’s "Water Campus" is bordered by N. Pima Road, East Union Hills and E. Hualapai Drive. The City’s Central Arizona Project Water Treatment Plant is immediately east of the Water Campus and is comprised of approximately 40 acres. In January 2002, a City consultant told the City that: "The City should purchase the . . . 3.44 acre parcel due West of the CAP plant property boundary from the Arizona State Land Department to accommodate its expansion and treatment goals." The City submitted an application to the ASLD to purchase the required acreage in March 2002 and, thereupon, went about planning to use the land to complete its CAP WWTP.
Not having acquired the land it needed to expand its CAP WWTP before it became committed to using the land (even though it knew of the need for the land since January
2002) , the City staff submitted a request to lease the property from the ASLD in October 2005. The Scottsdale Activist has been unable to find any information anywhere showing or even alluding to City Council knowledge of, or approval of this lease although the City’s records indicate that the City Attorney was aware of the City’s actions.The City’s records indicate that:
so.
The lease for the land was signed on November 11, 2005.
There is no indication as to who signed the lease; there is no documentation that the City Council was informed of the lease or ever approved it.
The Mayor signed the lease on December 6, 2005—without City Council approval to do
The lease provided for a nominal payment for the first year; followed by escalating payments amounting to about $1 million annually for the next nine years.
On December 13, 2005, the City Council was asked for authority to bid on the property. The City Council was told, for the first time according to the records reviewed by The Scottsdale Activist, of the existence of a lease on the property; but it was told only that the rent for the first year was $2,400. No mention was made of the true legal and financial exposure that a yet unknown City official had committed the City to on November 11, 2005 or that the Mayor had committed the City to on December 6.
In February 2006, the ASLD appraised the land (and two additional "uneconomic remainders" for a total acreage of 6.9 acres) at $4,865,000. The City objected to this valuation, but decided to accept it.
The ASLD auctioned the land on July 18, 2006. It had an appraised value of $4,865,000 plus a lease on it in the value of almost $10 million. The land was purchased by a local bidder for $6,165,000. City staff, red faced and caught red handed at being incompetent, complained bitterly and offered to buy out the high bidder for $100,000.
The new owner (Hualapai LLC) told the City that the land, with the lease, had a market value of $16 million, but it offered to settle for $12 million. The City, having its incompetence exposed even more, has offered $7.7 million—arguing, you got it, that the lease is invalid BECAUSE THE CITY COUNCIL NEVER APPROVED IT. The matter at this point is headed to trial with the City having an embarrassingly weak case.
The Mayor, City Manager and City Attorney owe an explanation to all citizens as well as to the City Council. First of all, they should come clean:
Who, without authority, signed the lease on
November 11, 2005? City Manager Jan Dolan?
Who failed from March 2002 to July 2006 to
tie up the land that the City needed to complete its CAP WWTP?
The City Manager’s Office led by Jan Dolan?
Who approved the lease for the Mayor to sign
on December 6, 2005? The City Manager Jan Dolan? The
City Attorney Deborah Robberson?
How could the City enter into a $10 million
lease without the approval of the City Council?
How, with a straight face, can the City argue that the lease is invalid because the City Council never approved it? First, the City Manager, the City Attorney and the Mayor ignored the City Council, and when caught red handed at acting unilaterally, their defense is that they acted unilaterally, without authority, misleading the City Council along the way.
We look forward to the depositions that will be taken of Mayor Manross, City Manager Dolan and City Attorney Robberson during the pending legal action.
These depositions should be VERY interesting. Under oath, they can’t lie (or CAN they?).
Manross, Dolan, and Robberson have to point fingers and tell the truth. As is the case with public scandals and incompetence, the cover up is often times worse than the original infraction.
Mayor Manross just cannot operate in the open; secrecy is her forte and her comfort zone. This time it will cost the City taxpayers millions of dollars. Jan Dolan has learned well from the Mayor as has apparently the City Attorney.
Was Dolan the person who signed or authorized the signing of the million dollar annual lease in November 2005? How about City Attorney Robberson? She knew about the lease; the City’s own records document that. Yet she did nothing to prevent the Mayor from signing the million dollar annual lease in December 2005—and Robberson failed to assure that the City Council was informed of the value of the lease or that the City Council had a chance to approve the lease. Now the City’s attorneys are arguing that Ms. Robberson’s incompetence or deceit are grounds to throw out the lease. What???
If there was ever a basis for the City Council to stand up for itself, it is NOW!!
It should forthwith fire City Attorney Robberson for insubordination and/or incompetence. And if City Manager Dolan signed or authorized the signing of the lease in November 2005 without City Council authority, she should be fired also.
How can a City Council with any pride or respect for its city and constituents put up with subordinates who flaunt the very authority they were hired to serve?
Recap
Note that the City was told in January 2002 that it needed the land in question. The City, thereafter, proceeded to design the expansion of the CAP WWTP based on the assumption that the land would be obtained. Yet no urgency was indicated until a letter noted on January 19, 2006 stating:
"Letter from City of Scottsdale Water Department requesting the Department to expedite the purchase application so we could comply with EPA mandates to have the GAC facilities operational by summer of 2007".
Where was the urgency on the part of City Manager Jan Dolan between March 2002 and January 2005 to get the property auctioned and in the hands of the city as Fee Simple owner before any construction began?
On June 28, 2005, the City Council authorized the Construction bid approval to Archer Western Contractors. No indication anywhere in the notes of any lease being mentioned or discussed, or the auction of the ASLD land to the city of Scottsdale.
On October 12, 2005, the COS requested a commercial lease (23-110294) and SLUP application (03-110295) to accommodate use of the property until the COS could
acquire the property at auction.On November 1, 2005
, the record clearly states: "State issued the SLUP for ongoing construction activities that authorizes construction until the commercial lease can be issued."Thus, as of November 1, 2005,
COS was well into the construction process on the ASLD land without any approval or knowledge of the City Council, without a lease and without ASLD approval.On November 18, 2005, the City Attorney Deborah Robberson was aware of and had looked at the lease "approving it in form." By that time, the lease had, according to City records
, been signed by an unidentified person. [The December 13, 2005 CCR clearly states the lease was executed on November 11, 2005.The City's
Right of Way Summary states that the Mayor didn't sign the lease until December 6. We wonder if Jan Dolan signed the lease for the City on November 11. See "Analysis and Assessment" (Paragraph 2) of the 12/13/05 City Council Report.] Regardless, Ms. Robberson apparently neither informed the City Council of the lease nor told Mayor Manross that she was not authorized to sign it because, on December 6, the Mayor executed the lease—apparently the second person to do so on behalf of the City.It certainly is peculiar that a lease for $10 million would be signed, first, by a yet unidentified city employee and, then, by the Mayor without either the City Manager or the City Attorney saying a single word to the City Council
. Do City Council members care that, at a minimum, its top two officials did not inform them of the $10 million lease?On December 13, 2005,
the City Council was informed of the ASLD Lease (although not of its $10 million value), a lease that was already signed without the City Council’s approval; the Council then approved Resolution #6800 to authorize the staff to bid on the three (3) parcels of land on which construction had already begun. The Council still hadn’t been advised about nor approved the ASLD lease which the Mayor, and possibly the City Manager, had signed with City Attorney knowledge.On July 19, 2006, the ASLD sale date for the auction of the three parcels totaling 6.9 acres, the City of Scottsdale was outbid by Mr. Robert Kimball, Attorney for Hualapai LLC; the successful bid was in the amount of $6,165,000.
Hualapai LLC bid on the property because it was a very prudent business decision based upon the miscalculations and missteps on the part of Jan Dolan, the failure of City Attorney Deborah Robberson to do her job and the willingness of Mayor Mary Manross to sign a $10 million contract without insisting that the City Council be told about it and have the opportunity to approve it or reject it (keeping in mind that the City was already building on the land). Sadly, this is typical of the Manross/Dolan/Robberson "if you don’t like it, sue us" attitude.
Anyone remember the ugly tent building at West World that the City built without going through its own permitting process?
In Conclusion
The City knew it needed the land in January 2002 and didn't get serious about getting the land from the state until late 2005. By late 2005, because of its construction activity which had already started on the CAP WWTP, it had committed itself to needing the land. By the time the City entered into the lease, it was already "openly and publicly" using the land. The City was totally locked into using the land regardless of cost.
The City could have refrained from using the land and from entering into the lease with the hope that it could pick up the land at appraised value because nobody would buy land next to a water treatment plant for almost a million dollars an acre. This would have forced the City, however, to deal with ADEQ which it chose not to do. Kimball bought the land for much more than the appraisal price because it had a lease directly tied to it that would provide him income of $10 million over ten (10) years and with the certainty that the City would have to extend the lease after the lease term because it had already built part of its water treatment plant on the property.
There were two very viable alternative options that were ignored;
Pursue the purchase of the property in 2002 or
Delay construction to 2006 until the land was purchased.
By building on the land in October 2005 and leasing it in November/December 2005, the City gave "value" to the land and "Constructive Notice" to the public and thereby to any bidder or purchaser other than itself.
The City's own consultant called attention to the need for the land January 2002. The real management error, therefore, was allowing the City to get into this mess by not having moved in 2002 to avoid a crisis in 2006; and then responding in late 2005
without City Council approval or knowledge (but obviously with the involvement of the City Manager, City Attorney, and Mayor). That increased the cost of the land to the City by a factor of two to three times (the difference between ASLD appraised value accepted by the city staff and the current market value with the lease as an integral part which it now is), without seeking an extension from EPA/ADEQ.No one should ever advocate ignoring a regulatory timeline and "just take the penalty." However, when faced with a situation like this (i.e., the inability to quickly purchase the land), there is usually regulatory flexibility and, yet, all we see in the record is the statement that "ADEQ has never allowed an extension for large systems." There is absolutely no indication in any of the paperwork provided that the
City ever approached the ADEQ to discuss the situation.ADEQ may have required a compliance order based on obtaining the land in July 2006 and the payment of some kind of penalty, but this might have had some political ramifications; thus, perhaps, the decision to proceed with the lease in the hope that all would go well. Through due diligence, however, Kimball became aware of the lease, then legally, openly, and fairly outbid the City for the property.
There was a serious initial management/oversight problem in not moving to get the
needed land well in advance of the lease date in December 2005. The second serious management problem, which compounded the first, was not informing the City Council of the situation and not letting the City Council make the decision as to whether to seek an enforcement extension (possibly involving a compliance order) or to proceed with the lease.The First problem would have been more in the nature of overlooking the need to act in 2002;
The Second problem was what had to have been
The first mistake was unfortunate, but understandable; the second is totally inexcusable.
The current administration knows all too well that the average citizen or citizens group doesn’t have the financial means to fight a city hall with deep pockets.
Only the City Council can demand accountability--if it cares.
As is the case in recent political scandals, the error comes first (2002) and is followed by a massive and clever but stupid cover-up (2005).
Full disclosure should have been made to the Council, but that might have had consequences that city management staff was NOT willing to face…
The real question is:
Will the City Council now do its job and face these issues head on?
Insiders are now advising us that City Manager Jan Dolan is doing everything in her power to convince Hualapai LLC to accept a piece of city land as a trade for the Hualapai Plant and the land on which it is built.
We want to know:
- What land is being offered and;
Why City Manager Jan Dolan is apparently allowed to privately and secretly bargain with land that has been purchased and designated for another use by the city for its citizens?
Comically, the City claims that the lease is invalid (even though signed by the Mayor) because it was never approved by the City Council. The logical conclusion of this argument, of course, is that the City was using the State's land illegally prior to the auction based on the fact that
, if there was no lease to use property, then the city must be trespassing on it.The Scottsdale Activist is astounded (but not totally surprised) by what it has found and is further astounded that the City Council does not seem to view this incompetence seriously. Or the fact that the top two (2) appointed Charter Officers ignored the Council, mislead the Council and, in effect, failed to disclose critical information to the Council while acting without the City Council’s consent or authorization.
By NOT condemning this situation and by NOT taking some strong action now, City Council members are, in effect, saying that they just don’t care and, in fact,
accept;by the City’s top two (2) appointed Charter Officers, and
massive incompetence
the City's top two appointed officials taking actions that the City's lawyers now admit were never authorized by the Council.
Is there any wonder why voters have no confidence in their elected officials? After all, if elected officials do not manage the Charter Officers they appointed and are totally responsible for, who can do so?
~ Shame, SHAME Again on the Local Press
Again we say Shame on the local press. They ran with a story which incomplete and was devastating and embarrassing to a family undeserving of such treatment.
Was Cody Rodbell guilty of speeding? Absolutely! As were multitudes of other city residents over the years. Were their names in the local press? No! Had she been imbibing too much? Possibly, but not to illegal levels according to the BA level test.
The real issue here is that our glorious, secretive Mayor, of all people, rear-ended a lady who is apparently still suffering from the violent hit put on her by Manross and not one word ever shows up in the press about it.
This is the kind of journalism that we as citizens don’t take a liking to locally, and Mark Scarp, of all people and as a long time Scottsdale resident, you should know better!
After spending Millions on the improvement and rebuilding of Hayden from Cactus to Redfield with the winding roadway, sidewalks, flora, and funky rusty "art", we now read in the Scottsdale Tribune that all major roadways in Scottsdale will have to expand to six (6) lanes south of FLW Blvd.
Wonderful………..
A few months back I specifically asked Roger Klingler, Jan Dolan’s right hand puppet, why Hayden wasn’t taken to a full six lanes when the improvements were being planned.
He, with disgust in his voice, said that you couldn’t
fit 6 lanes into that portion of Hayden and he didn’t seem very happy
that I asked the question as if I was just a stupid citizen who knew
nothing.
WRONG!!!
Having worked on roadways and knowing better, I measured it myself and took the numbers to an expert in roadway designs. He said there was plenty of room to go to 6 lanes while still maintaining necessary clearances, the nice sidewalks, ample shoulder flora, the planter median, and adequate left turn lanes. He said the current configuration was meant to constrict traffic, not reduce the congestion as should be done in this specific example.
Boy, Dolan, O’Connor, Klingler, and some of the people who work for them, sure get testy when you corner them on something they should know everything about don’t they? Is it because they have been caught.... Again covering up facts?
It’s time we pulled the plug on Dolan and Company blindly doing things that are going to cost us more millions down the road. The City Council needs to be more involved and informed: Where have we heard that before?
This project could have easily waited until the Transportation Master Plan was completed (remind you of the Dolan Hualapai Water Plant boondoggle?). Hayden was already a four (4) lane with some left turn areas and more could have easily added as temporary improvements for a mere fraction of the cost spent on the major renovation.
It would appear that this again relates to the apparent incompetence and short-sightedness of the city manager and her management staff, and the Council’s inability or lack of interest in checking out what’s going on in their (our) city.
So much for wisely planning and the frugal spending of taxpayers dollars……………
The only answer, with all of the current problems coming to light, seems to be that we need to clean house: Dolan and her cohorts need to be reassigned to lower levels, fired or resign effective immediately.
In a Scottsdale Republic article on Saturday, April 7th, the headline reads "Attorney steps over line with PV planners".
It would appear that someone else is actually seeing the same thing many taxpayers in Scottsdale have been complaining about since the inception of the Manross Administration. The complaints became even louder after the arrival of Dolan, then Robberson, but to which the City Council, Planning Commission, the DRB, and City Managers office have seen fit to turn a blind eye, deaf ear, or just totally ignore.
John Berry is an excellent attorney who is sought out by developer/builders for obvious reasons and who is very well paid for what he does extremely well. Unfortunately, his fiduciary (or legal) obligation is solely to his clients, not the citizens of Scottsdale, the success or failure of the city, or the future of the city. Just as a defense attorney must do his ultimate best to get a murderer off, John Berry is obligated to do his absolute best for his clients also.
John Berry’s only job is to "Sell" the project to the city based on what he knows to be acceptable to them and what won’t stir more than a minimal amount of controversy, if any, among dissenters within the area in which the project is proposed.
He schmooze’s, cajoles, pacifies, and talks the best story necessary to sell his project to his "target" based on what has been provided to him by his client. Berry doesn’t take a project he feels he cannot push through the city hoops successfully. He would be foolish if he did wouldn’t he?
Unfortunately, once the project has been approved by
the city for the client of John Berry, our understanding is that he is
no longer involved; his job is completed and he moves on to something
else. Therefore any changes made later by the builder/developer, with or
without the City Council or city’s approval cannot be attributed to John
Berry, but instead to the ignorance or possible connection to the City
Council, PC, DRB or other city entity "friendly" toward said
developer/builder.
Here’s where the Ethics Code comes into play.
We are not defending what John Berry does, we are defending his right to do what he does as long as he can get away with it whether we like it or not, or whether its good for the city or not.
We have seen many times in Scottsdale where things have been proposed, then approved, but later had design or other things changed without Council or City approval which saves the builder and developer tons of money in time and materials.
These are the kinds of issues where a Citizen’s Ombudsman Office would be a big help and give a stronger voice to Scottsdale citizens.
But, of course, this will never happen while the Manross, Dolan and Robberson team are in the secretive Ivory Tower at city hall.
Isn’t it comical that the departure of Carla has become a cat and mouse game running amuck in the bowels of city hall (as usual) and that an agreement was signed so no one could divulge what actually went on concerning her departure from either side of the discussion?
Carla has a good heart and it was in the right place for a number of years. But, as time went on, and things didn’t go her way, she seemed to become more and more possessive of the Preserve and how it was being handled, funded and controlled. Her personal needs and demands for the Preserve, according to insiders, outstripped resources and became out of control and over the top in some instances.
As pointed out by someone who sent us a Shout & Spout, she was also much too protective of the area residents to which she should have no connection or comments concerning at all. Her job was to work for the Preserve and ALL of the residents of Scottsdale who have paid for the land to be purchased, no more and no less.
Since the last election where the new Preserve tax just barely made it through based on the success in previous elections, many in areas other than those directly touched by the Preserve are having second thoughts about any new taxes to buy more land because those dollars are not coming from those area residents who reap all the benefits the Preserve brings in the form of solitude and a much reduced density and roadways. Those tax dollars are all coming from south of FLW and mainly below Shea whose resident gain zero benefit from the money that will be paid for more land.
If any more Preserve land is to be purchased, many former supporters suggest that the local area residents benefiting from the low density and solitude the Preserve provides, form a Special Preserve Property Taxing District and fund the remainder from additional tax dollars accumulated from that special taxing district. How could anything be more fair? The citizens of Scottsdale have provided the bulk of the dollars and have the project going well. It’s now time for those who benefit most to step to the plate and finish the job.
It has been mentioned that Carla should be hired by the city on a full time basis. We strongly object to this hiring on a number of fronts; the first being that her "departure" needs to be made fully public and in it’s entirety so we all know why she left or was, to put it kindly, nicely asked to leave as some claim before anything else can be discussed. We would be more inclined to believe she left under duress based on the secrecy of what transpired and the word that has filtered out from many sources.
As I ducked out of the way of a 20-something cutie in her Honda Accord with Nevada license plates, that handily sped at 55 MPH west on Indian School Road in Scottsdale and flipped me off in the process (I guess I didn’t move over fast enough), I began to wonder – where has the love gone these days? Sure, we’ve got major traffic problems. I got that. And yes we have a defunct governmental system led by a clueless Mayor, a dictator-like abrasive City Manager/Treasurer (how dare she let anyone else make money related-decisions!) and a somewhat inept group of individuals we call City Council. Oh yeah, and we DO have developers with great big pockets (that we happily fill with subsidies) who effortlessly finagle our city Staff members into awarding them carte blanche for the privilege of ruining our once architecturally diverse, cultured western resort town. But is that really any reason for an "outsider", "out of stater" "flyby nighter" "can’t afford to relocate here but want to fit in" wanna-be native to take their frustrations out on others who actually live here? I think not.
I wonder, instead, what might result if all the wasted energy that goes into ruining our City was transformed into positive, fulfilling, directional guidance? What then? Would we find the love or has the City of Scottsdale just become so massively out of hand that we’ll never really find balance again? I don’t know what the answer is, but I do know that the current direction we’re all going is leading right off the nearest cliff.
If it’s true that it takes more muscles to frown than to smile, then our Mayor has used her allotment of facial muscles in all the wrong ways for years. Her brash, abrasive rhetoric, especially prevalent when she’s challenging the opinion of one of the few Council members who dares to oppose her views during a Council meeting, is enlightening. I rarely see a real smile grace her face. Is it really all that bad? Apparently, she’s lost the love. This, too, seems to resonate throughout the City departments – they just don’t seem happy to go to work everyday – small wonder. Look at their leadership, or lack thereof. Look at their apparent lack of direction…they have no role models. Scottsdale is no place for a role model these days unless you embrace corrupt governmental rule as your own. Involvement in corruption and lies appears to be a requirement if you want to maintain your job at the City.
For many of us, our love has been transformed into frustration. While we want to believe that the love lost can be found again, that our beautiful "town" of sorts will one day see its original character restored, we are living a dream. Until major changes are made to the way in which we do business in Scottsdale, at both the developmental and governmental levels, we are merely sitting ducks, much like me on Indian School Road, awaiting the next obnoxious tourist, newbie or 20-something hot shot who thinks she has a right to own a piece of our road. We are victims of the dictatorship: we are voiceless, lifeless, powerless. Worst of all, we know it.
Is there an answer to this dilemma? Perhaps. A friendly smile, an occasional allowance to cut into your lane of traffic on Scottsdale Road and even a handshake with a stranger might be a starting point. Amidst the turmoil and over-development, Scottsdale needs to find its love again. If the newbies and wanna-be elite can’t see that, then kindly go home. Wouldn’t we rather be a city with heart than a heartless city, spotted with shoddy unplanned development, and faceless, rude citizens?
It is vitally important that, along with all the changes we make to the exterior of our City, that we look inward and make some changes within ourselves. As humans, we are privileged to sensory experiences – buildings are not. We need to find a way to breathe life back into the high-rise cement villages that our esteemed Mayor and City Manager have shoved down our throats and forcibly integrated into lives. Start with a smile…you’ll definitively be one step ahead of the stone-faced Mayor.
~ Council Holds Off on Employee Raises
For good reason, the City Council held off decisions on the raises for city employees. In true form, the Mayor for election reasons, danced around the issue until she could see that she needed to be with the majority on this one which is not where she was at the beginning of the discussion.
The city employees most definitely need and deserve their raises but the basis on which they are decided needs to be rediscussed, determined, and used equally for all employees with the raises being retroactive to January 1st of this year or even earlier.
Politics and tenure can not and must not be considered in any manner in the review process. The reviews must be based solely on the employee’s ability to do their job, the innovation and initiative they bring to the process, and their task oriented and positive attitude. This process should include department peers as well as management from the department in question which would help stop the management domination of the process which we all know is slanted politically.
Gee, Is that possible in a iron handed Jan Dolan controlled city?
It's truly a damned shame that the City Council and the City Manager/Treasurer think more of the Charter Officers than they do the faithful employees of this city based on the raises they are offering. Especially since many have gone without a reasonable raise since 9-11.
Isn’t it interesting that the city has dedicated $7.5 million dollars for the Museum of the West as well as the land where it will be built which will never provide any income or safety to the residents of Scottsdale while the Police/Fire Helicopters and other voter approved projects have been unceremoniously dumped from any future consideration?
The museum land itself could provide property, improvement, and sales tax revenue to the city if it was sold to a private developer for a city approved business venture.
All we’re really seeing here is a legacy driven Mayor, City Council, notable want-to-be’s, and staff who apparently couldn’t care less about the everyday safety as well as the availability of money for more park and library space for citizens who will be using those ventures rather than the museum.
Funding this Museum at this point in time is a slap
in the face to the voters who cast their precious votes for more
important things to be built. It will reflect directly during the next
election cycle.
According to the Scottsdale Republic Saturday, April 7th, It would seem that "some Scottsdale employees" are fed up with activists and activism within the city of Scottsdale.
Hmmm, Could that be that the Activists are finding and exposing the bad things the City Council, Planning Commission and DRB are missing, or stopping things from going through so that our city doesn’t go to Hell in a hand-basket because of very poor planning and very poor decisions as well as personal preferences of those in positions of power?
It’s very interesting that The Scottsdale Activist is constantly informed by insiders and mainly city employees about what’s going wrong and exposing the "bad seeds" who are doing the dirty work hidden within the bowels of city hall. The exposing of the Jan Dolan and the Hualapai Water Plant Debacle is a prime example, as are the current and continuing problems in Code Enforcement, and problems that existed in HR.
If you want to discuss abusive talk, you should ice down and pad your ears some, then listen to the tape of the Planning Commission meeting concerning signs where Chairman Steve Steinberg, in a tirade, verbally abused not only the speakers and activists but someone who wasn’t even at the meeting!
These are the people who are totally overstepping their bounds, not the city activists who are looking out for the best interest of the entire city. Many on these panels think they are the great gift to the city when in reality, all they want is what they want, not what the citizens want, and they don’t think the citizens should have any input.
In our opinion, the entire Planning Commission and
DRB positions need to be vacated immediately and replaced with only two
(2) new professionals and the remainder to be local citizens from
different areas of the city who have lived in Scottsdale for at least
ten (10) years and have some knowledge of the history and needs of the
city and ARE NOT acquainted with any of the professional appointees.
This would clean up the unfairness and lack of proper decisions on the
part of these partial, self-centered panelists.
~ Legal Way to Avoid Photo Radar
The ad below claims that their product is perfectly legal which my call to some PD's and DPS verified. Apparently, if the license plate can be fully seen clearly from all directions and angles, it is not illegal.
We don't support anything illegal, and we don't support using something to avoid being arrested for illegal actions, but being that Photo Radar is illegal under the Arizona Revised Statues anyway, and tickets have has been apparently reversed or thrown out by Arizona Courts of Appeal, if someone wants to pay this much money for something that IS apparently legal, go for it!
~ Guest Editorial
by Nancy CantorSkySong Center is many things to many people......as well we know in Scottsdale.
It is there and we need to make it work. The Scottsdale Coalition has believed that from the beginning though it has been hard to stomach the convoluted way the City "powers that be" have put this together.
Early on the Scottsdale Coalition saw the possibility of a partnership with the businesses and programs that were going to be located at SkySong and we facilitated bringing the Scottsdale Unified School District and ASU, as well as the business partners together. The SkySong Education Initiative has grown out of those efforts to benefit the Coronado Complex Schools, K - 12.
On Friday, March 23, 2007, a joint meeting of all parties, including members of the Steering Committee for the Scottsdale Coalition, was held at the Fulton Center to update all as to where "SEI" is headed, since the acquisition of a planning grant from the Virginia Piper Trust in early 2006. Amanda Burke and Dr. Gary Bitter, from ASU, received a planning grant of $20,000. As part of the process they met with members of the community prior to an organizing meeting last August.
Members of ASU from the Colleges of Education, Technology, Environmental and Science programs and the AME (Arts, Media and Engineering) programs, and staff from the Vice Presidents Office, along with district staff from Scottsdale Unified School District and staff from Coronado High School, Supai Middle School, Hohokam Elementary School, Tonalea Elementary School, Yavapai Elementary School and Pima Elementary School began planning and implementing programs.
A telephone survey conducted by ASU's Bruce Merrill last fall, through out the South Scottsdale neighborhoods, helped the team to focus their efforts and prepare projects that students and teachers are participating in already.
The following is taken from the Executive Summary for the SkySong Education Initiative:
Arizona State University is advancing the vision of the New American University - a university that assumes responsibility for the economic, social and cultural vitality of its community. Core to this vision is ASU's connection with the communities of Arizona.
To further advance this vision and meet community needs, ASU is proposing the development of an innovative educational initiative that will leverage the physical proximity of the ASU/Scottsdale Innovative Center (SkySong) and its resources to benefit the neighborhoods of southern Scottsdale and the K-12 education community.
Through SkySong, ASU can offer a unique opportunity for collaboration between the tenants for the center, local schools and the community to advance math, science and technology education that will help ensure the creation of a globally competitive workforce.
In developing the framework for the SkySong Education Initiative, ASU conducted a community assessment to make certain the project will meet actual needs and interests of the community and their children.
We found strong support for the establishment of an initiative that would promote technology, entrepreneurship, and arts and sciences.
With these needs in mind, ASU, in partnership with the Scottsdale Unified School District, has conceptualized four programs that will facilitate the translation of the innovation at SkySong to the education system: a professional development teaching lab, an entrepreneurship effort, a media corner focused on cultural creativity, and activities and space rooted in technology for learning.
Through this effort, ASU will:
Enhance teacher professional development particularly in the areas of math, science and technology by developing a state-of-the-art teacher development lab where innovative, high quality professional development courses are created and offered.*stimulate entrepreneurial thinking in the K-12 education community by providing meaningful opportunities for students, teachers, staff and administrators to be involved in learning about and engaging in new projects and ventures.
Arizona State University is advancing the vision of the New American University - a university that assumes responsibility for the economic, social and cultural vitality of its community. Core to this vision is ASU's connection to the community which is referred to as "social embeddedness" - the building of university-wide, interactive, and mutually-supportive partnerships with the communities of Arizona.
Provide students, teachers and community with a dynamic environment for innovative artistic expression, global cultural dialog, and critical reflection by developing interactive space that blends technology, the arts and culture.
Increase the skills and marketability of Arizona's future workforce by integrating emerging technologies into the classroom for teaching and learning.
Advance how technologies are utilized in education by encouraging research that will foster new concepts and methodologies.
With pride in the community that we live and knowing the respect our community has for education, as well as the need for all of our children to be well prepared with a comprehensive education for whatever they choose to do in life, the Scottsdale Coalition looks forward to continuing the promotion and support for this valuable partnership.
Nancy Ann Cantor
Co-Chair, Scottsdale Coalition
Scottsdale
In last week’s I discussed the trends of high rates of increases in city spending and spending more than we take in, trends that clearly cannot be allowed to continue. Here is what I believe the City Council must do reverse these trends.
First, we have to stop arguing about the trees and take a hard look at the forest. Every year that I have been on the Council until now there was little real scrutiny of the budget and the Council (with the exception of a few of us who tried to cut spending) would end up approving everything the City Manager asked for and more!
The staff manipulated the Council by deciding which items (almost always lovable programs that no one wants to deny) were up for discussion and which (the actual budget-busters) were not. This year we must go beyond arguing about these relatively small (in the scheme of Scottsdale’s enormous budget) items that the staff presents to us as "Policy Issues for City Council Consideration" and discuss the real meat of city spending.
We also need to decide one way or the other what we are going to do about the Barrett-Jackson auto auction. Over the last few years we have spent tens of millions of dollars to fund land purchases for WestWorld, primarily for parking. We need to decide how much of that land we need to keep and how much we can sell, which would free up both bonding capacity and cash flow.
We are also considering bonding for $80M (of course, it would end up costing more than that) for a multi-purpose building that would primarily serve the Barrett-Jackson auto auction. If we do that it will suck up a large piece of Scottsdale’s bonding capacity, which would mean less available for parks and other community needs. Continued uncertainty on this question wastes money and hampers our ability to plan how to finance other community needs. We need to put this issue to bed now rather than continuing to delay it.
We also need to stop giving lip service to listening to the priorities of the citizens when we decide how to spend your money and start actually doing it. Over the last few years we have under funded (or not funded at all) projects that you, the voters, approved in Bond 2000. Our excuse was that, while we could bond for the money to build these projects we did not have the money to staff and operate them.
Was this because the money was not there? No, the money was there, but we spent it on other things (such as SkySong, the tens of millions of dollars to fund land purchases for WestWorld, and subsidies for auto dealers) that you did not ask for and may not have approved of! You, the voters can help here by making it clear to the Council that you are tired of being ignored.
Next week the Council is scheduled to consider the proposed pay raises for city employees and to examine the question of "do we have too many employees?" This is an important issue – employee costs are the biggest piece of Scottsdale’s general fund budget, and with almost 3000 employees (more per resident than any other city in the area) it certainly looks like there is some room for savings in this area. But I am disturbed by those who were happy to give our top managers 8% raises (which I voted against) while suggesting that the rank-and-file employees (the ones who actually deliver services to the residents of Scottsdale) are somehow being coddled with 6% raises!
Sounds kind of Enron-like to me. But at least we are starting to discuss the real meat of city spending.
Councilman Bob Littlefield
bob@boblittlefield.com
|
~Letters to the Editor ~ letters@scottsdaleactivist.com ~ John Berry Loses – Finally!! Dear Editor, Finally, John Berry is starting to realize that he isn’t invincible. Mr. Berry felt the excruciating pain of being put back in his place when he attempted to sideswipe the Paradise Valley Planning Commission with his dog and pony show and bag of trick excuses for expediting the new Marriott development that he currently represents. Not only did they show Mr. Berry the door with regard to his project, they gave him the road map and provided direction on how to get there. Paradise Valley has backbone, Scottsdale, unfortunately, does not. That’s why Paradise Valley still has beautiful open land with refined communities of development. Scottsdale…well, take a look around! Scottsdale, aka Anywhere USA, is fast becoming Mish Mash Central, courtesy of people like John Berry. He could care less about the fall out in Scottsdale or Paradise Valley from initiation of these projects. He chooses to be emotionally numb to make the big bucks! He’s not a man, he’s an income-generating machine, operating at the expense of our citizens and our beautiful cities. Today’s Scottsdale is the aftermath of John Berry’s poorly executed, egotistical, self-righteous rezoning and development projects. Instead of graffiti strewn across our vacant city walls, the words JOHN BERRY HAS BEEN HERE would be more fittingly scrolled. The worst part about his projects is that he makes a bazillion bucks off of the stupidity of City Staff and Council. His dog and pony show is the SAME bland banter for every presentation. He conveniently inserts the new names of clients and projects in the page blanks. He cuts and pastes a few new pictures in between the pages. He always promises a new artistically fashioned project by "Taliesin trained architects" yielding "world-class design" with ample curb appeal. What the city ends up with is a pretty generic project where corners and construction budgets are cut, and deadlines are repeatedly extended. Costs are exponentially driven up, style is compromised, plans are changed midstream without so much as citizen approval, and yet Berry gets paid, time and time again, to sell. Once the project’s sold, he provides no warranty. The citizens inevitably pay the price for Mr. Berry’s success and the City’s stupidity. My hat goes off to the Paradise Valley Planning Commission for putting the kibosh on Mr. Berry’s big unrealistic load of manure. The Scottsdale City Council would be wise to take a lesson from Paradise Valley. Your approval of Berry’s nonsensical BS makes you all look like bigger buffoons that you already are in the eyes of the citizens. Stay your course, PV. Take the "showman" down. You have my absolute support! Kym Justy
~ Special News Report from San Francisco SAN FRANCISCO Third Street seeing streetcars Test runs for light-rail project begin at last Rachel Gordon, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, July 26, 2006 The San Francisco Municipal Railway’s Third Street light-rail project is more than a year behind schedule and $120 million over budget, but at last streetcars are rolling through the oft-neglected neighborhoods of Potrero Hill, Bayview, Hunters Point and Visitacion Valley – only without any passengers yet. The new Muni Metro route, officially known as the "T-Third,’’ is in the testing stage. Muni officials hope to open the service on a limited, weekend-only basis in January. The official opening is set for April 7. "That’s going to be the date – without fail,’’ said Nathaniel Ford, executive director of the city’s Municipal Transportation Agency, which runs Muni. That’s a bold statement for a Muni bureaucrat, especially given the history of the $667 million light-rail project – one that’s been hit with construction delays and skyrocketing costs. The start date has been pushed back more than once, first from the winter of 2005 then to the winter of 2006, and now to next spring. Local sales-tax revenue set aside for transportation projects funded most of the project. The cost, already beyond the original estimate, could balloon even higher, officials warn. -30- Submitted by a concerned and informed Scottsdale resident |
~ City Upset with New Traffic Website???
It seems that I must have struck a nerve with someone in the City, so much so, that the newspaper's editorial staff had to discredit my website to save face.
The purpose of my website, as most people with "real world common sense" could discern, is to get the citizens involved in forcing the City to look for solutions to fix our transportation problems.
Everyone knows that the Transportation Master Plan study is limited and is targeting light rail as the only solution. Nowhere on my site did I say roundabouts are evil. In fact, I can't find any reference to roundabouts except a link to the Cactus Road project.
Anyone who drives on our roads knows that we stop at a lot of red lights, even the ones that lead to parking lots like Jackrabbit and also Lincoln.
Contrary to what the editorial states, I don't think it is my job to offer solutions, that is what the staff is paid to do.
Thank you to all of the great citizens who have emailed me and support the cause.
Sue Wood
www.Scottsdaletraffic.com
"Patriotism is as much a virtue as justice, and is as necessary for the support of societies as natural affection is for the support of families."
—Benjamin Rush
"You give me a credit to which I have no claim in calling me "the writer of the Constitution of the United States." This was not, like the fabled Goddess of Wisdom, the offspring of a single brain. It ought to be regarded as the work of many heads and many hands."
-- James Madison (letter to William Cogswell, 10 March 1834)
~ Food
for Thought, Take it or Leave it
By Craig J. Cantoni
April 6, 2007
My hometown newspaper periodically asks me and other pundits to contribute to a sound-off feature in which we provide 100-word answers to a question posed by the newspaper.
For the most recent feature, the newspaper asked us if the city should spend taxpayer money to expand its performing arts center. I responded with these questions:
Should my neighbor pick up the tab for my
family’s many intellectual pursuits and leisure activities?
Should he buy an amplifier and other band
equipment for my son, and books, subscriptions, artwork, movie
tickets, hiking boots, and membership fees for various
social/intellectual clubs for my wife and me?,
If the answer is no, then why should my
family subsidize his preference for city-sponsored performing
arts?
Why is his preference more important than ours, and where does he get the right to take our money for his preference?
A tempest in a teapot? Not at all. To use another cliché, the city’s performing arts center is the tip of a huge iceberg. It’s the iceberg of the common good, and it’s an iceberg that is growing in spite of global warming.
Sticky-fingered subsidy seekers use "the common good" as their justification for taking other people’s money, whether they are hoity-toity patrons of the performing arts, beer-guzzling sports fans who attend games in subsidized stadiums, environmentally sensitive light-rail riders who receive an eight-dollar subsidy each time they board the train, or well-off retirees who send the bill for their medicine to future generations. It’s all for the common good and not for their own selfish good (wink).
In my hometown, auto dealers even convinced the city council to give them public money for advertising so that they wouldn’t relocate their dealerships to another city. It wasn’t extortion. It was for the common good.
There is so much common good at the national level that over 60 percent of federal spending, or over $12,000 per family, is money that is taken from some people and redistributed to other people in the form of handouts, subsidies, tax breaks, earmarks, and various kinds of packaged pork. Is this what the Founders meant by "the general welfare?"
What do the terms "the common good" and "the general welfare" mean? Shouldn’t we be having a national debate about this? Shouldn’t presidential candidates be asked to define the terms?
The more ambiguous a term, the more political mischief it causes. George W. Bush proved this with the term, "the war against terrorism." Hillary Clinton proved it with "It takes a village." And Barack Obama, who is the reincarnation of Rousseau, will prove it if he is elected on his platitudes, pedantry, bromides and sophistry about a social contract and the common good.
Is the common good whatever a majority of voters decide? If so, could the majority decide that it would be for the common good to confiscate all of the money of the minority?
That’s not a hypothetical question. Plenty of Americans believe that the estate tax is for the common good. What they really believe is that they have a higher claim to someone’s money than the person’s family has, and that the rights and property of the individual are secondary to the desires of the collective.
This will get me in trouble, but a similar "common good" argument is used to justify public education. People accept the argument without question and get extremely irritated and insulting if someone has the temerity to question the argument. Well, get your insults ready.
It’s certainly good for the populace to be educated. And it might also be good to make K-12 education compulsory and to subsidize the education of children who have the misfortune of being born to poor, irresponsible, drug-addicted, or mentally-deranged parents. But why is it for the common good for parents who can afford to pay the cost of their children’s public education to be subsidized by the 20 percent of Americans who remain childless all of 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 school. Clearly, it’s good for the recipients to be given other people’s money, but why is it good for the givers to have their money taken? Don’t the givers belong to the common good?
Please take a deep breath and let your intellect catch up to your emotions before responding. By asking these questions, I am not a mean-spirited, selfish person, or whatever pejorative comes to mind. Incidentally, that’s what the former dean of the Arizona State University College of Education called me when I asked him similar questions at a public forum. So much for intellectual discourse at the College of Education.
I’ll answer my own questions by offering a definition of the common good. The common good is those government services that benefit all people equally or as equally as practical, such as national defense and public safety, the cost of which are borne by all citizens equally or as equally as practical, within constitutional limits. The cost of services that benefit a select group, even if the group is in the majority, are not for the common good and thus should be charged to the beneficiaries in the form of user fees or targeted taxes. Exceptions can be made for the truly indigent and their children, but only if they do not have the physical or mental ability to support themselves.
If the common good were defined this way, George W. Bush wouldn’t have made his millions from subsidized baseball, my neighbor with the BMW and three kids in public school wouldn’t be able to take public education taxes from his neighbor with the Toyota Corolla and three kids in parochial school, patrons of the city’s performing arts center would pay the total cost of the center in the ticket price, government would shrink by at least half, and campaign contributions would slow to a trickle.
And that’s why politicians refuse to define the common good.
Mr. Cantoni is an author, columnist and founder of Honest Americans Against Legal Theft (www.haalt.org). He can be reached at
ccan2@aol.com.
~If you vote for a dupe, you’re a dope
By Craig J. Cantoni
March 23, 2007
On October 10, 2002, the resolution authorizing the use of military force against Iraq was passed by the US House of Representatives by a vote of 296 to 133. The next day, it was passed by the Senate by a vote of 77 to 23. A list of those who voted for and against the resolution can be found at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Iraq_Resolution_of_2002
Note that presidential candidate Hillary Clinton (D-NY) voted for the resolution, but presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX) voted against it.
Many of the 373 members of Congress who voted for the resolution are now saying that the war was a horrible mistake but that the mistake wasn’t theirs, because they were duped. In other words, they are admitting that they are dupes.
If you vote for a dupe, doesn’t that make you a dope?
It is inexcusable that members of Congress voted for the war and decided to send soldiers to their death without first:
- reading several history books on Iraq and the Middle East, especially those that detail the struggles and failures of the British and French armies to pacify and democratize their former colonies in the region;
- watching the movie "The Battle of Algiers," which shows in graphic detail the brutality of the Muslim insurrection against the French occupation and the brutal methods employed by the French army to quell the insurrection before eventually withdrawing; and
- holding hearings to listen to the testimony of noted historians, lower-level Middle Eastern specialists in the State Department, experts on the rift between the Sunni and Shiite branches of Islam, other experts on the animus between Persians and Arabs, and political-game theorists on the most probable outcomes of the war, especially what would happen geopolitically with the removal of the Sunni counterbalance to Shiite Iran.
Instead of taking the time and care to do the above, most members treated the resolution like any other piece of legislation--as an opportunity to grandstand, pander and score political points. (On a related note, members of Congress rarely read bills in their entirety before voting on them.)
At best, this was a dereliction of duty by the members. At worst, the members have blood on their hands. Either way, they don’t deserve to hold national office.
Only a dope would vote for a dupe. You’re not a dope, are you?
An author and columnist, Mr. Cantoni can be reached at ccan2@aol.com.
shoutandspout@scottsdaleactivist.com
~ The grass is now getting greener on the old Villa Monterey Golf Course. Is the city going to keep it green and mowed for us?
~ The medians on Scottsdale Road are supposed to be remodeled only to improve the aesthetic appearance of the roadway. That's all BS; it's to get the street ready for light rail or a street car. If you don't believe it you better swing back up on your tree branch and get a grip.
~I have watched, with earnest, as decisions are made at City Council meetings based upon requested advice from Debbie Robberson. As a legal professional, I have to say that I cringe every time that she opens her mouth! That woman is so far out in left field! Not only does she waffle when providing legal advice, but also she’s always trying to put out the fires, not prevent them. Why can’t she apply legal knowledge to the questions and give the Council members a straight answer? What is she hiding? Is Jan Dolan pulling her strings as is widely discussed and assumed? Or maybe Mayor Manross? I guess, in her case, you really don’t have to have common sense to be an attorney. Robberson should take note and recognize what’s going on here – Dolan and Manross are making her look like a complete FOOL. We really do need a new City Attorney who has some cajoñes!
~ Cultural Council needs more money? So do parks, libraries, and other city amenities used by almost every citizen while the "Artsy" stuff such as Symphony Hall, etc. is used by a select few. Let the the users start paying more of the bills the Cultural Council incurs, Let's start by asking Councilman Ecton for a hefty donation being that he believes so strongly in the program and will be, if not already, being able to afford to be living downtown in one of those million dollar condos enjoying the downtown venues.
~ OMG!!! Have you seen the drunks bouncing off the walls in the downtown area on Friday and Saturday nights? What a great advertisement for upscale, high end Scottsdale. They don't do too well with their cars either.
~Although I didn’t particularly like Randy Grant, he was smart enough to get out of the City’s hell-hole of employment before Jan Dolan ruined his reputation and life by making him look like one of her well-strung-up puppets. Are you listening Ed Gawf, Frank Gray and Roger Klingler??
~ Word has it that Mary and Larry Manross lost their landscaper because they demanded more and more work be done for less and less money to the point that Larry apparently cut down bushes or shrubs and expected the landscaper to haul it away free. Gee, would Larry and Mary do such a thing? Hey Mary! Don't you remember that the city of Scottsdale has a free service called the Brush Truck that comes by every month? Pay people what they're worth. You sure took good care of Jan Dolan who hasn't done "Jack" for the city except cost us millions of taxpayer dollars.
~I was so glad to see newspaper coverage on Sue Wood and her website www.scottsdaletraffic.com that I now proudly display a website bumper sticker on my vehicle. She’s really trying to get the true word out about traffic in Scottsdale and the lame plans that Dolan and O’Connor have to ruin our beautiful city! Dolan’s ad hoc personal transportation plan MUST be stopped NOW!
~If I were Chief Rodbell, I’d do a full investigation as to why my daughter was arrested and held at the jail without being legally drunk! Dolan hasn’t publicly stood behind Rodbell one bit during this fiasco – tells you what she thinks! Maybe Jan thinks that SHE can be Chief of Police in addition to city Treasurer and City Manager as well as maintaining Gestapo control over some other departments.
~ Hayden is finished north of Cactus. So now what are they going to do, tear it all up again to put in 2 more lanes spoken of in the Trib? More Dolan/O'Connor bad planning and waste........
~Calling all current City Council members and the three of you who are planning on running for re-election: JAN DOLAN MUST BE FIRED! If you make it happen NOW, pony up to the table with your FOURTH VOTE, then you are guaranteed re-election. DO IT NOW before Dolan completely ruins this city and we are unable to fix it in future years! GET SOME BACKBONE! FIRE HER!
~ The new "FireSky Resort and Spa" in Scottsdale is owned by a San Francisco company. Really? The name kinda says it all doesn't it? Go figure.
~ What has happened to the new organization I think was called COGS? We heard and read about the big splash, but it's been very quiet lately. Was Lisa Haskell right? Did it fold too?
~ Thanks for adding the Scottsdale Traffic website to the Scottsdale Activist. Great site. I'll bet Manross, Dolan and O'Connor are smoking mad.
~ Why hasn’t Raun Keagy replaced Judy Register as the General Manager of the Citizen & Neighborhood Resources department? After watching Register in action, Keagy saves her "bacon" time after time after time. Register has no clue about what’s going on in the department she is general manager over. Hello??? Anyone listening??? Anyone care?
~What is with that stupid Paradise Valley Water arsenic treatment plant in the Cattletrack area? It has been under construction since July 2005 and STILL is not done. According to John Berry, there was a timeline that would cost the company millions if the council didn’t approve the plans. That time has come and gone without any fine as well as the plans continue to change. I am getting really tired of all of that construction noise, dust and big trucks hauling materials around my area.
~Carla was rightfully removed from having anything to do with the Preserve and the city would be foolish, no, extremely stupid to hire her to do what she does(?). Carla has her own personal agenda for the preserve and it includes protection for current residents from any further addition of residential areas, and for her to remove much of the ability for the public access what we are just now starting to enjoy. My dog walks with me everywhere I go. Carla would put a stop to that too!! Preserve? YES! Carla? NO!!!
~We used to have a beautiful little artsy community at Cattletrack and now, the stupid City Council has gone and ruined it by listening to the "Maestro of Deception", John Berry. Another grand and greedy decision by Council without being fully informed about a situation and understanding the negative fall out from its implementation. Thanks a lot.
~ The cultural Council needs still more money? Fogetaboutit !!
~Thank you Scottsdale PD for keeping a close eye on illegally parked vehicles in our neighborhood. This past week, SPD tagged a car that had been parked on the street, in the same spot, on a regular basis. The PD had issued the owners’ of the vehicle a courtesy warning beforehand. We appreciate your follow up and action! Now, tow the vehicle before it grows permanent roots into the roadway!
~Does anyone know if we are going to get traffic cameras in the downtown Scottsdale area (like Indian School and Scottsdale Roads) for all those red light runners? I watched as tourists, in a crosswalk, were almost killed while crossing the street when three vehicles ran the red light downtown long after it had turned red – this is commonplace in that area.
This city is OUT OF CONTROL!!!!!! Someone, PLEASE HELP US! Start by FIRING Dolan and the City Attorney!!!!
~ As a resident who has strongly supported the Preserve over the years, I must now say that I will no longer support any more public sales or property tax dollars to finish a Preserve that should have been finished years ago. Carla has been part of the problem, but city meddling and cost overruns as well as other issues I read about in the media tell me that there’s been more going on with the money than any of us are aware of which needs to be cleaned up. How many dollars came from the General Fund when they should have come from Preserve tax dollars? The question, my friends, will NEVER be answered by Jan Dolan who conned the council in to giving her the job of City Manager as well as the City Treasurer position. Go figure.
~ So when are we going to see the 1st Amendment Lawsuit against the city of Scottsdale?
~ My, My, My. According to the Scottsdale Republic, the Planning Commission of Paradise Valley has figured out how the "magical" John Berry gets things done and have rebuked him, thereby stopping him and his Marriott project in its tracks! Gee, how stupid does the Scottsdale Planning Commission, DRB, and City Council look now? John Berry is paid big dollars to be a "Master of Disguise and Slight of Fact" when it comes to representing proposed projects. Take a look at what he SAID was going to be done versus what ACTUALLY was done on most projects he has presented. Huge Difference!!! The nasty tanks on Cattletrack are a prime example. But... Blame the city, not John Berry he only does what he's paid megabucks to do.
~ Thank you Paradise Valley for exposing, then expunging John Berry from your community.
Just click on the logos below to go to these websites.
Send our Brave Troops "Something from Home", Click on Links below.
Gathering of Eagles Website was launched 2/9/07. Click on the Logo above for more information on how they are protecting America's Memorials.
|
|
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 ~
|
The Scottsdale Activist is published, and edited in Scottsdale AZ ~ 480-326-2475