Volume
'07-22
Published
Late Saturdays
June 2, 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,
No Sponsor"
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, the USO Site, 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" Websites For Scottsdale Citizens!!! Just Click on the Logos below!!
|
Table of Contents Pick the Article in this Table of Contents that you wish to read, then Just Click on the title, there is no need to scroll the site to find what interests you. ~ Special Contribution by Councilman Littlefield ~ Weekly Editorial -- Staff ~ Guest Editorial by Jim Derouin ~ COGS Corner
~ The Land of Oz by Mike Merrill ~ Shout and Spout, Pima Road??? Chaparral ?? Cowards??? Derouin??? ~ Thought for the Week -- Cal Thomas ~ Quote(s) of the Week -- Various ~ Food for Thought - Take It or Leave It ~Other Stuff of Interest ~ Information You Can Use
~ Look up Prior Editions? Click a on date to open. |
~ Special Contribution by Councilman Littlefield
~ Council Honors Residents Request
Scottsdale neighborhoods won a big victory this week when we on the City Council voted 6-1 to take the option of condemning 50+ in Villa Monterey to widen Chaparral Road off the table.
Predictably the local papers have predictably criticized this decision, calling it "pandering to the neighbors." Imagine that, the City Council actually listening to and acting on the concerns of a neighborhood! How dare we do that!
Of course, that is exactly what we are supposed to do – city government is supposed to act in the interests of the residents, not destroy their homes to pave the way (literally in this case) for developers to make higher profits from more density. Not to mention that every member of the current Council promised during their campaigns to protect neighborhoods!
But the controversy over the potential widening of Chaparral Road is a symptom of a bigger problem in Scottsdale government, and that is the pathetic lack of planning at City Hall. Ask yourself this question: If Scottsdale were doing a good job of planning, would we ever have gotten to the point where would even be considering destroying established neighborhoods to put more traffic on Chaparral, Thunderbird and Pima Roads and tearing up Downtown Scottsdale to accommodate light rail? The answer is obvious.
Critics of the Chaparral Road decision accuse those Council members who will be running for re-election in 2008 of pandering to a bloc of high-efficacy voters. Frankly, I hope that these kinds of issues do dominate the 2008 elections. That is because, as I have said over and over again, the bottom line here is that Scottsdale's unique character and quality of life are under assault by special interests who seek to "redevelop" Scottsdale into a denser, more urban place in order to make more money.
The 2008 city elections may be our last chance to reverse this disturbing trend.
Councilman Bob Littlefield
bob@boblittlefield.com
With graduation, out of town guests, home renovations, some of us moving, and vacations starting, as well as a city council who can seem to make only one real decisions, we have shortened this weeks edition so as to not be too redundant.
We hope to be back up to speed next week if we can just get those little things that crop up, the Murphy's Law Stuff, to go away, and some out of town guests to decide to go home to happen on schedule instead of a week later. Maybe the 109o weather will speed up the process. Thanks for bearing with us.
~ Penny Wise but Pound Foolish??
After reviewing the City Council meeting concerning the widening of Chaparral Road, I think the residents have been badly had once again via their own request.
Stop and think about these issues:
The homes that were to be taken are getting older, and with age come more and more costly repairs, depreciation, and failures of the systems which keep the homes habitable.
These homes are set up for retired citizens and therefore young couples would never be part of the mix who might want to own one of them thereby reducing the buyer pool.
The access is much less than desirable due to the inability to easily access the street.
This street reportedly has 3 times the accidents of any other in the city, major or minor for the number of vehicles using the street based on usage.
To keep homes saleable, they need to be upgraded to meet the tastes of the purchasers which aren’t cheap by anyone’s accounting process.
These homes will continue to depreciate and become totally obsolete for future purchasers due to the enormous cost to refurbish the out of date design, water, electrical, and sewer systems.
Wouldn’t it make more sense to:
Have the city purchase the homes as they come up for sale at full, current market value at the time of purchase?
Rezone both sides of the street to Residential Service allowing doctors offices, legal offices, Insurance, and any other kind of service business to purchase the homes from the city to fully replace the taxpayer monies spent for acquisition?
Rezone from residential to residential service which would change the property tax rate from 10% to 16%, possibly 25% depending upon the use, as well as possibly adding some sales taxes from rentals and retail sales?
Allow some of the smaller homes to be cleared for parking for the new businesses?
Not increase the height or density in the area as well as resolving the street widening issue?
What the residents requested of the City Council is, in reality, a lose-lose situation for everyone involved, beginning in the near future.
Sure, the emotional issue is a major one right now, but the reality is that this question has been on the table for 17 years. Most owners haven't lived there that long and should have known what was planned when they purchased their homes. These homes are up to 50 years old and will continue to deteriorate due to their antiquated design and lack of room to expand. They could conceivably become the slums of the future, or worse than that, after they have hit rock bottom price wise, they will become the object of an assemblage by developers to again try to increase the density and height in the area while still widening the road which is just where we started isn’t it?
What it really boils down to is that the City Council majority in acquiescing to the current requests and desires of the residents while trying to make an honest and proper decision for the entire city, have in the long run, screwed over everyone once again due to lack of foresight and for failing to wait for the transportation report to be delivered.
Unfortunately, the homeowners on Chaparral Road between the Safeway strip center and Miller Road have been and will continue to be the biggest losers of all. They can’t see the forest for the trees and it's coming at them like a run away train on a down hill run.
Everyone forgets that the Council decision is only as good as it was for that evening, the council can change their minds at anytime they want just as they do on a regular basis on many other issues.
Another question that begs an answer is; Why didn't the council wait for the Transportation report which is due in less than 2 months before making such a critical decision?
Again we hear the stomping of the monster feet of big government trying to take homes or widen Pima Road come Hell or high water.
The Tribes don't want to give up any more land and the residents along Pima don't want to lose their homes or hear any more noise than they do now..... just as the sentiments were in the 80's and 90's.
If we remember correctly, we were promised that the freeway would be built below grade through Scottsdale to hold down the noise and reduce the effects on our beautiful views and the ambiance of the Sonoran Desert. The only place it was actually built below grade was in the more affluent area between 90th street and Raintree. Everywhere else, it is not just at natural grade but above grade which accentuates the noise level even more than it would have at natural grade despite the new rubberized asphalt now installed. The residents in both the north and south didn't get what was promised and now put up with excessive noise that wouldn't be there or would be reduced considerably if the promises had been kept.
The problem boils down to this: Apparently ADOT and MAG as well as the "Exalted City Leaders" of Scottsdale want to use Pima as a relief valve for the SR 101 freeway to expedite the movement of traffic through an area that will be further congested by traffic generated by the new commercial developments on both sides of the freeway on Reservation land.
If the expansion of Pima Road is to be used to expedite the traffic flow from the new commercial developments, why not build a new road in the middle of the new development (as it is at Chaparral) bringing traffic to the current freeway ramps instead of again causing severe strife with property owners in Scottsdale as well as Tribal members.
Scottsdale doesn't receive any benefit from these new commercial developments and therefore Scottsdale residents should not have to suffer because of them.
~ Councilman Ecton's
Public Comments
If Councilman Ecton really believes the BS he's trying to sell the residents of this fine city concerning increased traffic in the downtown area, he has a serious problem with perspective and understanding what he voted for as a councilman which doesn't surprise any of us at all.
For anyone to say that the new high rise and high density buildings and condos as well as new the retail businesses being developed in the downtown area don't affect traffic, they must be smoking "Funny Stuff". A child in grammar school can see past that nonsense by simply opening their eyes and their nose, which will quickly start smarting from the extra pollution generated.
The parks are improving, not because of the city council or city staff attention, but because of residents raising all kinds of heck about the condition they were in with little to no attention being given to their poor condition prior to the massive complaints.
This all coming from Ecton, a guy who just has or will move into one of those new, ultra expensive, downtown Scottsdale Condos and who reportedly brags publicly about shutting off the water to an African town to get what he wanted from them to benefit the mega million dollar company he worked for; .......and we've elected this guy.... twice?
~ We Were Promised............
When the voters approved the sales tax increase to complete the Preserve, we were promised that this would be the last time the voters would be asked to add any more money to fund the Preserve.
So much for political promises by the mayor and her band of legacy hungry thieves.
The voters overwhelmingly supported the Preserve on all but the last tax election which asked for still more money. The last one was a squeaker because promises had been made then too, but not kept.
We are very understanding of and in deep sympathy with the residents in the north not wanting any more population just as we in the remainder of the city are fighting high rises and ultra high density which this administration is desperately trying to shove down our throats to use the increased tax revenues to balance a budget they destroyed and is so far out of balance, it is no longer a laughing matter.
That being said, the southern portion of the city has literally paid for the vast majority of the Preserve as it sits today and the voters we hear from are saying they will not support any more tax increases or bonds to "finish the Preserve" which the last tax increase was touted to do.
Suggestions for the Preserve completion are as diversified as are the problems to complete it:
-
Stop it where it is and consider it complete.
-
Sell all land which has less than a 15 % slope and rezone it as 5 acre single family residential with a maximum height of one story from upper portion of natural grade with money from the sales to be used to complete the Discovery Center and the Gateway access.
-
Use what funds, if any, remain in the pipeline from the sales tax to build the Discovery Center and the Gateway and call it completed.
-
Sell some of the city owned land in the north, rezone it for restricted development, and use the money to complete whatever that money can buy or do.
-
Set up a special taxing district in the north with those areas/subdivisions bordering or potentially bordering the Preserve being the taxed properties that would guarantee the completion of the Preserve and the removal of all available land that could be developed into residential areas from ever being purchased for development purposes.
We think that the last option would probably be the best and most equitable of those suggested to date because we too would positively like to see the Preserve finished but not at the cost of other city programs or services. Under the last plan, the north will be adding the last amount needed to complete the Preserve which would make their contribution close to or equal that of the south and central areas over the years that the completion of the Preserve has been a city wide goal.
Isn't it time to get serious and therefore realistic about the what, where, why, and when concerning the Preserve completion and the money to fund it while preserving city programs and services at respectable levels as well as the very important rural ambiance in the northern areas of our city?
~ City Doesn't Follow Own Plans
It's been very interesting following the developments or lack thereof of the properties that were condemned for specific uses in the downtown area but not followed. Specifically speaking, the piece of property where Horseshoe Falls is located.
Not surprisingly, the bullheaded city manager and planning director Frank Gray, with the help of a very cooperative and malleable city attorney have taken what was supposed to be, and done something totally different with it.
What do citizens have to do to get a fair shake at city hall? Kiss someone's backside twice a day, 7 days a week? It would sure appear that is the case.
"Preferred" developers and former city council members, etc. have a set of swinging doors at the city with approval written all over them while an honest but determined man with everything laid out per the city rules and regulations is shunned, lied to, put off, given phony information, and basically given the short end of every stick.
Dolan and company have done everything in their power to stop this citizen from making a very worthwhile and needed addition to a critical area of the city which meets all city criteria including the general plan which they tout all the time, until they changed it that is in this specific case, at the Horseshoe Falls property.
Instead, they are going ahead with the installation of a pumping station which will serve the new condos at the cost of city tax payers, not the condo developers. This piece was supposed to have entrepreneur style retail to compliment the area near Horseshoe Falls, but no, we can't allow this specific property owner to do anything reasonable even though he has met the specific criteria to the letter.
There are 2 other city owned locations which could have easily, and for a lot less cost to the taxpayers, been used instead. But no, they have a personal vendetta against this citizen and want to stick it to him and twist it while they are at it.
Why did they give away some of these properties to other citizens including a former council member and a bar owner when they brought their lawyers on board but wouldn't deal with this guy when he decided he would trust the city and take them at their word.
This is going to come back and bite the taxpayers of this city because of the Gestapo type actions of this city manager and her staff.
~ Guest Editorial by Jim Derouin
I read with interest the comments by Rick Kidder, the President of the Scottsdale Area Chamber of Commerce, in the May 20 edition of the Scottsdale Tribune in which he said that my candidacy for mayor, if it should occur, would create an "Us vs.Them" race.
Inasmuch as I've never filled out a candidate questionnaire from the Scottsdale Chamber, I have been trying to figure out how it is that he, and apparently the Scottsdale Area Chamber, has already, 18 months before the election, determined they are opposed to my candidacy.
This raises several questions:
Did Mr. Kidder identify who "us" is? Is it the Scottsdale Area Chamber? If so, it can't be because I'm anti-business because I am not. After all, I've represented business and developer interests for almost 40 years.
Did Mr. Kidder identify who "them" is? Could he mean Scottsdale taxpayers? To the extent that I represent them, I plead guilty.
Let me say that I know Rick Kidder. He is a fine person with a tough job. He is obligated to do and say what he is told to do and to say; thus, his statements cannot be held against him personally. However, I've thought back through the last several years and tried to figure out why the Scottsdale Area Chamber has already decided who to support for mayor next year.
I've taken very few positions so it is hard to figure out why Mr. Kidder and his organization are so resolute. But here are a few thoughts that come to mind:
Although I am open minded on the light rail issue, I do not agree with Mr. Kidder's proposal to rip up Old Town for a light rail route. If the Scottsdale Area Chamber wishes to make a specific proposal for which part of Old Town should be torn down, how property owners will be compensated for the value of their property, how remaining retail merchants will be compensated for losses during the disruption caused by construction and how light rail will be paid for, I am willing to listen. But being open minded is apparently insufficient. Mr. Kidder apparently wants total allegiance to his proposal to rip up Old Town and to build light rail right up Scottsdale Road regardless of cost and regardless of consequences.
Although I have supported a massive upgrade of McDowell Road to make it a genuine destination and more user friendly for all merchants and neighbors, I did oppose the Scottsdale Chamber's proposal to give tax dollars to car dealers. I don't apologize for that position; I think most voters would agree with me--if they had been given the chance to vote on the issue.
Although I support targeted subsidies with the likelihood of a realistic pay back, I did not support giving away $130 million+ in tax funds to convert Los Arcos to a non-property tax generating office park and apartment complex, with a 200 year lease, that will never pay back the subsidy. The Scottsdale Area Chamber made every effort, unfortunately successfully, to prevent voters from having a say on this giveaway. I don't apologize for my position--particularly now when the City has acknowledged that, as I predicted, it doesn't have enough tax revenue to fund all its programs. If the City would stop giving away its tax revenues, it wouldn't be in this situation.
Although Rick provided no support for the effort, I did support the adoption of an Ethic's Code by the City to change the "business as usual" attitude at City Hall. Mayor Manross was initially against the proposal. Maybe this is what has the Scottsdale Area Chamber upset.
And although Rick opposed the idea, I proposed that all subsidies over $1 million dollars be subject to voter approval. Maybe that is what has the Scottsdale Area Chamber upset.
In short, I'm perplexed by the fact that Mr. Kidder, and the Scottsdale Area Chamber, have already decided who they are going to support--without a fair and balanced consideration of who the candidates might be.
Merely because I oppose the Scottsdale Area Chamber's policy of "no subsidy too big, no building too high," this is no reason to be jumping to conclusions and to adamantly support more of the same.
It’s time for someone to speak out for the return of common sense to City Hall and I don't apologize for doing so--on behalf of "them."
Jim Derouin
Scottsdale
~Letters to the Editor ~
letters@scottsdaleactivist.com
It was a privilege to sit at the Council Meeting this past Tuesday and see the fruits of outreach, cooperation, collaboration, and indeed, lots of effort and respect of and for it all, come to fruition.
All too often the well managed efforts of so many to weave the strands of the fabric of our city and its citizenry do not bear positive results and over the past months of so many people’s efforts you all have done just that.
Bravo! and Kudos to all concerned.
Rita Saunders-Hawranek
Scottsdale
~ Another Smart Solution for Chaparral Road
I am not sure what the logic is behind making any decision on Chaparral Road prior to the final study is presented, but as the say...Whatever !!
I do not think the 55 homeowners realize they are actually the losing side of the 1300 plus named petitioners. They are being sold out. All the other 1245 owners want is to maintain the same or better existing buffer. The other 55 will be stuck with continually increasing traffic and declining values.
If condemned, they would no doubt fight for and win a sales price higher than the depressed free market. Add to that no commission and a probable $20,000 relocation benefits, and they could be $50,000 ahead. I’ll bet not one of the 55 owners are thinking this situation out clearly.
If my concept of the city reselling the condos to a developer for a rezoning to Service Residential was considered, the city would get a majority of the acquisition money back, get the four lanes needed, the 1245 would still have a buffer, while the 55 owners would get rid of homes that will be forever burdened with its permanent reputation for impossible traffic and depressed values.
Maybe something to think about ??
Richard A. Funke
Scottsdale
~ COGS Corner
Several citizens have asked for the text of my comments at the Council meeting Tuesday night.
We at COGS are very disappointed in our "representatives" on the Council, who seem more and more these days to be representing developers and business interests instead of we the people who elected them. These comments were hastily written right before I delivered them, but I believe this was pretty close to what I said:
"The members of the Coalition of Greater Scottsdale and the organizations those members represent strongly support the City Council’s ORIGINAL decision in the matter of the SonRise Church school permit application, and we will continue to support that original decision.
"What is before you tonight is not a settlement. A settlement hast benefits to both parties. This is a capitulation.
"This is not an issue of religion. This is about a for-profit school.
"This is not about policy. Policy is clear, consistent, and respectful to all citizens.
"This is yet another deviation FROM policy in favor of case-by-case land use decisions made by the seat of our pants. Repeated deviations from sound policy BECOME the policy.
"Under this new, de facto policy, ANY organization can veil itself in religious garb to obtain similar or even MORE substantial land use concessions.
"Congregations throughout our City conduct worship in HARMONY with their neighbors, and with RESPECT for the land use policies that exist to facilitate harmony.
"There have been NO substantive changes to this proposed project since your earlier decision to deny the use permit. The Coalitions of Greater Scottsdale supports that decision and we urge you to vote ‘NO’ on this proposed settlement."
John Washington, COGS Chair
480.229.1831
~
Items from the Land of Oz
by Michael Merrill
Well tonight I sat at home and watched the supposed leaders of Oz make a decision, 17 years later, to not widen Chaparral Road and to not do anything to induce traffic volume increases.
17 years later, the Transportation Department, and no criticism to Mary O’Conner, managed to come up with an answer to not only a 17 year old problem, but a problem they had no solutions for prior to this great study.
Now, here is something that came out in discussions that night that were hilarious to watch, other than Councilman Ron McCullagh.
Councilman Wayne Ecton had to come off as the funniest man on the council when he exclaimed that "the increase in downtown development is not the cause of all of these problems."
Now, with respect to Councilman Ecton’s comments in the paper of no name calling, but rather, "discussion", I have to wonder two things.
Can he come up with any documented proof that was not brought to us by staff to give his comment any weight to not calling him names?
If he can not come up with valid documentation that proves his point, then should he learn to live with his comments and decisions in the future up-zoning battles to come with people calling him names?
Yes Wayne, this is an open invitation to respond because I know you read the Activist and maybe you should be asked to explain your comments (not suggested) or provide the proof (suggested).
Next in the Land of Oz commentaries from our supposed leaders came from Council Woman Drake.
Now, Ozite Betty made the comment that downtown is the place best suited for increases in density, and up-zoning.
So, not to ridicule Betty, but to make me understand her comments as a consultant, my interpretation of her comments would be as follows.
I think Downtown is the place to add height, density, transportation problems, infrastructure upgrade costs, and congestion that flows into the communities that were here first with little regard other than that they look pretty or the word we all hate anymore "visionary".
I believe this on the basis that under the circumstances that we have a Downtown Plan that is over 20 years old and has been outdated the minute the city removed the Redevelopment Designation and actually before that.
I believe this on the basis of the fact that we are going to be updating the General Plan before long and that the present "Plan" is sufficient reason to allow up-zoning and changes that add to those above problems, so I will continue to approve these projects based on the fact we have no plan, no studies, no guiding factors in long range impacts, the very real possibility that we will have to do a Bond to fix the problems, so I have no problem with building on new Downtown that will impact mature communities with no thought or planning.
Thanks Betty, please also feel free to respond to the activists of the city with any rebuttal you can bring forward and please remember that many of us are open for new development, but planned development and meshing of communities and at the minimum, a plan.
In Oz, we also would like that in writing, not that it seems to carry much weight.
Since I am saving Ron for another section, I guess we should focus on Councilman Jim Lane and his comments and actions as he poised himself to appear to be a "protector of communities."
Fact is, Jim made a common sense decision based on the fact that there were no drawbacks to removing the issue of widening so he was politically safe.
You have to keep your eye on Jim and maybe he sees opposition to his run for whatever he runs for, and maybe he thought that some of us were stupid enough to fall for it?
Well Jim, just to let you know, you are not the first one to try this and we caught on to it along time ago.
You watch, Jim will side with upcoming re-zoning issues, height increases, density increases, congestion problems, and infrastructure costs as opposed to community protections and being able to follow a plan, as there is none Jim.
As a matter of conclusion in the Land of Oz, you can count on all three of these council members to approve all of these upcoming projects and up-zoning issues with open arms, poor excuses as to why they must vote for it to the mature communities, and without one damned plan in place for the present, or the future, and don’t bring up the 20 year plans in any response if any of you who "may" decide to respond.
And the Wicked Witch makes 4!
Well a Tornado passed by today and whisked us off to another land of adventure, and I think it was a light rail car?
We landed in Whosville tonight and all the Who’s were watching something on TV. We walked over to find them playing re-runs of the Land of Oz Council Meeting regarding Chaparral Road and Councilman Ron McCullagh, standing as the lone dissenter to anything.
They were laughing because they said Ron was to clueless to figure out all he had to do was to vote with the majority who voted to remove an option that was already deemed dead even if the Study was not completed and even had no impact on the "study".
Instead they said, he decided to stand on some unknown basis of illogic and shear stupidity if he is indeed planning to run for the Oz Council again.
Personally I think they were correct.
If you had any chance of being considered realistically for another run to "think" you rule The Land of Oz Ron, that one had to be a kicker.
Don’t hold that one against me Ron, you had that one coming and even the Who’s agree.
Welcome to the newer shill of the local Government
I would like to induct the butt-nugget of the month award to non other than Robert Leger for his inept perception of the Pima Road issue and yet again another "opinion" he makes with little research or investigative reporting procedures.
Besides the fact I know more about this city than he ever will, he laments about a study that is the same thing they gave us before, which by the way was rejected then by both sides of the road and still is today.
Leger's comments about funding are so off base it is not even funny as those were dollars from 2002 and it is 2007.
Leger neglects to tell his reading public that the plan is to dump 101 traffic on the Pima road as the plans show a direct route to the famed ignorance of the 1 lane off ramp from the 101 to the 202 west bound ramp at Hayden and if that gets backed up Tempe should be excited about the created congestion this will cause for them.
Of course Leger tries to play this off as a problem from the Indian Community developments and will not tell folks that the real plan is to destroy an 8 mile section of communities so he does not have to sit in traffic when it backs up.
Personally I think Leger spend to much time sucking up to the Wicked Witch of Oz (Mary Manross)and one of the evil villains of Oz disguised as a Chamber of Commerce.
Therefore the award of butt nugget of Oz goes to Robert Leger of the Oz Republic and his stupidity in thinking he can make this fiasco sound good.
"I am not robbed by people who have more money than I. I am robbed by a government that wants to penalize my industry and give increasing portions of what I earn to people who do not emulate my principles, morals and ethics... We once taught our young people the virtues of hard work, saving, personal responsibility and accountability for one’s actions, chastity before and fidelity and commitment in marriage, honesty, integrity and virtue—not to mention the Ten Commandments (especially the one about not coveting that which belongs to your neighbor). We now teach them entitlement, victimhood, class envy and rights to other people’s money."
—
Cal Thomas
"Entry into this country—either as an immigrant or a visitor—is a
privilege, not a right. The safety of our citizens must come before
the comfort and convenience of foreigners."
—Michelle Malkin
"Heroes aren’t athletes who set new sports records or Hollywood actors who make ‘daring’ films, or politicians who make bold promises. Heroes are people who place themselves at risk for the benefit of others."
—Oliver North
"We’re the land of the free for one reason only: We’re also the home
of the brave."
—Peter Collier
"Compromise is incessantly praised, and has produced the proposed
immigration legislation. But compromise is the mother of complexity,
which, regarding immigration, virtually guarantees—as the public
understands—weak enforcement and noncompliance."
—George Will
"Whose problem is the immigration bill in Congress supposed to solve? The country’s problem with dangerously porous borders? The illegal immigrants’ problem? Or politicians’ problems?"
—Thomas Sowell
~Shout and Spout ~
~ Lisa Haskell’s letter in the Trib was entertaining at best. Obviously she seems to have forgotten that she personally collected petition signatures in the referendum drive to try and force SkyFlop to a public vote. What else has she forgotten concerning her plethora of "activist" activities on both sides of the fence on any single issue or candidate over the last few years, or didn’t she consider those "Activist" activities?
~ It's good to see Nan Nesvig out and about. It looks more and more that she is serious about running for council. Do you know when she will announce her candidacy? Editors Note: Candidate packets with all new rules and regulations will be available in July as we remember.
~ I've only lived in Scottsdale for 5 years but have come to see the real need for some kind of a voting district plan. This, what they call an "at large" council, is nothing more than a good old boys and girls network which is in place to protect itself and needs to be stopped. I'd vote for some for of a voting district plan based on population.
~ Who does Rick Kidder think he is? How can he make such outlandish statements about what Scottsdale businesses need when he doesn't represent most businesses in Scottsdale? I'm sick and tired of his incessant and ridiculous blabberations about what we want. I think he needs to find a dark place to shove light rail, high density, urban high rise, and anything else that has to do with any of it. I see what has happened to the small businesses in Phoenix and I don't want to be in their position-Broke and out of business!! Drive Jefferson if you want to see what light rail and the stupid wire web and urban high density looks like.
~ Again they are trying to nail us with a widened Pima Road. Over my dead body!!
~ Amazing isn't it? The owners of the homes on Chaparral didn't know they'd been taken advantage again of and the Council didn't know how dumb their decision was.
~ How can Councilwoman Betty Drake be involved in a resort that is located in both Phoenix and Scottsdale without being in violation of the Scottsdale City Ethics Code?
~ I live in the neighborhood next to Pima and I can tell you that anyone trying to widen Pima will find out how rabid my neighbors are about either leaving Pima alone or bulldozing it away altogether. Get a clue, don't mess with the owners in Park Scottsdale.
~ Lisa Haskell reminds me of an Africanized Bee; she flits from cause to cause leaving it and back biting it when it doesn't do what she thinks it should do.
~ I used to have a great deal of respect for Councilman Jim Lane. What has happened to him? Has he forgotten who brung him to the dance?
~ Congratulations to all of the high school graduates. Be smart and wear your seat belts and leave the booze and drugs alone. You don't need to die before you even get your first real job, girl friend, or start college.
~ When are we going to hear more about Mr. Derouin who is mentioned in the Shouts and Spouts from time to time as a possible Mayoral candidate? Editor Note: Mr. Derouin is the author of our Guest Editorial this week.
~ The residents of the homes on Chaparral don't seem to understand that as wishy-washy as this council is, the breeze can blow the other way next week and they will again reverse their position; if they don't, the next council will.
~ Bring Districting back to the ballot. We need it more now than ever. I didn't support it last time but definitely will if it can be put back on the ballot.
~ Enough nonsense: tear Pima Road into oblivion and make it a pedestrian walk or a bicycle path out of it. Just think, a quick way to the Tempe Town Lake as well as a way to help quiet the noise coming from Pima and best of all, save tons of taxpayer dollars.
~ Another bright young man lost to his failure to wear a simple seat belt. What a tragic loss which was totally preventable had he just listened to the promo's at his high school. God bless and comfort his parents in their time of unbelievable loss. Maybe it will wake up those who feel that because they are young, they are invincible and cannot be hurt or worse less, die for no reason.
~ The Chaparral decision was poorly thought out by the residents and to the councils credit, they listened, but to the questionable facts which cannot be verified as correct. Why didn't the council wait for the transportation report that we're paying way too much money for?
By Thomas L. Friedman
Published: May 27, 2007
Since my daughter is graduating from college today, I am thinking a lot about the class of 2007 and the world they are about to enter. I’m not sure what they call this generation. Is it generation "X" or "Y" or "Zero" or "Me"? Having taken part in two other commencements this season, though, and knowing enough about what my own daughter’s friends are doing, I can say there is something quietly impressive about this cohort. In fact, if I were giving them a label I’d call them the "Quiet Americans" — not in the cynical way Graham Greene meant it, but in a very positive sense.
They are young people who are quietly determined not
to let this age of terrorism curtail their lives, take away their hopes
or steal the America they are about to inherit. They don’t take to the
streets much — in part, I suspect, because they do a lot of their
political venting online. But it seems to me that they go off and
volunteer for public service or for military service with as much
conviction as any generation, if not more.
Four years ago, when my wife and I dropped our daughter off at college,
I wrote that I was troubled that I was dropping her off into a world
that was so much more dangerous than the one she had been born into —
and I worried that she would not be able to travel in the carefree way
that I had when I was her age. Her two summers teaching and researching
in India have cured me of that misapprehension. Now I know how my mother
felt.
"I don’t know where these kids find lepers, but they
find them and they read to them," said Stephen J. Trachtenberg, the
departing president of George Washington University.
"I’ve been a college president for 30 years, and these kids are more
optimistic about the future than any I have seen — maybe more than they
have reason to be," he said. "They still believe that the world is their
oyster and go abroad with abandon. Notwithstanding everything, they
remain optimistic."
In my previous column, I wrote about the number of
foreign-born students who are dominating graduate science programs at
our best schools, which I witnessed firsthand at Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute’s commencement. But something else struck me at
Rensselaer — the number of R.O.T.C. grads, including women, who came up
and collected their degrees in full dress uniforms. It was not only the
pride with which they wore those uniforms that was palpable, but also
the respect they were accorded by their classmates. I spoke to one young
man who was going from graduation at Rensselaer right out to sea with
the United States Navy. As bad as Iraq is, they just keep signing up. I
have been equally impressed by the number of my daughter’s friends who
have opted to join Teach for America. And that can-do-will-do spirit is
a good thing, because we will need it to preserve our democracy from
those who want to steal the openness and optimism that make democracy
work. When I graduated in 1975, the world was dominated by
interstate rivalries and conclusive wars. The class of 2007 is
graduating into a world of state-versus-gang wars and gang-versus-gang
wars that are often inconclusive. Look at the Middle East today.
You have gangs fighting states and armies in Lebanon,
Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and Gaza.
If the dominant clash of my generation was between communism and
capitalism, the dominant clash of this generation is between
"nihilism" — represented by suicide bombers who try to blow up
hope from New York to Baghdad — and "optimism" that a better
social and political order can be created, and therefore service
matters.
That’s why this generation’s willingness to continue venturing into the world, whether to repair it or do business with it, is so important. It is exactly the opposite of what the nihilists want.
"Triumphing over fear is the victory of the democratic citizen against the paralyzing effects of terror," the Israeli political theorist Yaron Ezrahi observed. "It has to be done, though, at the level of each citizen. Just as the violence has been fragmented, so must the victory over this violence be done one by one?
Leaders can help, but ultimately victory is about not letting the fear engendered by this new era paralyze you."
We have to hope, though, that the determination that
characterizes these Quiet Americans extends into their adulthood, and is
also shared by those who choose to be doctors, consultants, lawyers
and bankers. So many big problems are going to come due on their watch —
from underfunded Social Security to health care to climate change —
that the effort needed to fix them will require them to stay
involved, redouble their resolve and raise their voices.
~Keep it in your pants and be screwed by Hillary
By Craig J. Cantoni
May 31, 2007
It wasn’t eloquent, but it was effective. It was advice that my poor immigrant grandfather passed on to my working-class dad, who passed it on to me, and from me to my son: "Keep your weenie in your pants."
Granddad and dad used a more vulgar word than "weenie," but the message was the same: Don’t have children until you get an education and have the means to support them.
It came with other advice, such as these popular homilies of their generations:
A penny saved is a penny earned.
Waste not, want not.
Save for a rainy day.
A fool and his money are soon parted.
Then there was this sensitive, caring advice:
"If you don’t study, I’ll knock your head off."
Granddad and dad knew that the keys to getting to the middle class and beyond were to defer gratification, save money, and get an education. (They also had a wise distrust of government, politicians, unions, public schools, and banks, due to grandpa’s experience with the authoritarian and socialistic governments of Europe.)
Today, a large and growing segment of the population doesn’t know these things. As a result, 38 percent of children are now born out of wedlock, 30 percent drop out of school, and nearly half live in broken homes without a dad to tell them to keep their weenies in their pants and their ovaries in a lockbox.
Speaking of a lockbox, many Americans believe the government lie that there is such a thing as a Social Security lockbox, and, therefore, that the government will take care of them in old age.
There is much ado in the mainstream press about the widening wealth gap, but much silence about a major cause of the gap: men and women unzipping their pants, wallets and purses for immediate gratification instead keeping them zipped for a better future.
Hillary Clinton believes that the gap can be closed by "free" pre-K for kids and more redistribution and collectivism. It’s beyond me how people will learn to keep it zipped if they get rewarded by the government for unzipping it. Being married to someone with an indiscriminate zipper, Hillary should know this.
There is a high correlation between the wealth gap and the variables of out-of-wedlock births, single-parent families, and irresponsible behavior. Granted, correlation is not always causation, but in this case, the variables are indeed major causes. After all, why should people invest in their future and act responsibly if Hillary plans to take stuff from responsible citizens and give it to irresponsible ones? Similarly, why should people live frugally and build a nest egg if Hillary will use the tax code to take the nest egg and give it to spendthrifts? Hillary and her ilk call this social justice. I call it theft.
Speaking of frugality, I remember grandpa taking his lunch to work in a lunch pail, and dad taking his in a paper bag. The pail and bag included produce from their gardens.
To see the contrast between then and today, go to a convenience store in the morning. You’ll see working-class stiffs dropping $12 on designer water, lottery tickets, cigarettes, packaged food, and ice (can’t they make ice at home?). Then they climb into their high-rise pickup trucks after putting $50 of gas in the tank.
With virtually no impact on their quality of life, they could easily cut their convenience store expenses by $100 per week and invest the savings. After 30 years, through the magic of compound interest, they could have a nest egg of $350,000, which is about $250,000 more than the savings of the average American.
They don’t need to do this, however, thanks to the sap at the gas pump in the 10-year-old subcompact. He’s the one drinking a bottle of tap water from home and eating a bagel he brought from home and bought by the dozen at one third the price charged by the convenience store. Having lived below his means all of his life, he has considerable income from his sizable investments. According to Hillary, he is a selfish individual for not sharing more of his money with the guy in the high-rise truck who has lived beyond his means all of his life.
The moral of the story is this: If you keep your weenie in your pants, Hillary will screw you.
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.
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