In 2021, General Plan 2035 was approved by Scottsdale citizens, the first one in 20 years after previous unsuccessful attempts. This was accomplished with contributions from numerous citizens and visionary council members.
The current council wanted to make significant changes to GP 2035 and classify them as a minor amendment – which would only require four votes to overturn the will of our voters.
One stated justification was to comply with recent state legislative changes. However, in a last-minute news release, City Manager Caton stated “Because the focus is now on state statutes that the city is already in compliance with, there is no requirement or need for the City Council to initiate these changes.” Disaster avoided!
You must be a member to read this story.
Join our family of readers starting at $5 for your first month and support local, unbiased journalism.
Click here to see your options for becoming a subscriber.
Register to comment
Click here create a free account for posting comments.
Note that free accounts do not include access to premium content on this site.
I am anchor
Opinion
Bad policy decisions prevented in Scottsdale
Posted
By Betty Janik | Scottsdale
In 2021, General Plan 2035 was approved by Scottsdale citizens, the first one in 20 years after previous unsuccessful attempts. This was accomplished with contributions from numerous citizens and visionary council members.
The current council wanted to make significant changes to GP 2035 and classify them as a minor amendment – which would only require four votes to overturn the will of our voters.
One stated justification was to comply with recent state legislative changes. However, in a last-minute news release, City Manager Caton stated “Because the focus is now on state statutes that the city is already in compliance with, there is no requirement or need for the City Council to initiate these changes.” Disaster avoided!
This backpedaling by the city was largely based on Councilwoman Whitehead’s institutional knowledge of our General Plan and the law, which she shared with recently appointed City Manager Caton. Councilwoman Whitehead’s experience as she enters her seventh year on council proved invaluable in avoiding more bumbling by the council’s voting majority block.
The second justification was to comply with recent city council actions. This is totally inappropriate and a violation of our trust. I counted 196 changes to our General Plan which were not available until the last minute. Changes included replacement of words such as “incorporate” or “promote” with “encourage” or “consider;” redacting the words “sustainability” and “diversity” and completely removing existing policies and adding new ones. Equally repugnant was their classification of these modifications as “minor” when in fact they are major and an affront to our citizens. It is bad governance to let four council members upend our voter-approved Plan.
I applaud all the citizens who contacted City Hall and made their objections known.
We should all thank Councilwoman Whitehead for her persistence and fortitude.
Please send your comments to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here