Heath: Is Scottsdale about to step on a legal landmine?

I read a post recently on X (formerly Twitter) where (paraphrasing) the author was glowing about the recent election flipping the Scottsdale City Council majority to finally become in line with public opinion.

I assume the author did not realize the configuration of this year’s council is nearly identical to the one elected in 2022 – immediately after the horrible fight over the Desert Discovery Museum (which undoubtedly would have been a homerun for our tourist sector and city coffers). What changed the council members who were involved in that fight to become more open-minded afterwards?  Reality has a way of reshaping preconceived notions. 

What strikes me most about the configuration of the new council are the members who proudly highlighted their conservative credentials when they successfully ran for office. I don’t understand how a “conservative” could be against protecting private property rights. Like oil and water, those two things generally don’t mix.

Worse, essentially pledging to thwart approval of additional apartments in Scottsdale is a potential landmine for the city, because it could easily be deemed to be a premeditated obstruction to the transferability and value of commercial properties.  

There are 235,000 residents in Scottsdale. The City Council represents all of us, and preferably not by vote via the “Nextdoor Neighbor” app.

The Goldwater Institute has already threatened litigation against Scottsdale twice. From a Zoom call I recently sat in on, the Multifamily Homebuilders’ Association appears to be itching to pull the legal trigger, too.

Back to the election. I translate the signs posted around Scottsdale shaming Tom Durham for voting for apartments as saying, “we don’t want those kinds of people here.” The election is over, and it is clearly past time to take those offensive signs down.

Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at AzOpinions@iniusa.org.