JAN - 2 2002
<br />TOWN OF
<br />PARADISE VLY
<br />INDEPENDENT
<br />Paradise Vly, AZ.
<br />Cir: 6,000 weekly
<br />Resolves to becolne. involved in Town . issues
<br />Eead~r challenges other residents to do the .same
<br />: ,. I • • .' • " ' ' '
<br />Thirty years ago, when we .
<br />first moved to Paradise Valley, I ·
<br />frequently reassured out-of-state
<br />catalogue companies we ·did
<br />indeed have sidewalks and mail
<br />delivery.
<br />My parents, staid Easterners,
<br />considered our name of Town of
<br />Paradise Valley to be. "frivo-
<br />lous," possibly even sacrile-
<br />gious. . ·
<br />We have lived on the,. same
<br />street in the same house since
<br />we arrived. The palm trees my
<br />husband used to trim using a
<br />small ladder now sway gently,
<br />towering giants against bright
<br />blue skies.
<br />We saw the camels on Lincoln
<br />Drive move out, replaced· by
<br />houses and humans who wanted ·
<br />to enjoy this wonderful commu-
<br />nity we call Paradise.
<br />We watched the Town Hall
<br />grow from a small building into
<br />JAN .. ~ ~996
<br />TOWNOF ._,_
<br />PARADISE VL Y
<br />INDEPENDENT
<br />Paradise Vly, AZ.
<br />Cir: 6,000 weekly
<br />a modem <;omplex to meet the.
<br />growing needs of all the people
<br />who elected to live in Paradise. ·
<br />What I did ·not do was get
<br />. involved in any way with the
<br />leadership of the Town.
<br />Although I always · vo~ in
<br />state and federal elections, I
<br />paid scant attention to our local
<br />government.
<br />After all, the Town did not
<br />directly provide schools, fire
<br />protection or trash collection.
<br />' What impact could the local
<br />Town Council make,on my fam-
<br />ily or my neighbors? ·
<br />· Thanks in 'part to the Town of
<br />Paradise Valley Independent, I
<br />have begun to recognize that
<br />local government is important to
<br />the present and future of or
<br />Town.
<br />Reading this weekly publica-
<br />tion presents me with a better
<br />understanding of the issues that
<br />may very well impact my fami-
<br />ly and the place I call home.
<br />How can I get involved?
<br />While I admire the courage of
<br />the run for public office, I do not
<br />wish to do that. While I could I
<br />attend every Town Council
<br />meeting, my schedule does not
<br />allow it.
<br />Yet I do want to have some
<br />input, even in a small way, ·on
<br />decisions that will alter the
<br />future development of my com-
<br />munity.
<br />· A group of residents have pre-
<br />sented a new option. They are
<br />organizing a citizen's forum for
<br />people who live· in Paradise
<br />Valley.
<br />They represent no single
<br />viewpoint or position but will
<br />provide the opportunity for resi-
<br />dents to voice their opinions as
<br />well as learn about the issues on
<br />the table for the Town Council's
<br />consideration.
<br />My resolutions for 2002
<br />. include the following: I will
<br />read the Town of Paradise .Valley
<br />·Independent regularly; I will
<br />attend the January 9th initial
<br />meeting of the citizen's forum
<br />and I will utilize the information
<br />. it provides to make inforined
<br />decisions when I vote in local
<br />elections. ·
<br />Those of us who love this par-
<br />adise have the responsibility to
<br />keep up-to-date on what is hap-
<br />pening. · , .
<br />We moved here becaus<e the
<br />Town is very special.
<br />It is up to all of us to nurture
<br />the unique characteristics whic,h
<br />made us come here in the first
<br />place.
<br />Judith Austin Kunkel
<br />'(owri of Paradise Valley
<br />.New Qrainage project IGA on supervisors' Jan. 3 agenda
<br />By Wendy Miller ·
<br />Independent Newspapers
<br />Will the third time be the
<br />cha·m for the Doubletree Ranch
<br />RoJd Regional Drainage
<br />Project? Or will it be three
<br />strikes and you're out?
<br />officials from Maricopa County
<br />review the intergovernmental
<br />agreement a third time, in this
<br />· case, the Board of Supervisors at
<br />their Jan. 3 meeting.
<br />$11.2 project, in which the
<br />county would pay 70 percent of
<br />the drainage project and the
<br />Town 30 percent.
<br />the project," said board. member
<br />·Shirley Long. "I feel insulted
<br />this has come back to us again."·
<br />The drainage project was
<br />designed to carry storm runoff
<br />from the Phoenix Mountains to
<br />the Indian Bend Wash via
<br />underground culverts down
<br />Doubletree Ranch Road.
<br />1997 to share the project costs.
<br />The Board of Supervisors has
<br />the final say over issues consid-.
<br />ered by the advisory board. · ·
<br />How its members will vote
<br />Jan. 3 is difficult to predict for
<br />many reasons. They include: I)
<br />the project's rocky history, and
<br />2) the IGA that will be present-
<br />Either · way, proponents and
<br />opponents of the project are hop-
<br />ing for some resolution after
<br />The heavily-debated project
<br />was twice turned down in 2000
<br />by the Maricopa County Flood
<br />Control Advisory Board.
<br />On Feb. 23, FCAB members
<br />voted 6-0 to pull out of the
<br />On May 23, the project went
<br />again before the advisory board,
<br />much to the chagrin of some
<br />members. The advisory board
<br />voted 4 to 3 against recom-
<br />mending its approval. .
<br />"I can't justify the money for
<br />Paradise Valley and the coun-
<br />ty entered into an agreem(!rit in See. IGA, Page 2
<br />ed Jan. 3 is a revision of the one
<br />voted down earlier and may be
<br />more favorable to supervisors.
<br />IIi a letter to the Paradise
<br />Valley Mayor Edward Lowry
<br />dated June 27,2001, Supervisor
<br />Janke Brewer stated that, "I am
<br />riot inclined to place this pro-
<br />posed IGA onto the Flood
<br />Control Board of Director's
<br />agenda over the loud objections
<br />of the Maricopa County Flood
<br />. Control Advisory Board."
<br />On October, however, Ms.
<br />Brewer told the Independent
<br />that "a new proposal which
<br />seems to be much more appeal-
<br />ing to everyone" was under con-
<br />sideration. ·
<br />. The revision, which will be
<br />presented at the Jal}. 3 meeting,
<br />changes the cost-sharing to
<br />60/40, with the county picking
<br />up the greater share. Additional
<br />changes were being examined
<br />by the Independent as press
<br />time approached.
<br />While interested parties are
<br />eagerly anticipating closure of
<br />the project, some opponents are
<br />upset by the timing.
<br />"It is totally inappropriate for
<br />Supervisor Don Stapley to put
<br />the Doubletree project on the
<br />Maricopa County Board of
<br />Supervisors' agenda before even
<br />being elected chairman (of the
<br />Board of Supervisors). The tim-
<br />ing of this, when we were all
<br />involved with the holidays, is a
<br />deliberate unconscionable polit-
<br />ical act against residents of the
<br />Town -an action taken to try
<br />to shut down the overwhelming
<br />opposition," said Liz Clendenin,
<br />a long-time Town resident and
<br />member of the Concerned
<br />Residents for the Preservation
<br />of the Town (CRPT). "We might
<br />expect these kinds of political
<br />machinations back on the
<br />Potomac but they have no place
<br />here in the Town. ·
<br />"Is this the kind of political
<br />environment we can expect from
<br />the lobbyist hired by the Town? If
<br />it is, it is a sad day indeed for the
<br />residents of the Town. The town
<br />council owes its residents better,"
<br />she continued. "It will be inter-
<br />esting to see what the council
<br />does in the event that the supervi-
<br />sors do approve the IGA. Is the
<br />From Page 1
<br />rumor true that the mayor plans
<br />to have it on the Jan. lO town
<br />council agenda?"
<br />If approved by the board of
<br />supervisors, the town council
<br />has the authority to place the
<br />IGA on its agenda as early as
<br />Jan. 10, providing it gives a 24-
<br />hour public notice.
<br />"We don't set the board of
<br />supervisors' agenda," said Vice
<br />Mayor Dan Schweiker. "There's
<br />only a vocal minority against'
<br />the project, a handful of people .
<br />who represent themselves to be
<br />larger than they are. We'll just
<br />have to wait and see.
<br />"If it is going to be on the
<br />agenda on the third, that's excit-
<br />ing. We want to move forward
<br />with the road," he added.
<br />JAN 0 7 2002
<br />THE TRIBUNE
<br />NEWSPAPERS
<br />Mesa. AZ
<br />Cir: 106,228 Dly
<br />Not a time to do nothing
<br />about P.V. flood control
<br />W ater is at the very core of the history of the arid
<br />. . . Southwest And during the past 150 years,
<br />controlling nature's overflows has at times been as ·
<br />important as making sure we have enough ...
<br />Although water here is scarce, when it rains, our
<br />alkaline soil doesn't accept much water to soak into the
<br />earth; it runs off and collects into Washes-that can
<br />become raging torrents of briefly biblical proportions.
<br />Some folks in Paradise Valley-some ofthem
<br />long-time residents-don't recall or don't understand
<br />this. They plan to battle a $10.3 million flood-control
<br />project the Maricopa County Flood Control District says
<br />is vital to protect 180 homes from strong runoff from
<br />nearby mountains 3.!1d foothills. ·
<br />Unlike the massive Desert Greenbelt plan fot; mostly
<br />uninhabited areas of north Scottsdale that was correctly
<br />voted down by Scottsdale's council, at issue in Paradise
<br />Valley is an area that is already populated, an area where
<br />·structures have already been damaged by previous
<br />floods in 1972 and 1992. ·.
<br />Statements signed by 83 neighbors in the area stating
<br />their homes have never been flood-damaged is like a
<br />petition against stepped up police patrols saying one has
<br />never had his house broken into, or one against a new · ·
<br />fire station because one's home has never burned down.
<br />Here the public good....,.... and the protection of the
<br />public treasury from post-diluvian damage claims -
<br />justifies the cost and outweighs some inconvenience and
<br />affronts to aesthetics, which is the burden of the
<br />opponents' 'arguments .
<br />. :.: If disgruntled residents who oppose the plan can offer
<br />practical, affordable and more aesthetically pleasing
<br />alternatives, more power to them. But doing nothing is
<br />.. not a realistic option.
<br />)
|