Prescott's Development Dilemma
Ronald Reagan once commented on how the values of the Democratic Party had shifted when he said, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me.” Prescott, Arizona conservatives could easily apply that to Prescott. “I didn’t leave Prescott’s conservative, small town values, Prescott’s values left me.”
New Groups Claim to Fight for Prescott’s Conservative Values
You might have been led to believe that several new “groups” are fighting for conservative values, but you’d be wrong. Overdevelopment at the expense of residents isn’t a conservative value.
These groups are largely backed by recent California new comer Chad DeVries, aka, Chad Wade and Wade Chad, who makes his living as a real estate investor and developer. Perhaps that’s why he wrote an opposition argument against the protection of Prescott City’s open spaces in perpetuity.
Who else opposes protecting our open spaces? Chad’s allies and others who support poorly managed growth are Tony Hamer and Linda Nichols. Others include Linda Grey, Sherri Hanna and Michelle Hamer who are waging a campaign against targeted city officials.
What was the “sin” of these officials that provoked their wrath? Two of them didn’t vote for Sherri Hanna to fill a vacant city council seat. Hanna, a former government postal worker ran for county supervisor a few years ago and was resoundingly rejected by the voters. Her husband had been a Prescott City Councilman before his tragic death from downwinders. Sherri’s volunteer work is notable, but that doesn’t mean she’s necessarily the right person for the city council.
Unfortunately, Sherri and her friends have used tactics that have worked in their favor many times in the past in an attempt to destroy anyone they decide is getting in their way. She’s ambitious. Unfortunately, we have too many candidates and elected officials like that now. It’s time for government to be run more like a business, not a good old boys club for the Prescott elites.
How “Water Rights” Became “Water Privileges”
Growth is inevitable but out-of-control growth like Orange County, CA. and other California counties isn’t. It’s happening to Arizona and specifically, Prescott. Unfortunately, the recent session of the legislature passed a bill signed by the Governor that allows farmers to sell their water rights. The people most likely to buy them are developers. In addition to the influx of people fleeing California for the political safe-haven of Arizona, you can now add to that the housing needed to support 10 new plants being built here.
Four of the plants are artificial intelligence chip factories that use tremendous amounts of water in the cooling process. When asked the question ‘where’s all the water coming from to support these plants’ the only answer given was by one person. They’ll recapture the used water and recycle it. No mention of evaporation. The first plant is being built now near Lake Pleasant off the I-17. It’s projected that roughly 2,000+ housing units are being built to support just that one plant’s workforce. Many Taiwanese national are relocating here to support the plant.
Softbank has committed to Trump a $1 trillion investment in a robot factory that will be located in Arizona. The plans for this plant aren’t available yet, but it will no doubt require a large workforce and the housing to support it.
Intelligent Growth or Haphazard Development?
Growth is inevitable. Arizona is at a crossroads in that our growth going forward can be planned with lots of open spaces and services near to homes which will lessen the impact of city sprawl and its effect on the psychie of people. There are huge problems that need to be solved, hopefully before development loses its collective mind.
These are the same people who freaked at the idea of more bike paths and other good ideas in the General plan. A closer review of the provisions was a good idea. It’s largely a boiler template using leftist language, but what separates the plan from ideas are the lack of mandates, regulations, fines and force. Not all ideas in the plan are bad ones. Prescott’s status as a top tier mountain biking community and the growing popularity of electric bikes supports better bike lanes. As for the more odium ones, many are a result of mandates issued in the past by federal agencies. These will likely change as the Trump administration eyes reducing and minimizing government overreach and those sections of the plan will likely be void.
Prioritizing Problem-Solving and Smart Planning
At the top of the list of problems to be solved are the stretched healthcare resources, infrastructure like roads and highways, basic services (emergency, schools, shopping areas), water scarcity and groundwater depletion, construction labor shortages, habitant loss, changed drainage patterns, and regulator chaos and legal challenges. These problems pose the challenge of creating a delicate balance between the need for smart development and adequate planning - without the exploding taxes that will be needed to pay for much of it by our cities, counties and the State.
What does this have to do with Prescott? Its growth has been accelerating in the last several years and developers, current residents, “old time” residents and new comers are clashing. The city council in its foresight planned ahead and began buying parcels of pristine land to set aside for future generations.
Open Spaces v Parks
The developers and their friends want open space to be used for parks and other things. It makes sense because they don’t want to be required to provide those essentials in the tracts of endless houses that all look alike. Highway 69 through Dewy is a residents’ nightmare with small houses packed together next to the highway.
Another serious problem is the very real risk of fire. As Prescott packs more people in, evacuation is questionable. A California-like Pacific Palisades fired opens the question of how would Prescott evacuate a significant portion of its population? A quick analysis of local roads struggling to keep up with growth shows that it would be nearly impossible.
One cost effective, simple solution to fire prevention is to clear the open space land through grazing. Grazing keeps combustible fuel (primarily grass and weeds) from getting out of control. Chilton v the Center for Biological Diversity is a compelling story of how leftist agencies and NGO’s have attempted to destroy cattle ranching. It explains in detail how ranchers know the environment better than most environmentalists and grazing reduces fires.
However, too many developers aren’t interested in solutions.
Once there’s a workable plan with cost-effective solutions that the people of Prescott can adopt, then it’ll be time to consider changes to the Charter Amendment. To do otherwise puts the horse before the cart. In the meantime, be leery of people who make unsubstantiated claims, hide their identities under fake organizations whose intent it to feed you one-sided information, make promises they don’t keep (like releasing documents) and who clearly have a vested interest in the outcome.