Log in

Ortega: Scottsdale City Council should avoid interference in SB2 referral

Council action to thwart citizen referendum evades effort

Posted

Honorable mayor and honorable council members:

As you are aware, yesterday, the Southbridge 2 ownership voluntarily withdrew their appeal, which had been entered at the Arizona Supreme Court.

Accordingly, the Superior Court decision upholds the referral public right to move forward to overturn council action. Referral would overturn the split decision (4-3) which was taken by one council action that approved: Resolution No. 11660; Ordinance No. 4422; Resolution No. 15575; Resolution No. 11577; Resolution No. 11578; Resolution No. 11579 and Resolution 11649.

It may be that the Southbridge 2 ownership would voluntarily withdraw from the development agreement, as enacted by council on Dec. 4, 2019. Or SB2 entities might dissolve, merge, or attempt to sell their zoning interests. They have repeatedly, stated publicly, that SB2 ownership would do everything possible to prevent a public vote.

Apparently, SB2 ownership has requested that the council consider council action to repeal the enacted ordinances and resolutions, in their attempt to avoid the referendum all together.

The 4-3 split council decision, combining several statutory actions, was enacted with one vote. Reconsideration by a council member (on prevailing side) expired at 9 p.m. on Dec. 5, 2019. Enactment was suspended by referral petitioners within 30 day, as validated by the court.

Council action vested both city-owned land and SB2-controlled property, according to Arizona Revised Statute Zoning processes:

  1. Approved re-zoned -- blocks A, B, C, and D Type 1 & 111 zoning including waiving stepbacks, setbacks, height and density concessions.
  2. Approved re-zoned -- block D (Rose Garden) city-owned property was up-zoned. Approved block D shows excavation of Fifth Avenue.
  3. Approved abandonment -- alleyways and some public right-of-way, city property was also up-zoned Type III.
  4. Approved high density dwelling unit count above 50 units. Approved at block B 21 stacked dwelling units with no on-site parking.
  5. Approved simultaneously, termination of Rose Garden 2005 agreement and immediate sale of Rose Garden public parking property.
  6. Approved the development agreement allowing the SB2 ownership to sell their position with significant vested up-zoning.
  7. Approved the SB2 developer to purchase the Rose Garden with the option to sell their position.

Except for the development agreement and Rose Garden sale, all of the above were transacted by zoning application, staff review, public notifications, Planning Commission hearings, posted continuance and final council action.

The council cannot unwind a standing ordinance (one vote) which relates to the re-zoning of multiple parcels and multiple property owners, without going through the entire zoning procedure. Council might accept the termination of SB2 development agreement, but council action, vested the said properties with up-zoning and waivers.

To “unwind” the above, each ordinance and resolution would have to be transacted separately, a nightmare.

The council should step aside, not interfere, and allow the referral to go forward for a public vote as scheduled. The Scottsdale citizens remanded the council decision to the voters. Any action to thwart the referral would circumvent their rights.

Editor’s Note: David Ortega is a resident of Scottsdale and former City Council member.