Hidden Letters: Rail, Bars, General Plan

From “YOUR VIEWS” in this morning’s Scottsdale Republic:

Yes, Cave Creek bull run is bull

I enjoyed reading your editorial, “Bull runs trample town’s reputation” in Monday’s Arizona Republic . In your own words, you ask: “At what point do you say, ‘Whoops’? Does it take some­one to get hurt or someone to die?” This is intelligent logic. As the mayor of Cave Creek said, “We’re not Spain.”

Apply the same logic to Scottsdale’s bar district. We’re not Las Vegas or New Orleans and people have died and been hurt. Bull runs and bars trample both towns’ reputations.

— Bill Crawford , Scottsdale

Voters nix transit, to no avail

I read Tom Silverman’s recent My Turn regarding rapid transit, better known as rail-lobby failure, and I couldn’t have said it better. The people have spoken over and over again, and the City Council majorities keep bring­ing this to a vote every few years — which, by the way, causes Scottsdale to spend over a million dollars — only to hear the people say no time and time again.

Scottsdale is a tourist destination. Visitors love the openness of the desert and the mountain vistas — which are rapidly disappearing, like our height restrictions on new buildings. We are watching destructive growth change the face of Scottsdale with contempo­rary square-box facades, over-devel­opment with apartment buildings, and these so-called modern-day thinkers want to bring rapid transit here. Kiss Scottsdale goodbye.

— Shirley Cordasco, Scottsdale

Mayor Lane has lowered the bar

In response to Mayor Jim Lane’s self-serving and uncivil attack on Coun­cilman Bob Littlefield, I offer my “pub­lic­ safety plan” for Scottsdale’s bar district. First, stop approving condition­al-use permits for new establishments in an area that is already saturated, in violation of basic planning principles.

Secondly, enforce the laws we al­ready have on the books regarding disorderly conduct, apply them to bar owners (as well as just drunks on the street) and revoke the existing condi­tional-use permits for habitual vio­lators. That is the reason the condition­al-use permit process was implemented in the first place.

Lane accuses Littlefield of wanting to close all the bars and restaurants downtown. However, the truth is actu­ally the opposite. Lane has never enter­tained even a minute’s worth of serious dialogue about conditional-use permit revocation. Lane wants to pass yet an­other ineffective law (remember the noise ordinance?) to provide him politi­cal cover for not taking real action against his campaign contributors.

— John Washington, Scottsdale

South Scottsdale shortchanged

Why haven’t Scottsdale residents flocked to city-sponsored meetings on the General Plan to provide their valu­able input? The unpleasant reality is that most residents aren’t enticed by something that they simply can’t relate to. Speaking on behalf of my south Scottsdale neighbors and fellow slack­ers, I can confirm that most of us are busy with jobs, raising families and a variety of duties that simply do not allow us the luxury of providing input at city meetings — input which has historically been ignored.

Residents understand the tangible far better than the intangible, like the General Plan. Poor transit, blighted neighborhoods — that they understand. Apparently an adequate connection has not been made between the two, or the only residents who do care are the ones on vacation.

— Lisa Haskell, Scottsdale