This referendum against the Ellman project has to rank in the top three stories that I simply don’t understand after covering local news for 25 years.

It might even achieve the ultimate “number one” highest ranking of questionable ideas I’ve witnessed. I just don’t get it.

If the idea is to bring a worse development to town, or show spite to a developer or a Town Council, then it’s a brilliant and winning concept.

But if the goal is to “help” Fountain Hills as a community, develop an even better plan or send a message that “the people” are in charge, then it misses the mark by about 1,276 acres or so…

This project is going to happen at some point in time. If Ellman doesn’t do it, the land will eventually be sold to some other developer who will.

It is 99 percent certain that if the referendum is successful, Ellman or some other future developer is not going to spend additional money to revamp the plan.

So that means we go back to the original land plan and zoning approved by the Town Council in 2006. And you can be certain any future developer is going to maximize this plan to achieve the highest density. This plan was developed long before Ellman or Don Kile came on the scene, and it was essentially hammered out between town officials and those in charge of the Arizona State Land Department.

This was somewhat unprecedented at the time, because the state normally doesn’t deal with municipalities. Instead, it typically auctions off its parcels “as is,” meaning underlying zoning exists comes with the land.

The “new” zoning approved at the time was not one-acre custom homesites like Eagles Nest or FireRock. No, it more resembles SunRidge Canyon or Eagle Mountain zoning – a few pockets of custom but mostly higher density zoning that calls for, ‘oh my God,’ tract homes.

However, do you think even in this real estate market and with development costs where they are, we would get “cookie cutter” homes starting at the $120s?

Uh, no.

But if we get stuck with the 2006 plan, we will get 1,700 homes. Opponents say Ellman is being granted a lot of exceptions in the new zoning scheme. And the point is? If we hold Ellman’s feet to the fire and demand he follow all the rules, opponents say there is no way Ellman will be able to build 1,700 homes.

Well, how many then?

Perhaps 1,350 homes?

I picked that number because that’s the maximum being allowed in the new package approved in May by the Town Council.

What else will we get with the 2006 plan if the referendum is successful? Oh yeah, we’ll get an isolated park site not near the middle school. We’ll get the current alignment of McDowell Mountain Road, which is not very good.

And, oh yeah, we’ll get TWO road connections to Boulder Drive, not the ONE approved by the council.

So, I ask again, what exactly are we gaining by this referendum (other than a worse plan)?

If the objective is stop any development from occurring, that’s definitely not going to happen. If the objective is to make sure all rules are followed, we’ll get a worse plan. If the objective is to send a message that the council rammed this through the process too fast, who loses? The very people who are objecting to this plan.

Like I said, this referendum defies all logic and reason.

Building canals downtown for night-time gondola rides makes much more sense than this referendum.