In a letter to the editor last week Councilman Michael Scharnow accused Smart Development chairman Pete Brock, MD of being misleading when he stated that the overwhelming majority of Fountain Hills residents were opposed to the proposed Daybreak development. I believe Dr. Brock based his statement on the fact that the clear preponderance of Letters to the Editor and input at town meetings was against the development, and that in less than three weeks 1,800 signatures were gathered supporting a referendum opposing said development.
Councilman Scharnow speculates that there is “a vocal group consisting primarily of neighbors who oppose Daybreak.” Common sense would indicate that the majority of the 1,800 signatories on the petition for a referendum opposing Daybreak could not be neighbors.
Finally, Councilman Scharnow righteously states that it’s his “duty to factor in all arguments, opinions and concerns, facts, staff reports, economic impacts, housing diversity, commission recommendations the Strategic Plan et al.” and base his “decision on what’s best for the entire community.” He concludes with “and that’s what I did.” Yet he disregarded the clear message of negative input from the community and the almost unanimous recommendation from his own Planning and Zoning Commission. Apparently, we, the residents, are too dumb to understand that the proposed 400-unit three story rental complex would enhance the beauty of the main entrance to Fountain Hills, or that greatly increasing the congestion at the intersection of Shea and Palisades by dumping 2,500 more vehicles would be good for traffic safety. Really, Councilman Scharnow?!
Who is being misleading and disingenuous? I, for one, cannot wait for the next local election, when the citizens of Fountain Hills can affect a remedy for tone-deaf government officials.
