MEETING IN THE DESERT VIEW THEATER, SATURDAY, MAY 17, 6-8 p.m. This meeting will cover both Arroyo Grande issues and an important new initiative for the November ballot described just below. Slide and map shows about the initiative will be presented by Sonoran Desert Protection.
HOT NEWS!!! A NEW INITIATIVE: As soon as we developed this website, we had to re-do it. We just heard from the Nature Conservancy that they're taking advantage of the current financial limitations of builders to mount a land preservation initiative for this coming November ballot. In the past, a coalition of builders and ranchers have run well-funded campaigns to create land preserves, sometimes offering "poison pill" counter-initiatives that confused the voters. Called "Conserving Arizona's Land & Water," this initiative would achieve a couple of very positive actions. First, it includes a constitutional change that would resurrect API (The Arizona Preserve Initiative Program). The Arizona Preserve Initiative (API) was passed by the Arizona State Legislature as HB 2555 and signed into law by the Governor in the spring of 1996. It is designed to encourage the preservation of select parcels of state Trust land in and around urban areas for open space to benefit future generations. The law lays out a process by which Trust land can be leased for up to 50 years or sold for conservation purposes. Leases and sales must both occur at a public auction. Conservation is defined in the law as “protection of the natural assets of state Trust land for the long-term benefit of the land, the beneficiaries, lessees, the public, and unique resources such as open space, scenic beauty, protected plants, wildlife, archeology, and multiple use values.” But it was later deemed unconstitutional
Link: http://www.land.state.az.us/programs/operations/api.htm
Second, for those concerned with the Arroyo Grande annexation, the Nature Conservancy initiative also protects two thirds of the proposed lands from further development.
Link: http://www.nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/states/arizona/
Another friend of the effort is the Sierra Club. During the last attempt to pass an initiative, the Sierra Club chose not to endorse either of the two land initiatives on the ballot. This time around, they'll be on board along with other environmental groups. Links:
http://arizona.sierraclub.org/
http://arizona.sierraclub.org/rincon/
We can help with these issues, and that could help protect our wash, too. When petitions become available, we'll do everything we can to get them to you.
WELCOME TO OUR WEBSITE - APRIL 2008
There have been requests that we establish a web page so that our 3500 SaddleBrooke supporters can check in and find out about recent activity or immediate alerts requiring public action. This is it, at least for now. We'll post updates periodically, including a general meeting schedule yet to be determined.
Our co-founding group remains:
Michael Leigh at smartleigh@wbhsi.net 818-3302
Keith Offord at kvofford@yahoo.com 825-0276
Dennis Otto at ottod55@yahoo.com 818-3048
We live on Winding Trail along WASH 27, which extends down from the Catalina Mountains along the far west border of our community between SaddleBrooke Blvd. and Edwin Rd. The wash connects with Canada del Oro, a highly valued riparian area, and is a significant wildlife corridor. It's also all that divides us from the environmental holocaust of Eagle Crest. If you would like a look at the wash, take Clubhouse off of the Mountain View Country Club, turn right at Northwood, turn right at Sand Crest, bear left, and there it is.
When we saw what D.R. Horton did to the front of our entry way and discovered that the State Land Department was planning to auction 354 acres running down into Wash 27, we formed this group. State Trust Land surrounds SaddleBrooke. Imagine driving up SaddleBrooke toward Oracle and seeing the entire hilltop covered with hundreds of new homes, from Edwin Rd. across The Preserves. Our hope is to protect the wash from environmental damage and limit the amount of development surrounding our community.
It's an unusual problem to have too many Indians and not enough chiefs, but we've asked some folks from HOA 1 to help out.
Louise Grabell at peridot13@wbhsi.net
Louise has taken on the huge task of compiling our growing membership on Excel. If you want to sign a petition for our cause, you can send it directly to Louise at 37393 S. Golf Course Dr. You can get petitions from Michael Leigh at smartleigh@wbhsi.net We want to thank Bonnie Kraber for first compiling the list. If you know Bonnie and have seen her in a wrist brace, that's at least partially our fault.
WHY THE NAME CHANGE?
Our original title was unwieldy and hard to say (SaddleBrooke Citizens for the Protection of Wash 27). Even SCPW27 was a mouthful. So we've simplified ourselves to SaddleBrooke Citizens for Wash Protection. Also, since we started this work we've realized that the issues are much bigger than our backyard, involving the lack of environmental controls in Pinal County Planning, the way the State Land Department deals with assessing land for auction, often without concern for environmental impact, and statewide efforts to set aside conservation lands. When we say we're for wash protection in these larger contexts, that also implies a concern for species protection and animal connectivity, the ability of natural life to move from place to place safely. Washes are an integral part of such connectivity. Basically, we want to influence conservation issues that impact our community in general. We can't ignore Arroyo Grande. Obviously, water preservation is a key element of our concern. Our good friend Bob Dalaskey from Unit 21 has written excellent position papers on these issues. He can be reached at rfdenter@wbhsi.net for copies by attachment. Another productive group member, Robert Simpson has written three detailed position papers on Arroyo Grande and is circulating a petition on the matter, also available by attachement. He can be reached at dadnerdim@yahoo.com
For more information on both water and Arroyo Grande, local environmentalist Hector Conde has worked on a couple of very useful websites:
http://letorovalleyexcel.blogspot.com/2008/01/hector-conde-tries-to-inform-us-on.html
WHERE ARE WE NOW?
In a sense, we've been treading water, though the tide favors our wash...for now. The auction along Wash 27 has been set aside, in part because it's a relatively low priority for the State Land Department, in part because of the general housing market. The unsold inventory of builders has grown to the point that some are on the verge of bankruptcy, including D.R. Horton. Land has been stripped while building has stopped. The resale of houses is still extremely slow. We're the number one foreclosure state in the union, in part because much of the state's recent growth was built on bad loans, interest only loans, etc. (Yet we keep hearing talk that suggests that our growth will be ongoing and massive.) The Land Department doesn't want to auction parcels unless it can get a good price, so we're on the back burner for now. Yet that seems like exactly the time to make a point with the Land Department, our Board of Supervisors, and our Governor that further land development should proceed slowly and with concern for our natural resources, especially limited water. We can and should slow growth, and news of The Nature Conservancy initiative is a hopeful stride in that direction.
At our October 2007 general meeting we heard from Pima County planners about their environmental laws, many of which we do not have in Pinal, from Sonoran Desert Protection, Sierra Club, and the Sonoran Institute. Since that time, we've been involved in CPAG, The Citizens Planning Advisory Group for the Pinal County Master Plan, trying to contribute land conservation values. Michael has encouraged the use of light rail as one means of limiting smog and traffic and asked that we try to attract alternative energy companies to improve the employment situation. Gratefully, there seems to be a serious county concern for the preservation of open space...but we must remain vigilant. It's very possible that development in Pinal could get sufficiently out of hand that Phoenix and Tucson could become something like the Los Angeles area in California. Further, we think the plan should be more generous in keeping at least some portions of the Pinal Pioneer Parkway free from development. As it is, the proposal is for a mixture of open space and low density housing along the way, but we can do better, setting back development a mile or two along scenic portions of that road. The planning reports say that we "want Pinal County to be a destination," not just somewhere to pass through on one's way to Phoenix or Tucson. What exactly will folks have to look at if we denude the beautiful natural landscape along that highway? There's also a lot of push to put business parks, medical buildings, big box stores, etc., at Oracle Junction. The idea is that East County residents have to come all the way into Tucson to shop or get medical care. That's an idea to be carefully watched. How many big shop centers do we really need in the area? You can get information about the Pinal County Master Plan at ...
You can make comments about the master plan and a desire to preserve portions of the Pinal Pioneer Parkway to: Supervisor Lional Ruiz (address column right) County Planner Jerrold Stabley at Jerrold.Stabley@co.pinal.az.us Peggy Fiandaca, Consulting Team Project Manager at PSAinc@cox.net Audra Koester Thomas of PSA at audrapsainc@cox.net (PSA stands for Partners for Strategic Action, the advisory group for the plan.)
GLIMMER OF HOPE?
While the Arroyo Grande development project is loathsome to most and certainly includes too much housing and very fuzzy definitions of what constitutes open space, there is one small glimmer of hope in that controversy. The Land Department is actually discussing open space with the locals of Oro Valley. When we first mentioned conservation and wildlife preservation to the ALD a year and a half ago, they acted as though we were speaking Greek.
“That’s not our mission. Our mission is to get the highest possible value of the land by selling to the highest bidder.” After all, there’s so much land, what’s a few river washes or animal corridors matter anyway?
They took that position in spite of the fact that other trust land states are recognizing many appropriate purposes for land management:
*Colorado’s Multiple-Use Management Policy uses non-traditional agricultural leases for such activities as hunting, hiking, camping, and biking. More than 400,000 acres of such use is funded by hunting and fishing licenses.
*Montana’s planning process includes conservation potential. Not only do industrial, business, and residential projects require environmental impact studies, they limit rural development to no more than 5% of the total program. There is concern, not only with setting aside open space, but the connectivity among these spaces that allows natural wildlife migration.
*The Mesa del Sol development in New Mexico, planned cooperatively with the land department, will develop slowly over 70 years, incorporating residential, retail and open space areas in a sustainable model. Of the 12,400 acres of state land to be developed 2800 acres will be nature refuge (Source: “State Trust Lands in the West,” by P. Culp, A. Laurenzi, and C. Tuell, 2006).
Recent conversations here, though, suggest that we can have a more productive discussion with the Land Department, which is exactly why we shouldn't go to sleep as a group. Right now is the time to let the Land Department know that we appreciate the sea change, even though we may not agree with the details of Arroyo Grande. More particularly, since they've acknowledged that other washes in the area are vital riparian habitats, Wash 27 should be similarly appreciated.
That being said, so far, it's mostly talk. Carolyn Campbell of Sonoran Desert Protection has told us that their general good intentions haven't made it into the details of the plan, and, as the old saying goes, the devil is in the details.
WHAT CAN WE DO? LETTERS & PETITIONS
First, we need to kick up our letter writing campaign asking for the preservation of Wash 27, our most immediate goal. With only 100 letters and some Emails to the parties listed column right, we've gotten a lot of serious attention from government agencies. The county asked us to participate in Master Planning. The Land Department appointed Jamie Hogue, Deputy State Land Commissioner, as an envoy on our concerns, and she held serious discussions with Dennis and Keith. That's just 100 letters. What if we sent a 1000? 2000? We've posted a sample letter that's typical of what's been sent column right, but you can contact Keith Offord for other samples at kvofford@yahoo.com
Second, you can join our signatories by getting a petition from Michael Leigh, either by writing him with a self-addressed stamped envelope enclosed at 39414 S. Winding Trail, Tucson, AZ 85739, or Emailing him at smartleigh@wbhsi.net (The mailed copy will be prettier than the downloaded Email attachment). You can then either mail the signed petition back to Michael or send it directly to Louise Grabell at 37393 S. Golf Course Drive.
Why petitions? What are they for? The petition basically allows us to collect a database of members for future action and for informative purposes. It's not an official petition that would be recognized by any government agency, except that it's a list of SaddleBrooke voters, and we find that's very persuasive, both with the county and the Land Department. We're a powerful and well-respected voting block. Over 90% of us vote regularly. The zoning for the Wash 27 auction parcel is still General Rural. If it were to be sold, rezoning would be required, or no builder would be interested in purchase. Even at our present membership of 3500, a little shy of half of Saddlebrooke, we can require a super-majority vote of the Board of Supervisors for a zoning change. That is, the vote would have to be unanimous. It would take less than 6000 names on a petition to put a referendum on a ballot to stop said zoning change. We could do that, but we'd have to do it very quickly, roughly in a month from the announced zoning change. That means having a ready membership list to go to with an official petition, as well as some volunteers. Technically, Saddlebrooke voters can put a county referendum on the ballot without almost any support from any other part of the county. That 's otentially very powerful, as long as we know who's interested. The petition also has other information that could inform your letter writing.
It's also true that we're somewhat limited by the State Constitution that says that the land should be sold to fund education. That can be influenced, though. The Governor is partially responsible for the the more open conservation attitude of the Land Department. Various environmental groups are trying to put together bills that would set land aside. We can even encourage alternative funding methods for education to lighten the land sales. Doesn't that seem off center somehow, that we have to choose between the environment and education? Shouldn't the environment be a vital aspect of educating our youth?
Those of you who have participated in public discussions for the Pinal County Plan or for the Arroyo Grande project may have some very particular things to say, but all of us can express our concerns for the preservation of this very beautiful community, county, and state.
THANKS FOR LISTENING
If you're new to this group, other documents and newsletters can be sent if you contact us. We'll try to post something new here at least quarterly, and we're aiming to have general meetings at least twice a year, dates to be determined.