"Thomas Jefferson said a democracy is dependent on an informed citizenry. I don't care whether it sounds corny or not. It's the truth." -Jim Lehrer
Carefree Truth
Issue #1040, July 22, 2022
Issue #1040, July 22, 2022
Stephanie Barbour sent the following email to Carefree Truth Letters from Readers:
Ms. Hitchon,
I implore you to foster a kinder and more inclusive attitude. Carefree is not a monarchy where only the ordained rise to power. It is wonderful we have so many people running for Town Council, especially some younger candidates who are raising their families in Carefree. They clearly care about Carefree and will instill that love in their children. They may win or lose but isn’t it great to have them as part of our community and shouldn’t we nurture their desire to be part of our town government?
You criticize Mr. Maric but I believe you have done so quite unfairly. Sven Maric's exact words were "Arizona Law requires our General Plan to be updated and put to a public vote every 10 years”. You called him ignorant or intentionally misleading. But he is neither, he is accurate.
Arizona Law ARS 9-461.06 Section K says … A general plan is effective for up to ten years from the date the plan was initially adopted. On or before the tenth anniversary of the plan’s most recent adoption, the governing body has to readopt the existing plan or adopt a new general plan. We have done neither.
Our 2030 General Plan was adopted on May 1, 2012 - it has not been readopted nor has a new General Plan been adopted in over 10 years. I believe the next opportunity residents will have to vote on the General Plan is the 2024 election.
The purpose of a General Plan is to establish an intent and direction for the future growth and character of our community. I have shared with the The Town Council that I feel they put the cart before the horse. When Mr. Prokopek, Carefree’s Economic Development Manager, was hired his first job should have been to revise the General Plan for a vote of Carefree residents. And only after Carefree residents voted to approve the revised General Plan should Mr. Prokopek have begun working on the Economic Development Plan. Instead, we have an Economic Development Plan that the Town Council approved December 2020 this is not aligned with our current General Plan.
Mr. Maric has demonstrated that he understands some the basic laws governing a General Plan and most importantly, he appreciates the importance of including residents in the future direction of our town. Those are good qualities in a Town Council Member, don’t you agree?
Stephanie Barbour
The "not a slate" council candidates Sven, his wife Kathlina, and Duke, along with a mayoral candidate who appears to be their associate, Peter, (who now has 37 campaign signs along Tom Darlington, starting with where the street belongs to Scottsdale and signs are allowed, down Carefree Highway, which also belongs to Scottsdale, and along Cave Creek Road by Sentinel Rock, where it belongs to Cave Creek, including several very large signs and 2 signs zip tied into trees along Tom Darlington), have echoed these accusations about the General Plan not being presented to the voters on the August 2nd ballot.
Mo Benedetto, the president of the PAC registered in Delaware, so immune to any reporting/transparency, has also demanded "an explanation of the inaction by our current governing body regarding our General Plan." Mo's PAC is the sponsor of Props #472 and 473 that, if passed by the voters, would have devastating affects on our town. Aside from these devastating long term affects, both contain clauses making them retroactive, which is legally questionable, that if passed would trigger prolonged lawsuits, costing the town significant money. This, and other accusations, misinformation, and outright lies have been consistently repeated by this same group, leading me to suspect that there is communication and coordination among these allies.
The answer to the queries about the General Plan should be painfully obvious to anyone who hasn't been in a coma for over 2 years during the Covid 19 pandemic and the accompanying shut downs and restrictions, but when I got Stephanie's email, I sent it on to Gary Neiss for a reply. Stephanie's letter and Gary's reply were published in Carefree Truth Letters from Readers on July 6th.
Here is Gary's very clear and rational explanation:
As we have publicly discussed during the spring budget process, as most communities typically do within the state of Arizona, we revisit and update our General Plan every ten years. Historically, during this update process, we have had numerous community meetings to engage residents across the community through in-person meetings. These meetings took place in homes, through HOA meetings, at local churches, the fire station community room and the Council chambers. Unfortunately, over the last couple of years, the pandemic has disrupted this historical process of in-person meetings. If we were to move up this citizen involvement component to the General Plan update and conducted it during a time when most people where sheltered in place/isolating we would have been accused of rushing or hiding this process and not soliciting input within the community.
The economic development efforts have been ongoing for approximately 5 plus years. It started with a citizen committee which did a deep dive on the Town’s finances and potential sources of revenue. The mantra has always been to look at ways to enhance sales taxes and improve the economic viability of our small businesses and thus insulate the residents from increases in taxes. Several years ago at a well-attended joint meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council the options regarding Town Center revitalization and 2 corners at major intersections on the edge of the community were public vetted. These public discussions resulted in a publicly vetted Town Center revitalization plan that continues to be implemented and updated (as typical of the process), the rezoning of the northeast corner of Carefree Highway and Cave Creek Road with significant input from nearby residents and a General Plan amendment to develop the vision of what the Town would like to see in a quality high end resort at the northwest corner of Tom Darlington Drive and Carefree Highway (also with the participation with nearby neighborhoods). Needless to say, economic development is a process that takes years to cultivate solutions and true to form, the current efforts have evolved over many years. The Town’s economic development director was hired in the middle of this process to work with property owners and residents to cultivate solutions and create a community conversation regarding the options. Obviously, that is and continues to occur as we seek the best solutions through this community engagement process.
Furthermore, it is important to note that the die has already been cast on the balance of Carefree. We are mainly a low density residential community immersed in the upper Sonoran Desert. Our zoning standards speak of blending homes into hillsides, preserving on lot undisturbed desert in our low density neighborhoods, preserving natural attributes of the area’s washes while protecting properties from flood hazards and maintaining a sense of openness by restricting the use of walls which enclose properties in other nearby communities. A General Plan update will not change that as those scripts have already been established for the majority of Carefree. The referenced two corners at major intersections at the edge of the community already have nonresidential uses at each of the surrounding corners (mostly in neighboring communities) and therefore, support uses that could generate sales taxes in Carefree to further support our residential communities. Additionally, a significant preserve has historically been envisioned on the north side of Carefree which ultimately could include in excess of 1000 acres and connect to Continental Mountain and the Tonto National Forest. The Town has been working over the years in cooperative effort with the Desert Foothills Land Trust to identify opportunities to preserve these lands. Please donate to the Desert Foothills Land Trust if you have passion for building a very unique preserve in Carefree that includes tremendous archeological resources, significant riparian areas, migration routes of local fauna and unparalleled desert vistas.
Gary Neiss
Town of Carefree Administrator
I feel it is also noteworthy, as published previously in Carefree Truth, the candidates Stephanie supports, claiming , "It is wonderful we have so many people running for Town Council, especially some younger candidates who are raising their families in Carefree. They clearly care about Carefree and will instill that love in their children." that Sven, who is currently married to Kathlina, has had 13 different "Home, vacation, business, rental and apartment properties" since 2003. Kathlina has had 19 since 2001, and Peter has had 21 since 1996. Peter was in Burbank for 7 years at 2 different times. He has been in Carefree for 6 years and his wife Sonia has been here for 1-1/2 years. All of Peter's other locations were for 1-2 years. Sven and Kathlina have each been at the all the various addresses for 1-2 years. I tend to doubt that these candidates will be raising their families in Carefree for any length of time. And in fact, Sven and Kathlina have not shown any family pictures with children, or made any mention of them during this campaign. This leads me to suspect that they do not have children in which to "instill that love" of Carefree. I don't have a history of Duke's locations going back very far. He lived in Carefree for a couple of years before he and his wife moved back to CA, where they lived before moving here. After a brief stay in CA, they returned to Carefree, but his wife's law work is in Orange County, CA. All of these candidates are CA transplants.
Peter declared bankruptcy in Burbank, CA in November of 2008. He left the state that same month. I have attachments of all 59 pages of the bankruptcy form he filed in California, before moving from Burbank to Mesa, AZ, also in November of 2008, leaving the state where his filing was made. These attachments are available upon request.
Here is the info my friend, the P.I., was able to find with very little effort:
"Let’s review the original purpose of Bankruptcy, one of which was to keep people who experienced a genuine health disaster - or other financial catastrophe - out of debtor’s prison. It was not, dare I say, to wiggle out of government help that one was privileged enough to receive, or so that one could keep a fancy car for free. There’s something very freeing about walking onto a lot and paying cash for a vehicle you like. He should try it sometime!
Also attached are documents related to the Sample home purchase. Note they’re listed as married and Sonia's name is first; the tax bill is addressed to her only. (Hope she got a pre-nup!) The down payment was just a bit more than Peter's bankruptcy discharge - and I’ll bet Sonia paid it…. He’s not quite 50 - if he plays his cards right, he can slide into home on the taxpayer’s dime.
Attached are your documents - nearly $80,000 of debt, banks, student loan (US Dept. of Ed.), USAA (he screwed the taxpayers AND the military…), a real estate company, a tax education/seminar company and, last but not least, BMW Financial.
If you zoom out to the big picture, he has the M.O. of the person who wants and needs to be a career politician. Which is a fundamental, overarching problem that has crippled the country at all levels."
The information on Peter's bankruptcy and abrupt departure from CA was published on 7/15, Carefree Truth Issue #1038.
All of the attachments mentioned are available upon request.
My question to the voters is, do you want someone who has had 21 addresses since 1996 and who left a state the same month he filed filed for bankruptcy, as your mayor? Do you want council members who have a history of having different addresses every 1-2 years? It's no wonder they support Mo's Prop that proposes such short term limits. They most likely will have moved on and won't be around to run for more, if their history holds steady. As voters, I believe you have the right to know these facts.
Lyn Hitchon
Prepared by Carefree Truth
Copyrighted
Visit our website at www.carefreetruth2.com If you know anyone who would like to be added to the Carefree Truth email list, please have them contact me. Feel free to share Carefree Truth with others on your list.
Visit www.carefreeazbusinesses.com to see more info about businesses in Carefree. Please support our merchants.
Ms. Hitchon,
I implore you to foster a kinder and more inclusive attitude. Carefree is not a monarchy where only the ordained rise to power. It is wonderful we have so many people running for Town Council, especially some younger candidates who are raising their families in Carefree. They clearly care about Carefree and will instill that love in their children. They may win or lose but isn’t it great to have them as part of our community and shouldn’t we nurture their desire to be part of our town government?
You criticize Mr. Maric but I believe you have done so quite unfairly. Sven Maric's exact words were "Arizona Law requires our General Plan to be updated and put to a public vote every 10 years”. You called him ignorant or intentionally misleading. But he is neither, he is accurate.
Arizona Law ARS 9-461.06 Section K says … A general plan is effective for up to ten years from the date the plan was initially adopted. On or before the tenth anniversary of the plan’s most recent adoption, the governing body has to readopt the existing plan or adopt a new general plan. We have done neither.
Our 2030 General Plan was adopted on May 1, 2012 - it has not been readopted nor has a new General Plan been adopted in over 10 years. I believe the next opportunity residents will have to vote on the General Plan is the 2024 election.
The purpose of a General Plan is to establish an intent and direction for the future growth and character of our community. I have shared with the The Town Council that I feel they put the cart before the horse. When Mr. Prokopek, Carefree’s Economic Development Manager, was hired his first job should have been to revise the General Plan for a vote of Carefree residents. And only after Carefree residents voted to approve the revised General Plan should Mr. Prokopek have begun working on the Economic Development Plan. Instead, we have an Economic Development Plan that the Town Council approved December 2020 this is not aligned with our current General Plan.
Mr. Maric has demonstrated that he understands some the basic laws governing a General Plan and most importantly, he appreciates the importance of including residents in the future direction of our town. Those are good qualities in a Town Council Member, don’t you agree?
Stephanie Barbour
The "not a slate" council candidates Sven, his wife Kathlina, and Duke, along with a mayoral candidate who appears to be their associate, Peter, (who now has 37 campaign signs along Tom Darlington, starting with where the street belongs to Scottsdale and signs are allowed, down Carefree Highway, which also belongs to Scottsdale, and along Cave Creek Road by Sentinel Rock, where it belongs to Cave Creek, including several very large signs and 2 signs zip tied into trees along Tom Darlington), have echoed these accusations about the General Plan not being presented to the voters on the August 2nd ballot.
Mo Benedetto, the president of the PAC registered in Delaware, so immune to any reporting/transparency, has also demanded "an explanation of the inaction by our current governing body regarding our General Plan." Mo's PAC is the sponsor of Props #472 and 473 that, if passed by the voters, would have devastating affects on our town. Aside from these devastating long term affects, both contain clauses making them retroactive, which is legally questionable, that if passed would trigger prolonged lawsuits, costing the town significant money. This, and other accusations, misinformation, and outright lies have been consistently repeated by this same group, leading me to suspect that there is communication and coordination among these allies.
The answer to the queries about the General Plan should be painfully obvious to anyone who hasn't been in a coma for over 2 years during the Covid 19 pandemic and the accompanying shut downs and restrictions, but when I got Stephanie's email, I sent it on to Gary Neiss for a reply. Stephanie's letter and Gary's reply were published in Carefree Truth Letters from Readers on July 6th.
Here is Gary's very clear and rational explanation:
As we have publicly discussed during the spring budget process, as most communities typically do within the state of Arizona, we revisit and update our General Plan every ten years. Historically, during this update process, we have had numerous community meetings to engage residents across the community through in-person meetings. These meetings took place in homes, through HOA meetings, at local churches, the fire station community room and the Council chambers. Unfortunately, over the last couple of years, the pandemic has disrupted this historical process of in-person meetings. If we were to move up this citizen involvement component to the General Plan update and conducted it during a time when most people where sheltered in place/isolating we would have been accused of rushing or hiding this process and not soliciting input within the community.
The economic development efforts have been ongoing for approximately 5 plus years. It started with a citizen committee which did a deep dive on the Town’s finances and potential sources of revenue. The mantra has always been to look at ways to enhance sales taxes and improve the economic viability of our small businesses and thus insulate the residents from increases in taxes. Several years ago at a well-attended joint meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council the options regarding Town Center revitalization and 2 corners at major intersections on the edge of the community were public vetted. These public discussions resulted in a publicly vetted Town Center revitalization plan that continues to be implemented and updated (as typical of the process), the rezoning of the northeast corner of Carefree Highway and Cave Creek Road with significant input from nearby residents and a General Plan amendment to develop the vision of what the Town would like to see in a quality high end resort at the northwest corner of Tom Darlington Drive and Carefree Highway (also with the participation with nearby neighborhoods). Needless to say, economic development is a process that takes years to cultivate solutions and true to form, the current efforts have evolved over many years. The Town’s economic development director was hired in the middle of this process to work with property owners and residents to cultivate solutions and create a community conversation regarding the options. Obviously, that is and continues to occur as we seek the best solutions through this community engagement process.
Furthermore, it is important to note that the die has already been cast on the balance of Carefree. We are mainly a low density residential community immersed in the upper Sonoran Desert. Our zoning standards speak of blending homes into hillsides, preserving on lot undisturbed desert in our low density neighborhoods, preserving natural attributes of the area’s washes while protecting properties from flood hazards and maintaining a sense of openness by restricting the use of walls which enclose properties in other nearby communities. A General Plan update will not change that as those scripts have already been established for the majority of Carefree. The referenced two corners at major intersections at the edge of the community already have nonresidential uses at each of the surrounding corners (mostly in neighboring communities) and therefore, support uses that could generate sales taxes in Carefree to further support our residential communities. Additionally, a significant preserve has historically been envisioned on the north side of Carefree which ultimately could include in excess of 1000 acres and connect to Continental Mountain and the Tonto National Forest. The Town has been working over the years in cooperative effort with the Desert Foothills Land Trust to identify opportunities to preserve these lands. Please donate to the Desert Foothills Land Trust if you have passion for building a very unique preserve in Carefree that includes tremendous archeological resources, significant riparian areas, migration routes of local fauna and unparalleled desert vistas.
Gary Neiss
Town of Carefree Administrator
I feel it is also noteworthy, as published previously in Carefree Truth, the candidates Stephanie supports, claiming , "It is wonderful we have so many people running for Town Council, especially some younger candidates who are raising their families in Carefree. They clearly care about Carefree and will instill that love in their children." that Sven, who is currently married to Kathlina, has had 13 different "Home, vacation, business, rental and apartment properties" since 2003. Kathlina has had 19 since 2001, and Peter has had 21 since 1996. Peter was in Burbank for 7 years at 2 different times. He has been in Carefree for 6 years and his wife Sonia has been here for 1-1/2 years. All of Peter's other locations were for 1-2 years. Sven and Kathlina have each been at the all the various addresses for 1-2 years. I tend to doubt that these candidates will be raising their families in Carefree for any length of time. And in fact, Sven and Kathlina have not shown any family pictures with children, or made any mention of them during this campaign. This leads me to suspect that they do not have children in which to "instill that love" of Carefree. I don't have a history of Duke's locations going back very far. He lived in Carefree for a couple of years before he and his wife moved back to CA, where they lived before moving here. After a brief stay in CA, they returned to Carefree, but his wife's law work is in Orange County, CA. All of these candidates are CA transplants.
Peter declared bankruptcy in Burbank, CA in November of 2008. He left the state that same month. I have attachments of all 59 pages of the bankruptcy form he filed in California, before moving from Burbank to Mesa, AZ, also in November of 2008, leaving the state where his filing was made. These attachments are available upon request.
Here is the info my friend, the P.I., was able to find with very little effort:
"Let’s review the original purpose of Bankruptcy, one of which was to keep people who experienced a genuine health disaster - or other financial catastrophe - out of debtor’s prison. It was not, dare I say, to wiggle out of government help that one was privileged enough to receive, or so that one could keep a fancy car for free. There’s something very freeing about walking onto a lot and paying cash for a vehicle you like. He should try it sometime!
Also attached are documents related to the Sample home purchase. Note they’re listed as married and Sonia's name is first; the tax bill is addressed to her only. (Hope she got a pre-nup!) The down payment was just a bit more than Peter's bankruptcy discharge - and I’ll bet Sonia paid it…. He’s not quite 50 - if he plays his cards right, he can slide into home on the taxpayer’s dime.
Attached are your documents - nearly $80,000 of debt, banks, student loan (US Dept. of Ed.), USAA (he screwed the taxpayers AND the military…), a real estate company, a tax education/seminar company and, last but not least, BMW Financial.
If you zoom out to the big picture, he has the M.O. of the person who wants and needs to be a career politician. Which is a fundamental, overarching problem that has crippled the country at all levels."
The information on Peter's bankruptcy and abrupt departure from CA was published on 7/15, Carefree Truth Issue #1038.
All of the attachments mentioned are available upon request.
My question to the voters is, do you want someone who has had 21 addresses since 1996 and who left a state the same month he filed filed for bankruptcy, as your mayor? Do you want council members who have a history of having different addresses every 1-2 years? It's no wonder they support Mo's Prop that proposes such short term limits. They most likely will have moved on and won't be around to run for more, if their history holds steady. As voters, I believe you have the right to know these facts.
Lyn Hitchon
Prepared by Carefree Truth
Copyrighted
Visit our website at www.carefreetruth2.com If you know anyone who would like to be added to the Carefree Truth email list, please have them contact me. Feel free to share Carefree Truth with others on your list.
Visit www.carefreeazbusinesses.com to see more info about businesses in Carefree. Please support our merchants.