"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 #964, November 12, 2021
Issue #964, November 12, 2021
Public Comment during Call to the Public
An opportunity will be provided to members of the public to provide public comment through written submission to Council members on any topic of concern or interest to them during Call to the Public.
A member of the public wishing to submit a written comment must do so through the Carefree website Kandace@carefree.org For a comment to be read, it must be received by 12:00 pm noon on the day of the Council Meeting. Any comment submitted after that time may not be read until the next Council meeting. A member of the public may submit only one written submission per Council meeting, and it cannot exceed three minutes to read.
Next Steps/Permitted Response from Council Members to Comments received
During and following the reading of any public comment, members of the Council are prohibited by State Statute from answering or responding in any manner to a comment, except in response to personal criticism and/or a false statement.
During Call to the Public at the November Council meeting, Mayor Les Peterson noted that email letters submitted to the Town to be read during Call to the Public are requested to be no more than a half page, 12 point font size, double spaced, and able to be read in a maximum of 3 minutes. But he was going to make an exception for the only letter which was received to be read at that Council meeting.
Kandace Contreras read the email letter below, submitted by John Mattes:
When we moved into the Town of Carefree 3 ½ years ago we thought we had moved into a small well-run Town. We were close to the Town Center, the restrooms in the Sundial Center were clean and the roadways appeared to be well maintained.
I then learned that a $18 million dollar water bond was going to be passed, by the Carefree Water Board, without any communication from the water department to its customers. Then I learned the Town Council, Utilities Facilities District and Carefree Water Company Board were one in the same. The Town Administrator, by Town Charter, is supposed to follow the direction of a strong Mayor and Town Council. Interesting. The administrator is not part of the Utilities Facilities District or Carefree Water Board yet is in the meetings and comments. Why is this?
The Mayor in the Carefree Water Board meeting, July 2018, when asked if the water bond was going to go to a vote, says (paraphrasing) you don’t’ want that to happen. They are 80% and you are 20%, you would not like the results. Is this a Mayor for all of the Carefree residents?
We have a Mayor, Vice Mayor and Town Councilman who refuse to respond to direct questions from constituents. One email was referred to the Town Attorney, by the Mayor, when a procedural question was asked. Possibly therefore the Town Attorney fees are so high. Clase (sp) to $2 million, that are reportable, since 2018.
In December 2018 Resolution 2020-11 was passed, 7-0. This was the approval of the Strategic Work plan, that had 4 specific areas. The Council was to appoint and Economic Development Advisory Board/Commission (both used in the Resolution). That, to date, has never been done. Although in the January 2021 Council meeting, the Town’s Economic Development Director, same person who wrote the Strategic Work Plan in Resolution 2020-11, introduces his Economic Development Technical Advisory Panel, yet no Council action was necessary. When I asked why the resolution was not followed, and the Council did not appoint the Economic Development Advisory Board, I was told by the Town Administrator “To date, one has not been established as Steve is not far in that process.”
Isn’t the Planning and Zoning Commission being precented (sp) with a “Major General Plan Amendment Public Hearing” on November 8th for the resort planned at Tom Darlington and Carefree Highway? Hasn’t the Planning Director been in Contact with Arizona Land about the possible purchase of 43 acres on E Cave Creek Rd, by the airport? Isn’t there a redevelopment plan, for Town Center, going to be precented (sp) to either the Planning and Zoning Commission or Town Council in November or December? This is 3 of the 4 items on the Strategic Work Plan from December 2020 and Resolution 2020-11. If the Economic Development Advisory Board had been appointed, Arizona Open Meeting laws would have to be followed. An appointed Technical Advisory Panel would not have to follow the Open Meeting laws because they were selected by the Economic Development Director and not the Town Council. Could this be the reason why the Council did not appoint their Economic Development Advisory Board, as mentioned in Resolution 2020-11? Does anyone else feel this question needs to be answered? Mr. Neiss, I believe 3 of the 4 items on the Strategic Work Plan have been started. I believe that would qualify as being “far in that process.” By the way, the ARS Zoning law appears it was not followed. The ARS requires that the word ZONING “must be printed so that the following are visible from a distance of 100 feet: the word “zoning,” That is not the case on the 3’x3’ signed posted on Tom Darlington and Carefree Highway.
This posting, per the Economic Development Director in an email, was to be posted 30 days before the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. It was not. It was posted on 10-22-21
Carefree residents deserve more and deserve communication on all major projects. Maybe asking “the majority” of residents if they want these things. Possibly Town Hall and the Council has not seen the nosedive the economy is in. 6% inflation this year, gas over $1.00 a gallon in the last 7 months and food prices going up dramatically. We are looking to spend money we should be saving. Next year is going to by bumpy, at best.
I, as usual, realize the Council and staff can not respond to my questions and comments in open session.
John Mattes
37262 NE Greythorn Circle
Carefree, AZ 85377
Mayor Peterson took the opportunity to respond to Mr. Mattes' letter during Call to the Public as the letter was being read. See Next Steps/Permitted Response above. The Mayor submitted the letter below, which was also printed in COINS, in summary of his response. However, in listening to the video, I noticed that the issue of the legal fees was not addressed during the meeting but not in the Mayor's written response, so I will report on that segment now.
Mr. Mattes stated that the Town had spent, "Clase (sp) to $2 million, that are reportable, since 2018." Mayor Peterson clarified that the correct amount was $1,800,000. Of that, $1,450,000 was spent on arbitration issues with Cave Creek. The outcome, which went in favor of Carefree, was decided by an Arbitration Panel of 3 judges with a total of 120 years of experience. The entirety of that sum was reimbursable to Carefree. That leaves $350,000.
Nearly $100,000 of that was spent arguing for a rate adjustment to lower the huge rate increase requested by Liberty Utilities for sewer service. Residents in the Boulders were the sole beneficiaries of the removal of the sewer treatment plant located within the Boulders that emitted foul sewer odors which affected their quality of life as well as their property values. However, the rate increase triggered by the decommissioning of that plant was spread across everyone in Carefree, as is required by law for a public utility, who now pay an additional $12 a month per household. The Mayor did not see any of those who are now criticizing the Town, contributing or joining in to testify before the Arizona Corporation Commission to lessen the rate increase.
Mayor Peterson noted that the purpose of legal fees is to represent and defend the rights of Carefree residents. The Mayor, Council and staff are here to deliver benefits to the residents, and sometimes those things are costly. If 100% of the citizens had to "get behind it" each time, there would be no infrastructure and "we would be back in the Dark Ages". The Mayor added that Mr. Mattes misinterpreted his statement about 80% vs. 20% on the water issue, and had it in reverse. Mayor Peterson was saying that 80% were in support of the project, and that's why Mr. Mattes would not want it to go to a vote.
Councilman Tony Geiger, who spent his career in water, explained how the infrastructure is financed. He noted that the $18 million bond mentioned in Mr. Mattes' letter is to be spread out over a 30 year period, not paid for all at once by the current water customers. Bonds do not normally go past 30 years. The typical useful life of water utilities is 50-70 years, and they are in service through multiple generations. The total cost is spread out over the useful life, so future generations will also be paying for their portion of the upgrades. Mr. Geiger called it "disingenuous" to keep throwing out the "scary" $18 million figure.
This will not cause a huge rate increase for current water users that Mr. Mattes seemed to suggest. The rate increase for those currently on Carefree Water will only see the standard increase, approximately $4 a month, due to normal increases in costs, that they have seen in previous years. Those benefiting from the project will assume a greater rate increase, with a surcharge of approximately $20 a month.Unlike the sewer rate hike, this disparity between those who are directly benefiting and those who are not is possible because the Carefree Water Company is not a public utility.
Response to a Carefree resident’s letter to the Town Council
The Mayor again refuted the inaccuracies made at Call to the Public with the following written statement:
During a recent Town Council meeting, a letter from a relatively recent Carefree resident was received and read. This resident was highly critical in many respects of the projects being worked on by the Council and the transparency with which the work was proceeding. Mayor Peterson and Councilmember Geiger took the opportunity in the meeting to address some of the major statements in the letter submitted. Their responses are recapped below:
Statement: The water consolidation project should be voted upon, and not be a Council vote.
Response: During the past two Mayoral and Council elections (2018 and 2020), the water consolidation project was the number one issue. Council members and Town Staff personally met with hundreds of Carefree residents who emphatically demanded that the Council get the water consolidation project accomplished as quickly as possible. Those candidates who supported resolving the water issues received the highest number of votes. We were elected based on our promises to the Carefree community to address and resolve this pressing issue, which we are doing.
And, contrary to what was suggested by this resident, the Town Council and Town Staff are providing responsive and responsible government to Carefree residents. It appears that the author preferred the politics and in-actions of our federal government in Washington which is debate and compromise driven and lacks the result driven responses provided by our local governance team. In both the Boulders situation and now in the water consolidation instance, the Council was responding to and taking responsibility to address and resolve expressed concerns of our residents. Don’t dismiss the broad base of support expressed and ignore the wishes of a large portion of our community because of the writer’s personal desires, under the assumption that everyone else felt the same.
Statement: Why reference the Boulders wastewater treatment plant removal in our response?
Response: The decommissioning of the wastewater facility in the Boulders was the identical process as is being used to remedy that problem associated with the water service issue which affects 30% of Carefree’s residents. These Boulders residents requested the Town Council to assist them to get the wastewater treatment plant removed, to provide the necessary and expensive legal assistance and to take over management of the project, which the Council did.
Statement: No Carefree resident knows what is happening with water. Communicate better.
Response: There were countless public meetings which predated your residency (3 ½ years) within the community discussing the water concerns. As far as the communications, we will continue to expand our communications efforts, but the communications support behind each of the major issues/projects the Town has undertaken has been extensive and utilized the best communications devices available at the time. There has been no lack of communication to the Town’s residents during the times that the subjects under consideration were discussed:
Bottom line, we continue to expand our engagement efforts and have used all available communication channels to keep our citizens informed, but we welcome additional input.
Les Peterson
Carefree Mayor
https://vimeo.com/642139941
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.
An opportunity will be provided to members of the public to provide public comment through written submission to Council members on any topic of concern or interest to them during Call to the Public.
A member of the public wishing to submit a written comment must do so through the Carefree website Kandace@carefree.org For a comment to be read, it must be received by 12:00 pm noon on the day of the Council Meeting. Any comment submitted after that time may not be read until the next Council meeting. A member of the public may submit only one written submission per Council meeting, and it cannot exceed three minutes to read.
Next Steps/Permitted Response from Council Members to Comments received
During and following the reading of any public comment, members of the Council are prohibited by State Statute from answering or responding in any manner to a comment, except in response to personal criticism and/or a false statement.
During Call to the Public at the November Council meeting, Mayor Les Peterson noted that email letters submitted to the Town to be read during Call to the Public are requested to be no more than a half page, 12 point font size, double spaced, and able to be read in a maximum of 3 minutes. But he was going to make an exception for the only letter which was received to be read at that Council meeting.
Kandace Contreras read the email letter below, submitted by John Mattes:
When we moved into the Town of Carefree 3 ½ years ago we thought we had moved into a small well-run Town. We were close to the Town Center, the restrooms in the Sundial Center were clean and the roadways appeared to be well maintained.
I then learned that a $18 million dollar water bond was going to be passed, by the Carefree Water Board, without any communication from the water department to its customers. Then I learned the Town Council, Utilities Facilities District and Carefree Water Company Board were one in the same. The Town Administrator, by Town Charter, is supposed to follow the direction of a strong Mayor and Town Council. Interesting. The administrator is not part of the Utilities Facilities District or Carefree Water Board yet is in the meetings and comments. Why is this?
The Mayor in the Carefree Water Board meeting, July 2018, when asked if the water bond was going to go to a vote, says (paraphrasing) you don’t’ want that to happen. They are 80% and you are 20%, you would not like the results. Is this a Mayor for all of the Carefree residents?
We have a Mayor, Vice Mayor and Town Councilman who refuse to respond to direct questions from constituents. One email was referred to the Town Attorney, by the Mayor, when a procedural question was asked. Possibly therefore the Town Attorney fees are so high. Clase (sp) to $2 million, that are reportable, since 2018.
In December 2018 Resolution 2020-11 was passed, 7-0. This was the approval of the Strategic Work plan, that had 4 specific areas. The Council was to appoint and Economic Development Advisory Board/Commission (both used in the Resolution). That, to date, has never been done. Although in the January 2021 Council meeting, the Town’s Economic Development Director, same person who wrote the Strategic Work Plan in Resolution 2020-11, introduces his Economic Development Technical Advisory Panel, yet no Council action was necessary. When I asked why the resolution was not followed, and the Council did not appoint the Economic Development Advisory Board, I was told by the Town Administrator “To date, one has not been established as Steve is not far in that process.”
Isn’t the Planning and Zoning Commission being precented (sp) with a “Major General Plan Amendment Public Hearing” on November 8th for the resort planned at Tom Darlington and Carefree Highway? Hasn’t the Planning Director been in Contact with Arizona Land about the possible purchase of 43 acres on E Cave Creek Rd, by the airport? Isn’t there a redevelopment plan, for Town Center, going to be precented (sp) to either the Planning and Zoning Commission or Town Council in November or December? This is 3 of the 4 items on the Strategic Work Plan from December 2020 and Resolution 2020-11. If the Economic Development Advisory Board had been appointed, Arizona Open Meeting laws would have to be followed. An appointed Technical Advisory Panel would not have to follow the Open Meeting laws because they were selected by the Economic Development Director and not the Town Council. Could this be the reason why the Council did not appoint their Economic Development Advisory Board, as mentioned in Resolution 2020-11? Does anyone else feel this question needs to be answered? Mr. Neiss, I believe 3 of the 4 items on the Strategic Work Plan have been started. I believe that would qualify as being “far in that process.” By the way, the ARS Zoning law appears it was not followed. The ARS requires that the word ZONING “must be printed so that the following are visible from a distance of 100 feet: the word “zoning,” That is not the case on the 3’x3’ signed posted on Tom Darlington and Carefree Highway.
This posting, per the Economic Development Director in an email, was to be posted 30 days before the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. It was not. It was posted on 10-22-21
Carefree residents deserve more and deserve communication on all major projects. Maybe asking “the majority” of residents if they want these things. Possibly Town Hall and the Council has not seen the nosedive the economy is in. 6% inflation this year, gas over $1.00 a gallon in the last 7 months and food prices going up dramatically. We are looking to spend money we should be saving. Next year is going to by bumpy, at best.
I, as usual, realize the Council and staff can not respond to my questions and comments in open session.
John Mattes
37262 NE Greythorn Circle
Carefree, AZ 85377
Mayor Peterson took the opportunity to respond to Mr. Mattes' letter during Call to the Public as the letter was being read. See Next Steps/Permitted Response above. The Mayor submitted the letter below, which was also printed in COINS, in summary of his response. However, in listening to the video, I noticed that the issue of the legal fees was not addressed during the meeting but not in the Mayor's written response, so I will report on that segment now.
Mr. Mattes stated that the Town had spent, "Clase (sp) to $2 million, that are reportable, since 2018." Mayor Peterson clarified that the correct amount was $1,800,000. Of that, $1,450,000 was spent on arbitration issues with Cave Creek. The outcome, which went in favor of Carefree, was decided by an Arbitration Panel of 3 judges with a total of 120 years of experience. The entirety of that sum was reimbursable to Carefree. That leaves $350,000.
Nearly $100,000 of that was spent arguing for a rate adjustment to lower the huge rate increase requested by Liberty Utilities for sewer service. Residents in the Boulders were the sole beneficiaries of the removal of the sewer treatment plant located within the Boulders that emitted foul sewer odors which affected their quality of life as well as their property values. However, the rate increase triggered by the decommissioning of that plant was spread across everyone in Carefree, as is required by law for a public utility, who now pay an additional $12 a month per household. The Mayor did not see any of those who are now criticizing the Town, contributing or joining in to testify before the Arizona Corporation Commission to lessen the rate increase.
Mayor Peterson noted that the purpose of legal fees is to represent and defend the rights of Carefree residents. The Mayor, Council and staff are here to deliver benefits to the residents, and sometimes those things are costly. If 100% of the citizens had to "get behind it" each time, there would be no infrastructure and "we would be back in the Dark Ages". The Mayor added that Mr. Mattes misinterpreted his statement about 80% vs. 20% on the water issue, and had it in reverse. Mayor Peterson was saying that 80% were in support of the project, and that's why Mr. Mattes would not want it to go to a vote.
Councilman Tony Geiger, who spent his career in water, explained how the infrastructure is financed. He noted that the $18 million bond mentioned in Mr. Mattes' letter is to be spread out over a 30 year period, not paid for all at once by the current water customers. Bonds do not normally go past 30 years. The typical useful life of water utilities is 50-70 years, and they are in service through multiple generations. The total cost is spread out over the useful life, so future generations will also be paying for their portion of the upgrades. Mr. Geiger called it "disingenuous" to keep throwing out the "scary" $18 million figure.
This will not cause a huge rate increase for current water users that Mr. Mattes seemed to suggest. The rate increase for those currently on Carefree Water will only see the standard increase, approximately $4 a month, due to normal increases in costs, that they have seen in previous years. Those benefiting from the project will assume a greater rate increase, with a surcharge of approximately $20 a month.Unlike the sewer rate hike, this disparity between those who are directly benefiting and those who are not is possible because the Carefree Water Company is not a public utility.
Response to a Carefree resident’s letter to the Town Council
The Mayor again refuted the inaccuracies made at Call to the Public with the following written statement:
During a recent Town Council meeting, a letter from a relatively recent Carefree resident was received and read. This resident was highly critical in many respects of the projects being worked on by the Council and the transparency with which the work was proceeding. Mayor Peterson and Councilmember Geiger took the opportunity in the meeting to address some of the major statements in the letter submitted. Their responses are recapped below:
Statement: The water consolidation project should be voted upon, and not be a Council vote.
Response: During the past two Mayoral and Council elections (2018 and 2020), the water consolidation project was the number one issue. Council members and Town Staff personally met with hundreds of Carefree residents who emphatically demanded that the Council get the water consolidation project accomplished as quickly as possible. Those candidates who supported resolving the water issues received the highest number of votes. We were elected based on our promises to the Carefree community to address and resolve this pressing issue, which we are doing.
And, contrary to what was suggested by this resident, the Town Council and Town Staff are providing responsive and responsible government to Carefree residents. It appears that the author preferred the politics and in-actions of our federal government in Washington which is debate and compromise driven and lacks the result driven responses provided by our local governance team. In both the Boulders situation and now in the water consolidation instance, the Council was responding to and taking responsibility to address and resolve expressed concerns of our residents. Don’t dismiss the broad base of support expressed and ignore the wishes of a large portion of our community because of the writer’s personal desires, under the assumption that everyone else felt the same.
Statement: Why reference the Boulders wastewater treatment plant removal in our response?
Response: The decommissioning of the wastewater facility in the Boulders was the identical process as is being used to remedy that problem associated with the water service issue which affects 30% of Carefree’s residents. These Boulders residents requested the Town Council to assist them to get the wastewater treatment plant removed, to provide the necessary and expensive legal assistance and to take over management of the project, which the Council did.
Statement: No Carefree resident knows what is happening with water. Communicate better.
Response: There were countless public meetings which predated your residency (3 ½ years) within the community discussing the water concerns. As far as the communications, we will continue to expand our communications efforts, but the communications support behind each of the major issues/projects the Town has undertaken has been extensive and utilized the best communications devices available at the time. There has been no lack of communication to the Town’s residents during the times that the subjects under consideration were discussed:
- Water – as previously stated, this has been the leading issue in recent elections, and it is currently regularly posted on the agenda when it is discussed at public meetings. There have been countless COINS, articles and editorials in local publications and social media talking about all facets of the water consolidation project, including the financing. Interested residents could find information.
- The 2015 Town Center Revitalization Plan had a significant community involvement process associated with it. We continue to work on the recommendations of this plan and are updating its information/data. These citizen participation efforts will expand even further with the future Economic Development Board.
- The General Plan Amendment currently being considered goes back to a citizen driven financial analysis in 2017. This analysis was followed-up with a joint session of the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council which many residents attended. At that time, these discussions also utilized many of the most effective communications devices. More recently, neighborhood engagement and community engagement meetings, as typical in the public process, were undertaken. Additionally, public hearings were advertised and posted according to all applicable statutory requirements for General Plan amendments.
Bottom line, we continue to expand our engagement efforts and have used all available communication channels to keep our citizens informed, but we welcome additional input.
Les Peterson
Carefree Mayor
https://vimeo.com/642139941
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.