By Don Henninger

We don’t need any reminders about how valuable steady, sustainable, sensible leadership is in our country, from the national to the local levels. In Scottsdale, we’re fortunate to have a good leader in city manager Jim Thompson.

I caught up with him just a few days before the city’s new mayor and three councilors were sworn into office to get his take on where the city is as 2021 unfolds with its rookie slate of leaders now on board.

The council will be holding a retreat in February to identify issues and strategies for the year ahead. That will set the direction for what they think is important and the tone on how they intend to work together to get things done.

Leading up to that retreat, here are a few notes from my conversation with Thompson and his view from the city manager’s office:

–Until the COVID-19 pandemic is behind us, everything is up in the air; as he says, it’s a huge impediment that affects everything. Any economic recovery – particularly in the city’s tourism sector – will be stalled until more people are vaccinated. It doesn’t help that Arizona continues to post the highest infection rates in the country. That image discourages the desire for people to visit here and dims hopes for a meaningful tourism rebound. And that means a large segment of the city’s small businesses, many of which rely on the hospitality industry, will continue to struggle.

–Surprisingly, perhaps, the city’s financial picture is a bit brighter. The assumption was that the tourism slump would leave a huge hole in the city’s revenue stream. Not the case, he says. Led by strong car sales and high housing values, city revenues are $17 million ahead of a budget that was significantly cut back due to the virus. It also would be only $2 million behind the original budget that was created before those reductions.

–The General Plan will be one of the most important issues in the year ahead, and already is getting a lot of attention. Thompson’s hope is that the progress made by the Citizens Review Committee over the past year continues and citizens make time to weigh in with their input during the public hearing process. He offers a reminder that the plan is a visioning document not a regulatory one, which is the purpose of zoning laws.

We offer this suggestion, as well. With all the citizen input already gathered and with the public hearings to come in the months ahead as part of the review process, the city should not create another layer of bureaucracy, as it now is considering. It’s redundant, likely will add nothing to the feedback already received and yet to come. The council will vote Jan. 19 on adding a task force for more review. We hope they vote no.

–Public safety pension funding remains important as well, as the city continues to pay down on the balance needed for the police and firefighters’ pensions. The city also continues to gradually hire firefighters as nearly two-thirds of the department will be eligible for retirement in 2025, the 20th anniversary of the city taking over that service from Rural Metro.

–Leadership talent is an ongoing topic and it’s well-known that the city will need to replace three key positions: treasurer, clerk and police chief. But many of the city’s department heads also are nearing retirement age and the need to build a succession pipeline is important.

–We’ll end with a four-letter word: jobs. Creating jobs will continue to be one of the most important goals for the city in the year ahead. As he notes, Scottsdale is not a bedroom community. Job growth is the key to being a great city and sustaining its high level of services and low tax structure. It’s not about serving the existing population as much as it is serving future generations.

Here’s hoping the year ahead is one of growth and prosperity for the city’s future.

Don Henninger, executive director of SCOTT, can be reached at donh@scottsdale.com

By Don Henninger

In the spirit of the season – and despite all the challenges the world is offering to us right now – there still are plenty of reasons why all of us in Scottsdale can be thankful.

Be thankful that:

–The election campaign for the City Council is over. Starting with the primary in August, it’s been a long haul. What began with five candidates for mayor and nine for council has ended with new faces in the mayor’s office and on three council seats. We hope everyone wishes the winners well and offers support so the “rookies” get up to speed quickly. The challenges ahead are as daunting as any the city has faced in many years.

–There are signs our new leaders are embracing a collaborative spirit. At least that seems to be the message as they get acquainted with each other and prepare to take office. That’s refreshing after a campaign that got bogged down in the mud from time to time. We hope that once in office they put a few early wins on the board (an anti-discrimination ordinance could be one) and set the tone for the way they’ll work together.

–There still are a few investors willing to launch projects in the city. The Scottsdale Collective downtown is one promising development that is working its way through the city bureaucracy. But the investor pipeline is drying up, and that’s not a good sign for the city’s economic health. We hope that our new city leaders remain open to considering worthy developments and send clear signals that the city is not returning to its “stops-dale” days.

–Scottdale Arts is surviving the pandemic crisis, and is one of the few, if not only, arts organizations in the Valley that has not had to lay off employees or make severe cutbacks. That’s testament to strong leadership and fiscal management. We hope that trend continues as the arts are a dynamic part of the city’s culture.

–We’ve made it through a fire season with little to no damage to the McDowell Sonoran Preserve. We may be living on borrowed time, though. Fire officials now say it’s not a matter of “if” a fire strikes the Preserve but “when.” Let’s not take our good fortune for granted. We hope we all will support efforts to keep our preserve safe.

–We have a strong city manager in Jim Thompson. The city will need his steady leadership anchor as there are three important vacancies right now — city clerk, city treasurer, police chief. We hope good replacements are found soon for those jobs, critical to the ongoing operation of the city.

–There are a lot of big hearts in our city that are showing up to support worthy causes. Mercedes-Benz of Scottsdale is one. It has given $5,000 donations to five non-profit groups recently and plans to do more. Being on the board of Family Promise, I’ve seen many individuals and businesses support that homeless organization with in-kind supplies and cash. We hope that spirit of generosity continues at a time when our non-profit providers need it most.

–Over 86 percent of eligible voters in Scottsdale cast a ballot in this race. That’s an amazing voter turnout and suggests that the vast majority of residents are engaged and care about the future. We hope that spirit stays active and does not grow complacent in between our four-year election cycles.

As we move through the rest of this exhausting year of 2020, let’s remember we have a lot of reasons to be grateful, and we need to keep adding to the list.

Don Henninger, executive director of SCOTT, can be reached at donh@scottsdale.com

By Don Henninger

A note and some perspective for voters to consider in this year’s Scottsdale elections, and the one likely to come up next November, too.

Nearly two decades ago, Scottsdale community leaders received a road map that would chart a course for a sustainable robust future for the city. They recognized that, like all things, cities must evolve and adapt, and even when you are on top of the heap, you have to work hard to stay there.

That was visionary thinking. Scottsdale’s reputation was stellar; its star was shining bright. But they knew the city needed direction and they commissioned a report from the Morrison Institute at ASU to do so. It came back with some good news:

“From the 1950s onward, Scottsdale combined upscale resorts, an outstanding arts and culture scene, and a spectacular natural setting to create a cachet that few other cities anywhere in the nation could match.”

And then it included a strong dose of reality:

“The shelf life of great places is getting shorter … The ingredients of a successful ‘quality’ place are changing. Surrounding towns are beginning to develop a cachet. Greater Phoenix has become a big and important metropolitan area in which all communities must work together to succeed. And, for the first time ever, Scottsdale is beginning to run out of land.”

Another group of community and civic leaders did some follow up work seven years later in 2010 to build a plan for economic growth, aligned with the points brought up by the Morrison report.

There were five themes:

• How can Scottsdale retain and enhance its quality of place?

• How can the city shape its niche in a new era?

• How can the “three Scottsdales” work together?

• How can Scottsdale play with “360-degree” vision in collaboration with the region?

• How will “can-do” Scottsdale get past the “Stopsdale” reputation?

The themes are as relevant today – perhaps even more so – as they were then. Which is a nice way of saying there is room for improvement on just about all of them.

Some observers would suggest that residents can address many of those important themes right now, as there are elections coming up in the next two Novembers that could provide the leadership and the action plan needed to make progress on them.

This November, voters will be selecting a new mayor, ending a 12-year run by Jim Lane, as well as filling three seats on City Council. Which candidates for those jobs are best positioned to lead the efforts addressed by the Morrison report’s themes?

And then in November 2021 the long-overdue General Plan is expected to be delivered for residents to approve. Planning for that is well under way. A citizen review committee is on track to deliver the plan this year. After an extensive citizen review cycle, it goes to the City Council for approval and then referral to the ballot for voters to decide. The General Plan, which is in effect a visioning tool, could – and should – address many of the issues brought out in the Morrison report.

The Morrison report will not remain relevant for another 20 years. It may not make it past the next 20 months without action.

Residents can jump start things now by voting for leaders with the fortitude and skills to move the city forward and then a plan that gives them a road map to follow.

It’s not too late. But the clock is ticking.

Don Henninger, executive director of SCOTT, can be reached at donh@scottsdale.com

Statement: Scottsdale City Council members are elected by district.
Fact: Scottsdale elects City Council members at-large; each serves the entire city.

• Cities elect their local representatives either at-large, by geographical district or a mixture of both.
• Most cities of Scottsdale’s size use a district or a mixture of district and at-large to elect their local representatives.
• After two inconclusive studies in the 80s and 90s, a district advisory task force was appointed in 2003 to complete an analysis and recommend a course of action.
• Factors considered included Scottsdale’s growing population, diverse geography, costs of campaigning and new challenges facing the city.
• Twelve of the 14 members recommended six district representatives plus the mayor at large that was approved by council but failed at the ballot box, with 39 percent of voters for it and 61 percent against.
• Re-looking at districting is a part of each 2020 mayoral candidate’s platform.

By Don Hadder

In the late 1950s and early 1960s, public improvements, particularly streets, were made through the use of improvement districts. A project scope would be identified and then it would be shopped to engineering firms. The firms would be responsible for designing the project, securing property owner support for it and providing construction financing. This kept the management and capital costs minimal to the city. 

Although this was effective, it began to stir animosity across the community. The engineering firms in some cases used high pressure sales techniques to secure the signatures required to form a district and costs often escalated above the projected figures. Many owners felt “strong armed” and in some cases multiple districts applied to their property, making their property tax bills higher and hard to understand.

By 1964, the City Council had decided to try another way to build public infrastructure. Growth in Scottsdale was exploding and the county did not require development to build infrastructure of any significance. Public facilities were falling behind as the community almost overnight changed from a farming town to a major suburban city. 

There was a good deal of public unease at the time, having only recently been the recipient of freeway plans that would split the city into pieces, a Corps of Engineers plan that would create a massive concrete-lined channel down the middle of the city, explosive growth of schools and a lack of many key facilities such as parks, libraries or even a City Hall.

A new approach to build public facilities and infrastructure was chosen: the issuance of municipal bonds. This approach would require the fledgling community to take an active role in the design, financing and management of the construction process. It also required that a majority of the voters in an election support the issuance of the bonds, which are financed primarily through property taxes. 

Given the rumblings in the community, the council wisely chose to create citizen committees to help determine what improvements were to be included in the bond proposal and then to recruit support of voters across the community. The collection of committees appointed for this effort were placed under the overall title of the “Scottsdale Town Enrichment Program,” later commonly referred to as the STEP Forums.

These committees worked over several months to identify and prioritize public improvements to be included in the upcoming bond election. Since this became the basis of the council’s call for an election, the STEP committee members became a strong force of support across the community. Ultimately, the bond election was successful, and the new City Hall and Civic Center Library, Eldorado Park, street improvements, the extension of sewer lines and many other projects were able to move forward. 

Most notably, the selection of Bennie Gonzales as the architect/planner for the new Civic Center was in large part due to the recommendations of the STEP participants. He was not a traditional and well-established architect, but he brought a sense of vision and of the Southwest that appealed to citizens.

In April 1966, the city in conjunction with Arizona Town Hall held a series of meetings to establish goals for the community. This was one of the earliest Town Hall programs in Arizona and laid a strong foundation for the future of the city. The goals as presented were approved by the City Council in June of 1966. 

These were not per se a “General Plan,” but would shortly become incorporated into a new General Plan. Adopted by resolution, they established formal and defined directions for the future of Scottsdale. Underlying this effort was a strong affinity to the desert Southwest, its special natural setting and its particular native traditions and cultures.

The recommendations were grouped under the categories of physical development, residential, commercial, parks, streets and highways, economic and social-cultural.  Many of them would significantly change the appearance and function of the growth of Scottsdale, including landscaping in parking areas, a range of park types and sizes, an economic emphasis on tourism, a comprehensive Civic Center, medians in major streets, the Indian Bend Wash Greenbelt, an emphasis on open spaces and no more “strip” commercial.

Once these goals were approved, the city retained the services of Simon Eisner and Associates to prepare a General Plan for Scottsdale. This firm had completed a number of plans for communities in California and brought a sense of planning beyond just land uses and streets.

 Approved in July 1968, this “General Plan” was likely the earliest “comprehensive” General Plan for any community in Arizona. It embodied elements that, although modified over time, are still a part of the community, such as an “Airpark” business center, major detention basins as part of the Indian Bend Wash greenbelt flood control system and the “resort corridor.”

What is interesting about this plan is that it was more of a tutorial of ideas to think about, pursue and consider, and less about regulatory limitations. Unfortunately, this became its Achilles’ heel in that it was not specific enough to make decision making easy or predictable in hotly contested development cases.

Through 1967, 1968 and 1969 the STEP Forum effort was directed toward neighborhoods and how local areas could be made better with residents, business owners and visitors working together in harmony.  Also during this time, STEP committees assisted in the recruitment and concept for a junior college (Scottsdale Community College), enhanced design review (a Beautification Committee was established), the initiation of a city arts program and special studies into youth and senior services.

In the fall of 1969, the STEP committees were reconvened to plan for the next decade of growth and enhancement of Scottsdale. The final report of this effort was titled “Scottsdale Town Enrichment Program – Long Range Goals & Plans.” The committee reports were included under the headings of community development, community affairs, economic development, community services and community improvements. 

Some of the ideas from this process includes historical and art museums, manpower development, two redevelopment areas (Civic Center and Vista del Camino), a major roadway connection along 64^th Street, municipal golf courses, creation of a municipal water system, expansion of fire service facilities, a new police headquarters, fire and police training facilities and “brokered” community services.

This did not finish the STEP committee work. The planning firm of Wilsey Ham and the Brookings Institute were retained to develop an updated General Plan. In the process, the Brookings Institute conducted community surveys and organized a number of forums. The initial report from this process was titled “Alternate Futures for the City of Scottsdale.” It was organized under topics that included growth, population and land use, economy and human resources, environment, design of the city, housing, transportation, education, health and public safety, recreation, cultural and entertainment activities, government and city financing.

This was a summary of 10 seminars in which experts from across the nation spoke. Of note is that in the community survey, the most universally accepted idea was protection of the McDowell Mountains.

In September 1973, about a year after the previous report, a report of the STEP committee focused on sign regulations, undergrounding power lines (up to 12kV), requiring developments to dedicate school and park sites, requiring development to provide municipal infrastructure facilities, and providing bike paths and flood control systems.

The final major report of the STEP committees was released in June of 1974 and focused exclusively on transportation. It addressed all forms of transportation and covered local and regional issues and coordination. This would be the last major result of the original STEP Forum process. 

In 1974, the city approved updates to the land use transportation plans of the General Plan.  Unfortunately, these were later discarded.  From what little evidence that has been detected, they were more detailed and regulatory than those included in the 1967 General Plan, and they appear to have had relatively little impact.

In 1981, the STEP committee process was brought back for a report card and re-evaluation process.  The report at the end of this effort included subcommittee headings such as city buildings, cultural affairs, economic development, issues of the elderly, housing, long-range financing, neighborhood revitalization, parks and open space, public safety, resource conservation, transportation and issues of youth.  For the most part, this process substantiated the recommendations of the earlier committees.

Of general note about these processes was an emphasis on the Southwestern culture (particularly Native American), environment and lifestyles. The sense was that Scottsdale was a leader in appreciating the unique setting of the Southwest.

In summary, citizen participation and collaboration with city leadership through the STEP program brought about significant changes and advancements for Scottsdale, including:

• Comprehensive general planning
• The Indian Bend Wash greenbelt
• A city-wide parks system
• A municipal water system
• Significant control of outdoor signage
• Underground utilities
• Design review
• The Senior Centers
• Museums and the Center for the Performing Arts
• The “Resort Corridor”
• Bikeways
• Emphasis on open space
• And many more attributes that make Scottsdale a better place to live, work and play.

The ingredients necessary for this to add lasting value to the community were:

• A group of citizens willing to commit time, energy and perspective; and who were prepared to reach consensus and develop collaborations. They also were prepared to learn about the past and the present as well as consider a wide range of possible futures. They had heated discussions at times and differed on how to achieve the goals, but they were willing to abide by the consensus reached by the group.
• City leadership willing to take risks and make decisions. The risks were not rash but well informed and taken after a wide range of options had been considered. They were also willing to accept failures but were prepared to learn from them and continue to press forward.
• The citizens and leadership were focused on vision and values, with the horizon being a long range ahead. Some of the goals and ideas brought up through the STEP program were not reached or achieved for 20 and even 40 years.  There often were differences on how to achieve the consensus vision, but the vision was held in common.
• The greatest failure of the STEP process became a lack of passing the baton on to the next group of newcomers to Scottsdale as the community grew. Within 10 years of the program ending, very few people were aware of the program and most no longer understood or accepted the visions, values and priorities so many had worked to achieve. The forward thinking, “can do” attitudes and willingness to compromise and build consensus that characterized the STEP process became lost. Instead of a focus on community, control shifted to local interests, short-term thinking, fear of making decisions and the unwillingness to support actions that achieved city-wide benefit.

Don Hadder is a retired city planner, long-time resident of Scottsdale and a local historical resource.