By Suzanne Cook Catlin

Written by Suzanne Cook Catlin

Estimated Reading Time: 4 minutes

Ronald Reagan once commented on how the values of the Democratic Party had shifted when he said, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me.” Prescott, Arizona, conservatives could easily apply that to Prescott. “I didn’t leave Prescott’s conservative, small-town values; Prescott’s values left me.”   

New Groups Claim to Fight for Prescott’s Conservative Values

You might have been led to believe that several new “groups” are fighting for conservative values, but you’d be wrong. Overdevelopment at the expense of residents isn’t a conservative value.  

These groups are primarily backed by recent California newcomer Chad DeVries, also known as Chad Wade and Wade Chad, who earns his living as a real estate investor and developer. Perhaps that’s why he wrote an opposition argument against the protection of Prescott City’s open spaces in perpetuity.  

Who else opposes protecting our open spaces?  Chad’s allies and others who support poorly managed growth are Tony Hamer and Linda Nichols. Others include Linda Grey, Sherri Hanna, and Michelle Hamer, who are waging a campaign against targeted city officials.

What was the “sin” of these officials to provoke their wrath? Two of them chose not to vote for Sherri Hanna to fill a vacant city council seat. Hanna, a former government postal worker, ran for county supervisor a few years ago and was resoundingly rejected by the voters. Her husband had been a Prescott City Councilman before his tragic death from downwinders. Sherri’s volunteer work is notable, but that doesn’t mean she’s necessarily the right person for the city council.  

Unfortunately, Sherri and her friends have employed tactics that have worked in their favor many times in the past, attempting to destroy anyone they perceive as getting in their way. She’s ambitious. Unfortunately, we have too many candidates and elected officials like that now. It’s time for government to be run more like a business, not a good old boys club for the Prescott elites. 

How “Water Rights” Became “Water Privileges”

Growth is inevitable, but out-of-control growth like Orange County, CA., and other California counties isn’t.  It’s happening in Arizona, specifically in Prescott. Unfortunately, the recent session of the legislature passed a bill signed by the Governor that allows farmers to sell their water rights. The people most likely to buy them are developers. In addition to the influx of people fleeing California for the political safe haven of Arizona, you can now add the housing needed to support 10 new plants being built here.  

Four of the plants are artificial intelligence chip factories that use tremendous amounts of water in the cooling process.  When asked the question ‘where’s all the water coming from to support these plants’ the only answer given was by one person. They’ll recapture the used water and recycle it. No mention of evaporation. The first plant is currently being built near Lake Pleasant, off Interstate 17. It’s projected that roughly 2,000 housing units are being built to support the workforce of just that one plant. Many Taiwanese nationals are relocating here to support the plant.  

Softbank has committed to Trump a $1 trillion investment in a robot factory that will be located in Arizona. The plans for this plant aren’t yet available, but it will undoubtedly require a large workforce and housing to support it.

Intelligent Growth or Haphazard Development?

Growth is inevitable.  Arizona is at a crossroads, where our growth going forward can be planned with ample open spaces and services near homes, which will mitigate the impact of city sprawl and its effect on people’s psyche.

There are huge problems that need to be solved, hopefully before development loses its collective mind.  

These are the same people who freaked at the idea of more bike paths and other good ideas in the General Plan. A closer review of the provisions was a good idea. It’s essentially a boilerplate template using leftist language, but what separates the plan from mere ideas is the absence of mandates, regulations, fines, and force. Not all ideas in the plan are bad ones.  Prescott’s status as a top-tier mountain biking community, combined with the growing popularity of electric bikes, supports the development of better bike lanes. As for the more odious ones, many are a result of mandates issued in the past by federal agencies. These will likely change as the Trump administration seeks to reduce and minimize government overreach, and those sections of the plan will likely be revised or voided.

 Prioritizing Problem-Solving and Smart Planning

At the top of the list of problems to be solved are stretched healthcare resources, infrastructure such as roads and highways, basic services (including emergency, educational, and shopping areas), water scarcity and groundwater depletion, construction labor shortages, habitat loss, altered drainage patterns, and regulatory chaos and legal challenges. These problems pose the challenge of creating a delicate balance between the need for innovative development and adequate planning, without the exploding taxes that will be needed to pay for much of it by our cities, counties, and the State.

What does this have to do with Prescott? Its growth has been accelerating in the last several years, and developers, current residents, “old time” residents, and newcomers are clashing. The city council, in its foresight, planned and began buying parcels of pristine land to set aside for future generations.  

Open Spaces v Parks

The developers and their friends want open space to be used for parks and other things. It makes sense because they don’t want to be required to provide those essentials in the tracts of endless houses that all look alike.  Highway 69 through Dewey is a residents’ nightmare with small houses packed together next to the highway.

Another serious problem is the very real risk of fire. As Prescott packs in more people, evacuation becomes questionable. A California-like Pacific Palisades fire opens the question of how Prescott would evacuate a significant portion of its population. A quick analysis of local roads struggling to keep up with growth shows that it would be nearly impossible.

One cost-effective and straightforward solution to fire prevention is to clear open space land through grazing.  Grazing keeps combustible fuel (primarily grass and weeds) from getting out of control. Chilton v. the Center for Biological Diversity is a compelling story of how leftist agencies and NGO’s have attempted to destroy cattle ranching.  It explains in detail how ranchers often know the environment better than most environmentalists, and grazing can reduce fires.

However, too many developers aren’t interested in solutions.

Once a workable plan with cost-effective solutions is in place that the people of Prescott can adopt, it’ll be time to consider changes to the Charter Amendment. To do otherwise puts the horse before the cart. In the meantime, be leery of people who make unsubstantiated claims, hide their identities under fake organizations whose intent is to feed you one-sided information, make promises they don’t keep (like releasing documents), and who have a vested interest in the outcome.

Sourced from PRICKLY PEAR