Comments on: 8 Great Reasons to Create Desert Edge in Scottsdale

By: James Hauswirth

James Hauswirth — Mon, 02 Apr 2018 04:23:24 +0000

In reply to Allan Winston. This is the most sane assessment of the White Elephant the majority of City Council and the former Mayor are trying to make us pay for. I am not sure the Citizens of Scottsdale should have to subsidize the project no matter where it is going to end up. We do not need any more debt. Lets pay our debt down.

By: Allan Winston

Allan Winston — Tue, 02 Jan 2018 15:14:57 +0000

I agree that the DE should not be built in the Gateway preserve. When the Gateway opened some years ago it was a pleasure to hike and enjoy. In recent years it has been a hassle with too many hikers, bikers etc and we have moved our hikes to the Brown Ranch trailhead.
Do we really need another edifice to teach the next generation about the desert? Let them explore the Desert Botanical Garden. Leave the Gateway as it is. and move on.

By: The Peak

The Peak — Fri, 17 Nov 2017 23:14:08 +0000

In reply to Howard Myers. Thank you for your well-written comment. I know readers respect effort.

By: The Peak

The Peak — Fri, 17 Nov 2017 23:05:18 +0000

In reply to Andrea Keck. Thank you for a well-written comment. Taking the time helps The Peak.

By: The Peak

The Peak — Fri, 17 Nov 2017 22:38:15 +0000

In reply to Albert Shank. Thank you for your well-written comment. Your comment brought to memory my introduction to the land that became the preserve. I was fortunate to enjoy an adventurous jeep ride with Greg Woodall, Carla's archaeologist brother, in 1994. He explained the vision and we drove from Lost Dog Wash to what is now the Gateway Trailhead, on to what is now the site of the Tom's Thumb Trailhead and Brown's Ranch. I had taken a archaeology class at SCC in the recent past and he took me to several archaeology sites. This was just before the first public vote and my being appointed to the Preserve Commission. Sure, I been in the Preserve many times,hiked many of the trails, and know and respect many good people who were involved in creating the preserve.

By: Albert Shank

Albert Shank — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 18:00:46 +0000

Have you actually been in the preserve? Put on some hiking shoes and go for a nice 3 hour walk through the preserve. You don’t need a “desert center” to appreciate the beauty. It’s already there. This message is coming from someone who has run and hiked every single trail in the preserve. Putting a monstrosity of a building on the preserve goes against everything that it stands for, which is PRESERVATION! If the Navajos can vote not to put a blight on the Grand Canyon, then Scottsdale voters can, too. Let the people vote on it, and see what happens!

By: Roderick Stilson

Roderick Stilson — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 08:09:25 +0000

In reply to Howard Myers. Great comments Howard. And you didn't even get into the flaws in the business plan that will cost Scottsdale citizens about $5,000,000 a year.

By: Howard Myers

Howard Myers — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 04:47:57 +0000

The concept of educating people about the desert is good, but there are huge downsides to the proposal to do that. For example here are 8 to match your 8 reasons to support it. However these 8 are based on facts, not opinion:
1. The location couldn’t be worse, not only in the Preserve that we paid for to save the land from being developed, but at the highest use trail head in the Preserve making it even more congested. Already the number of visitors at the Gateway is going down, because it is too crowded, so what happens when we add another 300,000 people a year there?
2. Yes it woun’t require new taxes because they are raping the Preserve fund we thought would be used to buy more land, and also taking a lot of bed tax dollars that are needed for other tourism venues.
3. The fact is there has been NO study that shows this “attraction” will bring even one more tourist to Scottsdale so is it worth not buying additional land for the Preserve and depleting our bed tax fund? There was one independent study that claimed it won’t bring more tourists but will drain the city financially. The city has to be responsible for all the financial debt if it is located in the Preserve. BAD DEAL.
4. ASU is getting labs built in our Preserve at our cost, no cost to ASU. What makes this right?
5. The McDowell Sonoran Conservancy (MSC) already does education AND research in the Preserve at no cost to the city and in full conformance with the Preserve Ordinance. The DDC or DE will hurt the MSC and already has by stealing funding the MSC used to get. We need the MSC to maintain the Preserve, we don’t need the DE.
6. The DE will violate many of the Rules in the Preserve Ordinance, the ordinance that was to protect the Preserve and prevent it from morphing into a park. BTW even though it was known that the DDC was moved into the Preserve when this ordinance was drafted, there was NO mention of the DDC or even an educational center in the ordinance and no exclusion from the rules for any such use.
7. There is a huge public resistance building as people learn about it. All the surveys done (at least 5 that I know of including some by the city) show 75 to 95% of the public is opposed to putting it in the Preserve. The MSC has also issued a statement against locating it in the Preserve.
8. Most of the Preserve founders (Pete Chasar, Greg Woodall, Jane Rau, Carla, and the late Chet Andrews) and former Mayor Manross, are highly opposed to putting the DE in the Preserve.
I could go on, there is a lot more but the bottom line is this commercial venture doesn’t belong in OUR Preserve. If it is so great either submit it to a public vote or move it outside the Preserve and fund it differently. We shouldn’t destroy our Preserve, and also pay for it without a public vote to allow it or not in the Preserve.

Yep the facts dispute all 8 reasons. Also do you realize that they intend to use Preserve funds, intended to buy more land for the Preserve, to build it and the city is on the hook for all yearly overruns (can’t use Preserve tax for that). They are destroying the concept of a Preserve, taking money we dedicated to buy land to build it, and using up bed tax revenues to cover operating cost overruns. Also ASU gets free labs at our expense. Great deal.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 04:38:33 +0000

As an over 30 year resident of Scottsdale this is the exact opposite of what Scottsdale needs in our preserve as well as what we should be spending tax dollars on. Pretty sure there is already something like this and it’s called the desert botanical garden…….no Need for our own.

By: Jolene Drinkwater

Jolene Drinkwater — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 03:45:49 +0000

I love the idea of preserving the Sonoran Desert. I voted for it twice,

In my opinion, this potential development and the bringing of crowds will be adverse to preservation of the natural, beautiful Sonoran desert.

Thank you.