Comments on: Christine Kovack: DDC “will be extraordinarily respectful of the preserve …”

By: Nancy Voorhees

Nancy Voorhees — Sun, 05 Feb 2017 07:23:42 +0000

At the January 2016 council meeting, funding of $1.7 million was discussed and approved by city council, to continue exploration of the DDC.
In response to public outcry at this meeting, It was stated explicitly that the specific location for the DDC was not yet finalized. The implication was that this exploratory money would be used broadly, to vet other locations as well. It was not until the following spring, at the public outreach meetings conducted by DDSCI, that citizens learned this was NOT the case; that the exploratory work funded by the
$1.7 MM would occur ONLY at the Gateway. Citizens were shocked and outraged. To dampen the controversy, city officials implied, or actually stated directly that people would get to vote on it. But there was no guarantee of this; they were just nice sounding words.

Within the next several months, council members began seeding their opinions that there was no need to buy more land for the Preserve; there was enough already , and that buying more now would be too expensive.
And the final coup de tat was announced shortly thereafter: use the many millions of dollars in the Preserve Fund Reserves to BUILD the DDC
( important because private investment concerns weren’t interested in assuming this level of funding. ) The added bonus to proponents of the DDC would be that if Preserve Funds were used, citizens would never get to force a referendum on this issue (by securing x number of signatures.)

We get it. There has been a hidden strategic plan in place to ram this down citizens’ throats, and take away their say. The process has been a sham, and no nice sounding words can change that. It is shocking that there could occur such a breech of trust with the people, who voted numerous times to tax themselves, to create and maintain into perpetuity, a pristine Preserve. The council should do the only honorable thing, and take it to a citizen vote.

By: Betty Janik

Betty Janik — Sat, 04 Feb 2017 20:39:22 +0000

In response to the article by Christine Kovack in the Arizona Republic-
The citizens of Scottsdale should have a vote on the construction of the DDC. It is our Preserve and our money. City Council is avoiding this vote because they fear the outcome will be against the DDC in our Preserve, especially at the Gateway Trailhead. By using clever legal maneuvering, City Council is trying to circumvent the will of the people. The single best way to honor the Preserve and what it stands for, is to leave it in its pristine natural state. I do not trust anything that the DDCSI people have to say. Documents show discussions on jeep tours, concert venues, restaurants, etc. Just like there are documents prohibiting a DDC in the Preserve without a vote, City Council seems unwilling to stop the march forward by the DDCSI in violation of City Charter, Bond elections and the City Ordinance.

By: Howard Myers

Howard Myers — Sat, 04 Feb 2017 20:25:26 +0000

In reply to Howard Myers. One other thing, the ONLY way to respect the Preserve, the original founders of it, and all the citizens who voted for it, use it, and support it, is to stay out of the Preserve. The Preserve was formed specifically to prevent development on preserved land and building the DDC in the Preserve does not respect any of that. There are viable sites just outside the Preserve that would be perfect for a DDC, give it even more visibility to tourists, wouldn't impact the Preserve or the existing users of it, and would avoid significant public opposition, but the DDCS group Christine represents will not even consider an alternate site and have told residents that the DDCS will not accept ANY comments on the location. So much for public input. You should also know that the vast majority of citizens involved in the Preserve effort, including the original founders, oppose putting the DDC in the Preserve.

By: Mike Norton

Mike Norton — Sat, 04 Feb 2017 19:51:38 +0000

I must respectfully disagree with this article. I have reviewed over 10,000 pages of the DDC history. I have listened to and read repeated statements of Christine Kovack, Sam Campana, Linda Milhaven and Virginia Korte where they repeatedly state the “alternative means of transportation and access to the Preserve are required for those who do not hike, bike or ride horses”.

I also have in my possession the request made by Kovack for the Templates for Special Use Permits for Jeep use in the Preserve that she made of the City Council and City Staff in 2014 and 2015 just after the DDC Advocates Group was founded and the DDCSI Contract with the City was evolving.

It is preposterous to pretend that there is no discussion of jeeps in the Preserve. The documents prove otherwise.

By: Howard Myers

Howard Myers — Sat, 04 Feb 2017 18:04:23 +0000

Again a lot of misleading information which is typical of the Desert Discovery Center Scottsdale Group (DDCS). The claim that the DDC was always envisioned is totally false as the DDC wasn’t moved into the Preserve until 1997, and it was moved by tourism staff without even informing the McDowell Sonoran Preserve Commission (citizen commission responsible for everything related to the Preserve). Early studies,and even the Access Area Report (1999), talked about educational opportunities and park like amenities like ramadas and picnic tables, but when the Preserve Ordinance was drafted and passed in 2000, it specifically prohibited bringing food into the Preserve, concessions, night time operations, etc. all to prevent the Preserve from being morphed into a park. In Chet Andrew’s famous quote “it is a Preserve not a Park”. Also, both the educational and research goals were picked up by the interpretative trails and the McDowell Sonoran Conservancy that conducts educational hikes, lectures and has a full research branch, all in full compliance with the Preserve Ordinance. Also, early versions of the DDC were very small, compatible with the existing trail head, but since that time it has morphed into a destination attraction all by itself. Even DDCS claims that the DDC will violate the rules in the Preserve Ordinance, but somehow they feel they are allowed to while those rules were established specifically to keep the Preserve from being a park and there were NO exclusions or exceptions for a DDC or anything like it, specifically for that reason.

In the end this is all about keeping the Preserve just that, preventing it from becoming just another city park, and from being commercialized. This Preserve belongs to the people, not to city leaders and special interests, so if the DDC is such a great thing, let the public vote on it, it is their Preserve. For more http://protectourpreserve.org/resources/

By: Todd Rash

Todd Rash — Sat, 04 Feb 2017 17:17:33 +0000

The original placement of the DDC was suppose to be in the area of Pinnacle Peak Park. Those neighbors got together and stopped it. They even temporarily closed access to Pinnacle Peak to the public because of it. I might be a little sketchy on the details because I didn’t think about the DDC for years. But it was thought of as a bad idea in the beginning and looked at as a way for a few people to profit from the Preserve. But apparently bad ideas have a way of coming back up; just like a bad burrito. Turning a portion of the Preserve into a commercial development is a very bad idea on so many levels. It will set a precedent that will allow even more intrusion into the Preserve. The concept of the DDC and those behind it show the ultimate disrespect for the Preserve and all the citizens of Scottsdale who voted for the Preserve and paid for it. If it’s such a great idea, why don’t they ask the citizens of Scottsdale to vote on it? It’s because the city’s own survey showed nearly 95% of respondents were against the DDC. (But then they claimed the survey was bogus.) We can’t let a few bad apples destroy the best thing Scottsdale has ever done. #NoDDC!

By: Jason Alexander

Jason Alexander — Sat, 04 Feb 2017 16:53:42 +0000

Ms. Kovach has done some wonderful things for the Preserve. If citizens’ right to vote was recognized, all questions as to Kovach’s motives would disappear, we could rightfully laud her past actions, and the merits or lack-of for the DDC could be discussed rather than the controversy surrounding the process and its funding.

By: Patricia Shaler

Patricia Shaler — Sat, 04 Feb 2017 15:46:03 +0000

If the City Council is allowed to violate the City Charter and build any further on the Preserve with only the approval of 4 votes on the City Council, then neither Ms Kovach, nor anyone else, can anticipate what any 4 Council members will approve in the future.

This is the entire point – The Citizens of Scottsdale want the City Council to acknowledge the Scottsdale City Charter mandates a vote of the citizens who are paying to buy the Preserve before they can build and allow their campaign donors to profit from the Preserve.

Also, I did not see in the article where Ms Kovach explains why she requested, and received, RFP & Jeep Tour Permits in 2015 – 2 years after tours were moved to the Tonto Natl Forest.

By: Elizabeth Robkof

Elizabeth Robkof — Sat, 04 Feb 2017 05:13:54 +0000

Unfortunately Mr. Conklin you will not have the ability to evaluate anything. This project will be decided by four members of City Council.