From the May 23, 2001 edition of . . . 

Pinal County residents gather for more insight into Willow Springs last week

       Over 125 Pinal County residents crowded the Pinal County Board of Supervisors hearing room on May 16 to participate in a public hearing on the Willow Springs Rezoning Proposal, Phase 1.

       The Phase 1 plan calls for building 8,516 units near the Page-Trowbridge Landfill, off Willow Springs Road.

       The developer seeks an ultimate build-out of 24,096 units with a total population of 81,830 residents.

       Most of the citizens were present to testify against passage of the Willow Springs rezoning/PAD; four citizens spoke in favor of the project; 29 citizens spoke in disapproval.  Each was allowed three rather than the standard five minutes of testimony.

       Mary Ellen Kazda presented testimony to support her claim that the Willow Springs proposal violated the county's own zoning ordinance requirements.

       Bill McGovern, from Oracle, blamed all opposition speakers (ranchers, hunters, residents from Highway 79, San Tan, Coolidge and Oracle) for creating the energy crisis and endorsed efforts to drill for oil in the Arctic wilderness.  He claimed to represent a "silent majority."

       With most of the testimony complete, the supervisors abruptly declared an executive session to discuss legal concerns.  After conferring with Deputy County Attorney McClean for 25 minutes, a unanimous vote was taken in favor of the rezoning/PAD.

       Commenting on the decision, Supervisor Sandie Smith, from Apache Junction, declared she was "just going along" with the opinion of Supervisor Lionel Ruiz in whose district the rezoning resides.  She stated that "I go along with him because he goes along with me when I want something in my district."

       The Willow Springs Development is 25 miles from San Manuel and its economic benefits to the area are hotly debated by the Chambers of Commerce and a regional economic development group.

       Those opposing the development argue that valuable water and wildlife resources will be squandered, tourism undercut, only a few low paying jobs created and taxes increased for infrastructure at the county taxpayers expense.

       There is widespread concern that expected "big box" stores such as Wal-Mart will undermine many of the small businesses in San Manuel, Mammoth and Oracle.  Pinal County itself has provided no data one way or the other.

       Consultants for the landowners, Anam, Inc., supplied no economic data to bolster its claim of economic benefits to the region.

       Opponents of the proposal, Web Parton, and Cinnamon Sheik, presented specific data to bolster their contention that future growth in area tourism could have a positive economic impact and produce good paying jobs.

       A disabled former police officer from Coolidge stated that he had evidence that two of the project's backers had criminal records.   This was an apparent reference to a Wall Street Journal article of Nov. 27, 1993, which described Alex Argueta, applicant for the landowner, as spending 16 months in a Mexican prison for a bank loan repayment dispute in that country in the early 1990's.

       According to U.S. Bankruptcy Court Records, the landowner, Anam Inc., filed for bankruptcy in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in 1993.  According to that same report, an Anam investor, Bruce Stuart MacKenzie, also filed for Bankruptcy at that time.

       In a last minute move, Supervisor Ruiz pleaded with the applicant to give Pinal County $700 per house for a traffic study.  The applicant agreed.

       Conservative estimates of costs per house to Pinal County are $3,500.  Pima County, which assess fees of $1,500 per house, has declared that amount insufficient to cover costs to taxpayers.

       Some communities in Arizona assess development fees of up to $7,000 per home.  These fees protect current taxpayers from paying for new libraries, sheriff's sub-stations, road construction, etc., required by new development.

       Troy T. Hawks, vice president, Western Gamebird Alliance, stated that the development would destroy the best quail hunting area in Arizona.  Other testimony argues that destruction of this vital economic asset was irresponsible and undercut local economic development efforts.  Hunters spend hundreds of dollars per day in surrounding communities.

       County official sidestepped the issue of the Comprehensive Plan.  Several citizens requested that the rezoning be postponed until the Comprehensive Plan, required by State Law to be completed by Dec. 31, 2001 is finished.

       Many residents have volunteered to participate on a planning team but county officials haven't responded.  State law specifies a process which counties must follow to establish a Comprehensive Plan.