The Pols Vying For Supervisor's District 4 Must Face Our Community's Biggest Issue.
By Chris Limberis
ASSUME NOTHING when it come to growth and development in
the Republican three-way race for the Board of Supervisors in
Pima County's District 4.
The real-estate agent appointed to the seat, Ray Carroll, came
in wearing green--and not because he's Irish. On his first day
in office, he swore his opposition to the looming Canoa Ranch
development to appease Democratic Supervisor Raul Grijalva, and
also preached about the crap that unbridled development has brought.
Combined with a promise to leave the county healthcare system
as Grijalva wanted it, Carroll's Canoa stance pulled in the necessary
support for him to replace John Even, a Republican who died four
months into his term as the District 4 supervisor.
Now Carroll has sucked up the biggest pile of developer and construction
cash to help him defend--against Even's widow, Brenda, and Ken
Marcus--the seat handed to him in June 1997.
Even, a lame-duck Tucson Unified School District Board member,
has not been the growth magnet conventional wisdom held earlier
in the race. Her ambivalence and equivocation may have slowed
the flow of cash. She has yet to say whether she supports Canoa,
a defining issue greater in size than the Rocking K Ranch development,
which helped shape a couple sets of full Board of Supervisors
election campaigns, as well as a mayoral campaign seven years
ago.
Marcus, the thoughtful accountant, is of mixed political persuasion:
A green Republican himself, Marcus is a property rights proponent
as well as a development critic. His opposition to Canoa is muted.
But there's more to District 4 growth wars than Canoa. Indeed,
the fixes to the county's Buffer Overlay Zone Ordinance (BOZO)
and the Hillside Development Zone, which the Board of Supervisors
will consider August 11, have provided another area of distance
among Carroll, Even and Marcus. But it's the ranch that big parts
of District 4 are watching.
Canoa Ranch
THE CANOA RANCH, part of a Spanish land grant, lies just
south of Green Valley, the voter-rich retirement community. Fairfield
Homes, which developed Green Valley, is preparing to seek the
supervisors' approval to build 6,111 homes on 5,238 acres there.
But the anticipated election showdown over Canoa won't happen.
The proposed plan is still under review by county planning officials.
Canoa's lead planning consultant, Frank Thomson, is responding
to county questions on his third submittal.
County planner Frank Behlau says Canoa has yet to be put on a
schedule for the Planning & Zoning Commission, the 10-member
advisory panel that includes Grijalva's sister, Lydia.
Built over 25 to 30 years, Canoa would put about 13,500 more
people in the Santa Cruz River Valley. The plan also includes
nearly 2,000 acres of open space, most of which is along the river
and washes that lace the property.
Grijalva, who says his family lived on the ranch while his father
worked as a ranchhand there, wants nothing built on Canoa. He's
opposed the Canoa process since it started several years ago when
developers went through the first step, winning an amendment to
the county's porous Comprehensive Land Use Plan. To those who
asked about his intense interest in a matter well outside his
central Tucson and westside District 5, Grijalva proclaimed: "The
county is my district."
Grijalva failed last year to block Fairfield's rezoning of a
298-acre portion of the Canoa property. Weak from his fight with
cancer, John Even endured Grijalva's poorly run and overly long
meeting and provided the third vote, with Republican Mike Boyd
and Democrat Dan Eckstrom, to approve Fairfield's first Canoa
rezoning--500 homes on 298 acres.
A big part of Canoa lies in District 4, while another portion
is within c-shaped and mostly rural District 3, represented by
Democrat Sharon Bronson. While there is mixed reaction to Canoa
in Green Valley, a small but vocal bunch in District 3 oppose
it.
Carroll made Grijalva and the environmentalists smile when he
spoke against Canoa last year. He says he hasn't changed, but
he offers a peculiar position:
"I don't support it," Carroll says. "Not in its
present condition. That's not a solid no and never yes.''
Instead of a new Fairfield community, Carroll wants to preserve
the ranch under a Smithsonian Institution concept. He wants to
supplement county bonds for the ranch purchase with private and
federal money. Fairfield officials have been slightly bemused
by Carroll's push.
Even, meanwhile, has derided Carroll for what she considers empty
plays to the media. She also has questioned the legality of his
preservation proposal, though she has not provided specifics.
Marcus says Carroll displayed "a loose-cannon approach to
the Smithsonian proposal. He didn't talk to his colleagues. He
didn't talk to the property owners, and he didn't talk to the
City Council when the city also wants to do some Smithsonian project.
Plus, we don't have the money for it."
Even, whose campaign is dominated by promises to "study"
nearly every issue, has not veered on Canoa. She's pledged to
weigh proposals from Fairfield, opponents and Green Valley residents
before making any decision.
Marcus, who blends his Republican environmentalism with property-rights
defense and fiscal caution, does not favor the Canoa development.
As it has for Even and Carroll, Canoa has presented a consternating
issue for the Marcus camp.
"I'm concerned about commercial and residential development
near the river. I've seen that river full, and that will be a
real problem," says Marcus, who grew up in Santa Cruz County.
"There is also concern over the number of septic systems
they may use on the eastside."
Development Ordinance Revision
CARROLL AND HIS fellow supervisors will provide political
theater on Tuesday, appropriately enough at downtown's Leo Rich
Theater, where they'll hear howls of outrage about the zoning
revisions the Planning & Zoning Commission recently punted
their way. The buffer ordinance, adopted by supervisors on a hot
June night in 1988, after memorable and crafty amendments by then-Democrat
Ed Moore, increases building restrictions and setback requirements
for the owners of land within one mile of federal, state and county
parks and other preserves.
Under the proposed revisions recommended after two contentious
Planning & Zoning meetings, setbacks will be 150 feet, and
expanded to 300 feet if the property is rezoned. Property owners
must agree to leave 30 percent of the land as open space, increasing
to 50 percent if the parcel is rezoned.
The older hillside development restrictions will forbid construction
within 300 feet of a protected peak if the property is being rezoned,
and 150 feet under current zoning.
Changes, recommended by a narrow planning commission majority,
will be delayed one year and would include tax abatement, though
that has not been settled by lawyers.
The proposed revisions have kicked up a whole lot of dust. Veteran
property rights advocate Don Golos, a player in the successful
recall of City Council members in 1976, wants to recall Grijalva--a
virtual impossibility--and Bronson, who's in a waffle iron because
she's also angered environmentalists.
So Carroll and his political opponents had better pay attention.
Though it doesn't like blade-and-scrape developments, the overwhelmingly
Republican District 4 is conservative and values property rights.
Carroll says the revisions are "watered down" sufficiently
to be acceptable, or at least flexible.
"This board has shown the willingness to discuss growth
like none of our predecessors," Carroll says in a bit of
an overstatement.
Opposition, Carroll says, arose out of "the fears that have
been brought about by half-truths generated by wildcat subdivider
types.''
Marcus and Even both denounced the revisions as hasty, though
they both say development regulations must be reviewed and enforced.
"These were done in response to the state downzoning law,
effective August 21," Marcus says. "And whenever you
do something hastily to beat some deadline, there will be problems.
This has created divisiveness.''
All three candidates say property owners must be afforded an
appeals process and also be compensated if their land is taken.
Voters in Pima County Supervisor's district 4 will decide among
Carroll, Even and Marcus on September 8. Voter registration closes
August 10.
|