| Author | Post |
|---|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 02:48 am |
|
Ya know, after reading posts in the last few days my observation is that the issues aren’t really with JU, they are with the ADEQ and State. Your issues are basically with the lack of regulation on JU not really with JU as a company; your opinion is a little biased based on the history between you and JU though. Let’s look at this objectively and put our opinions aside:
1. JU is what we have and it will take an act of congress (probably literally) for it to be taken over by a government entity. I don’t think that will happen either because George Johnson rightfully owns the company.
2. If JU wasn’t built according to ADEQ specs wouldn’t JU have to make changes?
3. Is JU providing us good clean water? The answer to this one is yes; I said in a post awhile back that I work for a company with the resources and laboratories to analyze water. I sent a sample in just to see what would come back. The water was contaminant free, had high TDS (1232 ppm; which is normal for AZ), hardness was around 17gpg (also normal for AZ), the copper was within acceptable levels as were all other metals, minerals, and heavy metals. The water out here is perfectly safe and in comparison to other MUNICIPALLY run sources (Phoenix—I tested theirs too) who have very high levels of copper which can be harmful.
4. Comparing the cost of water in Gilbert to the water out here isn’t a fair comparison because to DEVELOP the water infrastructure the people had to pay higher taxes. George Johnson on the other hand didn’t have us pay up front for the development we are paying on the back end.
5. Capitalism is the ultimate regulator. IF JU were to operate in a manner that was so egregious he would lose his business, reputation, clout, and probably a lot of money. He would end up bankrupt and his company would go to the public anyway (GM). You are making assumptions that Government doesn’t operate out of self-interest, control, and greed—which it does!!
6. Seizing a person’s well-being isn’t a democracy. I agree that the resident’s health and welfare is the ultimate goal behind providing water. But, objectively, ask yourself—has JU harmed anyone? I don’t know the answer to this question so I may be wrong but for the time I have lived out here I haven’t heard of anyone being harmed by the water out here.
7. I would agree that the Government doesn’t typically sue individuals (I’m not even sure its allowed)
8. You don’t agree that JU should self-regulate because it is a private company but you are okay with the Government self-regulating when it is typically much more corrupt—especially out here in Pinal County! I’m only saying there has to be a balance—I don’t believe in 100% unregulated capitalism because of greed nor do I believe in 100% government control because of corruption. I’m a Republican not a Libertarian!!
9. A Democracy isn’t about making the people 100% happy because that is impossible. Besides, (I have said this a few times) WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY, WE ARE A REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC!!! Under your definition of Democracy you believe that we should all be provided what we need and contribute as we are able and that is not the American way. There is nothing in the U.S. or Arizona Constitution that says “the government will provide all basic life-sustaining stuff” we should feel blessed that George Johnson decided to make an investment out here so we could have the infrastructure need to bring us water.
10. SRP is a for profit company that made $47 million in revenue in 2008 and it is a private company partnered with a State run district.
My final thought is that some individuals have a personal vendetta to serve against JU and no amount of state regulation will satisfy them. I don’t feel that we pay that much more than other municipalities for water and they have plenty of issues with their water too!!
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/35324
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0125phxwater25.html
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/mar/24/bn24watmain-warnings-continue/
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 12:41 am |
|
For risk of being sued again, by a private utility company, I cannot state that reason publically. IF it was government owned/run, I wouldn't hesitate to disclose it. I do have the reason. But just remember the city councilman's (Florence) remark in the newspaper. I believe it went something like this....."No one in their right mind would buy that facility for the price he's asking."
Competition is fine in business's like the Internet, and phone companies, and some other business's, but when it comes to the "health" of the people, I say let the people run it and oversee it. Yes....I'm for public healthcare also. When it comes to our health, I have a difficult time believing capitalism will look out for our health, without the profit motivator intervening. What they look for is how to increase their profits, and as we have witnessed before, they sometimes take "shortcuts" at our expense.
If you see the revenues earned by Johnson off of us, you'd be quite surprised how much a (or this one anyway) private utility company makes. IF you want to read a copy of the report, I have it, and you're welcome to do so. A city owned utility company working off of Johnson's revenue stream, would probably never have to depend on any other source of revenue to function and serve it's people, imo.
I still prefer being annexed also. I continue to work on that. And being annexed into Florence isn't all that bad after all imo. But QC is first choice.
And I would guess that there is a sense of urgency at the County level, to "release" us, and I'm sure it is financial constraints prompting it, among other things. But let's not continue to guess. Let's ask Bryan.
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 235 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 12:21 am |
|
Bambi,
Didn't Florence just do a study not too long ago regarding the purchase of the utility company you speak of and decide not to go through with the purchase? Do you know the reason they did not go forward?
I can't see how anyone at the present time could even be considering incorporating our area into a standalone city. As the recession batters city budgets around the U.S., some municipalities are considering the once unthinkable option of dissolving themselves through "disincorporation." (See links below) Several small towns in Washington state, Colorado and California are considering disincorporation seriously. Vallejo, CA, a good sized city just North of San Francisco filed for bankruptcy protection last year and is seriously considering disincorporation. I'm confident counties aren't in much better financial shape either.
If a county like Pinal could encourage an unincorporated area like ours to incorporate, they'd be out from under one big financial burden themselves. Has anyone considered this may be the reason for the urgency coming out of the County Supervisors. Remember, they have a budget to balance also.
I do believe something needs to be done with our area; however, the startup costs of a new standalone city would be astronomical. Something our area could not afford with our limited business base. The HURF/LTAF funds and other sources of state revenue that would come into a new city wouldn't come close to balancing a budget. It is easy to say let's incorporate, but before we go down that path, someone needs to sit down and do the math.
I'd fully support annexation and believe that is the path we should be concentrating on.
http://washingtonindependent.com/44501/more-shrinking-cities-desperate-towns-move-to-disincorporate
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124337975286456249.html
http://www.showmedaily.org/2009/05/municipal-disincorporation.html
http://cominganarchy.com/2009/05/27/disincorporation/
|
azcats_01
Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 14th, 2009 12:18 am |
|
Republican_and_PROUD wrote: So how is Gilbert water NOT a monopoly? How would changing to a municipal water provider not be trading one monopoly for another?
There is no competition in the utility market because it is monopolized by the GOVERNMENT!!! What we need is MORE private utility companies not less. If we were able to have more private utility companies such that we could choose the one we want amongst several (like there normally is with cable/satellite TV, internet service, phone/cellular service, etc.), then I wouldn't be against private utility companies as there would be competition.
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 10:56 pm |
|
Republican_and_PROUD wrote: So how is Gilbert water NOT a monopoly? How would changing to a municipal water provider not be trading one monopoly for another?
There is no competition in the utility market because it is monopolized by the GOVERNMENT!!! What we need is MORE private utility companies not less.
Only if they are strictly regulated.....on site, by the regulators on a regular basis, and built to ADEQ specifications. It's much more difficult to regulate and hold private utility companies accountable, than municipal. It's all about control, self interest and greed, governing one's practices in capitalism. That is a missing component in Government run Plants. Ask Queen Creek. They just recently acquired a private utility company.
It should be the objective to acquire JU, if you become a city, as quickly as possible imo, and place it under the peoples (care) watchdogs....City Government, run by the local residents. The residents health and welfare is the issue here. Government run utility facilities are run by the People and for the People...not for profit or not run to intimidate it's customers or to initiate law suits for complaints about their service. None of that is allowed or will happen in a government (people) run facility. You're allowed to complain about Government run services and those running them, without repercussions of any kind. That's a Democracy at work.
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 10:42 pm |
|
Yes, Sandie didn't get envolved in the city vs no city debates, but perhaps she should have. What I mean by that is people in leadership roles that are "watching" over our welfare, should be able to have planners that can make good predictions by looking into the future to determine the consequences of a "booming" area such as ours, based on population growth statistics.
Perhaps Bryan should give us all a lesson on why we need to incorporate vs. stay County, and why he is playing this role of "match maker". I think we will all have a better understanding as to why he is doing this FOR US. Then we can ask him our questions regarding the whys. No one else appears to be taking the bull by the horns and getting this done. I appreciate his work on this.
King County, in the State of Washington, encourages unincorporated areas in their county to incorporate or annex all the time. Their rationale is that they are not set up to govern areas of high density in highly concentrated population centers.
"The King County Annexation Initiative is a County effort to PROMOTE annexation and incorporation of the remaining urban unincorporated areas (that is, areas outside city limits but inside the urban growth area) of King County, consistent with the state Growth Management Act and planning policies enacted over a decade ago by cities and King County government."
"The inefficiency of providing local services to a scattered patchwork of geographically isolated areas is another reason they promote this."
"Cities have a greater ability to provide urban local services than does the County, given both the variety of revenue tools available to cities, and given the fact that the tax revenue engines that support urban services—downtown commercial areas—are located in cities."
http://www.cityoffederalway.com/folders/home/businesseconomicdevelopment/projectsconstruction/proposedeastfederalwayannexationarea/Annexation%20Initiative.pdf
And yes, Bryan does read these posts so let's not jump to conclusions. I speak to him frequently on the phone. Call him if you don't think he's doing his job right and give him your suggestions on what he should be doing for us.....and not doing for us, within the scope of his job description.
|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 09:37 pm |
|
So how is Gilbert water NOT a monopoly? How would changing to a municipal water provider not be trading one monopoly for another?
There is no competition in the utility market because it is monopolized by the GOVERNMENT!!! What we need is MORE private utility companies not less.
|
azcats_01
Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 06:40 pm |
|
Republican_and_PROUD wrote: AZCat,
That's great that your water bill is so much lower than ours....what are your taxes like?
I pay $80(ish) a month for a family of 4 in a 2500 sq ft house....someone else on here pays $80(ish) a month for a family of 4 in a 1500 sq ft house...sounds like things are on the up-and-up to me...
I wish some of the people on here would stop attacking capitalism at work.
--R
I made a mistake earlier, my SWG (gas) bill is $30/month. My Gilbert Utility bill is ~60(ish) per month, but includes Trash, Recycle, Sewer, 3/4" meter fee, 7.8% tax, and water consumption (~$10 for 1000 gallons).
I have no problem with capitalism, but the utility company is a MONOPOLY and there is no reason for charging >2x than any other municipality in the Valley, IMO, other than GREED.
Last edited on Sat Jun 13th, 2009 06:45 pm by azcats_01
|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 05:52 am |
|
Living,
You have to be careful on here because people will make assumptions about you....me included!!! 
--R
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Coolidge |
| Posts: | 679 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 05:51 am |
|
JulieB wrote: I think this should have been done in a way that would have allowed the majority of the affected area to vote.
The people did vote and they elected Bryan. The benefit of a representative government is that you don't have to go to the polls for the minor stuff - LIKE THIS. There's a name opinion for every resident and in the end it won't matter a whit. What does matter is a zip code and a regional name.
|
Living in Arizona
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 63 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 05:49 am |
|
pcresident wrote: Living in Arizona wrote: Bryan was elected because folks wanted a change, and changing things he is.
All due respect to Supervisor Martyn, but you act like Sandi Smith was voted out. She retired.
I thought everyone here had known that Sandi Smith had retired, but thanks for pointing that out for those that didn't !
|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 05:48 am |
|
Living,
You got it right. NYBRIAN is a liberal and is attacking Bryan for doing the same things he glorifies Obama for?!??! Bryan is doing things and making things happen...keep in mind no one will be 100% happy with any elected official unless it is themselves. Sandie retired because she knew she couldn't be re-elected and decided to go out with in a positive way. Bryan made a decision which is what we elected him to do!!! Keep in mind, this is a republican form of government not a democracy. That means our voice was heard when we elected Bryan, we now have to allow him to do what he thinks is best for us. That doesn't mean we don't question him, that doesn't mean that we just accept what he says as gospel truth BUT we elected him and that is that. If you don't like it then in 2012 step up and run against him.....
|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 05:35 am |
|
AZCat,
That's great that your water bill is so much lower than ours....what are your taxes like?
I pay $80(ish) a month for a family of 4 in a 2500 sq ft house....someone else on here pays $80(ish) a month for a family of 4 in a 1500 sq ft house...sounds like things are on the up-and-up to me...
I wish some of the people on here would stop attacking capitalism at work.
--R
|
pcresident
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 |
| Location: | San Tan Valley |
| Posts: | 178 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 05:25 am |
|
Living in Arizona wrote: Bryan was elected because folks wanted a change, and changing things he is.
All due respect to Supervisor Martyn, but you act like Sandi Smith was voted out. She retired.
|
Maomoondog
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 5th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 04:11 am |
|
Bella Vista was not my first choice but it is certainly a name I can live with. I stand with Brian, At least we have someone that was elected by the people willing to stand up and make some hard decisions no matter the political fallout.
That being said, there didn't seem to be alot of community input in this decision. Perhaps Brian could give us an update with the reasons why. I suspect that there just wasn't time do that before the postal service needed a name for the new zip code boundries.
|
Bullwinkle
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 4th, 2009 |
| Location: | Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 7 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 02:53 am |
|
Living in Arizona wrote: Would there be such an uproar about the name for the area had SanTan Foothills or SanTan Vista had been chosen? I think not, but that is my opinion. Folks complained when Sandi Smith was in office she ignored our area, never did anything for us . Bryan was elected because folks wanted a change, and changing things he is. We have been here 5 years and people have been rehashing the some things over and over, again and again. It has gotten us NOWHERE ! I for one am thankful Bryan has taken the initiative to do something lord knows no one else has ! You are entirely right. Hurray for Bryan, for doing the job we elected him to do.
|
Living in Arizona
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 63 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 02:15 am |
|
| Would there be such an uproar about the name for the area had SanTan Foothills or SanTan Vista had been chosen? I think not, but that is my opinion. Folks complained when Sandi Smith was in office she ignored our area, never did anything for us . Bryan was elected because folks wanted a change, and changing things he is. We have been here 5 years and people have been rehashing the some things over and over, again and again. It has gotten us NOWHERE ! I for one am thankful Bryan has taken the initiative to do something lord knows no one else has !
|
2 cents
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 907 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 10:54 pm |
|
COSTING? You don't want to know how much is being spent on his new Copper Basin office and the stuff going into his AJ office. WTF? And we are led too believe the County is broke, has to cut back on pay and is firing people. But he sure looks good! WTF again?
|
nybrian
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 314 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 10:25 pm |
|
I've been (and am) out of town, but you're out of your mind if you think this is going to fly. Someone please find out how to recall this guy--I'm off all summer and will gladly stand on the corner getting signatures. Let's take our time and figure out something that works.
BTW, the way this thing is being handled is another reason that this incorporation is going to fail---it has left a bad enough taste that there is no way I'd vote for anything Martyn is pushing. In fact, I'll be the one standing there letting every voter know how much this scheme is going to cost us.
These guys are incompetent. Let's get this done ourselves rather than with these clowns running the show.
|
nunya
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 06:32 pm |
|
Lovethisarea wrote: azcats_01 wrote:
I think I would rather it stay UPC, than rush to something not voted on by the people. I would think changing it later to something else, such as during the incorporation process, would be extremely difficult.
I agree. Once people start putting a name on their mail and it shows up on maps that's pretty much it.
Why the rush? Seems we're in a big hurry to just do something.
BTW, my water bill is ~$85-$90 a month for family of 4 with grass front an back.
My house in Gilbert with a pool was ~$35-$40 a month. JU is high but it is what it is.
Last edited on Fri Jun 12th, 2009 06:36 pm by nunya
|
Lovethisarea
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 05:38 pm |
|
azcats_01 wrote:
I think I would rather it stay UPC, than rush to something not voted on by the people.
ditto
|
Lovethisarea
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 05:36 pm |
|
| In the original poll on here 30 people voted... only 7 of those voted for Bella Vista and I can see why... it was prob. the best option besides 'Other' which is what I and many others on here chose. So anyway, how many of the 200 chose Bella Vista? Surely not all of them. Did the 200 come up with the name choices? Were the 200 scattered around the San Tan area?
|
azcats_01
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 05:20 pm |
|
JulieB wrote: pcresident wrote: 200 people isn't even 1% of the people in this area, which would constitute a representative sample.
I was going to say the same exact thing. I like the name Bella Vista (I never cared for San Tan Foothills). However, I think this should have been done in a way that would have allowed the majority of the affected area to vote. That a "discussion" with 200 people throughout the community is what made the final decision does not sit well with me at all. I think I would rather it stay UPC, than rush to something not voted on by the people. I would think changing it later to something else, such as during the incorporation process, will be extremely difficult.
Also, an area that big should probably have 2 or 3 different "community" names anyways, IMO, regardless of how the Post Office wants to set up shop.
Last edited on Fri Jun 12th, 2009 05:20 pm by azcats_01
|
JulieB
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 05:13 pm |
|
pcresident wrote: 200 people isn't even 1% of the people in this area, which would constitute a representative sample.
I was going to say the same exact thing. I like the name Bella Vista (I never cared for San Tan Foothills). However, I think this should have been done in a way that would have allowed the majority of the affected area to vote. That a "discussion" with 200 people throughout the community is what made the final decision does not sit well with me at all.
|
pcresident
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 |
| Location: | San Tan Valley |
| Posts: | 178 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 04:59 pm |
|
azcats_01 wrote: pcresident wrote: My JU bill for a family of 4, 1400 sq ft w/ grass landscaping and broken drip system is only $95 a month. ONLY ?!?!
We pay ~$30/month for 2500 sq. ft. house on 10,000 sq. ft. lot, family of 4, in Gilbert w/ small grass area in the backyard and drip system for the rest. The majority of the $30 is for sewer/trash/taxes/fees. The actual water-use portion of the utility bill is like $6 or $7.
Compared to the $120 someone else quoted. LOL
|
azcats_01
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 04:57 pm |
|
pcresident wrote: My JU bill for a family of 4, 1400 sq ft w/ grass landscaping and broken drip system is only $95 a month. ONLY ?!?!
We pay ~$30/month for 2500 sq. ft. house on 10,000 sq. ft. lot, family of 4, in Gilbert w/ small grass area in the backyard and drip system for the rest. The majority of the $30 is for sewer/trash/taxes/fees. The actual water-use portion of the utility bill is like $6 or $7.
|
pcresident
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 |
| Location: | San Tan Valley |
| Posts: | 178 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 04:23 pm |
|
With all due respect to the supervisor, he doesn't live here, and doesn't have to live with the name that he has assigned to us. With the zip code changing, it is a good time to do this, but it's not the only time to do this. I think media blitz and town halls is the only way to do this, considering most of the 80,000 don't even know it's happening. 200 people isn't even 1% of the people in this area, which would constitute a representative sample.
My JU bill for a family of 4, 1400 sq ft w/ grass landscaping and broken drip system is only $95 a month.
|
Bullwinkle
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 4th, 2009 |
| Location: | Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 7 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 02:49 pm |
|
There is nothing wrong with Bella Vista.Let's move on, and support our supervisor,that we elected to handle our problems. Not having a name was a big problem. Read previous comments, and you will see that Queen Creek did not want us to have anything to do with there name. Let's move ahead with the name Bella Vista and be as proud as QC about there name.
Our water bill is 84$ for 1700 sq ft.
|
PJ22
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 164 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 09:01 am |
|
Our water tested really well; wasn't aware there was a 'water problem' out here.
We only pay $80, too.
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Coolidge |
| Posts: | 679 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 08:09 am |
|
nunya wrote: BryanMartyn wrote:
Bella Vista, AZ is a good compromise. Some hate it, some love it, most think it's okay. Now is the time to move ahead. Let's grow a 67 square mile community we can ALL be proud of.
What is the rush all of a sudden? Why is now the time to move ahead? Because you decided?
Something doesn't smell right.
This man doesn't make decisions for his own profit. Forget that. He's just seeking to jump a hurdle, a minor fluffy one about 'what is the name' - and move on. Saving countless hours of debate and and controversy. A rose by any other name....smells like a rose. Order up your new address labels and find another campaign. JU?
|
nunya
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 08:01 am |
|
BryanMartyn wrote:
Bella Vista, AZ is a good compromise. Some hate it, some love it, most think it's okay. Now is the time to move ahead. Let's grow a 67 square mile community we can ALL be proud of.
What is the rush all of a sudden? Why is now the time to move ahead? Because you decided?
Something doesn't smell right. I know you took money from George Johnson and then gave it back before the election when people found out and started wondering where your loyalty was. Does GJ have something else in the works for this area?
In my opinion Bella Vista is not a good compromise and just because you say it is doesn't make make me like it any more. I'd rather stick with Queen Creek than settle for Bella Vista.
Last edited on Fri Jun 12th, 2009 08:03 am by nunya
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Coolidge |
| Posts: | 679 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 07:54 am |
|
BryanMartyn wrote: Again, let me thank all who participated with their opinions and suggestions.
Bella Vista, AZ is a good compromise. Some hate it, some love it, most think it's okay. Now is the time to move ahead. Let's grow a 67 square mile community we can ALL be proud of.
Bella Vista is a good name and a pretty name, and now maybe the San Tan (rural) portion of the area can retain its identity while the higher density population can latch on to its own name and spring from there. I bet the web domain wars are raging for bella vista as we speak.
|
Lovethisarea
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 07:17 am |
|
| How many people total voted for Bella Vista? Just Curious.
|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 07:16 am |
|
Mine is only around $80 with a family of 4 and landscaping.....check your meters.
--R
|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 07:13 am |
|
Bryan,
This is one reason that I supported you and will continue to (well also because you are an Ayn Rand fan), you understand that being a populist isn't the way to go. I don't know who said it but more politicians and elected officials should live by it: "you can't make all of the people happy all of the time."
I'm not a big fan of Bella Vista but will we ever have a 100% agreement on the name? Never, and it takes a leader to step up and make a decision as you have done. You are a duly elected official and the majority chose you to represent us and that is what you are doing. I say we move with our new name and new zip code ASAP and start the process of re-marketing our area as the friendly community that has low crime and strong families.
Thanks,
--R
|
BryanMartyn
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 07:07 am |
|
Again, let me thank all who participated with their opinions and suggestions. Please allow me to address a couple things before we put this to bed and move ahead.
I do read every blog on the subject. Although I don't read newszap every day, I try and make a point to see what is happening in the area.
There is some confusion that newszap represents an accurate cross-section of the entire 80,000 citizen, 67 square mile community. Although I wish it were true, the multiple references to San Tan Foothills leads me to believe that most responders live in the southern portion of the community. I base this judgment on the responses I received from the communities in the northern portion of the community who voiced displeasure with the name San Tan Foothills. In fact, they were pretty clear that the community was much more than the mountain region. Therefore, San Tan Foothills was left off the selection list. At the same time, the suggestions Pecan Groves, AZ and Groves, AZ were left off the selection list for similar reasons. Very few in the southern portion identify with the fairly common/historical pecan ties in the northern region.
Some responders have wondered why I took the time to ask their opinion if their overall choice was not selected. As I've explained, this forum was used to validate the compromised selection of the entire community. And bloggers always provide timely, honest feedback.
Folks, I know that Bella Vista isn't perfect and doesn't sit well with everyone. I think most people understand that there is no single perfect name. There were dozens of great names that would have worked. The name Bella Vista represented the most widely accepted compromise of something in the middle of the communities of the north and the communities of the south.
It is important to remember that this community will thrive because it is willing to compromise. This is the first step in the combined future of 80,000 people. Working together is the key to creating a place where your grandchildren will want to raise their children.
Finally, I'm sorry that this process was rushed. Best case would have been a vote of the entire community. Best realistic case would have been a media blitz and town hall meetings with citizens providing suggestions and discussion about a compromised selection. Unfortunately, the change in zip code accelerated the selection. The HOA format was used to allow discussion and the blog was used to help validate the process. Bella Vista was the compromise if you take out the individual "other" selections (most were San Tan Foothills-type suggestions based upon the comments of the blog).
Bella Vista, AZ is a good compromise. Some hate it, some love it, most think it's okay. Now is the time to move ahead. Let's grow a 67 square mile community we can ALL be proud of.
Sincerely,
Bryan
|
pipeman
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 07:06 am |
|
Lovethisarea wrote: I have no clue how some people have water bills that are $80.... mine is about $120.00, there is only 2 of us and we have a pretty small yard. I think $120.00 is extremely steep for water.... where I lived before here my water/sewage AND trash was only about $50.00, here I have $120.00 just for water/sewage and then I pay about $47.00 for trash quarterly. Also why does the area next to Pecan Creek smell so strongly of sewage?
I was just gonna say the same thing, $80.00 a month? That's really hard to believe especially since we have to pay $45.00 a month just for a 1" water meter, which does not include water useage and those charges are 2.25/1,000 for first 7,000 gal and 2.50/1,000 for excess of 7,000 gal.
R and P, how long have you lived out here? One would have to assume it hasn't been very long.
|
Lovethisarea
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 06:50 am |
|
| I have no clue how some people have water bills that are $80.... mine is about $120.00, there is only 2 of us and we have a pretty small yard. I think $120.00 is extremely steep for water.... where I lived before here my water/sewage AND trash was only about $50.00, here I have $120.00 just for water/sewage and then I pay about $47.00 for trash quarterly. Also why does the area next to Pecan Creek smell so strongly of sewage?
|
Republican_and_PROUD
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Bella Vista, AZ |
| Posts: | 56 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 06:41 am |
|
Starleen,
This isn't pointed directly at you but I'm really getting sick of the charges of bad water out here. I work for a chemical company and we have the abilitities to analyze water because it is important to our business. I took a sample of water at my home and sent it in to our company. The results were that the water was just fine, in fact, the water in PHOENIX, MESA, and GILBERT all have very high copper levels that we don't and they all have higher levels of TDS and their water is harder than ours too. I'm not saying by any means that Johnson is a fantastic company but the man deserves to make money on his investment and my water bill for a family of 4 in a 2500 sq ft home with landscaping is only $80 a month which is affordable.
While attacking JU ask yourself if anyone else did anything to bring utilities to this area? Did City of Mesa or QC step up to make the investments in the infrastructure or did George Johnson? The man put his own money on the line to make our are a possibility and he deserves a profit on it--that's capitalism!!
Bottom line is that (1) we get clean water (2) yes, its a little more expensive (3) look at the records municipal water management has problems too!!!
--R
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Coolidge |
| Posts: | 679 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12th, 2009 04:14 am |
|
Republican_and_PROUD wrote: Starleen,
Contrary to the belief of many on this forum, Johnson Utilities isn't responsible for everything wrong in this area. We are very far from many of the places where people work and that is the main reason people don't want to live this far out.
San Tan is a worn-out name and I don't think we should keep holding on to it as a community. I like the Vistas name but something is lacking from that name and I'm not sure what it is.
Bella Vista is nice. I prefer something like Ironwood or Ocotillo or Mesquite because (like you said) they are short and sweet and can identify the community. They are also easier for marketing the area--Phoenix, Mesa, Gilbert, Chandler, Glendale, Avondale, Peoria...etc only have one word in their names.
-R
JU is the reason I chose not to move to the "San Tan" area, because of the incredibly high rates and the apparent poor management, including not replacing groundwater used.
|
nunya
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11th, 2009 11:33 pm |
|
BryanMartyn wrote: My fellow bloggers,
...
The majority of the suggestions on the blog revolve around the San Tan Foothills. Unfortuantely, having spent time with citizens living away from the mountains, many preferred to not call themselves San Tan Foothills. Based upon their input, the San Tan Foothills option was not a choice.
...
So did these "citizens living away from the mountains" also come up with Bella Vista?
Why is it that "based upon their input, the San Tan Foothills option was not a choice" given more weight than "the majority of the suggestions on the blog"?
I have wanted San tan Foothills for more than two years - well before you became our supervisor. Don't you live in AJ?
|
Living in Arizona
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 63 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11th, 2009 06:03 pm |
|
Bullwinkle wrote: I'm glad we're finally getting a name.I'm been waiting 4 years for this.I think Bella Vista is fine,and it's finally a done deal.I agree with pipeman,this is step one.I can' t wait for the area to keep moving forward.Thanks Bryan for doing the work,that should have been done a long time ago.
I'm with you there Bullwinkle. Finally someone is stepping up to the plate and helping this area move forward. We've been stuck in this rut too long.
|
azcats_01
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11th, 2009 05:02 pm |
|
History_101 wrote: San Tan over used? Come on now. I'm sure there are more then these few. Just a few more off the top of my head:
San Tan Area Chamber of Commerce - San Tan Area
San Tan Brewing Company - Chandler
San Tan Cafe - Queen Creek
San Tan Events - Pinal County
San Tan Ford - Gilbert
San Tan Foothills High School - San Tan Foothills
San Tan Freeway - Loop 202
San Tan Karate - Queen Creek
San Tan Learning Center - Gilbert
San Tan Mountain Regional Park - Pinal County
San Tan National Little League - Mesa
San Tan Sun News - Chandler
San Tan Vista - Chandler
San Tan Vista Golf - Sun Lakes
San Tan Vistas Ranch - Queen Creek
San Tan Vista Real Estate - Chandler
San Tan Vista Mortgage - Chandler
San Tan Boulevard - Chandler/Queen Creek
Santan Vistas Water Treatment Plant - South Gilbert
Santan Vista Drive - Eloy
And literally thousands more churches, businesses, subdivisions, etc.!
But I still prefer San Tan Foothills, followed by San Tan Vista. 
|
PJ22
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 164 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11th, 2009 05:01 pm |
|
I think that is what is so maddening; he puts a pretend poll up and ignores the actual results. When people across the valley scratch their heads at our strange new name, we need to make sure they know exactly who chose it for us and made us the laughing stock of the valley.
It's funny that some people think we should avoid San Tan anything because it is over-used; I say it's logical to use something that is already well used. Just like Fountain Hills has a name that describes their area, San Tan Hills or San Tan Foothills seemed logical to describe the area down this way.
Heck, why don't we just name it after our leaders that choose names for us: Dufus, AZ?
|
Lovethisarea
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11th, 2009 04:11 pm |
|
Google Search
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,110,000 for bella vista, az. (0.14 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,100,000 for san tan, az. (0.17 seconds)
Seems as though Bella Vista is a really popular name in Sierra Vista, AZ and also a popular name for a subdivision/apartment in az... I also remember seeing a Bella Vista subdivision in California so it must be popular for that there too, there is also an unincorporated town called Bella Vista, Ca so bella vista would be another secondly used name from CA like Riverside and Glendale
|
Lovethisarea
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11th, 2009 03:49 pm |
|
| I guess there could be worse names then Bella Vista.... there are far nicer named cities in AZ but at least Bella Vista wouldn't be the very worst. And after all, all of this may be for nothing... look what happened to Higley, looks like it will be Gilbert now after the zip change. There is still a chance we could be considered Queen Creek again in the future or whatever other big city surrounds us. Unless someone pushes to turn this into a city. No matter what this area is called I will still refer to this as the san tan foothills area of whatever it is. Still would have been nice if the people of this area could have chosen the name and not have someone choose for us.
|
Bullwinkle
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 4th, 2009 |
| Location: | Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 7 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11th, 2009 03:40 pm |
|
I'm glad we're finally getting a name.I'm been waiting 4 years for this.I think Bella Vista is fine,and it's finally a done deal.I agree with pipeman,this is step one.I can' t wait for the area to keep moving forward.Thanks Bryan for doing the work,that should have been done a long time ago.
|
History_101
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 16th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 235 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11th, 2009 02:59 pm |
|
San Tan over used? Come on now. I'm sure there are more then these few.
San Tan Adobe Queen Creek
San Tan An Indian Community on the Gila Reservation
San Tan Animal Hospital Queen Creek
San Tan Automotive Queen Creek
San Tan Aviation Chandler
San Tan Cabinetry Apache Junction
San Tan Carpet Care Chandler
San Tan Chiropractic Chandler
San Tan Chiropractic Mesa
San Tan Community Church Queen Creek
San Tan Counseling Queen Creek
San Tan Credit Union Chandler
San Tan Deli Chandler
San Tan Dental Care Queen Creek
San Tan Distributing Chandler
San Tan Elementary School Chandler
San Tan Endodontics Gilbert
San Tan Feed & Supply Queen Creek
San Tan Flats Hunt Corridor
San Tan Growers Chandler
San Tan Highway Currently highway 10 to highway 60
San Tan Historical Society Queen Creek
San Tan Home Furnishings Hunt Corridor
San Tan Home Inspections Chandler
San Tan Indian Arts Higley
San Tan Irrigation Gilbert
San Tan Irrigation District Gilbert
San Tan Landscape Management Higley
San Tan Mobile Village Chandler
San Tan Motorplex Gilbert
San Tan Motors Chandler Heights
San Tan Mountain Chiropractic Hunt Corridor
San Tan Nursery Gilbert
San Tan Oasis Gilbert
San Tan Pet Cemetery Rural San Tans
San Tan Pressure Washing Queen Creek
San Tan Ranch Gilbert
San Tan Reality Rural
San Tan Refrigeration & Heating Unknown
San Tan Roofing Gilbert
San Tan Self Storage Chandler
San Tan Tillage Chandler
San Tan Towing Gilbert
San Tan Travel Gilbert
San Tan Tree Service Unknown
San Tan Trucking Rural
San Tan Urgent Care Queen Creek
San Tan Ventures Rural
San Tan Village Shopping Center Gilbert
San Tan Wholesale Chandler
San Tan Youth Soccer Association Chandler
|
Lovethisarea
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11th, 2009 08:46 am |
|
MurphysLaw wrote:
You can't go anywhere without seeing San Tan "Something."
Strange I feel the same about 'Bella Vista'! Google it!
Someone on here said it sounds like a retirement home.... look at this.
http://www.bellavistaseniorliving.com/
|
MurphysLaw
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 1st, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 21 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11th, 2009 08:30 am |
|
Realistically, many of the names suggested also have communities of the same, or similar, names. Just for one example, there is San Tan Heights.
Personally, I don't mind Bella Vista. Setting the road and any communities aside, it's a nice sounding name with an appropriate meaning for our area. Like others have said, San Tan is tired and overused. You can't go anywhere without seeing San Tan "Something."
|
Current time is 05:15 am | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|