By Roland Murphy for AZBEX
“Don’t California My Arizona,” has become something of a battle cry for longtime residents who don’t like the ways in-migration from the Left Coast is impacting local culture.
Ironically, a group fighting for the status quo in Fountain Hills is taking up California-style tactics to prevent a new apartment development from being built.
A frequent issue with attempts to develop new properties in California is opposition groups filing litigation to get projects halted. In Arizona, that tactic has been comparatively rare, but opposition petitions to force approvals to a referendum have begun to come along more frequently, including a successful attempt in Tempe to kill approvals for the Arizona Coyotes’ planned Tempe Entertainment District and an unsuccessful attempt in Surprise to stop a multi-component senior living and affordable housing development.
Late last year, we reported at length about a plan by Sandor Development to build Village at Four Peaks, a four-story, 316-unit multifamily development on part of a dying retail center in Fountain Hills. That project encountered some heavy opposition from a cadre of residents, many of whom opposed multifamily housing on general principle. (AZBEX; Dec. 8, 2023; Jan. 5)
After extensive debate, the Fountain Hills Town Council approved the project on a 4-3 vote in January. Almost immediately, an opposition group calling itself Reclaim Our Town began collecting petition signatures to put the approval to a public vote. The group collected 1,800 signatures.
The Arizona Republic reports, however, that Fountain Hills Town Clerk Linda Mendenhall invalidated the submittal on procedural grounds because the group listed an incorrect serial number on the back of each petition sheet.
Early last month, Reclaim Our Town filed a complaint in Maricopa County Superior Court and requested that the judge order Mendenhall to continue the statutory review process and forward the signatures for verification by the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office.
The complaint names Mendenhall, the Town of Fountain Hills, Mayor Ginny Dickey, the Councilmembers, Sandor Development and other parties as defendants.
A status conference is on the Court schedule for next week, and an evidentiary hearing is scheduled for next week.
The Republic quotes a statement from Sandor’s legal representative Austin Yost saying, “A political action committee wants to stop this development and tried to refer this Fountain Hills ordinance to the ballot for a vote. But all its referendum petition sheets violated longstanding Arizona law by including the wrong serial number. The Town Clerk rightly rejected the committee’s petition sheets for that reason, and the developer looks forward to prevailing in court.”
Separate from the lawsuit, the Council debate and vote has led to sanctions against Member Allen Skillicorn by the rest of the body.
Skillicorn repeatedly asked other members during the January hearing if they had conflicts of interest, had accepted contributions from Sandor or engaged in inappropriate outside conversations and planning about the development and the vote.
Councilmember Sharron Grzybowski filed an ethics complaint against Skillicorn, as did Member Brenda Kalivianakis and a collection of residents, for a total of six complaints in all, some of which involved other matters. The complaints were referred to the Fitzgibbons Law Offices, which found Skillicorn had violated the Town’s Code of Ethics.
Council voted to sanction Skillicorn last month, prohibiting him from serving in the Vice Mayor’s role, removing Town funding for his participation in events and meetings, and requiring a monitor to be present if he interacts in person with Town employees.
Skillicorn has said the complaints were unfounded and called them a smear campaign.
Residents opposed to the Sandor development, however, have pressed for answers to the questions Skillicorn raised in January. Carol Rogala, Liz Gildersleeve and Barbara Russo have filed ethics complaints against Kalivainakis, who currently serves as Vice Mayor.
They allege she improperly communicated with Sandor representatives via her private email account before the January meeting. Councilmember Hannah Toth has filed a separate complaint with similar allegations.
According to the Republic article, “Kalivianakis maintained that these complaints were misguided and misinformed, saying the exchange with Eller had been initiated by town manager, Rachael Goodwin, because Kalivanakis was following up on questions the council had for Sandor about a parking agreement.”
“They’re just really upset with me right now and it goes back to 2 things,” Kalivianakis said, “My vote on the Target center, and then my filing the ethics complaint against Alan Skillicorn.”
As with the Skillicorn complaints, an outside law firm will investigate the allegations and issue findings. If the allegations are found to be valid, the Town Attorney will discuss the findings with Council in executive session to determine what sanctions to impose, if any.
The truly sad, disappointing and head-scratching issue about the lawsuit, the ethics complaints and the entire controversy is that the Sandor project is a vital lifeline for a town that is aging and withering.
Supporters have pointed out that the Target development in the retail center where the apartments will replace mostly vacant space, as well as the local Fry’s and Basha’s grocery stores are all “on the bubble” due to lackluster performance.
An infusion of new residents—most of whom skew younger, are comparatively affluent (at least enough to afford rents in a Class A apartment development) and will support area businesses—is the dream of every economic development official everywhere.
While the entrenched opposition to any housing type other than freestanding single-family is not going away anytime soon, hopefully in Fountain Hills even the curmudgeons can eventually be won over by an improved quality of life for the Town’s residents that Village at Four Peaks may bring, whether they want it right now or not.
