On May 13th the Carefree Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was about the General Plan (GP) adoption. The bone of contention was the Special Planning Area (SPA) at Tom Darlington and Carefree Highway. At the Council meeting on April 9th, the council had the SPA removed from the GP. 91 Petitions were sent to Gary Neiss, Town Administrator, in opposition to this, and a few other things. The last day to submit comments about the GP was December 31, 2023. The GP had 19 months of hearings, comments, revisions, and meetings in front of the council and P&Z. It was decided that these petitions were not going to be included in the comments, because of the late date. Why didn’t these folks attend and comment during this 19-month period?
At the P&Z meeting I made my comments that I felt Ms. Roberts was one of the 91 petitions sent, and I felt should recuse herself from a vote. Mr. Cook, representing the town attorney, said there was no conflict of interest. So, of course, Ms. Roberts voted against the SPA change in the GP.
Is it just me or do any other readers see the stalling tactics on the records request release, the conflict and, in my opinion, lack of integrity on Ms. Roberts part? Could one conclude that the town delayed releasing this information because of Ms. Roberts’ petition? Is it appropriate? Does the reader also feel that Ms. Roberts’ obvious decision on the GP was made without proper due process and listening to other opinions before casting a vote? Does the reader feel the town dragged their feet in the release of this information, intending to wait until after the May 13th P&Z meeting? My opinion is that they did.
We have an election for council in July. Vote wisely.
1 of 2.
John Mattes
Carefree
