4 ms·

By law, anyone who wants to sell or lease land in Scottsdale needs to prove that there's a water supply for at least 100 years[0]. Is that phony or something?

By law, anyone who wants to sell or lease land in Scottsdale needs to prove that there's a water supply for at least 100 years[0]. Is that phony or something? What was the writing on the wall that you saw that made you leave Scottsdale? Curious as a Phoenix-native who maybe one day might want to move back to the valley. [0]: https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/water/water-supply https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/water/water-supply

bilbo0s 3y ago
No. Anyone who wants to sell or lease subdivided land has to prove that. Not only that, but if the development gets water from Scottsdale, then it does not have to prove a 100 year reserve. Scottsdale is confident, (or, at least, shows outward confidence), in its ability to provide water for 100 years because of its three pillars. One, that the Salt River gambit will always pay off. Two, that Scottsdale's water from the Colorado will never run dry. And three, that if all else fails, I mean, hey, Phoenix is sitting on an ocean. They can't leave us out high and dry can they? With respect to two and three, we had zero confidence. Additionally, our faith in the ability of Scottsdale's leaders to effectively manage unexpected events with 1 was, limited. I'm not saying move out of Scottsdale. I'm saying for us, it was too much risk and inconsistent with sustainability. I believe for a place like Scottsdale to become sustainable, somebody has to move out. Not saying who that should be, but mother nature is clearly signaling limits on our growth ambitions. Not all places in Arizona are unsustainable. Tuscon, Sedona, Phoenix proper. Etc. There are lots of places in Arizona that I think have put forth credible plans to manage their growth in the face of uncertain water security. But climate, geography and a failure to get out in front of the issue long ago has just put other areas in a precarious spot. That's just reality.
- buzzert 3y ago
  Thanks for the reply. I do hold out some hope for technology in solving this problem. In theory (albeit at great cost), we could build a desalination pipeline from San Diego/Baja California to Arizona, and there's also the Source water panel[0] which pulls water out of the air, and seems like a potentially good option for residential water usage. [0]: https://www.source.co/ https://www.source.co/
shagie 3y ago
There is some interesting stuff with Scottsdale and water going on now. https://www.azfamily.com/2023/05/16/arizona-legislature-passes-law-forcing-scottsdale-provide-water-rio-verde-foothills/ https://www.azfamily.com/2023/05/16/arizona-legislature-pass... https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/ScottsdaleAZ/News/News+Images/News+documents/Scottsdale+HB2241+Veto+Letter.pdf https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/ScottsdaleAZ/News/News+I... https://kjzz.org/content/1847190/scottsdale-wants-governor-veto-bill-resume-water-sales-rio-verde-foothills https://kjzz.org/content/1847190/scottsdale-wants-governor-v... https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/joannaallhands/2023/05/17/scottsdale-rio-verde-foothills-water-fix-flawed/70225812007/ https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/joannaallhands...
- mdasen 3y ago
  https://www.abc15.com/news/region-northeast-valley/scottsdale/governor-katie-hobbs-vetoes-hb2441-further-impacting-rio-verde-foothills-water-supply https://www.abc15.com/news/region-northeast-valley/scottsdal... Looks like it was just vetoed by the governor today.
  - shagie 3y ago
    So now now. > Posted at 11:35 AM, May 22, 2023 and last updated 52 minutes ago Thank you for the update on this.
- buzzert 3y ago
  I looked into this and saw this as well, but Rio Verde Foothills is a tiny community far northeast of Scottsdale. It seems like more of a political issue (i.e., people who aren't paying taxes to the city are benefitting from the city's management of water resources), than a technological issue.
  - shagie 3y ago
    Correct. There are also issues like Scottsdale limits the use of water for lawns ( https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/water/desert-plant-care https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/water/desert-plant-care ) and encouraging desert friendly yards ( https://www.azfamily.com/2022/08/01/ditch-grass-city-scottsdale-offers-homeowner-incentives-desert-friendly-yards/ https://www.azfamily.com/2022/08/01/ditch-grass-city-scottsd... ). With the unincorporated town that... lets say "has a dislike of government" it becomes difficult for Scottsdale water district to implement the same restrictions for other areas. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/27/arizona-scottsdale-water-cut-off-rio-verde-foothills-drought https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/27/arizona-scot... > Incorporating could give the community more options for water supply in future but forming an official town or city brings requirements, such as paved roads, street lights, more taxation and rules. This would be expensive but also change the secluded, quaint feel of Rio Verde Foothills, where people own chickens, donkeys, horses and ride motorbikes straight out their doors to nearby Tonto national forest. > And forming a new water utility district doesn’t appeal either, with residents reluctant to have another government agency overseeing their neighborhood.

bilbo0s 3y ago

No. Anyone who wants to sell or lease subdivided land has to prove that. Not only that, but if the development gets water from Scottsdale, then it does not have to prove a 100 year reserve. Scottsdale is confident, (or, at least, shows outward confidence), in its ability to provide water for 100 years because of its three pillars. One, that the Salt River gambit will always pay off. Two, that Scottsdale's water from the Colorado will never run dry. And three, that if all else fails, I mean, hey, Phoenix is sitting on an ocean. They can't leave us out high and dry can they? With respect to two and three, we had zero confidence. Additionally, our faith in the ability of Scottsdale's leaders to effectively manage unexpected events with 1 was, limited. I'm not saying move out of Scottsdale. I'm saying for us, it was too much risk and inconsistent with sustainability. I believe for a place like Scottsdale to become sustainable, somebody has to move out. Not saying who that should be, but mother nature is clearly signaling limits on our growth ambitions. Not all places in Arizona are unsustainable. Tuscon, Sedona, Phoenix proper. Etc. There are lots of places in Arizona that I think have put forth credible plans to manage their growth in the face of uncertain water security. But climate, geography and a failure to get out in front of the issue long ago has just put other areas in a precarious spot. That's just reality.

buzzert 3y ago
Thanks for the reply. I do hold out some hope for technology in solving this problem. In theory (albeit at great cost), we could build a desalination pipeline from San Diego/Baja California to Arizona, and there's also the Source water panel[0] which pulls water out of the air, and seems like a potentially good option for residential water usage. [0]: https://www.source.co/ https://www.source.co/

shagie 3y ago

There is some interesting stuff with Scottsdale and water going on now. https://www.azfamily.com/2023/05/16/arizona-legislature-passes-law-forcing-scottsdale-provide-water-rio-verde-foothills/ https://www.azfamily.com/2023/05/16/arizona-legislature-pass... https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/ScottsdaleAZ/News/News+Images/News+documents/Scottsdale+HB2241+Veto+Letter.pdf https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Assets/ScottsdaleAZ/News/News+I... https://kjzz.org/content/1847190/scottsdale-wants-governor-veto-bill-resume-water-sales-rio-verde-foothills https://kjzz.org/content/1847190/scottsdale-wants-governor-v... https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/joannaallhands/2023/05/17/scottsdale-rio-verde-foothills-water-fix-flawed/70225812007/ https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/joannaallhands...

mdasen 3y ago
https://www.abc15.com/news/region-northeast-valley/scottsdale/governor-katie-hobbs-vetoes-hb2441-further-impacting-rio-verde-foothills-water-supply https://www.abc15.com/news/region-northeast-valley/scottsdal... Looks like it was just vetoed by the governor today.
- shagie 3y ago
  So now now. > Posted at 11:35 AM, May 22, 2023 and last updated 52 minutes ago Thank you for the update on this.
buzzert 3y ago
I looked into this and saw this as well, but Rio Verde Foothills is a tiny community far northeast of Scottsdale. It seems like more of a political issue (i.e., people who aren't paying taxes to the city are benefitting from the city's management of water resources), than a technological issue.
- shagie 3y ago
  Correct. There are also issues like Scottsdale limits the use of water for lawns ( https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/water/desert-plant-care https://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/water/desert-plant-care ) and encouraging desert friendly yards ( https://www.azfamily.com/2022/08/01/ditch-grass-city-scottsdale-offers-homeowner-incentives-desert-friendly-yards/ https://www.azfamily.com/2022/08/01/ditch-grass-city-scottsd... ). With the unincorporated town that... lets say "has a dislike of government" it becomes difficult for Scottsdale water district to implement the same restrictions for other areas. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/27/arizona-scottsdale-water-cut-off-rio-verde-foothills-drought https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/27/arizona-scot... > Incorporating could give the community more options for water supply in future but forming an official town or city brings requirements, such as paved roads, street lights, more taxation and rules. This would be expensive but also change the secluded, quaint feel of Rio Verde Foothills, where people own chickens, donkeys, horses and ride motorbikes straight out their doors to nearby Tonto national forest. > And forming a new water utility district doesn’t appeal either, with residents reluctant to have another government agency overseeing their neighborhood.