Don't tell us how to spend our money
In response to the articles concerning the acquisition of private water companies in the Upper Verde Valley:
To quote Brian Mickelsen, “We are a small town and we’ve got four different water companies.”
I have to disagree with his statement as the Verde Villages are not incorporated into the city limits of Cottonwood, therefore, they can’t be considered part of Cottonwood.
We do use Cottonwood as a mailing address, but if memory serves me right a couple of years ago the residents of the Verde Villages decided not to be incorporated into the city of Cottonwood.
How can we be part of Cottonwood when the annexation effort failed? We are not represented by Cottonwood, nor do we have a voice in what is for the good of the entire community. This includes all of the small towns that surround Cottonwood.
We did not have a voice in the voting to purchase any of the small water companies. The minority of voters in Cottonwood voted to purchase these companies, and then it wasn’t the entire registered voters who went to the polls.
How can a few voters have control over the majority of the residents? As a homeowner in Verde Village, I don’t have any protection from the city of Cottonwood. No fire, police or any of the other public services available to the citizens of the city of Cottonwood.
It appears that the City of Cottonwood is attempting to get into the pockets of the residents of the Verde Villages one way or another. The Verde Villages decided not to be annexed.
To me, this is taxation without representation.
If there is a lack of water in the county, please answer me one question. Why has approval been given for the building of an additional tract of approximately 650 homes near Cornville and also the proposed 650 homes in Clarkdale. Please tell me how this makes sense if we are to conserve water.
We the residents of Verde Villages are not allowed to vote for the mayor or city council of Cottonwood, so please do not tell us how to spend our money.
Frances J. Fowler
Stick with your original plan, Mr. McCain
Why did Senator McCain propose to federalize the Verde River?
With his draft legislation, he sets in motion all the support the Salt River Project needs to prevent Verde Valley residents from exercising their past water rights. It also potentially limits water use on our private property. Both of these will eventually limit development and hurt Camp Verde’s effort to grow and increase tax revenues.
This is being proposed because of the Yavapai Ranch trade with the Forest Service. Our water company has the water to support a lot more development. Camp
Verde needs to grow to remain competitive in the Verde Valley. It also needs to grow to develop a larger tax base and create jobs for our residents.
The trade with the Forest Service should go through to help us meet our goals.
McCain’s efforts here will have the effect of stopping growth and supporting the SRP. At risk will be all of our water rights and our ability to plan for our own future. Senator McCain, forget your new plans for our community and just pass the land trade.
Let's follow our presidents' advice
“We must affirm the rights of the First Americans to remain Indian while exercising their rights as Americans. We must affirm their rights to freedom of choice and self determination.”
— President Lyndon B. Johnson, 1968
“This, then, must be the goal of any new national policy toward the Indian People: to strengthen the Indian sense of autonomy without threatening his sense of community.”
— President Richard M. Nixon, 1970
“This administration intends to restore tribal governments to their rightful place among governments of this nation and to enable tribal governments along with state and local governments, to resume control over their won affairs.”
— President Ronald Reagan, 1983
We support the Yavapai-Apache Nation's land trust initiative.
Richard J. Nelson