Prior to moving here, I resided in a town similar to Fountain Hills. Development issues were always present and contentious. As town councilman and as a member of the town’s Planning Board, I heard it all.

Neighbors feared change and were apt to suddenly care about potential problems that never moved them before. Developers often wanted more than codes allowed, although restrictions required by those codes were there for all to see before they ever invested in the project. Moreover, developers tended to promise more benefits to the town than the town would ever actually realize.

Most of us never heard discussions that led the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission to reject the Daybreak proposal, or arguments that led our Town Council to vote approval. What “facts” most of us have are claims made by the developers and objections of nearby residents. Those “facts” may be over-stated, but the weight of decision appears to be in favor of the neighbor’s objections.

Daybreak’s main pitch is that the development will pour millions of dollars into town coffers, saving us from the prospect of a property tax. Most likely, that financial windfall will not materialize. Most of the financial benefits will be “one-shot” boosts. They will not reach the level promised by the developers and they will not support town services that a fully developed Daybreak project would require for decades to come.

The property is open and ripe for development. Its neighbors purchased their homes with knowledge of the property’s potential. They did not purchase rights to views. But enough of their current objections to this project are credible and important. This Daybreak proposal did not make its case.

Please vote “no” on proposition 427 and 428.