I recently saw a City Council sign for Sal DiCiccio indicating he was supported by developers and I thought nothing of it. Only later did I read that these are Karlene Keogh Parks campaign signs trying to look like DiCiccio campaign signs. Besides being a dirty tactic I guess the point was to disparage candidate DiCiccio. I don’t get it.
Developers by definition develop what was previously empty or redevelop something that was in decline or in disuse, making a profit in the process. There are two local examples of this. The first is new housing in fill development adjacent to Desert Vista where new homes are being built on a vacant lot, which increases housing choice and brings in new residents. The other is a commercial redevelopment at the Ahwatukee Foothills Towne Center, which renewed a declining commercial center, brought in new tenants, and increased consumer choice. Both of these development projects create jobs and expanded the local tax base, which ironically funds the public employees whose union supports candidate Keogh Parks. It seems to me that development and developers are generally good for business and good for Ahwatukee.
Based on these signs is candidate Keogh Parks indicating that candidate DiCiccio is then good for business and good for Ahwatukee? Conversely am I to assume candidate Keogh Parks is anti-business and, therefore, not good for Ahwatukee? I’m sure we could have a similar discussion about those lobbyist sign, but I guess I don’t get those either.