Jim Lane’s Psycho-Projection

by John Washington on May 25, 2016

LaneIncumbent Scottsdale mayor Jim Lane put out a campaign email today that would keep his psychiatrist busy for quite awhile. There’s so much wrong about it that I have to reprint it here and go through it point-by-point:

People who know me will easily attest to the fact that I am not an angry or unreasonable guy.

1. Denial. Actually anyone who has dared to oppose–let alone criticize–Lane have found pretty quickly that he’s both petty and vindictive.

I am now however astonished to the point of anger that someone who is talking about running for mayor has such an absurdly negative view of our city and our accomplishments since our recovery from the worst economic downturn that Scottsdale has ever endured.

I’m proud with your help of what I and we have been able to accomplish during my time as mayor.

I think Scottsdale is the best city in America. One of my opponents doesn’t.

The negative voices just don’t get it.

2. Identity: Lane’s opponents (including me) don’t have a “negative view of our city.” They (and I) have a negative view of HIM and the direction he’s taking the city. But Lane can’t in his mind separate himself from the city. Whatever he wants is good for the city? Not so much.

Our preserve. Our special events. Our arts. Our low taxes. The best local economy in the Valley. Our beautiful neighborhoods and parks. Our revitalizing southern city. Our thriving downtown. Our low crime.

3. Narcissism: The McDowell Sonoran Preserve existed long before Jim Lane, and so did the processes that continued its expansion during his term of office. In reality, Lane had very little to do with the Preserve, but clearly HE thinks it was all his idea. Ditto every other good thing about Scottsdale that he cites…except the “thriving” Barf District that has the highest crime rate in the city. Lane definitely had a hand in that!

How do they not see this? Maybe it’s because they want to take us backwards. They talk about Scottsdale as if it were an out of control blighted disaster because they think it serves their political ambitions.

Scottsdale deserves better.

Look, any city can do better, and the goal of perfection, though realistically unattainable, is what we strive for. But life in Scottsdale is pretty darn good. My opponents don’t think so. Listening to them you’d think we live in Detroit. That angers me because my opponents refuse to see or purposefully ignore some obvious truths.

4. More narcissism: If Lane doesn’t think it’s broken, it ain’t broken. If you live in Villa Monterey (Scottsdale’s first and only historically-zoned retirement community in Scottsdale) adjacent to the Barf District (Lane lives a LONG way from there), then you know about “out-of-control, blighted disasters.” And I don’t think any of those folks have political ambitions. They are just citizens who long for peaceful enjoyment of the homes, which represent the biggest investment that most of them will ever make.

Scottsdale has recovered better than most cities from the Great Recession and did so without raising taxes.

5. Intellectual dishonesty: True, Scottsdale did OK in spite of the recession. However, during the time that Scottsdale didn’t raise taxes, Jim Lane and his council cronies (including incumbent candidates Virginia Korte and Suzanne Klapp) short-funded infrastructure maintenance to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. That neglected infrastructure carries forward as a future cost…but as long as Lane gets his final term, what does he care? He doesn’t have to worry about you voting him out as long as he can avoid talking about this until after November.

And it will cost a lot MORE to fix our broken infrastructure in the future than it would have cost to properly maintain it all along.

We should continue with the pro-business, pro-tourism, anti-regulation approach that made this possible rather than revert back to the Scottsdale of about fifteen years ago which suffocated business and hurt the local economy.

6. Word Salad: In Lane-speak, “pro-business” means anti-resident. “Pro-tourism” is just a term he heard someone else use that sounds nice. “Anti-regulation” is a flat-out repudiation of the well-crafted ordinances and policies that built Scottsdale, including our sign ordinance, zoning code, the citizen ratified General Plan for development, and so many others. If you don’t have any regulations, then the Friends of Jim Lane can do whatever they want so long as they keep putting money in the collection plate.

If you think Scottsdale is heading in the wrong direction, vote for someone else.

7. Anger, confrontation, and denial, see Number 1, above: Actually, I couldn’t agree with Lane more on this one. And apparently a lot of you agree with him, too. Even Lane’s own polling shows that barely more than half of the normally inattentive Scottsdale electorate believes Scottsdale is headed in the right direction. That’s a larger number than said they support Lane! So, vote for someone else? Yes, take Lane’s advice: I recommend Bob Littlefield.

If you think Scottsdale is a pretty good place to live and work, I share your opinion and hope to have your vote.

Together, we will continue to take Scottsdale from better times to the best of times. Together we will ensure that Scottsdale remains the best city in America.

Blah, blah: I’ve got nothing on these closing statements, because there’s nothing there.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: