Editor’s note: This article was expanded to include voices from Scottsdale community organizations on April 18.

Key Points

• SB1543 would allow a massive multifamily residential headquarters for Axon
  

• The legislation has faced opposition from community organizations in Scottsdale
  

• Supporters believe the economic impact from Axon will be substantial for Arizona

Axon cleared a major hurdle when the Senate approved a bill on April 15 that would allow the company to build its global headquarters in Scottsdale without needing zoning approval from the voters.

However, if Gov. Katie Hobbs signs the bill into law, the company could still have to contend with a potential lawsuit from a group that opposed the project, as well as concerns from city residents that it won’t honor concessions that were agreed upon before the Legislature passed the bill.

Senate Bill 1543 would require cities with populations between 200,000 and 500,000 to allow hotels and multifamily residential housing to be built in areas zoned for light industrial use without needing an application that would require a public hearing.

The legislation was crafted to accommodate the company, which wants to build a sprawling headquarters near Loop 101 and Hayden Road. The campus would include 1,900 apartments and condominiums, a hotel and retail integrated into the company’s headquarters. About 30% of the apartments would be allocated for workers.

Supporters of the bill said it was important to keep the company — and the jobs it promises to bring with the new headquarters — in Arizona.

The bill also drew staunch criticism from legislators who viewed it as “special legislation” that would circumvent the will of Scottsdale voters, who might not have a say in the zoning for the development.

Group opposes project, plans lawsuit

The Scottsdale City Council originally approved zoning for the project in November, but a group called Taxpayers Against Awful Apartment Zoning Exemptions collected signatures to send the measure to the ballot after some residents expressed opposition to the project.

Now that the bill has passed the Legislature, the group is planning to pursue legal action, said former Scottsdale City Councilmember Bob Littlefield, who serves as the group’s chairman.

“Our lawyers believe this bill is grossly illegal and unconstitutional. It’s a special interest bill designed just to make one company happy,” Littlefield said. “It tramples on the rights of Scottsdale voters, so I think we can probably beat it in court.”

Littlefield said a number of city officials, including his wife — city Councilwoman Kathy Littlefield — were scheduled to meet with senators before the vote but never had the opportunity.

“I think they know they’re in the wrong and they’re just ashamed to face us,” Bob Littlefield said.

Bill divides lawmakers on both sides
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle expressed strong sentiments about the bill during its final reading in the Senate on April 15. 

“If they leave, I guarantee you it will be very difficult to start building back that reputation, a reputation we have built over the years, not only for having a great program to bring companies here, but our tax program and, yes, in fact, our school system,” said Sen. Vince Leach, R-Tucson.

Sen. Brian Fernandez, D-Yuma, said helping the company stay in Arizona would continue to spur economic growth and the creation of high paying jobs.

“It’s about keeping high paying, future focused jobs right here, growing our economy and showing the world that Arizona is a place where innovation thrives,” Fernandez said. “We should all want Axon to grow here because when Arizona companies lead, Arizona companies win.”

Sen. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, referred to the bill as a form of voter suppression.

“An election has actually been called and has actually been scheduled,” Kavanagh said. “A vote for this bill will cancel that election. That’s not theoretical, that’s actual. So this is voter suppression on steroids.”

The issue reminded Sen. Lauren Kuby, D-Tempe, of the Arizona Coyotes’ proposal to build a stadium and entertainment district when Kuby was a Tempe city councilwoman.

“It’s not about apartments. It’s not about how we grow our cities. It is about the will of the voters,” Kuby said. “And how can we take away the expressed will of the Scottsdale voters who want to vote on this.”

Homeowners association wants concessions honored

While the project has caused a division between groups and lawmakers, residents of a nearby neighborhood are concerned about a previous agreement to mitigate traffic and restrict the height of buildings in the area.

The residents of Scottsdale Stonebrook II had previously worked with city officials to ensure that road realignments would direct traffic away from the neighborhood, as well as implement additional setbacks, berms and upgraded landscaping.

“So here we feel like we started this little brush fire that has turned into this forest fire, fanned by other interests that had nothing to do with us,” said Susan McGarry, president of the Scottsdale Stonebrook II Homeowners Association. “So we started this little issue that has mushroomed into this big political football.”

The Homeowners Association does not oppose Axon or its headquarters plan, and never took a formal position for or against the legislation, McGarry said.

“We hope Axon will honor the changes and concessions made to their development plan at the city level, many of which were made with our community in mind,” she said in a text message statement after the Senate passed the bill. “They were good enhancements that can help buffer us from the campus while enhancing the development’s appeal.”

An Axon spokesman said earlier this week the company was focused on getting the bill passed and would revisit those concessions once the legislation and the actual campus proposal is finalized.

“Axon is very open to working with the neighbors. They’ve been doing it for years,” said Axon spokesman David Leibowitz. “Everybody wants this project to be a win, not just for the company, but for the people who live nearby, for the city of Scottsdale, for the state of Arizona.”