Opponents of Axon’s controversial new headquarters campus in Scottsdale are asking a judge to nullify a deal approved by the City Council last month to pave the way for the project after months of fighting, lobbying and legal threats that reached all the way to the state Capitol.

Taxpayers Against Awful Apartment Zoning Exemptions, a group led by former City Councilman Bob Littlefield, has opposed the development since it was first approved by the City Council in 2024. Specifically, the group criticized the council’s decision to rezone the land to allow for around 1,900 apartments and condos to be built alongside Axon’s new headquarters.

The group, also called TAAAZE, eventually gathered enough signatures to send the plan before Scottsdale voters, but before that could happen Axon successfully lobbied the state Legislature to pass a bill, circumventing the referendum.

After Gov. Katie Hobbs signed the “Axon bill” into law, TAAAZE sued, arguing it violated protections in the state Constitution banning legislation that benefits a particular individual or business.

A compromise

With the referendum, legislation and lawsuit all in play, Scottsdale officials continued to say they were committed to reaching a compromise with Axon to keep the homegrown body camera manufacturer in town while avoiding a referendum.

And, on Nov. 17, a majority of the City Council did just that. In a series of votes, the council voted to repeal the old development deal approved in 2024 and approve a new “memorandum of understanding” with Axon that reduced the number of apartments and condos to 1,200 units – with no more than 600 apartments.

At the time, Mayor Lisa Borowsky called it a win for all sides.

“Going from nearly 1,900 apartments down to 600, I think is a positive result, and especially with all of the other moving parts, which you’ve heard so much about,” said Borowsky, who was not on the council that passed the original deal in 2024.

Not so fast

But that plan didn’t sit well with TAAAZE, which continues to challenge the validity of the Axon bill in court.

And, on Dec. 17, the group amended its lawsuit to ask a judge to nullify the “memorandum of understanding” and related measures the City Council approved in November.

According to the lawsuit, the deal the council approved only works because of SB 1543.

For instance, the vote to repeal the old deal also changed the zoning on the land back to light industrial, a category that doesn’t typically allow for housing or apartments. But the new law allows qualifying headquarters projects to include apartment housing even if the area is zoned for light industrial.

If SB 1543 is invalid, then so are the City Council’s votes, the lawsuit claims.

“But for the Axon Bill – and now Scottsdale’s implementation of the Axon Bill through its actions at the November 17 special meeting – the fate of Axon’s project, as authorized by the Axon City Ordinance, would rest just where it belongs, in the hands of Scottsdale’s voters,” according to the lawsuit.

A city spokesperson told the Scottsdale Progress that TAAAZE’s claims about the most recent deal “are without merit.”