In "Planner takes job in Sahuarita"(Explorer, July 15), Oro Valley town manager David Andrews notes that "the [town]council would discuss whether to fill Sara More's position." As previously posted on the blog, she is leaving her $107,000 Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Director job for a $97,000 in Sahuarita (Who says public sector work doesn't pay! Ouch!)
Should the town replace her position?
Well, certainly not as it is presently structured.
Given the economy, future prospects of slow Oro Valley growth, and constuent demands that Oro Valley live "within its means", it would good to consolidate related departments with Planning and Zoning, streamlining operations for our new, leaner Oro Valley. Then, find someone internally who could lead the the new unit.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Mike Zinkin Says "No" To Wal-Mart Upcoming Request
Mike Zinkin, a former chairman an up until a couple weeks ago, a volunteer member of the Development Review Board, sent the following email to the mayor, council & Town Manager.
Other than Mike's noting the OV Marketplace is "very aesthetic," we totally agree with his assessment. Hopefully, the Council will also agree and vote "No" to Walmart's request for a non approved color change of their building at the July 15 meeting.
As an aside, Walmart really ought to ask for a roof change so they could hide those hideous skylights & A/C units!
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Mike's email-----
I am very interested in item 7 of your agenda. OV13-09-03A is a request from Walmart to override the DRB decision not to allow them to repaint their store "Sherman-Williams "Toasty"
The store is now painted Dun-Edwards "Rattan", a color extremely close to "Toasty". In fact, if Walmart were to re-paint their store under cover of darkness, chances are excellent that nobody will notice the difference.
This brings up the argument "Come on, what is the big deal" This big deal is this....
The color palette was designed in the MACP after 3+ years of study sessions, neighborhood meetings, and DRB meetings. The DRB, in fact, expanded the color palette from Vestar's original request.
What is important is the "process". The citizens designed the MACP, and Vestar concurred. Now, less than 18 months later, a retailer is requesting a change to the MACP. The DRB, and staff, worked hard with the Olive Garden, Red Lobster, In and Out Burger, and The Keg Steakhouse, to allow for individual corporate identity WITHIN THE MACP.
There is no reason to arbitrarily amend the MACP at the request of Walmart, or any other retailer. To allow for this change, as minor as it is, completely disregards the work and input of your citizens. If we allow Walmart to make a minor change, what happens when a tenant of a 1500 square foot store desires to make a change that is a little more that minor?
Do not open up Pandora's Box. Do not allow for the change. Once the MACP is amended, there is no stopping what might happen. The Oro Valley Marketplace is very aesthetic; there is nothing that needs fixing. To agree with the DRB decision is not being anti business, rather, respectful of the process that developed the MACP.
I wish I could be present on 7/15, but since I cannot, allow this as my “blue card.
Respectfully Submitted,
Mike Zinkin
Other than Mike's noting the OV Marketplace is "very aesthetic," we totally agree with his assessment. Hopefully, the Council will also agree and vote "No" to Walmart's request for a non approved color change of their building at the July 15 meeting.
As an aside, Walmart really ought to ask for a roof change so they could hide those hideous skylights & A/C units!
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Mike's email-----
I am very interested in item 7 of your agenda. OV13-09-03A is a request from Walmart to override the DRB decision not to allow them to repaint their store "Sherman-Williams "Toasty"
The store is now painted Dun-Edwards "Rattan", a color extremely close to "Toasty". In fact, if Walmart were to re-paint their store under cover of darkness, chances are excellent that nobody will notice the difference.
This brings up the argument "Come on, what is the big deal" This big deal is this....
The color palette was designed in the MACP after 3+ years of study sessions, neighborhood meetings, and DRB meetings. The DRB, in fact, expanded the color palette from Vestar's original request.
What is important is the "process". The citizens designed the MACP, and Vestar concurred. Now, less than 18 months later, a retailer is requesting a change to the MACP. The DRB, and staff, worked hard with the Olive Garden, Red Lobster, In and Out Burger, and The Keg Steakhouse, to allow for individual corporate identity WITHIN THE MACP.
There is no reason to arbitrarily amend the MACP at the request of Walmart, or any other retailer. To allow for this change, as minor as it is, completely disregards the work and input of your citizens. If we allow Walmart to make a minor change, what happens when a tenant of a 1500 square foot store desires to make a change that is a little more that minor?
Do not open up Pandora's Box. Do not allow for the change. Once the MACP is amended, there is no stopping what might happen. The Oro Valley Marketplace is very aesthetic; there is nothing that needs fixing. To agree with the DRB decision is not being anti business, rather, respectful of the process that developed the MACP.
I wish I could be present on 7/15, but since I cannot, allow this as my “blue card.
Respectfully Submitted,
Mike Zinkin
No More Sarah More In Oro Valley
All we can say about Sarah More's departure as Oro Valley's Planning & Zoning Director for a similar position in Sahuarita is that the severance package the Town Council approved, seems to be working.
Without being too presumptuous, we expect Assistant P & Z Director Paul Popelka will take over Ms. More's position. Should that occur, we wish Paul the best, and expect he will do a fine job.
Read the Az Star article here.
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/300508
Without being too presumptuous, we expect Assistant P & Z Director Paul Popelka will take over Ms. More's position. Should that occur, we wish Paul the best, and expect he will do a fine job.
Read the Az Star article here.
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/300508
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Council Member Kunisch Shows A Total Lack Of Class!
At the July 8 Council Study Session,a discussion regarding the Oro Valley Police Department Take-Home Vehicle Policy was on the agenda.
Council Member Al Kunisch leaves no doubt that he is a strong advocate of the police department, and consistently votes to give the police anything and everything they want.
That's well and good.
Where Kunisch crossed the line of professionalism was his nasty, uncalled for comment concerning the police take home vehicles.
Kunisch had this to say, referring to Town Manager David Andrews who was not in attendance.
Quoting Kunisch--- "IT WAS A STUPID MISTAKE BY THE TOWN MANAGER." Disagreeing with the Town Manager is Kunisch's right. To show such disrespect is not his right especially when David was not there. That's a classic example of speaking behind someone's back!
What a classless comment. Kunisch ought to be ashamed of himself, and make a public apology to David Andrews.
Anyone as callous as Kunisch does NOT deserve to represent us.
Council Member Al Kunisch leaves no doubt that he is a strong advocate of the police department, and consistently votes to give the police anything and everything they want.
That's well and good.
Where Kunisch crossed the line of professionalism was his nasty, uncalled for comment concerning the police take home vehicles.
Kunisch had this to say, referring to Town Manager David Andrews who was not in attendance.
Quoting Kunisch--- "IT WAS A STUPID MISTAKE BY THE TOWN MANAGER." Disagreeing with the Town Manager is Kunisch's right. To show such disrespect is not his right especially when David was not there. That's a classic example of speaking behind someone's back!
What a classless comment. Kunisch ought to be ashamed of himself, and make a public apology to David Andrews.
Anyone as callous as Kunisch does NOT deserve to represent us.
CityNorth Oral Arguments Scheduled For Az Supreme Court On Sept. 30 @ 11:00 AM
The Court has set a date to hear oral arguments on the $97.4 million subsidy to the developer of the CityNorth retail mall in Phoenix.
The date is SEPT. 30 @ 11:00 AM. at The Supreme Court in Phoenix.
Most of us know the ruling on this case may have major implications on a number of Economic Development Agreements in Oro Valley.
The date is SEPT. 30 @ 11:00 AM. at The Supreme Court in Phoenix.
Most of us know the ruling on this case may have major implications on a number of Economic Development Agreements in Oro Valley.
Matt Moutafis Oro Valley Artist Has Concerns As To What Is Happening To Our Natural Beauty
We recently met Matt Moutofis and he impressed us with his concerns to what is happening to the Oro Valley that many long time residents once knew.
Matt forewarns us that ADOT will continue to build GIANT WALLS along the Oracle road scenic corridor, in what some may consider progress. Perhaps, those citizens, especially the folks in Rancho Vistoso will heed Matt's warning as to what may be in our future.
It won't be pretty!
Please read Matt's column in the July 8 Explorer.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/07/08/opinion/doc4a53d3ec46a4d309613139.txt
Matt forewarns us that ADOT will continue to build GIANT WALLS along the Oracle road scenic corridor, in what some may consider progress. Perhaps, those citizens, especially the folks in Rancho Vistoso will heed Matt's warning as to what may be in our future.
It won't be pretty!
Please read Matt's column in the July 8 Explorer.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/07/08/opinion/doc4a53d3ec46a4d309613139.txt
Westward Look Resort In Oro Valley's Future? It Doesn't Look Like it.
Whether or not annexing The Westward Look Resort is a good idea, or not, is debatable.
However, it may be a moot point, as the resort doesn't seem to have any interest--- without getting some "kickback."
Past councils would have said, "Sure,tell us what you want, and you got it."
That was then. This is now. If they wish to be in Oro Valley, fine. If not, that too is fine!
Read The Explorer article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/07/08/news/doc4a53cced188f452239
However, it may be a moot point, as the resort doesn't seem to have any interest--- without getting some "kickback."
Past councils would have said, "Sure,tell us what you want, and you got it."
That was then. This is now. If they wish to be in Oro Valley, fine. If not, that too is fine!
Read The Explorer article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/07/08/news/doc4a53cced188f452239
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
The Goldwater Institute Speaks Out On "Supermajority Rule"
The Goldwater Institute Daily
July 7, 2009
In Defense of Supermajority Rule
By Nick Dranias
There was a time when conservatives stood for smaller government. They fought taxes and believed in spending only on core government functions. Then we saw the era of "read my lips" and "compassionate conservatism." Politicians of all stripes decided that voters wanted carefree spending--and they delivered. That's what generated the spectacle unfolding in California. And during Arizona's go-go real estate boom, it empowered a Democratic Governor and a Republican Legislature to surrender the state's fiscal health to reckless spending.
That's why Arizonans should be grateful that our state's Constitution requires two-thirds of the Legislature to approve a tax increase--a "supermajority" rather than a simple majority. So far the supermajority rule has helped some legislators resist the ridiculous notion of raising taxes in a depressed economy. But more deeply, the provision illustrates the crucial importance of restraining simple majority rule.
The problem with simple majority rule is not just the threat of mob action violating individual rights, but also the fact that the 2-point difference between 51 percent and 49 percent can shift in the blink of an eye. A simple majority is just not a good enough measure of consensus, much less the consent of the people. For this reason, especially when it comes to fundamental public policy, something more substantial than majority rule is required.
Taxes are among our most fundamental and critical public policies. Our nation was born of revolution because of taxes imposed without the consent of the people. Let's hope the Arizona Constitution's supermajority rule helps to restrain Arizona from continuing to engage in reckless spending.
Nick Dranias holds the Goldwater Institute Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan chair for constitutional government and is the director of the Institute's Dorothy D. and Joseph A. Moller Center for Constitutional Government.
July 7, 2009
In Defense of Supermajority Rule
By Nick Dranias
There was a time when conservatives stood for smaller government. They fought taxes and believed in spending only on core government functions. Then we saw the era of "read my lips" and "compassionate conservatism." Politicians of all stripes decided that voters wanted carefree spending--and they delivered. That's what generated the spectacle unfolding in California. And during Arizona's go-go real estate boom, it empowered a Democratic Governor and a Republican Legislature to surrender the state's fiscal health to reckless spending.
That's why Arizonans should be grateful that our state's Constitution requires two-thirds of the Legislature to approve a tax increase--a "supermajority" rather than a simple majority. So far the supermajority rule has helped some legislators resist the ridiculous notion of raising taxes in a depressed economy. But more deeply, the provision illustrates the crucial importance of restraining simple majority rule.
The problem with simple majority rule is not just the threat of mob action violating individual rights, but also the fact that the 2-point difference between 51 percent and 49 percent can shift in the blink of an eye. A simple majority is just not a good enough measure of consensus, much less the consent of the people. For this reason, especially when it comes to fundamental public policy, something more substantial than majority rule is required.
Taxes are among our most fundamental and critical public policies. Our nation was born of revolution because of taxes imposed without the consent of the people. Let's hope the Arizona Constitution's supermajority rule helps to restrain Arizona from continuing to engage in reckless spending.
Nick Dranias holds the Goldwater Institute Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan chair for constitutional government and is the director of the Institute's Dorothy D. and Joseph A. Moller Center for Constitutional Government.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Phoenix Has A Great Alternative For Its Animal Shelter
We probably all heard of about Joe Arpaio, Maricopa longtime sheriff, elected first in 1992, and re-elected since then for a total of 5 terms 4 years each.Sheriff Joe has come up with many new and innovative ideas throughout the years.
We thought it might be appropriate to make note of Maricopa's approach to animal shelters, under the leadership of Sheriff Joe, especially since many neighbors in Oro Valley have an interest in the "animal shelter issue."
Maricopa County was spending approx.$18 million dollars a year on stray animals, like cats and dogs. Sheriff Joe offered to take the department over, and the County Supervisors said okay.
The Maricopa Animal Safe Hospice (MASH),is a no-kill animal shelter operated by the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) in what was formerly Phoenix's First Avenue Jail. The facility opened by Sheriff Arpaio is a 30-year-old jail previously used to house inmates, but was closed for repairs to plumbing in December 1999. Though no longer suitable for housing inmates, the jail looks like a paradise to the four footed victims now housed and recovering there. The MASH location in the First Avenue Jail is air-conditioned, and the cells have been reconditioned to comfortably house animals.
"The purpose of the shelter is to provide a safe, healthy and healing shelter for animals who have been abused, neglected by their caretakers/owners and rescued by the Animal Cruelty Investigative Unit."
Sheriff Joe's no-kill animal shelters are staffed and operated by prisoners. They feed and care for the animals. Every animal in his care is taken out and walked twice daily. He now has prisoners who are experts in animal nutrition and behavior. They give great classes for anyone who'd like to adopt an animal.
The prisoners get the benefit of about $0.28 an hour for working, but most would work for free, just to be out of their cells for the day. Most of his budget is for utilities, building maintenance, etc. He pays the prisoners out of the fees collected for adopted animals.
His budget for the entire department is now under $3 million. A couple adopted a Weimaraner from a Maricopa County shelter a few years ago. He was neutered, and current on all shots, in great health, and even had a microchip inserted the day they got him. Cost:$78.
We thought it might be appropriate to make note of Maricopa's approach to animal shelters, under the leadership of Sheriff Joe, especially since many neighbors in Oro Valley have an interest in the "animal shelter issue."
Maricopa County was spending approx.$18 million dollars a year on stray animals, like cats and dogs. Sheriff Joe offered to take the department over, and the County Supervisors said okay.
The Maricopa Animal Safe Hospice (MASH),is a no-kill animal shelter operated by the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) in what was formerly Phoenix's First Avenue Jail. The facility opened by Sheriff Arpaio is a 30-year-old jail previously used to house inmates, but was closed for repairs to plumbing in December 1999. Though no longer suitable for housing inmates, the jail looks like a paradise to the four footed victims now housed and recovering there. The MASH location in the First Avenue Jail is air-conditioned, and the cells have been reconditioned to comfortably house animals.
"The purpose of the shelter is to provide a safe, healthy and healing shelter for animals who have been abused, neglected by their caretakers/owners and rescued by the Animal Cruelty Investigative Unit."
Sheriff Joe's no-kill animal shelters are staffed and operated by prisoners. They feed and care for the animals. Every animal in his care is taken out and walked twice daily. He now has prisoners who are experts in animal nutrition and behavior. They give great classes for anyone who'd like to adopt an animal.
The prisoners get the benefit of about $0.28 an hour for working, but most would work for free, just to be out of their cells for the day. Most of his budget is for utilities, building maintenance, etc. He pays the prisoners out of the fees collected for adopted animals.
His budget for the entire department is now under $3 million. A couple adopted a Weimaraner from a Maricopa County shelter a few years ago. He was neutered, and current on all shots, in great health, and even had a microchip inserted the day they got him. Cost:$78.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Two Points Of View Concerning "Library Issue"
Two members of the library committee have letters in the July 1 Explorer.
John Musolf saw fit to resign from the committee as he felt his rationale of turning the library over to Pima County was the fiscally responsible thing to do, but his pleas consistently fell on "deaf ears."
Allistair Innes, a long time "Friend of the Library," was in the forefront of having Oro Valley keep control, and try to find a way to alleviate the double, and possible triple taxation concerns of many citizens.
Here are the two letters. We should note, John's letter was shortened dramatically by the Explorer. We will give you the "unedited version" below.
*******************************************************************************************
Sordid tale of library friends letter campaign
After five months of intensive research including hours of one-on-one meetings with administrators, staff and patrons of other Pima County libraries, it was obvious that it would be impossible to maintain the same level of service to Oro Valley residents if the library was turned over to the Pima County and became one of 27 libraries under county administration.
It was agreed in the committee that the town is at a crossroads. Our town now has a population of over 44,000. We are a large municipality, however, under the present state statutes no municipality has control over funds raised by a county library district. The taxes are paid to the county and they pay our municipality whatever they wish to pay. At the present that represents around 50 percent of the costs of running the library, less than a third of the library property taxes paid by our residents. Last year, Oro Valley residents paid $2.3 million in library tax, and the county returned only $650,000 in reimbursements.
If we turn the library over to the county at this time, we will lose the leverage to take this, together with other municipalities, to the state legislature. We will also lose bargaining power with the county when the present intergovernmental agreement expires in 2012. If we turn over the library, Oro Valley will pay a large additional amount of money for the privilege of giving Pima County our library.
In the end our recommendation was unanimous and was intended to give the town time to potentially save over $1 million for the residents of Oro Valley, eliminate $700,000 of expense from the general fund, and keep the library.
Alisdair Innes, Review committee member, Oro Valley
Note: At the Council Meeting it was noted that one member of the committee was opposed to the report. Therefore, it might be erroneous to say it was "unanimous."
Art
John Musolf saw fit to resign from the committee as he felt his rationale of turning the library over to Pima County was the fiscally responsible thing to do, but his pleas consistently fell on "deaf ears."
Allistair Innes, a long time "Friend of the Library," was in the forefront of having Oro Valley keep control, and try to find a way to alleviate the double, and possible triple taxation concerns of many citizens.
Here are the two letters. We should note, John's letter was shortened dramatically by the Explorer. We will give you the "unedited version" below.
*******************************************************************************************
Sordid tale of library friends letter campaign
A number of weeks ago, I wrote a Letter to the Editor recommending that the Town of Oro Valley turn over the operation of the Oro Valley Library to the Pima County Library District. This was based on the fact that Oro Valley taxpayers pay double taxation for the operation of the OV library (library tax to Pima County and OV general fund tax money). The Town manager is predicting OV budget shortfalls for 2009/2010 and 3 years beyond for the general fund and that money could be used to alleviate the budget shortfalls.
I would like to state that I am a registered voter of Pima County and the state of Arizona. I am also a taxpayer of Pima County and the state of Arizona. I do have a summer home where I visit some of my children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren.
When the Explorer News published two letters in response to my letter, the Explorer did not know that the “Friends of the Oro Valley Library” had concocted a letter writing campaign (conspiracy) to attempt to discredit my letter. On the “Friends of Oro Valley Website”, the “Friends” had written:
"Someone must respond to John Musolf's letter in the Explorer. It can't be me, but I have written one that anyone could redo as their own. Please e-mail the board and ask if someone will do this. I will get the letter to them. Have them call me 825-xxxx".
"Apparently xxxx has a neighbor who is going to sign off on the article. I guess this avoids any comments from the public that it is a Friends of the Library article."
This chat information has since been deleted from the “Friends Website”. However, the whole sordid story can be read by going to the Let Oro Valley Excel Blog website. (http://www.letorovalleyexcel.blogspot.com)
I do not have any problem with the two ladies voicing their “own” opinion on the content of my letter. This is assuming it was their opinion and not something “ghost-written” for them. I have written a comparison between the two letters and some of the same language, numbers and talking points in the letters reek of collusion. The words “our” and “we” appear repeatedly in the context of their letters referring to the “Friends of the Library”.
I did not know that the “Friends” were responsible for the operation of the OV library.
Additionally, neither letter discusses or refutes the double taxation statement I made in my letter.
The “Friends of the Library” is a 501(c)(3) legal organization. Section 501(c)(3) organizations are subject to limits or absolute prohibitions on engaging in political activities. In my opinion, trying to influence (lobbying) the passing of a resolution to support the OV Library out of general funds certainly borders on being “unethical”, if not “downright breaking the law” concerning political activities.
My suggestion to address the issue of turning over the OV library to Pima County would be to place the issue on the ballot and let the Oro Valley voters decide what the best course of action would be. We did this the “old-fashioned Democratic way” with the Naranja Town Park!
The first letter from Judith Kuehl was filled with many misrepresentations and conjectures:
“Mr. Musolf appears to want us to give away a $7 million asset”.
Where did Judith come up with the $7 million dollar asset figure? The Pima County Library District funded $2 million of the original construction cost and $1.1 million of the library expansion and currently owns 50% of the building.
“The current library district tax for 2009-2010 is projected to be $1.8 million (not $2.35 million), of which approximately one-third is returned to the town to help run the library”.
At the time my letter was published the library district tax was 2.35 million. The Pima County administrator just recently changed the tax rate so that the new tax is 1.8 million. So evidently, Pima County returning only one-third is just as acceptable as returning one-quarter of our taxes.
“If we become a branch of said system, could our locally purchased books be fed into the county and permanently lost to our local facility? Can we stand to lose as much as 30 percent of our locally purchased books, many of which are bought by our Friends of the Library and not from town funds”?
In 2006, Tucson turned over the operation of 23 libraries and their books to the Pima County Library District. There was no mass drainage from any of the branches to another branch. Judith is also implying that once the Friends of the Library make a donation that they want to keep complete control over “their books”.
I also find the words “many of which are bought by our Friends of the Library and not from town funds” questionable! When the library first opened their doors where does Judith think the original collection that fills over 95% of the OV shelves come from? The answer is Pima County Library District.
“Pima County officials would be setting policy for our local library, and the employees would not be answerable to the OV Town Council, even though they are employed in our OV facility”.
Gee Judith!
They would not be our OV employees and would not be working in our OV facility. The OV library facility would be the property of Pima County and the employees would be paid by Pima County. Why would the Oro Valley Town Council get involved?
“If we allow the county to take over the facility we will still be paying our library tax, plus a yearly charge, for a minimum of three years, to the county. This amount could equal $1.5 million over that same three-year period”. What is Judith’s source for this projected yearly charge of .5 million per year? Evidently Judith knows something that the rest of us do not!
“Currently our Oro Valley librarians purchase the books we want or need. If we become a branch of the Pima County system, the county would select and purchase materials”.
From the inception of the Oro Valley Library until two years ago Oro Valley was part of the centralized buying. All 27 branches including Oro Valley did input their request based on patron demand and circulation. Oro Valley opted out of that system because “we” are unique.
“Would we lose access to our community center for other than county-sanctioned events”?
Evidently Judith has talked to Pima County Supervisors or District Library Officials and they told her only county-sanctioned events would be allowed in the Oro Valley Library. Even the OV Library task group couldn’t find that out!
Nancy Ledeboer, Library Director for Pima County Public Library, told the Library Oro Valley Library Review Committee that the Branches may vary according to the Branch Managers’ determination of local needs, but that the County is basically doing the same things that Oro Valley is doing. As Ms. Ledeboer explained it, the County Staff develops a shell and the Branch Manager fills it.
The second letter from Arlene Lehto was filled with many similar and almost identical misrepresentations and conjectures:
“Mr. Musolf appears to want us to give away a $7 million asset”.
Gee Arlene!
Judith Kuhel and you must be close neighbors. Funny, both of you ladies came up with the same identical $7 million dollar figure.
The two of you must have written your letters together over coffee, since your quote has the same words and dollar amount as Judith! Incidentally, The Pima County Library District funded $2 million of the original construction cost and $1.1 million of the library expansion and currently owns 50% of the building.
“Furthermore, Mr. Musolf doesn't seem to realize that the county board lowered our secondary tax from $2.35 million to $1.8 million for 2009 – 2010.
Gee Arlene!
You and Judith Kuhel are both very observant. Total coincidence of course! Both of you noticed that I quoted 2.35 tax million in my letter. At the time my letter was published the library district tax was 2.35 million. The Pima County administrator just recently changed the tax rate so that the new tax is 1.8 million.
“He fails to mention that would include as many as 30 percent of the books we asked for and paid for. As just another branch, our books, checked out through other libraries, would stay with them”.
Gee Arlene!
You and Judith Kuhel are both very observant of the same omissions from my letter. Total coincidence of course!
Funny you both used 30 percent for the Oro Valley inventory reduction. Even the Library Task Force suggested the supposed drainage would probably be 20%
.
You and Judith both used the words “our books” referring to the ones that the Friends had purchased and donated to the OV Library. When the OV library first opened their doors where does Judith think the original collection that fills over 95% of the OV shelves came from? The answer is Pima County Library District.
In 2006, Tucson turned over the operation of 23 libraries and their books to the Pima County Library District. There was no mass drainage from any of the branches to other branches.
“Really, do we really want Pima County to hire our employees, select our books and not be answerable to our council”?
Gee Arlene!
Both you and Judith want control of the library to remain with the OV Town Council. Total coincidence of course! The library would belong to Pima County and the employees would be Pima District employees. Why would the Oro Valley Town Council get involved?
“We would also lose the income from the semi-annual book sales (approx. $20,000 per year)”.
Gee Arlene!
Evidently you may have talked to the same Pima County officials that Judith Kuhel did and those Pima County officials told you that the semi-annual book sales would be eliminated in an IGA turnover. Even the OV Library task group couldn’t find that out!
***************************************************************************************
Committee was unanimous about keeping OV library
After five months of intensive research including hours of one-on-one meetings with administrators, staff and patrons of other Pima County libraries, it was obvious that it would be impossible to maintain the same level of service to Oro Valley residents if the library was turned over to the Pima County and became one of 27 libraries under county administration.
It was agreed in the committee that the town is at a crossroads. Our town now has a population of over 44,000. We are a large municipality, however, under the present state statutes no municipality has control over funds raised by a county library district. The taxes are paid to the county and they pay our municipality whatever they wish to pay. At the present that represents around 50 percent of the costs of running the library, less than a third of the library property taxes paid by our residents. Last year, Oro Valley residents paid $2.3 million in library tax, and the county returned only $650,000 in reimbursements.
If we turn the library over to the county at this time, we will lose the leverage to take this, together with other municipalities, to the state legislature. We will also lose bargaining power with the county when the present intergovernmental agreement expires in 2012. If we turn over the library, Oro Valley will pay a large additional amount of money for the privilege of giving Pima County our library.
In the end our recommendation was unanimous and was intended to give the town time to potentially save over $1 million for the residents of Oro Valley, eliminate $700,000 of expense from the general fund, and keep the library.
Alisdair Innes, Review committee member, Oro Valley
Note: At the Council Meeting it was noted that one member of the committee was opposed to the report. Therefore, it might be erroneous to say it was "unanimous."
Art
Oro Valley Council Says "No" To Economic Commission By 4-3 Vote
In what is becoming an all too familiar fact, once again the OV Council voted "No" on an issue by a 4-3 vote.
This time it wasn't taking money out the contingency fund in an ill-conceived way of balancing our budget.
This time, the majority of Mayor Loomis and Council Members Abbott, Carter & Kunisch said "no' to the implementation of an Economic Development Commission intended make recommendations to the council on economic development issues such as business attraction and retention, and provide the council with an annual action plan.
Only Council Members Garner, Gillaspie & Latas felt a 7 member volunteer group of members representing various sectors of the local economy from retail, lodging and other areas would be an asset to the town.
Some opposition was based on "no need for these damn commissions" (Carter) or not liking the idea of Ms. Latas choosing the members. (Abbottt & Loomis) We're not sure what problem Kunisch had.
Read The Explorer article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/07/01/news/doc4a4aa40d015bd817964102.txt
This time it wasn't taking money out the contingency fund in an ill-conceived way of balancing our budget.
This time, the majority of Mayor Loomis and Council Members Abbott, Carter & Kunisch said "no' to the implementation of an Economic Development Commission intended make recommendations to the council on economic development issues such as business attraction and retention, and provide the council with an annual action plan.
Only Council Members Garner, Gillaspie & Latas felt a 7 member volunteer group of members representing various sectors of the local economy from retail, lodging and other areas would be an asset to the town.
Some opposition was based on "no need for these damn commissions" (Carter) or not liking the idea of Ms. Latas choosing the members. (Abbottt & Loomis) We're not sure what problem Kunisch had.
Read The Explorer article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/07/01/news/doc4a4aa40d015bd817964102.txt
Contentious Issue Facing Council Concerning Pet Control
Along with the budget concerns, the control of the Oro Valley library, and other issues, we are now faced with the question of whether the town should take over the job of licensing the pets, and taking over animal control from Pima County.
Read the in depth story on this issue in the July 1 Explorer article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/07/01/news/doc4a4aa2f9db744311819879.txt
Read the in depth story on this issue in the July 1 Explorer article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/07/01/news/doc4a4aa2f9db744311819879.txt
Oro Valley Citizen Questions The Wisdom Of Funding Outside Agencies
The following letter appeared in the July 1 Explorer. We surely agree with the letter writer.
*************************************************************************************
Why does OV give money to outside groups?
According to your article on June 24, Oro Valley is giving $61,930 to the Greater Oro Valley Arts Council, $40,000 to Tucson Regional Economic Opportunities and $25,000 to Critical Path, with the total outside group giving reaching $277,717.
Perhaps this could be justified in a year of excellent economic growth, although I cannot understand why government funds art instead of the marketplace, but in these times it seems irresponsible at best.
The sum of $61,930 could pay for more than one teacher for a year.
I fail to see the logic of the Oro Valley Town Council giving any money to any outside groups when they were looking at cutting police a month ago. Sometimes it seems like every level of government has lost its collective mind.
Respectfully submitted, Lynne St. Angelo, Oro Valley
*************************************************************************************
Why does OV give money to outside groups?
According to your article on June 24, Oro Valley is giving $61,930 to the Greater Oro Valley Arts Council, $40,000 to Tucson Regional Economic Opportunities and $25,000 to Critical Path, with the total outside group giving reaching $277,717.
Perhaps this could be justified in a year of excellent economic growth, although I cannot understand why government funds art instead of the marketplace, but in these times it seems irresponsible at best.
The sum of $61,930 could pay for more than one teacher for a year.
I fail to see the logic of the Oro Valley Town Council giving any money to any outside groups when they were looking at cutting police a month ago. Sometimes it seems like every level of government has lost its collective mind.
Respectfully submitted, Lynne St. Angelo, Oro Valley
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
"What, Me Worry?"
As many of us are concerned about the goings on internationally, nationally, within the state and, certainly here in Oro Valley, we thought it would be appropriate to have Alfred E. Neuman share his point of view.
Alfred needs no introduction.
For those of you that share Alfred E. Neuman's philosophy ---"What, Me Worry," there should be no concern.
For the rest of us that do worry, there is something that can be done.
Remember, Oro Valley will be electing a mayor & 3 council members in 2010.
It's still early, but, PLEASE consider carefully who you vote for. There should be no doubt that we need NEW candidates with Common Sense. We believe we know at least two that will announce their candidacy soon.
Don't be an Alfred E. Neuman. Oro Valley needs and deserves better!
Alfred E. Neuman
by Norman Mingo
Alfred needs no introduction.
For those of you that share Alfred E. Neuman's philosophy ---"What, Me Worry," there should be no concern.
For the rest of us that do worry, there is something that can be done.
Remember, Oro Valley will be electing a mayor & 3 council members in 2010.
It's still early, but, PLEASE consider carefully who you vote for. There should be no doubt that we need NEW candidates with Common Sense. We believe we know at least two that will announce their candidacy soon.
Don't be an Alfred E. Neuman. Oro Valley needs and deserves better!
Alfred E. Neuman
by Norman Mingo
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
