Bits and Pieces

Traffic delays expected on Ina at Westward Look today

Drivers should expect traffic delays today at the intersection of Ina Road and Westward Look Drive due to traffic signal repairs. Westbound Ina will be reduced to one lane with a 25 MPH speed limit, and periodic full stops will occur during crane operations. Oro Valley Police will direct traffic while the signal is offline. Motorists are encouraged to use alternate routes and allow extra travel time.

Nine Month Results: Town finances remain stable with a caution

Town staff reported at Tuesday's Budget and Finance Commission meeting that Oro Valley’s financial position remains strong through the first nine months of the fiscal year. Revenues—including sales tax and recreation income—are generally meeting or exceeding budget, while most departments continue to manage expenses at or below expected levels. Staff credited conservative budgeting and a healthy local economy for these results, but cautioned that slower revenue growth may be ahead, reinforcing the need for continued prudent financial management.

Nine Month results: Community Center Fund surplus grows as golf revenues exceed budget

Tuesday, The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board received an update on the nine-month financial results for the Community Center Fund and municipal golf. Staff reported that both areas are performing well above expectations. Membership and program revenues are exceeding budget, golf rounds and revenues remain strong, and overall expenditures are on track or below budget. As a result, the Community Center Fund is now projected to end the year with a significant surplus, growing the fund balance to an estimated $2.3 million.

Staff sees progress toward golf self-sufficiency...possibly freeing funds for other recreation activities one day

Also at this meeting, staff reported that municipal golf operations are now generating an operating profit, thanks in part to strong membership growth and efficient management. Since the town took ownership ten years ago, about $29 million in half-cent sales tax has been collected to subsidize golf and the community center, with cumulative operating losses and major capital investments totaling about $19 million ($10 million each for losses and capital). Now, things may be changing. Staff noted that the next step is to use these operating surpluses to fund ongoing capital improvements, reducing the need to rely on the half-percent sales tax for golf’s capital needs. As golf operations move closer to full self-sufficiency, staff emphasized that more sales tax revenue will be available to support other parks and recreation projects across Oro Valley.

Honor America's Heroes Monday

Memorial Day is more than just a day off—it’s a time to remember and honor those who gave their lives in service to our country. Join the community on Monday from 10 a.m. to noon at the Arizona Heroes Memorial in Naranja Park for a special remembrance event. The ceremony is free and open to all.

OVPOA: Delay in police MOU discussion a good thing

According to Chris Knapp, representative for the OVPOA and FPO (Fraternal Order of Police), removing discussion of the possible wage agreement between the town and OVPOA from last night's council agenda is a good thing.  Knapp noted that there have been discussions with council members and staff and that good progress has been made. Knapp thinks a compromise is at hand.  A new MOU will be presented for approval at the June 4 council meeting.

Vella provides added insights into the Trails Master Plan
On Tuesday, LOVE provided an update on the Town’s Trails Master Plan study. That evening, Town Planning Manager Bayer Vella offered additional insights during a presentation to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, expanding on several key areas:

• Funding may be key: Vella noted that Marana dedicates part of its bed tax to trail and open space improvements. Oro Valley may consider a similar approach to fund future trail needs.
• Trail easements required: Much of the well-used trail land north of Big Wash lies on State Trust Land with no public easements. Gaining access will likely require coordination with state and county agencies and possibly purchasing easements.
• Trail difficulty ratings suggested: Board members proposed labeling trails by difficulty, similar to ski runs. Vella confirmed that trail maps will include slope, surface type, and other features to help users—especially families and those with mobility concerns—plan their outings.
• Connectivity gaps identified: Suggestions included creating safer access from the Loop to Catalina State Park, and building a direct connection from Riverfront Park to the Loop—both of which will likely be included in the plan’s recommended actions.
• Volunteer and partner contributions remain vital: The Town has no full-time trail planning staff. Many unpaved trails have been built by developers or volunteers, and that approach will remain important as the system expands.

- - -

Path Forward Phase 2 Moves Into Drafting The Plan Stage

Thank you, OV residents!
More than 100 residents dedicated their time and voices to the second phase of creating the community’s next 10-year action plan, known as OV’s Path Forward Phase 2—“Let’s Think”—began in January and involved four Resident Working Groups. These groups used insights gathered from a community survey, more than 90 pop-up events, and online feedback to draft goals, policies, and actions related to traffic, housing, development, views, parks, and more.

Turning the community’s vision into reality
In Phase 1—“Let’s Talk”—residents shared their values, priorities, and expectations for Oro Valley’s future. That input was captured in a vision statement and guiding principles. The goals, policies, and actions developed in Phase 2 are the next steps in turning that vision into reality.

Resident Working Groups were open to all who wanted to help shape OV’s future. Approximately 107 residents participated, drafting 31 goals, 82 policies, and over 230 actions that reflect the voices of Phase 1.

There’s still more work to be done
The Resident Working Groups will continue refining the draft goals, policies, and actions to ensure they accurately reflect the community’s vision. Over the summer, the web-based plan will continue to evolve with the addition of images, maps, and more.

A complete draft of the plan will be released later this fall, inviting all residents to review it and ensure it represents the community’s voice.

Visit OVPathForward.com to explore the plan’s topics, see how resident input is guiding the process, and track progress to date.

There’s still time to get involved! If you’re interested in contributing to the community’s next 10-year action plan, email OVPathForward@orovalleyaz.gov. Your participation and awareness are key to shaping OV’s journey over the next decade.

- - -

It’s Trail Time: Oro Valley’s Path Planning Enters Key Phase

Study progress continues since March update

We last reported on the Town’s 2025 Trails Master Plan Study on March 28 At that time, we reported that the Town had launched the study, identified key trail systems to be included, and begun initial outreach to gather community input. Since that time, the Town has completed a resident survey, summarized all public input to date, developed a draft vision with ten guiding principles, and held a second stakeholder meeting to collect feedback on those drafts. Tonight, Town staff will review the latest with the Planning and Zoning Commission.

Community survey results show strong support for trail maintenance and improved connectivity

The online survey received 735 responses, with 75% of respondents over age 55 and 95% being full- or part-time Oro Valley residents. Walking, road biking, and hiking were the most common uses. Across all trail types, the top priorities were regular maintenance, better connectivity to destinations, and improved signage and maps. Common barriers included a lack of ADA accessibility, limited parking, and unclear wayfinding. Respondents also emphasized the importance of trails close to home and connections to parks, schools, and shopping.

Parking, signage, and ADA access top list of trails barriers

The survey and other outreach efforts revealed several consistent barriers across Oro Valley’s trail and path systems. Many users cited inadequate parking, poor signage, and limited access to maps as obstacles. Lack of ADA accessibility was a concern, especially for unpaved trails. Users also noted safety concerns, discomfort due to limited shade or rest areas, and difficulty connecting to desired destinations. These issues were common across all four focus areas: unpaved trails, paved multi-use paths, the Loop, and the Vistoso Trails Nature Preserve. 

Stakeholders ask for restrooms, Wi-Fi, and more shade

At the May 8 stakeholder meeting, participants discussed the draft vision and guiding principles and offered additional feedback. Several comments focused on the need for basic amenities—such as restrooms, water fountains, and shaded seating—especially at high-use trailheads. Others emphasized the importance of reliable Wi-Fi access at locations like Vistoso Trails to support downloadable maps. Parking access for those who don’t live near trailheads was a recurring concern. Attendees also raised issues about maintenance practices, enforcement of trail rules, and the need for safe, accessible paths for all users. One organization, the Sonoran Desert Mountain Bicyclists, expressed interest in partnering with the Town or Pima County to fund and install bike repair stations at trailheads. 

Ten guiding principles will shape future decision

Based on community feedback, the Town has developed a draft vision that emphasizes a safe, well-maintained, and interconnected trail system that supports recreation, wellbeing, and a connection to nature. Supporting this vision are ten guiding principles organized under four themes: reinvesting in existing assets, enhancing community connectivity, growing a safe and accessible network, and improving signage and wayfinding. For example, one principle calls for adding restrooms, benches, and shade at heavily used trailheads. Another recommends providing downloadable digital maps and adding trail signage to help users navigate the system more easily. These principles will guide future decisions on trail amenities, maintenance, accessibility, and expansion. 

Draft plan will include implementation steps, costs, and funding strategies... none of which have been discussed to date

At tonight’s meeting, the Town will also review the draft outline for the full Trails Master Plan. The outline includes dedicated chapters for each of Oro Valley’s four trail systems—unpaved trails, paved multi-use paths, the Loop, and the Vistoso Trails Nature Preserve. Each chapter will address existing conditions, proposed improvements, maintenance standards, signage, safety, accessibility, and future connections. The final plan will also include implementation steps, funding strategies, and a process for ongoing updates and public engagement. The final plan could reasonably be expected later in 2025

- - -

It's Budget Time: A Quiet Review of the FY 2026 Operations Budge

Flat funding, tight margins
The Oro Valley Town Council held a budget study session on May 5 to review the operations portion of the FY 2025–26 Town Manager's Recommended Budget. It was a quiet meeting with no pushback on department allocations and only a few clarifying questions. The budget was presented function-by-function, and councilmembers appeared content to listen and observe.

Town-wide budget holds nearly steady
Town Manager Jeff Wilkins and CFO Dave Gephart opened the session with an overview of the full $147.1 million proposed budget, which represents a 2.4% decrease from the prior year. The decline reflects a drop in capital spending, while personnel and operations costs were held nearly flat. There is only one new full-time employee proposed—a police officer. The Town continues to face rising costs for services and supplies, even as key revenues like sales taxes and state shared revenues have flattened or declined.

General Fund pressure grows
The General Fund—the Town's main operating fund—is expected to decline slightly, with a projected ending balance of $17.1 million. That leaves only a small cushion above the Town's 30% reserve requirement. Revenues from local sales taxes and state shared income taxes are either flat or falling, while one-time increases in building permits and school contracts help offset the drop. Still, the revenue increase year-over-year is only 0.5%.

Only Parks and Recreation request shows big increase
Each major department presented its portion of the budget. The Police Department will see a modest increase, primarily to cover salary step increases and benefits. The Court budget declined slightly. Parks & Recreation proposed a $1 million increase, most of it tied to operations at the Community Center and aquatics programs. Public Works will see a slight decrease, with reductions in street maintenance and capital spending offset by a notable increase in transit costs. Community and Economic Development remains stable, while the administrative departments are essentially flat.

Council questions focused on revenue
Councilmembers asked only a handful of clarifying questions—most notably about the state's flat income tax and its impact on shared revenues. There were no motions, no requests for reallocation, and no new policy direction. The tone of the meeting was professional, brief, and quiet.

Police salary negotiations will change the numbers
One factor that will impact the proposed budget is the outcome of the Town's ongoing negotiations with the police union. The FY 2026 budget includes salary increases based on the current Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), but the final agreement—which the Council will vote on separately—will include higher raises. Consequently, the Town will need to amend the budget or dip into contingency funds. Over the long term, higher base salaries will also increase the Town's required annual contributions to the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS).

More budget work to come
This was the second of five scheduled budget discussions. The next session will be held with the Budget and Finance Commission on May 20. Councilmembers are expected to review and adopt the final budget in June.
- - -

It's Budget Time: Council Questions Whether Proposed Capital Spending Is Balanced and Justified

Council digs into details of capital spending
At the April 30 budget study session, Council members questioned several aspects of the Town Manager’s recommended capital budget for fiscal 2026. The discussion focused on major areas of spending: water, public safety, streets, parks, and town facilities. Mayor Winfield presided over the session but did not ask questions. Staff answered each question and said that the current proposal reflects priorities identified in the Council's strategic plan.

Water spending and NWRRDS funding
Several questions focused on the largest area of capital spending: the Water Utility, which accounts for 62% of the $45.6 million recommended CIP. Vice Mayor Melanie Barrett asked for clarification on how much of the Northwest Recharge, Recovery, and Delivery System (NWRRDS) project is new spending versus carryover from the current year. Staff responded that approximately $8 million is carryover and $16.7 million is new funding.

Barrett also requested that future reports distinguish between groundwater preservation fees, which are paid by all water users, and water impact fees, which are paid by developers. “It would be helpful to have those separated out, since they are different sources of funding,” she said.

Community center project costs and equity
Multiple councilmembers commented on the large share of parks funding being spent at the Community Center. Vice Mayor Barrett raised concerns about over-concentrating capital spending in one part of town, saying: “It kind of feels like we just keep putting more and more and more money onto this one area… I hope that [residents in that area] will also support funding other areas of our town.”

Councilmember Mary Murphy and Councilmember Mo Green supported the proposed $950,000 to resurface the Community Center parking lot, citing safety concerns and visible deterioration. Staff explained that the pavement is crumbling and poses trip hazards. Councilmember Joyce Robb added that the older part of the lot “definitely seems like there are trip hazards,” noting that she observed them during a recent site visit.

Traffic, streets, and intersections
Vice Mayor Barrett asked whether a traffic warrant study had been completed for the $750,000 traffic signal proposed at Tangerine Road and Musette Drive. Staff responded that traffic counts had been collected and a warrant analysis was underway. She also questioned the long-term deferral of the Moore Road and La Cholla Boulevard intersection improvements, a project she said residents continue to raise concerns about.

Councilmember Robb asked about the sidewalk program and whether $100,000 annually is enough. Staff responded that the program began two years ago and that the request for next year is intended to “catch up” on backlogged repairs before scaling down to $25,000 in future years.

Parks projects and equity concerns
There was strong support among councilmembers for moving a proposed $250,000 Naranja Park shade structure from the contingent project list into the funded budget. Councilmember Nicolson said he hears frequent complaints about the lack of shade, and Councilmember Jones-Ivey asked whether drainage issues might interfere with construction. Staff said drainage is being monitored but is no longer a barrier to building shade structures.

Barrett also questioned the proposed $350,000 multi-use path near Lambert Lane, asking whether it serves the highest-priority need in the town’s trail system. Councilmember Robb suggested earmarking the funds generally for multi-use paths, to be directed to the top priority identified in the updated trails plan.

Police facility planning and project timing
Vice Mayor Barrett urged caution on the $36 million police facility project currently listed in future years of the CIP. She supported the $400,000 in the FY 2026 budget for continued planning but said, “It seems a little optimistic to me to say that in next year’s budget we’ll have something ready for $18 million.” Staff responded that the project is still in the contingent list and that scope and funding are yet to be defined.

Operations yard and long-term use
Councilmembers discussed whether to remove a $50,000 project for decommissioning the Municipal Operations Center (MOC), given that the Town also proposes spending $450,000 on fencing and other upgrades at the same location. “If you’re going to go in one direction, you wouldn’t do one of the other,” said Barrett. Councilmembers agreed to remove the decommissioning project from the long-range plan, since there are no plans to relocate Transit or Water Utility operations.

Next steps
This was the first of five public meetings on the FY 2026 budget. A follow-up session on the operating budget is scheduled for tonight. Public hearings are set for June 4 (tentative adoption) and June 18 (final adoption). Councilmembers may continue to refine budget priorities as those dates approach.

- - -

Council Faces Three MOU Police Pay Proposals, Each with Trade-Offs

Its up to theTown Council to set police compensation
Last week, the Oro Valley Town Council became directly involved in decisions regarding a new Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Oro Valley Police Officers Association (OVPOA). The MOA defines pay, benefits, and working conditions for sworn police personnel. The current agreement, negotiated in 2021, expires on June 30, 2025.

This is the first time the Council has cut at the new MOA. As we previously reported, last week, after extensive discussion, the Council requested additional financial analysis and asked staff to present side-by-side comparisons of the union’s proposal and the Town’s most recent offers. Council members are expected to review this information and may decide on the terms of a new agreement at their next meeting.

Three proposals under discussion
Three proposals are currently under consideration. One is the union’s most recent offer, presented on April 21. Another is the Town’s “bridge plan,” also presented on April 21, which staff described as a short-term compromise to keep negotiations moving after earlier terms were withdrawn. The third is a proposal from April 14 that was later withdrawn by the Town due to concerns about its long-term financial impact, particularly its effect on pension liabilities. The union supported that offer and indicated they were close to accepting it before it was pulled.

Hard to see?
Click to enlarge

Proposals share some key elements
All three proposals reflect agreement that police compensation must increase to remain competitive. Each includes a raise of approximately 13 percent for entry-level officers in the first year, along with annual step increases, cost-of-living adjustments, and a structured pay scale designed to attract and retain qualified personnel.

And differ in important ways
The panel at right highlights five key differences among the three proposals, ranging from the size of salary increases to long-term pension costs. In essence, the union proposal offers the most generous across-the-board increases, the withdrawn April 14 offer falls in the middle, and the bridge plan is the most modest. Each reflects a different balance between competitiveness, affordability, and long-term fiscal impact.

Union questions pension analysis... incorrectly included DROP officers in pension impact calculation

During the Council meeting, union representative Sgt. Durbin expressed concerns about the pension analysis provided by Stifel. Durbin noted that the union had not received the report in advance and questioned its accuracy, suggesting it may have included individuals outside the bargaining unit. Durbin also stated that the modeling appeared to mischaracterize the union’s April 21 proposal, potentially overstating its long-term cost. These concerns are central to the union’s position that the Town’s decision to withdraw the April 14 offer was based on incomplete or flawed financial assumptions. 

More specifically, Durbin stated that six DROP officers (Deferred Retirement Option Plan) were included in the Stifel pension liability calculations, even though their pension benefit levels are already locked in and should not factor into projected pension increases. She expressed concern that while the Town removed some DROP participants from the modeling, six remained included, potentially inflating the projected pension impact of the union’s proposal. (Updated 5-14-25)

Why the Council is now involved
Negotiations began in September 2024 and progressed steadily until mid-April. According to the union, they were close to accepting the April 14 offer when the Town withdrew it based on updated pension analysis from its consultant, Stifel. The Town then introduced the bridge plan, which is less costly primarily because it offers smaller raises across most pay steps, especially for senior officers—reducing both wage costs and pension obligations. The union viewed the withdrawal as a breach of trust and declared an impasse on April 28. That action activated Section 3-5-6 of the Town Code, requiring that unresolved issues be submitted to the Town Council for final determination.

Budget impact in FY 2026 and 2027
Any Council decision will require a modification to the Town Manager’s Recommended Budget for FY 2026, which was developed without including major changes to police compensation. Depending on which plan is adopted, the added costs in the first year are approximately $1.48 million for the union proposal, $630,000 for the withdrawn offer, and $408,000 for the bridge plan. This is a LOVE estimate and it includes the cost of increased non pension fringe benefits. These costs can be covered by reallocating funds within the proposed budget or by increasing the overall budget limit, potentially through the use of reserves.  

Concerns about how pension costs are being represented by town staff

Some observers have questioned how Town staff are presenting the pension impact of the police union proposal, particularly a staff graphic projecting an $8–10 million drawdown in the Capital Fund by FY 2029–30. Critics note that the $7.82 million pension liability under the union proposal is not a one-time payment but a long-term cost spread over decades, reflected in gradually increasing annual contributions to the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS). These contributions are operating expenses, not capital outlays, and accurate projections would require actuarial input from PSPRS. In FY 2026, the actual added pension payment under the union plan would be about $423,000, with lower amounts under the other proposals.

Council’s focus: fiscal responsibility
No member of the Council has proposed reducing police staffing or underfunding public safety. While there is discussion about the pace and structure of compensation increases, their commitment to supporting the Oro Valley Police Department remains strong. The Council’s focus is not on whether to raise police pay—all proposals include significant increases—but on how to structure those raises in a way that rewards officers, manages pension obligations, and ensures long-term town fiscal sustainability.

- - -

Clarification:

Town staff presented four scenarios for comparison during the May 7 meeting: the union proposal, the withdrawn April 14 offer, the Town’s bridge plan, and a status quo scenario with no new MOU. Our article focused on the three proposals that were actually negotiated and discussed. The status quo was not formally proposed by either side and is considered a fallback rather than an active option. (Updated: May 17, 2025)

Bits and Pieces

Town overstates the case when it comes to Golf and the Community Center

The Town of Oro Valley recently issued a press release celebrating the 10-year anniversary of its acquisition of the El Conquistador Country Club—now the Community and Recreation Center. While the release praises growth in memberships, expanded amenities, and the development of golf and recreation programming, not all residents share in the enthusiasm. From the start, the purchase sparked division. Critics questioned the cost, especially the use of a half-percent sales tax to support what some view as a facility serving a limited segment of residents.

Over the past decade, the Center has required millions in improvements—from parking expansions to bridge replacements, irrigation system upgrades, and the recent installation of an elevator. And while golf rounds are reportedly up, and operations have reached a break-even point, capital expenses still rely on public subsidy. The facility disproportionately benefits residents living nearby and active users of golf, tennis, and fitness programming, leaving others to wonder if the investment truly reflects town-wide priorities. Celebrating 10 years is fair. But calling it one of the “Town’s most beloved amenities” may be overstating the case—especially for those who continue to question its cost, limited accessibility, and opportunity cost.

Animal control agreement with Pima County extended another year

Last night, the Oro Valley Town Council approved a one-year extension of its intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with Pima County for animal control services. The current agreement expires June 30, 2025, and the extension would carry it through June 30, 2026. Under the IGA, Pima County enforces Oro Valley’s Animal Control Code, covering issues such as rabies control, licensing, leash laws, and sheltering of stray animals. Since FY 2022, the agreement has been funded primarily through licensing fees collected in Oro Valley, with Pima County covering the balance through its general fund. Staff estimate the arrangement saves the Town about $50,000 annually compared to providing the service independently.

Wilkins says budget holds the line while addressing key priorities

Town Manager Jeff Wilkins told the Mayor and Council at Wednesday night's council meeting that town revenues are flattening while costs continue to rise, requiring “a lot of strategic choices” over the next two years. He emphasized that his team worked line by line with departments to keep the 2026 Town Manager’s Recommended Budget flat, while preserving essential services, supporting public safety, and making targeted investments in the workforce and community priorities. Wilkins acknowledged the difficulty of these decisions and noted the inclusion of a new police officer position, a modest reduction in staffing elsewhere, and a continued focus on critical infrastructure. He reminded the public that the budget process remains open, with three more meetings—including two public hearings—still ahead.

Lawsuit over Rancho Valley Vista sewer damage continues... questions linger

The legal case (C20242358) between Pima County and Pulte Homes over sewer damage near the Rancho Valley Vista lift station is still ongoing. The dispute focuses on whether the damage was caused by poor soil preparation during construction or by an alleged 84,000-gallon water discharge in December 2021. Pulte has countered the County’s claims and is seeking reimbursement for repair work it says became necessary as a result of the leak. 

While the Town of Oro Valley is not a party to the lawsuit, the town is the water provider.  Town Water Director Abraham presented findings at a February 2024 Council meeting suggesting that an 84,000-gallon water discharge in December 2021 may have caused sewer damage near the lift station at Rancho Valley Vista. However, questions have since been raised about the accuracy and completeness of that presentation. Specifically, the water bill shown to Council at that time was from September 2022—not December 2021—and showed minimal usage. Some observers are now questioning whether the key water bill from the time of the alleged leak even exists or was ever issued, raising doubts about the basis for the discharge claim.

- - -