REALTORS® PAC Makes $6,400 Contribution to Napier Campaign

Realtor PAC weighs in
The REALTORS® of Arizona Political Action Committee (RAPAC) contributed $6,400 to mayoral candidate Mark Napier’s campaign. That represents about 19.5% of the campaign’s total receipts through June 30. Excluding the $5,056.54 that Mark and Marlene Napier loaned the campaign, the RAPAC contribution represents approximately 23% of the money received from other sources.

Napier participated in questionnaire and interview
LOVE asked Napier about the contribution. He told us that he believes he completed an RAPAC questionnaire and participated in a panel interview. He said the questions covered his professional background, public administration, issues facing Oro Valley and his general understanding of real estate issues. 

Barrett says "No" to PAC contributions
We spoke with Vice Mayor Melanie Barrett. Her campaign-finance report shows no PAC contributions. She told LOVE she does not recall whether she was ever contacted by RAPAC. Even if the organization had contacted her, she said she would not have accepted its financial support. Barrett has never accepted PAC contributions in any of her three campaigns because she believes doing so allows her to answer only to Oro Valley residents. 

The value RAPAC get from supporting Napier...

Napier told us that his priorities are:

• Development consistent with existing zoning

• Building heights that do not detract from the Town’s appearance

• Development compatible with surrounding neighborhoods

• Responsible and sustainable development of Oro Valley’s remaining open residential land

We do not know whether any of those priorities align with RAPAC’s. You can do your own assessment by comparing them to those listed in the panel above. The size of the contribution suggests that either RAPAC saw an alignment between its priorities and his or that it expects to receive some other value. 

...could be "access"

Napier told LOVE that any suggestion that the contribution could influence him was “patently absurd....I made no commitments to the Realtors PAC other than to listen." This commitment to listen does assure RAPAC that its views will be heard if he is elected mayor. Whether that opportunity alone explains the $6,400 contribution remains unanswered.

- - -

Will Social Media Spell The Difference?

Social media, videos, robocalls and texts reshape campaign outreach
Campaign signs were once the primary way candidates reached Oro Valley voters. Event today, they remain highly visible throughout town. This election, however, has brought a broader outreach effort. Mayoral candidate Mark Napier and council candidates Chris DeSimone and Rhonda Piña have invested substantially in digital advertising and campaign media. Their reports identify approximately $19,300 in social media advertising, campaign social media and broadly described advertising services. Additional payments were made for websites, video production, consulting, signs and campaign materials. The reports do not separately identify how much was spent on automated telephone calls or campaign text message

Will social media make a difference? Will it sway voters? Will it change the voting blocs we discussed yesterday?

Social media may move the needle a little
There have been relatively few studies focused specifically on municipal elections. Research from larger elections generally finds that political advertising on social media has limited and inconsistent effects. One experiment involving approximately two million voters examined an eight-month digital advertising campaign during the 2020 presidential election. On average, the advertising neither increased nor decreased turnout. The researchers concluded that even a large digital campaign was likely to have only modest mobilization effects. Other research suggests that social media may be more effective at increasing visibility and reinforcing the views of existing supporters than at changing the minds of undecided voters.

Robotexts may work better as reminders than as persuasion
One study involving more than three million voters found that a simple text-message reminder increased turnout by about 0.3 percentage points. That is a small effect, but even a small increase could matter in a close local election.  Research examining text messages intended to change voters’ candidate preferences has generally found little or no measurable effect. The evidence suggests that texts may be more useful for reminding supporters to vote than for persuading them to support a particular candidate.

Robocalls have shown limited results
Randomized studies have generally found that prerecorded political calls have little effect on either turnout or candidate preference. They are relatively inexpensive and allow campaigns to contact many voters quickly, but reaching a voter is not the same as persuading one.

Negative advertising presents another uncertainty
Research on negative campaigning has produced mixed results. Attacks may affect attitudes toward the candidate being criticized, but they can also cause voters to react negatively toward the candidate making the attack. Other research has found that negative advertising is not necessarily more effective than positive advertising. Much depends on whether voters consider the criticism credible, relevant and fair. Repetition may make a claim more familiar, but familiarity does not necessarily make it persuasive.

These methods may make a difference at the margins
Social media advertising, robocalls and robotexts can increase a candidate’s visibility, reinforce the views of supporters and remind people to vote. They appear to be less reliable at changing firmly held opinions.

In a close Oro Valley election, however, even a small effect could influence the outcome. We will know next week whether this extensive outreach made a measurable difference.

- - -

Next Week We’ll Learn Whether Past Elections Foretold the Outcome of the 2026 Election

Past two elections revealed a geographic voting pattern
The results of Oro Valley’s Mayoral 2022 and Council 2024 elections suggest that where voters live may help explain how they vote. In both elections, a group of precincts centered in Rancho Vistoso voted differently from four precincts that include and surround the Town’s municipal golf courses. The candidates and issues changed, but the geographic divide remained.

Rancho Vistoso provided Winfield’s winning margin in 2022
In the 2022 mayoral election, Joe Winfield narrowly defeated former Oro Valley Police Chief Danny Sharp in the Mayoral election. This result was a bit surprising because Danny Sharp was a well-known, well respected figure in our Valley for many years. Sharp carried four precincts by a combined 920 votes. Winfield overcame that deficit by carrying  seven other precincts by 1,251 votes. His strength in Rancho Vistoso and the surrounding precincts provided the margin needed for his 285-vote townwide victory. That was close!

The 2022 council vote showed the same divide
The 2022 council race followed a similar pattern. Melanie Barrett, Joyce Jones-Ivey and Josh Nicolson won a majority of the council votes in nine of the Town’s eleven precincts. Their strongest support came from Rancho Vistoso. Their weakest results came from the precincts that include the Town’s two municipal golf courses, although they still received almost 48% of the vote there.

The same pattern appeared again in 2024
The 2024 council election produced another geographic split. Mary Murphy and Mo Greene received their strongest support in the golf-oriented precincts. Elizabeth Robb and Tim Bohen performed better in the Rancho Vistoso-oriented precincts. Murphy also received strong support in the Rancho Vistoso precincts. Robb received strong support in the community center precints. The election also produced substantial undervoting, as many residents used only one or two of their three available council votes.

A pattern is not a prediction... but tomorrow we will know more
Two elections do not establish how Oro Valley residents will vote in the future. Candidates, issues and turnout change from one election to the next. Still, the results of 2022 and 2024 suggest that Oro Valley has two identifiable geographic voting coalitions. And, as the panel shows, one is much larger in terms of voters than the other. The 2026 election will show whether that pattern continues or whether voters create a different one. 

Tomorrow: Will Social Media Spell The Difference?

- - -

Deputy Town Manager Cornelison Leaving Town For New Career

A major move

Oro Valley Deputy Town Manager Chris Cornelison has confirmed that he is leaving the Town after sixteen years of service. Cornelison will become a financial advisor with TCI Wealth Advisors, a local firm. He told LOVE that serving the Oro Valley community has been a privilege and that he looks forward to continuing to help people in a more personal, one-on-one role.

A long career with the Town
Cornelison joined the Town of Oro Valley in 2010 and rose through several management positions, becoming assistant town manager in 2017 and deputy town manager in 2021. He also served as interim town manager from 2022 until Jeff Wilkins became town manager in 2023.

A major contributor
During his tenure, Cornelison became one of the Town’s most visible senior administrators. His responsibilities included budget preparation, capital projects, parks and recreation, golf operations, public works, land matters and the redevelopment of the Oro Valley Marketplace. As deputy town manager, he oversaw Information Technology, Parks and Recreation, Public Works and the Town Clerk’s Office.

Cornelison also led a review of the Town’s 457 retirement plan about five years ago. This is a tax-advantaged savings plan offered mainly to state and local government employees.The initiative resulted in a new plan and improved services for Town employees. In 2025, he received the ICMA Credentialed Manager designation, recognizing his professional experience and commitment to local government management.

Sets a new direction
Cornelison’s move into financial advising builds on his interest in helping people plan for their futures. He said he looks forward to continuing to serve the community in a different way. We wish him well.

Presents town an opportunity to consider structure of town manager's office
Cornelison’s departure creates a natural opportunity for the Town to reconsider the structure of the Town Manager’s Office. Senior management positions shape how responsibilities are divided, how departments communicate and how decisions move through the organization. A vacancy at this level allows the Town to determine whether the existing arrangement still reflects its current needs.

That question is especially relevant as Oro Valley approaches build-out and faces slower revenue growth. The deputy town manager position may remain important and may ultimately be filled. The vacancy also provides an opportunity to consider whether the same duties, reporting relationships and management structure should continue unchanged.

- - -

Read more about Chris and his work in Oro Valley here.

Oro Valley Is Not Marana: Town Comparisons Need Context

Marana is not Oro Valley’s model
Oro Valley officials, town staff, council members, and candidates often look to Marana when discussing growth, economic development, revenue, land use, and public services. That is understandable. Marana is nearby. It is active. It is growing. It is often in the news. But proximity does not make the two towns truly comparable.

The two towns are different in important ways
Marana is much larger than Oro Valley. It has more room to grow. Its 78,000 acres are more than three times Oro Valley’s 23,000 acres. Its planning area is also more than three times larger than Oro Valley’s. Much of Marana is flatter and easier to build on. Interstate 10 also passes through Marana, giving it direct access to a major transportation corridor. That helps support highway-oriented commercial development, logistics-related uses, employment centers, and larger-scale projects.

Oro Valley does not have Marana’s I-10 location advantage. It has no direct I-10 frontage. The Tangerine Road corridor runs about 10 miles from I-10 in Marana to La Cañada Drive in Oro Valley. 

That means Oro Valley’s economic growth strategy must be different from Marana’s. Oro Valley’s future economic development must be shaped around its own geography, limited land supply, mature residential character, and community expectations.

Community values shape community choices
Both towns value quality of life, but they express that value differently. Marana’s General Plan emphasizes managed growth, economic development, infrastructure, parks, trails, downtown revitalization, open space, and conservation as the town prepares for continued expansion. Those values may sound familiar to Oro Valley residents. The difference is context. In Oro Valley, building height matters more. Density matters more. View protection matters more. Compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods matters more. These values are central to Oro Valley’s identity because most major land-use decisions now occur next to, or near, established neighborhoods.

Marana is also Oro Valley’s partner
None of this means Oro Valley should ignore Marana. In some areas, the two towns should work together. Water is one example. Oro Valley, Marana, and Metro Water District are partners in the Northwest Recharge, Recovery and Delivery System (NWRRDS), a regional effort to recover stored CAP water and deliver renewable water supplies to each service area.

Tourism is another example. Oro Valley and Marana have partnered on regional bicycling promotion, the Tucson Bicycle Classic, Project Echelon Gran Fondo, and the M.O.V.E. Across 2 Ranges hiking event. Transportation is another shared interest, as shown by the Tangerine Road corridor, which connects I-10 in Marana to La Cañada Drive in Oro Valley. These are useful partnerships because the interests are regional. They are different from using Marana as a benchmark for what Oro Valley should become.

Lessons are useful. False comparisons are not.
Marana is not wrong for making Marana decisions. Oro Valley would be wrong, however, to assume that Marana’s path is Oro Valley’s path. The better approach is simple. Learn from Marana where the lesson applies. Partner with Marana for mutual benefit. But measure Oro Valley by what fits Oro Valley, not by what fits Marana.

- - -

Bits and Pieces...Election Style

Napier overlooks Barrett’s ten years of hands-on Oro Valley experience

Melanie Barrett has served this community for more than ten years. She first served on the Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission. For the past eight years, she has served on the Town Council and as Vice Mayor. During that time, she has been directly involved in the Town’s budgets, land-use decisions, water policy, public safety funding, parks and recreation planning, road maintenance priorities, annexation discussions, and long-range financial planning. She has not watched Oro Valley from the outside. She has governed it. (Watch KGUN 9 Barrett interview here).

That is why a Mark Napier campaign video is so hard to take seriously. In the video, Napier compares his background to Barrett’s by describing her as a “part-time elected official” and listing only “Town Council Member” under her professional experience. That is campaign framing. It is not a fair description of what Barrett has done for Oro Valley. 

Napier has significant professional experience. That is not in dispute. The question for voters is what kind of experience matters most in this election. Napier offers outside executive and law-enforcement experience. Barrett offers direct Oro Valley governing experience. She knows the Town’s issues because she has been working on them for years. To say that she lacks the experience to lead Oro Valley going forward is not just unfair. It is ridiculous. It is patently absurd.

Click to enlarge

A commenter on Napier's facebook page had a visceral reaction to his video: "Ignoring someone’s accomplishments and achievements while also putting down stay at home moms is wild. But hey, I can do it too. Without the whole degrading various moms all over town… that’s gross dude." The commenter included a visual which we is on the panel at right. Enjoy.

DeSimone says that a photo of a six story building could jeopardize future "Uptown" annexation efforts
In a campaign video, council candidate Chris DeSimone said that a building shown in some competitors’ campaign materials is not in Oro Valley. He alleges that the building pictured is part of the Uptown redevelopment of the former Foothills Mall in unincorporated Pima County. DeSimone argued that using that building to warn voters about tall buildings in Oro Valley could make future annexation discussions with the developer of Uptown, Bourn Companies, more difficult.

We just do not see the problem.

First, Oro Valley residents have made clear that they do not want tall buildings in Town. Oro Valley’s zoning rules limit building height. Future development inside Oro Valley would be subject to the Town’s zoning and land-use approval process. If the Uptown property were ever annexed, existing buildings and previously approved development rights would only be affected if the Bourn sought new approvals, changed the project, or agreed to different terms as part of an annexation agreement. And these exceptions could be granted as part of the annexation agreement.

Second, Uptown is part of Oro Valley’s long-range annexation discussion, but it is a very long-term target. It is not contiguous with Oro Valley’s current boundaries. Arizona annexation law requires the territory proposed for annexation to be contiguous to the city or town. According to the Town Council’s January annexation discussion, annexing the former Foothills Mall area first would require annexing residential areas that together include roughly 2,500 residents. That would be needed just to bring the Town’s boundary to the mall. It would also make the annexation more complicated, more expensive to serve, and dependent on broad residential participation. 

Residents in that area have not shown interest in becoming part of Oro Valley. LOVE reported in 2020 that the last time the Town tried to convince the Foothills Mall area to join Oro Valley, it received a “resounding no.”  That history matters. It means Uptown may be worth watching as a long-range possibility, but it is not the Town’s practical near-term annexation strategy.

DeSimone says other candidates "might be afraid to answer tough questions"

In a separate campaign posting, DeSimone asserts that he has been more available to voters than the other candidates. He says he is “the one candidate of the seven total” who has held the most public events to encourage input and conversation. That would be a legitimate campaign point if documented. He goes further, saying that the “lack of public engagement” by some competitors “should worry the voters” and suggesting they “might be afraid of answering tough questions.” DeSimone says he will continue meeting with residents monthly if elected and hopes one or two fellow council members will join him. 

- - - 

Napier Says Oro Valley Marketplace Lacks Vision and Leadership… But Is He Right?

Does Napier's claim "hold water"?
A campaign video posted on mayoral candidate Mark Napier’s site states that “The Oro Valley Marketplace is not living up to its potential due to failed leadership and no long-term vision for its development.” The claim is not substantiated. It is simply an assertion. The video gives the impression, especially to those who do not know the Marketplace’s history, that the empty storefronts, and there are many, are the fault of the current Town Council.

History says otherwise
LOVE has documented the Marketplace since its inception. Indeed, LOVE’s founding grew out of the efforts of residents who opposed Town financial support for the center. They did not like the agreement the Town made with the developer, Vestar. Vestar was to receive an estimated $23.2 million in rebated sales tax revenue over the center’s first ten years.

These residents fought to place that choice on the ballot so residents could approve or reject it. Bedazzled by the promise of an “upscale” mall like La Encantada in the foothills, and with the support of the Paul Loomis-led council, 58% of residents, in March 2006, voted in favor of the Town’s financial support for the center. They did not get that upscale mall. A subsequent Arizona Supreme Court ruling sharply restricted such arrangements by requiring that public payments provide direct and proportionate public benefits.

The Marketplace was troubled from the beginning
LOVE chronicled this history through 2019. We concluded that the Marketplace was doomed from its inception because it was not an economically feasible venture. Even with ongoing government support, it was, at best, only marginally successful. The only council that could be blamed for its failure, if any council could be blamed, would be the council in office when the decision was made to financially support the center in 2005. Indeed, the Marketplace would never have been built at that time had it not been for the financial support to which the Town had agreed.

The Marketplace struggled throughout its history. There were always vacant storefronts. No upscale stores located there. Its gross revenues fell far short of the plan. After ten years, the center had generated $16.4 million in sales tax revenue for Vestar. That was far less than the projected $23.2 million. Store after store failed. Remember Dick’s Sporting Goods? Best Buy? Ashley Furniture?

During most of those years, from 2010 to 2018, the Town was overseen by the Hiremath Council. That council included current council candidate Rhonda Piña and Joe Hornat, a vocal Napier supporter. The Hiremath Council did nothing to fix the plight of the center. And, really, what could it have done?

The Winfield Council inherited the problem
By 2019, the first full year of the Winfield Council, there were 22 open businesses and 23 empty storefronts. By October, the Marketplace had a new owner. Vestar sold the Oro Valley Marketplace to Town West Realty. The reported purchase price was $45.15 million.

Town West presented a new vision
Town West had a vision. It planned to transform the Marketplace from a primarily retail center into a mixed-use development. Town West believed that only a mixed-use development could provide the density needed to make the shopping center successful. The Town Council agreed. From 2022 to 2023, Town staff and the council worked with Town West to shape the redevelopment into a plan that could revitalize the Marketplace.

Council shaped it the Oro Valley way
The initial proposal from Town West contemplated approximately 730 apartments in two six story buildings. They sought numerous exceptions from the Town’s existing height and setback requirements. These exceptions were not consistent with the Town’s General Plan. Nor were they consistent with what residents wanted. The initial plan included a “public-private partnership” that would have required the Town to underground a wash and build and maintain an entertainment center.

After much work, the final agreement allowed 320 apartments in two three-story buildings, with the buildings limited to 39 feet. It also included a hotel. The agreement added an important condition: The agreement added an important condition: The hotel in Area 4 must receive its certificate of occupancy before certificates of occupancy may be issued for any apartments in Area 4. The initial recreational amenities would be the responsibility of the developer rather than becoming a Town-funded obligation. If the project succeeds, the council can later decide whether it wants to underground the wash to accommodate another hotel and food-court-type concepts in the entertainment district.

Redevelopment is now moving forward
Drive through the Marketplace and you can see that construction is in progress on the north side of the property. It includes one of the two approved apartment buildings, the hotel, intersection and pedestrian improvements, and the neighborhood park. Surf Thru Car Wash is ready to go on the south side. There is also a new restaurant where Red Lobster used to be. 

Napier should explain his alternative
If Napier does not see that as leadership, then we ask: What would he have done, and would it have achieved a better result? We believe that question is legitimate. We see a center that is being revitalized and is on the move again. We see a center whose redevelopment plan was shaped with the input and effort of Town staff and council. We see that as leadership.

But Napier’s video does not agree. So we wonder: What would he have done differently to make this redevelopment a reality? Would he have approved six-story apartment buildings? Would he have approved 720 apartments? Would he have committed millions of dollars in Town money upfront to fund the entertainment center?

Those are legitimate questions Napier ought to answer instead of simply trying to rewrite history.

- - -