The name Don Cox should be quite familiar to our readers. Cox, a prolific comment maker here, wrote the following letter, printed in the April 19 Explorer.
Whether our readers agree with Cox or not is the question. Will an endorsement from Don Cox be helpful or hurtful to Terry Parish in his run-off election with Barry Gillaspie is another question.
Without further comment, we'll leave these questions for our readers. We look forward to your comments.
Art
****************************************************************************************
Parish Has Given What Oro Valley People Have Wanted
Whether you like it or not, a very significant part of the political landscape in America is the activity of contributing money to a candidate for office. In fact, this practice has become so popular there are businesses that do nothing but raise funds for candidates. Even the state of Arizona is in the political contribution business with the Clean Elections folly.
Terry Parish has raised a significant amount of money in his bid for re-election. Much of it came as a result of his past support for “much-needed, citizen-requested” commercial development. I utilize the terms, pointing to an Oro Valley citizen survey conducted not long before Mr. Parish’s election in 2004. At that time the population was screaming for more retail and dining opportunities closer to where they lived. Now allow me to quote from the most recent (2007) Oro Valley satisfaction survey.
“Desired Improvements – Oro Valley residents indicate that the best way to improve overall satisfaction is via recreational opportunities, retail and dining opportunities, improved traffic and controlling new building.” These are listed in the order of their importance as expressed by the citizens.
In two separate surveys, years apart, the citizens of Oro Valley have clearly stated that they want more places to shop and dine in Oro Valley.
So in essence Mr. Parish has supported the will of the people. In return for his efforts we read: “He is in the pocket of developers”, “…accepting illegal contributions”, “Mr. Parish is nothing but a liar,” and “money funneled to him was obtained in … a murky manner”. None of these are accurate or deserved.
Where is the outcry from the do-gooders about the shady contributions to Oro Valley candidates made by the Pima County Democratic Party in a non-partisan election? Where is the outcry against the phone banks being conducted by the same folks on behalf of the same candidates? Those things are far more disturbing, in my opinion, than Mr. Parish supporting the will of the vast majority of the citizens and receiving honest, legal and above-board contributions. By the way, I am still waiting for some candidates to declare their in-kind contributions from the Pima County Democratic Party and their attorney.
If you wish to disagree with Mr. Parish on issues, that’s fine. It adds to a healthy debate. But to accuse him of selling his vote, breaking the law and lying is simply tactless and exhibits petty ignorance.
Mr. Parish puts his life on the line every day he goes to work protecting the citizens of Pima County. He comes home to take care of his family and then tackles the job of being an Oro Valley Town Councilman. We should be thankful for people like him.
Show some class, folks.
Don Cox
Oro Valley
13 comments:
Art....
Once again you have put your spin on what I said and as usual it is not correct. If you could only state (or in this case restate) with some degree of accuracy, you would have a much higher credibility rating.
I want you to find one sentence or phrase in my letter that endorses Terry Parish. I didn't. I just don't like people making inflamatory, slanderous comments about Terry, or anybody else for that matter. I would even defend you, if I thought people were making the same kind of baseless comments about you. It would be tough but I would. :-)
If you examine Terry's voting record, which is probably far too much work for you to do, you will find that he has voted for items that, in the two surveys I mentioned, were requested by the respondents.
I appreciate the fact that you posted my letter, but please do not make any attempt to turn what I said into something that I didn't say.
Both candidates have served this Town well and both have been victims of unfounded, petty and senseless criticism.
Thinker, if the vast majority of Oro Valley residents supported Terry Parish then he would have been elected in the primary.
You know that surveys can be worded in ways that don't allow the person taking the survey to answer exactly as they want to.
You say that people expressed an interest in more shopping and dining choices. Fine I agree! : )
But how the heck does that lead you to interpret that people
want or approve of Terry Parish
having taking contributions from out of town developers? If you read that town survey,Yes it is long, but keep going, you will see
a lot of people are unhappy about the EDA with Vestar that resulted in WAL MART.
Terry Parish is the one who said that he takes contributions from developers and is proud of the fact.
Like it or not, most people will look closely at such a contribution.
Three points in response to Mr. Cox
1) You are the last person I would choose to defend me. Curiously, you are the ONLY one to make baseless comments about me. However, that's not the issue.
2) I'll let the readers decide if all the nice things you said about Terry Parish constitute an endorsement.
You need not use the word "endorse" for one to determine you "support" him.
3) Your sarcasm suggesting it's probably too much work for me to examine Terry's voting record is the farthest thing from the truth. I am quite aware it was his voting record that put him in the precarious position of needing to win a run-off election in order to remain in office.
Thinker, you say where is the outrage because the Democratic party made a contribution to a candidate.
Well you seem to be the only one who is outraged, I talked to hundreds of people and most were concerned about developer contributions , not contributions from political parties.
Also since OV is or was considered a Republican town, then most of the Republicans must have voted for Latas and Garner and not their fellow republican Parish.
I say those OV Republicans are smart voters!!!
OV OT, if your letter wasn't an endorsement of Mr. Parish that, to me, is equivalent to stating that, because large contributions by
'interested' parties were broken down into individual donations, therefore these 'small' donations cannot be construed as one 'large' one and thus Mr. Parish can't be construed as being beolden to these larger entities. So, you left out the word 'endorsement'; we still can speculate as to why you wrote the letter though it leaves you wiggle room to claim otherwise.
Yes, Mr. Parish has been the recipient of many [harsh] statements many of which were
speculative, observational, opinionated, etc. However, Mr. Parish has invited these comments by MANY of his actions whether intended or not - lashing out at those with whom he disagrees in public forums, making unfounded claims through news interviews, body language disdain directed at others, grouping those with whom he might disagree into certain negative categories - I could go on but there's no point in doing so - his history is rife with these
'defensive' maneuvers.
As a person, I find Terry amiable and, in a sense, dedicated. I , however cannot view him as intellectually adept for the challenges that face us; it is thus that I find him to be unsuitable for the 'job'.
As to the [economic strides] that have been afforded the community, one only has to look at the empty storefronts, the 'for lease' signs, the meager receipts of existing businesses, etc. to realize that we are over retailed and under 'specialized'. I cannot simply blame Terry Parish for this as our whole governance was responsible for this. But, the handwriting was on the wall before Mr. Parrish opted for re-election; at that point accepting more money from 'developers' appears to have been a 'thank you' and a 'just in case' scenario. Read the business section of the AZ Star today, the business outlook is bleak. Terry's bent towards more development is, at this time and for some time future, no longer a viable segment of need.
At this point, I WILL ENDORSE Barry Gillaspie for the open position on the Council. He IS well versed on needs versus wants, he can articulate his positions well, he has a superior background in virtually ALL things municipal, he can listen, he can understand, AND he can intelligently discuss a divergent opinion, without getting ruffled.
OV OT, keep your friendship with Terry Parish, that would be admirable, but, please, don't overplay him.
Thinker,
If you reviewed the OV survey thoroughly, you would also have seen that many respondents mentioned that they were NOT happy that Wal-Mart was coming to OV Marketplace. And they mentioned this without being prompted. They were not asked, "Are you happy/unhappy that Wal-Mart will be the anchor for OVM?" Yet many survey respondents brought this topic up on their own which means it was foremost on their minds.
Asking for more retail opportunities and getting a Wal-Mart is like asking for more homes and getting a housing project. So you can't really say that Parish has "supported the will of the people." The majority did NOT want a Wal-Mart. I really believe that this is where he lost the support of the citizens.
He was well-aware of the 3,500 signatures that OV1st collected in protest of the Wal-Mart but he never addressed this petition issue. He is well-aware that OV citizens despise Vestar, yet he took thousands of dollars in contributions from them which means he will now OWE Vestar something in return if he wins, and the last thing we want is Vestar cashing in on favors. No one trusts Vestar at this point, so for Parish to take that much money from them just makes everyone think...well, you're known by the company you keep. His association with Vestar has cost him.
Although I don't disagree with Parish on everything, in the final analysis, I have to vote for Gillaspie because he had the guts to distance himself from Vestar and the guts to stand up for OV1st when others on the council were trying to marginalize us by ridiculing us and refusing to even meet with us.
Thinker,
Read my last two comments under OV COUNCIL APPROVES PRE-ANNEXATION.
Ms. Coyote...Good to hear from you. My statement was that many of the Oro Valley voters supported the ISSUES for which Terry voted favorably.
Most were not concerned about the contributions from political parties because few knew about them. Sadly, they were not publicized like the developer contributions.
The blog master of this wonderful blog was outraged in the past election when two other candidates and myself published a post card stating that we were endorsed by the Oro Valley Republican Club. We received no financial or in-kind support from the Pima County Republican party or any other Republican group. The Mayor, whose testosterone level was evidently much higher in 2006, was very critical of our actions. Unfortunately, what the Pima County Democratic Party did during the course of this election is going to come back to bite them in future elections.
85% of the respondents in the last survey were satisfied with what is going on in Oro Valley. Surely you don't want to argue against 85%....or do you? I hope to awaken the sleeping 68% who didn't vote in the last election. If they vote, I'll be a happy camper.
Zev... Your recent comments have been very on point and far less inflamatory than some of your initial postings and I appreciate that. Whether that carries any weight with you, I leave for you to decide.
I believe you understate the degree of harshness of the statements. Mr. Parish is a good Christian, good father, public servant and above all an honest human being. So that folks do not consider that an endorsement, Mr. Gillaspie fits into the same description. I take offense when false statements are made and I do my best to present facts supporting my positions. Terry received donations which were legal, reported properly and far from "murky", "illegal" or "cloudy". That was my primary point. I have already described my secondary point. But few respond with comments about the points. Art attacks in two paragraphs and makes appropriate comments in a third. We will let folks decide who presents a more fact based, logical argument on any issue and who wants to spend ink in attempt after attempt to besmirch the other.
The issue is whether a person has responded to the stated need, wants and desires of the public. I would love for you, and I think you might take the time, to look at the voting record of Barry and Terry on development issues and in particular Vestar issues. And if you really want an eye opening experience look at the voting record of Ms. Abbott and Mr. Carter on the same issues. You will find little difference.
As I previously stated, disagree with Mr. Parish (or Mr. Gillaspie) on issues. Don't attack their character. They have spent countless hours serving this community. I can't say that for most of the folks who post on this blog.
Last but not least...Art.
I addressed your comments in my response to Zev. I know it is so very difficult for you, but please, please restrict your comments to the points that have been made. Those were your rules to me, many months ago. Even Zeeman has requested that we get past personal remarks. I firmly believe that most folks who post and read this blog would prefer to proceed down the high road.
Hi Thinker.
You say that people supported the issues that Terry Parish voted favorably for? Hmm, not sure about that one. If that was the case like I said he would have won by a landslide, and that did not happen.
I am in favor of more choice in shopping and dining but that does not mean that I am in favor of developers controlling our community by contributing or funding most of a candidate's run for office. t really looks bad and a smart person would be thinking about the why of such a push by the developer. Also people voted for the EDA to Vestar because they really believed that Vestar would deliver what they promised for the 23.2 share of our future tax dollars and secondly they really believed that the town of Oro Valley would not allow a big junk store like a super wal-mart clusterd with the same old, same old chain stores.
So by Terry publicly stating that this deal was a home run he struck out with most of the voters. my opinion of course but again he did not get elected in the primary and also he had the advantage of being an incumbent. I would say people were unhappy with his record.
YOu asked me if I would argue against 85% of the people who responded favorably to the questons in the last survey?
No because it is not worth fighting about and they of course are entitled to their opinion.
So 400 people took the survey, I hardly call that a true representation of what most of Oro Valley residents think. To me it is an example of waste of our money.
Now if they asked me, which they did not I may have answered in a manner that would count me with the 85% affirmative. Does that mean that I support non stop development, junk stores like Wal Mart and other decisions, H ll NO.
I am very satisfied with town services and think I could easily live without some that are provided.
Now if they asked the question along with willingness to increase or pay more taxes, I bet the answers might well be different.
I am not thrilled with the voting record of Barry Gillasp;ie but think that he has more potential
to make planning and land decisions that would benefit the community then Terry Parish.
So my vote goes to Barry Gillaspie.
I wish he would just learn to speak up and stand up for what he says are his stands on issues, but looks like he s improving.
Also Terry Parish seems to have a bit of a problem with female's who express themselves and are intelligent.
So as a female, I am offended by his behavior towards the "weaker" gender. He comes across as very chauvinistic and not in a flattering way.
Take Care
Isn't this supposed to be an open exchange. So what if OV objective thinker endorses TP. If everyone agreed with the blog, what is the point of posting. I enjoy reading ov objective thinker's posts. It is refreshing to read some real objective thinking.
yada yada yada, what's your point?
This is an open exchange - we can knock and we can get knocked - so what? Some of us have written regularly on this site, you haven't. Yes, sometimes things can get a little heated, but we all bear with it and continue on. So, you're defending OV OT; believe me, he takes care of himself! In the meantime, and all this time, what have you contributed? Yada, yada, yada!
Zev....
It is the quality of posts, not the quantity. Defending ov ot? I said it was refreshing to read an objective thinkers posts. Do we need your opinions about "taking care of himself". What is your point, Zev?
yyy, you did NOT state that 'it was refreshing to read AN objective thinker's post', you said it was refreshing to "read ov objective thinker's posts" thus you have singled out just one author! As to quality, that is subjective analysis, and neither you nor I can determine absolutely that which is or is not. Agreeable or not, contributions come from all directions and in many forms.
For me, yours was just yada, yada, yada.
Post a Comment