The blog has not been too favorable to Council Member Parish, but it is only fair to give credit where credit is due.
I listened & watched the video of the April 16 meeting. Consent agenda item E. Resolution No. (R)08 - 27 Providing Notice of Intent to Increase Water Rates, Fees and Charges for the Oro Valley Water Utility was "pulled" by Mr. Parish.
Rather than agree another rate increase was required, after lengthy discussion and a presentation by Phil Saletta, the town’s water utility director, a motion by Mr. Parish to continue this item with the possibility of adding additional tiers for water consumption was passed.
Keeping in mind, this item was only a "notice of intent" to have a rate increase, it was good to see the council agree that gathering additional information was the prudent thing to do.
It has been brought to my attention that perhaps Mr. Parish doesn't deserve as much credit as I gave him. It seems that the Water Utility requires a rate increase, at least to some extent, as a result of the Council's previous action to allow the home builders a five year phase-in period for water impact fees lobbied the Council for the 5 year phase-in, rather no phase-in and Parish was all for this.
If this 5 year phase-in was not approved this proposed increase may not be necessary. Might this be another example of an action with "unintended consequences?" Our readers can decide.
9 comments:
Art
Someone is not telling the truth. The water rate regarding developers is not relevant to this discussion. Because developer rates are supposed to be determined by their ultimate cost to the town. The councils approved plan covers these costs in a phased approach. This has nothing to do with basic water rates. However, as I propose it (you listened) those who use the most pay the most per gallon. This is not and never will be a developer friendly suggestion. (somebody is not being truthful to you)
Oro Valley charges it's citizens the most in our region for water. Why can't we at least be competitive. If KC Carter is successful in his bid to make Oro Valley charge its citizens almost 2x what the citizens of Tucson pay for their water we get what we deserve.
KC Carter brought us the Storm Water Utility Tax, we already pay this to Pima County. Still many were silent. This tax has no sunset, no goals and no real purpose other than to tax our citizen twice for the same service and allow Oro Valley's Govt. to grow for no good reason.
I voted for one tax in four years it is called the Utility tax. It expires next year as it should. Property crime was up 40% we needed police officers to address the problem. They were hired, problem solved and now the money from our increasing sales tax revenues will be able to foot the bill.
Most of you have been lied to. I work all day protecting you and the rest of Pima County so I don't have time to correct the lies you have been told. I do have the time , determination, courage, and energy to evaluate all the facts before I make any decision.
Most of us can't agree with our spouse all the time but we still love eachother. I don't understand why we can't discuss these issues that hopefully we are less passionate about without the hate speach and deceptive criticism that have been so much a part of this election.
If you want to discuss any issue with me all you need to do is call me. Don't say you won't call because I'll neve change my mind. I can't learn your point of view if you don't express it, neither can you hope to understand mine if you aren't willing to listen.
260-6195
Art
The developer rates that you and I are talking about are impact fees. That was not part of the discussion. Legally impact fees have to be used to mitigate the impact of new growth they do not relate to our basic water rates.
Delivery of water to existing citizens is mitigated with water rates. Our water rate structure punishes those who conserve. It should be the opposite and that is what I am trying to accomplish.
That will mean stabil water rates for the average citizen and rising rates for those who do not.
Phil Richardson was right when he use the analagy of being nibbled to death by ducks. Lately though these ducks have teeth and are trying to take bigger bites.
Terry--- I stand by my original post---giving you the credit for getting this potential water rate increase continued.
I also stand by my subsequent comment that you voted to allow the homebuilders a five year phase-in for the increased water impact fees, whereas KC voted "No."
With that motion, passed by the council, the amount of dollars coming in to the town will be less than what would have been, had KC's vote been in the majority.
So---With less money coming in from the homebuilders, the town is now saying they need more income, so let's tax the homeowners.
Lastly, your day job has no bearing on this subject. By constantly mentioning that, it appears you may be soliciting a "sympathy vote."
Terry, in my opinion most are silent or not complaining because most of the tax increases or new taxes are small amounts to most people.
You bring up something a lot of us have mentioned and that is the increase in crime, specifically property crime. Well Terry, the more development increases the more crime will increase. Another reason some of us think we are developing too big and too fast.
You say the problem was solved by hiring more officers, well no it does not really solve the problem of increased crime it just solves the problem of staff shortages to handle investigations, etc.
And Yes most of us feel that discussing our opinions with you is not going to change your mind.
Most of us also feel that you are so heavily financed by the developers that you can't represent us.
Thank You for being in law enforcement but law enforcement and policy decisions are two different things.
Terry,
By your own admission, in effect you are stating that you do not have the time to be a COMPLETE
representative on the Town Council.
It shouldn't take a long time to refute a lie, so your assertion that you work too long and/or too hard just doesn't cut it. As I see it, one of the problems with our Council is that it is so embedded in suspicion and embroiled in controversy BY IT'S OWN SHENANIGANS
AND LACK OF TRANSPARANCY, that we, the people, have to 'pull teeth' to get at the truth, we the people have to confront in order to try to get written statutes/directives followed, we the people have to run around like chickens in order to overcome the slip-sliding of Town Staff, we the people have to dig to China in order to 'find' the 'truth'. So, Terry, you think you have problems, we the people have them and YOU, sir, should be
working your tail off to correct these abominations and if you do not have the time, then you should should not be a deputy and a councilperson at the same time. Please understand that I have the highest respect for your work in law enforcement, that I do not dislike you as a person, that I believe that YOU truly believe that you are benefiting this community as a councilperson, but, I can't go along with the idea that you, in fact, do have those insights necessary to be a PEOPLE oriented councilperson, one that can CLEARLY grasp the TOTAL picture of that which makes a great community, NOR CAN I ACCEPT YOUR COMMENTARY ON THE DONATIONS YOU RECEIVE!
Zev
I respect your point of view. Regarding my council work it takes priority over the lies I was referring to. Those lies are told respective to me and my campaign.
One example was the editorial that claimed I had never seen a tax I didn't like. Patently false but it's out there.
Thanks for the comments.
Terry
Terry,
You said "property crime was up 40%...more police were hired...problem solved." Can you be more specific about this? Exactly how has the problem been solved? Did that 40% increase disappear?
After the additional officers were hired, I was hoping to see more police patrols in our neighborhoods but this has not been the case. I still NEVER see any patrol cars in my neighborhood or the surrounding areas. The only police I continue to see are the ones on Tangerine who are issuing speeding tickets.
So can you give me some specifics as to how the crime problem has been "solved" by hiring more police offiers? And I'm not being sarcastic here. I really want to know what's going on.
Also, I agree with you about people writing letters to the editor that make false statements which are then seen as "true" just because they are in print. I wish people would stick to the facts and not make generalizations or add their own embellishments and innuendo and word them in such a way that they are interpreted as fact.
That's why I will never run for office. What was that sound? Oh, it was just Thinker breathing a big sigh of relief!
Cowgirl
Our crime stats are published every month. They are approved as part of the Consent Agenda. We are doing very well. Our CRT squad has made a real impact in targetting the 10% of criminals that committ 85% of the crime.
The goal is to keep our crime rate the same or lower as the town grows. This refers to crimes per capita. As more people move here the number of crimes will rise but the rate must not be allowed to rise if we are to remain one of the safest communities in the country.
I would be happy to go over the stats with you in person if you so desire.
Terry
How much will these crime stats change once the Wal*Mart opens at OVM?
Someone needs to explain to us why this Wal*Mart needs to be open 24/7, and this Wal*Mart borders residential communties that don't have street lights. What an open invitation for increased crime activity!
It would be pretty impressive if one of our elected officials would go to Vestar and convince Wal*Mart to modify the store hours. Wal*Mart has made exceptions in in the past in order to promote goodwill in the community they invade.
Post a Comment