There was a spirited discussion at the July 2 Council meeting concerning the 2008-2009 town budget.
In a July 2 article in the Az Star (prior to the meeting) it was noted that KC Carter " is pushing to cut funding altogether for the group (GOVAC) within three years."
Well---that may be the case, but it was KC that made a motion to increase GOVAC funding in the 2008-2009 budget.
After lengthy discussion, it was decided to increase GOVAC from $105,000 to $120,000, change a few other contributions, and cut The Northern Pima County Chamber of Commerce from $27,500 to zero.
The rationale: NPCCC has seen fit to be a political influence on recent OV council elections. Also, the feeling was we don't get much in return for our dollars.
Only Mayor Loomis & Vice Mayor Kunisch----not surprisingly, voted "No."
These two seem to be a coalition of two on a number of recent votes.
Oh well---- some things change, others never will!
You can read the Az Star article here.
http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/246554.php
21 comments:
I am really starting to question why KC would want to increase the donation to GOVAC.
Well for that matter why the town would be increasing donations period.
All over the country towns, cities and states are cutting their budgets, instituting hiring/wage freeze's and OV is increasing spending.
GOVAC seems to think they have an entitlement to money from OV.
Wants and Needs are being confused.
So, KC, what’s up with you?
You move to waste more of our money in GOVAC, a forced contribution that we get no individual tax deduction for;
and a yes vote on Oro Valley rebuilding a golf course green.
I thought you were a good steward of our money.
Guess I was wrong.
KC, be good for you to reflect on who your constituents are and what they want. Or have you fallen prey to the "I'm here...screw you" philosophy that some former council members had?
Well, if nothing else, this shows that Carter is a little out of touch with his own rhetoric (and that's being polite). He is well past his "sell-by" date. He is mysogynistic, and unable to follow a simple debate. But we keep re-electing him. How strange....)
Again, as I understand it, only 10%of GOVAC's budget comes from the Town. So, we're debating here about a percentage of a percentage.
No one was harmed by upping the grant to GOVAC. That's the choice made by our elected officals. This increase won't buy very much--it certainly does not put GOVAC in the immediate position of having the Tucson Symphony come back for Independence Day.
But it might allow GOVAC to fund some school music programs and additional performances at Riverfront Park that are free and open to all, including each of us. Not a bad deal, I'd say, especially if it means that GOVAC will not have to move its programs to La Encantada next year.
Zee Man--the philosophy that you attribute to Council member Carter ("I'm here, screw you") could easily be applied to many on this blog.
The predominant attitude is: I'm here, I paid my dues. I don't want to pay to support schools, libraries, parks or to maintain public safety. Shut the door behind me and don't let anyone else in. If you have kids--too bad. Let them go play in the street. They don't need any damned parks where drugs will be dealt and all sorts of nasty things will happen. ("It starts with P and rhymes with T and that stands for Pool. I mean we've got trouble--right here in River City.").
I'm thankful to the people who came before me for having the foresight to build parks and schools and libraries for me and my family to use. They taxed themselves when they didn't have to through bond issues and other elections. I truly extend my gratitude to them for the amenities that I enjoy today.
Will we be able to say the same thing about Oro Valley in 20 years?
Boobie-baby,
You said we keep re-electing Carter. That implies that he's been re-elected many times. He's only been re-elected once.
I said I didn't want to pay for the Naranja Park.
Who exactly said that they didn't want to pay for schools, libraries, and public safety? Who said that kids should play in the street?
When you accuse us of saying things we never said, you lose your credibility.
Readers
you many want to check out the GOVAC website.
Maybe only 10% of the GOVAC budget comes from the town of Oro Valley but the town of Oro Valley is by far the biggest single contributor in dollar amount to GOVAC. I will assume the GOVAC web site is accurate.
Perhaps GOVAC could use some help with their organization so that they would not have to have a paid
staff or director and would not need the town to contribute as much money to their funding.
Boobie-Baby, you seem to be
in a nasty way today.
No need to be so nasty towards
KC.
Yes he is getting older, we all are.
People elect him because of his past voting record and most feel he is trustworthy.
I find your comments mean and strange.
You may have superior writing skills but that does not mean that your opinion is superior.
I don't recall any poster here saying they don't want to pay for schools, library, public safety, etc.
We all pay for the above.
Personally I don't feel that we need a megal theme park for our town to be paid by taxpayers.
Does that mean I don't support a park or don't like parks?
Again who is going to pay for all of this?
Things are getting tough out there for most people Boobie. If you have a money tree in your yard then consider yourself lucky.
Most of us don't.
Of course I know KC has only been re-elected once. I would guess that if an election were held today, he'd be elected again. So, excuse the hyperbole in this case.
It doesn't take away from the fact (and it is fact) that this man doesn't understand most of what happens at the Council, was never qualified to be Vice Mayor (and, thusly, was never elected by his fellow Council members, even as a courtesy), and whose logic--or lack thereof--is impossible to follow. You all have even said as much to start off this entry.
The general sentiment on this blog from the beginning has been what I said it is--I've got mine, and I'm not gonna pay for yours. Is that overstated a bit? Perhaps, but overstatement is the norm on this blog.
I have seen a lot of hate, and hateful words used here. Personally, I don't hate anyone--it's not in my nature. I hate stupidity (yes, of course, I have my own definition of stupidity, and it does not include people who disagree with me). I hate narrowmindedness. I hate selfishness. I hate it when people assume things without knowing all of the facts.
A fully-funded regional park is not a "mega theme park." The park and its amenities were planned by YOU (in the editorial sense). You all served on committees in 2001 and 2002 to decide what you wanted to see in the park. There were plenty of ideas that were tossed out, too, and--after significant debate--municipal facilities were removed from the plan, necessitating the purchase and development of the property next to Ventana Medical. Is that what you wanted?
If you go back and read through this blog from the beginning, you'll find plenty of examples of people saying that they don't want to pay any more, that they have enough recreational facilities where they live, that the pools and tennis courts and ballfields are not used enough now, and that we shouldn't build anymore just so that people from outside the town limits can use the facilities.
So, I don't think that I have to justify it when I say that the Zee Man's opinion that Mr. Carter has a "I'm here--screw you" mentality when I read similar statements throughout this blog, only they're not made by elected representatives.
No money tree in my backyard, just a few citrus and some sad palms. I just know that burial shrouds don't have pockets, and--sure--I'm worried about outliving my bank account, just like all of you. But a modest contribution to an arts organization seems appropriate to me--it doesn't impact me in the slightest (as I've already said), but it may provide us with additional arts opportunities next year. And there's nothing wrong with that.
b-b, today your posts disgust me. First you start by plagiarizing yourself from a previous post and then you simply go on a blathering rant. Perhaps you don't hate but you most certainly are one angry person. Talk WITH us when you can be reasonable.
Re: GOVAC
"Town funding is a relatively small percentage of the group's annual budget, she (Kate Marquez, executive director) said, which next year is projected at about $810,000."..."We feel that we've done a great service to this town," she said. "We have been able to bring in over $600,000 a year, easy. Every dollar that we raise outside of Oro Valley comes back into Oro Valley".
(AZ Star, Northwest section, Thursday, July 3)
WHERE'S THE BEEF!!!
Why are all of you on KC and not the other 4 people who voted for it?
KC had a senior moment and the followers (not lemmings by gosh!!) just followed.
I LOVE IT!!!!!
Boobie-baby--Perhaps you should proof read what you comment before you click "publish."
You write, alluding to KC Carter:
"It doesn't take away from the fact (and it is fact) that this man doesn't understand most of what happens at the Council, was never qualified to be Vice Mayor (and, thusly, was never elected by his fellow Council members, even as a courtesy), and whose logic--or lack thereof--is impossible to follow. You all have even said as much to start off this entry."
You write "AND IT IS A FACT" KC doesn't understand most of what happens at the Council.
Obviously, because you say so---it must be a FACT. What a load of BS.
You go on to say: "I hate it when people assume things without knowing all of the facts."
And, if two bloggers make a comment, that hardly suggests "You all have even said as much to start off this entry."
How does "two" relate to "you all?" More BS from you!
You just eliminated yourself as a person that should be believed. No wonder you don't want to identify yourself. It would be too embarrassing!
I doubt that any of us are not in favor of parks, etc or making contributions.
Boobie, perhaps some of us feel that contributions should be voluntary and not mandatory.
Some of us may have other priorities then again some of us feel other
organizations are more deserving.
Personally I think it is a choice to be decided by each individual how to
spend their money when it comes to
donations.
All of us 'on' KC? Don't think so, OV OT. Zee Man questions his (K.C.s) stance, b-b tries to 'cream' him. In the grand scheme of things this vote means nada.
Another vulgar, lack of civility comment from the 'MASTER'
How much longer are you folks going to associate yourself with this jaded commentary?
Zev...Ms Coyote is on all of you for jumping on KC.
By the way....you have a snal mail coming from me which I think will be enlightening.
Don
OT, I did NOT jump on K.C.; where did you get that notion?
I stand correced. See, I can admit an error. Other folks questioned K.C.
I owe you coffee, tea or a healthy martini!!
OK, let's all take a deep breath here. That's better. Now we can all relax a bit.
Yes, the proposal and vote on the modest increase to GOVAC was "nada" in the scheme of things. I agree.
I stand by my descriptions of this particular Council member, despite the fact that the issue under consideration was inconsequential.
You don't get the opportunity to "choose" what you pay for--police vs. parks, libraries vs. street repair. That's why you have elected representatives.
Art--unfortunately, I don't believe you're in a position to criticize others' criticisms. Many of your entries here have been "rants" that have maligned individuals and groups. I agree that when I do the same thing, it certainly doesn't help the reasonableness of discussion. But I don't think any of us are 100% pure in this area.
Zev--I hold most of your entries in high regard. Sometimes, though, it takes some paragraphs to spell out one's position on a subject. And, I stand guilty of plagiarizing from myself--I'm not sure that's a sin, just consistency of thought (Emerson's famous quote about "consistency" notwithstanding).
I think this thread has run its course. There's an election coming up in November, and Art has rightly posted a support letter that deserves examination and response.
You'll get a chance to vote in November on whether you think this community has enough parks, ballfields, tennis and basketball courts, and general recreation space. The results should be interesting and will bring about some healthy debate, I hope.
BB
Other than your comments about KC, I think you are right on with the rest of it.
Broad brush for sure, but they deserve it. There is a group here that wants to "slam the door" on every thing....too bad.
Hopefully they are in the minority, but they are noisey and they do confuse some honest people.
Observer---- The "minority" voted in the last council election. That says it all!
Observer77
So, what you seem to be concluding is that [many of those who post here are simply noisy and confuse honest people]; that, sir/madame, is one of the most ludicrous statements I have ever observed on this site. Those, confused, honest people you refer to, do they log on to this site by choice or are they threatened with decapitation if they don't? Do they participate and, as such, are they duped by the 'loud croud'? Are they without the necessary means to make their own decisions? I can only conclude by your post that YOU are the confused one. If you can speak with some 'meat' to your post and do so with some authority, then your post might mean something. THIS SITE IS NOT A BRAINWASHING FACILITY!
Observer77:
"They are noisy and they do confuse some honest people."
I couldn't agree with you more. You WERE talking about Vestar, yes?
Please don't confuse the rest of us with the likes of them! :)
Post a Comment