Two Explorer Letters On "The Lesser Of Two Evils"

Two Oro Valley residents share the same concerns on filling the third council seat in the upcoming election. Some may say "none of the above," but that would be non-productive.

Who does OV want in last council spot?

Thanks to John Musolf for caring enough to research the sources of council member Terry Parish’s significant contributions. Sixty-five contributions from outside of the Tucson area are monumental. Only four donors are Oro Valley constituents who might have an interest in how growth occurs locally. Sixty of the contributors knew exactly how much they could donate ($390) so they would slide under the radar.

Parish’s day job is law enforcement in Pima County, yet he is accepting contributions from individuals associated with the building community who want to influence decisions made and use methods barely inside the parameters of the law. None of the other candidates has the resources Parish has available to him.

Are Oro Valley voters questioning this disconnect in his functioning … supposedly upholding the law but stretching its implementation to the extreme? How can someone whose methods are so sneaky possibly represent Oro Valley constituents with integrity?

May 20, Barry Gillaspie challenges Terry Parish for the remaining seat on the council. Who do you want in that spot?

Michelle Saxer
Oro Valley


Columnist hit the nail squarely on its head

Emil Franzi’s March 19th Inside Track opinion, “OV election lessons,” hit the nail squarely on the head. I certainly hope the new council will consider his well-made points.

Oro Valley citizens have seen enough of the tax and spend behavior of the current council. The results of the primary election were a mandate from the people for a more fiscally conservative elected leadership.

In the May general election it is clear, as Franzi pointed out, we are faced with a choice of electing the lesser of two evils. Both Terry Parish and Barry Gillaspie have not served their constituents well during the past four years. Based on his campaign contributions from the development community, Terry Parish is in their back pocket. It appears that much of that money funneled to him was obtained in a rather clouded if not downright murky manner.

While Barry Gillespie has not served in the best interests of Oro Valley, he is the lesser of two evils and I plan on voting for him. I hope he gets the message that the voters sent to him. If he does, he will work in concert with Latas, Garner, Carter and Abbott to change the governmental direction in Oro Valley.

That governmental direction should include a laundry list of repealing the utility tax, repealing the storm water surcharge on water bills, terminate all retain economic development incentives, say no to annexation of the Arroyo Grande, and halt the unbridled growth of Oro Valley government.

Richard Purkey
Oro Valley

Pat Kinsman Asks Why Oro Valley Seems To Ignore The General Plan

Following is Oro Valley resident, Pat Kinsman' letter to The Explorer

OV, its council are ignoring general plan

I just finished reading the Focus 2020 Town of Oro Valley General Plan and it appears that the town of Oro Valley, its mayor and council have generally ignored it. For example, Land Use page 19 states “Where possible, encourage permanent protection of scenic vistas, especially from the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor, the Tangerine Road Corridor…” page 79 states “and the Town shall discourage visually intrusive structures (Visual Resources Section 11.3.2).”

How does allowing a six-story hotel on Innovation Drive and Tangerine comply with this provision? How will the huge bright Wal-Mart and Best Buy signs at the Oro Valley Marketplace comply with this provision?

These are only two examples. There are many more provisions that are being ignored. I recommend Oro Valley citizens acquire a copy and hold the town accountable for its refusal to follow the dictates of this general plan.

Pat Kinsman
Oro Valley

Two Issues Concerning Arroyo Grande

Carolyn Campbell heads the Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection.

In an Explorer article of March 26, on Arroyo Grande, Ms. Campbell, who recently addressed the Oro Valley Town Council, stated: “The largest cause of habitat fragmentation in the Southwest is urban growth."

Her most profound comment was this.

“I’m excited to be working with you,” Campbell told the council recently, but added, “I’m not excited about developing the land.”
*************************************************************************************
In his letter to The Explorer, Oro Valley neighbor Hector Conde addresses another issue on Arroyo Grande.

Septic tanks on Arroyo Grande? Not so likely

One of the often-heard assertions on the subject of Arroyo Grande is that if Pima County has jurisdiction over the area, there will be mobile homes with septic tanks built upon it. That, coming from Oro Valley officials, sounds hollow.

One has to consider that Oro Valley has the Highlands, a mobile home park, located on Lambert Lane, the same street where the mayor of Oro Valley lives.

Also, there are plenty of septic tanks in Oro Valley. My house, located in the middle of town, two miles from city hall, has a septic tank. The whole subdivision of Tangerine Hills has septic tanks. Moreover, I remember recently when a developer wanted to use septic tanks, the town refused, they went to court, and, as usual, the town lost.

The county wanted to buy the land from the state for preservation purposes, the only sure fire way I know that it will remain so in perpetuity. Agreements and promises may not work. So, how could Pima County could allow septic tanks or mobile homes in a land that can be used for preservation only? The county deal fell through because the appointed state land commissioner — a real estate salesman for 20 years — decided, all by himself, to declare the law unconstitutional. He ignored Marbury v. Madison, on 1803, where the Supreme Court was recognized as having the power to review the acts of Congress as to how they abide with the Constitution. There was no mention of the commissioner having any say on unconstitutionally.

Hector Conde
Oro Valley

Read the Explorer article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/article/show/21691

Explorer's Perry Endorses Sanofi-Aventis Incentive

In a well thought out editorial, The Explorer's Dave Perry presents his case why Oro Valley should give a 1% construction tax rebate to Sanofi-Aventis.

In his article, reporter Patrick McNamara saw fit to quote me, among others. He writes:
"Oro Valley resident Art Segal spoke out against the proposed tax rebate, citing the company’s profits in 2007 on an estimated $38 billion in sales worldwide."

According to Fortune magazine, Sanofi-Aventis had $36.99 billion in sales and $5 billion in profits during fiscal 2007.

Dave writes---"Sure, Sanofi-Aventis is a multi-billion-dollar, profitable business that probably doesn’t need a tax break. So what. They can do business anywhere in the world. They have chosen to do business in Oro Valley, and we ought to be very happy about that. It has been estimated that this project has a long-term economic impact of $110 million. On behalf of the community, government can extend a hand, and say “thanks, and welcome.”

So---- As I see it, it comes down to a question of----as some Council Members stated, is it better to give them the "rebate" as a way of saying "thank you," or is it better to say "thank you" and offer what their chairman stated during groundbreaking----something like Oro Valley is a great place to work, live and raise a family.

Considering the economics, I believe a "Thank You," should suffice. What do you think?

Read Patrick's article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/article/show/21714

Read Dave's editoral here.
http://www.explorernews.com/article/show/21696

Anthem Equity Development: A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words!

Thanks to Anthem Equity Development in Rancho Vistoso, our neighbors in Neighborhood 2 (near Vistoso Village Dr.) who paid a premium for their "View Lots" of the Catalina Mountains (top photo), will soon be looking at the back of 36 foot tall structures that are 200' X 100' (20,000 sq. ft)

The bottom photo depicts what they'll see if this development goes forward as planned.

Note that you can click on each photo for larger views. On the top photo, you'll note a large pole. That depicts the top of the structures.

At the March 19 meeting, the Town Council, at the urging of the Town Attorney, based on the developer threatening to not only sue Oro Valley, but individual Council Members, if his development was not approved immediately, voted 7-0 to approve. (Whether individual Council Members are liable is questionable.)

We would urge the neighbors to pursue any and all legal means in an attempt to not have their views destroyed, but more important, to not have their property values decrease by as much as $50,000.

We will continue to monitor this ongoing saga, and hope the developer will be willing to modify is building plans to help alleviate this terrible injustice.

You can read The Explorer story on this issue here.
http://www.explorernews.com/article/show/21711