More On Rock Music Theme Park From Tom Jenney

This is a follow up email from Tom Jenney on the Rock Music Theme Park.

We totally agree with with Tom's staement ---"Further, if we let the Eloy deal pass, it will only encourage the rest of the sharks, who are already pestering the Legislature to pass the Big Boondoggle Bill of 2008, which includes special tax breaks for entertainment districts, ballparks, and other politically-favored industries, all in the name of “economic stimulus.” Remember that every dollar given to a favored industry in a tax credit is a dollar that cannot be cut from the taxes of ordinary individuals, families, and businesses. Somehow, that does not seem very stimulating…"

Art
**************************************************************************************

Dear Arizona Taxpayer:

As I wrote yesterday, the Arizona Senate is considering SB1450, a bill that would award a private company the privilege of issuing $750 million in tax-free bonds, so that it can build a rock music theme park in Eloy.

Proponents of SB1450 have contacted me, arguing that the bill’s language removes any legal obligation for taxpayers to bail out the theme park district in the event that it cannot attract enough visitors to pay back the bond creditors.

That appears to be true about the legal obligation, but the legislation does not remove the political obligation to bail out the theme park district. If the Eloy theme park turns out to be a flop, future legislatures will be under intense pressure to bail out the theme park. If they do not, the failure of the district to pay back creditors will hurt Arizona’s bond ratings, effectively raising the interest rates for revenue bonds for traditional public-private partnerships, such as road construction projects.

Again, the economic downsides of the Decades Theme Park deal are not nearly as important as the question of principle at stake: Should the government give special taxing privileges to chosen companies? Again, the answer to that question is, “NO.” The government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers in the economy.

Further, if we let the Eloy deal pass, it will only encourage the rest of the sharks, who are already pestering the Legislature to pass the Big Boondoggle Bill of 2008, which includes special tax breaks for entertainment districts, ballparks, and other politically-favored industries, all in the name of “economic stimulus.” Remember that every dollar given to a favored industry in a tax credit is a dollar that cannot be cut from the taxes of ordinary individuals, families, and businesses. Somehow, that does not seem very stimulating…

For emerging details on the Big Boondoggle Bill of 2008, see Mary Jo Pitzl’s story in today’s Republic:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/06/18/20080618stimulus0618.html

The tax credit handouts in the Big Boondoggle Bill of 2008 make the Eloy deal look almost innocent. It seems that our politicians just can’t break the habit of picking winners and losers in the Arizona economy—no matter how many losers they pick. We will keep you posted on developments related to the Big Boondoggle Bill.

Meanwhile, if you haven’t already, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR STATE SENATOR, AND ENCOURAGE HIM OR HER TO OPPOSE SB1450.

WE ARE ESPECIALLY CONCERNED ABOUT ANY SENATOR WHO VOTED YES (“Y”) ON THE EARLIER VERSION OF THE BILL:

http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/48leg/2r/bills/sb1450.sthird.1.asp

Tom Jenney

Arizona Director

Americans for Prosperity

(Arizona Federation of Taxpayers)

www.aztaxpayers.org

tjenney@afphq.org

(602) 478-0146

Rock Music Theme Park Could Cost Az Taxpayers

We received the following email from Tom Jenney, Az Federation of Taxpayers. We thought it important enough to post it. We hope the taxpayers don't get stuck with this potential boondoggle.
Art
*************************************************************************************


Dear Arizona Taxpayer:

Right now, members of the Arizona Senate are debating whether or not to award a private company the privilege of issuing $750 million in tax-free bonds, so that it can build a rock music theme park in Eloy.

If the project turns out to be a flop, and if tourists fail to come to Eloy in sufficient numbers, the state could have to pay back creditors, or it could jeopardize its bond rating, making it more expensive in the future to borrow money for traditional projects, such as road construction.

But the economic downsides of the Decades Theme Park deal are not nearly as important as the question of principle at stake: whether or not the government should not be handing out special privileges to chosen companies. The answer to that question is clearly, “NO.” The government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers in business.

PLEASE CONTACT YOUR STATE SENATOR, AND ENCOURAGE HIM OR HER TO OPPOSE THIS BILL.

WE ARE ESPECIALLY CONCERNED ABOUT ANY SENATOR WHO VOTED YES (“Y”) ON THE EARLIER VERSION OF THE BILL:

http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/48leg/2r/bills/sb1450.sthird.1.asp

In response to a query from the Senate, AFP Arizona hereby announces that the bill, SB1450, will be included in our 2008 Legislative Scorecard. Given the potential yearly fiscal impact, and the importance of the principle at stake, the bill will be a 50-point bill. In last year’s scorecard, that would have been just under 5 percent of the total, but there are fewer bills this year, so SB1450 could weigh as much as 10 percent of the overall score.

For more information about why SB1450 is a bad bill, see the pieces from the Goldwater Institute and the AZ Free Enterprise Club .

Tom Jenney

Arizona Director

Americans for Prosperity

(Arizona Federation of Taxpayers)

www.aztaxpayers.org

tjenney@afphq.org

(602) 478-0146

Historical Society Wants To Inform Residents About Steam Pump Ranch

An article in the June 18 Explorer notes that the OV Historical Society will attempt to educate the citizens about the proposed Steam Pump Ranch restoration.

As our readers may recall, we recently did a posting on an extremely well done interview with Henry Zipf, grandson of the founder of the old ranch, George Pusch. A Wonderful History Of Steam Pump Ranch & The Town Of Oro Valley


I would respectfully suggest that one way to generate interest in this restoration would be to make more citizens aware of this historical site by familiarizing them with this video. I found it quite by accident, and other than the many blog readers, we wonder how many other people are aware of the video.

The Explorer article is here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2008/06/18/news/doc48583d5517619574639083.txt

The Explorer Discusses Possible Water Rate Hikes

The June 18 Explorer has an article and a number of scenarios as to water rate fee increases.

We note that Mayor Loomis sounds a little like a politician when he says: “The bill as written makes it a little bit of a challenge when it comes to planning.”

The bill he refers to is the one that home builders and others in the construction industry have been busily working with members of the state legislature — including Senate President Tim Bee (R-Tucson) — to pass legislation that changes how cities and towns collect and implement impact fees.

As we discussed in a number of earlier posts on this subject, if the legislatures pass this bill it may freeze water impact fees for two years. That is why many other communities in Arizona are against it.

We hope the council---with or without the backing of Loomis, will take the necessary action to overcome this bill that is good for the builders, and not so good for the citizens.

Read the article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2008/06/18/news/doc4858413c3c40f952050250.txt

Salette Latas: 3 - Minute Interview In The Explorer

The Explorer has a "3-minute interview" with new council member Salette Latas.

Read it here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2008/06/18/news/doc485844c312bc0825231734.txt

Geri Ottobani Questions Giving Of Incentives

Geri Ottobani-Gilmore, in her letter to The Explorer, June 18, writes that giving Sanofi-Aventis a construction tax rebate of $360K is not necessary.

Hopefully, our new Town Council will agree as they vote on this issue this evening.
*************************************************************************************


Desirable OV has no need to give any incentives

You can always tell when a business is on the ropes and management has lost its competitive edge. It starts cutting prices.

Oro Valley sits atop one of the most desirable locations in the entire country, but Councilman Gillaspie seems to think the only way Oro Valley can attract companies such as Sanofi-Aventis is to use public funds to bribe them.

In an e-mail response to a constituent, Gillaspie wrote: How do we make this happen if we do not engage in mutually beneficial agreements? I don’t intend to be cynical, but standing on the corner and waving is not very useful. It is apparent that Gillaspie learned nothing from the Vestar debacle that resulted in OV forking over $23 mill to get a Wal-Mart.

Even worse, out-of-touch Councilwoman Dankwerth described the $360,000 bribe to Sanofi-Aventis as “miniscule.” To whom is 360 thousand dollars miniscule?

And the always generous-with-tax-dollars, developer-poster-boy, Councilman Parish, said “it would be a snub ... if we didn’t give this $360,000.”

I guess it’s easy to give away other people’s money, but any councilman or councilwoman who cannot adequately extol the inherent virtues of this community and induce businesses to locate here is demonstrating his or her inadequacy for the job he or she was elected to perform. If Gillaspie, Dankwerth and Parish choose to subsidize a multinational corporation, which is already located in Oro Valley, they will create more angst and provide yet another opportunity for the referendum. Voters are disgusted with giveaways. Fifty million in giveaways is more than enough for our little town.

Perhaps their limited business experience contributes to this Wal-Mart, give-away mentality, but my business experience is quite different. If you produce an unique, quality product and back it with exceptional service, customers will flock to your store. Locating in Oro Valley is the desirable product. Unlike Detroit, Oro Valley does not have to bribe people to come here.

Occasionally, listening to the voters is a good thing for politicians.

Geri Ottoboni-Gilmore

Oro Valley

Oro Valley Resident Acknowledges Bill Garner

In her letter to the June 18 Explorer, Jacqueline Parker notes what many of other Oro Valley residents know: The cost of fire service and other new fees have escalated dramatically. Ms. Parker notes that only Bill Garner responded to her initial letter back in April.
*************************************************************************************


Burdened by the cost of government

This letter was sent in April to the mayor of Oro Valley, vice mayor and city council members. The only respondent: Bill Garner.

How many times did I hear that the annexation into Oro Valley would not increase taxes? Now that my subdivision has been annexed, taxes have and will be increasing the cost of living in Oro Valley.

My cost for Rural Metro went from $132 in 2005 to a whopping $256.96 in 2006 – almost doubled in one year. This year, $278.68. This because “both fire agencies as well as the town of Oro Valley are working together to make the system better.” This is better? It’s my understanding that once we are annexed by the Golder Ranch Fire District I can look forward to this cost (probably increasing) being added to my property taxes.

Oro Valley gained approximately 126 businesses with annexation of the Rancho Catalina area. Because of this we now pay an increase in sales tax when we patronize these businesses.

It’s curious why, when Oro Valley gained tax revenues from annexation of these businesses, should costs for Rural Metro or anything else increase for residents? Why should an increase in tax revenue for the town of Oro Valley translate into higher costs for residents? Maybe a no-annexation, no-growth policy would be better for all of us.

And now Oro Valley has decided that we should pay yet another $34.80 a year for a “storm fee.” Now we have to pay for our scant rain?

I’m sorry to say that I was better off under Pima County. These are lean times. The whole country is in a recession. We are paying more and more for food and gas, and seeing more and more home foreclosures. Maybe you don’t think that $34.80 a year is very much, but this is the very worst time to be putting increasing economic pressure on people.

We need city council members with good fiscal problem-solving skills who will balance the budget and prioritize the use of tax revenues so not to overburden residents with the cost of government.

Jacqueline Parker

Oro Valley

Kathy Pastryk Acknowledges Error

In an earlier letter to The Explorer that we posted, Kathy Pastryk noted that Mayor Loomis had placed campaign signs on his property. In the June 18 Explorer, Kathy acknowledged her error.

Read her letter here.

Writer was wrong about political signs

Dear Mayor Loomis,

Thank you for your graciousness in writing to The Explorer to explain that the campaign signs that I cited in a letter to the editor belonged to your neighbor.

I was misled some time ago about whose home had the campaign posters.

You corrected the comment very nicely, but I am sending this to The Explorer acknowledging that I was wrong about the ownership of that property.

I certainly have nothing against displaying campaign signs. Still, I can understand your choice of not taking sides in a nonpartisan election.

Thank you,

Kathy Pastryk

Oro Valley