We pointed out previously, that Dave Perry arrived in Oro Valley less than two years ago to take control of The Explorer, as editor & publisher.
Is Mr. Perry familiar enough with the goings on in Oro Valley PRIOR to his arrival? We must wonder. Once again, we believe Mr. Perry writes about this council's actions without regard to previous council's actions or inaction's that caused us much chagrin.
His lengthy editorial of Feb 3 addresses many issues, including EDAs, building fees, Utility Tax and GOVAC among others.
Here are OUR comments:
The Oro Valley Council took bold action in putting subsidy money in an escrow account awaiting a final determination of the constitutionality of the Gift Clause as raised by the Goldwater Institute in its victory in the Az Appeals Court.
Good for this council, and good for them that they are not intimated by the potential threat (as Mr.Perry points out) from developer's lawsuits.
Oh yeah! The people did approve Vestar's $23.2M "giveaway," but many weren't aware we'd get a Walmart for our efforts. That is what is known as "being snookered!"
Let's talk about the Utility Tax. It took 3 times to get that "fool tax" approved by the previous council. It had a sunset clause, and that sunset clause should be honored, not withstanding the fact the tax was implemented to fill additional staff positions, many of them police, that begs the question, "was the tax necessary in the first place?"
Raising building fees was another bold step. Keep in mind, if the previous town council's weren't so "developer friendly," these fees would have been raised incrementally, but that didn't happen.
As to GOVAC (and TREO & NPCCC that Mr. Perry didn't mention,) the question is this: What does Oro Valley get for its money? Should we be subsidizing these entities to the extent we do, especially in these difficult economic times when we are operating with a deficit?
As a side note, for those not aware, you might want to ask about the Hilton's obligation as to the "fireworks display" as part of its bed tax subsidy.
We think the majority of this council is, and must be, much more fiscally responsible than any of its predecessors in recent memory. For that, they should be commended----not chastised!
Please read Dave Perry's editorial here, and feel free to comment.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/02/04/opinion/editorials/doc4988ea02c5e2c214944283.txt
30 comments:
"Incidentally, dear voters, in March 2006 you approved the Oro Valley Marketplace EDA."
It's pretty condescending for newcomer Dave Perry to address Oro Valley voters in that tone.
Additionally, it doesn't matter whether a former council approved it or whether the voters approved it. The appeals court ruled that the deal was UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
I'm not one of the "dear voters" who approved the EDA because I was smart enough to know what we would really be getting...a run-of-the-mill mall with a Wal-Mart anchor. And it turns out, I was correct.
But I would venture to guess that most of the "dear voters" who voted yes, did so because they believed they were getting a unique and upscale mall for their money because that's what they were told. What they "approved" and what they got were two entirely different things.
Look at the entrance to the mall. The first sign you see is for Wal-Mart. Why? Because THAT'S what this mall was about from the beginning...a deal between Vestar and Wal-Mart. That's also why Wal-Mart was the first store to open while 90% of the remainder of the mall is empty storefronts. From what I could tell, only two of those storefronts have signs announcing that something is "coming soon"...Darcy McGee's Restaurant and Styles for Less. The other storefronts don't even indicate that anything is "coming soon."
Between the money Vestar shelled out to build this mall, the lack of rent money from all those empty storefronts, the failing economy/people not shopping, and now the withholding of the sales taxes from Vestar, perhaps the only thing "coming soon" will be Vestar's bankruptcy.
By the way, I recently bought some exercise equipment. I purchased it at Big 5 Sporting Goods on La Canada. The entire $6.50 sales tax went to Oro Valley. Had I purchased this item at Dick's Sporting Goods at OVM instead, only $3.58 would have gone to Oro Valley and $2.92 would have gone to Vestar.
Can anyone present a valid reason why I should have made my purchase at OVM/Dick's Sporting Goods instead?
Anyone? Thinker? Boobie-Baby? Cyclone-1? Anyone?
VC....Only if it was cheaper than at Big 5.
By the way OV Mom the Court did not rules as you stated. They ruled that the Phoenix deal was unconstitutional. Each of these needs to be vetted as many of them I believe will be found to be valid.
Editor Perry,
We appreciate your monologues if only for the lack of knowledge about Oro Valley that you editorials exhibit.
You lack a knowledge of history.
"“Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”
The Zeeman
VC--I support your purchase and your reasoning. Good choice.
By the way, remember that the Town only receives 2% of the sales tax--the remainder goes to the state. I don't know if you took that into account when you posted your "tax contribution" to the Town.
BB-
No, I forgot about the State tax portion, but I stink in math anyway and I've never really understood how the money gets divided between Oro Valley, Vestar, and the State. Can you break it down for me?
Suppose the sales tax was $10.00. Exactly how much would each entity receive?
VC--It's not a question of whether you're good at math or not. I would guess that you could walk down the street and ask 100 people to break down the sales tax and they couldn't.
The simplest way is this: 6.1% to the state and county, 2% to the Town. So, on a $10 purchase, the Town reaps a grand total of $.20.
Were a purchase to be made at Oro Valley Marketplace, about 45% of the $.20 (or about $.09) would go to Vestar and about $.11 would go to the Town. This continues for a set number of years or until a dollar amount cap has been reached.
The sooner that the dollar amount cap is reached, the sooner the Town gets to keep 100% of the sales tax (the current court case notwithstanding). So, it puts residents in a kind of pickle--if you don't shop at OVM, then Vestar continues to keep its 45% for a longer period of time. If you DO shop there, Vestar reaches its maximum payout more quickly.
You forget one thing "bb." Tha EDA does not go on forever, It's $23.2M or 10 years, whichever comes first.
As such, it's still better for OV to keep the 20 cents in the $10 example, rather than have Vestar pocket almost half.
We should all remember----shopping where Ov keeps the full 2% is in OUR best interests.
Re: EDAs
OV OT is right in that the court ruled on the Turken vs Gordon case only; HOWEVER, this ruling CONFIRMS, in case law, that the Constitution of the State of Arizona demands that EDAs conform to certain 'terms and conditions' for them; Gordon, the City of Phoenix' (as well as the developer) failed to meet those 'terms and conditions'. If there is an appeal within the time limit set by the Court then we, at least for now, have a new ballgame. If there is no appeal than the Turken vs Gordon will have established CASE LAW for the confirmation of the 'gift clauses' as they were intended in our Constitution.
In those instances relative to those EDAs which were granted in Oro Valley, each individual situation will most likely be reviewed and PERHAPS acted upon in separate manner.
Remember-legality and the ability to enforce same, for one reason or another, are two separate issues.
Disclaimer:
This is how I understand the above; I am not a legal authority.
Zev Cywan
BB-
I'm still confused. What would the numbers be if the SALES TAX was $10.00 on an item purchased at OVM (not the actual PURCHASE being $10.00.)
Does the State get the first 6.1% and then OV and Vestar split the remaining 2% with OV getting 55% of 2% and Vestar getting 45% of 2%?
I need an Advil.
VC-
It's easier to figure out if you start with the cost of the item sold. For the sake of round numbers, lets say $100. The total sales tax on a $100 item would be $8.10 ($100 time 8.1%) The state would get $6.10 ($100 time 6.1%), the Town would get $1.10 ($100 times 2% times 55%) and Vestar would get $0.90 ($100 times 2% times 45%). Incedentially, though, at this point Vestar would get $0 because they haven't vested in their tax sharing rights yet under the contract.
I guess I just did the same thing BB did. Sorry!! If the sales Tax is $10, then the item cost would be $123.45 (roughly) So the state gets $7.53, the Town gets $1.36 and Vestar gets $1.11.
Thanks, Cyclone. I think I get it now.
So, I receive in my Sunday paper of 1-1/2 weeks ago an advertising supplement which was a Wal-Mart insert. Included in it was an item a small flat panel TV, perfect brand, size, and price for my computer room/den, advertised for $197. My wife and I immediately go to the store and were told that only 2 had been available there and had immediately sold out. We asked if we could have a rain check and were told 'no'. We get back to our home and find out it was printed that yes, they would take rain checks if an advertised item was out of stock; we called in and they said yes, okay, there was a mistake in communication and took our information over the phone BUT were told they wouldn't call, we would have to keep checking. Well, we did that although in the meantime I searched the internet and couldn't find the item anywhere, and, ALL of the Wal-mart stores and their on-line warehouse were listed as being out of stock except for Sam's club which had them listed for $30.00 higher (I'm not a member anyway). Wal-mart stated they had no idea when these sets were going to be available. Not one to give up I searched the internet some more and BINGO Costco had just put the set up on their site for $3.00 more BUT included an extra 2 year warrantee. I called, they had 30 units in stock. My wife and I had other business in that area, so we went to Costco and purchased the item. As I was assembling the stand, etc. the phone rang and, wouldn't you know, Wal-mart was calling to advise me my TV was in. Sorry, Charlie, because of your lack of coordination we bought elsewhere. POINT #1 - Tucson or Marana (not sure which town Costco is in) got $4.00 (their share) of the tax - TOV got ZIP. We tried a lunch at the Olive Garden - it was horrid! We' stopped eating at Risky Business because of the lax attention to how their employees act and/or dress and their inconsistency. So, we go to Ra, or Hifalutin, or Zona's - always good - no tax for TOV in these places. For a few items we may purchase at Kohl's but mostly we go to Stein Mart or elsewhere for clothes - very little here for us to buy here in OV - so not much to contribute in sales taxes to our home town. ANY ANSWERS ANYBODY?
Zev....I just read your EDA post. I think (I am in the same legal position that you are) that the problem with the Phoenix case was that the City of Phoenix got NOTHING out of the deal. Therefore any contribution was a "gift". In the OVM case there are very well defined financial benefits to OV(that go beyond the sales tax issues) I believe will withstand a legal review. And while, as you say this may confirm case law, it in itself still does not relieve OV from the agreement they have entered into. I believe each EDA will have to be individually challenged. Frankly, I believe that OV is now breaching their EDA contracts because their agreements have not been challenged.
Next post....
Try Olive Garden again. You are the first negative I have heard. I have eaten there several times (lunch) and have enjoyed every exposure. I agree with you on Risky's. They just don't give a crap. I go to The Loop and find their food to be above average and consistent. I also shop at Costco for many items but have bought several electronic items at Wal-Mart for considerable savings. I saved nearly $300 (over Costco) on a 36" Vizio flat screen. Wal-Mart also is a great place to shop for name brand products as they are usually lower in price on many items.
Before this gets out of hand, those that wish to express their legal opinions, go ahead---but, this is hardly the place to do restaurant reviews or critiquing which retailer has the best bargains.
This blog is certainly not at all interested in touting anything at the Oro Valley Martketplace, other than the crime that goes on there that can be accessed in the OV police reports.
I'm sure I need not remind anyone that I decide what's appropriate ---- and what's not!
Sorry, Art, I was using 'critique' for the reasons of illustrating why I couldn't shop Oro Valley to the extent that proponents say I should because they think I should inject money into this community. Perhaps I simply should have stated that, for me, I shop and eat where I can get the best for myself and most of that is not in Oro Valley!!! Is it really fair to have a stream allowing the naming of a 'whole' (for example,the OVM) without allowing for the naming of the 'parts' (the individual businesses) for purposes of
example? NUMEROUS past streams have been allowed to utilized 'Wal-Mart' time and time again as a pro or a con for one reason or another AND, as such, Wal-Mart has been 'critiqued' on a continual and constant basis; should we not, all of us, then exercise the same criteria for all commentary related
to specific 'targets'?
What are the public benefits that Oro Valley gets out of the Vestar EDA?
Oro Valley Mom- as to that which I can ascertain, there are none which might satisfy that requirement as proscribed in the 'gift clause'.
VC, I guess you can't complain that your question regarding sales taxes wasn't answered!
Art, your statement that the Economic Development Agreement with Vestar is over in 10 years may be slightly mistaken. My recollection (which could be faulty) is that the agreement calls for construction in phases, so I wouldn't be planning any big celebrations for 2015, or whenever the 10 year anniversary of the signed agreement comes up.
OVM--as for the benefits to Oro Valley: The proponents of the agreement with Vestar would argue that it jump-started the construction of a regional shopping center on that site. Prior to that point, no developer had come forward with a reasonable plan for a shopping center. The thinking was that the agreement would accelerate the development and that a bird in the hand (55% of the sales tax for a fixed period of time) would be better than two in the riparian bush (no sales tax being generated from any empty property).
Now we see that Ike's is pulling up stakes. So that leaves food shoppers with choices, which may involve more driving--Fry's, Safeway, or--dare we mention it--Wal-Mart.
Vestar's deal---unless it is ruled to be unconstitutional, will certainly go beyond 2015. My point was that the giveaway won't go on forever.
I suspect there are those of us that believe the large, vacant ugly parcel looked less ugly than it does today. Prior to Vestar's "unique, upscale" mall, nobody was forced to see scores of skylights, and an abundance of AC units on the rooftops that are a definite eyesore for anyone driving through the Tangerine & Oracle road scenic corridors.
boobie-baby
Your assertion that the mere fact of someone taking a parcel that PERHAPS no one else wanted is no less than a stretch IF you are trying to use it as an argument for satisfying one of the requirements within the 'gift
clause'. If you are using this 'taking' as simply an argument for Vestar developing a shopping center at the site then I would suggest that they then should have erected a structure or structures more in keeping with aesthetics that might have been a bit more palatable for the area's surround. I don't think people were opposed to a shopping center; I don't believe that people were opposed to a shopping center built by Vestar (after all, in essence, they did vote for one). I do think that most are disappointed at the architectural result and I, as a former retailer, think they shot themselves in the foot for several reasons. For now, at least one of their anchor stores appears to be doing quite well; as Pinal County develops (yes, I heard that there ARE plans for a large center north of us), as Marana's centers go in at I-10 and Tangerine, as the traffic gets 'worser and worser', there could very well be a severe drain on the OVM patronage. Then what?
Yes, oh great one....you remind us frequently that this is YOUR blog and not the peoples blog. And I, and others, continue to heed your scoldings with as much seriousness as we take most of your comments.
Zev...it is not necessary to apologize or justify your comments.
Your comments were appropriate and apprweciated by 99.9% of the participants.
OV Mom... in addition to the sales tax income that is being generated, the Town was a beneficiary in several roadway improvements that cost them nothing. The scared farm waste land now has a walking path, new viable landscaping which will mature creating a park-like setting , a state of the art water retention and redustribution system along with many convenient shopping opportunities. We also received a $250,000 gift from Wal-Mart.
Thinker,
Regarding your comment to Zev, "Try Olive Garden again. You are the first negative I have heard." I guess you missed a post I did a few weeks ago where I mentioned that I had eaten at an Olive Garden in Massachusetts and it was awful. But I went back a second time and ordered a different dish thinking maybe it was just the dish I ordered that was bad, but unfortunately my second dining experience there was just as bad as my first and I never went back again.
As for the "benefits" to the town from the EDA, even if the court determines that we have received benefits from this deal, my personal opinion will still be that those benefits will not outweigh the "costs" to the town.
Boobie-Baby,
Do you (or does anyone) know if the reason Ike's is closing is because their sales went down after Wal-Mart opened? There might be another reason, but it sure would be interesting to find out! Many of us were worried that other businesses would close once Wal-Mart opened.
VC the following is my opinion:
I truly believe that Wal-mart had absolutely nothing to do with the Ike's situation. While I have heard a couple of other 'reasons' why the closing will happen, I believe that, having patronized this store when and shortly after it opened, and eventually seeing the patronage dwindle, the reality hit that the concept, as executed, was weak at best, especially in the location where it stands. Specialty stores of any kind must be exceptionally strong in their SELECTION, QUALITY, and SERVICE, otherwise people will preferably go to those stores which do provide a one-stop shopping experience for most of their food and 'notions' wants and needs. Both Safeway and Fry's as well as the parent store, Basha's itself, do this. Those stores have also progressed into the more organic conscious market, having recognized that the public is wanting for more of it. OR, most WILL travel a greater distance in order to obtain more variety at a lower price (value - real or perceived ) such as a'Sprouts' or to a HIGHLY specialized entity such as a Trader Joe's or a higher end multi-specialty 'boutique' operation like an AJ's. In short, for most persons living WITHIN a reasonable shopping distance, IKE's seemed not to be a good fit; for those a bit further out, it just didn't have what it takes to draw them in. Ike's started out with a good following; that following appeared to falter quite some time ago. Over the years, when I was in the retail furniture industry and I would be asked [who do you consider to be your competition, my answer was always the same - EVERYONE else in this business]. I think Ike's forgot that.
According to a few Safeway employees I talked to they said that the store has not taken the "hit" from Wal Mart as bad as was expected. Good News
I am sorry to see Ike's close, I don't think it was the result of Wal Mart but just due to the area almost being saturated with food store choices, course I don't have facts and figures, just my opinion :))
About the Olive Garden, we really like it and Yes we are originally from an area known for Italian food and Olive Garden would not have been an Italian restaurant that we would go to . The Olive Garden seems to be doing well, let's hope that we get a few more decent places to eat in that otherwise blah mall.
Oh and Yes I agree that Dave Perry
voices his opinion on limited or little knowledge of past history of OV
Ms. Coyote...GOOD to hear from you I have missed your input!!!
Just for clarification purposes, I said that proponents of the economic development agreement made those arguments regarding the benefits that would accrue to the Town. That was not me advocating that; I was just reporting what I recalled.
Likewise, I don't think there's a direct connection between Ike's and Wal-Mart. I merely pointed out that shoppers will have to turn elsewhere and that Wal-Mart would be one choice.
I stopped by Ike's and asked a few questions. I was told that their sales were not as good as they had hoped even before Wal-Mart opened and that they didn't notice a drop in sales after WM opened.
Was also told that Ike's will not be closing until sometime between May and July.
Also got some info on The Loop, the group that bought out Uno's. The new general manager and the new chef previously worked at Torino's and the Loop menu will be changing in about a week.
I used to go to Uno's back east and it was good, but the one here in OV was awful. As with the Olive Garden, I went twice and tried two different items and both were terrible and I never went back.
I assume that with Chef David from Torino's taking over, that there will be a marked improvement in food quality at this restaurant now. I hope Loop does well and takes business away from the junk at OVM.
b-b, your 'clarification' is okay but appears to be in agreement with those 'reasons' the TOV
gave Vestar a way to 'take' the property and develop it. Vestar brags about their restoration of the damaged riparian areas; if memory serves me correctly relative to the demands on Rancho Vistoso, that area was supposed to be reclaimed by Vistoso Partners anyway! There seems to be NOTHING that Vestar has done there that would meet the 'smell' test as required by the AZ constitution's 'gift clause' considerations! All that Vestar has done there was NECESSARY in order to satisfy their OWN needs by whatever 'deal' they made with Vistoso Partners. Where IS the 'gift' to TOV?
Post a Comment