This Monday night at 5:30 PM, there will be one more OV Council Special Session in which the people will be heard. Please try to attend, and if willing, have your voice heard.
You can be sure the police who have a critical stake on the following two items, will turn out and address the council.
At this point, we do not know the outcome of Bill Garner's proposal he presented to the council this past Wed. We were pleased to hear the police union thought there was enough merit in the proposal, to want to discuss it further. That is a good thing----but why wouldn't they? After all, the crux of Bill's proposal was the transfer of a few personnel to other departments, cutting back on certain expenditures, but NOT losing any officers to layoffs.
Every resident, every council member and every police officer should be thankful for the extraordinary work done by our friend & neighbor, John Musolf, whose valuable input was a major factor in the new proposal.
Following are the two items to be discussed. (Not to make light of it, but there will also discussion and possible action regarding increasing Summer Camp Program Fees.)
Discussion and possible action regarding the Use of Take-Home Vehicles by Oro Valley Police Department Personnel
Discussion and possible action on alternative budget proposals regarding the Oro Valley Police Department’s FY 2009-2010 Budget
28 comments:
Art,
I will say Thank You to John Musholf for getting involved & cutting that budget.
Thank You JJohn
Ok, I hope they don't cut funding for the White gloves and party manners camp!! :)))
This is a very unfortunate position the city leadership finds itself right now with hard decisions to be made. Unfortunately this is quite common when it comes to government and Oro Valley, there never is any “rainy day” planning or saving when times are good. The town just expands and spends (Vestar, Naranja Park) with projections of always improving revenues available.
So we are in a “crisis management” situation to correct the budget, then to make things worse the “11th hour Amended Study Session” attempted to accelerate an already stressed decision. How could this have made things better? I would agree that some expedience needs to be adhered to; however rushing a decision without properly preparing the council members or allowing the residence their voice is typical of the management that has gotten us into this predicament in the first place.
Blogging my thoughts, I put the blame squarely on the Oro Valley police management and budgeting for not having plan “B” available for these troubled times. The arrogance of not considering any cost saving or reduction while private sector individuals and businesses have been taking measures now for months is inexcusable. Just imagine if this was even considered. Why a contingency plan could have prioritized and targeted with precision reduction steps maintaining the highest integrity of the force. Instead this lack of judgment has jeopardized jobs and turned this into an emotional situation.
This is also why I am totally against trying to fix this with a tax hike. Funding will band aid our lack of planning, then be spent later on other city expansion items since we never run a surplus.
One question I would like to put forth.
Is there anybody out there that will find fault in Don Milliken's analysis?
It's amazing that a clear, concise point can be made WITHOUT blaming a fellow blogger, a citizen or a council member.
Thanks again for your insight Don.
Mr. Milliken's posts have all shown that he is reasonable, smart, and civil. He would make an excellent council member!
Once again, Mr. Milliken has 'nailed it'; concise, rational, and complete!
Who can argue with his commentary.
DM
The Town does have a "rainy day" savings. The balance is 14.5 million.
The town didn't spend money on Vestar and the much of the money used for Naranja was donated.
The town manager prepares all budgets for all departments. It is the town managers job to present his reccomendation to the council. Dept heads.
I believe the lack of judgement ocurred when the manager said your going to cut bodies and I will let you decide which ones. Police management required to do as the town manager says. So if you believe there was a management failure it would have to have ocurred at the Town Mgr level.
It is very unusual for a Dept head to be allowed to present publically something that differs from the Town Mgr's recommended budget.
I guess I argued by pointing out how town govt works and that the town does have a rainey day or contingency fund. But I was nice.
Mr. Parish--- It appears to me that Don Milliken, who has never served on the Town Council has more knowledge about the "real world" than you---an ex-council member.
Ask anyone in town government, especially the town manager, and they'll tell you that the foolhardy giveaway to Vestar---that you called a "homerun," is nothing less than a drain on our economy.
You didn't know it then, so I'm sure you won't know it now. Hopefully, the CityNorth Supreme Court ruling will bail OV out of that financial disaster where half our sales tax revenue goes into Vestar's pocket. I'm sure you also have trouble understanding the word "cannibalism."
As to Naranja Park, once again you show a lack of knowledge as to the facts. Besides the obvious cost to purchase the property, throughout the years, the town expenditures included consulting fees, ballot costs, advertising costs trying to sell a losing proposition, among other things.
Your time on the council is what Don Milliken rightly notes was a time where there was "never any planing for a rainy day."
I'll repeat myself: "Thanks Don Milliken for your insight," in spite of Parish's inability to grasp it.
I guess the contingency fund we raised to over 14 million doesnt count as planning ahead. For some reason I thought we were talking about the police budget process with a little of the old days sprinkled in.
We can disagree on Vestar and the park there are arguable points on both sides.
But you can't hold dept heads responsible for something they can't control.
I will most likely be out of town tomorrow and can't make the meeting. The following items are questions concerning expense reduction and revenue enhancements:
1) Are there cost containment and risk management programs in place to help control and lower health and liability insurance premiums? These services for a group this large are usually free, and easy to implement.
This is a cost savings measure for the town.
2) Why is the license fee paid directly to Comcast instead of to the town, and is Comcast the right cable provider to use? This appears to be a good time to bid out this service as Comcast appears to be losing market share because of their price structure.
This is a revenue enhancer for the town.
3) Last but not least. Since Golder Ranch's monopoly on the town was recently broken this might result in the reduction of the outrageous fees they charge...but I doubt it.
There has to be a way for OV to gain control of fire and ambulance services. I would rather see the money from this lucrative revenue generating machine go back to our town, save jobs, and enhance services than to go into someones pocket who took advantage of their monopoly.
I asked "who can argue with his (Mr. Milliken) commentary"? Evidently there is one person within this stream that thinks he can; sorry, Terry, you are no match! I'm not going to waste my time pointing out 'wrongs' in your post however, for example, you state that "much of the money USED on Naranja was DONATED"; would you please elaborate on that.
Z
The money for the trail system was donated by Ventana Medical was donated. Many citizens also contributed thousands of their dollars and other businesses have contributed around $300,000 to the town for the park.
And my post whether it's worth your precious commentary or not is factually accurate. You may however, disagree with my opinions your highness.
And, Terry, how much of the Town's money WAS spent?
I did not say your post was not worth my precious commentary, I said I was "not going waste my time pointing out 'wrongs' in your post"; there is a lot of difference in what I said and what you interpretively conveyed.
And who IS playing the part of "your highness"?
I'm no longer on the council but I hope the current council is paying the park bills with the donated money and using our tax dollars for other endeavors.
Zev--- Obviously Parish is having a big problem justifying his erroneous statements.
Therefore, allow me to expound on the costs the TOWN OF ORO VALLEY INCURRED AS IT RELATES TO THE NARANJA PARK SITE.
Naranja-related costs:
• $2.5 million for the land
• $120,000 in consultant fees for master plan
• $18,000 for market analysis
• $297,070 for architectural design
• $2,799 in travel expenses for town leaders to visit a similar park in Denver
• $15,000 in engineering fees
• $174,000 for park fees assessment
• $12,320 for traffic studies
• $50,000 to market the proposal
• $70,000 in legal fees to get the park question on the ballot
• Total: $3,259,189
So Art why don't you answer Zev's question? How much of the Donated money has been used? I don't know either but we can probably find out if we ask the town.
My question was not [how much of the donated money was used], it was how much of the Town's money was used; let's not parse the questions here.
I must have misunderstood. Maybe that helps my answer make sense.
Maybe no who cares it only me after all:)
FEAR THE TURTLE:
You have raised 2 exceptional points in you post above.
1. Comcast
2. Golder Ranch FD
Both of these organizations have grown quite fat off of our money.
I would rather spend my time fighting to reduce their fees/taxes than this endless debate re da po-lice!
Art,
I would like to see the dates on all the expenditures you listed.
Personally I think the park plan has always been far too grand of a plan.
The maintenance costs alone would be a hardship on the taxpayers.
Why not build income generating facilities such as soccer fields for events like the Ft. Lowell Shootout that generates almost as much revenue as the Gem Show? How about a pool for competitive swim meets? Phoenix and the U of A get all the sales tax, bed tax and increased traffic for their businesses.
Naranja Town Site would then provide activity for OV residents and charge a fee to anyone else.
And Deacon, I suggested an amphitheater and forwarded a few examples to the Council. I even described how one in Cary, North Carolina got started from scratch and EVOLVED into the venue it is today, AND, from the start, it's philosophy (family participation0 grew into becoming a superb facility, extremely well attended, and a MONEYMAKER!!! Of course there are many in this town (especially self-serving adults) who think night baseball games, non-profitable are the answer to life.
Wow, this is a good thread.
Both FTT and Deacon have made most excellent points:
"Why not build income generating facilities such as soccer fields for events like the Ft. Lowell Shootout that generates almost as much revenue as the Gem Show? How about a pool for competitive swim meets? Phoenix and the U of A get all the sales tax, bed tax and increased traffic for their businesses. "
"Why is the license fee paid directly to Comcast instead of to the town, and is Comcast the right cable provider to use? This appears to be a good time to bid out this service as Comcast appears to be losing market share because of their price structure.
This is a revenue enhancer for the town. "
"Golder Ranch's monopoly on the town was recently broken this might result in the reduction of the outrageous fees they charge."
This is productive blogging - good suggestions not endless complaints about da po-lice
DMilliken,
The OV Contingency Fund was established, and has been added to, for many years. The policy for that fund to be used is tied in some way to one time expenditures.
I would have to research the details on that.
The economy of OV has been in trouble for several years. The national economy has made it even worse. The department heads have each seemed determined to have the biggest kingdom inside Town Hall. Too bad that was allowed to evolve over the years. I look to Chuck Sweet on that one! Maybe he wanted a bigger kingdom too. I had hoped Andrews, coming from finance, would have stopped that.
It is time for bare bones during this economic storm. That will mean jobs will be eliminated. OV will have to deal with this just like the rest of the nation. The department I think has high priority for funding is the police.
The key to overall funding for all the topics that have been brought up due to the budget constraints in my mind is: Council, Use restraint. Prioritize. Some departments can cut expenses considerably, others cannot. How many planners and inspectors do we need when there is virtually no development right now? Finance and HR will clearly have less to work with. Fewer meetings of boards and commissions should require less staff time to prepare and attend.
Economic Development? How many Town Managers do we need and at what cost? The assistant Town Manager costs less and appears up to the job.
I agree tax hikes are not the answer. Cutting costs is what must be done. To quote John McCain, "You don't raise taxes during a recession, you cut spending" is correct.
Zev, Naranja Town Site Costs:
Good to know there are minds like yours at work! The park can be developed as a mostly self-sustaining attraction.
As for non-profits: The Town could consider allowing their use with reduced or no fees as 'in kind' contributions for certain events.
Elect those people with the ability to think outside of the government box.
Terry Parish is right when he says town funds were not used to develop Vestar. The payoff for them:EDA!
If the courts rules against tax sharing that will help Oro Valley collect more of the sales tax. The unfortunate reality is that sales taxes are very low due to the economy. The only up side would be Vestar isn't getting half the money they anticipated. The time for the agreement will expire long before they collect 23M even if the court allows the agreements to stand.
Art, I wish they would build the park to be income producing or sell it. The bozo's that bought the land didn't have a plan other than town offices and now the entire idea is out of control!
I don't think the people in Copper Creek will go for commercial development on that site.
The land is already mostly stripped bare. They could build homes without much worry about bulldozing much in the way of native plants.
Fear The Turtle,
The idea of the Town running fire and ambulance really scares me. Golder Ranch has a citizen board of directors that sets their budget. They are not a government entity that is out of control of the citizens. The key is to elect the right people.
Deacon,
One simple question - will Golder Ranch open their books so the public can see the revenues generated from the OV district ,and I'm assuming the citizens on this board are volunteers.
Based on the feedback I received from my fire fighter buddies back East when I showed them my tax bill, we are being "hosed".
Deacon
In answer to your questions about the dates for the Naranja Town Site, Art derived those dates from an article I wrote to the Explorer News prior to the vote last November on the Naranja Town Site:
News Article:
Vote No Against the Bonds (Question 400) on the November 4, 2008 ballot that requires a secondary property tax for 25 years to fund general obligation bonds to build TOV Naranja Town Site (NTS) Park.
Starting in the year of 1996, the TOV purchased land for parks for $7,650,000 using municipal bonds. At this time there remains payments for these bonds of $380,380 that will be paid out by the year of 2012.
Originally, the TOV wanted to spend up to $150 million dollars for general obligation bonds to build the entire proposed master plan for NTS.
Under Arizona Law (Article 9 State Constitution – 8. Local Debt Limits; Assent of taxpayers), municipalities may issue general obligation bonds (subject to voter approval) for specific purposes up to an amount not exceeding 20% of the secondary assessed value. The TOV could only bond for an amount of $92,642,349 based upon the most recent secondary assessed value of $463,211,743. Additionally, if the full master plan had been constructed, the town would have needed to request a primary property tax for operating and maintenance costs.
TOV then decided on a phased bond issue for $48.6 million dollars.
Tax dollars already spent by TOV for NTS before any vote by taxpayers on the new bond issue:
· May 2001 – Paid Stantec Consulting $120,000 for NTS Master Plan.
· December 2003 – Paid Webb Management $18,000 for needs assessment and market analysis for a performing arts center.
· June 2006 – Paid Burns,Wald-Hopkins $291,070 for programming and concept design
· July 2006 – Paid travel expenses $2,799 for TOV council members/staff to go to Denver to observe similar park structure
· September 2006 – Paid Burns, Wald-Hopkins $6,000 for scale model
· November 2006 – Paid Stantec Consulting $15,000 for engineering survey
· December 2006 – Paid Ballard $17,400 for facility cost and fee structure
· December 2006 – Paid DMA Engineering $12,320 for traffic study
· March 2008 – Paid Gordley Design Group, advertising firm, $50,000 for public education program
· 2008 – Paid lawyers $70,000 for ballot preparation work on NTS bond question 400.
It must be reviewed that this new secondary tax will be for 25 years and is based on the bonds being bought at 5% that will end up with a total cost of $85,868,75. In these economic times the 5% is not a good figure and it could go legally to a figure of 12%.
The administrative cost of issuing the bonds is estimated be $125,000.
Add on the unknown maintenance costs of $1.2 million and higher in the long range (25 years) that could eventually cause a need for a primary property tax for the operation and maintenance.
Common sense calls for your NO Vote Against the Bonds on Question 400.
Incidentally, I got those dates by filing "request for records" with the town clerk. Of course you have to pay for the copies they send you.
Try it. It's a way to learn a lot about the town activities.
John Musolf
Unfortunately I travel quite a bit and it is hard for me to respond in a timely manor. Reading through the blog I felt that I needed to respond to a couple items.
I am glad that there was a 14.5 million surplus, apparently this was some time ago since we have a deficit now. It would be interesting to see what percentage of total budget this surplus fund was and why it wasn’t flagged as it diminished (even if it were for one time expenses, that is a lot of expense!)
I believe that the city manager holds some responsibility for the overall expense and operation of the city, the police chief is responsible for how his department spends their share of the pie. Who is better qualified to recommend spending priorities for the police? I would think Daniel Sharp should know best, and probably talks to Andrews about the budget situation.
Then it is up to the constituents to get involved, voice their opinion and get their city back on track. For the most part we all have our own lives with limited time to involve ourselves in how or government is run. I have based my opinion from past experience and what is readily available in making my comments. To have balance, one needs to take a step back from one’s beliefs and examine situations from other avenues and decide what is best for the group, not the individual.
Post a Comment