Bill Adler who quietly donates his own money to many Oro Valley projects addressed the Council at the May 20 meeting on the issue of Community Funding.
To paraphrase what Bill said----How can we justify giving money to any of these outside organizations, no matter how worthy, when we are considering laying off Oro Valley workers?
Additionally, Bill noted that Oro Valley services are presently now unfunded, and as such how can we consider giving funds to outside entities?
We couldn't agree more with Bill Adler.
However, the Council obviously didn't agree and accepted the subcommittee's recommendation of donating $236,717, plus $25,000 to C-Path & an additional $16,000 for a total of $40,000 to TREO.
Also, a motion to take the amount of $72,000 from the Bed Tax revenue to donate to MTCVB.
As Bill said, how do you explain this to employees that are to be laid off because of budget constraints?
11 comments:
Regretably, not feeling too well, I left the meeting early last night unaware that the funding for non-profits was going to be addressed; this item was not SPECIFICALLY listed as such within the 'agenda' as available at the door (yes, I know this would probably be in the 'packet' but STILL it should have been identified in the 'handout'. Otherwise I would have somehow found a way to remain. Although I am opposed to giving such monies in such amounts to the likes of TREO, GOVAC, et al, I would have particularly singled out C-Path in an address to Council. Why? I have brother-in-law, a NOTED biochemist and toxicologist who works for the FDA in Washington, D.C. and is CLOSELY affiliated with the Critical Path Institute; I believe him when he says this organization is, in fact, an excellent concept and performer in coordinating and facilitating the various entities involved in drug research - drug companies, university research facilities, and the FDA in order to appropriately bring new medical solutions to market.
HOWEVER, I am very much opposed to
our community being 'hit up' for donations to this publicly funded organization. This is a group that has received millions and millions of dollars from private drug firms, State and Federal grants as well as the FDA itself, so why Oro Valley for $25,000? Yes, I know that funds from all of the above are not as available as they were a couple of years ago, EXCEPT that, wouldn't you think that with all of the money being tossed around in Washington towards whatever, that C-Path would be a 'natural' to receive 'stimulus funds' and wouldn't have to crawl to towns like ours in order to 'assist' them?
Of what specific use is C-Path to Oro Valley? They are headquartered in Tucson so most probably there are no jobs for OVites within. Yes, they work with UofA, Ventana Medical, Sanofi-Aventis, etc. in our area, but they also work with bio-tech firms and universities ELSEWHERE and it is thus that there can be NO assurance that WE will benefit from this donation.
How much homework did Council do in this matter? In my mind, so called publicly funded non-profits who ask for mo' money MUST release their books to the PUBLIC for scrutiny and if they won't, no deal! How much DO they receive in grant money and from whom? How much do their officers make? What percentage of donations and/or grants go for salaries, operational expenses, 'fluff' and so on -ACCOUNTABILITY!
In short, while I can believe my own brother-in-law unequivocally that C-Path is an excellent concept and program, I cannot accept that we the people of Oro Valley must assist in funding it in these hard times that we, too, are experiencing, and shame on Council for possibly squandering OUR MONEY.
Under the current situation I think the council could have slashed this spending a lot more then they did.
Perhaps somebody working for the town could do some of the same functions these organizations claim to perform.
Maybe not, just a thought.
Geez, and to think I thought that I lived in a TOWN. Turns out that I actually live in a philanthropic organization.
Art, can you clarify some items? I watched from home for about 2 hours but they hadn't gotten to the budget discussion yet so I turned it off.
Did the entire council agree to these donations? Were there any nay votes?
Also, what happened with "a motion to take the amount of $72,000 from the Bed Tax revenue to donate to MTCVB?"
mscoyote, perhaps the Town could also
delve into the costs/benefits of these non-profits. Times are tough and this is yours and my money; Town ought to be cautious to the EXTREME in the realm of giving handouts. And, it seems that Town is just a town that can't say "no".
Some of these council votes leaves one (me, for example), scratching their head, saying, "why did they vote this way?"
The addition of the $25K for C-Path & additional $16K for TREO was a motion by KC, 2nd, Kunisch.
Vote was 4-3 with BIll, Barry & Salette casting "no" votes.
Loomis made the motion to use bed tax money for TMCVB $72K. 2nd by Kunisch.
It got approved 6-1. Loomis was "no" vote. Why? Beats me!
Too bad the council doesn't have to explain why they vote a certain way.
One reason might be, some of them don't understand the ramifications of the vote. Some may feel it's their duty to spend taxpayers money however and whenever they want.
Artmarth, actually any of us can ask the council as a whole or individually why they voted as they did. Not saying the have to answer but we can ask.
Zev,
Agree the town that just can't say No. Even if the economy improves I still want the council to be conservative with OUR money.
I think it was pretty lame of Loomis, Kunisch, Carter, and Abbott to hand out $25k to C-Path and an additional $16k to TREO, against the wishes of the voters and against the recommendation of the subcommittee. Obviously, they're beholden to special interests and need to be replaced.
Art,
Loomis did not vote against funding the MTCVB. His motion to approve funding for the MTCVB was amended by Gillaspie, seconded by Latas, to approve the remainder of the subcommittee's recommendations. Loomis, Kunisch, and Abbott voted against the subcommittee's recommendations. One would assume that's because they wanted to give some of their pet projects/campaign donors more. Then the vote went back to the main motion to approve funding for all the items at the subcommittee recommendations. That vote passed 6-1, with Loomis opposed. Again, he probably wasn't finished handing out taxpayer money.
Too much money for special interests.
I thought we were in a budget crisis.
Where was all this money when we were debating the OVPD cuts?
nombe
HOLY COW.
Did somebody say that Carter and Abbott are beholden to "special interests"????
Amen, sister!!!!!
There is hope on the horizon.
:-)
Donations to private organizations are not within the purview of a public entitity's responsibilities.
These are individual decisions.
It is fraud to give away taxpayer funds for any reason. I did not get taxed so that Oro Valley could give my taxed money away.
Stop all such funding.
Post a Comment