Both the Az Star & Explorer (online) have written about the 4-3 vote to "raid" our Contingency Fund in order to retain overstaffed positions.
The Star article quotes Town Attorney Tobin Rosen as saying that the council's action suspended a town policy that prohibits using contingency funds for recurring expenses.
In our opinion, that maneuver orchestrated by Mayor Loomis was bad enough. However, what was totally despicable was the fact that Loomis did NOT have the common decency to even discuss this with David Andrews, our Town Manager, and 17 year dedicated employee of Oro Valley.
As we said in a previous post, we learned to expect this kind of action from Loomis, and Al Kunisch pretty much does whatever the mayor wants, as he has trouble thinking things out for himself, which he proves time and time again.
What was really disappointing was the fact that Loomis obviously convinced both KC Carter & Paula Abbott to go along with him.
Anyone that listened to the meeting would have a hard time believing this "deal" was not put together by Loomis PRIOR to the meeting. (Having the 3 of them all looking to 2nd the Loomis motion without a moment of hesitation should tell us something.)
Regardless of KC & Paula's motives, and I believe in their minds, they were doing the right thing, it was undoubtedly the wrong thing to do.
I think KC felt if the council did not vote to layoff any police at the previous meetings, he was not going to vote to layoff anyone.
I also believe Paula's intention was to not let any employees go, if there was any way to save their jobs.
Honorable on their part? Some would say "yes."
BUT, and to me, it's the crux of the issue, this is where their rationality was totally off kilter.
To have "blindsided" David was INEXCUSABLE. He is too good a town employee, and too good a man, to have this done to him..
We RESPECT DAVID immensely. I am sorry to say I can NOT respect what his friends KC & Paula did to him.
Here are the two articles--The Star & The Explorer
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/295041
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/05/27/news/doc4a1e0836ee95d912455284.txt
11 comments:
I suppose we could go through this whole scenario and pick it apart piece by piece. I suppose we could go through this whole scenario and try to figure out the intentions of the 'gang of four' including that of the OV Napolean. An exercise in power, sour grapes, sappy sympathy, follow-the-leader - it doesn't make much of a difference as to what motivations each one of these flip-floppers had. However, they did have a couple of mindless processes in common, and that was to undermine the work of and the respect for the Town Manager and, in so doing, they undermined the Town itself. Observing their nuances in the past few months, NONE of them surprised me by their action. I think their reliability can be summed up by a quote from one of them most recently (as published in one of our local news papers): [I don't know what they do but I'm going to vote to give them the money anyway] - WOW, what a brilliant way of governance.
Well, the next time I ask for something from the Town and I'm told that they can't do it because of "Town Policy," I'm going to remind them of how they "suspended" Town Policy when they used the contingency fund to pay for recurring expenses.
Do they realize what an ugly precedent they've set?
As the husband of a former 15 year budget coordinator for a major county in North Carolina and having observed the procedural norm that has been established as a standard for budget preparation, I can only conclude that the hit and miss, piecemeal methods and presentations utilized in Oro Valley are amateurish at best. This 'flailing approach' seems to suit the mentalities of some of the 'controllers' as they can then create the necessary conditions for themselves that allow for wriggling their way in and out of reality and responsibility at will.
That there are those who's actions reflect their inability to think and/or act straight is ENOUGH for me to say to ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
IT'S OUR MONEY, BUT THEY PLAY WITH IT; IT'S OUR TOWN, BUT THEY PLAY WITH IT; IT'S OUR 'CONSTITUTION', BUT THEY PLAY WITH IT.
IT'S YOUR VOTE THAT CAN PUT AN END TO THIS NONSENSE AND THEY CAN'T PLAY WITH THAT; OH, THEY'LL TRY (AND PERHAPS ARE DOING SO AS WE SPEAK), BUT THAT CAN BE EXPOSED!
"KC felt if the council did not vote to layoff any police at the previous meetings, he was not going to vote to layoff anyone."
That doesn't really sound like honor to me. It sounds like spite.
"Paula's intention was to not let any employees go, if there was any way to save their jobs."
That would only be honorable if she were using her money to "save jobs." Using taxpayer money to ensure that people have a paycheck whether there's work for them or not...that's something else.
OV Mom, et al---Please keep in mind, that was me speaking, not them. Without asking either KC or Paula "what were you thinking?"---I tried to come up with a rational reason for them to go along with Loomis, and against the Town Manager,(without his knowledge on this action).
Perhaps one of our bloggers can determine "why?"
As far as I'm concerned, there was NO good reason!
I have stated my opinion of the action in the previous post.
My only addition comment would be directed to Art. In order for there to be, "a rational reason for them to go along..." they must be rational people. It will probably not surprise you but I believe think neither one has been prone to rational thinking.
I have to agree with OVOT. It's been a long time since I've seen any rational thought coming from Kunisch, Carter, or Abbott.
Loomis, on the other hand, is very rational. He counts his votes and then springs things at the last moment to avert any opposition movement. He then counts the votes again and decides which way he'll vote.
Kunisch is pure emotion ("I'll keep pounding my fist...") and no reason. He basically seems to do whatever Loomis tells him to do.
Abbott is also pure emotion and no reason.
Yes, those presently named all have a certain degree of irrationality that can be attached to them. BUT, there are several who preceded them who can also be described as such, one in particular who had the fervent support of one of the posters here. And, yes, I too have supported a couple of those who I now deem to have abandoned rational behavior as it should be applied to 'the best interest of the COMMUNITY'; gradually and immediately as well. As to Mayor Loomis, he is without question a clever and serious manipulator who seems only to have love for his power self. He knows what he is doing and he does it 'well'; there is an election coming up and it appears that a couple of weak wannabes, former adversaries, are now slurping at his heels.
Bloggers:
While Zev aptly described our Machiavellian Mayor as Napolean whose "hand was always over his heart in pictures", I concur that cronie Kunish is a "yes" man but feel that Abbott's "wanting to help the world" is sincere but shortsighted. It disappoints me that the crusty KC is seeking revenge, a sourgrapes attitude that will impact on taxpayers not on those people who may have lost their jobs. KC seemed to have longer range vision than that.
NB: Interesting, this is also an election year for Loomis, Kunisch, KC Carter and Paula Abbott, if she runs. Voter-pleasing is a skill candidates work hard on. Might that have been their motive, however shortsighted?
In response to OV Mom, I do think the voters are rational. Just as the rational three(Garner, Gillapie and Latas) were blindsided with careful manipulation by Machievellian Mayor, I know the voters are sharper than the Mayor. My empathy to you three for having to respond without preparation.
Strike: Machiavellian Mayor for poor communications with your elected political body.
A memory surfaces of Machievellian Mayor challenging blogger Zev at a Town meeting in a surly voice, "So, whata ya gonna do about it?"
I hear that as a clarion call to all the voters to show the Council exactly how powerful we are and to rally around the Council members who understand the broader community's concerns and how very irresponsible raiding the contingency fund is.
Vic Cowgirl,
Yup! They need reminding of their "picking and choosing" of regulations to support/not...great application.
Machievellian Mayor,
We know how to handle you. Beware!
Marana seems to have figured this out. They have made logical cuts, and asked the employees to become part of the solution.
The four who voted yes all know how to make a Motion for Reconsideration. If any of wake up and re-exam this issue that vote can be reversed!
Lamb Chop....I vow to work on the weakest link.
Post a Comment