Wednesday, July 8, 2009

Council Member Kunisch Shows A Total Lack Of Class!

At the July 8 Council Study Session,a discussion regarding the Oro Valley Police Department Take-Home Vehicle Policy was on the agenda.

Council Member Al Kunisch leaves no doubt that he is a strong advocate of the police department, and consistently votes to give the police anything and everything they want.

That's well and good.

Where Kunisch crossed the line of professionalism was his nasty, uncalled for comment concerning the police take home vehicles.

Kunisch had this to say, referring to Town Manager David Andrews who was not in attendance.

Quoting Kunisch--- "IT WAS A STUPID MISTAKE BY THE TOWN MANAGER." Disagreeing with the Town Manager is Kunisch's right. To show such disrespect is not his right especially when David was not there. That's a classic example of speaking behind someone's back!

What a classless comment. Kunisch ought to be ashamed of himself, and make a public apology to David Andrews.

Anyone as callous as Kunisch does NOT deserve to represent us.

16 comments:

Oro Valley Mom said...

I agree that Kunisch should apologize to Andrews, especially since Andrews wasn't even the one who ordered the vehicles to be removed from the command staff. Chief Sharp ordered them removed way back on April 14, before the Council even addressed the vehicle issue. Was Sharp in the audience last night? If so, I question why he didn't immediately get up and correct Kunisch.

Native Spirit said...

Art,OV Mom,Bloggers,

Agreed: Kunisch should apologize.
Kunisch acted like he was just waiting for the opportunity to say his lines, as if he was following someone's directives. He publically upbraided his administrative superior! His attitude about Mr. Andrews was tangible. Do voters want such behavior from an elected official?

Yes, OV Mom, by neglect the Chief allowed the Town Manager to be maligned. The question is why did Sharp let that happen.

Both Garner and Carter asked intelligent and thoughtful questions inspite of the challenge to do that with the silent, forceful police presence.

Kudos for their professionalism and courage.

While Lt. Teachout spoke articulately about the cars, there are several questions about I have about the content.

Why did the OVPD not address the number of responses of 2008? It was conspicuously absent in the data and is the most logical year to account for. Is there something OVPD doesn't want to tell the constituents?

How do these numbers of responses compare to those of other same sized cities?

"Ten years or 100,000 miles" for retiring vehicles is their rule of thumb. In three years, just doing routine errands, I have 48,000+ miles on my car. Certainly their routines are much longer than my errands. Applying their standard in three more years at 6 years of age, if it were a police car, it would be turned in. Turnover at 6 is much more costly and very different than 10 years. How many cars are turned in that early?

That means those officers who drive farther home run up mileage on their vehicles more quickly, moving up the date of retiring the car to 5 or 4 years, increasing the expenses of a new vehicle, a cost that comes back to residents.

Lt. Teachout did not say whether the Officer's spouse was able to drive the OVPD vehicle. If it is the only car in the household, how do they work that out? Are constituents paying extra insurance for their spouses to drive an OVPD vehicle?

Teachout happily praised their ability to reuse 35% of police equipment. However, the reverse 65%
is what residents' pay for when new cars are purchased. That's a big difference, a considerable expense inspite of the recycling they are able to do.

artmarth said...

If anyone wants to hear the ignorant comment made by Kunisch, all you need to do is listen to the archive meeting (audio, no video)on the OV web site.

The time on the counter will be at 1:08:30 (one hour 8 minutes, 30 seconds in)

All Loomis had to say was, "Let's not throw stones."

What he should have said to Kunisch is---"That's a disgraceful comment to make. You are totally out of order, and you owe an immediate apology to the Town Manager."

Another reason to get some people with Common Sense serving us, instead of those that not only embarrass themselves, but the whole community.

Nombe Watanabe said...

Bitter old nut cake.
Out out out.
get out.

Ferlin said...

Is anybody really surprised by the comments from Al Kunisch? He has not been representative of the needs of OV citizens for a very long time. He certainly doesn't show much class when he openly insults David Andrews. It is a lack of thinking for sure!

LambChop said...

I like Andrews. I think the comment was in very poor taste.

In the unlikely event the Council is unhappy with Andrews, Council has the power to appoint a new Town Manager if the majority believes this is necessary.

Andrews would have been in power almost a year earlier if Abbott or Carter had demonstrated leadership back in early 2006.

There was a vote of no confidence, 4-3, for Chuck Sweet in 2006. The vote was 4 to keep Sweet, Loomis, Abbott, Carter & Parish, and the 3 who voted NO to renew his contract were Gillaspie, Culver & Dankwerth.

I also understand it was Sweet who brought the EDA's for Vestar and Bourne Partners to the 2001-2005 Town Council. Sweet wanted to please his developer friends.

Deacon said...

Al K. owes the public an apology.
Andrews has served Oro Valley honorably for many years.

I don't think the same can be said of Sweet.
I almost forgot how pleased I was when he left. I was in town hall the night he was almost canned.

Andrews is a good man in my book. Keep him!

artmarth said...

Hopefully, after the 2010 election, David Andrews will receive a 100% endorsement from the new council.

Those of us familiar with Oro Valley know that David is a valuable asset.

Kunisch, on the other hand,......

'nough said!

travelling dancer said...

I also agree that Council Member Kunisch should apologize to Mr. Andrews. I was shocked by the comment publically made by Council Member Kunisch. I presume that Council Member Kunisch worked in the private sector and knows that any dispute you have with a member of your Organization, is to be made in private, not in a public meeting, expecially when it was
Chief Sharp and not Mr. Andrews who made that decision. I commend the work that Council Member Kunisch has done with the Volunteer Police Department, but I think what he said at the meeting, puts a little bit of a cloud on the positive things he has done.

So definitely a public apology is in order.

Deacon said...

Art,
I agree about David Andrews.

Do you know the history of how David got the job?

artmarth said...

Hi Deacon--- Rather Than tell you what I know, David's resume answers your question.

Bottom line. We are lucky to have David as our Town Manager.

David Andrews began his tenure as Oro Valley’s Town Manager in September 2006. He is the fourth person to serve as Town Manager since the Council-Manager form of government was adopted by the Mayor and Council in 1986. Mr. Andrews has been with the Town of Oro Valley for over 17years and held the position of Finance Director for 13 years, followed by the Assistant Town Manager position for just about two years.

Before joining the Town, Andrews was the Assistant Finance Director for the City of South Tucson. Prior to that, he worked for the Texas State Comptroller for three years, and held a senior analyst position in the private sector for a Fortune 500 company.

Deacon said...

Art,
I wasn't referring to David's resume.
He certainly earned where he is today.

Sweet wanted to get rid of David. A council member intervened and managed to remove the problem.

Deacon said...

Art, Since I haven't see a response from you I can only conclude you were unhappy about the name of the council member who drove Sweet out and lined up David for Town Manager. I hope you are willing to give credit where credit is due.

Native Spirit said...

Mr. Kunisch,

Your lack of apology to your Town Manager has been duly noted by Oro Valley citizens.

Did you ever think of yourself as politically suicidal?

artmarth said...

Deacon--- Do I need to tell you the problem with "assuming?"

Your assumption is hardly accurate.

You may not have noticed I was away for the past week, and thus, did not respond.

Other than that, I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Deacon said...

Art, Welcome back. I thought it had been unusually quiet.

LambChop's postings lead me to believe the story of Andrews rise to Town Manager is common knowledge.

My questions to you: Did you know Chuck Sweet wanted to get rid of David Andrews?

Do you know a council member intervened and lined up Andrews to be the new Town Manager?