Mayoral candidate Mike Zinkin has issued a statement regarding Property Taxes for Oro Valley. Mike says no.
He believes that there's more that can be done to reduce cost before a property tax, or any other tax for that matter, should even be considered.
Instead of more taxes, Mike advocates a hard look at how Oro Valley does things. It's time to "reengineer" the business of Oro Valley.
Did you know, for example, that the Oro Valley Police Department keeps the proceeds of the sale of "seized goods"? That this money is used at their discretion? Why, Mike asks, aren't these funds under the town's control?.
Did you know that Oro Valley can save money by reducing its energy footprint with simple things like shutting off computers at night? Or shutting off lights?
Clear here to learn more by reading Mike's statement.
24 comments:
Zeeman....
"Why, Mike asks, aren't these funds under the town's controls."
The way the above quote is presented and punctuated it is difficult to understand just exactly who is asking what. Maybe Zeeman can clarify.
Mr. Zinkin has published several statements that are completely false. One would think that if you were going to run for the highest office in ths community your would have a better grasp on the operations.
I didn't have any trouble understanding "just exactly who is asking what."
Mike Zinkin is asking the questions: Why is the OVPD allowed to keep the proceeds from the sale of seized goods? Why are they allowed to use that money at their own discretion? Why doesn't the town have any control over this?
I understood it even though no quotation marks were used.
OK, Thinker, now I'm going to give you a hard time...
Did YOU not understand it because...
(1) You're not smart enough to follow a simple sentence?
(2) You really DID understand it but you just like to stir up trouble where there is none?
VC....I guess my point was too subtle. Not that I am a grammer freak but it is poorly written.
Neither Zeeman nor Zinkin know the answer to the question. I would think (hope) that a person running for the office of Mayor would know the answer.
I'm not stirring up any trouble where there is none. Zinkin is simply not qualified to be our Mayor. His record at DRB was laughable at times, he is anti-business and he has not demonstrated that he has any financial strengths. We elected one air traffic controller and that individual certainly has made a mess of things so far including being a factor in the loss of Dave Andrews.
Just my opinion.
OVOT:
Per your prior post, the correct spelling is "grammar" and not "grammer" as you put it. I expect that if you're going to nitpick others and jump on ANYTHING that you don't agree with, that you'd at least have your act together. Get it together.
Your negativity is entirely unbecoming. Granted, this is a blog where individuals are free to complain and bicker. However, you often take things to an unnecessary level.
Here's a piece of (unsolicited) advice: A mature adult doesn't feel the need to express every thought that crosses his mind, nor take active issue with any little thing with which he disagrees. Pick your battles. Don't continue to make mountains out of mole hills. I'd like to think that even you are better than that.
AZ...Thanks for correcting my typo.
I would be interested in knowing what mole hill I have transformed into a mountain.
Someone needs to take some of these things to a different level or they become accepted as fact. Much of what is posted on this blog is nothing more than the crap that Art spews out of his alledged mind. But some folks believe everything he says because they don't know he is a devious, angry man
90% of what I post on this blog is rebuttal to incorrect statements. The other 10% is simply an attempt to have fun at Art's expense. As I have often stated, he seldom fails to cooperate and make some hilarious nonsensical comment.
Thinker,
People who work at the highest levels of aviation (eg. air traffic controllers, pilots) are people who are excellent problem solvers and people who remain calm under pressure. These are good attributes to have in a council member.
They are also direct and civil in their communications, as opposed to Loomis (passive-aggressive) and Carter (belligerent.)
Good point, Cowgirl.
Can you imagine Loomis as an air traffic controller? "Well, we'd like to let you land, but it would be premature. I need some more information. Do I hear a motion to form a committee and study this issue?"
Or Carter as a pilot? "G*d d*mn it, people, you've ruined this flight, is what you've done."
Carter is not belligerent, he is stupid - and to quote Ron White (sp) "you can't fix stupid"
Ok. My bad. I admit it.
Proofreading is not my strength. I must have read the post 100 times before I published it and I never saw that I had pluralized control. Well, it is corrected now.
Why are the proceeds from the sale of seized goods kept by the Police Department?
Because that's the way the law is written.
13-4315. Allocation of forfeited property
I am curious. Since OV Thinker is speaking about Mike Zinkin's performance on one of the Boards, I would like to know how OV Thinker's performance was on his Boards? I am sure that someone out there, other than OV Thinker, can inform me.
Zeeman has stood up and once again, in my book, distinguished himself as a clear thinking, objective individual. For that, I truly respect him. What he did would have never occured to Art Segal. And therein lies my lack of respect for Art.
Having said that I refer to Cyclone 1's post. THAT'S the answer. IT'S THE LAW. It's not my hyperbole, it's not me making a mountain out of a mole hill, it's not me misunderstanding a simple sentence. It's not any of those things. It's simply the truth.
And it is really sad that Mr. Zinkin does not know the answer. He wants to be MAYOR.
PLEASE, before you throw your support to someone you REALLY DON'T KNOW, check out the available information. Just because you disagree with Loomis, don't automatically vote for Zinkin.
Nombe..You are 100% correct.
TD...If you cannot find anyone to give you any information I would love to chat with you directly about my 5 years on the P&Z. I am easy to contact.
LOVE.....most all of you!! :-)
PS....At his request, I am meeting with Mr. Zinkin on Wednesday morning. He has stated that he doesn't want to get into a back and forth on this blog. I find that interesting. He was certainly willing to post comments about the lighting ordinance. I will share with you the high points of our meeting unless he requests that I do not.
I would like to hear from Mike, and the other candidates DETAILS of their idea's to bring the budget under control AND their plan to lead Oro Valley through these difficult times.
I don't want any of the "Hopey Changey" generalities.
The next few years cannot be about promises. Voters need to see the details on how they will accomplish their goals.
OV Mom,
Thanks for my laugh for the day. I loved the "scripts" you came up with for Loomis and Carter. They were spot-on.
Nombe,
I'm a big Ron White fan. You're right...we can't fix stupid...but we can throw him out of office.
OV Thinker, I wanted to find another individual, other than yourself, to critique your performance on your Boards. Surely there is someone out there who can do that. Unfortunately you would probably be biased.
TD...May be difficult to find. Few folks can remember the period from 2000 to 2005. If you know Bill Adler, he would be a good contact. Byer Vella in the Planning Department would be another.
Thinker,
You commented, "Just because you disagree with Loomis, don't automatically vote for Zinkin."
So...just because you agree with Loomis, don't automatically discount everyone else.
Your support of Loomis confuses me. You want to decrease spending rather than increase taxes. Loomis is pro-utility tax and pro-property tax and seems to enjoy spending other people's money.
You don't like Carter or Abbott. You didn't like them when they voted AGAINST the Mayor and you still don't like them when they vote WITH the Mayor. If they all vote YES on something, how can it be that the Mayor did the right thing and they did the wrong thing?
I'm trying to understand your logic.
Travelling Dancer,
Richy Feinberg might also be able to answer your question.
VC....I don't recall making a statement that I supported Loomis. He and I have disagreed on several occasions. And I will make an attempt to clear the "support" issue for you.
I don't base my support for any single individual on any single issue. I look at the total record and actions of the individual and draw a conclusion based on their ability to look at the big picture. I have never been an Abbott supporter primarily because she has never demonstrated an ability to comprehend the complex issues that face her. My second observation of her is her attendance. It's horrible. Lastly she has,over the years, isolated herself from the public. She is a nice friendly person but in my opinion, a poor councilperson. KC's conduct has been an issue from day one. And his attitude is he is 80 something and if you don't like it, KMA!! Now that may be humerous at times but reflects poorly on our community. I wonder how happy those people are that just screamed to have him elected as the Vice-Mayor. Maybe now you understand my opposition to that appointment.
That makes more sense.
For the record, I was not one of the people who supported Carter for Vice-Mayor even though I was happy with his work on the council at that time. I thought he was too old and would not be able to effectively run a meeting. And I think he's too old to run for a third term.
Now all of the "old" people in town will be having a fit that I said that. But just as you can be too young to do a particular thing, you can also be too old to do it, too!
I'm baack. Conny, your 'suggestion'
relating as to how [everyone talks about fiscal control but 'let's go' when it comes down to the nuts and bolts of the issue] is quite a valid point. First, let me state that I believe we should exercise a 'zero-based' budget format. Following that, the real nitty-gritty expertise on this subject should be left to the Finance/Budget Director, the Budget Analyst(s), under the direction of the Town Manager and oversighted by the Town Council. The interaction of these entities along with delegated 'authoritarian' applications can do wonders. ALL departments MUST be mandated to cooperate fully in the interest of Town. Salaries must be realistic, personnel numbers must be realistic, operational expenses must be scrutinized and a sense balance must prevail. In the end, no tail should be allowed to wag the dog.
As to the extras that Town desires, full analysis of each and every one of them must be executed.
If a 'non-profit' is to receive consideration, I would demand FULL disclosure of their operational income and expenses as well as a treatise relative to exactly what they are 'chartered' to perform. There are too many non-profits whose proceeds go to too much bun and too little beef. I would also want to know EXACTLY how their presence benefits US.
As to 'studies', much of these can be done 'in house' rather than hiring outside consultants. And, we should encourage volunteerism as we have a community loaded with qualified retired professionals as well as others who would like to make contributions.
Okay, Conny, as a former business person I HAD to balance my books, I had to control expenditures, and I had to offer a superior product and I had to provide a welcome atmosphere both to customers as well as employees. And I NEVER gave away the store.
What I have written above is simply
a digest of outlook and the reality can be tough; but, fiscal responsibility is not only possible, it is a must!
If Oro Valley wants to charge fees like a business, for this or that, then it should be run like a business.
Any sensible business "zero base budgets". That is, they require justification of every dollar requested; and does not simply give an "increase" of x% over last year's budget.
Time for a strong dose of good business sense in the management of Oro Valley.
Post a Comment