Not surprising that the spokesperson for the Oro Valley Police Union has joined in with Councilman Al Kunisch in questioning why their budget---that is almost 50% of the whole town's budget should be looked into.
Kunisch says; "What's broken, why do we have to do this?"
We say, "Let's see if the police budget is "broken," or at the very least, overstaffed." Doesn't a $12.3 million budget deserve just a little scrutiny?
As Councilman Bill Garner said; "We're not going to know where we're at until we do some focused study."
I addressed the council on this issue and noted "ROI"---Return on Investment. If we can do a study that will potentially save us hundreds of thousands of dollars, then I ask: Why not?"
Obviously Councilman KC Carter thought otherwise, as he cast the only "no" vote.
Read The Explorer article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/11/25/news/doc4b0c6b998c45a494173445.txt
7 comments:
I didn't see this meeting. It sounds like Kunisch spoke out against it but then voted for it? Is that correct? I ask because it says that Carter cast the only NO vote. So even Loomis voted FOR it?
Cowgirl--- You may want to watch the streaming video. Specifically this item where Kunisch went out of control as a result of me addressing the council and suggesting he ought to let people know he's a volunteer cop---a noble job, but which many of us believe makes him (Kunisch) totally biased as to police issues.
Loomis was probably shrewd enough to vote "yes," because he's running again. Kunisch usually follows Loomis in his votes.
Let's not forget, it was Loomis that amended the motion to add Parks & Rec to the evaluation.
Don't be too surprised when staff comes back with its proposal if Loomis suggests, it costs too much for the police study and recommends council only do Parks & Rec.
OK, I get it now. Is IS interesting the way Kunisch spoke out against it but then voted for it when Loomis voted for it. I wonder who Loomis will turn into his new puppet after the next election.
Cowgirl--- If the voters pay attention to what has been going on, Loomis will have to "pull the strings" as a private citizen.
We really need MIKE ZINKIN FOR MAYOR!
A management study-- WHY? How about an alternative? The police chief is compensated at the executive level. He is, or should be capable of developing a budget that takes into account the financial realities of our situation. Charge him with developing a plan that reduces overall cost by 10% and 20%.
A study will only delay actions needed by another year. 4 months to decide who will do the study, another 4 months to decide how to do it, another 4 months arguing over the results of the study. All really unnecessary if the council will direct the police chief and hold him accountable. Any executive that is compensated at his level should be able to provide a meaningful budget at significantly reduced expenditures.
Mr. Davis speaks wisely on this topic.
But to answer his "WHY?" question, the answer is "a political witch hunt." It's nothing more than that.
I'm not sure I understand how a managment study of the police department and the parks department is a "political witch hunt." Were the management studies of the legal department, the library, and public works political witch hunts?
Post a Comment