An article in The Explorer discusses the home-rule question. In a nutshell, home-rule allows Arizona cities and towns to determine their own budget limits. Without home-rule, the state law would set budget standards.
A number of our citizens asked our opinion of whether we believe home-rule is good, or bad for Oro Valley.
We believe the answer is, it depends on who will be elected mayor and who will fill the three council seats come June 2010.
This present council----or more appropriately, the four incumbents whose terms expire----Loomis, Carter, Kunisch & Abbott have shown they have no clue when it comes to fiscal responsibility.
Hopefully, the challengers we enthusiastically endorse---Mike Zinkin, for Mayor, and those for council all have a good business background, and will use their expertise to do what is right for the people of Oro Valley.
So--- The basic answer is this: Home-rule is good in the right hands. Otherwise, let the state dictate the policy. That is not desirable, but let's not forget, Loomis and his three fellow "incumbents" have shown that raiding our contingency fund is NOT the way to balance a budget.
Remember---- Your vote is critical. Please read about the candidates we endorse (Top right on blog) and let's control our own destiny.
Here's The Explorer article.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/11/05/news/doc4af0b9b1485c8805106718.txt
10 comments:
Cox never seems to learn. He was told numerous times to NOT post comments that involve personal lives.
He consistently thinks he can do as he pleases.
That is not the case. That is why his comment has been deleted.
For those who are unfamiliar with
'Home Rule' cities vs 'General Law' cities, the following is a short synopsis of the basic differences:
'General Law' cities can ONLY be allowed to do what the State Statutes allow them to do. 'Home Rule' cities can rule as they feel is appropriate as long as the action is not prohibited. Thus, [a "Home Rule' city is self-governance in it's ultimate form]. It appears that being a 'General Law' city is most appropriate for smaller cities i.e. 5,000 or less in population. As cities grow, 'Home Rule' is considered to be more ideal.(The above is adapted from an e-mail I coincidentally received today which is comprised of an outline of actual circumstances and commentary).
I would maintain that no matter which system is enabled, responsibility is a key component in the execution of either.I would also maintain that 'Home Rule' is the better option for cities (towns) of our size and magnitude; the budget is only ONE facet; the other 'freedoms' are advantageous.
Zev's comment shines another light on dark, uninformed and irrational point made in the original post.
Ok Boys. Art... Thinker...
It is enough!
Let's focus on the facts and the facts alone.
No personal comments, please. No personal reference.
Time for us to discuss the facts.
As the communications administrator for the Town of Oro Valley, I'd like to provide some education for this discussion. The Alternative Expenditure Limitation law, or Home Rule as it is commonly known, is a ballot question put before the voters in Oro Valley every four years. With voter approval, it allows the Town to set its spending limits based on revenues received and expenses incurred. Oro Valley is required to have a balanced budget.
State law imposes budget limitations that assume all things are equal with cities and towns around the state. It does not allow for individual community size, priorities or needs. Without Home Rule approval by the voters, Oro Valley will continue to receive revenue from the state and other local sources, but will only be allowed to spend what is allowed by State law. These levels are set based on 1979/80 budget levels with some allowance for inflation and population growth. Currently, this would mean that Oro Valley would have to spend approximately $99 million less next year if not approved. This would result in the Town having to cut virtually every program and service to reduce its spending to the legal limits.
Home Rule does not empower the Town to create new and additional taxes. It also does not allow the Town to spend more than it receives, and the budget process would continue to be open to the public as we currently do.
The Town will hold its first Public Hearing on Home Rule at the November 18th Council meeting, and Town staff is available to speak to local groups on this matter. I invite you to contact me directly at 229-4712 or by email at mdavis@orovalleyaz.gov with additional questions.
We appreciate your bloggers starting the conversation on this issue.
Thinker,
You're losing me again. What specifically was "uninformed and irrational" about the original post?
It simply said that having the State dictate the budget is NOT desirable, UNLESS you have a fiscally irresponsible Town Council.
That makes sense to me.
We are pleased that individuals from our town, regardless of where they are employed, are participating in this blog.
Christopher Fox, a personal attack on Mary Davis is not appropriate. So, I have removed your comment since it discussed her salary. Your comment was completely off base regarding the subject of our posting.
Please see our terms of use if you have further questions.
Alan,
Sorry my post was interpreted as a personal attack. In a sense, I can see how it could be taken that way, but if I had parsed my words more carefully, I am sure I could have removed any tinges of personal attack completely. The general gist of my comment related to my previous postings under other threads re: staffing levels and compensation within the Town of Oro Valley government, and difficult decisions ahead.
Again, I apologize to yourself, to Ms. Davis personally, and to the entity known as LOVE bloggers....
Christopher Fox
Post a Comment