The Az Supreme Court decided to review the CityNorth case (Turken vs. Gordon) on the $97.4 million giveaway to developer Klutznick Co.
Read story here.
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/06/supreme_court_to_hear_phoenix.php
Late news: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/06/02/20090602citynorth0602.
SUPREME COURT RULING
Monday, June 1, 2009
MINUTES No. 2368
Arizona Supreme Court
CV-09-0042-PR
(23)
MEYER TURKEN et al v PHIL GORDON et al
Court of Appeals Division One 1 CA-CV 08-0310
ORDERED: Petition for Review [Appellee/Cross-Appellant NPP CityNorth
LLC] = GRANTED.
FURTHER ORDERED: Petition for Review [Appellees Gordon et al] =
GRANTED.
FURTHER ORDERED: The case shall be set for oral argument.
FURTHER ORDERED: The parties may file simultaneous supplemental briefs,
not to exceed 20 pages in length, no later than 30 days from the date of this
Court's Minute Letter.
FURTHER ORDERED: Request to Vacate Court of Appeals Award of Attorney
Fees [Appellees Gordon et al]= CONTINED
Monday, June 1, 2009
Mayor Loomis Talks Out Of Both Sides Of His Mouth
Many of us are just plain fed up with Loomis and his antics. His total lack of class came to the forefront last Wednesday in raiding our contingency fund, without having the decency of mentioning his intention to the Town Manager PRIOR to making the motion, totally ignoring the Manager's recommendation.
To prove the double talk of Loomis, we need not look beyond two statements he made.
He is known to have said he took this action to avoid discussing furloughs, layoffs and a potential reduction in benefits in order to "balance the budget."
At the council meeting, Loomis said, with total disdain, if we don't have work in six months we
can "fire them," meaning the workers.
He claims he wanted to avoid any layoffs, but has no qualms in firing these same people in six months!
That's a hell of a way to "balance a budget." "Steal" from a contingency fund, that doesn't help one iota in balancing a budget, and then, if the Town Manager believes it necessary, let the workers go. Why in the world should we think Loomis and his "team of three" would listen to the advice of David Andrews, who served the community for 17 years, including more than a decade as Financial Director, after they unilaterally decided to not give a damn what David said after months of reviewing the financial situation with his staff.
The time has come. Within one year Loomis should be sent packing. The sooner, the better!
Hopefully, he'll take Kunisch along with him---as without Loomis, Kunisch wouldn't know which way is up!
To prove the double talk of Loomis, we need not look beyond two statements he made.
He is known to have said he took this action to avoid discussing furloughs, layoffs and a potential reduction in benefits in order to "balance the budget."
At the council meeting, Loomis said, with total disdain, if we don't have work in six months we
can "fire them," meaning the workers.
He claims he wanted to avoid any layoffs, but has no qualms in firing these same people in six months!
That's a hell of a way to "balance a budget." "Steal" from a contingency fund, that doesn't help one iota in balancing a budget, and then, if the Town Manager believes it necessary, let the workers go. Why in the world should we think Loomis and his "team of three" would listen to the advice of David Andrews, who served the community for 17 years, including more than a decade as Financial Director, after they unilaterally decided to not give a damn what David said after months of reviewing the financial situation with his staff.
The time has come. Within one year Loomis should be sent packing. The sooner, the better!
Hopefully, he'll take Kunisch along with him---as without Loomis, Kunisch wouldn't know which way is up!
Az Supreme Court Ruling On CityNorth Due Today
As we anxiously await the Az Supreme Court decision on whether to hear the CityNorth appeal or let the Appeals Court decision stand, the project is losing money daily.
Among its detractors is the mayor and majority of the Scottsdale Council that plan on filing a friendly amicus brief if the Court decides to hear the case. Mayor Jim Lane questioned the philosophy behind the tax incentives, saying they are selective and "unfairly reallocate the tax burden to remaining taxpayers."
We in Oro Valley fully understand Mayor Lane's concern.
Read the Scottsdale amicus brief here.
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Asset27767.aspx
Read more from Az Republic article.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/05/30/20090530citynorth0530.htmlnorth052
Among its detractors is the mayor and majority of the Scottsdale Council that plan on filing a friendly amicus brief if the Court decides to hear the case. Mayor Jim Lane questioned the philosophy behind the tax incentives, saying they are selective and "unfairly reallocate the tax burden to remaining taxpayers."
We in Oro Valley fully understand Mayor Lane's concern.
Read the Scottsdale amicus brief here.
http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/Asset27767.aspx
Read more from Az Republic article.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/05/30/20090530citynorth0530.htmlnorth052
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)