Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Oro Valley Council Candidates Respond To Four Additional Questions From The Explorer

Previously, the Explorer published the responses to four questions. In today's paper, the balance of four questions are answered by the seven candidates.

Our readers can analyze the responses.


OV Objective Thinker said...

Here is a classic:

"Streamline the process in which businesses go through the process here."


Here is one by a candidate that isn't quite up to date.

"There are several inexpensive ways we can promote business and economic development Our Town web site, for example, could easily showcase Oro Valley small businesses."

That's probably why "THE NAVIGATOR" was implemented well over a year ago and is on the Town web site. And we certainly wouldn't want to showcase those pesky big businesses. They produce way to much sales tax.

Matthew Rabb said...

OV Objective Thinker,

You're right. There was no excuse not to make sure an idea I had was not already adopted. I, for some reason or another, did not come across the Business Navigator while I was doing my research. It was my mistake. Obviously, its link is easy to access.

I do think, however, that your post was somewhat inaccurate about my position. I have nothing against "big business.” When I was doing my research, I came across all the big businesses showcased on the Town's website and I thought, "Well, why can't we do the same thing for small business"? My statement was that our town website could easily showcase Oro Valley small businesses. I read that as including small businesses, not excluding big businesses.

I was also making the point that, right now, maybe we don’t have to be giving money away when we don’t have it. Maybe we have to be a little more creative. Clearly, we need to be more creative than proposing ideas that have already been thought of. My folly, obviously, got in the way of my message.

artmarth said...

Matt-- I appreciate your comment.

Having had the opportunity of spending time with you, I believe you are a worthy candidate to serve the people of Oro Valley.

There are those among us that will find fault with all others. Do not be concerned.


OV Objective Thinker said...

Hi Matt....

I am not sure you remember that we have met and the circumstances of that meeting. It's not really important except that our dialog at that time indicated that your "research" on a wide variety of fronts was lacking. I say that in the most constructive way possible.

I believe that you are a very bright young man and you obviously have some political ambitions. Whether they begin at the Town Council level or end at that level remains to be seen.

But I have to be objective in my evaluation of candidates and it is my opinion that you need some more experience under your belt before taking the step you are attempting at this time. It's like (and I am guessing here)running for a JP position immediately after passing the bar.

Apply for a board or commission position. Immerse yourself into 'things Oro Valley government'. Spend time chatting with former Town Council members. When you do those things you become acquainted with The Navigator.

I do not believe that marketing expense falls into the category of "giving money away". We have money to market our business community and we should do so. As I have mentioned many times before, our business community is out largets financial supporter. We need to treat it as such.

Good luck to you and I would love to spend some time chatting with you at your convenience!!!

Matthew Rabb said...

Art, thank you.

OV Objective Thinker, those are fair observations. Thank you for your well wishes.


artmarth said...

I can't tell you how pleased I am to be a "conduit" in this last exchange from Cox to Matt.

Whatever Matt's motives may be, I give him credit for taking this step. Matt is obviously intelligent enough to have passed the bar and become a lawyer.

Regardless of the outcome of the primary election, I give Matt credit for taking on the responsibilities of running.

To Matt-- whatever the result, you'll still be a "winner."

Nombe Watanabe said...

I voted for Matt, I think he is going to be a great addition to the local government, in whatever position he is able to obtain now or in the future. Thinker provided good advice. - NW

Zev said...

"There are those among us that will find fault with all others". Art, are you looking in a mirror?

"I can't tell you how pleased I am to be a conduit in this last exchange from Cox to Matt"? C'mon, Art, wipe the 'smug' off your face; said exchange was no different from a myriad of others that go (have gone) back and forth on this site.

How much 'me' do you need?

artmarth said...

Zev--- There's an expression about "bees in your bonnet" and another not as nice version, but it appears you are afflicted with one of those maladies.

Why you feel compelled to interject yourself into every discussion, especially since you recently stated you were finished with this blog, is bewildering.

Cox had a very nice public exchange with Matt Rabb.

I stated that I was pleased they used the blog as a means of interfacing.

You call that being "smug?"

I'm sorry to say, you're being foolhardy.

OV Objective Thinker said...


Three thoughts crossed my mind when I read your last posting.

1. I have a nice public exchange with 90% of the people on this blog.

2. I stated my opinion regarding Matt's candidacy and some of the things he has said and his response contained comments like "those are fair observations" and "You're right." Nombe stated that I had provided matt with "some good advice."

Now compare those comments to some of the comments you have made when I discuss the candidacy of Zinkin and Emmons.

3. I would ask that you reflect on your own words. "Why you feel compelled to interject yourself into every discussion..." as it relates to your interjection into this conversation. Zev has a point and as is usually the case you took issue and attacked. It's just SO unnecessary.

Nombe Watanabe said...

On the Nature of Discourse while Blogging: By N. Watanabe, Blogger, Wine Lover and Gadfly.

There is a great fundamental debate which threads though many postings on the LOVE Blog.

The basic question, as posed by many, is one of civil discourse versus snarky, Loomis like, behavior (oops).
How do we want to conduct ourselves whilst blogging away? Do we want to have a dry, rational discussion of local politics and events? Or do we want a spicy exchange of ideas with personal attacks, name calling and good old mud slinging?

I am quite happy with the American tradition of pointed exchange. The duel of wit makes for good writing and reading. However, the more mature blogger is, no doubt, put off by some of our more celebrated exchanges.

In the final analysis, I submit it is up to the reader to draw his own conclusions when he comes upon the dreaded snark.

Blog on dear readers, blog on.

OV Objective Thinker said...

Nombe....GREAT POST.

BUT......let's have some more on the "Wine Lover and Gadfly" part.

I like a good Cab but Estancia Monterey County Pinot Noir is also pretty tasty.

But then too I like Bud Lite so the spectrum is pretty wide!!

Victorian Cowgirl said...


If only your spectrum were that wide when debating politics...

I can dream.

OV Objective Thinker said...


When I was younger it was. But the folks on the left didn't want to take the time to allow me to truly taste their product. They just kept shoving it down my throat until I gagged. And then every time I had accumulated enough to feed myself, they kept taking most of it from me to feed to some illegal passer by.

So I narrowed my spectrum and came over from 'the dark side'.

OVDad said...

Maybe we can keep the discussion to OV related things, because this might be the wrong forum to spread Fox talking points. One of the beautiful things about local elections is that they are less partisan than the big one's.