Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Can We Believe Jill Anderson? I Don't Think So!

Jill Anderson was on the Development Review Board when Mike Zinkin was chairman.

Anderson supports Satish Hiremath for mayor. That's her right.

What is totally disingenuous is when this woman has the audacity to berate Mike Zinkin when he (Mike) voted against allowing Walmart to violate the approved color code of this (ugly enough) building with its obtrusive roof.

Why, is it disingenuous?

How about 4 other DRB members also voting no!

One more thing. The old DRB meetings are on the OV web site (archives.) Anyone can listen and judge Mike Zinkin & his demeanor. You don't need to believe Anderson.

Here's her letter. Don't forget to see all the OUTSIDE Special Interest Groups supporting Hiremath.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

No way Zinkin a pro-business OV candidate


Mike Zinkin claims that his work on the Development Review Board in Oro Valley proves that he is pro-business, but nothing could be further from the truth.

In fact, Mike was consistently arrogant, argumentative and made things much more difficult for business applicants. His tone of voice and body language indicated that if he made a suggestion to the applicant, they had better listen and agree to what he wanted, whether it made sense or not. Mike berated applicants and let the title of "chairman" go to his head. Just think what he might be like as "mayor" if being chairman brought out these attributes.

Mike did not show any leadership skills as chairman of DRB. He ran it just like he runs sporting games where he is the umpire. He makes the decision and there is no room for compromise. I believe that a large part of the reason that the DRB will most likely be eliminated is due to the poor leadership in the past of Mike Zinkin and his inability to work with applicants in a positive manner.

Voters of Oro Valley, don't be fooled, Mike is not a friend of business, any business large or small. His idea of instituting the Business Development Commission is just another attempt to make you believe he is pro-business.

Although there are many examples showing Mike's inability to listen and be attentive to business owners, one case comes to mind. Wal-Mart requested a paint color change and Mike insisted that they could not change the color, so it was denied by DRB. Once the issue reached town council, it was determined that the color requested was part of their trademark colors and therefore had to be granted as a color change.

Mike Zinkin does not have the skills or temperament to be mayor of Oro Valley. The only candidate who does have the right skills and temperament is Dr. Satish Hiremath, who has been endorsed by the Northern Pima County Chamber of Commerce, SAHBA, Tucson Chamber of Commerce, Tucson Association of Realtors, North Tucson Firefighters and Oro Valley FOP.

Jill Anderson, Oro Valley

9 comments:

Victorian Cowgirl said...

Well, Ms. Anderson seems to be a very "detail-oriented" person. Look at how she goes into such great detail and gives specifics on her reasons for disliking Zinkin.

Then notice how she switches gears and speaks in "vague generalities" when touting Hiremath's attributes.

Here, she simply says he has "the right skills" but offers no details on what they might be.

Seems odd for such a detail-oriented person, doesn't it?

Zev Cywan said...

Dammit, there is no such thing as being 'pro-business' or 'anti-business'; there is simply a way of promoting business right. So, Mike Zinkin promotes business within the parameters as set forth in the Town's Guidelines and Codes; Dr. Hiremath cannot even differentiate between a 'small business' and a single operator 'professional' service (yep, there IS a difference and Hiremath's 'business' is simply just one of those) let alone do I think the Doctor has any grasp of that which is necessary to promote and/or execute business development in the business world in fact. I would rather elect a person who might have a few perceived 'demeanor defects' but who knows his 'business' than one who puts on a big smile and mushes his way into promoting himself in an area of which he appears to have NO knowledge whatsoever. Even the necessary differentiations as to what small businesses truly are and what is needed for THEM is too much for the good Doctor to handle. And shame on the NPCCC et al for not recognizing such fact; this does not reflect well on
their qualifications either.

travelling dancer said...

well,

I went to the Archives and watched the meetings and Mike Zinkin is doing a great job. Then I checked Jill Anderson's voting record and she voted with Mike it would appear at every instance, so her comments don't make any sense at all.

artmarth said...

Thanks "Dancer."--Perhaps "disingenuous" wasn't the correct descriptive word.

It appears that Ms. Anderson is nothing more than "----."

Fill in the blank yourself.

Desert Voice said...

Mrs. Anderson writes Zinkin "did not show any attributes of leadership."

We know Anderson's opinion. Let's see how her opinion compares to Zinkin's performance during the campaign.

LEADERSHIP is defined as:

the art of motivating a group of people to act towards achieving a common goal.

Oro Valley citizens, after visiting the DRB archives, need to review the campaign. Judge for yourselves whether Mike Zinkin is a leader.

Zinkin motivated people to gather signatures for him to run.

With the smallest budget of three mayoral candidates, he collected the highest number of votes in a 3.5 month period.

Zinkin utilitzed cost effective advertising in the Star. Today the opposition which Anderson supports, followed his lead, "copied" as kids would say. "Imitation is the highest form of flattery."

Financial gurus would praise his efficient use of funding. Zinkin got the most efficient use of his dollars. His ability to manage his campaign is a sign of how he will lead the Town. Hiremath and Loomis with more resources did not achieve the same results.

While Zinkin is known in Oro Valley, Loomis and Hiremath probably have more name recognition. Yet Zinkin ranked first in the primaries.

Zinkin campaigns as the "constituent friendly" candidate. He is known for his listening and communication skills.
The voters proved he motivated them.

Zinkin's supporters include Republicans, Independents and Democrats. He gathers people with differences to support him.He is truly a nonpartisan candidate.

Attacks about his funding sources, launched by his opponents, proved patently false. The "evidence" proved Zinkin tells the truth.

Can a man whom Anderson called "consistently arrogant", "argumentative", "berates"and "does not listen" possibly influence and motivate so many people to campaign and vote for him? Does that make sense?

In my opinion,imbedded in the campaign itself, is clear proof of Zinkin's leadership. He's a motivator,a blender of consensus, honest, fiscally sound, present to others listening and very capable of taking charge.

Vistoso Val said...

First of all, if someone doesn't like a candidate, then give the reasons with consistent, provable, professional statements.

Secondly, would I be so insulting to somebody that so many people regard with great admiration....Mike Zinkin! How does that make me, the writer, look?

Thirdly, perhaps Ms. Anderson wanted control of the DRB and she scorns anybody with any authority, she wanted the title of "chairman" and to be in charge herself. Her letter sounds like a sore loser or scorned woman...

I thought her letter was very reflective of her and not Mike Zinkin.

Vistoso Val said...

It is my understanding--check the archives, please--that Ms. Anderson was NOT even present at the DRB meeting she complains about where the Wal-Mart colors were discussed.

Furthermore everyone voted against the change along with Mike Zinkin.

I read in this blog that Ms. Anderson voted with Mr. Zinkin most of the time on other projects. All of this is very puzzling to me because how can you spew the vitriolic diatribe about somebody that Ms. Anderson did, agree with him in voting, not be in attendance at a meeting and the vote you refer to, and have ANY credibility.

After some research I have learned that this woman likes to control all the committees, boards, groups wherein she participates. She has an obsessive need for control, probably born out of insecurity.

It's either that or the scorned woman I suggested earlier folks!!

Nombe Watanabe said...

V. Val:

Your info concerning Ms. Anderson's motives is important. Pls. send a letter to the Explorer.

it could help Mr. Zinkin, who is being cut out of the race due to the wave of outside special interest money supporting Dr. H.

OinStarr said...

Vistoso Val, as suggested I checked the archives. You are correct Ms. Anderson was not present as you have stated. But I will correct you, there was one member who voted to approve the color change. His reason was that the proposed color was very similar to the current color. He opined as a community the Town doesn't want to be viewed as rigid and difficult to work with. Another member stated the color change was similar but voted with member Zinkin.

Perhaps Ms. Anderson had also checked the archives as we have done.

In listening to the audio of this meeting, Mr. Zinkin mentioned that 60 days ago he brought up the issue that signs were not being turned off 1 hour after closing. Ms. Widero said letters would go out to violators. There was discussion as to whether this item needed to be placed on the agenda. He said the appropriate parties were present and he was able to make his point.