The Mayor constantly harps on trying to make Oro Valley better by showing respect to others.
Well, Hiremath would do well to follow his own advice. His latest "victim" was Council Member Bill Garner, the ONLY one that consistently votes in the best interests of his constituents.
At the last council meeting,Hiremath and his four cronies---Hornat, Snider, Solomon & Waters passed a tentative budget which included doubling our Utility Tax. Bill Garner showed a slide presentation pointing out numerous areas where the town has frivolous expenditures that should be examined more closely. Garner & Barry Gillaspie both voted against the budget and were the only two to vote "no" on doubling the Utility Tax.
Hiremath chastised Garner publicly by stating: "A man of your intellect and somebody who prides yourself on being very meticulous at every single council meeting by asking department heads a ton of questions so that you're very well-versed. I'm actually surprised that you chose a public forum to actually let everybody know that you don't know all the answers to 99 percent of the questions."
The mayor should be ashamed of himself. He is an embarrassment to himself and to our community. Hiremath has maybe 1/2 the knowledge of Bill Garner when it comes to Oro Valley issues, and has proven himself to be a stooge of the Special Interest Groups that got him barely elected.
Read what the Az Star has to say about this issue here.
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/northwest/article_539e5b00-57a9-54c2-a56a-6f66e8776fb4.html
20 comments:
To be "ashamed" of one's self, one must have some capacity for thinking of others and then evaluate your actions/position.
I'd say hizzoner is lacking in the introspection area.
If I remember correctly, Hiremath was also very rude to Lynne St. Angelo (she was mentioned in the AZ Star article) after she spoke out against raising the utility tax during the May 4th council meeting. I remember thinking...well, there goes Hiremath, showing "respect" again.
I think we should change his name from Mayor Hiremath to Mayor Highertaxes.
Also, I was there when an individual spoke against the 2% Utility Tax increase, stating that the 5 Oro Valley schools in the Amphi School District have to pay the Tax and showed the Council a letter she received from the Amphi School Board showing that information. They paid $37,000.00 for the year, which is being taken away from the classroom and all Ms. Snider would do is roll her eyes and give the speaker a snide smile, which she did to several of the speakers. She apparently is NOT for the Oro Valley school children as she has lead the residents to believe!!!
I was also at the Council meeting when Council Member Garner was kind enough, to explain the finances behind the Budget and was AGAST when the Mayor, so rudely chastised Mr. Garner.
The Mayor apparently was not capable of giving a thorough presentation (as another individal presented it),or had the understanding of the finances behind the Budget. His rude commentary showed his lack of understanding.
The Mayor is being held hostage by the OV Police Dept.
Did anyone notice the OV Flyer in the last water bill?
The Mayor wants to increase the number to police officers to 2.5 per 1000. I do not know how he expects to fund these extra officers.
All he has to do to get more boots on the street is to call back the officers - which we are paying - from duties outside of Oro Valley.
He has made up his mind (or his mind was made up for him) and he will show NO respect when the tax payers question his police expansion plans.
This appeas as good a spot as any for my to insert myself back into the LOVE pool.
This recall is an the illconceived plan of a bunch of malcontents and whiners. It shows little respect for fiscal responsibility as this election will cost the taxpayers of Oro Valley unnecessarily.
In addition, a recall effort will further serve to divide the community. For two years proiir to the last election we evidenced what a divided community can bring to our community.
We have regularly scheduled recall votes every two years.
Those behind the recall should bow their heads in shame. This is not something of which you can be proud.
Omygod, Don Cox,you have resurfaced...
Not all the taxpayers are rich, have other income...investments are not doing well and I guess there are exceptions :)
I remember working for Al Kunisch and was a fool.....
Now why is it that the people I vote for always change. Joe Hornat and Mary Snider have said that they will not raise taxes (previous to being elected) and now they change.
And then there is the "sheep issue"...why does Joe Hornat follow whatever Mr. Solomon wishes?
And I guess Ms. Snider is just enjoying the adoration of her fellowes....Solomon and Waters.
Here is my motto Mr. Cox:
THOUSANDS FOR RECALL ELECTIONS
NOT ONE CENT FOR TAKE HOME VEHICLES
I will mail you a bumper sticker forthwith.
Well! Well! Cox is back. This time preaching to us "malcontents & whiners."
The audacity of this group to cost the taxpayers of Oro Valley.
After all, the money spent on this potential recall could have been used to hire another dozen cops.
Shame on the "malcontents & whiners."
How did I ever let you talk me into being one of your fiscally irresponsible group?
Woe is me!
After all, what right to you have to try and eliminate two of "The Gang of Five" that constantly showed no concern for the people of Oro Valley?
Shame! Shame!
It's kind of good to be back. In the order received in my e-mail....
Ferlin...So far, with your reply, you have yet to identify an issue for which a recall of an elected official is justified. You just whine. I am sorry that your investments haven't worked out for you. I don't know why those you vote for change. Maybe it is because you didn't listen very well in the beginning. Woe is you!!!
Nombe....I have missed your sharp pointed commentary. I don't really have a strong position on the take home vehicles as I am not an experienced police administrator. However on the surface it seems somewhat excessive. However, I would ask you if this (take home vehicles) is a sound basis for recalling an elected official? I think not.
And my dear friend artski....
Oh how I have missed you on the blog. It was so quiet and peaceful, civil, boring. You return and the crap (name calling, uninformed commentary, and general chaos among the naysayers) begins anew.
Once again I will ask, what is it in your reply that justifies a recall of elected officials? For once in your life present a position and leave the sarcasm and BS for the softball field.
Boy I missed this. Nothing like a recall to get the blood up.
Post on my friends, post on!!
Cox writes with his standard non-sensible arrogance---
"Once again I will ask, what is it in your reply that justifies a recall of elected officials? For once in your life present a position and leave the sarcasm and BS for the softball field."
My response----for starters---
The recall of Hornat & Snider is based on, among other things:
1) Appointing Developer Steve Solomon to the vacant council seat in lieu of 18 other candidates, most of whom were 10 times more qualified. (Solomon has proved to be a disaster for the people.)
2) Killing the Police Management Study that probably would have told us that the Oro Valley Police Dep't budget is too damn bloated, being almost 50% of the whole town's budget.
3) Trying to balance the budget at the expense of the people of Oro Valley, by doubling the Utility Tax, instead of looking to cut cut frivolous expenses.
4) Refusing to cut back on 68 police take home vehicles---many going well beyond the OV border.
5) Not cutting back on giving the employees 100% benefit on their health care. (Great for the employees. Not great for the OV taxpayers.
6) Cutting out The Coyote Run Bus Service---a service used predominately by our senior citizens & disabled. (That was a disgrace.)
So cut the BS cox, and face the facts.
Be pleased that Hiremath & his other two cronies, Waters & Solomon weren't subject to a recall.
Some seem to think that the utility tax increase is so insignificant that it is not worth discussing. Well that may be but for us the point is that the tax was supposed to be temporary and the ability of elected officials to tax at will seems to render them incapable of trying to live within a budget or make cuts to do so.
I was in line behind a old gent waiting to pick up his prescription and when he was told his insurance would not pick up the cost of the med's and he would have to pay he was troubled. So for some a few dollars could mean breakfast cereal for a week or some medicine, etc. And for politicians to compare that cost to a cup of Starbucks makes me angry and sad.
OVOT,
If you have a problem with those who "show little respect for fiscal responsibility" then you should be first in line to sign the recall petitions!
Is it fiscally responsible to allow take-home vehicles for police officers who don't even live in Oro Valley? It is fiscally responsible to pay 100% of employee health insurance? Is it fiscally responsible to give all employees a paid day off for their birthday?
Now what about being socially and morally responsible? Is it socially and morally responsible to cut services and programs for the elderly and disabled so that you can continue to offer perks to town employees?
You don't like things that cost the taxpayers "unnecessarily." Take home vehicles, free coffee, paid birthdays off, 100% paid medical insurance.....
All of that is UNNECESSARY.
Hi art.....
I will provide a response to most of your points at this time. I doubt they will satisfy you but I have yet to find anything that would.
1. Steve Solomon was appointed to fill a seat vacated by your best friend Salette Latas who I believe you will now admit was less than a model citizen. You will have every chance to recall him in short order. His appontment does not, in my opinion, warrant a recall of Hornat and Snider. I fail to see the connection.
2. The key word in your statement is "probably". We don't know what the study would have produced. What we DO KNOW is that it was expensive and we are the safest city (of our size) in Arizona and public safety is a prime driver of citizen satisfaction and economic development.
3.I believe there was a rather long laundry list of cuts that were implemented by Town Staff. The Utility Tax was just one measure used to balance the budget. As Bill Adler said in the Town Council meeting, (I paraphrase) We signed up for a first rate community, and there are costs associated with remaining a first rate community.
4. I am gathering information on what other local governments do as it relates to take home vehicles and will share that with you later. Many employees of the county take vehicles home including law enforcement. The qualifier that ours go outside the Town limits is of no consequence as town employees are allowed to live anywhere.
5. I have asked the Town HR manager for some information on the benefit question and will have that shortly. However the number of employees that receive totally free healthcare benefits is relatively small.
6. The service provided to our seniors and disabled persons was REPLACED by another service. The service was not eliminated however the cost was. I think that is fiscally responsible.
So I have "cut the BS" with some facts. There is more to come but the bottom line is that the recall is nothing more than (to use one of your historically favorite descriptions)"sour grapes" by the exact people who were soundly defeated in the last election. Rather than take it like good solid citizens and make your points in the next election (if there are any to be made) you (pl) throw yourselves on the floor like spoiled children and kick and scream.
And yes, that is shameful.
OVOT: Thank you for your post.
Here are a few points to consider.
Just because some towns allow a certain number of take home vehicles, that does not translate that OV must follow other, bad, examples. Take home vehicle policy should reflect that only a limited number of "on call" or mission essential officers should be allowed a vehicle. If an officer resides more than, say 21.5 miles, from Oro Valley it would be hard to claim that he/she was "on call" in that it would take far too much time to respond to a emergency call.
I don't want to resurface the sad l'affaire Latas, however I will say that only the Taliban and other crypto-fundamentalists, attempt to control women to the extent of the FORMER town council.
I would be VERY interested in the exact percentage of town employees who receive full health care benefits. As a former government employee, I always paid a share of my health care benefits and I do not see why ALL OV employees cannot do the same.
cox--- Your "facts" on my 6 points turned out to be:
1)Your opinion.
2) "We don't know"
3) Bill Adler's opinion
4)"I'm gathering information"
5) "I have asked the HR Mgr for some information"
6)The Coyote Run was "REPLACED" by
another service.
Easy for you to say, as you're not one of the disabled that find this "replacement service" hardly comparable.
Your response was just more more Horse Manure. Give it up. You're looking even more foolish than usual with this "crap!"
Nombe...Some day if you would like to open a good bottle of pinot noir or a cab and chat about our wonderful Town, let me know. Your responses are typically insightful.
I present the fact about take home vehicles implemented by other agencies not because I necessarily agree with the policy but others seem to think that Oro Valley is the only government entity that employs this practice. It is relatively common. You never hear people bitch about their property taxes and reference the county take home vehicles. Pima County is by far the leader of the 'tax cartels'.
It just intrigues me that it is such a big deal here.
I am not sure I totally understand your Latas/previous Town Council comment. That's where the bottle of red would be beneficial!!:-)
As soon as I get the Town info I will pass it along.
Have a great Memorial Day. Please remember those who have sacrificed so that we can enjoy the freedom of open dialog about our government.
Art.....Take just a moment and compare your response to that of Nombe's. There is a lesson to be learned there.
And yes I did present my opinion of some items. I knod of thought thats what we did here.
But there were some "DO KNOW" things. And I am the first to admit that I don't have all of the facts at my fingertips but I am willing to take the effort to find them. I also take the effort because I continue to learn more about our community and our region. I do that in lieu of just sitting in a vacuum and spouting rhetoric as others do. The new service that replaced Coyote Run is probably less 'personal'. But I suggest that it is as effective and get's the job done. That's what matters.
OVOT,
So you "fail to see the connection" of why the choice of Solomon warrants a recall. I will connect the dots for you. It's because Latas won that seat with more votes than any prior council member. The voters had spoken...in huge numbers! And what did Snider and Hornat (and Waters and Hiremath) do? They appointed someone who is the exact opposite of Latas to fill her vacated position, effectively telling the citizens of OV that we could kiss their butts. THIS was their first big decision and it was a DEFINING moment in the history of this council. They were letting us know that they had no intention of representing the citizens.
You said, "I believe there was a rather long laundry list of cuts that were implemented by Town Staff." Key words: "Believe" and "long laundry list." I also heard Mayor Highertaxes and Snider say that they had cut everything that could be cut, yet NO ONE has offered an actual "laundry list" of those items. If they're so confident that they cut everything possible, then they should be happy to provide an itemized list of those cuts.
"There are costs associated with remaining a first-rate community." Funny you didn't say that when Zinkin was falsely accused of promoting a property tax!
Regarding take-home vehicles. "The qualifier that ours go outside the Town limits is of no consequence as town employees are allowed to live anywhere." The reason that this is a hot-button issue is because we were told that the reason for allowing take-home vehicles was so that in the event of a major emergency, the police response time would be much quicker. Yes, I feel very confident knowing that the police could arrive within 45 minutes of a major emergency. If it's about expediency, doesn't it make more sense to only allow take-home vehicles for police living within a 10-mile radius or so?
And my favorite quote: "Rather than take it like good solid citizens and make your points in the next election...you throw yourselves on the floor like spoiled children and kick and scream."
You just described your friends in the Tea Party!
Victorian Cowgirl,
Your post is brilliant, passionately rendered, captures the voters' divining rod
for constituent friendly politicians and leaves nothing to add.
Kudos!
Post a Comment