The Politics Of The Recall Run To The 2014 Elections

Yesterday, in our posting "Hiremath Orchestrating Zinkin Recall", we spoke of Mayor Hiremath's lead role in the Council Member Zinkin recall attempt. We identified the reason he is going after Zinkin.

However, we did not state that it is imperative that the majority and their special interest friends, the Oro Valley Police Officers Association ("OVPOA") and the development community, open Zinkin's seat for election.

The recall is not about Zinkin. Its never been about Zinkin.  The recall is about opening a council seat for election.   Zinkin's recall is a "means to that end." The end goal is to reduce the minority from 3 to 2 on the 7-member council, opening 4 seats, plus a Mayor, for election in 2014.

Its about continuing absolute control of Oro Valley.

On January 1, Thelma Grimes, editor of the local advertising circular, published her opinion on Oro Valley council matters.  The piece speaks mostly of the recall effort and of some of the assertions against Zinkin.  Grimes made one significant observation:

"On the minority side, councilmembers Brendan Burns, Mike Zinkin and Bill Garner are often a vote short of winning on issues from the budget to spending and management of the Oro Valley Police Department." 

She is a bit wrong.  The minority is always a vote short. This is because the majority-4 never break rank.

What Grimes fails to state is that it is precisely because the minority is one vote short of winning on all issues that majority have to get rid of Zinkin!  Zinkin is the most outspoken of the three minority members.

The majority are up for election in November.  If they lose just one seat to the minority view, then they minority will be the majority.  Priorities could change.  For example:

• There could be a study of police operations and the department itself could be shifted from reporting to council to reporting to the town manager.   
• There could be more stringent  enforcement of Oro Valley's sign codes. 
• There could be interpretation to the general plan as a policy statement that is to be followed, not one that is to be "worked-around".   
• There could be a revitalization of Oro Valley's investment in is social infrastructure (Have you seen Steampump Ranch lately?  Its an embarrassment.)  
• There would not be a "jump on the bandwagon" approach to economic development, an approach which puts "current market demand" above all other decision criteria. 

These are different priorities than those displayed during 4-years of council control of the majority-4. Their priority is economic development and protecting the police department.

If the majority and their special interests can get rid of Zinkin, however, then they will have a better chance of keeping the status quo. What is the status quo? As one reader shared with us:

"As tough as 2013 has been in different ways for each of us, I think it's been a tough year for Oro Valley.  Many would look at the mild surplus in the budget, and be pleased; I look at the deficit in social programs, and am disappointed.  Many would highlight the aquatics center, and be pleased.  I look at the decline in quality of service at our Library ( the transfer of which contributed in part to the dollars for the swimming pool ) and feel let down... Many would look at Securaplane and be satisfied with growth; I look at the very ordinary architecture of a very highly visible structure, and wonder what happened to our "scenic corridors". Many would note "signature" events, such as the El Tour, and be happy with the influx of tourist money.  I look at the disgraceful condition of Steam Pump Ranch and the piecemeal approach to the Naranja Town Site, and wonder "what could have been".

2014 is a year in which the owners of Oro Valley, you, will have the opportunity change the town's priories, if you wish to do so.   The loss of a valuable member of our council and a seat that today, truly does belong to the people, will make that change much more difficult to achieve.
---