Guest View: Mike Zinkin - Where Are Our Elected Town Representatives?

In the 2022 Mayor/Council election, the main focus was development. Developers and investors piled money into the campaigns of the challengers, thereby allowing for the incumbents to make development a major issue. The candidate forum put on by the Chamber of Commerce also focused on the development issue. To illustrate, there were at least five questions asked about the Marketplace and not one question about water or the ADA issue at the Community Center.

Now the question is, what are the re-elected incumbents going to do that might be different from what their challengers would have done? We have already seen apartments and hotels approved in the Marketplace. What are they going to do with the two rental developments proposed around Safeway? What are they going to do about the proposed recreational use requested by the Nazarene Church?

We have already witnessed how there is no concern for the desires of the citizens, when money is spent on a pump track and splash pad, which the vast majority of residents did not want. We have already seen them ignore the need for ADA compliance at the Community Center and at Pusch Ridge tennis courts. We have seen wanton/reckless spending justified by the fact that the loan on the Parks and Recreation bond was a small percentage. Do we even know how much the upgrades and maintenance at Preserve at Vistoso is going to cost us?

Have they ever said “no” to staff? Have they ever questioned or verified what staff tells them? These four were elected to represent the entire Town, but I wonder…just who/what are they representing?

---

Mike Zinkin and his wife have lived in Oro Valley since 1998. He served on the Oro Valley Development Review Board from 2005-2009, the Board of Adjustment from 2011-2012, and the Town Council from 2012-2016. He was named a Fellow for the National League of Cities. He was a member of the NLC Steering Committee for Community and Economic Development and a member of the Arizona League of Cities Budget and Economic Development Committee. He was an Air Traffic Controller for 30 years. Mike has a Bachelor’s degree in history and government from the University of Arizona and a Master’s degree in Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education from California State University, Northridge.

Guest View-Mike Zinkin: New Council Majority Has Kept Its Promises

Tonight, the Oro Valley Town Council will meet. The Council has been in the usual August recess. For at least the last 8 years, there have been no Council meetings scheduled in August. This might be a good time to look back and reflect on how this new Council majority is doing.

The last election had two major areas of concern: First, the golf dilemma; and second, the disregard for the General Plan and the rampant approval of development. This new majority was elected, I believe, because the majority of voters felt that these new council members could bring a change to what was happening.

So, how is the new council majority doing? 
Since taking their seats on council last November, only one development application has come forward. That was the development of the Town Centre at Oracle and Pusch View Lane. This application initially came forward during the past regime. The new majority sent the applicant back to amend their request and reduce the density and grading requirements of the property. Although they might have gotten a better deal, the applicant came back with an amended request. This would not have happened if the new majority had not been elected.

All Major General Plan Amendments must, by State law, be submitted prior to April 30 of the calendar year, and heard by the Council before the end of the year. This year there were NO General Plan Amendments submitted. It appears that the development community has gotten the message that this new majority will adhere to the wishes of the voter approved General Plan.

Developers have plenty of entitlements that were issued by the last majority. There is approximately an 8 – 10 year supply of homes that already have entitlements from the past majority.

Another big concern was the annexation of the State land on the west side of town. The Citizens did not want the State plan for small lots and 3,000 homes. The Town has received word that the State has closed its Tucson office and will pursue the annexation at another time. Do you think that the State would withdraw or delay its plans if the new majority had not been elected?

So how about golf? 
The majority is being criticized for questioning the numbers that they are getting from staff. After all, the prior majority NEVER questioned staff. However, there is not one member of the staff that has any experience in municipal golf. They are receiving their numbers from Troon. Do you think Troon might have a dog in this fight?

This majority is not going to make a rash decision, a decision that has not been vetted and thoroughly researched. This is, without question, the most important decision that the Council will make. There are millions of your dollars at stake. Taking time to ensure that all the facets of the decision are completely studied is why you elected them. Let them do their job.

I can pretty much assure you that no matter what decision they make on golf there will be a group of residents who will disagree and probably initiate a recall. This is the atmosphere that these 4 newly elected public servants live under. They need your continued support.

Changing Of The Guard Continues At Tonight's Council Meeting

Tonight's council meeting is marked by a continuation of a conversion from the Hiremath years of leadership to the Winfield years. Here are some of the changes that will be discussed.

Volunteer Commission Liasons
The consent agenda presents an assignment of council members to town volunteer commissions. The role of the council member is to attend meetings of these commissions and to provide feedback to council on important developments. The assignments are:

• Board of Adjustment: Solomon 
• Historic Preservation Commission: Solomon 
• Parks Recreation Advisory Board: Barrett 
• Planning and Zoning Commission: Rodman
• Stormwater Utility Commission: Jones-Ivey 
• Water Utility Commission: Piña 
• Amphitheater School District: Jones-Ivey 
•  Legislative District: Nicolson 
• Visit Tucson: Nicolson 
• Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce: Nicolson 
• Pima Association of Governments: Winfield
• Regional Transportation Authority: Winfield

There is also a liaison responsible for establishing the agenda for council meetings. It proposed that Council Member Jones-Ivey serve that role through March 1, 2019.

Volunteer Commission Term Limits

Members of Oro Valley's volunteer commissions may serve up to 2 or 3 year terms. A member can serve a third term at the discretion of the council. The council will discuss a proposed resolution by Mayor Winfield and Council Member Barrett that there be no discretionary third term. In addition, the proposal would end any current third term commission membership at the end of this year.

Council Member Barrett mentioned to us during our October interview that she was hopeful of stimulating greater community involvement by making more volunteer opportunities available. This resolution would do just that.

Nineteen 2019 Town Council Meetings

Also on the agenda is approval of the 2019 town council  meeting schedule. There are 19 of these. The next will be January 9th.

---

New Council Installed Tonight... Big Challenges Ahead

The installation
For the first time in 8-1/2 years there will be four new council members.
Tonight, at 6pm in Town Council Chambers, Mayor Joe Winfield, and Council Members Joyce Jones-Ivey, Melanie Barrett, and Josh Nicolson will be seated at the table. We've published a personal profile about each of them this past week.

Huge challenges ahead
The new council faces many challenges. We have discussed some of these in the past several weeks.

• Expansion of Oro Valley's boundary
• Large number of proposed general plan amendments and zoning changes
• Bringing back that "small town feeling"
• Oro Valley's ticking development time bomb
• Empty store fronts and the impact on Oro Valley's major source of operating revenue: The sales tax
• Oro Valley's de facto property tax: Your Water Bill
• Oro Valley's bloated budget
• The money-sucking Town of Oro Valley Country Club (a/k/a The Community Center)
• Lame-duck decisions like the zoning amendment to the "Ford Property" to allow residential property; the extension of the Troon Country Club management agreement to December, 2019, adding a total of $60,000 in fee due Troon; and proposed bonds to fund a police substation and the water utility

Biggest challenge is to work together
Despite the magnitude of these challenges, the biggest challenge will be within the council itself. Can they work together in the best interest of the community?

We have no doubt that the newcomers will be able to do so. They are individuals. They will all act in accordance with what they believe is best for the community. They will disagree on some things but they will never be disagreeable.

But what of the three holdover members?

They have 2 years left in their term.  They ran as a team in 2016, supporting the agenda of the former council. They have distinguished themselves by voting for general plan amendments, zoning changes, a property tax, a bonding to pay for improvements to the golf course, and for developers in general.

What will the three Hiremath holdovers do when faced with decisions for which they must prepare? What will the three Hiremath holdovers do when they have to engage in a logical and not a bullying discussion? What will the three Hiremath holdovers do when their job requires more than attending events for photo ops?

Time will tell.

It begins tonight!
---

Editorial ~ The El Conquistador Purchase from HSL appears to be the most Irresponsible Decision in the History of Oro Valley

On tonight’s Town Council agenda (Wednesday, June 21, 2017) is a discussion for possible action to amend the Fiscal Year 16/17 budget before it expires on June 30th. The Finance Director is requesting that the Council allow for a reallocation of an expected $2 million dollar General Fund surplus. What does this mean? If the Council approves this reallocation, instead of adding the $2 million surplus to the General Fund Contingency, they will instead add only $300,000.

Here’s the plan:
The Finance Director is requesting that the Council take $350,000 of the surplus and direct it to the Community and Recreation Center Fund (CRC). Keep in mind how the Mayor and his minions have stated time and time again how there’s no need to worry because, "We have a fund to cover all the golf and community center expenses.” That fund is the CRC which is funded with the half-cent sales tax increase. (The remaining allocations are explained at the end of this article).

The Council report states:

"Based on year-end budget projections presented in the April financial reports, it is estimated that the Community Center Fund will end the year with an estimated deficit of $285,000, including the $120,000 loan repayment transfer to the General Fund. Contributing factors to this deficit are mainly water costs due to unseasonably warm and dry weather conditions this spring and golf member dues revenues trending under budget. Staff is recommending a transfer of $350,000 from the estimated year-end General Fund surplus amount of nearly $2 million into this fund to close the deficit and provide a minimal positive fund balance to begin FY 2017/18.”

Robbing Peter to pay Paul
In other words, the half-cent sales tax is NOT covering the expenses as promised. Therefore, in order to begin the new fiscal year with a positive CRC Fund balance and to meet this year’s $120,000 loan repayment obligation back to the General Fund Contingency, they want to transfer $350,000 from the General Fund into the CRC Fund.

(As a reminder, in 2015, the Council borrowed $1.2 million from the General Fund Contingency to start the CRC Fund with a promise to repay it at $120,000 per year for 10 years. Due to lack of funds, the Town Council already reneged on the first year’s payment in 2016. Now, in 2017, still lacking the funds, they want to repay it by transferring money from one account to another.)

What has this foolish purchase cost the citizens of Oro Valley so far?

• $1 million to purchase the Community Center and Golf Courses
• $1.2 million taken from the General Fund Contingency to start the CRC Fund
• $350,000 in additional General Fund revenues to keep the CRC Fund in a "minimal positive balance”
• $506,710 in additional sales tax revenues in FY 14/15
• $2,030,750 in additional sales tax revenues in FY 15/16
• $1,811,207 in additional sales tax revenues so far in FY 16/17 (through April 30th)

TOTAL COST: $6,898,667

It’s a Matter of Trust
Remember, these are the same irresponsible people who are now asking Oro Valley citizens to approve a Secondary Property Tax to fund ball fields. They actually expect us to trust them with another $17 million dollars in light of this record?
………………………………

Addendum
Additionally (but unrelated to the Community Center) the Town is also requesting $300,000 to be allocated to the Self-Insurance Benefit Fund which is expecting a year-end deficit of $200,000-$250,000 plus an estimated $1,073,051 to refund excess employee contributions made into the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS). This will provide lump-sum reimbursement payments to the Town’s PSPRS members. You can read the entire Executive Summary by clicking here:

The Evil Trickster of Oro Valley

---
The Evil Trickster ("The Trickster") hides in the shadows.   The Trickster's goal is to eliminate town officials and managers, mostly, but not always, when they oppose the Oro Valley Police Union.  The Trickster's tactic is to "make it personal."

The Trickster is the evil.  The Trickster is also a coward. The Trickster never reveals who they are.  We know, though.

The Trickster's dirty tricks are effective.

In the summer of 2009, The Trickster used a dirty trick to force the resignation of then Town Manager David Andrews.  In 2010, The Trickster used dirty tricks and The Trickster's police buddies to eliminate a viable candidate from running for public office.

Now, The Trickster is at it again.

For the past two months, The Trickster has been using dirty tricks in an attempt to remove Council Member Mike Zinkin fro his duly elected office.   On Friday, in a most recent effort, The Trickster used an old trick to personally hurt one of the council members.  This is a member other than Council Member Zinkin.

The Trickster never focuses on the record of the person. The Trickster focuses on the personal life. The Trickster tries to get to their "significant others" and their spouses of those they attack.  The method of The Trickster is anonymity and innuendo.

Here is The Trickster's track record...

The Anonymous Letter Trick I

In 2009, The Trickster wrote an anonymous letter to council members. The letter alleged personal improprieties on the part of Town Manager Andrews.   Art Segal, LOVE publisher at that time, wrote: "I have seen the letter. although the anonymous letter writer had full intentions of causing David Andrews a problem. There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the letter other than malicious innuendos."   Malicious is the trademark of the Dirty Trickster.

David Andrews was the only Oro Valley Town Manager to ever oversee a police budget.  He did his job. He became the target of the police union, the group that negotiates the memorandum of understanding between the town and the police. The memorandum of understanding codifies wages, working terms and conditions.

The anonymous letter swayed the last leaning council member to vote to terminate David's service.  The Trickster won.  

Six months later, the The Trickster got a second victory when a council member resigned because that council member did not want a personal relationship to be an issue in their service to the community.  The council appointed a developer to council, Steve Solomon.  They council is then 5-2 in favor of any and all general plan amendments. Developers, another of the trickster's constituencies, and the police union had won.

The 10-Year Old Domestic Event Trick

In March, 2010, The Trickster used given a 10-year old domestic event, as documented in a police report,  that involved a council candidate. The candidate was told that the event will be revealed to the press if the candidate doesn't quit the race. The candidate discussed it with spouse.  The spouse said: " Quit." The candidate did. The trickster has won again.

The Outrageous "Potty Mouth" Trick

It is December, 2013.  The Trickster was faced with the prospect of losing absolute iron-fisted control of council with the 2014 Election.

The Trickster, teaming with Oro Valley Mayor Satish Hiremath, targeted Council Member Mike Zinkin for recall.  Zinkin, though elected by a wide margin in the primary, had the fewest votes of winners.  The number of recall signatures is based on the number of votes in the primary.  Zinkin is targeted because his recall requires the fewest number of signatures.  In addition, Hiremath considers Zinkin his political enemy because, among other items, Zinkin has filed open meeting law violations involving Hiremath.   The police union consider Zinkin their enemy.  Why? Because Zinkin actually does his job of asking questions regarding police spending.

The Trickster goes into action. He finds a few words that Zinkin has used in his first few months in office in 2012, long ago, really, and tries to convince Oro Valley voters that Zinkin is evil.  The Trickster embellishes these unremarkable events, suddenly becoming the bastion of propriety.

Again. The Trickster doesn't focus on Zinkin's record. The Trickster focuses on Zinkin personally.

The Anonymous Letter Trick II

Last week, The Trickster was at it again. This time The Trickster sent an anonymous letter with some other "information" to a person of importance in the life of one of the council members.  The mailing was sent merely to inflict personal damage on the council member.  It had nothing to do with the individual's record as a council member. It was strictly personal.
---
The Trickster needs to be stopped.  The Trickster is close to one or more members of council.  They can and should put a stop to The Trickster's diabolical schemes.  It is the council members and especially Mayor Hiremath that need to bring civility and respect back to Oro Valley. 
---

Oro Valley Town Council Rejects "Feathering Its Nest"

The Oro Valley Valley town Council unanimously rejected voting itself a defined benefit pension.  This vote occurred at the December 4 council meeting.  The seven members of this council was the council members that could have participated in the Arizona state defined benefit pension program. The opportunity to do so would have cost the town $45,000 plus an annual contribution of $18,000.

As we previously reported, the state of Arizona has changed its pension program from a defined benefit plan to a defined contribution plan.  The difference between the two plans is:  Under a defined benefit plan, the pensioner receives a specific sum for a specific term, usually lifetime.  Under a defined contribution plan, the employer, in this case the town government, matches, in some fashion, the amount that an employee contributes to the plan.  The employee directs the investment of the plan into "authorized" investment vehicles.

Council Member Snider spoke at the meeting: "One of the reason's the State changed was that defined benefit plans are very expensive. That's the reason they are going to a defined contribution plan.  So, I can't support grandfathering in any council...because it will cost our residents more money in the long run...I really can't support this. I think it's fiscally irresponsible."

How abused have we, the citizens, been of the Arizona's public employee pension program? "Arizonans are propping up public-pension systems that allow civil servants to retire in their 50s, receive annuities that can exceed $100,000 a year, and collect pensions while staying on the same job." (Source)

The State's move to a defined contribution plan puts it in-line with the practices of most commercial enterprises.  However, the State has granted itself (it's employees) a very rich employer portion of the contribution, equivalent to 25% of the employees' contribution.  According to town manager Greg Caton: "This is very rich" in comparison to non government practice, which, we observe, is generally never more than 10%.  There are limits to the amount an employee can contribute annually. The 2014 limit is $17,500 plus one time catch-up limits that could amount to another $17,500.  (Source)
---

Oro Valley Boards and Council Urged To Provide Reasons In Public To Support Their Decisions

---
On June 19, resident Bill Adler spoke in the end of meeting "call to audience."(see video)  Adler urged the town council clearly state on the public record the reasons why they make a decision.

"The lack of understanding of town actions is more prevalent," noted Adler. He continued: "People mistrust government and this is why.  They don't think you're clear and when you're not clear they assume that there is something going on that they ought to know about."

Adler feels that such "openness" is essential for the 2015 General Plan: "There is only one item that gets ratified and that is the General Plan. This is the one opportunity to gain comprehension of Town intent ( not commitment ). If the Town seems reluctant, or is unable to provide comprehension, the public can, and should, vote against the proposed General Plan. "

In June, Oro Valley Planner David Williams sent a letter to the Board of Appeals discussing the same need for public explanations of decisions:

 "It is important to publicly create a clear and defensible record of your decisions. Basing your decisions on whether all five criteria are met is essential to this function and I ask that you participate in creating a clear and defensible public record by referring to these criteria. As a quasi-judicial body, the record of your actions is important to all parties concerned. Making a record of your findings and sound decisions is both essential and required." 

This letter followed training given to the Board. This training followed what we we felt was a completely unjustified decision to obliterate a hillside to benefit a developer.  In this instance, the Board applied some of the 5 criteria required for granting a variance, ignored others, and added an "it ain't no big deal and it helps the developer" reason.

In fairness to the Board, "Board of Adjustment considerations are to be based upon specific criteria, but how those criteria apply to a given piece of property will vary from one well trained person to another. That is simply because there is a degree of subjectivity involved."

We are the public. We are perplexed by some decisions that are made.  That is why, for example, the debate on where the police department should report was so important.  Each council member explained their rationale.  We now understand their thinking.  

We, the public, sometimes assume a nefarious motive underlying the decision, as Adler note, when no rational is presented.  Indeed, there may be no such such motive.  Since none was presented, however, we assume "the worst."

We prefer not to guess what the rationale is.  We'd like the rationale behind decisions explained; explained, not only by council, but by all town boards and commissions.  If, for example, there are 5 criteria for granting a variance, then weed like the application discussed in relation to the 5 criteria. There is need for an applicant "dog and pony show" only if it relates to one of the 5 criteria.  We'd like our boards, commissions and council to focus on the facts; to present their rationale; to "keep us from guessing."
---

The Debate: Where Should The Oro Valley Police Department Report? (Part 4)

---
This week, in 3 parts, we have discussed the background, and the pro's and cons regarding where the Oro Valley Police Department should report: To town council or to town manager?  Today, part 4, is our analysis.

The management concept: "If it ain't broke, don't break it" was replaced by"If it ain't broke, break it" in 1986.

Successful businesses, those that thrive over time. break the the way they do even the most successful things in order to develop new ways that are more efficient, more attuned to the times, and more applicable to the current situation.

This idea was expoused by Drs. Michael Hammer and James Champi of MIT in their 1986 text: "Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution." Their basic tenet is one that is universally accepted in business circles:  "If you don't change, if you don't reegineer your business, they our business will die.  This is because being wedded to the way you do things today blinds you of your need to change to meet the needs of tomorrow.  You will become inefficient. You will not survive.

So, on this score, we would give the argument to Council Member Burns and not to Council Member Hornat because Mr. Burns' asserts current management theory.

Management By Consensus Does Not Work

Management by consensus can work when there is agreement among all parties regarding the policies that should exist and the operations that should follow these policies.  It is rare that this type of consensus exists in any enterprise. It certainly does not exist in Oro Valley.  This is why it is a best practice that a department report to one individual.

As Mr. Zinkin's research revealed, a department whose functions are critical, like public safety, reports to one individual, the town manager.  It is a best practice for "99.9% of jurisdictions."

It is best management theory also that a department head report to one individual, not to a committee.  This is a universally accepted business organization principle.

So, on this score, we give the argument to Mr. Zinkin, and not to Mayor Hiremath, because, in most instances, and certainly we are seeing it in Oro Valley, management by consensus does not work.

The police department does report to the town manager for operating purposes

This argument was put forth by Mayor Hiremath.  If this is the case, the why is the council having the debate?  If this is the case, then, the council must have already agreed that, for operating purposes, the department reports to the town manager?

We find that the Mayor's assertion is factually unsubstantiated.  There is no written agreement among the council, the Chief of Police, and the town manager regarding this. There is not vote of council, as there must be, delegating this responsibility to the town manager.  There is no addendum to Chief Sharp's contract that states this is the case.  As the situation currently stands, the department can and should follow the law, reporting to council for all matters.

A handshake agreement is simply not sufficient to substantiate this argument.

This argument is dismissed because it can not be factually supported.

This is a contract issue

We agree with Council Member Snider that the Chief's contract calls for the department to report to council on all matters. We agree that the contract and the town code are in compliance.  Making a change would require amending the Chief's contract.

This argument has factual support

It is a political calculation --- Oversight by the town manager removes the department from Oro Valley politics 

We've analyzed these two arguments.  Council Member Waters asserts that there will be politics involved regardless of where the police department reports. Council Member Garner asserts that moving the police department oversight function to the town manager will result in less politics at council level.

We think that both arguments have merit, though neither is factually provable.  We call this argument a "draw'.

Council does not meet to discuss police department operations at any time

Council Member Burns asserts that the council does not oversee police operations.  If they did, he asserts correctly, they would have to do so in open meeting.  The record of this discussion would be in minutes of the town council meetings.   There is no such record, except for brief reports of department operating results in council meeting consent agendas.

We agree with Council Member Burns, the Council is not discussing police operations in any manner that would be considered sufficient oversight of the department.
---
So, you ask, who won the debate?

It really doesn't matter.

The Oro Valley Town Council is divided on this issue. Council Members are not going to change their positions.  A change in the reporting relationship of the Oro Valley Police Department will only occur if there is a change in Council Members. Even then, there is no guarantee that there will be a change.
---

The Debate: Where Should The The Oro Valley Police Department Report? (Part 3)

---
Monday, we published part 1 of this 4 part series on the debate of where the police department should report: To the town council, as is the present case, or to the town manager.  Yesterday, we presented the support provided by the prevailing side, those who want the department to continue to report to council.  Today, we continue by presenting the case for having the department report to the town manager.


The police department reports to the town manager in almost all arizona cities and towns

Council Member Mike Zinkin reported his extensive research regarding the reporting relationship of the police department in cities and towns.

Essentially, Zinkin noted, in almost all instances, the department reports to one person, and that person is the town or city manager.  In other words, a police department reporting to the town manager is a "best practice."

The council can not provide police department oversight unless it meets openly at a council meeting to discuss police operations

Council Member Burns observed that the code requires the council to oversee the operations of the department.  "The majority of the council has to give Chief Sharp direction. We have something in Arizona called the 'Open Meeting Law.' If Chief Sharp wants to do something...[as it now stands] he needs 4 of th 7 of us [to agree].  4 of 7 of us can not talk about this [outside of a council meeting] because it violates the law. To truly have a discussion and get consensus, we have to put this on the agenda, open it up to the public, and describe day to day operations if that is the direction we intend to take."

Simply put, in Burns' view, it is not feasible for the council to do this.

Council does not meet to discuss police department operations at any time. The council is simply not doing its job.

Burns further noted that the council has never discussed police operations at any of its meetings except if an item as on the "consent agenda."  "That's not day-to-day management," Burns observed.  He further noted that, even when they did discuss police operations during the special budget sessions, nothing was explored in detail.  There was no voting. There was no consensus.  Thus, for example, the departments "take home car" policy did not get properly inspected, according to Burns.

Best management practices stress clear guidance to subordinates

Further, when it comes to the "It ain't broke don't fix it" philosophy:  "It doesn't sit with me. I've never been a part of an effective organization that doesn't have good management that provides clear guidance to subordinates and insures that that guidance is implemented.  I don't think we are doing that as a council. Mr. Caton is more than capable and I think that is where it needs to be."

"Everyone needs a boss."

Council Member Garner observed: "It is totally inadequate to think 7 individuals [can oversee the operations of the department] and then we're going to majority vote things.... We've put it in our code. We are his (police chief) superior. Micromanaging... That's our job by code."

Oversight by the town manager removes the department from Oro Valley politics

Council Member Garner, who has been the brunt of criticism for 5 years because of his desire to actually do the job of overseeing the police department, as required by law, wants to discussion of the department from politics.  "We put the police chief [reporting to] the manager where 99.9%  jurisdictions do."  Referring to all member of council and the friction that occurs among them on the department: "Let's get the political nonsense out of it."

---
Tomorrow, in Part 4, we will present our analysis.
---

Council Votes 4-3 To Retain Police Current Reporting Relationship

---
The Oro Valley Town Council voted 4-3 to retain the current reporting relationship of the Chief of Police.  Chief Sharp does and will continue to report to council and not to the town manager, as is the practice in most communities.

The vote was split along the same 4-3 lines as many other council votes:

For:        Hiremath, Hornat, Snider and Waters.
                             Against: Burns, Garner and Zinkin

Those voting for no change supported their position using an: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."  Those voting for the change did so on the basis that the council in not now doing its legally mandated job of management oversight of the department.  In essence, by reporting to 7 people, the Department reports to no one.  Therefore, there is no effective oversight of its operations.

We will report more in depth on this Monday.
---

Oro Valley Adopts International Energy Codes

---

Last week, by a 6- 1 vote, the Oro Valley Town Council approved the family of international building codes as Oro Valley's code.  It includes the international energy codes (IECC).   Most council members did so without even reading all of the 700 plus pages that comprise the changes to Oro Valley's code.

One council member was unsure that the town staff had read all of the international and IECC code.

"I clearly do not have the time to go through these codes.  [Town staff] obviously are still trudging through them yourselves," noted Council Member Bill Garner.

Council Member Mike Zinkin noted that there were many things in the 700 pages of code that were not health and safety related.  He was referring to new energy restriction requirements.

Council Member Joe Hornat noted: “The energy thing causes me some grief.”

Council Member Garner spoke: "I’m still having heartburn and trouble over the … sustainability issue."

The "heartburn" some council members were having is this: For some, the code should focus solely on health and safety; and not mandating energy-related compliance.  For others, mandating energy-related compliance is something they feel the have the right to do based on the "general welfare" clause of the US Constitution.

In the end, only Council Member Zinkin voted against adopting the 700 pages of changes.   Two council members, Garner and Hornat, voted to approve the codes, after getting "assurances" from town staff that the code changes did not apply to existing structures.

Addressing town staff Garner noted: "Is there any way for there to be assurances for the public at least so that if something is found within the code that [town staff] weren't even aware of, that there could be some provisions written in there that there could be an appeal process that you can formally document as part of this motion..."

The response from town staff was that the code has a list of things that do not require permits and that pretty much covers anything that you are just replacing.

There was no appeal process added as part of the motion that carried.

So, you ask, why does all this matter?  Why are we so concerned?   Why should you be concerned?  After all, these regulations supposedly only impact new construction.  Let the new homeowner or those who chose to add a room suffer the burden of undue regulation.

It matters to us for two reasons. One, we will all be residents of Oro Valley, whether we own an existing home or a new home.  It is simply morally wrong to require owners of newly-built structures to suffer what some consider over-regulation and an intrusion on their property rights, while we sit idly by because the regulations do not impact us.

Second, the Council did not approve an energy element amendment to the general plan on December 11, 2012.  Yet, in one evening, without any voter approval, the IECC energy elements were added to Oro Valley code.  Town staff, supporters of the IECC codes, introduced the "energy amendment" as a code update.  And your council, trusting of town staff, and without actually doing their diligence, went along with it.

Rather than getting it right, the Oro Valley Town Council simply got it done.

Lazy. Embarrassing.  Far less that we deserve from our elected officials.
---

Marathon Meetings

---

On July 25, we posted: "More Frequent, Better Balanced Oro Valley Council Meetings Required." In it, we stated the following: "We've noticed an erratic pattern to the duration (in minutes at left) of Mayor Hiremath's 41 Town Council Meetings. The meetings have run from a low of 33 minutes (7-21-11) to a high of over 6 hours (12-7-11).


Last Wednesday's, the Mayor Hiremath led Oro Valley Town Council Meeting set a record.  It lasted almost 8 hours.  It started at 5 PM, continuing past midnight.  Incredible? It really does stand out:

Click to enlarge

Yes. The length of council meetings during the Hiremath years varies substantially. One can expect to be sitting in council from less than an hour to five hours. Occasionally, an even longer stay is required:

Click to enlarge

What difference does it make how long the council meetings run?

It makes a difference because Town Council meetings are open meetings. They are the time in which the Council makes its decisions.  Oro Valley governance is open to the public.

Unpredictably long meetings discourage public attendance. Waiting hours for your turn to comment in a public hearing is infeasible for most, so public hearing input is not heard. This, for example, happened with last Wednesday's public hearing on a possible general plan energy element addition.  The room was virtually empty when the topic was discussed six hours into the meeting.

Long, arduous meetings also reduce the effectiveness of council members.  Some are simply worn down after sitting for so many hours.  Council meetings should not be a personal endurance test!

Research has shown that an "ideal meeting length" of 45 minutes maximizes attention.  Its all "downhill" after that.  Obviously, Oro Valley Town Council meetings are going to run longer than that because they is so much to cover.

Perhaps, there should be a time limit.  Perhaps the meetings should be timed to run no longer than four hours.  Perhaps the mayor should schedule more meetings.  There were, after all, only 16 meetings in 2012!  There was no reason for him to cram three major general plan amendment requests, plus a ton of other decisions into one meeting in the month of December when two meetings are required.  Yes. We know it's the holiday season. Still, the business of the town must go on and thoughtful decisions must be made.

We repeat our call for: "More Frequent, Better Balanced Oro Valley Council Meetings."

Bits and Pieces

---
The Oro Valley Archery Range is now open for business.  It is located at the Naranja Town Site. The range is open for free use through the remainder of this year. Sponsorship opportunities are currently available:

• $150 Set of ten wheel stops for the parking lot
• $700 Bench 
• $1,000 Picnic table 
• $20,000 Shade structure

---
Proposed fees for the Oro Valley Archery Range to be implemented January 2, 2013, are as follows:

• Daily Fees: $5 per person per day
• Annual Pass : $60 – adult; $30 – student, 18 and under

Town Council will consider these fees at next weeks' council meeting.  It is listed as Item 5 on the regular agenda.
 ---
The 34-member Oro Valley Youth Advisory group held its first meeting in town council chambers on October 22. Anyone know what took place at the meeting?
---
For your reference, the following are the assignments that each council member has as liaison to town commissions and outside agencies:

Boards and Commissions

• Board of Adjustment                                 Mike Zinkin
• Conceptual Design Review Board             Lou Waters
• Historic Preservation Commission            Brendan Burns
• Parks and Recreation Advisory Board      Mary Snider
• Planning and Zoning Commission            Joe Hornat
• Stormwater Utility Commission                Bill Garner
• Water Utility Commission                        Joe Hornat 

Outside Agencies

• Amphitheater School District                  Mary Snider
• Imagine Greater Tucson                          Lou Waters
• Legislative District Joe Hornat MTCVB Brendan Burns
• Greater Oro Valley Chamber                  Satish Hiremath 
• Pima Association of Governments          Satish Hiremath
• Regional Transportation Authority        Satish Hiremath

---
This month's Oro Valley Economic Development Report lists the following as under development:

• The Joint (Oracle Crossing)
• Anam Inc (San Jose Plaza)
• GMG Chinese Bistro (Shops at Oro Vista)
• Alzheimers Care Facility (Villa Fatima [Sun City])

The report also notes planned phase 1 and 2 construction at San Dorado.  See our posting on Monday for more on this.

---

Mayor Hiremath: "Trust Is A Two-Way Street"

---


At last Wednesday's Oro Valley Town Council Meeting, Mayor Hiremath spoke on the concept of "trust." It is to him, unfathomable, that residents do not entirely trust their elected officials or the town's employees.  You can listen to his words in the video we have provided here.

Mayor Hiremath said he was "cranky" on the issue of trust. It annoyed him that a citizen, Shirl Lamonna, speaking at the hearing on the EEZ Innovation Park approval process,  cited "trust" as one reason they wanted public input to be a formal part of the process.

Ms. Lamonna had stated the following:  "One key goal of this plan is to Build trust through effective public outreach and communication. How should the Town grade itself on responsiveness to residents and building trust when we hear that you’re “trying to get rid of input”? That the zoning has already been approved - as if Staff can’t misinterpret codes? They’re human; they can make mistakes; and let’s not forget that they could be influenced by powerful developers. Happens all the time at all levels of government."

The statement seems quite reasonable to us; but it rankled Mayor Hiremath.  The Mayor lectured the council and attendees  at the meeting on "trust."  "Trust is a two way street," he said.   Lack of trust is "an insult to me."

When it comes to trust, our local elected officials are subject to a bit of Oro Valley history.

Many untrustworthy events have happened in the historical governance of Oro Valley.    People have lost trust.  The election of an official does not mean that everyone will automatically trust that individual.  That trust will be earned over time.  Maybe.

People feel more confident and trusting when they are involved than when they are not involved.  By being involved, they will see how trustworthy are our town officials and employees.

Perhaps it is Shirl Lamonna's concluding remarks that sum it best: "Please consider where community input fits with the new Oro Valley tagline. Is it in our nature to stifle pesky town residents or is it in our nature to value community participation?"
----

Council "Replaces" Attorney Tobin Rosen Because He Announced His Retirement

---
Last night, on a 4-3 vote, the town council replaced town attorney Tobin Rosen with an interim attorney.

Despite all the eloquent statements regarding Attorney Rosen and despite his own assurance to council that he will remain to help a transition,  it was clear the Mayor Hiremath and Council Member Snider, Waters, and Hornat were in favor of the motion.

Eloquently, Council Member Mike Zinkin noted that there was no reason to appoint an interim attorney until January.    Council Member Zinkin spoke eloquently regarding Mr. Rosen's performance for the town.

Member Burns concurred with Council Member Zinkin.    He also noted that "firing" someone because they retire is wrong.  They should continue their work until their retirement date, then move on with the thanks of the town. This is a common policy practice in industry and in the military.

Member Garner also concurred that Tobin Rosen should continue in his present role until his retirement date.

Tobin Rosen noted that his retirement will be effective as of January 3, and not sooner.  It is his intention to continue to work as town attorney.

Council Member Hornat and Mayor Hiremath disagreed.  They argued that the appointment of an interim attorney would make the transition  "easier".  Council Member Hornat noted his belief that employees who are leaving are not productive and should be relieved once they notice.  He even  suggested that the Council accept the retirement as of today. 

Appointing an interim attorney will cost the town added funds since they will likely give the interim attorney an interim raise.

The motion passed 4-3, with Council Member Zinkin, Burns and Garner voting "no."

In essence, Tobin Rosen was replaced because he had announced that he will retire on January. Rather then exhibit decency in thanking Tobin for his hard work for Oro Valley and allowing him to complete his commitments to the town, the four members of council who voted to replace him sent a clear statement to all in town who wish to leave or retire.  The message: "We don't trust you.  Leave now."  The result, people will simply quit their last day of work. They would be foolish to do otherwise.
---

How To Add An Item To An Oro Valley Council Meeting

---
Did you ever want to have an item discussed by council at a council meeting?  John Musolf did. Here's how its done:
---
Recently, as a citizen, I submitted via email to the Mayor, 6 council members, Town Clerk, and Town Attorney that contained two future agenda suggestions:

• Discuss the creation of a Formal Oro Valley “Code of Conduct and Ethics”
• Discuss and reconcile differences and discrepancies that may exist between the Town Code and Parliamentary Rules and Procedures.

As it turns out, there is no provision that allows a citizen to directly submit an item for addition to council meeting agenda. Simply put, if you want to add an item to the agenda for council consideration you must get two council members to put it on the agenda.

There are two documents that describe the process of creating the agenda.  One is the Town Code. This document can be found at the Oro Valley town web site. The other is a document called: Oro Valley Parliamentary Rules and Procedures. This document is not found on the web site.

According to town code, it is the town clerk who collects all pertinent information and prepares an agenda according to the order of business and furnish each council member, the mayor and the town attorney with a copy of the agenda and any material pertinent thereto.” (Town Code: Article 2-4)

The Parliamentary Rules and Procedures document describe how an agenda is formulated:

 “Agendas for Council meetings shall be prepared by the Agenda Committee, which shall be made up of the Mayor (or Vice-Mayor), Town Manager, Town Clerk, and one Councilmember, with review of the proposed final agenda by the Town Attorney. The council member shall be selected by the Council and his/her term shall last for three (3) months ending with the second Regular Council meeting of the third month and at which time a new Councilmember shall be selected.(Section 5.2.A)”

The sequence of the agenda is also detailed in section 5.2.  However, missing from this sequence is a discussion of how future agenda items are considered.  Further in the Parlimentary Rules and Procedures we find that:

 “Any Councilmember may request that an item be placed on a future agenda by contacting a member of the Agenda Committee. This provision applies to the Mayor and Councilmembers. However, if two (2) or more Councilmembers request that an item go on the agenda, then it shall be put on the agenda if it is submitted to the Agenda Committee twelve (12) days before the Council meeting date.” (Section 8.6)

So, if a citizen wants to get an item on the council agenda, you need to get two council members to agree that it should be on the agenda.

John Musolf
---

Speed In A Construction Zone In Oro Valley-It Will Cost You!

---

Last night, the Oro Valley Town Council voted for double fines for speeding in a construction zone.  This brings town fines in line with state law.  The fines double only when workers are present.

In other items, the council approved to rescind its agreement to fund TREO since TREO no longer requires municipalities to pay for membership.

During the call to audience, resident John Musolf voiced the need to the town to create and publish a "Code of Ethics".  Resident Bill Adler asked that the council consider that public input be added to fast track project approval process which will be considered by council at the next session. This process applies to Innovation Park construction projects.
---

Town's Endorsement Of A Private, For Pay Event Is Wrong

---

Mayor Hiremath is going to deliver his "State Of The Town" speech today.

This speech is being delivered at a paid for event that is jointly sponsored by the Town of Oro Valley and The Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce.

Take a look at yesterday's Oro Valley press release titled: "OV State of the Town event sees record-breaking ticket sales; Mayor to focus on regional collaboration"

The top of the press release has the Oro Valley logo.  The bottom has the logo of the Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce. This is clearly co-branding of this event.  It is, therefore, an Oro Valley sponsored event.  

This is not about the Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce.  May they "love long and prosper." It is not about Mayor Hiremath being invited to speak at a Chamber function.  The Mayor should "spread" the word about the virtues of Oro Valley.

It is about whether the Town or Oro Valley should use its equity in this manner.

We say: NO.

It is highly unusual for Oro Valley or any municipality to lend their name to a paid event that is being run by and whose financial benefit accrues to a third party.  The $55 per seat fee goes to the Chamber of Commerce, who also pay for the costs of the event.  The gain or the loss is all theirs. That's fine.

The Town of Oro Valley, however, has endorsed this program.  The town has co-branded it.  The town is a brand. The logo of the Town of Oro Valley is a brand.  The use of the name and the logo, together with an official press released by the town related to the event is an endorsement by the town of the event and of the participating organizations.  It is a use of town value, albeit mostly non monetary.

Doing all of this for a private membership organization is simply wrong.

What independent standard did the town use to determine that they should endorse this event?  What was the decision-making process? Who made the decision?  Certainly, this was not a council decision.

If the town does this for one organization, shouldn't it do it for all organizations?

Maybe, we think, the town should not be doing this at all.
---

The Aquatic Center: "Will Haste Make Waste"?

---
Last week we posted: Oro Valley Approves Added Funding For Aquatic Center.  This was a press release from the Town of Oro Valley.  The Town Council, after a lengthy and often confusing discussion,  unanimously approved a 43% increase in spending on the town pool renovation just to get what they thought they were going to get in they approved the initial $3.45 million in spending. (Note: Also see an Arizona Daily Star article)

The council was "between a rock and a hard place".  They had no choice but to approve the added spending.  There is a swim meet scheduled for the fall. There are no further council meetings until  September, thanks to Mayor Hiremath.  The five on council when the initial spending was approved had committed that this would be a first class facility.

Part of the increase in cost is due to the requirement of Pima County that pool be 2-feet deeper, requiring a change in the decking, totaling about $1 million.  Pima County use to own this pool!

The other part of the increase, the part that the council literally had to identify during the meeting, was to put back into the project items that Greg Caton, Town Manager, had "value engineered" out of the project:

• $126,000: Family changing room
•   $50,000: Scoreboard
•   $89,000: Shade structures
•   $79,000: Decking

 The council was surprised to learn that these items had been deleted from the project.

There was one addition to the original project: A 3-meter diving board at a cost of $42,000.

The council not only approved the funding requested, but they added to it in order to retain these items.

We understand that Greg Caton advised Commissioner Legner to "value engineer" these items out in order to reduce the additional amount requested.  Taking major items out of the pool renovation project is a council decision. It is not the decision of a town employee.  Shouldn't they have requested the Mayor to hold a special session of the town council to discuss the situation with the full council?  

The discussion of the request was insanely confusing. Watch the video.  Numbers are tossed about with abandon; and with no relation to what the final product will actually be.  In addition, at no time was there any discussion of whether the numbers being "tossed around" for one item or another had  validity.

The discussion was clearly the product of "tired minds."  The meeting was already four hours into a five hour marathon when the topic was discussed.  At one point, Council Member Snider asked the same questions regarding what was included or not included in the facility as other council members had already asked thirty minutes prior!  At another point, Council Member Hornat spoke to Director Legner asking:

"We sat down individually...with Ainsley and with Town Staff and went through these numbers. Tonight, we come to council for direction and we get  a whole different set of numbers and we get a whole different set of things that were not included in those meetings.  Should I go get the picture [of the proposed facility] so you can point to that, and show us what we're not going to get and what we're going to get now that you value-engineered this?  'Cause that's what we promised to deliver and I want to know what it's going to cost to deliver what we promised the Community cause that's what this is about: What we promised the community." 

Clearly frustrated, Council Member Hornat, placed the responsibility for the confusion on Director Legner. He is only partially correct.  Some of the responsibility falls on Town Manager Greg Caton, to whom Legner reports.  Caton advised Legner to "value engineer" out certain items.   Finally, some of the responsibility should be shouldered by Mayor Hiremath for not being "on top of" the biggest project the town has undertaken in many years and for jamming such an important topic into a five hour meeting.

Mayor Hiremath: "Haste makes waste" Mr. Mayor.

Let's hope that in their zeal to get this right, the Council was not inadvertently forced into making wrong decisions based on bad information or withheld information.  Let's hope that the Mayor's desire to cram everything he can into fewer meetings, causing marathon sessions, did not substantially reduce the quality of the council's decision-making.

There are other issues, issues regarding funding of the project on which we will focus in a future posting.
---