Editorial ~ The Sign Tamperer. Part 2. “The Smoking Gun”

Part 1 was published on Monday. Please scroll down to read it if you haven’t already done so.

Crime Scene Investigation
The photograph that was published was an overhead shot. A few days after it was published, three Oro Valley residents (including a former law enforcement officer using binoculars) walked the site of the “crime” and could not find a camera attached to either a pole or a building that could have taken the picture from the angle at which it was taken (from above and to the right of the sign).

A security camera on the old Sports Authority building was aimed at the parking lot, not at the area with the sign. This camera was tested nonetheless and found to be inactive. So what happened to the “surveillance” camera? Who put it there, when, and why? It appears to have been removed right after the picture was taken. This leads us to wonder if this “crime” was a staged event.

The Smoking Gun
Also of interest is who filed the complaint. The person who made and posted the sign should be the one who filed the complaint since they are claiming that the sign was their property. This means that the OVPD now knows the identity of the person who deliberately posted many of those same signs directly in front of Axe the Tax signs in an effort to block them from view. This is a Class 2 misdemeanor under ARS 16-1019. Why hasn’t the OVPD issued a citation against them?

Collusion?
Axe the Tax dealt with sign issues for weeks…stolen signs, signs found thrown in a wash, signs bent in half, signs covered by “Why Ax Kids Sports?” signs deliberately placed directly in front of them.

In these instances, the State Statute does apply since these signs were paid for and placed by a PAC. (Axe the Tax PAC).

It’s suspicious that the OVPD turned this “non-story” into front page news and that they pulled this stunt just one week before the election, just in time to make the last issue of the Explorer before election day. Was the OVPD (via marching orders from the mayor) colluding with the Yes on 454 folks to damage the character and credibility of Axe the Tax supporters in a last ditch effort to garner more votes for their $28 million dollar “desperately needed ball fields?”

After all, similar stunts have been pulled in past Oro Valley elections. Remember the “Lou Waters was assaulted by a ream of paper” story that they pulled out during the 2015 Recall Election in order to smear the character of the challengers? That case went to court. Waters lost. We have to wonder what ploys they will conjure up this year in order to tip the scales in their favor for the Town Council election in August.

It bears repeating
We will end Part 2 of this article the same way we ended Part 1. This whole thing smacks of political maneuvering and LOVE does not take kindly to our police being involved in politics.

Editorial ~ The Sign Tamperer. Part 1.

With another Town election coming up in August as the mayor and three Town Council members run for a third term, LOVE would like to report on a campaign problem that is likely to rear it’s ugly head again in a few short months.

Background
Back in early November 2017, many of you saw the photo on the front page of the Explorer of a person who was allegedly seen tampering with a “Why Ax Kids Sports?” sign near the intersection of First and Oracle. The caption accompanying the photo indicated that the “OVPD is asking for the public’s help with a criminal damage investigation.” This seemed a little excessive considering that the sign was not an official campaign sign protected under Arizona State law, but rather, would be considered the equivalent of a Yard Sale sign.

Who’s the Boss?
After you read this article, ask yourself these questions:

• Why is the OVPD putting this much time, effort, manpower, and taxpayer money into investigating the equivalent of someone tampering with a homemade “Yard Sale” sign?

• Does this merit a 3-month long (and counting) investigation? Why are they going to such great lengths to find the “perpetrator” when no campaign laws were violated? Don’t our police have more important things to do?

•Who’s orchestrating this?

• Would the police launch a “criminal damage investigation” if someone had tampered with a Yard Sale sign? Would they post a picture of the person on the OVPD Facebook page AND on the front page of the Explorer newspaper asking for the public’s help in finding this person? Of course not. So why did they do it in this instance?

• Why are they maneuvering to keep the Police Report from the public?

OVPD Withholds release of Police Report
LOVE wanted to report on this story back in November, but in order to report the whole story, we needed to obtain a copy of the Police Report. One of our LOVE readers has been trying to obtain this report since November. The OVPD initially said that it couldn’t be released until the investigation was closed. When the case was finally closed in mid-January and the LOVE reader attempted once again to obtain a copy of the report, the case was suddenly reopened because “new information has been obtained in furtherance of the investigation.”

It’s suspicious that new information was obtained which bars the release of the report just as the report was about to be released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Someone does not want that file to be released.

After waiting patiently for more than three months, LOVE has decided to report on what we know at this time. We’re also reporting on it now because the repeated delays in releasing the Police Report have become a story all on its own.

Why is this story important?
The etiology of the complaint is an important piece of this investigation. The owner of the “property” must be known and identified for any item to be considered “property” under law. Additionally, no complaint is valid or actionable by law enforcement unless a complaint is filed by that “property” owner. Once a complaint is filed, it is required to be disclosed upon any request under Federal FOIA and Arizona Public Records law.

During the Naranja Park Bond election, numerous “Why Ax Kids Sports?” signs were illegally placed directly in front of campaign signs that had been posted by the Axe the Tax PAC. Axe the Tax filed a complaint with the Town. When contacted by the Town Clerk about the illegal placement of these signs [a Class 2 misdemeanor under ARS 16-1019] the Yes on 454 PAC claimed that these signs did not belong to them.

Being that there was no “Paid for by…..” disclosure statement on the signs, it appeared that they were placed by an individual who was not associated with any political action committee. Therefore, it was assumed that they did not belong to the YES on 454 PAC.

Irresponsible Allocation of Town Resources
Since no campaign laws were violated, the amount of time and effort being spent on this investigation is disproportionate to the “crime” that was allegedly committed. The question remains…why? This whole thing smacks of political maneuvering and LOVE does not take kindly to our police being involved in politics.

Part 2 will be published on Wednesday.

Guest View: Mike Zinkin ~ It’s Time to Take Back Oro Valley

Let’s begin with some history of the 2016 General Plan: Your Voice, Our Future
The Town began to allocate funding for the development of the State-mandated General Plan beginning with the FY 2013/14 budget. Several hundred thousand dollars were set aside to hire people to assist with development of the Plan. Councilmember Hornat and I were designated as Council Liaisons for this effort.

A multitude of Town residents volunteered to help ensure that the citizens were given ample opportunity to provide input to the Plan. Coffees were held and tables were set up at the Farmer's Market and at Town events in an effort to reach as many citizens as possible. Councilman Hornat and I attended over 15 staff meetings as the General Plan developed. During those meetings, we worked to ensure that the town staff did not have an inordinate amount of influence over the new General Plan. As council liaison on this project, I wanted to ensure that the Plan was derived from public input – not council and staff input.

Voters approve new General Plan in November 2016
The General Plan, now called Your Voice, Our Future (YVOF), was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council following two public meetings. The Council placed it on the November 2016 ballot and YVOF passed by a large majority of those who voted in that election. The people were told that YVOF was a guide for all elected, appointed, and town employees to inform them that this is what the citizens desire for OUR TOWN.

The new developer-friendly Town Council amends the plan just two weeks later
On November 16, 2016, the new council (ALL of whom were financially supported by developers and builders during their election campaigns) was sworn in and they immediately voted to amend the new General Plan that was not even two weeks old! You can read the details HERE.

While it had been reasonable in the waning years of the 10-year General Plan for the Town Council to amend it using the argument, "The General Plan is almost 10 years old; times have changed; demographics have changed; values have changed,” those arguments were not valid on November 16, 2016 when the Plan was LESS THAN TWO WEEKS OLD.

More General Plan amendments on the agenda for the December 6th Town Council Meeting
Now YVOF is a year old. Nothing has changed. It is still fresh. However, at the December 6th Council Meeting, there are 4 proposed amendments to YVOF including a related rezoning.

The Town spent untold hours over 3 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars attempting to obtain YOUR thoughts on how the Town's land should be utilized. Now, once again, your wishes are in jeopardy of being overthrown by a Council that is beholden to developers and builders.

IT'S TIME TO TAKE BACK ORO VALLEY. Let your voice be heard. Email the mayor and council with your thoughts on these General Plan Amendments or speak during the Public Hearing portion of tomorrow evening’s Town Council Meeting.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Editor’s Note: A new citizens group has been established
The landslide defeat of the $17 million dollar Naranja Park Bond (71% to 29%) has energized the group "Axe the Tax" to reorganize into a new group called, "Take Back OV."

Visit their website HERE

You can also LIKE "Take Back OV" on Facebook to receive updates in your Newsfeed.

UPDATE: Naranja Park Bond Campaign Finance Reports

Since LOVE’s last report on the campaign finances of “Axe the Tax” and “YES on 454,” the following donations to both PAC’s have been reported to the town:

Additional contributors to YES on 454 include:

$1,100 from individuals contributing more than $50.00
Zero from individuals contributing $50.00 or less

Once again, there are no contributions from the parents or coaches who are crying about “the desperately needed fields.”

$2,500 from Diamond Ventures
$2,500 from Southwest DVI Properties (another Diamond Ventures entity)
$100 from Tim Overton, Banker at Vantage West Credit Union
$1,000 from William Walker, Owner WLB Engineering

TOTAL $6,100

NOTE: WLB is the development group that represents landowners in the majority of new home and commercial developments in Oro Valley. They frequently appear before council to request land use changes (to the voter-approved General Plan), rezoning requests, and grading waivers to accommodate their residential and commercial developments. (e.g. Big Wash General Plan Amendment, LaCholla Major General Plan Amendments, Estates at Capella, Saguaro Viejos, Sanctuary at Silverhawke).

Of note also is that Oro Valley Little League Baseball donated $250 which was later refunded back to them. Was this because all the “big league players” donated so much money that the Little League group didn’t feel a need to contribute to their own cause?

Additional contributors to Axe the Tax include:

$417.22 from individuals contributing $50.00 or less
$482.52 from individuals contributing more than $50.00*
$96.80 from Toggle Enterprises, LLC

TOTAL $996.54

*Three of the individuals are Oro Valley residents and one is from Tucson.

You can read the previous LOVE article on the campaign finances of Axe the Tax and Yes on 454 HERE

A Message from Axe the Tax regarding Naranja Park Bond Campaign Contributions

Lets take a look at who’s really supporting this cause.
There are signs all over town proclaiming “It’s for the kids.” There are “Why axe kids sports?” signs. There are “454 4 kids” signs that are designed to pull at your heartstrings by being designed to look like they were painted by the children.

At Town Council meetings earlier this year, kids were rounded up and sitting in council chambers wearing their sports uniforms. Many parents and coaches spoke up in an emotional plea to give the kids a place to play; a place in Oro Valley to call their own.

But how many parents and coaches contributed to the Yes on 454 PAC? How many parents contributed to the “It’s for the kids” campaign?

Sadly, not one of these parents has given more than $50.00 to the Yes on 454 campaign. In fact, the total amount of under $50.00 donations amounts to…..wait for it…..just $50.00. If the parents of all of these children gave a combined total of just $50.00, how important can sports fields possibly be to these parents?

Even more enlightening is the amount of donations from developers and businesses that most likely hope to profit, in one way or another, from the building of this park.

The list of contributors to Yes on 454:

Now let’s look at who funded the Axe the Tax PAC.
Here’s the breakdown of donations to the Axe the Tax PAC. These aren’t “get off of my lawn” curmudgeons. These aren’t people who hate kids. These are people who advocate using a pay-as-you-go approach to the build-out of Naranja Park.

These are people who understand the real drivers behind Prop 454…that the $17 MM bond is just Phase I and more than half of it ($8.2 million) is for the building of the infrastructure for the future Event Center (which isn’t included in this bond and is covered over in gray on the map that the Town released.) The Event Center is slated for construction with a second bond in the future.

The list of contributors to Axe the Tax:

Axe the Tax Chairman, Jim Horn, stated it best in a recent press release:
“What surprised us though was the lack of donations by parents to Yes on 454…But with all the talk of ‘desperately needed park improvements’…well, the parents sure didn’t put their own money behind it. All the special interest donations make you question if its really ‘all about the kids’ or whether these major contributors are trying to influence Council votes.”

Axe the Tax Issues Press Release regarding Campaign Finance Reports

PRESS RELEASE

Prop 454 Campaign Finances Revealed. Axe the Tax donations are dwarfed by HSL and Developer donations to Yes on 454.

Oro Valley — October 15, 2017: Axe the Tax, a group of concerned Oro Valley residents opposing the Naranja Park Bond - Proposition 454, is not surprised to find their donations dwarfed by the massive contributions to the Yes on 454 PAC.

The cumulative $3,627 in Axe the Tax contributions were primarily sub-$50 donations from Oro Valley residents who are concerned with loss of their community park for a sports complex and the high costs of infrastructure related to a future event center that will require another bond. Many have also expressed concerns with the Town Council's lack of fiscal responsibility related to the golf courses. Large contributions included three donations of $500 each, counting the one from the PAC chairman.

Operating expenses were $2,157.

“Never underestimate the power of a grass-roots effort,” commented Jim Horn, Chair of the PAC. “We knew all along that we’d get smaller, individual contributions from members of the community who believe in fiscal responsibility. And, that the same donors who funded the Mayor and all six of the Councilmembers’ campaigns would donate generously to ensure support for their pending General Plan amendments, rezonings and new construction projects.”

"What surprised us, though," continued Horn, "was the lack of donations by parents to Yes on 454. The PAC chairman donated $100 to the cause. There were $50 in miscellaneous cash contributions - equal to about 10 lattes - that likely came from parents. But with all the talk of "desperately needed park improvements"...well, the parents sure didn't put their own money behind it. All the "special interest" donations make you question if it's really "all about the kids" or whether these major contributors are trying to influence Council votes."

Yes on 454 contributions totaled $36,600. Significant contributions were made by various HSL entities which totaled $5,000. HSL (Humberto Lopez) owns the Hilton El Conquistador hotel. Other significant contributors include developers with projects in Oro Valley and a management consulting firm that is often used to broker deals for developers within Oro Valley and Pima County. These donations ranged from $2,500 to $5,000 each.

Unisource Energy, the parent company of Tucson Electric Power (TEP), and Cox Communications also contributed $5,000 each to the Yes PAC. TEP was granted a rate increase in February 2017.

The YES on 454 PAC paid Saguaro Strategies, a Phoenix political consulting firm, $35,886 to run their ballot measure. This is the same firm that ran the recent campaigns of the Mayor and current councilmembers.

Axe the Tax in Oro Valley stands by its position that the Naranja Park Bond, Proposition 454, is an unreasonable and irresponsible property tax for homeowners and commercial properties when the Town has resources to “pay as you go.” Axe the Tax recommends using the FY 16/17 $2 million budget surplus for an immediate start of construction of the baseball complex. The project can be completed within five years by adding $1.1 million annually into the Town's budget through FY 22/23.

Axe the Tax Announces Naranja Park Bond - Prop 454 Informational Meetings

PRESS RELEASE: Oro Valley — October 9, 2017: Axe the Tax, a group of concerned Oro Valley residents opposing the Naranja Park Bond - Proposition 454, will hold meetings to provide Oro Valley residents additional information regarding the proposed property tax. The Town's open house on September 13, 2017, did not provide residents the opportunity to ask their questions in an open forum.

Each meeting will offer a short presentation followed by a question and answer session.

Oro Valley Library
1305 W. Naranja Drive, Oro Valley, AZ
October 12, 2017 -- 4:45 to 5:45 p.m.
October 12, 2017 -- 6:00 to 7:00 p.m.

Golder Ranch Fire Station
355 E. Linda Vista Blvd, Oro Valley, AZ
October 14, 2017 -- 9:00 to 10:00 a.m.
October 14, 2017 -- 10:30 to 11:30 a.m.

Axe the Tax has highlighted that the $17 million Naranja Park Bond would ultimately cost taxpayers a total of $28 million, with interest, over the 20 year life of the bond. As it stands, only $5.6 million will be allocated toward seven sports fields. The majority of the funding will be utilized for infrastructure for a future event center and sports complex which will require an additional bond.

The Town’s recent announcement of a $2 million surplus confirms that Naranja Park sports fields can continue to be built with the “pay as you go” strategy instead of imposing an unnecessary property tax on homeowners and commercial properties. "Pay as you go" has been utilized successfully since 2008 when Oro Valley taxpayers voted against a $48.6 million bond for the Park.

Axe the Tax in Oro Valley stands by its position that the Naranja Park Bond-Proposition 454 is an unreasonable and irresponsible property tax for homeowners and commercial properties when the Town has resources to “pay as you go.”

Axe the Tax Signs are being Vandalized and Stolen

It appears that proponents of Proposition 454 are trying to silence the opposition.

This picture illustrates what Axe the Tax is up against. Notice that the Vote NO sign is bent over while the YES sign right next to it is untouched. There have been other instances in which YES signs have been placed in such a way as to partially block the NO signs.

Additionally, Axe the Tax reports that they have had at least three of their 3 x 3 signs stolen, and in a couple of instances, even the rebar that is drilled into the ground and holding the signs in place was stolen as well. One supporter also reported to the OVPD that their yard sign was stolen.

Signs cost money. The vast majority of donations sent to Axe the Tax have been used to purchase these signs…signs that are now being stolen or vandalized. The placement of these signs also takes hours of volunteer labor.

Signs influence people. Is this the reason that Axe the Tax signs are being vandalized or stolen? What is the Yes crowd so afraid of? They already have the advantage of the town subliminally advocating for the bond on the town website and during the informational Open House. (The town has subliminally advocated for the bond by repeatedly mentioning only the $17 million dollar bond figure, not the full $28 million cost, and by emphasizing the words $4.50 per month in bold print.)

The YES PAC also has an advantage in donations which has allowed them to hire a Phoenix political consulting group, Saguaro Strategies, to run their campaign and to mail full-color postcards to every Oro Valley voter. Oro Valley residents began receiving these postcards this week. The hiring of Saguaro Strategies (the same consultants hired by the mayor and all six current council members during their election campaigns) plus the design and mailing of the postcards costs thousands of dollars!

Despite having all of these advantages, somehow they still feel the need to vandalize or steal the Axe the Tax signs. Perhaps it’s because, despite all these advantages, they’ve noticed that letters to the editor and comments posted on the YES Facebook page are all running heavily against the bond.

When all your money and consultant strategies do not appear to be working, perhaps all you have left is to attempt to silence the opposition.

"Vote NO on Prop 454" signs stolen from Oro Valley Country Club Estates neighborhood

LOVE received a copy of an email recently sent to the mayor and council regarding theft of Axe the Tax signs in the Oro Valley Country Club Estates neighborhood.

Honorable Mayor & Council,

We live in a beautiful neighborhood that surrounds the Oro Valley Country Club. This neighborhood has been a great example of a safe well-maintained neighborhood, relatively free of vandalism, etc., for many years.

Never have we had anything taken from our yard until now. Many of our neighbors, including us, have had "NO on Prop 454” signs taken from our property. Who would go so low to steal signs? Who would be so shallow minded that they can’t handle the fact that others have different opinions? What type of people would be so mean spirited that they can’t allow others freedom of speech, freedom to show, in the form of a sign, what one believes? It’s just plain nasty. These are the type of people you surround yourselves with.

Thank goodness for social media, because we are going to let as many people as possible know what is happening in our once safe neighborhood. Since we have NEVER had these dirty tricks happen in this area even during the most recent Presidential Election, we are to assume, that it must be someone that is new to this small community of Oro Valley Country Club Estates that doesn’t want ours and many other voices to be heard. Very sad.

This has emboldened us to fight even harder to get out the “NO on Prop 454” voters, and to tell others about the thuggery that is happening here in our neighborhood and in Oro Valley.

WE DO NOT WANT OUR PROPERTY TAXES INCREASED! NO ON PROP 454! NO NEW TAXES!

As stated on TOV website, the town is running $2M in the black, and since the Naranja Park so far has been on the “pay as you go” plan, the question needs to be answered. Why is there a need to add a property tax (Prop 454) to Oro Valley residences? We await your response.

........................

ARS 16-1019. Political signs; printed materials; tampering; classification A. It is a class 2 misdemeanor for any person to knowingly remove, alter, deface or cover any political sign of any candidate for public office or knowingly remove, alter or deface any political mailers, handouts, flyers or other printed materials of a candidate that are delivered by hand to a residence for the period commencing forty-five days before a primary election and ending seven days after the general election.

Axe the Tax Issues Press Release

PRESS RELEASE

Axe the Tax has a Better Game Plan for the Town's $2 Million Budget Surplus

Why impose a $28 million property tax when a surplus exists to build fields now?

Oro Valley — September 26, 2017: Axe the Tax, a group of concerned Oro Valley residents opposing the Naranja Park Bond-Proposition 454, is releasing a response to the recent Fiscal Year 16/17 results reported by the Town of Oro Valley. The town reported a “strong financial position” and a surplus of $2 million for this past fiscal year.

“We propose that the Town’s $2 million surplus be spent on Little League baseball fields for our youth,” stated Jim Horn, Axe the Tax PAC chairman. “Clearly the town has the means to accomplish this without a property tax on its residents.”

Petitioning for fiscal responsibility from town officials known for the financially irresponsible purchase of the El Con golf courses, Axe the Tax has highlighted that the $17 million Naranja Park Bond would ultimately cost taxpayers a total of $28 million, with interest, over the 20-year life of the bond. As it stands, only $5.6 million will be allocated toward seven sports fields. Two multi-sports fields are currently under construction with funding spread over two fiscal years 16/17 and 17/18.

Axe the Tax is confounded by the proposed bond following the town’s announcement of a $2 million surplus. These results confirm that the town has existing resources to continue building Naranja Park sports fields with the “pay as you go” strategy that has been utilized since 2008 when Oro Valley taxpayers voted against a $48.6 million bond for the Park.

Instead of imposing an unnecessary property tax to pay for this bond, Axe the Tax recommends using the $2 million surplus for an immediate start of construction of the baseball complex on a “pay as you go” development plan. The entire field area should be graded and irrigation should be installed. Two fields should be completed with lights.

In the fiscal year 18/19 budget, $1 million should be allocated to construct a third field with lighting and to build a concession stand with restrooms. This will complete the three-field Little League complex. Axe the Tax in Oro Valley stands by its position that the Naranja Park Bond-Proposition 454 is an unreasonable and irresponsible property tax for homeowners and commercial properties when the Town has resources to “pay as you go.”

Many signs point to the Town's illegal advocating of the Naranja Park Bond.

Last Thursday, September 14th, Axe the Tax Chair, Jim Horn, sent the following letter to the Town Manager and the Town Attorney regarding what is perceived to be the Town’s illegal advocating for the Naranja Bond via information provided on the Town website.

LOVE readers have also noticed the same advocating in hand-outs, the Open House on September 13th, and in an editorial by Oro Valley Communications Administrator, Misti Nowak published in the Oro Valley Voice this summer.

Legally, the Town is only allowed to provide education and information about the bond. They are not allowed to advocate for it.

It has been one week and there has been no response from the Town.

September 14, 2017

Town Manager, Mary Jacobs
Cc: Town Attorney, Tobin Sidles

Ms. Jacobs,

I understand that the Town cannot advocate for or against the Naranja Park Bond but can only “educate” and provide information.

However, in looking at the Project Fact Sheet on the Town Website, it appears that the Town is subliminally downplaying the cost of the Naranja Bond by using bold print for certain terminology and by omitting some of the facts. This is outlined below.

The Project Sheet begins by giving the basic facts such as what’s in the plan and that it will be paid for with a secondary property tax. However, under the heading, “What’s the cost and how will it impact residents?” it then goes on to sway voters into voting YES by placing the following words in regular print:

$17 million
secondary property tax
$1.4 million per year for 20 years

While placing the following words in bold print:

$4.50 per month to an average homeowner.

In addition, the final cost of the bond with interest is $28 million. This number has been omitted from the website. Instead, it is worded, “$1.4 million per year for 20 years.” When worded this way, the number doesn’t seem so high.

In other words, just because the website does not specifically contain the words, “Vote YES on the Naranja Park Bond” does not mean that the Town is not presenting information in a way that is designed to sway a person in that direction.

Under the heading, “Alignment with Your Voice, Our Future General Plan,” the Project Sheet states that the “Naranja Park Bond Project conforms to the 70% voter-approved 2016 Your Voice, Our Future General Plan…” This is more subliminal messaging and manipulation of the facts designed to sway voters into thinking that this proposal must be popular if it was approved by 70% of the people.

It wasn’t 70% of the town, it was 70% of the voters who cast a ballot.

Let’s look at what “70% voter-approved” really means:

Oro Valley has a population of 43,781 (U.S. Census Bureau)
Oro Valley has 30,321 registered voters. (Town of Oro Valley Website)

23,250 ballots were cast for Prop 439 – Your Voice, Our Future General Plan (11/8/16)
16,424 voted YES (70.64%)
6,826 voted NO (29.36%)

The General Plan was not approved by 70% of the total population of 43,781. It was approved by 70% of the 23,250 ballots cast which equals 16,424 residents or 37.5% of the population of Oro Valley. This is not overwhelming support.

In addition to the bond information on the Town website, if your future newspaper ads and educational meeting(s) also present a manipulation of the facts, all of this equates to free advertising for the “Vote YES on 454” PAC, which they are getting with OUR tax dollars.

The “Informational Pamphlet” that the Town will be mailing to registered Oro Valley voters about a month prior to the election is also paid for with taxpayer funds. Will this publication also be heavy on “$4.50 per month” and “70% voter approved?”

In closing, when both sides aren’t presented equally or one side is not presented at all, this could be interpreted as the Town advocating for one side over the other. If the Town presents only the positives and none of the negatives, isn’t that in effect advocating for the bond?

Yours truly,

James W. Horn
Chair, Axe the Tax PAC

New Websites Recently Launched

Axe the Tax

The Political Action Committee that has formed to oppose the Naranja Park Bond has launched their website. You can view it by clicking HERE

Save the Cactus

Why did you move to Oro Valley? Was it to get away from the city, urban living, and track homes? Was it to experience the desert? Or did you want Oro Valley to bring the city to you?

These are the questions asked by Save the Cactus.org. If you cherish our desert surroundings and are tired of all the clear-cutting and development, please check out their website to learn about Oro Valley’s future development plans, to include annexation of State Land at Tangerine and Thornydale for the purpose of rezoning to a Master Planned Community plus a second development at Tangerine and First.

You can view their website by clicking HERE

Axe the Tax PAC Opens Email Account

Axe the Tax OV, the PAC that has been set up to oppose the $17 million dollar Naranja Park Bond, has created an email address for citizens to ask questions and submit comments.

They can be reached at: axethetaxOV@gmail.com

Important Dates

Monday, October 9th -- The last day to register to vote in this Special Bond Election

Tuesday, October 10th -- Mail-in ballots go out

Tuesday, November 7th -- Special Bond Election Day

PAC Formed to Oppose Naranja Park Bond

A PAC has been formed to oppose Proposition 454 -- The Naranja Park Bond. Stay tuned to LOVE for future updates including the launch of the PAC's website. An email address will also be provided where citizens can submit questions and comments.

For those of you who are not already familiar with the details of the $17 million dollar Naranja Bond, we previously reported the following on LOVE:

"The bond will cost nearly double due to the interest, bringing the total cost to $28 million dollars, thus the need for a secondary property tax.  Council members are claiming that this is not a property tax.  That's because they all ran on the promise of never agreeing to a property tax.  However, a 20-year secondary property tax on top of our already high Pima County primary property tax is definitely a property tax and it will create an unnecessary burden on many of us."

You can learn more about the bond by clicking HERE to read, "The $28 Million Dollar Question."