Out With The Old. In With The New.

Out with the old. In with the new.
Tonight marks the dawn of a new era for the Oro Valley Town Council. Two new members will be seated. Two former members, both of whom have created controversy during their years on the council, will be gone.

An Era of Peace?
We expect this to be an era of peace, at least for the next two years. That’s when four seats on the council, including the mayor’s seat, will be up for reelection.

Reflections on Past Councils
This is the first time we can recall a council this peaceful. The councils chaired by Mayor Paul Loomis were full of characters who liked to argue with each other. It was actually quite funny. The councils chaired by Mayor Hiremath were marked by ongoing efforts by some majority members, led by Council Member Solomon, to target the three council members who didn’t agree with them. They were constantly harassed and bullied. Add to that the fact that one of those council minority members was continuously focused on the police department. It’s never a good idea to go after the police department in Oro Valley.

A Calmer Council Outlook
For at least the next two years, there will be no wrangling on the council. There will be no harsh words among council members. Nothing negative will be said about Town staff. There will be no “points of order” used by one council member, Solomon yet again, to harass Tim Bohen. There will be lots of seconding by Council Member Mo Greene. And we suspect many more bland council topics produced by a very passive Town Manager who, a year ago, replaced a town manager with an aggressive agenda shaped by the previous administration.

New Members Ready to Serve
The two new council members, Elizabeth Robb and Mary Murphy, are “ready to go.” They are both interesting people with very different backgrounds. They'll bring fresh perspectives to this council. Both have been attending introductory meetings with Town staff. These meetings are designed to familiarize them with all facets of Town operations. We recently spoke with both of them, and their level of enthusiasm is high. They are starting their four years on the council with open minds.

Wishing Them Well
We can only wish them well.

We hope they don’t step on any land mines.

Bits and Pieces

Barrett: Should the town rename the Community Center Fund?

At last week's council meeting, Vice Mayor Barrett reacted to a comment made by Council Member Solomon. Solomon has repeatedly complains that half of the half percent Hiremath Community Center sales tax no longer goes to support golf only.  

"I usually listen to this argument and let it pass, but I don't feel like I can tonight," Barrett noted. "The community center fund sales tax was passed unilaterally by council on a four-to-three vote. This council, on a six-to-zero vote, expanded the use of that sales tax with the exact same authority that passed it to begin with; through the same mechanisms, and ordinances. So continually saying that the community center fund sales tax is just for the community center and the golf courses is just not the case.” That expanded use of these sales tax monies also now goes to funding Naranja Park and other park-related amenities. "It probably shouldn't even be called the community center fund anymore, because now that can be allocated to parks and recreation."

Tiny Bits

• Naranja will likely have its grand reopening in May (Source: Town Manager Wilkins)
• Ashley Furniture is now "Lounge By Levitz"
• Council voted to reduce town's Historical Preservation Commission" from seven to five members. Lack of resident interest in being on the Commission was the primary reason 

Big 50th Anniversary Celebration Saturday

The Town of Oro Valley invites residents and visitors alike to join us for the 50th Anniversary Community Celebration at James D. Kriegh Park this Saturday, April 13, 2024, beginning at noon and concluding with a fireworks finale at 9:30 p.m. JDK Park is located at 23 W. Calle Concordia. (Source: Town of Oro Valley Press Release)

- - -

Town Council Requests Staff Report On Municipal Golf Operations

Council wants staff report on municipal golf operations 

Last week, the Oro Valley town Council voted unanimously that Town staff present a detailed report on municipal golf operations to include the financial results. The request is not in anyway to infer that operations are either good or bad. The council simply wants town staff to provide a single comprehensive source of information, accessible to the public. They didn’t specify a timeline for this report, but it is our opinion that it would be best issued together with the result to the recently commissioned external audit of municipal golf results.

The upcoming independent audit of municipal golf operating results is crucial

...because all reports on municipal golf operations have come from the municipal golf course operator, Indigo Golf, and are not considered the town’s accounting. It is our opinion that the Indigo reports are not prepared  in conformance with recognized accounting principles, so we anticipate changes in reported results to ensure such. In addition, Council member Bohen has raised valid concerns about reported revenues, prompting the audit to include a review of point-of-sale data for revenue verification. Agreement on the revenue number is critical for future decision making regarding the courses.

The decision for this report emerged through a somewhat indirect process 

Councilmember Solomon initiated the motion that would provide information to the homeowners association (HOA) that subsidize municipal golf operations. Vice Mayor Barrett stressed the importance of disseminating information to everyone, leading to unanimous agreement on that.

Council emotions "all over the place" regarding "Everything Municipal Golf"

The council members have different views regarding municipal golf's profitability and the need for continue HOA financial support. 

Council member Solomon questions why the Town is taking money from five HOAs to support municipal golf if municipal golf operations are profitable. The subsidy agreements is with five HOAs who provide $160,000 annually in financial support. Solomon points out that the Indigo Golf reported financial results show that municipal golf is now making a profit. He observes that the municipal golf is making a substantial profit when you include all of the revenues designated for g municipal golf, which includes sales tax revenue and the subsidy from the HOAs. 

Solomon also believes that things have changed.  One of the HOAs committed a subsidy at a time when the entire half-cent sales tax, approved by the 2015 council, was designated to support both municipal golf and the community center. Following that agreement, the Winfield council decided to redirect half of that sales tax revenue to the town’s other recreational activities. Consequently, Solomon contends that the town is indirectly using HOA funds to sustain non municipal golf recreational activities.

Despite this, Solomon never made a motion to cancel the HOA subsidies. Instead, he opted for the motion on reporting that council approved with minor modification.

Vice Mayor Barrett observed that the town has dedicated millions of dollars to municipal golf, factoring in the substantial operating losses experienced during Mayor Hiremath's administration and the significant costs associated with the replacement of the irrigation on the municipal golf courses. 

Council Member Bohen believes that the HOA contributions are trivial in comparison to these substantial expenditures and says that he would have voted against the subsidy had he been on council at the time of the agreement.  

Council Member Nicolson, on the other hand, thinks that it is reasonable for the HOAs to contribute to the municipal golf, stating, "It's worth the $50 a month... It's a reasonable amount." 

Mayor Winfield bleives that "...we are in a better place now that we are all collaborating. We've made substantial investments in these municipal golf courses."

Fuzzy numbers at heart of the issue

The town staff incorporated the panel (shown above right) into the council packet. The operational and budget figures are sourced from Indigo Golf, while the capital investment figures are supplied by the town staff. As previously noted, there is an ongoing debate regarding the appropriate methodology for calculating municipal golf profit. Questions have arisen as to whether it should encompass depreciation and amortization, rely on cash inflows and outflows, or be determined based on revenue earned versus expenses incurred. We anticipate that the forthcoming audit will shed light on these matters and more, bringing clarity to the situation.

Until then, further discussions about municipal golf's financial results are meaningless.

Town Manager Jacobs Resigns After Proposing "Laundering" ARPA Funds

Jacobs resigns

Town Manager Mary Jacobs resigned Friday. We do not know the reasons behind this. We do know that she proposed a money laundering scheme regarding $5.38million in ARPA funds. This happened at the Town Council meeting last Wednesday. You can read about this scheme in this article.

We do know that council conducted her annual review as scheduled after she had proposed this scheme. 

- - -

Jacobs proposed laundering ARPA funds 
Jacobs and her staff tried to “pull a fast one”. She put an item, Consent Agenda, item 2, on last week’s council meeting, which was an item that clearly needed discussion. Consent Agenda items are not discussed at the meeting unless a council member requests that the item be pulled for discussion. Otherwise, Consent Agenda items are voted on as a block.

The item called for the council to approve a loan of  $5.38 million from the General Fund to the Water Utility Fund.  These funds were received from the federal government as part of the ARPA award. ARPA required that the funds be used for water infrastructure projects. Under Jacobs’ scheme, the utility would pay back this money with interest over time. 

Rather than simply gifting the money from the town to the Water Utility to build infrastructure, Jacobs wanted to lend the money to the Water Utility so that the town can get it back and use it for another purpose, one not related to the federal allowable use of these funds.

As council member Steve Solomon pointed out at the council meeting, the scheme sounds like the town is trying to get around federal regulations for the use of the money because the town will get the money back and then use it for some other, non ARPA allowable purpose.

Solomon was exactly right.  

The Water Utility was the conduit for the sham transaction

Speaking in defense of the loan arrangement, Town Manager Mary Jacobs said that the money that the utility will be getting would be the ARPA funds which carry the restriction that be used for water infrastructure.  According to Jacobs, the money the town will get back in loan repayment and interest would be unrestricted. It will not get back ARPA funds. The funds would be from the general revenues of the Water Utility.

Attention all.

This is called “money laundering”.

Gephart: It's OK to do this because the Water Utility is an enterprise fund

Town Finance Director David Gephart justified the scheme because he felt that the town should not simply transfer the money to the utility.  Gephart said that the reason that a loan has been proposed is because the Water Utility is supposed to be a self sustaining (“An Enterprise Fund”) entity. Thus, anything that has to do with the Water Utility, including administrative services that are provided by the town must be paid by the utility.

The loan approach, according to Gephart, provides the appearance that the Water Utility is self-supporting. Gephart also explained that the town had no alternative but to use this money for the Water Utility system. That’s because any other allowable uses were just not feasible for the town.

So, why not just gift the money to the Water Utility Fund and be done with it? After all, these ARPA monies were gifted to the town by the federal government  The funds are intended to be used for water infrastructure projects.  In this case, the town’s general fund is merely a conduit to get the money to the town-owned Water Utility Fund because the Water Utility did not get the funds get directly from the federal government.

Jacobs tried to do this "in the dark of night" by putting the item on the “Consent Agenda” segment of the town council meeting

Jacobs claimed at the meeting that she wrote about this loan transaction in April. Council Member Bohen agreed that he found it buried in a document council received back then. The members never discussed it then because they were never really aware of it.

It would not have been discussed last week had it not been for the sharp eyes of Bohen, Jones-Ivey and Solomon. The former two asked for the item to be pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Solomon identified the transaction for the “sham” that it is.

Former Town Manager Jacobs tried to put "one past them." 

Fortunately, she failed.

- - -

Council Agrees It's a Priority: Improve Community Center Mobility Access Now

All agreed: Time to act is now

After much discussion last week, the Oro Valley Town Council unanimously agreed to do something now to improve mobility access to the Community Center.  Improving mobility access had been deferred by council for four years because it had become intertwined with a possible redesign of the Community Center.

Resurface.. .improve parking... add a conveyance

Vice Mayor Melanie Barrett  crafted a motion with the help of Councilmember Solomon to get something done now. 

The motion compels staff to make immediate improvements to the mobility accommodations. This includes resurfacing and cleaning up the ramp, repairing electric doors, adding handicap parking. The motion also directs staff to develop a proposal on how to get a "conveyance" into the existing building and to do without any other modifications to the facility. Solomon added, and it was agreed, that this become a funding priority from existing Community Center Funds.

This "fix" has been needed since 2015

Councilmember Solomon presented a timetable [panel right] starting in 2018 showing that there was intention, but not action, to make the Community Center more mobility accessible. He asserted that the current council "...decided to not make community center renovations and the ADA compliance a priority.”

Making the Community Center more mobility friendly was never a priority for any council

Councilmember Solomon's chart is misleading. It notes a date of July 2020. That is the first time that any specific improvement in mobility access was defined by any council. And that happened under the current council.  That improvement was an "elevator." However, the motion that the council passed at that time was to add the elevator only as part of a grand redesign of the Community Center. That redesign yet to happen.

Indeed, as Council Member Bohen noted, a fix for the mobility problem was never a priority of any council. "Something should have been done in 2015" when the town acquired the facility.

Winfield "takes the bullet"

Mayor Winfield observed that the current situation reflects badly on us as a community and on him as the Mayor. “I support universal access. Access for all of us.” Recently, Winfield traveled around the community with a resident who has disability challenges. They toured many of our facilities. Winfield wanted to see our facilities through the eyes of someone else. “I will freely admit that I’ve let the community down in this regard. I could have done a better job.”

- - -

Five Reasons Parks and Rec Bond Project Priorities Could Change

Yesterday, we discussed the fact the council approved $25 million bond for parks and recreation improvements does not include a specific list of projects that are being funded. As a result, there is no enforceable promise that guarantees that the projects approved for bonding in July will happen.  

Today, we present five reasons why priorities could change.

---

The "next council" might have a different set of priorities

The term of the two members of council who voted "no"on the bonding ends in 2024. Thus, they will be in office through the completion of most of the work. All they need are two new members of council who agree with their thinking to change the direction of the use of these bond funds.

Some of the items on the list of projects do not reflect the wishes of the residents

Council Member Solomon is focussed on what residents want. He bases his thinking on a town conducted statistically valid needs assessment that was done by an independent consultant for the town's 2020 Parks and Recreation Master Plan. That survey classified facility needs into three categories (See panel right). Many of the items on the July approved priority list are either low or no priority. "My big objection is that this does not follow the statistically valid survey that was touted 'time and time and time again' through this council. Yet, after all of that, that is not the way priorities were set," according to Solomon speaking a last week’s town council meeting.

The town does not know what each project will cost yet they are raising money to fund the projects now

The town has "put the cart before the horse". The town has no true financial picture of what projects it can and can not afford.  This is because it is just now preparing revised estimates of construction costs, costs that may be much greater because of inflation. Council Member Solomon asked Town Finance Director Gephart last week what these estimates were. Gephart  stated that “I do not have a cost estimate...” of these items “… because we are still working through what this final project list is going to be.”  According to Gephart, the project list cost could well be more than originally estimated.

The town may need even more than $25 million for these projects. Funds may have to come from added sources.

$25 million may not be sufficient to pay for all of the cost of the projects because of inflation. According to Gephart, inflation may stay in the 5-7% range for the foreseeable future because government stimulus money has flooded the market.  “There is concern that with inflation, we are not going to complete all of the projects, amenities that have been approved.”

What happens if the town finds itself short of funds for these projects? According to Town Manager Mary Jacobs: “If we are not able to get everything done on the list, I will come back to council. We also have the opportunity for...” adding funds to complete these projects through future budgets. “Because these projects are going to go on over multiple years… We’ll have to budget the bond monies…and look for supplemental monies."

The town has no idea of what will be the cost of maintaining these facilities

The projects that will be funded by the bond are not fully defined nor have they been fully vetted per town policy.  Policy 1 of the town’s financial and budgetary policies states that all proposed projects should have “…all operations, maintenance and replacement costs shall be fully costed.” Town Finance Director Gephart stated that he had no idea of what these costs would be.

---

Council Members Solomon and Green voted against the bond measure. Solomon summed up his reasoning.  "This is a pretty big wish list and we are not going to be able to afford all of this especially considering the operating cost.” After reminding the council that voters have always rejected bonding for parks projects at the ballot box, Solomon noted; "This is not what the community asked for. This bond is rushed through and no real financial analysis." If new council members next year agree with Council Members Solomon and Greene, then the allocation of the bond money will change.

Town Staff Fails To Include As Directed By Town Council Specific Uses In the $25M Parks and Recreation Bond

Council approves a $25 million parks and recreation bond...

Last week, The Oro Valley Town Council passed a measure to raise $25 million through bonding for parks and recreation improvements. Mayor Winfield framed the discussion of the bond as the culmination of efforts to add long neglected items to the town’s parks and recreation facilities.  After discussion, the measure passed 5-2, Council Members Greene and Solomon dissented.

But projects to be financed are not a "done deal"

Mayor Winfield framed it as a “done deal.” After all, in July, the council approved by a 5-2 vote the specific projects that are to be funded by the bonds. But that does not mean that all of those projects will actually happen.

 

Because the bond agreement does not restrict use of funds to specific projects

The only legal document that survives a change in council is the bond indenture document. That document does not restrict the use of these funds to the July approved specific purposes. The funds will be spent over a three or perhaps a four year period. This term of the current Mayor and three council members next year. There is no guarantee that the items this council approved this past July will survive a newly installed council.

Despite the fact that staff was directed in the July  town to include specific uses with the bond

The minutes of the July 2021 town council meeting reflect exactly how these funds are to be used.  The following motion was passed (5-2): "Motion by Mayor Joseph C. Winfield, seconded by councilmember Josh Nicolson to direct staff to include the following projects and amenities with the Parks and Recreation Bond."  The panel at right lists these. Not including these items specifically in the bond indenture violates this council directive

Thus, the use of these funds can be shifted because the funds are really just a "pool of funds"

The funds, thus, can be shifted to other projects because they projects are not identified specifically in the bond. The only way that the projects this council defined in July can survive a new council is if the  the specific projects are included in the "bond indenture."  That is because the bond indenture is the legal document that has been approved by the IRS and the SEC. It is the document upon which investors rely. It is the use of funds as described in that document to which the Trustee of the funds and the town must abide regardless of what any council wants to do.

In this case, however, there is nothing in the bond legal documents that defines the specific use of the funds.

85% of these funds must be expended within three years... beyond the term of current council

In effect, the bonding is creating a $25M fund that can be used for any future parks and recreation need as long as 85% of the funds are expended within three years. This leaves 2 years of spending beyond the term of the current council majority. 

Most of the projects won't even start for six to nine months.

Funds can not be spent in advance. Thus, it is highly likely that it will take at least a year before major projects building commences simply because of a shortage of contractors and materials for the work. 

Consequently, ample funds will remain in the bond fund well into the term of a new council. Indeed, the use of these funds will be their responsibility.

Tomorrow: 5 Reasons why the projects funded may differ from the originally intended projects if the council bond vote last week stands

---

Oro Valley Town Council Approves Plan To Eliminate Public Safety Pension Unfunded Liability

6-0 Approval Vote
The Oro Valley Town Council voted 6-0 ( Council Member Greene abstaining) on a plan to fully fund the towns public safety pensions by 2036. It is a plan that will need to be implemented by the council if it chooses to include it in the annual budget.

Plan combines general fund money and bond funds
The plan will have the town issue $17 million in pension obligation bonds and earmark $10 million in general fund monies towards the pension obligation. According to consulting firm CBIZ,  this option is the least costly to the town.

Pension obligation bonds do not require voter approval
It is the expectation that the interest rates that the town will pay on these bonds will be far less than the rate of return the funds will earn on that money. The consultant assumed that the town could borrow the funds at 2.75% and invest them at 5.25%. The difference, according to Council Member Nicolson, is, in and of itself, sufficiently significant to warrant borrowing as a solution because Interest rates are at historically low levels. Indeed, that seemed to be the motivation of others on council to support a July implementation of the measure.

Prior Added $1 million contributions to PSPRS had small impact on underfunding

The aggregate funding ratio for all 264 plans in PSPRS is 48%. Ore Valley police funding is better than the average, at 61.7%.

Both the Hiremath and Winfield councils recognized the need to increase funding of the plans. Both contributed $1M annually for the past three years in addition to the required annual contribution. The result was a small dent in the unfunded liability total of $24 million.

Plan implementation requires that it be included in 2021-22 budget 
According to Town Manager Jacobs, the motion that the council approved directed her to “...incorporate into the recommended budget the capacity to move forward with this type of an option in the budget.” It did not direct her to implement the plan. As a consequence, the efficacy of implementing the plan will undergo much vetting over the next two months as the council and the public opine on the budget. 

Plan implementation in July if it is included in budget

If it is included in the budget, the town will deposit $10 million from the general fund into the PSPRS in July. Bonding will require a council resolution in July. The town will then issue $17M in pension obligation bonds in July, the proceeds of which will be contributed to the PSPRS. 

 

According to Jacobs, there is some urgency to move forward with the plan in order to take advantage of low interest rates. “I think the Vice Mayor is correct. If we’re going to do this the sooner that we can take advantage of the interest rates and shoot for as early in July as possible or sometime in that timetable. I think would be the best.”

Council Member's Green and Solomon question wisdom of implementing the plan

Council Member Mo Greene abstained from voting on the plan. He had asserted that there is no urgency to fund the plan. Greene stated that he had met with police union officials. They told him they were not concerned about the underfunding and that none of their member payments have been impacted by it. 

Council Member Solomon said that the plan must be considered in light of other town needs; that it should not be considered in isolation. He referenced other needs such as upgrades and improvements to town facilities and funding that may be required for parks and recreation. He also felt that obligating future councils to pay interest on and to pay off pension bond debt principal was a statement that future councils were not capable of dealing with the underfunding problem.

---

Censure Motion Withdrawn

It was "Much Ado About Nothing"

Council member Solomon, with the agreement of Council Member Greene, withdrew the motion that they had proffered to censure Council Member Bohen. They did this with the understanding that Bohen had apologized to Town Manager Jacobs for a remark Bohen had made at the prior town council meeting. 

As we reported this past Monday, the motion to censure was patently ridiculous.

---

Mayor Winfield Proclaims Oro Valley "A Golf Community"...Enthusiastic About Reopening Pusch View Golf Course

Winfield: “We are a golf community.”

Mayor Winfield declared that Oro Valley is a golf community at last week’s council meeting (4h21m 2/17/21 Oro Valley Town Council Meeting) This, he says, is supported by last year’s statistically valid resident survey done as part of the now in-progress Parks and Recreation ten year master plan project. 

This survey was one of several reasons he gave for championing the reopening and three year commitment to operating the Pusch Ridge Course. Other reasons he gave are an uptick in golf usage because of the Pandemic; and his assertion that the town owned golf courses are meeting their subsidy metrics. According to Winfield, the only problem with Pusch View nine hole golf course is that it has been under-promoted.

Winfield "Kicks the Can" down the road

When Winfield and fellow council members Steve Solomon and Mo Greene have their way, the course will operate starting November 1. It will close each year in May.  Three years will be the  horizon for determining what will happen next to the course. By that time, the Mayor will have completed his term. It will be someone else's challenge.

Open space option summarily rejected

The idea of allowing the property to revert to its natural state or turning it into a walking preserve was summarily rejected by Winfield and council at the February 17 council meeting.  They decided that that solution was too expensive. They based that on numbers provided by town staff. No council member challenged these numbers or the basis for them. As LOVE has previously noted, the natural space option is least costly over a five year planning horizon.

Council never considered the Pusch View Course's history of failure

The council did not discuss the operating history of this course during the meeting, a history that includes:

• The Town purchased three financially failed golf courses in 2014 from HSL Properties. HSL's purchase of the El Conquistador resort was financially feasible only if the Town took over these courses. That is what the Town did. The Town council raised the sales tax a half cent to subsidize the losses. The subside continues to this day.
• Once it owned the Pusch View Course, the Town observed that the course was underused and worked to market it. There was no success. 
• In 2016, the Town then tried to turn the course into a family entertainment center, adding things like larger holes on the green and Frisbee Golf. That didn't work to stimulate use either. You can read about the Town's enthusiasm for that here.
• In 2020, Town Council voted to discontinue the course so that the Town could lease the course back to HSL.

Winfield, Solomon and Greene must believe that the pandemic driven resurgence in course use in Oro Valley is going to continue after the Pandemic passes. They may be right. On the other hand, the fundamental reasons the sport of golf is in decline has not changed. Read about those things here.

Tim Bohen was the only council member to speak against reopening the course

Council Member Tim Bohen stated that the Town has excess golf inventory even in today's hot market.  “I just wanted to let the people know at Pusch Ridge Course: I’ve walked their course a couple of times. I’ve talked them. I have sympathy for their plight." He continued: "I really do believe as a responsible entity, we have inventory that we already have that we don’t consume and that is why I can’t support this.”

Winfield did not want a council resolution.  Jacobs insisted they that there be one.

Mayor Winfield stated at several different points during the February 17 council discussion that Town Manager Jacobs had enough information from listening to the discussion to formulate what town staff was to do next. He did not want a formal vote (“resolution”). Town Manager Jacobs insisted that there be one: "You tell me what. I will give you the how." 

RFP to lease Pusch View Golf included in resolution

Two of the three other council members, Vice Mayor Barrett and Council Member Josh Nicolson, successfully fought to insure that the resolution include directing the Town Manager to formulate  a request for proposal ("RFP") for someone to lease the facility.  That RFP will be issued and analyzed over the next seven months if approved by council.

The Resolution to reopen Pusch View Golf Course

Council passed the following resolution by a 6-1 vote: 

Resolved: “Town council directs staff to return with a plan for operation of the Pusch Ridge Golf course to be evaluated within three years as to its continued feasibility, capital improvement requirements while also looking at alternatives to look at water usage and potential new configurations and a third party lease.” 

Town Manager Jacobs will present the plan at the March 17 Town Council Meeting.

---

Bits and Pieces

Efforts to convert Vistoso Golf to public open space continue
According to an email from Preservevistoso.org, efforts continue by the Conservation Fund to acquire and convert the Vistoso Golf property to public use.

"Since May of 2020, The Conservation Fund (TCF) has been engaged in a partner-driven endeavor with the community, the Town of Oro Valley and other key individuals regarding the community’s desire to protect the beautiful features of the former +/- 208 acre Vistoso Golf Course (“Property”) including its nature preserve with wildlife and a 6-mile community trail that could be used for public benefit. Following the Town Council’s approval to begin these discussions at their public meeting in June, TCF began the process to begin negotiations with the property owner to purchase this property. TCF is also partnering with Preserve Vistoso, a local non-profit organization, regarding this endeavor to seek out the property’s potential of being preserved and added to the Town of Oro Valley’s public open space system where anyone can enjoy its breathtaking views along the winding pedestrian pathway which traverses the area. Of course, this effort is in the early stages and will continue to evolve especially given many moving parts. However, with the strong support received from the local community and the Town’s elected officials, TCF is poised to lead this endeavor and create long-term solutions that work for our partners."(source)

Rodman and Solomon Approved This

Rodman and Solomon never funded Community Center ADA needs...but now they support it
For the last four years while on council, Oro Valley Council Candidates Rodman and Solomon have voted in favor of every budget. No budget included funds need to make the Community Center ADA compliant. Neither ever brought this up as an issue.

Now Candidate Rodman talks about being a "good friend" to those with ADA needs; and Solomon talks about making the Community Center ADA compliant.

For three years, they didn't care. Now, during an election, it becomes important to them.

PPP Loans Saved 2,908 jobs for Oro Valley headquartered businesses
246 Oro Valley headquartered businesses saved 2,908 jobs by receiving $17.3 million in funding from the SBA Payroll Protection Program. The program was implemented to cope with the business closing impact on employees of the pandemic. The companies do not need to repay these funds as long as the funds were used to pay staff.

Many other businesses that have Oro Valley operations also received loans from the PPP program. For example, HSL's El Conquistador received a loan for up to $5million.
(source)

Town hires consultant to help local businesses
Town Manager Mary Jacobs has retained a consultant to help Community and Economic Development Manager, J.J. Johnson develop a plan to assist local businesses in the Covid-19 Pandemic (Source).
.
---

Councilmember Steve Solomon is disruptive during the Sun City Town Hall

During the June 30, 2020 Sun City Town Hall with all 5 town council candidates present, in typical Steve Solomon fashion, he was disrespectful to the moderator and the other candidates, disruptive of the process, and refused to follow the rules.

The moderator set the rules at the beginning of the town hall:
“I will ask each candidate a unique question and that candidate will have a minute and a half to answer. After that answer, in alphabetical order by last name, the other candidates will be provided up to 45 seconds for a quick response if they so desire.”

Therefore, whenever Bohen or Garner finished their answer, the order for giving a 45 second response would be: Greene – Rodman – Solomon.

But, as usual, Solomon refused to be respectful and follow the rules. In the attached video (just over one minute in length) you will witness the following:

Solomon interrupts Bohen
Tim Bohen discusses the fact that the people who made the largest donations to incumbents Rodman and Solomon’s 2016 town council campaigns were non-residents. (LOVE previously reported that these non-residents were developers, builders, and real estate PACs).

Solomon immediately interrupts. “There you go talking about 2016. If you want to accuse me of something, I suggest you (inaudible). Are we going to allow people to accuse other candidates…"

Throughout this interruption, the moderator can be heard repeatedly saying, “Mr. Solomon…Mr. Solomon…please.” But Solomon ignores him and continues talking over him. (This is the same behavior that Solomon exhibits during town council meetings.)

Solomon interrupts Garner
The moderator then calls on Bill Garner who says, “It’s pretty rich when he [Solomon] talks about his campaign finances because not one dime came from an Oro Valley resident in 2016…"

Solomon interrupts again. “That’s false, that is a lie, he cannot make a false statement a fact.” Garner attempted to finish his turn speaking but Solomon continued interrupting. “Do you live in Marana or do you live in Oro Valley? How about you address that question because you applied for the council in Marana.”

Garner: “Please cut Mr. Solomon off Mr. Moderator.” (Garner is polite and says “please.” He is asking, not demanding.)

Solomon barks orders to the moderator
Solomon: “No, cut Mr. Garner off if he’s going to lie.” (Solomon is abrupt and demanding. He is ordering, not asking.)

Moderator: “Please follow the outline.”

Solomon: “Well, how about we do this? How about we make a pledge not to make false accusations against the candidates because that’s an outright lie.”

(Now Solomon is telling the moderator how to run the meeting. He’s trying to take over the meeting just like he tries to take over Town Council meetings).

Moderator: “Mr. Solomon, you are free in your closing statement to say whatever you would like.”

Solomon’s Diversion Tactics
Solomon tried to make an issue out of a non-issue (Bill Garner’s place of residence) in order to create a diversion and take the focus off of his special-interest campaign contributors. So to clarify, Bill Garner and his family lived in Oro Valley from 2004-2017, then briefly lived in Marana for a little over a year, returning to Oro Valley in February 2019. So yes, Bill Garner is eligible to hold office in Oro Valley.

In 2018, after the sudden passing of Marana Councilmember Carol McGorray whom Garner had known personally for many years, he applied to fill the vacancy when there was a call for applicants to fill the remainder of her term. Garner never ran for the Marana Town Council and had no plans to do so.

LOVE Exclusive: HSL Money Poured Into Rodman and Solomon 2016 Campaign

This is the third of a three part series on the influence of developer and contractor donations on Oro Valley politics. Our first article covered the special funding of the 2014 campaign.  Our second article discussed the special interest donations in the recall election of 2015 and in the primary election of 2018. This final article focuses on the special interest money that poured into the Rodman and Solomon candidacies in 2016. 
---
The 2016 election of Bill Rodman and Steve Solomon
2016 was the only year between 2014 and 2018 in which Mayor Hiremath and his council majority were not on the ballot. There were six candidates that year. Three were incumbents. The incumbents raised a total of a few thousand dollars for that election.  Bill Rodman and Steve Solomon raised $47,600.

91% of Rodman and Solomon contributions came from special interest developers and contractors
In 2016, then candidates Bill Rodman and Steve Solomon were introduced to the big money special interests that Mayor Hiremath and his majority had solicited for the 2014 and 2015 elections.  Rodman and Solomon drank from this well of money. They took a huge gulp.

76% of Rodman and Solomon contributions were from HSL Properties
HSL Properties is the company that had so generously donated to the campaigns of Mayor Hiremath and his majority council members.

Somehow, current council members Rodman and Solomon had found the same "pot of gold" that Hiremath had uncovered in 2013; a source so rich that it literally financed all Oro Valley council majority campaigns from 2014 to 2018.

Two building related PACS further emphasized their funding financial dependence on the developer community. Rodman and Solomon each received $1,000 from the Southern Arizona Realtors PAC and $250 from the Southern Arizona Homebuilders Association (SAHBA).

Rodman and Solomon virtually had no public financial support
What is also striking is the lack of general public financial support of either candidate. Solomon received $33.38 while Rodman raised $925 from the public. Seven donors were listed on his report. Only three had residences listed as Oro Valley.

Does the past behavior predict future behavior?
Is it likely that Candidates Rodman and Solomon will raise funds from the special interest community for this election? It is, if past behavior predicts future behavior. We won't know who are their contributors until they file their campaign finance reports. One report is due at the end of this month. The other is due before the August election. Even then, we're not sure that information is accurate. Our review of the election reports revealed that information is sometimes left off of these reports, information that is reported later as amended campaign election reports.

So do stay tuned on this.

We will review and report what we learn when we learn it.
---
Source: The campaign financing information in these three articles was from the campaign finance reports filed by the candidates. There were about a hundred of these. A few of them were clear and concise. Many reports, especially those of Mayor Hiremath, were difficult to follow. Sometimes, the information on current contributions was in the wrong column; or the contributions called "campaign to date" were wrong. In some instances the "occupation" of the contributor was incorrect or their affiliated employer was wrong. We don't know nor did we ask if these reports are reviewed and audited by the town. But they should be audited and verified before being accepted.

Oro Valley Looks To Help Local Business Survive The Pandemic

Several measures considered
Last week, The Oro Valley Town Council discussed what the town is doing and what it can do in the future to aid those businesses in our community that have been decimated by Covid-19 social distancing imposed restrictions.

Grocers and home stores are booming, They are even hiring,  according to Dave Perry, head of The Greater Oro Valley's Chamber of Commerce ("GOVTC").

Overall, though the shock to small businesses has been extreme. As Council Member Solomon noted: "One day these were businesses that were thriving in a booming economy. The next day they are closed."

...to alleviate, in some fashion, this economic horror show
The State's shutdown of all non essential businesses is an economic horror show. It is a horror show that extends well beyond the retail and hospitality industry, It is a horror show that extends into the medical community, where dental offices are closed, physical therapy offices have limited hours, and local physicians are seeing fewer patients because people have been "scared into" not coming to appointments. Physicians have cancelled elective surgeries, impacting hospital use. 

All of this is a terrible economic blow to businesses and residents of Oro Valley. It is also a huge blow to Oro Valley's budget. A subject we will discuss in a future article.

Help to date
The town has moved to help retailers, relaxing Oro Valley's sign codes. For all small businesses, the town has a web page that lists resources for business to use, including links to the government's CARE program. According to Town Manager Mary Jacobs, the town has appointed an ombudsman to work with businesses, added police presence for retailers, and waived late fees for permit filings. The town intends to waive fees for emergency repairs. The town has suspended water disconnects. Many of these costs and fees are relatively small. Still, as Jacobs noted at the meeting, they are something.

Winfield: Residents need to help
Mayor Winfield commended businesses for taking their own initiatives, some closing voluntarily,

He asked residents we consider things we can do to support the jobs in our community (see video). For example, though the Best Buy store is closed, you can can buy on line and pick the product up at the store.

In concluding his remarks, Winfield asked that those of us who leave for the summer, consider remaining in Oro Valley this year to help sustain our local business.

Looking Forward
The town will collaborate with the Chamber of Commerce  to develop a data base of Oro Valley businesses. The database is needed so that both groups can reach the entire business community.  This effort will be led by the Chamber.

The town will consider other action items of at future meetings. For example, Council Member Solomon suggested that the town consider a sales tax holiday for some period. He believes that this would help both the consumer and businesses in town. In addition, he thinks that it might bring in business from outside the community.
--

Mayor and Vice Mayor Recall Effort Underway

Note: A previous version of this posting stated that Ed Slentz pulled recall petitions for Mayor Winfield and Vice-mayor Barrett. According to Slentz, "That is absolutely and categorically false, untrue and a lie. I have not initiated any such action" (Source: email from Ed Slentz) This is an inadvertent error on our part. Subject to check with town records, we believe that the individual is Thomas Plantz.
---
  Council Member Steve Solomon Attends Kickoff Meeting
This past Friday night, some Oro Valley residents met in the Sunset Room of the Community Center to prepare for an attempted recall of Mayor Winfield and Vice Mayor Barrett. Oro Valley Council Member Steve Solomon was standing in the back of the room. He is seen in the right in the picture we have posted. The meeting discussed petition 'Rules for Signing' and a 'Plan of Action'.

Solomon At Recall Meeting
Sunset Room
Community Center
Friday, November 8, 2019

Petition signature solicitation has started
Saturday, petition circulators set up a tent in the dirt lot on the left entering the Community Center. Oro Valley Thrives head Jen LeFevre and Oro Valley resident Mary Murphy were soliciting signatures Sunday. Oro Valley Thrives is comprised of members of the Town of Oro Valley Golf community. Circulators have been seen in other locations since then.

The issue:
Winfield and Barrett's support PAYg for Golf and Community Center Improvements
Lefevre was enthusiastic when, several weeks ago, the council voted to operate two golf courses. Her enthusiasm can be viewed in the clip of the KVOA Video that follows.

She is no longer enthusiastic because last week Mayor Winfield and Council Member Barrett said that they favor “pay as you go” (“PAYg”) financing for golf course improvements. They support this alternative over financing the improvements by issuing bonds or by borrowing from the town's general fund. The general fund is the fund that supports town operations. She fears that this will defer proposed improvements.

Other reasons given for a recall:
•  The council is looking both internally and externally for a police chief. They should select an internal candidate only
• Barrett is not always civil with other council members

• The degrading of the police department

• Winfield and Barrett have shown themselves to be disingenuous and untrustworthy

May 2020 is the election target date

The petition circulators are telling people that May 2020 is the election target date if the petitions are turned in. In order for this to happen, the group will have to submit 3,952 (for Mayor) and 3,668 (for council) validated Oro Valley resident registered voter signatures.
---

Guest View: Diane Peters ~ Councilmember Solomon violates the rules at the October 2nd and October 16th Town Council Meetings. Part 2.

Part 1 was published yesterday and discussed Solomon’s violation of Attorney-Client privilege. Scroll down beneath this article to read it. Today’s article discusses his violation of Parliamentary Rules and how he appears to see himself not just as a councilmember, but also as the mayor and town attorney all rolled into one.

Councilmember Solomon violates Town Council Parliamentary Rules
First some background on what led to the violation. During the October 16, 2019 Town Council Meeting, a discussion ensued regarding Mayor Winfield’s desire to reassign the Council Liaison positions for the various boards and commissions during that evening’s meeting rather than waiting until the current terms expire on December 31st.

Open Meeting Law
Winfield explained that he did not discuss the new council liaison assignments with each councilmember prior to the meeting because he was concerned about a possible violation of the Open Meeting Law since it was something that they would all be voting on. He consulted with the town attorney who recommended that he communicate the town council liaison appointments through the town manager, so that’s what he did.

Councilmembers Pina, Rodman, and Solomon become confrontational
Despite Mayor Winfield offering valid reasons for amending the liaison assignments and for not discussing the changes with the council beforehand, Councilmembers Pina, Rodman, and Solomon launched into multiple diatribes claiming that Winfield was disrespectful to them in not discussing the changes with them prior to the meeting.

The video of that discussion was posted on LOVE on October 21st. If you haven’t yet seen it, you can watch it HERE

“Town Attorney” Solomon speaks
Councilmember Solomon gave his “legal” opinion that, “if it’s done on an individual basis, it’s not a violation of the Open Meeting Law.” Solomon also insisted that not discussing the new liaison assignments beforehand, “shows a complete lack of cooperation, a complete lack of a desire to have the council work together, an obvious disdain for the other council members, and I could go on and on…” (Yes, we all know that Solomon likes to go on and on and on).

Mayor Winfield defends himself via waiving his attorney-client privilege
Winfield asked the town attorney to tell the council what advice he gave Winfield about discussing the liaison assignments prior to the meeting.

Attorney Cohen: “…As I recall, I received an inquiry from the mayor about, I believe you were in the process of coordination with the Town Manager to make certain assignments to the various boards and commissions amongst the council members, and you asked me if you could communicate with the individual council members, if that would be an Open Meeting Law violation, or if there was another way to do it, and my instruction, using one of my favorite phrases that I use all the time is, “out of an abundance of caution I think it would be best if it came from the Town Manager.”

It's interesting that Pina, Rodman, and Solomon argued this issue with the mayor but NOT with the town attorney who is the one who made the call, the one who gave the legal advice. All Winfield did was follow that legal advice. This is an example of how the minority council members like to twist things in order to make Winfield the bad guy.

“Mayor” Solomon speaks
Vice-Mayor Barrett made a motion to approve the amended liaison assignments. Councilmember Nicolson seconded the motion and then “Mayor” Solomon blurted out, “It’s been seconded and now it’s open for discussion. Correct?"


The proper parliamentary procedure is to say, “Mr. Mayor” and wait to be recognized before speaking. Solomon did not do that. He usurped the mayor’s role and attempted to commandeer the proceedings. This from a person who just accused the mayor of being disrespectful to certain council members! Winfield was visibly annoyed but maintained his composure. (I don’t know how he does it).

The mayor runs the meetings and it’s his job to announce that the motion had been seconded and is now up for discussion. Solomon taking control of the meeting is just one more example of him being out of control. (LOVE has published numerous articles on this topic.)

Excerpts from Town of Oro Valley Parliamentary Rules

"SECTION 10. Discussion and voting procedures – 10.3 Getting the Floor

Every Councilmember desiring to speak shall address the Mayor, and upon recognition by the Mayor, shall confine himself/herself to the question under debate.

SECTION 13. Code of Conduct – 13.6 Respect

Councilmembers shall show respect to all colleagues by acting in a professional and dignified manner whether in support of the issue or expressing an adverse point of view."

In my opinion, interrupting others, usurping the mayor’s role, speaking in a condescending tone, and making unfounded accusations is neither professional nor dignified and wreaks of desperation.
---
Diane Peters has lived in Oro Valley since 2003, moving here to escape the humidity of the East Coast. She’s been involved in OV politics and development issues since 2006. In 2014, she organized a citizens group, who over a 9-month period, successfully negotiated a controversial 200-acre development project. In her past life, she worked in medical research at various University Hospitals in New England. Her interests include reading, writing, nature photography, travel, art galleries, museums, and politics.

Guest View: Diane Peters ~ Councilmember Solomon violates the rules at the October 2nd and October 16th Town Council Meetings. Part 1.

Councilmember Solomon violates Attorney-Client privilege
During the “Council Reports” part of the October 2, 2016 Town Council Meeting, Councilmember Solomon read a privileged communication between the town attorney and the mayor and council.

Town Attorney Cohen explained the different types of Attorney-Client Privilege during the October 16th council meeting, when Mayor Winfield waived his attorney-client privilege in order to release private information.

“The lawyer has certain privileges with the body that only the body can waive. From time to time, the lawyer has confidential communication with individuals that are one-on-one. What we’re talking about here is a one-on-one communication with the mayor only, limited to an issue for the mayor that he has now instructed me to publicly disclose. This is not a “body” privilege. This is a one-on-one confidence.”

In the case of Mayor Winfield, it was a one-on-one confidence, therefore, he was the only one who needed to waive the attorney-client privilege in order for the communication to be made public.

In the case of Councilmember Solomon, however, the letter he read from the dais was a private communication between the town attorney and the entire council (the body). Therefore, the entire council needed to waive the attorney-client privilege before Councilmember Solomon could make it public. But that was not the case. The entire council had not waived the attorney-client privilege.

How I discovered this violation
I submitted a Public Records Request to obtain a copy of the letter. The Town responded that they could not release it due to attorney-client privilege. I responded that I thought the attorney-client privilege had been waived when Solomon read the letter publicly. The Town responded that the memo was addressed to the entire council and therefore the privilege had to be waived by the entire council and that Solomon made “a mistake” in releasing the content of that memo.

Solomon’s legal mistake is particularly amusing because during the October 16th council meeting, he professed to knowing more about the law than the town attorney. Read about that in Part 2. tomorrow.

Solomon doesn’t follow his own orders
When Councilmember Solomon was called out publicly at a prior meeting for having a conflict of interest regarding the golf course issue due to his being involved in a real estate deal to purchase property along the Canada Course, he denied it and said only, “I do not own property on the golf course.” He never admitted to being in escrow to purchase that property. He never admitted to planning to build condos and townhomes along that golf course.

With that in mind, it seems fitting to quote Solomon’s own words from the October 16th council meeting during his lecture on amending the council liaison appointments.

Solomon: “Be upfront about it. Be honest about it for once, what you’re doing. Don’t sit there and go through a whole charade of why this is happening.”

Perhaps Solomon should stop lecturing others on what he himself refuses to do.

Part 2, “Councilmember Solomon violates Town Council Parliamentary Rules” will be published tomorrow.