Guest View: Greene and Solomon overlooked citizen input prior to recent Town Council vote

 

Councilmembers Greene and Solomon made some questionable comments during the January 6th council discussions regarding the Kai property General Plan Amendment (GPA) at First and Tangerine.

Councilmember Solomon’s Comments
“In all the years I’ve been in Oro Valley and involved in land use issues, that’s well over 25 years, I’ve never seen a project that was so unanimously supported by all parties through the entire process.”

For the record, that “process” would include neighborhood meetings, Planning and Zoning public hearings, Town Council public hearings, and all the emails submitted by residents stating whether they were in favor of or opposed to this GPA.

Councilmember Solomon insisted that the citizens were in favor of the amendment, when, in fact, the opposite was true. (You can read many of the citizens’ comments HERE). Those in favor were the adjacent business owners and Chamber of Commerce President, Dave Perry.

Councilmember Greene’s Comments

“I haven’t been over the land use, but what I have done is listen to the careful presentations by people who are much smarter in land use and the needs of Oro Valley than I am. I think [leaving] the land vacant and hoping that some commercial person is going to suddenly come there is really neglecting what is going on with Amazon and online shopping. Even the merchants that live there and have businesses there have supported this idea. So I like to listen to the people who live there, who live around there, and let them give their voices to what we should do.”

Mr. Greene, listening to the business owners and the merchants who live in the area is not enough. As a responsible elected official, you also need to get off the golf course, read, study, learn, ask questions, verify, visit the site in question, and listen to the citizens whose lives will be impacted by YOUR decisions. Adjacent businesses owners are not necessarily Oro Valley citizens.

Greene’s statement reveals that he has no idea what his job is as a councilmember. He is an elected official and should be expected to understand land use issues. The presentations by the applicant and the Town staff are biased, and it is up to the councilmembers to separate the wheat from the chaff, know the appropriate codes, and know the relevant parts of the General Plan.

If a resident approaches you when you are out and about and asks you to explain your vote, responding that you approved it because the staff was in favor of it, or business owners were in favor of it, is not acceptable. You need to be able to explain your vote in terms of your research and how you came to your conclusion. Staff just provides a source of input, but their input should carry no more weight than a citizen.

- - -
Mike Zinkin and Diane Peters both contributed to this Guest View.

Guest View: Diane Peters ~ The Best Laid Plans?

During January 6th Public Hearing for the First and Tangerine General Plan Amendment (GPA) to allow multi-family residential zoning on a vacant commercial parcel, one resident (we’ll call him Mr. Double Standard) gave the following reasons for why the town council should approve the GPA. He said:

"I want to point out the fiscal benefits of this development. This is a fiscal no-brainer for the Town of Oro Valley: The construction sales tax, the residents supporting the water utility, the long-term sales tax benefits, the state-shared revenue.

I have said to many people that one of the reasons that Oro Valley Marketplace looks the way it does today...is the way this land looks right now. It's vacant. The land to the west of the marketplace is vacant. The land to the north of the marketplace is vacant. The land to the east of the marketplace is vacant. All of these have a very negative impact on Oro Valley Marketplace.

And as we look for that area of develop, this will be a great benefit. We've seen Big Lots close...Cost Plus...Dick's Sporting Goods. And you can relate that to the fact that the residential density close to the Oro Valley Marketplace is very low."

Let’s review his arguments.

Vacant land has a negative impact on business
Mr. Double Standard claims that the vacant land to the west, north, and east of Oro Valley Marketplace is the reason that The Marketplace never did well and is the reason that Big Lots, Cost Plus (World Market), and Dick’s Sporting Goods closed. Then why is the Wal-Mart at Oro Valley Marketplace still open when they have the same amount of nearby residents? Why did Sears at Tucson Mall close? They didn’t have enough nearby residents?

Vestar, the original developer and owner of Oro Valley Marketplace, had population and demographic studies done prior to pitching their Anywhere USA mall. They had the stats for how many people lived within X number of miles from that location and they projected that it would all work out beautifully – but now we are told that The Marketplace failed because they didn't have enough homes in that location.

Is Mr. Double Standard saying that Vestar's projections and population and demographic studies were wrong? Were they fabricated or slanted to show what Vestar needed them to show in order to get the town to sign on to the deal? If so, this might be a lesson not to trust the projections and population and demographic studies of other developers when they’re pitching their grandiose plans to the town.

Arguing with himself
When Vestar was pitching their mall, Mr. Double Standard was strongly in favor of it. He never spoke in opposition to it or claimed that it would fail because the land to the west, north, and east was vacant.

The pro-development crowd simply alters their arguments to suit their whims of the day. His current arguments are all just excuses to keep the Hiremath pro-growth agenda going.

Taxes and Water Utility Arguments
• The construction sales tax is not a recurring tax, it is a one-time tax.

• Stating that more residents will support the Oro Valley Water Utility overlooks the fact that Arizona is in an extreme drought, but yes, let’s keep bringing in more people to use more water.

In fact, according to the applicant’s (Paul Oland, Paradigm Land Design) GPA submittal narrative: “With a maximum of 167 housing units proposed, the maximum number of new residents expected to live onsite would be 392” and would “typically demand approximately 50,100 gallons of potable water per day.” Oland also admitted that keeping the existing C-1 zoning “would equate to a typical water demand of approximately 17,600 gallons per day.”

Mr. Double Standard said that approving the GPA was “a fiscal no-brainer.” One could argue that choosing to use 17,000 gallons of water a day vs. 50,000 gallons a day during a drought is an “environmental no-brainer.”

• Long-term sales tax benefits? That’s the same sales pitch we heard from Vestar when they were selling the town on the benefits of Oro Valley Marketplace, and yet half of the storefronts at OVM remained empty for the entire ten years that Vestar owned that mall (2008-2018).

What’s the perfect ratio?
So when does the growth end? What is the perfect ratio of businesses to population? Does anyone really know? Because no matter how many of each we have, I keep hearing that we need more people to support our businesses and we need more businesses to bring in sales tax dollars.

You know what else we need? We need open space (green space), healthy air, less traffic congestion, peace and quiet, and we need to protect the Sonoran desert and the wildlife who call it home.

Business saturation
I don’t recall any empty storefronts when I moved here in 2003. Our population has increased by approximately 15,000 since then, yet we now have an abundance of empty storefronts. This begs the question: Is increasing the population really the answer? Or do we have too many duplicate businesses? As an example, a quick internet search revealed approximately 20 nail salons in Oro Valley. How about three identical mattress stores at one intersection!  (One has since closed.  Gee, I wonder why).

- - -
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.

Jones-Ivey Asks Council to Reconsider Kai-Capri General Plan Amendment... After Rejecting It

Jones-Ivey asks town to reconsider   

Council Members Joyce Jones-Ivey and Mo Greene have asked the town council to reconsider its rejection of the Kai-Capri amendment. The reconsideration will be discussed tonight.

Sponsoring reconsideration does not mean that Jones-Ivey supports that this general plan amendment.  Rather, it may mean that she is offering support to a fellow council member who wants the motioned reheard.  A reconsideration requires one council member who voted against the plan to sponsor reconsideration.

The following are the two reasons Jones-Ivey voted against the amendment at the January 6 meeting.

Voted "No"for two reasons

Council Member Joyce Jones-Ivey voted “no” on the Kai-Capri general plan amendment at the January 6 council meeting. She joined Council Members Barrett, Bohan, and Nicolson in rejecting the amendment. You can read their remarks here. Jones-Ivey did not say why she voted "no" at that time. So we asked her. There were two reasons.

First, the existing land use provides a key alternative commercial site and should remain such

Jones-Ivey has been looking at the property for a long time. She considered its present land use when the council made changes to encourage economic development.  “I was looking a commercial properties and cataloguing in my mind what could be possible.” The Kai-Capri property “...was right on the top of my brain, mainly because of where it was located.” She concluded that is was properly zoned for neighborhood commercial given its easy access to Oracle, via First Avenue; and access on the newly widened Tangerine Road.

“If we are going to attract employers we are going to need some different locations for them to be able to look at.” In addition, Jones-Ivey noted, the property as zoned will be less disturbing to the habitat. “Leaving it as is just made sense.”

Second, the argument that the town needs more rooftops to support retail has not worked out over time

Jones-Ivey never thought that the amendment request, which changed over time, would come back to request housing on the property.

This presented a new challenge. 

“My other issue” became the high density of the land use.” The residential options the amendment sought ranged from single family housing to apartments. (Panel above). “That just seemed to be a repeat of the previous council’s position of ‘rooftops...rooftops...rooftops'. It just didn’t seem to address the issue of bringing in additional revenues.”

During her deliberations, Jones-Ivey spoke with Oro Valley Planning Director Bayer Vella. Vella emphasized that apartments bring in additional revenues. She wondered though: What kind? Reflecting on the result of the “rooftops strategy” she concluded that significant new primary employer jobs did not happen from more rooftops. Rather, Oro Valley got more eateries. “More eateries is nothing substantial in my mind. How many eateries can we have?"

---

Guest View: Diane Peters ~ Wildlife Matters

 

Despite being involved in Oro Valley development issues for the past 15 years, reading Dr. Amy Eisenberg’s recent Guest View on LOVE about the devastation on the Kai-Silverhawke property was an eye-opener even for me. (Read it HERE)

The Town needs to implement a Wildlife Conservation Ordinance
After reading her Guest View and witnessing what Meritage Homes was allowed to do on the Silverhawke property -- completely leveling the land and all those beautiful rolling hills (wildlife habitat) -- it appears that the Town does not have any protocols in place for protecting wildlife. Therefore, we can expect the same devastation to occur on the remaining Kai property at First and Tangerine if and when it is ever developed.

Since tortoises are very slow moving and cannot outrun a bulldozer, I can surmise from reading Dr. Eisenberg's article that some of them were crushed to death or buried alive during the mass grading of Silverhawke. And apparently the Town does not care because they are not federally protected. Until recently, I had no idea that there were tortoises living on that parcel.

Our Town Council has an opportunity, from this point forward, to establish a preconstruction protocol to analyze, protect, and perhaps relocate indigenous species living in the construction area. In light of what these animals could face, this is the humane, compassionate, and civilized thing to do. What the Town is currently allowing is just plain cruel.

The Town should require a “Wildlife Assessment and Plan” to be submitted with every development proposal and rezoning.

A wildlife biologist should be consulted
If the Town can arrange to have all the saguaro cactus counted on a property and make arrangements for them to either be protected in place or carefully relocated, they can certainly do the same for wildlife...and not just the ones on the Endangered Species List. How do you think they became endangered in the first place? It was due to the thoughtless, selfish, greedy, and reckless behavior of man.

Rather than destroying wildlife habitats and killing the wildlife, then waiting for their numbers to decline so much that they are eventually placed on the Endangered Species list, and then we must wait years (if not decades) for their numbers to increase again, why not be proactive and have protocols that prevent this from happening in the first place? 

Demolished tortoise habitat (Photo from Dr. Eisenberg's Guest View)

Oro Valley - It's in our nature!

Is it? Or is that just a slogan?


The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan
I’ve wrongly assumed all these years that Oro Valley’s wildlife was being catalogued and protected due to The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan that has been in effect since 1998. According to their website, below is one of the components in the plan:

• Working with local jurisdictions such as the City of Tucson, Town of Marana, Town of Oro Valley, and Town of Sahuarita on regional habitat conservation planning and the development of their conservation policies and ordinances. We also continually monitor how these policies and ordinances are applied to specific development projects.

This did not appear to happen on the Silverhawke property. Is the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan just a guide without any actual requirements and enforcement?

A plea to our Mayor and Council
Impacts to wildlife habitat must be considered in all future General Plan amendments and rezonings. I call on our Town Council and Town Staff to immediately begin implementation of a wildlife conservation plan. And not just a guide that can be overlooked or modified when convenient, but an actual Town Code to prevent this travesty from ever happening again. We must stop allowing wildlife to be killed simply because developers deem them to be in the way and disposable. On the contrary, it’s us humans who are in their way!

And do it now because we are not likely to have a more environmentally friendly council than this to do it.
- - -
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.

Barrett, Bohen, Nicolson "Shine" in Championing The General Plan

Clear support for the general plan

Vice Mayor Melanie Barrett, Council Members Tim Bohen and Josh Nicolson provided clear and unwavering support of the "Your Voice, Our Future" General Plan during last week's hearing of the Kai-Capri General Plan Amendment. They voted "No" together with Council Members Jones-Ivey. (Mayor Winfield voted "Yes".)

Barrett did her homework
Vice Mayor Barrett relies on her own analysis and not town staff to made decisions on the part of the residents. As a result, she concluded that the land use of this property should remain neighborhood commercial. She proffered five arguments in support.

There is already much land in the area zoned for residential use, land that has yet to be used

The argument that the town needs more residential property in the area of First and Tangerine to support retail located in the area has been used numerous times to justify converting commercially zoned property to residential. In fact, the prior council approved a number of commercial to retail zoning changes that are reasonably near First Avenue and Tangerine, properties that do not yet have residencies. These include Nakoma Sky (behind Home Depot); property at Rancho Vistoso and Vistoso Highlands Drive, property on the corner of LaCanada and Moore Road; and BigWash. To add yet another property before seeing the impact of these on retail in the area makes no sense. The town needs to first see how these other areas “play out”.

There are long term financial impacts on town spending to be considered

The town needs to move carefully, according to Barrett. There are long term financial impacts on town spending to be considered. She reminded the council of a study they had commissioned that noted that “The cost of municipal services is generally less for non residential development than for residential development.” Commercial haas more of an impact on the town.

Impact of recent land use changes to improve primary employment in area need time to bear fruit

Barrett also wants to see the impact of recent changes approved by this council before making yet another decision to rezone the Kai-Capri property. “We have spent a lot of the past two years... to expand property for primary employment.. Just a few months ago we passed a zoning code that would expand the allowable uses on this property... to allow it to be used for primary employment. Let’s see if this works before we consider rezoning for a different use.”

According to Barrett, the town had only 188 acres available for primary employment land before this change. Oro Valley already has a significant deficit in primary employment land compared to other towns (Marana). A town study said Oro Valley needed 300 acres to meet its ten year primary employee goal. Changing the zoning on the Kai-Capri property reduces primary employment land.

Amendment goes against some key general plan goals

“To me, there are goals in the general plan”.. that matter to her that the change proposed does not enrich. This property as currently zoned enhances some of the key challenges of meeting the general plan including the achieving the goals of improving long term financial and economic sustainability of the community, providing robust job opportunity for quality employment, minimizing traffic and maintaining a small town feel

Property, as zone, provides ideal commercial space

Her conclusion was that the Kai-Capri property as currently zoned provides for ideal commercial space. It is next to other commercial property. It’s close to “shovel ready.” The corner of First and Tangerine is one of the. last spaces in Oro Valley that provide significant commercial use opportunity.

Listen to her remarks in the panel above.

Nicolson presents two reasons he voted "no" 

Council Member Nicolson observed that proponents saying that there is not enough people living in the area of First and Tangerine fail to consider the enormous amount of discretionary spending just north of the area. He reiterated his commitment to supporting what he believes residents want (See panel left)

Bohen, likewise, did his homework
New Council Member Tim Bohen observed that the town has already done much since 2015 to make this area commercially feasible such as approving the Silverhawk development, the expansion of commercial land use to enable primary employment, the widening of Tangerine Road to provide better access to the area and marketing activities on the part of the town to let people know properties such as this are available for construction.

He concluded: “We are only three years into this ten year general plan.” This request “... does not rise to the threshold required for a change to the general plan. I respect the work that was done. I respect following the process.” 

- -

Winfield "Changed Position" By Voting Yes On The Kai Capri General Plan Amendment

Fails to seize his role to represent the views of the residents
Three Oro Valley Town Council members voted in favor of the Kai-Capri General Plan Amendment ("GPA") last week. One of them was Mayor Winfield.

That amendment would have allowed residential use on a commercial property. Last week, in a LOVE editorial, we discussed why we opposed the amendment. 

Thinks area needs more residents to support local business

Mayor Winfield supported the measure because he sees a need for more residents living in the area to support the businesses there. He concluded this after touring the area with the Director of the Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce, Dave Perry.  

Winfield believed that residents wanted this amendment to pass

Winfield "...was surprised by the low level of public participation. There certainly wasn’t any significant opposition to this effort as so I can only interpret that as being that there was community support. I would have liked to have seen for those that are opposing this to join us in this journey earlier in the process,” because town staff and others spent a lot of time on this.  

The Mayor has his facts wrong

Our fact check revealed that opposition was expressed by residents early in the process (source). There were 23 pages of comments as of September 15. All but four speak in opposition to the plan. We also know that there were many emails in opposition that were sent to council after September 15. 

Reneges on an election pledge

At the meeting, Winfield stated that the General Plan as something that can be changed. “Plans are not static. Plans are dynamic. Things change.” He believes that it was the intent of those who created the plan that details, such as land use, be determined by the GPA process.    

Winfield's view of the role of the General Plan is opposite of what he told us when he was running for council in 2018. Then, he said that one of his goals was to "...champion the General Plan." He also told us at that time that he was opposed to never-ending General Plan Amendments, rezoning approvals and the hyper-growth rate the town was experiencing. 

Trusts that staff to uphold the General Plan

As to upholding the will of the people as shown in the General Plan: “There’s no one who upholds the General Plan more than our staff does. And I want to applaud them for making our General Plan a priority.”

You can listen to Winfield's complete remarks in the panel at above right.

---
Tomorrow, read and listen to the measured remarks of Vice Mayor Barrett as well as the remarks of Council Members Bohen and Nicolson in opposition to this GPA.

Publisher's View: Say "No" To The Kai-Capri General Plan Amendment

The same old story...

We’ve seen a “ton” of general plan amendment requests during our 27 years of living in Oro Valley. Almost every request has passed. Almost every request was justified based on two factors: An increase in economic activity and the need for a change based on the petitioner’s perception of market demand.

Once again

Tonight, the Oro Valley Town Council will consider and then vote on the proposed Kai-Capri General Plan Amendment, an amendment that will convert commercial property to residential property. The request is being justified using the same old basis: The change will bring more people to Oro Valley and, thus, will add to economic activity; and the market really does want apartments, or casitas, or small homes or whatever the developer wants to put on the property… but not that for which it is planned and zoned… commercial use.

 

Failed "rooftops strategy"

Yes. More people do mean more economic activity. Yes. They will generate more sales and utility tax revenue for the town. But at what cost? More rooftops do not add to quality job growth. More rooftops do not bring the kind of high quality businesses the town wants. More rooftops do not add to our "small town feel."

That was why former Mayor Hiremath's “rooftops strategy” failed. Instead of attracting quality employers, more rooftops lead to more traffic on Oracle Road as people commuted to work. Retailers like Dick’s Sporting Goods and Big 5 closed up shop. Empty storefronts remained empty. Many still are empty. Just look at the Oro Valley Marketplace. All this happened while town population grew 10%. No. A bigger population is not going to save stores like World Market that are going to die anyway.

Market demand is always shifting back and forth

The second argument, a shift in market demand, is equally specious. The real estate market is always shifting. Residential is hot today because people are nesting in place due to the pandemic. Commercial is not hot because “people are nesting in place due to the pandemic.” A year from now it could all turnaround. And it likely will.

Two controls residents have over what happens in Oro Valley. 

One is the General Plan.

The General Plan is the vision of what residents want the town to be. The town spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to create it. Residents spent a million combined hours working on it. It took two years. It was overwhelmingly approved by the vote of the people in 2016. That plan includes a land use map that specifies how each area of the town will be used. The Kai-Capri property is designated for “commercial use.” It is ideal for commercial use. Unless there is some egregious error in this land designation, and there is not , there is no pressing need, no council imperative to turn over the will of the people.

The other is who residents elect to council

There is only one other way residents can control the future of the town. That way is by electing people to council who will uphold the general plan, protecting the wishes of the people as expressed in that plan. The residents elected those people in 2018, tossing out a Hiremath led majority that never rejected a general plan amendment. That council’s behavior was outrageous. That council approved two general plan amendments to the current general plan before the State ratified the election approval vote. To them, the general plan was merely a guide to be ignored as they wished. And they did ignore the plan countless times.

The will of the people as expressed in the general plan should over ride the will of a developer and town staff

It does not matter that town staff thinks that the plan should be approved because they think that it satisfies the five criteria for general plan amendment approval. That is their judgment. There are no hard and fast rules when it comes to the five criteria. A handful of unelected town staff members and a landowner should not be allowed to overrule the will of the people. The new majority, led by Mayor Winfield, and newly elected council person Tim Bohen, promised to uphold the general plan. We expect them to do that tonight by rejecting the Kai-Capri request. It is the right thing for them to do. 

Our message to council: Just say “No”.

---

Guest View: Mike Zinkin ~ Will your elected Oro Valley officials take charge tomorrow evening?

 

The Town Council meeting on Wednesday, January 6th will be very telling as to who actually governs Oro Valley. Is it the Town Manager/Staff or the elected officials, your Town Council?

There are two topics on the agenda that are worrisome
1. General Plan Amendment: One of the topics to be voted on is a General Plan amendment (GPA) converting a commercial corner into a residential one (either high density or medium density) on the SE corner of First and Tangerine. This vote should have occurred by December of 2020, but, due to an oversight by the Town Manager and Town Attorney, the topic was not listed as a “public hearing.” (The Mayor attempted to take some of the blame, but that was just a courtesy.)

The Town Manager and Town Attorney are responsible to post a legal agenda, while the mayor and the Agenda Committee are responsible for forming the agenda. Usually, after a public hearing, there is a council discussion and a vote. The December 30th Special meeting regarding this GPA allowed only for a discussion and no vote.

Look to the General Plan for guidance
So now we come to the January 6th meeting. The Kai General Plan amendment is posted as discussion and possible action (i.e. a vote.) Rather than listen to the recommendations from the staff as to whether or not to approve this GPA, why not look at the General Plan for guidance, as that is a valid document that states the recommendations of the citizens.

We know that Councilmember Solomon gives no credence to the General Plan as he voted to amend it during the same meeting in which it was approved (November 2016).

Bottom line: This property on the SE corner of First and Tangerine is one of the prime commercial corners in Oro Valley. The citizens desired it to be commercial. Our elected officials need to do their job and represent the citizens, not the Town staff, not the special interests.

2. Employee raises: This is another troubling item on the agenda. Town Manager, Mary Jacobs wants to give the employees a 3% raise. There was no employee raise in the FY 2020/21 budget for obvious reasons. Does Jacobs think that all the COVID issues are in the past because this is a new year?

The pandemic still continues. Many people in the private sector are unemployed or have had their hours cut drastically and some risk being evicted. Businesses are still closing. Yet, no Town employee has missed a paycheck or day of work and many worked from home. No Town employee has had to suffer like those in the private sector. But Jacobs wants to give a 3% raise to these employees. Will she ask for another raise in the FY 2021/22 budget as well?

Mayor and Council members: TAKE CHARGE of Oro Valley. Say NO to the General Plan Amendment and the requested raise.

Guest View: Amy Eisenberg, Ph.D. ~ Sonoran Desert Tortoises are Greatly Imperiled by Unsustainable Development in Oro Valley

This Guest View is derived from a letter sent by Dr. Eisenberg to the Town of Oro Valley regarding the proposed residential development of the Kai Property at First and Tangerine. LOVE added the subheadings. The destruction described below was witnessed on the large contiguous Kai parcel from Palisades Road to Tangerine. This is a large tortoise habitat that has been greatly reduced and fragmented due to development on that parcel.

A public hearing on this General Plan Amendment and Rezoning will be held this Wednesday, January 6th during a Town Council Special Session Zoom Meeting.  You may join the meeting and comment.  A link to the Zoom meeting can be found HERE

---

Sonoran Desert Tortoise dens destroyed by Meritage Homes and Capri Co., LLC
As stewards who reside in the adjacent community, we understand and witness that this parcel has environmental and archaeological significance: Sonoran Desert Tortoises - Gopherus morafkai reside on this parcel and some of their dens were destroyed during Capri Co., LLC trenching and Meritage Homes development during tortoise brumation! This is unlawful, unethical, unacceptable and disgraceful. I contacted the President of Meritage Homes, Jeff Grobstein and Steve Hilton as well as Game and Fish to no avail!

*No hired biologist monitored this before the destruction except myself, and I was not consulted by the developers who destroyed the tortoise dens and burrows.

An illegal dumping ground
There are significant native plants and trees on this parcel as well as ancestral tools, Native American trails, ceramic shards and worked stone. Kai and Capri have been irresponsible and negligent land owners and developers. Kai has allowed this parcel to be an illegal dumping ground for many years. As stewards, we reported illegal dumping on this site to the police on numerous occasions.

Unsustainable development of this parcel leads to environmental impacts to the native plant and animal communities as well as the human community. Meritage Homes is currently trashing the parcel and workers are leaving their garbage and recyclables all around the perimeter of the Meritage Homes development zone. It is disrespectful and unacceptable. I reported this illegal dumping to Oro Valley Government, the Arizona Attorney General, and the Better Business Bureau.

Lack of respect towards native plants, trees, and wildlife
A healthy intact environment sustains life. The continued destruction of this parcel with its significant plants, trees and animal communities will be further harmed by this proposed development and it will further impact the human community. Extensive trash, destruction of animal burrows and dens, workers treating the desert parcel as a wasteland, workers defecating and leaving their fecal matter and wiping paper is a health and sanitation hazard and violation. I reported this to Oro Valley government to no avail!

Tortoise Den on Kai parcel

Shame on Kai and Capri Co., LLC for their unethical and shoddy practices of digging deep vertical trenches that entrapped native animals without placing barriers, destroying tortoise habitat, burrows and dens, and archaeologically significant sites and trails. Our human health and well-being are inextricably tied to a healthy environment. Kai, Meritage Homes, and Capri Co., LLC have negatively impacted the environment with their irresponsible development practices, negligence and illegal dumping.


Oro Valley government is certainly complicit
Oro Valley gives a green light to many unsustainable developers who have irreparably altered the natural environment to a great extent. There are mounds of hundreds of pounds of rusting cables and rusting hardware on this parcel that have been dumped there for decades. This impedes the growth of native plants and the safety of native animals that travel in this zone. It appears that Kai is not at all concerned that illegal dumping has been occurring on this once beautiful parcel and this is lamentable. As Arizona stewards, we greatly care and have cleaned up hundreds of pounds of illegally dumped trash by Meritage Homes, American Tower workers, contractors, Capri Co., LLC workers and others. These irresponsible adults should be cleaning up after themselves, but sadly, this is not the case.

Demolished tortoise habitat

A sacred homeland
This type of shoddy development is unsustainable, unacceptable, and negligent. NO, indeed, we are strongly opposed to this proposed development project. Enough damage has been done to this once pristine and beautiful parcel that is rich with Native American history in the Tohono O’odham Haki: Dag - the sacred homeland of the Tohono O’odham Nation.

As knowledgeable stewards and citizens, we must all carefully and responsibly respect and safeguard the Sonoran Desert Tortoises that still live on this greatly fragmented parcel. Sonoran Desert Tortoises and their broken habitat will surely be further devastated by the impending proposed development. They will not survive the onslaught! Gopherus morafkai urgently need Federal Protection to ensure their perpetuity and wellbeing. These magnificent creatures of the Sonoran Desert greatly deserve this.

[As previously reported on LOVE, the proposals for the remaining undeveloped land on this parcel include five land use options: apartments, rental casitas, townhomes, senior care facility, and single family residential.]

- - -
Dr. Eisenberg is an ethnoecologist and botanist who teaches at the University of Arizona and is an Associate Scholar with Center for World Indigenous Studies. She has authored and co-authored numerous articles on indigenous peoples’ issues, social and environmental impact assessment, and sustainable natural resource management.

Kai First Ave and Tangerine Public Hearing Tonight

The Oro Valley Town Council is holding a special session tonight. The session is for a public hearing on the general plan amendment for the property located on the southwest corner of Tangerine and First Avenue. We have previously reported on it.

"Because this item was previously continued on December 2, 2020 by the Town Council to its January 6, 2021 meeting, no action may be taken. The only purpose of this item is to provide a presentation and hold a public hearing as an additional opportunity for resident comment that ensures the Town meets the state requirement for hearing all Type I General Plan Amendments within the same calendar year submitted. “\" (Source)

This link provides information on how to join this meeting.

---

1st and Tangerine General Plan Public Hearing On December 30

A previously unschedule meeting that must be held

The town council will hold a Zoom session on December 30 at 5pm to discuss and take possible action on the 1st Avenue and Tangerine Road General Plan Amendment.

The council failed to hold this hearing at its December 2 meeting because Town Manager Jacobs failed to post the public hearing notice. The council voted to defer the hearing until January 6. As LOVE noted at that time, this violated state law requirements that the council hold the hearing with the calendar year of the request. Thus, the need for the hearing on the 30th.

The council does not need to make a decision on the 30th. Council can continue its decision until the planned January 6 hearing.

Town needs to fix meeting link

The town will need to correct the link to the meeting. The link is to the "meetings and agenda" page. That page does not show the December 30 council meeting.  

Another landowner money maker

Like all general plan amendments, this one stands to make the Kai family millions. They seek to change the general plan designation on this property from commercial to residential. As we’ve reported, they have submitted five plans: Apartments; Rental Casitas; Senior Care; Townhomes; and Single Family Residential.

These will substantially increase property density. They are attempting to justify this based on “market demand.”

The family has already benefitted greatly from the generosity of the Hiremath majority, with land use change and rezoning of acres south of the lot for the Silverhawk development.

You can learn more about the requested amendment here.

---

Town Manager Error Causes Delay In Kai Amendment Decision. Possible Legal Violation

Failure to post public hearing notice

The Oro Valley Town council voted to continue the hearing on the Kai General Plan amendment to the January 6th meeting. Oro Valley Town Manager Mary Jacobs failed to post notice of public hearing on the amendment. 

A public hearing on a general plan amendment is required before the council can vote. Jacobs had posted public hearing notice for the rezoning that would have been required if the council approved the general plan amendment; but she did not post public hearing notice for the general plan amendment. This notice of public hearing is published as part of the agenda. (See Agenda Item 2)

Mayor Winfield attempted to shoulder responsibility for this mistake by noting that he is responsible for setting the agenda. 

The legal violation is that the town is required by state statute to hear a general plan amendment before year end. They can make the decision after year end but they must hear it by year end. A hearing on January 6. 2021 does not meet this statutory requirement.

Council assignments approved

The Council approved the council liaison to commission assignments. The assignments are shown in yesterday's LOVE posting.

Barrett to serve second term as Vice-Mayor

The council approved Council Member Melanie Barrett as Vice Mayor for a second term. The vote was 5-1. Council Member Solomon voted "no". Council Member Jones-Ivey was absent.
---

Tonight's A Busy Night For Council

Tonight, the Oro Valley Town Council will consider four important items: A staff update on the implementation of the 2016 Your Voice Our Future General Plan; discussion and approval of town board and commission council liaison assignments; the election of the Vice Mayor for 2021; and consideration of the Kai General Plan Amendment. Here's a peak at what is in store.

General Plan Update: 71% of implementation tasks completed

The Town Manager is required to provide an annual progress report on the progress on general plan action items.  There are 310 action items in the plan.  Town Manager Jacobs will report that the town has accomplished 71% of these, either as separate tasks or through ongoing operations. Approximately 75% of the remaining tasks are in progress. 

Proposed board and commission liaison assignments present little change

The proposed council liaison assignments are shown in the panel at right. There are two changes. New members Bohen and Green will replace the assignments of prior members Pina and Rodman, respectively. Bohen will liaison with the Water Commission. Greene will liaison with the Stormwater Utility Commission.

Vice Mayor Selection

The Vice Mayor serves in the role of Mayor when the Mayor is absent.  Melanie Barrett is the current Vice Mayor. We suspect no change here.

"Silverhawke" General Plan Amendment and Rezoning

The town is required to hear general plan amendments by year end. There is one this year. We previously reported on a proposed general plan amendment for the property that in north of and abuts the Silverhawke Development.  It is bounded by Tangerine and First Avenue. 

This property is owned by the Kai Family. They contributed $3,500 to Council Member Solomon's campaign this year.   

Since the first public hearing in October, the applicant revised their request such that approval of the amendment will only require a simple council majority, and not a super, five-vote, majority. 

The applicant is presenting five land use options (shown above, left panel) for the land use rezoning request. This request will only be viable if the council approves the general plan amendment. Council approval of the zoning request will give the landowner the right to pick from any of these options without future council review. 

You can read the details of this proposed amending and the accompanying rezonig here.

---

Guest View-Jack Stinnett: Bill Rodman Is Proven Leader of "Over-development"

Rodman's voting record fostered Oro Valley Over-Development
During the early Hiremath years, Council Member Bill Rodman sat on the Planning and Zoning Commission. These are years in which Oro Valley moved toward over-development. Rodman was at the epicenter of it all.

Rodman's record shows that he is a proven leader in over-development. From 2012-2016, while on the Planning and Zoning Commission. Rodman demonstrated his bias by approving wealthy land owner and developer requests.

Want proof? Just look at his voting record while on the Planning and Zoning Commission
During these years, Rodman rarely saw a General Plan amendment or rezoning he did not like. Rodman approved the following while he was on the Planning and Zoning Commission:

• Increased building heights for El Corredor apartments; 
• Approved a General Plan Amendment, ESL Amendment, and Rezoning for a 5-story retirement community (the abandoned Nakoma Sky project) on 79.5 acres;
• Voted to approve rezoning 45 acres from R1-144 to R1-7 (144,000 sqft to 7,000 sqft lots) on Naranja near La Cholla; 
• Approved rezoning 149 acres at Tangerine and First Ave ["Kai" property] from 3 acre lots to Medium Density Residential and commercial; 
• Supported a Major General Plan Amendment of the Olsen property from Low Density Residential and open space to Medium Density Residential.

This is  just a sample. 

Rodman has continued his over-development stance while on council
Rodman brought his over-development bias with him when he was elected to Town Council in 2016. From 2016 to 2018, while Hiremath was in control of council, Rodman approved thirteen General Plan amendments and/or rezoning requests. Indeed, he voted for one of these General Plan Amendments while he was a council member for less than three hours!

The only reason Rodman has not shown his over-development bias in the past two years is that you, the voters, replaced the Hiremath council with a council that was far more resident friendly, and far less developer friendly.

We need leaders who put the people first
Yes. Incumbent Bill Rodman has demonstrated “proven leadership” but unfortunately it’s been directed at steering developer projects through and around Oro Valley’s General Plan process, Environmentally Sensitive Lands rules, and town zoning codes.

This might be a good thing for developers.

But it is a bad thing for the residents of Oro Valley.

Let’s be sure to elect council members that place residents, not developers first.
---
Jack Stinnett is an Oro Valley resident. He graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy and served on Minesweepers and Destroyers. After his military service, Jack was employed as an engineer and plant manager in the Nuclear Power industry, a factory manager in the automotive industry, and Vice-President of a worldwide engine components business. Jack finished his career as President and CEO of Morris Material Handling in Milwaukee. He and his wife, Connie, moved to Oro Valley in 2011. Jack was a member of Oro Valley Parks and Recreation Commission from 2012-2014, serving as Chairman in 2013-2014. He enjoys woodworking, biking, and visiting his grandchildren.

Guest View: Diane Peters ~ Development In The Time of a Pandemic

In the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Town, in accordance with maintaining proper social distancing measures, has been forced to consider alternatives for the required Neighborhood Meetings for General Plan Amendments (GPA's). These alternatives will reduce citizen input by a considerable margin.

Two GPA's have recently been filed with the Town. One request is to convert the now-closed Vistoso Golf Course (Romspen property) from golf course and recreational use to medium and high-density residential. (Nearby residents prefer that this land remain as a nature preserve and community trail.)

The other request is to convert 24 acres of land on Tangerine Road just east of First Avenue (Kai Property) from commercial to multi-family residential including rental casitas, 2-story apartments and townhomes, and a senior care facility.

The normal scheme of things
Oro Valley Town Code requires that all General Plan Amendments must be filed prior to April 30th each year.  State law requires that the GPA be heard by the Town Council prior to December 31st of the same year.

Town Code also requires Neighborhood Meetings to apprise nearby residents of the proposal and to afford them an opportunity to ask questions and give input. The first Neighborhood Meeting must be held prior to the applicant filing their formal submission. In other words, before April 30th.

Town code also mandates that “Neighborhood meetings must be held in a facility that is accessible to the general public, such as a town-owned facility, school, house of worship, or community recreation center.”

Enter the pandemic and social distancing
Due to social distancing, the town is not currently able to hold Neighborhood Meetings in a public facility. Some residents have asked the mayor to issue a proclamation whereby the Town could still accept the applications but suspend further action on them until the pandemic subsides. As I write this, the Town has rejected this idea in favor of the use of video meetings.

Some residents contacted the mayor and council with our thoughts on why video meetings were a bad idea. Our thoughts are as follows:

• Video meetings are impractical.
A lot of spontaneous communication takes place at Neighborhood Meetings. An applicant’s answer to one question spurs another question from another participant. Allowing only for questions to be submitted ahead of time completely disallows for this kind of spontaneity, leading to many residents questions being left unanswered.

• Some citizens do not have the hardware/software or the computer expertise to attend a video meeting.
Substituting in-person meetings with video meetings means that less citizens will be involved in the process, they'll have less of a voice in the outcome, and the applicant and landowner will get to have an easy process where they don't have to face down a mob of angry citizens.

• There's power in numbers.
Video meetings minimize the power of the citizens by not allowing them to come together as a group. How can people watching from home be anywhere near as persuasive or effective as they are in a public group setting? Video meetings amount to another form of the divide and conquer technique.

And then there’s this…The golf course meetings precedent
Think about all the 2019 golf course public meetings. All of those meetings were packed and standing room only. Would those residents have been as effective if they were attending those meetings from home rather than showing up en masse, supporting each other and showing their "strength in numbers?" I doubt it.

And just as there were thousands of Canada Hills residents who would be directly affected by the closing of the town-owned golf courses, there are thousands of residents living in Rancho Vistoso who are directly affected by the Romspen proposal to convert their golf course views into something much less desirable. Rancho Vistoso residents should be afforded the same opportunities to come together and voice their concerns as their counterparts in Canada Hills.

A precedent was set in allowing Canada Hills residents to have such a large and unifying voice. To do less for other residents in town is going to be viewed very unfavorably.

And no, I do not live in Rancho Vistoso. I just want a fair and equitable process for everyone.
...
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.

A Tempest Is Brewing Over The Kai Property

If you live near or around the Kai property then you are in the heart of a brewing tempest.  If you live close to in, in areas such as Catalina Shadows, Catalina Shadow Estates and Palisades Point, then you are in for a treat.  This conclusion reached based on our interviews of those who attended a neighborhood meeting last week.  Attendees heard and provided comment on a "zoning request" for the Kai Property, which sits as prime real estate off of First Avenue.

Click To Enlarge

Developer WLB Management wants to build 195 homes on 7,000 sq. ft. lots on the portion of the property that is north of Palisades and East of First Avenue.  The portion south of Palisades would remain the same zoning which is low density residential.

We think that this change requires a change in the property's 2005 General Plan designated  "land use;" and a zoning change from low density residential to medium density residential.

However, town staff and the developer don't agree.  They think that this is not a land use change.  It is nothing more than a zoning change, requiring a simple majority approval by council.  We've commented on this. ( (Kai Property: Here We Go Again).

We think that a "legal" determination needs to be made on the meaning of the key words in the 2005 general plan in relation to the Kai property. The word is "overall".   We believe that, in 2005, one unit per acre was agreed to be the residential density of the entire residential portion of the property. Town staff is interpreting the term to mean an average density over the entire property.

Residents attending last week's neighborhood had other concerns:

• Habitat Destruction of Eagles Nests:  Apparently there are an number of eagles' nests on the property that would be disturbed by any construction.
• Road way exit for the property would only be onto Palisades, creating significant additional traffic. This will also create, they allege, safety hazard for walkers on Palisades and a challenge for school bus stops.
• 195 new homes will add children to, what are likely to be, overcrowded schools in Oro Valley given all the other construction taking place.

We are hopeful that town staff will hold another neighborhood meeting.  If not, the next time the public will have an opportunity to opine on this, other than here, will be at the first of two required Planning and Zoning Commission hearings.

---

The Kai Property: Here We Go Again

The town is hosting a neighborhood meeting on a request to rezone 117 of the 271 acres of the Kai Property to medium density residential.  This request is to accommodate 195 single family homes. The rezoning is to reduce lot requirements form acre lots to 7.000 square foot lots.  The property is located between Palisades, First Avenue, and Tangerine Road.  We describe what we think this property will be in a July 2012 Bits and Pieces posting.

Every few years, owner Herb Kai requests a change in zoning from low density residential, as approved in the 2005 General Plan.

Our blog contains a history of these events (Search Word: Kai).  In 2010, we noted that, over a 5-year period, owner Herb Kai had requested a general plan amendment for "...among other things, offices, shops, restaurants, housing and a continuing-care center for seniors..."  We also noted, at that time, the display of political signs on his property, nicely visible to travelers on First Avenue.  There were two sign's apiece for Mayor Hiremath, and Council Member Waters and Hornat.  Council Member Snider needed no sign. She has already been elected to council.

At that time, Oro Valley resident, Alan Dankwerth, was quoted as saying that, the blog, by noting the placement of these signs on the property, was implying that "...if elected, these three, since they were permitted to place their signs on the property, will help the Kais, should they request, to obtain an amendment to the general plan." (Source)

Yes. That is exactly what we implied. In fact, we did more than imply, On May 10, 2010, we asked: "Perhaps Satish cut a deal with the Kai's to support rezoning their property on 1st Avenue?"

Dankwerth further observed that "Changing an existing zoning designation of this type requires passage of a major amendment. Two-thirds or five town council members must approve it.  Prior to its reaching the council, two public hearings are held by the Planning & Zoning Commission, as well as two neighborhood meetings. There is a public hearing at the town council meeting should the request get that far."

The present request is not being viewed as a request requiring a general plan amendment.  Rather, they are viewing it as a rezoning of the master planned community. Thus, at the moment, the town is arguing that no general plan amendment is required.

Whether or not this request requires a general plan amendment or a zoning change matters.  A major general plan amendment requires a 5-vote council majority.  A rezoning requires a 4-vote council majority.  And, given past political support by Kai, we suspect that, absent enormous public outcry, the majority-4 in council will approve it.

At the moment, this determination matters more than what is actually being planned for the property.
---

A Special CAUTION To Homeowners By Palisades Road

What does the name Herb Kai mean to you? Some recognize the name as Marana's Vice Mayor.

Those of our neighbors living in Catalina Shadows or the custom homes at Palisades get frightened beyond belief when the name "Kai" comes up.

Why?

Because Herb Kai and his family own some 271 acres of land in and around the only entrance to their homes.

That's fine. What's not fine is the fact for the last five years and more, the Kai's have been coming to the Oro Valley Council requesting a General Plan Amendment to change the zoning.

What do they want?

Well, among other things, offices, shops, restaurants, housing and a continuing-care center for seniors have been requested.

Why bring this up now, you ask?

Anybody driving on 1st Ave from Oracle road towards Rancho Vistoso Blvd can't help but notice six candidate signs on Kai's property---- two each for Hiremath, Hornat & Waters.

Why is that an issue?

Who do you think will help Herb Kai with a General Plan Amendment, if elected?

Yup!It's those that have their signs there.

ONLY MIKLE ZINKIN & MATT RABB ARE ON RECORD OF STATING, "NO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS UNLESS IT SERVES THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE!"


Serve your own interests! VOTE FOR MIKE ZINKIN & ONLY MATT RABB.

Patty Estes Responds To Recent Explorer Editorial--Re: Kai Property

We previously took exception to this same editorial in a recent posting. Explorer Editorial: "Let's Deal Straight Up"

Below is Patty Estes. letter printed in the July 2 Explorer.
************************************************************************************

In OV, there are no backroom developer deals

This letter is in response to “Let’s Deal Straight Up,” June 18.

It is interesting that the editor did not mention the Oro Valley General Plan even once in the editorial. The Kais, prosperous Marana businessmen, were seeking a major amendment to the general plan, ratified by the Oro Valley voters in 2005. All stakeholders, including the Kais, were part of that process. In addition, the general plan process clearly defines the numerous public meetings which are required to take place before a major amendment can even be heard before the town council. Only one such meeting had taken place before the Kais withdrew their proposal.

The editor stated that the neighbors don’t want more neighbors. The current General Plan designation allows 255 homes (roughly three times what current zoning allows for that property) plus a neighborhood commercial area. This hardly constitutes denying the Kais use of their property. The current general plan protects riparian areas, open space, and slopes, and encourages clustering. These were not added by the recent proposal.

Yes, many residents do worry about incompatible uses adjacent to their homes. In fact, industrial / commercial / professional parks often do not want to be adjacent to residential areas. Ventana Medical even sued the town of Oro Valley when they changed the zoning on an adjacent parcel to residential. The purpose of zoning regulations is to ensure that uses are compatible, benefit the community, and reduce conflict. The standards for infill are necessarily more stringent than when developing property with no existing neighbors.

I am very curious as to what the editor means by Oro Valley being surrounded by “relative mess.” Is he referring to Marana and unincorporated Pima County?

When the town of Oro Valley follows the rules outlined in the general plan, it inspires confidence in the residents. Contrary to the feelings of the editor, this experience goes a long way to restoring the faith of the citizens in the processes of government. It allows all sides to be heard in public meetings and dispels the notion that backroom deals with developers are business as usual in Oro Valley.

Patty Estes

Oro Valley

Explorer Editorial: "Let's Deal Straight Up"

Let me go on record that I had the pleasure of meeting Dave Perry, editor & publisher of The Explorer shortly after he arrived here a little more than 6 months ago. Subsequently, Dave & I have spoken and he even suggested we meet for lunch---his treat.
So---what's not to like?

Well, in case you missed Dave's editorial comments in the June 18 Explorer, he addresses a number of issues pertaining to Oro Valley.

Perhaps one advantage I have over Dave is the fact that while he has been a resident of Oro Valley for approx. 6 months, I've been here going on 15 years.

Therefore, I think Dave misses a few points on some of the issues he addresses.

Let's take the Kai property, for one.
Dave writes: "The Kais have as much right to use their land as those who live on horse properties."

No argument, but Dave----the Kais were looking for a General Plan Amendment to change the zoning. Do you know how much time, effort and money was spent to finally generate a General Plan that the voters could accept? Why in the world would the neighbors say "To hell with the General Plan. Let Kai build what he wants."

No! The neighbors stood up for their rights, and it appears the Kais realized we now have a town council that will not cave in and go along with every developer's request.

I think you missed the point on this issue Dave.

Your comment that "There’s no point in sending the developers elsewhere, lest Oro Valley become an island surrounded by relative mess. So let’s deal with the developers, straight up"
fails to acknowledge that the developers have pretty much gotten whatever they asked for, in particular over the last 8 years or more. Regardless of whether it was retail developments, with the approx $50 million in giveaways, or the home builders who were receiving favorable treatment when it came to impact fees, I for one couldn't be more pleased that we now have a council with common sense that will be a lot more fiscally responsible. As I noted in a recent posting, if SAHBA isn't happy with our "new rules," they may want to do their home building in South Tucson in lieu of Oro Valley.

You mention that "The Greater Oro Valley Arts Council has put out the call to its constituency, urging a show of support for the arts at the town council meeting Wednesday night." You may not realize it, but not too long ago, Dick Johnson----who voted for all those giveaways during his tenure on the OV Council, put out a call in a GOVAC newsletter to have kids from all over the place come and tell our council how our citizens should tax ourselves for the Naranja Park. If it wasn't so sad, it would have been funny. Kids from outside of Oro Valley asking for the dozens of fields so they would not have to travel so far. Oro Valley kids were one thing. Outsiders were something else.

Fortunately, this new council will not be swayed by groups or individuals coming with "their hands out" looking for financial help. This council will do what is best for the people, and if that means curtailing some funds, so be it.

Lastly, you allude to Vestar. You write: "Many people in Oro Valley are angry and upset about the massive retail complex rising along Oracle Road. Some believe they were misled."
On this issue, you will get no argument from me.

Glad to see you writing your opinion about what's going on in Oro Valley. Too bad, but I think you "missed the target" on too many issues.

Hopefully, we can talk about it more over lunch----if you're still buying!

Read Dave's Editorial here
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2008/06/24/opinion/editorials/doc485834241a853296292803.txt