Hiiremath Supporters Attempting To Recall Zinkin

The Arizona Daily Star reported yesterday, with a follow-up today, of the taking out of recall papers on Council Member Zinkin.  The papers were taken out by "The Oro Valley Citizens for Ethical Government." One of the organizers of this effort is Jane Burge, wife of Mayor Hiremath's still active political campaign treasurer and contributor.

The chairman of the committee is Kevin Jones.  Jones wrote a letter to the Explorer that was published on June 8, 2011.  In that letter, Jones "railed" at an effort to recall Council Members Hornat and Snider.  Jones wrote:

"The attempted recall of Oro Valley council members Joe Hornat and Mary Snider is a needless distraction to our community and reeks of pure hypocrisy. This effort is being driven by a small number of bitter, discontented residents who resent the outcome of our last election and are now trying to sabotage our duly elected officials from doing the job we elected them to do."

Seems that Jones is doing exactly what he says was wrong to do.  Duplicitious?  You think?

It is no coincidence that this recall effort is launched after the Oro Valley Police Officers Association (OVPOA) and its leader, Marshall Morris  Last week, OVPOA declared war on Zinkin.  OVPOA went "ballistic" because Zinkin had the audacity to ask for overtime pay information by levels (not by individual) of the police department.  This very act threatened public safety, according to the letter they filed with Oro Valley's human resource director.  The hand of OVPOA most certainly is also behind this.

So, the gauntlet has been thrown.

According to Mayor Hiremath who, according to the Daily Star, denies any complicity in the recall effort: "Zinkin is being recalled mainly because of documented instances of inappropriate comments to female town employees, as well as racially insensitive remarks."

He  is, of course, not being truthful about his involvement.   How would he know about why this effort is underway if he is not part of it?

In addition, the alleged insensitive remarks are not a reason to recall an elected official.  A recall should be justified in only the most egregious of circumstances.

The attempt to recall Zinkin is a critical cog in the ability of the Majority-4 ( Mayor Hiremath and Council Members Waters, Snider and Hornat) all of whom will be up for reelection next year, to maintain "iron-fist" control of the town. It is an attempt by OVPOA to maintain "iron-fist" control.  In their mind, Zinkin, who is truly the voice of the people, must be silenced.
---

OVPOA Goes to War On Council Member Zinkin

The Oro Valley Police Officers Association has declared war on Council Member Mike Zinkin. This is our conclusion based on a series of simple events in the past week.

The Facts

Earlier this month, Council Member Zinkin requested information regarding police overtime. He asked to receive a report regarding which program received overtime in each pay period. He did not ask for information by individual, just in total for each of the nine programs in the police budget.

Zikiin's request was made to Police Chief Sharp. Zinkin clarified what he wanted in an email to Town Manager Caton.  Click here to read both of these communications.

Somehow, the OVPOA was informed of the request. Marshall Morris, President of the OVPOA, wrote a 3 page memo dated September 16 to Ron Corbin, Oro Valley Human Resources Director. The memo attacked Zinkin's request.  Click here to read the OVPOA memo.

Our Analysis

The memo alleges the following:

• Zinkin asked for overtime slips of each employee.
  This is not the case. Zinkin did not ask for overtime slips by employee.  Zinkin specifically stated in his message to Chief Sharp that he did not want to see information by person.


• Zinkin asked for such information only for the police department and not for any other Oro Valley department.
  This is true.  The other departments do not report to the council. They report to the town manager; therefore, Zinkin did not request overtime information on those departments as they do not report to council. 


• Zinkin's request was targeted at commissioned officers.
  This is not true. It was asked in relation to 9 programs in the police budget, not by individual.


• Zinkin wants to monitor the overtime of commission personnel.
  As stated already, this is not what was requested.


• Zinkin is upset that the OVPOA found out about this request.
  If Zinkin is upset, he has a right to be so. He made the request to a department head, an individual who reports to council. The request was not made to OVPOA. In our opinion, someone deliberately passed the information to OVPOA,  a union that is not employed by the town of Oro Valley. Their being given this information is unethical on the part of the person who provided it to them.


• Zinkin has no confidence in Police Chief Sharp.
  Council Member Zinkin has never made such a statement.


• Zinkin has reason to accuse some officers of fraud and dishonesty when it comes to overtime.
  Zinkin has never made such an accusation.


• Zinkin is accusing all commissioned officers of collusion in committing overtime fraud.
  This assertion is absolutely without merit.  It is mere supposition, combined with imagination.  Zinkin has made no such accusation.


• Zinkin is attempting to reduce command staff in the police department.
  There is no evidence that Zinkin's request for overtime information could, in any way, relate to an attempt by Zinkin to reduce command staff.  In addition, Zinkin has never said that he is attempting to reduce command staff.


• "Through his actions, Council Member Mike Zinkin appears to have some unknown reason to undermine the efficient operations of the Town of Oro Valley Police Department, putting its employees and the residents of the Town of Oro Valley into unneeded danger."
  
How does a simple request regarding overtime put Oro valley residents in unneeded danger?

Questions Raised

Our reading of the OVPOA memo leads us to with some questions.

First, what is the intent of the OVPOA memo? Is it to intimidate Council Member Zinkin to prevent him from doing his elected job?  If so, then the OVPOA is trying to disuade Zinkin from doing what he was elected to do.  We hope not.  The job of the cops is to uphold the law; not to thwart it.

Second, is this memo is an example of the quality of the investigative prowess of the Oro Valley police?   We hope not.  The memo is factually incorrect. The memo is emotional. The memo presents illogical and presumptive conclusions.

Third, are there more people behind this sniping than the OVPOA?  We hope not.  OVPOA received the Zinkin request from someone in town hall.  Could this memo be a coordinated effort to impugn and discredit Council Member Zinkin?

Fourth, why is the police union coming down so hard on a simple request?   This OVPOA memo is way "over the top".  To paraphrase Shakespeare: OVPOA "...doth protest too much, methinks."

What do you think?

---

How Closely Should The Oro Valley Town Council Adhere To The General Plan?

Town Of Oro Valley is embarking on a 2-year project to update the general plan.  The general plan and the update are required by state mandate.   The general plan includes a land use map that defines how land can be used in Oro Valley.  It includes many other directives, some of which we will explore in future postings.

The town is planning to spend upwards of $300,000 in building this plan. The effort includes a significant public input program.

The plan matters to you because it is one of 3 things over which residents actually have control.  Through voting, residents control who is elected to the seven elected positions, the approval of the new forms of taxation, and the approval of the general plan.

The plan is not sacred.  It can be changed by vote of the Oro Valley Town Council.  We have observed a number of amendments to the general plan since 2010.  We will detail these in a later posting.

Last week, two "call to audience speakers" voiced their views on the importance of adherence to the general plan.

Should Our Elected Officials Use The General Plan As A Guide?

Marshall Morris, President of the OVPOA, a lead police officer, and Oro Valley resident, voiced his opinion that the plan is a guideline that should be changed based on current circumstance.

"The general plan in my opinion...should be a guide, not a hard and fast rule.  Things change. You can't rely on a plan that was made a decade ago.... We expect town leaders to make changes when its needed and when it can be justified."

Should Our Elected Officials Be the Implementers and Protectors Of The General Plan?

"My concern has to do with the general plan update," Oro Valley resident Bill Adler observed. "Not with the intentions of the update but rather with the poor track record that the town has established in following and consistently applying plans of almost any kind."

He continued: "We spend so much time making exceptions to these plans than we spend time following them."

"Citizens are inclined not to have  a high level of trust government to begin with...and that it appears rather obvious that the plan is vulnerable in fact susceptible to change."

As a result, he noted, citizens  might consider "...an invitation to join in an effort to update a plan as disingenuous when it appears that the town has no intention of following it, either that plan or any other plans."
---
We ask you:   How closely should the council adhere to the general plan?   Should council members be instruments of changing the general plan or should they be stewards of the general plan?
---