Guest View: Mike Zinkin ~ Is Democracy dead in Oro Valley?

Webster defines democracy as:

“Government by the People; especially: rule of the majority.”

The International City-County Management Association (ICMA) has a Code of Ethics, consisting of 12 Tenets. Tenet 4 is:

“Recognize that the chief function of local government at all times is to serve the best interests of all the people.”

Do the actions of the current mayor and council meet the definition of democracy? Are they serving the best interests of all the people?

Exhibit A. The Golf courses
In June 2014, the Town paid for a statistically valid survey asking residents what amenities they desired in their parks. The results showed that the top 3 items requested were (1) playgrounds and play structures, (2) ramadas and picnic areas, and (3) paved walking paths.. Out of 34 possible options, golf came in at number 33 (with 63% of respondents stating that golf was “not important.”)

Despite this, just six months later, in December 2014, the Council decided to purchase 45 holes of golf. The overwhelming amount of input from the People was NO, yet the Council majority (Hiremath-Hornat-Snider-Waters) voted to purchase the golf courses anyway.

If there was any democracy in Oro Valley, would the Town Council chose to purchase a golf course just six months after the citizens asked for play structures, ramadas, and picnic areas? This purchase was supported by Greg Caton, the Town Manager at the time. So much for ICMA Tenet 4, and Government by the People.

Exhibit B. The voter-approved General Plan
In 2016, the Town Council forwarded to its residents a new General Plan. Developed with approximately three years of resident input. This plan, Your Voice, Our Future [YVOF] was placed on the ballot for voter approval. And although YVOF was approved by the voters on November 8, 2016, the Town Council voted to amend the Plan just 8 days later on November 16th. And they have continued to amend the voter-approved plan at every opportunity. Government by the People?

Exhibit C. Ball fields
In 2017, members of the community came to the council asking for ball fields for the children. They said that they were “desperately needed” and the Town Council agreed. But instead of looking for available resources to fund these fields, the Council instead asked the residents to impose a secondary Property Tax on themselves to fund these ball fields. This was a $17 MM bond that would have cost taxpayers $28 MM including the interest. The Residents overwhelmingly rejected the tax. Interestingly, the Council continues to brag that they have saved $2 million in the budget. Well then, why not put that $2M towards building those “desperately needed” ball fields?

Exhibit D. Undesirable development
The residents have told the Council repeatedly that they do not want postage-stamp sized residential lots and the continued blading of the desert. They have told the Council that they desire to save their mountain views and preserve the desert environment. What does the Council do? They repeatedly ignore the wishes of the citizens in favor of the developers/builders who financed their campaigns. Is this democracy?

Exhibit E. The Town Budget
The FY 2018/19 Town Budget is over $20 million higher than the previous fiscal year. There are NO ball fields included in it. There is, however, a $6 million bond of which $3 million will be used to improve the GOLF COURSES. Does this sound like adherence to the ICMA Tenet 4? Does this sound like Democracy?

Sadly, there is ample evidence that democracy does not exist in Oro Valley. On August 28th, the voters of Oro Valley will have an opportunity to replace four members of this council and return democracy to our Town.

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

Editorial ~ Fields of Dreams are already here

LOVE has compiled a list of 14 nearby ball fields to counter Yes on 454’s claim that more ball fields are “desperately needed” because “there simply aren’t enough fields to go around.” The following parks are located close to Oro Valley. Hours vary between 6 AM and 10 PM and all include restroom facilities.

Many of these parks also include basketball courts, tennis courts, ramadas, etc., but for the purpose of this article, we are providing information only on the availability of Little League, soccer, and multi-use fields.

Ann Day Community Park
7601 N Mona Lisa Road
baseball/softball fields
soccer field

Arthur Pack Regional Park
9101 N Thornydale
7 baseball fields
2 softball fields
1 soccer field

Continental Ranch Community Park
8900 N Coachline
4 Little League
2 soccer/multi-use fields

Continental Reserve Community Park
8568 N Continental Reserve Loop
2 Little League fields
2 soccer/multi-use fields

Crossroads at Silverbell District Park
7548 N Silverbell Road
3 lighted ball fields
2 lighted soccer/multi-use fields

Curtis Park
2110 W Curtis Road (off LaCholla)
1 lighted baseball field
2 lighted Little League fields

Dan Felix Park
5790 N Camino de la Tierra
4 lighted soccer fields

Denny Dunn Park
4400 W Massingale Road (near Old Father and Magee)
2 baseball fields
soccer field/football field

Flowing Wells Park
5510 N Shannon Road
2 lighted baseball/softball fields

George Mehl Park
4000 E River Road
4 lighted baseball fields
1 lighted soccer field

Gladden Farms Community Park
12205 N Tangerine Farms Road
2 Little League fields
1 soccer/multi-use field

Ora Mae Harn District Park
13250 N Lon Adams Road
5 lighted ball fields
1 lighted soccer/multi-use field

Wade McLean Neighborhood Park
8000 N Silverbell
1 Little League field
1 soccer/multi-use field

Wildwood Park
6201 N Parsley Road (near Orange Grove and Shannon)
1 softball field
soccer/multi-use field

But wait, there’s more!

Below are excerpts from Jack Stinnett’s two LOVE Guest Views, “Solving Oro Valley’s Little League Field Crisis” published on September 25th and “Solving Oro Valley’s Sports Field Crisis” published on August 30th.

A quick count shows that there are over 30 baseball fields within 8 miles of Naranja Park, many lightly used. The two parks located in Oro Valley are described below.

J.D. Kriegh Park is the home of the Canyon del Oro Little League. It has two excellent lighted competition fields and three practice fields used for baseball and softball. The park has restrooms, a snack bar and is well-maintained by Oro Valley Parks and Recreation.

Riverfront Park is the center for youth softball and has two lighted and well-maintained fields. Riverfront Park also has two lighted soccer/multi-purpose fields. This park has playgrounds, picnic areas for families, a nice walking path, and draws softball players from NW Pima County.

Listed below is a summary of Amphi baseball fields in and around Oro Valley:

Canyon del Oro High School……….…2 competition fields -- 3 practice fields
Ironwood Ridge High School……….…2 competition fields -- 2 practice fields
Wilson Middle School……………….…2 competition fields -- 2 practice fields
Coronado Middle School………………2 competition fields -- 3 practice fields
………………………

Editor’s Note: The FY 2017/18 budget already includes $1.046 MM for two new ball fields at Naranja Park…and more fields could be built with the $2 million dollar FY 2016/17 budget surplus. Rather than saddle homeowners with a $28 million dollar, 20-year long secondary property tax, Oro Valley sports youth could utilize the above-mentioned existing fields as we continue with the pay-as-you-go plan.

Axe the Tax Issues Press Release regarding Campaign Finance Reports

PRESS RELEASE

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

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

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

Operating expenses were $2,157.

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

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

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

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

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

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

This Just In! No Surprise ~ Campaign Finance Report for Yes on 454 PAC reveals major funding from the development community.

Before you complete and mail your ballot for the $17 million Naranja Park Bond election, you should be aware of who funded the Yes on 454 PAC. LOVE recently reviewed their Campaign Finance Report (submitted October 11th). Here’s what it reveals.

As usual, anything that is wanted by Mayor Hiremath and his loyal followers (to include the 6 members of his Town Council) is always generously funded by what we like to call “the usual suspects.” Keep in mind that these substantial donations were made in large part by wealthy builders and developers whose development applications will be presented before the Town Council for a vote over the next year. You scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours?

In a nutshell, Yes on 454 collected $36,600 and spent all of it ($35,886) on the Phoenix consulting firm of Saguaro Strategies (yes, this is the same firm that was hired by the mayor and all six current councilmembers during their election campaigns). The majority of donations came from the development community including Humberto Lopez of HSL Properties.

Humberto Lopez (famous for his “back room deal” with Mayor Hiremath for the town to purchase the run-down community center and golf courses) donated a total of $5000 to the cause. Do you think that he is scratching Hiremath’s back as a thank you for being allowed to unload his money-sucking golf courses on the town?

The attached slide gives the breakdown of these contributions.

How do you feel about wealthy developers having such a substantial say in what goes on in our town? They are pushing for the building of multiple ball fields, nighttime lighting intruding on the surrounding residential neighborhood, plus sports tourism and an event center along with all of the noise and traffic it will bring…all in a residential neighborhood and all to be paid for with your tax dollars. 

Also of note, if it's "For the Kids" where are all the contributions from the parents and coaches?

We urge you to VOTE NO on Prop 454 – The $17 million Naranja Park Bond.

You can read the entire Campaign Finance Report HERE

Editorial ~ Chaos ensues at the Naranja Park Bond Open House

The Town held an Open House educational meeting on the Naranja Park Bond on September 13th. The Open House format is frowned upon by citizens because it does not allow for everyone in attendance to hear the questions and the answers. Instead, after the Town’s formal presentation concludes, citizens are directed to various tables stationed around the room where they must stand in line and wait to ask their questions in a one-on-one conversation with a Town staff member.

With this format, only the person asking the question (and perhaps 1-2 others standing next to him/her) can hear the question and the answer rather than all of the questions and answers being heard by everyone in attendance. Those waiting in line at other tables cannot hear the questions and answers being addressed at the remaining tables.

The attached video contains an excerpt from that meeting. Although the highlights are outlined below, please watch the video to witness the chaos for yourself.

The video begins as Assistant Town Manager, Chris Cornelison, finishes his presentation and begins to walk off the stage.

Audience member: Can we ask questions now?

Cornelison: No, go to the stations. That’s kind of the difference between the Open House Format to give you an opportunity to get more one-on-one time.

The audience continued trying to have their questions answered from the floor.

Audience member (2:00 minute mark): The other thing I wanted to clarify is that you indicated that the cost of the bond was $17 million dollars. That’s not true. The cost of the bond over 20 years is $28 million dollars. Is that right?

Cornelison: The cost of the amenities and to build the project, yes, is $17 million, but like with any bond loan, there is interest. Like I said, we're happy to answer your questions at the stations. Everybody has different questions.

Cornelison never admitted to the $28 million dollar figure. This figure is also not mentioned anywhere on the Town Website. If the Town Staff is not advocating for or against this bond measure, but merely providing information, why wasn’t he forthcoming with the $28 million figure?

He again leaves the podium. Audience members begin expressing their disappointment with the meeting and the format.

Audience members: The cost is not going to be $17 million…So this is not a public forum.

Cornelison: Come over here and I’ll answer your questions. I don’t want to yell over everybody. (That could have been avoided by remaining at the podium and using the microphone.)

Audience: But we all want to hear it!

At the 3:10 mark, people begin moving to the tables when they had no choice.

Citizen: What I want to know is why can’t the newer fields be built the same way, on a pay-as-you-go basis?

Cornelison: That’s the way we had been approaching it, however, the community requested that they wanted the additional fields expedited.

Citizen: Sir, who made that request?

Cornelison: Oro Valley sports groups, families, youth.

Citizen: But are they Oro Valley residents? Because I heard they’re not.

Another citizen: No they’re not!

Citizen: There was a survey on line…10,000 people signed it…but only 167 of them were from Oro Valley.

Citizen: Why didn’t you tell us that this was to be a 10-minute, one-sided presentation? This is absolute chaos. Why can’t we have a forum where we ask one question at a time? Kind of like a press conference. That’s why we came. (4:47 mark on video)

Editors Note: The refusal to state the $28MM figure leads us to believe that Town staff has been issued a directive to never state the $28MM total cost of the bond. They are apparently under orders to just keep parroting the $17MM figure.

Legally, the Town is not allowed to advocate for or against it, but in deliberately and repeatedly omitting the $28MM figure, the Town is working in concert to tip the scales in favor of a YES vote.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Axe the Tax Signs are being Vandalized and Stolen

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Guest View: Mike Zinkin ~ Why you should vote NO on Prop 454/Naranja Park Bond

It goes against the Town’s founding principle
Oro Valley was founded in 1974 on the concept that residents would not have property taxes. One of the tenets of Oro Valley has always been that the Town works on a “pay as you go” model. This is how Naranja Park was started and it’s also how the Aquatic Center was built. Since 2010, due to extravagant spending by our Town Council, that concept is now being cast aside.

Proposition 454 is not a decision of being for or against children. Proposition 454 is a question of fiscal responsibility.

Your taxes have already paid for multiple ball fields
Multiple ball fields are already available to provide services to our Citizens. The Amphitheater Public Schools have ball fields that Citizens could use if the Town entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement. Pima County has multiple ball fields for use, all within a reasonable commute. Additionally, funds have been allocated in the FY 17/18 budget to build two lit multi-use fields. With a fiscally responsible government, more funds could be made available.

The Town should maintain the fields we already own
One of the arguments for the bond is that the soccer fields at Riverfront Park are in disrepair. Now ask yourself…Who allowed them to go into disrepair? The Town of Oro Valley did. Instead of repairing them, they want to build new ones. The Town seems to be saying: “Let’s not repair the current fields. Let’s build new ones so we can let them go into disrepair as well.”

Examples of their fiscal irresponsibility
Since 2010, Oro Valley’s population has grown by 4.9%, yet Oro Valley Town staff has grown by 12.4% with every employee receiving a 4% raise for the past 8 years.

Not including vehicles utilized for public safety, the Town owns an additional 153 vehicles.

Since the Town purchased the Community Center and Golf Courses, it has lost over $200,000 in the Town-owned restaurant and over $7 million in the Town-owned golf courses despite increasing your sales tax by 25% ($2 million per year). They now want you to approve a property tax to cover for their poor judgment.

If only they’d listened to the people
You told the Oro Valley government in June 2014 what you desired at Naranja Park. They ignored your wishes and bought a golf course instead. (Remember that of the 34 items listed on the Parks and Recreation Survey, golf came in at #33).

This is not a question of supporting our youth. This is an opportunity to say NO to the poor judgment and continued fiscal irresponsibility that has resulted in a proposal for $28 million in additional taxes. They didn’t listen to you. Why should you reward them for their poor judgment?

The Town’s Misinformation Campaign
This is not a $17 million dollar bond. It is a $28 million dollar bond.

The Town is minimizing what your share of the tax bill will be. They are using a figure of $4.50 per month for a home valued at $250,000. According to the Town website, the MEDIAN price of a home in Oro Valley is $276,600. This means that HALF of the homes are valued at MORE than $276,600.

Send them a message by voting NO on Prop 454. Remember, the money is available to fulfill the desires of the Citizens if it is spent wisely.

A Message on your Property Tax Increase

(A little humor…)

To our Oro Valley friends who have received their property tax bills for 2017, we would first like to say thank you for your past prompt payment. We have so much good work to do that we can’t spend time hounding deadbeats.

Next we want to explain the increases on your bill so that our phones do not ring incessantly with people calling to ask why their taxes went up so much.

First: Our taxing authorities need more money so the rates have increased.

Second: You have approved new bond issues which are now hitting your tax bills. For example, last November, Amphitheater School District proposed a $58MM Bond for school facility and sports field renovations which you approved. So it’s now up to us to collect the money.

Finally: Your house values have risen 5-6% with the improving economy. Using our professional, objective appraisal procedures on Oro Valley homes, we have increased total appraised value by 3%.

Keep in mind that a big part of your home appreciation is due to the terrific amenities that your Mayor and Council have provided. Not every community has two pools, 30 tennis courts, and 45 holes of town subsidized golf.

These facilities attract developers and soon your worthless Sonoran Desert landscape will come alive with Cat and Komatsu earth movers. There will be more construction jobs, more homes will be built, more schools will be needed, and more taxes will be levied. Everyone wins! All of us in your local governments truly feel we can do so much more good if you just give us your money.

Sincerely,

Your Pima County Government

Vote no on Prop 454

PROPerty Tax 454

Axe the Tax Issues Press Release

PRESS RELEASE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Guest View: Jack Stinnett ~ Solving Oro Valley's Little League Field Crisis

The justification for the Town’s proposed $17 million dollar Naranja Park bond is the need to provide more fields for Oro Valley youth sports. (This will be funded with a secondary property tax that, with interest, will cost Oro Valley homeowners $28 million over 20 years).

The issue here is that the Oro Valley Little League (formerly known as Coronado Little League) has played their games and practices since 2003 at the Coronado Middle School fields which they complain are poorly maintained by Amphitheater School District. They want their own fields in Naranja Park to be comparable to the CDO Little League fields in James Kriegh Park.

Let’s look at the sports fields we currently have:
Unlike youth soccer, baseball has long been a part of Tucson and Pima County. A quick count shows that there are over 30 baseball fields within 8 miles of Naranja Park, many lightly used. The two parks located in Oro Valley are described below.

In 1974 upon Oro Valley's founding, Pima County transferred the ownership and cost of operation of J.D. Kreigh and Riverfront Parks to Oro Valley. These parks came with baseball fields which have been used and improved by Oro Valley.

J.D. Kriegh Park is the home of the Canyon del Oro Little League. It has two excellent lighted competition fields and three practice fields used for baseball and softball. The park has restrooms, a snack bar and is well-maintained by Oro Valley Parks and Recreation.

You can view the field layout of J.D. Kreigh Park HERE

Riverfront Park is the center for youth softball and has two lighted and well-maintained fields. Riverfront Park also has two lighted soccer/multi-purpose fields. This park has playgrounds, picnic areas for families, a nice walking path, and draws softball players from NW Pima County.

A visual overview of Riverfront Park can be viewed HERE

Why don't we have ball fields in Naranja Park?
The Town's Naranja Park plan included Little League fields but did not anticipate that the mayor and council would be dumping over $2 million per year in sales tax revenue plus a $350,000 general fund transfer this year into a losing effort to support three golf courses.

The Town could have built all the fields Oro Valley could possibly want with the half-cent "no sunset" sales tax the council approved in 2015 to subsidize the Community Center and Golf Courses. The mayor never proposed a town sales tax for Naranja Park, nor budgeted Little League fields for Naranja Park in 2014, 2015, 2016, or 2017.

Options for supporting Oro Valley youth sports without instituting a property tax

1) Use the ball fields at Arthur Pack Park

Arthur Pack Regional Park (Thornydale at Overton) is a 500+ acre park facility that we already support with our Pima County Property taxes. The Park has a fine, inexpensive 18-hole public golf course, large open natural areas and two baseball areas. The baseball complex has 2 softball fields, 7 baseball fields and a batting cage. The 8th baseball field was converted to a soccer field to meet the growing demand for more soccer fields. The park also has rest rooms, picnic ramadas and is maintained by Pima County. Arthur Pack Park is home to the Thornydale Little League.

2) Make better use of Amphi School District ball fields

Your Pima County property taxes also support the Amphi School District and their facilities. In November of 2016, school district voters approved a $58 million bond which provides increased funds for the maintenance of Amphi school facilities and fields.

Listed below is a summary of Amphi ball fields in and around Oro Valley:

Canyon del Oro High School.......2 competition fields -- 3 practice fields
Ironwood Ridge High School.......2 competition fields -- 2 practice fields
Wilson Middle School..................2 competition fields -- 2 practice fields
Coronado Middle School.............2 competition fields -- 3 practice fields

Many communities cooperatively share the use and support of school facilities, but not Oro Valley and Amphi. During my three years on the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB), I pressed two Parks and Recreation Directors to craft an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) with Amphi to gain more access to school fields, but with no success.

The Oro Valley Little League currently uses the Coronado Middle School fields off North Oracle Road, but has requested the Town to build Little league fields in Naranja Park. I supported their presentation to PRAB in December 2014 and voted for the inclusion of Little League Baseball fields in the plan for Naranja Park.

This project was deferred in favor of the higher priority golf course purchase. However, while Oro Valley Little League patiently waits for better fields, the Town can insist that Amphi better maintain the Coronado Middle School Little League fields.

3) Continue the "pay as you go" development of Naranja Park

I support the Town building ball fields in Naranja Park, but not through a $17MM bond and $28MM secondary property tax. The ball fields can be funded with the Town's FY 2016/17 surplus of $2MM. Town coffers are overflowing with development fees. The mayor and council just need to support our Little League and give the kids a place to play in Naranja Park.

Recommendation
I am voting NO on the Naranja Park $17MM Bond and $28MM property tax increase. Instead of "crisis" planning by our elected leaders, Oro Valley should fund the youth fields from within it's operating budget. The Town has the resources to build fields in Naranja Park but has chosen to exploit this self-inflicted "field crisis" to put a $28MM property tax on the November ballot.

Jack Stinnett graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy and served on Minesweepers and Destroyers. After his military service, he was employed as an engineer and plant manager in the Nuclear Power industry, a factory manager in the automotive industry, Vice-President of a worldwide engine components business, and finished his career as President and CEO of Morris Material Handling in Milwaukee. He and his wife, Connie, moved to Oro Valley in 2011. He was a member of PRAB from 2012-2014, serving as Chairman in 2013-2014. He enjoys woodworking, biking, and visiting his grandchildren.

Guest View: Brian Gagan ~ Oro Valley’s epic fiscal mismanagement from the Town Hall to the OVPD. Part 3.

Part 2 (published yesterday) revealed how over-staffing and poor management of the OVPD have cost taxpayers anywhere between $2.8 million and $4.6 million per year.

The Naranja Park Connection
The latest example of the Town’s disregard for fiscal responsibility is the $17 million Naranja Park Bond/Proposition 454. It appears that nobody at town hall is even slightly skilled at procurement analysis and negotiation skills because the costs for quality work and build-out at Naranja Park are currently overstated by approximately 28% to 33% for the current plan.

Is the Naranja Park build-out really desirable or necessary?
The Naranja Park plan was developed without considering the interests of the very citizens who will be forced to fund it and who are being duped into believing that this facility is wanted or needed by the majority of Oro Valley residents.

According to the National Education Association, the national range of team sports participation in public schools is 19-23%. This is a significant minority of students.

Back-scratch fever?
The overstated cost to construct the sports fields alone is only $5 million of the proposed $17 million dollar bond. With interest paid back over the 20-year life of the bond, this is a $28 million dollar unnecessary expenditure.

It’s hard for me to imagine that there are reasons other than back-scratching, favor-mongering, and/or kickbacks on the part of some or all prospective contractors that account for this egregious state of affairs.

Stop the next fiscal folly
In November, voters will have to decide whether to approve $28,000,000 more in spending while increasing taxes on ALL property owners rather than just on those without mathematical skills and those wishing to play softball, football, and soccer.

Remember, this is the same crew that raised our sales tax by $2 million dollars per year in order to fund three losing golf courses. You can have a say in preventing this town’s continued epic fiscal mismanagement by VOTING NO on The Naranja Bond/Prop 454.

Guest View: Jack Stinnett ~ Solving Oro Valley’s Sports Field Crisis

In November, Oro Valley residents will be given the opportunity to vote on the Town's proposed $17 million dollar Bond for Naranja Park improvements to be paid for by a $28 million dollar property tax.

The Mayor and Council voted 7-0 to place the Town Staff proposal on the ballot after a long session where coaches, soccer moms and youthful participants eloquently cited the need for more fields.

Let's look at some past history
In 2013, when I was the Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board [PRAB], Oro Valley had only two soccer fields in Riverfront Park. These fields were worn out from overplay with 2-3 teams sharing a field during a practice.

Then in the fall of 2013, prior Town Manager, Greg Caton, exploited a town budget surplus of $1.9 million, added $400,000 of Bed Tax funds, and directed the Town Staff to develop a plan for additional fields at Naranja Park recommended by PRAB. Led by Paul Keesler, Director of Infrastructure Services and Kristi Diaz-Trahan, Parks and Recreation Director, the Town proposed building two new, irrigated and lighted soccer fields, a large and small dog park, a graded access road and a paved parking lot.

The Plan was presented to PRAB, unanimously approved and then approved by the Town Council. The new facilities were constructed at Naranja Park in 2014 within budget and have seen strong use and support. The Plan for Naranja Park at full build out was to have 8 soccer fields. PRAB members looked forward to the continued development of the Park.

Now let’s look at some recent history
Fate intervened, however, when Mayor Hiremath and his Majority-4 on Council quickly purchased the El Conquistador Golf and Tennis Club with its 3 golf courses, 31 Tennis courts, 8 racquet ball courts and swimming pool.

PRAB did not support this purchase because it was not what residents said they wanted in the Town's 2013 and 2014 surveys. Further, it was felt that this purchase would divert resources from developing Naranja Park.

The Town Council’s Misplaced Priorities
It would appear that resident concerns were well-founded since the Town has now lost $7 million between the golf course purchase and operating losses. At a cost of $350,000 for a lighted sports field, we could have built 20 new fields with the money the town has lost subsidizing golf. Going forward, the Town is budgeting to lose $2 million per year on golf operations (the equivalent cost of 6 more sports fields for every year that this fiasco continues).

Oro Valley doesn't need a $28 million dollar secondary property tax to build an adequate number of youth fields - the Town has the funds- our Mayor and Council just have the wrong priorities.

Some additional Town Council decisions that were deemed a higher priority than youth sports include:

• $2.1MM to bury TEP power lines along the recently widened Oracle Road = 6 fields not built.
• $2.6MM capital expense in this year's budget for a new Police Station Annex and Evidence Facility = 8 more fields not built.

This year’s budget already includes two additional sports fields
In a positive development, this year's FY 17/18 Town Manager's budget included $1.046 million for two additional soccer / multi-purpose fields in Naranja Park with grading already underway. These two additional fields (#3 and #4 plus the two fields at Riverfront Park) will give the Town a total of 6 well maintained, irrigated and lighted fields…three times what we had in 2013, but short of the total of 8 fields planned that I agree are needed.

Recommendation
My recommendation to residents is to vote NO on the $28 Million Naranja Bond and Property Tax and demand that our Town Council solve the need for fields by budgeting funds in the Town's operating plan. A $1 million dollar investment in FY 18/19 can build fields #5 and #6 in Naranja Park. Along with the two improved fields at Riverfront Park, this will provide the 8 multi-purpose fields we need.

Let's continue the Town's "pay as we go" development of Naranja Park by giving our youth a fair shake at budget time…not by wasting money on the wrong things and then taxing property owners to pay for the fields that our youngsters need.

---
Jack Stinnett graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy and served on Minesweepers and Destroyers. After his military service, he was employed as an engineer and plant manager in the Nuclear Power industry, a factory manager in the automotive industry, Vice-President of a worldwide engine components business, and finished his career as President and CEO of Morris Material Handling in Milwaukee. He and his wife, Connie, moved to Oro Valley in 2011. He was a member of PRAB from 2012-2014, serving as Chairman in 2013-2014. He enjoys woodworking, biking, and visiting his grandchildren.

Guest View: Jeff Jones ~ Connecting the Dots from the Community Center to the Naranja Park Bond

I’d like to weigh in on the boondoggle known as the Town of Oro Valley Golf Courses (aka El Conquistador Golf Club) and the options offered by the National Golf Foundation Consultants who were hired by the Town Council to help them figure a way out of the mess they made.

What have we learned from the $50,000 Consultant’s Report?
All the options suggested by the consultants will cost millions of dollars to implement. In other words, let’s throw good money after bad.

Public golf is losing money nationwide but our Community Center Golf Courses are losing more than the national average.

They believe that our losses will be reduced by 10.5% if all of their projections come true.

The projections
A 4% increase in golf fees (even though these have been trending downwards)
A 17% increase in Member Golf Fees (even though membership is declining)
A 4.6% increase in Food & Beverage (even though F&B has never met the budget even once)
A 10% Reduction in Food & Beverage Cost

Why should we believe those projections?
Not one of the projections (revenue or costs) from Day One relative to the El Conquistador purchase have come anywhere near close to being accurate. Not a single one…Membership – Capital Improvements – Costs – Revenue. Not a single one!

When the Majority-4 on the 2014 Town Council (Hiremath-Hornat-Snider-Waters) “sold us” the El Conquistador purchase, their projections were that we would “break even” by Fiscal Year 3 (FY 2017-18) and that it would turn a profit beginning in Year 5. However, the FY 2017-18 budget continues to project a net loss of $1.8 million. This is breaking even?

What’s more, Mayor Hiremath recently backtracked on his original 5-year plan, claiming that it was always a 6-year plan to begin making a profit. (Public records reveal otherwise.) Now, the Golf Consultant’s report states that even with the proposed millions of dollars in changes, they still can’t guarantee that we will turn a profit for another 5 years after the implementation of the changes!

It’s a matter of trust
How can we trust the same fools, and their three new cohorts, to properly handle the development of Naranja Park? If they can’t make good decisions on a $1 million purchase, why should we trust them with a $17 million dollar purchase?

Don’t let them fool you into believing that the property tax will expire in 20 years. Have you ever seen a tax expire? I predict that when the $17 million bond is paid off (at a cost of $28 million with interest), that the Town Council will then state that they need to renew the property tax because the now 20-year old facility is in need of updating and refurbishing.

I urge you to vote NO on the Naranja Park Bond/Secondary Property Tax. Do not trust them with any more of our tax dollars.

A Matter of Public Record

When the $48.6 million dollar Naranja Park Bond failed in 2008, the Town Council switched to a phased approach.

Former Oro Valley Town Manager, Greg Caton stated:

"In 2008, our voters told us they didn't want to issue bonds for a big-ticket expense, and we heard them loud and clear. Our new approach to developing Naranja Park lays down the required infrastructure, and then lets us add amenities a la carte, as funding is available, without going into debt or issuing bonds." [Source: Tucson News Now, November 2013]

Remind the Town Council of their promise. Vote NO on Prop 454 – Naranja Park Bond

Guest View: Nancy Humphry ~ Past financial missteps illustrate why we should Vote NO on Naranja Bond

Is there no end to the financial disasters of the Oro Valley Town Council?
The Naranja Park improvements bond issue, to be voted on November 7, 2017, is a prime example. The Town Council requests the citizens to approve a $17 million bond to be paid back with a 20-year secondary property tax. This dollar figure does not include the interest ($11 million in interest for a grand total of $28 million dollars). Cost for just putting the ballot to citizens: $145,000.

The charming appeal of the children and their parents must be weighed against yet another financial burden being imposed on the citizens of Oro Valley. It is always difficult to say no to the children, but there are alternatives to meeting the children’s desires other than another tax.

Let the Community Center fiasco be a warning
We, the taxpayers, have already had a half-cent sales tax increase imposed in 2015 in order to subsidize the Community Center fiasco. This additional $2 million per year in tax revenue has failed in every regard to cover the Community Center and Golf losses. In addition, there is no “sunset” for this sales tax increase.

The Town Council recently hired a research firm, at a cost of $50,000, to analyze the present financial situation of the Community Center. The results of that study are in and we have now learned that every option will cost millions of dollars with no guarantees of success, as proven by the thorough analysis.

Send them a “Rejection” Letter
Was there no forethought when the Naranja Park property was purchased? Was a feasibility study done? Apparently not. A Naranja Park bond was placed on the ballot once before (November 2008) and was rejected. We the taxpayers in the town of Oro Valley would be wise to reject it again.

A NO vote in November will, hopefully, put an end to this bond issue and cause the Town of Oro Valley to operate within its available cash flow without debt.

Axe the Tax PAC Opens Email Account

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

They can be reached at: axethetaxOV@gmail.com

Important Dates

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

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

Tuesday, November 7th -- Special Bond Election Day