Five Things To Keep In Mind When You Vote Tomorrow

Our fact check sets the record straight

Three things happened since we posted our "Election Primer" on July 14.  First, things got nasty in the form of expensive post cards containing outrageous accusations that were mailed by Greene, Rodman and Solomon. Second, because things got nasty, Mayor Winfield, Vice Mayor Barrett and Council Member Jones-Ivey endorsed Bohen and Garner. Third, last week we finally got the truth on developer campaign financing of Greene, Rodman and Solomon.

So, as you vote, do think about these things and more...

All candidates support public safety

There are two issues that are always lightning rods in Oro Valley elections. One is support of public safety. 

In every election since 2010, one set of candidates accusing the other set of "not supporting public safety." This year  Candidates Greene, Rodman and Solomon did just that is an expensive (60 cents per) glossy 6x11 post card. 

We've fact checked the accusation. All candidates support public safety. In fact, Candidate Garner did the hard work in 2008 of saving police positions.

First responder and school support has nothing to do with the Oro Valley Town Council

That same flyer accused "the other guys" of not supporting first responders or education. Where did that come from? First responders are not part of Oro Valley operations. They are a separate taxing district. Schools are not part of Oro Valley operations. They are also a separate taxing district. These things have nothing to do with the Oro Valley Town Council.

No candidate is encouraging policies that will likely lead to a property tax

The other lightning rod is an Oro Valley property tax.  An Oro Valley property tax is antithetical to the founding of Oro Valley. Oro Valley was founded on the basis that it would not have a property tax. Not having an Oro Valley property tax is in our DNA.  It is simply in not an issue.  The council can not mandate a property tax. Only the voters can do so.

According to candidate Bill Garner, speaking on a Jim Horn Oro Valley Podcast: "We should never be at that point [of needing a property tax] providing that you elect candidates that are stewards of your money. I have always been a fiscal steward of taxpayer money."

The campaigns of Greene, Rodman and Solomon are financed by the special interest developer community

Last week, we confirmed our earlier observations based on the Rodman and Solomon campaign funding of their 2016 campaign. As they did then, developer money has flooded Oro Valley politics.  All the usual characters are back - HSL, Realtors of Southern Arizona, Town West Real Estate, The Kai Family, Beztak (Sam Beznos) and Heritage Homes- to the the tune of $35,000. Solomon and Rodman alone received 75% of their campaign funds from them.  See our posting last week to learn more.

Garner and Bohen are endorsed by Mayor Winfield, Vice Mayor Barrett, and Council Member Jones-Ivey

Mayor Winfield, Vice Mayor Barrett and Council Member Jones-Ivey were silent at first regarding which candidates they would prefer to be on council. That changed once the expensive post cards containing outrageous accusations were mailed to homes. They have endorsed Garner and Bohen for council. That is an endorsement of the people with whom they will work for at least the next two years. See our posting of July 15 on the endorsement of Winfield and Barrett.  See our posting of July 22 with quotes from Barrett and Jones-Ivey.

---

Bits and Pieces

Property taxes to increase
Oro Valley and county residents voted themselves a property tax increase earlier this month. Voters approved both propositions 466 (Amphi Schools spending override) and 477 (Golder Ranch Fire District Bonds) by 58% and 54% respectively. We surmise that the robust economy we are experiencing played a major role in voter generosity.

Roundabout opens November 22
Good news for those who frequent the Moore and LaCanada intersection. The roundabout is on schedule to open midday on the 22nd.  Watch the video on the roundabout here.

Captain Jeff's "Belly Bomber"

The Belly Bomber

Captain Jeff's "Belly Bomber" is open Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday in the Riverfront Park parking lot. "We feature Sabrett hot dogs, all the way from Bronx New York..Special order." Jack told me. They are setup starting at 3pm and will stay open "...until it gets too cold or people quit buying."

According to the Sabrett website: "...every New Yorker knows the name Sabrett® because it sprouts from the blue and yellow umbrellas atop vendor carts seen on almost every corner of the city. "

They are permitted by the Pima County Health Department and have passed inspection from GRFD.

Jack served 23 years in the Air Force and retired to Oro Valley with his wife Becky. The live in Rancho Visoso.

Housing market cools
... just a little The housing market cooled down a bit in October, according to the Long Realty report.

“Year-to-date home sales outpace last year by 5%. “In the Oro Valley area, October 2019 active inventory was 181, a 34% decrease from October 2018. There were 73 closings in October 2019, a 12% decrease from October 2018. Year-to-date 2019 there were 824 closings, a 5% increase from year-to-date 2018. Months of Inventory was 2.5, down from 3.3 in October 2018. Median price of sold homes was $325,000 for the month of October 2019, up 10% from October 2018. The Oro Valley area had 72 new properties under contract in October 2019, down 1% from October 2018.”

It’s a seller’s market for homes priced at less than $700,000.
—-

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: “Nombe Watanabe” ~ With proper due diligence, Naranja Park could have been built without a 20-year long property tax

Those of you who have been following LOVE for years will remember one of our regular bloggers who went by the pseudonym, “Nombe Watanabe.” (This was back in the days when our “comments” section was open for commenting.) We always looked forward to his posts as they were not only factual, civil, and well-reasoned, but also witty. We recently received the following Guest View from “Nombe.”

……………………….

I read the July 26th Explorer article entitled, “Oro Valley determining feasibility of troubled golf operations” with great interest.

In the article, Mayor Hiremath is quoted as stating that the study is: “the next step in the due diligence process.”

This is due diligence?
I have always thought that due diligence was a process that was fully in place before spending vast sums of taxpayer money. I stand corrected. I am concerned that the town of Oro Valley has spent $50,000 on a study which provided the same conclusion that many citizens had already come to at much less expense.

Town Council Marx the Spot
I am also concerned that the town of Oro Valley is gifting $2.2 million in yearly sales tax revenue so the 200+ members of the Golf Club can, well...play golf. (That’s $11,000 per golfer.) I guess the new motto for the Great Seal of Oro Valley should echo Karl Marx:

From each according to his ability. To each according to his desire to play golf.

Redirect the dedicated sales tax increase to Naranja Park
Now the Mayor and his tax-and-spend crew want to impose a property tax for the build-out of Naranja Park. I fully support the park but the current town leadership wasted a chance to build a park for all to enjoy when they purchased a golf course instead, which only a few enjoy.

Oro Valley cannot afford a failing tax-supported golf course and restaurant and an expensive to maintain park. If we want the park, all golf and restaurant operations must be closed. The additional sales tax which supports the golf operations should be redirected to a fund for the park. No additional property tax should be placed on Oro Valley homeowners. Oro Valley already pays the highest property tax in the state to Pima County, with little return from the county.

Approving additional funding (property tax) to the current town administration is a very bad idea. The golf course fiasco has demonstrated that they can not be trusted with tax payer money. Rather than build a park for everyone to enjoy, the administration has raised taxes for a golf operation that only a few can enjoy. Shame.

Deadline Tomorrow For Submitting Pro and Con Property Tax Arguments

The Town Of Oro Valley is proposing a secondary property for your approval on this November's election ballot. The funds from this tax are supposed to be used to pay for even more ballfields in Naranja Park, as we have previously posted.

The election pamphlet that you will receive will explain the tax. In doing so, the pamphlet will include arguments for and against the bond offering. The deadline for submitting those arguments is tomorrow.

Anyone may submit an argument for publication. However, as you will  note further, it will cost you a whopping $250 to do so.

However, LOVE welcomes all views. So you are welcome to send us a Guest View and, assuming it meets our guidelines (see right panel) we will publish it for free.

The following is the Town Of Oro Valley press release that presents further detail:
---
"Deadline is Friday, July 21, to submit arguments “for” or “against” Naranja Park bond question 
 Oro Valley, Arizona (July 17, 2017) – As a reminder, any persons wishing to submit an argument “for” or “against” the Naranja Park bond question must do so by 5 p.m. this Friday, July 21, 2017. Arguments will be included in the informational voter pamphlet that is prepared and mailed to each household with a registered voter not less than 35 days before the date of the election. The bond question will appear on the November 7, 2017 ballot.

Arguments must meet the following requirements in order to be accepted for publication:

• Argument shall not exceed 300 words in length. 
• Argument shall contain a sworn statement of each person sponsoring it. 
• Argument shall include the residence or post office address and telephone number of each person signing the argument. 
• Argument shall be submitted to the Oro Valley Town Clerk in an electronic format, preferably Microsoft Word.
• Argument shall include a payment of $250 (as allowed by Arizona state law). 
• As required by law, all information—including the $250 fee—must be received by the Oro Valley Town Clerk by 5 p.m. on Friday, July 21, 2017.

For complete details on submitting an argument, you may read the official Public Notice from the Clerk’s Office. Click or copy/paste this URL into your browser: https://www.orovalleyaz.gov/sites/default/files/media/docs/2017/instructions-submitting-arguments-or-against.pdf

To learn more about the Naranja Park Bond Project, please review the May 4, 2017 press release and the project overview document at the links provided below.

• May 4, 2017 press release: https://www.orovalleyaz.gov/town/news/naranja-park-bond-question-will-be-placed-november-ballot 
• Map and project overview: https://www.orovalleyaz.gov/sites/default/files/media/docs/2017/naranjaparkbond-projectsheet-web.pdf "

Editorial ~ Wednesday, April 19th Town Council Meeting --The $28 million dollar question

REMINDER: Wednesday, April 19th, 6:00 PM, Town Council Meeting. Item #1: Public Comment and possible action from Town Council regarding the community request for funding and construction of additional sport fields and related improvements for Naranja Park.

The requested funding is for a $17 million General Obligation Bond to be paid back with a secondary property tax (in addition to your Pima County property tax). This tax will last for 20 years for a total repayment of $28 million dollars.

This will be the first opportunity for public input for this item. The second opportunity for public input will be at the May 3, 2017 council meeting. The council will then vote whether to put this item on the November ballot for voter approval/disapproval.

Background Information
At the February 15, 2017 Town Council meeting, the Town received a request by some members of the community (including youth sports parents, athletes, and Oro Valley user groups) to construct additional sports fields at Naranja Park. Council directed staff to return at a future meeting with a proposal and a plan to finance it. This proposal was presented at the April 5th council meeting. Council asked that it be brought back to the April 19th council meeting for public comment.

Included in the Proposal

• 3 lit multi-sport fields (oversized)
• Baseball/softball complex including 4 fields, batting cages, and a concession building with restrooms
• Playground
• Ramada shade structures
• Pedestrian walkways
• Paved parking spaces (300 additional)

Taxpayers shouldn’t be punished for the “Sins of the Council”
The issue isn’t the ball fields, it’s the proposed funding. The Town wouldn’t need to issue a bond and secondary property tax for ball fields if the Town Council hadn’t made the rushed and foolish decision to purchase the El Con Community Center and Golf Courses in 2014. This enterprise has been under-performing for the entire two years that it’s been operating, thus bleeding the town of millions of dollars per year…money that could have been used to fund the Naranja Park ball fields instead without necessitating a secondary property tax.

Speak now or forever pay a property tax
Attend the Council Meeting and submit a Blue Card (available on the back table) to speak about Item #1. You can expect that many supporters will be in attendance and will speak. Those who oppose a secondary property tax to finance these ball fields need to make their voices heard as well.

If you are unable to attend, please e-mail the council members and send a copy of your e-mail to Town Clerk Michael Standish (mstandish@orovalleyaz.gov) and request that your letter be included in the Council Packet for the April 19th or May 3rd council meeting. The mayor and council member e-mails are as follows:

shiremath@orovalleyaz.gov
lwaters@orovalleyaz.gov
msnider@orovalleyaz.gov
jhornat@orovalleyaz.gov
rpina@orovalleyaz.gov
brodman@orovalleyaz.gov
ssolomon@orovalleyaz.gov
---

Guest View: Diane Peters ~ The Great “Bond” Caper (Part 2.)

During the second Call to Audience at the April 5th Town Council meeting, Radio talk-show host, Chris DeSimone (Wake up Tucson!) called out Councilmember Steve Solomon for interrupting a speaker who didn’t support the council’s views. Below is the transcript of his speech and the response by Town Attorney, Gary Verburg:

Chris DeSimone: “I was watching the lady [Karen Stratman] who got up before, the first lady who got up at the Call to Audience, and Mr. Solomon was trying to shut her down by saying she was talking about Item #2, the bond thing. Mr. Verburg chimed in and you ate her time a little and you shut her down. Then the next guy comes in [Ben Baker] an older guy, and you guys just let him blab.

So what did the first person do to get shut down and get her time truncated and the other guy just kept on going, starting with the 1997 bonds? For the record, I thought it was pretty unfair that Solomon tried to shut her down. Verburg didn’t know what to do with her and then you let the next guy come on and he went, ‘This is how you sell the bond to Sun City.’ I think you guys were wrong on that one.”

Hiremath: Mr. Verburg, do you want to answer that?

Town Attorney Verburg: Yes. He was discussing a Sun City bond. He wasn’t discussing a particular bond for ball fields so I thought he was talking about bonds in the general sense. He wasn’t talking about Item #2 until right at the very end he snuck in a couple of sentences. Sometimes the better part of discretion is to let someone finish…I make the calls as I see them and that was my judgment.

Clear Intentions 
 Of note is that Baker’s very first sentence was, “I was the OV representative to the 1997 bond issue along with Ms. Pina’s husband, Raul.” What relevance could a bond issue from 20 years ago have on last week’s council meeting other than to connect it to that night’s agenda item on the Naranja Park bond discussion? I could see what his intent was in opening with that sentence. How could the mayor, council, and town attorney not see it?

Verburg claims that Baker didn’t discuss the Naranja Park bond issue until right at the very end. This is demonstrably false. All one has to do is read the transcript of Baker’s speech or watch the video (provided yesterday in Part 1. of this article) to see that Baker’s second sentence was, “If you’re looking at a bond issue, how are you going to go about getting it passed?” Since the council was going to be “looking at a bond issue” during Item #2 on the Regular Agenda that evening, it wasn’t all that difficult to connect the dots.

Mr. Baker’s intent couldn’t have been clearer at this point. He was about to give the council direction on how to sell the bond and secondary property tax to an unwitting public…and that’s exactly what he proceeded to do. Despite this, he was allowed to continue to the end of his speech (approximately another 200 words) without interruption.

Attorney Verburg’s Argument: Over-ruled. 
An Oro Valley resident who witnessed the above exchange, e-mailed Attorney Verburg to question the inconsistency in applying the rules. In Verburg’s e-mail response, he stated that Baker “talked about bonds in a very general sense and did not connect his discussion to the matter on the agenda [until] at the end of his presentation.” Verburg asserted that it was too late at that point “to advise him about appropriate protocol.”

This is not true. Mr. Baker should have been interrupted when he uttered his second sentence, “If you’re looking at a bond issue, how are you going to go about getting it passed?”

Verburg continued that Ms. Stratman, “was allowed to speak for some time…before she was stopped.” While this is true, the fact remains that Mr. Baker was allowed to present his entire speech unimpeded despite speaking on the same agenda item that Ms. Stratman was prevented from speaking on.

Verburg also stated, “There was no inconsistency, it was just that the speakers made their inappropriate comments at different times in their respective presentation” and “you can’t interrupt someone’s presentation once they have concluded it.”

Again, the record shows that Mr. Baker’s intent was clear with his opening sentence and his objective became crystal clear with his second sentence; he was there to give the council specific instructions on how to pass the Naranja Park bond (Item #2 on the Regular Agenda) that evening. His goal was apparent long before his speech was concluded. No one talks about something that happened 20 years ago unless they are going to connect it to something that’s happening NOW.
--------------------

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, Citizen Advocates of the Oro Valley General Plan, who over a 9-month period, successfully negotiated a controversial 200-acre development project slated for the LaCholla-Naranja-Lambert-Shannon area. 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.

Four Residents Speak On Issues Important To You

At last week's Oro Valley Town Council meeting, four Oro Valley residents spoke of four different topics. Each topic is important to you as an Oro Valley resident. These are matters on which we have previously reported. We're publishing the comments because they are important to you and because you will never hear them otherwise.



Oro Valley leaders should use valid, documented assumptions when making important decisions

Last week, we reported a dialogue between Paul and Mayor Hiremath.

It was about what has turned out to be an  unsupported assumption that 33% of Oro Valley sales tax revenues come from people who do not reside in Oro Valley. That number was used by the Town and Mayor Hiremath in justifying why a sales tax increase s should be used to fund the El Conquistador Country Club purchase.

As it turns out, the town had no substantiation for the assumption. Mayor Hiremath told Emmert to prove the mayor wrong.

Emmett brings it all to a conclusion in his remarks to council.

The Oro Valley Town Council should not advocate a property tax through Pima County

There is no one on town council advocating for Oro Valley to have its own property tax.

Yet, there are members of this council who enthusiastically hope for a Pima County bond issue that would fund Naranja Park, Steam Pump Ranch and Innovation Park.  All of these are worthy endeavors. However, as resident Geri Ottoboni pointed out to council, all result in a property tax.

As Otoboni points out in her remarks,  Oro Valley residents will pay more than their share of the repayment for the bonds because our property values are much higher most other Pima County communities. This, LOVE has also observed.

Frankly, as Ottoboni notes, we would pay less as individuals if issued bonds, instituted a secondary property tax with a sunset to pay back the debt.  This will likely never happen.

Listen as Otoboni explain the logic. Read our February posting on the matter.

With Golf Course purchased, Oro Valley also gets the liability and the law suits that follow

Resident Don Barnett is a member of the El Conquistador Country Club  discuss the condition of one of bunkers on the course. There are liners in the bunkers.  Barnet was significantly injured when his club hit the liner.

Barnett wants to town to fix the problem, even though the town does not yet own the course. He cautions that serious injuries could result and law suits could follow.

Liability and law suites are one of the unattended consequences of owning a golf course.  Add to this the many issues that will likely be brought to council when something is awry on the golf course; or when the manager of the course, Troon Golf, does not do something a member want them to do.

Train Oro Valley town staff and commissioners on the content of the general plan and "law"

Resident Don Bristow observed that there are some town employees and some members of the Planning and Zoning Commission who don't know the requirements of the general plan or Oro Valley legal zoning requirements (termed: "code").

He had observed a Planning and Zoning Commission meeting where staff failed to provide complete information on these matters and that some on the commission had no idea of the requirements.

Bristow also observes that there have been more than 30 changes on Oro Valley's sign codes since 2010. None were to benefit resident  scenic views or way of life. All of these have been favorable to business.

He wonders why the people's interests, as demonstrated by the  general plan and law are not considered.

Hiremath Accuses Garner Of Lying About El Conquistador Country Club Purchase

On February 26, Mayor Hiremath called Council Member Bill Garner a "liar" several times during an interview with KNST host Garrett Lewis. The interview regarded the town's purchase of the El Conquistador Country Club. You can listen to the mayor's comments here.

The Mayor had requested the interview. Lewis had  interviewed Garner two days earlier.

Mayor Hiremath provided his view on why he feels that it was right of the council to approve the purchase of the El Conquistador Country Club. However, rather than simply refuting what Garner had said in a respectful manner, Mayor Hiremath chose to call Garner a liar.

So, we investigated the Mayor's charges:

Garner Asserts: A Rushed Decision To Purchase The El Conquistador Country Club

Mayor Hiremath said the Council Member Bill Garner is "flat out lying. As a matter of fact I know that he is flat out" lying.  Garner had said that the council members had been rushed into the decision to purchase the El Conquistador Country Club.

You can watch the video of the December council meeting in which the decision to purchase the El Conquistador Country Club was made. The minority members of council felt that Mayor Hiremath had exceeded what he was authorized to do and that they were blindsided by the rush to make a decision give the lack of accurate, thorough information.

We can not confirm that their allegations because the minutes of the special council sessions in which this information would have been provided are not available to the public.

We can confirm the following:

• The numbers the town was presented in relation to the purchase were constantly changing. 
• In addition, during the December meeting, Council Member Burns says that it was he who authorized the Mayor to pursue discussions but that the Mayor was never authorized to make a deal to purchase the El Conquistador Country Club.

Garner Asserts Costs of Building a Community Center Are Far Less That Town Guesstimates

Later in the interview, Mayor Hiremath said that Garner lied about the cost of building a community center.

The Mayor said he has never seen "anything detailed that shows what the cost [of building a community center] are going to be."

Council Member Garner's estimates of what it would cost to build a center are based on looking at what he considers to be comparable facilities that have been recently built.  Town Manager Caton has also done an estimate.  The numbers differ substantially. That does not mean that either is lying. It simply means that no one, in this case the town, invested the time to get the kind of detailed estimate the Mayor has never seen. This is standard procedure in making a purchase versus build decision.

Mayor Hiremath Says Garner and Zinkin Want A Property Tax and Sun City Will Welcome It Gladly

Next, Mayor Hiremath stated during his interview that:

"I've heard Council Member Zinkin say that  for the sun city residents, he is sure that they won't mind paying a property tax."  (KNST Interview: 25 minutes).

When asked by LOVE, the Mayor said that he had not heard this directly. Rather: "I heard this comment second hand because I was not there. but it came from a very reliable source who wrote it down."

We checked with Debra Arrett of Sun City Oro Valley. Debra is Chair of the Government Affairs Committee who organized and  attended the meeting where Mike Zinkin spoke. She reported, "I never heard Mike Zinkin or Bill Garner say that they wanted a property tax or that they think the voters of Sun City would approve it."

Apparently on some sort of "roll" during the interview, the Mayor felt compelled to continue: "...Council Member Garner and Council Member Zinkin have repeatedly wanted that subject [of a property tax] put up.." for council discussion.

We asked the Mayor to clarify this: "Councilmembers Garner and Zinkin have advocated for other revenue sources to include discussions of commercial lease tax, renters tax and property tax because we need to diversify our revenue sources and all three of those would have to go to the voters."

Mayor Hiremath believes that asking that something be discussed is same as "advocating" for that something.  "I find it illogical to think that if they do not support something then why would they bring it up?"

We asked Council Member Garner why he even brought it up.

Garner told us that he has done so because he feels there needs to be a discussion as outlined in the strategic plan of 2014. He never has advocated for a property tax and never will as the Town of Oro Valley founding fathers wanted to keep the property tax out of our Town and continues to run on a fiscally responsible platform.

Garner has reminded us that the majority four would not even allow for a discussion of alternative revenue sources over the course of several attempts at various meetings throughout 2014. In Garner's mind, a discussion of alternative revenue sources to be potentially taxed is far different than voting to put one on the ballot for a vote.

Those are the facts.

So, was Council Member Garner lying? You tell us.
---

Bits and Pieces

How To Manage, Maybe Even Reduce Your Property Tax Values

Pima County Assessors have sent homeowners their 2015 Residential Notice of Value for 2015.  Property taxes will be based on the limited value.  An insert sent with the notice says that this value can not be appealed.

On the surface, you might think that you can not do anything about your property tax valuation; but you can!

 "The limited property value of property for property taxation purposes is the limited property value of the property in the preceding valuation year plus five per cent of that value" (Source)

So,  yes, for any one year you have not control.

However...

Pay attention to the total full cash value because: "The current limited property value of a parcel of property shall not exceed its current full cash value."  So, you would want the full cash value to never grow more than 5% annually.

In 2014, total full cash value and limited value were set to be the same.

In 2015, however, we were not surprised to find that the county increased the full cash value 3 percentage points greater than the 5% statutory increase in the limited value.  This gives them leeway to always collect based on the limited value, since it will never be less than the full cash value.  At this rate of difference, the limited value will never be less than the full cash value.

So, appealing the full cash value matters to you. You goal should be to reduce the full cash value to less than the limited value or, as minimum, to keep an increase in the full cash value at 5% or less.

Visit the assessors site for the appeal forms.  The appeal deadline is April 1.

Also, if you are over 65, you may be eligible for a 3-year freeze on the limited cash value of your property. Learn more here.
---
Oro Valley Police Warn:" Beware of Computer-Based Fraud

The Oro Valley Police Department (#orovalleypd) sent out two "tweets" this week regarding internet-based fraud. "Oro Valley residents warned of online rental scam" linked to a TV7 report about a scam on the website "Zillow."  The site advertised a rental unit. The prospective renter sent in a deposit.  The rental was bogus. (source).  The other was a Facebook scam in which an individual sent money to a "friend" to pay taxes on supposed lottery winnings.  Of course, there was no lottery winnings. (source)

The adage: "If it seems to good to be true, it probably is" applies to both of these situations.

Beware, readers, the internet is a dangerous place.

Thanks to The Oro Valley Police Department for reminding us of this.
---
Big Doin's At Steam Pump Tomorrow

" The...Second Saturday at Steam Pump Ranch will feature a blacksmith demonstration, Heritage Garden demonstration, and guest speaker Brenda Marjaneimi, author of An Extended Stay, the story of one woman's struggle with Parkinson's disease, as lovingly told by her daughter. Following the morning's activities, live music will be provided by Reno Del Mar. Second Saturdays at Steam Pump Ranch are held from 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. on the second Saturday of each month. (Source: Oro Valley Press Release)
---
COXCO No More

In case you haven't noticed, the COXCO gas station on the northwest corner of Oracle and Ina Road is closed.

Plans have been filed by SSBL Architects to build a 3,600 sf retail building in that spot.   The site is bit odd.  It is small, less than 1/2 acre and significantly higher in elevation that abutting properties.  "The architecture at this intersection can best be described as eclectic," notes architect Sayler-Brown  in the architectural design narrative he filed with the town.

The Oro Valley Conceptual Design Review Board will review the conceptual plans for this site at this Tuesday's meeting.
---
Basis Primary School Plans Unveiled

BASIS has filed information with the Oro Valley Conceptual Design Review Board regarding its plans for a 48,000 sf, 2-storybuilding next to the existing BASIS school on Oracle Road. 36' will be the maximum height.  The new building will provide education for grades K-6.

BASIS notes in the information filed that it is not required by state law to abide by the standard Oro Valley development review process. "The applicant has agreed to submit the Conceptual Architecture for a "courtesy" review by the Conceptual Design Review Board and Town Council."  Town staff has determined that the proposed design in in conformance with Oro Valley's design principles and standards.

The Oro Valley Conceptual Design Review Board will review this project at Tuesday's meeting.
---
Town Has Done No Study To Determine On-Site Clinic Feasibility?

Last month we reported that the Town Of Oro Valley had held a bidder's conference regarding creating a full-time, onsite wellness clinic for its employees.  The town was exploring having a clinic that includes Golder Ranch Fire District ("GFRD'") employees. We submitted an information request asking for studies that discussed what was being planned. The town responded by providing us emails between town manager Caton and the fire chief of GFRD. We conclude from this that the town has performed no study of the feasibility of this concept; or determined any justification for creating this facility since it did not provide such to us in response to our information request.
---

Oro Valley To Build 2 Multi-Use Fields and A Dog Park On Naranja Town Stie

Last night, the Oro Valley Town Council voted unanimously to begin construction of two multi--use fields and a dog park at the Naranja Town Site.  Construction will start shortly and will be completed by the spring of next year. You can read all about the facility by reading our prior post.

17 people spoke in favor of building a new facility. Most were for the proposal, having a vested interest in it because they need to use the fields. Three longtime residents felt that the expenditure on the town site at this time was not appropriate. They wanted the town to wait until after it had completed a study, which is funded, on what to do with the town site.

The facility will cost $2.3 million, most of which will be funded from general fund reserves or the bed tax. Much of this cost is to create the infrastructure for the roadway into the site from Naranja, parking, electric, and water.  The fields will use reclaimed water. There will be no fresh water or permanent restroom facilities at the site.

Council Members spoke of the need to complete the full study of the facility as part of the general plan.   At least three of the council members spoke of the need to find funding for the construction of the facility. One, council member Joe Hornat said that the town site will need to have something for everyone so that new sources of revenues, which we believe to be a property tax, would be approved by the voters.  Council Member Brendan Burns seemed to echo these comments.
---

Bits and Pieces

---

The following is from an email message we received:

""Streetcar Named Tucson's Fiasco"" "Interesting piece in today's Az Star about Strretcar delays, and consultants fees. It seems our former Mayor Loomis will be paid almost $400,000 for his consulting work!! How is this possible, why are the citizens of Tucson Metro so apathetic. Don't we all realize the money for these consultants come right out of our pockets?? This Streetcar situation is disgusting, and hopefully we will have answers as to how this situation got so out of control."
---
Town Of Oro Valley is seeking a consultant to drive the communications aspect of the 2015 General Plan update.  Click here to view the bid solicitation.  The bidders conference is May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM in the Town of Oro Valley Administration's Kachina Conference Room
---
Click here to read year-to-date Oro Valley Police Department crime and safety statistics.
---
This is from another email message we received:

""We are house hunting in AZ. Property taxes in OV are double what the property tax is in Scottsdale - Desert Mountain. Why is this? It certainly impacts our thouight process on where to seriously house hunt. Further, it really hurts current OV property owners who are hoping to sell to out of state retirees. I note OV is hoping to impose a property tax over and above the county's , is this true? If so, how much more?"

We informed the writer that Oro Valley does not have a property tax.

Let's hope it stays that way forever.
---
Council Meeting humor:  Joe Hornat's: "One question... five parts."
---

Bits and Pieces

---
The Oro Valley branch of the Pima County Library System will be adding nine more open hours starting February 10. Click here to view both the current and new times.
---
The library has a number of events that it is promoting this month. Click here to see them.
---
By now, you have received your 2014 Pima County property tax valuation for 2014. It likely shows an increase in your property's valuation.  You can ready why here You have until April 1 to appeal.
---
A Dollar Express Store is coming to the Oro Valley Marketplace.  It is a division of Dollar Tree Stores.
---
The Oro Valley HiVE enforcement program will continue this month. Six motorcycle officers will be deployed at Oracle & Magee and at Oracle & Suffolk on the following dates:
Feb. 11, 2013 7 – 10 a.m.
Feb. 13, 2013 4 – 7 p.m.
Feb. 18, 2013 7 – 10 a.m. Feb. 21, 2013 4 – 7 p.m.
Feb. 22, 2013 4 – 7 p.m.

Motorists are asked to be aware of the additional enforcement activity and drive safely. (Source: Oro Valley Press Release)
---
"The Town of Oro Valley is proud to announce the guest speakers for the February 9 event at Steam Pump Ranch.  Barbara McIntire and Nancy Cobb, the great, great granddaughters of George and Matilda Pusch, will give a special presentation at 12:30 p.m., including items that Geroge and Matilda Pusch traded with Native Americans in exchange for flour and sugar.

11 a.m. – 12:15 p.m. Property tours, hosted by the Oro Valley Historical Society
12:30 p.m. Guest speakers: Barbara McIntire and Nancy Cobb, Pusch Family descendants

 Second Saturdays at Steam Pump Ranch are held from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. on the second Saturday of each month. This exciting new way to visit Oro Valley’s vivid past will include special guest speakers, tours, and an opportunity to enjoy the beautiful mountain scenery and eat lunch on‐site.
(Source: Oro Valley Press Release)
---