New State Zoning Edict Shifts Roles for Non-Discretionary Development Requests

Oro Valley moves ahead with development process changes required by HB 2447
At its September 10 meeting, the Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission discussed proposed zoning code amendments to comply with HB 2447—state legislation that changes how municipalities review certain development requests. The Commission unanimously approved initiating the zoning code amendment process. Staff will draft specific changes, including administrative review language, and a separate effort will define objective design standards for future projects.

HB 2447 shifts roles among commission, staff, and the public
Planning and zoning commission will see a reduced load
The Commission will lose some oversight authority. Non-discretionary items such as development plans, plats, architecture, and public art will move to administrative approval. Commissioners noted this could cut a substantial portion of their traditional workload. The Commission will continue to review discretionary cases—rezonings, general plan amendments, and conditional use permits—but will no longer weigh in on many design and architectural issues.

Staff will see a larger role
Town planning staff will be required to approve code-compliant submittals, shifting most development and design reviews from public hearings to administrative decisions. Staff will also manage new processes, including at-risk grading and expedited reviews.

Public input will narrow once an application meets code
Neighborhood meetings will remain, allowing residents to comment early in the process, but once an application meets code, staff must approve it. This reduces direct community influence over outcomes compared to today’s hearing-based process.

Town council’s role will be reduced
Discretionary cases—such as rezonings, general plan amendments, and conditional use permits—will still require Commission review and Council approval. For non-discretionary items (development plans, plats, architecture, design reviews), Council will not see them. Council’s influence will be primarily up-front when adopting code amendments and refining design standards. Once standards are set, Council will not be involved in individual project approvals unless a discretionary request is included.

Board of adjustment’s role will expand
Appeals of staff administrative decisions will go to the Board of Adjustment. This makes the Board the formal venue for contesting administrative approvals, increasing its oversight role while narrowing the timing and scope of public influence compared to current hearings.

"Objective Design Standards" key...yet to be developed...not an easy task
Staff explained that proposed amendments will require consistency with the zoning code and “objective design standards”—a key focus of the Commission’s discussion. The town will develop these standards in a separate process. The standards must be specific, measurable, and not subject to interpretation. Commissioners asked what qualifies as an objective standard, including whether aesthetic elements such as color or texture could be regulated. They noted that unclear standards could limit staff’s ability to enforce Oro Valley’s design expectations.

The town will develop these standards through a separate process that is expected to include significant community involvement.

Next steps
Staff will draft the zoning code amendments, including administrative review language. They will launch a separate process to develop objective design standards that will govern future projects.
- - -

See our May 27 Article on HB2447

This and That From The TMRB Study Sessions

No change in what we previously reported on the TMRB

The Oro Valley Town Council held 8 hours of a study session on the 2023-24 Town Manager’s Recommended Budget (TMRB). Nothing new regarding the TMRB emerged. What we previously reported stands.  However, there were a few things that we did learn from the sessions that are worth sharing.

Town considers "Winfield Special" fifth tier for water billing

The town’s water department is studying adding a fifth tier to the water billing structure. That tier would be for users, like the Winfield family, of less than 3,000 gallons of .water.  The town’s current structure, in which users are penalized for water use, will continue. Staff did not announce a timetable for this new tier.  Interestingly, the brain child of this tier was offered up some months ago by Mayor Winfield on the guise of encouraging less water use. Could it be that he just wants he wants to lower his water bill? One could reasonably question how a family of six can survive on 3,000 gallons of water a month.

Homeowner insurance may cover scams

We hope that you are never scammed. Some of the latest scams are discussed on the Oro Valley Police web site.  If you are, we learned at the special session that Homeowners insurance may cover the damage. Check your policy or ask your agent to see if you are covered.

Whether municipal golf makes a profit is a matter of accounting

There is no agreement among councilmembers or among town staff on how to determine if municipal golf is making a profit. Staff says it is but one has no idea if that interpretation includes sales tax support.  And there are differences in understanding what revenues and what costs should be charged to golf operations. For example, when town staff says that municipal golf is profitable that are not including the millions that are being spent on replacing the irrigation system, enlarging the community center parking, or making the area more challenged accessible.

Grants and outside funds play a huge role in public works funding

The town seeks federal, state or local funds for just about every road project they do.  The La Canada Bridge needs repairs so staff is seeking federal funding. Naranja Drive needs a multi-user path. Staff is seeking PAG and RTA funds for this. Much of the remaining roads program is funded by state highway funds.

Councilmembers want to measure the results of economic development efforts but…

Every council member asked how the Economic Development Department measures its results. None of them got an answer. That’s because, try as he may, Mr. Melcher, the department head, has very little to show in his three years in on the job. Much of this is because the town's target businesses, high tech and medical tech, are hard to find. So, Melcher is focusing on bringing events to town. This will bring outsiders in to use the town's retail and hotel services. Melcher will report to council on the result of one such event, the Tucson Bicycle Classic, at this Wednesday's meeting. Read our April analysis of why economic development efforts have produced limited results.

The town is getting software to help them identify those who do not register their short term rentals

The software scans the various short term rental website. The program gathers information on rentals offered in Oro Valley, summarizes the results, and develops a report of activity by the owner.  Staff will then compare that list to the list of those who have registered to determine those who have not.  Staff claims that this will be "evidence" sufficient to press forward. Here's one example of the kind of software that can do this.

Fee Payers should pay credit card fee

The town budgets a $57,000 credit card fee cost incurred when people pay fees using their credit cards. Why doesn't the town add this fee to the cost when the person is paying? This is a common practice when paying bills online to public entities.

Councilmembers "fall over backwards" to complement staff on the job staff is doing

It was difficult to listen to eight hours of a study session. Much of the session is consumed by councilmembers telling staff what a great job the town staff person is doing; and if they are addressing a supervisor, telling them what a great job their staff is doing. "Thank you for your services and the great work you do" is heard over and over again.  There's nothing wrong with that. But when you do to every one every time, the compliment becomes gratuitous. One suggestion: Mayor Winfield should thank staff for their great work at the start of every meeting. That way, the same praise does not have to be repeated ad nauseam. 

- - -

Bits and Pieces

Town Council fails to consider financial results on a timely basis

Forever, it seems, the town staff updated the Oro Valley Town Council on financial results. It was a monthly report that discussed spending and receives of all major funds. It was a source of transparency for all residents.  In January, the council voted to change that to quarterly reporting or results. As of April 19, 2023 not a single monthly financial report has actually appeared on a 2023 Council Agenda.  It's Mayor Winfield's job to set the agenda.

The Budget and Finance Commission, a group of unelected residents who have no authority over anything, see the monthly financials at each of their meetings. Mayor Winfield is the council liaison to that Board. So, if you want to know how the town is doing financially, you have to attend their meetings.  Fortunately, their meetings are short and contain little substance.

These are the neighbors that are resolutely opposed to the OVCN sports complex request

LOVE has referred to OVCN Neighbors in our postings on the OVCN matter. These are individuals who oppose the rezoning of land adjacent to the Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene (OVCN). The Church wants to build sports facilities on this land. The "neighbors" cover a very large portion of the original section of Oro Valley. 

We've created the panel at right for you to see the large area of opposition. It includes four neighborhoods: Linda Vista Citrus Tracts 2; Shadow Mountain Estates, Campo Bello and Oro Valley Estates. 

One trip through those neighborhoods and you will know why there is such resolute, united opposition to the OVCN request.

Oro Vally SR77 Wildlife Game and Fence is complete 

ORO VALLEY, Ariz. (April 7, 2023) – The Town of Oro Valley is holding a ribbon cutting on Wednesday, April 19 to celebrate the completion of the State Route 77 (Oracle Road) Wildlife Gate and Fence project. 

The ribbon cutting is the culmination of a years-long collaboration between the Town, surrounding neighbors and regional partners to preserve scenic views and protect wildlife along SR 77 north of Tangerine Road. The ribbon cutting will start at 9 a.m. at 2746 E. Scenic Overlook Place (the west side of SR 77 at Scenic Overlook Place). Parking will be available in the neighborhood along two streets. A-frame signs will provide instructions on where to park as well as directions to the ribbon cutting staging area.

The Pima Association of Governments and the Regional Transportation Authority funded this project. (Source: Town of Oro Valley Media Release)

Friends of Pusch Ridge Golf host Cinco De Mayo Scramble

The date is May 5. The time is 8:00 am. Its a Friday. So that's another good reason to take the day off and play nine holes on this beautiful course. Register here.

(Source: Friends of Pusch Ridge Golf email)

- - -

Guest View: Mike Zinkin – A Plea to the Younger Demographic of Oro Valley to "Get Involved"

I have documented on many occasions how the newly elected mayor and three councilmembers will be remembered as the most fiscally irresponsible council members in the history of Oro Valley.

Examples
Allowing the past Town Manager to spend $620,000+ unchecked and against Town Policy, spending bonded monies for park amenities that the citizens did not desire and without asking what the cost will be to maintain these amenities in the future, giving over $400,000 to Visit Tucson even though our Bed Tax revenues are down 11%, and until recently, completely ignoring the ADA issue at the Community Center and ignoring the need for a new Police Station.

Does anyone care about these issues? Does anyone care about the horrendous waste of potable water the Town is using on its properties? Does anyone care about the continued golf losses?

The impact of these council decisions will have lasting effects
Those most impacted will be those who are younger…our college students, young couples with small children, and those under 65. Where are these people? Why are they not engaged in the conversation when they will be the most impacted?

These issues will not likely affect me, and yet I still take the time to research them and report on them. Where are the citizens that have children who will be adversely affected by this Council’s decisions?

Over the years, residents in various parts of town have been “up in arms” over land and development issues that impact their views, their neighborhoods, and their property values. They organize and spend a lot of their time and energy on these issues that directly impact them. But where is their anger over the Council’s reckless spending and water waste?

An appeal to the younger generation
Unless the younger population of the Town gets involved, this Council will continue unchecked. The result? In about 10 years, there will be a Council faced with paying for the maintenance and upkeep of the Town’s amenities -- the cost of maintaining the splash pad, the BMX track, the Vistoso Preserve. When coupled with the cost of providing needed services, the Council in office in 10 years will either have to reduce amenities, reduce services, or levy an additional tax on you to pay for these things.

People need to get involved, ask questions of the Council, and implore them to consider the future costs of the decisions that they make today that will impact you tomorrow.

---
Mike Zinkin and his wife have lived in Oro Valley since 1998. He served on the Oro Valley Development Review Board from 2005-2009, the Board of Adjustment from 2011-2012, and the Town Council from 2012-2016. He was named a Fellow for the National League of Cities. He was a member of the NLC Steering Committee for Community and Economic Development and a member of the Arizona League of Cities Budget and Economic Development Committee. He was an Air Traffic Controller for 30 years. Mike 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.

Guest View: Mike Zinkin – Where did all the allocated money go?

Something is amiss in Oro Valley governance

The type of Government we have in Oro Valley is based on the Town Council (elected officials) making the Town’s policies, and the Town staff (unelected officials led by the Town Manager), carrying out those policies. 

 However, in Oro Valley something is amiss.

Council sets policy. Staff implements. 

The Council has study sessions and public meetings to ensure that the budget is fully vetted by both the policy makers and the public. The budget process is somewhat lengthy and detailed, and the vote to amend and approve is the most important vote the Council makes every year.

The Council should feel confident that their policies, as reflected in the annual budget, come to fruition

However, there is a real problem in Oro Valley in that the adopted spending policy has not been carried out.

We have heard how the Council allocated $750,000 to make the Community Center ADA compliant. What happened? Where did the allocated money go? The Council has enough on their plate without having to worry about their policies coming to fruition.

The State of Arizona requires that all budgets be balanced
If the Town Manager submits in the budget that an expenditure is $X, then there must be $X in revenues. For example, if there was $750,000 allocated for Community Center ADA compliance issues, then there has to be $750,000 in revenues.

Town Council’s adopted budgets are not being implemented
On page 244 of the adopted budget for FY 19/20, there is a Capital Improvement allocation for a $3,000,000 bond for golf course irrigation improvements. What happened? Was there a bond, and, if so, where are the improvements? On page 227 of the adopted budget for FY 20/21, there is a Capital Improvement allocation for $1,100,000 for golf course irrigation. What happened? Where are the improvements?

On page 230 on the adopted budget for FY 21/22, there is a Capital Improvement allocation for $90,000 for tennis court resurfacing. However, the Council just passed a bond where some of the money is going to resurface tennis courts. What happened to the allocated $90,000?

On page 110 of the adopted budget for FY 21/22, there is a breakdown of the personnel allocated to the Town Manager’s office. In this breakdown there is no allocation for the position of CIP Director. However, there was a recent Facebook posting advertising a position for a CIP Director. This is a position that is not budgeted. 

Where did the Federal Cares Act money go?
During the Call to Audience at the March 16th Town Council meeting, Town Council Candidate Bill Rodman stated that the Town received $5.3 million in Federal Cares Act money. Who authorized the spending of this money and where did it go? Did the Town even consider spending this money on piping reclaimed water to Jim Kriegh Park or Riverfront Park or to the Pusch Ridge Golf Course?

Town Policies are being ignored
There are adopted Town Policies which have been ignored by this Council and Town Manager. Town Policy 6, adopted on 3/5/97, and reaffirmed on 4/20/05 is titled “Unbudgeted Expenses”. It directs the Town Manager to go to Council for approval for any unbudgeted expenses. Where was the Council approval for the above-mentioned unbudgeted position?

The Council needs to fix this problem
It is unfortunate that our underpaid part-time Council members cannot rely on the Town Manager, who makes over $184,000/year to carry out adopted policies and procedures. The Council must ensure that their policies are carried out.

The Council must ask: What happened to the $750,000 for ADA compliance? What happened to the previously approved expenditure totaling $4,100,000 for golf course irrigation? Where did the allocation for a position in the Town Manager’s office come from?

It is too bad that our Town Council cannot expect their decisions to be carried out. Unfortunately, this delinquency is costing Oro Valley a lot of money.

- - -

You can watch Zinkin's remarks to council on this matter above.

- - -
Mike Zinkin and his wife have lived in Oro Valley since 1998. He served on the Oro Valley Development Review Board from 2005-2009, the Board of Adjustment from 2011-2012, and the Town Council from 2012-2016. He was named a Fellow for the National League of Cities. He was a member of the NLC Steering Committee for Community and Economic Development and a member of the Arizona League of Cities Budget and Economic Development Committee. He was an Air Traffic Controller for 30 years. Mike 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.

Remote View Only For Tonight's Council Meeting

Town Council meetings accessible to public remotely only
The public will not be allowed in council chambers for tonight's town council meeting. Instead, the public will be able to view the meeting and participate remotely. This procedure by the town is to "... ensure public participation during the current period of social distancing." (source)

The public can view and listen to the meeting
The public can watch the meeting and listen to the meeting online or listen by phone. Click this link to watch and listen on line. Dial this phone number, 480-999-2896 and when prompted entering ID: 311 239 070#, to join.  The meeting starts at 6pm

Here's how the public can participate in the meeting remotely
Comments on an agenda item
You can provide comment on an agenda item if such is allowed by law, such as in a public hearing. To do so "...contact the Town Clerk at 520-229-4700 or at mstandish@orovalleyaz.gov at least thirty minutes prior to the meeting and state what agenda item they would like to speak on."

Call to audience
If you want to participate in the "Call to Audience" segment of the meeting "The comment or question must be sent via email to Bluecard@orovalleyaz.gov no later than thirty minutes before the public meeting. If the sender wants it to be read at the meeting (which may or may not occur, in part or in its entirety, as appropriate under the circumstances), comments shall be limited to no more than 500 words or three minutes as read aloud."  Note that we do not believe that you need to provide the comment or question in writing since that is not required when you attend a meeting. Simply let the town know that you will be speaking and inform them of the topic of your speech.

Remote participation is not always reliable so do be patient
The town is assuming at least two things in moving to this remote mode. One is that the technology is reliable. The other is that people will be sufficiently skilled to be able to comfortably use it.

In the past, the technology has not always been reliable.  Indeed, the last town meeting was supposed to be viewable on line, but it was not.  All we could see was a blank screen. And we have a very high speed internet connection. Most people don't.  Add to this the possibility that the system may crash if there are many viewers. We don't know if there is a backup system.

The other challenge is that most people, especially older folks, are not computer fluent. And it's older people who generally attend these meetings. Participation requires coordination of using a device for viewing and a phone for talking. Sounds simple enough. But our experience with others attempting this is that they simply don't get it right. We imagine also that there will be latency problems; that is, what you see on the screen will not synch with what you hear on the phone.

Regardless of all this.. . show up.. it's our town!
---

Guest View: Diane Peters ~ The “Art” of Time Management

As you begin reading this article, you might ask yourself…what does this have to do with Oro Valley? Bear with me for a moment and it will become clear.

Have you ever been on the Internet, perhaps Facebook, and you've clicked on a video that is of interest to you? Maybe it was a heartwarming video of a soldier being reunited with his dog that he hasn’t seen in a year. Maybe it was a stunningly beautiful nature video. That’s what you chose to watch…and then BAM!!!...your video is interrupted with a commercial for dental implants or car insurance. You’re annoyed, yes? The commercial might last only 30 seconds, but 30 seconds seems like an eternity when you’re not interested in the topic and you’re waiting to see something else.

And this brings me to the “Youth Art Program by the Arts and Culture Ambassadors” that I and many others have been forced to sit through during council meetings when we are there to listen to and perhaps speak on an agenda item that is of importance to us.

The only “art” I want to see at a Town Council meeting is the “Art of Time Management.”

It’s not that I don’t appreciate art. I love art. One of my favorite past-times is visiting art museums and art galleries. But when I’m in an art gallery, I don’t want to discuss town business or politics. And when I’m at a Town Council meeting, I don’t want to sit through a Youth Art presentation. I decided to speak on this issue because the Youth Arts Presentation was just on the council agenda four months in a row (Oct-Nov-Dec-Jan).

Town business should be the #1 priority
We have approximately 17 town council meetings per year. These meetings should be for critical town business, not for art shows. It’s a disservice to the residents who are waiting to speak on an issue of importance to them (usually a development proposal) to have to first sit though these presentations which usually last anywhere from 8 to 13 minutes. I remember one marathon presentation that went on for over 30 minutes, at which point I got up and walked out, missing the agenda item that prompted me to attend the meeting in the first place.

Another meeting where the inclusion of the Youth Art Program was particularly annoying was the December 6, 2017 meeting. The room was packed that night due to the agenda containing FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS on contentious development proposals. These included:

• General Plan amendment regarding the 302 acre Tangerine North Annexation
• General Plan amendment and rezoning for a 131 acre residential development in Big Wash
• General Plan amendment for a 76 acre residential development on Shannon Road
• General Plan amendment to change a 15 acre property from office park to residential

The town had to know that this meeting would be a standing room only crowd, packed with residents who were opposed to these development proposals, and that this meeting would last for hours. The room was packed and the meeting lasted 4 hours and 34 minutes, not ending until 10:30 PM. This was not the appropriate time to include a Youth Art presentation on the agenda.

On that particular evening, (former) Mayor Hiremath asked those who were there for the above agenda items to give up their seats to the parents and kids because the room was over capacity. [You can watch the full video clip above.  A partial transcript of his speech is below.]

HIREMATH: “Because it’s such a packed house…would people who are not here for the Youth Art presentation please relinquish your seat and just kind of wait outside so the parents and kids can get a seat?...We have an ask from the Fire Marshall because we’re over capacity.”

A time and a place for everything
My point is that people come to town meetings to listen to and speak on important issues. Therefore, Youth Art would be better celebrated in a place where parents and friends could appreciate it. I’d like to suggest that Youth Art be displayed at the library where people can enjoy it on their own time.

---
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. 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.

Expansion: A Daunting Oro Valley Challenge

In 2016, the residents of Oro Valley approved a general plan. There is a map that is part of the general plan (adapted below). This map shows the current boundaries of Oro Valley. It is within these boundaries that all of us are neighbors. And it is within these boundaries that the town must provide essential services, such as water and police protection. It is within these boundaries from which Oro Valley collects sales taxes, the primary source of town operating revenues.

The map also shows an area that extends beyond the boundaries of the town. This area is unincorporated Pima County land. It is land which Oro Valley can attempt to annex to our community. The "State Lands Annexation and Rezoning" is one example of land that is not part of Oro Valley but is within it's planning boundary. The resort, Westward Look is another example. All the businesses on Oracle Rd, from Orange Grove north are also examples of properties included in the planning area.

The planning area is huge

Oro Valley Town Limit and Planning Area

Attempting to bring unincorporated Pima County land into Oro Valley presents both a challenge and an opportunity to the new council.

Mayor Hiremath's theory was that business will locate in Oro Valley if Oro Valley has more rooftops. Thus, the community saw many general plan amendments and zoning changes that did, indeed, enable more rooftops. As we will discuss Wednesday, there are many more rooftops to come.

A change in direction provides many options
The people of Oro Valley clearly stated in this past election that they don't like the rooftops strategy. They want Oro Valley to have a "small town feeling."

Why expand at all?
If Oro Valley no longer has a "rooftops strategy", then getting more buildable land through amendments or through annexation is no longer a sole reason for change.

What, therefore will the new council do regarding expansion of Oro Valley's boundaries?

The General Plan does not mandate expansion.

It's up to council.

So, the first question the council must answer: Why expand at all?
--

Councilmember Steve Solomon threatens three Oro Valley women. Part 1.

Over the past couple of months, LOVE has received information about three Oro Valley women who have received threats from Oro Valley Town Councilmember Steve Solomon. Part 1 will discuss the face-to-face threats that he made to two of these women. Part 2 will discuss the email threat that he made to a third woman.

In order to protect the privacy of the two women who were physically approached and who are currently weighing their options for dealing with this situation, LOVE is only going to report on what happened and not release the names of the “victims” at this time.

Solomon vs. the First Amendment
In all three cases, Solomon launched completely uncalled for and out-of-control attacks on all three women due to these women commenting that they believe that wealthy special interest campaign contributions to the current Town Council are influencing Council decisions in favor of these special interest donors. The women have a First Amendment right to state their opinions.

The public incidents
Accounts of these incidents included Solomon acting like a maniac with his face contorted and twisted up as he yelled verbally abusive comments and threatened to sue each woman for slander. He asserted that their comments equated to accusing him of the felony act of bribery. Of note is that no one has accused him or any other council member of doing anything illegal…just unethical.

Hence, we think Solomon doth protest too much. He sure isn’t acting like an innocent person. He’s acting like an animal whose been cornered.

Evidence of developer influence
All one has to do is to look at the Campaign Finance Reports from council elections in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2018 and compare it with Town Council meeting minutes to see that the wealthy developer donors have been getting all of their General Plan Amendments and rezoning requests approved despite vocal opposition from numerous well-organized residents who have repeatedly presented valid and well-researched arguments before this Council.

In every single instance, the Council sides with the developers and builders who have funded their campaigns. How can it be that the residents are wrong every. single. time? The law of averages does not support this notion.

What other conclusion can a person draw than to believe that there is a symbiotic relationship between developers and builders who need the Town Council to approve their development proposals and Town Council members who need those special interest donations in order to fund their campaigns.

Solomon puts the “mean” in demeanor
These three women are not the only Oro Valley residents who have made this observation. Numerous Oro Valley residents have made the same comments in Letters to the Editor and also when speaking at Town Council meetings over the past few years.

Not once has any Town Council member felt the need to retaliate by verbally accosting any of these residents or threatening them with lawsuits…until now…until Steve Solomon…and he has chosen to threaten only the women, despite numerous men having made the same observations. We’ll leave it up to our readers to determine why that might be.

LOVE has previously warned Oro Valley residents that Steve Solomon did not have the demeanor to be a council member as we had already witnessed his bullying behavior during his prior brief stint on council from 2010 to 2012. He hasn’t changed and his brutish and bullying behavior appears to have only gotten worse.

How have other Council members handled the same allegations?
As stated above, no other Town Council member has felt the need to retaliate by verbally accosting any of these residents or threatening them with lawsuits. Whenever the topic of special interest donations has come up in the past, the incumbents brush it off by simply stating that the accusations are not true. The only Council member who attempted to defend himself, was Councilmember Joe Hornat who stated with civility that there is nothing in it for him to cater to these special interests. While we appreciate his civility in addressing the topic, we disagree with his conclusions.

An inter-dependent relationship
LOVE will now explain exactly what’s in it for the council members.

Example: Bruce the Builder donates $10,000 to your 2014 campaign because he believes that he can count on you to represent him and his financial interests. If he’s right, Bruce the Builder will recoup that $10,000 donation many times over.

The well-financed councilmembers then vote to approve every development proposal, General Plan Amendment, and rezoning that Bruce the Builder requests over the next four years, allowing him to spread his cookie-cutter homes all over the land. Bruce the Builder’s $10,000 donation served him so well that he will now donate another $10,000 to each of the incumbents 2018 re-election campaigns. Wash, rinse, repeat.

That’s what’s in it for the council members. If they do the bidding of the wealthy special interests who funded their first campaign, those wealthy special interests will continue to fund every campaign. It’s an inter-dependent relationship.

This would explain why it’s the same wealthy members of the development community who donate substantial sums to the incumbents every election season. It’s not rocket science.

We just wonder why Steve Solomon is the only one who was so threatened by these comments that he felt it necessary to verbally assault and threaten two women (one of whom is elderly).

This is what he does best?
LOVE would like to remind our readers of some of the assertions that Steve Solomon made when he was running for Town Council in 2016.

• I am running for Town Council to bring civility, professionalism, collaboration, and positive forward momentum back to our community and Town Government. [Explorer Newspaper, June 8, 2016]

• Practicing civility and finding common ground are what I do best. [Facebook page, Solomon for Oro Valley Town Council, July 29, 2016]

We’d say that Solomon needs more practice. Does verbally assaulting people and threatening them with lawsuits for engaging in their First Amendment rights sound like the actions of someone who practices civility?

Part 2 will be published later this week and will discuss the threat that Steve Solomon made in an email to another Oro Valley resident.

Guest View: Frank Pitts ~ How I fought the Good Ole Boys Club of Oro Valley

Former Planning and Zoning Commissioner, Frank Pitts, discusses what transpired during his time on the P&Z Commission and why he does not trust the Town Council to do what’s best for Oro Valley residents.

I joined the Planning and Zoning Commission in 2014 after the Town Council began discussing the rezoning of Desert Springs, an approximately 100-acre parcel located on the east side of Oracle Road at Tangerine. Catalina State Park is without a doubt the jewel and essence of what makes Oro Valley special. I was raised at Pusch Ridge Stables, adjoining the State park. Riding a horse and buggy with my father was our special time together both as a child and even today as two “old men.”

During the rezoning discussions in 2013, we were driving horse and buggy around the State park and I looked up at the land that the Town Council was considering rezoning from R-144, 3.3 acre lots to medium density residential. I thought to myself…houses overlooking the State park will rob the park of its essence and its serenity. The escape from civilization for a brief moment to get in touch with Mother Nature and rekindle our basic human needs with the outdoors is vital to our health and happiness. The park’s serenity helps keep us grounded.

They wanted a Yes-man. They got an independent thinker.
As a near life-long Oro Valley Resident, I knew it was time to do more than talk. I reached out to all the Town Councilmembers and explained to them that Catalina State Park is the Jewel of Oro Valley. Councilmember Mike Zinkin was the only councilmember who replied to my email and lent an ear. Mike said he would vote against rezoning it if it ever came back up but he also explained that “The Majority 4” (currently seeking reelection) would most likely approve the rezoning. I knew I needed to do more to help save Oro Valley from becoming just another “any town USA” so I applied to be a Planning and Zoning Commissioner.

I met Councilmember Joe Hornat and Planning and Zoning Chair Don Cox for the first time during the P&Z interview process. Cox asked what I thought of the direction of Oro Valley. I knew this was a do-or-die moment into the Good Ole Boys Club. So I ate my pride for the moment and said that I thought it looked great and I wanted to help keep improving it.

The rezoning of the property overlooking Catalina State Park also came up and Hornat explained how he would like to see the ridge over the park lined with quality homes. I gritted my teeth and smiled. Cox and Hornat both gleamed with pride over their Oro Valley open space reduction plan and the fact that they thought I was a Yes-man. They selected me for a position on the commission. After my first P&Z meeting, they realized that I was not a Yes-man.

Planning and Zoning should be called, “No planning. Just rezoning.”
As I sat through multiple P&Z meetings where they discussed nothing about planning but only rezoning, I realized there was a mission to get as many roof tops built in Oro Valley as possible to reach the magic 50,000 residents that the Town needed in order to receive additional federal funding. More retail business would also come to OV if we had a stronger consumer base. More federal money and more business tax dollars allow for a bigger OV bureaucracy. More houses lower Oro Valley's standard of living, reduce current home values, schools suffer, parks suffer, roads become congested, taxes increase, crime increases and the overall standard of living is reduced. As population increases, simple peacefulness is gone.

I voted NO for almost every single rezoning request because I knew that increasing bureaucracy was bad, and increasing bureaucracy at the demise of Oro Valley's Jewel (it's natural beauty) was illogical. Rezonings were approved time and time again when it was obvious in these meetings that most residents (and even our neighbors bordering Oro Valley) were opposed. The P&Z Commission didn't take the residents concerns seriously and the Town Council didn't take the residents concerns seriously.

As the outcry got worse, the council and staff figured out a way to divide and conquer the residents by changing the format of the public rezoning information meetings. These meetings were now broken-up into multiple discussion groups, thereby weakening the unified voice of the citizens.

What is the driving force behind all these rezonings?
After witnessing rezoning after rezoning without any long-term planning, I began to wonder why the council was on such a mission to change the delicate face of our little town in the desert. Money? Seeking higher public office? Fame? None of these reasons are serving their constituents.

Why I do not trust the current Oro Valley Town Council to look out for our best interest.
• Don Cox has been reappointed to the P&Z Commission for almost 15 years. Cox’s repeated reappointments are not a sign of a healthy democracy. Cox currently runs a PAC supporting the incumbents (and has done so in the past).

• 95% of the incumbents campaign funds are from Developers, Land Owners and Special Interest groups like HSL Properties from whom the Town purchased the country club and golf courses.

• Rezoning land should only be done if it benefits the common good of the community, NOT for the benefit of the individual landowner who knew the zoning restrictions when he/she purchased the land.

• Several volunteer committees were recently eliminated such as the Conceptual Design Review Board (CDRB). This Board assured that new developments were up to Oro Valley’s stringent codes. This is one less set of eyes looking out for the best interest of Oro Valley and merely allows for more steamrolled developments pushed through without opposition.

• I attempted to improve the public meeting process. I asked the council to create a web-site for residents to become informed about rezonings with a message board for questions. I asked them to advertise in the Explorer to inform more residents. I asked them to post more signs around the property of the proposed rezoning. I asked that they allow more time for residents to educate themselves prior to the council vote. I asked for a survey to be handed out at the end of each meeting giving the residents one last say. A watered down survey was initially adopted but I’m not sure if it’s still being used today. However, none of my other suggestions were considered.

This council is not transparent nor do they intend to be. Save what’s left of Oro Valley and remove the incumbents from office.

-----
Frank Pitts grew up in Tucson, moving to Oro Valley in 1977. He graduated from Northern Arizona University in 1991 and has been employed as an airline pilot for 18 years. He was an Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commissioner from 2014-2016.

Mark your Calendar: Candidate Debate for Oro Valley Mayor and Town Council

Tuesday, July 31st

6:00 to 8:00 PM

Hilton El Conquistador Hotel

The Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce is hosting this candidate debate/forum. All mayoral and town council candidates will be present. This is a free event and is open to the public.

The debate will be moderated by Chamber President, Dave Perry. You may submit questions to be considered during the debate by emailing him at dave@orovalleychamber.com

A History on our “Turn-Key” Community Center and Golf Courses

December 2014
Town Council Majority-4 (Hiremath-Hornat-Snider-Waters) voted to purchase the El Conquistador Golf Club from their largest campaign contributor, Humberto Lopez (HSL Properties) for $1 million dollars.

They justified the purchase by saying that the residents wanted a multi-use recreation center and that the country club facilities would be a turn-key Community Center. However, they knew that extensive repairs were required for the golf irrigation systems and the 1980’s country club building.

Spring 2015: Half-cent sales tax increase
The Town Council approved a ½ cent sales tax increase to cover all costs associated with the Community Center. The Community Center opened in May 2015 and immediately became a financial drag on Oro Valley.

2017: Golf and restaurant losses are 3.5 times the original forecast
By June 2017, the Town had already lost $5.7 million in golf and restaurant operations (or $200,000 per month). When this budget year ends on June 30, 2018, the total losses are projected to be over $7M dollars.

These excessive losses are 3.5 times the original Town forecast. Therefore, the sales tax revenue doesn’t even cover the operational expenses, much less the required repairs.

In 2017, the Town Council commissioned a $50,000 golf study by the National Golf Foundation and the WLB Group. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the Town’s golf facilities, course management, competitive landscape, and recommend actions that the Town should take to reduce these unsustainable losses. The NGF presented their results to the Council in a July 2017 Special Meeting. It was not acted upon at that time because the Town was focused on the $17M bond and secondary property tax for Naranja Park.

2018: Council reviews Golf Study options
The Council took up the golf study options in early 2018. The options aren’t good. Every one costs several million dollars, including closing the courses.

The study recommended 4 options:

Option A. Keep the two 18-hole courses on LaCanada
Cost $5.2M plus $1.4M in annual losses

Option B. Reduce the 36 holes down to 27 holes and frees up 32 acres
Cost $4.6M plus $1M in annual losses

Option C. Reduce the 36 holes down to 18 holes and frees up 83 acres
Cost $4.2M plus $1.3M in annual losses

Option D. Close both 18-hole courses and convert to a greenbelt park and pathway
Cost $3M plus ongoing Town park maintenance

What did our leaders do?
After spending $50,000 on the National Golf Foundation Study, they ignored the recommendations and instead followed Town Manager Jacobs recommendation to stay with Troon’s plan of 36 holes even though that plan has already lost us $6.9M.

The Troon plan will cost $3.6M for the irrigation system replacement and turf reduction, but future costs will likely require substantial funding to rebuild greens, sand traps, and cart paths.

In addition, $2.4M was proposed to rearrange, repair, and upgrade the 1980’s community center structure. But millions more will be required if or when they rebuild the tennis courts and lighting, remove and replace racquetball courts, and complete the additional ADA-compliance concerns.

Mayor Hiremath and Council adopted a budget for FY 2018/19 approving a $14M bond to mask the $6M Community Center and golf investment by packaging it with the $6M water and utility improvements and the $2M police evidence facility overrun.

Costs to-date and Costs to come

Purchase price                                                   $1.0M
Losses May 2015-March 2018                          $6.9M
Capital invested to date                                     $2.7M
FY 18/19 and 19/20 Bond for                            $6.0M
      Golf Course/Community Center Repairs

TOTAL costs $16.6 Million

This information was derived from a video produced by Take Back OV. Visit their website HERE

Guest View: Mike Zinkin ~ The Town Council appears to have some philosophical problems

Let’s begin with some historical facts.

December 17, 2014 Council Meeting. During the December 17, 2014 council meeting, during the discussions about purchasing the Community Center and Golf Courses, the Mayor bragged that he would not saddle the residents of Oro Valley with a 20-year bond debt for the Community Center and Golf. (Scroll down to the article “Then and Now” published on Monday to read his exact quotes.)

During that same meeting, the Power Point presentation presented by then Town Manager Greg Caton showed how the Community Center/Golf expenses would be covered with the 25% increase in our sales tax.

January 6, 2016 Council Meeting. Councilmembers Burns, Garner, and myself pointed out that just six months into operations, the golf investment had over $1.9M in losses and the Overlook Restaurant had over $148,000 in losses. Vice-Mayor Waters responded by chastising us and telling us to “get on board.” And with that, Hiremath-Hornat-Snider-Waters dug in their heels, accepting the fact that the Town would lose money on this endeavor for at least 5 years.

April 6, 2016 Council Meeting. Councilmember Snider blamed the lack of golf memberships on information that I had presented to the public which she said was “creating a headwind in town.”

Councilmember Hornat, when asked by a Channel 4 reporter, “What is your Plan B?” replied, “I’m not sure there is a Plan B.”

Burying their heads in the sand
When the monthly “actuals” repeatedly failed to match the “projections,” I asked then Town Manager, Greg Caton to revise the estimates. He refused to do so, replying that he worked for the majority of Council, not just one council member. The majority did not desire to see revised estimates (it’s easier to bury your head in the sand) and thus they were never prepared.

That Council majority is still in office and will not press Troon for accurate estimates.

Now let’s look at the current state of affairs.

The Town Budget for FY 2018/19 is $143.2 million. That’s $20 million more than the budget for FY 2017/18 which was $123.2 million.

After Mayor HIremath said in 2014 that he would not saddle residents with a 20-year bond for Community Center and Golf expenses, the FY 2018/19 budget includes…wait for it…a $6 million dollar, 20-year bond for Community Center and Golf Course improvements.

Town Policy forbids bonding for continuing expenses
The current Oro Valley Financial and Budgetary Policies forbid bonding for continuing expenses. One could argue that the Community Center/Golf operation is a continuing expense, but the Town is framing it as a ONE-TIME expense since the bond money will be used for improvements and not for monthly expenses such as payroll or utilities.

Town’s Philosophy: Use one-time revenues for one-time expenses
And now the plot thickens because if we look at it from the Town’s perspective as a ONE-TIME expense, there is still a problem. The Town’s philosophy has always been to use one-time revenues for one-time expenses. Yet they plan to support payment of the bond with the annual $800,000 in sales tax revenues from OV Marketplace that the Town will receive when the sales tax sharing agreement with Vestar expires in November 2019. Sales tax revenue is not one-time revenue, it is an ongoing revenue. Therefore, using sales tax revenues to pay for a bond is against the Town’s philosophy.

To clarify, using one-time revenues for one-time expenses is within the Town’s policy. Using ongoing revenues to pay for one-time expenses is against the Town’s policy. But we all know by now that this Town Council does not follow Town policies or philosophies.

-----

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.

Guest View: Devon Sloan ~ Open letter to the Mayor and Town Council

Let’s just take a look at recent happenings:

The $17 million dollar Naranja Park Bond failure. Despite this bond being "all about the kids" you were not planning to add playground equipment in next year's budget, but rather not until FY 2022/23. Then you suddenly moved it up to the FY 2019/20 budget. Could this be because this is one of the issues that mayoral challenger, Joe Winfield, has been campaigning on (citizens asked for playgrounds and you bought three golf courses instead) and you're worried that his campaign will resonate with voters? $350,000 suddenly becoming available for playground equipment in an election year sure seems coincidental to me.

The $14 million dollar bond. You’ve approved a $14M bond, which you can approve with no vote from the citizens, with $6M of that bond going towards improvements at the Community Center and 45 holes of golf, a dying sport supported by less than 1% of the town population. And now, with the Vistoso Golf Course closing, are you not paying attention that golf is NOT a sustainable sport anymore?

Closure of the Overlook Restaurant at the Community Center. This is due to loss of revenues, which makes me wonder…why close the restaurant and NOT the golf courses? The Overlook Restaurant has the best views of ANY restaurant in Oro Valley and would probably be successful with an actual viable restaurant manager/owner who would keep it open for dinner more than three days a month. Get out of the restaurant business, and give it over to someone who has the expertise.

The inane idea of Main Streets. If this was such a great idea, why didn’t the Town discuss with Vestar (when OV Marketplace was being built) that they should expect a town center concept in a few years? If the Town wanted a “Main Streets” they should have planned it long ago. Key word…planned. It would have made more sense in the OV Marketplace location (lots of space for people to congregate, easy access, plenty of parking, walking trails) than in the planned LaCanada Drive location between the Community Center and Lambert Lane (fighting lots of traffic to get to-and-from).

Complete disregard for Steam Pump Ranch and the Oro Valley Historical Society. What are the plans for the Ranch? Are there any? It’s a valuable historical asset to this town, and the Council doesn’t treat it with the respect it deserves.

Amazing disregard for our town’s desert landscape. Look at the two Silverhawke projects on First Avenue and the Capella project on LaCholla. You call this “judicious use of our remaining land” as was mentioned in the State of the Town speech last fall? What is judicious about it? Judicious means sound judgment, and I personally don’t see that, unless you are talking about sound judgment when it comes to funding your campaigns with developers’ money.

Nakoma Sky departure from Lambert and First Avenue. Wow! And now what will the town do about all that bladed land?

I, for one, will not be voting for any of you in the August Town Council election. I want this town to be the one I moved into almost 20 years ago, and I don’t believe that is possible with your “leadership.”

Guest View: Mike Zinkin ~ Then and Now

It's always very revealing to look back on what our overly-confident mayor and council were asserting back in December 2014 when they decided to purchase the El Con Community Center and three Golf Courses and compare it to what they are telling us now. While they will never admit that they were wrong about any of their promises or predictions, a look back in time tells the story.

Flashback to December 17, 2014

Below are two quotes from Mayor Hiremath from the 12/17/14 council meeting. This is the meeting when the council voted to purchase the HSL El Conquistador property:

"...We’re telling you that in the first two years, we’re going to lose major money on it…I know we’re going to lose money, but I think we have a good plan to help turn that around and that includes capital investment.”

“A lot of things have been floated around and one is a bond…Councilmember Burns mentioned it. Councilmember Garner mentioned it. How are they going to pay for the bond?...What’s the revenue source going to be? It doesn’t matter what it is…It’s not free money. There’s interest on it. Why do I want to saddle my residents…to pay extra money when we have the cash?"

Fast-Forward to June 2018
Well here we are, 3½ years later, and the new FY 2018/19 budget includes a $6MM bond to finance capital improvements required for the Community Center and Golf Courses. What happened?

I’ll tell you what happened. The Mayor and Council, along with the staff, completely ignored what was clear to everyone else. The money promised by the Mayor and Town Staff in 2014 NEVER MATERIALIZED.

The Town’s 2014 Power Point presentation

According to the Town’s Power Point presentation on 12/17/14, the promised capital improvements were:

                               FY 14/15                FY 15/16                   FY 16/17                   FY 17/18

Golf                        $50,000                  $1,310,500                $1,282,500                 $130,000
Comm. Ctr.             $760,000                $550,000                   $490,000                    $466,000
Total                       $810,000                $1,860,500                $1,772,500                 $596,000

The Town’s chart below shows the specific work that was to be done and in what year it was scheduled.

Fast-Forward to March 2018

Below is what they actually spent on capital improvement.

                   FY 14/15                 FY 15/16                FY 16/17               FY 17/18 (Thru 3/31)

                    $37,873                   $499,774                $72,414                  $29,464

Deficient     $772,127                 $1,360,726             $1,700,086             $566,536

Summary
• They promised to spend a total of $5,039,000 in capital improvements by FY 17/18.
• They actually spent just $639,525.
• This is $4,399,475 less than what they promised.

They have been wrong repeatedly, forcing them to renege on their promises year after year. It is now 3½ years later and this council still refuses to accept reality. We cannot allow them to continue in office for another four years.

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.

Guest View: A trap of their own making

Today’s Guest View is from a long-time LOVE reader who went by the pseudonym “Nombe Watanabe” 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 contained shades of sarcasm and great wit.

-----

The controversy over the Town’s purchase of the Conquistador Golf Course has raged on for far too long. Outrage on one side vs. sullen defense on the other side have been the order of the day. All this passion has not done one thing to change anyone’s mind. Oro Valley remains divided and we have not heard the voice of compromise and reason from town leadership.

The “Property Values” Argument
Although the game of golf appears to be in decline nationwide, the game itself is not the issue. The mayor and town council have a vested interest in preserving the property values (read “votes”) of the homes located near the Town-owned golf courses.

With the recent closure of the Vistoso Golf Course, our elected officials find themselves in a trap of their own making. How can they continue to cater to a minority of homeowners living along the Town-owned golf courses, when a second group of homeowners living along the Vistoso golf courses now face the same “property values” issue?

Any attempt to stop or even reduce the damage that our tax-supported Golf does to the Oro Valley budget runs into the fact that many of the solutions would create a serious loss of property values to the homes bordering the Town golf courses.

A Logical Solution
Returning the golf courses to desert wilderness may be attractive to some, given the over-development that has been foisted upon Oro Valley. However, the answer to our problem may lie in the transition from golf to a more inclusive, family friendly, recreational use for the golf course land.

A phased conversion to linear parks, trails, and playgrounds could be established on the existing course and even serve as a model for the now-closed Vistoso course. (Note: Playgrounds, paved walking paths, and natural surface trails were in the Top 10 list of amenities that Oro Valley residents requested in the 2014 Parks and Rec Survey).

This solution would accomplish the following:

• maintain property values
• expand recreational opportunities to all citizens rather than just the shrinking golf population
• cut budget losses by 20 to 50 percent (thereby reducing costs to the taxpayer)

Maximizing profits should not be the rationale for rezoning land in Oro Valley

Below is an excerpt from the speech given by Oro Valley resident, Michael Sanderson, during the May 16th Town Council Public Hearing on the Capella rezoning. Yesterday, we published the speech that Diana Sanderson gave the same evening. We’re publishing these speeches to show our readers that the current Town Council does not listen to the citizens, no matter how well-researched and well-presented those citizens’ speeches might be.

Mr. Sanderson’s Speech
We live in the Canada Hills area. My wife and I sent a letter to each of you at the first of the week. I assume you have taken the time to read it. In the letter, we listed the specific variances proposed in the rezoning for the Capella PAD that are unacceptable to a significant number of Oro Valley residents. We have been meeting with these residents for the last three months.

We, unfortunately, do not have time this evening to discuss each variance, as we did in the letter. Very briefly – they center on the following requests by the Developer:

• In the residential areas: to create dense single-family housing by reducing the size of the lots and placing the homes closer together, beyond existing town code.

• In the multi-family housing: to reduce the open areas surrounding the structures, again, beyond town code.

• In the commercial zone at the NW corner of Naranja and La Cholla: to expand the size of the buildings from the existing code of 5000-9,000 sq. feet to 20,000 sq. feet.

• In the commercial zone at Lambert and La Cholla: to have a super big-box store of 125,000 square feet, more than twice the size allowed by current code – and bigger than any single store in Oro Valley except the Walmart Supercenter at Oro Valley Marketplace.

• In both commercial zones: They are also requesting that commercial buildings in both areas be five feet higher than allowed by code.

The Zoning Code is intended to maintain the character and quality of the town by imposing development standards and to reduce adverse impacts on neighboring property owners. Unfortunately this proposed plan seeks variances that would allow the developer to degrade the character and quality of Oro Valley and have an increased adverse impact on neighbors.

Three of us met with the applicant in an attempt to understand the need for the zoning variances. We, absolutely, appreciate him taking the time to meet with us and provide detailed responses to our questions. Clearly we do not agree with the basis for the variance requests.

Our interpretation of the responses was that they were based on the need to build as many single-family homes, multi-family dwellings, and provide as much commercial square footage as possible to maximize the profits for the current landowners and prospective buyers. This should not be the rationale for rezoning land in Oro Valley.

We support the amendments proposed by the Planning and Zoning commission at their April 3 meeting and approved by a 6-0 vote.

In addition, there must be the 5 conditions that we listed in the letter we submitted to each of you. These conditions for approval of the Capella PAD rezoning have been thoughtfully researched and considered by our group of concerned Oro Valley citizens. We expect you to add these conditions to the amendments unanimously approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. These combined conditions represent a reasonable compromise to allow this PAD to move forward.

This is your opportunity to demonstrate to the citizens of Oro Valley that you do listen to their concerns.

(Editor's Note:  The council did not listen.  They approved the rezoning with a unanimous 7-0 vote).

- - - - -

For reference, below are the amendments passed 6-0 by P&Z during the April 3rd meeting.

Planning & Zoning Amended Motion:

1. All future site plans for each parcel will go through the Conceptual Site Plan process to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as Town Council for further review.

2. Complete an updated Traffic Analysis for each development phase required by Town Code.

3. Parcel M is restricted to 1-story height within 300 feet of the west property boundary.

4. The plans for restrooms and playgrounds in recreation areas must be maintained.

Below are the additional conditions that the Sanderson’s requested in their letter to the mayor and council:

1. All single family homes in the PAD shall meet the requirements of R1-7 zoning regarding minimum lot area, lot width, yard setbacks, and building height; except that the minimum lot area in Parcel H, for homes not located along Lambert Lane, can be 6600 square feet, per the Special Area Policies adopted in 2015.

2. Multi-family residential buildings in the PAD shall meet the requirements of R-7 zoning regarding outdoor open space and outdoor private living space.

3. All businesses in the C-N commercial zone at the NW corner of Naranja and La Cholla shall meet the current C-N zoning requirements for business floor area limits, building height and allowable use.

4. All businesses in the C-1 commercial zones shall meet the current C-1 zoning requirements for business floor area limits, building height and allowable use.

5. A traffic control “island” or curbing shall be placed at the Canada Hills Drive intersection to not allow through traffic to cross La Cholla. (The proposed design will not be sufficient to “not permit eastbound or westbound through-traffic across La Cholla Boulevard” as stated in the current proposal).

Analysis: The Town Council views the General Plan as nothing more than “a glossy advertising sales pitch.”

Town Council continues to ignore citizens in order to appease developers
Below is a speech given at the May 16th Town Council meeting by Oro Valley resident, Diana Sanderson, during the Public Hearing portion for the 200-acre Capella Rezoning. This is another example, in a long list of examples, of how, when it comes to development issues, the current Town Council will not listen to anything presented by an Oro Valley resident, even when the resident is citing the voter-approved General Plan in their argument. The rezoning passed by a 7-0 vote.

Ms. Sanderson’s Speech
Thank you for allowing me to speak tonight. I am an Oro Valley resident for almost 3 years. I appreciate my neighbors and community members voicing their concerns regarding the Capella Rezoning project. I want to speak to the entity that has no voice in any of this: The desert wildlife. I sense I am in the minority on this topic, but to me, it certainly doesn’t diminish the importance.

The Your Voice, Our Future General Plan does a very good job of convincing the general public of the following:

From Page 29: “Oro Valley’s exceptionally rich wildlife and vegetation are a big part of the region’s appeal. We cherish Oro Valley’s open space and strive to focus development in appropriate areas.” From Page 33, Policy SD.8: “Encourage development project designs that connect wildlife habitat areas, avoid disturbing significant wildlife habitats and minimize the overall impacts on wildlife habitat areas.”

Policy SD.9: “Provide for the safe movement of wildlife near man-made features which may potentially disconnect wildlife corridors.”

In all the Capella parcel designs offered, it’s difficult to determine exactly where these two policies were a consideration.

Blading of desert landscape does little to promote any of the policies outlined. It’s a fact that blading in the spring and summer months disturbs habitats and kills the young. Anyone that thinks animals move on when development begins is wrong. They simply die.

The Tucson Wildlife Center offers a free service to walk areas scheduled for blading before the process even begins. The purpose is to identify potential habitats of animals that could be safely relocated. They have yet to be engaged on any Tucson or surrounding area development projects. With respect to Mr. Oland [the applicant] and Mr. Spaeth [Town Planner] the 30% of open space that they are leaving in this development is land that cannot be built on.

We are stewards of this planet and should speak for those inhabitants that have no representation and are basically considered development collateral damage.

From Page 33, Policy SD.1: “Identify, preserve and manage an integrated and connected open space system that protects Oro Valley‘s natural resources and provides enjoyment for residents and visitors while recognizing our place in the larger ecosystem.”

That should be our goal, not a politically-correct marketing pitch.

It starts with us. Let’s make the policies in the Your Voice, Our Future General Plan a reality instead of a glossy advertising sales pitch.

. . . . .

Click HERE to read another example of an Oro Valley resident’s well-researched and well-prepared speech being dismissed by the current council. The agenda item on which she spoke, again citing non-conformity with the General Plan, also passed with a 7-0 vote.