Editorial ~ The Sign Tamperer. Part 2. “The Smoking Gun”

Part 1 was published on Monday. Please scroll down to read it if you haven’t already done so.

Crime Scene Investigation
The photograph that was published was an overhead shot. A few days after it was published, three Oro Valley residents (including a former law enforcement officer using binoculars) walked the site of the “crime” and could not find a camera attached to either a pole or a building that could have taken the picture from the angle at which it was taken (from above and to the right of the sign).

A security camera on the old Sports Authority building was aimed at the parking lot, not at the area with the sign. This camera was tested nonetheless and found to be inactive. So what happened to the “surveillance” camera? Who put it there, when, and why? It appears to have been removed right after the picture was taken. This leads us to wonder if this “crime” was a staged event.

The Smoking Gun
Also of interest is who filed the complaint. The person who made and posted the sign should be the one who filed the complaint since they are claiming that the sign was their property. This means that the OVPD now knows the identity of the person who deliberately posted many of those same signs directly in front of Axe the Tax signs in an effort to block them from view. This is a Class 2 misdemeanor under ARS 16-1019. Why hasn’t the OVPD issued a citation against them?

Collusion?
Axe the Tax dealt with sign issues for weeks…stolen signs, signs found thrown in a wash, signs bent in half, signs covered by “Why Ax Kids Sports?” signs deliberately placed directly in front of them.

In these instances, the State Statute does apply since these signs were paid for and placed by a PAC. (Axe the Tax PAC).

It’s suspicious that the OVPD turned this “non-story” into front page news and that they pulled this stunt just one week before the election, just in time to make the last issue of the Explorer before election day. Was the OVPD (via marching orders from the mayor) colluding with the Yes on 454 folks to damage the character and credibility of Axe the Tax supporters in a last ditch effort to garner more votes for their $28 million dollar “desperately needed ball fields?”

After all, similar stunts have been pulled in past Oro Valley elections. Remember the “Lou Waters was assaulted by a ream of paper” story that they pulled out during the 2015 Recall Election in order to smear the character of the challengers? That case went to court. Waters lost. We have to wonder what ploys they will conjure up this year in order to tip the scales in their favor for the Town Council election in August.

It bears repeating
We will end Part 2 of this article the same way we ended Part 1. This whole thing smacks of political maneuvering and LOVE does not take kindly to our police being involved in politics.

Editorial ~ The Sign Tamperer. Part 1.

With another Town election coming up in August as the mayor and three Town Council members run for a third term, LOVE would like to report on a campaign problem that is likely to rear it’s ugly head again in a few short months.

Background
Back in early November 2017, many of you saw the photo on the front page of the Explorer of a person who was allegedly seen tampering with a “Why Ax Kids Sports?” sign near the intersection of First and Oracle. The caption accompanying the photo indicated that the “OVPD is asking for the public’s help with a criminal damage investigation.” This seemed a little excessive considering that the sign was not an official campaign sign protected under Arizona State law, but rather, would be considered the equivalent of a Yard Sale sign.

Who’s the Boss?
After you read this article, ask yourself these questions:

• Why is the OVPD putting this much time, effort, manpower, and taxpayer money into investigating the equivalent of someone tampering with a homemade “Yard Sale” sign?

• Does this merit a 3-month long (and counting) investigation? Why are they going to such great lengths to find the “perpetrator” when no campaign laws were violated? Don’t our police have more important things to do?

•Who’s orchestrating this?

• Would the police launch a “criminal damage investigation” if someone had tampered with a Yard Sale sign? Would they post a picture of the person on the OVPD Facebook page AND on the front page of the Explorer newspaper asking for the public’s help in finding this person? Of course not. So why did they do it in this instance?

• Why are they maneuvering to keep the Police Report from the public?

OVPD Withholds release of Police Report
LOVE wanted to report on this story back in November, but in order to report the whole story, we needed to obtain a copy of the Police Report. One of our LOVE readers has been trying to obtain this report since November. The OVPD initially said that it couldn’t be released until the investigation was closed. When the case was finally closed in mid-January and the LOVE reader attempted once again to obtain a copy of the report, the case was suddenly reopened because “new information has been obtained in furtherance of the investigation.”

It’s suspicious that new information was obtained which bars the release of the report just as the report was about to be released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Someone does not want that file to be released.

After waiting patiently for more than three months, LOVE has decided to report on what we know at this time. We’re also reporting on it now because the repeated delays in releasing the Police Report have become a story all on its own.

Why is this story important?
The etiology of the complaint is an important piece of this investigation. The owner of the “property” must be known and identified for any item to be considered “property” under law. Additionally, no complaint is valid or actionable by law enforcement unless a complaint is filed by that “property” owner. Once a complaint is filed, it is required to be disclosed upon any request under Federal FOIA and Arizona Public Records law.

During the Naranja Park Bond election, numerous “Why Ax Kids Sports?” signs were illegally placed directly in front of campaign signs that had been posted by the Axe the Tax PAC. Axe the Tax filed a complaint with the Town. When contacted by the Town Clerk about the illegal placement of these signs [a Class 2 misdemeanor under ARS 16-1019] the Yes on 454 PAC claimed that these signs did not belong to them.

Being that there was no “Paid for by…..” disclosure statement on the signs, it appeared that they were placed by an individual who was not associated with any political action committee. Therefore, it was assumed that they did not belong to the YES on 454 PAC.

Irresponsible Allocation of Town Resources
Since no campaign laws were violated, the amount of time and effort being spent on this investigation is disproportionate to the “crime” that was allegedly committed. The question remains…why? This whole thing smacks of political maneuvering and LOVE does not take kindly to our police being involved in politics.

Part 2 will be published on Wednesday.

UPDATE: Naranja Park Bond Campaign Finance Reports

Since LOVE’s last report on the campaign finances of “Axe the Tax” and “YES on 454,” the following donations to both PAC’s have been reported to the town:

Additional contributors to YES on 454 include:

$1,100 from individuals contributing more than $50.00
Zero from individuals contributing $50.00 or less

Once again, there are no contributions from the parents or coaches who are crying about “the desperately needed fields.”

$2,500 from Diamond Ventures
$2,500 from Southwest DVI Properties (another Diamond Ventures entity)
$100 from Tim Overton, Banker at Vantage West Credit Union
$1,000 from William Walker, Owner WLB Engineering

TOTAL $6,100

NOTE: WLB is the development group that represents landowners in the majority of new home and commercial developments in Oro Valley. They frequently appear before council to request land use changes (to the voter-approved General Plan), rezoning requests, and grading waivers to accommodate their residential and commercial developments. (e.g. Big Wash General Plan Amendment, LaCholla Major General Plan Amendments, Estates at Capella, Saguaro Viejos, Sanctuary at Silverhawke).

Of note also is that Oro Valley Little League Baseball donated $250 which was later refunded back to them. Was this because all the “big league players” donated so much money that the Little League group didn’t feel a need to contribute to their own cause?

Additional contributors to Axe the Tax include:

$417.22 from individuals contributing $50.00 or less
$482.52 from individuals contributing more than $50.00*
$96.80 from Toggle Enterprises, LLC

TOTAL $996.54

*Three of the individuals are Oro Valley residents and one is from Tucson.

You can read the previous LOVE article on the campaign finances of Axe the Tax and Yes on 454 HERE

A Message from Axe the Tax regarding Naranja Park Bond Campaign Contributions

Lets take a look at who’s really supporting this cause.
There are signs all over town proclaiming “It’s for the kids.” There are “Why axe kids sports?” signs. There are “454 4 kids” signs that are designed to pull at your heartstrings by being designed to look like they were painted by the children.

At Town Council meetings earlier this year, kids were rounded up and sitting in council chambers wearing their sports uniforms. Many parents and coaches spoke up in an emotional plea to give the kids a place to play; a place in Oro Valley to call their own.

But how many parents and coaches contributed to the Yes on 454 PAC? How many parents contributed to the “It’s for the kids” campaign?

Sadly, not one of these parents has given more than $50.00 to the Yes on 454 campaign. In fact, the total amount of under $50.00 donations amounts to…..wait for it…..just $50.00. If the parents of all of these children gave a combined total of just $50.00, how important can sports fields possibly be to these parents?

Even more enlightening is the amount of donations from developers and businesses that most likely hope to profit, in one way or another, from the building of this park.

The list of contributors to Yes on 454:

Now let’s look at who funded the Axe the Tax PAC.
Here’s the breakdown of donations to the Axe the Tax PAC. These aren’t “get off of my lawn” curmudgeons. These aren’t people who hate kids. These are people who advocate using a pay-as-you-go approach to the build-out of Naranja Park.

These are people who understand the real drivers behind Prop 454…that the $17 MM bond is just Phase I and more than half of it ($8.2 million) is for the building of the infrastructure for the future Event Center (which isn’t included in this bond and is covered over in gray on the map that the Town released.) The Event Center is slated for construction with a second bond in the future.

The list of contributors to Axe the Tax:

Axe the Tax Chairman, Jim Horn, stated it best in a recent press release:
“What surprised us though was the lack of donations by parents to Yes on 454…But with all the talk of ‘desperately needed park improvements’…well, the parents sure didn’t put their own money behind it. All the special interest donations make you question if its really ‘all about the kids’ or whether these major contributors are trying to influence Council votes.”

Axe the Tax Issues Press Release regarding Campaign Finance Reports

PRESS RELEASE

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

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

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

Operating expenses were $2,157.

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

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

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

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

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

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