You've just got to read the article (click here) which appeared in The Explorer. Who do you agree with? Parish or Segal? We look forward to your comments.
Gift? I doubt it is really a gift, I look at that money as Wal-Mart buying its way into Oro Valley Personally I don't think our town should accept money from such a controversial business. Makes us look like we can be bought. Well I take that back, we were bought for the tune of 23.2 million dollars. Thats a big and expensive gift. Makes us look desperate and cheap.
No coincidence here. This is payback to the town for gifting Vestar $23.2 million. I wonder when the State Attorney General will look into this matter from start to finish. There is much that stinks here. I wonder when the smell will reach the AG's office in Phoenix.
1. Oro Valley receives $60-70 million in tax revenue from the Oro Valley marketplace over 20 years and invests nearly nothing.
2. Wal-Mart donates $250,000 toward the costs of the Naranja Park.
And these are bad things.
Here is my suggestion. Why don't the 'do-gooders' that are so opposed to the OV Marketplace do something positive and start raising donations to offset the above mentioned revenus to the Town. Then everyone can be happy and we won't have to raise taxes in Oro Valley.
Its not a citizens job to raise funds to cover the follies of those who lead us. It is our job to elect people who will make responsible decisions for the citizens of Oro valley. Then, it is up to our elected officials to be true to their word; put the welfare of our Citizens first and all else second.
The point on Wal-Mart, and this is what separates the issue, is that there was never a need to induce them to come here; to locate on a prime piece of property. Wal-Mart can not find enough sites to build on. This prime location is ideal for them. They would have "killed" to get the site.
So, really, there was never a need to induce anyone to build anything on this location. It is prime!!!
I want what we were promised, Thinker. And that is a unique, upscale shopping experience. Wal-Mart is not that. And, don't forget, we were also promised "no property taxes" if voters approved the deal.
I don't like "switch and bait" tactics: Promise us one thing and give us something else.
I know you will disagree (actually I don't but I think you will disagree)with the following statement but it IS true.
One of the factors that caused, pushed, led Vestar to Wal-Mart for the OV Marketplace was the fact that they had a previous working relationship with them. The delays created by SOVOG put Vestar in a time bind to get tenants signed on so they could meet the deadlines set forth in the economic development agreement. The time spent in the court system could have been utilized to find and secure other tenants.
My second point is that two other developers had expressed an interest in that exact location prior to Vestar. Both backed out when they looked closely at what the building costs were going to be. It IS a PRIME location but the cost of development was far too great for either of the first two.
So the property could very well be still sitting there empty doing us no good today or in the foreseeable future. Would that be in the best interest of the citizens?
And just to set the record absolutely straight, there was NO promise of no property taxes. It was stated that this (OV MArketplace) will certainly push back the need for property taxes in the near future. And don't get primary and secondary property taxes mixed up. The taxes for a Naranja Park would be a secondary property tax.
Once again, you are WRONG! You claim that Vestar's ads did NOT state a promise of no property taxes. One ad stated in big orange letters, "No New Taxes!" A property tax would fall into that category. It's a tax, isn't it?
Another ad stated that if the incentive passed, "Oro Valley can put off talk of a PROPERTY TAX for another day." That ad SPECIFICALLY mentioned a property tax! And wouldn't "another day" be sometime many years AFTER the mall was built? Isn't that what was implied?
Another ad stated,"OVM won't cost a single Oro Valley resident one dime." So why am I now paying a 2% utility tax to fund the salaries of the new police officers that will be hired for this new mall?
Could it be because Vestar's ads were just a pack of lies?
Good points, Cowgirl. The "No New Taxes" promise is STILL prominently displayed on EVERY PAGE of Vestar's website promoting the tax giveaway:
http://yesonquestion2.com/
Also, OVOT, I'm not sure why you're counting chickens that haven't hatched by looking at tax revenues 20 years in the future. Retailers who receive tax subsidies are famous for abandoning projects as soon as the tax subsidy expires. Culver City California gave Walmart $1.8 million in subsidies, only to have them close the store and open three new ones outside the city limits just as the town was going to start realizing their tax revenues. Oh, and the town was $3 million in debt at the time.
In fact, there are thousands of empty Walmart stores across the country:
Who is going to be able to move into that 175,000 square foot space at OVM when Wal-Mart moves on?
Also, a big thanks to Evan Wise for his recent posting regarding the study done in Massachussetts. According to his figures, the new Walmart superstore at OVM will cost Oro Valley taxpayers $138,950 just for police and road maintenance. Add to that the $420,750 that a 2004 Congressional report found that one 200-person Walmart store costs taxpayers for federal school lunch programs, housing assistance, state and federal health coverage, and low-income energy assistance for Walmart's employees. That adds up to $559,700 PER YEAR that our new Walmart will cost us in taxes. So yes, their token $250,000 contribution towards our $161 MILLION-DOLLAR park is kind of a joke.
Oh, and one more thing about the tax projections for the OVM: I don't understand where these new sales are going to come from. I don't see people from other places flocking to Oro Valley to shop at Walmart! Sure, people will shop there, but they'll be the same people buying the same things that they currently buy at other stores in Oro Valley. Only instead of Oro Valley receiving 2% from their purchases, we're only receiving 1.1%.
The "do-gooders" are encouraging people to shop where they're paying the full 2% sales tax. Good for them.
Great points made by the Cowgirl and Mom. Only other thing I can possibly add to their posting, is that those projected tax revenue figures are or were based on each family or individual spending thousands each month at the new shopping center. I recall looking at those charts and thinking, Who the heck is going to be spending that kind of money shopping.
10 comments:
Gift? I doubt it is really a gift, I look at that money as Wal-Mart buying its way into Oro Valley
Personally I don't think our town should accept money from such
a controversial business.
Makes us look like we can be bought.
Well I take that back, we were bought for the tune of 23.2 million dollars.
Thats a big and expensive gift.
Makes us look desperate and cheap.
No coincidence here. This is payback to the town for gifting Vestar $23.2 million. I wonder when the State Attorney General will look into this matter from start to finish. There is much that stinks here. I wonder when the smell will reach the AG's office in Phoenix.
Let's see if I get this straight.
1. Oro Valley receives $60-70 million in tax revenue from the Oro Valley marketplace over 20 years and invests nearly nothing.
2. Wal-Mart donates $250,000 toward the costs of the Naranja Park.
And these are bad things.
Here is my suggestion. Why don't the 'do-gooders' that are so opposed to the OV Marketplace do something positive and start raising donations to offset the above mentioned revenus to the Town. Then everyone can be happy and we won't have to raise taxes in Oro Valley.
Hey, you misspelled "revenues". :_)
Its not a citizens job to raise funds to cover the follies of those who lead us. It is our job to elect people who will make responsible decisions for the citizens of Oro valley. Then, it is up to our elected officials to be true to their word; put the welfare of our Citizens first and all else second.
The point on Wal-Mart, and this is what separates the issue, is that there was never a need to induce them to come here; to locate on a prime piece of property. Wal-Mart can not find enough sites to build on. This prime location is ideal for them. They would have "killed" to get the site.
So, really, there was never a need to induce anyone to build anything on this location. It is prime!!!
I want what we were promised, Thinker. And that is a unique, upscale shopping experience. Wal-Mart is not that. And, don't forget, we were also promised "no property taxes" if voters approved the deal.
I don't like "switch and bait" tactics: Promise us one thing and give us something else.
Vestar simply needs to deliver what it promised.
Why didn't Art fix mine????
I know you will disagree (actually I don't but I think you will disagree)with the following statement but it IS true.
One of the factors that caused, pushed, led Vestar to Wal-Mart for the OV Marketplace was the fact that they had a previous working relationship with them. The delays created by SOVOG put Vestar in a time bind to get tenants signed on so they could meet the deadlines set forth in the economic development agreement.
The time spent in the court system could have been utilized to find and secure other tenants.
My second point is that two other developers had expressed an interest in that exact location prior to Vestar. Both backed out when they looked closely at what the building costs were going to be. It IS a PRIME location but the cost of development was far too great for either of the first two.
So the property could very well be still sitting there empty doing us no good today or in the foreseeable future. Would that be in the best interest of the citizens?
And just to set the record absolutely straight, there was NO promise of no property taxes. It was stated that this (OV MArketplace) will certainly push back the need for property taxes in the near future. And don't get primary and secondary property taxes mixed up. The taxes for a Naranja Park would be a secondary property tax.
See ya in the outfield soon!!
OV Objective Thinker:
Once again, you are WRONG! You claim that Vestar's ads did NOT state a promise of no property taxes. One ad stated in big orange letters, "No New Taxes!" A property tax would fall into that category. It's a tax, isn't it?
Another ad stated that if the incentive passed, "Oro Valley can put off talk of a PROPERTY TAX for another day." That ad SPECIFICALLY mentioned a property tax! And wouldn't "another day" be sometime many years AFTER the mall was built? Isn't that what was implied?
Another ad stated,"OVM won't cost a single Oro Valley resident one dime." So why am I now paying a 2% utility tax to fund the salaries of the new police officers that will be hired for this new mall?
Could it be because Vestar's ads were just a pack of lies?
Now THAT'S setting the record straight!
Good points, Cowgirl. The "No New Taxes" promise is STILL prominently displayed on EVERY PAGE of Vestar's website promoting the tax giveaway:
http://yesonquestion2.com/
Also, OVOT, I'm not sure why you're counting chickens that haven't hatched by looking at tax revenues 20 years in the future. Retailers who receive tax subsidies are famous for abandoning projects as soon as the tax subsidy expires. Culver City California gave Walmart $1.8 million in subsidies, only to have them close the store and open three new ones outside the city limits just as the town was going to start realizing their tax revenues. Oh, and the town was $3 million in debt at the time.
In fact, there are thousands of empty Walmart stores across the country:
http://wal-martrealty.com/Buildings/PrintableBuilding/BasicBldgListOnly.html
Who is going to be able to move into that 175,000 square foot space at OVM when Wal-Mart moves on?
Also, a big thanks to Evan Wise for his recent posting regarding the study done in Massachussetts. According to his figures, the new Walmart superstore at OVM will cost Oro Valley taxpayers $138,950 just for police and road maintenance. Add to that the $420,750 that a 2004 Congressional report found that one 200-person Walmart store costs taxpayers for federal school lunch programs, housing assistance, state and federal health coverage, and low-income energy assistance for Walmart's employees. That adds up to $559,700 PER YEAR that our new Walmart will cost us in taxes. So yes, their token $250,000 contribution towards our $161 MILLION-DOLLAR park is kind of a joke.
Oh, and one more thing about the tax projections for the OVM: I don't understand where these new sales are going to come from. I don't see people from other places flocking to Oro Valley to shop at Walmart! Sure, people will shop there, but they'll be the same people buying the same things that they currently buy at other stores in Oro Valley. Only instead of Oro Valley receiving 2% from their purchases, we're only receiving 1.1%.
The "do-gooders" are encouraging people to shop where they're paying the full 2% sales tax. Good for them.
Great points made by the Cowgirl and
Mom.
Only other thing I can possibly add to their posting, is that those projected tax revenue figures are or were based on each family or individual spending thousands each month at the new shopping center.
I recall looking at those charts and thinking, Who the heck is going to
be spending that kind of money shopping.
A great article from the past before the actual store was known. Will the numbers stand up to Terry Parish's expectations? Or Chet's?
http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/117407
Post a Comment