I wasn't there. Wouldn't pay to hear Hizzoner give his State of the Town address last week to the development community. But for a hefty fee, you could have gone.
The Explorer reported on the event (click here to read).
Loomis' talk was about sustaining a town: "Without growth, Oro Valley will become more and more dependent on sales tax revenue."
Duh.
Unless, of course, we the people are foolish enough to grant Oro Valley the right to levy a property tax.
The Naranja Town Site November referendum would do just that.
Not a good idea
Another option for Oro Valley is to CUT costs and streamline operations, something each of us are doing in these difficult economic time. No operation is sustainable without stringent cost management.
Notice in the article. Hizzoner never speaks to that.
38 comments:
Thinker,
So you ridicule the Zeeman for leaving the "s" off of the word "time," meanwhile you used the word "that" when you meant to say "than."
"that from within" should have read, "than from within." Yes?
And what are you implying with your statement, "while you lounged at your summer cottage in Cape Cod?" Zeeman isn't allowed to take a vacation or have a summer home?
If this is the best you can do, perhaps YOU need a vacation!
Thinker,
On another topic, your letter to the Explorer was amusing. You wrote endorsing the Naranja Town Park and said, "It's about being a Community of Excellence versus a town of mediocrity."
This from the same person who was one of the biggest cheerleaders for the Mall of Mediocrity.
Regarding the park, you said if the bond passes and the park is built, "we can hold our heads high."
But won't we all get whiplash injuries from holding our heads high as we pass the Naranaja Park and then quickly shifting to holding our heads low as we pass the Oro Valley Marketplace?
Well, at least the chiropractors in town will benefit from it all!
Thinker,
What do you mean, I once again charged the wrong party? If it was Boobie Baby who corrected Zeeman, then why does the post begin with...ov objective thinker said....
Did you not remember that YOU were the one who wrote the comment?
And you should have known better than to get me started on which party creates stories when they have nothing of substance to say. Bush accused McCain of fathering a black child in order to turn the white southern voter off of McCain in the 2000 election. McCain never fathered a black child. Talk about creating a story when you have nothing of substance to say! And you know as well as I do that that's just ONE example. I could give you dozens more from the 2008 McCain campaign but this blog is about Oro Valley so I'll refrain for the most part, but I wasn't going to let that comment go without a response.
And don't kid yourself...the reason you won't comment on my "park vs. mall analogy" is because you can't come up with a good argument for why you're FOR mediocrity in some cases and AGAINST it in others.
My comment wasn't ridiculous...it was humor and sarcasm. But in your world, if a conservative uses humor and sarcasm, it's brilliant. If a liberal uses it, it's ridiculous.
Don Cox,
I have removed your comments from the blog because they are personal attacks on an individual.
Keep you postings on topic.
Hello, Mr. Mayor, is anybody home?
The statement "without growth Oro Valley will become more and more dependant on sales tax revenue" is ludicrous! In essense, the Mayor is saying that growth must forever continue on through eternity or the sky will fall. Hell, the sky is falling right now because of unchecked growth, unchecked (and unneeded) luxuries, unchecked whatever and more, more, and more.Our country's economics are out of control, out of kilter; who knows what tomorrow will bring? And the Mayor, et al, thinks that all is rosy and impact fees on top of impact fees will take care of yesterday's follies as well as tomorrow's unknowns. It just can't go on forever, folks, and increased sales tax revenues will never be able to bear the burdens of it all.
So, what to do? I say, ya better lay low for the time being until the dust clears, especially the dust in your head! Mr. Mayor and friends, look at what the financial experts have done to our country, our world, and ask yourselves why is it that you think you know better?
VC....
" boobie-baby said...
Unless Loomis and SAHBA were engaged in tasting the fruit of the vine, I doubt that they were "wining." They may have been "whining.""
This is a direct copy and paste.
Any further questions???
I will not buy any more properties in Oro Valley as this area is a dead zone right now due to pending tax increases (ie. Naranja Park). My $s, as are other investors are going to other areas of Tucson.
Purchased a condo on Campbell and had a renter the same day, my condo in Oro Valley still sits empty after four months and there are -0- prospects.
A lot of BS (Biotech center ..no way) on jobs coming to OV as we are now defined by the Walmart at OVM. Thanks a lot Loomis and previous town council!!
Fear the turtle,
Oro Valley has 'grown' into a Town that is a result of the belief that we are somehow greater than every other town in the country (world?). This has happened because of the dominance of those wrapped up in book smarts rather than street smarts. Are most of these people blind? Can they not see the results of this same mindset by visiting other areas of the country where people are vividly desirous of freeing themselves from the daily humdrum of traffic, noise, crime, drugs, and so on, but can't because developers and political subdivisions go hand in hand elswhere too in pleasuring THEMSELVES and do not care about solutions relative to the problems they create. There are probably between 4-5 MILLION homes on the market in the Country today with more probably coming on line with a 'market' out there consisting of those who will not be able, for what should be obvious reasons, to purchase that which already exists. Vacancies in commercial properties are rampant; empty storefronts from here to eternity abound. And yet there are the 'smart' philosopher kings who want to continue the charade, want to pretend that a problem doesn't exist, don't want to acknowledge that tax after tax, surcharge after surcharge, piles up upon our increased fuel costs, increased food costs, increased health costs, and stagnant incomes.
Yeah, into the valley of death goeth the Town of Oro Valley - if this insanity persists.
I find it interesting that our founders of Oro Valley denied a provision for having a property tax. Does anyone really think that our founders thought that Oro Valley could become such a hub of retail that support for over the top expansion was the ideal. NO! I think they wanted to keep OV from becoming a burgeoning scab on the flesh of this superb desert oasis. Unfortunately some of our current maggots seem to want more and more wounds on which to feed.
Can we please leave party politics off the Oro Valley blog?
Have heard enough from the media and emails about what what he said, she said, the lib's, the conservative's
God Bless America!!!
Anybody offended, then delete my post.
Nuff said.
Thinker,
Boobie Baby's comment about "whining" was submitted on a completely different post...SAHBA whines some more, Loomis agrees.
My comment was in response to THIS posting...Hizzoner says nothing. Your comment was the very first post on this topic (since deleted) and my response to you was the second post.
So your "direct copy and paste" was pasted from the wrong thread.
You tried to claim that I was wrong "once again" in that I responded to the wrong person, but I did not respond to the wrong person. I responded to YOUR comment on THIS post dated 9/18/08 and then YOU decided to go back to Boobie Baby's post from a completely different topic from a week or so ago and claim that I was responding to that.
Nowhere in my response did I talk about wine vs. whine (from BB's post). I quoted YOUR post.
You're wrong. Admit it.
Any questions?
VC...I assumed you were talking about the wine vs.whine comment....I don't recall the "s" comment .
But more importantly because the true whiner, Zeeman, removed my first post is is diffficult to respond.
As I satted top Zeeman when her removed my post, he and Art, have no intention of this being an open forum. If you don't agree, follow along, or have the audacity to call them on an incorrect post they call it " personal attack" and remove it.
Enjoy talking to yourselves!!!
MS Coyote...
This council has made three anit-business votes so far and they are not through.
Objective Thinker..
We remove any comments that attack, insult or otherwise defame individuals.
That fact that you attacked me is no more or less relevant to the decision to remove your post.
This is, indeed, an open forum.
Please stay on point.
For example, what is your opinion of the Mayor's State of The Town Talk? Do you agree that he should have presented this at a private, fund raising event?
Be good to read what you think.
OV OT,
Your last post, with it's poor structure, misspelling, abundant typos, as well as obvious disorientation, appears to be an indication of an underlying problem. Enough said!?
As to your comment relative to an assessment that our current council has made three anti-business votes, I will say only that, for some time now business has had it's way with Oro Valley,and, along with the participation of questionable assistance from certain members of the Town, has done so in a most dubious manner. It is time for a regrouping and balancing of OUR Town; OUR council is doing an excellent job in that pursuit. And, guess what, OV OT, that's why they got elected!!!
Zeeman....
I did not attack you or anyone else. I challenged your statement as being patently false and you took offense.
You want my thoughts....you apologize for publicly lying about my comments.
Otherwise....enjoy talking to yourself.
Ms. Coyote,
When Thinker said my "whiplash" comment was ridiculous and typical of a "liberal" I had to respond by arguing party politics since that was HIS argument.
If, for example, he had said that my comment was typical of a "woman" then I would have argued "gender bias" since that would have been the basis for his comment.
But, as usual, the basis for his argument was that I'm a liberal and therefore I'm stupid, so that's what I had to work with.
I couldn't help but notice that if a conservative on this blog uses sarcasm, Thinker never questions it. It's only when it comes from a liberal that he complains.
Thinker,
I'm proud to be a liberal. And I'm proud to be a community organizer, too!
And where's your apology for stating that "once again" I've responded to the wrong person? I never responded to the wrong person in the past so where did you come up with "once again?" See? You're making stuff up...the same thing you accused me of doing. I never responded to the wrong person in the past and I didn't respond to the wrong person this time either. It was YOU who got confused.
I did not see the post by Thinker calling VC a typical liberal , etc
What is a typical liberal or conservative.
Am I a typical Independent? Probably not.
Unless the post by Thinker was so out of control , why not let it stay posted ? Typical Liberal/conserative, male, female, labels , I consider these terms.;
lightweight on the attack meter. I see these terms used frequently when people can no longer justify their actions or opinions
That way others can read it and respond and I have confidence most of us can see thru insults
I am also finding myself in agreement with Thinker about this forum not being an open forum/blog anymore
I see less and less participation and few opposing opinions.
If we just read or listen to those with the same opinions then it
closes the door to trying to understand other opinions and honestly it gets boring.
So Thinker ifyou want to throw jabs at me, go right ahead. I will jab you back.
mscoyote and all
I think that most opinions with which we might disagree are met with welcome and most efforts at rebuttal are worthy and in good taste. In certain instances I have disagreed with VC, boobie baby, and others (OV OT, too), but consider their positive contributions, for the most part, to outweigh extraneous differences.
Now, I hadn't read the post that was deleted by a blog administrator in this stream so, in regards to this immediate matter, I cannot form a personal opinion. I am aware however that this blog is a 'private' service and that service has the right to control the tenor of the posts if it deems it necessary to do so.
Now, 'personal attacks' MAY be subject to interpretation, but generally they are 'darts' thrown at an individual rather than the
individual issue at hand (and yes, perhaps I, myself, have been interpreted as having done just that, but if I have done so it most probably was a kneejerk reaction to a toss at my own person). As an example, when the question of one of the Council Member's personal life came into the fold during the 'run for the roses', though I was adamantly against his re-election and wrote vociferously on the question of his political alliances, I STRONGLY condemned the attacks that were taking place relative to his personal life.
And yes, while OV OT and I have gone toe to toe and head to head in slinging the slop, I believe that, though still in disagreement on many matters, for the most part our interaction has evolved and modified itself into relatively civil discourse; I hope he can maintain this demeanor with others, too.
I would like to continue to see the interaction of opposing views but it must be kept within the framework of respect.
And, by the way, and as an aside, the addition of a little humor is a good thing.
mscoyote....
The reason you didn't see the post is because THE ZEEMAN was insulted when I called him on his "cutting back" and his little feelings were hurt.
Your common sense understanding of what this blog SHOULD be about is refreshing but unfortunately not shared by most.
A little jab here and there, IF NOT MEANT TO HARM, is in my book, not only fair but as you stated keeps the blog interesting. Now I am not sure that calling a group of people "maggots" is within bounds but according to the 'masters', it must be.
OV OT, I doubt that any linguist would consider the term 'maggots', within the color framework of my descriptive, as a 'personal attack'. Let's not create false impressions out of euphamistic context, please.
Sorry, I misspelled 'euphemistic'; I don't want to catch hell for that.
Zev.....Good Morning on this beautiful Oro Valley Sunday morning.
I believe you can readily see how I type when I am pissed. I will make a more concentrated effort to check my postings when in that state. There was NO reason for Zeeman to pull my remarks. His temper got the best of him. If you check the box that sends postings directly to your e-mail, as do I, then you can read the postings before the 'masters' get their shorts in a wad and pull something.
I appreciate your response to my reference to "maggots". However think back to the 'outrage' that was slung (is that a word?) my way when I referred to some council members as following along like a bunch of 'lemmings'. I submit to you that the euphemistic context was similiar.
Lastly, I believe your general comments regarding posting on this blog are accurate. As I said to MsC a well intended jab every now and then is fine. Having said that I think you must agree that there are two sets of rules on the blog as it relates to my posts. I am on a much shorter leash than you and others and that stems directly from Art's personal dislike (mildly stated :-)) for me.
As an aside, big bass tournament this next Friday and Saturday at Roosevelt Lake. I am sure everyone will miss me for a few days!!!
Thinker,
I wasn't clear on why your two postings on this thread were pulled. I thought they were mild in comparison to some of the very rude comments you've made in the past. However, some of those previous comments are what set you up as being less tolerated than the rest of us and therefore more likely to be "deleted" in the future. Sometimes you are your own worst enemy.
Now...where's my apology? You accused me of doing something I didn't do and even after you were shown that you were wrong about this...nothing...no apology...no retraction. Aren't you a big enough man to admit when you're wrong? Hey, even your friend Terry apologized for calling some of us "cave people." Is he a bigger man than you are?
Apparently.
VC....I think your personal definition of rude and mine may differ greatly. But that's what makes the world go around.
As for an apology, I can't apologize for something that I am unaware of (not particularly good grammar but you get the drift).
As I have said many times before I will be more than happy to apologize when necessary. If you are talking about the whine vs wine episode, I believe I made mention of that in the second post that was stupidly removed. And I don't apologize for typos.
Now that everything related to the original post has evaporated, I guess it's time to move on and, as I say to my dog, Marty, "it's time to settle". It's too late to start analyzing the intended subject matter at this juncture so perhaps we can take this up in a later stream. Everyone, have a good week, OV OT, catch a big one, and LOVE and friends, keep on truckin'.
Thinker,
I'm not asking you to apologize for typos. Go back to the top of this column and read my THIRD POST DOWN. Read the first 2 paragraphs of that post. It begins with "what do you mean..."
You accused me of doing something that I did not do. It was YOU who was referring to the wrong post, not me.
I'm only making a big deal out of this because you are always so quick to point out others' mistakes but you like to gloss over your own.
Here is a comment:
Where did the money go?
The State of the City presentation was not free.
The trip to Europe was not free.
Love to all N. W.
Boy--where did this thread get off the tracks? I'm beginning to think that I never should have pointed out the whining/wining issue.
But--let's go back to the beginning. The Mayor spoke about sustainability in the community and finding a balance among growth, environmental sensivity, inceased business opportunities, and the need for additional quality-of-life amenities like the Naranja Town Site.
To me, it sounded like an alarm bell signaling that it was time to take these issues seriously and to realize that there's a cost associated with each.
With a downturn in development fees and without annexing vacant land, the time has come to look for other revenue sources. The good news is that initial property taxes (whether primary or secondary [like the Naranja Town Site bonds] require a vote by us--the citizens.
So, let's see what the democratic process brings us in November and in subsequent elections. If the new Council cannot make ends meet, where would you recommend that they go--to the Retired Home for the Elected Bewildered?
bb,
Your post very succinctly progresses in a very deliberate and logistical manner and for this, I thank you! Your last line/question, however, is a bit befuddling in itself, but, so be it, humor is good. While the Mayor spoke about about sustainability, (the new 21st century catch-all), balance, amenities, etc., he, of all people, had muffled the voices of many during his tenure and left those MANY out of the process by utilizing a myriad of hats. He now talks the good talk; I hope we will see the good walk.
The view from the Council dais looks different, I can assure you. The Mayor is just one vote among seven. So, the question I posed was whether this Council (or a voting majority) was up to the task of making the hard decisions regarding sustainability. Cutting funding for the Chamber or GOVAC or the Mayor's travel saves modest amounts that people can understand, but it's the really big, hard and expensive decisions that we should be watching more closely.
Over the years our Mayor was NOT just one vote on council, bb, of THAT you can be assured!
Zev,
I'm not sure what you mean. But there have been numerous times over the past 10 years when Mayor Loomis was on the losing side of a vote. Perhaps you are crediting him with more influence and authority than he actually has. He receives the same information that every Council member receives and, beyond that, he facilitates the Council meetings. This is a classic Weak Mayor/Strong Manager type of governing.
It might seem easy to blame the Mayor for any Town misstep, but I believe that the blame can be evenly spread among all current and immediate past Council members.
bb, perhaps I am crediting the Mayor with more DECEPTION than you are willing to admit. And, yes, I can blame, ALMOST equally, the former council for 'allowing' it.
In prior posts I have stated that we need to move forward, and I suppose that means we need to regroup, rethink, and carry on; I do not think the overall performance of our current council, including how the Mayor
adapts, can be judged at this juncture. At one of our earlier council meetings, one of our former councilpersons who was voted out of office, got up before council and jaggedly assailed our 'new' members for their stance on one particular item; this was not only a wrong but was outlandishly snobbish in presentation. It nailed, for me, that my opposition to that person's rehire was ABSOLUTELY CORRECT and that my desire for moving forward was headed in the right direction.
Bb, sometimes you seem to get caught up in technicalities which cloud reality. So, you have been on the other side of the dais or infer that you have been; does that not reflect a bit of bias on your part? Understand, if you haven't read it in one or another posts of mine in the past, I was VERY close to the operations of both the County of Wake, NC government as well as the City of Raleigh, too. As a result of my personal 'knowledge' it is very difficult for me to accept the propriety absolute of many of our elected 'caretakers', from Mayors, Commissioners, Councilpersons, on down and on up.
Again, we must move forward and while you (bb) can provide some valuable insight, please do not let the quagmire of your own PAST involvements slurp up the positive aspirations of what we newbies are striving for in the future. Most certainly we can disagree on some issues but, please, do not try to convince me that government processes are or have been holy.
Most sincerely,
Zev
BB-
In reference to your comment, "The view from the Council dais looks different, I can assure you".....Care to comment on when YOU were on the council? Since that appears to be what you are inferring.
"The view from the dais" was meant metaphorically. Whether I ever sat behind one is irrelevant to the discussion. The point is that, once elected, some persons go through transformations when they're faced with massive amounts of information and conflicting citizen opinions.
There are those who stick to their beliefs, even when the facts don't support them. There are those whose beliefs change more often than their socks and whose votes are unpredictable. There are those who try to carefully study each issue before weighing in. And there are those who simply shoot from the lip, regardless of the issue.
And there are those whose bloated egos are disproportionate to the general welfare.
Post a Comment