In the Oct 8 issue, Patrick McNamara, Explorer reporter noted our issue with Oro Valley "editing" our "NO" argument in the pamphlet on the Naranja Bond Issue.
It's a little surprising to me to have Tobin Rosen, our respected Town Attorney, try to justify this action by the Town Clerk, stating it was "an editing lapse."
Was it also a "lapse" some months ago when the Town Clerk said "I Must form a Political Committee" as a result of my endorsement of Bill Garner & Salette Latas both of whom were subsequently elected to our Town Council? That action cost Oro Valley in excess of $1000 in legal fees before they backed off.
This action will only negatively impact those that implemented it.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2008/10/08/news/doc48ebe437f3679047095349.txt
45 comments:
"An editing lapse" by the Town Clerk? Ha,I was there when she FUMBLED her explanation to you, Art, it appears the story keeps changing. A "lapse"?
I think it was left out on purpose.
This blog criticizes the mayor and the town, so they are getting even with you.
I noticed that a high school student had a submittal.
Why should a town pay for a child to express their opinion, we pay for that
If the parents have a thought, then let the parent sign their name. sheesh
Art and Zev,
What was the original story she gave you as to why the website address was inadvertently left out? Zev said the story keeps changing. Now it's "an editing lapse." What was the original "story?"
As some of you already know, I also had a problem with Kathi Cuvelier when I tried to submit my AGAINST argument. She made a mistake when assessing it, I called her on it, and she backed down. No apology, of course, for her "error."
There have been so many instances of this woman making "mistakes" that I fail to understand why she has not been fired by now.
Are the mistakes due to incompetence? Then she should be fired. There's no excuse for this repeated incompetence when she's been on this job for 30 years!
Are the "mistakes" deliberate? Is she working to protect someone at the Town and therefore she makes trouble for anyone who might have a differing view from that person? (ie. Loomis) If she is deliberately and repeatedly getting in the way of the democratic process, then she should be fired!
So there you have it. If it's incompetence...fire her. If it's deliberate... fire her. Why are we paying tax dollars to support this woman's job when all she does is get in our way??!!
VC
Ms. Cuvelier, in her 'apology' to Art, first stated that the attribution down to the room number of one Ryan Hansen, associated with the University of Arizona Athletic Services, was THE error, let alone that also Susan Zebrat, treasurer of the PAC for the Park Bonds, also recieved specific identification with a fumbling explanation offered up by Ms. Cuvelier. Her expression was stone faced and it appeared to me that her demeanor was kind of a 'forced recognition' and lacked sincerity. I believe, and that can be substantiated by Art, that she was in the company of the Mayor in her 'accidental', after-the-meeting encounter. And, yes, I agree with the rest of your assessment!
Oh----By the way---There appears to have been another "lapse" in the Town Clerk's removing of our web address while "overlooking" the fact another "yes" argument had the person's name PLUS "A.Y.S.O. Regional Board of Directors Regions 922 & 206."
How convenient that the "American Youth Soccer Organization" was OK but "letorovalleyexcel" was found to be unacceptable.
Enough said!!!
It is obvious that this was a deliberate omission.
Clearly, the "town" is doing all it can to get this bond issue passed.
Guess we must REPLACE all of the rascals!
Wow! I think my friend the Zee Man is getting a little over zealous.
This is a case where you don't want to "throw out the baby with the bath water."
To my knowledge---once again, the Town Clerk pretty much took unilateral action and has been "spoken to."
An "oversight?" Hard to believe.
An intentional effort to single us out? We can all form our own opinion on that question.
However,I don"t believe you can blame those that knew nothing about the decision for the decision.
Certainly, there is no argument that Loomis,Mary Davis and others in town government will do whatever they can to stick the people with an unnecessary property tax!
OK, everyone take a deep breath. First, if you reread the article in the Exlporer, I think the statements by the Town Attorney confirm Zev's account of the conversation with Ms. Cuvelier - that leaving in the U of A address was the oversight, not the removal on the web address. As for the comments about Ms. Cuvelier and her motives I have this to say, anyone who has spent more than 15 minute with her will tell you that there is not a malicious or manipulative bone in the woman's body. She, for 30 years, has served the Town well and faithfully and takes her position very seriously. She is neither incompetent nor deceitful; she is however human and mistakes are sometimes made. I think you would have had to been living under a rock in this Town to not know about this blog, as Art mentions it every chance he gets. We all know who you and Richard are, there was nothing to gain by the Town leaving the web address off intentionally. Isn't more plausible that everyones address information was ommitted and a one got missed, seeing as on one elses address appeared except for the U of A professor? As for the PAC and the AYSO - those weren't addresses, they were affiliations. The AYSO writer was representing an organization's position and the PAC writer was representing the PAC's position. Not a big leap to see why that info was left intact. Had someone from the "Vote No" PAC identified themselves as such I am sure that would have appeared also. The bigger picture here is that the substance of Art and Richard's comment appeared as written - correct? Isn't that what is really important - what you had to say as opposed to promoting the Blog?
There is no way to believe this was just a simple omission.
It is possible that our town clerk was just following orders from her boss. If this is the case, then the person who gave our town clerk this order hides in the shadows while this employee takes the heat....what a coward!
Cyclone 1---- We surely could argue your point,but allow me to accept it,for whatever it is worth.
However, let's take a closer look at your last statement.
You write:
"The bigger picture here is that the substance of Art and Richard's comment appeared as written - correct? Isn't that what is really important - what you had to say as opposed to promoting the Blog?"
Following up on that, would you then not agree that when Mayor Loomis stands with the PAC folks advocating the park,especially with him easily recognized, and with his official ORO VALLEY SHIRT, wouldn't that mean that this is the mayor trying to "sell" the fact that OV voters should vote for the bond issue?
After all, is that not the substance that you allude to in your comment on our "NO" argument?
Were we advocating our blog in our comment? No more than the soccer coach advocating his soccer league, the retired general advocating that he served his country, (I could have said "Art Segal retired Army Spec4"), the ex owner of the Explorer advocating her prior job, the councilman who caused us more problems than anyone else in OV history advocating that he was an ex councilman,etc. etc.
I guess Dick & I are the "ganders," because what's good for the goose is evidently not good for the gander!
Art.... I didn't know you were retired from the military. How many years did you serve? If you are "retired" then it must have been over 20. I thank you for any service but would be very interested in an accurate number.
To all the rest...Cyclone has a very good point. Our Town Clerk is a superb individual who does a great job but is human. As pointed out the error was leaving one address in.
Stop whining!!!!! You sound like a bunch of spoiled brats.
Cox---It's none of your business as to my service to the country. I only noted it in that another individual thinks it's prestigious to refer to yourself as a retired military person.
As to your last comment, it's obvious you're back with the same arrogance as before.
OV OT and Cyclone,
While your defenses of Ms. Cuvelier might be admirable (or tainted), and though, with the exception of my encounter with her as described below, I have never personally had any 'experience' with her, I am quite well aware that their are SEVERAL in this community who HAVE had negative responses and opinions from her when the need for such attitude was unwarranted as well as totally out of character with the needed sensitivity of her job; in each instance those who encountered this type of behavior were, in one way or another, involved in an action that seemed not to be the position of the Town. Hmmm.
Now, OV OT, while we can all agree to discuss this issue with our own prejudices or experiences at hand, while cyclone1's demeanor and presentation is collected and reasonable, I am afraid your's is not. You come off like a wildly flailing whale whose blow-hole has a nasty booger in it. Calm down!
Zev...
Your last comment has convinced me that you are not capable of carrying on a reasonable conversation with any degree of intelligence. As I said before, you and many others on this venomous vehicle, sound like a bunch of spoiled brats. Your "booger" comment fit that description to a tee. At your age I would have thought that you might have matured beyond the "booger" stage of life. Evidently you haven't.
It is obvious by your and your running buddy's comment that I struck a nerve. Birds of a feather flock together.......right Art!!!
Cyclone-1
How can it be that Ms. Cuvelier has served the Town for 30 years and yet continues to make so many mistakes? Shouldn't she know all the rules and regulations by now? Why after 30 years does she continue to give people the wrong information when asked a simple question as to how to proceed with something?
Doesn't this imply that her actions are deliberate and meant to obstruct the democratic process?
I had my own run-in with her recently and this is when I realized that everything I'd been hearing about her was true. Up until that moment, I actually had been giving her the benefit of the doubt. Not anymore.
OV OT
You struck a nerve? I think it's the other way around. What happened to your sense of humor? Did it land at the bottom of the glass? So, Art is a whiner and I am an old fart. Can't you do better than that? Cox, you are a pitiful! You spout authority though your life experiences appear to be negligable. You cut others down when you are mired in
self admiration. If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance you try to baffle 'em with baloney. Cox, you're not the whale, you're the booger!
Zev...
I am not humored by childish remarks from someone who presents themslves as 'worldly' or 'intelligent'.
Many of your comments recently have been acidic and nasty. Your continued snide, pompous comments such as, "though your life experiences appear to be negligable' are completely unfounded and previously described.
One of my extensive life experiences was having the honor to spend several months in a small southeast Asian country defending the rights of people to make ignorant comments.
When you know my life experiences feel free to pass judgement. Until then you do your self a disservice making "ignorant" (Ms. Coyote's definition) comments.
Cox, so you lean on ms coyote's definitions? In your mind does that help your credence? Stand on your own feet (if you can).
Cox, it's funny how you accuse me of having those attributes that you overwhelmingly exude. I have, in the interest of worthy discourse, tempered most (not all) of my remarks over the last several months. You seem not to have caught on to this mode. While you appear to be a 'bit' sarcastic towards Art in questioning his service to his country, you further your own by attempting to utilize your involvement as an instrument to portray that you were"defending the rights of people to make ignorant statements". So, in attempting to make a point, you continue on the path of your own negative remarks, and, as always, you spin to justify. I can discuss and respect differences in outlook or opinion with many who write on this site or
in person, whatever or wherever the theater might be, but, if they should carry around an 'attitude', then let the chips fall where they may.
You have a perpetual 'attitude' towards Art. This is his site so why do you not show a little respect for him instead of constantly harping on his every move? Yes, Art can handle himself and do it WELL, but when you up your impetuous sarcasm, I have difficulty in just 'letting it go'.
Thinker,
You said that Zev's comment about your "negligible life experiences" was completely unfounded. Not true. We were having this discussion on a previous post...a post from which you conveniently disappeared some time ago. Zev and I both commented that you have made many comments about how you've never been to a particular place. Pretty much any place that anyone has named on this site, you've never been there, yet you profess to know everything. That's what we were talking about...that you seem to have very limited life experiences. If we're wrong (and all we've had to go on is what you've told us) then feel free to enlighten us as to all the places you have lived and visited and experienced.
And I can't help but notice that no one has been able to refute my statement that Kathi Cuvelier should be fired. Yes, some of you claim that she has been a wonderful Town Clerk, but no one has been able to explain or justify her repeated "mistakes" or why it's acceptable for a town employee to make this many mistakes after 30 years on the job.
There is simply no excuse for this.
The previous two comments by Cox were removed as they discuss his own life story.
Under no circumstances will this blog permit Cox to use this blog for autobiographical information.
If he feels compelled to write about his life story, he is welcome to find another format.
This blog is designed for dissemination of information about Oro Valley issues. Every other blogger has no trouble understanding that!
Art,
Cox was responding to my post (I assume) where I asked him to tell us of some of his life experiences. I asked this because whenever another blogger mentions a place they've lived or visited, Cox has no familiarity with it. Therefore, both Zev and I came to the conclusion that many of his arguments are empty because he has such a limited frame of reference.
So I think it would be helpful to know if he has lived in other places...experienced other things.
Others on this site including myself, Zev, Fear the Turtle, etc. have given our histories so that others can understand why we believe as we do. I know Cox isn't your favorite person, but he should be afforded the same courtesy as the rest of us and I don't think it would cause any harm to let him answer the question (as long as he doesn't use it as an excuse to belittle the rest of us).
In all due respect, this blog, as I noted, is to discuss issues affecting the people of Oro Valley.
If you or Zev, or anyone else has an interest where Cox was born, how much he paid for his house or where he went to school, please exchange emails with him and keep it off this blog.
Hopefully, that will work for everybody.
VC.....You usually speak with a certain degree of intelligence. However, when it comes to the job performance of our Town Clerk, you have no clue how efficient she is or how well she performs her job. Just because she may have erred in dealing with you (and I frankly doubt that she did...but it's possible) you think she should be fired.
As for the previous post you refer to, I left town for four days and when I returned the original post was so old that I sent my response to the recycly bin! It had to do with visiting Nordstrom', etc.
Since you asked I have been able to retrieved it and it follows:
VC and Zev.... I'll respond to both of your diatribes with one posting, hoping that I hit all of the points. (And don't you know that there are probably several people out there waiting for our continued discourse. :-))
‘Master’ Art may remove my response because it contains much personal information. BUT since both of you 'well-traveled, worldly' folk have made reference to my 'lack of exposure to the outside world', I'll take this opportunity to give you a little history.
I am 64 years old, born in a rural part of SE Missouri but raised (thru 18) in St. Louis, MO, a fairly large metropolitan area. I played ball, did my share of childish pranks but my parents also took me to the outdoor municipal opera once or twice a summer. After high school I joined the Army in 1962 as a Private E-1 and was honorably discharged a little over five years later as a Captain. During my tenure with Uncle Sam's Army I lived in various cities in the United States (not always on a military post/base), Europe and Southeast Asia. On leaves I have visited such places as Berlin, Munich, Mannheim, Heidelberg, Bangkok, Saigon and many more.
I then joined an international service management company and for 30 years lived in and/or temporarily worked in such places as Portland, Los Angeles, Monterey, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Chicago, Lubbock, San Angelo, Texas, Marysville, Missouri, Champaign/Urbana, Illinois and several others, big and small, too numerous to mention. So I have had a broad exposure to life in both rural communities as well as very large metropolitan areas. I earned my college degree taking night courses during this period also. So your snide comments about me never visiting New York City or "quite a few other places that people on this site have mentioned" are not flattering to you do yourselves a great disservice.
And VC, when you make totally unfounded statements such as, "but in most other areas, your knowledge and life experiences appear to be very limited), you lose all credibility and frankly your comments are insulting. I doubt your life experiences and mine can even be remotely compared, especially when you include my five years of military service, including 9 months in Southeast Asia, defending peoples right to make ignorant statements.
And Zev and VC, if you go back and really read my posting I stated that there is nothing wrong with being a Nordy. But when one uses Nordstrom’s as a point of reference it is a status statement. I don’t go shopping to be pampered or to be treated like a snob. And I have yet to have an unresolved service issue with any product I have purchased at Wal Mart or Macy’s or Mervyn’s or Kohls.
Having said all that, I am simply a common, semi-retired, far from rich (my home cost $149,000 new) person who, since moving here in 1996, does what I can to make my community a better place to live. I have a long, well established record of local public service.
I understand that my income (and probably yours) is shrinking just as most other people with investments in the stock market and that my day-to-day expenses are going up. And Zev, I understand the shopping process you defined. But also I understand that there are many people who want an Oro Valley Market Place. I understand that there are people who want ALL of the business community within Oro Valley to thrive, not just a few. I understand that there is a critical shortage of park space in Oro Valley to serve all age groups. And I understand people would rather have those living outside of Oro Valley pay their fair share of OUR expenses through sales taxes. I understand that there are people that want our community to grow and prosper. And I know that there are more of them out there than there are posting on this blog.
So please understand that my comments on this blog are not personal ("What's in it for me?)comments. If there were no softball fields in that park I would still be out there pushing for the approval of the bond just as hard. It’s not about me or softball. It’s about making our community better. PERIOD!!!
OV OT
In the past I have acknowledged your contributions, whether or not I might have disagreed with them, without any animosity whatsoever when you have precipitated a post in a thoughtful and non-personal attack mode. Even in your last post here, it seems you can't resist injecting a couple of negative push buttons by your usage of uncomplimentary and thus unnecessary words; but, since, for the most part, you are presenting yourself in order that you perhaps 'correct' a perception of your life's experiences, let's let that go for the time being.
The problem some of us have with you is that you write with a flair for misinterpretation, denigration, and wild accusation. Why? You can only expect a reaction by doing just that; yet you seem not to be able to 'help it'. And THAT, OV OT, is a major issue some of us have with you.
I can appreciate your list of the places you have been and where you have lived; I still can question how much of it you have actually 'experienced'.
Recently I was in the company of a group of persons NOT INVOLVED IN THE TOWN'S ARENA; your name came up in a conversation by someone who knows you well, a person who
'has no dog in this fight'. I did mention, in a non-diparaging way and without detail, that you and I have had our differences; this drew the comment that " oh well, he's just full of himself" And, I suppose, in a sense, that that kind of sums it up for me.
If you can temper YOUR rehtoric, I can do so, too.I've done it in the past, you've done it in the past so why not continue in this mode?
I admit to painting certain OFFICIALS in a negative light and I feel I do so with good reason. But, they are OFFICIALS and as such are open to a different standard or scrutiny than you, I, Art, VC, et al. Unfortunately, politics is no longer an application of community, it is not what you fought for is it? But the rest of us can be and should set an example that we can at least set a higher standard for ourselves and perhaps some day this Country will be able to retreat from the edge of insanity that now seems to permeate the spines of our elected governance.
Thinker,
Where did a make an "ignorant" comment?
Please explain
If this is a jab, towards me, oh well
I can take it.
You make it sound like I called Zez ignorant, never did!
What is going on here?
You didn't mscoyote, and what's important is that you and I know that!
Ms Coyote....As is always the case, when I make an error I correct it. The post should have read "Victorian Cowgirls definition" not Ms. Coyote.
VC posted a definition of "ignorant" in a really old post and I wanted to make sure that Zev knew which application of the word was being used.
SORRY!!!
Hi,
Ok, I think I get it !Maybe instead of going at each other we should go after the town :>
Thinker,
Now that I've seen your response to my question (before Art had a chance to remove it again) I understand why he chose to remove it. I was only asking for a general list of the places you've lived and cultures you've "experienced" so that I could ascertain whether you have any real frame of reference for some of the comments you make. But as usual, you had to turn your response into an attack.
The reason we believed that you had a lack of exposure to the world was because no matter what places other bloggers mentioned in their posts, you had never been there even tho numerous places had been mentioned, so it gave the impression that you had never been anywhere and therefore didn't have much of a frame of reference for your arguments. That's why I opened the door for you to enlighten us as to your U.S. travels and world travels. I wasn't being "snide" as you say. I was merely trying to point out that by your own comments you appeared to have traveled very little and experienced very little and I wanted to know if that was true or if there was more to the story that you hadn't shared.
You should thank me for having the insight to ask the question rather than continue to assume that you had never been anywhere.
You should also have appreciated that I thought Art was wrong to not allow you to tell us where you've lived when he's allowed others to do the same. When we're arguing things like parks, for instance, it helps to hear stories of how these types of parks fared in other places in the country. Zev and Fear the Turtle have provided a wealth of information in that respect. But I suspect Art may have removed your post because you got a little "uppity" about it, especially when you said that my life experiences can't compare to yours because yours includes military experience in Germany and SE Asia.
No one's experiences compare to anyone else's. That's why I always say that each one of us is who we are because of everything that's happened to us up until this point. I suspect your experiences don't compare with mine either since I grew up in a very bad neighborhood with a single parent and this was the best we could do. I was not born into privilege. I worked my way up through student loans and a Pell Grant. And that's how I got where I am today, so that's why I take issue when you try to paint me as a snob because I shop at Nordstrom twice a year.
As for your comment, "when it comes to the job performance of our Town Clerk, you have no clue how efficient she is or how well she performs her job."
Yes, I do. I know of her incompetence in dealing with Art and this website, and I know of her incompetence in dealings she had with two council members where she disseminated the wrong information. When you know 3 people who've been the victims of her incompetence, well, that's a pattern.
You also said, "just because she may have erred in dealing with you (and I frankly doubt that she did...but it's possible) you think she should be fired."
Were you there? Do you know what happened? No. So how can you assert that you doubt she did anything wrong? And I don't think she should be fired because of what she tried to do to me, I think she should be fired because there is a pattern of this behavior and it's always directed at people who disagree with Loomis. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the pattern here.
As for the park, you said it's not about you, it's about making the community better. Well, just how many more things will we have to do to make this community better (according to your definition of "better?) You chided me for asking, "What's in it for me?" but I only asked that because everyone who is FOR the park is for it because there is something in it for THEM. If you don't believe me, read the FOR arguments in the voter pamphlet. It's all about my child should have and my son needs.
Who showed up at the recent rally for the park? Two softball clubs, two little leagues, a baseball academy, youth soccer, youth football. It's all about what's in it for THEM, but I get chastised if I ask what's in it for ME.
This is not a community park. It is a sports complex as evidenced by the people who showed up for the rally. I'll say this again and I challenge you or anyone else to argue just this one point:
Is it fair to me that I've had to cut back on vacations and day trips (haven't taken even ONE this year) so I can just turn around and hand the money I didn't spend on those things over to someone else so they can enjoy THEIR recreational activities?
Sheesh!
Ms Coyote....
When they are wrong we should. But when they are right we should also compliment them.
VC....
I did compliment you on your admonishment of Art. Maybe you haven't read it yet.
As I recall, and sometimes I have senior moments, I only have said that I have not been to New Your or to some place where Zev lived. The truth be told there are a lot of places I haven't been. The "not been' list is far greater for all of us. But because I have not been to two places, you translate that into having little life experiences. That's completely unfair.
As for Ms. Cuvelier, I am not sure what information you are referring to with the 'Master'. If it about the blog registering as a political group, she only gave Art the information that she was directed to give by the then town attorney. As for information to two Council members, I have no point of reference. I can only go by my experiences with her, and there have been many. But I can assure you for every error she makes, she does thousands of things correctly.
On to the park....
We had a little over two hundred people in the march. We have those you mentioned, three sitting Council members, seniors, people with many children and some with no children. It was a cross-section of the community. And everyone in this town has an interest in the park. Whether it is for additional property values, a place for our children to play, a safe path to walk on, a place for a family picnic, a possible future home for the Tucson Museum of Art or what ever, you have a stake in the park.
"Sports Complex". I don't think so. The actual active sports committment is only 24.8 acres of the 213 acres. I would be happy to break down the acreage for each activity if you wish. I have the facts. :-)
As for your final challenge, you may choose to not use the park. But, yes it is fair because parks are what municipalities do. Streets are what municipalities do. Sewers are what municipalities do. Have you ever been to Reid Park? Did you ever go to a park as a child or young adult? That's what municipalities do. It is a continuum of the maturation of any community. Are you really saying that only those that actively use a park should pay for the construction of a park? I would hope not.
We as a community will decide the issue on November 4.
According to the news of approximately 3 hours ago, the International Monetary Fund is warning oF a potential GLOBAL FINANCIAL MELTDOWN and here we are considering $48,800,000 (actual total $85,868,750 with interest) for a sports complex (you can't put lipstick on a sports complex and call it a park, OT); it just doesn't make sense!
Zev....
Here is a fact for you to digest.
Out of a 213 acre piece of property (Naranja Park), only 24.8 acres are currently designated for active recreation. That's only 11.6%.
Sports complex....I think not my friend.
I'll start saving my coffee cans for you to bury in your back yard.
:-)
OT
Recently you have indicated (and let me paraphrase) that [without the proposed park, Oro Valley will be a town of mediocrity] and that [it is necessary to have this park in order that we gain stature as a community]. Please correct me if my IMPRESSION of your position is wrong.
It is thus that I ask you, and the question is intended only that you legitimize your assertions, the following:
What municipality do you know of or have the belief of that, by failing to proffer a CONTIGUOUS facility like or similar to the first phase of the one proposed for the Naranja Site, the stated municipality has or is suffering a lack of 'recognition' by virtue of not having same?
What municipalities can you name that have realistically, in fact, or even by virtue of your personal opinion, increased their stature by proferring that they DO have a CONTIGUOUS facility like or similar to the first phase of same proposed for the Naranja Site?
A candid and dispassionate reply would be appreciated.
Zev...Your questions are muddled.
I cannot give you a dispassionate reply because I am passionate about this park.
I could sit here and whip off several communities and you would have no more useful information than you have now.
My focus is Oro Valley. I don't give a rats behind about any other community at this time other than Oro Valley. So let's stick to what is good for Oro Valley and why we need such a facility. If you listened to the KVOI program this morning you would have heard several reasons.
But here is a few:
A general rule of thumb is that a community should have 1 acre of active recreation park for every 1000 residents. We have nearly 44,000 residents so we should have about 440 acres. Kriegh Park has about 17 acres. Riverfront Park has about 30 acres. That's it...47 acres.
Having sufficient park and recreation area is one of the measuring tool used by businesses when they are considering relocating or starting a business. We are already at mediocrity in this regard.
It is a known fact that when you provide kids a place to recreate, crimes committed by that same group decline.
Just as communities need excellent educational facilities to nourish the mind, communities also need recreation areas to nourish the body.
Parks improve property values.
Green space and trees help clean the air.
The survey of the Oro Valley population during the creation of our general plan revealed 91% of the respondents stated that they supported (49%) or strongly supported (42%) parks on our undeveloped land. It ranked the highest among the choices of residential, retail and services, parks, undisturbed open space, business/research/office park and schools/educational facilities.
Element #8 of the Town's General Plan specifically calls for the development of the Naranja Town Site. It goes on to say, "...the Town Site will play a central role in the Town's overall parks, recreation and arts programming."
I could go on but that should be sufficient to give you some things to ponder.
OT,
Thank you for at least acknowledging my questions. I do not believe that they are muddled; as a matter of fact they are quite
lucid in light of some of your past assertions. That you cannot give a dispassionate answer condradicts your past statements that you are a person of fact.But, since I can understand passion, I can accept your position. Let it be said, however, that, in the future, do not claim to be strictly a man of fact when it might serve your purpose do proclaim such. Your satement about not giving a rat's behind about any other community belies your claim of what constitutes 'mediocrity and/or success'. Now, I personally to not give a rat's behind about attracting more businesses to Oro Valley; the ones that have come here haven't been exactly what I would call citizen friendly. However, I do agree that parks
nourish the body, as well as the mind and soul. It remains my contention however that this one, in it's format (as well as in my lifetime), will serve only a few in this regard.
No, I did not listen to KVOI this morning as I am getting overly saturated with the subject.
Accuse me for whatever you will for not having done so, it was a personal choice.
Thank you for taking the time to at least respond to my query.
Zev my dear friend....
There are time that you post statements that lighten my heart and cause me to laugh out loud. Allow me the priviledge of an example:
"I do not believe that they are muddled; as a matter of fact they are quite lucid in light of some of your past assertions."
While I appreciate your compliment PLEASE do not use my statements as the gold standard for lucidity (is that a word?). I do have brain farts from time to time. A recent example was by attribution to Ms. Coyotye for a statement made by Victorian Cowgirl.
Given MY personal choice I would have much prefered to sleep a couple more hours this morning and go to a radio station that is somewhat closer than Palo Verde and I-10 at 6:45 AM.
But as I said I am passionate about this issue and I respect your position (albiet wrong...:-))
on the issue.
WHATEVER!!!?
I still see the Naranja Park this way...the people of Oro Valley are middle class and upper middle class. They and their children are wanting for nothing. What we are going to do is to take money from Middle and Upper Middle Class Group A and transfer it to Middle and Upper Middle Class Group B.
Many of the arguments had to do with "it's costing me too much money in gas to drive all the way to Tucson for my child's sports activities." So now, in essence, what I'm really doing is giving my money to save someone else money at the gas pump. Meanwhile, I haven't been anywhere in a year because of high gas prices.
Is someone going to start a collection for me? Because, you know, it's just costing me too much money lately in gas in order to go to the places that I want to go and I shouldn't have to give anything up so someone should be chipping in to help me with high gas prices, too.
Thinker,
Regarding our Nordstrom argument from another post, you said in this thread, "if you go back and really read my posting I stated that there is nothing wrong with being a Nordy. But when one uses Nordstrom’s as a point of reference it is a status statement."
What you actually said was that the fact that I shop at Nordstrom (albeit twice a year) "speaks volumes" about me. Now you say there is nothing wrong with being a Nordy. So which is it?
You said it speaks volumes about me. So just what exactly do those volumes say?
VC...
Now you have really confused me. What separates group A from group B????? You define them as the same economic group?
The cost of transportation is just one facet. Let's drill down on the transportation issue alone as follows:
More driving - more pollution
More driving - more cost(gas and vehicle costs)
More driving - more liability
More driving - less family time
More driving - more wear and tear on roadways
More driving - Less time to devote to community issues!!!!
There could be 50 more!!!!!
On the Nordy issue... We are spending WAY TOO MUCH TIME ONE THIS.
There is nothing wrong with being a Nordy...but it does place you in a unique group. I venture to say that 98% of the population of the United States has never set foot in a Nordstrom's. I believe statistics would show that people who routinely (even twice a year) shop at a store such as Nordstrom's, Nieman-Marcus have differing views on socioeconomic matters than those who routinely shop at Wal Mart. AND I would submit that the Wal Mart shopper is much more tolerant of the Nordstrom folks than the Nordstrom shoppers are of Wal Mart folks.
What does all this mean. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. It simply translates to the fact that Nordstrom folks and Wal Mart folks probably see things differently.
STOP TAKING EVERYTHING PERSONALLY and start looking at comments more globally.
I'm finished with this thread!!!!
Thinker,
You can't be finished with this thread since you asked me a question and you have to come back to find out the answer. You asked what separates Group A from Group B? Nothing. That was my point. The middle class is taxed to the point that we are becoming the lower class. The wealthy get tax breaks off the backs of the middle class. The poor get tax breaks off the backs of the middle class. And now we have one group of middle class people saving money at the gas pump at the expense of another group of middle class people. So now I'm supporting everybody!
And the irony is that we're the ones who get labeled tax and spend liberals. Here's a novel idea...let's stop taxing and let's stop spending money on things we don't NEED.
As for your "transportation" argument:
More driving - more pollution
More driving - more cost(gas and vehicle costs)
More driving - more liability
More driving - less family time
More driving - more wear and tear on roadways
More driving - Less time to devote to community issues!!!!
Couldn't that be said of everything we do? There are many people who live in OV but who have a 45 minute commute to Raytheon every day. They have more vehicle costs and less family time, etc. because of this. So does this mean that we should move EVERYTHING to Oro Valley so that no one will ever have to drive more than 15 minutes to go any of the places they have to go?
Why should we cater to just one particular group of people in this regard? The person who drives to Raytheon from OV HAS to do so FIVE days a week. The mother of the little league player doesn't HAVE to attend games (it's a choice) and she doesn't have to attend them FIVE days a week.
You asked that I stop taking things so personally. That's hard to do when someone says, "That particular thing you do speaks volumes about who YOU are." THAT'S personal!
VC
It is about time that you and I realize that trying to debate an issue with OV OT is like trying to wrestle with a hydra. In a prior post he tries to list his most of his exposures as 'experience'; in many prior posts he states he deals in 'facts' only, yet he claims passion when it comes to the community; he thinks experience is just visiting a place, and he uses off the wall (non) statistics in order to atempt to bolster an argument.
VC, the man is a logistics mess and, frankly, I don't think he can help it.
Post a Comment