Last week, Diane Peters addressed remarks made by 2 individuals during the "Call To Audience" portion of the May 7 Oro Valley town council meeting. The remarks of these 2 individuals were intended to show support of Oro Valley Police Department ("OVPD"). Their remarks were also intended to disparage the concerns regarding department budget oversight and operations made by Council Member's Garner and Zinkin. This week Diane continues to address comments made by the remaining three speakers at that meeting
---
Matt McCarty stated that he is an Air Force officer who has lived all over the world.
He stated: “I have friends who live around the city and they are frightened to drive into Oro Valley because of the police department, because if they disobey the law even a little bit, they’re going to be told that they disobeyed the law.”
McCarty thought this was a good thing. I don't.
People should not be “frightened” to drive in Oro Valley because of the police. People should never be frightened of the police department unless they are "wanted". I assume McCarty's friends are upstanding people so why should they be frightened?
He stated: “I have friends who live around the city and they are frightened to drive into Oro Valley because of the police department, because if they disobey the law even a little bit, they’re going to be told that they disobeyed the law.”
McCarty thought this was a good thing. I don't.
People should not be “frightened” to drive in Oro Valley because of the police. People should never be frightened of the police department unless they are "wanted". I assume McCarty's friends are upstanding people so why should they be frightened?
It is ironic that McCarty's comment confirms the arguments of the other side.
His remark speaks volumes about the reputation of a Oro Valley police force when even ordinary
citizens are frightened of them. His
comment inadvertently confirmed that their aggressive posture is unnecessary
and amounts to harassment of motorists.
We are not the enemy and should not have to be “frightened” to drive in Oro Valley. The police are here to serve and protect, not to harass and intimidate.
We are not the enemy and should not have to be “frightened” to drive in Oro Valley. The police are here to serve and protect, not to harass and intimidate.
Carmen Trevizo is an Oro Valley Police Department ("OVPD") Sergeant. She spoke of the work that her colleagues
do every day including: A police officer who saved the life of a 3-year old
child with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation; another officer who saved the life of
a man who was having a heart attack; and another officer who talked for four
hours to a suicidal man who was holding a gun to his mouth.
Yes. We applaud these officers for their commendable
handling of these situations. This is
where their training pays off and is more in line with the “serve and protect”
model that they are sworn to uphold. We are proud of the work of our officers on the street.
However, Sergeant Trevizo may have missed the point of Council Member Garner's prima donna and thug comments. Council Member Garner was not criticizing the performance of Oro Valley police officers. None of us are. Garner was referring to an attitude on the part of department management that OVPD operations and spending is above reproach and above inspection.
However, Sergeant Trevizo may have missed the point of Council Member Garner's prima donna and thug comments. Council Member Garner was not criticizing the performance of Oro Valley police officers. None of us are. Garner was referring to an attitude on the part of department management that OVPD operations and spending is above reproach and above inspection.
Does commendable performance in the field mean that the Oro Valley Police Department should be given sovereignty? Does it mean that they should be given a blank check to run the department with minimal
oversight and no questions asked?
Oro Valley resident Harry Sheetz claimed that Council Member Zinkin’s desire for a police management study
indicates that he has no confidence in Chief Sharp. Sheetz is wrong. Council Member Zinkin has never criticized Chief Sharp.
The point of the management study is to look for ways to cut costs, not to criticize the department director. Virtually all other Oro Valley departments have had management studies approved by prior council. For example, management studies have previously been performed in the Legal Department, Planning and Zoning, and the Town Engineer’s office.
Does the fact that these studies were done mean that the then Oro Valley Town Councils had no confidence in those department directors? No. Rather these councils were just looking for ways to increase efficiency and streamline procedures to save the taxpayers money. As a result of one study, for example, the Town Engineer’s office and Planning and Zoning were combined into the Development and Infrastructure Department.
The point of the management study is to look for ways to cut costs, not to criticize the department director. Virtually all other Oro Valley departments have had management studies approved by prior council. For example, management studies have previously been performed in the Legal Department, Planning and Zoning, and the Town Engineer’s office.
Does the fact that these studies were done mean that the then Oro Valley Town Councils had no confidence in those department directors? No. Rather these councils were just looking for ways to increase efficiency and streamline procedures to save the taxpayers money. As a result of one study, for example, the Town Engineer’s office and Planning and Zoning were combined into the Development and Infrastructure Department.
Why does engaging a management study only become an issue when it
involves the police?
Sheetz also mentioned Council Member Zinkin’s being critical of overtime
pay for police officers. Zinkin should be critical of a policy whereby
an employee is paid for hours scheduled
rather than for hours worked. As an example, under the current policy, an
officer (or any non-exempt employee) can take 40 hours vacation
Monday-Friday and then receive overtime wages for working an 8-hour shift on
Saturday. Overtime pay for working an
8-hour week? Where does this happen in
the private sector?
A Town Staff Report revealed that the current overtime
policy costs the Town Of Oro Valley, at a minimum, $120,000 a year (with the OVPD utilizing the vast majority of it). Councilmembers Zinkin, Garner and Burns attempted
to revise that policy during the April 2, 2014 council meeting so that overtime would
be paid only for hours worked over 40
hours. Marshall Morris, representing the
OVPOA, gave a speech objecting to the change.
Interestingly, no other town employees showed up to object. The motion failed 4-3 with the Majority-4 siding
with the police and against the taxpayers as usual.
---
---
Diane Peters has lived in Oro Valley since 2003, moving here to escape the humidity of the East Coast. Combining her love of animals and writing, she wrote her first protest letter at the age of 12 to the Canadian Prime Minister in support of ending the annual baby harp seal hunt. Years later, she flew by helicopter to the ice floes off the coast of Newfoundland where she was able to pet baby harp seals recently born on the frozen tundra. Her other interests include reading, nature photography, traveling to National Parks, Native American history, art galleries, museums, and following politics. In her past life, she worked in medical research at various University Hospitals in New England, including coordinating Oncology Clinical Trials and preparing manuscripts for publication in medical journals. Her husband is an Army veteran who served in Germany and South Korea. A former hippie, he attended the 1969 Woodstock Festival in Upstate New York.
43 comments:
Personally, I'm not really bothered by the Sat. OT policy. I'm much more concerned with the new Pima County policy of giving out hefty fines for driving ONE MILE PER HOUR over the limit! Who hasn't looked down and gone - oops!
What?! Tell us more, sheeplady.
The article was in the Arizona Daily Star two days ago. Fees for speeding are going up. ONE to ten miles over the limit will go from $176.50 to $213.50. That is insane!
Get with the program, sheeplady! This thread is supposed to be about bashing the OVPD!
I have no reason to bash the OVPD.
No, notovdad, this thread is not about bashing the OVPD. It is about bashing overtime payments for scheduled hrs rather than worked hours and about bashing over 60 take home vehicles.
We love the PD, we just don't want the evil to overcome the good.
Is it a concern for any other Oro Valley citizen to drive by a stopped car on the side of the road and there are three Oro Valley Police Officers there (usually 2 vehicles and a motorcycle)? I have lived here almost 10 years, and have heard the "I don't drive through Oro Valley" for the reasons of zealous Police Officers. My personal opinion is there is nothing wrong in questioning the motives of our elected officials, and the Police Department.
Is that the best comment you have to offer? It's very telling that you didn't attempt to even TRY to dispute any of the statements made in the article. It's very hard to argue with facts and evidence, isn't it?
I believe Trevizo also commented that Garner "confuses confidence for prima donna and bravery for thuggery." She should focus on the confusion within her own department since some members of the OVPD confuse "serve and protect with harass and intimidate."
VC, I am really not sure what your beef is with the OVPD, but you are like a dog with a bone. I'm disgusted by your comments that the OVPD harasses and intimidates. Has that ever happened to you? You have so many concerns regarding the department, I wonder if you have taken the time to go chat with the Chief or the officers. I know you are all about education...you might find a chat with the Chief to be very enlightening and informative.
I want to share a few facts with you...but I fully expect that you will argue each one.
1. In general, the OVPD does not ticket speeding drivers unless they are going ten or more miles or hour over the speed limit or it's a school zone (VC, I think you have some experience with this).
2. Maybe the posters on this blog who are so critical of the OVPD and the take home vehicles should talk to residents on Mt. Bigelow Rd., the location of the recent home invasion.
I recently attended the OVPD Awards Night (I am not an officer, nor related to anyone in the OVPD.). The evening was filled with stories of heroics and actions by Oro Valley police officers who not only went above and beyond to assist our citizens, but saved lives, as well! I was most touched by the group photo at the end of the evening that included all of the officers who responded to the recent Oro Valley home invasion. But what truly brought tears to my eyes was that the families whose homes were invaded during that incredibly frightening event rushed to the stage to join the officers. This was not planned, but an outpouring of gratitude that only those involved can truly understand.
It was great to see members of our town government, including Mayor Hiremath, Council members Snider, Hornat, and Waters attend. Sadly, I could not find the other Council members, Burns, Garner, or Zinkin. I'm sure they were invited! I have witnessed a l! ack of support and respect of the OVPD by this group of three. Maybe the group of three should ask those families whose lives were abruptly interrupted what might have happened to them if many of the officers who responded did not have access to take home vehicles!
Personally, I can't imagine why any of those three council members would not want to witness and take part in this incredible evening, honoring our local police department. In my opinion, their absence sends a message that this group is just not interested or does not respect and support the OVPD.
Ah, Sheldon, you describe police work; nothing heroic about that. They are paid very well for the work they applied for & were hired to do. Get real.
Yes, it has happened to me. In the school zone "speeding" incident you mentioned, I was going 35 mph in a 45 mph zone when the officer aimed his radar gun at my car. He admitted in court that I was going 35 in the 45, 10 miles UNDER the speed limit. This would tell any REASONABLE person that this motorist is not a speeder. But did he lower his radar gun? No. He kept it aimed at my car just waiting for me to make a mistake. That, my friend, is harassment. I'd also call it stalking. He KNEW that the 15 mph school zone sign was not visible and that numerous other motorists had also missed it and were pulled over and ticketed for it. How do I know that? Read on...
I wrote letters complaining about the poor placement of that sign. I suggested that the town attach bright orange flags to the sign to make it more visible, as I had seen done in other parts of Tucson. I attached pictures of those 15 mph signs with the orange flags as proof. Months went by, still no flags were attached, but the officer remained posted at the intersection handing out more "speeding" tickets.
I also stated in my letter that in the town where I used to live, they had installed a yellow flashing warning sign to indicate that the 15 mph school zone limit was in effect. It's hard for motorists to miss a yellow flashing light.
Continued.....
A couple of YEARS later, the town finally installed the yellow flashing light. At this point, I contacted the town to inquire why this was done. I knew why it was done but I wanted to hear someone admit it. I was told that it was done because NUMEROUS motorists had complained that the small white 15 mph sign was not visible.
Really? Gee, I stated this same thing in court. The OVPD officer who ticketed me was sitting right there. He heard me say it. Did he do anything about it? No. Instead he continued to sit at that intersection every day pulling over other motorists and ticketing them as well.
Now
really, how hard would it be and how expensive would it be to simply
attach two bright orange flags to the sign? Clearly, money was not the
issue. So what was?
For Sheldon Rose, here's another little tidbit from my speeding ticket incident.
I decided to fight the ticket in court. However, there was a portion of the ticket where the officer's handwriting was illegible and words were abbreviated so that HE knew what they meant but I did not. I called him to ask what he had written on the ticket. His response was...
"I am under no legal obligation to give you that information."
Fine. How about a moral one? How about an ethical one?
First they place a sign in an area where it can't be seen, then they ticket NUMEROUS unsuspecting motorists, then they hand them a ticket filled with hieroglyphics, then they refuse to enlighten them on the translation so that the motorist is at a disadvantage in court (like we're not already at a disadvantage when the officer and the judge know each other). And you expect us to say, "Thank you, OVPD. Great job!"
Show me at what point in any of that that the cards WERE NOT stacked against me.
Toughteri, I am flabbergasted by your response. There is obviously no point in arguing with you. But I would encourage you to talk to some of the residents who live on Mt. Bigelow Rd., and see how they define the behavior of the OVPD the night of this terrible incident. I'm sure "heroic" would be just one of many positive things they would have to say. I hope you never find yourself in a scary situation. But my guess is that if you were to have officers come rescue you, you might change your tune.
VC, I am not going to argue with you about this incident. First of all, I wasn't there, so your story is just that...your story. I have no idea what the story is from the officer's perspective. Second, if this school is in your neighborhood, shouldn't you have been aware of its presence and the speed limit there, despite the lack of clear signage?
Second, your personal experience may explain why you are often critical of the OVPD. That incident has colored your opinion and willingness to seek the truth and be open minded. Maybe that's also true of Zinkin, who has had his share of traffic citations (it's public record).
Finally, I notice that you didn't comment on the fact that none of the three council members this blog so blindly supports attended the OVPD Awards Night. Did you also know that none of those three attended the study session that dealt with the police budget? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the lack of attendance by those three at anything related to the police department is intended to send a message. I find it inexcusable and disrespectful.
You bet - there is no point in arguing with me, My logic is impeccable.
Sheldon...Terry is correct. They CHOSE to become police officers. You know, they're not the only people whose job is to save the lives of others. Paramedics perform CPR and mouth-to-mouth resuscitation all the time. Firefighters run INTO burning buildings, also RISKING THEIR LIVES! But we don't hear these fine men and women constantly bragging about the work they do or how dangerous it is or how dare anyone make even the slightest critical comment about them. Look what our soldiers do every day, also risking their lives, and for a lot less pay and benefits. And they don't get to go home to their families at the end of each day. And again, no one is complaining about their performance, they're complaining about their attitude and their sense of entitlement.
toughteri, you just made me laugh out loud. I'm just going to assume that wasn't your intent...but your comment is pretty funny.
I respect and admire anyone who puts their lives at risk to protect the rest of us. I have not heard the OVPD "constantly bragging about the work they do." Maybe you still harbor anger and frustration about the school zone speeding ticket you received. I wasn't there. I only hear your side of the story. But let's say that in this case, the officer was wrong. There are people in all professions who aren't perfect. This shouldn't mean that our impression of that group is permanently tainted or negative.
And once again, you haven't commented on the fact that the group of three chooses not to attend police events, like the recent awards night and study session. I'm going to assume that the fact that you don't comment on this is because you agree with me...their lack of attendance is inexcusable and disrespectful.
Now I'm done with this conversation. I know from past experience that it doesn't do any good for people with opinions different than the regular posters on here to present facts and post comments. Sometimes it's just tough to sit back and watch.
Well, I WAS there and I DO KNOW what happened. Apparently, when you can't debate something you take the easy way out and just decide that it's not true.
The speed limit for the school zone is 45 mph. It's only 15 mph when school is starting or ending for the day. Additionally, it was a HOLIDAY so that's another reason I wasn't expecting the 15 mph limit. I didn't find out until later that this particular holiday is not celebrated in Arizona.
And as I approached the intersection, there wasn't one school bus or car in the area. There were no children in the crosswalk or anywhere nearby. The intersection was EMPTY. So what indicator would I have had that school was getting out for the day other than a VISIBLE 15 mph sign!
Sleep tight, Shelly. Humor will save us in the end.
I've given up reasoning with you. Experience taught me it has zero chance of success.
But I found this discussion quite illuminating, as I now see what brings you together with the Tea Partiers in town: Just like Zinkin and Garner, you feel like the OVPD has mistreated you in the past and you haven't been able to let go of the grudge. You guys are just emotional dogs trying to wag their rational tails.
Or perhaps the reason I didn't comment yet on the awards night is because yesterday (Saturday) was a nice day and it was the weekend and maybe I wanted to spend some time outdoors with my husband! I WILL respond to your comments as time permits. Today is Sunday, another nice day to spend with my husband who is currently outside doing yard work as I write this. Then we're spending time with each other. But, if you think that not responding right away means that I agree with you, then apparently you agree with me about the orange flags because you did not argue with me on that topic and you did not answer my question...WHY didn't they attach the flags AFTER they were made aware that the sign was not visible? What would that have cost? $5.00?
My impression of the OVPD is not a result of anger and frustration over the speeding ticket or that my impression of them is permanently tainted or negative because of that ticket. It's a result of a PATTERN of behavior on their part.
Loved your Freudian slip on that one! Oh, and I'm NOTHING like a Tea Partier. For instance, I can spell.
Perhaps you'd like to try responding to a comment that I left the other day. I didn't send it directly to you. I posted it as it's own comment. Check the thread. It's about a conversation I had with the officer who ticketed me and it's another example of the ATTITUDE that they project every day.
And if the police treated you with contempt, you might change your tune as well.
You haven't heard the OVPD bragging about the work they do? Listen to Sgt. Trevizo's comments at the May 7th council meeting. Then listen to Marshall Morris' comments at the April 2nd council meeting.
One of the reasons it is so frustrating to post on this blog is that certain posters seem to want to analyze the behavior of those who don't agree with her. Comments like , "when you can't debate something you take the easy way out," are absurd.
VC, I get that you were there...my point was that there are always two sides to every story.
Just FYI VC, in this tangle of posts, I did comment that not every person in every profession is perfect. A bad experience with one officer would not lead me to make generalizations like you do, i.e. "Harass and intimidate."
I don't think stating facts is bragging. I heard everything they said and I applaud them! Maybe if some of the council members didn't appear to attack the OVPD on a regular basis, there wouldn't be a need to "brag" as you say. Maybe if those three attended the awards ceremony, they would have been enlightened about what really goes on in this town.
notovdad, you are a breath of fresh air!
I didn't come up with "harass and intimidate" because of "A bad experience." As I stated previously, there is a PATTERN of this behavior on their part. For the love of God, even one of the speakers at the Call to Audience who was DEFENDING the OVPD ended up stating that his friends are FRIGHTENED to drive into Oro Valley BECAUSE of the POLICE DEPT.! Answer the question...WHY are they FRIGHTENED of the OVPD? Because they always treat citizens with courtesy and respect? Or because they feel harassed and intimidated by them? Perhaps you can offer another reason.
You want me to answer your questions but you won't answer mine. No comment on the orange flags, no comment on the "ethical obligation" issue.
Would you attend an awards ceremony for a group of people who do nothing but criticize you? I wouldn't. For instance, why would Council Member Garner want to watch Stan Weintraub get a Citizen of the Year Award after the way Weintraub ridiculed him during a recent Call to the Audience? Was Garner supposed to applaud and give him a standing ovation when he received the award? That would be disingenuous. If he attended and didn't stand and applaud, he would be criticized for that as well. Better to skip it altogether.
I've seen Marshall Morris be very rude to Burns, Garner and Zinkin in public and, if memory serves, I've also seen his rudeness to them in e-mails. Again, why would they want to watch him get an award and also be expected to give a standing ovation and applause?
Let's suppose you're gay and these two people have made numerous homophobic remarks about you and even to your face. You would show up at an awards ceremony and give them a standing ovation and applause? See what I mean?
Reegarding the Study Session, it was not just about the POLICE. It was also regarding the budgets of DIS, Parks and Rec, and OV Water Utility. So are you implying that Garner, Zinkin and Burns wanted to show disrespect to those departments as well?
That study session was on Wed. April 9th at 4 PM. Garner and Burns are still at work at that time of day and cannot attend. April 9th was also Zinkin's 20th wedding anniversary. He informed them MONTHS in advance that he was not available on that day. He also asked them to reschedule so he could attend. He never heard back from them. As you said, "it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out" that the schedule is deliberately set for times when Zinkin, Garner and Burns cannot attend.
Now I've answered all your questions. I'll bet you still won't answer mine.
VC, On one of your many comments, you mentioned that the world is not always black and white. I understand that more than you know. Also, I am fully aware that we all see the world through our own eyes. But certain things are black and white...like the calendar for instance.
You defend Garner's lack of attendance at the OVPD Awards Night because of some issue he has with the gentleman who won the Citizen of the Year Award. In an effort to present facts on this blog, let me just inform you that the Awards Night was held on April 25. The citizen award winner spoke at the Town Council meeting on May 21. Unless Garner has ESP and knew what that citizen intended on saying several weeks in advance, that can't possibly be a reason for not attending.
Enough
This comment section is hard to read. I liked the old interface better.
Sorry but the issues with Morris and Weintraub pre-date the May 21st Call to Audience. Therefore, Garner didn't need ESP to know their opinion of him or the entire OVPD's opinion of him. I only mentioned the May 21st speech because it was recent and the comments they made should be fresh in your mind.
Now, back to black and white. I explained why none of them were at the study session. Can YOU explain why they IGNORED Zinkin's request to reschedule it? You blamed Zinkin for not being there and asserted it was because the meeting dealt with the OVPD. Now you know the REAL REASON he wasn't there and that he TRIED to have it rescheduled and was IGNORED. Now you've stopped commenting on that issue. I'll assume that means that you now know that you were wrong.
You always want us to give the OVPD the benefit of the doubt. Why can't you offer that same courtesy to Zinkin?
And you're STILL ignoring the orange flags issue and the ethical speeding ticket issue. I've answered ALL your questions, why do you avoid answering ALL of mine? Rhetorical question of course. I know why.
Hello Nombe,
We changed to this format for many reasons.
When the dialog becomes people responding to comments and there is a lot of "back and forth", it does become a bit challenging to follow.
So, when it does become complicated, you need to read each conversation.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Richard
Sheldon, let me also ask you this (not that you'll answer, but that's OK). You said you won't argue with me about the ticket because YOU WEREN'T THERE and my story is just that, MY story. OK.
Then you said that you have no idea what the story is from the OFFICER'S perspective. So...if you spoke to the officer and got HIS story, would you still say that you STILL don't know what happened because YOU weren't there...or would you automatically believe HIS story?
And if you haven't seen it yet, you need to go back to the blog and read the new comment from Wings Three. THIS is what we're talking about.
Post a Comment