Oro Valley voters rejected the politics of “big money from special interests” in the 2022 council election. Just like they did in 2018. Incumbent Barrett, Jones-Ivey, and Nicolson earned 56% of the 45,750 council candidate votes cast in this election. This is comparable to the 58% they earned in 2018. They earned a majority of the votes in nine of the eleven Oro Valley voting precincts [See panel below right]. They got two of every three votes from Rancho Vistoso residents. The only place they earned less than a majority were in the two precincts that comprise the 36-holes of municipal golf. Even there, they earned almost 48% of the vote.
Challengers got the same vote count result in 2018 when residents voted out “Special Interests”
The campaigns of challengers Joe Erceg, Charlie Hurt and Bill Rodman were financed by developer and real estate special interests, most of whom do not live in Oro Valley. You can read more on their financing in our report of July 25. They earned the same voting results as Joe Hornat, Mary Snider and Lou Waters got in 2018. These three had their campaigns financed by the same sources.
Sharp had no “coattails”
Erceg, Hurt and Rodman were running as an informal slate with mayoral candidate Danny Sharp. Unlike Sharp, whose mayor race with Joe Winfield, was tight, their race for council wasn’t close.
Sharp did well at the polls because he is Danny Sharp: A former Chief of Police who earned the respect of the community after 20 years of building the State’s top police force. That’s a reason for people to vote for Danny. It is not a reason to vote for his running mates.
Coattails are created by what the lead candidate says. It is what Danny Sharp said that caused problems for his candidacy and for that of the three challenging council members.
Sharp advocated for a “Rooftops Strategy” that was rejected by the voters in 2018
Sharp doomed his candidacy when, at the Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce Candidate Forum, he announced that he was for Hiremath’s “Rooftops Strategy.” This is a strategy to build business in the community by increasing housing substantially. Hiremath tried it for eight years. It did not bring business. It brought congestion and the need to substantially increase town services. Hiremath lost the 2018 election because of this.
Whether they subscribed to this strategy or not, the candidacies of Erceg and Hurt were damaged by it. They were painted as “rooftop guys”, willing to do anything to make home growth happen. Add to this the fact that they were running with Bill Rodman, a former council member during the Hiremath days. Rodman approved all but one of the many General Plan and zoning plan amendments that he saw. Voters know this. Rodman was never going to win. Erceg and Hurt had no way to separate from him or the rooftops strategy even if they wanted to do so.
The campaigns of challengers Joe Erceg, Charlie Hurt and Bill Rodman were financed by developer and real estate special interests, most of whom do not live in Oro Valley. You can read more on their financing in our report of July 25. They earned the same voting results as Joe Hornat, Mary Snider and Lou Waters got in 2018. These three had their campaigns financed by the same sources.
Erceg, Hurt and Rodman were running as an informal slate with mayoral candidate Danny Sharp. Unlike Sharp, whose mayor race with Joe Winfield, was tight, their race for council wasn’t close.
Sharp did well at the polls because he is Danny Sharp: A former Chief of Police who earned the respect of the community after 20 years of building the State’s top police force. That’s a reason for people to vote for Danny. It is not a reason to vote for his running mates.
Coattails are created by what the lead candidate says. It is what Danny Sharp said that caused problems for his candidacy and for that of the three challenging council members.
Sharp advocated for a “Rooftops Strategy” that was rejected by the voters in 2018
Sharp doomed his candidacy when, at the Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce Candidate Forum, he announced that he was for Hiremath’s “Rooftops Strategy.” This is a strategy to build business in the community by increasing housing substantially. Hiremath tried it for eight years. It did not bring business. It brought congestion and the need to substantially increase town services. Hiremath lost the 2018 election because of this.
Whether they subscribed to this strategy or not, the candidacies of Erceg and Hurt were damaged by it. They were painted as “rooftop guys”, willing to do anything to make home growth happen. Add to this the fact that they were running with Bill Rodman, a former council member during the Hiremath days. Rodman approved all but one of the many General Plan and zoning plan amendments that he saw. Voters know this. Rodman was never going to win. Erceg and Hurt had no way to separate from him or the rooftops strategy even if they wanted to do so.
Labeling the work of the town’s police chief as severely lacking was never going to be a winning strategy in this election
Sharp did not attack Chief Riley directly. Rather, he attacked what he perceived to be the result of her three years of effort. It cost him votes. It cost the council challengers votes. He said that the Oro Valley Police Department is no longer good enough: That Chief Riley and her team, people Sharp groomed to take over, have let the department fall apart. Sharp’s claim was not believable. He had no evidence to back it up. He only had his opinion based on his observations.
Erceg did not follow suit on this in any material way; but Hurt did. From Hurt’s website: “Oro Valley is presently 14 full-time officers below the level it should be in order to maintain and ensure it continues to be the safest place to live in Arizona.” Hurt provided no basis for this statement nor does he have the skill in the area of public safety regarding what should be the staffing level. Rodman also echoed the same thoughts in his first glossy postcard to the community.
They never proved that Oro Valley is in financial trouble
Sharp and the three challenging council candidates alleged that the town is in financial trouble because it has debt and an alleged deficit. You can say it. But you have to prove it. Proving it in this instance was going to be difficult because it’s the first time residents would’ve ever heard that the town is in financial trouble. One would think that the press would’ve covered this, including LOVE. We haven’t seen it. In fact, the town has been flush with cash from the federal government. It has been pressed to spend it all.
They alleged a lack if “transparency” but they couldn’t prove it
Transparency in government is far too vague an issue. Most people don’t even know what it means. Most people don’t know how to measure it. Sharp and the challengers tried to make their case that the Winfield Council has not been transparent. Yet, they couldn’t provide any data to demonstrate that’s the case. They had one case of an alleged open meeting law violation that wasn’t an open meeting law violation.
The fact that the town has had to conduct executive sessions over the years is merely because of the nature of what is being discussed in those sessions, not because anything is being hidden. Indeed, the biggest “hiding of all” was former Mayor Hiremath’s purchase of the El Conquistador courses and the clubhouse. Nothing that any councilmember has done since that date has ever been so duplicitous.
They gave no vision of a better future under their leadership
Erceg did not follow suit on this in any material way; but Hurt did. From Hurt’s website: “Oro Valley is presently 14 full-time officers below the level it should be in order to maintain and ensure it continues to be the safest place to live in Arizona.” Hurt provided no basis for this statement nor does he have the skill in the area of public safety regarding what should be the staffing level. Rodman also echoed the same thoughts in his first glossy postcard to the community.
They never proved that Oro Valley is in financial trouble
Sharp and the three challenging council candidates alleged that the town is in financial trouble because it has debt and an alleged deficit. You can say it. But you have to prove it. Proving it in this instance was going to be difficult because it’s the first time residents would’ve ever heard that the town is in financial trouble. One would think that the press would’ve covered this, including LOVE. We haven’t seen it. In fact, the town has been flush with cash from the federal government. It has been pressed to spend it all.
They alleged a lack if “transparency” but they couldn’t prove it
Transparency in government is far too vague an issue. Most people don’t even know what it means. Most people don’t know how to measure it. Sharp and the challengers tried to make their case that the Winfield Council has not been transparent. Yet, they couldn’t provide any data to demonstrate that’s the case. They had one case of an alleged open meeting law violation that wasn’t an open meeting law violation.
The fact that the town has had to conduct executive sessions over the years is merely because of the nature of what is being discussed in those sessions, not because anything is being hidden. Indeed, the biggest “hiding of all” was former Mayor Hiremath’s purchase of the El Conquistador courses and the clubhouse. Nothing that any councilmember has done since that date has ever been so duplicitous.
They gave no vision of a better future under their leadership
None of the candidates presented a clear concise vision of the future under their leadership. Rather, they chose to focus on the inadequacies of the current administration and how they would not do “those bad things.” That is not really a winning strategy. Danny Sharp, the three town council challengers, and the PAC created to support them proved that in this election.
- - -
