The Oro Valley Town Council’s special session on the 2026-2027 strategic plan last Thursday took an unexpected turn just 30 minutes in when the entire planning process came into question. Expecting an open forum discussion, council members were instead handed a draft plan—one created by consultant Mike Letcher of BridgeGroup, LLC. Letcher, who was previously fired as Tucson’s City Manager (Tucson Citizen, Tucson Sentinel), now presents himself as a strategic planning expert specializing in public sector work.
Planning process truncated without council consensus
Letcher, with the approval of Town Manager Wilkins and likely the agreement of Mayor Winfield, unilaterally changed the strategic planning process without council input. Previously, strategic planning involved several days of open council discussions where each department and issue was reviewed in depth. The process encouraged collaborative brainstorming, linking General Plan objectives to strategy discussions. This time, those open discussions were eliminated.
 |
| Attendees could not see the work |
Letcher defended the process change, arguing that one-on-one meetings with council members provided a deeper understanding of project priorities than previous survey-based input. During these private meetings, council members were asked what they wanted included in the strategic plan, with no requirement to justify their choices. Letcher claimed that the new format—used in other cities—offered better structure by defining guiding principles and focus areas upfront. According to Letcher, presenting a full draft plan allowed council members to see the entire strategic landscape rather than building it piece by piece, making discussions more efficient. While acknowledging that the process was different from previous years, he maintained that it was designed to improve clarity and facilitate decision-making.
Council members push back: What happened to open discussion?
Several council members objected, frustrated that they were being presented with a nearly complete plan rather than collaboratively developing it. Councilmember Barrett pointed out that previous strategic planning allowed for open discussions over multiple days, creating opportunities for council collaboration before drafting the plan. She felt the new approach limited consensus-building and weakened engagement among council members. Others raised concerns that private meetings with the consultant and town staff prevented them from understanding each other's priorities. Some felt that the process restricted their ability to shape the plan organically, making it feel predetermined rather than collaborative.
Consultant and town manager dismiss concerns
Neither Letcher, Wilkins, nor Mayor Winfield acknowledged the validity of these concerns. Instead, Letcher simply defended the process as superior, implying that council members should accept it without debate. Wilkins was even more dismissive, comparing the one-on-one meetings with council members to an exercise in gathering sticky notes for a whiteboard. He stated: "We’ve kind of done a whiteboard exercise—getting all the projects up there. That process has been completed." However, what Wilkins called a "whiteboard" exercise turned out to be a prewritten draft plan, which council members were expected to spend five hours reviewing—formatted as a Microsoft Word document with a font too small to read. Meanwhile, while council members were denied a collaborative session, town staff had met in person to develop their contributions to the plan.
The town made it difficult for residents to attend or follow this meeting
This study session was a public meeting. However, the public notice was posted only a few days in advance, leaving little time for residents to prepare. Staff did not attach the document reviewed by the council to the agenda, nor did they provide copies to attendees. Attendees could barely see the document (Panel above). As a result, following the discussion in real time was nearly impossible. LOVE has submitted a public records request for these documents but has not received them as of this publication date.
Town staff now control the plan
This shift reduced council involvement and transferred strategic planning control to town staff. The six council members, including the two newly elected members, were not given the opportunity to openly share their views or build consensus. Additionally, residents interested in the process had no way to prepare for or easily follow the meeting.
How good will the 2026-2027 strategic plan be?
The council spent five hours reviewing a Microsoft Word document containing seven focus areas and 62 initiatives. The document included all council member suggestions gathered during one-on-one meetings and all staff recommendations from the staff’s in-person strategy session One April 2, the consultant will present a revised draft for council review. On April 16, staff will present the final draft for council approval
- - -
Town staff now control the plan
This shift reduced council involvement and transferred strategic planning control to town staff. The six council members, including the two newly elected members, were not given the opportunity to openly share their views or build consensus. Additionally, residents interested in the process had no way to prepare for or easily follow the meeting.
How good will the 2026-2027 strategic plan be?
The council spent five hours reviewing a Microsoft Word document containing seven focus areas and 62 initiatives. The document included all council member suggestions gathered during one-on-one meetings and all staff recommendations from the staff’s in-person strategy session One April 2, the consultant will present a revised draft for council review. On April 16, staff will present the final draft for council approval
- - -
