Bits and Pieces

Own a small business? 
Apply for the "Payroll Protection Program" today
Keep paying  your employees!!!!
There is no reason that a small business can not pay its employees even if it is shutdown.  All small businesses should talk to their bank today to get an SBA payroll protection program loan. The loan can be up to $10 million. It is forgiven as long as it is used for payroll.

If you work for a small business (under 500 employees) tell your boss about the program. The neat part is that they can put recently furloughed employees back on the payroll and pay for it.

This program is ideal for Oro Valley's local restaurants, most of whom are struggling.

This program is a giant win for everyone. Employees get paid. It costs the business nothing. And the business will be able to get rolling quickly once we get the all clear.

Learn more here.

Miller endorses Reidhead for US House District
Pima County Supervisor, Ally Miller, the representative for Oro Valley, has endorsed Nolan Reidhead as republican candidate for US Congress in Oro Valley's district (District 1).

According to Miller: "Nolan believes in limited government and holds the same fiscally conservative values that I do."

New resident in Riverfront Park
Sure there's things to worry about. But lets not forget that it is spring. It's a time for life. It's a time to celebrate the great life we have in Oro Valley.  This little one obviously thinks that Oro Valley is a great place. We took this picture just south of the paved path at Riverfront Park.

State failed to provide mandated online nomination petition signing portal for local candidates
State statute 16-317 mandates that local candidates can solicit petition signatures online using the State's E-Qual online portal system. Oro Valley Town Council candidates could have used the system if the State had complied with the law.

According to State Representative Mark Finchem: "The E-Qual online portal system, which is managed by the Arizona Secretary of State, has been up and running since before the 2018 election, accepting candidate nomination petition signatures for federal, statewide, and legislative offices. Under state law, candidates for city, town, or county office, and precinct committeeman are also entitled to online signature collection but, thus far, they have been denied access to the state’s E-Qual portal. The Secretary of State’s office has not yet fully complied with the law, even though funds were allocated in prior years budgets to update the system."

Visit this link to see how the system works. Find your favorite candidate and sign the petition. Note, as we mentioned, that local candidates are not included on the list. Then, imagine how useful this system could have been to encourage even more candidates to run for town council had the state followed the law and allowed such.

Is this LOVE or what?
We came across this in an article analyzing the state of journalism today. It is an article well worth reading regardless of your national political leanings. In referring to We thought, goodness, this is us.
"...local journalists don’t try to pretend they’re heroes. They exist to inform their community and hold local government – the government that will most impact their lives – accountable."

Ally Miller Will Not Run For County Supervisor in 2020

Miller opts out
Pima County Supervisor has decided that she will not run for reelection in 2020. Miller is considered by many to be a champion of the people, fighting to root out cronyism and wasteful spending in county operations. Unfortunately, she is a voice in the wilderness.

Announcement on Facebook last evening
Miller made this announcement on Facebook last evening:

Guest View: Ally Miller ~ Bond Notice and Disclosures to Voters

This posting is a clarification and expansion of Supervisor Miller’s earlier email that was posted on LOVE last Tuesday. This is being provided to help our readers more fully understand the issue. Although this information pertains to Pima County bonds, the information provided ties in to the upcoming Naranja Park Bond Election in Oro Valley.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

After the 2015 Pima County Bond Election which included 7 bond propositions, I realized that reform was needed of State Statutes governing the bond notice and disclosures to the voters. These disclosures are provided via the Publicity Pamphlet for bond elections. I worked with State Representative Vince Leach to draft the legislation to update Arizona Revised Statute 35-454. Representative Leach ran this bill twice and it was killed by the lobbyists who didn’t support improved transparency to the voters.

I identified 3 deficiencies in the existing Statutes governing disclosures to voters:

1. Interest rates are not calculated at the maximum rate
The "estimated" bond payments provided to the voters weren’t shown at the maximum interest rate that voters were being asked to approve. In the upcoming Oro Valley Naranja Park Bond election, the estimated payment is calculated using a 5% interest rate. However, voters will actually be approving an interest rate up to 7%. The proposed amendments to the statutes would have required the payment to be calculated with 7% interest and disclosed to the voters.

2. Project Lists and Maps are Non-binding
Most voters believe that maps and project lists are binding. They are NOT. The town will be held to the “Purposes” only.   In the upcoming Oro Valley Bond Election, the purposes are listed as: Parks, Open space and recreational bonds. Any spending that falls within those categories is appropriate and legal to spend the monies on.

The 2013 Audit of Pima County Bonds clearly shows how monies can be moved around as well as showing projects which were canceled altogether.

You can access the link to the Pima County Audit HERE

Go to Appendix D, Table 8, “Project Changes: Reasons for changes in bond proceeds allocated to projects or changes in project timing, May 1998 through May 2012” towards the end of the document (Pages 52- 57). This is the list from the auditor showing all the monies that were moved into or out of bond projects. You will see many projects that were never done due to millions of dollars that were moved to other projects.

For example, you will see on the last page of Table 8 that the money from a previous Pima County NARANJA PARK project ($2.9 million) was taken away due to “Proceeds moved to cover costs in another project.”

3. Operations and Maintenance Costs are not included
Voters often don’t think about additional costs that come with Bond Projects. Operations and maintenance costs are not part of the disclosure to voters. My bill would have required a statement that primary tax rates could increase as a result of bond passage. Operations and maintenance costs typically start out low and increase over time as projects age.

I believe transparency to the voters is critical and that knowledge is power. I am hoping this bill will be presented at the state legislature again. In the meantime, I believe it is important for elected officials to provide the information to you so that you make an informed decision when you vote.

Ally Miller is a Pima County Supervisor in District 1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Editor’s Note: As noted in the article, the $3 million dollars that was transferred from a previous Pima County Bond from Naranja Park to another park appears to be the type of bait and switch that Supervisor Miller was referring to in her email of last week, published on LOVE, entitled, “Ally Miller Cautions Voters on Naranja Park Bond.”

Ally Miller cautions voters on the Naranja Park Bond. The Devil is in the Details.

We recently received an email from Pima County Supervisor, Ally Miller, with her thoughts on the Naranja Park Bond. Ally has worked with State Representative Vince Leach on bills to clean up the laws for Publicity Pamphlets sent out to voters because they are misleading. Unfortunately, lobbyists have twice killed these bills.

Below is a portion of that email:

……………………

Below are some of the things that I noticed in the Publicity Pamphlet for Oro Valley’s Naranja Park Bond. These are the issues that everyone should understand and question.

1. PURPOSE: “Parks, Open Space and Recreational bonds”

These monies can be used on any parks, for purchase of open space, and any recreational purpose.

The list of amenities and all the renderings listed are nonbinding. The PURPOSE stated above is the only binding use of these funds.

If you want clarity…it must be stated in the PURPOSE.

2. Voters are approving up to 7% per annum Interest Rate.

The calculations were done using a 5% per annum interest rate. Ask the Town for the calculations at the 7% interest rate that voters are being asked to approve. 2% will make a huge difference. (My bill would have required them to show the calculation at the maximum interest rate).

3. They list the average cost per year for a homeowner with a $250K home as well as the estimated cost over 20 years. However, for the 20 year cost, they simply multiplied year-1 times 20 years.

This assumes that your valuation stays at $250K for the entire 20 years.


One of the things that Chuck Huckelberry (Pima County Administrator) does to garner support for bonds (and I will use a Parks and Recreation bond to illustrate) is that he will list every park in the county and list $1 million for each park. This sounds great to voters. They think, “My park will get some improvements. You’ve got my vote.”

Then after the election, he uses all the bond money for one park. Voters are outraged. An audit is ordered but of course it passes with flying colors. Why? Because the audit is focused only on the bond PURPOSE listed in the Publicity Pamphlet.

Allyson Miller
Pima County Supervisor

You can read the Naranja Bond Publicity Pamphlet HERE

Bits and Pieces

Oro Valley commemorates 9/11 today
The Town Of Oro Valley has a flag raising ceremony at 8:0am today at the Oro Valley Community Center. A moment of silence will be held for those who lost their lives on 9/11.

Zinkin and Miller Agree: Bond Package Bad For Oro Valley Taxpayers
Oro Valley Council Member Mike Zinkin and Pima County District 1 Supervisor, Ally Miller, agree that the Pima County $850 million bond package is a bad deal for Oro Valley. They appeared together on the James T. Harris radio talk show last week. The show's host Harris seemed amazed that a registered Democrat, Zinkin, and a registered Republican, Miller, would agree on fiscal matters.

Zinkin has been a champion of fiscal restraint during his 3 years on the Oro Valley town council. He told Harris that fiscal responsibility crosses party lines. Fiscal responsibility should be in the forefront of every elected official regardless of party.

Zinkin observed that the bonds are bad deal for Oro Valley residents because passage of the bond package will result in Oro Valley property owners substantially subsidizing the rest of the county. He stated that the average annual cost of repaying the bonds to an Oro Valley household is $125 whereas Oro Valley, if it chose to do so, could sell its own bond at a cost of $96 a year per resident. That is assuming that Oro Valley residents would want to bond the same "nonsense" that is in this bond package. Which, according to Zinkin, they would not.

You can listen to the interview here.

Hiremath on public governance: "Everything needs to be discussed in the open"
In remarks at the September 2 Oro Valley council meeting, Oro Valley Mayor Hiremath closed a council study session about Arizona's open meeting law by observing the decision-making difference between decisions made in the private sector and those make in the public sector:

“It is amazing government gets anything done because you can not talk to anybody because we are governed by the Arizona open meeting law and so it not like in the private world where you have a board of directors or in my dental office where you huddle everybody together to talk about it and make a decision. Its not like that. Its really eye-opening, when you are on this side of the dais and you understand how exactly you’re governed. It [the open meeting law] makes it very, very difficult. So its all more impressive when any elected body does good things for municipalities because everything has to be discussed in the open.”

Apparently, not "Everything has to be in the open." For example, the council held closed-door discussions while the  Mayor negotiated the purchase of the El Conquistador Country Club and its 45-holes of money-draining losses from one of his major campaign contributors. Then it sprang the purchase on the public and forced a decision to make the purchase and raise the sales tax in 2 just weeks, last December.

Guest View-Ally Miller:

Ally Miller took office as Pima County Supervisor for District 1 onJanuary, 2013. She is serving her first term . Oro Valley residents are in her district. Ally voted against this bond issue. Ally is  accessible and very responsive to the needs of her constituents. Contact her with your questions or concerns. Or talk with her directly this Saturday at the Oro Valley Library at 9:30am.
---
Pima County board of supervisors voted on April 21, 2015 to approve placing a bond for $815 million on the November 2015 ballot. It will be in the form of 7 packages from which the voters can pick and choose.

Cheerleaders from special interest groups dominated the room on April 21, advocating approval of this bond in the name of economic development, job creation and tourism.

One individual speaking on behalf of the $3.5 million velodrome project at the Kino campus asked the crowd to stand as he brilliantly encouraged them with his pledge to get the vote out. Click here to listen. While a velodrome is most likely a wonderful project, I wonder how many of you will be driving down to Kino campus to use this facility?

Spending money to make money was often presented as rationale for approving this bond. Funding special interest projects and hoping for a boom in tourism is not sound fiscal policy. How about another hand out to Banner Health for an $18 million expansion to the University of Arizona Health South campus?

Meanwhile, while Pima County wants to go into more debt to help the University of Arizona, the University of Arizona is investing in Maricopa County: $136 million in the biotech campus in downtown Phoenix and not Oro Valley.

The list is of special interest projects is long.

There were 12 speakers who spoke just as passionately against the bond as they recognize the ramifications of piling on more debt to the most indebted county in the state.  Listen to Planning and Zoning Commissioner, Brad Johns who began his remarks with this statement: “If taking on debt improves the economy, we’d be doing a lot better right now than we are doing.”

Pima County already has the noteworthy distinction of having twice the debt of the other 14 counties in Arizona combined. Pima County is in debt to the tune of $1.3 billion.

Road repairs of $160 million were added at the last minute to sweeten the pot for voters desperate for road repairs. This illustrates the brilliance of never letting a crisis go unused.

Included in the road repair package is a $10 Mil road for UA tech park and a $30 Mil road for the Sonoran Desert Corridor south of Raytheon.

Bonding for road repairs makes little sense. The lifespan of a road repair is maybe 2-3 years at best. Don’t take my word for it. Pick your favorite pothole and watch how long it takes to fall apart after it is “repaired” by a county road crew. I disagree with the board assessment of a 10 year lifespan for road repairs. The roads will again be falling apart while we are paying interest on the original repair job.

Bond Projects take decades to complete, costs are often underestimated and some projects may never be completed. The board voted just 2 weeks ago to move issuance of $80 million for 7 projects of 1997 HURF bonds to 2022. These project costs were underestimated and we must find the additional monies elsewhere to complete them. Almost 20 years later and here we sit with almost a quarter of those bonds unissued. We have yet to complete the 1997 road projects and ones that were finished are already falling apart.

1997 HURF Bond payments require $19 million per year be siphoned off HURF Distributions (Gas Tax) from the state which are monies meant for road repairs. Voters approved this payment method which ties bond payments to the HURF revenue stream. I don’t think voters understood the gravity of this decision.

Open Space, zoo exhibits, Old Tucson Studio expansion among others are all nice additions to a community that is thriving. Pima County is far from thriving.

What more? Listen to Bill Buckmaster's interview of Ally Miller.
---