Guest View: Mike Zinkin - Where Are Our Elected Town Representatives?

In the 2022 Mayor/Council election, the main focus was development. Developers and investors piled money into the campaigns of the challengers, thereby allowing for the incumbents to make development a major issue. The candidate forum put on by the Chamber of Commerce also focused on the development issue. To illustrate, there were at least five questions asked about the Marketplace and not one question about water or the ADA issue at the Community Center.

Now the question is, what are the re-elected incumbents going to do that might be different from what their challengers would have done? We have already seen apartments and hotels approved in the Marketplace. What are they going to do with the two rental developments proposed around Safeway? What are they going to do about the proposed recreational use requested by the Nazarene Church?

We have already witnessed how there is no concern for the desires of the citizens, when money is spent on a pump track and splash pad, which the vast majority of residents did not want. We have already seen them ignore the need for ADA compliance at the Community Center and at Pusch Ridge tennis courts. We have seen wanton/reckless spending justified by the fact that the loan on the Parks and Recreation bond was a small percentage. Do we even know how much the upgrades and maintenance at Preserve at Vistoso is going to cost us?

Have they ever said “no” to staff? Have they ever questioned or verified what staff tells them? These four were elected to represent the entire Town, but I wonder…just who/what are they representing?

---

Mike Zinkin and his wife have lived in Oro Valley since 1998. He served on the Oro Valley Development Review Board from 2005-2009, the Board of Adjustment from 2011-2012, and the Town Council from 2012-2016. He was named a Fellow for the National League of Cities. He was a member of the NLC Steering Committee for Community and Economic Development and a member of the Arizona League of Cities Budget and Economic Development Committee. He was an Air Traffic Controller for 30 years. Mike has a Bachelor’s degree in history and government from the University of Arizona and a Master’s degree in Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education from California State University, Northridge.

Mayoral Candidate Danny Sharp: “We Need More Rooftops”

Mayoral Candidates Danny Sharp and current Mayor Joe Winfield have different approaches to “Development”

This was noted at the Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce Candidate Forum of June 28. 

Sharp advocates for the “rooftop strategy”. Winfield does not

Danny Sharp stated at the Forum that Oro Valley needs to bring in on-site retail business in order to grow sales tax revenues.  According to Sharp: “We have to bring in more retail. We don’t have the retail because we need to bring in more rooftops.”

Winfield believes that the General Plan should guide whether variances and general plan amendments should be approved. The Winfield Council abided by the General plan during the past four years. Winfield promised to do so when he ran in 2018 and he did so. Only one general plan amendment was submitted and it was rejected because it did not fit the concept for that area.

The “rooftops strategy” is a revisit to the Hiremath Years

The “rooftops strategy” is a revisit to the Mayor Satish Hiremath years (2010-2018) of leadership. It was his strategy. Hiremath was eager to grow rooftops because he felt it would attract retail business and increase the town’s sales tax revenue. His council, which included current council candidate Bill Rodman and current Council Member Steve Solomon, approved a slew of general plan amendments, converting land into high density residential zoning. His council was so eager to increase rooftops that they approved several general plan amendments before the citizen vote that approved the 2016 “Your Voice, Our Future” general plan was ratified by the Secretary of State.

The “rooftops strategy” added to congestion but did not foster retail business success

As LOVE reported, the Hiremath Council left Oro Valley with a large pipeline of residences to build. As a result, the town’s population has and will continue to grow substantially.  Still, onsite retail struggles in this town before, during and now after the Pandemic. One merely needs to look at the vacancies at the Oro Valley Marketplace and the need for complete revisioning as an example of the failure of this strategy. Indeed, one could reasonably question the feasibility of the “rooftop strategy” in today’s retail world, a world where on-line retailing, a lack of personnel, and huge supply chain issues are plaguing brick and mortar retailers. 

We believe it was the rejection of the “rooftops strategy” that propelled Winfield, Barrett, Jones-Ivey and Nicholson to win the 2018 election, defeating Hiremath and his team. Voters were tired of the congestion that the rooftop strategy has caused.

Sharp will be more aggressive in pursuing growth.

For example, Sharp would have approved the Oro Valley Marketplace revisioning as presented 

Sharp blames Winfield for not approving the Oro Valley Marketplace revisioning as presented to council.

Sharp stated at the Forum: “When people propose projects we need to be sensitive to the fact that this costs them money. We need to be sensitive…We should have told Town West years ago that what they were proposing would not be approved and that they needed to come up with something that fits within the town’s framework.”

What was presented to council was vetted by town staff in detail, vetted at neighborhood meetings, vetted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and vetted at a public hearing before council. This is the town’s process. There was no opportunity for the Council to tell Town West anything because the council can only discuss the project together in public at a hearing after this process has been completed. 

After all this, however, what was presented to council-15 exceptions to code, 75 foot tall buildings, and minimal road setbacks- was “not in character” with the town. Still, the council wanted to shape this project because the Oro Valley Marketplace is a commercial disaster; so they continued the application as opposed to rejecting it.

We believe that it is reasonable to conclude that Sharp would have approved the project as presented because the developer had invested so much into it and because the project had gone through a long process.

Sharp does agree with Winfield in one area. According to Sharp, speaking at the forum: “If [a developer] brings in something that is not in character with the town, we need to find a compromise to get to ‘Yes.’”That is exactly what Winfield did. In June, Town West, the owner of the Marketplace, presented a new plan that is more in line with existing codes and the character of the town . It is a revised plan that both Sharp and Winfield said they would support.

 "The properties currently under consideration for annexation

by the Town of Oro Valley are the two State Land‐ owned sites

indicated on the map below, referred to as Tangerine North

(302 acres), and Tangerine South (550 acres)."

Sharp will vigorously pursue the annexation of the Tangerine State Lands

Both Sharp and Winfield agree that town should annex the Tangerine Road State Lands. This is 852 acres, split into two portions (panel left). Sharp asserts that it should have happened long ago because he worked on it with State Lands when he was interim town manager (June 2016 to September 2017). 

However, as stated by Winfield and as reported in LOVE, the State discontinued conversation with the town in July of 2019 because State Lands was short of staff. They were to continue discussions in November of that year but failed to do so. Sharp would seek to restart these discussions immediately. The town’s annexation plan calls for seeking this annexation in the near term.

…Though not all residents want this annexation

It is not at all clear that residents want the town to annex these lands and open them for development. Annexation and development of these lands met significant opposition from residents when presented at neighborhood meetings.

- - -

Guest View: Diane Peters - My Vision for Oro Valley

This is an open letter to the candidates running for Oro Valley mayor and town council.

Simply put, my vision for Oro Valley is one that respects our natural landscape and our wildlife. My vision is one that respects the residents and what we’ve worked all of our lives to accomplish, and how much has gone into maintaining the value of our homes. After all, a person’s home is their sanctuary.

It was in our nature
With that, my vision for the Town is pretty much the vision that I encountered on the first day that I laid eyes on Oro Valley back in 2003. It was a small town, quiet and pretty, with lots of desert and mountain views, an abundance of wildlife, mostly 2-lane roads, many with dirt shoulders instead of sidewalks, hardly any traffic lights or street lights. It was a peaceful little town.

The undeveloped desert areas surrounding our home were all zoned for rural residential 3.3 acre minimum lot sizes, so we expected that even when those parcels were eventually developed, that Oro Valley’s “nature” would remain the same and our neighborhood would remain the same.

Local government should be citizen-friendly, not developer/builder friendly
Things changed with the arrival of the Hiremath administration who approved every greedy landowner and developer’s request to rezone all the rural residential 3.3 acre minimum lots down to 7,000 square foot minimum lot sizes with mass grading. No concern at all was given to us and what we bought (semi-custom home on a large lot with desert views). No concern was given to nearby residents who live in $800,000 custom homes on 3.3 acre and up lot sizes. They all lost their desert views, their peace and quiet, and their property values when the desert was leveled and replaced with 2-story McHomes right outside their backyards.

No concern at all was given to all the wildlife that was displaced or killed in the process. Trees that once gave shade and shelter to animals and kept our temperatures cooler were bulldozed with reckless abandon. (Before someone asserts that desert vegetation was removed to build my home, I will clarify that my neighborhood was not mass-graded and there are no connecting walls, which was specifically why we chose a home in this neighborhood…to be surrounded by trees and other desert vegetation, plenty of wildlife, and the sounds of nature).

I still remember the night when a resident who lives on a large lot on a dirt road spoke at the podium during a town council meeting regarding an Oro Valley development proposal that was going to come right up to his property and not only destroy his property value but also destroy the wildlife habitat that surrounded his home…and he actually began crying while speaking at the podium. You know it’s bad when a man is reduced to tears in public.

See us as human beings
I’ve heard former council members and former Planning and Zoning commissioners state that their decisions must be based on facts and not on “emotions.” But our emotions play a significant role in our overall well-being. Happy people are healthier. People who are often angry, sad, frustrated, or constantly stressed end up with a multitude of health problems to include stomach ulcers, high blood pressure, headaches, weight gain or weight loss, cancer, etc. So, I think that if the town truly cared about its residents, then the town would care about the health of those residents, which would include considering our emotions and our feelings. We are human beings, after all, and there is more to our lives than balance sheets.

My vision is also one where all stakeholders are treated equally. But what I have observed is a pattern where developers, builders, business owners, wealthy land speculators, and residents who live along the town-owned golf courses are all given priority over the rest of us.

Stop circumventing the General Plan and Zoning Codes
What's the purpose of having zoning codes and a voter-approved general plan when every developer shows up requesting exceptions to the rules and the town grants those exceptions more often than not?

Look at the exceptions being requested for Oro Valley Village Center. To my knowledge, they’ve asked for exceptions to the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance, building height limitations, setback requirements, the open space requirement, and scenic corridor requirements. They also want apartments to be allowed as well as permitting drive-thru uses without a Conditional Use Permit (CUP).

Give equal weight to the arts and culture crowd
Oro Valley caters to the athletic crowd, whether they be residents or tourists – golf, hiking trails, biking trails, tennis, swimming, etc. But if you are not athletic and you enjoy the arts, museums, upscale shopping, and fine dining, there isn’t much here for you, despite all of the commercial growth in this town.

Yes, we have a Spring Arts Festival and a Fall Arts Festival, but amenities for the athletic crowd are available every day, not just once every few months.

So, my vision also includes what I have seen done in other communities that appear to have a better "vision" than what Oro Valley has shown. We’ve been to other towns all over the country that have areas for boutique shopping, upscale restaurants, and art galleries all located on beautiful tree-lined streets. It can be done. But in Oro Valley, every shopping venue is a run-of-the-mill strip mall. Not long ago, we had three Mattress Firm stores at one intersection.

Epilogue
I used to be proud to live here and was always inviting our friends and family from New England to come out and visit. I no longer invite anyone to visit. What am I going to show them? Scraped desert, cookie-cutter cluster homes, traffic lights and traffic jams, street lights, Anywhere USA shopping plazas, and apartment buildings blocking mountain views? We can and should do better.

- - -
Diane Peters has lived in Oro Valley since 2003, moving here to escape the humidity of the East Coast. She’s been involved in OV politics and development issues since 2006, including organizing a citizens group in 2014 that spent 9 months negotiating a controversial 200-acre development project. In her past life, she worked in medical research at various University Hospitals in New England. Her interests include reading, writing, nature photography, travel, art galleries, museums, and politics.

Bits and Pieces

Westward Look annexed

The Oro Valley Town Council voted 4-1 on three measures to annex the Westward Look Resort. This happened at Wednesday’s council meeting. Council Members Nicolson and Solomon were absent from the meeting. Mayor Winfield, Vice Mayor Barrett and Council Members Joyce-Ivey and Green voted in favor. 

Council Member Bohen voted against the measures because the annexation did not include residents who live east and west of the resort. Indeed, as town manager Jacobs confirmed, the town had never considered bringing these residents into Oro Valley. Bohen noted that the town was violating its own annexation policy of only annexing continuous areas, and not annexing “islands.” Bohen is also fearful that these residents, having participated in a rather rancorous process, will not be interested in joining Oro Valley in the future.

Impact of big payment to PSPRS won’t be seen until fiscal 2024
As previously reported, the Oro Valley Town Council approved an additional budget item to be included in the tentative 2021-22 budget. It regards using $10 million from the general fund and using the proceeds from a $17 million pension ob bonds to be issue to fund the PSPRS underfunded obligation. 

If this item is included in the council approved budget, the payment will occur the first week of July. The plan is to then continue to fund PSPRS at State determined annual contribution levels. For the next two years, those payment amounts will be determined as though the $27 million was never contributed. This is because the funding requirement is determined as of June 30 and any change takes place starting the following July 1.

Single family residents permits issued set record
The Town of Oro Valley is on its way to issuing almost 400 single family residence building permits this year. That level is an historic high, an increase of 43% over last year. Projected revenues from permits to the town this fiscal year is $2.8 million.

Projected sales tax revenues set record
One of the unexpected consequences of the Pandemic is seen in the town’s sales tax revenues. Oro Valley sales tax collections were more than 15% higher than the prior year, This was “...helped greatly by an increase in online purchases.” Total sales tax revenues are projected at $14million this year. This extrapolates to $553 million in resident purchases.

“Ghost” golf course in Oro Valley

“We discovered an abandoned, formerly luxurious golf course in Oro Valley that we dubbed the “ghost golf course.” We meandered along the paved cart path wondering what had happened to change this oasis in the desert into a peaceful yet scrubby eyesore to the advantage of walkers and bikers.”  This quote appeared in an Colorado Springs  online publication. We suspect that the writer is referring the former Vistoso Golf Course.  We love the referfence to the “scrubby eyesore”.

Oro Valley wins Distinguished Budget Presentation Award” for 13th consecutive year

“For the 13th year in a row, the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) has awarded the Town of Oro Valley the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for its 2020 budget. The award represents a significant achievement by the Town of Oro Valley. It reflects the commitment of Town Council and staff to meeting the highest principles of governmental budgeting. the conservation” (source)

Former Purchase Golf Course negotiations continue 

Negotiations between Rompsen LLC and The Conservation Fund regarding the purchase the former Vistoso Golf Course continue. Romspen is getting an appraisal of the property for negotiations with the Fund.  Romspen is also in negotiations to sell the parcel of the property that is zoned for multi-family residential.  This according to Town Manager Mary Jacobs, speaking at  this weeks Oro Valley Town Council meeting.

Bits and Pieces

"Lets run the Pusch Ridge Course Year Round." Are you nuts?

Three members of the Oro Valley Town Council suggested that the town keep the Pusch Ridge Course open year round. This is the course they closed last year and are planning to operate from next November through April, 2022. This is course is being reopened because a handful of residents who live around it can have a green grass view, instead of desert... like the rest of us. This is a course that is going to use drinking water at cheapest rates at a time when the Western US is in the twenty-first year of drought. This is a course that has always been a money loser.

The brilliant idea came from Council Member Solomon. Then it was echoed by Council Member Greene (Solomon's bagman).  But wait. Council Member Josh Nicolson also joined in. He also thinks it's a good idea. Give us a break, boys!

Lest we remind council: You represent all the people of Oro Valley. You are not members of the board of the local country club.

Historic Preservation Commission Seeking Applicants

The Oro Valley Historic Preservation Commission, a town volunteer board, is seeking applicants. You can learn more and apply here. We've joined in on some of their meetings. They primarily focus on what is happening at Steam Pump Ranch. 

Oro Valley's single family home growth highest in 18 years

In 2020, Oro Valley experienced its most active year for new single family residences since 2003. The town issued 384 new single family residence permits in 2020. That is a 43% increase over 2019.

Town Manager Jacobs: Town still lacks tools to attract businesses

Town Manager Mary Jacobs continues to beat the drum of economic development. One of the documents she provided council at last weeks strategic plan council retreat said that Oro Valley needs more shovel-ready sites and competitively priced land in order for the town to get more primary employers. "There are approximately 188 acres of Campus Park-zoned land available in Oro Valley, and only half of the sites are over 10 acres." Seems to us that that's plenty of available sites that no one wants. Oro Valley is essentially a retirement community. See the panel at right for the 2019 stats. 

Sounds to us like the "shades of JJ Johnston." He was Oro Valley's last economic development director. He blew into Oro Valley three years ago. Worked here for two. Then he retired.  He left us with the potential of bladed desert and an eased building permit process.   But he did not leave us with more jobs gained.

Town Manager Jacobs: Town will be 'hard hit' by baby boomer generation retirement

At the same retreat a Jacobs' document stated: "With the Town's average age of 53, Oro Valley will be particularly hard hit by the retiring of the baby boomer generation in the coming decade. And as a desirable place to retire, it is not unexpected that many of those will remain in their homes rather than relocate."  We have no idea what she is saying in this paragraph.

Here is our cut. Oro Valley is already seeing major growth as baby boomers are retiring. They will flock her for the next 15 years. That will have major implications for economic development. They will not want jobs.

---

Oro Valley In Pictures: Available Commercial Land

Oro Valley's Ticking Development Time Bomb

Approved projects will keep Oro Valley growing for some time
Residents who want to see a slowdown in growth of Oro Valley are not going to see it for some time. The pace of development is going to continue. LOVE estimates that there are more than 2,300 homes that are either under construction or approved for construction. The calculations are based on our analysis of all Oro Valley development projects.

These development projects are "embedded growth." They are projects over which the incoming council has no control. The projects will continue on pace, subject to required construction approvals that need to be obtained as homes are built. They will run for several years.

Requested but not yet approved projects present a growth challenge
The council does not have the authority to disallow construction on the property that is zoned for the use to which is being used. But the incoming council does have some influence over development that will take place in subsequent years.

The council has authority to approve or deny General Plan Amendment requests and zoning change requests. Here are a few of the approvals that are pending:

• The annexation and the rezoning of State lands on the west side of Oro Valley's planning area. Approval, as currently proposed, will result in approximately 3,200 “dwelling units” in various combinations of single family homes, apartments, and townhomes. 
• A Planned Area Development (PAD) rezoning on El Conquistador Way includes a mix of Neighborhood Commercial, Senior Care, and Multi-Family Residential 
• The project on Innovation Park Drive could result in the construction of 74 homes 
• Cresta Morado (La Cholla by Church of the Apostles) could result in the development of 55 homes. 
• A change in the Oro Valley Town Center Planned Area Development could allow 90 homes plus apartments

There are upcoming neighborhood meetings on some of these.

It's about criteria
The incoming council is under no obligation to approve any of these projects. However, to simply reject them on the basis that the town no longer wishes to see growth is probably not in the best long-term interest of the community.

We believe that the incoming council will consider not only the wishes of the people ratified in the General Plan, but also the welfare of the entire community.

Some suggested criteria
Here is a suggested list of criteria that we think council should consider - a list that we think was completely ignored the past eight years:

• Water: Oro Valley has been growing as though it has an infinite supply of water. The West in general has been suffering an 18-year drought. There are upcoming restrictions on Colorado River water that will, at some point, reduce the water our town gets to recharge its aquifers. Certainly, every project that is proposed should be required to present a water impact study. Indeed, it may be that water is the eventual gating factor of Oro Valley's growth 
• Small Town Feeling: We want a small town. That is clearly the message voters sent in August. We don't like tract houses packed like sardines on small lots. 
• Scenic Beauty: We want to preserve the scenic beauty and desert environment that we love.
• Wildlife: We appreciate our wildlife and don't want to disrupt the patterns of their life. 
• Noise and Inconvenience: Let's not forget that construction is an enormous inconvenience to us all through the noise created, the roads closed and the general dust kicked up in the desert.
• Cost of Service: Oro Valley needs to consider the long-term financial impact of new residential property on the town's budget. New communities must be served in the same manner as existing communities. This adds cost to the town. For example, the town has to provide public safety. The major source of town operating revenue is the sales tax. How will these new homes bring sufficient sales tax revenues to the community to support their cost? (No. A property tax is not an option.)

Soliciting and hearing community input is they key
In the movie "Darkest Hour", King Edward tells Sir Winston Churchill to trust the people to determine what to do. Churchill proceeds to ride the tube, talking to the "common folk" of Britain. It made the difference. While the general attitude of Parliament was to surrender in some form to Hitler, it was the people of Britain who told Churchill that Britain must fight for survival.

The most important criteria isn't listed in the bullet list. It's community input. It’s YOU.

For eight years, Oro Valley leaders have deliberately stayed away from getting the opinion of the community. They have told us to surrender to development. That have told us that development is inevitable.

At hearings, residents were given three minutes to express their views while developers were been given hours to state their plans. We think that this paradigm needs to be reversed.

It is now time to change.

This is Oro Valley's fight for survival.
---

Tucson Association of Realtors spreading Town Council election falsehoods

A LOVE reader sent us this screenshot of an email that is being distributed by The Tucson Association of Realtors (TAR) and the Realtor Political Action Committee (RPAC).

The contents of this email are a blatant lie and there are only two possible explanations for this:

• They received inaccurate information and didn’t bother to verify its authenticity before spreading this false information

• Or they are deliberately putting their own spin on the story in order to instill FEAR in their members in an attempt to drum up donations and votes for Hiremath-Hornat-Snider-Waters

Did TAR interview the challengers? No! So how do they know the challengers stances on this issue? On what basis did they draw the conclusion that the challengers “have promised to impose a building moritorium [sic] in Oro Valley if elected?” Did a mole attend one of the challengers Meet and Greets and then inaccurately report back what transpired at that meeting?

Fortunately, we have an accurate report of the challengers’ positions on development. Below are direct quotes from the 3-part article, “LOVE interviews mayoral candidate, Joe Winfield” published on June 5-6-7.

In Part 1 of the interview, Winfield stated:

“In addition, I want to moderate growth. I would approach that by simply putting a moratorium on any amendments or rezonings and letting our community take a breath on the amount of development that has been occurring. I’m not suggesting that we don’t need development or that development would need to stop, but that we would comply and follow the current land use and zoning.”

Winfield suggested only a moratorium on General Plan amendments and rezonings. He never promised a complete moratorium on all building. He said “moderate…take a breath…follow the current land use and zoning.”

First of all, a moratorium is just a temporary halting of an activity, in this case, a temporary halting of General Plan amendments and rezonings. That is a far cry from imposing a complete moratorium on all building.

Does Winfield’s measured approach sound like something that would “have a dramatic impact” on the entire community?

In Part 2 of the interview, Winfield stated:

“I would hope to have made a difference in terms of the development of our community. Admittedly, much of the community is already developed so I don’t know that you’ll see a significant difference but I would hope that there would have been some moderation in development and the type of development.”

Does that sound like a complete building moratorium to you? Does that sound like it would lead to a dramatic impact?

Melanie Barrett’s thoughts on development

“Seek development that is responsive to residents wishes and responsible in design…[slowing] the current pace of developments.” [Introducing Melanie Barrett, LOVE, May 22nd]

Joyce Jones-Ivey’s thoughts development

“Responsible growth that preserves our town’s scenic beauty…Adhere to the guiding principles of the General Plan.” [Introducing Joyce Jones-Ivey, LOVE, May 24th]

Josh Nicolson’s thoughts on development

“Frequent General Plan amendments and rezonings…Right now it seems like developers are getting their way and there’s a group of citizens who aren’t being listened to at all. I believe elected officials have a moral obligation to do what’s best for the community as a whole and for the long-term prosperity of Oro Valley.” [Introducing Josh Nicolson, LOVE, June 11th]

As you can see, TAR and RAPAC are using fear tactics and spin to drum up support for their cause. No one should take them seriously. After all, they can’t even spell moratorium, the very subject of their email! They misspelled it four times!

TAR and RAPAC have a right to support the incumbents but they need to cease and desist with their lies and fear-mongering.

A Message from Town Council Candidate, Melanie Barrett

It has been a pleasure over the course of this campaign to meet so many of you. Oro Valley has so many wonderful people. I look forward to continuing to build relationships with the citizens and to serve the people of our Town.

I am running with a team of wonderful people; Joe Winfield for Mayor, and Joyce Jones-Ivey and Josh Nicolson for Town Council. We are a diverse group of men and women of various ages, races, backgrounds, and even political ideologies, but we are like-minded when it comes to the moral obligation of government to serve the people.

We have a positive vision of Oro Valley as a place where citizens are respected and placed at the forefront of the government.

Special interests and Development
In the past few years the mayor and current council have accepted over $150,000 in campaign financing, all from 5 donors, all of whom are developers. They later vote on these developers’ projects (and buy and maintain money losing golf courses from them). This results in many 7-0 decisions in favor of developers, even when a large number of citizens object to these rezonings. Many people leave Town meetings feeling it was a "done-deal." Since the 2016 election, the council has approved all 14 rezonings that have come before them.

We would prefer moderate growth that is respectful of the community and the environment. Our beautiful natural desert and scarce water resources need to be carefully considered.

We are committed to putting the citizens back at the top of the Oro Valley Organizational Chart, and bringing back respect and transparency, as well as operating without ties to special interests. Our financing comes from ourselves, our families and friends, and the community.

My time on the Planning and Zoning Commission
I began my first year gaining my footing and trusting what I was told by town planners and other commission members who made strong arguments for the proposed developments. Over time, my perspective broadened and I began to realize that things were not as they appeared, and that residents’ voices were not being given enough consideration.

While on P&Z, I fought for parks, for view sheds, for the preservation of plants, and for lanes to be added for schools. I lobbied the planners and the council, fought to protect the “small town feeling” language in the General Plan, and added language about parks and recreation that met the needs of citizens of all ages.

I did vote in favor of many re-zonings that I knew would ultimately be approved by Council no matter what P&Z recommended. I did so in order to add conditions to improve the plan. One of the planners told me I had taken upon myself the role of “chief skeptic.”

In my last year as a P&Z Commissioner, I witnessed the following:

• Town Council ignoring the recommendations of the P&Z Commission if they recommended denial of a rezoning application

• Town Council eliminating the 4-year maximum term limit for P&Z commissioners in order to maintain pro-development votes

• Some of my concerns not being included in staff reports to Council

• Town Council removing conditions that I fought to have included in development proposals

This is when I realized that the only way to change the system was to change the Town Council itself.

Taxes and Fiscal responsibility
In the 8 years of Mayor Hiremath and council's tenure, the budget has grown 59%, though population growth has been around 8% and inflation around 12%. This growth rate is 5 times the rate of inflation.

Taxes have been raised significantly, with the sales tax being increased by 25% and the utility tax doubled. The current Town Council even supported a property tax which was voted down by the citizens. Too much taxpayer money is being funneled into the community center and golf, larger government, and the associated personnel.

The most recent FY 18/19 budget that the council passed in June included a $14M bond, paid over 20 years. The mayor and council claim to have a $1.3M budget surplus. I don’t know about you, but I don’t put $1,400 on my credit card, then look at my account with $130 left and say that I have a $130 surplus. This is akin to what is happening with the Town finances.

We would like to employ disciplined fiscal responsibility with our taxpayer dollars with an eye towards the long-term benefit of our community's future, keeping in mind what we are leaving for our children.

Parks and Recreation
Many of you know that the Town commissioned a statistically valid Parks and Recreation Survey in 2014 regarding amenities residents desired. Far at the top were Playgrounds, Ramadas, and Walking Paths. Out of 34 items, golf came in at 33 and with negative favorability (with 63% of respondents rating golf as “Not important.”)

Six months later, the Town Council voted to purchase a golf course in a deal with their biggest campaign donor, and since then have doubled down on that purchase, throwing good money after bad. We believe that parks and recreation should meet the needs of the greatest number of people and be truly designed for the citizens.

To me, the golf losses are about the opportunity lost. What could we have done with that money instead? To put the scale of losses into perspective, we have lost enough money on Golf to have constructed 57 new playgrounds, or 6 large splash pads (like the one in Marana), or any number of ball fields, but in 8 years the Town Council has not built any of these things.

The FY 2018/19 budget includes a 6 million dollar bond for golf and the community center improvements paid over 20 years, but no money or plans for Naranja Park or any playgrounds or ball fields. My children will be nearly my age before the Town is finished paying for this bond.

The Town Council now says it is “breaking even.” What they mean by this is that the Town has projected that the sales tax revenues will now be enough to cover the losses. This does not account for any capital improvement or the upcoming bond. This is not the definition that was given of breaking even when the purchase was proposed, and the courses are still costing $2.5M per year of your tax dollars, no matter how you manipulate the math.

We want to employ sensible, community driven strategies to stem the golf losses and direct the parks and recreation dollars where they can benefit all our residents.

I am running for Council because I love my Town and I want to make it a better place. It is a challenge – however, I feel deeply about doing what I can to make Oro Valley (and the world) a better place and about being the change I want to see in the world.

The Town Council election is held in the Primary on August 28th.

Read more about Melanie’s campaign issues HERE

Guest View: Mike Zinkin ~ Is Democracy dead in Oro Valley?

Webster defines democracy as:

“Government by the People; especially: rule of the majority.”

The International City-County Management Association (ICMA) has a Code of Ethics, consisting of 12 Tenets. Tenet 4 is:

“Recognize that the chief function of local government at all times is to serve the best interests of all the people.”

Do the actions of the current mayor and council meet the definition of democracy? Are they serving the best interests of all the people?

Exhibit A. The Golf courses
In June 2014, the Town paid for a statistically valid survey asking residents what amenities they desired in their parks. The results showed that the top 3 items requested were (1) playgrounds and play structures, (2) ramadas and picnic areas, and (3) paved walking paths.. Out of 34 possible options, golf came in at number 33 (with 63% of respondents stating that golf was “not important.”)

Despite this, just six months later, in December 2014, the Council decided to purchase 45 holes of golf. The overwhelming amount of input from the People was NO, yet the Council majority (Hiremath-Hornat-Snider-Waters) voted to purchase the golf courses anyway.

If there was any democracy in Oro Valley, would the Town Council chose to purchase a golf course just six months after the citizens asked for play structures, ramadas, and picnic areas? This purchase was supported by Greg Caton, the Town Manager at the time. So much for ICMA Tenet 4, and Government by the People.

Exhibit B. The voter-approved General Plan
In 2016, the Town Council forwarded to its residents a new General Plan. Developed with approximately three years of resident input. This plan, Your Voice, Our Future [YVOF] was placed on the ballot for voter approval. And although YVOF was approved by the voters on November 8, 2016, the Town Council voted to amend the Plan just 8 days later on November 16th. And they have continued to amend the voter-approved plan at every opportunity. Government by the People?

Exhibit C. Ball fields
In 2017, members of the community came to the council asking for ball fields for the children. They said that they were “desperately needed” and the Town Council agreed. But instead of looking for available resources to fund these fields, the Council instead asked the residents to impose a secondary Property Tax on themselves to fund these ball fields. This was a $17 MM bond that would have cost taxpayers $28 MM including the interest. The Residents overwhelmingly rejected the tax. Interestingly, the Council continues to brag that they have saved $2 million in the budget. Well then, why not put that $2M towards building those “desperately needed” ball fields?

Exhibit D. Undesirable development
The residents have told the Council repeatedly that they do not want postage-stamp sized residential lots and the continued blading of the desert. They have told the Council that they desire to save their mountain views and preserve the desert environment. What does the Council do? They repeatedly ignore the wishes of the citizens in favor of the developers/builders who financed their campaigns. Is this democracy?

Exhibit E. The Town Budget
The FY 2018/19 Town Budget is over $20 million higher than the previous fiscal year. There are NO ball fields included in it. There is, however, a $6 million bond of which $3 million will be used to improve the GOLF COURSES. Does this sound like adherence to the ICMA Tenet 4? Does this sound like Democracy?

Sadly, there is ample evidence that democracy does not exist in Oro Valley. On August 28th, the voters of Oro Valley will have an opportunity to replace four members of this council and return democracy to our Town.

Mike Zinkin has a Bachelor’s degree in history and government from the University of Arizona and a Master’s degree in Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education from California State University, Northridge. He was a commissioned ensign in the United States Navy Reserve. He was an Air Traffic Controller for 30 years. He and his wife moved to Oro Valley in 1998. Mike served on the Oro Valley Development Review Board from 2005-2009 and the Board of Adjustment from 2011-2012. He served on the Town Council from 2012-2016 during which time he was named a Fellow for the National League of Cities University, he was a member of the National League of Cities Steering Committee for Community and Economic Development, and a member of the Arizona League of Cities Budget and Economic Development Committee.