Jacobs’ Update: Former Rancho Vistoso Golf Course Purchase Negotiations Continue

Agreement in principal could mean end is in sight
Some Rancho Vistoso residents voiced guarded optimism regarding the town’s purchase of the former Vistoso Golf Course at tonight’s council meeting. They did so after Town Manager Jacobs discussed the status of the purchase. 

Jacobs stated that the town has reached an agreement in principal with several parties. These include Rompsen, the property owner, and a third party purchaser of the 6 acres of land that is now zoned for development on the property. 

Jacobs said that The Conservation Fund, was informed of progress. They are the group that, under Vistoso resident plans, were to purchase the remaining 202 acres and gift it to the Town as permanent conservation land. It is unclear if those residents who pledged up to $1.5 million toward the purchase have been involved. 

Jacobs provided no details regarding the agreement or a timetable for completing the deal.

Some residents are cautiously optimistic
One resident stated cautious optimism; but observed that the “devil is in the details”. Others also cautioned that Romspen, a secured lender of last resort, cannot be trusted as a business partner.

Solomon: Jacobs acting on behalf of council... personal criticism of her unwarranted
After resident comments, Council Member Solomon stated for the record that Town Manager Jacobs and former Town Attorney Gary Cohen have acted under the auspices of the town council. This is in response to the fact that some residents have been and continue to be critical of Jacobs’ handling of this deal.

The saga does continue but perhaps there is an end in sight.

Rancho Vistoso residents have been working for three years to resolve this problem. It’s been a long time for them to live with the uncertainty regarding what is going to happen with this property. They even devised the solution to it. They brought that solution to town Council last fall.  We do hope a successful end is in sight for them.

---

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.

---

Vistoso Residents: Only Town, Romspen and The Conservation Fund Should Negotiate Vistoso Land Deal

Monday we wrote about Vistoso resident demands that Council Member Steve Solomon be excluded from council actions regarding the town's potential purchase of the defunct Vistoso Golf Course. Yesterday, we posted an email to council supporting this contention. Today, we post a second email from a different residents.  This email highlights the distrust of some in Council Member Solomon and in the group Preserve Vistoso.

We have removed identifying information regarding the writer in order to promote harmony in the community. This email was sent to council after the council's decision to seek a land purchase.

---

Hello Town Council Members,

We are writing to follow up on the Town Council meeting conducted on 11/18/20, specifically agenda item #2 – DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE CLOSED VISTOSO GOLF COURSE PROPERTY. We were in attendance and unfortunately our request to speak during the meeting (from our land line) must have not been detected by TOV [Town of Oro Valley] staff. Thus, we are writing to provide our input.

[We]  have lived in Vistoso Highlands ... [for] years. We would like to begin by sincerely thanking those Council members who have persevered to uphold the Rancho Vistoso resident’s unwavering choice to purchase the former Vistoso Golf Course (the 202 acres at FMV as green space, in perpetuity). The ONLY parties required to negotiate and finalize this agreement are the Town of Oro Valley, Romspen and The Conservation Fund (TCF). All other non-essential parties MUST stand down. Otherwise, the success of this action will be put at risk.

Personal Experience: 

1. [We] attended a Preserve Vistoso (PV) sponsored Zoom call on July 7, 2020 in support of The Conservation Fund (TCF) with the goal to participate in the pledge drive. As follow up to this PV Zoom call, we received the attached PV Survey (note 2 attachments – one is the original email dated July 17, 2020. The survey is also separately attached for ease of reference). In summary, we were requested to make significant monetary pledges while the questionnaire clearly is driving to support partial development. Thus interpreted -- we were requested to make a considerable financial pledge to have the property developed behind us – 6th and 7th holes? Imagine how my [We]  felt? 
2. As of the 11/18/20 Town Council Meeting, Michael Bilodeau, PV President, still continues to deny and spread the false narrative that TCF was not yet involved as of July 17, 2020. This somehow is being used to justify the distribution of the attached survey/questionnaire. This is a blatant misrepresentation - TCF was involved and is the reason we participated in the PV Zoom call. Also, please note, the Pledge form distributed on July 17th clearly reflects TCF (this further contradicts/refutes Michael Bilodeau’s claim TCF was not yet involved). [Insert follows below]
3. 
   We would like to add that whether TCF was involved or not, PV is a 501(c)(3) and was participating in behavior to the detriment of certain members of the community without full disclosure that partial development was in fact their true mission. The bigger question is “with whom was PV with working regarding the potential development of the parcels on the 6th and 7th holes”? My husband and I attempted to ascertain the motive and facts behind the PV survey. We feel we need to impart the “information/rumors” we subsequently learned which implicate a sitting member of council. The “rumors” indicate there was a targeted 6-acre parcel in this area for development that may have influenced Romspen’s decision to decline the TCF FMV [fair market value] offer for all 202 acres. While these are rumors, we believe where there is smoke there is fire. 
4.  Thus, to date, we are still withholding our pledge commitment. Our pledge will only be made to TCF. 
   

Council Member [Solomon] Feedback

1. Councilman Solomon needs to consider “recusing himself” from further involvement in this matter. 
2. Councilman Solomon’s comments during the Town Council meeting were alarming and clearly revealed questionable motives (particularly development) with respect to some portion of the property. Is this related to the specific portion highlighted by the PV survey (holes 6 and 7 – including the targeted “6-acre parcel”)? Clearly, he has been working with PV for some time. It was very disconcerting to hear he had already formed and met with his “hand selected committee” that could resolve this matter in 30-60 days. When pressed by residents for his strategy and plan, he had none. 
3. [We] were very uncomfortable when Councilman Solomon’s motion was discussed. Did his motion set the stage for the compromise and development of the targeted 6-acre parcel? Please note he referred to “his hand selected committee that would include himself, PV leadership and Romspen” and that they could resolve this issue quickly with a handshake and resolution within in 30 – 60 days. Please note he indicated they had already been meeting which further supported the quick resolution. 
4. Again, could this have possibly been a reason that Romspen declined the TCF FMV deal/offer? 
5. As stated above, we request Councilman Solomon recuse himself from further involvement in this matter. 

Request for Resident Communication

We would like to request (if possible) that the Town of Oro Valley communicate directly with the Rancho Vistoso residents with respect to information and updates regarding status and future actions of the golf course resolution. This approach will provide the required transparency needed to ensure that all information is fully distributed/communicated to all residents. This will avoid residents having to rely on Preserve Vistoso, an organization that clearly has “some” explaining to do. 

Respectfully,"

---

Publisher note: The group Preserve Vistoso asserts that it has always operated to ensure that the Vistoso property remains open space. Please read our November 24th posting regarding Preserve Vistoso's explanation of their activities.  The group asserts that their goal has always been to create a permanent conservation easement on the property. 

Vistoso Residents: Bar Solomon From Town's Vistoso Land Negotiations

Yesterday we wrote about Vistoso resident demands that Council Member Steve Solomon be excluded from council actions regarding the town's potential purchase of the defunct Vistoso Golf Course. The following is one of  two emails to The Oro Valley Town Council stating their position in more detail. Tomorrow we will publish the second email. 

We have removed identifying information regarding the writer in order to promote harmony in the community. This email was sent to council after the council's decision to attempt the land purchase.

---

"Dear Town Council Members:

It was with relief and anticipation that your 7-0 vote to initiate the process to purchase the defunct golf course from Romspen at fair market value was received. Relief, that the council voted down Councilman Solomon's motion to act as our sole agent in a murky, backroom negotiation with Romspen. Anticipation, that the town is now on board with the community in actively seeking a permanent conservation easement for all of the property. The Rancho Vistoso neighborhood has been adamant that we want conservation and limited use for walking and cycling in a natural setting. No development. 

Those of us on the Zoom conference were aghast to learn that Councilman Solomon had been acting as an unauthorized "town agent" to give Romspen a premium and likely a path towards development in order to sell. One is left wondering what his motivations were .... His lack of transparency in responding to inquiries about the framework of his deal was alarming for a town council member. His boasting of "major, $100 Million deals" was telling. He's just a wheeler-dealer; a retired developer that wants back in the game. A Romspen "Fixer". 

For those reasons, I ask you to demand a recusal of Councilman Solomon from any further dealings in the matter of the defunct Vistoso Golf Course property. 

Solomon's opportunistic "Preserve Vistoso" signs stapled onto his re-election signs signaled his intent to support conservation. He talked conservation up during his campaign. Now his actions demonstrate his true intent, which is to create value for Romspen at the expense of our community. He wants to divide our community into winners and losers, depending on where you live around the old course. This is exactly what Mike Ford, The Conservation Fund (TCF) stated in his final communication to us. He said THIS MUST NOT HAPPEN. Mr. Ford knew well the perils of dividing the community with partial development. That is why TCF insisted that their effort to create a conservation easement be for all 208 acres, nothing less. Partial development would tear at the social and financial fabric of our neighborhood. The fear of partial development is palpable and needs to be taken off the table. 

We believe that the best way forward is just what your 7-0 vote calls for - a full conservation easement in perpetuity. It may be a long, hard path to walk but just knowing that the council will stay the course to that conclusion will sustain us. 

Councilman Solomon's motion for creation of a task force included a seat for Preserve Vistoso, (PV), leadership in the deal making. He unwittingly confirmed what many of us have suspected for some time. His comments appeared to be in line with a PV survey that circulated last spring polling residents as to their stance on potentially developing some of the property in order to conserve other areas around the course. I saw the survey. It clearly showed the golf course property right behind our home as available for development. I note that none of the PV leadership's homes were near the areas they thought would be agreeable to Romspen for development. Conservation would take place near their homes. After I saw the survey form, I quickly rescinded my five figure pledge to PV. I then spoke directly to Mr. Ford by phone. He was aware of the survey and told PV to cease sending it out, as it as divisive; it would tear the neighborhood apart and TCF would not be a party to it. The form disappeared quickly. Unfortunately, a seed of doubt has been planted in our neighborhood. What were PV leadership's real intentions? What are they going forward? Are they for creating a conservation easement for ALL of the defunct golf course, or just those areas behind their homes? Is PV really just a self-serving entity? 

I would like to see the Preserve Vistoso leadership offer the community a clarifying statement, so we can better understand their motivations and survey mis-step. Perhaps they can re-affirm their role as a strong, collective voice for our neighborhood regarding the future of the old course. 

The council's rejection of Councilman Solomon's motion to create a task force to codify his murky deal also gives PV an opportunity to step away from him. Instead, they could provide our neighborhood with the much needed clarifications on where they stand on the future of the defunct golf course. While only the town council speaks for us in legally binding matters, PV can be our voice and gathering place to hash out and communicate to you our collective desires in these matters. They are not our negotiators. 

I know the hard road to town ownership of this land will be successful. We have the votes and the will of the people behind the effort. [We] will re-pledge our donation to the purchase of the land if the council stays the course towards a fair market value for the property. Many others in Rancho Vistoso will do the same. As Mayor Winfield said, "We can find the money". We can take the time, too. 

Most importantly, you have the power to just say NO to re-zoning the property. If Romspen sees that the council majority is in favor of a full conservation easement and has not opportunity to develop the land, they will finally sell at fair market value terms. The property has been abandoned. It is subject to condemnation. They will sell when they see our resolve. 

Our neighbor, [name deleted], has asked to sign onto this letter. [Information regarding neighbor deleted for privacy purposes.

[We] and many others share the opinion that Councilman Solomon must recuse himself from this agenda item. We hope the entire town council agrees.

Sincerely"

---

Vistoso Residents Want Solomon and The Group Preserve Vistoso Barred From Town's Vistoso Land Negotiations

Residents want Solomon to recuse himself...

Residents of Rancho Vistoso have asked the Oro Valley Town Council to remove Council Member Steve Solomon from any discussions regarding the town's potential purchase of the former Vistoso Golf land from owner Romspen LLC. As LOVE reported in November, the council has authorized the town manager and town council to negotiate with Romspen to purchase the property. 

...because Solomon has been involved in previous discussions with Romspen, the landowner, that would have resulted in development of some of the property

Rancho Vistoso residents are seeking Solomon's recusal from discussions because Solomon, starting in March, inserted himself into activities with the group Preserve Vistoso , activities that could have resulted in residential development of some of the property. These residents, like many in Rancho Vistoso, want no development of the property. Rather, they want the property to become a natural preserve.

Council Member Solomon's activities with Romspen and the group Preserve Vistoso continued at least until the council meeting of November 18. At that meeting, Solomon put forth a motion that would have the town join with a small "working group" he had formed with Romspen's representative to, as he put it, "quickly resolve" the purchase. The working group was to also include Preserve Vistoso and the Vistoso Community Association ("VCA") to, supposedly, represent the residents. 

Residents vehemently rejected Solomon's proposal at the November council meeting. Now, they are fearful that any Solomon involvement could result in a "deal" that would see some of the property developed; in particular, a six acre plot on the far east side of the golf course. This would disadvantage residents living in that area.

Residents: The group Preserve Vistoso and the Vistoso Community Association should not be involved

These residents assert that only the town can represent the interests of all residents. The group Preserve Vistoso represents only some members of the community. In addition, only a small part of the land is under the auspices of the Vistoso Community Association  ("VCA"),  the governing master homeowners association. 187 of the 208 acres of the former golf course are under town control. Thus, it is up to the town to take the lead role in resolving this land's use. And the town has acted to do just that.

The residents believe that the group Preserve Vistoso has not been operating for the benefit of all. They point to a questionnaire that the group sent out that asked respondents whether it was agreeable that a six acre plot mentioned previously be developed (Panel Right). 

The group Preserve Vistoso asked this question in mid July during the time when they were soliciting donations for The Conservation Fund (TCF).  This was at a time when The Conservation Fund ("TCF") was negotiating a land purchase at Fair Market Value with Romspen. TCF will only purchase the land if the land will have no development. They will place the land in a Conservation Trust, protecting the land in perpetuity. 

Residents: The actions of Council Member Solomon and the group Preserve Vistoso may have interfered with the negotiations between TCF and Romspen

We have been told by residents that Council Member Solomon has been in contact from time to time with Peter Oelbaum, managing director of Romspen. Solomon is a sitting Oro Valley Town Council member.  Romspen sought an active general plan amendment that would result in significant property development. This is an amendment that Solomon would be opining upon. Perhaps his involvement held out some hope to Romspen that development was possible.

Then, in July, the group Preserve Vistoso sent out the questionnaire on development of the six acre parcel.  Perhaps, this reinforced Romspen's impression that the community might be amenable to development of some of the property. 

Taken in this light, it makes sense that Romspen rejected the TCF offer. TCF can only offer fair market value for conservation land. Land that can be used for residential development would be far more valuable. Thus, it would be wise for Romspen to reject the offer and see if a better deal would be forthcoming.

Solomon has denied personal benefit from his involvement

Council Member Solomon, in the November council meeting, stated that he had no personal interest in the transaction. He stated that he has been acting on behalf of his constituents.

The group Preserve Vistoso asserts that it has always operated to ensure that the Vistoso property remains open space

Please read our November 24th posting regarding Preserve Vistoso's explanation of their activities. In it, they provide an explanation of their activities which, they assert, are to create a permanent conservation easement on the property.

---

Tomorrow and Wednesday we will post two email communications sent to council by residents. These emails substantiate and provide further detail regarding the assertions in this article.

Five Things To Keep In Mind When You Vote Tomorrow

Our fact check sets the record straight

Three things happened since we posted our "Election Primer" on July 14.  First, things got nasty in the form of expensive post cards containing outrageous accusations that were mailed by Greene, Rodman and Solomon. Second, because things got nasty, Mayor Winfield, Vice Mayor Barrett and Council Member Jones-Ivey endorsed Bohen and Garner. Third, last week we finally got the truth on developer campaign financing of Greene, Rodman and Solomon.

So, as you vote, do think about these things and more...

All candidates support public safety

There are two issues that are always lightning rods in Oro Valley elections. One is support of public safety. 

In every election since 2010, one set of candidates accusing the other set of "not supporting public safety." This year  Candidates Greene, Rodman and Solomon did just that is an expensive (60 cents per) glossy 6x11 post card. 

We've fact checked the accusation. All candidates support public safety. In fact, Candidate Garner did the hard work in 2008 of saving police positions.

First responder and school support has nothing to do with the Oro Valley Town Council

That same flyer accused "the other guys" of not supporting first responders or education. Where did that come from? First responders are not part of Oro Valley operations. They are a separate taxing district. Schools are not part of Oro Valley operations. They are also a separate taxing district. These things have nothing to do with the Oro Valley Town Council.

No candidate is encouraging policies that will likely lead to a property tax

The other lightning rod is an Oro Valley property tax.  An Oro Valley property tax is antithetical to the founding of Oro Valley. Oro Valley was founded on the basis that it would not have a property tax. Not having an Oro Valley property tax is in our DNA.  It is simply in not an issue.  The council can not mandate a property tax. Only the voters can do so.

According to candidate Bill Garner, speaking on a Jim Horn Oro Valley Podcast: "We should never be at that point [of needing a property tax] providing that you elect candidates that are stewards of your money. I have always been a fiscal steward of taxpayer money."

The campaigns of Greene, Rodman and Solomon are financed by the special interest developer community

Last week, we confirmed our earlier observations based on the Rodman and Solomon campaign funding of their 2016 campaign. As they did then, developer money has flooded Oro Valley politics.  All the usual characters are back - HSL, Realtors of Southern Arizona, Town West Real Estate, The Kai Family, Beztak (Sam Beznos) and Heritage Homes- to the the tune of $35,000. Solomon and Rodman alone received 75% of their campaign funds from them.  See our posting last week to learn more.

Garner and Bohen are endorsed by Mayor Winfield, Vice Mayor Barrett, and Council Member Jones-Ivey

Mayor Winfield, Vice Mayor Barrett and Council Member Jones-Ivey were silent at first regarding which candidates they would prefer to be on council. That changed once the expensive post cards containing outrageous accusations were mailed to homes. They have endorsed Garner and Bohen for council. That is an endorsement of the people with whom they will work for at least the next two years. See our posting of July 15 on the endorsement of Winfield and Barrett.  See our posting of July 22 with quotes from Barrett and Jones-Ivey.

---

HSL Dominates Contributions to Rodman, Solomon and Greene

HSL leads the pack
HSL properties, the owner of the El Conquistador Resort, partner in the future of the Oro Valley Marketplace, owner of a large apartment complex on Oracle Road, dominated the funding of pro developer Oro Valley candidates Rodman, Solomon and Greene. This continued what they had done in financing the 2016 campaign of Rodman and Solomon. (source)

Two sources contributed 71% of funds
The three amassed $34,450 in contributions from special interest developers and realtors as revealed in the 2020 Pre-Primary campaign finance report. HSL contributed $15,000 of that. The other big contributor in the amount of $9,000 were the Realtors of Southern Arizona PAC.

In addition, the Kai family, currently seeking a general plan amendment for a Silverhawke related property, donated $2,500. Missing from this list was Venture West. Generally, they contribute $1,000 to each pro developer candidate.

More and 80% of Rodman funding.... 72% of Solomon funding
Candidates Rodman and Solomon were particular dependent on special interest funding. 81% of Rodman and 72% of Solomon campaign funds have come from the special interest developer community.

The charts that follow tell the story


---

The LOVE "Six Step" 2020 Election Primer

A "Six Step" Plan
You have your ballot. The future of Oro Valley is in your hands. How will you vote? If you are undecided, here's six steps to follow.

Step 1: Watch the two forum videos
There are two forum videos. Oro Valley resident Jim Horn hosted a candidate forum on June 29. Horn's forum is a "Meet and Greet" forum. Each candidate discussed their candidacy. There was no debate or cross discussion. You can watch that forum here.

The Sun City Oro Valley Government Affairs Committee hosted a forum on July 1. That forum included questions to which each candidate responded. The forum is worth watching.

Step 2: Read candidate question responses and check online sources
The Explorer sent questions to each candidate. The Explorer published their "Candidate Surveys" in their June 24th edition.

Visit online sources like Take Back Oro Valley and Oro Valley Thrives. Learn from social media. Search each candidate's name on Facebook and Nextdoor.

Step 3: Look at past behavior
"Past behavior predicts future behavior."

There is ample information in LOVE regarding the behavior and the actions of Council Members Rodman and Solomon. There is also information on the behavior and actions of former Council Member Bill Garner. Tim Bohen has posted on the pages of LOVE.

Harry Greene has never been active in Oro Valley. He is playing catchup. He play's mini-reporter in some videos on his facebook page, doing interviews to try to get up to speed on Oro Valley.  He's like a cub reporter. We published about him on LOVE so do read that.

Please do take a look at our article last Thursday regarding the "hit piece" put out by Greene, Rodman and Solomon. The mailer brings the bar of civility way down. We wonder what they would do if they were elected to council.

Step 4: Understand endorsements or "implied" endorsements
Greene, Solomon and Rodman have attached placards or stickers on their signs regarding endorsements. "Endorsed by police and fire" means that the police and fire unions have endorsed them; not the police department or the fire district. These two unions, together with the Realtors of Southern Arizona always support pro-growth candidates. They don't interview other candidates.

You will also want to be careful to not assume what appear to be endorsements on campaign signs. Solomon, for example, has a campaign sign on La Canada, north of Moore that has a “Preserve Vistoso” placard attached to it, inferring that he is supported by the organization "preservevistoso.org". Preservevistoso.org has not endorsed him. They are not allowed to endorse any candidate because of their 501c3 status.

A new endorsement this year is the golf community surrounding the Oro Valley municipal courses. This is the Canada Hills Community Association ("CHCA"). They also support the pro developer candidates. They believe that Greene "...will best represent the Canada Hills Community Association".  Which we believe is code for "protect golf at any cost." As a council member, however,  Greene is supposed to represent the best interests of the entire community and not just the place he lives.

Candidates Garner and Bohen have not sought the endorsement of any group. They have earned the endorsement of people who actually do the "heavy lifting" of Oro Valley Government. Read about that tomorrow.

Step 5: Look at their contributors
Contributors are the best indication of the leanings of a political candidate. Contributors make donations to candidates who support their views. As we wrote last week, "big" money buys access. This week, the candidates will file reports telling us who has contributed to their campaign as of June 30. There will be another report they will file before the primary that will add to that list.

• For Rodman and Solomon, LOVE looked at their 2016 campaign funding. Almost all of their money came from developers, HSL being the primary one. It's hard to imagine that they have no developer money in their 2020 campaign. We shall see.
• Greene is a first time candidate.  He stated at the Sun City forum that he has no control over who donates to his campaign. "Anyone can click the 'donate' button." What Greene did not say is that he is free to reject a donation from someone with whom he does not want has campaign associated.
• Bill Garner and Tim Bohen have told us that they have taken contributions only from local residents in small amounts.

Step 6: Vote only for candidate(s) you want to be on council
Yesterday, we wrote that you are not required to vote for anyone you don't want on council.  Casting a second or third vote for someone you really don't want on council reduces the chance that your chosen candidate(s) will win. These non votes are called undervotes. Undervotes have spelled the difference in past Oro Valley elections.

Do be judicious in your voting. No need to rush. The future of Oro Valley is in your hands.
---
The county sent the ballots on July 8.  You can call (520) 724-4330) if you did not receive yours.

"Cease and Desist" Letter Sent To Greene, Rodman and Solomon

Cease and desist use of town seal
Last week we reported of a political mailer sent by the campaigns of Greene, Rodman and Solomon. The mailer included the photo in the panel below. It is a picture of now ex-police chief Dan Sharp in uniform with a badge that includes the town's logo.

Class One Misdemeanor
Town Legal Services Director, Tobin Sidles wrote the a "Cease and Desist-Use of Town Logo" letter to Harry Greene on July 9.

"On or around July 8, either you or one fo your agents acting on your behalf created and published a political mailer advertisement, which included a picture of the Town Seal/Logo located in it on the badge of retired Police Chief Danny Sharp...  You are hereby put on notice that the Town of Oro Valley Seal/Logo is copyrighted within the State of Arizona.

Logo included in last week's political mailer

Further, under Town Code Section 10-1-26, it is a crime... to use the Town Seal/Logo without the prior consent of the Oro Valley Town Council. This specifically includes use for election purposes. You are hereby on notice that any pictures within your control containing the Town seal/logo within them must be "fuzzed out." (Source: July 9 letter from Tobin Sidles to Harry Greene)

Not in compliance in other areas
Add this to the list of other violations regarding political signage from which Greene, Rodman and Solomon suffer. These include placards that make their signs bigger than allowed and identification labels on signs that are smaller than required.
---

Greene, Rodman, Solomon Launch Disgusting Attack on Garner

Candidates Greene, Solomon, and Rodman introduce a new low to Oro Valley elections
Today's mail included an 8.5 x 11 inch glossy mailer that was paid for by the campaigns of council candidates Harry Greene, Steve Solomon, and Bill Rodman. It features Ret. Oro Valley Police Chief  Daniel Sharp.

Sharp says Garner is a threat to public safety
Sharp asserts that "Bill Garner's candidacy... is a threat to a very successful approach" to Oro Valley public safety...when on council he practiced 'wedge politics', creating conflict.."

Sharp states that Garner has "...continued to work behind the scenes to undermine the Department."  He concludes that "A vote for Bill Garner is a vote against public safety."

Saying something does not make it so
Sharp makes these outrageous assertions without providing one example.

In addition, Sharp fails to mention that in 2009 while on council, Garner and Oro Valley resident John Musolf worked with Sharp to save 8 police officer positions in the budget. Garner worked for public safety. Not against it! Their work resulted in a 7-0 police budget approval by council. (source)

Sharp's image on mailer fraudulent
The picture of Sharp in the mailer conveys the impression that Sharp is still in charge of the department and that, therefore, he represents the views of the department. It's a picture that was posted on a website in October, while he was Chief of Police. He is wearing his Chief's uniform. The badge on the uniform includes the town logo.  Sharp's signature on the mailer puts the word "Ret" after OVPD Chief of Police. Most people won't even see that.

The Oro Valley Police Department does not support this attack
We asked Oro Valley Police Chief Kara Riley if the  Department was associated in any way with this document. Riley's reply is quoted in the panel at left. Clearly, any inference that the views of Sharp reflect the views of the Department are false.

Council candidate Bill Garner rebuts Sharp's accusation
"Frankly, I was stunned by the political mailer. My campaign has had nothing but positive messaging and support towards public safety. I did not oppose the community policing model nor was it cut or modified while I served on council. I actually advocated for retaining police officers when the former chief removed them from a recommended budget in 2009.

Oro Valley has turned a new chapter in our police department leadership. I’ve met with Chief Riley and have nothing but respect for the manner in which she is running the department. I look forward to working with her."

The repulsive three
We always thought Council Member Solomon capable of low behavior. After all, he led an attempt to recall Mayor Winfield and Vice Mayor Barrett. He's ranted and raved at council meetings. He told one person at a council meeting that they should leave Oro Valley if they don't like it here.

But we never thought that Rodman or Greene would allow their campaigns to participate in something so repulsive. Nor did we ever imagine that a former police chief would allow himself to be used.

Why would anyone want Harry Greene, Steve Solomon, or Bill Rodman on council? 
They have introduced Oro Valley to the depths of depravity with this behavior.

Imagine what they will do to council.
--

The Watchdog Report: By Mike Zinkin

The Ides of March weren't good for Oro Valley either
Just like Julius Caesar had a bad month of March, so did the Oro Valley Golf and Community Center. The Community Center Fund (CRF) ended the month $346,907 in the red. At 75% through the fiscal year, the fund remains in the red, and the council still owes a $120,000 payment to the General Fund Contingency and $454,808 in promised capital improvements.

Troon-managed facilities (golf, food, beverage, non aquatic center swimming, and some tennis) lost $77,103 in March. They were forecasted only to lose $25,754. They missed their forecast by 33%. How does Troon manage to keep their job with their 2.5 year record of continually poor forecasting? Troon has lost $1,809,051 so far this fiscal year and we still have 25% of the fiscal year remaining. So far, they have upped their year-end forecasted losses from $1,534,505 to $2,038,334 to $2,092,218.

The Overlook Restaurant was forecasted to make $27,021, but lost $3,204. The food and beverage portion of Troon has lost $93,705 through March.

The dedicated Community and Recreation Center Fund is not covering expenses
The CRF fund was suppose to provide ALL the revenues for capital improvements, yet the FY 17/18 budget shows $75,000 coming from the Bed Tax Fund for tennis court improvements, another $75,000 coming from the Water Utility Fund for a water main replacement at the Community Center, and only $50,000 actually coming from the CRF for cart path improvements. In other words, of the $200,000 being spent on Community Center capital improvements, only $50,000 (or 25%) is actually being provided by the "special Community Center fund.”

Solomon’s Fuzzy Math
During the April 19th council meeting, Councilmember Solomon bragged that “7,000 rounds of golf were played” in March. Of course, he didn’t mention that 2,046 of those were member rounds. This is important to note because members do not pay per round, they pay a monthly fee and that fee does not change whether they play one round or 100 rounds. Solomon also neglected to mention that 602 of the 7,000 rounds were complimentary rounds or that golf memberships had increased by just one, from 238 to 239. This is a far cry from the 318 memberships that Troon desired to have by December 2016.

Solomon Speaks with Forked Tongue
Councilmember Solomon also mistakenly crowed during the April 19th council meeting that:

“…the Golf and Community Center revenues and dedicated half cent sales tax for this year will cover all of its costs. It’s not using any other town funds. It’s not taking money from any other town project or town source.”

Of course, none of that was true. Interestingly, after claiming that the dedicated Community Center fund was covering all of the costs, just one week later, during the April 26th budget study session, it was none other than Councilmember Solomon who suggested taking additional monies from the General Fund Contingency to do some upgrades to the Community Center. Councilmember Rodman agreed.

This is a complete turnaround from what they asserted while campaigning – that we didn’t need to worry about Community Center expenses because there was a special fund set aside for those expenses. Additionally, it has always been the Town's philosophy that one time expenses should be paid for with one time revenues. Dipping into the General Fund would certainly be a departure from this philosophy.

A novel idea - Represent your constituents
If Councilmembers Solomon and Rodman desire to spend General Fund Contingency monies, why don't they spend them on Naranja Park? That way their constituents will get something they desire. They NEVER desired a golf course, more swimming pools, or a restaurant. What their constituents desired is spelled out in the June 2014 statistically valid survey.

Councilmember Rodman is a member of the Gallery Golf Club – a club that fired Troon. Oro Valley residents should ponder this question: If Troon was not managing Councilmember Rodman's money responsibly, why does he allow them to mismanage your money?

Et tu Hiremath, et al.

Editorial: You Don’t Say!

During the April 19th Town Council Meeting, residents were allowed to address the council regarding the proposed $17 million dollar Naranja Park Bond.

One resident stated that if they hadn’t made the poor decision to purchase the El Con Golf Courses and Community Center, we would have the money to fund the Naranja Park ball fields without the necessity of a $17 million bond and secondary property tax.

Another resident made three points in his speech. (1) the town needs to straighten out the financial problems with the golf courses first before looking for any more money from the citizens to fund ball fields, (2) the council shouldn’t allow one financial mistake to add to another, and (3) we the taxpayers shouldn’t have to bear the burden for a limited number of users.

Councilmember Solomon Presents “Alternate Facts”
Clearly upset that some residents had the insight to connect the financial problems of the Community Center and Golf Courses to the current need for a secondary property tax to fund ball fields, Councilmember Steve Solomon launched into a 4-minute lecture attempting to discredit the naysayers and convince the audience that the Community Center is thriving. Below is a sample of his comments that evening.

Solomon said: “The community center is thriving. It is not failing.”

What he didn’t say: The Community and Recreation Center Fund (CRC Fund) is currently $477,986 in the RED. In addition, as of June 30, 2017, the Town will owe $240,000 from the CRC Fund back to the General Fund to begin repayment of the $1.2 million that the council borrowed from the General Fund in March 2015 to jumpstart the CRC Fund.

The council voted to delay the first payment in Fiscal Year 15/16 until FY 16/17 which is why they now owe two payments of $120,000 ($240,000) back to the General Fund. Add this $240,000 to the $477,986 deficit, and the CRC Fund is now $717,986 in the RED. Solomon also didn’t tell you that golf memberships are still nowhere near Troon’s desired 318 members.

Solomon said: “The expenditures for the community center, particularly this year, are down and our revenues are up. Now that’s the kind of trend that you want and it’s been trending that way for awhile now.”

What he didn’t say: Not only is the Community Center Fund $477,986 in the red, but this figure takes into consideration that there was $1.4 million in sales tax revenues dedicated to the CRC Fund in this fiscal year.

Solomon said: “As mentioned, the golf and community center revenues and the dedicated half cent sales tax for this year will cover all of it’s costs. It’s not using any other town funds. It’s not taking money from any other town project or town source.”

What he didn’t say: As reported on LOVE on April 10th in the article “Smoke, Mirrors, and Lower Math,” during the April 5th Town Council meeting, the mayor asked the finance director how much money the Community Center was taking from the General Fund. The answer was that the Community Center was consuming 6% of the adopted budget of $117,368,903. However, with the dedicated sales tax revenue source, the actual effect was 1.6%.

Translated into dollar figures, 1.6% of $117 million is $1.8 million. This is the first time that the mayor and finance director admitted that the half-cent sales tax increase is not covering Community Center expenses. To compensate for this shortfall, they have siphoned almost an additional $2 million out of the General Fund. Therefore, Solomon’s assertion that the Community Center is “not using any other town funds” is demonstrably false.

Remember that NO MONIES other than the .5% sales tax revenues were to be utilized for the Community Center. They now admit that they have spent $1.8 million above and beyond the sales tax revenues.

Solomon said: “The facts clearly show that the claims of the failing golf course and that we can’t afford new playing fields are completely false. The true financial numbers are on our website.“

What he didn’t say: He didn’t tell you what the “true financial numbers” were.

Drum Roll Please -- The True Financial Numbers

• In February 2016, Troon (golf, food, beverage, tennis) lost $61,294.
• In February 2017, Troon lost $110,264.
• Troon’s losses were $48,970 HIGHER in February 2017 than in February 2016.

• Food and beverage was forecasted to make $12,354 in February 2017 but made only $5,553.
• The restaurant has lost $90,501 so far this fiscal year.
• The forecast was to lose only $11,842.

• Troon’s initial forecast for losses in FY 16/17 was $1,534,505.
• They recently had to up that forecast to $2,038,334.
• There has not been one month this fiscal year where their losses have been under $100,000.
• If this trend continues, the $2,038,334 figure will have to be revised again.

Guest View: Don Bristow ~ The Great “Bond” Caper (Part 3)

Last week on LOVE, “The Great ‘Bond’ Caper (Parts 1 and 2)” revealed the biased treatment of Call to Audience speakers based on whether their presentation concurred or not with the Council’s wishes. Unfortunately, censoring the first speaker (Ms. Stratman) while taking no action against the second speaker (Mr. Baker) were not the only biased acts of the council that evening.

As a preamble to Call to Audience, Mayor Hiremath read the following statement:
“At this time, any member of the public is allowed to address the Mayor and Town Council on any issue not listed on today’s agenda. Pursuant to the Arizona Open Meeting Law, individual Council Members may ask Town Staff to review the matter, ask that the matter be placed on a future agenda, or respond to criticism made by speakers. However, the Mayor and Council may not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during Call to Audience. In order to speak during Call to Audience please specify what you wish to discuss when completing the blue speaker card.”

As noted in last week’s LOVE article, Attorney Gary Verburg reiterated the above protocol during the meeting.

Protocol Schmotocol
Therefore, at that point in the meeting, the mayor, council, and town staff had TWICE heard the protocol that they must follow regarding a Call to Audience speaker. In fact, they are reminded of this protocol at every meeting. Despite this, Councilmember Solomon made the following comment upon completion of the first speaker’s presentation:

Solomon: “Mr. Mayor, there was an implication [in Ms. Stratman’s speech] that Oro Valley has a problem with their budget somehow…I’d like to ask our financial director [Stacey Lemos] to give us a brief summary of whether we are in trouble financially or not…”

Solomon initiated a financial discussion with Stacey Lemos with the intent of countering Ms. Stratman’s comments. Neither Attorney Verburg nor any councilmember objected to Solomon’s action which was out-of-order and a violation of Arizona Open Meeting Law.

Later, after the discussion on Regular Agenda Item 2 (the bond issue) had ended, Mayor Hiremath also responded to Ms. Stratman’s earlier golf course comments in his typical manner of lecturing and criticizing. As we’ve witnessed many times, anyone who questions or disagrees with the mayor and council is painted as negative and misinformed.

The fact that he delayed his lecture until after the bond issue had been discussed still did not make it allowable. He, too, violated Arizona Open Meeting Law without anyone objecting.

Recap: It’s a Matter of Ethics

• Point of Order called against Ms. Stratman for speaking on the bond issue.
• No Point of Order called against Mr. Baker for speaking on the bond issue.
• No Point of Order called against Councilmember Solomon for discussing an issue brought up during the Call to Audience.
• No Point of Order called against Mayor Hiremath for discussing an issue brought up during the Call to Audience.

With no member of Council or Attorney Verburg raising a Point of Order on any of the above prohibited actions, it calls their ethics into question.

Anyone interested in hearing all of the Mayor’s comments can go to the Town’s website and view the video of the April 5, 2017 Town Council Meeting.

Solomon Uses Scare Tactics

The other day, council candidate Steve Solomon dropped a "scare flyer" on the doorsteps of some. This one alleges that Burns, Garner and Zinkin have "pledged to close and sell your golf course-destroying your home value." Oh my. Tragedy to follow! What will these poor residents do?

We wouldn't be surprised to see more flyers, saying that incumbent candidates plan to "gut the police force;""take your gun rights;" kidnap and  your children and grandchildren.

Heck. Solomon will make anything up. And those who live only on "sound bites" will believe it.

The fact is: The supporters of the challengers would like you to vote from fear.

Solomon will feed you any "horse petuti" that he thinks that you will swallow!

Here's what one Oro Valley resident thinks about Solomon's behavior.
---
TIRED OF THE SOLOMON FALSEHOODS? 

Four years ago, Steve Solomon ran for Council in an attempt to retain the seat that he was appointed to by the Majority-4 in 2010. Since being beaten in the 2012 primary, no one has seen hide nor hair of Mr. Solomon. He has not been present at any Council meeting, board or commission meeting, and has not volunteered for any Town project. Now, after all this time, he reappears.

Solomon is a "big developer", "big projects" guy.

On April 20, 2011, Solomon voted to rezone the property where the HSL apartments now stand in Steam Pump Village. On Dec. 7, 2011, Solomon voted to approve a Major General Plan Amendment to allow for the apartments at Linda Vista/Oracle. On April 18, 2012, Solomon voted to rezone the property to allow for the apartments at First/Oracle. On May 2, 2012, Solomon voted to approve both the conceptual site plan and architecture plan to allow for the Encantada Apartments at Steam Pump Village to be 3 stories high.

Now Mr. Solomon is trying to tell you that he will save the Police and SRO's. In fact, the current council increased the number of SRO's by a 7-0 vote, and when have the police been threatened? He’s taking credit for forming Dial-A-Ride when it was a concerted effort by citizens and multiple council members after Solomon voted to eliminate funding for Coyote Run, the town’s former transportation service for the elderly and disabled.

Now he is telling the people who live adjacent to the golf courses that, if you do not elect him, your property values are going to diminish.  (See right panel)  Next he will tell you he laid the cornerstone to the library and Town Hall.

Solomon is telling you that the incumbents have pledged to close and sell the golf course. This is absurd. The incumbents are the only candidates who have offered any alternatives to the continued losses incurred by golf. Evert incumbent has also stated publicly that they want to include the People in finding alternatives to stop the continued losses from the golf operation.

Solomon is n got going to save your property values. He has not offered one solution to stop the recurring losses from the golf course operation. His “plan” is to do nothing and thereby continue to lose more than $1,000,000 annually for at least the next 5 years. His “plan” could result in the need for a property tax because Oro Valley cannot afford five more years of these substantial losses.

Solomon was bad for Oro Valley during his 2-year tenure as an appointed Councilman. He has done nothing to help our town since his defeat in 2012. It would be a serious mistake to return Mr. Solomon to Town Council.
---