Shame on me?
In regard to Dec. 13 letter “Shame on you, Solomon”: I was misquoted in a letter to the editor last week and then accused of shameful behavior based upon this misquote. The supposedly offending statement occurred at the Dec. 6 council meeting during the discussion about Oro Valley potentially having planning input on the state-owned land on Oro Valley’s boundary at Tangerine and Thornydale.
During that discussion, many Pima County residents spoke objecting to any Oro Valley involvement with the planning of any potential future use of this state property even though it would have a direct impact on Oro Valley and our residents. Most of those speakers stated that they chose to live on large four-acre lots near the state land, and they don’t want to live near higher density. Their opposition to Oro Valley was based on incorrect information, and they freely expressed their opinion that they thought Oro Valley is developed poorly and not a good place to live.
This discussion can be viewed on the video on the town’s website. It starts at the 20:52:00 time mark and my comments are in the 1:42:31 through the 1:46:00 time mark. Please watch for yourself and you will hear the discussion and my comments. At the end of my comments I said, “If you don’t want to live in Oro Valley because you don’t like it, don’t live in Oro Valley.”
Although my statement could have been worded better I did not, as the letter writer claimed say “if you hate Oro Valley so much you should leave.” When the letter writer made that claim at the council meeting I apologized stating that I did not say that nor did I intend to make such a statement. Unfortunately, the letter writer chose to continue to make this false claim based upon what she thought she heard as opposed what was actually said.
Editor’s note: Steve Solomon is a Town of Oro Valley Councilmember.
No seat at the table
In the spring of 2017, Oro Valley commissioned a $50,000 study on “El Conquistador Golf & Tennis Assessment & Recommendations.” On July 12, the consultants delivered their results and a 170 page report to Town Council in a special session. The report (with summary) and video can be viewed aonline at the town website.
This past week, on Dec. 12 and 13 the town hosted two meetings moderated by town manager Mary Jacobs to discuss these findings and recommendations. However, only residents living along the courses and El Con members were invited. What about the rest of us Oro Valley residents who are paying the extra half-cent sales tax, and funding the $2.2 million losses? These losses are on operations alone (no improvements) and include $740,000 per year just to water the grass.
First, we did not get to vote on this acquisition in 2015, and now we have no seat at the table to ask questions and share thoughts. This week’s invitees were already allowed to provide input to the town because on page 4, the report states “The feedback from these groups showed very little tolerance for change and a lack of concern for the troubled facility economics.” Yet this week’s forums are a pre-cursor to town staff giving a final recommendation to the council next January.
Why are the majority of Oro Valley residents and tax payers again being left out of a decision of such momentous consequences?
Want to see your opinion in the paper? Send letters to the editor (300-word limit) to Managing Editor Logan Burtch-Buus at email@example.com.