On Tuesday, at the Pima County Board of Supervisors’ meeting, one issue was front and center for members of the public; Pima County Proposition 415: Facilities for the Care and Safekeeping of Animals.
The staggering $28,000,000 plus price tag has some residents worried. Pima County Proposition 415 must be approved by the voters for a $22,000,000 bond to build a new animal shelter and it will increase annual property-tax by $3.90 on a home worth $147,800. There is also a state Proposition 415 concerning state lawmakers salaries.
Members from the Stop Prop 415 Committee were on hand to share information with the public about the costs included in the bond measure. The Pima County Supervisors voted to place a bond measure on the 2014 General Election ballot, with the stated intention of funding a “no-kill” animal shelter. In that bond package are millions of dollars tagged for consultants.
It was a divided room with many people in favor of the new animal facility and many in the room concerned over the exorbitant cost. The bonds, which will be issued in yearly waves, will carry interest rates between 3-4 percent.
Before the Calls to the Audience, Supervisor Ally Miller voiced her concerns about construction cost, the facility itself and its usability. Miller and others including leaders in Marana have continually expressed concern about the use of bonds and the questionable allocation for those monies.
Supervisor Elias pushed back citing a favorable audit of Pima County bonds last year saying, “So an outside independent entity from the state of Arizona recognized that we had conducted bond programs since 1997 without getting a single ding… well that is unusual coming from the state, but that’s okay.”
The finding was unusual, but virtually meaningless due to the fact that the clean bill of health was issued after funds were reportedly swept into and out of accounts to ensure a clean audit.
But according to the Stop 415 Prop Committee, Pima County has twice as much debt as all 14 counties in Arizona combined, and is already $1.4 billion in debt. The tax rate has increased 24 percent over the past 2 years in the 8th poorest metropolitan area in the country.
Still, one volunteer at the local animal shelter was distraught and worried about the shape of the animal shelter saying, “Our animals are leaving in a facility that probably should have been updated or replaced at least 25 years ago… this is probably for most of us the most important thing we will see come to fruition in our lifetimes for the animal community.”
Geri Ottoboni, a member of Stop Prop 415 told the supervisors, “We are already in debt and this facility is too expensive… There is just too much pork.”
Joe Bogart, a member of the bond advisory committee said, “What bothers me the most is the bond advisory committee does not look at the money when we vote on this… I voted for it, but the thing is I voted for the project. We don’t look at the money side of it and I think that is a mistake.”
Richard Hernandez, a popular community activist, agreed. He told the supervisors that he opposed Prop 415 because on the way to the Board meeting, “I passed 59 to 60 homeless men, women, and youth. Instead of spending almost $30 million dollars on a shelter facility for animals we should spend $10 million on building a place for human beings. These people laugh, cry, have feelings just like you and I, and long before I’m willing to support almost $30 million dollars for an animal shelter I’m willing to support a shelter for human beings.” He asked members of the public in attendance at the meeting to join him to defeat “another frivolous waste of taxpayer money. Several millions to consulting fees for cronies? Let’s focus and prioritize the needs of our community.”
Miller was a lone no vote and based her objection “upon the cost of the animal shelter only. I think we need an animal shelter however we’ve already purchased $16,000,000 worth of dirt this year that I thought was unnecessary and we could have used those monies to work on the animal shelter instead of incurring further debt.”
The subject of using public funds for donations to private charities sparked the most impassioned speech by a Pima County resident Nancy Newman.
Newman, who had attended the meeting to address the issue of failed washes during a storm earlier this month, told the supervisors that she would address that issue later because “after hearing what I heard today, I am horrified.”
She addressed her comments to the to the County’s attorney, who earlier in the meeting refused to answer Miller’s questions regarding the donations of public funds to private charities. Newman said, “You’re the chief legal counsel and you’re ignorant of everything that’s going on? Ms. Miller, now I understand why you have not joined the tent,” referring to supervisors Sharon Bronson, Elias, Ramon Valadez, and Ray Carroll. Newman then asked the supervisors if they took the donations they made with Pima County tax payer money’s off of their personal tax returns. “Jeepers,” she said, “I’m really wondering about you guys. You guys are sloppy. You are really loose with what you do. I’m horrified. Thank you Miss Miller, for being who you are.” Referring her comments to the other supervisors, Newman continued, “And here you don’t clean up the washes. You’re taking all of our money for your own tax donations or whatever, but you’re letting the washes wash away our landscapes. Our trees. Our roadways, and people are dying because they’re being washed off the roads because you’re not keeping the bridges cleaned out. I’m shocked. Where have you guys been? You’ve been in office too long. You’re sloppy. You’re corrupt. You’re just not what we expect, and management filters down, and when we look at the roads, and the washes, and the money that we all have to pay out as homeowners; you are not taking care of us. We do not feel secure because our roads are not being taken care of, washes are not taken care of. I’m very very concerned because I watched it happen in my neighborhood last week and we were pretty much flooded. We were in the middle of the river and it shouldn’t have been.”
“Here you are spending our taxes on your little slush funds,” said Newman. “As a matter fact, I questioned Bronson last week for the award she was getting from the Golden Goose. She probably doesn’t even know where it’s located.”
Newman concluded, “Now I understand why you haven’t joined the tent. Now I understand why Mr. Carol says Miss Miller doesn’t join us in the tent. Now I understand why. I am so disappointed. We have a beautiful community, and bad management filters down, and you guys are pretty much trashed it.”