PACC supporters go on the attack

On September 26, Daniel Sullivan, an appointee to the Pima County Bond Advisory Committee filed a complaint against Supervisor Ally Miller with the Pima County Attorney’s Office due to her opposition to Proposition 415.

“I have reason to believe that District 1 Supervisor Ally Miller has violated state law by trying to influence the outcome of an election or ballot proposition through her publicly owned and publicly financed web page,” according to an article in the Arizona Daily Star.

While it was the first time Sullivan filed a formal complaint against Miller, the Star failed to note that the retiree from the Dukakis administration and former RTA attorney was appointed to serve on the Bond Committee as a representative for Supervisor Ramon Valadez’s District 2.

Sullivan is a loud and prolific critic of Miller’s and appears to be a staunch supporter of the $22 million bond ballot measure.

That bond measure proposal allows at least 13 percent of the monies to be used on consulting fees, which is over 2 /12 times what typical fees run for this size project, according to experts.

The proposed “no-kill” facility will provide life-long homes to mostly pit bull breeds that are considered unadoptable. With that population, and inability to find homes willing to take the dogs, it is the long term costs of keeping the animals that raise the cost of the proposal to a staggering $182.4 million for 30 yrs.

Sullivan told the Star that he was “wary of Supervisor Miller’s baseless allegations against the other supervisors … since she’s been in office.” The Star failed to note that Sullivan has supported Supervisor Sharon Bronson with campaign dollars and volunteer time and ignored his volumes of literary complaints against Miller.

Out of the 22 plus million dollars – very little will even go to benefit the animals. Most of this is going to “other, ” according to sources.

$22 million dollars divided by the 24,000 animals cared for at PACC equals $916.66 per animal. This does not include the money taken in by the adoption fees, pet fix funding, and general funding for the program.

In 2010 – 4.6 million dollars were spent to renovate PACC
In 2012 -2013 PACC provided care for approx. 24,000 animals
In 2014 – $200,000 additional dollars were provided to AWASA to pay for “free” spay and neuter Pima County Pet Fix program (based on an average of $75 per pet that is over 2,600 animals spayed or neutered – more than 10%

Although Huckelberry claims that the Pima County Animal Care Center has not had any improvement since the 1960s an invitation by Supervisor Sharon Bronson to a groundbreaking event is making the social networking rounds.

A group of Pima County residents has also gained momentum with their Stop Prop 415 campaign.

While the supervisors’ Publicity Package comments amount to a call for action and are signed by them, the link to which Chuck Huckelberry hopes to hang Miller with is a link to her private website; That site then offers a link to a Pima County page.

Miller told the Star reporter that she “would certainly post ‘Vote no on Proposition 415 again because that is my opinion. There was no county funding to do that post.”

Huckelberry told the Star, “I think it’s obvious we go to great lengths to be neutral, and the staff cannot take a position on a proposition one way or another. All we can do is factually provide information,” he said. “This clearly is something that ought to be reviewed by the county attorney.”

Draft Bond Implementation plan memo
Draft Bond Implementation plan memo

To read Huckelberry’s memo:PACC draft bond ordinance, click here.

About ADI Staff Reporter 16946 Articles
Under the leadership of Editor-in -Chief Huey Freeman, our team of staff reporters bring accurate,timely, and complete news coverage.


  1. This is laughable. We Tax Payers are paying for their pamphlet and all their friends have submitted letters along with Richard Elias, Ramon Valdez and Ray Carol (Board of Supervisors), Notice that Huckelberry says no one employed, especially Supervisors can show partiality. Some of which will receive funds from the 22 Million. Notice no one has advertised on the no side. Boy this sure “smells” This is a knoxymoron.

  2. Just more of our taxpayers money flitted away by people who haven’t a thought in the world about us. I wish we could get everyone out of there except Ally now. Is there a way anyone knows? We can’t afford this bunch anymore.

  3. But, of course he’s affiliated with other board members and a tool. It’s so frivolous. Everything associated with prop 415 should be investigated, including the fact that it was probably illegal to even put the bond on the ballot without first having proper public hearings. Those supervisors could care less about either saving or shooting dogs. It’s all about more money to divide among their friends.

Comments are closed.