Pima Power Structure Continues To Stonewall Citizen Complaint, Ignore Own Rules

After filing a complaint on January 2, 2018, with the Chair of the Pima County Board of Supervisors pursuant to the Pima County Regulatory Bill of Rights, Picture Rocks activist Albert Lannon expected a response at the end of the 15 business days allowed by the statute. It didn’t come. The complaint charged that County Administrator Charles Huckelberry and his staff had, for at least five years, promoted and publicized an Interstate 11 route through the Avra Valley in violation of BOS Resolution 2007-343. Lannon said that he, and others, had been “adversely affected” through misuse of tax dollars and in other ways.

Chair Sharon Bronson resigned instead, and on January 16 Richard Elias took her place. Giving the BOS the benefit of the doubt, Lannon waited another 15 business days, but still no response. While standing at the Call to the Public podium at the February 6 BOS meeting to insist on the response he was due, BOS attorney Andrew Flagg told Lannon he thought a response had been sent. It had not. On February 14, Flagg sent this email:

After our conversation last week, I reviewed our file, and you were inadvertently left off our response list. Attached is the response you should have received sooner. I apologize for the error.

Sincerely,
Andy
Andy Flagg | Chief Civil Deputy
Pima County Attorney’s Office – Civil Division

The non-response was identical to one sent to dozens of other Pima County residents who had submitted shorter, but similar, complaints. When an ADI reporter requested earlier that some questions about the non-response be answered by the County Attorney’s designated media contact, Isabel Burruel-Smutzer, Flagg sent this non-response:

Your questions below were forwarded to me. This Office represents Pima County. I have not been authorized to provide any substantive response to your questions below.

Respectfully,
Andy

At the February 6 BOS meeting Chairman Elias said he knew nothing about the complaint, despite the fact that BOS video of the meeting shows Lannon handing copies to the County Clerk, Julie Castañeda; BOS protocol is that things for BOS members are distributed to them via the Clerk. Lannon gave them each individual Supervisor a copy after asking Elias if he was saying the Clerk didn’t do her job, adding “I don’t believe that.”

Here is Flagg’s non-response, along with relevant citations that show his errors:

February 14, 2018
R£: Your complaint filed January 2,2018

Dear Albert Lannon,

This letter responds on behalf of the Pima County Administrator to your complaint filed January 2, 2018. The complaint was not submitted to a department director as required by Board of Supervisors Policy C 2.8.

Policy C 2.8 states: “Individuals alleging that they have been adversely affected by a county or flood control district ordinance, rule, substantive policy statement or practice in violation of the applicable Regulatory Bill of Rights may submit a written complaint to the relevant department Director or their designee.”

Since the complaint is against the “relevant department Director,” County Administrator Charles Huckelberry, it is curious that Flagg writes “on behalf of the Pima County Administrator.” Missing from Flagg’s analysis, however, is any reference to County Code 2.04.070:

“The county administrator shall report to the board of supervisors of Pima County, and under the direction of the board of supervisors the county administrator shall be responsible for the general direction, supervision, administration and coordination of all affairs of the county…Subject only to policies adopted or directions given by official actions of the board….”

Flagg continues: “In any event, the allegations in your complaint do not involve any County ordinance, rule, regulation, substantive policy statement, or county practice. Therefore, the actions you describe in your complaint are not subject to A.R.S. §§ 11-251.18 or A.R.S. Title 11, Chapter 11, Article 1.”

Andrew L.Flagg
Chief Civil Deputy County Attorney

Lannon’s 10-page January 2 complaint stated: “Since at least 2013 the County Administrator has been actively pursuing, advertising, and promoting an Avra Valley route for a proposed Interstate 11 in blatant violation of BOS Policy, as expressed in Resolution 2007-343 (copy attached). He has used copious County resources and personnel in his continuing deliberate reinterpretation of BOS Policy, including the publication of maps (attached). He has spoken for the County in the current Arizona Department of Transportation Interstate 11 Tier 1 Environmental Impact Study (attached) creating the impression that Pima County favors an Avra Valley route for I-11, despite the clear language of BOS 2007-343, and Supervisor Bronson’s statement to a Picture Rocks community meeting prior to the last election that the BOS opposes an Avra Valley I-11 route consistent with BOS 2007-343.

“As a result the current ADOT study continues to show an Avra Valley I-11 route as one of only two possible ‘recommended alternatives’ despite overwhelming community opposition. Adverse effects of the County Administrator/ADOT’s proposed I-11 Avra Valley route include the displacement of 47 families, noise and air pollution, light pollution; infringement on protected land such as the Tucson Wildlife Mitigation Corridor established when the CAP canal was constructed to facilitate wildlife movement, and diminishing of current recreational facilities.

“Loss of tourism dollars may well lead to increased property taxes to make up the difference, which adversely affects me, a fixed-income senior. The misuse of my tax dollars on this issue over the past five years affects me adversely.

“The impact of an Avra Valley interstate highway nearby would adversely affect me and many others by denying us the enjoyment we now have of Saguaro National Park West, Tucson Mountain Park, the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum, Ironwood National Monument and Kitt Peak Observatory. I, and my neighbors, would be subject to the dangers of hazardous cargo, human and drug smuggling in our communities. Those, like myself, who have medical conditions like Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease would be put at increased physical risk from increased air pollution, an adverse situation. I, and others, would adversely face decreased property values with a freeway nearby.”

About ADI Staff Reporter 12171 Articles
Under the leadership of Editor-in -Chief Huey Freeman, our team of staff reporters bring accurate,timely, and complete news coverage.