Surprise, AZ News blog

Comments to the City Council May 24,2007

I gave a copy of my remarks to the City Clerk for the record.

This email was sent to you Mayor Shafer in March and as of yet no response.

Mayor Shafer

Could you tell me, if you and the city council can borrow through the bonding process the maximum allowed under law without the approval of the voters of the City of Surprise?

As always

Bob Vukanovich

MY RESPONSE TO THE ARTICLE ON ANOTHER BLOG.
THAT CLIFF ELKINS WAS A STAND UP GUY TO COME IN DURING THE RECALL IS A MISREPRESENTATION OF THE FACTS. CLIFF ELKINS WAS A MEMBER OF WHAT WAS KNOWN AS THE S.O.S. 

THIS GROUP LED BY LYNN TRUITT WERE BEHIND ALL OF THE RECALLS, TAKING PLACE IN THE CITY OF SURPRISE, EVEN JOE JOHNSON ATTENDED THEIR MEETINGS AND THEY ONLY STOPPED WHEN THEY HAD ENOUGH SIGNATURES FOR MY RECALL.

 AT THE SAME TIME THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A DEAL BROKERED BETWEEN THE MAYOR AND TRUITT BECAUSE THEY STOPPED ALL RECALLS AGAINST THE MAYOR. SINCE THEN SHE HAS REMOVED THE MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE MEMBER OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND REPLACED HIM WITH LYNN TRUITT, WHO IS A REALTOR.

 I QUESTIONED THE MAYOR ABOUT THIS AND WAS TOLD THAT HE WAS THE BEST PERSON FOR THE JOB…..

BOB VUKANOVICH

The blog’s comments in the newszap.com and the surpriseaznews.info is turning the heat on for the Mayors race in the City of Surprise. Some have already been burnt.

Received one comment on this article from a person who use’s I don’t how many names? I have no idea what she, he or what is talking about. This is why I screen most of everything that comes in, this is not a garbage web site.

Several quotes have been made by the “Bears” on the sister blog of this site proclaiming a leader in the Surprise Mayoral race.  Where are these findings from?  Can we have them listed as proof?  Please don’t delete this request.  I believe Surprise residents have the right to know.

surprised devil

This was my answer to the above post.

 Ask, as you call it the sister Blog.

Bob Vukanovich

I take it that there are no dummies, only Bear’s at surpriseaznews.info

Because we don’t live in the wild west.

When our City Manager Jim Rumpeltes made his accusation against this sitting council, I thought and still do that the State of Arizona should have taken control of the city until we have some resemblance of order.

And pass the ammunition, watch the actions and words of our council members, worst then a grade B movie, even our attorney seems to be spaced out, making bad calls.

This City is like a loose cannon without any direction what so ever, nobody Home.

Councilwoman Foro accuses Councilman Arismendez of being mad (7/12/07 meeting) because he couldn’t put his shill in to replace Cliff Elkins.

07/13/2007 7:55:54 AM
Leaque of Women Voters
The Surprise Voter Guide for Mayor and City Council have been posted online at http://nwmc.az.lwvnet.org/
Click on the link above and follow the prompts to the Voter Guide. We have diligently tried to post your answers as sent to us.
UNFORTUNATELY WE CANNOT MAKE CHANGES TO YOUR ANSWERS IN ANY MANNER UNLESS IT WAS OUR ERROR. ANY SPELLING, GRAMMAR OR ANSWERS THAT WERE TRUNCATED BECAUSE THE RESPONSES WERE OVER 100 WORDS CANNOT BE ADJUSTED.
We are looking forward to the Mayoral Forum on 7/24 and the City Council Forum on 7/25. Please remember to arrive no later than 5/45 PM.We wish all of you good luck in the election! 
Cathy Goldberg
Webmaster, League of Women Voters NW Maricopa  

Cities need to stop crying about overdue limits on tax incentives

With a stroke of her pen, Arizona’s governor has rightly affirmed that tax rebates used by municipalities to lure retail developers are a waste of taxpayers’ money.

Gov. Janet Napolitano signed into law a measure that fines cities that put taxes in developers’ pockets in exchange for their business. She deserves commendation. 

She saw through flaccid arguments of cities wanting to maintain local control and needing tax incentives to spur economic development. In reality, all that the municipalities wanted was a competitive economic edge over surrounding communities.

“These tax breaks have gotten out of control and have been offered to a host of businesses, many of whom were likely to locate in Arizona regardless of whether they were offered a tax incentive,” Napolitano said. “The use of tax incentives to pit Maricopa County towns and cities against each other is not in the interest of Arizona or its taxpayers.”

Cities could keep offering incentives, but their state-shared revenues would be reduced, dollar-for-dollar.

Unfortunately, the new law can’t unravel the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of deals in Phoenix, Glendale, Surprise and other cities. That money is lost.

Even still, some city leaders are bemoaning the new law, saying it will derail economic development in their communities. They also claim the law will devalue state trust land because cities no longer will be able to offset costly land improvements .

Those officials are in “the sky is falling” mode.

Get over it.

They have no one to blame but themselves. For at least three years, a measure aimed at quashing sales tax rebates used to entice retail development has floated about legislative hallways. Rather than work together to craft their own compromises and slow the runaway giveaways - as they repeatedly pledged they would - city leaders used their political muscle to kill proposals.

Make no mistake, flaws exist in the current law, which takes effect Jan. 1.

For instance, the law doesn’t apply to the cities of Peoria and Marana because neither is located entirely in Maricopa or Pinal County. That loophole gives those communities a competitive advantage over neighbors - ironic, because the law is aimed at preventing that type of unfair competition.

And that leads to the second major flaw: It does not apply statewide. Lawmakers deliberately carved up the state, selectively applying the law only to cities and towns in the Phoenix metropolitan area. Left out, for example, was the Tucson metropolitan area, a region where incentives are on the upswing.

The new law is good as far as it goes. After so many legislative missteps, so much rhetoric, so many empty promises of mayors that state intervention wasn’t necessary, to have the new law on the books is a victory for taxpayers. In time, it might mean that cities won’t have to pass special bond issues, for example, to add new police and firefighters. The money saved might be sufficient to buttress public safety budgets.