Archive for February, 2010

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

GUEST OPINION: Difference in attitude
By Hugh Holub, special for Inside Tucson Business
Published on Friday, February 26, 2010

One of the interesting pieces of information from the Census statisticians is the difference in median household income between Tucson and Phoenix. According to the American Community Survey compiled in 2003, in Phoenix the median household income is $40,919 a year and in Tucson it is $32,414. That’s a difference of more than $8,500.

So if you want to make $8,500 a year more in your family, what is the answer?

Why is this the case?  Local government being hostile to business?

My favorite Tucson story involves a business that put flags up in front of its headquarters in honor of each country it did business in. They were cited for violating Tucson’s sign code. They moved their headquarters outside the area.

But the governments of Tucson and Pima County reflect the people who vote and participate in the political process.

It could be said that a whole lot of people in Tucson do not depend on the local private sector to eat. And even if they do, they don’t vote their paychecks. How could they when Tucson is a franchise town?

Tucson is also a government town.

If you look around the broader region, from Austin to Albuquerque to Maricopa County and westward, you see communities with very strong and clearly identifiable private sector business leadership. They have big plans. They have a “can do” attitude about improving the income levels of their areas. They have courage and confidence.

When the other cities go looking for jobs, they land Intel plants. When Tucson looks for jobs they land call centers that compete with workers from India.

Recently when companies were solicited by the federal government for renewable energy proposals, all of the companies on the short list were from Maricopa County. None were from Tucson.

There is also a healthy respect for the private sector in El Paso, San Antonio, Austin, Albuquerque, Phoenix, Las Vegas and San Diego. Not so in Tucson. The private sector is viewed by many as the enemy of desert rodents.

Look at the downtowns of the cities in the region. You see lots of privately owned buildings.

Tucson has an almost total governmental monopoly of ownership of its downtown. The only cities with higher percentages of government buildings might be Washington,D.C., or Moscow.

The private sector in downtown Tucson was bulldozed out of existence in favor of monuments to tax revenues.

A friend once suggested making the downtown library building — which is spectacularly out of place architecturally — a mausoleum for dead Tucson politicians. Government workers could have an annual parade down Stone Avenue, with local politicians standing on the roof of the building.

The lawn next to the mausoleum would have gravestones for all the downtown businesses that have died since 1950. There would be lots of them.

What is Tucson the headquarters of besides one of the most obstructionist environmental groups in the nation?

What is Tucson famous for making, besides a sign code that makes it difficult to fly an American flag at your business?

Inside Tucson Business came out with its 2010 Book of Lists at the end of January. A suggestion for a new List in the 2011 edition might be: Regional Business Leaders. Who are they?

And besides reducing the amount of red tape businesses have to deal with, what should  business leaders be doing to eliminate that $8,500 a family income gap?

Contact Hugh Holub, an attorney who works in real estate development, public utility, water and environmental law, at HughHolub@msn.com.

Copyright © 2010 Inside Tucson Business

Tucson’s modern streetcar - now we get to the pesky details
WAKE UP, TUCSON: Does it make sense?
By Joe Higgins, Inside Tucson Business, or Chris DeSimone, Inside Tucson Business
Published on Friday, February 26, 2010

 We can hear it now, “Why do those Wake Up guys have to bang on the streetcar?” Don’t they have anything better to do than bum us out about this “high point” in Tucson’s economic development soap opera?

Does light rail make sense when Tucson lacks a crosstown freeway, our streets are so bad Joe almost lost his car in a pothole, and freight trains routinely botch up rush hour traffic along the east side of Interstate 10?

Spending $144 million — $38 million per mile — to build rail tracks on roads that nearly empty Sun Tran buses now travel makes complete sense to us — in fantasyland! Print this story

 
Our electeds love to work with the broad brushstroke. That’s good for campaign pamphlets, but the pesky details about this modern streetcar/light rail worry us.

 It’ll spur private investment

Portland, Ore., is the land of light rail. They’ve been modernizing their light rail system since 1986. After 10 years, Portland’s then-City Commissioner Charles Hales noted the many vacant sites along its light rail system and said, “It’s a myth to think the market will take care of development along transit corridors.”

Ten years and a career change later, in 2006 Hales, now a development consultant to HDR Engineering, the company that helped sell Tucson on light rail, was quoted saying “The $55 million streetcar line has sparked more than $1.5 billion (and growing) in new development.”

What the ex-commissioner, now light rail promoter, failed to mention is to-date, Portland’s governmental subsidies have exceeded $1.5 billion.

 It’ll spur housing

Is light rail really the impetus to finally get student housing built downtown? For the last decade, the University of Arizona has suffered from a housing shortage and downtown needed the development.

Downtown has the Ronstadt Transit Center and lots of Sun Tran buses to take students to campus.

The lack of student housing downtown has more to do with developers not wanting to get tangled up in the city’s and Rio Nuevo’s insider deals, development services, payoffs for pet projects, bureaucracy, and more.

Having a streetcar without major reform in the downtown redevelopment process leaves us in the same swamp of stagnation.

Ongoing expenses

Once the light rail is built it’s going to take money to keep it running. Fares are planned to be somewhere between $1 and $2 per ride. The actual cost will be something else.

The scariest example comes from Beaverton, Ore., where the TriMet system has an average cost of $33 per rider but collects just $1.15 per person in fares. (read about Oregons experience HERE)

Construction isn’t cheap

The “Happy Gilmore” check in federal stimulus money our esteemed electeds now hold represents $63 million of a total $144 million project. Tucson Transportation Director Jim Glock was quoted saying it will more than likely come in under budget. God bless him in his optimism.

Call us skeptical, but after a 50 percent cost overrun on the $46 million Fourth Avenue Underpass and the $820,000 that was spent on a 15-minute movie about Rio Nuevo, our confidence in the cost projection is a little low.

The Federal Transit Administration studied 21 rail projects and found they had an average 40 percent cost overrun on construction. That’s only an extra $56 million in Tucson’s case. Maybe the mayor can find that amount under the cushions of his couch. (Read the US Dept of Transportation report HERE)

Why not celebrate?

Lastly, we’ve heard: “How can you guys knock Tucson winning a $63 million federal grant, who would be against something so wonderful?” Our simple response is these tax dollars are your tax dollars. The working family in Oakland, Calif., the single mom in Lincoln, Neb., and the cab driver in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., are all contributing to a city in Arizona that’s getting $63 million of their hard-earned tax dollars. For what? To build a four-mile rail system that will shuttle college students to and from school.

Other’s excitement and Tucson’s excitement over winning the money may not match up.

 We hope we are wrong regarding Tucson’s venture into the world of light rail. We hope ridership is through the roof and businesses spring up along the route. We hope the project comes in under budget. We hope light rail is the spark downtown needs to get going.

Our history, research and past experience with projects run by the City of Tucson just isn’t encouraging.

Contact Joe Higgins at joe@joehigginsinc.com or Chris DeSimone at provenpartners@comcast.net. They’re the hosts of “Wake Up Tucson,” which airs 6-8 a.m. weekdays on The Voice KVOI 1030-AM. Check out their blog at www.TucsonChoices.com.

Copyright © 2010 Inside Tucson Business

More about light rail from Antiplanner.com.

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Remember his from the UofA?

Why Tucson’s elected officials put business on the back burner
WAKE UP TUCSON: Time to restore balance
By Joe Higgins, Inside Tucson Business, or Chris DeSimone, Inside Tucson Business
Published on Saturday, February 13, 2010

We have many callers to our “Wake Up Tucson” radio show who ask the same question: Why are business owners treated like second-class citizens in Tucson and Pima County? One big reason is that the environmental lobby and the neighborhood associations have done an end-run around the business community.

It’s time for the business community to meet the competition for your local elected officals’ interest. They are kicking your butt.

Environmental lobby 
 
The environmental lobby is extremely successful in our region. There are dozens of groups loosely assembled but they come together like a laser light focus to achieve their goal. Their mission is to stop humans from encroaching on habitat and slow or stop growth from coming to the Sonoran Desert.

Their techniques are multi-pronged and in most cases, very effective. Some of the tools of their trade include:

• The Endangered Species Act, which uses the federal court system to block growth.

• The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan, adopted in the late 1990s that laid the path for future growth, land use planning  and wildlife corridors.

• Political influence exerted on county elected officials and bureaucrats. Taxpayers have spent over $200 million buying ranches around the county. Uber-environmentalists sit on the Pima County Bond Committee, for gosh sake. With only 16 percent of the land in Pima County in private hands and 10 percent already built, the idea of affordable housing that matches our region’s wages will soon be gone.

• Federal rules regarding dust control, navigable water ways, 404 bridge crossing permits, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineer studies.

• The joint water–wastewater study, which has been in planning for 20 months, is the latest battleground. The blue ribbon panel (Blue Ribbon Panels: Where good ideas go to die…) is looking to merge Tucson Water and Pima County Wastewater Management. In the Phase II report, we see lots of talk about sustainability and stopping growth but little discussion on diversifying our industries. The county has been using its wastewater authority to control growth for years. Give those bureaucrats Tucson Water and things will look even worse.

NIMBY associations

If the goal of the environmental lobby is to stop sprawl and preserve the desert, then city folk need to allow for denser populations, vertical growth, tear down and rebuilds, and infill of vacant lots. When a business man or woman tries to venture into the Tucson city limits to open, develop or grow a business, they run into an entirely new set of problems:

• A land use code that has such restrictive parking, set backs, landscape requirements and now rainwater harvesting, that less and less of their property is actually usable.

• A system that allows one or two rogue neighbors to wield tremendous political influence. A small minority faction can delay your business opening until you’re out of money or completely discouraged to the point that you wonder why you chose Tucson in the first place.

• City council members and offices that realize taking care of neighborhoods above all else has been the path to getting re-elected. When elected officials’ actions are constantly in deference to what these vocal minorities want, the message to city staff is pretty clear: Take care of the neighbors and put the business owner on the back burner.

 The business community is trapped between enviros in the county and neighborhood associations in the city. What are we to do as a group? As we’ve said before, the electeds need to fear us at election time — 97 percent of all electeds want one thing in life: to be re-elected. They know the dysfunctional business community does little to help them or their opponents get elected.  They will continue to govern in favor of the groups that they perceive will get them votes.

Environmental groups and NIMBY neighborhood associations are united and passionate about their issues. Who speaks on behalf of the Tucson business community with passion and on a consistent basis?

Each month, we ask that question during our many presentations to business groups. We haven’t received an answer yet.

Contact Joe Higgins at joe@joehigginsinc.com or Chris DeSimone at provenpartners@comcast.net. They’re the hosts of “Wake Up Tucson,” which airs 6-8 a.m. weekdays on The Voice KVOI 1030-AM. Check out their blog at www.TucsonChoices.com.

Copyright © 2010 Inside Tucson Business

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

We live in the desert, water is a precious commodity. In the west, if you control the water you control EVERYTHING.

Water and Wastewater is the issue of the future for southern Arizona. The two biggest bureaucracies in our region, Tucson and Pima County control the water supply and wastewater processes for the entire region.  For the past 20 months a group of citizens (primarily from the environmental side of our community) have been assembled to learn, talk and plan for the future of ALL of southern Arizona.

 A note that breaks down the core concern of the report from Chris Sheafe:

The problem some of us see with the report is that the report resolution directed staff to proceed on the basis of the report which would codify the allocation of 25% (10,000 Acre Feet) of our Effluent into an Environmental Effluent Pool which would be limited to environmental projects only at no cost to the projects.  The report makes this allocation absent any review of the long term economic sustainability impacts for such an allocation because no economic analysis of its impacts has been made.  Staff was directed to proceed with implementation of the conclusions of the report.  The idea is that economic analysis would be deferred until the next phase of the report is completed after the allocation decision has been set in stone.

It turns out the 10,000 acre feet is the result of a meeting between four individuals ten years ago without any basis for justification for that amount of water being taken off the table for other uses and without any form of economic impact analysis or any evidence confirming that amount of water is required to satisfy the goal of gaining a Section 10 permit for Pima County in order to satisfy the ESA (Endangered Species Act) requirements for only the listed species. 
 
In the long run the economic health of the region is dependent upon a healthy environment and a healthy economy.  Water is needed for both.  To pre-allocate a large amount of water to one use is ill advised and sends the wrong message to the world about Tucson’s future water supply and or its ability to meet demands from future economic opportunities.  This is the most serious and the latest threat to our ongoing battle to save the precious water available to the region and preserve while preserving as many options for the future that are possible. It removes the burden upon environmental uses to justify their need based upon their individual merit, removes any economic analysis for individual projects and removes many options for the greater Tucson metropolitan community.

A GUEST OPINIONfrom The Tucson Weekly about the Water/Wastewater study from member of the citizen advisory panel:

The Tucson City Council needs to support these recommendations to ensure our area’s water future

by Jim Barry, Chris Brooks and Bonnie Poulos

This past December, a volunteer citizens’ committee, in conjunction with a large, multi-disciplinary array of city and county staff members, wrapped up a 20-month study of the water and wastewater resources of the city and county; the goal was to “develop a common understanding of the basic facts and critical factors related to planning for a sustainable water future.”…….

…….This is an important study for the Tucson region because of what it proposes for growth policies. In the past, we have largely reacted to growth as it occurred. As proposed in the Phase II report, proper planning for growth can protect our existing water supplies, limit the need for costly new water supplies and protect the environment……

……..We also must allocate water for the environment. Historically, the environment has been viewed more as a supplier of water than a user. But as we have seen nearly all riparian ecosystems in the Tucson basin altered or eliminated by our ever-increasing thirst, the environment has inevitably been sacrificed at the altar of growth. Viewing this as an either-or issue has caused us to miss opportunities to accommodate both the environment and the economy for the overall good of the community. The Phase II report outlines a series of policy changes that can promote allocation of water necessary for the environment without compromising our ability to support continued growth. Our overall quality of life depends on changes like this…..

Who are the CITIZENS in charge of our water future?

Chair Jim Barry- Barry is a retired Pima County director who once ran the transportation department under Huckelberry. Barry is the go to guy on major Pima County efforts and has a proven record of doing the bidding for current administrator, Chuck Huckelberry. Barry is the uncle of Board of Supervisors odd man out, Ray Carol. From the Tucson Weekly, 2004

Barry, a 20-year county executive who also has lobbied state and federal governments and served in the county transportation department, has about a half-year to kick around or get kicked around by his nephew and fellow Chicago native, Republican Supervisor Sugar Ray Carroll (Tucson Weekly)

Marcelino C. Flores served as the Pasqua Yaqui Tribe jurisdictional representative at the Pima Association of Governments (PAG) Governments, Environmetal Planning Advisory Committee for five years. He is quoted in a PAG report on the role of solar in our region.  Flores is a transportation and land planning professional for the tribe.

Christopher Brooks - Hydrologist. Brooks is a arid desert water specialist. He blogs at Watering The Desert. He covers desert issues and the City of Tucson’s rain water harvesting effort.

Bruce Gungle, a 24 year Tucson resident with a professional background in atmospheric science including lightening strike analysis and rain fall.  Gungle serves on the Pima County planning commission which worked recently to implement the SWIP which would implement put to a $30k per house impact fee for developments on the western edge of Tucson city limits.

Vince’s position as water resources coordinator for Diamond Ventures, Inc. includes working with the company’s development and wet utility divisions on water planning and policy issues. He was appointed to the Citizens Water Advisory Committee by Ward 4 Council Member Shirley Scott and sits on both Conservation & Education and Finance Subcommittees. Vince’s involvement as a member of the West University Neighborhood Association includes volunteer support of the Community Food Bank and assistance with neighborhood planning efforts. His professional affiliations include Urban Land Institute and American Planning Association. Vince is a native Tucsonan whose family has lived in the region for over 100 years.

Bob Cook - Author and contributor to Sustainable Tucson. Cook As a sustainability advocate, he served on the City of Tucson’s Cost of Growth Task Force; contributed to the early development of Civano-Tucson’s Solar Village as past-chair of the Tucson-Pima Metropolitan Energy Commission; promoted multi-modal transportation and transitoriented development as Treasurer of the 2003 Citizens Transportation
Initiative ballot measure; co-founded Sustainable Tucson in 2006, a community-building and advocacy
organization promoting regional sustainability; and currently serves on the Pima County Planning & Zoning Commission, Bob co- authored two books in 1975 on environmental planning and renewable energy development; graduated with distinction in economics from the University of Arizona.

He has been involved in neighborhood and environmental issues for the last 13 years. Rob helped found several local neighborhood and environmental organizations and served onthe boards of several local non-profit organizations. He remains active in the Sierra Club, Center for Environmental Connections, Environmental Justice Action Group and theGem and Jewelry Arts Academy.
Rob has also served on several policy-making committees dealing with neighborhood issues, open space and the environment. Some of these are the Tumamoc Area Plan Update Committee; Pima County Planning and Zoning Commission Subcommittee on Environmental Ordinances; Pima County Open Space Acquisition Review Committee; and Steering Committee for the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. He was also on the City of Tucson Board of Adjustment for eight years.

Tina Lee - Tina has been appointed to various commissions Water commissions in the City of Tucson from Ward 3 and Ward 2. As an environmental consultant, she specialized in resolving regulatory compliance issues under the Clean Water Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program for public and private sector clients.

Joseph Maher, Jr. holds a Bachelor of Architecture degree from the University of Arizona and established his own architectural business in 1983. His credentials reflect a comprehensive diversity of master planning, site and building analysis and feasibility studies along with the diverse and exciting concepts of creating user friendly, functionally cost as well as energy efficiently designed sustainable architecture of all types including Solar & Environmental Homes and additions.

Bonnie Poulos, a research scientist at the UofA studying shrimp farming. Paulos has weighed in on numerous Tucson and Pima County issues relating to planning, billboard lights and much more. Pima County Planning and Zoning Commission; 2002 to present
Neighborhood Infill Coalition; 2002 to present
Campus Farm Neighborhood Association; 1983 to present
Aravaipa Canyon Ecosystem Management Plan Citizen Advisory Committee, 2006
Cost of Growth Task Force for COT General Plan; Sept. 2000 to January 2001
City of Tucson (COT) Planning Commission; 1998-2001
Tucson Regional Transportation Coalition; 1993-1995
Pima County Comprehensive Plan Citizen Advisory Committee for the
Southeast-Rincon area; 1991-1992
COT Storm Water Management Study Citizen Advisory Committee; 1988-1994
COT Citizen Transportation Advisory Committee; 1986-1992
North side Area Plan Citizen Advisory Committee; 1986-1987
Pima County Deputy Registrar; 1984-1992

Mark R. Stratton the director or Metro Water which operates in the north west portion of Pima County as an independent water district. In digging in a bit looks like the regional water story started to take shape back in 2005.    Councilwoman Scott stumbled across documents that showed that Tucson Water’s director Dave Modeer (now the head of the states CAP) was going from water department to water department to test the waters on a regional water supplier. Pima County waste water wasn’t mentioned in the original discussions.