In what can only be defined as "defiant" behavior, Administrator Huckelberry (once again) refused to provide Supervisor Ally Miller with information pertaining to the cost of county-owned public art. Miller's original request stemmed from a September 12, 2018 county press release and Huckelberry's self-touted "Chuck Huckelberry Loop" Art Map ... a webpage showcase for the more than four dozen art pieces along the soon-to-be-expanded bike path.
On October 17, 2018, Pima County Department of Transportation sent letters to District 1 constituents advising them their roads would "not be paved due to lack of funding."
The letter went on to state that the November 6, 2018 ballot would ask voters to approve a bond to fund regional road reconstruction, preservation and repair... "without increasing property taxes ...."
At my direction, my office immediately contacted Carmine DeBonis, Pima County Deputy County Administrator for Public Works, and inquired about the contents of the letter having the appearance of "attempting to influence the outcome of an election." I enclosed a copy of Attorney General Mark Brnovich's July 30, 2015 opinion providing guidance on the limitations imposed by A.R.S. Sec 11-410 on the use of county resources to influence an election.
YOU HAVE TO SEE IT TO BELIEVE IT!
Yes, that's right folks! A multi-million dollar bike path paid for by your taxes ... while your roads crumble and deteriorate right before your eyes ... and underneath your tired and abused tires!
Each year the Pima County Board of Supervisors provides authority over $30 million-plus federally funded grant programs. These programs cover a multitude of community projects and services which can provide a great benefit to our community. As part of my job as your supervisor, I review these contracts carefully to ensure both local and federal compliance.
On October 2 and 16, 2018, I questioned Administrator Huckelberry why we were continuing a subrecipient contract when the organization had not met the required participant outcomes. Administrator Huckelberry issued a memorandum saying my questions were answered and the "matter was closed." Not true.
Huckelberry goes on to accuse Miller of "searching for information on which to oppose Proposition 463" ... the road tax. Huckelberry justified his response by stating it would "take hundreds of hours of research since artwork on the Loop has been installed over a 30-plus year period using a varity of resources and programs." Ooops! I guess he forgot about his February 14, 2014 email to the Supervisors stating, "a hard copy of the Pima County Public Art Portfolio" would be provided to each supervisor. Read all the details ....
And, to add to this puzzling withholding of information, read the October 7, 2013 letter from the Executive Director of the Tucson Pima Arts Council questioning Huckelberry about, "WHO'S GOING TO MAINTAIN THE COUNTY'S COMPLETED PUBLIC ART COLLECTION TOTALING EIGHTY PIECES OF ARTWORK?"
What Huckelberry failed to acknowledge in his response to my initial inquiry was that monitoring documents reporting deficiencies were revised at management's directive. In fact, the entire discussion about the original contract and lack of deliverables was "dismissed" by the board majority. Watch the video and listen to my inquiry. Follow the conversation in my memo re missing information.
This matter is not closed. And, I will continue to report to the taxpayers on our grant funded programs. I want to ensure all taxpayers have the opportunity to participate in receiving community benefits from grant funded programs.
Miller Seeks Answers From Huckelberry on Grant Funds
Mr. DeBonis responded on October 22, 2018 indicating that "to avoid any future confusion [to constituents], subsequent letters will be revised to simply refer individuals to the road bond website." Read full details here ....
Have questions or County related concerns?
Call (520) 724-2738
I strive to return your calls or emails within 24 hours
Huckelberry Refuses To Provide Information to Miller
Accuses Her of Electioneering
COUNTY CAMPAIGN ELECTIONEERING ... A VIOLATION IN ACTION?