Tortolita And Casas Adobes Have A Lot Of Similarities -- And Differences. By Emil Franzi ARIZONA'S TWO latest incorporated communities, Casas Adobes and Tortolita, have a lot in common. Both: Were incorporated under the 1997 state law eliminating the need to apply for permission from other cities within six miles; Exist under a cloud while the question of the constitutionality of that law and the 1961 law setting up those "disenfranchisement zones" wind through the courts; Are hobbled by an inability to raise cash while the lawsuits continue; Face an immediate problem concerning the funding of a special census needed to secure full revenue sharing, and; Have Tucson, Marana and Oro Valley trying to eliminate them. But that's where the similarities end. Tortolita has clearly defined goals, a unified population that overwhelmingly supports the incorporation, and a representative council chosen in open meeting by its own residents. Casas Adobes, on the other hand, managed to secure the votes of a bare majority of its citizens, has multiple factions on the pro-incorporation side alone, and has a divided council whose members barely know each other and were chosen--somewhat haphazardly--by the Pima County Board of Supervisors. Also, Tortolita has about 3,000 people living on 21 square miles, while Casas Adobe has a population of 58,000 (the eighth largest in Arizona) and 26 square miles. The purpose of the two incorporations differed vastly. Tortolita residents clearly wish to preserve a desert lifestyle and what's left of the environment on the northwest side, and they could care less about receiving additional governmental services. But Casas Adobes leaders had grandiose plans for more roads, libraries, parks and other goodies; furthermore, Casas Adobes was formed to increase services by keeping sales-tax revenues away from Marana and Oro Valley. Casas Adobes was designed to be developer-friendly; Tortolita was designed to restrain growth. While on the surface it may appear Casas Adobes has all the advantages, it doesn't. Tortolita's problems are external; Casas Adobes faces not only external threats but internal dissension. The difference here stems from the manner in which the two towns were formed. No sharper contrast exists than the attitude of the two incorporation committees. Tortolita's was wide open. The steering committee met openly and often and included anybody who wanted to participate--the final membership was 37. Another 56 people passed petitions and more than 100 folks gave financial donations. But Casas Adobes ultimately had a core decision-making group of five who split three to two on many issues, held most of their meetings in secrecy, literally chased people off, and left a bad taste in the mouths of many potential supporters. They dealt duplicitously with Tortolita, filed an unnecessary lawsuit against their neighbors in that community, and then pig-headedly refused to drop the suit when its issues became moot, only to see a judge dismiss it as irrelevant. This ill-considered action simply raised the legal bills for both towns and exemplified the mentality of those self-proclaimed "leaders" called the Casas Adobes Gang of Three--Jeff Coleman, Tim Brown and Scott Nelson. THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE between these two towns was the attitude of their founders. Tortolita, with 3,000 people, forged consensus. Casas Adobes, with almost 60,000, was usurped by the Gang of Three. Tortolita was a textbook case of citizen participation; Casas Adobes was a classic case of insider dealing, replete with intrigue, exclusionism and a host of hidden agendas for which that city is now paying the price. Tortolita's unified and representative council hit the ground running. Within two days--as soon as they could post the first meeting--council members had outlined their needs and requirements and hired Bill Risner as their town attorney. The first priority of both towns is staying alive, and that requires legal assistance. Risner was the attorney for the incorporation committee and there was no question among Tortolitans that he would be kept on. In fact, he's so popular in Tortolita that they'll probably name their first park or government building in his honor. That is, if they ever get around to having a park or a government building. But Casas Adobes has no such consensus over the attorney for their incorporation committee, Greg Good, who is seen by many as the mouthpiece for the Gang of Three. He was appointed village attorney for the first meeting only, because he was the only candidate willing to serve on the promise of being paid sometime in the future. Even if he secures the permanent appointment, or is kept on by the council through the pending court cases he's worked for the incorporation committee, he faces the problem of a lack of trust by many council members and citizens. A town that doesn't feel confident in its own lawyer has real problems. Both incorporation committees ran up large legal bills that cannot be paid by the towns' taxpayers. Tortolita owed Risner and other lawyers more than $10,000, and Casas Adobes reportedly owes Good $20,000 to $30,000. Tortolita residents threw a party attended by more than 1,100 people and paid their legal bills by raising $12,000. Meanwhile, the Casa Adobes Incorporation Committee must now figure out how to pay that pre-incorporation tab. Because the real committee who made all the real decisions--such as hiring Good and having him file the stupid lawsuit against Tortolita--consisted of five people, two of whom dissented, the one consensus in the rest of the community is that the exclusionist Gang of Three should eat the bill they incurred. But with no real constituency, it will be difficult for them to pull off a town fund-raiser. Some think the deal was for the new council to appoint Good as town attorney and get him to forgive the incorporation bill. But none of the five power brokers are on the council, and only one member of the non-decision making portion of their committee, Chris Stock, was chosen as a council person. Other Casas Adobes council members include moderates Mayor Don Burtchin, Vice-Mayor Marty Kramer, Asa Bushnell, and Mary Schuh, a hard-nosed opponent of incorporation in the first place. Add a couple of wild cards like Eugene Kelly and Michelle Phillips, and you begin to see the other major internal problem in Casas Adobes--a council with some very good people on it who barely know each other. And that means it will take a while before they all start operating on the same frequency. The Casas Adobes Incorporation Committee's original plan was to immediately implement a 2 percent sales tax. It didn't happen, although Stock is still pushing the idea. Meanwhile, the rest of the council wants to proceed slowly; or, in Schuh's case, barely proceed at all. She favors the idea of a town without debt, with no income and no spending. Which, of course, raises the question: How do you have an incorporated town at all without the basics, such as liability insurance? BOTH CASAS ADOBES and Tortolita face the problem of borrowing to pay the feds for a special census necessary to get increased state revenue-sharing. Both towns' incorporation committees based future municipal budget plans on estimates of current populations far greater than those counted in the 1990 census. Being larger, Casas Adobes needs to front about $150,000 by December 15, while Tortolita needs $15,000. The Tortolita Town Council has already passed a budget similar to the one drafted by its incorporation committee. Casas Adobes, however, must hold hearings and go through a 30-day budget process, something that will drive great holes in the grandiose plans and pre-cut deals of the Gang of Three. Individual Tortolita citizens are ready to underwrite their costs by co-signing a bank note, if necessary. That would be all but impossible for Casas Adobes. And having passed a budget, Tortolita may issue warrants--government IOU's--that would be covered by the town's property owners via a special levy should a final disincorporation be ordered. Casas Adobes can probably do the same, but must adhere to a more stringent timeline, because it's two months younger. Also, Tortolita was incorporated before the appellate court opinion, making its actions unquestionably legal for at least two months. Because Casas Adobes was incorporated after the court ruling, incorporation foes could easily challenge its official actions. The two towns have one other great difference. Unlike Casas Adobes, which was partially planned by land speculators and developers like Don Diamond (who privately met with the Gang of Three to approve their final boundaries), Tortolita has the developers trying to kill them off. Another lawsuit, actually drawn up by the attorneys for Cleveland megafirm Forest City, has been filed by Attorney General Grant Woods to disincorporate Tortolita, on the grounds that it isn't really a community and has the wrong attitude about massive development. We're not making up that last one--it's actually one of the arguments stated in the suit, indicating just how tightly Woods and his staff are in the pocket of private development interests. Tortolitans consider that lawsuit and its bizarre arguments to be a sick joke, since anybody can tell they may be the only real community in this sprawling, car-culture megalopolis. Casas Adobes, while not facing a similar challenge, must somehow overcome the problem of looking like a town despite its lack of consensus and common purpose. With any luck, however, the Casas Adobes Town Council will be able to find some common ground and at least tread water until the court cases are resolved. They've hired Good as town attorney on a 4-2 vote (with Stock absent) and plunged into lengthy executive sessions on multiple issues. Not a good sign. The Casas Adobes Council must also supplant the Gang of Three as the dominant force by reworking major portions of the Gang's agenda and presenting to the voters something reasonable and palatable.

Home | Currents | City Week | Music | Review | Books | Cinema | Back Page | Archives

		© 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth