Candidates respond to city issues

Recently, the Yuma Sun asked readers to submit questions for the city council candidates.

Here are your questions, with the responses from the six
 for Yuma City Council - Bobbi Brooks Gurrola, Ema Lea Shoop, Paul Johnson, Jerry Stuart, Emma Torres and Clinton Underhill.

The election will be held Nov. 3.

---

1) If elected, will you look into contracting out services that the city currently operates to help eliminate some of the burden to taxpayers? Examples of this include the long-term contract for the operation and maintenance of the golf course and the collection of refuse, which could be billed by the city but operated by one of the many commercial operations that can efficiently do the job.

Bobbi Brooks Gurrola: No. We need to keep contracted services within Yuma County. Local businesses should keep their prices competitive of others outside of the community. If local services cannot be provided than this option would be needed.

Ema Lea Shoop: The land of Arroyo Dunes, Ball Park, Civic Center, Desert Hills Golf Course, Jack Rabbit Pass all belongs to Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and can only be used for recreation by the city of Yuma. The land cannot be sold. The operation-management for any of these facilities can be put out to bid and have been done, including Putter Inn. ... Any time something goes out to bid, it must go to the low bidder. ... The city has invested in trucks and equipment and labor for collecting trash/refuse at residents. Currently, a private company picks up from all commercial dumpsters. The city contracts with Copper Mountain to dispose of such. Finding private companies who do operation/management services is a challenge. Private companies would need to charge residents/customers the full cost for the service.

Paul Johnson:  I am always trying to find ways to improve services to our citizens while reducing the cost to taxpayers. Some of the suggested areas have already been tried. For example, there have been several attempts to get a private restaurant or other private provider to take over and operate the Putter Inn but there were no bids received from established restaurants and the sole bid that was received had virtually no capital to try to take over running the Putter Inn. My main emphasis on any city operation is to see that it is run efficiently at the lowest cost to both the taxpayers and city residents. It all comes down to the bottom line. Which provider will operate a city facility at the lowest cost to taxpayers?

Jerry Stuart: If elected, I will look into contracting city services to outside private firms. I recognize that the city provides its services as befits its nonprofit status. Which means that if we contract services to a private business which must add a profit on top of the cost of its services, we could wind up paying much more for the same services. Or, the private business could slice its costs by lowering the quality of service and lowering the quality of its employees. Golf courses could be the exception, as a private firm would charge only golfers, not every household in the city. Again, this should be studied on a contract by contract basis so that the city residents are protected and the quality of service we now receive is not sacrificed.

Emma Torres: When elected, I will make sure that our team of local employees are working most effectively and produce the highest output. I will also look very closely at cost/benefit analysis of current city service contracts. Nonetheless, I will be careful of not creating unemployment for Yuma residents.

Clinton Underhill: Yes. This is what I would consider common sense. Smaller government is a good thing and as many might be aware, government typically operates less efficiently. If the operation of the city golf course currently produces a profit, I am curious how much more it could profit being operated in the private sector. The collection of refuse is very similar. If the proposals received by outside vendors are higher than current operating costs, we continue as is and the RFP is justified. There are other areas which should be considered, like basins and parks. I'm still trying to figure out why the city of Yuma has a truck labeled "forestry." Just because you haven't spent your allocated budget for the year doesn't mean you HAVE to! Operation cost of the city should be kept at a minimum while providing exceptional facilities and services to the community.

---

2) Yuma city residents overwhelmingly support Riverfront and Heritage Area development - about 70% of city voters said "Yes" to funding this development through Prop 100 recently. Why are you for or against city funding of this development?

Gurrola: Yes, I support the funding of this development. We need to protect and preserve our Riverfront and Heritage Areas. I believe this will entice future business owners to locate to Yuma. This will also bring customers to Yuma and increase the economic development within the community. Yuma offers historic landmarks which are a great value on the local business industry.

Shoop: I support the matching funds for grants to reclaim easy access to the Colorado River area so that the river is more accessible by local folks as well as tourism. From 22nd Avenue to Avenue 3E along the river is well used. And the Quechans are doing improvements for public use on their side of the river also. The habitat of natural plantings and the use by the people need a funding source to maintain and, thus, a need for the revenue of which some monies come from the 2 percent tax.

Johnson:  I have always supported and worked for the development of the Riverfront and Heritage Area. I think that there is a potential gold mine of economic activity that could be generated from summer European tourists if we took proper advantage of the numerous historic events that occurred along the river. Where else in the West can you find a location that has had repeated visits by Spanish explorers, the camp of Kearney's Army of the West, the trail followed by the Mormon Battalion, plus Arizona's only seaport, the ferries that carried the 49ers across the Colorado on their way to the California gold fields, the Butterfield Stage route and the first place where a railroad entered the state of Arizona, all within sight of each other? Our community has been sitting on this potential gold mine for too long and we need to move forward and take advantage of it.

Stuart: Tourism has long been recognized as a major revenue source for the Yuma area. The Riverfront and Heritage Areas not only provide parks and recreation for Yuma residents, but also provide tourist destinations for both year-round residents and visitors. For continued economic development, it is necessary to continue to build on the classic development segments in this area - arts, culture, government, entertainment and the new buzz words historical tourism. These components are in place and will continue to continue more and more to our local economy.

Torres: Yes, I am in favor of maximizing our local beauty from our River and Heritage Area. We are blessed with beautiful surroundings and by enhancing a healthy river front we will also attract more tourist dollars, thus helping our local economy.

Underhill: The city isn't funding this development, the taxpayers are. As much revenue we are told Prop 100 generates and the many years it has been used as an additional tax, I imagine there would be more amenities for the community to enjoy. Finally, this year the citizens were "guaranteed" the money generated by the tax would be used as was initially intended. Where did the millions go? And why now is there a rush to provide what should have been already provided? The Riverfront and Heritage Area development is a wonderful compliment to the community and continued funding is a must, along with the other wonderful areas of the community. There aren't enough individuals that appreciate how this city, let alone the country, has become what it is today. History can teach us to be proud of why Yuma is, and it starts downtown.

---

3) How do you propose to alleviate traffic concerns and congestion in the city, especially as the busier winter season approaches?

Gurrola: Widening of specific major streets. But unfortunately not at this time due to the economy. As a community we need to watch out for unnecessary budget spending until the economy is on a uprise.

Shoop: Traffic concerns and congestions ARE being addressed with large dollar projects as identified in the adopted roadways plan. The city matches the federal and state dollars. Acquiring rights of ways is very costly to retrofit older streets to handle the growing volume of vehicles. The growing numbers of riders on the YCAT bus route system is subsidized by the tax dollars. The next two years will see more road construction projects, which provide work for local citizens, but may cause delays, thus, encouraging people to travel other routes and see more of the city.

Johnson: The city council needs to focus the city's road funding like a laser on the chokepoints and bottlenecks on our arterial streets. The city council needs to re-prioritize the spending of road funds and make the arterial improvements that the voters were told were going to happen when they approved the 1/2 cent city sales tax for roads in 1993. Some of those arterial improvements haven't even been designed yet but the voters were told that they would be build by 2003. Until the city's road funding is focused on bottlenecks in the arterial street system, there is not going to be any significant improvement in traffic congestion.

Stuart:  Once all our various road and street improvements are completed, we can only hope that traffic will flow smoothly. However, with the Arizona Department of Transportation cutting back and closing rest stops and offices around the state, and the decline in Highway Users Revenue Funds, we will find our street improvement funds curtailed. We will need to be resourceful in the use of the special city tax that we use for street improvements. Each new project will need to be taken on very carefully and will have to be based on need. And, we cannot neglect regular maintenance of our streets, either. We will have to manage very carefully to maintain existing streets and to continue to work on relief of traffic problems.

Torres: We are currently paying the price of years of neglect in development of appropriate transportation infrastructure. This is a problem that needs long term planning and implementation and not something that can be fixed in a few months. At present, we need to make sure that our local winter visitors and year round residents will have access to our business sites without traffic congestion.

Underhill: I'm not sure the traffic problems in the city can be solved with wider roads. Utilizing the already available resource of vehicle traffic counts, signals should be adjusted regularly, following the trends of the traffic. With common sense, one would think the roads and traffic signals that experienced a higher volume of vehicles should be configured to move traffic more efficiently. Another idea is to promote responsible driving. Times and areas which experience higher traffic should be provided to the community in order to deter unnecessary traveling and alleviate congestion. Without focusing on vehicles exclusively, the city already has plans to encourage more bike traffic. This is a healthy alternative and helps the city in more ways than only traffic congestion. I would suggest residents know speed limits, utilize fast and slow lanes, refrain from rubber necking at traffic accidents and remember that you aren't the only one out on the streets!  

---

4) Is the city's "anti-ugly" ordinance too restrictive, too loose or just right, and why?

Gurrola: Too restrictive. During these rough times some agencies are on a very tight budget and short on cash, thus causing them to either shut down or not spending money on more needed areas. Need to be more lenient.

Shoop: The anti-ugly ordinance works quickly when citizens call in the locations. Damage and destruction of public (as well as private) properties costs the taxpayers. I encourage Neighborhood Watch groups to assist law enforcement to catch whoever does the damage and the one caught needs to do restitution for their bad actions.

Johnson: I'd say just about right. The city's "anti-ugly" ordinance is enforced on a complaint basis. That means that no city employee goes around patrolling the city to look for possible violations. Action is taken only when the citizens complain. That usually means that until your place becomes so unsightly that your neighbors or the public complains, a property owner is free to do what they want with their property. It is not some city bureaucrat that determines when a property is so unsightly that it needs to be cleaned up, it is your neighbors and the public that make that determination by filing a complaint. The current system works pretty well and we don't have any "Lawn Police" imposing their ideas on private property owners.

Stuart: Since its inception several years ago, the anti-ugly ordinance has helped the city clean up some true eyesores. I am in favor of keeping the ordinance in its present form so the remaining eyesores can be cleaned up. Along those same lines, I would hope that our community continues to help in controlling graffiti, which is another eyesore.

Torres: We have to adhere to city regulations that assist in deterring the visual ugliness. We all share the city and we are all responsible to do our part. A clean city is a healthy city.

Underhill: I believe the "anti-ugly" ordinance means well, however, the ordinance should be implemented in a fair manner. I also believe the ordinance must be applied with common sense to focus on those who blatantly break the rules. Recently, someone called in the Catholic Community Service office on 32nd Street about their landscaping and was forced to improve. The landscaping wasn't ugly and I believe there are other properties that aren't nonprofit which could use some help. Similar to code violations, the "anti-ugly" ordinance is only as effective as those who persistently call in. I attempt to maintain my property in a manner that is pleasing to the eye and would expect others to do the same. In instances this hasn't happened, I've reported them myself. Everyone wants a nice looking community and the "anti-ugly" ordinance is in place to ensure everyone follows the rules.

---

5) Many Yumans have expressed concern about feral cats. Should the city of Yuma be active in finding a solution in the feral cat situation?

Gurrola: This concern has been in the community for sometime now. I believe a portion of the community is at fault. Not neutering and spaying of cats is a major issue. We need to hold the people accountable for their non-actions. Having a specific agency to handle and dispose of these feral cats is a good idea but costly.

Shoop: Feral cats colonies in neighborhoods are problems. More so when someone puts out feed daily. Trap and neuter works but the service has a price tag. And no one wants the cats returned to where they were caught. Most cat owners do keep their pet cat(s) on their property and not let them roam. However, litters of kittens are hard to get adopted out, even though they are free - another reason to have cats neutered. Who pays? Animal owners and donations to the Humane Society.

Johnson: The city has been actively seeking a humane solution to the feral cat situation. The skyrocketing feral cat population is a serious health problem. Unfortunately, no one has found a solution that is both humane and will not bankrupt the city treasury. I do NOT have a silver bullet to solve this problem and I would appreciate any input from our citizens that can help us solve this problem.

Stuart: Because feral cats are unaware of boundaries and move back and forth from city areas to county areas, I would strongly support a joint city-county task force to develop a solution to the feral cat problem. They carry diseases as well as parasites such as fleas, and are a health hazard. As an animal lover, I hate to see the always pregnant, always hungry feral cats searching for food. And, if all the dove feathers in our neighborhood are indicative, they are feeding on the bird population. Feral cats are a problem in our entire area, and a humane solution can only work with the cooperation of our entire area.

Torres: It is important for the city to maintain direct involvement in the issue of feral cats. This issue has become a nuisance to city residents therefore the city and the humane society should find creative solutions to solve this issue in a humanitarian way.

Underhill: The city of Yuma must be active. An active role is to continue funding the Humane Society and promoting the issue. After personally speaking with the Humane Society director and discussing this very issue, these individuals know and care about animals. I feel the city council is concerned with the problem but needs help from others. I love my animals dearly; however, the most logical solution right now is euthanization. The citizens who do not agree with the city supporting the cause to find a solution, should take it upon themselves and get involved. If every citizen donated just 25 cents to a cause, over $20,000 would be raised. Similar to the feral cats, the little involvement needed to help the problem would be more than enough to win the cause. What seems like a simple issue is indeed complicated and needs the help of the community.

**** (Clinton Underhill- photo not available)