I’m not keen on the word ‘vision.’ It’s a word  frequently used by  politicians who don’t have one. I’m embarrassed to be using it here, but I can’t think of a better one. The word ‘plan’ is a good workmanlike alternative, but perhaps too workmanlike. It suggests a specific project in hand, an end agreed upon for which we need only specify the means; something like building a bookcase or providing for the orderly repair of  a system of streets.

If  I say I have a plan for my house, you understand one thing; if I say I have a vision of what my house will be you understand something different. My vision is more than a scheme for the mechanical arrangement of rooms and utilities, it suggests how it might fit with the world around it, and the sort of life I will live within it.

City planning that is not also informed by some less mechanical, some wider-reaching vision of what the city is, or is to become, plans for a body without a soul.  A city not anchored by some vision of itself is nothing more than a developers’ town.

There was a time when thinking of ourselves as the Old Pueblo was enough to impose, on what we built and how we lived, a certain character and style of life that made Tucson distinctive. Our public buildings, like the old courthouse and the veterans’ hospital were built in an exaggerated  Spanish Colonial style.

The interior decoration of our homes reflected the Southwest, Native American and Hispanic traditions. We wore boots and bolo ties, and gentlemen were excused by the mayor from wearing suit coats or jackets during the summer. Our sense of ourselves was that we were a vacation place, a dude ranch place, a place where Spanish was spoken as well as English, a place that was part of the cowboy west  and its traditions.

As we grew in size we outgrew the Old Pueblo sense of who we were. Does rodeo week still express to ourselves and others what we are? I think not. Rodeo is still fun, but it used to be downtown, when there was a downtown, and it was somehow at the heart of things, a culturally defining event. Now it’s banished to the south side and many families use the rodeo week school holiday to take the kids to Disney Land.

Tucson needs a new sense of itself if it is not to be just another sprawling, boring builders’ town.

There’s plenty to build on, including the Spanish accented cowboy west of the Old Pueblo, and the deep cultural traditions and touching cultural pretension that would build a theater and then call it The Temple of Music and Art.

We have made a start in a small way by redefining ourselves, on the electronic billboards  that welcome travelers arriving at the airport, as “Optics Valley.” Corny, derivative, commercial, but not bad. Beats “five dollar town” or “phone center central.”

If we’ve decided to be  the center of  a high tech, well-paid industry, attractive to an intelligent and well educated work force we’ve gone a long way toward redefining who we are.

But we should also aspire to become the artistic and creative center of the southwest. We invest money to bring businesses here, we should also invest money to attract, support, and encourage  the arts. We should make Tucson a place where young artists and intellectuals want to come because it is a center of creative energy.

We could use more studio space, rehearsal space, and above all  a well designed outdoor venue for  all of the performing arts. We should  build a regional art complex, with a mix of  studios, apartments, theaters, and public patio gardens; built at public expense if need be, or with the same sort of tax benefits and subsidies that we offer manufacturers and failing hotel keepers.

Let’s invite young architects and designers of all sorts, too. Let’s  start to think of ourselves as a place where all  the crafts flourish and are supported; a place too proud of its intellectual and artistic traditions to be nothing more than a developers’ town.

The Greek city of Athens was the center of its world. Athens was a great business and commercial power as well a  center of the artistic and intellectual  life of its time. There is no reason why we should not aspire to become the Athens of The Southwest.

It could be a transforming vision… and it would make excellent economic sense.

The Latest on The State Budget Negotiations

In an exclusive interview with Representative David Bradley (D District 28) The Data Port has learned the current state of progress on balancing Arizona’s budget. The first action to be taken was to correct one of the consequences of Governor Brewer’s vetoing of the education budget. She vetoed all of it, which would have left the schools with no money at all and unable to open in the fall.

According to Bradley the legislators “fixed the eduction budget” and corrected another consequence of the veto that would have made it impossible for Arizona to receive Federal stimulus funds.

Bradley reports that the Democrats are sitting at the negotiating table with the Republicans and the Governor is closeted with Republican leaders. She continues to refuse to talk to anyone in the Democratic leadership.

According to Bradley a sales tax deal is in the works under which the state sales tax would be extended to all services except medicine and food, but reduced from 5% to 3.4%. This would greatly increase income but would save the average family $275 a year.

Bradley wryly commented that progress is slow but that “We should have a state budget by August.”

The Long Republican Nose and Tucson City Elections

As the Republican-dominated legislature rushed toward adjournment it decided it didn’t like the way we elect our council members.

In Tucson each ward decides in a primary who its Democratic and Republican candidates will be. However, in the general election the vote is city-wide. A consequence of this may be that even though a ward is predominantly Republican it may find itself with a Democratic council person, or vice-versa.

The legislature decided that “first ward and then city-wide” was out. Also out were  partisan elections. All candidates for the council would run as no-party-declared candidates. No one The Data Port contacted, including Democratic and Republican Party  headquarters in Tucson, knew whether Governor Brewer had actually signed the bill. It probably won’t matter if she does, since Tucson is organized by a City Charter, and the state Supreme Court decided in 1951 that the Lege has no power to alter or control a city charter.

Meanwhile, Back at The Rialto

Rob O’Dell, writing in today’s Arizona Daily Star, reports that the City Council and developers Martin and Stiteler yet again failed to reach agreement on a plan to preserve Rialto Theater access to its Green Room and office space. The theater has been using that space rent free.

“Martin and Stiteler were rebuffed last month for a development agreement that would have given them $4 million in city land for $1.7 million worth of developer improvements downtown,” O’Dell reports.

What followed was a spitting match in which the developers threatened to collect back rent, then threatened eviction, and the city threatened to start proceedings to condemn the property.

Some of us thought this was a truly bad deal from the get-go, since many of the developments that were promised would be in the developers’ own property…the building that’s next the Rialto.

Based on quotes in today’s O’Dell article, council members Trasoff and Glassman think this is a great deal, swapping $4 million worth of property for $1.7 million worth of improvements, gifts and develpment, most of it in the developers’ own property. As a bonus gob of icing on the cake there was no guarantee that the $4 million worth of property would  ever be developed. 

Councilwoman Nina Trasoff has forwarded The Data Port a copy of the letter she sent to constituents explaining why she supports the Stiteler development plan. As you see the focus of her concerns was the Rialto Theatre.

I am posting the letter (slightly edited for length) so that readers may make their own judgements abut Trasoff’s arguments. I invite your comments, and have invited the councilwoman to join us. Trasoff writes:

“I am concerned about the future of the Rialto Theatre.

“Tuesday, we had an opportunity to support a Development Agreement [DA] that’s been in the works for 6 months.  It is important to note this was an Incentives agreement.  The Developers already own the entire Rialto block except for the Theatre itself, which is owned by the City of Tucson through the Rio Nuevo Facilities District.  This agreement was designed to get redevelopment of this block under way NOW, despite the dismal state of the economy, setting the stage for other developers to want to invest in the area without future incentives.

“The Development Agreement included several important ‘gives’ on behalf of the Rialto:

“§         The Developers would have given the Rialto Theatre a 1,000 sq. foot bay for new bathrooms;

“§         The Developers would have given the Rialto Theatre 450 sq. feet at the northeast corner of the building to provide adequate space and a great entrance for the Theatre’s own bar, downstairs.

“§         The Developers would have provided $400,000 to the Foundation for development of the bathrooms and the bar. [This was NOT a loan! No repayment was required.]

“§         The Developers would have installed an elevator that would have made the balcony of the Theatre handicap accessible for the first time. In exchange, the Foundation would have provided access so balcony patrons could go to the Developers’ bar upstairs before and after shows, with appropriate protections both to assure they’ve paid to enter the Theatre and that liquor law provisos are met.

“There was intense pressure from the Rialto board that the Developers also had to give them the 2,500 square foot Green Room/Office space.  The problem is the Developers have other plans for that building.  But, I believe that issue was taken care of with this additional concession:

“§         The Theatre would be given use of the Green Room rent-free guaranteed for 5 years. After that, a series of 5-year leases would be negotiated at market rate.  When the Developers were ready to raze the Broadway building for redevelopment, Green Room facilities would always be made available to the Theatre on the Rialto Block at market rate rent.

“There were many other elements in the DA, including incentives to move forward NOW with renovating the ground floor of the Rialto Block, bringing in a major art gallery and JANOS, in his important return to Downtown.  Several small nonprofits would have received important funding support, including WAMO, Skrappy’s youth program and the new artist in residence program called ‘Distributor’, creating an important upgrade of one of the gateways to Downtown.

“My motion to express strong support for the Development Agreement, just working to retool a couple of language points to clarify the deal, failed to gain support.  Yes, there were a few changes needed, but I believe the basic framework was in place and felt we needed to confirm it since the deadline to which we agreed was June 17^th (the next day). I believe we had a deal that would greatly benefit Downtown’s East End, the Rialto Theatre and Downtown revitalization as a whole.  The developers would also reap benefits in the form of City property earned in exchange for their risking their cash redeveloping before the economy turned around.  Instead, Council voted to delay the decision for three weeks so the parties could continue to talk and work out details.

“Bottom line: I believe this multi-faceted development agreement was in the best interest of our community as a whole: it protected and strengthened an important City asset, the Rialto Theatre; it provided a necessary ‘push’ or incentive to getting this project moving quickly, providing a boost to other local restaurants, retail, commercial business, neighborhoods; and it gave the business community the confidence that the City would be a partner in getting our economy moving again.

“I’ll keep you posted.

“Nina J. Trasoff

Councilmember - Ward VI”

Comments? Criticisms? Objections?