After spending a great deal of time discussing their duties, and failure to perform them, at their January 5 meeting, the Pima County Supervisors opted to shift their responsibilities to the elderly to the Green Valley Council and Clerk of the Board.
At issue was the funding of the Green Valley Council and the accommodation for an elderly disabled woman.
In a memo dated January 4, Pima County administrator Chuck Huckelberry unilaterally disregarded the Americans with Disability Act by changing the definition of accommodation to “special favor.” Huckelberry then forced Supervisor Ally Miller to place the issue of whether or not the County would continue to make an accommodation for the physically challenged Ottoboni on the meeting’s agenda in case “any other supervisor would want to free parking to any other members of the public.” Contrary to Huckelberry’s characterization that Ottoboni was simply receiving free parking, Ottoboni, whose physical challenge makes walking long distances nearly impossible, was advised to park in the lot below the Board of Supervisor’s building since 2013.
According to the ADA guidelines, “An individual with disabilities’ right of access to “reasonable accommodation” is truly at the heart of the ADA. In essence, an “accommodation” is a modification of established procedures or existing physical space to allow full access to and participation in those activities enjoyed by the general public. Accommodations may be as simple as placing blocks of wood under a table’s legs to make it high enough for use by a person who uses a wheelchair, or as complicated as widening doorways, or rewiring light switches so they can be lowered to wheelchair height. It is important to note that accommodations need not be expensive, and as long as employers and others subject to ADA regulations made a reasonable effort to meet the needs of individuals with disabilities they will (usually) find themselves in compliance. “
Huckelberry’s move was intended to intimidate Miller and silence Ottoboni. Both women have been highly critical of the County administrator and the special favors granted by a majority of the County Board of Supervisors. Huckelberry, and his vast public relations team along with the County Attorney has effectively silenced any opposition over the years – that is until Miller was elected.
On Tuesday, the majority of supervisors argued that the language on the cover of meetings agenda’s was key to the discussion. That language instructs those seeking accommodations that they must call three days before a meeting request an accommodation. As a result, Ottoboni, a regular at the Board meetings must now contact the Clerk of the Board, Robin Brigode, and request an accommodation before each meeting.
At one point, Elias questioned why Ottoboni needed an accommodation when another regular meeting attendee, who uses the heavily tax-subsidized bus system, “seems to follow the rules and it seems to work okay.” The implication that Ottoboni was not obeying the rules shocked many attendees. Because, according to Huckelberry no one else, presumably including the resident to which Elias referred, has ever requested an accommodation other than Ottoboni, the attack was baseless.
In light of the fact that the notice that accommodations can be made is difficult to find, it is not surprising that requests have not been made.
“I leave it in the hands of the Clerk. She can obviously locate and provide for that,” stated Carroll referring to requests for accommodations.
In denying Ottoboni the accommodation, Supervisor Richard Elias stated, “I will say that if Miss Ottoboni feels embarrassed or anything by this I apologize. While I disagree with just about everything that you say here, I’ve always found you to be pleasant and polite in personal interactions and I think that’s fine. I disagree with a lot of people on the face of the Earth and I really don’t have any problem with it at all so thank you for being patient and all of that but there really is no need to make a motion. The only thing that has to happen is to allow Miss Brigode to do her job. That’s it.”
“Miss Ottoboni is a member of a very vulnerable population; senior citizens that are disabled,” Miller told her fellow supervisors. “I think that we as a Board need to be cognizant of the needs of all of the individuals in our communities but especially vulnerable populations. Mr. Carroll is doing a special Green Valley Council accommodation, and these parking spaces sit empty, I very seldom see anyone parked in them. And according to ADA guidelines, an accommodation is a modification of established procedures or existing physical space to allow full access to and participation in those activities enjoyed by the general public. And labeling an ADA accommodation request as a special favor is demeaning and will serve to inhibit those vulnerable populations such as the elderly or disabled. I know if I were sitting in this audience and I heard what I just heard I’d be very reluctant to ask for accommodations in fear of being ridiculed and expecting special favors. It’s not something that we as a Board should support or encourage.”
Related articles:
Pima County Parking Decision Smacks Of Retaliation
Huckelberry Changes Pima County ADA Accommodations Definition
The Board did approve $75,000 for the Green Valley Council. Green Valley is a retirement community located in Supervisor Ray Carroll’s district. The Council, according to residents, has been a political vehicle for Carroll. Much like his position on assisting residents with accommodations, rather than offer constituents services through his office – using his budget – a majority of the supervisors voted to give the Council $75,000 to provide the services normally offered by supervisors offices.
One Pima County resident, Lou Sampson, told the supervisors during the Call to the Audience, “I’ve been coming to BOS meetings for over a year now. I want to speak on the $75,000 that you are giving the Green Valley Council (GVC), which was formed in 1974 to help us gain influence with Pima Government. They used to be advocates for us citizens but they have not attended these meetings for several years. I heard a former President say they no longer need to attend because they have become so important politicians now come to them.”
“GVC no longer represents us. Supervisor Carroll or one of his staff attends the monthly council meetings in Green Valley and gives out information that supports what he advocates,” stated Sampson. “The Council has become openly anti-business, pro $ .10 gas tax, pro higher taxes, more regulations, and lawsuits. Mr. Carroll has said he doesn’t care about businesses – he only cares about rooftops. Rooftops vote.”
“An example of the lack of information given at Council meetings is that the hierarchy of the Council was not even aware there were 2 sides to the road bonds. I don’t know if this is willful ignorance or they are just so beholden to Mr. Carroll,” continued Sampson. “When the President of the Council stood in front of the audience at the pro-bond forum he stated that people in Green Valley have to realize that their taxes must go up in order for the roads to be repaired. My taxes went up $166.00 this year. That’s my quota for lattes, Mr. Huckelberry. Unfortunately the Council has become very partisan so whatever position Mr. Carroll takes is what they advocate.”
“If citizens of Green Valley knew the waste and abuse of their hard earned money, they would know there’s plenty of money in the budget for road repair and Sheriff’s step raises.” Sampson said, “The Council has had money problems since 2012. They know they can’t raise dues because HOA’s would quit. It seems to many citizens of Green Valley that this is a political payoff for being loyal to Ray Carroll’s agenda.”
Sampson noted that “On one hand you accommodate Green Valley Council….But you can’t accommodate Geri Ottoboni, a handicapped senior citizen of Pima County with a parking permit. While you call her accommodation a “special favor.” We call your accommodation of the Green Valley Council a very special favor.”
“Instead of the county giving the Green Valley Council $75,000.00 maybe Supervisor Carroll should take the money out of his budget …since the Council has become merely an extension of his office,” concluded Sampson.
Pima County resident addresses Green Valley Council accommodation
Review of requested accommodation