🏆 "Safest City in Arizona" Status at Risk as Officers Threaten Exodus
Wealthy Arizona town debates officer compensation while funding million-dollar ponds. Survey shows 40% of Oro Valley police would consider leaving over compensation.
😽 Keepin’ It Simple Summary for Younger Readers
👧🏾✊🏾👦🏾
🏙️ The town of Oro Valley had a big meeting 🗣️ where many people showed support for the police officers 👮♂️👮♀️. The police are asking for higher pay 💵 because nearby towns offer better salaries. 🤑 Residents of Oro Valley expressed that the police are important and deserve fair compensation ⚖️. Some pointed out that the town spends money on parks 🌳 and ponds 🏞️ but hesitates to pay the police adequately. 🤔 Town leaders couldn't reach a decision, so another meeting will be held in two weeks to figure things out. ⏳ If the police aren't paid enough, some officers might leave for better opportunities in other towns. 🚓🏃♂️💼
🗝️ Takeaways
📊 Police compensation in Oro Valley lags behind regional competitors, with starting pay at $27.53/hour compared to $30.83 at Arizona DPS.
🚓 31 officers left during the current contract period, with 8 departing for better-paying agencies.
🏠 Community members and local realtors identified public safety as the #1 reason people choose to live in Oro Valley.
💵 While claiming budget constraints for police pay, the town recently approved millions for recreational amenities, including a pond and pump track.
🗣️ More than 25 residents spoke in support of competitive police compensation, creating an unprecedented public turnout.
📝 Management withdrew a nearly-agreed-upon proposal and replaced it with a "bridge plan" that would compress officer pay scales.
⚖️ Council postponed decision until May 21, requesting side-by-side comparison of competing proposals.
Power, Police, and Priorities: Oro Valley's Public Safety Showdown
A deep dive into how Arizona's "safest city" wrestles with worker compensation while funding luxury projects
In the plush council chambers of Oro Valley—Arizona's self-proclaimed safest and wealthiest community—a showdown unfolded on May 7, 2025, perfectly encapsulating the contradictions of modern municipal governance. As dozens of uniformed police officers lined the walls and concerned citizens packed the seats, the true priorities of this affluent desert enclave were laid bare for all to see.
This wasn't merely a town council meeting. It was a referendum on values, a wrestling match between public safety and fiscal austerity, and a stark illustration of how even in progressive-seeming governance, the interests of workers can be subordinated to the desires of property development and aesthetic amenities.
And isn't it always the way? We'll spend millions on decorative ponds but balk at fair compensation for the people who keep us safe. Classic capitalism masquerading as fiscal responsibility.
The Players: Power Dynamics on Display
The Oro Valley Council Chambers transformed into a theater of power dynamics, with clear protagonists and antagonists emerging throughout the evening:
Town Leadership
Joseph C. Winfield - Mayor of Oro Valley, who attempted to project authority while navigating the tension between police support and budget concerns
Barrett - Vice Mayor who questioned the union's dedication to the step plan and sought clarification on competing proposals
Green - Council Member who seconded several motions and presented on community projects
Jones-Ivy - Council Member who attended virtually (reported ill)
Murphy - Council Member who asked pointed questions about retention concerns
Nicholson - Council Member who proposed an alternative motion supporting the union's preferred proposal
Rob - Council Member who questioned the necessity of cost-of-living adjustments
Michael Standish - Town Clerk who managed procedural aspects of the meeting
Wilkins - Town Manager who opened with talk of "flat budgets" and "strategic choices" while deflecting from criticism of prioritization
Votava - HR representative leading management negotiations, who presented competing salary data and defended the town's position
Police Representatives
Christopher Knapp - OVPOA President, who challenged the town's transparency and data presentation
Steve Levoe II - FOP Lodge 53 President, who detailed obstacles placed in the union's path during negotiations
Jeff Douglas - OVPD Sergeant and OVPOA Vice President, who spoke emotionally about increased danger and changing public perception of police
Kelsey Derbin - PSNC Representative who methodically presented the timeline showing management's shifting positions
Community Voices
Twenty-five residents spoke in support of police compensation, many sharing personal stories that highlighted the department's role in maintaining Oro Valley's quality of life. Their testimonies created a tapestry of community values that starkly contrasted with management's budgetary focus.
Notice anyone missing from this lineup? How about representatives from low-income neighborhoods or housing advocates? Of course not—this is Oro Valley, where the median home price exceeds $500,000 and the primary concern is maintaining property values through the perception of absolute safety.
The Battleground: Competing Narratives of Public Safety
Setting the Stage: Management's Opening Gambit
Town Manager Wilkins began with a carefully crafted narrative about fiscal constraint, noting that "revenues have started to flatten out and the cost of doing business continues to rise." He praised his team for going "line by line with each department to keep to a flat budget" while preserving "essential services and public safety."
The message was clear: austerity is necessary, resources are limited, and hard choices must be made. Left unmentioned were the recent approvals of multimillion-dollar recreational projects that numerous community speakers would later reference.
Ah yes, the classic neoliberal two-step: plead poverty when workers demand fair pay, then miraculously find millions for development projects and amenities that boost property values. I'm shocked—shocked!—to find such duplicity in municipal governance.
The Community Rises: An Unprecedented Show of Support
What followed was extraordinary—a parade of 25 residents who methodically dismantled the town's narrative of necessary austerity while emphasizing public safety as Oro Valley's defining characteristic.
Lisa Bayless, an 18-year realtor in the community, cut to the heart of the matter: "The number one reason people tell me they move to Oro Valley or choose to stay in Oro Valley is public safety and the quality of the schools. It's a two-way tie, and it exceeds all other variables."
Tony Cox, a 41-year Tucson Police Department veteran, reinforced this sentiment through personal experience: "About six years ago, my wife and I decided to move to Oro Valley because it was one of the safest cities in the country to live, and we want to make sure that it stays that way."
The emotional peak came when Bonnie Quinn shared her family's experience following her son's death: "The officer stayed outside the house while the paramedics worked on him... They stayed respectfully posted outside the house until the funeral home came to pick up our son... This is community policing... How blessed are we?"
These testimonials humanize the police in ways that progressive discourse sometimes struggles with. There's an important lesson here about distinguishing between critiquing systems of power and recognizing the community-building role that well-trained, community-oriented officers can play.
The Workers' Case: A Methodical Exposé of Unequal Treatment
When Detective Knapp and Sergeant Derbin took the podium, they transformed what could have been merely emotional appeals into a data-driven indictment of management's approach to negotiations.
Derbin meticulously presented a timeline showing management's apparent strategy of delay and obstruction:
Blocking union representatives from meeting with council members
Spending three weeks debating restrictive ground rules
Taking 10 weeks to respond to the union's initial proposal
Reversing progress at the eleventh hour with an inferior "bridge plan"
Perhaps most damning was the presentation of statistical evidence showing Oro Valley officers falling behind regional competitors:
OVPD officers start at $27.53/hour
Tucson officers: $29.44/hour (+6.9%)
Marana officers: $30.08/hour (+9.3%)
Arizona DPS officers: $30.83/hour (+12.0%)
Sergeant Douglas highlighted the town's contradiction in approach: "The reason OV is able to boast about its reputation as a quiet, safe, upscale community is 100% the product of the hard work of these men and women."
It's the fundamental contradiction of capitalism—wanting the product (safety) without fairly compensating the labor that creates it. Marx would have a field day with this meeting.
Management's Defense: Data Wars and Pension Concerns
Mr. Votava presented the town's counter-narrative, focusing primarily on pension liability concerns and overall cost comparisons:
Union's two-year cost: $1.1 million in base wages, $7.8 million in pension liability
Town's proposal: $637,000 in base wages, $3 million in pension liability
He showcased comparison data suggesting Oro Valley's compensation remained competitive regionally, though the union disputed how these comparisons were calculated and presented.
Pension liability—the convenient boogeyman that allows municipalities to cry poverty while building splash pads and pump tracks. Never mind that these officers put their lives on the line daily; heaven forbid we adequately fund their retirement.
The Community's Counterattack: Following the Money
Several speakers directly challenged the town's budgetary priorities, with striking clarity.
Rob Wanzik, a 31-year resident, questioned: "As I looked at the 24-25 budget, it listed the top three strategic focus areas: Economic vitality, culture and recreation, question mark, public safety. I find it hard to believe that the town has put splash pads and pump tracks above public safety."
Ted Dressinger was even more direct: "We're here because of, in my view, malfeasance in the long strategic planning of the town council. So we put money into Naranja Park. We put money into a pump place when it was not even on the top 10 items when a survey was sent out to the community."
Bill Rodman, a former council member, highlighted the contradiction: "My understanding is that as many as 36 officers were strongly considering leaving for better pay if this latest offer became the MOU. If you're looking for some money to help fund a fair MOU, you can look to the funding of the PSPRS contributions... Secondly, take another look at the decision to spend millions for the pond at Vistoso Trails."
Follow the money and you'll always find the truth. The pond and recreational amenities increase property values and make for nice campaign photos. Officers' salaries? Not so Instagram-worthy, are they?
The Battle Lines: Step Plans, Compression, and Competing Proposals
The technical heart of the dispute revolved around two competing compensation approaches, each with significant implications for officers at different career stages.
The Step Plan Debate
The union strongly advocated maintaining their step plan system (where officers receive scheduled increases based on years of service) rather than shifting to a range system. Sergeant Douglas explained: "With the step plan, officers can see their future. They know the path that they're moving. Whereas if you take a step plan away, they don't. You don't know what your future looks like."
Vice Mayor Barrett questioned whether the step plan itself contributed to the compensation challenges: "It seems like the step plan has been the thing that has made the starting pay more of a challenge, if that makes sense."
The Compression Problem
A key union objection to management's proposal was the compression of early-career officers' compensation.
Detective Knapp explained: "We're taking officers that are brand new at this agency, they instantly get brought to the same level as officers that have been here for three years... There's a huge frustration that happens, and it causes a lot of, you know, almost infighting."
The Missing Proposal
Perhaps the most dramatic revelation was that the Council had never seen a prior proposal that both sides acknowledged had been very close to agreement.
Detective Knapp noted with frustration: "Mr. Votava himself admitted that you guys have never seen the proposal that brought us within a quarter of a percent of each other. Why would you guys have never seen that?"
The oldest trick in the management playbook—keep decision-makers in the dark about how close workers are to reasonable compromise. Paint the union as unreasonable while withholding evidence of your own shifting positions.
The Decision: Can Kicking at Its Finest
After hours of testimony and debate, the Council found itself in an uncomfortable position—clearly supportive of police but unwilling to fully embrace the union's position without more information.
Mayor Winfield attempted to thread the needle by moving to approve management's proposal for additional bonuses for early-career officers and pay increases for long-serving sergeants.
Council Member Nicholson countered with a motion to adopt the April 14th proposal that both sides had nearly agreed upon, with additional negotiation guidelines ensuring transparency and communication rights.
Ultimately, the Council punted, voting 6-0 to table the decision until May 21st and requesting a side-by-side comparison of both proposals.
Classic municipal governance—when faced with a clear moral choice between workers and budget abstractions, choose... more meetings! Nothing says "public safety is our priority" like two more weeks of uncertainty for the officers protecting your community.
Beyond Police Pay: Other Business
Lost in the shadow of the police compensation debate were several other agenda items:
National Public Works Week Proclamation: Mayor Winfield proclaimed May 18-24, 2025, as National Public Works Week, with Public Works Director Paul Keisler accepting.
Noble Hops Liquor License: The Council unanimously approved a Series 12 Restaurant liquor license for Noble Hops at 1335 W Lambert Lane.
Remaining Agenda Items: Due to the late hour, the Council tabled the remaining items, including town code amendments and a planned area development amendment.
What It All Means: The Real Priorities of Power
The May 7th meeting exposed the true priorities of Oro Valley governance and, by extension, the contradictions inherent in many affluent communities across America.
When residents purchase homes in communities like Oro Valley, they're buying more than property—they're buying the perception of safety, exclusivity, and protection from the challenges facing less affluent areas. Speaker after speaker inadvertently confirmed this reality, citing safety as their primary reason for choosing Oro Valley.
Yet when it comes to fairly compensating the workers who create that safety—the same workers who make the community's primary selling point possible—fiscal restraint suddenly becomes the paramount concern.
Former Chief Danny Sharp perfectly captured this contradiction when describing his recent visit to a University of Arizona criminal justice class: "I was stunned that not one of those individuals was interested in coming to Oro Valley. They wanted to go to Tucson. They wanted to go to Pima County."
The message is clear: Oro Valley wants the product (safety) without fairly compensating the labor that creates it. This is capitalism in its most transparent form—extracting maximum value while minimizing compensation.
This is the fundamental hypocrisy of wealthy enclaves everywhere: marketing safety and quality of life while undervaluing the essential workers who make it possible. From police officers to teachers to service workers, the pattern repeats across America's landscape of inequality.
The Path Forward: Community Accountability
The May 21st meeting will reveal whether Oro Valley's leadership truly values public safety as much as their marketing materials suggest. Will they prioritize fair compensation for officers, or will aesthetic amenities and property development continue to take precedence?
The impressive community turnout on May 7th suggests a potential path forward—citizens holding their representatives accountable for aligning budget priorities with community values. When dozens of residents from across the political spectrum unite around fair compensation for public servants, it creates a powerful counterbalance to the technocratic arguments of budget hawks.
Perhaps there's a lesson here for progressive movements generally—effective advocacy requires both moral clarity AND showing up in numbers at seemingly mundane municipal meetings where the real decisions affecting workers' lives are made.
Get Involved and Support Independent Journalism
The Three Sonorans will continue monitoring this situation and providing the kind of in-depth analysis you won't find in corporate media. Here's how you can stay engaged:
Attend the May 21st Town Council meeting at 6:00 PM in the Oro Valley Council Chambers
Research budget priorities in your own community—are workers being fairly compensated while luxury projects receive funding?
Speak up at public meetings—your voice matters, especially when united with others
Support our work at Three Sonorans Substack with a paid subscription to help us continue providing this critical coverage of local governance issues
Your subscription directly enables us to attend these meetings, analyze complex documents, and provide the progressive context missing from mainstream coverage. Together, we can hold power accountable and push for governance that truly serves all community members, not just property interests.
What do you think? Should Oro Valley prioritize competitive police compensation over recreational amenities? Have you noticed similar patterns in your community's budget priorities? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
Quotes
Former Police Chief Danny Sharp: "I was stunned that not one of those individuals [criminal justice students] was interested in coming to Oro Valley... They wanted to go to Tucson. They wanted to go to Pima County." [Revealing recruitment crisis]
Ted Dressinger (resident): "We're here because of, in my view, malfeasance in the long strategic planning of the town council. So we put money into Naranja Park. We put money into a pump [track] when it was not even on the top 10 items when a survey was sent out to the community." [Accusing council of misplaced priorities]
Paul Sheldon (State FOP President): "When I started 25 years ago, [Tucson Police Department] had 1,100 officers... Now, 25 years later, we have 700 officers and we respond to nothing... You have a traffic accident, we're not coming. Your house alarm goes off, we're not coming." [Warning about consequences of underinvestment]
Detective Christopher Knapp: "Mr. Votava himself admitted that you guys have never seen the proposal that brought us within a quarter of a percent of each other. Why would you guys have never seen that?" [Questioning transparency of negotiation process]
Rob Wanzik (resident): "I find it hard to believe that the town has put splash pads and pump tracks above public safety." [Challenging budget priorities]
Stacy Douglas (officer's wife): "In the event of an officer involved shooting or line of duty incident, this town has brought up that they wanted to do away with any benefit. How does that seem okay? In all honesty, finding this out was just a slap in the face to every law enforcement family." [Revealing controversial benefit reduction proposal]
Names and Memorable Quotes
Joseph C. Winfield (Mayor): "The reality is that this council has consistently prioritized public safety. We dedicate a greater percentage of our budget to policing than Tucson, Serrita, Marana, or Pima County." [Defending council's support for police]
Christopher Knapp (OVPOA President): "We've seen a pattern of this mistransparency, misleading information being presented this entire time." [Accusing management of bad faith negotiations]
Lisa Bayless (realtor): "The number one reason people tell me they move to Oro Valley or choose to stay in Oro Valley is public safety and the quality of the schools. It's a two-way tie, and it exceeds all other variables." [Connecting property values to police services]
Bonnie Quinn (resident): "They were there the day our son died... And they stayed respectfully posted outside the house until the funeral home came to pick up our son. This is community policing." [Sharing emotional testimony about police support]
Danny Sharp (former Police Chief): "The town was founded on the premise of strong public safety, give the cops what they want." [Quoting James D. Cree from 25 years ago]
Jeff Douglas (OVPD Sergeant): "Even being the safest community, we have seen a dramatic increase in critical incidents. In the last 17 years, there have been five officer involved shootings. In the 17 years prior to that, there was one." [Highlighting increased danger]
Charles Bowles (resident): "If we fail our police officers and their families, shame on us. If truly you cannot pay the increase that's required, you need to rescind your vote on the pond and then come back on a later date and revisit that." [Suggesting redirecting funds from recreational projects]
Carol S. Clark (resident): "You're not making widgets here. This is people's lives. They're livelihoods." [Criticizing management's approach to compensation]
Nate Leotis (towing company owner): "The reason OV is able to boast about its reputation as a quiet, safe, upscale community is 100% the product of the hard work of these men and women." [Attributing town's reputation to police efforts]
Christine Sharp (Chamber of Commerce President): "In a recent survey conducted by the town of Oro Valley, business owners selected more often than any other item the fact that Oro Valley is safe as the reason for opening their business in Oro Valley." [Connecting economic development to public safety]
Have a scoop or a story you want us to follow up on? Send us a message!
