tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23717700.post465837891519808278..comments2023-10-23T14:30:26.234-07:00Comments on Random Musings: A surprising early contender for the Legislative Loon AwardCraighttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03338682971485143332noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23717700.post-18598924788019403952009-01-29T15:57:00.000-07:002009-01-29T15:57:00.000-07:00SB1069 does not limit the Sherriff from increasing...SB1069 does not limit the Sherriff from increasing fees; they are not impacted at all. As a matter of fact the Sheriff and Constable’s are required to ask the legislature for fee increases (as are virtually all Governmental agencies) which they routinely do. Why should the courts be exempted from this process of checks and balances? Thank you Senator Paton for looking out for your constituents!Melanie Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06436358472408497466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23717700.post-73443402207274488892009-01-23T21:26:00.000-07:002009-01-23T21:26:00.000-07:00Kim - I'm unfamiliar with the history you cited, s...Kim - I'm unfamiliar with the history you cited, so if I've misread the bill, then I'll correct my post. <BR/><BR/>However, the current bill looks pretty clear - it removes some limited judicial branch autonomy to determine legal fees and leaves that authority (and the courts' fiscal solvency) to the tender mercies of the lege.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03338682971485143332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23717700.post-66895674433861972632009-01-22T09:27:00.000-07:002009-01-22T09:27:00.000-07:00“Throwing down the entire judicial branch” are you...“Throwing down the entire judicial branch” are you serious? SB1069 does not throw down the entire judicial branch. To understand this bill you need to review the history behind this issue (HB2210 in 2008). Last session the Supreme Court negotiated a 44% fee increase with Governor Napolitano to be included in the budget. In addition the Courts and Governor Napolitano padded their own retirement by siphoning off a portion of the fees to fund the “Elected Official Retirement Fund”. Senator Paton’s bill simply requires the Court to ask the legislature for future fee increases not allow them to operate on auto-pilot. The Court’s have always had to go to the Legislature for all fee increases until state statutes were amended last session as part of the despicable state budget. This bill simply returns the Courts to business as usual, a process that has successfully been in place for many years and requires them to justify their fee increases to the Legislature and the citizens of Arizona.Kimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11220319105375646665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23717700.post-11203796333833769152009-01-15T04:16:00.000-07:002009-01-15T04:16:00.000-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23717700.post-32860464092990741492009-01-13T08:41:00.000-07:002009-01-13T08:41:00.000-07:00To let you know that AZ is not the only place with...To let you know that AZ is not the only place with the Loonies, NV has a throwback Assemblyman who is dragging the motorcycle helmet law back out of its well deserved oblivion, and want 2nd Amendment supporting license plates....<BR/>After the announcement by Lt. Governor Krolicki that he was interested in Reid's Senate seat, the subsequent announcement that he was indicted on four felony counts rather put the kibosh on that candidacy. The timeline makes it apparent that Krolicki knew the indictment was coming down before he announced his interest. I'm not sure who that leaves as a serious contender, because the word is out that the "gentleman's agreement" between Ensign and Reid expires in 2010.Desert Beaconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02005950397571592827noreply@blogger.com