Hey! I occasionally disagree with professional journalists

Admittedly, it's not a huge disagreement; more of a quibble over some details.

Last week, I published a post on the coming Lieutenant Governor sweepstake in AZ.

Now the actual pros (ya know, *real* journalists) are getting into the act.

From the Arizona Agenda, written by Hank Stephenson and Nicole Ludden -

The VP of AZ

Political prognosticators are already labeling Arizona’s 2026 governor’s race a “toss-up” and debating the strengths and weaknesses of Gov. Katie Hobbs and her two potential challengers, Republicans Karrin Taylor Robson and Andy Biggs.

But the 2026 gubernatorial election will be played by a whole different set of rules than Arizona politicos are used to.

That’s because, for the first time in Arizona’s history, when voters weigh their options for their next governor, they’ll also be hiring a lieutenant governor.

It's a good story, and I recommend reading the entire thing, but I *do* disagree with it one thing.

The article goes on to discuss various possibilities/candidates in a "pro/con" format, and the "con" for a Democratic possible may not be much of a bad thing, IMO. (emphasis added by me)

• Lt. Gov. Anna Tovar

  Pros: Tovar is a former lawmaker, corporation commissioner and mayor of Tolleson who knows her way around government. Like Romero, she’s a Latina (former) mayor. And she’s also an old Hobbs ally who the governor appointed to the State Board of Education (although that tenure was cut short when the Senate refused to confirm her).

  Cons: She comes with some political baggage, including an ethics censure during her time on the Corporation Commission and an episode in 2013 when she led a coup against Senate Democratic Leader Leah Landrum Taylor, who is black, and Landrum Taylor accused her of racism.

Ummm...in 2014, Taylor endorsed Michele Reagan, the R candidate for AZ Secretary of State.

I don't know if Tovar is a bigot (if she is, that's an automatic disqualifier for any position, except maybe for one in the Cheeto administration), but a personality conflict with a known quisling?

Most assuredly, *not* a disqualifier.

And that "censure" from the Corporation Commission?

Partisan hackery at ugliest.

From the Arizona Capitol Times, written by Reagan Priest, dated 12/17/2024 -

Corp Comm Republicans censure outgoing Democrat 

for alleged statutory, ethics violations

Republicans on the Arizona Corporation Commission voted Tuesday to censure outgoing Democratic Commissioner Anna Tovar and refer a complaint to the Maricopa County Attorney’s office, saying she violated open meeting laws and the commission’s code of ethics.

At an open staff meeting, three Republicans on the commission said an investigation into Tovar’s office found a letter sent by Tovar on Nov. 6 disclosed information discussed in executive session and constituted harassment of a commission staff member. The commissioners also voted to refer violations of Arizona open meeting law to the Maricopa County Attorney’s office.

I don't know if Tovar (or anyone else) is interested in the Lieutenant Governor (LG) gig, and I don't who Hobbs (or any other candidate) is looking at, but I truly expect the speculation to continue until the LG candidates are named.

Are "petty" and "vindictive" characteristics of (alleged) public servants?

From KJZZ, dated 12/18, written by Wayne Schutsky -

Republican Arizona Corporation commissioners censure Democrat Anna Tovar

Three Republican Arizona Corporation commissioners voted to censure the commission’s lone Democrat after she criticized the agency’s executive director, saying he shouldn’t receive a $20,000 bonus.

The commission awarded Executive Director Doug Clark the bonus on Nov. 6 on top of his annual $215,000 salary.

[snip]

The commission found Tovar violated state laws “pertaining to Executive Session confidentiality” and “the confidentiality of personnel matters,” according to the censure, which referred the matter to Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell for further review.

[snip]

Jim Barton, Tovar’s attorney, accused the Republicans on the commission of targeting Tovar for political purposes weeks before her term on the commission ends.

“This is a witch hunt, and it's gross and it's a misuse of taxpayer dollars to settle political scores like this,” Barton said. “They should be ashamed of themselves.”

To that point, Barton cited the commissioners decision to refer the allegations against Tovar to Mitchell, the Republican Maricopa County attorney, instead of Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes, whose office has a dedicated Open Meeting Law Enforcement Team. That team regularly reviews complaints against public bodies and elected officials for alleged violations of the state’s Open Meeting Law, which requires those elected officials to vote and discuss most issues in a public forum.

In fact, the Attorney General’s Office recently concluded that the four Republicans on the Corporation Commission violated that law after Tovar filed a complaint against them.

Actually, the only way that this (using public funds to give a $20,000 payoff bonus to one of their employees and going prosecutor shopping to target the person who had the audacity to criticize it) would look more like a witch hunt is if the R members of the ACC voted to have Commissioner Tovar subject to trial by drowning.

Oh, and the fact that they've hidden Tovar's dissent doesn't add to their credibility.

The Google result -

Leads to -

Hmmm...

Clark is the former Public Works Director in Bellevue, Nebraska.