As usual, all info gathered from the websites of the relevant political bodies/agencies (except where noted) and subject to change without notice.
...The floor action in the U.S. House is going to be dominated by money issues, but there will be a few other issues of interest.
- H.R. 3590, Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009;
- H.R. 1016, Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act of 2009, CRS summary here (note: this one is cosponsored by CD5's Harry Mitchell and most of the Democratic members of the Arizona delegation);
- S. 1717, "A bill to authorize major medical facility leases for the Department of Veterans Affairs for fiscal year 2010, and for other purposes."
...all of the above bills will be heard under suspension of the rules, meaning that a 2/3 majority will be needed to pass the measures.
The following budget-related items will be heard "under a rule" -
- The conference report for H.R. 2997, Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010;
- Possible consideration of the conference report on H.R. 2892, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2010;
- Possible consideration of the conference report on H.R. 2647, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010.
- Also to be heard under a rule, H.R. 2442, Bay Area Regional Water Recycling Program Expansion Act of 2009.
...Over in the Senate, scheduled floor action includes consideration of H.R. 2847, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. Committee schedule here.
...Back here in Arizona, the budget is still out-of-balance and the legislature is still out of session. However, there is still activity on West Washington this week.
- On Monday at 9 a.m. in HHR1, the Senate Education Accountability and Reform and House of Representatives Education Committee of Reference will meet regarding the school performance audits of Chandler Unified School District, Tolleson Union High School District, Somerton Elementary School District and Flagstaff Unified School District.
- On Thursday at 1:30 p.m., the Senate Government Institutions and House of Representatives Government Committee of Reference will meet in HHR4 regarding the sunset review of: Arizona Neighborhood Preservation and Investment Commission, Legislative Council; Ombudsman for Private Property Rights, Office of Ombudsman-Citizens Aide, Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records; Board of Library Examiners, and State Board on Geographic and Historic Names.
- Also on Thursday in HHR4, but at 9:30 a.m., the Senate Commerce and Economic Development and House of Representatives Government Committee of Reference will meet regarding the sunset review for the Board of Athletic Training.
...On Thursday at 10 a.m., the Arizona Corporation Commission will hold an open meeting dealing mostly, but not exclusively, with securities matters. The ACC's hearing schedule is here.
...The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has two meetings this week.
The highlight of Monday's informal meeting is item 3 -
Authorize legal action including filing and/or defending an appeal and taking other legal actions as may be appropriate regarding the Judgment in the matter of Andrew Thomas et al v. Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, CV-2008-033194 (C-06-10-114-M-00)
There will also be an executive session.
Wednesday's formal meeting agenda looks to be fairly non-controversial, though there are a number of items related to the offices of the county sheriff and county attorney.
There is a special/executive meeting scheduled to take place immediately after the formal meeting.
...The Tempe City Council is meeting on Thursday. The agenda is here. The Council's calendar of events is here.
...The Scottsdale City Council is meeting on Tuesday. The agenda includes an item for approving the employment agreement with the interim City Treasurer, David Smith.
The Council has an executive session scheduled immediately prior to the regular meeting.
- The City's Charter Review Task Force is scheduled to meet Monday evening at 5 in the City Hall Kiva. The agenda includes consideration of language that would allow the Council and Mayor to directly appoint City Staff, apparently to bypass the City Manager's influence over the hiring of professional employees.
Yippee - when the Task Force isn't pushing language to protect the profit margins of favored corporations, they're helping Jim Lane gather power to himself and his professional staff.
I wonder if everyone, even *anyone*, involved realizes that they are supposed to be working to help Scottsdale, not just themselves or their friends.
Scottsdale's community meetings schedule is here.
Not scheduled to meet this week: Arizona Board of Regents, Citizens Clean Elections Commission, the Boards of Directors of both the Maricopa Integrated Health System and Central Arizona Project, Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District.
Saturday, October 03, 2009
Friday, October 02, 2009
Scottsdale looking to turn its charter on its ear
The City of Scottsdale has a task force reviewing its charter, looking toward voter approval of changes at a special election in March. Most of the changes suggested are of the "technical correction" variety (updating language for current usage or for clarification purposes, etc.)
However, some of the proposed changes that they are considering are somewhat less innocuous.
Here is the public comment that I submitted to the Charter Review Task Force regarding some very specific language proposed for the charter -
Why bother though?
Using the same address as American Water's corporate HQ shows that they don't really care if people know who is behind the ORANGE Coalition.
Mayor Jim Lane and his friends are being as subtle as baseball bats in their quest to consolidate power in Scottsdale and to protect their friends' profits, both at the expense of the best interests of Scottsdale's residents.
Lane and his supporters may rail against the influence that the Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce had during the Manross administration (complaints that have more than a little merit), but the only thing that has changed with his election has been the names of those pulling the strings, not the facts that strings *are* being pulled, and that enough money gets you a turn at tugging on one of the strings.
Later...
However, some of the proposed changes that they are considering are somewhat less innocuous.
Here is the public comment that I submitted to the Charter Review Task Force regarding some very specific language proposed for the charter -
Among the fine observations that I left out of the comment that one of the benefits of creating the ORANGE Coalition at a non-profit corporation instead of a political committee is that political committees have to disclose their donors while non-profit corporations do not.Good afternoon,
At the Charter Review Task Force meeting on September 28, I submitted a written comment on the appropriateness of inserting into Scottsdale’s charter language written by the “ORANGE Coalition”. At the time, I advised against doing so, but because of the short notice, that comment wasn’t quite as specific as it should have been.
The Charter Review Task Force was established to make recommendations for updates to the City Charter, with an eye toward making it more citizen-friendly, among other things. More generally, the Task Force is charged to work on improvements and updates to the Charter that benefit Scottsdale’s citizens as a whole.
However, the language suggested by the ORANGE Coalition has only one beneficiary - American Water.
American Water’s subsidiary, Arizona American Water (AZAm Water), has a small but troubled presence in the Scottsdale water market. Its approximately 2000 customers and their families have repeatedly been faced with TCE-contaminated water pouring from their taps. This situation has led to some residents, including members of the Scottsdale City Council, to call for looking into acquiring AZAm Water’s system and adding those customers to Scottsdale’s water system.
(http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/06/23/20090623srwater0624.html)
Naturally, American Water objected to this, and while the movement to acquire AZAm Water has fizzled, American Water is taking no chances. The ORANGE Coalition seems to have been created specifically to ensure that such an idea is removed even from the realm of possibility.
- The ORANGE Coalition was incorporated as a non-profit corporation on November 12, 2008 with two directors listed as having the address of 1025 Laurel Oak Road in Voohees, New Jersey. (http://starpas.azcc.gov/scripts/cgiip.exe/WService=wsbroker1/names-detail.p?name-id=14878680&type=CORPORATION)
- That address is the same address as that of the corporate headquarters of American Water. (http://www.amwater.com/about-us/contact-us.html)
- One of the directors listed on the incorporation paperwork, Daniel Kelleher, is a retired American Water executive and currently serves as a consultant to American Water on defending it against condemnation initiatives. (http://pr.amwater.com/PressReleases/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=261448)The members of the Charter Review Task Force are attorneys, professional lobbyists, and current and former elected officials. To a man and woman, you all
are familiar with the idea of representing the interests of others. As Task Force members, your chosen duty is to represent the interests of the people of Scottsdale.
If any member of the Task Force (or, for that matter, the Mayor or the City Council) wants to stand before the community and argue that the residents of the City are best served by protecting the revenue stream of a corporation that has a documented history of poor customer service and threats to public health (as if forcing overpriced and contaminated water on its customers is merely “poor” customer service), of course they are free to do so.
However, it isn’t the place for the Task Force members to provide political cover for such a scheme by burying the ORANGE Coalition’s charter changes among a large number of innocuous technical corrections and housekeeping changes, expected to be the subject of a special election in March.
I urge you to reject the ORANGE Coalition’s proposed changes. If there is enough support in the community for the changes they desire, they should have no problem gaining the signatures needed to place a stand-alone referendum question on the ballot next fall.
Thank you for your consideration.
Why bother though?
Using the same address as American Water's corporate HQ shows that they don't really care if people know who is behind the ORANGE Coalition.
Mayor Jim Lane and his friends are being as subtle as baseball bats in their quest to consolidate power in Scottsdale and to protect their friends' profits, both at the expense of the best interests of Scottsdale's residents.
Lane and his supporters may rail against the influence that the Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce had during the Manross administration (complaints that have more than a little merit), but the only thing that has changed with his election has been the names of those pulling the strings, not the facts that strings *are* being pulled, and that enough money gets you a turn at tugging on one of the strings.
Later...
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Arizona court slaps down most of the lege's misogynistic anti-abortion laws
From AZCentral.com -
A state judge on Tuesday blocked implementation of several key parts of a new Arizona law restricting abortions, while allowing a few provisions to take effect.The Center for Arizona Policy and their water carriers on West Washington have already promised to continue their fight enact a de facto revocation of a woman's right to control their own bodies, so stay tuned. If all or part of the new laws are struck down permanently, expect them to return in some form in the new session of the lege in January.
The preliminary injunction issued by Judge Donald Daughton of Maricopa County Superior Court allows a 24-hour waiting period to take affect, but he blocked requirements that a woman see a doctor in person for advance disclosures before getting an abortion.
{snip}
The state judge also blocked provisions prohibiting nurse practitioners from performing surgical abortions, requiring the notarizing of parental consent forms and expanding an existing law that now permits health-care workers to refuse to participate in abortions.
There are five more Republicans in DC tonight...
...and they joined the Soullessly Corrupt wing of the GOP.
From the New York Times (emphasis mine) -
It's still frustrating though - one of the reasons that Democrats have a majority in both chambers of Congress (and one of the reasons that I personally am a proud Democrat) is that in 2006 and 2008, we could point to the Republicans and their outright sellout of America and Americans to corporate interests and say "that's not us."
Tonight it is us.
If you live in a district represented by a Democratic Congressman/woman, contact them now and let them know that if they truly support the best interests of their constituents, they will push for and support a health care reform bill that contains a viable and robust public health insurance option.
Anything less is no reform at all.
Gabrielle Giffords (CD8) has a contact form here
Raul Grijalva (CD7) here
Ann Kirkpatrick (CD1) here
Ed Pastor (CD4) here
Harry Mitchell (CD5) here
Later...
From the New York Times (emphasis mine) -
After a half-day of animated debate, the Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday rejected efforts by liberal Democrats to add a government-run health insurance plan to major health care legislation, dealing the first official setback to an idea that many Democrats, including President Obama, say they support.This development isn't the end of the debate on a public option, in fact it was expected - the committee chair Baucus has staunchly opposed a public option (surely he hasn't been influenced by the hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions that he has received from health insurers over the years, right?), so one was never going to get through his committee.
All of the other versions of the health care legislation advancing in Congress — a bill approved by the Senate health committee and a trio of bills in the House — include some version of the government-run plan, or public option.
{snip}
The committee on Tuesday afternoon voted, 15 to 8, to reject an amendment proposed by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia, to add a public option called the Community Choice Health Plan, an outcome that underscored the lack of support for a government plan among many Democrats.
Mr. Baucus voted no, as did Senators Thomas R. Carper of Delaware, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, and Bill Nelson of Florida, joining all 10 Republicans in opposition.
It's still frustrating though - one of the reasons that Democrats have a majority in both chambers of Congress (and one of the reasons that I personally am a proud Democrat) is that in 2006 and 2008, we could point to the Republicans and their outright sellout of America and Americans to corporate interests and say "that's not us."
Tonight it is us.
If you live in a district represented by a Democratic Congressman/woman, contact them now and let them know that if they truly support the best interests of their constituents, they will push for and support a health care reform bill that contains a viable and robust public health insurance option.
Anything less is no reform at all.
Gabrielle Giffords (CD8) has a contact form here
Raul Grijalva (CD7) here
Ann Kirkpatrick (CD1) here
Ed Pastor (CD4) here
Harry Mitchell (CD5) here
Later...
Monday, September 28, 2009
Fear and Loathing in Phoenix - state Sen. Sylvia Allen on climate change
On Monday, State Sen. Sylvia Allen (R-6000 years) held a meeting of her anti-science committee (aka the Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Climate Initiatives).
The agenda featured a number of industry lobbyists presenting to an "adjusted" committee membership (Chuck Gray and Russell Pearce were added to the committee late last week).
With a mix like that (Allen, industry lobbyists, and Pearce and Gray) expectations were low at the outset of the hearing, and it lived down to those expectations.
It was clear from that outset that this meeting was not concerned with science, Allen made that clear in her opening remarks when she pointedly thanked "business leaders" for attending.
Allen herself set the tone for the meeting, also in her opening remarks, when she announced that she was "quite frightened" by the initiatives to address climate change.
The other speakers tapped into that fear vein.
Michael Curtis of the Arizona Municipal Power Users Association railed against H.R. 2454, better known as Waxman/Markey or the "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009."
He objected to the bill's "economy-wide approach" and derided it as a "transfer of wealth."
Kimball Rasmussen of Deseret Power (Utah), a long-time skeptic of climate change, reiterated the wealth transfer theme, as well as creating an "us vs. them" atmosphere, with small states vs. big states and middle states vs. the coasts (aka - red vs. blue states).
Craig Idso, chair of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, argued that climate change was real, but that higher temps and increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere would be good for plants. He disregarded the impact of increased CO2 levels on human and animal life. It wouldn't be good (see the atmosphere of Venus).
Chuck Gray (R-East Mesa) served up a softball question, asking the presenters what the lege could do to facilitate the construction of a nuclear plant or oil refinery in Arizona.
One presenter advised him to put aside safeguards (you know, safety standards and such are such an unnecessary drag on corporate profit margins) and another advised him to short circuit the Arizona Corporation Commission's permitting process.
When all was said and done, Sylvia Allen though had the best line of the day -
Apparently, Sen. Allen pays as much attention to the finer nuances of economic theory as she does to those of scientific theory.
Well, that's assuming that the basic tenets of Marxism qualify as a "finer nuance."
The agenda featured a number of industry lobbyists presenting to an "adjusted" committee membership (Chuck Gray and Russell Pearce were added to the committee late last week).
With a mix like that (Allen, industry lobbyists, and Pearce and Gray) expectations were low at the outset of the hearing, and it lived down to those expectations.
It was clear from that outset that this meeting was not concerned with science, Allen made that clear in her opening remarks when she pointedly thanked "business leaders" for attending.
Allen herself set the tone for the meeting, also in her opening remarks, when she announced that she was "quite frightened" by the initiatives to address climate change.
The other speakers tapped into that fear vein.
Michael Curtis of the Arizona Municipal Power Users Association railed against H.R. 2454, better known as Waxman/Markey or the "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009."
He objected to the bill's "economy-wide approach" and derided it as a "transfer of wealth."
Kimball Rasmussen of Deseret Power (Utah), a long-time skeptic of climate change, reiterated the wealth transfer theme, as well as creating an "us vs. them" atmosphere, with small states vs. big states and middle states vs. the coasts (aka - red vs. blue states).
Craig Idso, chair of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, argued that climate change was real, but that higher temps and increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere would be good for plants. He disregarded the impact of increased CO2 levels on human and animal life. It wouldn't be good (see the atmosphere of Venus).
Chuck Gray (R-East Mesa) served up a softball question, asking the presenters what the lege could do to facilitate the construction of a nuclear plant or oil refinery in Arizona.
One presenter advised him to put aside safeguards (you know, safety standards and such are such an unnecessary drag on corporate profit margins) and another advised him to short circuit the Arizona Corporation Commission's permitting process.
When all was said and done, Sylvia Allen though had the best line of the day -
Socialism and Marxism are about concentrating the wealth in the hands of the few who are going to make billions off of this cap and trade scheme
Apparently, Sen. Allen pays as much attention to the finer nuances of economic theory as she does to those of scientific theory.
Well, that's assuming that the basic tenets of Marxism qualify as a "finer nuance."
Sylvia Allen's anti-science hearing going on now
So far, it is going as expected, with the presenter who is supposed to inform the panel about current federal legislation related to climate change instead engaging in a diatribe against all such legislation.
Go to the lege's video page and select "view live proceedings."
Go to the lege's video page and select "view live proceedings."
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Question of the day
From AZCentral.com -
Could somebody explain something to me?
How is it that the Republicans in the lege think that guns are safe enough to force them into schools, bars, and others' private property, all places where a majority of the people present will have no clue about handling dangerous weapons, yet people in a place where the the vast majority (if not all) of the folks present are experts on the safe handling of weapons are in immediate danger from those very same "safe" weapons?
Welcome to Arizona, the place where blind ideology trumps stark reality.
Dealer accidentally fires gun, injures 2 at gun show
A woman and a girl received minor injuries when a gun dealer inadvertently fired a loaded handgun during a gun show in Mesa late Saturday morning, police said.
Police responded to the Mesa Convention Center about 11:30 a.m. to a call of a shot being fired during a gun show, said Det. Mike Melendez, a police spokesman.
Investigators learned that a presenter at the gun show brought a loaded gun into the event, which is not permitted, Melendez said.
Could somebody explain something to me?
How is it that the Republicans in the lege think that guns are safe enough to force them into schools, bars, and others' private property, all places where a majority of the people present will have no clue about handling dangerous weapons, yet people in a place where the the vast majority (if not all) of the folks present are experts on the safe handling of weapons are in immediate danger from those very same "safe" weapons?
Welcome to Arizona, the place where blind ideology trumps stark reality.
The coming week...
As usual, except where noted, all info gathered from the websites of the relevent political bodies/agencies, and subject to change without notice.
The normal format of these posts is a simple one - start with the highest level of government (federal) and work down. This week, a slight change to that template is merited.
...The Arizona Legislature is still out of session and the budget still isn't balanced. However, they still have the time and energy to canoodle with some industry lobbyists in a propaganda session.
From a press release from the Senate Republicans, posted on the lege's website -
Zwick appears to be the token "non-industry lobbyist" on the panel. However, she is not a scientist.
Sen. Sylvia Allen is the Arizona politician best known for her deep understanding of science. Or not.
The meeting is at the Senate in SHR1 from 8:30 - noon.
...In the U.S. House of Representatives, the agenda looks to be fairly light on controversial floor action, though not without some (hey, this wouldn't be the House if they didn't have stuff to yell at each other over.)
Of interest to AZers -
- Rep. Raul Grijalva's H.R. 1333, "To amend chapter 40 of title 18, United States Code, to exempt the transportation, shipment, receipt, or importation of explosive materials for delivery to a federally recognized Indian tribe or an agency of such a tribe from various Federal criminal prohibitions relating to explosives." Heard under suspension of the rules.
- Conference report on H.R. 3183, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. This is money-related, so it is likely the most controversial matter subject to floor action this week. House Report 111-203 on the bill, including earmarks and "directed spending" is here.
...Over in the U.S, Senate, floor action will focus on Defense Appropriations. Committee hearing schedule here. The highlight, or at least the one that will receive the most attention, is the Senate Finance Committee's continued consideration of Max Baucus'Health Insurer Wish List health care reform bill.
...On Tuesday, the Arizona Corporation Commission is holding a special open meeting in Yuma related to APS and rates. Full hearing schedule here.
...The Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System is holding two special meetings on Monday. The noon meeting has an executive session component and general session discussion on contract renegotiations with MedPro and an employment agreement with Betsey Bayless, current MIHS CEO. The meeting at 5 p.m. covers approval of the new MedPro contract.
...The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project has a busy week planned.
- On Wednesday, there will be a joint meeting of the CAP Board and the Board of Directors of the Arizona Municipal Waters Users Association at the Embassy Suites Phoenix Biltmore.
- Thursday, there will be a meeting of the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District and Underground Storage Committee immediately following the regular meeting of the CAP Board.
- Thursday, there will be a meeting of the Board's Public Policy Committee at 9 a.m. (aka - immediately before the regular Board meeting.)
- And, of course, the full Board will meet in open and executive session on Thursday.
...The Tempe City Council isn't scheduled to meet this week, but a calendar of Council-related events is here.
...The Scottsdale City Council will be holding a joint meeting with Budget Review Commission on Tuesday. There will also be a special meeting of the Council with an executive session concerning the interim treasurer appointment/hiring mess. Scottsdale's community meeting calendar is here.
Not scheduled to meet this week: Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (though an executive session called on short notice would be the norm for this group), Arizona Board of Regents, Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District.
Later...
The normal format of these posts is a simple one - start with the highest level of government (federal) and work down. This week, a slight change to that template is merited.
...The Arizona Legislature is still out of session and the budget still isn't balanced. However, they still have the time and energy to canoodle with some industry lobbyists in a propaganda session.
From a press release from the Senate Republicans, posted on the lege's website -
The Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Climate Initiatives is holding its second meeting Monday. Committee Chair Sylvia Allen contends federal proposals targeted at global warming are quickly moving forward without consideration for scientific evidence and we are going after problems that do not exist. She wants Arizonans to understand how cap and trade regulations will impact their energy supply and utility costs. “They need to evaluate the claims behind 'green jobs' and climate scare tactics,” she said. The agenda includes an update of federal legislation and an economic forecast/industry roundtable. The committee’s first meeting was June 8.The list of "distinguished" panelists includes: Michael Curtis, executive secretary, Arizona Municipal Power Users’ Association; Kimball Rasmussen, CEO, Deseret Power; Dr. Craig Idso, chairman, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change; Cynthia Zwick, president, Arizona Community Action Association; Cathy Reheis-Boyd, COO, Western State Petroleum Association; and Steven Regis, vice president of engineering services, CalPortland Company.
Zwick appears to be the token "non-industry lobbyist" on the panel. However, she is not a scientist.
Sen. Sylvia Allen is the Arizona politician best known for her deep understanding of science. Or not.
The meeting is at the Senate in SHR1 from 8:30 - noon.
...In the U.S. House of Representatives, the agenda looks to be fairly light on controversial floor action, though not without some (hey, this wouldn't be the House if they didn't have stuff to yell at each other over.)
Of interest to AZers -
- Rep. Raul Grijalva's H.R. 1333, "To amend chapter 40 of title 18, United States Code, to exempt the transportation, shipment, receipt, or importation of explosive materials for delivery to a federally recognized Indian tribe or an agency of such a tribe from various Federal criminal prohibitions relating to explosives." Heard under suspension of the rules.
- Conference report on H.R. 3183, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. This is money-related, so it is likely the most controversial matter subject to floor action this week. House Report 111-203 on the bill, including earmarks and "directed spending" is here.
...Over in the U.S, Senate, floor action will focus on Defense Appropriations. Committee hearing schedule here. The highlight, or at least the one that will receive the most attention, is the Senate Finance Committee's continued consideration of Max Baucus'
...On Tuesday, the Arizona Corporation Commission is holding a special open meeting in Yuma related to APS and rates. Full hearing schedule here.
...The Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System is holding two special meetings on Monday. The noon meeting has an executive session component and general session discussion on contract renegotiations with MedPro and an employment agreement with Betsey Bayless, current MIHS CEO. The meeting at 5 p.m. covers approval of the new MedPro contract.
...The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project has a busy week planned.
- On Wednesday, there will be a joint meeting of the CAP Board and the Board of Directors of the Arizona Municipal Waters Users Association at the Embassy Suites Phoenix Biltmore.
- Thursday, there will be a meeting of the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District and Underground Storage Committee immediately following the regular meeting of the CAP Board.
- Thursday, there will be a meeting of the Board's Public Policy Committee at 9 a.m. (aka - immediately before the regular Board meeting.)
- And, of course, the full Board will meet in open and executive session on Thursday.
...The Tempe City Council isn't scheduled to meet this week, but a calendar of Council-related events is here.
...The Scottsdale City Council will be holding a joint meeting with Budget Review Commission on Tuesday. There will also be a special meeting of the Council with an executive session concerning the interim treasurer appointment/hiring mess. Scottsdale's community meeting calendar is here.
Not scheduled to meet this week: Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (though an executive session called on short notice would be the norm for this group), Arizona Board of Regents, Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District.
Later...
Saturday, September 26, 2009
More 2010 campaign committees...
Edit on 9/28 to update with candidate info...
Another in the heretofore irregularly timed series of posts (but one which will probably become a regular weekly topic for the foreseeable future)...
- Republican Vernon Parker, mayor of Paradise Valley, has opened an exploratory committee for a run at the Governor's job. He's had some legal issues, but he is a credible candidate.
- Republican State Senator Thayer Verschoor has opened an exploratory committee for a run at State Treasurer, apparently assuming that Dean Martin, a fellow Republican and the incumbent, is going to run for Governor.
- Republican Beth Price has formed a committee for a run at Superintendent of Public Instruction. The committee address is in Casa Grande, and she used to work at Central Arizona College (page 4 of the linked .pdf). I'm not sure about her current activities. Her name makes for lousy search terms.
She joins a cast of thousands in next year's Rep primary for the post (actually the number is five, for now).
- In LD8, one W. John Williamson, no party listed, has formed a $500 Threshold committee for a run at state representative. Another name that makes for lousy search terms, but I'll call the number on his committee paperwork later this week.
Update on 9/28 - Mr. Williamson returned my call and graciously spoke to me about his candidacy. He's running as a Democrat and his focus is on education. He is a 40+ year Arizonan who graduated from Saguaro High and ASU. Currently, he is a high school English teacher and is concerned about the "punitive tone" exhibited by the lege and the leadership there toward education and teachers. (See the BRB language [page 62 of the linked .pdf] regarding teachers and professional association activities [i.e. - union activities] and barring compensated days for such activities being part of district contracts). He's going to "try to make a difference."
I wish him well with that and with his candidacy.
End update...
- And, in the "blast from the past" portion of our program, the "legendary" David Burnell Smith, the first sitting legislator to be removed from office for violating Clean Elections rules, is again running for state representative from LD7. There are already five Republicans running for the two state rep slots from LD7, including an "exploring" Jim Waring, the soon-to-be termed out state senator from the LD. With his history and the crowded field, Mr. Smith has a seriously uphill battle, even in a group at morally bereft as the AZGOP.
...Other committees -
- Dean Martin, well into his third year as State Treasurer, has finally gotten around to opening an "officeholder expense" committee, named "Treasurer Dean Martin Community Service."
Either he never had any officeholder expenses before this or he's running for Governor.
Guess which one I think it is?
:)
Later...
Another in the heretofore irregularly timed series of posts (but one which will probably become a regular weekly topic for the foreseeable future)...
- Republican Vernon Parker, mayor of Paradise Valley, has opened an exploratory committee for a run at the Governor's job. He's had some legal issues, but he is a credible candidate.
- Republican State Senator Thayer Verschoor has opened an exploratory committee for a run at State Treasurer, apparently assuming that Dean Martin, a fellow Republican and the incumbent, is going to run for Governor.
- Republican Beth Price has formed a committee for a run at Superintendent of Public Instruction. The committee address is in Casa Grande, and she used to work at Central Arizona College (page 4 of the linked .pdf). I'm not sure about her current activities. Her name makes for lousy search terms.
She joins a cast of thousands in next year's Rep primary for the post (actually the number is five, for now).
- In LD8, one W. John Williamson, no party listed, has formed a $500 Threshold committee for a run at state representative. Another name that makes for lousy search terms, but I'll call the number on his committee paperwork later this week.
Update on 9/28 - Mr. Williamson returned my call and graciously spoke to me about his candidacy. He's running as a Democrat and his focus is on education. He is a 40+ year Arizonan who graduated from Saguaro High and ASU. Currently, he is a high school English teacher and is concerned about the "punitive tone" exhibited by the lege and the leadership there toward education and teachers. (See the BRB language [page 62 of the linked .pdf] regarding teachers and professional association activities [i.e. - union activities] and barring compensated days for such activities being part of district contracts). He's going to "try to make a difference."
I wish him well with that and with his candidacy.
End update...
- And, in the "blast from the past" portion of our program, the "legendary" David Burnell Smith, the first sitting legislator to be removed from office for violating Clean Elections rules, is again running for state representative from LD7. There are already five Republicans running for the two state rep slots from LD7, including an "exploring" Jim Waring, the soon-to-be termed out state senator from the LD. With his history and the crowded field, Mr. Smith has a seriously uphill battle, even in a group at morally bereft as the AZGOP.
...Other committees -
- Dean Martin, well into his third year as State Treasurer, has finally gotten around to opening an "officeholder expense" committee, named "Treasurer Dean Martin Community Service."
Either he never had any officeholder expenses before this or he's running for Governor.
Guess which one I think it is?
:)
Later...
Thursday, September 24, 2009
NIBW Update - contaminated water release on September 23, 2009
From an email from Rachel Loftin, project manager for the North Indian Bend Wash Superfund area, to the NIBW Community Involvement Group -
My work week has started, so I won't be able to follow up on this until next week at the earliest. For more information, please contact Ms. Loftin at the above number.
Later...
Dear NIBW Community Involvement Group:
I am Rachel Loftin, the new EPA Project Manager for the Indian Bend Wash site, and I'd like to share information with you regarding a release that occurred yesterday, September 23, 2009, at Well PCX-1, a groundwater extraction well that pumps water to be treated at the Miller Road Treatment Facility (MRTF).
Here's what EPA has learned from the Salt River Project:
First, and most importantly, we want you to know that the spill did not impact the drinking water supplied by the Miller Road Treatment Facility.
Between approximately 6:00 am and 7:00 am yesterday (September 23, 2009), a release from Well PCX-1 occurred. The spill lasted a little over 40 minutes. The SRP reports that a valve at Well PCX-1 failed, leading to the spill of untreated water. It appears from photographs taken immediately after the incident, as well information from witnesses of the actual spill and the visual evidence regarding the slope of the surrounding terrain, that most of the spilled water flowed away from the canal and on to Miller Road. A small portion of the spill appears to have leaked into the Arizona Canal adjacent to the well. The spill contained up to 75 ug/l (micrograms per liter) of trichloroethelyene (TCE) and the volume of water spilled is estimated to be less than 20,000 gallons.
The Arizona Canal provides water to downstream water purveyors, including the cities of Tempe, Phoenix, Glendale, and Peoria. The closest downstream plant is the City of Tempe's Johnny G. Martinez Water Treatment Plant (JGMWTP), which is roughly 5 miles downstream. The next closest downstream plant is City of Phoenix 24th Street Plant, which is roughly 7 miles downstream.
We believe, and the preliminary data indicates, these water purveyors were not impacted by the release because of their distance from the PCX-1 location, the fact that the released water became mixed with water that was already in the canal thereby reducing the concentration of TCE, and the fact that TCE tends to dissipate rapidly. SRP notified both water purveyors immediately. At EPA's request, and as a precaution, the City of Tempe's JGMWTP and the City of Phoenix 24th Street Plant sampled for TCE to be sure the water meets the safe drinking water standard for TCE which is 5 ug/l. Expedited results from water samples taken in the Arizona Canal at a location about 50 feet downstream from PCX-1 well, at Chaparral Road, and at Camelback Road indicate no detectable concentration of TCE in the canal. Preliminary sampling results taken at the City of Tempe's plant also indicate no detections of TCE. We expect to receive results from the City of Phoenix plant in a day or so.
The SRP acted very quickly to:
1. Determine what and where the problem was;
2. Stop the spill by turning off the well;
3. Obtain samples of the spilled water on Miller Road, in the canal, and downstream of the release;
4. Vacuum the spilled water along Miller Road;
5. Sample the soil on the canal bank and Miller Road; and
6. Contact appropriate parties including EPA, ADEQ, the Cities of Phoenix and Tempe water utility districts, and the City of Scottsdale where the MRTF is located.
What happens next?
•The SRP is gathering additional information and will provide it along with sampling results to EPA in the next day or so.
•The Cities of Phoenix and Tempe will also provide sampling data for the 24th Street Plant and the JGMWTP.
•The SRP will provide a report on the incident within seven days.
•I will share the sampling data and incident report with all of you when I receive them.
I look forward to planning the upcoming annual meeting with you in the short term, and meeting you all in a few weeks. In the interim, please contact me at 415/972-3253 or by e-mail if you have any questions.
Regards,
Rachel
My work week has started, so I won't be able to follow up on this until next week at the earliest. For more information, please contact Ms. Loftin at the above number.
Later...
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Anybody have a good pic of the Sword of Damocles?
After last night's kangaroo court, Scottsdale needs a new logo. The old one (above) hasn't fit Scottsdale for years (witness the loss of horse property in Scottsdale over the last decade plus).
Maybe a nice drawing of someone sitting under the point of a sword...someone with curly hair and a mustache?...with someone else with a pair of scissors, reaching out to the single horsehair holding it up...someone also with a mustache, and with a shiny (perhaps sprayed-on?) tan...just musing out loud here.
:)
Scottsdale City Manager keeps his job - for another 3 months, anyway
Tuesday's meeting of the Scottsdale City Council began as most of them do, with a local group of kids (a Brownie troop this week) reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. In honor of Constitution Week, they announced that they would also recite the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution (You know, the one that starts "We the People...)
Which they did an awesome job with, except for the fact that they recited the beginning of the Declaration of Independence. (You know, the one that starts "When in the course of human events...)
Close, but... :)
That should have been the first clue that the original plan for the meeting (basically for the Council to fire City Manager John Little via a 4-3 vote) wasn't going to come off *quite* as planned, but would still be in the ballpark.
What was officially supposed to be a discussion of Little's job performance was more of a kangaroo court. It was made clear by a number of Council members that this evaluation was not about how well Little had met the goals and objectives of his job, because they had never laid out any for him to meet.
The tactics of his detractors on the Council (Borowsky, Mayor Lane, Littlefield, and Nelssen) consisted of harping on the things about Little that they didn't like (his "attitude" and conflicts with the Mayor, mostly). Council member Lisa Borowsky *did* mention that she thought Little is a good guy, before excoriating him for "not getting along" with the majority of the Council.
That was a pattern from the detractors - compliment him on his "charm" and then criticize him for his "insubordination."
There was also a tendency to allude to "other issues" without being specific (Borowsky referred to a rumor that not only was Little not "open" with the Mayor and Council, he wasn't "open" with other charter officers who were "open" with the Mayor and Council.)
That would have to refer to City Clerk Carolyn Jagger, who's pretty much the only charter officer left standing since Jim Lane took over the Mayor's job.
Tony Nelssen even accused Little of taking the City Manager's job just so he could list it on his resume.
In the end, though, it all came down to the contentious relationship between the City Manager and the Mayor.
They want to fire Little because he doesn't genuflect enthusiastically enough when the Mayor enters the room.
Nothing more tangible, or job performance-related, than that.
To be certain, Little had his supporters, too.
Council members Ecton, Klapp, and McCullagh made it clear that they thought Little has done well playing the hand he has been dealt and deserves to keep his job.
Ecton - "He has done an excellent job in a difficult time."
McCullagh - This is "not the easiest council to work with."
Klapp - "Six months is too short a period" to evaluate job performance.
Little also had strong support from the community and from rank-and-file City employees, including former Council member Robert Pettycrew and the Scottsdale Police Officers Association.
Most praised Little's honesty and "uncompromising integrity." Pettycrew, being a former member of the Council, brought some historical perspective to the mix, noting that there has been an "erosion" in the how the Council and City Staff relate to each other.
The end result of it all was a bit of a surprise - Council member Ron McCullagh moved to keep Little in his job and revisit the evaluation in six months. Nelssen said he could support a 90-day period, so McCullagh amended his motion to that time period.
Surprisingly, the amended motion passed by a 4-3 vote (Borowsky, Lane, Littlefield opposed - they want to fire Little immediately), giving Little a three-month reprieve.
So, after more than a couple of hours of contentious discussion, nothing was settled. Come back in December.
AZRepublic coverage here.
...A couple of observations on the events at the meeting.
- If Little has failed as City Manager, the most legitimate reason to fire him (and failure wasn't proven or even charged), then the Council has failed too. They hand-picked him to replace Jan Dolan and voted him in by a 7-0 vote.
- While the Mayor and members of the Council are intelligent and educated, they aren't very bright. There was some talk of Tuesday's story in the Republic about how the City has turned around a gaping budget deficit and now has a $6.6 million surplus, but they ignored the story of the investigation of the Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District by the national college accrediting organization. They're in trouble because of "micromanagement."
There's a lesson there for all at the meeting.
While the Scottsdale City Council doesn't have an accrediting agency to answer to, it does have voters to answer to, and will next year. It also has independent measures like the City's bond rating to help gauge the effectiveness of the City's day-to-day management, and the interference of the Mayor and City Council in the day-to-day affairs of the City does not bode well for the City's bond rating and other measures.
- Little was not the only target in Lane's sights during the meeting. Two of his supporters introduced petitions callng for the resignations of non-Lane clique Council members Klapp and McCullagh because the Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce's political activity last year.
Which they did an awesome job with, except for the fact that they recited the beginning of the Declaration of Independence. (You know, the one that starts "When in the course of human events...)
Close, but... :)
That should have been the first clue that the original plan for the meeting (basically for the Council to fire City Manager John Little via a 4-3 vote) wasn't going to come off *quite* as planned, but would still be in the ballpark.
What was officially supposed to be a discussion of Little's job performance was more of a kangaroo court. It was made clear by a number of Council members that this evaluation was not about how well Little had met the goals and objectives of his job, because they had never laid out any for him to meet.
The tactics of his detractors on the Council (Borowsky, Mayor Lane, Littlefield, and Nelssen) consisted of harping on the things about Little that they didn't like (his "attitude" and conflicts with the Mayor, mostly). Council member Lisa Borowsky *did* mention that she thought Little is a good guy, before excoriating him for "not getting along" with the majority of the Council.
That was a pattern from the detractors - compliment him on his "charm" and then criticize him for his "insubordination."
There was also a tendency to allude to "other issues" without being specific (Borowsky referred to a rumor that not only was Little not "open" with the Mayor and Council, he wasn't "open" with other charter officers who were "open" with the Mayor and Council.)
That would have to refer to City Clerk Carolyn Jagger, who's pretty much the only charter officer left standing since Jim Lane took over the Mayor's job.
Tony Nelssen even accused Little of taking the City Manager's job just so he could list it on his resume.
In the end, though, it all came down to the contentious relationship between the City Manager and the Mayor.
They want to fire Little because he doesn't genuflect enthusiastically enough when the Mayor enters the room.
Nothing more tangible, or job performance-related, than that.
To be certain, Little had his supporters, too.
Council members Ecton, Klapp, and McCullagh made it clear that they thought Little has done well playing the hand he has been dealt and deserves to keep his job.
Ecton - "He has done an excellent job in a difficult time."
McCullagh - This is "not the easiest council to work with."
Klapp - "Six months is too short a period" to evaluate job performance.
Little also had strong support from the community and from rank-and-file City employees, including former Council member Robert Pettycrew and the Scottsdale Police Officers Association.
Most praised Little's honesty and "uncompromising integrity." Pettycrew, being a former member of the Council, brought some historical perspective to the mix, noting that there has been an "erosion" in the how the Council and City Staff relate to each other.
The end result of it all was a bit of a surprise - Council member Ron McCullagh moved to keep Little in his job and revisit the evaluation in six months. Nelssen said he could support a 90-day period, so McCullagh amended his motion to that time period.
Surprisingly, the amended motion passed by a 4-3 vote (Borowsky, Lane, Littlefield opposed - they want to fire Little immediately), giving Little a three-month reprieve.
So, after more than a couple of hours of contentious discussion, nothing was settled. Come back in December.
AZRepublic coverage here.
...A couple of observations on the events at the meeting.
- If Little has failed as City Manager, the most legitimate reason to fire him (and failure wasn't proven or even charged), then the Council has failed too. They hand-picked him to replace Jan Dolan and voted him in by a 7-0 vote.
- While the Mayor and members of the Council are intelligent and educated, they aren't very bright. There was some talk of Tuesday's story in the Republic about how the City has turned around a gaping budget deficit and now has a $6.6 million surplus, but they ignored the story of the investigation of the Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District by the national college accrediting organization. They're in trouble because of "micromanagement."
There's a lesson there for all at the meeting.
While the Scottsdale City Council doesn't have an accrediting agency to answer to, it does have voters to answer to, and will next year. It also has independent measures like the City's bond rating to help gauge the effectiveness of the City's day-to-day management, and the interference of the Mayor and City Council in the day-to-day affairs of the City does not bode well for the City's bond rating and other measures.
- Little was not the only target in Lane's sights during the meeting. Two of his supporters introduced petitions callng for the resignations of non-Lane clique Council members Klapp and McCullagh because the Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce's political activity last year.
In case anyone who was at the meeting or watching it on TV thinks that I am exaggerating and that the two petitioners were just concerned citizens, know this -
One was Mike Fernandez, who was/is treasurer of the committee "Republicans for a Bright New Day in Scottsdale", a big player behind an anti-Mary Manross and Betty Drake ad blitz last year.
The other was R. Lamar Whitmer, who was Lane's campaign manager last year.
Even though it wasn't listed on the agenda as such, last night's meeting was *all* about Jim Lane's ongoing quest to consolidate his power and marginalize or remove any potential dissenters within the City's elected and senior staff power structures.
During the meeting, former Council member Pettycrew opined that Little should be kept on because "someone has to tell the emperor that he has no clothes."
That statement is more on point than one might think a usually trite aphorism could be -
It's looking more and more like Lane has a lot of tinhorn Napoleon in him.
- Lastly, in what could be a sign of things to come during the Lane administration, they couldn't appoint an interim City Attorney because all of the potential candidates for the job have withdrawn their names from consideration. Apparently word is getting out about Lane and the Council's penchant for using the City's professional staff as pin cushions when they don't parrot the Lane party line.
Later...
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Anyone want to guess what the main topic of this meeting will be?
I supposed this was inevitable given yesterday's arrest of County Supervisor Don Stapley.
What had been scheduled as a quiet week (i.e. - no meetings) for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors now has a special meeting and executive session planned for tomorrow, Wednesday September 23 at 10 a.m.
Now, the special meeting has one item on the agenda - an application for a permit for a fireworks display in Queen Creek.
The executive session agenda doesn't specify a subject, but for some reason I expect that the latest development in Sheriff Joe Arpaio's holy war against the supes will at least rate a mention.
...In other "county level officials under investigation" news, the Arizona Republic has a story of how the organization that accredits colleges is investigating the Governing Board of the Maricopa Community College District for micromanagement.
That didn't sound too serious to me, but it turns out that would violate the rules governing maintenance of accreditation.
From the story -
The investigating team will be part of a public meeting with the Board at 4:30 today, and will attend the regular Board meeting at 6:30 tonight.
Unfortunately, I cannot attend those two meetings - tonight is the night that the Scottsdale City Council may fire yet another City Manager. The MCCCD Governing Board meeting has a high potential for being a boring set piece whose outcome is predetermined; the City Council meeting is probably going to be a train wreck.
As morbid as this sounds, train wrecks are far more interesting to write about than set pieces.
What had been scheduled as a quiet week (i.e. - no meetings) for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors now has a special meeting and executive session planned for tomorrow, Wednesday September 23 at 10 a.m.
Now, the special meeting has one item on the agenda - an application for a permit for a fireworks display in Queen Creek.
The executive session agenda doesn't specify a subject, but for some reason I expect that the latest development in Sheriff Joe Arpaio's holy war against the supes will at least rate a mention.
...In other "county level officials under investigation" news, the Arizona Republic has a story of how the organization that accredits colleges is investigating the Governing Board of the Maricopa Community College District for micromanagement.
That didn't sound too serious to me, but it turns out that would violate the rules governing maintenance of accreditation.
From the story -
[College Chancellor] Glasper will then prepare a report on whether the district is violating parts of the Higher Learning Commission's accreditation policy. The commission could dismiss the complaint or recommend sanctions against Maricopa, which serves about 250,000 students at 10 colleges and two skill centers.Specifically, the violations could be rooted in the fact the governing board, any governing board in fact, is supposed to set policy while the College staff oversees day-to-day operations.
Ultimately, Maricopa Community Colleges could be placed on notice or on probation, or could lose accreditation.
The investigating team will be part of a public meeting with the Board at 4:30 today, and will attend the regular Board meeting at 6:30 tonight.
Unfortunately, I cannot attend those two meetings - tonight is the night that the Scottsdale City Council may fire yet another City Manager. The MCCCD Governing Board meeting has a high potential for being a boring set piece whose outcome is predetermined; the City Council meeting is probably going to be a train wreck.
As morbid as this sounds, train wrecks are far more interesting to write about than set pieces.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Arpaio still using MCSO to go after people he considers to be "enemies"
From the AZ Republic -
Also interesting is that this was a "probable cause" arrest, not one based on grand jury indictments.
I'm going to over-generalize a bit here, but aren't these the kind of crimes that generally merit a long, patient investigation capped off with grand jury indictments announced at a splashy press conference with the County Attorney and full color charts and somber pronouncements on the decline of the level of integrity of public officials and such?
By all accounts, the County Attorney's office had nothing to do with today's events or the "investigation" that led up to them. Even though the kind of crimes charged today don't usually fall into the bailiwick of a sheriff's office that by the very nature of its work spends more time and resources on street crime, not white collar crime.
This really reeks of arrogant grandstanding, or raw desperation, or both, on Arpaio's part.
Besides all that, it's sloppy police work.
It could endanger any possible legitimate case against Stapley or the other supes (Yes, I assume they are dirty in some way, if not this one). If this ever gets to a jury, the credibility of the MCSO and its investigation, or lack thereof, will undermine the prosecution's case.
I just wonder how much today's circus is going to cost Maricopa County's taxpayers.
Channel 15 coverage here; Phoenix New Times coverage here and here. Commentary by AZRepublic columnist EJ Montini here. EV Tribune coverage here. Commentary from the blog Mesa Issues here.
Maricopa County Sheriff's deputies arrested County Supervisor Don Stapley Monday morning on 93 new felony counts, which they say relate to campaign fraud, including using campaign funds to pay personal bills.Now, I'm not saying that I think that Stapley is innocent here, but the timing of this arrest is rather interesting, since it comes just a few days after Arpaio's first case against Stapley collapsed.
The Sheriff's Office said Monday afternoon all 93 felony allegations relate to fraudulent schemes involving Stapley's mortgage and loan businesses, campaign account fraud, tax return fraud and campaign fraud. The office alleges that Stapley used campaign money to pay personal bills and to pad his personal accounts. The supervisor is also accused of seven misdemeanors.
Also interesting is that this was a "probable cause" arrest, not one based on grand jury indictments.
I'm going to over-generalize a bit here, but aren't these the kind of crimes that generally merit a long, patient investigation capped off with grand jury indictments announced at a splashy press conference with the County Attorney and full color charts and somber pronouncements on the decline of the level of integrity of public officials and such?
By all accounts, the County Attorney's office had nothing to do with today's events or the "investigation" that led up to them. Even though the kind of crimes charged today don't usually fall into the bailiwick of a sheriff's office that by the very nature of its work spends more time and resources on street crime, not white collar crime.
This really reeks of arrogant grandstanding, or raw desperation, or both, on Arpaio's part.
Besides all that, it's sloppy police work.
It could endanger any possible legitimate case against Stapley or the other supes (Yes, I assume they are dirty in some way, if not this one). If this ever gets to a jury, the credibility of the MCSO and its investigation, or lack thereof, will undermine the prosecution's case.
I just wonder how much today's circus is going to cost Maricopa County's taxpayers.
Channel 15 coverage here; Phoenix New Times coverage here and here. Commentary by AZRepublic columnist EJ Montini here. EV Tribune coverage here. Commentary from the blog Mesa Issues here.
Today's meeting on STOs at the State Capitol
The Bipartisan Task Force on Private School Tuition Tax Credits (STO) Program met on Monday for nearly two hours.
They were beginning their research into the background of the STO program. While this meeting was open to the public, no public testimony was solicited today. That will happen at future meetings.
After opening with brief statements from the chair, Rep. David Schapira (D-LD17), and the other members present (Reps. Nancy Young-Wright (D), Rich Crandall (R), Tom Chabin (D), Cloves Campbell (D), and Chad Campbell (D) ).
They started with an overview of the history of the STO tax credits and program, presented by Mark Bogart, Senior Economist with the House Democratic staff. That presentation isn't available online, though its sources can all be found online. The compilation may be posted at a later time (I suggested doing so anyway.) I have the handout from the meeting. Where practicable and relevent, I'll link to the original source.
Later presenters included a representative from the Arizona Department of Revenue (ADOR).
Professor Larry Mohrweis, PhD, an Accounting professor from NAU and volunteer head of a northern AZ STO, spoke at length on the oversight issue. He wrote about it in 2002 and 2005 and was so prescient that Rep. Schapira called him the "Nostradamus of STOs." He doesn't seem to have an axe to grind and he knows his stuff (see list of sources of info below).
I won't try to recap their entire presentations here (when the video of the meeting is posted on the lege's website, you can watch them there).
EV Tribune coverage here.
There were a couple of things to take away from today's meeting -
- One of the biggest problems with the STO program, and this is an observation that cuts across partisan lines, is the lack of oversight and accountability. (The AZ Republic agrees. Witness this story in today's paper.) The closest thing to oversight and penalties for non-compliance that seems to exist is the fact that ADOR can disallow a credit taken by a taxpayer for a donation to a non-compliant STO. There's really nothing that ADOR can do to keep STOs in line. Unless they run afoul of 501c3 rules from the IRS, STOs can continue to siphon tax revenue away from the state and public education without any way to compel them to actually use the funds for the purpose originally intended by the writers of the original tax credit legislation.
- The meeting was informative, cordial, and utterly lacking in partisan posturing. It was unlike any other committee meeting that I've seen at the lege.
In other words, bipartisanship *is* possible.
Wonder if the Republican leadership and their rank-and-file members will remember that when it comes time to balance this year's budget and start working on next year's.
Some of the sources of their info can be found at:
AZ Department of Revenue's Corporate School Tax Credit Reports
ADOR's Private School Contributions and Fees
ADOR's Public School Contributions and Fees
ADOR's list of STOs, with caveats
ADOR's Private and Public School Tax Credit Information Publication
An August 2008 Issue Brief from the Arizona State Senate Research Staff, pertaining the school tax credits
Dr. Mohrweis' 2005 article from the trade journal AZCPA is here. His 2002 article, "Private School Tax Credits: What CPAs Should Know" doesn't seem to be available online. A 2000 piece, written for the Journal of Accountancy, is here.
Later...
They were beginning their research into the background of the STO program. While this meeting was open to the public, no public testimony was solicited today. That will happen at future meetings.
After opening with brief statements from the chair, Rep. David Schapira (D-LD17), and the other members present (Reps. Nancy Young-Wright (D), Rich Crandall (R), Tom Chabin (D), Cloves Campbell (D), and Chad Campbell (D) ).
They started with an overview of the history of the STO tax credits and program, presented by Mark Bogart, Senior Economist with the House Democratic staff. That presentation isn't available online, though its sources can all be found online. The compilation may be posted at a later time (I suggested doing so anyway.) I have the handout from the meeting. Where practicable and relevent, I'll link to the original source.
Later presenters included a representative from the Arizona Department of Revenue (ADOR).
Professor Larry Mohrweis, PhD, an Accounting professor from NAU and volunteer head of a northern AZ STO, spoke at length on the oversight issue. He wrote about it in 2002 and 2005 and was so prescient that Rep. Schapira called him the "Nostradamus of STOs." He doesn't seem to have an axe to grind and he knows his stuff (see list of sources of info below).
I won't try to recap their entire presentations here (when the video of the meeting is posted on the lege's website, you can watch them there).
EV Tribune coverage here.
There were a couple of things to take away from today's meeting -
- One of the biggest problems with the STO program, and this is an observation that cuts across partisan lines, is the lack of oversight and accountability. (The AZ Republic agrees. Witness this story in today's paper.) The closest thing to oversight and penalties for non-compliance that seems to exist is the fact that ADOR can disallow a credit taken by a taxpayer for a donation to a non-compliant STO. There's really nothing that ADOR can do to keep STOs in line. Unless they run afoul of 501c3 rules from the IRS, STOs can continue to siphon tax revenue away from the state and public education without any way to compel them to actually use the funds for the purpose originally intended by the writers of the original tax credit legislation.
- The meeting was informative, cordial, and utterly lacking in partisan posturing. It was unlike any other committee meeting that I've seen at the lege.
In other words, bipartisanship *is* possible.
Wonder if the Republican leadership and their rank-and-file members will remember that when it comes time to balance this year's budget and start working on next year's.
Some of the sources of their info can be found at:
AZ Department of Revenue's Corporate School Tax Credit Reports
ADOR's Private School Contributions and Fees
ADOR's Public School Contributions and Fees
ADOR's list of STOs, with caveats
ADOR's Private and Public School Tax Credit Information Publication
An August 2008 Issue Brief from the Arizona State Senate Research Staff, pertaining the school tax credits
Dr. Mohrweis' 2005 article from the trade journal AZCPA is here. His 2002 article, "Private School Tax Credits: What CPAs Should Know" doesn't seem to be available online. A 2000 piece, written for the Journal of Accountancy, is here.
Later...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)