Redistricting object lesson: Maricopa County Board of Supervisors

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors does its own redistricting, and one can tell that, for the most part, they pick their own voters. 

See if you can see a pattern here.

The main MCBOS redistricting webpage is here.

First, some basic demographics -

The Board has five members.

The membership is 100% male.

The membership is 80% non-Hispanic Caucasian.

The membership is 80% Republican.

The membership is NOT representative of the county as a whole.  Not even close.

From the U.S. Census Bureau -

Voter registration figures, courtesy the Maricopa County Recorder's Office -

While 80% of the board is Republican, Republicans only make up 53% of the voters who 

have registered in one of the two major parties.

Of course, only 34.3% of all registered voters in Maricopa County are enrolled Republicans.

While partisan affiliation is (allegedly) not a consideration during the supes' redistricting process, other factors may be.

I wonder what those factors could be? (That's sarcasm - I don't actually wonder at all.)

The supes' are considering five plans.  Even the least bad of those plans involve packing most ethnic minority voters into a single district.

The demographic figures of those plans -

I'm torn between wanting to keep them around and doing what they do to serve as a warning to those who believe that elected officials should be allowed to do their own redistricting and having the voters impose an AIRC-like process at the county level.

Then I remember that the county has a $3.42 *billion* budget.

They should be compelled by the voters to be more representative of Maricopa County.

The Maricopa County Recorder's Office isn't telling the truth to Spanish-speaking voters? It must be a day ending in "y",,,

Arizona has a "special" election coming up for the voters to consider two ballot propositions placed before them by the legislature (which, for most observers, should be definitive evidence that both are bad for Arizonans - this *is* the Arizona legislature that we are talking about here).

Proposition 123 would allow the legislature to continue to shirk its duty to properly fund education in Arizona by letting it tap into the state's land trust at a faster pace than is currently allowed.

Proposition 124 would reward the legislature for it habitual underfunding of the pension system for public safety employees by placing more of the financial burden of the system on those public employees.


Early ballots have started reaching mail boxes this week, and there are already problems.

And to the surprise of almost no one, the problems are in Maricopa County.

Of course.

From KNXV-TV, written by Melissa Blasius -

ABC15 has learned thousands of early ballots mailed in Maricopa County this week have a major mistake in the Spanish translation of Proposition 124.

Proposition 124 is a proposal to make changes to police and firefighter pensions.  However, the boldface short title of the proposition in Spanish indicates it’s about education funding.  The wording in the title for Proposition 124 appears identical to Proposition 123, which is also on the ballot.

Beneath the incorrect title for Proposition 124, there is a more lengthy explanation that appears to appropriately describe the pension reform ballot measure.

Spokespeople for both the Arizona Secretary of State and the Maricopa County Recorder say they were unaware of the problem until ABC15 brought it to their attention Friday morning.

They, meaning Michelle Reagan (Arizona Secretary of State) and Helen Purcell (Maricopa County Recorder), respectively, the overseer of elections in the entire state and the overseer of elections in the state's most populous county, want people to believe that this is a minor mistake that can be corrected by reprinting the ballots to be used for in-person voting and sending post cards to the recipients of early ballots.

Which might be an adequate response...if there weren't problems with all elections in Maricopa County.

Most of the time, Purcell, Reagan, et al. place the blame for problems with elections square on the shoulders of the people they seem to despise most - the voters.

Apparently, certain elected officials are surprised when voters actually vote in elections that don't have those specific elected officials on the ballot.

Of course, there are a few examples of official malfeasance/sustained incompetence that even they can't blame on the voters; when caught, they just "pooh-pooh" (minimize) the impact of their bad acts on the voters.

Like they have in this situation.


Full disclosure time: I have already voted "No" on both propositions and returned my ballot.  My reasons for voting against Prop 123 have been stated before this.  As for Prop 124, while a number of people that I wholeheartedly respect actually support the measure, I cannot bring myself to support of anything that the legislature puts on a ballot.

Somewhere...someday...the modern Arizona legislature may spawn an idea that actually benefits all Arizonans, and not just their deep-pocketed masters.

When (if!) that comes to pass, the related post will have a title that starts with "Well, there's a first time for everything".


Anyway, a few pictures of my ballot, to illustrate the problem -

Prop 123; please note the Spanish language short title.

Prop 124; please note the Spanish language short title.

Prop 124's Spanish language short title, magnified:

A translation, courtesy Google Translate (probably not necessary in Arizona, but it makes a great visual :) ):

Maricopa County Election Fiasco: Was it an exercise in "Two Birds, One Stone" or was it an exercise in "All Politics Is Local"?

...Or maybe it was an exercise in "it's not what you know, it's *who* you know"...

Ya know, maybe Maricopa County Elections, in the persons of Helen Purcell (County Recorder) and Karen Osborne (Purcell's Director of Elections) didn't deliberately set out to disenfranchise minority and lower-income voters last week (something that they are still claiming they didn't do).

They have claimed that they determined the geographic distribution of the county's 60 polling places based on cost.

However, looking at some other data suggests that at least one factor, aside from cost, may have been part of the considerations involved.

This analysis from Phoenix' channel 5 points out the one that most people have already noted - the areas with the most polling sites tended to be whiter and more affluent than those areas with a dearth of polling sites.

Having said that, I'm not going to go there.

Well, not *too* much :)

Turns out that in addition to having the money to buy bigger houses and whiter neighbors, the residents of the areas looked upon with favor by Purcell et. al. have the money to buy themselves some neighbors that hold elected office.

To whit:

Of the 13 county-level elected officials*, both county-wide and board of supervisors (who are elected to represent districts), only three live more than four miles (by road, not "as the crow flies").

Don Covey, county school superintendent

Andy Kunasek, District 3 on the Board of Supervisors

Michael Jeanes, county clerk of courts

* = In Maricopa County, justices of the peace and constables are elected from 26 districts; for the sake of brevity, they aren't included here. They are "county-level elected officials" but there are too many of them.  Plus, as important as they are to general public in terms of day-to-day life, in terms of Maricopa County politics, the local PTB don't give them much more regard than the PTB give to the general public.


Of those three, two (Covey and Kunasek) are retiring.  Jeanes may be an elected official, but he is as low profile as low profile gets here.  For most people, *not* being able to name the clerk of courts is a good thing (I can, but I'm a political geek; you make the call about whether or not that's a "good" thing :) ).

Of the rest...

...County Sheriff Joe Arpaio lives less than three miles from not one, but two (2!) polling places (Fountain Hills and Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation)

...County Supervisor Denny Barney (District 1) lives just over two miles from his nearest polling place in Gilbert (as a bonus, Senate President Andy Biggs lives just over a mile from the same polling place; not a "county" official, but one with some influence nonetheless)

...County Attorney Bill Montgomery lives just two miles from his nearest polling place, also in Gilbert

...County Supervisor Clint Hickman (District 4) resides 3.3 miles from the nearest polling site in Goodyear

...County Assessor Paul Petersen resides less than a mile from the nearest polling place in Mesa (as a bonus, his predecessor Keith Russell, now a justice of the peace, lives even closer to the same polling place)

...the previously mentioned Andy Kunasek lives a little less than 4.5 miles from his closest polling place in Paradise Valley.  He's retiring, though.  On the other hand, County Supervisor Steve Chucri (District 2) resides a little more than a mile from the same polling place.  And he's not retiring.

...The soon-to be-retired Charles "Hos" Hoskins, Maricopa County Treasurer, resides a little less than 3.5 miles from his nearest polling place in Peoria

...County School Superintendent Don Covey, himself soon to be retired, "wins" this round (not that this is really a competition that anyone wants to win), living in far north Phoenix over 8 miles from the nearest polling place

...County Supervisor Steve Gallardo (District 5), the lone Democrat on this list, lives a shade under three miles from the nearest polling place

...County Clerk of Courts Michael Jeanes resides just over 4 miles from the nearest polling place in north Phoenix (not as far north as Covey, though)

...County Recorder Helen Purcell, the center of the uproar surrounding last week's fiasco (ya didn't think I was going to forget her, didja? ) lives all of 1.4 miles from the closest polling place to her in Phoenix


...Bonus time: Michele Reagan, Arizona's Secretary of State (and chief elections officer), lives 6.3 miles from the polling site in Phoenix nearest to her home in Scottsdale, which doesn't sound too bad.

Except for the fact that her father Michael, an elected official in his own right (justice of the peace) resides all of 1.6 miles from the closest polling place in north Scottsdale.


Now, I expect that most, if not all of the "dignitaries" listed above are on the Permanent Early Voters List (PEVL) and voted by mail in last week's election.

However, all but one of them live in mostly white and relatively affluent areas, and have mostly white and relatively affluent neighbors.

Meaning that not only do their neighbors get special treatment because of their skin color and the size of their bank accounts, they are accorded special treatment because of who they live near.

It's a bit of a "chicken or egg" question - do those folks live near elected officials because they (and the electeds) are affluent, or do the affluent like living near electeds?

Either way, the average Maricopa County resident ends up with the short end of the stick on Election Day...and every other day of the year.



My nominees for the two most questionably placed polling stations:

Pinnacle Peak Public Safety Substation, 23100 N. Lake Pleasant Road in Peoria and Cross of Glory Evangelical Lutheran Church, 10111 W. Jomax Road, also in Peoria.

Why?

Both sites are located in the same precinct, Lake Pleasant.*.

If the "cost" excuse was the truth, why waste money by having two polling locations in such proximity?

* - Actually, the recorder's website's district locator function indicates that the police substation is in the Zuni Hills precinct and that the church's address doesn't exist, but maps published by the recorder indicate that both are located in the Lake Pleasant Precinct (which is immediately north of Zuni Hills).


Notes:

All distances above are based on Googling the addresses.

All addresses are based on public record filed by the electeds in question.

Russell Pearce misuses county resources: gets "admonished"

From the Arizona Republic, written by Yvonne Wingett Sanchez -

Russell Pearce, the former Republican state Senate president known for his hard-line stance on illegal immigration and controversial remarks about Latinos and women, appears to be violating the Maricopa County's e-mail policy.

On late Tuesday afternoon, he sent an e-mail from his county treasurer's account that hits on the enforcement of immigration laws, sanctuary city policies, the ACLU and the media. The e-mail was titled "NO PERMISSION SLIP NEEDED:  STATES HAVE INHERENT AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS, ENOUGH OF THE LIES BY THE LEFT AND PROFITS OVER PATRIOTISM CROWD."

Maricopa County policy defines improper use of e-mail as using it for "illegal, inappropriate, obscene, political, or personal gain purposes."

{snip}

He signs off with a description of himself, "Senator Russell Pearce and former President of the Arizona State Senate, former Chief Deputy of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, former Judge, author of:  SB1070, Employer Sanctions, Proof of Citizenship to vote, No welfare for illegals, No bail for illegals charged with serious crime, English as the Official Language, No in-state tuition for illegals, etc."

In most any other state, Pearce would have been fired; in Arizona, he gets less than a slap on the wrist.

For wasting public resources on his private jihad against immigrants.

Laurie Roberts, a columnist for the Republic, has her take here (as it turns out, Pearce is a "well-rounded" winger - he hates public education almost as much as he hates immigrants)

Know who had a bad week this week? Joe Arpaio

It is far too early to gloat - Arpaio has a seemingly uncanny ability to weasel out of trouble, often by throwing others under the bus.

He did that a lot this week, only to see many of his "throwees" drag him under the same bus.


First up: a primer (see the video above).

Note: it isn't perfectly accurate (for example, the infamous nativist bill SB1070 became law in 2010, not in "the 2008 - 2009 time frame") and most lawyers will cringe at it (much of the terminology used is for laymen, not those with JDs).  However, it effectively explains the factors that lead up to the current situation.


Second up: what happened this week in federal court in Phoenix.

A. A civil contempt hearing looking into possible violations of a court order by Arpaio took place.

B. At the hearing:
     1. Arpaio threw his lawyer under the bus.
     2. One of Arpaio's senior officers threw Arpaio under the bus.
     3. Arpaio's lawyer withdrew from the case.
     4. Arpaio admitted, under oath, to news broken last year by Stephen Lemons of the Phoenix New Times - that he had the wife of the judge in this case, Murray Snow, investigated.

Personal observation: I don't know if Arpaio is a praying man, but if he is one, he should give a heartfelt prayer of thanks that Snow is the judge hearing this case.  Upon hearing that admission, most other people, including many judges, would have simply turned to the nearest court officer and ordered that Arpaio be taken to the darkest, dankest hole in the federal prison system and dropped in it.

Because Snow is the judge, Arpaio is still sleeping in his own bed.

So far, most of Arizona's Republicans haven't publicly weighed in on Arpaio's travails, though a couple of "fringe-y" folks have (in this case, "fringe-y" speaks to their likelihood of holding office in the near future, not to their political positions.  At this point, most members of the AZGOP espouse positions that are pretty "fringe-y.)

One that is (very) mildly critical of Arpaio: Christine Jones, a 2014 candidate for governor.  From her Twitter feed:

Another, stridently supportive of Arpaio: Jack Harper, a former state legislator and legendary whackjob.  From Donna Gratehouse, friend and fellow blogger:

Personal observation2: If one thinks about the ramifications of it, Harper's "logic" would ultimately preclude court actions against public officials who are corrupt or otherwise abuse the powers of their offices.


Anyway, it really is too soon to start gloating over Arpaio's political demise (this is a long way from over), but that hasn't stopped some people from quietly speculating over who among Maricopa County's Rs will angle for the sheriff's job should Arpaio not run for reelection next year.

My (not-so-quiet) speculations:

1. Someone from MCSO who is unfamiliar to the general public but who is an Arpaio lifer.
2. Russell Pearce, former legislator and longtime Arpaio ally.
3. John Kavanagh, current legislator and also a long-time Arpaio ally.

One thing all have in common:  If they gain the office, they almost certainly won't investigate the previous administration.

Recall Joe Arpaio: Send the "Pink Underwear" man a message with a Pink Postcard

Respect Arizona, the group behind the effort to recall Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, is closing in on its goal of collecting enough petition signatures to force a recall election.

It has now come up with a way to both send a message to Arpaio and to raise funds to support their efforts.

Pink Postcards.

For $2 each, or 3 for $5, people can send a message to Arpaio, letting him know why you think he should be removed from office.

Every Thursday at 5:30 p.m., the newest batch of messages from the people of the county, state, and country are delivered to Arpaio.  If you want to participate in the recall, if you want your voice to be among the thousands clamoring for justice and integrity to return to the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office, sign up and order postcards here.

Maricopa County Board of Supervisors: the race to 3 is on...

...3, as in the number of votes from the remaining supes needed by a candidate to be named to fill the vacancy on the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors left by the recently resigned/retired Max Wilson...

Brahm Resnik of AZCentral.com has posted the information on the 14 people who have officially submitted their names for consideration for the appointment.

Note: there may end up being more candidates - the deadline for candidates to declare their interest in the appointment is Friday.  If you are a Republican who lives in Supervisor District 4, you too can be a member of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors!  Seriously, those are the two main qualifications for the appointment.

Many of the 14 candidates (so far) are people who may be familiar to regular readers (with some notes from their submissions or their past histories):

Peoria City Council member Ron Aames

Peoria Mayor Bob Barrett

Former county schools superintendent Sandra Dowling (as the victim of a past BOS power play/witch hunt, her candidacy may be something of a long shot)

Avondale City Council member Jim Buster

Former Arrowhead Justice of the Peace John Keegan (husband of former AZ Superintendent of Public Instruction Lisa Graham Keegan).  Possibly the front-runner.  Reason?  He lists as one of his favorite hobbies firing his "full scale American Civil War howitzer".  May be something that the supes want on their side during their next tiff with Joe Arpaio.

Former state legislator and a 2012 primary opponent of Wilson, Jean McGrath.  Highlight of her legislative career: she ran a bill to ban opposite sex overnight visits in dorms at state universities.  Hint: she wasn't trying to score points with her LGBT constituents.  The bill didn't pass, and I'm guessing that it would have been thoroughly ignored even if it had passed.

Goodyear City Council member Joanne Osborne.  She likes to play solitaire and has lots of books to read about "business, leadership, business, and faith".  I guess that's better than a howitzer.

Litchfield Park Mayor Thomas Schoaf

Former state legislator Bob Blendu

Former state legislator Jack Harper, a frequent subject of not-so-random musings here.  Many things have been said and written about his "colorful" political activities, but for this, the highlight is from his submission: on his resume, he lists as one of his qualifications for the job (which is what a resume is all about) that he is a "Life Member of the National Rifle Association".


The selection of a new member of the may take place as early as next week.  No matter who is appointed, they will serve until the 2014 election when the voters will choose someone to serve out the remainder of the term (until 2016)

Max Wilson resigning from the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors

From the Arizona Republic, written by Michelle Ye Hee Lee -

 

Longtime Maricopa County Supervisor Max Wilson announced Friday he will retire, effective March 11, citing health reasons.

 

The 70-year-old Litchfield Park Republican was hospitalized with the flu in January. This week, his doctors advised him to take it easy. He also has had previous health concerns, and has gone through two open-heart surgeries in the past.

Wilson won reelection last year, so his office normally wouldn't be on the ballot again until 2016.

However, his resignation means that the rest of the BOS will appoint another Republican from Wilson's NW Maricopa County district to fill the office until the 2014 election, when somebody will be elected to serve out the remaining two years in the term.

If he (or she) chooses to run for election to the position, the appointee, whoever it may be, will have a leg up in the 2014 election.  They'll be running as an incumbent, an unelected one to be sure, but better to be an unelected incumbent than none at all (see: Jan Brewer in 2010).

Being the Northwest Valley, and Republicans, I've got no insight into how this is going to shake out, but expect to see a bit of a "domino effect".

Any person who is appointed to the office is likely to be a "mover and shaker" on the West Valley political scene, and if not already an elected official, someone who is on the short list of those considered to be ready to move into office.  Their appointment will, in turn, create an opening for someone else to move into the political "on deck circle" (nice baseball reference for a political change happening during spring training, doncha' think? :) ).

Wilson has faced two primary opponents during his tenure, easily defeating both. 

In 2012, former state legislator and current member of the governing board of the Central Arizona Project, Jean McGrath ran against him, getting trounced.  She may have some supporters among SD4's Republicans, but based on the primary results, there aren't many of them.

In 2004, one George L. Bradbury IV served himself up as the political equivalent of cannon fodder.  Hadn't heard of him before doing some research for this post, so he seems to done with his (apparently short-lived) political career, but a Google search turned up some allegations of sketchy land deals and being on the defendant side of some civil actions in court.

Stuff that isn't supposed to be done by those interesting in being on the MCBOS...at least until they are part of the MCBOS.

Maricopa County Board of Supervisors disenfranchising part of their own county

When Ben Arredondo (D-LD17) resigned from the Arizona House of Representatives, it created a vacancy in the legislature, leaving a district, part of Maricopa County, under-represented.

There is a specific series of steps to be followed to fill that vacancy.

Basically, once notified of the vacancy, the elected precinct committeemen of the same party and district as the person who vacated the legislative office meet, and nominate three persons to fill the seat.  The names are then forwarded to the board of supervisors of the applicable county (in the case of Arredondo's Tempe/South Scottsdale district, Maricopa County), and the supes appoint one of the three to fill the seat.

In the case of the vacancy in LD17, everyone has done their part...except for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, who are now refusing to make any appointment at all.  There was a rumor that there was going to be an appointment on the agenda of Monday's meeting of the MCBOS, but that didn't happen, nor is such an item on the agenda for the Wednesday meeting.

Now, state law seems to be pretty clear, once the other steps have been followed, the supes *must* appoint someone to fill the seat.  From ARS 41 - 1202 (linked above to "steps") (emphasis mine)-

4. The state party chairman of the appropriate political party shall forward the names of the three persons named pursuant to paragraph 2 of this subsection to the board of supervisors of the county of residence of the person elected or appointed to the office immediately before the vacancy occurred. The board of supervisors shall appoint a person from the three nominees submitted.

I've heard a few different speculations about the motivation behind the supes' refusal to follow the law here -

- It's a Democratic-controlled seat, and the Republicans on the board are simply playing partisan games.

- Two of the Republicans on the MCBOS are lame ducks, so they know if the Board's failure to do its duty comes back to bite them in the ass, it won't impact them - they're gone anyway.

- A few people have pointed out that the appointment of Juan Mendez, who recently won election to the AZ House from the new LD26, would highlight the fact that for the purpose of term limits, even a partial term counts as a full term.  Something that the Rs may not want highlighted as long an Jan Brewer is trying to argue that she can run for another term as governor, even though the law says that she cannot because of the partial term she held after Janet Napolitano left AZ behind for D.C.

Whether the motivation is one of the above reasons, or is another entirely (though I admit, I'm leaning toward partisan gamesmanship, but I'm a cynic), I have to ask -

What's the hang-up?  This isn't theoretical physics.  It's not difficult.  Get it done.

The people of LD17 want a representative.  The people of LD17 need a representative.  And state law requires that the MCBOS appoint a representative from the list of nominees given to them.

Imagine the uproar if a Democratic-controlled board of supes, say in Pima County, refused to fill a lege seat held by a Republican.  There would outraged calls to mobilize the Arizona National Guard governor's personal vigilante force to invade the offending county and force them to appoint a Republican.

People beyond the list of nominees are watching this all play out (or not) and are voicing their opinions of what is going on, and the most charitable description that I've heard is "frustrating" because not only are the supes not doing their job, they've been sending mixed signals, saying (through surrogates like staffers) that an appointment will be made, and then it won't be, and then it will be, and then it won't be, and so on.

Contact the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and urge them to do their job and appoint someone to represent part of their county at the state legislature.


Steve at The Arizona Eagletarian has more coverage of this here.

Maricopa County Recorder's Office engaging in voter suppression activity?

From ABC15.com, written by Tim Vetscher (emphasis mine) -

The Maricopa County Elections Department mistakenly listed the wrong date of the upcoming general election on an official government document.

The error appears on a document containing a voter ID card.

In addition to the ID card, the piece of paper it comes in lists other information such as important election dates.

In the corner of the document, it says November 6th in English but in Spanish it reads 8 de Noviembre, the 8th of November.

 

Election day is November 6th, not November 8th.

Folks, there is a reason that Arizona has been, is, and will remain, a "preclearance" state under the Voting Rights Act.

OK, there are *many* reasons, and this is only the latest and most blatant.

Folks2, it's official - we've reached the "cheat like hell" portion of the Republicans' plan to win the elections this year.

Another Pearce out of office: Lester Pearce resigns from office

For the first time in 15 years, brothers Lester and Russell Pearce are out of elected office at the same time.

Both are attempting to win office in November (Russell, state senate; Lester, Maricopa County Board of Supervisors), but until then, the amount of bs and hatred spewed into the atmosphere by AZ's elected officials by a huge middling OK, a tiny amount.

Russell was removed from the senate by a now-legendary recall vote in November; his brother Lester resigned from the office of North Mesa Justice of the Peace on Monday in order to pursue a run at the East Valley seat on the MCBOS.

From the press release announcing the resignation -

Lester Pearce, Presiding Judge of the Maricopa County Justice Courts, has announced his resignation from the Justice Courts Bench. In his resignation letter to the Board of Supervisors, effective at midnight tonight, Judge Pearce cited Rule 4.5 of the Arizona Code of Judicial Conduct, which states that a judge shall resign from judicial office upon becoming a candidate for a non-judicial elective office.

"It has been an honor to serve the citizens of Maricopa County as a Justice of the Peace for the past 15 plus years," said Judge Pearce. "I have enjoyed my role in providing justice at the level closest to the people. However, as I will be announcing my candidacy for another elected position, I unfortunately must resign as the North Mesa Justice of the Peace."

{snip}

Associate Presiding Judge Clancy Jayne will assume the duties of the Presiding Judge.

There are 25 justice courts in Maricopa County that hear a combined caseload of more than 400,000 cases each year, including civil lawsuits where the amount in dispute is $10,000 or less, landlord and tenant controversies, small claims cases and civil and criminal traffic offenses, including DUIs. Justices of the Peace also resolve other types of misdemeanor allegations and handle requests for orders of protection and injunctions against harassment.

While both Pearces are running in R-heavy districts where the winner of the Republican nomination is likely to win the general election, both face formidable opponents in the Republican primary.

Sign the petition urging the USDOJ to bring Arpaio to trial

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has run roughshod over standards of professionalism, fiscal good practices, and civil rights for nearly 20 years.

The US Department of Justice is finally taking a long look at him and his activities, but they have been slow to actually bring Arpaio to court.

Steve Muratore of The Arizona Eagletarian has started a petition to urge the DOJ to bring Arpaio to trial. 

You can sign it at Change.org here.

If you can, share the petition with your friends via Facebook, Twitter, and other social media.

Later...

Arpaio Testifies At Thomas' Ethics Hearing

Most of the time, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio likes to portray himself as "America's Toughest Sheriff" or something similarly grandiose and self-serving.

However, when he testified before the panel investigating former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, he portrayed himself as something else. 

I'm just trying to figure who or what he was playing.

From the Arizona Republic, written by JJ Hensley -

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio does not recall many of the details related to the investigations that have threatened the careers of former County Attorney Andrew Thomas and one of his top prosecutors.

{snip}

"I don't recall" was Arpaio's most common answer when attorneys pressed him for details.

Upon reading the srory and watching the video (embedded in the Republic story), I had to sit back and figure out what role Arpaio was playing on Tuesday.

Was it -

Ronald Reagan?  The former president may have been best known for evading questions about his involvement in the Iran/Contra scandal with "I don't recall".  However, while Reagan's politics were almost as abominable as Arpaio's (in a different way, however), I can say one positive thing about the man -

He could deliver a punch line.

And Arpaio doesn't have a funny bone in his body.

pic courtesy IMDB


Alberto Gonzales? The former US Attorney General is famous for his use of "I don't recall" to protect himself (and others) from an investigation into the firing of US attorneys who refused to trump up cases against prominent Democrats and other critics of his former bosses, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove.

Hmmm...probably not.  Even though Gonzales was a fan of torture and an enemy of civil rights, I can't see Arpaio ever acting like someone named "Gonzales."

pic courtesy OnePennySheet.com

So, if Arpaio wasn't doing his best Reagan imitation and he wasn't doing a Gonzales imitation either, who could it be?

Hmmmm...........I've got it!

pic courtesy KickingTheCanDownTheRoad.com

 

 

The Arpaio Scandals: It's getting where you need a scorecard to tell them apart

With the latest scandal to hit Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Maricopa County Sheriff's Office this week, the arrest of three MCSO employees for involvement with drug and human-trafficking cartels, it seems as if the scandals could form their own baseball team.  Here's the lineup:

Leading off and playing center field, the fleet-footed rookie above

Batting second and playing second, the politically motivated investigations and indictments of Maricopa County supervisors and Arpaio political adversaries Don Stapley and Mary Rose Wilcox

Batting third and playing left field, the politicall motivated investigation of and charges levelled against a county judge who failed to kiss Arpaio's behind

Hitting cleanup and playing first, the news that Arpaio and his office misspent almost $100 million of jail funds

Hitting fifth and playing the hot corner (3rd base for the heathens out there :) ), former Chief Deputy Dave Hendershott, who's as famous for taking one for the team as he is for hitting them out of the ballpark

Batting sixth and catching, Joel Fox and the SCA laundered campaign contributions/depraved attack ad

In the seventh spot and playing shortstop, the new linchpin of Arpaio's defense, Bill Montgomery and the hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of campaign finance violations

Batting eighth and playing right field, the Taj Mahal of buses, ostensibly purchased to transport prisoners, but now used to throw loyalists under in hopes that the bodies will stave off a federal indictment

And batting ninth and pitching, the master of distraction, Joltin' (rhymes with Revoltin'), Joe Arpaio.

The MCSO scandal bench is pretty deep - dead bodies at the hands of his detention officers, millions of dollars in lawsuits, junkets to Honduras to "train" the military there, just months before a right-wing military coup there, and more await their turn at the plate.

His team does have one glaring weakness - his star relief pitcher and biggest ally at the legislature, State Senator Russell Pearce, has troubles of his own.  Like a growing recall effort and a son who has been sentenced to a year in prison.  Wonder if he's going to do his time in  a luxury hotel room one of the private prisons that his father so ardently supports?

Fortunately for Arpaio, if this lineup ever sees a game, the umpire will be a federal judge, not any of the Maricopa County judges that he has tried to intimidate.

Unfortunately for him though, if this lineup ever sees a game, the opposing team captain won't be the prosecutor he's hired for his team, it'll the the US Attorney.

Maricopa County Politics: the very definition of "small world"

Item one:  Witness one Mark Goldman, attorney.  A former deputy Maricopa County Attorney, he was heavily involved in the case ginned up by former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas against Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley, a political rival of Thomas' biggest political ally, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Item two:  Witness Dennis Wilenchik, attorney.  At one point in time, his firm employed Thomas.  When Thomas became county attorney, Wilenchik's firm received oodles of private contracts from MCAO, essentially using public funds to pay Wilenchik et. al. to serve as Thomas' political hatchetmen "special prosecutors".  Cases included (but were hardly limited to) the persecution and arrest of the publishers of the Phoenix New Times for their coverage of Arpaio and his misdeeds.

Item three:  Goldman, like Thomas, worked for Wilenchik at one point (see the link in the first item).

Item four:  Goldman is the attorney for State Senator Scott Bundgaard in his "domestic violence" case.

Item five:  Jason Rose, the AZ Republicans' resident PR guru, is Bundgaard's PR guy, helping him deal with the fallout from the domestic violence incident.  Bundgaard's case is still pending, in Phoenix Municipal Court, but I'm not sure.  Their records don't seem to be available online.  However, I can find no mention of the case in the Maricopa County court system's records.

Item six: Arpaio incurred fines of over $75K over illegal campaign finance activity when his campaign spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertising that supported Bill Montgomery, a Thomas ally, over Rick Romley, a Thomas and Arpaio adversary, in the race to fill Thomas' unexpired term as CA.

All of which leads to item seven:

A Paradise Valley-located fundraiser for Montgomery, scheduled for Wednesday evening.

Organized by Goldman, it boasts a host committee (aka - list of big $ contributors) that includes Goldman, Wilenchik and Rose.

It also boasts of a "special appearance" by Arpaio, and curiously, Joe Miller, the candidate for U.S. Senate in Alaska who lost to Lisa Murkowski, who ran as a write-in candidate.  Maybe Miller will take the time to bring a housewarming gift to his friend Sarah Palin at her new digs in north Scottsdale.

Goldman's political fundraising LLC, GoldmanSmith, was incorporated in April, shortly after folks started figuring out that Bundgaard's "domestic violence incident" wasn't going to go away.  It's got a bare-bones website, and only one event listed - this one.

I don't know what sort of concoction they are brewing up over in PV, but given the ingredients include a number of people with large amounts of money and a personal or professional need for a "friendly" county attorney, whoever is standing over the cauldron better be able to stir with one hand.

The other holding will be holding their nose.

Nearly $100 million is missing!! Somebody call the sheriff! Oh wait...

From AP, via the Washington Post -

An examination in Arizona’s Maricopa County has found that the sheriff’s office, widely known for efforts against illegal immigrants, inappropriately spent $99 million from two jail funds over the last eight years to pay for other law enforcement operations — including immigration patrols.


The $99 million figure released Wednesday is an update to an estimate made in September by budget officials who said the sheriff’s office was believed to have used $60 million and $80 million over four or five years from a jail tax on other purposes. Since then, officials said they discovered that the sheriff’s office had inappropriately spent money from a second jail account.

Hmmm...it seems that calling the sheriff to investigate this case would be like calling the fox to investigate a missing hen.

...On second thought, at $100 million, it's more like calling the fox to investigate a missing hen house.

...Actually, on third thought, at that price, make that "the missing hen house at the Taj Mahal".

Next hearing in Andrew Thomas' disciplinary case: April 14, 2011

On March 10, the principals of the Bar disciplinary case against Andrew Thomas, former Maricopa County Attorney, and two of his former assistants met before Presiding Disciplinary Judge William O'Neil.

For background, a Phoenix New Times' story on the case is here.

The hearing, with Thomas, his former assistants Rachel Alexander and Lisa Aubuchon, their attorneys, and Independent Bar Counsel John Gleason, was for the purpose of setting up a basic schedule for future proceedings.

And, of course, being lawyers, for filing motions.  Lots of trees are giving up their lives for this case. :)

Most of the motions filed were responses to earlier motions (did I forget to mention that everyone involved is a lawyer?  :) ).  The judge accepted one motion that was filed "in confidence."  As such, that motion and the documentation associated with it aren't open to the public.

The lawyers have until Wednesday, March 16 to file responses to the various motions or a default decision can./will be handed down.

The upshot is that nothing was decided, other than to meet again on April 14.  At that time, the judge is expected to rule on whether future proceedings will be televised or even open to the public.

Thomas and Aubuchon have objected to both ideas, and at least one local media outlet has requested permission to televise future proceedings.

Coverage from AP, via KOLD TV in Tucson, here.

More to come...in a month or so.  :)

First proceeding in the Andrew Thomas, et. al. Arizona Bar disciplinary case on tap for next Thursday

The Presiding Disciplinary Judge of the Arizona Supreme Court has set a time for the initial case management conference in the Arizona Bar Association's complaint against former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and two of his former assistants, Lisa Aubuchon and Rachel Alexander.

That conference will take place on Thursday, March 10, 2011 in the Arizona State Courts Building.  It shouldn't be too colorful, as it is more to establish a schedule than to make any substantive decisions concerning the complaint against the threesome, but it may be worth keeping an eye on this.

Backgrround info: 

The Bar complaint against Thomas, Aubuchon, and Alexander is here.

Thomas' motion to disqualify the Bar's Independent Counsel, John Gleason, from the matter because he isn't admitted to the Arizona Bar, is here.  Gleason is an attorney in Colorado, and was appointed by the Arizona Chief Justice to serve as Independent Counsel in this matter.

Thomas' motion to dismiss the complaint, based in no small part on the previous motion, is here.


News coverage:

Phoenix New Times coverage of the complaint here.

AP coverage, via the Arizona Capitol Times, here.

New investigation into MCSO "misconduct and mismanagement"

Something tells me that perhaps someone feels that the feds are getting close...

In what is probably the first in a string of public occurrences of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio throwing someone under the PR bus, a memo written by one of his senior aides accusing another senior aide of "misconduct and mismanagement" was made public yesterday.

From the Arizona Republic -

A top aide to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has requested an investigation of the sheriff's second-in-command, Chief Deputy David Hendershott, and two of his allies, signaling growing concern among the sheriff's top hierarchy about the agency's management.

A memo written by Deputy Chief Frank Munnell and recently delivered to Arpaio alleges years of misconduct and mismanagement by Hendershott, who has directed day-to-day operations of the Sheriff's Office since 2008 and has been in the department's top echelon since the mid-1990s.

[snip}

Munnell asked Arpaio to place Hendershott and two of his close allies, Deputy Chief Larry Black and Capt. Joel Fox, on administrative leave pending an independent investigation by the Arizona Department of Public Safety.

Instead, Arpaio confirmed Wednesday, the sheriff sent the investigation to Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu, a close political ally.

"I decide who to send investigations to if it's necessary," Arpaio said, declining to comment further on the allegations. "This has been given by me to another agency. It wouldn't be appropriate for me to discuss it."

When describing the relationship between Arpaio and Babeu, "close political ally" is an understatement.  In many ways, Babeu could be best described as an "Arpaio in training."  I expect that his involvement with the case may actually be less to protect Black and Fox than to make sure any "investigation" doesn't go beyond those two.

All this comes on this week's $154K fine for Arpaio's illegal "in kind" contribution to the recent County Attorney campaign of another political ally, Bill Montgomery.  Arpaio funded a "hit piece" against Rick Romley, a long-time adversary and the other candidate for Maricopa County Attorney.

Note: some long-time or Arizona-based readers may recognize the name "Joel Fox."  Fox was the front man/fall guy in the one of the most brazen and tawdry illegal campaign finance schemes ever associated with Arizona politics.

Later...

Romley squares off against Arpaio and Thomas

From the Arizona Republic -

Interim Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley on Thursday released hundreds of pages of grand-jury testimony and other documents showing failed attempts by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas to obtain criminal charges against county officials.

Grand-jury proceedings are secret, but a Superior Court judge unsealed the records "in the furtherance of justice."

The whole article, as well as the attached documentation, is well worth a read.

As is the article in the Phoenix New Times' Valley Fever.

From that article -

Bombshell stuff at a press conference just completed in downtown Phoenix at the offices of interim Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley.


The biggest news was that a county grand jury last March rejected efforts by one of then-County Attorney Andrew Thomas' special prosecutors to issue major felony indictments against Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe, county manager David Smith, and several other county officials.

"This is outrageous behavior, absolutely outrageous, and this miscarriage of justice stops now," Romley said a few minutes ago.

Let's be clear on one thing - the *timing* of Romley's presser was almost certainly motivated by political considerations, at least in part.

Arpaio has been using his vast campaign war chest to fund anti-Romley and anti-Tom Horne (Andrew Thomas' primary opponent for the R nomination for AZ Attorney General) and Romley's primary is less than two weeks out.  And in what is sure to be a low turnout election, many folks are still undecided (statewide ballpark figures that I've heard on early ballots are that roughly 1/4 have been returned at a point in the cycle when normally closer to 1/2 have been returned).

Today's press conference by Romley, who's running a "professionalism vs. blind ideology" campaign against his opponent, the Arpaio-endorsed former Thomas deputy Bill Montgomery, needed to reach out to some of the undecideds.  This does that.

Having said all that, however, let's be clear on one other thing - the *content* of the press conference is nothing that surprised any seasoned observers of the goings-on in Maricopa County.

Folks have known for months and years that Thomas' and Arpaio's investigations and indictments of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and various county employees and judges were more about intimidation and retribution than about justice and truth.

Folks have known that the outside prosecutors who looked at the cases declined to accept the cases on the grounds that there was no "there" there.

Folks have heard whispers about all of this, but now those whispers are documents.

I think that the ideal situation in government is that officials who are relative equals behave as independent yet respectful colleagues.

Right now in Maricopa County, we are seeing a situation where relative equals are ardent adversaries (the Supes and County Attorney on one side, the Sheriff and former CA on the other).

Still, it beats what we had just a few short months ago - County officials who were less "independent" and more "co-conspirators."  And the co-conspirators were something other than "respectful" toward their other equals.

Andrew Thomas has a press conference of his own scheduled for 1:30 p.m. to respond to Romley's information release today.

Stay tuned...