Rep. Judy Burges (R-LD4) making an early run for the Legislative Loon Award

It's early (since the 2010 session hasn't actually started yet), but Rep. Judy Burges is making a spirited declaration of her candidacy for the 2010 Legislative Loon Award.

Let's see...

She's a primary sponsor of...

...HB2001, creating a voluntary tax fund for taxpayers who feel that they didn't pay enough. Call this one the "F--- you Arizona" Act.

...HB2005, creating a special license plate for the Arizona Masonic Fraternity, with 68% of the revenue from the fees for that plate going to the Masons. Call this the "43 Special Plates Isn't Enough" Act.

...HB2015, expanding the definition of justifiable use of deadly force to allow deadly force to be used in situations where only the mere display of a weapon ("defensive display of a firearm") had been justified. Call this one the "Violent Paranoiac's Free Pass" Act.

...HB2016, allowing convicted felons with concealed weapons permits from other states to possess and carry firearms in AZ if their rights have been restored in that other state. Not sure what to call this mess.

...HB2017, specifying that firearms instructors working in K-12 schools be certified by either the Arizona game and fish department or the NRA. Changes current language that only specifies "a national association of firearms owners." Call this one the "NRA Employment Act."

...HCR2001, a concurrent resolution asserting the state's sovereignty over the federal government under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Call this one the "Go Away Feds, We Don't Need Your Civil Rights Act, Environment Regulations, Worker Safety Laws, Or Product Safety Laws. Just Leave Lots Of Money Before You Go" Resolution.

Yes, Rep. Burges is making a serious play for the Award, but if she is going to be a real contender, she needs to expand her activities to all areas of legislation. She needs some nativist proposals, some anti-balanced budget stuff, maybe some anti-choice proposals, and, of course, massive tax cuts for the wealthy and for corporations.

Her emphasis on appeasing the gun lobby is admirable (in a "well, it helps identify the wingnuts" sort of way), but she needs to embrace the all around lunacy exhibited by her Senate colleague from LD4, Jack Harper, if she wants a real chance to take the LLA home this coming year.

Later...

Well, the special session has been called...

...now we have to wait and see if they can actually do anything, or even reach a quorum...

The Governor has issued the proclamation for a special session of the lege, planned start date of Thursday, December 17, 2009.

From the proclamation -

The subjects to be considered at the Special Session shall be:

1. Adjustments to address the fiscal year 2009-2010 state budget.

2. A referendum to voters to impose a temporary tax for the purpose of raising state revenues for primary and secondary education, health and human services and public safety expenditures.

3. A referendum to voters to temporarily suspend the provisions in Article IV, Part 1, Sections 6 and 14 of the Arizona Constitution.

The lege's website has a fifth special session up, but there aren't any bills or committee hearings posted yet.

Reports from The AZ Guardian (subscription required) are that the Governor is expressing confidence that they have the votes, including some from Democrats, to pass the measures on the agenda. However, other denizens of the Capitol aren't so sure.

From the Arizona Capitol Times -

Legislative Republicans and Democrats haven’t agreed on much this year, but both are puzzled by Gov. Jan Brewer’s proclamation earlier today that the two parties have set aside their differences and hashed out a deal that would allow a sales-tax increase she favors to be sent to the ballot in March.

{snip}

Earlier today, media outlets reported Brewer was saying she had been assured by Adams and Senate President Bob Burns that they have secured the necessary Democratic votes to send the temporary one-cent sales tax hike to the ballot.

But that came as news to Democratic leaders.

“She hasn’t asked for a single (vote). We haven’t gotten a call,” said House Assistant Minority Leader Kyrsten Sinema. “She hasn’t talked to anybody.”

This is just a guess, as I haven't talked to any legislators since last night, but it seems that this special session is more a hail mary pass from Brewer, hoping that she only has to call the play(special session), while praying for somebody else to step up to actually make it work (catch the pass), than any example of real leadership.

AZCentral.com coverage here.

Maybe justice will be served this time

I guess elections *do* matter, because I'm pretty sure the corrupt cops named in these indictments would have been given a free pass by the Bush-era DOJ...

From CNN.com -

Five people, including three police officers, have been indicted in the fatal race-related beating of a Latino man in Shenandoah, Pennsylvania, the Justice Department said Tuesday.

Two indictments charge the five with federal hate crime charges, as well as obstruction of justice and conspiracy, authorities said in a written statement. A federal grand jury handed up the indictments last week, and they were unsealed Tuesday.

The charges stem from the July 2008 beating and murder of Luis Ramirez, a Mexican immigrant, in Shenandoah. Two teenagers, Derrick Donchak and Brandon Piekarsky, beat Mr. Ramirez while shouting racial and ethnic slurs (hence the hate crime charges).

The federal indictment alleges that Piekarsky, Donchak, and four police officers, including the chief of Shenandoah's PD, conspired to obstruct investigations into the crime.

Note: while CNN is reporting that 3 police officers have been indicted, the USDOJ's press release says 4. I'm going to go with the DOJ's number, under the presumption the DOJ knows who they've indicted (which is a rather large presumption, I know :)).

While it is heartening to see the action regarding the murder itself (especially given the fact that the killers were sentenced to less than 2 years in jail on state charges), the obstruction and conspiracy charges are what are really encouraging.

Especially given the amount of obstruction and conspiracy spewing forth from the similarly bigoted offices of the Maricopa County Attorney and Sheriff.

While none of this will bring Mr. Ramirez back to his friends and family, it could work to prevent future murders and coverups by officialdom.

At least one can hope...

Special session Thursday?

Mary Reinhart of The Arizona Guardian is reporting that a one-day special session of the lege is in the works for Thursday (subscription required). There is some confusion over the details of the timing, but her article covers the topic well.

As planned, the session would include a referral of a sales tax hike to the ballot as well as a question to allow the lege to breach the protections of the Voter Protection Act (aka "Prop 105") to raid the funds of measures approved directly by the voters. In addition, there would be $200 million in budget cuts on the agenda.

According to State Rep. David Schapira (D-LD17), the tentative schedule is for the session to begin on Wednesday for Appropriations Committee consideration (and back room arm-twisting [my phrase, not his]) with COW and final passage (and probably more arm-twisting) on Thursday.

There are some serious questions if any package can pass a special session - most of the R caucus in the House and some of the Rs in the Senate have made it clear that they won't support even the referral of a temporary tax hike unless they pass permanent tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy.

In addition, they still aren't talking to Democrats (other than to notify them of the session itself).

As Rep. Schapira said, referring to the Republicans in the House and the chances of a special session passing anything -

"They fall in line, or it falls apart."

More coverage here from Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services, published by the EV Tribune.

Stay tuned for developments as this is a fluid situation. While it seems likely to fall apart at any moment, it could also be a done deal by Wednesday, with the leadership just holding the session to cross some "Ts" and dot some "Is" (pro forma consideration of something that they have worked out behind closed doors).


Assuming that the fifth "special" session goes off as planned, I'm not sure how I'd vote on a sales tax hike.

If it is simply to backfill revenue lost to tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, then my vote will be "HELL NO!!"

If it is part of a complete package designed to actually balance the budget while minimizing the pain to Arizona's neediest residents, then "maybe".

As for giving the lege the ability to breach Prop 105, that's a "HELL NO!!" Period. End of question.

These people have shown that they have neither the ability nor the inclination to govern responsibly. As long as they continue to ignore the wishes of their constituents, they must not be given the legal ability to do so.

And regarding any proposed budget cuts, I know that they are inevitable, but I want to see what they are first.

Time to cut the lege's budget, as well as those of state officials who have thus far been untouched by previous budget restrictions (like the Governor, Secretary of State, Treasurer, and State Superintendent of Public Instruction).

Later...

Brewer to the people of Maricopa County: You're on your own

First she abandoned any pretense of leadership during the state's budget crisis, now she has abandoned the people of the state's most populous county during the crisis (OK, it's a clusterf***) facing Maricopa County as a result of the conflicts (OK, it's a civil war) between the County's elected officials.

From AZCentral.com -

Gov. Jan Brewer said the state's budget crisis precludes her from even considering any intervention in current legal and personality clashes within the Maricopa County government.

Brewer told The Associated Press on Monday that she has not looked into whether she should or could intervene.

"I have been paying attention and I have been reading the newspaper and, you know, listening to television and hearing about it," said Brewer. "Certainly I've got my hands full with what I'm facing here at the state level."

The sad part is that Brewer was a Maricopa County supervisor before winning election to the AZ Secretary of State's job.

Yet despite the fact that the people of Maricopa County are her constituents and neighbors, she is washing her hands of the situation, claiming that the state's budget situation demands her complete attention.

So where's the balanced budget, or at least a proposal that's balanced?

Where's her call for a special session to fix the latest fix for the budget?

I suppose this is a cheap shot (but she has made it so easy), but if the budget is the most important thing on her radar right now, more important even than the complete meltdown of Maricopa County government, why is she flitting about the country campaigning speaking at hotel openings, elementary schools, conferences, Christmas tree lightings, and more? (Public schedules for the last two weeks here and here)

Maybe one of her advisers should remind her that she will need the votes of Maricopa County voters during next year's elections if she hopes to win a full term on the ninth floor.

Not seeing the forest for the trees

The Arizona Daily Star has an interesting article (byline: Rhonda Bodfield) up today about Clean Elections and its perceived failures.

From the article -

It's been more than a decade since voters made Arizona one of only two states at the time to offer public financing of campaigns for statewide races.

It was supposed to mitigate the effects of special interests, give voters more choices and help new faces compete against the power of incumbency.

But even the guy who helped bankroll the campaign to get it approved, former Democratic Party Chairman Jim Pederson, now says it it was a mistake — not only failing to achieve those goals, but actually contributing to more partisanship and the exclusion of political minority perspectives.

There are other quotes, from both sides of the partisan aisle, but almost all boil down to "it's made the lege less partisan and less civil."

Have no doubt - the legislature *is* less civil than it used to be (not that it was ever an afternoon tea party with the Queen of England). Just ask anybody who has been down there for more than five years.

Yet for all of the statistics and anecdotal quotes, the article (and the "quotees" in that article) make one fundamental error - Clean Elections was not and is not about changing partisanship or the behavior of legislators at the Capitol.

It was about giving an opportunity to citizens who don't have the corporate fundraising connections needed to fund "traditional" campaigns to run for lege or statewide office.

It has done so. I personally know a number of people who have run, and a few who have won, races who could never afford to do so under traditional financing.

It was about reducing the influence of lobbyists over the lege, or at least reducing the amount of influence that they have over who is *in* the lege.

This one may be a something of a failure. OK, more than "something" of a failure. Too many legislators (mostly, but not totally, from the R caucus) are openly in the pockets of corporate lobbyists. Of course, that may be due more to the ideology and lack of ethics of the legislators involved than any failures on the part of the Clean Elections law.

And there were elected officials around who were more interested in serving their personal ideologies and/or personal wealth than their constituents long before Clean Elections was ever proposed, much less enacted.

What the Clean Elections law is being blamed for are the effects of two phenomena that are utterly out of its control -

1. The far-rightward shift of the GOP and the harshening tone of its rhetoric, even toward its own members. As this piece from the Washington Post demonstrates, this tendency is a nationwide thing and not limited to Arizona.

Has the right wing of the AZGOP used Clean Elections candidates to take out moderate Rs with primary challenges (here "moderate" = "not conservative enough to bring smiles to the faces of Grover Norquist and David Duke")? Yes.

However, CE was just a tool for the extremists. Blaming CE for that is like blaming a hammer because the carpenter put up an ugly house.

In a state like Arizona, one that is thus far a Republican-majority state, the harshening of the GOP's rhetoric and the polarizing of its internal politics has the effect of similarly "harshening and polarizing" the overall political atmosphere, beyond just the GOP itself.

That's been seen in states that don't have publicly-financed elections, such as Texas and New York ("Scozzafava-ed" is a verb now). Blaming CE for the loss of civility in public discussions is misleading and inaccurate.

2. The apathy toward politics and governance on the part of most Americans. It seems that the vast majority of voters don't pay attention to what is going on in their government until campaign season heats up. And some, not even then.

The cynic in me believes that certain demagogues have deliberately made politics more distasteful so that more people turn away in disgust, leaving the demagogues and their vassals in office to wreak their havoc with minimal oversight.

However, the apathy toward politics has existed for, like, *ever*, so it isn't fair to blame the demagogues for the existence of that tool.

Of course, it *is* fair to blame them for their use of that tool, a use that is detrimental to the state and to the country, but that is a topic for another day.

This post is already long enough. :)

Anyway, I don't have a solution for this problem, other than to tell folks, D, R, or I, to watch the votes and actions of their elected officials, ask hard questions of their electeds, and listen to and consider the answers.

And to do it all the time, not just during campaign season or when things have already gotten ugly.

During one of the pro-education rallies at the lege last session, I was talking to one of the teachers present. He stated that he was a Republican and he was surprised at how bad things were at the lege (i.e. - the level of contempt for education, students, and educators on display from most of the Republican caucus).

He was a Republican, but he had never attended a meeting of his LD party or even a candidate forum other than for school board. He was shocked at the low priority his legislators give to the needs and views of the majority of their constituents.

I suggested that he switch parties or just show up.

I advised him that while as a Democrat, I would welcome him to the party if he chose to change his registration, I would understand if he chose to remain an R. What he could, and should, do, is get involved, at least a little. He doesn't have to be a PC to talk to and evaluate candidates, nor to talk about candidates. Just be there and let the candidates know that average people are watching them, not just the blind ideologues.

And by paying attention, and showing candidates and potential candidates, folks such as him can have a greater voice in which candidates are nominated by their party.

Because ultimately, voters decide who is in office; Clean Elections has only expanded the number of options that they can choose from.

Edit on later on 12/14 to add:

Donna at Democratic Diva has a post on this same subject here where she provides the perspective of someone who has run a campaign as a Clean Elections candidate.

End edit...

2010 candidate update

Normally, the format for these posts is to discuss top of the ballot candidates and then work down. However, since the candidates for Tempe City Council are set while most of the other races are still forming up, we'll start with that one.

- For Tempe City Council:

Incumbents Shana Ellis and Onnie Shekerjian will be joined in the race for the Council's three open seats by Robin Arredondo Savage and Mark Ortiz. AZCentral.com report here. The Tempe City Clerk's announcement here. The Primary election will be held on March 9, 2010 and the General election (if necessary) will be held on May 18, 2010.

Ortiz is an Iraq War vet, community volunteer, and employee of a locksmith business and a lawn care business. His website is here, though it seems to be incomplete at this time.

Ellis is on the Council and is currently serving as Tempe's Vice Mayor. Her 2006 campaign website is here, though I'll update the link when/if a more current one comes online. Before her election to the Council that year, she had been a long-time community activist.

Shekerjian was also elected to the Council in 2006. Her campaign website from that year is here, though as with Ellis, when/if a more current site comes online, I'll update here. She's a conservative Republican who emphasizes her ideology during Council meetings and campaign stops. She's also Mayor Hugh Hallman's last remaining ally on the Council - unlike Mayor Bob Walkup of Tucson, Hallman doesn't ignore partisan affiliations when deciding who to work with on issues facing Tempe.

Arredondo-Savage is perhaps the most interesting candidate. She's the niece of current member (and future state legislator?) Ben Arredondo. She's currently a member of the Tempe Union High School District Governing Board. Unlike Shekerjian, she emphasizes community needs in her speeches and actions. She is a Republican, but in her dedication to the community, she is more like her uncle than Shekerjian (or Hallman.) I couldn't find a campaign website, but when one is set up, I'll link to it here.

- For District 2 on the Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District...

...Dana Saar, a member of the Fountain Hills school board, has formed a committee to challenge incumbent Jerry Walker (R-embarassment). AZCentral.com coverage here; Fountain Hills Times coverage here. The race may yet fall by the wayside - a conservative blog (Sonoran Alliance) is reporting that Walker is considering a run for the LD19 seat in the state senate.

- In LD8, a Republican has stepped up to challenge presumed candidate (and fellow Republican) State Rep. Michelle Reagan for the State Senate seat. Michelle Ugenti, a "tea party" brand of Republican, set up a committee on December 3.

Yes, this means that the AZGOP is running against a Reagan from the right.

- Current State Senator Jim Waring is termed out after next year. He has formed an exploratory committee for a run at state treasurer. He will only run *if* current treasurer Dean Martin decides to run for Governor. Phoenix New Times coverage here.

- Tajudeen "Taj" Oladiran has filed to enter the race for the Republican nomination for Attorney General. I couldn't find out much about him, but he seems to be best known for his rather "unique" court filings.

- NRA board member Owen "Buz" Mills has filed for the Republican nomination for Governor next year. And after Jan Brewer said all those nice things about the man at some NRA event last May. I'm shocked. Really. :)

AZBlueMeanie at Blog for Arizona has more complete coverage of candidate committees here.

The coming week...

As usual, all info gathered from the websites of the relevent political bodies/agencies, except where noted, and subject to change without notice.


...In the U.S. House, the agenda looks to be pretty non-controversial, with the notable exception of possible consideration of a conference report on H.R. 3326, Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010. Anything with that much money attached to it is certain to generate a fuss.

The House is expected (no guarantees on this however) to finish its business for the calendar year by Friday.

...The U.S. Senate will also be in session. Its committee schedule is here. Of interest to Arizonans: An Armed Services Committee hearing considering, among other things, the nominations of AZers Douglas Wilson as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs and Mary S. Matiella as Assistant Secretary of the Army for Financial Management and Comptroller.

Wilson's bio is on this page near the bottom (summary - he's a DLC Dem who spent most of the 1990s working for the Clinton administration); Matiella's bio is part of this article (she's held a number of finance-related positions in government, including for HUD and the Forest Service. She has been appointed to the Audit Subcommittee of the Tucson Unified School District Governing Board.)

...Back here in Arizona, the intersession makework schedule seems to be nearing its end.

- On Tuesday, the House Study Committee on Sentencing will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR5.

- Wednesday, the Joint Committee on Capital Review will meet in SHR109 at 1 p.m. and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) will meet at 2 p.m in the same room. Both agendas contain an executive session component on private prisons. The item language on the respective agendas differs slightly so they may or may not pertain to the same matter. Either way, they address sending public money to private corporations that exist to profit from incarceration.

No sign of a special session. There were rumors that one more would develop before the end of the month, but that doesn't seem likely at this point. Things could change Monday morning, but... :)

...The Arizona Corporation Commission is scheduled to meet on Tuesday and Wednesday. The agenda of that "utilities" meeting is here. Its hearing calendar is here.

...The Citizens Clean Elections Commission is scheduled to meet on Thursday. Agenda here.

...The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has an "informal" meeting scheduled for Monday, agenda here. The highlight of this one is the presentation and discussion regarding adoption of financial disclosure standards for County elected officials.

Whatever comes out of this one, you can be sure that Andrew Thomas and Joe Arpaio a) won't like it, and b) won't think it applies to themselves.

The supes have a "formal" meeting scheduled for Wednesday, agenda here.

...The Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District looks to have a special meeting scheduled for Tuesday night, at least according an item on the previous meeting's agenda. I can't find an agenda for a meeting this week, though a phone call to the district on Monday morning should definitively confirm/refute the existence of a special meeting.

...The Tempe City Council isn't scheduled to meet this week; the Council Calendar is here.

...The Scottsdale City Council isn't scheduled to meet this week; the Community Meeting Notice is here. The highlights of that are a meeting of the Charter Review Task Force on Monday and a meeting of the City Manager Recruitment Ad Hoc Committee on Tuesday (members: Mayor Lane and Council members Littlefield and McCullagh).

Not scheduled to meet this week: Arizona Board of Regents, Boards of Directors of the Central Arizona Project and Maricopa Integrated Health System.

Later...

This stuff would be funny...any place else.

But since this is all here, it's more scary than funny...

You know, in this down economy (an outright depression in AZ), I am grateful to have a job.

Because of my work schedule though, it's sometimes difficult to write during the second half of the week.

This was one week when I *really* wished I had a schedule that allowed for some serious blogging time after Tuesday.

Let's see. This week saw...

...AZ Senator John McCain facing an ethics complaint over his use of campaign funds to protect the interests of his Big Insurance clients conduct Senate business when he created a series of robo-calls urging recipients to call their own Senators in support of McCain's effort to gut the Senate health care reform measure...

- Brett Mecum, Executive Director of the AZGOP, in trouble for using voter registration records to stalk a woman (thanks to Blog for Arizona for the heads-up on this)...

- Senate President Bob Burns (R-AZ9) purging fellow Republicans Ron Gould, Pam Gorman, and Jay Tibshraeny from leadership positions by stripping them of their committee chairmanships (in Gould's case, he dissolved the entire committee.) Gould's and Gorman's ousters weren't surprising - they've made a spectacle of their "more conservative than thou" jihads against anything resembling good governance...or, as is the case in what has come out of this legislature and governor, anything resembling governmance that is only moderately horrific.

They've embarassed Burns, and payback is as much a part of politics as elections.

I'm not sure what is going on with Tibshraeny. He's had his differences with Burns, but has been civil and professional about it (two terms that are not necessarily applicable to the words and actions of the other two). He's as conservative as they come in the Senate, but will occasionally oppose some of the more draconian measures that come before the Senate. He's a former mayor (Chandler), so maybe he understands that the wingers' games have real world impacts that stretch far beyond the ideological cat box on West Washington.

Or maybe he just has a conscience.

Either way, the fact that he is on Burns' bad side doesn't bode well for Arizona - all expectations are that the coming session's budget battles will be even uglier than last session's.

- However, none of that begins to hold a candle to the fireworks taking place between the various politicos at Maricopa County.

Just this past week, we saw...

...a federal lawsuit alleging a vast conspiracy among judges, attorneys, and county officials to interfere with investigations...

...indictments of Don Stapley and Mary Rose Wilcox. two county supervisors; indictments that probably won't hold up under scrutiny, but they get plenty of press coverage for Arpaio and Thomas...

...an Appeals Court quashing, at least temporarily, any MCSO search warrants of a judge's home and/or computer.

...A judge facing charges from County Attorney Andrew Thomas. It probably isn't a coincidence that the judge is the one who ordered an MCSO officer jailed for contempt for stealing papers from an attorney's briefcase in open court ...or that Thomas and Arpaio released the judge's home address...

...a fishing expedition raid at a public advocacy agency...one that just happens to be focused on the needs of Arpaio's pet "boogeymen" - Mexicans...


I don't know if Arpaio, Thomas, et. al. have violated any federal laws, but given their total control of Maricopa County's law enforcement apparatus and their pre-empting of a state investigation by their own investigations of the state Attorney General, Terry Goddard (there's no substance to those, but an investigation by the AG might be seen as "retaliatory" and a conflict of interest), sooner or later, federal intervention will be necessary in order to clean up Maricopa County government.

In case anyone from the U.S. Attorney's office is reading this:

Sooner would be better than later.

Later...

Out of a comfort zone and lessons learned

Let me start off by saying that I have a newfound respect for anyone who steps in front of a crowd of (mostly) strangers to speak to them.

A few weeks ago, I wrote of an incident at a meeting of the Scottsdale City Council where a speaker criticized some members of the Council (which while poorly done in this instance, is part of a public official's lot) and the wife of a Council member (family members = off limits under most circumstances).

As this wasn't the first time such things have happened with the Scottsdale City Council and the fact that the Mayor issued a very tepid response (perhaps not-so-coincidentally, the targets of the speaker's ire were the Mayor's adversaries on the Council), I felt it was necessary to step up and say something, to let folks know that this behavior was not representative of Scottsdale's residents as a whole.

So, at Tuesday's Council meeting I did so.


And have never been so scared in my life.


I've spoken in front of small groups of people that I've known (friends, coworkers, etc.) but never in front of strangers, much less a group where I knew going in that most of them were not going to be receptive to what I had to say.

This was definitely out of my comfort zone.

So, as it was a rookie outing for me, it could best be described as "inartful."

Still, it could have been worse - at least I didn't drool on my notes or break into Pig Latin when I got nervous. :)

Among the lessons learned - the three minutes alloted to each speaker that can seem interminable for listeners just flies by for speakers. Even though I tried to keep my remarks brief and on point, the Mayor still cut me off before I finished. To be fair to the Mayor, I got my three minutes, so I am not criticizing him...for this. There will be other occasions for that.

Plenty of them.


In other news: the Council appointed current Deputy City Attorney Bruce Washburn to the vacant City Attorney's job. The initial over/under on his job tenure will be set at 16 months (April 2011) unless Lane's faction remains in the majority after next year's elections.

In other, other news: the Council failed to reappoint an associate city judge (or at least was well on their way to not reappointing - I had to leave for the D17 holiday party) because they didn't feel they didn't have enough info to make the reappointment..but not before they gave the floor to one of Mayor Lane's allies to engage in an off-topic diatribe against photo radar.

Which I thought was rather ironic because on Tuesday evening, one of the City's photo radar vans was situated on Civic Center Boulevard near Scottsdale Stadium, perhaps 1000 feet from City Hall.

Later...

Ya know what I love about campaign season? Campaign ads.

Particularly satirical ones.

It's amazing what a Google search turns up - fourth on the list of items found with search terms: "Eric Wnuck" and posted on the internet in the last week -



FYI - there's a difference between "shameless copying," which is what the Wnuck campaign did when they posted their own spot last week, one that copied a spot from the Bean campaign in Illinois, and legitimate parody, which this is and something that Eric Wnuck opened himself up for.

FYI2 - I don't know who created the above parody, but given the nature of some of the lines used and the fact that it is, ya know, actually funny, I'm guessing that it is a Democrat.

Seven million dollars would keep a lot of teachers and court workers employed

Not that Arizona's version of Joltin' Joe (aka Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio) would care about that - that wouldn't earn him as much media coverage as his never-ending feuds with other County officials.

From AZCentral.com -

The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office is asking the Board of Supervisors for $7 million to cover the costs of legal fees.

Chief Deputy David Hendershott wants the board to transfer the $7 million from the county's general fund to the Sheriff's Office general fund early next year, according to an agenda item obtained by The Republic.

The money would help pay for legal fees the Sheriff's Office incurred from three law firms: Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak and Stewart; Sanders and Parks; and Wilenchik and Bartness.

Most of the legal fees that Arpaio wants the county supes to pay were incurred during Arpaio's fights with the supes themselves. In short, he wants the supes to fund his harassment of the supes.

Welcome to Maricopa County folks.

Enough with the Tiger Woods stuff already

Time for a rant...

Enough already.

I don't care that Tiger Woods was in a car accident and ran over a fire hydrant, other than to be happy that no one was seriously hurt.

I don't care that he has cheated on his wife - that's an issue to be sorted out between him and his wife, and perhaps their marriage counselors/divorce attorneys (whichever direction they choose to move in).

I don't care how many different women he has cheated with - any number above zero is bad news for the relationship.

I don't care that his wife has apparently moved out of their home - she hasn't moved in with me (not that I would have a problem with that - she's seriously hot).

What I *do* care about is that media coverage of this is overwhelming coverage of matters that actually have an impact on most of the country.

I can understand if the tabloid magazines/websites/TV shows that exist for the sole purpose of disseminating celebrity gossip cover this because this crap *is* their reason for existence. If you don't care for celebrity gossip (and I don't), you can avoid these media outlets (and I do).

I can understand if the sports networks/websites/mags cover this because Woods *is* a sports figure. This isn't their normal fare, but since this could reasonably be expected to impact Woods' play in his chosen field of endeavor, it's fair game.

What I can't understand is why the "mainstream" media outlets such as MSNBC and CNN have devoted so much effort and time to covering this. I watch those outlets for hard news, not the latest reports of "celebrities behaving badly."

Enough already.

End rant...

Yup, there were lots of "I's" in this one, but it was a rant, just something that has really been bugging me for a week and that I needed to get off my chest.

Thanks for your patience. Back to politics...

Let the screaming in north Scottsdale begin...

From AZCentral.com -

Senate eyes cosmetic surgery, Botox tax

Last week, the Senate began debate on an $848 billion health care reform bill that includes a 5% excise tax on elective cosmetic surgery, beginning Jan. 1, 2010. The provision would raise an estimated $5.8 billion in the next decade.

To those readers who think that I am being inappropriately snarky toward my oh-so trendily-dressed and impeccably-coiffed neighbors to the north, know this -

The website of the Arizona Medical Board lists 21 medical doctors with a specialty in cosmetic surgery.

7, or 33%, list a Scottsdale address on their licenses. An eighth lists an address in Paradise Valley, but that addy is physically on Scottsdale Road. The doctor in question literally just has to cross the street to be in Scottsdale. That's 38% in or right next to Scottsdale.

According to estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau, Arizona has more than 6,300,000 people in it.

According to the same source, Scottsdale has 235,000 people, or roughly 3.7% of the state's population, living in it.

3.7% of the general population, but more than 38% of the plastic surgeons.

Hmmm...

:)



Note: These numbers don't include the 7 licensees who list out of state addresses. I believe that most of them practice in Scottsdale when they are in-state, but belief is not proof. Also, the numbers do not include the doctors who have a cosmetic surgery component to their practices, but do not claim it as a specialty with the Medical Board. So far as I know, there is no requirement that they do so.

But it does make running numbers on this topic a little more difficult. :)

An open letter to Scottsdale's Mayor and City Council

This letter was submitted to them via the City's website contact form -

Mayor Lane and members of the Scottsdale City Council,

On Tuesday you will be considering a consultant’s report on the possible acquisition of Arizona American Water Company’s (AAWC’s) operations in Scottsdale.

I am writing to you to urge you to consider the report with an open mind, and during your discussions keep an eye toward protecting the long term interests of the residents of Scottsdale.

You are certain to hear from a number of interested parties on this matter, including many representatives of an organization calling itself The ORANGE Coalition. They will flatly oppose even the mere possibility of the City of Scottsdale acquiring the troubled local operation and assets of Arizona American Water. While they profess to be an Arizona-based organization dedicated to protecting the private property rights of “farmers and ranchers and other land owners,” that description of their purpose may not be a complete one.

According to records from the Arizona Corporation Commission, The ORANGE Coalition was incorporated on November 12, 2008 and listed the addresses of its directors as “1025 Laurel Oak Rd., Voorhees, NJ 08043.”

That is the address of corporate headquarters of American Water Works, the parent company of AAWC.

The inference is clear here – The ORANGE Coalition is an “astroturf” group formed specifically to further the interests of its industry backers, and nothing more.

While all of the residents of Scottsdale (your constituents), even those who work directly (or indirectly) for AAWC, have the right to have their opinions heard, the fact that certain individuals represent AAWC shouldn’t give you reason to confer greater weight to their opinions.

To conclude, let me reiterate the beginning of this note – please consider the report with an open mind and let your decisions in the matter be based on what best serves the needs of the residents of Scottsdale.

Thank you for your time.

Regards,

[cpmaz]

NOTE –

The ACC page for The ORANGE Coalition is here: http://starpas.azcc.gov/scripts/cgiip.exe/WService=wsbroker1/names-detail.p?name-id=14878680&type=CORPORATION

SEC info on American Water’s address from its initial registration is here: http://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1993/dig052193.pdf

American Water’s contact page from its website, with corporate HQ address, is here: http://www.amwater.com/about-us/contact-us.html

Later...