Early bill filings for the 2012 session of the legislature

It's early, but a number of bills have been pre-filed for the 2012 session of the Arizona legislature.

A large number are "technical correction" bills, or bills that exist mostly to serve as shells for strike-everything amendments late in the legislative session.

Some are head scratchers, meaning that either I don't really understand what they do, or do understand but don't see the point.  Most of those have names like Harper, Allen, or Seel attached as sponsors and so are presumed to be bad.  Very bad.

With the other bills, there's no doubt.  They're just plain ugly.

A few of the high/lowlights -

HB2022, Rep. Jack Harper's annual proposal to repeal the one year waiting period on former legislators coming back as paid lobbyists

HB2024, one of the head scratchers relating "waste of finite resource; repeal".  I think it has to do with a specific kind of speeding violation, which doesn't sound too bad.  However, it is sponsored by Sylvia Allen, Chester Crandell, Brenda Barton, Michelle Ugenti, and John Fillmore.  There are a few leaders of the lege's tin foil hat brigade on that list, so the bill is probably a bad one.

HB2035, Kimberly Yee's attempt to undermine the voter-approved medical marijuana law by punishing health care providers who prescribe medical marijuana for other than "an accepted therapeutic purpose."  That doesn't seem too unreasonable, until you realize she doesn't actually specify the definition of "accepted therapeutic purpose".  While the AMA concedes that medical marijuana has benefits, the federal government adamantly disagrees.

HCR2004, a not-quite-a-proclamation of secession in the form of a declaration of Arizona's sovereignty over the federal government, courtesy of Allen, Barton, and Crandell.

HCR2005, a proposed amendment to the AZ constitution to require periodic reauthorization of any voter-approved initiatives that affect state spending by requiring that certain things are funded.  Call this "the Legislature really hates having its hands tied by the voters" measure.

HCR2006, a proposed amendment to the AZ constitution from Jack Harper, Judy Burges, and Carl Seel.  It's yet another attempt to create school vouchers, this one geared to "helping" students in public schools with an average class size of 35 or more pupils. 

Interesting.  They force class sizes to balloon by making massive cuts to education funding to pay for tax cuts for corporations, and then turn around and try to use the large class sizes that they foisted off on public schools to justify taking more money from those schools and funnelling that money to private schools.

David Safier at Blog for Arizona has a write-up on the Rs plans to gut "reform" public education here.  This measure looks to be just one salvo in their ongoing war against public education.

And last (for now), but certainly not least is a bill that hasn't been filed yet.  Ron Gould is promising to bring back a "guns in schools" bill.  It passed the lege last session, but Governor Jan Brewer vetoed it (it may be her only wise act during her term as governor, but I'll give credit where it is due.  She was on the right side on that one.)

This is just the beginning, so this much is clear:  Russell Pearce may be gone, but the wild and insane ride that is the Arizona legislature at work will still be running at full speed...

Russell Pearce, martyr? Not so much...

...though to listen to the whining among the Republicans, you'd think they were Al-Quaeda and Pearce was a suicide bomber...

As soon as it became clear that Russell Pearce had lost his November recall, the whispers started.  And when it became clear that Pearce didn't just lose but was thoroughly thumped, the whispers became shouts (whiny, wheedling shouts, but shouts nonetheless).

Tuesday, the Republican blog/press release site Sonoran Alliance posted a long and rather revisionist paean to Pearce that effectively sums up what most of the Rs have been saying.

Their main spin has been to claim that Pearce was the subject of a recall because of his anti-immigrant policies, positions and speeches and particularly because of his SB1070.

Now, I cannot deny the fact that Pearce's bigotry makes him much easier to dislike.  However, if the recall effort was based on that, why has only one other supporter of SB1070 faced a recall effort?  And that effort actually pre-dated SB1070 and was pushed by Republicans who fell the legislator in question (Sen. Rich Crandall, R-Mesa) isn't conservative enough.


Another R talking point is to claim that the recall process was abused and was never intended to an unpopular legislator.

Ummm...the recall law was followed to the letter, and it's been used once in a century.

Pearce wasn't just unpopular.  He misused and abused his office.

...He ordered the arrest of people who criticized him when those critics peacefully entered the Senate building for a scheduled appointment...

...He proclaimed that legislators could ignore the laws barring possession of weapons in public buildings...

...When the other legislators caught up in the Fiesta Bowl gift scandal shut up and paid up, Pearce refused to repay the Fiesta Bowl and still denies wrongdoing...

...When his friend and close political ally Sen. Scott Bundgaard was involved in a "domestic violence incident" (i.e. - he assaulted his girlfriend by the side of a Phoenix freeway), Pearce declared that Bundgaard was the victim...

It should be pointed out here that the GOP's whiners and spinners are expressing criticism only of the fact that Pearce was held accountable for his bad conduct in office, but have said nothing about the conduct itself.

Apparently, they believe if someone is stridently nativist, they should be forgiven "minor" foibles like corruption in office, abuse of power, and si\nple unbridled arrogance (not a crime in itself, but the attitude that he and the rest of his caucus were and are above the laws that govern the rest of society was the root of his downfall).

Bottom line:  the recall was legal, proper, and most importantly, deserved.

Sylvia Allen, keeping the "AZ" in crazy

State Sen. Sylvia Allen (R-LD5) is a conservative legislator from northeastern Arizona.  During her career in politics, she's been best known for two things - she's a close friend and ally of Russell Pearce, the recently recalled former president of the state senate, and she's prone to uttering some of the whackiest things ever to pass the lips of an elected official in AZ (and that's saying something in a state that boasts among its past and present electeds folks like Evan Mecham, Karen Johnson, and Jack Harper).

Whether it was claiming that it is OK to strip mine uranium because the Earth is 6000 years old and is doing fine, that people should think of more ways to help the wealthy, that trees in Arizona should be destroyed because they suck water out of Arizona's water supply, or even crazier, she's been embarrassing her district and her state for years.

She's still going for the crazy, as this article from The Payson Roundup from last week illustrates.

From the article, written by Pete Aleshire -

State Sen. Sylvia Allen called for a state struggle against federal authority in a wide-ranging appearance last week before about 50 members of the Payson Tea Party gathered at Tiny’s Restaurant.

{snip}

...she decried the mostly federally funded Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System as “socialized medicine.” AHCCCS provides coverage for about 30 percent of the residents of Gila County.

{snip}

“We need to tighten this program up and have people pay for babies. That’s not life and death. They won’t let you charge (the patients) a penny for that care. That’s the socialized direction we’ve gone in for 50 years.

{snip}

Sen. Allen also decried various efforts to increase voter turnouts, with things like mail-in ballots and online voter registration.

Now to be fair to Senator Allen, I have to leave open the possibility that she isn't crazy.

She may just be someone who revels in pure ignorance while relying on party talking points to get her through contact with actual voters.

Happy Holidays...

To all readers, regular or drive-by, whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Ashura, Festivus, Chrismukkah, winter solstice, or something (or nothing) else, may you all have a joyous and safe holiday

Time to state the obvious: Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee

...Yes, for months it has seemed likely that Romney would be the nominee in spite of his tepid support (at best) among the tea party/most extreme wing of the GOP.  Every few weeks, a new darling of the screamers arose, only to fall by the wayside as their (metaphorical) warts were exposed by the glare of the light of scrutiny that all front-runners face.

Still, it's a large field, meaning that a candidate could win a state's primary/caucus with 20 - 25% of the vote.

Only now the field is getting smaller, without anyone actually getting out of the race.

From Time Magazine, written by Will Lester -

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Texas Gov. Rick Perry have failed to qualify for Virginia's March 6 Republican primary, a setback in their bids for the Republican presidential nomination.

Also not on the ballot, courtesy the Arlington County (VA) GOP - Michelle Bachmann, Jon Huntsman, Rick Santorum, and Gary Johnson.

That leaves Romney on the VA ballot alone with Ron Paul. 

Now, Paul has a small but dedicated core group of followers in the far-right reaches of the Republican Party, but his usually extreme (even by the GOP's standards) positions make him all but unelectable in a contested general election.

His party's poo-bahs (insiders and power brokers) won't allow him to get even within sniffing difference of the actual nomination, though he may win a few primaries or caucuses.

In the end, the R nominee will be Romney, with someone like Chris Christie or Tim Pawlenty as the VP candidate.

Next November's election will be about returning Barack Obama to office, perhaps with a Congress that won't be dedicated to keeping the economy cratered for political gain, or returning to the blindly pro-greed and pro-corporate bottom line policies that got the US and world into this mess.

Note: as of this writing, Romney and Paul are the only two "major" candidates on the ballot for Arizona's Republican primary, though the others have another couple of weeks to submit their names.

The maps are in, and other 2012 updates

Just a few quick updates...

The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) has submitted its "tentative final" maps for Congressional and legislative districts to its analysts.  Assuming that the analysts don't find any major issues with the maps (and they probably won't), the maps will then be submitted to the US Department of Justice for preclearance under the Voting Rights Act.  If DOJ doesn't find any major issues (the likelihood of that is anybody's guess), those maps will form the basis of elections for the next decade.

Some national media outlets (The Hill and Politico) are calling the maps a victory for Democrats, but they aren't, really.  They guarantee Republican control of the legislature for another 10 years, and all but guarantee a Republican-majority Congressional delegation for the same period.  What they do however, is make it more difficult for the Rs to maintain their outsized domination of the legislature.

As such, the Rs are crying about the maps, but the tears may be mostly of the "crocodile" variety...

Steve at Arizona Eagletarian has more complete coverage of the AIRC here.


...Neil Giuliano, former mayor of Tempe, a rumored candidate for the Democratic nomination in the new 9th Congressional district, has announced that he will not be pursuing that job (subscription required).  State Sen. David Schapira is currently exploring a run at the seat, and State Sen. Kyrsten Sinema and Arizona Democratic Party chair Andrei Cherny are rumored to be eyeing the same race.


...Lastly, the list of candidates on the ballot for February's Republican presidential preference primary is now five strong - Ron Paul, Mitt Romney...and Wayne Arnett, Raymond Perkins, and Al "Dick" Perry.

No, I don't know those last three either.  Look for the final ballot to include 20 - 25 names, with seven or eight that people actually know.

...

"Merry Christmas" from the GOP sounds a lot like "up yours"

'Twas the week before Christmas, and all through the House, the Teapublicans were jostling, each trying to prove that he was the biggest louse..."

Tuesday, the Republicans in the US House of Representatives voted to increase taxes on 160 million Americans when they voted to reject a Senate compromise that would have extended the payroll tax holiday by two months.

They're trying to blame President Obama and the Democrats in Congress for this betrayal of the the vast majority of working Americans, but the bottom line is that the people who oppose any tax increases that affect corporations and wealthy people shamelessly threw average people under the economic bus.

Beside the expected outcry from Democrats and other advocates for middle class and working families, even Republicans as disparate as Sen. Scott Brown (MA) and Sen. John McCain (AZ) have roundly criticized the actions of the House Republicans.

 Brown, as perhaps the most vulnerable R senator up for election next year, is justifiably worried about the impact of the Teapublicans' tantrum on his reelection chances.  With consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren hot on his heels, Wall Street's favorite senator has realized that he'd better look like he has Main Street's back if he wants to return to the Senate in 2013.

McCain on the other hand was just reelected last year and is from an R leaning state.  He has no short-term motivations when he points out that the House Rs' greed (they want what they want and refuse to compromise or even negotiate in good faith) is hurting the entire R brand.  Going into a presidential election year.

Most observers, including me, expect that the payroll tax holiday will be extended eventually.  The only real question is how much damage the House Republicans will wreak upon the middle class and the economy as a whole before they do right thing.

Note:  Of the AZ Congressional delegation, Republicans David Schweikert, Ben Quayle, Paul Gosar, and Trent Franks voted to raise taxes on the middle class while Democrats Raul Grijalva and Ed Pastor and Republican Jeff Flake (running for US Senate) voted against it.  Gabby Giffords didn't vote as she is continuing her recovery from January's shooting in Tucson.

State Sen. Steve Gallardo proposes stricter domestic violence penalties

...and the denizens of the Capitol wait with bated breath for the next lawsuit from State Sen. Scott "Fists of Fury" Bundgaard...

Sen. Steve Gallardo (D-Phoenix) has introduced SB1027.  If passed, it would strengthen the penalties for misdemeanor domestic violence.  Under existing law, people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence can be sentenced to as little as counseling.

Gallardo's measure would mandate that those convicted on or pleading guilty or "no contest" to domestic violence charges face a minimum of mandatory treatment (that the offenders would pay for), supervised probation, two days in jail and a $50 fine.

Which doesn't sound like much, until you remember that it's stronger than current law by, oh, mandatory treatment, supervised probation, two days' jail time, and a $50 fine (at a minimum).

The money collected from the fines will go toward programs to assist victims of domestic violence.

“Right now in Arizona, someone who beats their dog can face harsher punishment than someone who beats their girlfriend. This legislation sends a strong message to those who engage in domestic violence. Arizonans won’t put up with that behavior, but we will help domestic violence victims escape abusive situations," said Gallardo.

For the record, Bundgaard pled "no contest" to the charges stemming from his February assault. 

Look for him to complain, maybe to the Senate Ethics Committee (you know, the people he is suing to stop them from looking into his actions), that he is personally attacked by this bill and that Gallardo should be disciplined for his lack of decorum (or some such BS.)

A few Christmas stocking stuffers...

It's that time of year.  Many commentators do something along the lines of a "diamond/lump of coal" theme for their Christmas stocking pieces, I'm going for the practical this year.

This year, the list of Arizonans who deserve a little something special in their stockings includes...

...State Sen. Scott Bundgaard.  In the wake of his "domestic violence incident" (a euphemism for "beating up his girlfriend by the side of a freeway").  After invoking legislative immunity from arrest (for misdemeanors, and only while the lege is actually in session), he is expending massive amounts of effort to keep the Senate Ethics Committee from weighing in on his conduct.  Now he is suing the members of the committee to block any inquiry.

Bundgaard seems to think that he stands a chance in hell of winning reelection next year.

So here's to hoping that on Christmas Day, Bundgaard looks in his stocking and finds a clue.


...Marcia Busching.  She has opened a committee for a run at a seat on the Arizona Corporation Commission.  While the ACC is incredibly important, it's also incredibly low profile.  On top of that, she'll be running against some incredibly well-funded Republicans who aren't shy about taking "contributions" from the industries that they are supposed to regulate.

So here's to hoping that on Christmas Day, Busching looks in her stocking and finds two things - a little good luck and a good communications person for her campaign.  It better be a big stocking... :)

...Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.  After seeing his buddy Russell Pearce go down in flames in November, the deluge just hasn't stopped.  He's been coming under growing criticism for his sacrifice of investigations of rape and child molestation cases while funnelling MCSO resources into his never-ending anti-immigrant raids (which apparently are far more camera-friendly than actual police work).

Now, the US Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division has released the scathing report of its investigation of Arpaio's operation of MCSO, and "scathing" may be something  of an understatement.

Instead of the usual combination of legalese and bureaucrat-ese that are the usual hallmarks of such things, it reads like it was written by someone who's a combination of Stephen King and Franz Kafka (OK, with a generous smattering of legalese and bureaucrat-ese thrown in.  It *is* DOJ, after all :)  .)

At this point, it looks like he should be less worried about winning reelection next year and more concerned with making an exit from office that doesn't involve an indictment.

However, he has spent the week declaring that it's all politics and that the investigation was a "sneak attack" and other similar utterances that prove that "denial" isn't just a river.  Of course, the list of his misdeeds may be longer than the Nile, but I digress... :)

Anyway, Arpaio is going on and on, even though the investigation has been going on for years and he has been the one who has used his office for politically-motivated investigations.

So here's to hoping that on Christmas Day, Arpaio looks in his stocking and finds a clue (hope Santa has one to spare after giving one to Bundgaard).

This was fun.  Have to do it again, soon.  :)

How to undermine your credibility as a blogger/online commentator

I generally don't counter-post here.  If I've got something to say about another's blog post, I just comment on the post. 

However, some things just beg for a counter-post.

Plus you can't add a pic/screenshot to a comment, and I want to do that for this.  :)


Earlier today, someone over at Sonoran Alliance put up something, complaining that State Sen. David Schapira (D-LD17) is exploring a run for Congress but has failed to file the appropriate paperwork with the FEC.  The post included a link to the FEC page covering exploring or "testing the waters". 

The problem?

The linked page actually refuted, not supported, their argument about Schapira.

To quote (emphasis added) -

Before deciding to campaign for federal office, an individual may want to "test the waters"—in other words, explore the feasibility of becoming a candidate. An individual who merely test the waters, but does not campaign for office, does not have to register or report as a candidate even if the individual raises more than $5,000—the dollar threshold that would normally trigger registration. Nevertheless, funds raised to test the waters are subject to the Federal Election Campaign Act’s (the Act) contribution limitations and prohibitions. See Advisory Opinion 1998-18 [PDF].

It's a really good idea to *read* the sources one cites in support of an argument before, you know, citing it.

Corporation Commission meeting this week to gut solar power's future in Arizona

As the calendar moves inexorably to the holidays, most political bodies in the state try to get any work they need to perform done during the early part of the month so that they enjoy those holidays.
One of the side effects of the holiday rush is that the average member of the public isn't really paying attention to political matters during the holiday, both because of the large number of items on agendas and because they have a lot going on in their personal lives.
Many bodies use the chaos of the holidays and the laxity in public oversight to push through some of the less palatable measures before them to help minimize the ability of opponents to organize.
One of those bodies is the Arizona Corporation Commission, particularly since the election of former ALEC president Brenda Burns.  While Gary Pierce, rumored to be mulling a run for Congress, is the chair of the ACC, the addition of Burns in 2010 signaled the change of the ACC from an industry regulatory agency into an industry front group.  Burns replaced the term-limited Kris Mayes

The ACC is meeting Tuesday and Wednesday, and some of the items on its agenda illustrate just this.

Docket numbers E-01345A-11-0264 (APS), E-01933A-11-0269 (Tucson Electric Power) and E-04204A-11-0267 (UNS Electric) relate to approval of those companies' 2012 Renewable Energy Standard implementation plans (enter those docket numbers into the ACC's E-Docket webpage for more info).

Those items sound wonky and more than a little technical, because they are.  However, one of the little gems hidden deep in the provisions of the plans is that they basically end any real incentives for those utility companies to "go solar."

However, while solar incentives are being slashed, tax breaks for coal-fired generating plants remain in place (note: those are controlled by the legislature, not the ACC).  The impetus behind this appears to be a reverence for accounting principles over scientific principles -

The utility corporations have a lot of money tied up in their coal (and nuclear) facilities and want to maximize their profits from those.  Solar power, particularly distributed solar power, is both more sustainable and lower cost than those, and would lead to lower profits.

On top of that, the Rs on the Commission have taken steps to declare that inefficient, high-cost energy generated by *trash burning* plants is "green", or renewable, and deserves as much or more support than solar power.

Apparently, for the three Rs on the ACC, Burn, Pierce, and Bob Stump, and the corporations that they are working for (instead of regulating), "energy efficiency" is more about generating profits in the most efficient way than in generating (and using) energy in a more efficient and sustainable way.

Anyway, people who are interested in weighing in on the renewable energy standard items, or any other items on the agenda, are advised to watch the meeting(s) this week via the ACC's online streaming video page.  ACC meetings tend to run long, so you are better off staying aware of when your item of interest is coming up, and then heading down to the meeting than in trying to sit through the entire session.

Short Attention Span Musing...

...Jan Brewer may yet be inducted into the Arizona Governor's Hall of Fame.  Unfortunately for her, it's looking more and more likely it will be in the Mecham/Symington wing.

From the Phoenix New Times, written by James King -

Federal authorities spent more than a year investigating Governor Jan Brewer's role in collecting Social Security benefits intended for her mentally ill son, Ronald, who currently is in a state hospital after being found not guilty by reason of insanity in 1990 on kidnapping and sexual assault charges.

The federal government, according to the Arizona Republic, which broke the story, was trying to determine whether $75,000 in benefits were improperly paid to the governor on behalf of her son.

Yes, Brewer is the same governor who earlier this year cut healthcare benefits for an estimated 135,000 poor Arizonans.

As of right now, the feds have chosen not to file charges.  However, given this, her close ties to industry lobbyists (i.e. longtime advisor/friend Chuck Coughlin, et. al.) and her predilection for pronouncing that she is above the laws and constitution of Arizona (i.e. the her effort to hijack the independent redistricting process), nobody will be shocked if she finds herself indicted before the end of her term.

...Do Brewer et. al.'s lawyers get paid extra every time they receive a slap-down from a judge?

I as that question because the best explanation for the continuing efforts to use the legal system to overthrow the AIRC is bill padding.  On the heels of a separate decision by the AZ Supreme Court overturning the Rs' removal of the AIRC's independent chair, a judge at the Maricopa County Superior Court derailed another of the R efforts to take over the redistricting process when he ruled against their move to say that the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) violated the Open Meeting laws. 

...The constant stream of losses isn't dissuading the Rs from continuing their attacks on the independence of the commission.  The Arizona Capitol Times has a story about a number of changes the Rs in the legislature want to foist off on the commission and the process.  However, they all seem to be ignoring one basic fact - the voters wanted an independent redistricting commission, so we set one up.  If we wanted to set up an elected officials job security commission, we'd have done that, instead.

...Yeah, education is her number one priority, but doesn't say if *supporting* it or *eviscerating* it is what she most wants to do.

From the Yuma Sun, written by Chris McDaniel -

“We have to get our population educated,” said Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer during a ribbon-cutting ceremony Tuesday at the University of Phoenix Yuma Learning Center.

The ceremony marked the grand reopening of the Student Resource Center. It was recently upgraded to include 23 high-speed computers, two interview rooms, a faculty room, and printing and copy services.

{snip}

Education is my No. 1 priority."

To be fair to Brewer, I think that Brewer's actual target is *public* education.  As documented by the article ("University of Phoenix Yuma Learning Center"), she's been pretty consistent in her support of "for-profit" education companies (private and charter K-12, and private post-secondary), while cutting hundreds of million of dollars from public education.

...Joe Arpaio spent Saturday going after people with brown skin.  Perhaps he'd have left them alone if they were dressed up as rapists and child molesters...

...From the "deja vu" department:  State Rep. Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) has reintroduced one of his regular bills, a proposal to repeal the restriction on former legislators that makes them wait a year after leaving the legislature before they can return to lobby the legislature.  This time around it is HB 2022.

Look for the measure to NOT pass, for at least two reasons:

1.  It's an election year, and even AZ's Republicans don't want to be seen as that blatantly self-serving, especially because...

2.  Most former legislators find ways around that particular restriction anyway, often by simply not registering as lobbyists.

Later...

Committees update...

While redistricting is still a bit of a mess, with Arizona's Republican elected officials still trying to hijack the independent redistricting process, more and more candidates are stepping up.
Note:  when district designations are used, they are for the current designation and used for reference only.  They'll change after the new district maps are finalized.


...Republican John Lervold of Sierra Vista has started a committee for a run at a Congressional seat.  Don't know anything about him.

...Republican State Senator Ron Gould of Lake Havasu City has formed an exploratory committee for a Congressional run.  He's term-limited in the state senate, so the "exploratory" part of the committee is just pro forma.  He's running.  Period.

...Republican John Lyon of Glendale has formed a committee for a run at US Senate.  Tea party type.

...Democrat Amanda Aguirre of Yuma, a former state senator, has announced that she is exploring a challenge to incumbent Democratic Congressman Raul Grijalva.  I couldn't find the paperwork on the FEC's website, but will post it when it is available.

...Republican Peter Eidsness of Bullhead City has formed a committee for a run at an LD3 state representative

...Democrat Carol Lokare of Peoria has formed a committee for a run at the LD9 seat in the state senate.

...No new committees have been formed in Scottsdale or Tempe for municipal offices.  However, since Tempe's elections are on a March/May schedule, candidates are already turning in signatures.  Four of them have been certified for the March ballot -

Mark Mitchell and Michael Monti for mayor
Kolby Granville and Dick Foreman for council

...In Maricopa County news, Republican state representative Cecil Ash  (LD18) has formed a committee for a run at the North Mesa Justice of the Peace office currently held by Lester Pearce, brother of the recently recalled former state senator Russell Pearce.

...Far and away, the race with the most candidates is one that most people haven't heard of - the governing boards of the Salt River Project (SRP).  I'm not going to list them all, but so far I've found at least 17 candidates, most of whom seem to be incumbents of one sort or another.  SRP's summary of its governance is here.

My summary:  1.  Only landowners in SRP's area vote in the election.  2.  The highest paid elected official in the state isn't the governor (~$120K) or the state's members of Congress (~$175K), but the president of SRP (~$180K)


Later...

Reminder: North Indian Bend Wash Superfund Area CIG meeting tonight

Just a quick reminder -

Tonight, Wednesday December 7, 2011, the Community Involvement Group (CIG) of the North Indian Bend Wash (NIBW) Superfund Area will meet.

Details:

Time - 5:30 pm to 7:30 pm

Place - Scottsdale Center for the Performing Arts (Stage 2, Main Floor), 7380 E. Second Street

Agenda:

Results of Indian Bend Wash Five-Year Review

Overview of NIBW Groundwater Data

Well PCX-1 Long-Term Measures Schedule & Implementation

Questions & Answers

Later...

Technical issues

FIve years is barely the beginning in human years, young adulthood in dog years, and maybe a week in tortoise years.

In laptop years it's at least two, perhaps three, complete generations.

Due to some technical issues*, it will be a few more days until the blog gets back up to speed.

* = The screen on my five-year old laptop finally gave up the ghost.  While it stood me in good stead during the joyous 2008 election season, and the not-so-joyous 2010 election season, and dozens of legislative, government, and public meetings. 

It's time to gratefully let it retire.

See you in a week or so.

...And I so wanted to write about Herman Cain, Jan Brewer, Lori "Cain couldn't have cheated on his wife because he didn't make a pass at me" Klein, and more... :)