Why I haven't posted anything recently.

I was supposed to have started writing for this blog regularly six weeks ago or so, but haven't done much else except comment on the presidential primary. So naturally, here is a list of reasons I haven't been writing anything:

1. Working, volunteering, or meaning to do either for for the Arizona League of Conservation Voters and the Fair Districts campaign.

2. Watching with fascination the Tempe City Council races, and trying to decide how to cast three votes for four people-- Mark Mitchell, Corey Woods, Joel Navarro, and Rhett Wilson.

3. Studying. Sorry, nothing to link to.

4. Anticipating the next round of discussion on Wactivist about the Shadegg/McCain/etc saga.

5. Wondering how the creator of A Democrat's Lament gets the time to write posts that are worth reading. Also, who he is.

I'm looking at hitting the blog alot harder soon though, the development plans for Jackson and the immigration debate in Phoenix haven't been talked about enough.

Ray Caroll bends space and does something Democrats don't hate

A Republican finally forces an end to a year’s worth of arguing among Democrats

Republican Pima County Supervisor Ray Carroll forced three Democratic colleagues last week to do what their party and its lawyer couldn’t accomplish in a year of arguing and court challenges.

Supervisors Richard Elías, Sharon Bronson and Ramón Valadez voted to obey a court order to open county records to ensure ballots were counted accurately in 2006 and will be correct for this year’s primary and general elections.

Thanks to Carroll, we’ll either learn those elections were counted honestly, even if procedures were sloppy ... or that one or more rogue employees of the county’s Elections Division actually changed some vote results.

Phoenix City Election Roundup

Here is the Phoenix city election in brief: Mayor wins big, runoff in district 3 (BAIER/Altmann), runoff in district 7 (Pastor/Nowakowski), Public safety tax wins big, Increasing Mayor and Council salaries is narrowly defeated, Home Rule wins big (in your face Robert Robb) and all three charter amendment pass (mostly related to collecting signatures and elections).

Congratulations to the Mayor and other winners. To Baier/Altmann and Pastor/Nowakowski, good luck (if you thought no one cared before wait until the runoff). To the losers, public office is a headache, you didn't really want the hassle anyway.

Get out and Vote Phoenicians!

Time to get out there and vote my fellow Phoenicians... I voted two weeks ago, but I am all about easy.

Arizona's Dumbest Law that You Probably Do Not Understand (You are not alone)

The Arizona Republic ran this story about the homerule exemption being voted on in Phoenix. I have often wondered how many people understand homerule and why the exemptions are necessary. Basically, there is formula for limiting funding in each city. The city can only spend the amount spent in the 1979-1980 fiscal year adjusted by population. Does this sound reasonable?

I am sure it does to many of you at first look... For some cities, maybe it would even work. Overall, it is a bad idea for a variety of reasons. First, this is why we have elections (and presumably term limits). If politicians overspend or overtax they should be removed from office. I am not a big advocate of term limits, but one of the positive aspects of term limits is that it limits politicians from having undue influence on spending decisions (unfortunately, it also allows them to make the same dumb mistakes as predecessors and gives the city manager a lot power).

And to my Republican friends, imagine a business operating on this model. What if Microsoft was forced to operate off of their 1980 revenue adjusted by the number of customers added since then...


So, what is the biggest problem? Arizona is growing really fast. If you only spend based on your current population, how can you prepare for future growth? If you project an area will add 50k new residents in five years, you would have to wait for them to live there before you would have the funding necessary to add roads, sewer systems, traffic lights etc. Or you would have to short change existing infrastructure to build for the future. Either way it is inefficient and short sighted.

The simple fact is that cities need the flexibility to make large expenditures for large projects. If you have a large infrastructure project you may have to spend a lot up front. Spending is not linear like this model. Development happens in more fits and starts than in a clean linear fashion. Does that mean that cities won't make dumb decisions or spend money on the wrong project, probably not, but frankly disagreements on spending are usually more the result of philosophical disagreement than stupidity.


Here is another reason why it is a bad idea. 56 cities have home rule exemption (BTW it is the largest cities and most of the population of Arizona. This spending scheme is opposed by many Republican and Democratic city officials). Officials from both parties oppose it because it limits their ability to take the right actions. They get complaints from constituents about all manner of things and they want to actually do something, but this can severely limit their ability.

Why would we make a law that limits spending and keep that law when everyone circumvents it? If a city cannot circumvent the law they end up grossly underfunded and unable to provide adequate services like, police, fire, sewer, road construction/maintenance, parks etc. Guess who gets blamed the cities politicians... Ironic isn't it.


We are not talking about some pie in the sky theory of government. This is think tank government at its worst. This law determines whether the city can fill that pothole outside your house or add those two lanes to the only major road with access to your neighborhood or pick up trash in the park your kids play in or maintain that green belt that you like to walk on. It determines whether a city can act when they see a problem on the horizon. This where the rubber meets the road so to speak and directly affects all of our lives.

UPDATE: If this is defeated, Phoenix would have to cut 1.1 Billion from the city budget.Here is a link to the suggested cuts by the Arizona Federation of Tax Payers. I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in that city...

The Republican Coalition is Falling Apart

The Arizona Republic has a great article about how business interests (that almost always support Republicans) are creating political action committees to go after the very Republicans who passed the employer sanctions law. It is certainly a good thing for us...

Maybe there should be a law?

I found this amusing (I am clearly easily amused..) So, Jan Brewer's son was fooled into signing a petition for a ballot initiative under false pretenses. If the SoS's son cannot be educated about these things, maybe, just maybe there is a bigger problem or flaw in our system. Note to Jan, I know you are not the most adept public official, but this is what legislation (pronounced legis-lay-shun) was designed for... I know it is hard to believe but there are a group of people who can make these special rules that make it so people are punished when fraudulently collecting signatures.

Jan, we know you are trying your best over at that big office... Hang in there your term is almost over and you won't be elected Governor, so the confusion will soon end.

Just kidding...I kid the our Secretary of State, I am sure she is a fine woman (and not litigious).