The Goldwater Institute has spoken on its lawsuit on behalf of developer Michael Goodman vs. the city of Tucson, calling Pima County Superior Court Judge Paul Tang's ruling a victory for Prop 207, the Private Property Rights Protection Act passed in 2006:

"Arizona voters overwhelmingly embraced greater protection of private property rights," said Clint Bolick, director of the Goldwater Institute Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation, "and this ruling vindicates that intent."

Mr. Goodman, a Tucson builder, buys run-down properties in the downtown area and near the University of Arizona, and replaces them with new housing that meets or exceeds zoning requirements and building standards. But in 2007 the City of Tucson enacted an anti-demolition ordinance that subjected property owners to a labyrinth of rules that limited property use and instantly reduced property values for thousands of homeowners and small business owners. This ordinance applied to Mr. Goodman after he had received building permits and begun the building process.

The next step in Goodman v. City of Tucson is to determine the amount of damages the City must pay. "[F]or every actionable injury there is a corresponding right to damages," Judge Tang added. Prop 207 is "part of a greater effort and movement in favor of individual rights."

We would quibble with Bolick's portrayal of Goodman as a heroic developer improving neighborhoods, but whatevs.

More importantly, Tucson City Attorney Michael McCrory says Bolick may be jumping the gun.

"We have a long way to go before we go to awarding damages," said McCrory, who is representing the city in this lawsuit, as well as other litigation Goodman still has against the city regarding his Feldman's and Jefferson Park neighborhood developments.

Since the anti-demolition ordinance has already been repealed, McCrory says Goodman no longer has any present damages. But next will be a discovery phase, and the Goldwater Institute will have to come before Tang and show specific damages.

McCrory says he expects to bring up a whole slew of legal issues regarding Goodman's claim, statutory interpretation and the question of whether damages can legally be awarded.

"We're not terribly upset by this ruling," quipped McCrory, who said that he expected to be back in the courtroom on the case early next year.

I think Frank Antenori just turned into the Howard Dean of the local Republican Party.

Antenori remarked to a still-upbeat crowd that even though Pima County had only 12 precincts counted (at the time), everyone needed to stay put and think positive.

Antenori has now gone from angry politician to aggressively happy politician.

It happened tonight, folks, at Chuy's.

Steve Kozachik is here with his kids, wife and his 83-year-old mom. I'm waiting to talk to his mom right now. I understand, from Steve's wife that she is a long-time reader of the Tucson Weekly.

OK, talked to Steve's mom, Miriam Kozachik. She told me she is a long-time reader of, yes, the Tucson Weekly. And she doesn't seem like the political-pandering type. Listen up art community folks: Steve’s mom has an MFA from NYU, and has shown her work in town.

When I asked her how she helped in the campaign:

"Mostly, I was there to talk and share opinions. He's an interesting person to talk to and has a lot of interesting ideas."

OK, folks, straight from a mother's mouth.

Remember the somber funerary atmosphere of the GOP party at Manning House last year?

Well, it seems the local Republicans have had a year to heal, or maybe all that tea-bagging has renewed their Lincoln spirit. This year, the Pima County Republican Party is having a grand ol' time at Chuy's on Tanque Verde. According to my finger and a quick head count, there are almost 300 people milling about.

Chair Bob Westerman is emcee for the night, passing the microphone to the likes of Tim Bee, Frank Antenori and Trent Humphries. Elections results are coming in right now on a big-screen TV, and while Prop 200 seems headed for defeat the room was full of smiles and cheer seeing Steve Kozachik in a early-ballot lead against Nina Trasoff.

The night is young, folks, and we'll have more to come. Until then, I'm keeping an eye out for the Republican gentleman who keeps feeling up our interns. They are working, GOP peeps. I know this is a happy time, but hands off.

According to an article in today's Telegraph, the paper had been running reviews by a staff writer using the pseudonym Mae Coleman, a Reefer Madness character.

However, the writer “wanted to return to the day job”, according to the paper, so the position was opened up to the public.

The job application involved writing a short essay on “What Marijuana Means To Me”. Apparently, the first response came within five minutes — “fast work for a stoner”, as Westword notes wrily.

A few minutes later, the first enquiry from the media arrived. “Really fast work for a journalist”, says Westword.

According to Westword's Patty Calhoun, their ad for a medical marijuana dispensary reviewer asked potential critics to write a brief essay on "What Marijuana Means to Me." First reply came in five minutes, and the media attention regarding the ad came a few minutes later.

Our first applicant replied within five minutes — fast work for a stoner. Our first media response came a few minutes later — really fast work for a journalist.

A week later, our quest has been captured by everyone from the Wall Street Journal to the New York Times, and the essays continue to pour in — some silly, some actually spelled correctly (many potheads don't seem to care for punctuation), some very sincere. A sampling:

From an engineer who started with the great line "Hey, Joe, whatcha doin with that doob in your hand...What Mary Jane means to me: As a 'burner' of more than 14 years, I have spent many an hour pondering the importance of herb in my life... among other things. Recently, however, I have realized a new herbal importance to my overall quality of life. I am an outdoor sporting enthusiast and have experienced my share of injuries throughout the years, as many of us do. As I have aged (elegantly, damnit!), I have developed a couple of recurring conditions that have allowed me to legally indulge myself as an alternative to prescribed narcotics and the dangerous longterm effects. Long story short... (TOO LATE!) I have been frequenting many of our local dispensaries with mixed experiences. Most places are kind and professional. Others, though, are simply drug dealers that check your ID. I think that you have a great idea — a service, rather, that will help your readers make educated decisions and enjoy their 'medication' experience to the fullest..."

Just think of the possibilities if the Tucson Weekly was able to hire its own MMJ critic (Medical Mary Jane), allowing us to join in this... fun. Maybe it's a possibility if medical marijuana advocates get their way. Folks with the Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project are currently gathering the needed 153,365 signatures to get another measure on the ballot next year.

Arizonans have been here before when a measure was passed in 1996 with 65 percent of the vote. That initiative said patients could use marijuna with a doctor's prescription, but federal law prohibits doctors from writing prescriptions for harmful drugs without medical value - although seven other state allow patients to receive marijuana through a prescription. In 1997, the Legislature overturned the initiative anyway and in 1998 a referendum reinstated the measure and then Arizona voters passed the Voter Protection Alliance Act, to prevent the guys in Phoenix from undoing voter-passed measures. Arizona's ongoing saga with the drug continued when another initiative was defeated in 2002.

Proving, even back then, that Democrats and those in chronic pain will never get a break with our state government.

According to The Huffington Post and The Arizona Republic, Maricopa County's Sheriff Joe Arpaio may have been stripped of his ability to do immigration sweeps by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).

In response, Arpaio reportedly said this over the weekend on radio station KTAR:

"I'm going to tell you something, Jay," he said to (host Jay) Lawrence. "I don't need the feds to do my crime suppression to opt to arrest illegals. I can do it without the federal authority, and I'm going to continue to do it. It makes no difference. It helps us. Because I don't have to do all the paperwork for the feds, number one. And number two, I won't be under their umbrella, their guidance. So I will operate the same way, nothing is going to change." He added later in the show, "They just don't want me, I'm the poster boy."

Arpaio continued, telling the radio host, "Nothing changes because pursuant to our duties in these crime suppression [sweeps] we arrest anybody that violates the law. If we find during the arrests that that there are illegals, we arrest them. Now the only difference [is] we're going to take 'em down to ICE. I hope they accept them, if they don't, I'll bring 'em myself to the border. So nothing really has changed. This is all politics. They want to use me to get rid of this 287 agreement across the country."

Be sure to read the Phoenix New Times' Stephen Lemons here. Lemons wrote this morning that by going on the radio and making other ICE rants, Arpaio may be in violation of his last ICE jails agreement—one that remains unsigned by the federal powers-that-be.

Damn, we're not ready for this weekend to be the last Saturday at the De Anza Drive-In. Can you make it next weekend? Please?

The local daily confirmed what we all knew was inevitable since it was first announced last year that a development company was interested in the property for a commercial project. I was sorry to read in the story that the property won't even be developed right away, but the drive-in will still close. Evidently, it's just not financially viable. I don't have time this weekend to say good-bye, or re-create that night when my cousins put me in the trunk of their car and snuck me in to see Up in Smoke. Sigh.

What will replace Tucson’s last drive-in theater remains unclear, although it will almost certainly be some kind of retail complex.

“We really don’t have a plan,” said Gregg Alpert, Evergreen’s managing principal. “We do not have any immediate plans to develop it. We just like the property. Its infill location and heavy traffic count make it an intriguing purchase for us. But we are going to take our time to develop it.”

Evergreen is known for creating “neighborhood marketplaces” with grocery store anchors. Its projects in the Old Pueblo include Steam Pump Village in Oro Valley, Madera Marketplace in Sahuarita, several Walgreens stores and a grocery store project on the southwest side’s Yaqui reservation.

Los Angeles-based De Anza Land and Leisure Corp. purchased the old drive-in theater in 1977 when it was called the Cactus Drive-In.

Today the theater is in need of numerous costly improvements and the company had to sell it, Teri Oldknow, senior vice president for De Anza Land and Leisure, said in a written statement.

“The closing comes at a critical decision point for the business — in the near future, De Anza Land and Leisure would have to make major capital investments in the infrastructure of the drive-in which was not financially feasible for us,” Oldknow said.

When we reported on Planned Parenthood Arizona's lawsuit, Patti Caldwell said she hoped a Maricopa Superior Court judge would issue a preliminary injunction.

Well, according to the local daily, it looks like Planned Parenthood's chief operating officer for the most part got her wish:

A state judge has blocked implementation of key parts of a new Arizona law restricting abortion.
Judge Donald Daughton of Maricopa County Superior Court late Tuesday issued a preliminary injunction granting most of a request by Planned Parenthood, the state’s largest abortion provider.

Daughton’s order allows a 24-hour waiting period to take affect, but blocks parts requiring that a woman see a doctor in person for advance disclosures before getting an abortion.

Other blocked provisions include a requirement that parental consents for a minor’s abortion be notarized and a ban on nurse practitioners performing abortions.

Other parts of the law still take effect Wednesday, pending a federal judge’s ruling on one provision not covered by Daughton’s order.

Since the lawsuit was filed in Phoenix, other folks have gotten in on the litigation action. The Alliance Defense Fund announced it filed a motion to intervene in support of the abortion-restriction laws signed by Gov. Jan Brewer in July. The Center for Arizona Policy joined in, although at the time we interviewed Cathi Harrod, she told us: "One of our top priorities is to make sure the law is adequately defended in the state and federal courts. There are a variety of ways we can participate, but I'm not going to tell you what those are."

The day we talked with her, CAP filed its own motion to intervene.

To quote Church Lady, a wise woman who could probably take Harrod down in a vat of Jell-O, "Isn't that special."

An update on the great chalk crackdown of 2009: After a second chalk-wielding criminal was apprehended today by the UA Police Department, administration officials decided to back down on pressing criminal charges and will instead deal with them through the Dean of Students. We suppose that means that this outrageous infraction will go on their permanent record and they'll be under double-secret probation for the remainder of their college careers.

Wonder if this means that UA President Richard Shelton will have to have a beer with the students, who were using chalk to advertise a protest against higher tuition at the UA, and the police officers who brought in the dastardly vandals?

Whatevs. Clearly, some saner minds have prevailed at the UA, although we'd have to say the entire matter should have dropped by now. At least taxpayers won't be on the hook for any more court charges involving this idiotic waste of law-and-order resources.

Here's the UA statement:

The University of Arizona stands firmly committed to defending, celebrating and hosting free expression, a value that was tested last week when students rallied on campus to protest cuts to higher education funding.

The protest itself was part of the UA's tradition of robust freedom of expression, but advertising of that event in the form of chalk messages that appeared on surfaces other than the ground and sidewalks resulted in one student being cited for criminal damage for