One thing’s for certain in this video of a political sign thief—those are not Michael Hicks’ legs. I just don’t think his legs are that nice, right? Wear shorts at the next meeting, Mike, so we can figure this out.
The video is of what is evidently the latest in campaign season political sign thief capers. Every season right, it’s always someone. Tucson Unified School District governing board president, Adelita Grijalva, running for reelection, put out this video today asking if anyone knows the identity of this thief. She wants to prosecute.
On her Facebook page, the candidate claims $7,000 worth of her campaign signs have been stolen.
Got info, contact the candidate via her campaign page here.
This article appears in Oct 23-29, 2014.
If she loses, it’s not because of the number of signs she has or had…
Michael Hicks, Betts Putnam-Hidalgo, and Debe Campos-Fleenor have each had a huge quantity of signs vandalized or (mostly) stolen. Many of Miguel Cuevas’s signs have been knocked down and probably not all by the wind. A couple who have been active in the Democratic Party reported in mid-September that young men in a Burgundy Scion stopped on Fifth Street near Alvernon and took a Hicks sign, before turning north on Longfellow. Each of these candidates surely has a theory about the source of the vandalism, possibly similar theories.
Yet, somehow one of Huppenthal’s signs near my house stood for 30 days after he lost the primary.
This is a weird little city.
hell it wouldn’t suprise me if hicks is paying people to steal signs if the sheer laziness he shows in teaching his classes at PCC are anything to go by.
Hey Mari, Let’s remember that sign stealing is part and parcel of the Grijalva machine’s playbook. Wasn’t it Regina Romero’s husband (an employee of Raul Grijalva’s) who was caught with a trunkful of signs supporting a political opponent? Didn’t he claim that he just found them and was on his way to return them. ROTFL.
I suspect that this incident is nothing more than a set-up to gain some favorable publicity for poor Adelita. What a coincidence that her sign was not only stolen, but there happened to be a camera at that very site. Surely, we are not expected to believe every one of her signs has a camera watching over it. The fact that the ADS and you are helping her play the victim card is not at all surprising. Personally, I think this is just a sign (no pun intended) of desperation.
I agree with you Marty. Adelita learned a lot of lessons (tricks) from her father.
Plus it can get you sympathy votes if the victim can get some media time. Sorry Adelita, but we know what it feels like to be robbed……you know the rest.
Actually, NO, Marty … it was ONE sign that some teabagger saw in his trunk and went ballistic over, a sign that someone had placed in his yard without permission.
Correction … it was TWO signs … an opponent’s sign and an anti-Grijalva sign that someone had left in his yard, but hardly a “bunch of signs” as falsely reported by the right-wing Three Sonoran “News” and claimed by Marty.
If she does not get elected, it’s not because someone is stealing/removing her signs. I see signs go up and come down all the time during an election. Apparently all sides are culpable.
I wish someone would remove the multiple signs at the Northeast corner of Speedway and Houghton before someone has a crash there. The signs are large and do a perfect job of blocking the view of oncoming traffic. Besides being an eyesore, of course, but we can’t do anything about that.
Seriously, friends — is this what we should be talking about a week before the election that will determine for the next two years the quality of leadership in a school district that serves approximately 49,000 students? Who is stealing whose campaign signs?
The childishness Grijalva / Foster / Juarez are displaying as they try desperately to hold onto their majority on the TUSD Board is astounding. I find it hard to believe that a single voter who has paid attention to the quality of discourse coming from the various candidates and who understands the issues this election cycle will vote for Grijalva or her ally Darland. Do Grijalva / Foster / Juarez or Darland have anything meaningful to say about the serious problems with procurement, hiring, budgeting, and financial transparency that have been credibly reported to have taken place under the leadership of the current board majority? If so, I have not heard it. Instead they embarrass themselves by pouting in a letter to the editor about the fact that the Star has shown the good judgment not to endorse Grijalva (Foster and Juarez), post videos of people stealing their campaign signs (Grijalva), and talk ad nauseam about the state legislature’s funding failures (Darland and Grijalva) as though that were a serious campaign issue for candidates seeking positions on the governing board of a very dysfunctional school district that needs comprehensive reform before it can begin to properly apply the money given to it by the state.
My opinion, which I will keep stating and re-stating until the results of the election are clear: If we want to put an end to the remarkably poor leadership the district has suffered from for the past four years under two different but equally dysfunctional, polarizing board majorities and if we would like to support the formation of a working group on the governing board that can actually get some positive good accomplished for our schools, Putnam-Hidalgo and Campos-Fleenor are the candidates to elect.
This isn’t just happening to Grijalva. I caught a guy removing Fleenors signs he ran and some of Hicks sign were vandalized and I put them back up. Suggesting Hick is involved is childish.
Why don’t we just admit it?
It’s a SIGN of the times.
Arizona, where a dui can get you fired from TUSD, but allow you to be the Congressman
The whole “sign-war” scenario is part of every campaign. Adelita is no different than anyone else running for office- except that she whines about it and gets publicity, while everyone else just sucks it up. Many of her campaign contributions are listed on her finance report as being from Washington D.C. and other eastern cities; all tied to her dad. This is another notable distinction. For me this was the ultimate straw that broke the camel’s back. Who the hell are folks who vote for her think they are electing because the “local” has gone out of her campaign. You can find her finance election reports on the Arizona Independent (which I am ashamed to reference but will just this time). Our household has several voters in it. Each have received calls from her campaign form “People for Grijalva -520- 629-0050,” which is her dad’s campaign headquarters and his phones for phone bank-calls. I did not see any of this as “in-kind” contribution on her finance report. They have been calling now for weeks. It was ridiculous for Juarez and Foster to write to the Arizona Daily Star about their whining displeasure with their endorsement of Putman-Hidalgo and Darland. The Star’s non-endorsement of A. Grijalva was a very loud OPINION on what they think of her 12 year legacy, which has been filled with few accomplishments and lots of minus. We are minus a TUSD curriculum, we are minus a financial system that provides current balance sheets, we are minus thousands of students and most of all; we are minus LEADERSHIP. The Star got it right and if you have not voted yet- give your vote for TUSD Governing Board very serious consideration!
It was an ex mayor. He just wanted to see himself in the weakly.