WHO WILL HELP PIMA REBUILD?
Pima Community College
governing board
When we interviewed Mark Hanna and Michael Duran, Pima Community College governing board candidates for the District 1 seat that's been held by Brenda Evan since 2001, they both said they made an agreement early on when they signed on as candidates to keep their campaigns civil and not go on the attack. The only criticism, offered by Hanna, was that Duran is a member of the Southern Arizona Leadership Council, a business organization known for an early conservative history that was about pushing a business agenda in almost all facets of Tucson government and community. Duran's defense was that, as a vice president at Tucson Medical Center, it's a membership that makes sense and at the same time provides the organization some much-needed diversity and the perspectives that come with that.
Besides that, it can be difficult to really discern many differences between the two men in how they see their tenure on the board or why they feel PCC is important to Tucson—both attended the college and have a personal connection the school that goes beyond business concerns or agendas. They know, first hand, how it changes lives.
If anything, it's their stories of how they learned that lesson that's different—with Duran going to the school as a baseball player out of high school trying to figure out what he was going to do with his life and getting direction from some life-changing mentors. For Hanna it was late in life—a retired Costco general manager, who decided to give-back and go back to school in an effort to do that. Hanna went to Pima, then the UA and worked eight years as a counselor with students at Catalina Magnet High School. It was there, working with his students, that he also saw first-hand how Pima and education are life-changing.
However, when asked specific questions about the college and its issues, while Hanna may seem like a candidate who could get stuck in the weeds as a board member, he has impressed Tucson Weekly education and political scribes the most. It takes heart, but it's also good to hear full answers on the budget and specific issues.
It's been a long-haul for the college—a PR nightmare that started with a former Chancellor accused of creating hostile work environments and sexual harassment, and then being put on probation with its accreditor, the Higher Learning Commission. With a new Chancellor, the college is moving forward to get off probation, but at times that road still seems rocky. It's not over yet, so why not put in a new board member who seems to know the dust in all the corners and is willing to talk about it all—Hanna.
HOW TO MAKE SENSE OF THE TUSD BALLOT
The past few TUSD school board election seasons haven't always made it easy to embrace the democratic process with 13 candidates the last one and 9 this one, with three incumbents running last and two now. Each season, too, has brought in equal shares of political game-playing that are sometimes just plain ridiculous. If this is really about helping students in Tucson's largest school district, and yes, an oft-beleaguered district at that, well geesh, you'd think the adults who want our vote could act like ... well, adults.
Being an adult in this race, however, after now watching two school board election seasons, means really knowing the district, coming to school board meetings regularly, understanding the budget and recognizing the issues facing district's like TUSD.
Which means, we're going to ask that, in being adults, that Debe Campos-Fleenor and Don Cotton consider not running again next season. Both continue coming to each debate saying basically the same thing over and over again about class sizes, diversity is good, and touting their business experience. But when asked to specifically answer questions on issues and finance, sometimes it's been pretty obvious they have no idea what the person is asking. Don't run again.
There was the issue that came up of Mark Stegeman helping Campos-Fleenor and incumbent Michael Hicks out, hiring petition gatherers to get the less than 500 signatures needed to qualify for the ballot. Hicks seems to have had some trouble figuring out how to report that, while Campos-Fleenor did what's needed. And to Campos-Fleenor's credit, we recognize she is still healing from a foot surgery she had last campaign season. But we don't get having to go this for so little signatures. To me it means you don't really have the support to help you and that means you shouldn't run.
However, Michael Hicks supporters can't use his refusal to vote to close schools in 2012. It was noble and we even liked him for a second when we saw him speak to parents at Brichta Elementary on the Westside. The problem is, we've seen firsthand when Hicks wasn't so noble. we saw him go out during board breaks during the height of the district's Mexican-American studies debacle and antagonize protesting students. When he embarrassed us further with his answers on the Daily Show, feigning he didn't know what it was or he was set up, made some of us wonder, but at the same time happy to show the country a taste of what we were dealing (and yes, a few were upset that he leaked the super power of burritos, yet students and white people keep eating them).
It sucks for Mark Stegeman to be in the minority, but Campos-Fleenor and Hicks return aren't going to help the district, just Stegeman.
Miguel Cuevas wants to return to the district, but no, sorry Miguel, but saying you did this or your leadership did that is ludicrous, or even the latest of being in support of Mexican-American studies. You and Stegeman, when you were leaders of the board, did such a poor job bringing the district and community together during a highly contentious time. People are still hurting—so yes, Cuevas, time to focus on you, your education and your career. What happened to that plan?
Former Pima Community College governing board candidate and PCC adjunct math and science teacher, Francis Saitta, hasn't shown up to any debate. He runs his campaign making comments on the Tucson Weekly blog and asking statements be read in his place. No interest in answering direct questions from people who take the time to show up at these debates means you don't deserve their vote.
That leaves us with four remaining candidates. René Bernal, a political newcomer, is an applied software engineer at Honeywell and the product of TUSD. He's also the son of teachers and that often came out this campaign. While I think he could use some time getting to know the district better from a different perspective, he's great and we'd love to see him return another election season once that newcomer sheen wears off a bit.
Incumbent Adelita Grijalva, has been on the board more than a decade and she has children in the TUSD system, and while she may be a Democrat Party favorite in a nonpartisan election, it may be time for her to step back, continue to earn her political chops in other ways. It's understandable that during her time on the board she hasn't always been part of a majority, but it's difficult to hear her say that during her time she's seen six superintendents come and go, and school closures and more further damage to the district's credibility. It's also been difficult in the past to hear her say that it's OK for the district to drag its feet in some areas of its 40-year-old desegregation plan because we have a new superintendent. That really disrespects the six-month, very difficult work that all the deseg plaintiffs did together with the school district. At some point, can incumbents make a difference if these are the excuses? It doesn't feel that way.
We threw our full support behind Jenifer Darland for a reason. She may seem like a political newcomer, but she isn't. The co-founder of Arizona Education Network that brought parents and public education supporters together for all political parties, Darland is savvy about our problems with public education funding and the state legislature. She an amazing researcher, and while she has a TUSD parent perspective, she's a fervent public education supporter and knowledgeable.
However, let's not forget about Betts Putnam-Hidalgo. She ran in 2012 and has further earned a reason to be in office—continuing to show up to almost every school board meeting and actively speaks out—especially on the desegregation plan and its haphazard implementation. Before she ran in 2012, she was an ardent supporter of Mexican-American studies, but it was particularly interesting to see ideas she brought up during her last campaign, come to light: using closed schools for the community and increasing solar projects at those sites and other school buildings. And when it comes to the issues, the minutia of budgets and funding and teacher issues, she has it down.
THE PROPOSITIONS
Prop 122
Proposition 122 is another effort to get the state tangled up in expensive legal fights with the federal government. It would allow state lawmakers or the public to declare a federal law to be a violation of the U.S. Constitution—a designation normally reserved for the courts—and then block the state or local governments from spending any money helping with the enforcement of that federal law. We honestly can't see anything good coming out of this, but we can see plenty of bad unintended—and in some cases, intended—consequences. We say vote no.
Prop 303
If approved by voters, Proposition 303 would allow terminally ill patients to use experimental drugs that haven't yet been approved by the FDA. We are a tiny bit skeptical of this one, but we're leaning toward a Yes vote with the hope that we're not opening the door to snake-oil salesmen who are going to give desperately sick people false hope.
Prop 304
Proposition 304 would boost the salaries of state lawmakers to from the current $24,000 to $35,000 annually. On the one hand, it does seem like the pay is pretty low considering the importance of the work; one the other hand, we're unimpressed with the quality of most of the people who are winning primaries these days. We're voting no.
Prop 415
Proposition 415 would allow Pima County to sell up to $22 million in bonds to build a new animal-care center to replace the current facility, which is nearly a half-century old. Opponents have made a big deal about the price tag, but it comes down to less than four bucks a year for the average county resident, which really isn't asking too much—and that's assuming the cost hit the maximum. The county has worked in recent years to reduce the number of dogs and cats that are euthanized and increase the number who are adopted, which is a great thing. That track record is enough for us to urge you to vote yes on Prop 415.
WHO WANTS TO BUY AN ELECTION?
Dark Money Is Flowing Everywhere
Secretary of State candidate Terry Goddard gave the Weekly a call last week after a new TV ad hit screens, funded by $300,000 in "dark money."
"I've been slimed," Goddard said on Friday as a new ad targeted him as anti-senior because he wouldn't defend SB 1070, the state's 2010 anti-immigration law (the truth is, Brewer and the GOP legislature insisted on hiring their own legal team—which lost much of the case when they reached the U.S. Supreme Court) and he didn't fight against the Affordable Care Act (which wasn't legally challenged by the state until after Goddard left office).
The ad, from the Koch-brothers linked 60 Plus organization, was part of a $300,000 ad buy in the final stretch of Election 2014. Given that Goddard only gets about $293,000 from the Clean Elections program for the entire general election, it's clear that he can't counter the ad directly on TV.
Goddard, a Democrat who is facing Republican state lawmaker Michele Reagan in the campaign, said the targeting was likely driven by polling that shows Goddard in the lead.
"They see Michele in trouble so they're coming to her defense," Goddard said.
The former Arizona attorney general speculated that there is another reason the dark-money groups may be coming after him: He has said throughout the campaign that he will try to shine a spotlight onto the growing use of dark money to influence campaigns in Arizona.
"I guess they believe me," Goddard said.
Dark money is one of the big factors in this year's election. Nonprofits such Seniors Plus have become a larger force in politics in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United decision. The nonprofits can accept unlimited contributions from corporations and unions, and do not have to reveal the identities of their financial backers.
Such groups—often linked to Arizonan Sean Noble, who has doled out tens of millions of dollars via 501(c)(4) organizations—have poured millions of dollars into statewide campaigns in support of candidates such as Republican gubernatorial candidate Doug Ducey (a frequent political ally of Noble), Republican attorney general candidate Mark Brnovich, and Arizona Corporation Commission candidate Doug Little and Tom Forese (whose dark-money contributions have been linked to APS, an electrical utility that wants to crush Arizona's fledgling solar industry).
Earlier this week, Goddard—who said that Arizona has become the "Cayman Islands of dark money—joined a number of Democratic state lawmakers to roll out a proposal to regulate dark-money organizations by creating new reporting and audit requirements.
"Dark money is insidious and it's everywhere," Goddard said. "Legislators are already rallying around my bill to stop Dark Money in order to scrub this polluting agent out of our politics."
-Jim Nintzel, jnintzel@tucsonweekly.com
HOW TO VOTE
Polls will be open from 6 a.m. to 7 a.m. on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 4. To find your polling location, call the Pima County Recorder's Office at 724-4350 or visit the website at http://www.recorder.pima.gov/
If you're received an early ballot, you must send it back in by Friday, Oct. 31. Otherwise, you can drop it off at any polling place.
WHERE THE PARTIES AT?
The Democrats will be celebrating election night at the Tucson Marriot University Park, 880 E. Second Street.
The Republicans will be celebrating at the Sheraton Tucson Hotel and Suites, 5151 E. Grant Road.
Both parties begin at 7 p.m.
