Janice E. Mitich 
Member since Mar 3, 2010


  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Editor's Note

Brad, before you vote for PROP 123, as a retired TUSD teacher (taught 30 yrs) and served 16 years on the Marana School Board, please know that the State Treasurer has a plan to fully fund Public schools without using State Trust money, or raising taxes. Furthermore Prop 123 takes away voters’ power to legislate thru referendums. PROP 123 will cap future education spending at 49% of the State General Fund Budget. This will cancel out the Voters’ Prop 301 that was passed in 2000. Prop 301 mandated that K-12 funding must be increased each year to keep up with inflation. The language in PROP 123 basically means that the State will keep up with inflation until the School Funding reaches 49% then funding will go no higher no matter the inflation amount. This means that PROP 301 becomes null and void and sets a dangerous precedent that the legislature can finagle their way out of a referendum voted on by the People. (School funding is already 42% of the General Fund. It won’t be long until we reach the cap of 49%. The State has willfully and arrogantly refused to comply with Prop 301. If we let them get off by Passing Prop 123, we have given them our permission to break the law that we mandated. Therefore the Public’s will means nothing.

12 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by Janice E. Mitich on 05/12/2016 at 6:32 PM

Re: “Glenn Hamer: AZ Budget and a Dollar Will Buy Schools a Half Cup of Coffee

I am a retired public school educator (30 yrs) and served 16 years on the Marana School Board. Back in the late 80's I was getting information on who and why some people were praising how business could run schools better and the cure all was the voucher system. Businesses came into schools, spending lots of money on computer labs, computers in the classroom, etc. and failed miserably. Vouchers took hold, and now PROP 123 opens up vouchers to families whose children are on free or reduced lunch. Parents can take $5,400 from the Public School budgets for each child to pay for tuition at private or parochial schools---a gift of public funds, in my book, to private enterprises and a violation of the separation of Church and State. Unfortunately, average tuition in AZ for these school is $10,000. The families would have to come up with the other $4,600 per child. Net result, wealthy families get to use Public School Funds, to send their children to elite schools on the backs of public school children. Why? The ultimate purpose of the wealthy is to create a two caste system of education in the US. Wealthy children get expensive, quality education and learn to run corporations, network with other rich kids and their parents, while the children of the fading middle class and growing lower and poorer classes get just enough education to become low-paid worker bees. The only way they will be able to go to college is to join the military and hope they survive the current wars. All hope of achieving the American Dream will be trampled by the greedy pursuit of the purveyors of dark money to use our tax dollars to pay for their children's education. For the sake of Public Education Please Vote No on PROP 123. Thank you.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Janice E. Mitich on 05/11/2016 at 12:31 AM

Re: “The AZ Legislature Has the Court System By the Short Hairs

PART 1 of Prop 123
Before you vote for Prop 123, the State’s proposition to fund Public Schools-----TAKE A GOOD LOOK IN THE HORSE’S MOUTH !
List is prioritized from the most damaging language to the least.
1. This gift is full of unpleasant surprises that the State is trying to slip by the unsuspecting Public. Prop 123 is a “slight of hand” maneuver to amend the State Constitution.
(Back story) The voters passed an initiative to force the State to increase public school base level funding by 2% to cover inflation. The STATE STOLE this money by redirecting it to give tax breaks to corporations. The schools sued the State. The AZ Supreme Court found in the favor of public schools and ordered the State to pay up—$300 million dollars it kept, to fully fund public schools and to add the 2% that the voters paid to cover inflation. THE STATE HAS REFUSED TO FOLLOW THE COURT’S ORDERS.
Since the State got caught violating the voter approved 2% inflation initiative, the State HID language in PROP 123 that will amend the State Constitution so that the State DOES NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW voter approved initiatives. In other words, the Voters will have no power to initiate new legislation. ONLY THE POLITICIANS will be able to make laws!
2. In order to hoodwink the public, the Governor and the HOUSE and SENATE, put in some language that the STATE will raise the State’s Base Level per pupil funding for K-12 students from a measly $3,426.74 to $3,600.00, an increase of $173.26. The national average is $12,401 per pupil. AZ still ranks 49th and most likely will fall to 50th or dead last in Per Pupil Funding.
3. It also appropriated $625 million dollars to be spread out over 10 years to public and charter schools to be used for maintenance and operations which includes salaries and capital outlay (buildings, busses, equipment, furniture, books, etc.) That works out to $62.5 million a year (or $25,000 apiece) for over 2000 Public and over 500 charter schools in the entire state. This would not even cover the price of one new school bus ($65-85,000 each). Any suspended inflation adjustments WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE PAID BACK. If a lawsuit is filed, no monies will be sent to classrooms.
Janice E. Mitich
30 year Public School Educator now retired
16 years on Marana Unified School Board

8 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Janice E. Mitich on 04/19/2016 at 6:06 PM

Re: “More Trash Talk

One must wonder what made this piece of property ideal for a dump? In the Pima County 1992 report on possible sites for a new landfill, sites were disqualified if they "... were in an incorporated area; if the land was a park, forest, or Indian Reservation; all land in a 100 year floodplain; all land within 1 mile of a major watercourse; land with grandfathered water rights; all land within 10,000 feet of an airport runway; all land within 1 mile of active wells in the Tucson Water well fields; mountain areas and areas with rocky outcrops; all areas with more than 10 persons per section or within 1 mile of an area with more than 50 persons per section."

The Marana site will be in an incorporated area once annexation is done; is between the east and west branches of the Brawley Wash (a major water course); is in a 100 year floodplain; has grandfathered water rights; is practically on top of active Tucson water wells; is just west of the Marana Regional Airport; and is within 1 mile of areas with more than 50 persons per section. Six outta nine is BAD!

So, what made this site so attractive to the Marana Town Council? Mmmm-- Does the fact that Michael Racy, spokesman for DKL Holdings, is a paid lobbyist for the Town of Marana? Oh, and we mustn't forget that the Vice-Mayor just happens to own this piece of fallow farmland. And is it a coincidence that the Vice-Mayor also owns land that, along with adjacent State Land (currently used for grazing), is up for annexation by Marana as a site for a solar power plant just west of Marana High School? My, My, My...Has Vice-Mayor Kai discovered a full-proof means of lining his pockets?

Guess we County land owners better find out if the Vice-Mayor owns land near us? We, too, could wake up one morning to find out we have been annexed with a tire or computer recycling plant, or a maximum security prison, or a sand and gravel pit, or who knows what right next door. Yikes, the stuff of nightmares!

Posted by Janice E. Mitich on 03/18/2010 at 11:09 PM

Re: “Trash Troubles

In the Feb 4 community meeting with Mr. Racy at the Sky Rider Cafe/Marana Regional Airport; Mr. Racy kept answering citizens' concerns with ..."a study has been done.."regarding the issue. When a resident of Silverbell West neighborhood, just north of the proposed site, asked Mr. Racy, where were all the people that were making the surveys/collecting data for the studies because they had seen any strange vehicles or people in the area. Mr. Racy, then quickly backpedaled and said that the studies "...were based on computer models." Just what we all wanted to hear.

Several citizens have asked Mr. Racy to provide documentation of all the "other" sites that he said the Town officials looked at before deciding that Vice-Mayor's property was "ideal" for a land fill that will be in place for 50 to 70 years & will have a mound of dirt in excess of 200 feet high (20 stories)! Neither he nor DKL Holdings has provided any documents. The only thing ideal about this whole matter is the money that Mr. Kai, the town, and Mr. Racy stand to make in this deal.

At the Marana Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Racy made an hour and a half presentation instead of the ususal 15 minutes. He assured the Commissioners that there would be a $20 million dollar bond in case of any harm or environmental mishap...perhaps the liners leaking??? Just how much will $20 million buy in 75 years? $20 million won't touch the cost of cleaning up the aquifer (if that is possible) after toxic chemicals have filtrated into it. Nor will it pay for desalination plants and the piping to bring us water from the Sea of Cortez (Gulf of Calif.)
This precious aquifer provides water to Nogalas north to Pichaco Peak, over to Oracle, all of Tucson, east to include Vail, and west to the Silverbell Mts. WAKE UP TUCSON!

Posted by Janice E. Mitich on 03/03/2010 at 11:44 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • More Trash Talk

    A Pima County appraisal says a proposed landfill will devastate nearby property values
    • Mar 18, 2010
  • Trash Troubles

    A private-landfill proposal in Marana has residents, politicians and lobbyists spinning
    • Mar 4, 2010
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

© 2017 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation