Sonoran News October 12, 2011
Dear Sir:
I picked up my copy of Sonoran News from my PO Box today and in this instance I read it because of an event that is happening in our town this weekend. This event was covered by the national media and I have had friends from the East Coast to Europe calling me and asking about it. Maybe I missed it but I could not find a single reference to this event in your publication. If your publication is meant to be local newspaper should it not serve the local interests? Dissecting the front page, there is a great story about Tap Haus and I admit that I like a beer and especially the non supermarket variety. This is good. The Taste of Cave Creek is a great event and this will get my patronage again. Wild West Days is interesting but that is still many weeks away. This said, no matter how good these events are, the Bull Running is the main attraction and immediate dollar earner for the town's businesses. Then we have the PVUSD and CCUSD93's articles taking up close to half the page, not to mention page 2. I presume these are well researched and they have some relevance but they are about as interesting as a root canal and I would be very interested to know what percentage of your circulation actually read these articles in their entirety. In the interest of full disclosure, I did not.
I am sure you have the actual numbers but having lived here for some time my anecdotal observation is that a large proportion of the town's businesses survive on non Cave Creek residents visiting and spending their dollars. The Bull Running event has to rank up there in pulling visitors in to Cave Creek. If Cave Creek is a vibrant town commercially we all benefit from Cave Creek being a popular destination and in turn a popular place to live - this can only raise the values of our properties. So whilst you might choose to use the local newspaper for partisan political purposes, in the real world we might do better to support our local business enterprises, promote Cave Creek as a friendly (non partisan) exciting fun packed destination and bit by bit drive the values of our properties back up. Surely this should be the mandate of any local newspaper - support and promote the local community. In my limited experience most folks shy away from communities and neighbors who are self absorbed in petty bickering, rabid politics and negativity. We happen to be blessed to live in one of the best locations in the country, why not promote the positives, bury the negativity and welcome people to our community? We would all benefit. The last I heard was that bulls were neither democrats nor republicans so the silence in the Sonoran News is all the more curious.
Sincerely,
Rick Custance | Cave Creek
Editor note: After quick archive search on www.SonoranNews.com, where all print issues are published plus a new online issue on the opposite weeks, these are the dates of Sonoran News’ coverage of the Running of the Bulls: Front page July 6, Front page July 20, two instances on Aug. 3, Front page Aug. 31 and the full schedule was printed in the Oct. 12 issue under scrutiny. As a newspaper, we prefer exclusive material but will settle for “scoop” material. The bull run, despite qualifying for neither received far more attention than most non-advertisers. The “best case” we are able to surmise is the reader is inconsistent in his reading habits. All other possibilities fall under “worse case.”
Back
A sad situation
When I was a kid visiting the library I wasn't allowed to make noise.
The librarians made sure of that if my parents did not.
A sad situation exists at the Desert Foothills Library.
Instead of being a quiet refuge to read we find patrons acting like they are in a bar. Loud cell phone conversations are not seen as bad behavior, but normal – as are loud conversations.
Worse are the library staff who do not comprehend that a library is supposed to be a quiet place and seem to enjoy the loud cacophony they help create. What is management thinking?
When asked, management suggests they don't want to offend library volunteers by imposing basic library rules.
Huh?
I long for the good old days when we had standards and people had concerns for others and displayed far less narcissism.
Sincerely,
Stumpy McGee | Email
Back
Decision holding school district to its promise has potentially broad effects
The Goldwater Institute’s recent court victory protecting taxpayer rights is already having a ripple effect throughout the state.
Last month, a Superior Court Judge ruled that school districts may not use bond money for projects that voters have not approved. That decision has already influenced at least one school district’s plans for voter-designated funds.
Earlier this year, the Institute filed a lawsuit on behalf of Cave Creek District taxpayers, challenging a law that allowed the district to redirect over $13 million in bond money from new school construction to unapproved projects. The court agreed that the district violated its contract with the voters and that the law “strikes a blow to the election process and violates both the Arizona and Federal Constitution.”
Peoria School District was listening. Until recently, its governing board also was considering spending more than $10 million in bond proceeds on purposes voters did not authorize. But upon hearing of last month’s decision, the district resolved to respect the voters’ wishes.
While this decision pertains specifically to school districts, the principle applies to all government bodies that seek voter approval to issue bonds. Governments must play by the same rules as everyone else and are equally bound by the terms of their agreements. The projects that persuaded voters to back a bond measure must be the ones the government undertakes.
Although the issue was a first for Arizona courts, this ruling joins others across the country in protecting voters’ constitutionally-guaranteed rights. Now in Arizona as well, governments will be held to their agreements, and taxpayers will not be forced to foot the bill for projects they did not approve.
Christina Kohn | Attorney with the Goldwater Institute’s Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation
Learn More:
Goldwater Institute: Court: School Districts Must Abide By Voters’ Wishes On Bonds
Goldwater Institute: Friedman v. Cave Creek Unified School District
Peoria Times: PUSD must make changes to bond fund reallocation
Back
Corruption in Maricopa County
“… we know Joe (Arpaio) quite well. He has attended and spoken at a number of our local association meetings. He’s for real! Tough, as only a long career at the Federal level in the DEA fighting international drug traffickers demands. A no nonsense patriot who runs a really tight ship. That of course, is why the professional political class hates his guts.”
Steve Warsaw | Carefree
Back
Dump the Mayor from this event!
U-Haul Hosts the 2011 Wounded Warrior Project Soldier Ride Phoenix ...
Special guest speakers this year include: Arizona Governor Jan Brewer and Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, along with executives from WWP and the United War Veterans Council.
Mayor Phil "Fail" Gordon is no friend of veterans! He is a liar and has attacked public officials and private citizens alike, for calling for the Rule of Law and support of our Constitution.
His support of illegal aliens and pandering to special interest groups, while calling a disabled veteran a self proclaimed neo-nazi, in front of a Ceasar Chavez event, has angered and alienated every veteran I know.
We fully support the Wounded Warrior Project, but cannot support anyone who gives this racist mayor a platform to speak!
Buffalo Rick Galeener | Phoenix
Back
Vote NO on CCUSD’s 15 percent M&O override!
According to the state Auditor General, the total CCUSD spending per student rose from $6,552 in the 2005-6 school year to $7,210 in the 2009-10 school year (a 10 percent increase). However, despite an M&O override, district classroom spending remained flat, with $3,902 spent per pupil in 2005-6 to $3,921 spent per pupil in 2009-10. However, during this period, CCUSD non-classroom spending rose about 24 percent from $2,650 per student in 2005-6 to $3,289 in 2009-10. This increase occurred despite a 2 percent decline in district student enrollment (5,732 students in 2005-6 to 5,608 in 2009-10)
This spending increase is reflected by CCUSD’S staffing imbalance: 328 non-teaching staff compared to 285 teachers in 2009-10, despite M&O overrides. This 43 non-teaching staff imbalance has not changed since the 2005-6 school year.
With this significant non-teaching staff surplus, why are only district teachers confronted with reductions in force? Could it be that they are considered to be more visible to the voter than district administrators? The Auditor General has reported there is little difference in the classroom/non-classroom spending levels in Arizona, whether or not a school district has budget overrides.
An anonymous letter sent, but not received for publication in the Voter Information Pamphlet
Back
Arizona Republic Special Report – AMMUNITION
To the Arizona Republic Editor:
When you assign one of your “crack investigative reporters” to report on firearms, you should at least send him to a firearms education class, so he learns the difference between a cartridge and a bullet. DUH. Ditto for the editor. The word "bullets" occurs over a dozen times incorrectly in your "special report." How much more of the article is incorrect as well?
Cartridge – A cartridge, also called a round, packages the bullet, gunpowder and primer into a single metallic case precisely made to fit the firing chamber of a firearm.
In popular use, the term "bullet" is often misused to refer to complete cartridges. This is incorrect; "bullet" refers specifically to the projectile itself, not the entire cartridge. A cartridge without a bullet is called a blank; one that is completely inert is called a dummy. Not to be confused with someone who knows nothing about firearms, but writes about them anyway.
By the way, how did your “crack investigative reporters” miss the whole Fast and Furious gun-running scandal foisted on us by Eric Holder and his pals in the BAFTE, and the FBI, et al? You seem totally unaware that much of the scandal happened right under our noses here in Arizona. Somehow your paper has missed it completely, with the one exception on the day Burke was demoted for his role in the scandal. Lack of knowledge or editorial malfeasance? This may be the biggest government scandal since Watergate, but at least nobody died at Watergate. Instead, The Republic has its crack investigative reporters telling us there is big money and mild corruption in the BCS system, something Joe Sportsfan has known for many years. Double DUH!
To paraphrase President Obama ("never bring a knife to a gunfight"), never bring bullets to a gunfight, bring cartridges and a rifle, and bring someone who knows what they are doing.
Still searching for a happy liberal ...
David J. Kolander | Scottsdale
Back
Lessons from a scandal
It’s been nearly impossible to open a newspaper that does not contain more damaging revelations about the Solyndra scandal. Much of the commentary has focused on the Obama Administration’s handling of the company's loan application; indeed, it’s important to get to the bottom of this scandal so that we can prevent it from happening again in the future.
Americans should never again have to hear their president tell them that “companies like Solyndra are leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future,” only to see that same business go belly-up and lay off more than 1,000 workers shortly thereafter. And, of course, American taxpayers should never again be asked to cut a check for more than half a billion dollars (money that is likely now lost) for a similar boondoggle.
Accordingly, congressional oversight committees have begun investigations into the matter. On September 23, Solyndra executives were called to testify before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, although all of them refused to answer the committee's questions. The FBI, which is also investigating, recently raided the company's offices.
At the same time, I think there is a larger lesson from this scandal that is more important than learning whether this official or that one should be held responsible (as vital as that may be). The most important point the failure of Solyndra proves is that the government is terrible at trying to game the market to pick winners and losers.
Of course, this isn’t really news. The government is usually a very bad judge of market forces. Often, in its attempts to ride a trendy wave, the state’s heavy hand ends up setting back the very industries it seeks to advance. We need only look to former Eastern Bloc countries to see clear – sometimes even comical – black-and-white examples of these failures.
Remember the Trabant? In its attempt to satisfy East Germans’ demand for the Fords and Mercedes driven by their capitalist cousins, the government forced upon its citizens, in the words of TIME magazine, a “hollow lie of a car constructed of recycled worthlessness” that was “powered by a two-stroke pollution generator that maxed out at an ear-splitting 18 hp.” The state tried to tell the people what they should want, and it failed (many East Germans traded in their Trabants the moment the wall fell). It would have been much better off simply letting the market work by allowing in what East Germans actually wanted – Western cars.
Of course, that is an extreme example, but the lesson is the same. Here in the U.S., President Carter launched the Synthetic Fuels Corp. in 1980, promising that it would produce enough synthetic fuels made from shale and coal to supply the equivalent of 40 percent of petroleum imports. Congress authorized $88 billion for the project, but it was plagued by scandals and mismanagement. Just six years later, after yielding less than 2 percent of its production target, the program was repealed – but not before billions of taxpayer dollars had been wasted. Just like today, Washington politicians got it wrong, and taxpayers paid the price.
Indeed, The Washington Post characterized the Solyndra debacle as “a case study of what can go wrong when a rigid government bureaucracy tries to play venture capitalist and jump-start a nascent, fast-changing market.” I agree. History tells us quite clearly that the government can subsidize, monopolize, nationalize, and prioritize all it wants, but it is ultimately the market that will determine the most economically viable way to achieve an objective, produce a product, or provide a service.
We should, of course, continue investigating the Solyndra scandal to determine what happened. But, more importantly, we should see this unfortunate situation for the teachable moment it can be. It is, after all, but one example of what so often happens when the government tries to intervene and pick winners and losers at taxpayers’ expense – we all lose.
Sen. Jon Kyl | Senate Republican Whip
Senate Finance and Judiciary committees. Visit his website at www.kyl.senate.gov
Back
WHO (World Health Organization): Number of people with TB falls for first time
The real answer, as any U.S. healthcare professional knows, the fewer illegals, the fewer cases of TB.
When I was in HR, in the nighttime shift in an Eastern Shore poultry plant in Maryland, SEVENTEEN percent of Mexican temporary workers scored positive on their TB skin tests. This, mind you, was with workers vetted by both Mexican and U.S. governments.
Imagine what the percentage is with invaders, whom the lamestream media euphemistically call "undocumented workers!"
J-P. A. Maldonado | Phoenix
Back
Anti-American Funeral Picketers
The recent Supreme Court decision upholding the First Amendment right of the Westboro Baptist Church, Topeka, KS to picket at the funerals of military personnel was a victory for our Constitutional rights but a defeat for morality in this country.
The followers of this so called church typically gather at the funeral ceremonies of our fallen heroes accusing them of condoning homosexuality within the military.
These misguided disciples are reminiscent of the Nazis and other fascist elements who persecuted gays, the clergy, Jews, gypsies and various ethnic peoples in the 1930’s and 1940’s. They should be looked upon as anti-American bigots who are trying to undermine our military and tear at the fabric of our country.
States should pass laws which prohibit such provocative and anti-American behavior within one mile or more from a funeral ceremony.
Donald A. Moskowitz | Londonderry, New Hampshire
Back
