RIDING

RIO NUEVO RIPOFFS INVESTIGATED

TUCSON CITY NEWS: Rio Nuevo Rundown

The Rio Nuevo Board takes action to uncover the daisy chain of events leading up to the evaporation of the Rio Nuevo dream. It appears that high rollers took most of the money and very little hit the ground for the little guy. Rio Nuevo is a tax rebate program created by the state aimed at encouraging development that would result in increased tax revenue. The construction was to create jobs and the result was to attract consumers.
Since a few well connected individuals made off with most of the money, there were very few jobs and now there are no consumers because the money was blown on multiple designs, trips to Italy for U of A faculty, a useless $700,000 video, and endless cost overruns that were always granted. The rich became richer and the poor had no jobs, yet our tax money paid for all of it.

The problem with Rio Nuevo is that the projections lacked practical vision, leaving the field wide open for charlatans, which I will label any designer who designs something that is so expensive, it can never be built by the employer. Yes, employer. Rio Nuevo hired these people to produce a workable design and they did not do that. Clawback time for sure. Oh, but somebody's feelings might be hurt if they had to refund money for a job not done well. How about limiting design costs for that actually constructed?

This Garfield Traub mess was to be predicted, since they have serial lawsuits recorded all over the country where they sued other cities. I don't know who brought these people in, but they should be thrown out. And as for Sundt not paying his contractors, I say that they be excluded from bidding on government work until they pay up.

So I heard on the John Justice program that this new forensic audit will not only look at the existing paper trail of who was paid what, it will also examine bank records and possible conspiracies centered around the disbursements. Let's remember that all of this took place with the Democrats firmly in control, their lawyer issuing opinions that allowed for payments over the amount of contract to flow unimpeded into the hands of the unscrupulous. The Democrats and their buddies milked Rio Nuevo dry. Just hours from the institution of a new Rio Nuevo Board, the old board borrowed $80,000,000 and disbursed most of it. This money trail has to be followed.

The upcoming city council elections are extremely important. We have a little Napoleon around here by the name of Jeff Rogers, head of the Pima County Democrats. Rogers runs the town and the politicians like a fiefdom, dictating positions and lack of compromise and apparently he supported the Rio Nuevo Ripoff. His people are still in office, still burdening the city with debt and still allowing rampant cost overruns on the streetcar and the bridge. The Democrats are running a lawyer for Mayor, who has deep financial ties to the current city council, which means more of the same for the taxpayers. The Democrats are supporting the unions yet allowing workers to be furloughed in order for workers on overtime to have the empty slots. Are the union honchos grabbing that work for themselves, while the rank and file take furloughs? The Democrats deserve to be voted out of office for corruption and waste.

The primary election for the Mayor and city council is coming up in August. Republicans have two candidates for city council, Jennifer Rawson in Ward 2 and Tyler Vogt in Ward 4. The Republican write in candidate for Mayor is Rick Grinnell. I hope you all write in Rick Grinnell on your mail in ballots for the primary. If enough people write him in, then Republicans will have a candidate on the ballot.

If you are wondering why we don't have a Republican on the ballot when you signed a petition for Shaun McClusky, I'll tell you now. Enough petitions were turned in, but some petitions were signed by two people, which is taboo, according to the elections people. The Democrats challenged Shaun's petitions and they were thrown out because two people signed a few of them. The signatures were valid, but the glitch allowed the Democrats to challenge successfully. It seems to me that the intent of the people who signed the petitions was to have Shaun on the ballot and that the government thwarted the will of the people. The people signed the petitions! I think that a huge write in campaign for Rick Grinnell would reward the Democrats for ignoring the will of the people.

Amendment to Pima County GOP Bylaws

Amendment to the Proposed Bylaw Change set forth by the Pima County Republican Central Committee


This is the original proposed bylaw change to add Section 5 to Article IV:

An elective officer of the county committee may be removed at any time by a vote to that effect of two-thirds of the precinct committeemen of the county committee elected per the provisions of A.R.S. ~ 16-821 A. and present in person or by proxy at a mandatory or special meeting of the county committee, but an elective officer may not be removed at a special meeting unless his/her proposed removal is set forth in the notice of the call of the meeting as one of the items of business of such meeting. Thirty percent of the precinct committeemen members of the county committee elected per the provisions of A.R.S. ~ 16-81 A. and present in person or by proxy at a mandatory or special meeting called for the purpose of removal of an elective officer shall constitute a quorum.

It is proposed that the following paragraph be inserted behind the above Amendment to the Bylaws:

An elective officer of a Legislative District may be removed at any time by a vote to that effect of two thirds of the precinct committeemen of the Legislative District elected per the provisions of A.R.S. ~ 16-823 C. and present in person or by proxy at a special meeting of the Legislative District precinct committeemen. An elective officer may not be removed at a special meeting unless his/her proposed removal is set forth in the notice of the call of the meeting as one of the items of business of such meeting. Thirty percent of the precinct committeemen of a legislative District elected as per the provisions of A.R.S. ~ 16-821 A. and present in person or by proxy at a special meeting called for the purpose of removal of an elective officer shall constitute a quorum.



(The rationale behind this amendment to the proposed Bylaw Amendment is that many of the Legislative Districts have no mechanism to remove officers, if that does become necessary. This is a situation similar to that of the county GOP, and needs to be rectified. Since the LD officers are elected differently even though they are on the county GOP committee, a different paragraph is needed to cover that eventuality. It also offers a failsafe for the LDs in case of lapses of judgment, infighting, cronyism, sectarianism and false accusations. If the central committee wants power to remove the chair, they should all be subject to the same removal procedure as the Chair.

I think that allowing non precinct committeemen to vote or hold proxies in this election is a violation of some kind that must be investigated. This election is for elected precinct committeemen who hold proxies of precinct committeemen from the same precinct only, not Tom, Dick and Harry. There needs to be some order maintained. If citizens want to vote as a precinct committeeman, then they should run for the office.)

Dorothy Prater Niemi 8 July 2011

Tucson City News Let us eat Cake!

This Jeff Rogers who is chair of the Pima County Democrats is waging a campaign against the voters of this city. If he manages to disenfranchise all of the Republican voters, he may view that as a victory but it actually shows why lawyers should not be running this country. I always did think that the rules for getting signatures are too fluid. How about a standing number of 200? If 200 people want this person to be in the primary, then so be it. Cancel clean elections and let the primary sort it out. In the mean time, the Democrats seek to prevent legitimate candidates from even being on the ballot. The letter of the law but not the intent of the law.

The intent of the law was never to prevent all candidates but the Democrat candidate from being on the ballot. The intent of the law was to have an orderly election process that prevented unworthy candidates from running for office by requiring citizen signatures of support for the candidate. How about a little reform that would lower and standardize the number of signatures and let everybody pay for their own campaign? If Rothschild is the only candidate of the two major parties on the ballot, I will not vote for those tactics.

Democrat chair Jeff Rogers can be lumped with Clarence Dupnik in his rabid response to the January shootings, blaming his old political foes for that horrible tragedy. Too bad such shortsighted and narrow men remain in power among the Democrats. I sense a possibility of compromise and progress if these roadblocks to creativity are removed.

These Democrat politicians and Mayor Walkup have used and abused the city of Tucson, leaving the taxpayers with a heavy debt of more than $1,200,000,000,000 that these people expended. $1.2 billion in debt with more planned so they can spend and spend. Since Jeff Rogers is suspected to have threatened the Democrat city council members with dire noncooperation from the party if they don't follow his line, I can't help but wonder when his name was on the ballot. It is obvious that he likes shutting out a chosen candidate from the meetings simply because the Democrats have a majority. Our voters are being disenfranchised by the city council who refuses to hear anything from the voters who elected our guy.

I openly call this kind of political manipulation corruption. We don't need any little Kings in this town. Let us eat cake, will he?

I can't help but hope the current investigations bring some corruption to justice. The heat of the summer might bring out the tarantulas. Just shine a light down their holes.

In other news, the RTA is borrowing and must pay back about $150,000,000 plus about $50,000,000 in interest. I don't believe that $50,000,000 in interest was a professed ballot item even though projects that cost far less were on the list. Why has the right of voters to OK borrowing been destroyed? Mr. Hayes is playing fast and loose with tax money in an effort to meet some imaginary deadline, instead of using the ready cash to pay for projects. Mr. Hayes is in such a hurry to start projects, he is wasting fifty million dollars on interest. That's $50,000,000 less to spend on local hiring. I'm tired of these wasteful officials who are not even an elected having the power to indebt the taxpayers. So what will Mr. Hayes cut from the RTA budget when he has to pay back the money with interest? Valencia Road work? It's near the bottom of the list.

Maybe Mr. Hayes can hire more of his inlaws, like he did for the 'Value Engineering' reports for the Grant Road and Houghton Road RTA projects. I asked for these reports in a public information request that was finally answered after repeated e mails. I was told that the reports would not be available until July. That was a month away but Mr. Hayes had assured everyone that money was saved by hiring his inlaws for $89,000 without a bid. Maybe the next time Mr. Hayes has a no bid project, he should hire local. I can hardly wait to see these reports!

Support Republican candidates for Mayor and City Council plus Joe Flores in Ward 1 if you can vote in the Democrat primary. Jeff Rogers has blackballed Joe Flores even in the primary among the Democrats. I guess Joe is a little too independent for the likes of Rogers.

Vote Shaun McClusky, Jennifer Rawson, and Tyler Vogt! Clean up the corruption in city government!



Dorothy Prater Niemi

June 2011