Tucson Weekly: The Skinny (July 24

MAYBE THEY'LL MOVE THE POST OFFICE NEXT: Marana Councilman Ed Honea, always a bit of a dim bulb, has lit up again. Seems the Banc One branch in Old Marana wants to pull up stakes and move to where most of the people in Marana are now--down the road at Continental Ranch. Furious, Honea is screaming about how that will inconvenience the folks in Old Marana, where he lives.
Eddie, it's called "cause and effect." For years you and your cronies on that town council have rolled over for every new development that came down the pike, not giving a rat's ass about what that would mean. Now, in a small way, you found out: It means screw the older residents of the area in favor of the new ones. Outfits like the bank will now go where more people live--people you put there, Eddie.
It's just another payout from the unrestrained growth you and your pals have brought us all, Ed. Nice to see it bite you on the ass for a change.
ETHICS, SMETHICS: The 15 members who composed the Pima County Charter Commission all signed off on their final product, which could mean they really liked it, or it could mean that they figured the end document was the least damaging of the alternatives. It does not mean that all 15 commissioners advocate the charter proposal's passage.
But a recent letter to voters which reproduced the signatures of the 15 commissioners seemed to imply all 15 support the current proposal.
Skinny One of those 15 people is Pima County Supervisor Dan Eckstrom. His position, after working on the current proposal, is to let the voters decide, and he has not--nor will he--publicly declare his personal preference. And he's plenty ticked at charter supporters for using his name without asking him.
We wonder if any of the other signers are similarly being misrepresented as supporting this seriously flawed proposal. And we find this little incident somewhat amusing, since the Charter Committee spent so much time promoting the need for an "ethics committee" in county government and mandated the inclusion of one in the final charter proposal.
Gee, doesn't it constitute an ethics violation when you use somebody's name without his permission?
And while we're on the subject of ethics: Isn't it a little fishy that the charter commission got to write both the pro and con summaries of the charter? Despite committee members' bleatings to the contrary, the arguments are clearly slanted in favor of passage--a sleazy maneuver indeed.
EVEN JUNKYARD DOGS HUNT IN PACKS: We're beginning to wonder if Supervisor Mike Boyd has a dart board on his office wall to select a "Pose of the Week." This week, Mikey the Environmentalist; next week, Mikey the Crime Fighter; and coming soon, Mikey the Fiscal Conservative.
Last week the dart must've hit "Fiscal Conservative," so Boyd decided he could cut the county's budget by "privatizing" the Public Defender's Office. Thus, he launched an attack on Susan Kettlewell, who heads up the office.
As usual, Mikey's proposal was poorly stated and even more poorly researched. Hiring outside counsel to replace lawyers employed in-house does not save money--about a century of local governmental history on the subject proves that rather conclusively.
In the face of Mikey's ridiculous move, the Board of Supes responded by passing, four-to-one, Supervisor Dan Eckstrom's rather unique motion: "I move we do nothing." (Unlike Mikey, Eckstrom actually has a functioning brain.)
But one other player emerged in the hit on Kettlewell--Tucson City Councilman Mike Crawford, an employee of the Public Defender's Office.
We're told Crawford has been whining about Kettlewell to fellow Growth Lobby running dog Boyd during the course of their normal working relationship--which largely consists of seeing who can roll over quickest for the developers who own them both.
Seems Kettlewell has expected Crawford either to put in a full week's work at the office, or take official time off for his council duties and re-election campaign. Apparently this pissed off Crawford, so he reportedly started giving Boyd "inside information" about how poorly Kettlewell supposedly runs her operation, and how inept some of her lawyers allegedly are. Since Crawford is one of those lawyers, we concede his case might have merit.
Could it be Mikey's big fiscal pose was really nothing more than a crummy political hit motivated by a disgruntled employee unhappy about having to put in a full day's work? The sleazy shot at Kettlewell should be remembered by the defense bar and feminists this September, when the opportunity arises to dump Crawford in the city's Ward 3 Democratic primary.
FOLLOWING THE MONEY: Continuing our lonely crusade to fill you in on the campaign finance reports for this year's City Council races (an element of the campaign that has been completely ignored by the mainstream media): City Councilman Michael Crawford last week applied to establish his eligibility for matching funds from the city, having crossed the hurdle of receiving 200 contributions of at least $10 each from city residents.
As of July 18, Crawford had collected a total of $12,710, which would double were he to ask for matching funds. So far, he has spent $7,252.
Crawford's opponents in the Democratic primary, Jerry Anderson, Alex Kimmelman and Demitri Downing, have not yet applied for matching funds.
Meanwhile, as we reported last week, three Democrats in the Ward 6 race have applied for matching funds. So far, Carol Zimmerman leads the pack, having collected $16,161 in contributions, which will double to $33,585 with matching funds. Zimmerman's contributors include development lawyer Si Schorr ($150), former Tucson Mayor Tom Volgy ($200), current Mayor George Miller ($50) and his wife Roslyn ($50), Councilwoman Janet Marcus ($200), Councilwoman Shirley Scott ($25) and development consultant Carl Winters ($100),
Alison Hughes has received $9,673 in contributions, which will double to $19,346 with the match. Among her contributors were City Councilman Michael Crawford ($10), Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall ($40), state Sen. George Cunningham ($50) and former congressman Sam Coppersmith ($100).
Leo Pilachowski has collected $5,139 in contributions, which would double to $10,278 with the match. Pilachowski's contributors include Councilwoman Shirley Scott ($25) and her husband Joe ($25), Ward 3 candidate Jerry Anderson ($15) and his wife Tamara ($15), and state Rep. Carmine Cardamone ($10).
WE SCREWED UP: Last week we noted that no candidate running in the upcoming Tucson City Council race had bothered to check off that little box on our water bill that allows us to donate money to the matching-fund program designed to keep election expenses within reason. We were wrong--incumbent Councilman Steve Leal, who's running unopposed, does give money to that program, and has consistently. So sue us.
SQUEEZE PLAY: While the other media have been reporting Tucson Electric Power will pay $2 million over the next decade to name Pima County's new baseball stadium Tucson Electric Park, they all seemed to ignore the fact that Jerry Colangelo and the rest of the team owners will collect that two million bucks as part of the idiotic deal our supine Board of Supes cut with them for the "privilege" of letting them use the stadium built with our tax dollars.
Colangelo told the press that these days, it's almost impossible for not to sell naming rights to a stadium. Yes, the Diamondbacks need the additional money so they can sign another ballplayer to another multi-million-dollar contract. Welcome to the "Home of the Diamondbacks."
Perhaps we could get a lollipop corporation to purchase naming rights for the Pima County Administration Building, which could then be known as the "Home of the Suckers." Our local pols were so eager to have a lousy month of spring training that they let Colangelo and company have nearly everything short of our first-born children. Millions in tax revenue that could have gone to cops or health care or tax relief is being pissed away on this poorly named edifice.
And furthermore, did anybody--besides Tucson City Councilman Steve Leal, that is--think to ask whether Colangelo should be paying a sales tax on the naming rights?
LEGAL RIGHTS: We've recently perused the UA College of Law's most recent library conduct policy. It lists a number of restricted activities, most of them reasonable--at least on the surface. But as any law student can tell you, it's all in the interpretation.
One highly questionable item classes "solicitation of law students for research assistance" in the same category as "rowdiness, noise and sexual behavior." Whoever drafted the policy should try looking up "First Amendment" next time they're in the law library.
But the biggest load of crap is the introductory paragraph, which states: "The College of Law premises are not a place of unrestricted public access. The use of the College of Law is restricted to faculty and students of the College of Law, and to others who have a specific legal research need." This comes from a Board of Regents policy manual and a resolution of the College of Law faculty.
Last time we checked, the UA library was for the benefit of students, faculty and citizens. All the university's many spin-off libraries, from law to music to science, are supported by taxpayer funds, and taxpayers have a legal right to use them--particularly in a town that has no central research library for its citizens.

		© 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth