A Look At The Murky Mess That Is Tucson's Ward-Only Initiative.
By Chris Limberis
THE ISSUE OF how Tucson elects its City Council--at large
or by ward--has been taken from voters and put in the hands of
the Tucson Police Department.
Backers of the initiative to change the general election format,
including Mayor George Miller, have little hope that police will
free up their petitions in time for the issue to be placed on
the November 3 general election ballot.
"I wish to hell I knew what was going on," Miller,
a Democrat, said Monday. The Mayor's comment came one week after
his pleas to get a public briefing on problems with the petitions
fell on the deaf ears of five members of his Council--who chose
instead to get the information in a backroom executive session.
Freshman Republican Fred Ronstadt also favored public disclosure.
He didn't attend the closed session.
At issue is the integrity of the 11,817 signatures validated
by the office of Pima County Recorder F. Ann Rodriguez.
Ward-only backers needed 10,609 valid signatures of city voters
to place the measure to change the city's 69-year-old Charter
on the November ballot.
City Clerk Kathleen Detrick has not certified the petitions,
however. Duplicate signatures and other problems prompted her
to seek an investigation by Tucson police for possible fraud.
At first the questions seemed routine, at least according to
a confidential memo City Attorney Tom Berning wrote to Miller
and the Council on July 29.
"Additional petition checks which the City Clerk routinely
carries out on all petitions have revealed a potential issue of
systematic signature irregularities, on what appears at this time
to be a small number of petition pages," Berning told his
bosses/clients.
Berning put the lid on public disclosure with the public election
matter, ordering the Council to "keep confidential the specifics
of the particular matters being investigated."
It's the secrecy, particularly the executive session last week,
that's troubling Miller, who proposed the ward-only election change
during his State of the City Address in January. The change is
intended to lure residents of the Casas Adobes neighborhood as
well as the Catalina Foothills into Tucson city limits. Miller
sweetened this annexation ploy with a promise of an expanded council,
with the two new seats to the annexation targets.
The following day, Miller called for Attorney General Grant Woods,
a lame-duck Republican, to take over the investigation. Woods
declined. Miller and other ward-only backers, including Ronstadt,
who failed to carry his midtown Ward 6 last fall, and Rick Grinnell,
a failed candidate for northeast side Ward 2 in 1995, also turned
the spotlight on Detrick, who has run the clerk's office with
stunning equanimity for eight years. Before that she served as
city election director.
Miller and the others question Detrick's motives and say, given
the validation of sufficient signatures by Rodriguez, a second-term
Democrat, that they must wonder that "someone has gotten
to Detrick," and that "someone is pressuring the clerk."
Detrick was appalled.
Later she would say that she understands that initiative supporters
are passionate about their causes and work, but that she has an
obligation to the public as the city clerk to make sure petitions
are not fraudulent.
Councilman Steve Leal, a third-term Democrat and ward-only opponent,
blasted Miller for not questioning Rodriguez's motives in light
of her relationship with political activist Byron Howard, a founder
of the ward-only movement.
Howard, once the director of the county sewer system, was paid
$3,000 for his work on the ward-only campaign.
The Arizona Daily Star bit and spit out a front-page headline
revealing the poorly kept secret that Rodriguez and Howard are
an item. They are engaged. They also live together.
Rodriguez was appalled.
She called her mother to warn her of that day's headline. Her
mother told her that Leal was reaching, or sinking, to the level
of independent counsel Ken Starr.
At the least, Leal said, Rodriguez should have turned over the
petition signature verification to someone else, perhaps a recorder
from another county.
The focus then shifted from the Rodriguez's office in the Old
County Courthouse to City Hall. The chorus discussed the fact
that Detrick's husband, Brad, is the deputy city attorney. Some
ward-only supporters suggested they were colluding to puncture
the Mayor's ward-only dreams.
The Detricks were appalled.
Meanwhile, the Leal-Miller skirmish may have set the stage for
a full showdown next year, if Miller decides to seek a third term
and if Leal makes his move to ascend.
THE COUNTY RECORDER verifies petition signatures for the
simple reason that it is the office with the records, voter-registration
affidavits and other data.
And there's no doubt Rodriguez can be combative. Unsuccessful
in the 1988 Democratic primary against Dick Kennedy, she came
back to win the office in 1992, and promptly showed that she would
not be bullied. She got in the face of Ed Moore and his Republican
Board of Supervisors majority of Mike Boyd and Paul Marsh. She
also did heated battle with that majority's clerk and elections
director, who presided over one of the worst-run elections--in
1994--in memory.
Rodriguez is too fortified for some--like the time she sent appointed
Supervisor Ray Carroll a response to his office's note about complaints
and inquiries from a couple of voters. Rodriguez reminded Carroll
that he was unelected.
But Rodriguez had nothing to do with verification of the ward-only
signatures. In fact she was on vacation. Larry Bahill, a former
county elections director and now Rodriguez's voter registrar,
handled most of the oversight along with Rodriguez's chief deputy,
Bob Jones.
The petitions in question could include up to 3,000 signatures.
Some pages released by city officials indeed look suspicious.
There are four pages with repeat names in different styles of
signatures or printing.
Bahill and petition organizers attribute that to error on the
part of passers who were circulating petitions for a number of
initiatives. Petitions for the same issue were mistakenly placed
before signers, they claim.
But those signatures were stricken, Bahill and Rodriguez say.
In all, 550 duplicates were discounted.
By comparison, the police "meet-and-confer" pay initiative
last year contained 660 duplicates along with 3,403 invalid signatures.
No investigation was ordered in that matter, Rodriguez points
out.
This time around police have stumbled around petition co-ordinator
Alexis Thompson, the veteran Tucson political consultant.
Three cops came calling with a subpoena for Thompson's records
for a September 3 date with the Grand Jury.
Police also are on the trail of Erin Parker, a petition passer
who, because of a complicated bureaucratic dilemma, at first denied
she circulated petitions. Parker was not available to answer questions
at her East Glenn Street apartment.
But Thompson maintains that Parker circulated and signed the
petitions that bear her name. A look at her signature records
at the Recorder's Office seems to confirms it.
TPD wheel-spinning has included demands to Thompson for addresses
and telephone numbers for petition passers. Organizers, including
Councilman Ronstadt, whose cousin Peter is a retired Tucson police
chief, were stunned that the cops didn't simply go first to City
Hall, where the evidence--the petitions--lay.
There even was talk that the city, and the police, found it wrong,
maybe even illegal, that out-of-state hawkers encouraged petition
signers. Organizers were left wondering if the First Amendment
had vanished.
|