Right Wing Extremists, EH????

Right Wing Protest:



Left Wing Protest:



Right Wing Protest:



Left Wing Protest:



And they say WE are the extremists!

Ok, Update 2

For some strange reason, I am now fascinated to see where this person is going with their videos.

They haven't posted anything new tho... I hope they didn't run out of steam, or change their mind...

Oh, well... there's lots of other fun Tucson videos like this one to watch.

Ok... Update

Well, I went to see if the video I posted below had spawned any new videos... and it had. There are now 2 more videos... So rather than make it hard for you to open my blogspot page by having a bunch of embedded video clips, I say go check them out here.

I still don't quite understand it, not sure if it's advertising, or what, but you be the judge...

http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/291124

OPINION
Letcher: time for Tucson to make tough choices
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 05.03.2009
advertisement

Mike Letcher was named Tucson city manager about two weeks ago after the City Council decided to forego a national search to replace former manager Mike Hein, who was fired last month. Letcher, the former deputy city manager who has 30 years of city management experience, has the daunting task of guiding the city through tumultuous economic times. His first task: Recommend a budget for fiscal 2010. Letcher talked with the Star's Editorial Board last week about the budget and his plans for stabilizing the city's fiscal situation. We've excerpted some of his comments here.
Star: What are your reactions to the public hearing on Tuesday night, when so many Tucsonans expressed opposition to tax increases?
Letcher: We need to spend a lot more time communicating with the public on line of sight between the money we're asking them to pay and the services that they are provided.
It's really critical because last night I heard repeatedly don't cut public safety, "Why did you cut public safety, why are my potholes not being filled?"
And the reason why is because we don't have the money.
I also heard last night that "Why haven't you cut like I had to, 25 percent of my budget and overhead?"
Well, the city of Tucson has already cut over 20 percent; and we're hit over the next two fiscal years. By the time we get done, unless this economy picks up, we're going to have over a 30 percent cut overall in our budget.
I heard, "Why don't you reduce salaries a few points?" We've reduced them 2 percent through furloughs.
There wasn't an opportunity for us to really explain what we've done and why we are where we are now. Once people understand what's at stake — if you cut, here's what's going to be cut, here's the results of the cut — we're fine.
And they need to understand if we don't get the increased revenues what's going to happen. We have totally eliminated our residential street maintenance. We're barely able to keep up with potholes. We have problems getting the weeds in our medians. We have cut hours at the pools and we've trimmed staff in parks and recreation.
If we don't get these revenues, other things are going to happen.
In addition to that, we are fenced in, we are boxed in. Someone mentions, "Well, you should take some lessons from the county. But the county has property tax, a significant amount of property tax. We get $11 million from property tax, and it's capped by the city charter. We're fenced in. We don't have an easy out or a stable source of revenue.

So, Letcher starts right off the bat by admitting they are cutting back on BASIC city services: Street Maintenance and Parks and Rec. This is important, read on...

Star: Why put $2 million in the housing trust fund that could contribute to reducing the proposed $10 million rental tax or any other revenue shortfall?
Letcher: I have heard that. It's not just the housing fund. There's some folks saying why even have money go toward human services? We spend about 76 percent of the general fund to maintain core services, police, fire, et cetera. For human services, it's 24 percent.
A society is not just built with brick, mortar, police, fire. It's built also about how do you take care of those that are least in society. That's what our society's about. That's what's made this country a great country. But the bottom line is we think that we've taken a balanced approach.

Now we get to the meat and gristle. They are 'spreading the pain' around. Little off the city teat, a little off of basic services.  Churchill said it best,"The inherent vice of capitalism is the uneven division of blessings, while the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal division of misery." This is an upside-down and bass-ackwards way to approach city funding. The first responsiblility is to fully fund your core services: Police, Fire, Water and Utilities, Roads, Parks and Rec. ONCE, and only once those are funded, if there is money left over, then you can fund the pet projects and freebie human services. 

And the comment about taking care of the 'least'? Thinly veiled socialism. These are non-profit groups that have gotten so used to lining up at the easy money ATM of the City of Tucson, they have forgotten how to raise their own funds. Yes, holding fund raisers, bake sales, car washes and the like take time and energy - but this just goes to show that once someone becomes DEPENDENT on the government for their livelyhood, they will always rely on the government for their livelyhood. I am not saying it is easy to tell all the non-profit leaches it's time to find another host for a year or two, but that is what needs to happen.

Star: We haven't heard an explanation of the rental tax is fair. We think that's what people most of all want in taxation. We know we have to pay some. But is it fair?
Letcher: The council took action last night on raising the transit fare. They still have to make some decisions on that. We are going to be going to the council to adjust fees. But those aren't going to raise $10 million dollars, as the 2 percent renter tax would do. We do have not a lot of options in the city to raise $10 million. That's the problem.
I don't think it's a question of being fair. It's a question of what options do we have available. Again, if we had a tax like a property tax that was stable, that generated the money, we would be fine. The problem we've got is we've got a sales tax, both state and local, that has bled $68 million dollars, that's been sliding.
And so the only option we've got to raise that kind of money without making some significant cuts is the tax that's in front of you. It's not a question of fair, it's a matter of what options do we have.

NO, the option that you seem to fail to grasp is that when the budget is bigger than the supply, do not grow the supply, but TRIM THE BUDGET. Why is this so hard to understand? It's not about unfair taxation. It's about the people's desire to have the city stop raising taxes as the answer to budget problems. CUT SPENDING!!! How many more times can it be said?

Just in case you can't figure it out, here's the quickie guide to working the budget:

Start with the estimated income for next year. Make sure that income amount is realistic in nature!

Then fully fund Police and Fire, subtract from the income amount, if > zero, continue on...

Next, fully fund Water and Utilities,  subtract from the income amount, if > zero, continue on...

Next, fully fund Roads,  subtract from the income amount, if > zero, continue on...

if < zero, now you go back and start to reduce each department

Next, fully fund Parks and Rec,  subtract from the income amount, if > zero, continue on...

if <>

Next, fully fund any other neccessary services,  subtract from the income amount, if > zero, continue on...

if <>

Next, fund your human services departments,  subtract from the income amount, if > zero, continue on...

<> if <>

LASTLY, pet projects, non-profits, etc,  subtract from the income amount, if > zero, continue on...

if <>

How simple is that?

Star: Do you actually expect the City Council to approve this budget?
Letcher: This is a proposed budget. And that's what the purpose of the public hearing last night was, to hear from the community and see what the community wants. We would expect by June 2 that the council would have to approve a tentative budget. The policy makers now have to decide where they need to go.

Read: No, it's just some razzle-dazzle...We'll go back to Hein's budget, everyone will be happy since it does not raise taxes in the process, and people won't notice how much pet projects are still alive in it. It's the old bait and switch. Hein's budget was going too gather heat as well, so let's make it SOOOooooo overly bloated, that when they go back, everyone thinks they won, everyone is happy.... but you think we don't see what is going on?

We won't notice? Yeah, come November you'll see just how much we didn't notice...

Star: Why not cut spending more? 

Letcher: Seventy-six percent of our money is the core, things that people see: parks, roads, cops, paramedics, all that, fire. So we can continue to cut. But it's going to have huge consequences, down the road.

The problem is, the physical appearance of this community is not acceptable. I live here in Tucson. This is my home. When I drive to work, and I have people visit, my mom was here three weeks ago — potholes, there's trash blowing all over the roads. Our parks we can't maintain as well as we should.
And it's very simple that if we keep cutting, I can cut people; I can continue to cut finance people because that's what we've been cutting. I can continue to cut procurement people. We can reduce the clerk's office. But the real money is in everything people want.
If we can give people a line of sight — what we're trying to do now is stop this, is to stop the decline and then we can start building this place back. But we're going to need to do something other than have the city rely on sales tax. It's that simple.

Ok, again, you still have 24% going to???? If you started slicing into that, you could have the cops that keep downtown safe, the fire department necessary to provide emergency services, the parks department to keep the parks clean, and roads to keep up on road repairs. Quilters, 'urban artists', and the like will not improve the 'look' of Tucson, so why fund them when we can't afford it?

Star: How are you going to pull that off though politically?
Letcher: I have a lot of faith in the democratic process. We have got to take time, and we can't just talk to people when we need money or have a problem that we need to fix. You talk to them throughout the year. You share with them. You give them more information. The more that they understand about the consequences of the actions that they take.
So we're going to start talking. In July, one of my goals is an engagement process in the community to really listen and to say here's what our problems are, both short term and long term. And then we make informed decisions.
It's about how are we going to maintain our police, our fire? How are we going to improve our streets? How are we going to make sure our parks are taken care of? How are we going to make sure that people who need to be served are taken care of?
And then we figure out where we're going to go. And as long as the community does that, then we're fine. I'm fine with it. But without that, what you've got is chaos.

He actually has the order right, as he goes through the services... now if he just would fund in that order, everything would be great!

Star: What about selling assets?
Letcher: One of the things we're trying to do is a stability plan to ask, how do we recover from this?
We're trying to get a three-year plan together for recovery. And one of those strategies in that plan for recovery is going to be can we dispose of assets. That's a two-edged sword: We can sell the asset, but if you use it for recurring costs, you burn through it like a savings account.
But what it does is buy us time. Let's say we get out of the recession in two years. If that buys us time to limp through and to get the two years and we stabilize.
We'll roll this thing out this summer, first with the council and then the community, this whole stability plan. And it's really what the community wants to do.
I'm not going to do something that is going to burden this community, like for a quick fix to make my life easy. My goal is just to stabilize the city.

Plans, strategies, yes, they are all neccessary, I would want them to have some plan... but the first step is mandating via Town Charter a minimum of expectation for Police and Fire. If the City Council cannot get it through their heads that this is what the town wants, then we must take the ability for them to have the freedom to choose away from them. Yes, I hate limiting the freedoms of the people, and it pains me to have to go to this kind of solution, but this has gone on for too long. The City Council has lost touch with it's people. They worry only about their pet projects, only about the leaches that show up in their offices on a daily basis asking for funding for their underwater basket weaving social program, rather than the needs of the average Joe or Jane out there working hard to make a better life for themselves.

Program to detect lies.

http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/287532

Ok, so, I say we run this video through first:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojeTr9P7ax4

I could just see the screen on that computer right now... It would be flashing so hard, and so quickly, that people three buildings over would be suffering epileptic fits.

Heck, why don't we take this one step further, what about using it at court? Maybe get rid of the judges, and have one of these systems act as the judge? Or how about mount them in police cars? Get pulled over, you get put in the back and questioned by Icop, I mean, a computer can't racially profile someone?

Do we really want to continue to take the human element out of law enforcement? Do we? 

TPD and the Great Chief Search...

Ok, this is a story that kinda came and went, but I did some research this past weekend and learned a few things...

This story appeared in the March 11th Tucson Citizen. I'll include the pertinent details:

Seven hours of closed City Council talks Tuesday quashed a national selection effort for the city's next police chief.

The pool had been narrowed to four over several days of interviews and public panel discussions.

The next search will be limited to officers from within the Tucson Police Department, City Manager Mike Hein said in a news release Wednesday evening.

The release was sent at 4:54 p.m. and contained no reason for the change in the recruitment process.

Neither Hein nor former police chief and current Assistant City Manager Richard Miranda was available for comment during the day or after the release was sent.

Tucson Director of Human Resources Cindy Bezaury confirmed the halt Wednesday but denied it was because there were discrepancies in advertised criteria for the position, which two sources told the Citizen was the reason the selection was called off.

The job opening was posted on the city's Web site and on several police-affiliated Web sites, but the minimum criteria differed and could have led to a legal challenge after a chief was selected, the Citizen was told by two independent sources.

One of the alleged discrepancies involved whether a bachelor's degree was required. One candidate, TPD Capt. Brett Klein, expects to earn his degree this summer, according to his résumé.

TPD's Klein and Assistant Chief John Leavitt, two of the four finalists, are welcome to reapply, she said. Hein had said he hoped to have a candidate in place by May, when current Chief Kermit Miller retires.

None of the candidates - Klein, Leavitt, former North Las Vegas Police Chief Mark Paresi and Phoenix police assistant chief Blake McClelland - would comment on the process Wednesday, but Paresi said he was "notified."

My source within TPD sheds a little more light onto this story. What he has said is that there is a power struggle with Assistant City Manager Miranda, who would like to keep direct control over the Police Dept. That being said, both outside candidates during interviews were visibly at odds with Miranda's previous policies and decisions, and would be on the outside with Miranda - possibly making Miranda's control over TPD limited to the duties available to the Assistant City Manager, and no more. How to fix that? Residency requirement, which was left off on one of the job postings.

Leavitt apparently has always agreed with Miranda, and while having minimal support from the officers (outside of them doing their duty), he would have been favorable to Miranda's continued direct influence over TPD policy and structure.

Klein, who like Leavitt, comes from within TPD, would come into the job with a desire to change things up, and minimize Miranda's continued influence. However, Klein does not have a BS, yet, and has a lower rank than Leavitt, not necessarily enough to consider him a 'lesser' candidate. On one of the job postings, it states "BS or equivalent"...equivalent by TPD policy is time of service, allowing Klein to meet the requirements set forth on one, but not all, of the job postings.

Starting to see the picture? Miranda, through Hein, sees only one opportunity to keep control over TPD. If someone else comes in, changes policy, and makes the force better, more effective, and most cost-efficient, how is his tenure as chief going to look? So right then and there, both outsiders must be taken off the running.

Now we are down to two men, Klein and Leavitt. Hire Klein, and possibly lose control, because the officers will rally behind him, or hire Leavitt, and open the force up to a lawsuit - due to the discrepancies of the job-opening postings. Not to mention the two outside candidates who may also sue due to the discrepancies in residency requirement.

Ultimately, the only choice that could be made, was:

Shut down the process.

Start over - with one posting so that there is no possibility of any errors causing a lawsuit, and find as many reasons to limit the available candidate pool to those that would be favorable to Miranda. Note, while the Chief of Police (you can see the current job posting here) reports to the Asst. City Manager's office, it is the Chief's job to organize and direct all functions, not the Asst. City Manager.

Miranda, it is time to let it go. You took the step up the ladder, do the job you are hired to do. If you want to be Chief of Police, apply for the job. Until then, be the best Assistant City Manager you can be, and let the Police run the Police Department...

Earth "Hour of Power"

First of all, let me say this...

CONGRATS JIMMIE JOHNSON on your win today!!!

Ok, that's out of the way...(I know any liberal reading this is saying to themselves 'of course he's a nascar fan, how typical')

Anyways, last night, Tucson celebrated Earth Hour. Or at least I was told we were going to... Since I live out 2 miles past B.F.E., and I knew no one on my street would turn off their lights, since darkness just invites the tweekers to steal stuff... I went into town to document just how dark all the places that promised to observe Earth Hour would get.

First stop, Ward 2 offices... but I got there a little too early, so I decided to stop off at the 104.1 The Truth's broadcast office, right around the corner. As 8:30 rolled around, lights on the first floor dimmed - home to KGUN 9, the TV station housed in the same building. But true to their word, and proudly too, the lights blazed on upstairs:

8:25, time to head out to Rodney Glassman's Ward 2 Office.

What you don't see, because it doesn't show up well, is that inside, there are quite a few visible 'vampire' lights - these are systems, computers, etc. that continue to drain power while in sleep mode. Also, the main sign out front remained lit. Now, normally I would commend Rodney for keeping all these (except for security lighting) energy draining products on in sleep mode, to help counter the power-backup caused by everyone else going dark, but this is the office of someone who has always talked a good game, but never backed it up with action.

In this instance, I say, hat's off to you Rod, for not giving in to pressure and unplugging everything for the night before leaving... for once you agree with Jon, and joined in on the 'Hour of Power'!

So, I head down the street. I fully expect the City of Tucson, and Pima County Parks and Rec., to bow to the pressure of Earth Hour, yet, as I pass by Udall Park, on of the biggest recreation facilities in NE Tucson, this is what I see...

Thank-you, Pima County Parks and Rec, and City of Tucson for adding to Jon's 'Hour of Power'!!!

I drive past Ft. Lowell park, and see that City of Tucson felt that Udall wasn't enough:

They even light the statue!!!

On up the hill, next stop is Ventana Canyon, where the 'Director of Green Operations' had been interviewed by the local paper, all under the guise of increasing business at one of their lounges, where some "dark" theme was to take place. You would think, if you were in the paper, saying you would also get involved in Earth Hour, you would go dark, right? Well...

Some one there obviously listen's to 104.1, and decided to take part in the 'Hour of Power'.

So, lets see how Tucson does, during "Earth Hour":


And same spot, little over an hour later:


I had quite a fun night, first time ever out wasting my time doing something completely stupid, all for the sake of showcasing an equally stupid green movement publicity stunt. Wasted all that gas, all that time, and lots of bandwidth, which in turn is wasting electricity every time somebody opens this page...

El Rio Nuevo Secundo

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/all_headlines/112890.php

About 70 people involved in the newly formed Friends of Tucson's Birthplace intend to push city leaders to complete the Mission Gardens, where adobe walls are under construction to enclose the gardens just off Grande Avenue and Mission Lane.

With Rio Nuevo tax increment financing dwindling during the economic downturn, the City Council and Hein last month decided to focus nearly all Rio Nuevo attention on the Tucson Convention Center hotel, the TCC expansion and the Tucson Arena.

First of all, let me say that I am all for saving local landmarks and history. I think links to our past are important. Art and culture should be saved so as to show future generations an artistic look into our life and times.

This is not one of those projects. The archaeological dig here was. Building replications is not. We are in a financial crisis in this town. The State is NOT going to give us any more money towards this project, or anything similar for a long, long, long time.

Tucson needs to focus on it's needs first. Fire, Police, Roads, Water and Sanitaion, all take precedent. If there is money left over, then maybe, just maybe, we can look at building replicas of long lost buildings!

Name change...

So I changed the name of my blog...

Well, I found that mostly what I have been doing is repeating two, three or more articles that I had read in my own words. Nothing wrong with that since essentially my readership is "0". Mostly, this blog has been a place for me to vent my political frustrations, since my wife prefers not to hear my rants (and for the sake of our marriage, refuses to wear the tinfoil hat while writing for this blog).

But, since the best change is the change that you can make locally, I am going to try to rant a little less about national news (unless is affects something locally), and focus more on what I see happening locally.

Hopefully, I can double my readership this way. (I tell myself this knowing full well that 2 x 0 = 0)

Is this what we get to look forward to?

First of all, I am printing the important part of the Daily Star article here, since they only keep them up for 7 days:
Tucson Region
Rio Nuevo bond money shifted again
By Rob O'Dell
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 02.19.2009
advertisementRio Nuevo has changed course again. The City Council voted 6-0 Wednesday to redirect money from its recent bond sale to projects "like" revamping the Tucson Convention Center and a new convention hotel.
...
Details of what projects will get more money, or lose funding — or even when the city will have the new plan ready — were not available, other than the money should go toward infrastructure and revenue- and job-generating projects.
...
The council also criticized a Sunday Arizona Daily Star story that estimated it will cost taxpayers $10 million more in interest because the city went to the bond market in December, when interest rates were highly volatile and other communities were postponing bond sales.
Shawn Dralle, the city's bond adviser, said the markets were so chaotic toward the end of 2008 that no one could predict future interest rates. To look back in hindsight at the sale eight weeks later is "disingenuous," Dralle said.
Star Managing Editor Therese Hayt said the newspaper stands by its story. "They went into the market when it was sky-high. Taxpayers are now on the hook for all that interest, which is not in the taxpayers' interest," she said.
...
On StarNet: Check out a searchable database of where the Rio Nuevo money went at azstarnet.com/special/rionuevosummary


I want to draw attention to something here. The Council wanted to "jump-start" the Rio Nuevo project (and keep it alive) by stimulating it with 80 million dollars. Dollars gained through bonds. Now, governments have three ways of raising funds: raise taxes, sell bonds (at interest), or print money. Well, there is no tax base in Tucson right now since there is no business, and the only group that can print money is the Feds, so City Council sold bonds.

At a ridiculous rate.

Since NO ONE is buying bonds right now.

And Tucsonans are upset that we wasted all this money starting projects that are only partially funded or have no funding. And that it's going to cost Tucson $10 MILLION in interest to pay off these failed projects. Again: ""Taxpayers are now on the hook for all that interest, which is not in the taxpayers' interest," she said."


Fast forward a few years, if you will.

The U.S. has spent $750 BILLION on stimulating the economy by starting programs or providing intitial funding on thousands of pet projects. $750 BILLION that is raised in three ways - raising taxes, selling bonds, or printing money. Raising taxes on a society that is struggling will stall any kind of recovery quicker than anything. Printing money will create hyper-inflation and/or stag-flation. So we sell bonds.

Bonds that nobody wants to buy.

How do we make them buy the bonds? Make it lucrative to do so. And how? Issue them with a high interest rate. A rate that will come back to haunt us, just like the Rio Nuevo bonds of just last December are hauting us already!

By the way, $750 Billion is 9,375 times bigger than $80 Million. Again: ""Taxpayers are now on the hook for all that interest, which is not in the taxpayers' interest," she said."