The signs mark the only noticeable campaigning effort for this upcoming election the next Tuesday. Signs are not free, they are an expense that must be accounted for according to campaign finance laws of Arizona if two or more people are working together to influence an election.
I'm starting to wonder though... is the person that put up the signs working on this effort all by himself?? In an article that appeared on the Kingman Daily Miner's website on 10/23 this person has the following quote...
"Everything on those signs is something that happened with this Council in the last year, and we're just not happy about it," Schritter said.
(my emphasis)
Hmm... Who must file Campaign Finance Reports?? Political Committees, that's who. What is a Political Committee?? Well according to the campaign info packet I received at the city, the definition of a Political Committee is this...
Any time two or more people work together to try to get an issue on the ballot, to recall a public official, or to influence the result of an election, they are a 'political committee' under Arizona law. All committees must register with each jurisdiction in which they are active.
So I guess I'm just left wonder who 'we' is, as in "we're just not happy about it"?? And... has the proper paperwork been filed at the city?? I'll find out on Monday.
It is also rather appalling to continue to find out how the city still grants 'waivers' to the good old boys. I'm hearing that the folks behind the signs did not have to put up the required bond that normal folks have to when they put up signs. Why are people so scared of the good old boys?? Rules simply do not matter for a select some in this community I guess. I bet the good old boys sure know where the back door is at the city complex and how to get those 'secret' deals done.
Meanwhile, below is how the sign looks today.
November of 2007
When I see this sign, however, it makes me wonder what that sign might look like if Kingman's obligation for the Rattlesnake Wash traffic interchange was included in the road improvement part of the current bond issue.
I'll take one step further even. How would the sign look, say, in November of 2012?? Pretend for a moment that this sign (above) helped influence this election this year and no bonds were passed and the bonding capacity for Kingman is protected for the time being. Fast forward 5 years and the city leaders will be facing the challenge of coming up with the phase one cost of the Rattlesnake Wash traffic interchange (30% of a reported $36 million dollars) and phase two that included a new road between the RW area and Hualapai Mountain Road (100% obligation of the city of Kingman).
In 2007 we saw members of RAID write publicly on their website that they didn't like the bonds for various reasons, including because they didn't want to see their property taxes increase (generally an amount of money is attached to property tax to pay for the bonds). The sign-maker and RAID are both against the bonds at this time (2007)... but maybe for some different reasons. In 2012 it is likely that those reasons will clash against each other. Politics does make strange bedfellows... or so I've heard.
In 2007, we've also heard from the same folks (good old boys and RAID) who said that the city should not be trying to improve or enhance a property for a land developer. That we shouldn't trust anyone involved in 2007 because there are 'back room' or 'secret' deals in the works... I do happen to agree... I've already pointed out a couple of secret back room deals that went in the favor of the good old boys in recent weeks.
In 2007, we read in the Miners opinion page that RAID members don't think a popular retail store like Target would be in Kingman's best interest. I personally heard from somebody in the Rattlesnake Wash camp say the very same thing to me less than a week ago. I've even had Internet forum conversations with anti-growthers that insist that retail giants like Lowe's and Target would rather be located in a city like Kingman on a street like Bank over a possible opportunity to be located with Interstate frontage. The sign above says 'no background checks'... and yes some of these folks that say stuff like that need to be checked out or at least checked into the 21st century... the first decade is almost over for crying out loud.
And just looky here... if the good old boys get their way... sometime in the second decade they will look to bring the community more truck stop type of commercial opportunities. That is right... truck stops, gas stations, diners, truck washes... basically another Crazy Fred's (who knows... maybe they try to put in a strip club out there too). That's going to be like getting a pair of socks from your rich uncle for a birthday present. Gee... thanks good old boys. Thanks for making Kingman wait 6 or 7 years for something we already have today.
Bottom line, when you read through all the lines, all of this stuff is simply a matter of protecting Kingman's bonding capacity for the possible future use to enhance the property of a few folks in Kingman... which is why I'll bet the signs that Mr. Shritter and whoever 'we' is will likely once again allegedly not fill out proper campaign forms and snub Arizona law, and post signs similar to the following...
Circa 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment