Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Once again, Jim Nintzel of the Tucson Weekly is the only political reporter in Tucson doing his job. Hey, Big Spender: Public Safety First Campaign Raises More Than A Quarter-Million Dollars:
The latest campaign finance report shows that the Public Safety First Campaign had raised $268,988 through Sept. 21. The Tucson Association of Realtors and assorted real-estate professionals around town remain the biggest donors, with TAR giving $135,276. Car dealer Jim Click kicked in $50K and the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association's total contribution has risen to $30K.
The campaign had spent $239,412, with most of the money moving through political consultants Zimmerman and Associates.
Wonks can look over the report themselves: PSFOct1.pdf
More reports to come later today. Track themselves yourself at the city's Web site.
Nintzel adds this report Tucson's Visionaries Revealed:
We got our first peek at the Tucson Vision Committee today, when the independent campaign that's targeting Democrats in this year's City Council election filed a campaign-finance report.
The biggest contributor is Michael Goodman, the man who is destroying the quality of life of homeowners north of the University of Arizona by demolishing existing houses and replacing them with gargantuan mini-dorms, with little regard to the existing residents. Goodman kicked in $5,000 of the $9,000 that the committee reporting raising between Sept. 15 and Sept. 21.
The committee showed only three other contributors through Sept. 21: Grace Howard of Phoenix ($500), who evidently has a vision of making money in Tucson; investor Charlie Bass of Tucson ($1,000); and Richard Studwell of Tucson, who has been angry with council Democrats for some time now ($2,500).
Just great. Yet another developer with a personal vendetta against the Tucson City Council because he didn't get his way with his development plans. Will the GOP City Council candidates be beholden to this developer as well? Have they made any promises or assurances to Mr. Goodman to reverse the Council's decision should they be elected? University area voters have the right to know.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You are correct Darsha. It is my understanding from my sources that Mayor Bob Walkup is opposed to Prop. 200 because it will tie the hands of the city council and render the council unable to respond to the competing critical needs of the city by mandating that almost 75% of the city budget go to police and fire. But Silent Bob will not speak out publicly against Prop. 200 because – well, because he is a partisan Republican – and he will support the GOP council candidates because if they are elected it means he will have political power again and he will no longer be a potted plant on the council. And the GOP candidates have wrapped themselves around Prop. 200 as their only issue – they stand for nothing else.
Statistics indicate that Tucson’s crime rate is down! Proponents claim that the prop 200 will pay for itself with future growth in our community. They insist that other programs/services will not lose funding. Am I missing something, Arizona has a high rate of unemployment, bankruptcies, business failures and home foreclosures. Who is to say we will have growth anytime soon. I think we seriously have to look at who is backing this proposition. Am I missing something or is our Mayor exceeding quiet regarding this issue? Perhaps he doesn’t want to anger Prop 200’s backers.