| A m e r i c a n P o s t - G a z e t t e Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona |
| | Other counties including Sheriff Paul Babeu having similar problems with their power-hungry Supervisors Supervisors spending your money like crazy on high-priced lobbyists to defeat SB 1411 |
The Maricopa County Supervisors' reign of terror will soon be over. The state legislature is considering a bill, SB 1411, that will limit their budget authority over other county agencies. Be sure to contact your legislator and make sure they are supporting this important bill. The Supervisors are spending thousands of dollars of your money on lobbyists to convince legislators not to support it. But this bill urgently needs to be passed; officials in other counties like Sheriff Paul Babeu are having the same problems with their County Supervisors.
The Supervisors have done everything they can to take out officials like Sheriff Arpaio and former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas because they disagreed with their efforts combating illegal immigration. But Arpaio and Thomas are being vindicated. Just today the Republic ran a story on how there has been a 40% drop in illegal immigrants in county jails. At the same time, the rest of the country saw increases in deportations! This is astounding, and proof that Arpaio's and Thomas's efforts worked. The taxpayers of Arizona will reap the benefits.
Meanwhile, the Supervisors continue to do everything they can to get their buddies in the media to protect them and smear Arpaio and Thomas. This slanted interview on ABC-15 with Thomas tries to portray corrupt Supervisor Don Stapley as a victim, and quotes him accusing Thomas of abusing his power. Really? What about the Supervisors' many abuses of power? They even voted to make themselves immune from investigation! The fact we cannot look into their wrong doing is an abuse of power!
Here are parts of the Arizona Republic article about the SB 1411:
For the third year in a row, state lawmakers are discussing a realignment of power in at least some Arizona counties that would take certain authority from boards of supervisors and put it in the hands of other elected county officials.
The effort underscores the tension that has long existed between supervisors and elected county attorneys, sheriffs, treasurers, schools superintendents and recorders over political autonomy - especially in terms of how money is spent.
The idea behind recent legislation is to take some budget authority from the supervisors and put it in the hands of other elected county officers, giving them authority over their own budgets. That would mean they no longer would have to ask supervisors for permission to spend money to perform their duties.
This year's effort was driven by some of the state's most visible Republicans - Senate President Russell Pearce, Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu.
Their push for change is partly driven by years of infighting in Maricopa County, where costly conflicts raged between the Board of Supervisors, Arpaio, former County Attorney Andrew Thomas and certain other county officials. Most revolved around control of money or information.
"The genesis of this was our civil war," said Rick Bohan, director of Maricopa County Government Relations. "But it's taken on a new importance now with Paul Babeu and other new players who are involved" in trying to pass the legislation.
A number of recent disputes illustrates the friction that has developed between county supervisors and other elected officials:
- The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and Arpaio have fought bitterly over the sheriff's purchase of a $456,000 bus to transport inmates. Arpaio bought it without getting competitive bids and without telling the supervisors, who have since claimed it was illegally purchased and refused to title, register or insure it.
The bus has been used by both sides as an example of why the legislation is or is not needed. Arpaio maintains he should be able to buy a bus if he needs one, saying, "I don't think the public wants the bureaucrats to tell the elected sheriff how to run his office." [Note: The Supervisors filed a costly lawsuit against Arpaio over purchasing the bus, which the court threw out, finding no validity for it. It was a complete waste of taxpayers' money.]
- Maricopa supervisors at various times have also battled with Arpaio, Thomas and Treasurer Charles Hoskins over computer systems, a civil legal department, staffing, technology, equipment and other budgetary issues.
- The Pinal County Board of Supervisors and Babeu have clashed over personnel and equipment. Babeu says he was not allowed to transfer overtime from one portion of his budget to another. He says supervisors and their budget officers tried to dictate which vehicles he could buy for his fleet and refused to pay for a needed helicopter.
"You've got these policy setters who manage next to nothing, versus an elected sheriff who is also the full-time manager of the Sheriff's Office," Babeu said. "And I need flexibility to make decisions in my budget. This is a wake-up call to county managers and county supervisors - they're waking up to a frying pan that's hitting them in the face."
- The Greenlee County Board of Supervisors and Sheriff Steve Tucker battled over vehicles. The sheriff says he needed four-wheel-drive vehicles for deputies, but supervisors wouldn't allow it.
"They wanted me to drive patrol cars, but what if I needed to cross the middle of a creek at 2 a.m.?" he asked.
Though he says his relationship with supervisors has improved and he is neutral on such legislation, he noted that supervisors often want "total control."
Such disputes date back more than 15 years. In 1996, for example, a legislative push to establish county charter government failed. It would have permitted the election of supervisors who then appointed the sheriff, county attorney and most other county officials. Since that unsuccessful push, supervisors - especially in Maricopa County - have tried to consolidate authority over other elected officials using the power of the budget.
In 2006, then-Maricopa County Superintendent of Schools Sandra Dowling sued both the Board of Supervisors and the county treasurer over attempts to close down a school for homeless children. Dowling prevailed in both cases, as judges ruled that while supervisors controlled the amount of money in her budget, they could not tell her how to run her office.
The reasons for the tension lay in how county government operates. State law gives supervisors the power to oversee the entire county budget, including those of individual elected officials and their offices. But how closely supervisors can manage individual expenditures within those budgets is unclear, leading to more than one court battle.
Sen. Steve Smith, R-Maricopa, sponsor of this year's county legislation, said anyone entrusted by voters with a county office should also be entrusted with its money. Instead, supervisors sometimes "muscle other elected officials around."
"You shouldn't have to go on bended knee to a board of supervisors for the resources to do your job," he said. "If we're going to put them in office, the least we can do is trust them to manage their own budgets. This problem has gotten bigger than a beef between two people. It's become more of a widespread problem."
His proposal would require supervisors to hand over lump-sum budgets to other elected county officials, giving each officeholder total control over how that budget is spent. This year's version also would give elected officials authority to sign contracts, make purchases, and establish salary and personnel policies for their offices. Those functions now are managed by policies set by county supervisors.
Supervisors are generally understood to have the power to allocate budgets to other elected county officials, who generally must live within those allocations. But some also complain that the supervisors micromanage how their money is spent and butt into decisions that should be made by each officeholder - everything from staffing and pay to vehicles and technology.
Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever offered another reason for his opposition: "You can't legislate what our relationships should be.
|
| | | |
|
No comments:
Post a Comment