Arizona's Own Espresso Pundit

Republic Circulation Tumbles Again

Circulation statistics are out again and it's looking bleak. 

Blame the big metro papers -- again. The Audit Bureau of Circulations released the spring numbers this morning, revealing more plunges in daily and Sunday circulation.

As in the past, the losses are steep while gains are minimal. This is the fifth consecutive reporting period that overall newspaper circulation experienced big drops, despite easing comparisons. For all papers reporting daily circulation, the Newspaper Association of America said that daily circ fell 2.1% while Sunday tumbled 3.1%.

The Republic's circulation dropped a little over 1%, but remember that it is the paper of record in the fastest growing state in the nation.

The Republic's troubles are nothing compared to the Dallas Morning news.  The Morning news (or I should say Mourning News) lost more than 14% of its circulation in the last six months alone.   Long time Arizona political junkies will remember that Keven Ann Wiley left the Republic in order to run the editorial pages of the Morning news.  Now the paper is about half the size it was when she took it over.  Golly, who would have thought that a left wing agenda, shallow writing style and sophomoric analytical skills would turn off readers? 

Quarter Finals

State Treasurer Dean Martin serves as a commissioner on the State Quarter Commission and has been conducting a survey to get some feedback on the design for the state Quarter.  You can see the designs here.  The results are out and design number two won.  Design number 3 came in second.  I have the totals below. 

The Governor's survey hasn't been released, but it doesn't matter, she's clearly going to pick design number one.  (Just my humble opinion from four years of watching the 9th floor.)

UPDATE:  Unbelievable.  The Governor picked number two.  How could it be possible that she and I don't have similar taste?

Here's the results of Martin's survey.

13%   #1  Grand Canyon

50%   #2   Grand Canyon and a Saguaro Cactus / Desert Scene

26%   #3 Saguaro Cactus / Desert Scene only

<1%  #4 Powell’s Grand Canyon Expedition

11%   #5 Navajo Code Talkers

Really Thin Ice

The Project for Arizona's Future is mailing pieces like these into key legislative districts.  Someone is on really thin ice because PAF has steadfastly refused to disclose its donors.  Is any of the funding from corporation or unions? Has PAF registered as a campaign committee?  Is the money collected for these pieces within the normal contribution limits?

Perhaps PAF will try to argue that they are simply discussing issues, not expressly advocating against candidates.  After all, the pieces don't say "vote for."

Of course, they don't have to.  Here's ARS 16-901.01

A. For purposes of this chapter, "expressly advocates" means:

2. Making a general public communication, such as in a broadcast medium, newspaper, magazine, billboard, or direct mailer referring to one or more clearly identified candidates and targeted to the electorate of that candidate(s):

(A) That in context can have no reasonable meaning other than to advocate the election or defeat of the candidate(s), as evidenced by factors such as the presentation of the candidate(s) in a favorable or unfavorable light, the targeting, placement, or timing of the communication, or the inclusion of statements of the candidate(s) or opponents...

Let's see, These pieces are obviously "direct mailers."  Were they targeted?  Well, they were sent to district 9 and referred readers to a website that covers district 9.  It clearly identifies the candidates.  So far so good.  Are the candidates placed in an unfavorable light?  Definitely.  Placement?  There's no better placement than direct mail.  It's not like this is a billboard on I 40.

Of course, someone could argue that the election is a long way away so the timing factor hasn't been met.  That's a nonstarter.  We are in the era of the permanent campaign.  Just look at the speculation in CD 5 or the presidential race.  Can anyone really argue that we are not in the 2008 campaign season.

Some might argue that Stump and Murphy technically aren't  candidates.  Again, that's a nonstarter.  Prosepective candidates don't become actual candidates until they file their nominating petitions in late June of the election year.  If the court were to determine that campaign finance rules don't apply to unofficial candidates, then corporations and unions could engage in express advocacy with impunity until the filing deadline.  That holding would completely gut Arizona's campaign finance laws. 

Presumably, the people behind this piece have a good lawyer, but since guessing wrong is a class 6 felony, they should hope that he's a very good lawyer.

Mainstream Arizona tried this trick a few years ago, and they even had a good lawyer.  They lost big time.  Check out this case and then tell me that this piece isn't candidate advocacy.   

I'm sure the donor list will become public eventually...nothing like a subpoena to loosen things up.  I'll be interested to read (and print) who's on it.   

Statement from Congressman Rick Renzi

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Rep. Rick Renzi (AZ-01) today released the following statement:

“For several weeks, I have been the subject of leaked stories, conjecture, and false attacks about a land exchange. None of them bear any resemblance to the truth, including the rumor that I am planning on resigning.”

Renzi Update

A source in Washington just emailed me to say that the rumor on The Hill is that the Renzi resignation is imminent.  Meanwhile, Mike Sunnucks of the Business journal has a good overview of the candidates in the race to replace him.  Mike and I each thought of Bennett and O'halleran, but his list includes Konopnick while excluding Mayes. 

His Democratic list is more complete than mine. 

Possible Democratic contenders include former Casa Grande Mayor Bob Mitchell, real estate developer and former state Democratic Party Chairman Jim Pederson, Sedona attorney Ellen Simon, Pinal County Attorney Carter Olson and former Phoenix TV news reporter Mary Kim Titla. Simon ran against Renzi in 2006 and Bob Mitchell is the brother of Tempe/Scottsdale Congressman Harry Mitchell.

Renzi Frenzy

In less than a week, speculation about Renzi has evolved from "can he get re-elected"? to "Can he finish his term?"  The conventional wisdom is that the answer to both questions is a resounding "no."  (Ted Prezelski is speculating that Renzi may be gone by Friday.)

The names of potential challengers surfaced immediately--Bennett and O'Halleran on the Republican side and Kirkpatrick and Owens on the Democratic side.  With events progressing as fast as they are, candidates are now being evaluated for their organization, access to capital and decisiveness.  (If Renzi steps down, he will be replaced in a special election.  Appointments can be made to fill Senate vacancies, but not House vacancies.)

On the Republican side, I would give the edge to Bennett.  He's probably stronger than O'Halleran in a head-to-head match up; he has a more solid base and the credibility of being a former Senate President.  O'Halleran would have to resign to run which would be a significant initial hurdle.

One Republican wild card would be Corporation Commissioner Kris Mayes.  She's from Prescott and has won two statewide elections.  She would also have to resign to run and getting through the primary would be a challenge but she would be well positioned for the general.  If Mayes gets into the race, O'Halleran is toast.  They are both moderates and I think she has more appeal to the moderate wing than he does.  I don't see any way that he could beat her in the primary and if they both run against Bennett, he is assured the nomination.  Gosh, moderates spliting the primary vote in a swing district and handing the nomination to a conservative who gets pounded by a strong Democrat.  That's beginning to sound like a pattern. 

On the Democratic side, I'm frankly without a clue, but that has never stopped me from speculating.  So I'll give you my thoughts and then we can wade through the comments and see if we get any insight.  I would lean toward Steve Owens.  He's run a Congressional campaign before (but not in this district) and as Al Gore's former Chief of Staff, he has tremendous Washington connections and access to capital.  I don't think Owens lives in the District, but frankly, that didn't stop Renzi. 

Owens' opportunity cost isn't as high as Kirkpatrick's because she would have to resign to run, but he could simply step away from DEQ for a while.  If he loses, he could go back to DEQ, or practice at one of the big firms.

How about Bennett v. Owens?  After the thumping that Republicans took in November, it would be difficult for me not to admit that a Republican would have an uphill battle in the race. 

 

Andy and Terry, are you Reading This?

Newspapers have a long history of employing children.  We may imagine Norman Rockwell pictures of paper boys yelling "Extra!" but the reality can be far different.  The Republic used to hire young children to gather at 4:00 or 5:00 am on Sunday morning and deliver stacks of newspapers on their bikes.  The children also went door-to-door collecting the monthly bill and seeking new subscribers. 

The Republic finally discontinued the practice of using children to deliver the paper and collect the payments when a one of its child employees was killed by a subscriber in the mid 1980s. 

However, the Republic still allows third party vendors to use children as bait to sell papers.  I reported extensively on the issue nearly a year ago. (Scroll down to May 22, 2006).  I say "bait" because the children are used as a prop.  It's the adult vendor who has a contract with the Republic.  The vendor brings a child to the door and the child recites a speech about staying off drugs and going to camp then the vendor asks you if you want to subscribe so the kid can go to camp.  It's a lot harder to say no to the kid than it is to the vendor.

Look, this is child labor pure and simple, but there's no one monitoring the vendors.   Who keeps track of how late the kids work or their conditions, who ensures that the kid really gets to go to camp?  At least the kids in Malaysia get paid.  The vendor isn't related to the kid, so it's not like he's walking around with his parents. 

I've talked to the Republic Publisher and they know that vendors use kids as props.  The Tribune has discontinued relationships with vendors who use children to solicit subscriptions but the Republic steadfastly refuses.

You would think that advertisers would get wise to the practice.  After all, the guy at the door isn't really subscribing, he's just giving $20 to the vendor so he doesn't have to see the kid's sad eyes.  The "subscriber" is probably not going to be poring over the Dillard's ads.

Naturally, you don't hear about the Republic using children to solicit subscriptions because the Republic doesn't cover itself. 

I've been talking about this issue for nearly a year.  I've spoken to the Publisher.  I've pointed out that the Editorial Board will pummel corporations for their business practices, but when you mention that the Republic relies on child labor to get subscriptions, the Board just looks at its collective shoes.  I haven't made any progress.

So let me address this to two people who should care.  Andy and Terry are you reading this?  Are you willing to take on the tough cases or are you going to stick to indicting politicians who don't get their paperwork right?

Here's a letter that I received over the weekend.

Greg,

It happened again last night -- the creepy salesman guy using the kid to tell the Republic's 'Big Sunday Paper' came to my apartment door at 8:00 in the evening.  I tried to tell them I read it on-line for free but they proceeded to tell me that it won't be free much longer.  I then said it was too liberal for me and the guy snapped back with a question of why I read it if it is too liberal.  I said because it is the only local paper out there right now.  Then he asked if I just wanted to at least help the kid win the trip to Six Flags and stay off drugs.  I politely said no and closed my door.   

This time around the sales guy was creepier looking.  He was wearing a ratty T-shirt, shorts and wasn't wearing a badge like last time.   

You are right that they are having hard times.  You can really tell they are getting desperate to sell that paper.

Ketchup Day

I have had a lot of people contact me about items that I really want to put into Espresso Pundit,  but I've been really swamped at work this week, so I'm behind on my phone messages and emails.  Give me another day to catch up and I'll call you tonight. 

Damage Control

Newspapers have their lowest readership on Saturdays and their highest readership on Sundays, so if you are a savvy media professional and your client has some bad news, make sure that it lands in the Saturday paper.  If you are really good, make sure that several bad articles land in the SAME Saturday paper. 

The APS media guy must be a genius, because these two stories will have much less impact on Saturday than they would have had on Sunday.  This is the lead story in Saturday's Republic.

Federal authorities are accusing a former engineer at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station of illegally taking software codes to Iran and downloading details of control rooms, reactors and designs of the nation's largest nuclear plant.

Officers arrested Mohammad "Mo" Alavi, 49, in Los Angeles this month and charged him with one count of violating a trade embargo, which prohibits Americans from exporting goods and services to Iran.

Golly, who would have thought that an Iranian guy named Mohammed who worked at the Nation's largest Nuclear Power Plant might, you know, take stuff. 

Of course, Palo Verde is rated as the lowest performing Nuclear Plant in the nation.  So when "Mo" shows the software to his Iranian buddies, you know what they are going to say..."D'oh."

Well, APS can look on the bright side.  The good news about the security breach at Palo Verde, is that it kept this story off the front page.   

Pinnacle West Capital Corp. reported that Chairman Bill Post was paid $7.5 million in total compensation in 2006, according to papers filed Friday with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The story contains this little paragraph that drives regulators crazy.

The company has reported substantial earnings increase, but it grapples with issues such as worker performance at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, located about 50 miles west of Phoenix. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has downgraded Palo Verde to the rank of country's most monitored nuclear power plant.

What a nice combination:  $7.5 million in annual compensation and substantial earnings increase combined with poor performance.  The article fails to point out one other issue...the company is seeking a rate increase at the Corporation Commission.   

Renzi in the Wall St. Journal

Today's Wall St. Journal provides a level of detail to the Renzi coverage that I haven't seen elsewhere.  The article is by subscription only, but here's an excerpt.

DEAL BREAKER
Land-Swap Plan Causes Trouble For Congressman Mr. Renzi Offers Field To Mining Companies; Grand Jury Is Active
By JOHN R. WILKE

SUPERIOR, Ariz. -- As they dig for nickel, copper and other commodities in the far corners of the earth, the world's largest mining companies, Rio Tinto PLC and BHP Billiton Ltd., are used to solving geological problems. Here, though, the problems they encountered were political.

North America's largest copper lode is believed to be buried more than a mile beneath Apache Leap, the stark red cliffs that loom above this storied Old West town about an hour east of Phoenix. Resolution Copper Co., a joint venture between Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton, wants to mine it. But first it needs Congress to approve a federal land exchange, under which Resolution would swap 5,000 acres of private land for 3,000 acres of public land near its planned mine.

In exchange for supporting the bill, the local congressman, Rick Renzi, a Republican, insisted on something in return: He wanted Resolution to buy, as part of the land swap, a 480-acre alfalfa field near his hometown of Sierra Vista, according to documents and people involved in the deal.

Resolution executives refused. For starters, they thought the land was overpriced, people close to the deal say. More troubling, they discovered it was owned by Mr. Renzi's former business partner, these people say.

Resolution wasn't the only party troubled by the congressman's demands. His chief of staff resigned and began cooperating secretly with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, according to witnesses and others close to the case. The FBI began a preliminary inquiry that was first reported in October, just before Mr. Renzi was elected to a third term.

That investigation has now become a formal public-corruption probe by a federal grand jury in Tucson. On Thursday, the grand jury authorized a search warrant of a Renzi family business. Investigators have uncovered evidence that Mr. Renzi received a cash payment from his former business partner, funneled through a family wine company, after a second investor group pursuing an unrelated land swap agreed to pay $4 million for the alfalfa field, according to people contacted in the course of the two-year investigation.

Mr. Renzi denies any wrongdoing and says that he intends to cooperate with the investigation. The search of the family business, he said in a statement Friday, is "the first step toward getting the truth out." His lawyer says the cash payment he received was to settle an unrelated debt.

Squaring Off

I'll be on Sunday Square Off at 8:05 AM on channel 12 right after Meet the Press.  Tom Liddy, Kyrsten Sinema, Rick DeBruhl and I discuss the Virginia Tech story, gun control and photo radar.  Here's a picture of what we look like when the guy with the headphones is counting down from 5-4-3-2...

This is my second time appearing on the show with Sinema.  She and I are opposites on nearly every issue...although on the show we found some common ground on photo radar and gun control.  I'm not a fan of either one and she had some of the same concerns. 

Don't tell her, but I really enjoy her company.  She's obviously very bright and she's interesting to talk to.  Folks who don't work around the Capitol are often surprised to learn that people on the opposite ends of the political spectrum are good friends. 

I enjoyed serving with John Kromko and Art Hamilton.  Sinema gets along well with Eddie Farnsworth while Karen Johnson and Ken Cheuvront are good friends.  Oftentimes there is more tension within the caucus than there is across the aisle. 

Federalist Society Meeting

The Federalist Society, Phoenix Lawyers Chapter Cordially Invites you to Join us for a Discussion on:

Commander-in-Chief Authority: Congress vs. the President
Wednesday, April 25th, 11:30-1pm
One Hour of Arizona CLE Credit Available
Location:
Wrigley Mansion
2501 E. Telawa Trail
Phoenix AZ 85016
Speakers include:

*       Honorable Ronald A. Cass, Chairman of the Center for the Rule of Law and Dean Emeritus Boston University Law School
*       Charles Blanchard, Partner Perkins Coie and former General Counsel to the U.S. Army
*       Major William Fay, Arizona attorney, Officer in the Arizona National Guard and Iraq War Veteran
*       Mark Brnovich, Phoenix Lawyers Chapter Executive Committee Member and former Judge Advocate General Officer (Moderator)

Some members of the U.S. Congress are attempting to use the “power of the purse” to place restrictions on the use of funds by the Administration in the conduct of the War on Terror. Various potential restrictions being discussed include an exacting timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, and the imposition of benchmarks and goals with a timeframe for mandatory reports by the President as well as for their ultimate achievement. Critics of the proposed requirements argue that Congress is attempting to micromanage the war, infringing on the President’s Commander in Chief authority in violation of fundamental separation of powers principles. Proponents assert that Congress is well within its rights when attaching conditions on the expenditure of appropriated funds. Who has the better argument?

Registration details:
Lunch is available from 11:30-12 noon. The event will start promptly at 12:00 noon.
For directions, see http://www.wrigleymansionclub.com/mansion_directions.html
$15 for lunch; add $10 for 1 hour CLE credit.
Please RSVP to Nicole Nugent at nnugent@ij.org or 480-557-8300 no later than Friday, April 20, 2007.

FBI Raids Renzi's Office

My son just finished reading Machiavelli's "The Prince."  I asked him what he thought about it and he said "cool, if you strike a king, you have to kill him."  Five hundred years later, that wisdom still holds true.  If you raid a Congressman's private business office you better be darn sure that he's not going to remain a Congressman.  That's why I'm guessing this is really serious.

From Roll Call

In a second blow to House Republicans this week, the FBI raided a business tied to the family of Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.) Thursday afternoon as part of an ongoing investigation into the three-term lawmaker.

Details of the raid on Patriot Insurance Agency in Sonoita, Ariz., were not immediately available. Renzi's most recent financial disclosure form lists the business as an asset belonging to his wife, Roberta, and valued at $1 million to $5 million.

Little is known about the inquiries into Renzi's activities, but according to media reports the Justice Department has been running a two-track investigation into Renzi regarding a land deal, as well as a piece of legislation he helped steer that may have improperly benefited a major campaign contributor. It was not immediately clear which investigation the raid pertained to, and neither his attorney nor his spokesman could be immediately reached for comment.

As a result of the raid, Renzi is stepping down from his seat on the House Intelligence Committee, according to a statement from his office obtained Thursday evening by Roll Call.

"Today, the FBI came to my family's business to obtain documents related to their investigation," Renzi said. "I view these actions as the first step in bringing out the truth. Until this matter is resolved, I will take a leave of absence from the House Intelligence Committee. I intend to fully cooperate with this investigation."

Renzi informed Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) of the raid Thursday afternoon.

"This afternoon Rick informed me that the office of his family's private business had been the subject of an FBI search earlier today," Boehner said in statement. "In a similarly pro-active fashion, he also informed me of his decision to step down from his seat on the Intelligence Committee to avoid any unnecessary distractions on the panel and its critical work. Rick's decision was made with the best interests of the House of Representatives in mind, and I credit him for the decisive and forthright manner in which he has he responded to these developments. He and his family have my best wishes for a speedy resolution to this matter."

Last Friday, the FBI raided the Oakton, Va., home of Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) to obtain documents related to his wife's business, Sierra Dominion. John and Julia Doolittle are both under investigation for their ties to incarcerated former lobbyist Jack Abramoff. In contrast to Renzi, Doolittle never directly informed Boehner of the raid, and the news did not reach House leaders until six days after the event occurred. Doolittle stepped down from his seat on the Appropriations Committee today.

In his first-quarter filing with the Federal Election Commission, Renzi reported a debt of $103,000 to Patton Boggs for legal services. However, he lists Laurie Miller at Nixon Peabody as his attorney in a statement.

In an election year tainted by numerous Congressional scandals, Renzi had a tougher-than-anticipated re-election fight in November against attorney Ellen Simon (D), winning with just 51 percent of the vote.

Crowded Field

I've written several posts about the 2010 race for Attorney General.  I suggested that Bill Mundell and Paul Charlton are top candidates for the post.  Someone posted a comment suggesting that Representative Eddie Farnsworth would be a good candidate.  I had a chance to talk to Mr. Farnsworth and he confirmed tha he is indeed considering a run. 

Inbox

Between espresso pundit, work and law school, I get a ton of email.  Most of the spam is filtered out, so I don't have to worry about Viagra ads, but the juxtaposition of some of the emails is pretty interesting. Usually you have to compare the subject lines from different emails to see any humor.  This one was pretty funny on its own.

Subject:  Want a Free Bar Review or Massage????

Keep John Dougherty in your Prayers

John Dougherty, Vice President of Governmental Affairs for the Tucson Chamber, has been diagnosed with bone cancer.  Last summer, John fought back against melanoma skin cancer, but it has returned in his spine.  He thanks you all for the great support and prayers received from colleagues across the state and wants people to know he’s fighting back and will conquer cancer. 

Chemotherapy keeps him from his usual schedule of spending a lot of time in Phoenix, but he continues to work, and can be reached at the Tucson Chamber’s offices.  John is in great hands at University Medical Center and the doctors at the Arizona Cancer Center.  For those of you who know him well, his optimism is higher than ever and he’s in great spirits.  John will be back at the capitol soon and will keep fighting for Tucson’s business community at the legislature. 

Witch Hunt

Earlier this week I pointed to the prosecutions of Doug Martin, David Petersen and the investigation of Terry Goddard as examples of prosecutorial over reach.  The full weight of law enforcement is falling on violations that seem to be trivial. 

The latest example of this trend was announced today. 

In order to get on the ballot, candidates have to circulate nominating petitions.  The circulator must sign the back of the petition and attest that he witnessed signing of the petition.  However, it's common for a candidate to take a clipboard to a District or Rotary Meeting and leave the it on a table in the back while he speaks.  He obviously doesn't watch every signature.  The confusion is compounded by the fact that the "circulator" of Clean Elections $5 forms does not have to witness the actual signing. 

Former Representative Russ Jones survived a ballot challenge that went all the way to the Supreme Court last summer.  Jones apparently signed nine petitions in which he wasn't the circulator.  The Democratic party called that forgery and said that he should be removed from the ballot.  There was never an argument that Jones needed the signatures on those pages in order to get on the ballot.  The argument was that since he didn't circulate them, they shouldn't just be thrown out, he should be removed as a candidate because of forgery. 

The Supreme Court dispensed with that argument very quickly.  You can't be convicted of "forging" your own name.  Jones remained on the ballot and was defeated in the General Election.  That should have been the end of the story.  But now we have this.

Today, County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio announced that a Grand Jury has returned an indictment charging former State Representative Russell L. Jones (R-Yuma) with nine counts of Presentment of False Instrument for Filing (class six felonies) and one count of Fraudulent Schemes and Practices; Willful Concealment (class five felony).  The case is the first indictment to arise from Operation MACE (Maricopa County Anti- Corruption Enforcement), a joint project of the Sheriff’s and County Attorney’s offices.

Law enforcement is criminalizing trivial procedural violations.  Candidates from both parties should fear this type of selective prosecution.  It is almost impossible for elected officials to follow every procurement rule, reporting requirement, disclosure form and administrative procedure.  Now instead of getting a nasty note from the AG, elected officials are facing indictment. 

Who is going to run for office?  The sacrifices--low pay, no privacy, public ridicule, long hours--are already significant, and now trivial violations are being branded as "corruption" elected officials are being hit with multi count indictments and are forced to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend themselves while risking significant jail time if they lose. 

This may be 21st century Arizona, but it's looking an awful lot like 17th century Salem. 

Robert Novak on Gifford's Record

You may disagree with Novak's style, but he makes some interesting points and they are well documented.

Notwithstanding the rhetoric of their election campaigns, just how moderate are they now that they are in office? With the Democratic Congress back in session, and just over 100 days now passed since its members were sworn in, the new Democratic moderates can receive their first evaluations. Some are holding to the moderate line they promised on the campaign trail. Others have directly gone back on their word. But as a few key votes show, all of them are finding it difficult to reconcile the tension between the conservatism of their constituents and the liberalism of their party leadership.

The “moderate” and “conservative” freshman Democrats have a mixed record so far in this Congress on a wide range of issues related to economic, military, and social policies. But most of them have shown that, in a pinch, they do what their party’s liberal leaders tell them. Four of the “moderates” mentioned above -- Carney, Altmire, Lampson, and Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) -- have followed the party line on every important and controversial vote so far this Congress.

Where are we...China?

The functionaries at the State Board of Appraisals want to prevent you from accessing zillow.com.  Naturally, this is for your protection. 

An Arizona regulatory board has ordered Zillow.com to stop offering its online estimates of home values.

The Arizona Board of Appraisal has issued two cease-and-desist letters to the popular real estate Web site, claiming Zillow needs an appraiser license to offer its "zestimates" in Arizona.  "It is the board's feeling that (Zillow) is providing an appraisal," said Deborah Pearson, Board of Appraisal executive director.

The Board has a point.  After all, you might decide to buy a house and the bank that wants to loan you a couple hundred thousand dollars may say "you know, we like used to send a licensed guy out there with a camera, tape measure and computer, but that cost like, you know $300, so we've decided to just look at this satellite picture on Zillow.  It says that your house is worth like half a million dollars, so dude, your loan is approved."

Does anyone really think that the information on Zillow could be dangerous?  Are they really providing an "appraisal."  When I call my real estate agent and tell him I want to sell my house and ask him what it's worth, and he says "based on the size and the price that other homes in your area sell for, I think your house would sell for about $275,000."  Is that an appraisal?  Should it be illegal?  Zillow does a lot less than that. 

How about the medical sites?  When someone wants to identify a rash that won't go away, or learn the signs of a stroke, and she goes to MyDoctor.com, is that website practicing medicine without a license?  If you look up information on living wills or bankruptcy, is that site practicing law without a license?  Maybe those sites should be shut down for your protection. 

The State Appraisal Board is actually exhibiting the symptoms of classic regulatory capture.  The Board was designed to protect consumers from appraisers.  The board has morphed, as most boards of this type do, and it is now protecting appraisers from consumers. 

Knowledge is power and the Internet has empowered consumers.  Your travel agent, newspaper reporter, financial planner, banker, doctor, lawyer, accountant and, yes, appraiser, used to have a monopoly on information.  The Internet is empowering consumers of those products and now the government agencies that were designed to protect you are using the power of the state to protect the industries they once regulated. 

If the Appraisal Board has lost sight of its mandate, perhaps it has outlived its useful life. 

Milestones

I've been going through our Easter pictures and discovered this picture that Debbie took. 

Fatherhood has many milestones--some big, some not so big.  In the grand scheme of things, this one's not so big.  But it's been passed from father to son for generations, and it was an important moment for me.  "Ok, hold the base of the knot in your left hand...no, your other left hand..."

Live by the Sword...

I love Arizona, but sometimes I feel like I'm on the set of the movie Deliverance.  What's going on with local law enforcement?

We learn today that: 

Authorities are investigating whether a payment made from the state treasurer's office to the Arizona Attorney General's Office for legal fees influenced the prosecution of former state treasurer David Petersen.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio confirmed Thursday that his office is investigating a $1.9 million payment the AG's Office received last year. Arpaio said he was trying to determine if the money was part of an arrangement to secure leniency for Petersen, who at that time was under criminal investigation.

So the Sheriff is investigating a payment from the Treasurer's Office to the AG's office.  Doesn't that seem strange to you?  Do you think that Terry Goddard has incentive to extort money from another state agency in exchange for going easy on David Petersen?

I'm quick to say that there's probably nothing there.  But I'm also quick to say that if you live by the sword, you die by the sword.  The investigation of Goddard is the latest in a series of investigations that seem to be groundless. 

Take the original charges against Petersen: 

The guilty plea capped a monthslong criminal investigation into ultimately unproven accusations of misuse of public money.

Petersen was charged only with the single misdemeanor charge of filing a false or incomplete financial disclosure statement in connection with $4,200 in commissions he received for selling character-education materials to schools.

Goddard has said his office's investigation found management problems but no evidence that warranted charges on the original allegations

That's right.  Petersen was hounded by the AG, indicted, didn't run for re-election, pled guilty and was removed from office...but the original charges were dropped.  The investigation said Petersen was a lousy manager, but warranted no charges.   Eventually, the AG's tactics lead Petersen to plead guilty to one count of a reporting violation.

That's outrageous.  With as much paperwork as elected officials and lobbyists have to file, you can get dang near anyone on a "reporting violation."

Now we find out that Sheriff Arpaio has a tape of a private conversation that took place among Petersen's family and apparently in Petersen's home--not on the phone, not with an agent wearing a wire, not in an office that was bugged--in his home.  And Arpaio is using the evidence against...Goddard.

At the news conference, Arpaio distributed a recording and transcript of a conversation between Petersen, his son Paul Petersen and other family members dated February 2006, in which David Petersen briefly mentions whether he should discuss the fee with the Attorney General's Office. Arpaio said it was this recording that set off the investigation.

Paul Petersen, an attorney and public information officer for the county Assessor's Office, said he was outraged when he learned of the tape recording, which may have been made at his father's home. He called the tape "probably illegally obtained,"

So Petersen was eventually forced to plead to a charge that was lame and now Arpaio has a tape from a Petersen bug and he's using it against Goddard. 

Frankly, the charge against Goddard is probably as bogus as Goddard's charge against Petersen.  It may even be as bogus as Goddard's charge against former Mine Inspector Doug Martin. 

You remember that story.  One of Martin's employees ordered a pick up truck for the office and didn't go through the proper procurement channels.  Martin ended up driving a truck that was "loaded with options" and purchased from a local dealer.  The "conflict of interest" and any personal benefit was restricted to Martin driving the truck during off hours. 

While the truck may have had plenty of options, Martin didn't.  He was removed from office and Goddard managed to announce the coup a week before the election. 

Former Arizona State Mine Inspector Doug Martin pleaded guilty Thursday in Maricopa County Superior Court to a felony conflict of interest charge.

Martin, 67, was accused of trading in a state-owned vehicle for a new pickup truck that was “loaded with options” that he used for work and personal matters.

Read those two paragraphs again and tell me about the crime.  He used a new truck for work and personal matters?  That's it?  He's hounded, removed from office and pleads guilty to a felony because he drives his truck home?  Was Martin the only guy in state government who drives his truck home?

So now Arpaio is investigating whether Goddard's deal to settle the trumped up charges on Petersen included a nearly $2 million transfer from the Treasurer's Office to the AG's office. 

Golly, if that happened, it sounds more like a paperwork violation, perhaps it's poor management oversight, maybe it has appropriations implications but it's probably technical and after all, Goddard probably didn't benefit personally. 

Welcome to the club Terry. 

Maybe we will read that the original charges have been dropped.  There's nothing to them.  But after a monthslong investigation, we will find that Goddard's financial reports aren't in perfect order.  Maybe he picked up his laundry while in a state car.  Maybe the official AG van that's covered with his name is loaded with options.   Maybe he hired an undocumented nanny in the 80s.  Maybe he cut class in high school. 

Maybe he broke the law when he seized $18 million in a fraud investigation, bypassed the Legislature, and used the money to build a State Crime Lab in Tucson.  Tucson is such a nice base to lock up when you are running for Governor. 

Are those charges bogus?  Probably.  Are they serious?  Absolutely.  Just ask David Petersen and Doug Martin. 

Frankly Speaking

Congressmen are allowed to use the US Postal service to send mail to their districts for free.  This "franking" privilege is an important right, but it is subject to abuse.  Over the years constituent communications have begun to look more and more like campaign brochures and less and less like constituent communications. 

This mailing from Congressman Harry Mitchell is 11 by 24, full color, full bleed, on heavy gloss paper.  It folds into 8 panels that are 5.5 by 11.  I've printed the front panel at the left.  The back panel says "This mailing was prepared, published and mailed at taxpayer expense."

The cover photo includes Mary Manross and I may be wrong, but the man on Harry's left looks like Chris Warner. 

Come on.  This isn't constituent communications.  It's a campaign piece--a really expensive campaign piece.   

We Live in a Great Place

The mainstream media loves to print stories about how rotten it is to live in Phoenix.  Talton made a good living printing the same "Phoenix sucks move to Denver" column each week for seven years.  The local spending lobby constantly flogs the story that Arizona is 48th in everything, the freeways are gridlocked, the air is dirty and people are crazy to move here. 

Let me say that I think Arizona is a great state and metro Phoenix is one of the nation's great metro areas.

The Bizjournal agrees and makes some excellent points. 

More than a million college seniors are preparing to enter the real world this spring — and their prospects are remarkably good.

Bizjournals analyzed 171 metros, looking for qualities that would appeal to workers in their 20s and early 30s. It gave the highest marks to places with strong growth rates, moderate costs of living, and substantial pools of young adults who have college degrees and jobs.

There's a distinctly Western flavor to Bizjournals' list of the 10 most attractive metro areas for young adults.

Four other Western metros are among the 10 leaders: Phoenix (second), Salt Lake City (fifth), Seattle (eighth) and the Riverside-San Bernardino (10th) region in California.

"In particular, the interior West has done really well the past few years," says Hugo Sellert, research manager for Monster Worldwide Inc., the parent company of Monster.com, an online employment service.

"A lot of companies moved to places like Las Vegas and Phoenix from the Northeast and Midwest, because costs there were cheaper," he says. "And there's also been a substantial relocation of people there from the coastal West. It may slow down a bit in the future, but those are still strong markets."

Too Close for Comfort

In the mid 90s, I was unemployed for a while so I had some time on my hands.  A friend of mine called me about an article in the Wall Street Journal and asked if I had seen it.  I said.  Sure, it was a great story and I also saw it on Oprah.  He hesitated for a moment and said..."you are the only person in the country who read it in the Wall St. Journal and saw it on Oprah." 

Indeed, Wall St. Journal provides a rich source of ideas for journalists. Katie Couric has discovered that sometimes the stories that result from those Journal articles are a little too close to the original. 

I'll let you decide if this immigration story in today's Republic is a little too close to this immigration story from the Wall St. Journal. 

Arizona Republic	Wall Street Journal
The Internal Revenue Service created the nine-digit tax identification numbers in 1996 for people who aren't eligible for Social Security numbers.	In 1996, the IRS created the individual taxpayer identification number, or ITIN, a nine-digit number that starts with "9," for taxpayers who didn't qualify for a Social Security number.
Foreign nationals living legally in the U.S. who have reason to file, such as students, also can get the numbers	Foreign nationals with tax-reporting requirements in the U.S. can also get an ITIN
…said Steven Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that supports tighter restrictions on immigration.	…says Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports tighter immigration controls.
"It's important that we comply with the laws of this country," Aldaz said.	"The rules of this country say that everyone must file taxes," says Pablo Espinoza, a welder. "I am complying with the rules."
Many illegal immigrants are hoping that playing by the rules now will help them earn legal status in the future should Congress pass comprehensive immigration reform…	Most illegal immigrants who visit Petra Business Services, as Mrs. Castillo's business is called, say they hope that filing a tax return will eventually boost their chances of securing a green card.
Many also hope to get a refund.	The possibility of getting a refund is another motivation:
"I want to have a record of my taxes, how much I paid and how much I received . . . to prove I am paying my taxes like everyone else," Romero said.	"We work hard. We have a clean record. We file our taxes," he says.

Hospital Update

Yesterday I posted on the story behind the Banner/UA deal.  I received a comment on that post that sheds so much additional light that I'm taking the rare step of printing the comment as a new post. 

Insightful and dead-on. I enjoy your thoughts and smile sometimes (not always) at your whimsical approach. But you have someone on the inside of this one because this is spot on. Although I believe you eluded to it, some might not have picked up on the fact that the publisher of the AZ Republic sits on a Banner Board. Big surprise that they continue to try to bury this story.

Just to clarify the deal between Banner and the UA:
-Big physician shortage in AZ. UA promises to build Medical School in PHX and train another 150 medical residents a year. UA promises it will only cost $7Million.

-UA signs deal with Banner to teach/train more resident doctors but Banner has no faculty to teach students (Business Journal reports that Banner/Regents claim to have 6 doctors that are willing to become UA faculty).

-MIHS already teaches 450 medical residents a year and have 150 physicians that are already faculty at the UA through a prior agreements. MIHS is already set up as a teaching hospital and teaches more residents per year than anyone else in the Valley.

-MIHS offers to build 450 acute care hospital next to new UA Med School to train residents with approved tax money.

-Banner promises to build a 150 bed research hospital in downtown Phx. and come with the UA to the legislature for more funding (read the agreement MOU page 10); this year it is $25 Million, what about next year.

-Governor's friend, aide, politicalpal is brought in to cut deal for benefit of Banner.

-Republic ignores story and the "other story" How does a 150 bed research hospital train 150 additional med residents? One patient bed per resident does not work, you dont have to be a brain surgeon to figure that one out.
-Good deal UA,

The First Rule of Safety...

The first rule of safety is this:  "When you are traveling into potentially hostile territory make sure your support network knows where you are and when you are expected to return."

I'll be speaking to the District 11 Democrats at Shepard of the Hills Lutheran Church on Lafayette and 56st at 7:00 PM tonight.  If I'm not home by 9:00 use my direct line to Karl Rove and request the immediate dispatch of a level one extraction team.

update: What a great group.  I spoke for about half an hour and then answered questions.  They were informed, polite and attentive.

Second Update:  I just received this very nice note from the District Chairman.   

Greg, just a brief note to express my thanks to you on behalf of our members for speaking to the monthly meeting of the District 11 Democrats last night. Your examples and insights into certain philosophical or value positions that groups or individuals have in common, who in conventional wisdom are thought to hold polar extreme political views, were points well-taken and very interesting.  We had a nice turnout last night (50+ members) and I think nearly all of them enjoyed your presentation as well as the give and take in the question and answer period.  Not only did some tell you that directly, but others said as much to me after the meeting.

Again, thanks so much and all the best to you and your family,

Brian Aby, Chair
District 11 Democrats

Here's another really nice letter.

Greg:

Although I had never read your blog before you spoke at the meeting on Monday night, your comments provoked me into looking at it.  I'm sure there are lots of issues we can disagree on, but it is always refreshing to find agreement during an era of partisan polarity.

That is the rub, though.  Would Republicans take the time to hear a Democrat at their District meeting?  I would like to think so, but I doubt it.  At any rate, thank you for taking the time to find issues we can agree on.

Let the Beatings Begin

The Arizona Republic wants a new hospital downtown and they want it bad.  Get in the way and you will be pummeled.  Ask and inconvenient question and you will be isolated.  Refuse to tow the line and you will pay a heavy price. 

We've all seen the pattern before.  Usually, the editorial board picks a bill or an issue and fires off a quick editorial and moves on.  Every few years however, management sees fit to demand something big and the editorial board and capitol reporting team up to pummel recalcitrant Legislators into submission. 

Here was the first sign of trouble. 

Lawmakers turned a skeptical eye Tuesday to the growing budget requests and structure of the medical college soon to open in downtown Phoenix.

During an informational hearing, they questioned why the plan to bring the University of Arizona College of Medicine to a downtown Phoenix campus had grown from an initial investment of $7 million in state dollars to what House Speaker Jim Weiers painted as nearly $500 million, citing university figures.

They also questioned why the college chose to partner with Banner Health Care rather than Maricopa Integrated Health System.

Here's the paper's response.

Last year, after considerable wrangling, state lawmakers agreed to a $7 million start-up for a University of Arizona School of Medicine expansion to downtown Phoenix.

Some lawmakers resisted.

They wondered whether UA could pull it off. Whether the proposed "collaboration" between Arizona State University and UA would actually work. If the academicians really knew what they were getting into and whether they could spend the money efficiently.

Today, a year later, and into another legislative budget deliberation, those questions have been answered with a series of resounding successes.

How do I know that this is going to be a pummeling instead of a normal policy difference between the Legislature and the Republic?  How do we know that this is going to get ugly?

Because the editorial board and the reporters are ignoring the elephant in the room.  And, despite expressing concerns previously, they are now using their power as gatekeepers to ensure that the elephant remains ignored.  The elephant is Banner Hospital. 

Here's how last Sunday's editorial refers to the Banner deal.

The UA has cemented a historic partnership with Banner Health for a teaching hospital and a cancer research center, both located in the city's bio-medical district.

"Historic."  That's brilliant. 

I was at church during a lecture where the pastor was telling high school kids that it is never OK to lie.  One kid asked what you say if someone shows you a picture of their really homely child.  The pastor said that you should say.  "You must be very proud."

"Historic" is the equivalent of "You must be very proud."  The choice of historic hides the fact that the editorial board thinks the Banner deal is an abomination but they apparently have strict instructions to support it anyway. 

Here's how Republic Editorial writer Joel Nilson originally described the Banner deal.

A partnership between Banner Health and the University of Arizona for a downtown hospital leaves out Maricopa County, which desperately needs a replacement hospital. Banner flexing its muscles is counterproductive. Two new full-service hospitals downtown aren't needed.

Here's the deal the editorial board really wanted. 

The governing board of the special Maricopa Medical Integrated Health System has decided to begin planning a new facility that could be in downtown Phoenix. The board's call recommends that the new hospital be developed in partnership with the new University of Arizona medical school and the downtown bio-medical campus.

That grand vision would be a major booster shot for Arizona's health care capacity, for the medical school and for downtown.

That's right.  The County hospital is a much more logical choice.  In fact, the Banner choice has been universally panned.

Here's Democratic Minority Leader Phil Lopes. "For Banner to build a 150-bed general hospital and the county to build another somewhere close by doesn't seem logical. We don't need new beds in downtown Phoenix,"

Here's another comment. "It's surprising to us that we would not be the core partner," said Betsey Bayless, chief executive officer of Maricopa Integrated Health System, which operates Maricopa Medical Center. "I feel there was an abrupt change of course."

The CEOs of the other hospitals were taken aback. 

On Monday, the chief executives of eight major health organizations sent a letter to the Arizona Board of Regents. Among the signers were Linda Hunt of St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Tom Sadvary of Scottsdale Healthcare, Victor Trastek of Mayo, and Betsey Bayless of Maricopa Integrated Health System.

The letter urged the regents not to make a decision yet on the Banner proposal.

"We were of the belief that the process would be more open and inclusive of hospital systems and physicians in our community. We expected collaboration and cooperation," the CEOs wrote.

Senator Carolyn Allen didn't mince any words.

The Banner/UA plan may get a chilly reception from at least one legislator, Sen. Carolyn Allen, a Scottsdale Republican who will be head of the health committee. Allen, who had been on the governor's medical-school committee, called the UA/Banner proposal a "back-door deal" that ignored the governor's committee.

"It was clumsily handled," she said. "I don't know what to think of it. I am ready to wash my hands of the whole thing."

Back room deals?  Clumsily handled?  Abrupt change of course?  Doesn't seem logical?  Not open or inclusive?  Lacking in Collaboration and cooperation?

And now the Republic simply calls it historic?  What's up with that?  Who could have enough swat to get a deal like this done?

Everyone at the Capitol knows who got the deal done, but no one is willing to print the obvious.  Someone with skill, talent and connections got this done.  Someone that nobody is willing to mess with got this done. 

It starts right here. 

The University of Arizona College of Medicine has appointed Beth Schermer, a noted Phoenix attorney who has worked in health care law for more than 25 years, to a one-year appointment as vice dean for administration, UA College of Medicine-Phoenix.

It ends right here.

The most recent memorandum of understanding, however, states Banner would build, finance and operate clinical facilities on the biomedical campus "as the primary affiliate."

Bayless said she was furious when she saw the Dec. 6 agreement, which came out after she submitted her own memorandum of understanding on Nov. 30 stating MIHS would build a replacement hospital on the biomedical campus.

Beth Schermer, vice dean for administration for the UA College of Medicine, said the MIHS model did not fit with the concept of a public/private partnership because it would have to rely on too much county and state funding.

Isn't that a Conflict?

Schermer, together with her husband Sam Coppersmith, are one of the state's premier behind-the-scenes power couples.  Schermer was on loan from Coppersmith, Gordon, Schermer, Owens & Nelson.  Banner hospital has been--and perhaps still is--a client of of the firm. 

Back room deals?  Did the UA College of Medicine bring Schermer on board only to have Schermer steer the college away from the logical choice of partnering with Maricopa County and toward one of her firm's clients?

Why haven't reporters questioned the obvious relationship between Schermer, the College, Banner and the law firm?  Why has the editorial board changed its tune about the Banner deal?  Why are Legislators going to be pummeled for questioning the Banner arrangement despite the fact that the editors themselves questioned the Banner arrangement?

The answer is that there are some deals and some people who are too big to mess with. 

Let the beatings begin. 

We have an Answer

Last week I objected to the Yellow Sheet's March 6th conjecture that Corporation Commissioner Bill Mundell would have trouble getting out of a Republican Primary.   I concluded that despite his moderate leanings, I couldn't think of anyone of either party who was better positioned for a run at AG. I've had quite a bit of feedback on that post so I've decided to provide an update. 

Objections to Mundell fell into three categories.  His wife's too moderate; he switched to pro-choice in 1992 and he opposed victim's rights legislation while in the legislature.

I think the moderate wife comment is silly.  It's way too inside baseball.  If you ask Republican Primary voters who is married to Barbara Mundell, they will guess Conway Twitty or George Jones.  Having a wife who is the Presiding Judge of the Maricopa County Superior Court is a net asset in any race. 

The other two issues, well, time will tell.  I was pro choice while I was in the legislature, so I'm pretty sympathetic to folks who reconsider the issue later in life.  Victim's rights issues are widely accepted now but were surprisingly controversial in the early 1990s.  Mundell probably has some patching up to do there. 

I wouldn't have written this post except someone managed to answer my question.  "Name someone of either party who is better positioned to run for AG than Bill Mundell?"  My point is that Mundell was elected from a conservative East Valley District three times, elected state wide twice and has been in office nine years. 

Who's better positioned?  Bill Montgomery?  No.  Bill's a great guy and would have been a great AG, but being the former nominee doesn't usually translate to front-runner status once the seat is open.  Nobody has Kaites, Magovern or Greene on the list.

Hugh Hallman?  Is Tempe a big enough base to run for AG?  He would be credible, but I don't see how his credentials, resume or name recognition top Mundell's.  (Speculation is that Hallman wants to try to take out Mitchell.  Tempe is a great base for District 5.  In fact, there is only one person whom Tempe residents would prefer over Hallman.  Unfortunately, that one person currently holds the office.  If you are a Tempe voter and you have a choice between Hallman and Mitchell, it seems to me that you choose Mitchell.  Besides, Schweikert has been working that district since, like, high school.)

So who is better--or at least as well--positioned as Mundell?  Paul Charlton. 

If the enemy of my enemy is my friend then everybody loves Charlton.  I was at an event with Governor Napolitano last week and someone asked about Alberto Gonzales and Napolitano dove right in to how great Charlton is.  What a coup, the guy was minding his own business and willing to go quietly and now Karl Rove and Charles Schumer have turned him into Archibald Cox. 

Charlton will be seen as a moderate as well--what with him being Episcopalian and all--but he will be able to deflect that charge by pointing to a long list of prosecutions. 

I can see the stump speech now..."So I was on loan by the Justice Department, on assignment in Columbia, we had the Jefe of the Cali Cartel pinned down in his Hacienda..."

Mundell and Charlton...now that would be a race.  Wow. 

It Has Words!

I realize that a lot of Espresso Pundit readers are too young to remember life before the Walkman or Cable TV, but those of us who grew up watching Bonanza and listening to Johnny Cash on eight track will enjoy this clip.  If you have seen the movie "Walk the Line" a couple hundred times, you will probably enjoy it as well.  Click the link because I'm not sophisticated enough to embed the video.

 

Washingtonian on McCain---Ouch.

This is going to leave a mark.

When all is said and done in 2008, this may be remembered as the week when John McCain lost the presidency. He suffered two major set-backs this week that combined to severely damage—or end entirely—his status as the GOP frontrunner. First, his first quarter fundraising numbers came in at a disappointing $12.5 million, which in any other year would be a shocking total but this year had him with only about half of Mitt Romney’s total. Second, McCain’s ongoing and unquestioning support of the Iraq War is beginning to look stranger and stranger. After a tiff with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer last week over whether Baghdad was safe to walk around in, McCain went to Baghdad to walk around—and proved that as long as you’re surrounded by 100 armed U.S. troops, 3 Black Hawk helicopters and 2 Apache gunships AND wearing a bulletproof vest, you’re safe. The images from the photo op did more to undermine his image in Washington’s chattering class than almost anything in the race so far. In the end, the April Fool’s Day Baghdad visit made him look, well, foolish.

Payday Payback

Here's an interesting lede from the Capitol Times.

Despite her best efforts in the Legislature, and in spite of a deal she has struck with the payday lending industry on current legislation, a Tucson lawmaker says the businesses notorious for preying on the poor and financially uneducated can’t be trusted to follow regulations set by the state. In turn, Rep. Marian McClure will try to get voters to effectively kill the industry.

"businesses notorious for preying on the poor and financially uneducated"?  Did McClure say that, or did the reporter just throw it in?  At a minimum it's unclear.  If McClure didn't actually say that part then it's a great example of a reporter slipping his opinion into the lede. 

Mark Shaffer leaving the Republic

Republic Energy/Telecom Reporter Mark Shaffer is leaving to take a job at DEQ.  Click to enlarge his original email.