Liberal State Bar Spends Three Years Going After Lawyer For Being Conservative Blogger

by John Hawkins
Reposted from Right Wing News

Everyone has now heard stories about conservatives who’ve been punished by “non-political” agencies like the IRS for their beliefs, but it happens at the state level, too. Back in 2011, I wrote about Rachel Alexander, who was targeted by the liberal State Bar of Arizona for having the audacity to work with other conservative lawyers to fight corruption in the state.

Rachel Alexander was collateral damage in a liberal fight to ruin her former boss, then-Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas. Thomas attempted in 2009 and 2010, with the help of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, to stop corruption by some judges and county supervisors in Arizona by filing criminal charges and a racketeering lawsuit against them. Alexander, a Deputy County Attorney, performed some research and writing on the racketeering lawsuit after it had been filed. However, since she was one of the best known conservative bloggers in Arizona, running Intellectual Conservative and IC Arizona, she was dragged into the court even though she was a minor player in the case.

The supervisors filed bar complaints against Thomas, Alexander, and another prosecutor. The left-wing Bar ran with the charges, demanding to know everything Alexander had ever blogged, anonymously or not, within the past five years and the corrupt liberal judiciary rubber-stamped the charges. That’s not surprising considering the judiciary is under the Bar and can be disciplined by the Bar; so there is no way the judiciary would not do the Bar’s bidding.

Thomas and his other deputy prosecutor were disbarred and Alexander was suspended for six months plus one day, requiring her to retake the Bar exam again and reapply to the Bar. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice, which the Left had asked to investigate Thomas and Arpaio over abuse of power for going after the judges and supervisors, dropped the case, stating it had found no evidence. This completely refuted the Bar’s case against the three, exonerating them, but the Bar would not budge. Thomas remains disbarred and his other deputy is appealing.

The supervisors refused to pay for Alexander’s appeal, which was unprecedented for a merit-protected Maricopa County employee. Alexander wrote up her appeal herself (A lawyer would have charged $60,000, to give you an idea of how much work this was). The Arizona State Supreme Court sat on her appeal for eight months; then just one week after Thomas announced he was running for governor, it issued the opinion which essentially upheld most of the suspension.

The Arizona Supreme Court based most of its ruling upon statements of a former supervisor of Alexander’s who was her supervisor in name only. He said he’d heard complaints about Alexander’s performance in the office, but provided no evidence of these supposed complaints. The Supreme Court said this was evidence she wasn’t competent enough to work on the racketeering complaint. The court ignored the fact that Alexander had never received a poor review in her entire five years at the County Attorney’s Office and Thomas testified during the trial that he’d never received a complaint about her. At the same time, the Court stated several times in its opinion that it found no evidence of political bias by Alexander against the judges or supervisors. So essentially, Alexander is being suspended because liberals want to stick it to a conservative blogger.

At this point, Rachel Alexander is being left with little recourse other than to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The problem is the Supreme Court only accepts about 80 of the 10,000 petitions it receives every year. Alexander has no attorney and cannot afford one, having been forced out of the legal profession into journalism, where she doesn’t even make enough money to make payments on her law school loans. Alexander also has a federal claim against the Bar for selective prosecution. Several attorneys familiar with her case have told her she has a slam-dunk case, considering the Bar reached down through several layers of supervisors to single her out for discipline without even targeting her immediate supervisor, who was in charge of the racketeering case and who performed the bulk of the work on it. Worse yet, the Bar is trying to force her to pay $128,203 for the cost of its prosecuting just her.

The Left targeted her because she may have been well known on the Arizona political scene, but she didn’t have the connections or money to fight back. She is a weekly columnist for TownhallThe Christian Post, and Right Wing News, but not someone with enough star power to make this a huge story. This story of corruption at the state government level is no different than the corruption that is now coming out about the Obama Administration, but because it is on a smaller scale, it is more difficult to get people interested in it.

Meanwhile, Alexander’s reputation has been dragged through the mud and the abuse that she has had to endure is appalling. She has been smeared non-stop by liberal websites in Arizona. Her main website was hacked by an IP address associated with the county supervisors, but no law enforcement agency would investigate it even though it destroyed her traffic, got her website banned from Google –and she finally had to rebuild her website from scratch using a different platform in order to get back into Google. Her traffic has never recovered because she lost thousands of articles; she went from 5,000 unique visitors per day down to less than 1,000. Her bankruptcy business fell apart because potential clients would not hire her once they’d googled her. She lost her home to foreclosure last summer and moved in with her parents.

This is even worse than the IRS’s targeting of Tea Party groups because she’s one person, without the resources to fight, without the national attention, without lawyers coming out of the woodwork to help her out.

If anyone can help Alexander find legal counsel or provide more exposure for her plight, please contact her at rachel@intellectualconservative.com. This case needs all the sunlight it can get. The liberals have been doing this to many bloggers and if we don’t stand up to them and stop this, they’ll be coming for us next. Michelle Malkin has covered it here.

Taxpayer outrage! Supervisors award $1.4 million to convicted felon Wolfswinkel

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
Friday, April 26, 2013

The bigger the crook, the larger the settlement 
Supervisors out of control awarding millions to more gold-diggers in order to make Sheriff Arpaio look bad 

Convicted felon Conley Wolfswinkel When are the adults going to take over?  Even the judges are figuring out the Supervisors’ little scam, and are refusing to allow more million dollar settlements to Wolfswinkel and Mary Rose Wilcox. After it was clear that the judge was not going to approve convicted felon and Don Stapley business partner Conley Wolfswinkel’s lawsuit against the county over “stress” from Arpaio and Thomas prosecuting him, Wolfswinkel went to the County Supervisors and demanded a payout. They awarded him $1.4 million this morning, the largest settlement yet. Next up for a generous settlement offer of YOUR money will be disgraced former Don Stapley, who was so corrupt he didn’t dare run for reelection last year.

Here are other settlements that have already been awarded, a waste of OUR taxpayer money, courtesy of the Supervisors, who are always eager to give their pals and themselves handouts in the name of making Arpaio look bad -

* Supervisor Andrew Kunasek; $123,000.

* Retired Judge Barbara Rodriguez Mundell; $500,000

* Susan Schuerman, executive assistant for former Supervisor Don Stapley; $500,000

* Retired Judge Anna Baca; $100,000

* Retired Judge Kenneth Fields; $100,000

Steve Wetzel, Maricopa Chief Information Officer; $75,000
Contact the Supervisors NOW and tell them you do not approve of them handing out OUR money to corrupt politicians in order to shame Arpaio.

We hear that Andrew Thomas is running for governor. We bet he will finally put a stop to these abuses of tax dollars, since no one else will.

Join Our Mailing List

Convicted felon Wolfswinkel about to get huge settlement from County Supervisors

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
Friday, April 26, 2013

UNBELIEVABLE. Will Supervisors award him $5 million, even more than Mary Rose Wilcox? 
Judge repeatedly ruling against Wolfswinkel’s lawsuit against Maricopa County over “stress” from being prosecuted, so he turns to County Supervisors for settlement   

Convicted felon Conley Wolfswinkel You can’t make this stuff up. Convicted felon Conley Wolfswinkel, who was disgraced former County Supervisor Don Stapley’s business partner, is demanding $5 million from county taxpayers over Sheriff Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas attempting to prosecute him. The Phoenix New Times exposed Wolfswinkel’s dishonest land swaps with Stapley a few years ago.

We’ve been told that Wolfswinkel’s lawsuit against the county hasn’t been going so well, the judge has been ruling against him on everything. Realizing he’s going to lose and not get even one cent of our money, Wolfswinkel has turned to the County Supervisors, who have a pattern of handing out millions of taxpayers’ dollars to anyone who disagrees with Arpaio (and Thomas), in order to make them look bad. Any whistleblower who tries to put a stop to their taxpayer-funded political vendetta spending spree is fired, as happened to poor Deputy County Attorney Maria Brandon.

Will the County Supervisors repeat their generous handouts of taxpayer money and award convicted felon Wolfswinkel millions of dollars, simply to make Arpaio look bad? How many more people have to lose their jobs, reputations, and live savings simply because they tried to put a stop to this kind of corrupt activity? The Supervisors are meeting this morning at 10 a.m. to discuss his settlement.

Contact the Supervisors NOW and tell them you do not approve of them handing out OUR money to corrupt politicians in order to shame Arpaio.

Join Our Mailing List

MIHS Meets in Closed Door Session to Discuss Controversial State Contract


The Maricopa County Integrated Health Systems Board of Directors
is currently meeting in closed-door Executive Session to discuss the current legal challenge and protest filed by Magellan and United RHBA against MMIC (Mercy Maricopa Integrated Care), MIHS CEO Betsey Bayless, and Maricopa County Special Health Care District.  The current agenda shows a 30-minute spot dedicated to discussion of this subject, all of which will be exempt from records requests and exempt from public inspection.

It is not surprising that the MIHS Board is keeping a low profile and is remaining tight-lipped about this controversial contract after being awarded a possibly illegal $2 billion to $3 billion dollar contract from the State of Arizona.  This came on the heels of a controversial pay raise for MIHS CEO Betsey Bayless that raised her taxpayer salary to $500,000.

Accountability and SunshineThe board will apparently receive legal advice on the protest to the bid and discuss options moving forward.  An administrative law judge is likely to uphold the Department’s awarding of the contract, leaving a lawsuit targeting the state as a possible option.  Magellan has already filed a civil suit seeking financial damages in Maricopa County Superior Court against MIHS and MIHS’ CEO Betsey Bayless.  Magellan alleges MIHS was awarded the contract improperly and used proprietary information from Magellan to win the bid.

The new contract was set to begin on October 1, 2013, but the protest and lawsuit are likely to delay implementation.  Previously MIHS responded to the formal protest with the following statement:

“We are studying those protests and will respond in the appropriate venues,” the statement said. “We are confident in the strength of our bid, and we are proud to offer a unique, collaborative approach to meet Maricopa County Medicaid recipients’ behavioral-health needs and to integrate the behavioral- health and medical services for those with serious mental illness.”

If you recall, the lawsuit also alleges “serious conflicts of interest” by MIHS because Mercy Maricopa both manages the system and provide services, which is “prohibited by the contract and by state law.” Magellan also alleges that the bidding process contained “serious irregularities,” such as the state’s bidding process being amended twice to unfairly benefit MIHS over their private competitors.  Additional claims include conflicts of interest, improper scoring, licensing problems, and disclosure of proprietary information to competitors. Magellan originally serviced the state contract since 2007.

The serious allegations require attention and deserve public scrutiny.  MIHS should be holding discussions on the contract and the protest, but they should be doing this in the face of the public.  Not behind closed doors immune from public records requests. MIHS is a government entity that collects nearly $60 million dollars in property taxes every year and is run by a publicly elected Board of Directors.  When the state awards a contract that could be worth up to $3 billion dollars, possible bias in favor of a taxpayer funded MIHS over private competitors deserves more sunshine and certainly more accountability.

If you’d like to contact the MIHS Board of Directors and demand more transparency for taxpayers, they can be reached via email as follows:

 

State Bar assigns Andrew Thomas nemesis to investigate whistleblower’s complaint against Disciplinary Judge

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
Saturday, April 20, 2013

State Bar assigns candidate who lost race to Thomas, and who was fined, to investigate legitimate complaint about Thomas disciplinary judge
Corruption within State Bar at highest levels ever

—–Original Message—– From: Mark Dixon [mailto:md20033@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 6:20 PM To: ‘Amelia Cramer’ Cc: ‘levine2005@aol.com‘; ‘whitney@cunninghammott.com‘; ‘rtplattlaw@gmail.com‘; ‘bryan.chambers@azbar.org‘; ‘lisaloo@asu.edu‘; ‘jennifer.rebholz@farmersinsurance.com‘; ‘alex@vakulalaw.net‘; ‘jflagler@flaglerlaw.org‘; ‘mcrawford@mcrazlaw.com‘; ‘Dee-Dee.Samet@azbar.org‘; ‘r.coffinger@gmail.com‘; ‘tom@crowescott.com‘; ‘dderickson@rhlfirm.com‘; ‘DDrain@DianeDrain.com‘; ‘mho@polsinelli.com‘; ‘ssaks@cb-attorney.com‘; ‘gt@ltinjury.com‘; ‘JimmieDeeSmith@azbar.org‘; ‘Kanefieldj@ballardspahr.com‘; ‘smays@phoenixlaw.edu‘; ‘marc.miller@law.arizona.edu‘; ‘Douglas.Sylvester@asu.edu‘; ‘tonyfinley@hotmail.com‘; ‘ajennings@bloodsystems.org‘; ‘meredith_peabody@hotmail.com‘; ‘maritajohn@cox.net‘; ‘jennifer.burns@azbar.org‘; ‘dbyers@courts.az.gov‘; ‘virginia.gonzales@azag.gov‘; ‘John F. Phelps’

Subject: Expected contact regarding State Bar Disciplinary Council and Disciplinary Judge William J. O’Neil

Ms. Cramer,

I have been waiting patiently for the response you promised below. The only communication I have received is an email from Mr. Thomas McCauley:

“RE: 13-0689 (Kent Volkmer); 13-0691 (David Cowles)
Mr. Dixon,
“These matters have been assigned to me for investigation. I will let you know if I need any additional information and the results of my investigation.
Tom McCauley 602-340-7352″

I strongly object to the assignment of Mr. Thomas McCauley to the investigation of these issues. It is impossible for Mr. McCauley to be impartial in any investigation regarding any matter revolving around William J. O’Neil, my issues, or any issue involving Andrew Thomas, Lisa Aubuchon, Rachel Alexander etc.

Mr. McCauley ran for Maricopa County Attorney in 2004, a race he lost in the primary, and in which he was, quite frankly, not even a serious contender. Upon losing the primary race he organized Concerned Citizens Against Andrew Thomas. Mr. McCauley subsequently was fined $1,000.00 by the Maricopa County Elections Department for campaign violations under order CF04-35. McCauley supported the Democrat candidate in the General Election over Thomas — who was so out there that even Democrat Mayor Phil Gordon supported Thomas over him in the General election. The Wells Fargo bank account used was out of Portland Oregon. This appears to be an obvious attempt to secret additional finance information.

Mr. McCauley’s loyalties clearly lie against Andrew Thomas and investigating my claims against Judge O’Neil will entail reopening Thomas’s discipline investigation, along with many others that are tainted by Jg. O’Neil and his accomplices at the State Bar. As I revealed in an earlier email, Kent Volkmer warned me that O’Neil and “the establishment” would try to take me down for my attempts to expose the corruption.

My claims, which are fully supported by the evidence, clearly show a severe problem with William J. O’Neil and the attorney discipline process he controls. The true and factual affidavit that Lisa Aubuchon used in her appeal adds to the credible information supporting the fact that O’Neil did not provide Andrew Thomas and his subordinates with a fair and unbiased hearing. Mr. McCauley’s extreme bias against Andrew Thomas is cause to remove him from investigating this matter because the essence of my complaint includes abuses perpetrated against Thomas and the others by O’Neil and the disciplinary arm of the State Bar.

This speaks to the bias of the Arizona State Bar and Ms. Vessella, head of the discipline department. Ms. Vessella would have been the individual to assign these complaints to Mr. McCauley. To put it frankly, upon the inevitable investigation of my claims and exposure of William J. O’Neil, Mr. McCauley, Ms. Vessella and others in her department also will be exposed for abuses of power.

A next logical step is to re-open and question every proceeding brought by the Bar and presided over by O’Neil as the Disciplinary Judge, starting with Andrew Thomas. Mr. McCauley’s personal vendetta against Andrew Thomas compels him to find any reason not to expose the truth. Moreover, we need not look any farther than the actions taken against Mr. Ernest Calderon. Mr. Calderon served as the State Bar President from 2002 – 2003. He worked for the State Bar reviewing hundreds of investigations similar to those brought against Andrew Thomas. Even though he publicly did not agree with Thomas’s immigration policy, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office asked Mr. Calderon to review the many bar complaints filed against Andrew Thomas and the others in his administration. Mr. Calderon determined none were legitimate.

What did Mr. Calderon receive for this? He was removed as one of the four delegates to the American Bar Association’s House of Delegates, a position he had held for four years. Emails reveal that there were no character issues raised regarding Mr. Calderon. The only issues raised were “related to the Thomas matter and concerns about loyalty to the organization.” The emails further reveal the individuals attacking Mr. Calderon: “Several, led by Ed (Novak), Drain and Ditcher wayed[sic] in. Alan defended the recommendation of the Appointments Committee to reappoint you. It seemed the general sentiment was not to reappoint you and a motion was made to appoint Jeff Willis instead.

Tabling the decisions works in your favor because it will buy you time to make your case for reappointment. ” Emotions were running too high to vote today. I’m sorry about all of this, I get the impression that many Board members are unhappy with me also because of my role in the Thomas matter.” Former Bar President Daniel J. McAuliffe stated, as you have, “the members of the State Bar of Arizona’s Board of Governors do not involve themselves in disciplinary matters.”

Yet, in the matter of Mr. Calderon, it is apparent that they do, in fact, involve themselves in disciplinary matters. Specifically Mr. Calderon was punished by being removed as a delegate strictly because he presented an unbiased opinion regarding the numerous bar complaints brought against Mr. Thomas that said complaints were unfounded. Please remember that Ed Novak has been central in all these issues at the State Bar and still is.

A more recent development, just after coming out in support of the allegations I have raised, a NPR radio reported that Mr. Jack Levine, a member of the Bar’s Board of Governors, was accused of assaulting a State Bar staffer. Such an accusation is incredible. Come on, how low will some people stoop? Let’s see that one stick in the face of a claim of retaliation for Mr. Levine trying to do the right thing in attempting to hold members of the Board of the Arizona State Bar accountable.

One of the two complaints Mr. McCauley is “investigating” revolves around Tiffany & Bosco and Mr. David Cowles. Tiffany and Bosco breached an agreement with me regarding my property and they lied to me regarding my rights and their future conduct regarding the property. Since the complaint was filed, the foreclosure sale date has been postponed twice and now is set for April 18, 2013. I contend that if there was no merit to my complaint the property would have sold on the original sale date of March 21, 2013. Tiffany & Bosco committed to a judicial foreclosure on the mortgage and not the property; they further assured me that I would have access to the escrow account on said property. I do not. If there was no merit to the complaint the property would have sold long before now.

The fact that Mr. McCauley has not contacted me needing any additional information on this matter causes additional great concern regarding the integrity of this investigation. I am afraid that in the response to the complaint Tiffany and Bosco will not disclose the volumes of emails and other correspondence validating my claims. I also am sure Tiffany and Bosco will be protected from discipline due to the many Tiffany & Bosco representatives serving at the State Bar, “the establishment” will protect itself.

Currently the most conspicuous event is the change in status of my contractor’s license. In the enclosed attachment “ROC Timeline exhibits 4-15-13.pdf” (which can be found on scribd.com if not now then in the immediate future when I upload it) you will see said license was suspended on May 13, 2010 or September 27, 2010 or February 8, 2011 depending on which document you want to believe. The suspension stems from an unsubstantiated complaint filed on November 16, 2009. The complaint originally was cleared by the ROC investigator but reopened through the persistence of Maxine M. Becker Esq. with Salmon Lewis & Weldon, P. L. C. I ask you to review the file and realize that this was all done at the request of William J. O’Neil. The enclosed documents and timeline backs up this accusation and it is further substantiated by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors, along with the Arizona Attorney General’s office, removing the complaint history etc. from the file. This pleases me of course but, does nothing to compensate me for the years I was not able to use my license (asset) to earn a living.

I was informed that the Arizona State Bar had no intention of looking into a complaint against William J. O’Neil regarding Robert M. Gallo as mentioned in the previous email. The State Bar disciplinary counsel has misinformed you that the Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct cleared O’Neil in this matter. O’Neil was NOT cleared on these charges by the Commission on Judicial Conduct. They didn’t even consider them; the charges were just flat ignored, see the attachment “oneil complaint dismissal 12-4-12.pdf.” (check scribd.com in a few days for this file)

I want to make it clear that these charges were never addressed by the Commission and the attachment “william j oneil judicial complaint 4-16-13.pdf” (check scribd.com in a few days) is a new complaint to the Commission on Judicial Conduct addressing, in detail, those charges. I will also formally ask you to investigate those charges as it is very apparent the State Bar Disciplinary Counsel lacks the credibility to pursue this matter.

In my initial conversation with Mr. Jack Levine, we agreed that there were just a few bad apples in the system and some things needed to be straightened out. My opinion is quickly changing. A conclusion I am coming to is the Arizona Supreme Court is unable or incapable of policing its own and nothing short of a constitutional amendment abolishing the current judicial selection process and attorney discipline process will solve the problem. The Judiciary seems to thumb their nose at the legislature and governor all the while doing whatever they want, violating anyone’s rights who cross them and placing themselves above any and all A. R. S. statutes. It is time to remove this absolute power from the judiciary and put some serious oversight in the hands of the other branches of government.

I will remind you that I did not ask for this fight, it was visited upon me. What have I gotten for demanding my constitutional rights? I have had my family and business destroyed, my reputation attacked and my civil rights denied. When all this has not shut me up, then the cowards who are protected by the State Bar of Arizona attempt physical threats and intimidation. I have received death threat phone calls telling me to back off. I won’t. It is time to clean up this mess and restore the judicial process to its legitimate, respectful status. Are you part of the solution or the problem?

Sincerely, Mark Dixon

Join Our Mailing List

Americans for Prosperity Foundation – Arizona Releases 2013 Local Government Scorecard

Americans for Prosperity Foundation - Arizona

AFPF-Arizona’s Local Government Scorecard for the 2013 fiscal year (its 6th annual local scorecard) covers 106 Arizona cities, counties and special-purpose taxing districts, and 670 local officials.  The Scorecard grades local officials on overall budgets, property tax levies and sales tax changes, and includes yearly scores for current officials going back to the 2008 fiscal year, as well as cumulative averages.  AFPF-Arizona’s Local Government Scorecard for the 2013 fiscal year comes out at a time when many local governments in Arizona are finalizing tax and budget plans for the 2014 fiscal year. View the scorecard at this link: http://americansforprosperityfoundation.com/arizona/legislativealerts/1000-2/

Follow the Money…..

MIHSThe recent mental health contract awarded by the state to Maricopa County Integrated Health System or MIHS is raising eyebrows. MIHS, a government funded and owned entity, is on the cusp of receiving a 3-year contract that is potentially worth $3 billion dollars.

Any $3 billion dollar deal should be viewed as suspect by watchdog groups and taxpayers, but what makes this deal special is that MIHS is a government owned, property tax levying entity bidding against private providers.  In fact, MIHS currently collects nearly $60 million dollars in property taxes each year.  MIHS is even allowed to go into debt with revenue bonds that can be paid for through the district’s operating property tax levy without voter approval.

To secure the lucrative contract, MIHS teamed up with Aetna-owned Schaller Anderson, Medicaid provider Mercy Care Plan, Carondelet Health Network and Dignity Health.  Not surprisingly, private providers Magellan Health Services and UnitedHealthcare (both of whom bid on the same contract) have filed formal protests against MIHS and MIHS CEO Betsey Bayless.

MagellanWhy would the state award the largest contract its ever offered to another government entity in what appears to be a clear violation of the Arizona Constitution’s “gift clause?”  When you pull the thread and follow the money trail, it’s hard to not suspect corruption, cronyism, and a healthy dose of conspiracy.

MIHS was created by Proposition 414 in 2003 after voters approved the measure in a special election by a margin of 58% to 42%.  At the time, AZ Republic columnist Robert Robb called the establishment of a property-tax-supported hospital district “unnecessary and unwise.”  Robb even warned voters that “…special tax districts, focused on only a single service with independently elected boards, are bad fiscal policy.  Hard choices are good for taxpayers and make for more efficient government.”

Robb even called the publicity pamphlet and ballot question used to promote the measure “the most blatant case of government propagandizing I’ve seen in over a quarter century of Arizona elections.”  Bold statement for a columnist who typically calls it as he sees it.

The lobbying firm responsible for the passage of the ballot referral legislation at the Capitol also ran the ballot campaign.  Phoenix-based HighGround public affairs is run by consultant Chuck Coughlin, Brewer’s campaign advisor and a man who has been referred to as Arizona’s “shadow governor.”   According to their website:

“Our team was the principal public affairs and lobbying team for the legislation that authorized the creation of the new Maricopa County Hospital District on behalf of Maricopa County.  Following the successful passage of the legislation, HighGround was retained as the principal campaign consultant for the Yes on 414 Committee.”

Fast forward to 2008.  HighGround is once again rewarded for their work and is retained by MIHS with their first lobbying contract.  Today, HighGround works hand-in-hand with Betsey Bayless who was hired as MIHS’ CEO in September 2005.

BaylessIn February 2013, Bayless was given a 33% pay raise, an extra $125,000 per year, bringing her annual taxpayer-funded salary to a whopping $500,000.  This despite a poor rating issued by a national accrediting group, the Joint Commission, which found widespread record-keeping problems and other flaws that posed risks to patients’ safety.  This even despite the fact that Bayless has already announced she’s leaving her position at the end of 2013.  Two of MIHS’ board members even voted against the pay raise, saying they opposed raising the pay of a CEO who is leaving in less than a year and working for a public hospital.

“It really rubs me the wrong way that we’re spending this type of money,” board member Elbert Bicknell said. “Don’t get me wrong. Betsey is a smart … woman, and she’s done a hell of a job from 2005 to now. But a ($125,000) raise in a year when we give our janitors maybe a 1 percent raise or lay off people? It just doesn’t make sense.”  Dissenting board member Sue Gerard commented: “I think having that kind of salary is totally inappropriate.”

Could the pay raise have anything to do with the fact that it was widely speculated that MIHS was going to be awarded the enormous mental health contract?  Was this Betsey’s “swan song” on her way out the door?  Possibly.

But where this story gets really tangled is when one considers the ramifications of the state adopting Governor Brewer’s Medicaid expansion proposal.  Again, the value of the contract could increase an additional $1 billion dollars if the state accepts federal Medicaid dollars.  Who is running the campaign in Arizona for Medicaid expansion?

If you guessed Chuck Coughlin and HighGround, you’re correct.  Serving as Coughlin’s wingman is Peter Burns, a former Brewer budget advisor.  Perhaps that explains the governor’s complete flip-flop on this issue from less than a year ago.  The Wall Street Journal went as far as to describe the governor’s flip-flop as a “political 540°” and “a case study in the political pressure and fiscal gimmicks designed to get states to succumb.”

The New York Times sums up the magnitude of political forces and financial incentives behind this coordinated effort:

Recently, 40 lobbyists, representing at least 110 groups pushing for the expansion, among them hospitals, health care associations and business organizations, huddled in the executive wing of the State Capitol to update the governor’s advisers on their progress and hone strategies.

The Wall Street Journal goes further, discussing how “Ms. Brewer was nonetheless besieged by health-industry lobbying, especially from hospitals that want more government money and the insurers that administer Medicaid.”

There is something wrong with the State of Arizona climbing into bed with private business to give away billions of dollars in public funds.  When those decisions are tied to the largest health contract the state has ever awarded and possibly the biggest expansion of federal government our state has ever seen, tax-paying citizens are owed an explanation and deserve transparency.

Aside from the arguments of whether accepting federal Medicaid dollars related to the full implementation of Obamacare is good or bad policy, the one thing that is clear is that the consultants, lobbyists, and hospital administrators pushing the plan stand to make millions of dollars in profits.

Money makes people do strange things, indeed.

Government Contract Rigged for MIHS?

CASH

Magellan Health Services filed a “formal protest and a lawsuit” against Maricopa Integrated Health Services or MIHS. Magellan had managed a contract that included serving Maricopa County’s poor since 2007. Magellan’s complaint alleges numerous irregularities:

In its protest, Magellan alleges that Mercy Maricopa has “serious conflicts of interest” because Mercy Maricopa intends to both manage the system and provide services, which is prohibited by the contract and by state law. Magellan also claims that Mercy Maricopa should have been ineligible to bid on the contract but that state procurement officials improperly amended the request for proposals “to permit the winning bidder to qualify as an eligible bidder.”

Magellan Arizona CEO Richard Clarke told The Arizona Republic that there were “serious irregularities in the bidding process,” such as the state twice amending the proposal request “at the last moment” to allow bidders to subcontract services, which benefited the Mercy Maricopa proposal.

Magellan also claims that the bids were improperly scored and that “there was an overall bias in favor of the winning bidder.”

For example, Clarke said, both organizations proposed eliminating the separate provider network for children’s treatment and using the administrative savings for direct services. Mercy Maricopa earned points for that portion of its proposal, but Magellan did not, he said. “There are a number of errors like that where it’s really clear to us that the two entities were judged very differently,” he said.

Magellan’s complaint targets not only MIHS but Betsey Bayless, MIHS’ CEO. Bayless has previously been under scrutiny for receiving a $125,000 taxpayer funded pay raise earlier this year, bringing her annual salary to $500,000 - in taxpayer money.  Bayless was viewed by many as a spoiler in the 2002 governor’s race between Matt Salmon and Governor Napolitano. Napolitano won by less than 10,000 votes and in return, Bayless was appointed as director of the Department of Administration. Bayless’ appointment would serve as a launching pad to her lucrative position at MIHS, a position which many view is beyond her qualifications.

The Arizona Republic also states an interesting fact about the state contract:

The contract, worth $2 billion to $3 billion, depending on whether the state expands Medicaid, is the states first for integrated health care, which blends physical- and mental-health treatment.

The difference between $2 billion and $3 billion is staggering. The Arizona Republic understates the amount and ignores the underlying possible nefarious motive for the changing of state law, bidding processes, and why MIHS would want the contract.  To put this into context, the difference between $2 billion and $3 billion is the difference between, say, Jerry Jones and Steven Spielberg.

Another key factor easily glossed over by the Arizona Republic is that MIHS receives nearly $60 million dollars in property taxes each year.  So, you essentially have a taxpayer-subsidized government entity bidding against private providers for the largest behavioral health contract the state has ever offered.  Does that seem fair?

The legal challenge by Magellan will hopefully shed light on the seemingly back door deal and reveal what really took place in the bidding process. When $3 billion in taxpayer dollars is at stake, the people deserve complete transparency on state contracts.

Who will be the next Maricopa County Supervisor?

Here are the names of the candidates who have submitted their letters of interest to the Maricopa County Supervisors hoping to become the next Supervisor from district four.

Recently, Supervisor Max Wilson announced his resignation due to health issues.

If I were to call this “race” right now, it would probably be former Peoria Mayor John Keegan who receives the appointment.

Here are the names in the running:

Peoria Council member Ronald Aames
Peoria Mayor Bob Barrett
Former state legislator Robert Blendu
Former Maricopa County Superintendent of Schools Sandra Dowling
Lobbyist Jim Buster
Former state legislator Jack Harper
Dick Hensley
Egg hatchery Executive/Owner Clint Hickman
IT consultant Joseph Hobbs
Former Peoria Mayor John Keegan
Former state legislator Jean McGrath
Goodyear Vice Mayor Joanne Osborne
Litchfield Park Mayor Tom Schoaf
Gregory Smith

The compensation for Maricopa County Supervisor is currently set at $76,600/year.

Hobbs to seek Maricopa County BOS Appointment

image001(Maricopa County, March 6th, 2013) Joseph Hobbs, a Member at Large on the Maricopa County Republicans Executive Guidance Committee is the latest activist to toss a hat into the ring to fill Board Supervisor Max Wilson’s position.

After completing a short and rather intense study of interest and support, Joseph Hobbs has announced that he will seek appointment to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors once Max Wilson’s seat is vacated on March 11th. “Max Wilson has served with distinction and he will be missed.” said Hobbs, adding “I believe I can continue Max’s work in terms of looking out for the best interests of our district and the taxpayers of Maricopa County as a whole.”

Joseph Hobbs is an IT Consultant and President of Optical-IP-Networks LLC. He holds a Master’s degree with emphasis in Telecommunication Sciences and a Bachelor of Science degree in Computer Information Systems (Minor in Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems). He is running in large part because of the encouragement and support he has received from numerous Republican Party officials, elected officials, and several large grassroots organizations.

Hobbs has been serving as Maricopa County Republican Committee Member-at-Large, and as an elected Precinct Committeeman. He was recently elected for his second term as Member-at-Large with more than 66% of the vote from his fellow PCs in Maricopa County. Hobbs currently serves on the MCRC Executive Committee as a dependable fiscal conservative with a strong reputation for protecting our Constitution.

Maricopa County taxpayers will be well served by his fiscal conservatism while his leadership style and team-first attitude will be a real asset to the Board itself. An additional benefit will be Hobbs’ extensive background in technology, as Maricopa County has one of the largest technology budgets in the country.

As a nearly 20 year resident of Maricopa County, Joseph Hobbs knows the district and the county and is ready to go to work on day one to ensure that first-class services are delivered at the best possible prices to County residents.

Recall Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox!

RecallWilcox

Stapley questioned by federal judge about criminal charges in lawsuit against Arpaio, Thomas

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

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Federal judge wants to investigate criminal charges against Stapley, won’t rubberstamp judgment for him
Judge also looking into real estate dealings of Stapley’s felon business partner Conley Wolfswinkel
Here are some excerpts from the Arizona Republic article:

Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley will have to answer more questions about property deals and criminal charges than he wants to, according to the U.S. District Court judge presiding over his lawsuit against Sheriff Joe Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas.

Seven of the cases have been settled for amounts ranging from $75,000 to $975,000. (Payment of the latter to Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox is under dispute.)

Three remain involving retired Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe, because of criminal charges and a racketeering lawsuit filed against him, ostensibly as retaliation for court rulings and to prevent him from holding a court hearing over Thomas’ objections; Stapley, who was indicted twice alleging campaign-fund and disclosure crimes; and businessman Conley Wolfswinkel, whose offices were raided in a failed search for evidence against Stapley.

Stapley’s attorney, Michael Manning, had sought to limit evidence against Stapley to what was known at the time the indictments were filed. The intent is to keep defendants Thomas and Arpaio and their former deputies, Lisa Aubuchon and David Henderschott, from using this trial to try to prove the allegations they could not prove because the indictments were dismissed.

U.S. District Judge Neil Wake granted Manning’s motion but cautioned that certain evidence pertaining to Stapley’s reputation will be allowed at trial.

Among Stapley’s claims are that he was forced to sell certain property to pay his legal bills and that the criminal indictments tarnished his reputation.

But when Stapley faced the defendants’ attorneys in deposition earlier this month, Manning advised him not to answer questions about the property in question, which figured into the criminal charges against him, or about an analysis of the criminal charges done by Gila County Attorney Daisy Flores.

The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office had asked Flores to re-evaluate the evidence against Stapley. Flores wrote that there was indeed probable cause to charge Stapley with multiple felonies.

Late Friday, Wake ruled that the property was central to the case and that Stapley would have to answer questions.

Wake also ruled that even if Stapley didn’t want to answer questions about Flores’ opinion during the deposition, he would not be able to deny their content at trial. And if Stapley wanted to deny the allegations, he would have to explain why.

Luncheon with Andrew Thomas this Saturday

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
Sunday, November 4, 2012

PARADISE WOMEN’S REPUBLICAN CLUB 

EVERYONE WELCOME


Saturday, November 10  

10:30 Social, 11:00 Business Meeting
11:15 Program, 12:00 Luncheon 

     

Gainey Ranch Golf Club 
 7600 Gainey Club Drive, Scottsdale  85258
_______________________________________________________

FEATURED SPEAKER

Former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas Biography _____________________________________

$25.00 per person
($1.06 additional if paid online)  
Regular Luncheon Menu

Corn Chowder
Braised Beef Short Ribs w/Sundried Tomato, Soft Polenta
Season Vegetables

Dessert:  Chocolate Mousse Cup with Fresh Berries

Vegetarian Luncheon Menu
Corn Chowder
Vegetable Terrine w/Roasted Garlic Aoili 
Dessert:  Chocolate Mousse Cup with Fresh Berries

Menu Options (Click Below)

 

Paid Reservations Required in ADVANCE
Contact President Susan Kay Schultz
(480) 945-1490 or detailshm@cox.net 

All checks payable PRWC.  Mail to:

Paradise Republican Women’s Club
P.O. Box 12070
Scottsdale, AZ   85267-2070  

Click here for more information

Join Our Mailing List

Support Your Local Sheriff!

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
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Support Your Local Sheriff! 

 

Joe has always been there for us, now it’s our turn to be there for him.
Help get out the Republican vote!

Give the chronically unemployed something to do for the next 4 years.

 

County Attorney Bill Montgomery Calls On Kyrsten Sinema to Release Client List

“Kyrsten Protects Criminals, Vernon Protects Families” 

Phoenix, AZ – Maricopa County‘s top law enforcement officer, County Attorney Bill Montgomery, is demanding that Democratic Congressional candidate Kyrsten Sinema support her claim to having been a criminal defense attorney and reveal which cases she worked on.  Over the course of her career, Sinema has claimed to have worked for murderers and other violent criminals but refuses to say which ones.

In a 2006 interview, Kyrsten Sinema boasted about her work as a “criminal defense attorney who represents murderers.”    Shawn Macomber, “The Marginalized Mainstream,” The American Spectator, June 14, 2006.

Montgomery is joining Vernon Parker and the entire Arizona Republican Party in demanding Sinema release her client list to support her claims and reveal just who she stands with.

“Democrat Kyrsten Sinema claims to have made a career out of protecting criminals.  She shouldn’t hide who she has defended now just because she is running for office.  Arizona families deserve to know the whole truth so why is Sinema keeping who she claims to have defended a secret.  Vernon Parker has the support of national victims rights groups because he is committed to protecting law-abiding citizens.  I look forward to working with him when he gets to Congress,” said Bill Montgomery, Maricopa County Attorney.

*On Wednesday, the National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Lifers spoke out against Kyrsten Sinema’s “extreme and alarming record on victim’s rights” and gave their support to Vernon Parker.  

On Display Today: Paul Penzone’s Inexperience and Ineptitude

Penzone, Goddard and Camacho Miscalculate and Look Foolish

PHOENIX, AZ – Maricopa County Sheriff candidate Paul Penzone and two fellow Democrats had their hopes dashed today after prematurely calling a press conference to applaud the county Board of Supervisors’ decision to offer a massive settlement in a jailhouse death claim against Sheriff Arpaio.

Problem is, the Board refused to settle the claim today and instead sided with Sheriff Arpaio to go back to trial and fight the lawsuit.

“Penzone did today what many inexperienced politicians do. He came to an incorrect conclusion, jumped the gun, called a press conference and looked foolish in the process,” says Chad Willems, Arpaio’s campaign manager.

To save face, Penzone and his Democrat colleagues, former Phoenix mayor Terry Goddard and former TV reporter Frank Camacho, went on to level accusations against Arpaio and his office, again without the benefit of accurate knowledge and verifiable data.

The three Democrats told reporters the manner in which Arpaio runs the Sheriff’s Office costs taxpayers exorbitant amounts of money in legal fees.

But the data says something altogether different. The MCSO’s legal fee payouts are far less than the Phoenix Police Department and neighboring Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office, which also operates a mega-jail system.

Since 1993, when Arpaio was first elected Sheriff, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office has paid out a total of $45 million dollars in lawsuits from vehicle accidents to inmate claims. In that same time period, Phoenix Police Department, which does NOT have a jail system with 8500 inmates, has paid over $74 million dollars in legal fees. And in just the last ten (10) years, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office has paid out a whopping $274 million dollars in legal fees alone.*

“Sheriff Arpaio is an excellent manager and a responsible steward of the taxpayers’ money,” said Willems. “He runs the third largest jail system in the nation yet continues to come in under budget nearly every year and has returned $40 million to the taxpayers in the last ten years alone. Penzone is either totally ignorant of these facts or is once again deliberately misleading the public.”

# # #

*The LASO is the nation’s largest Sheriff’s Office, followed by (2) Cook County Chicago and (3) the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Phoenix.

Why Virginia Ross best recorder candidate

by Gerald Stevenson (reprinted with permission)

 

I know Virginia and her business acumen — she has the technology background and organizational experience to lead the recorder’s office out of the operational and financial missteps of the past.

She has clearly outlined her objectives to revitalize this key county department to be more customer oriented; technology current; and fiscally sound.

After years of ingrown management, the Pinal County recorder’s position needs Virginia’s drive and leadership to ensure the critical data of our county is protected and accurate.

She has quickly grasped the pivotal needs to lead for the future and make it more accessible to you and me.

Virginia is a seasoned and disciplined manger whom we can trust with our county’s critical records. She will make the right business decisions to upgrade, strengthen and refresh the office as appropriate.

Once elected, Virginia will conduct an operational audit and a budget review to determine the weaknesses and refine the development needs for the recorder’s office. She will then publish the short-term and long-term objectives of the department and provide a realistic roadmap to accomplish these goals.

I think you’ll agree with me. This office has an embarrassing record and is a laggard. Let’s straighten this out and get it right this election. Virginia Ross is the best candidate for the Pinal County Recorder’s position.

- Gerald Stevenson is retired IBM executive who lives in Mountainbrook.