Russell Pearce Responds to Bob Worsley Attack

RUSSELL PEARCE CALLS FOR BOB WORSLEY TO END NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN, JOIN HIM IN STANDING WITH ARIZONA’S FAMILIES

(Mesa) - On Tuesday, Bob Worsley’s campaign attacked me and like-minded Arizonans for our efforts to draw attention to–and business away from–the Phoenix New Times and its corporate owner, The Village Voice. While hypocritically attacking me for some imagined “divisive rhetoric,”  Worsley’s campaign offered a strangely disconnected defense of the Phoenix New Times while asking voters to draw a connection between Congressman Raul Grijalva and me. Worsley’s rhetoric was obviously meant to be divisive, but he could not pick a more ill-fitting pair than Grijalva and me.

“What do Russell Pearce and Raul Grijalva have in common?”  asked his press release. The answer is nothing. I’m a proven conservative, Raul is a committed liberal. I have a 100% pro-life, pro-family, pro-Second Amendment voting record; Raul’s is the opposite. I helped to write and pass Arizona’s Jobs Bill and led the passage of the first truly balanced state budget in years, while Grijalva passed ObamaCare and voted for trillion dollar budget deficits. My actions led to job creation and economic growth, while Grijalva’s led to recession and depression. I wrote and passed SB1070 to enforce our nation’s immigration laws, while Grijalva opposed our efforts and wrote that the bill was bad for Arizona.

Come to think of it, so did Bob Worsley. You wouldn’t know that he wrote about it because he deleted part of his writings just after he announced for office, but the same Bob Worsley who wants to attack me for non-existent commonalities with Raul Grijalva wants voters to ignore (or better still, never find out) that he shares his illegal immigration ideology with Raul.

In his desperate attempt to try to connect me to Grijalva, Worsley jumped the shark and decided that attempts to change the business practices associated with the New Times and its owner were morally equivalent to Raul Grijalva calling for a boycott of the entire State of Arizona because he disagreed with SB1070 and enforcing the law.

It is worth revisiting the Phoenix New Times and The Village Voice to learn more about the people that Bob Worsley is defending.

According to media reports, The Village Voice and its family of newspapers account for 70% of all prostitution advertising in the United States. 48 State Attorney Generals and 19 U.S. Senators–Republicans and Democrats alike–have called on them to stop running sex ads which have been tied to child sex trafficking, and which collectively finance a national operation of hate campaigns against conservative individuals and organizations, elected officials and public servants, law enforcement and others. Investigations into these crimes have led to more than 50 arrests in 22 states. Millions of tainted dollars flow into the coffers of these publications and those paying the price are too often themselves victims of the most horrible crimes imaginable. Human trafficking and child and adult prostitution are horrific, and it is right and justifiable that decent people here in Arizona and across the country draw attention to these crimes and act to hold businesses that profit from them responsible.

While our effort to let advertisers know the truth about these publications is brand new, we have already been rewarded because the great people at Harkins Theaters and Buddy Stubbs Harley Davidson have pulled their advertising. Bob Worsley accused me of threatening Harkins Theaters, but his accusations were wildly off the mark. The good folks at Harkins run a decent, family-oriented business, and they are much better off today knowing the truth about where their advertising dollars were going. And the people of Arizona will reward Harkins with even more business for being a responsible and family-friendly corporate citizen.

SB1070 was about enforcing laws to keep people safe. Liberals like Raul Grijalva and Bob Worsley opposed SB1070 and Grijalva went so far as to call for a boycott of his own state because he was mad that it was going to enforce the law.

Exposing the New Times and its corporate model is about exposing human exploitation, indecency, and alleged illegality. Bob Worsley, Sean Noble, and the rest of his political team oppose our efforts because they are desperate to attack me with a ludicrous comparison to Raul Grijalva. In so doing they take the side of an entity that profits off of some of the worst crimes imaginable.

I am disappointed in Bob and his campaign, both for the position they are taking, the negativity with which they are beginning this campaign, and the very same divisive rhetoric they would accuse me of.

I hope that Bob will change his mind and join those of us who are working to expose these practices. Decent Arizonans from all over this great state are rallying to the effort and we certainly have room for Bob, Sean and the rest of his team. We can and ought to be able to agree on the need to end the exploitation of children, and I hope that political ambition does not prevent Team Worsley from getting on the right side of this very important issue.

The citizens of our district deserve an honest and decent debate on the issues facing our state. I hope Mr. Worsley will drop his attacks and join me in that effort.

###

Supervisors award Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox and cronies millions of dollars in “settlements”

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, April 12, 2012

Corrupt Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox to be awarded $975,000 from taxpayers for “stress”        

Supervisor Don Stapley’s secretary awarded $500,000 for “stress”

Corrupt Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox
Corrupt Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox

Emboldened by the verdict against Andrew Thomas disbarring him, the Maricopa County Supervisors are going on a spending spree of our taxpayer dollars awarding themselves and their cronies millions of dollars. Arpaio and Thomas had tried to prosecute county supervisors and judges, but the defendants cleverly turned the prosecution around on Thomas by filing bar complaints against him, knowing the liberal State Bar would punish him. Now the Supervisors are handing out millions of dollars to themselves and their cronies like it’s candy. Even county employees who were not prosecuted by Arpaio and Thomas are getting in on the gravy train.  Don Stapley’s secretary, who was not prosecuted, filed a lawsuit against the county demanding $1.5 million. The Supervisors’ hatchet man David Smith said today that she will be awarded $500,000. You have to wonder if this was a payoff to her for keeping her mouth shut about Stapley’s wrongdoing? Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox will receive $975,000 and retired judge Barbara Mundell will receive $500,000. The Supervisors have already awarded millions of dollars to other cronies for similar claims.

Wilcox, a Democrat, has a long sordid history of breaking the law and using her powerful political position to avoid punishment, some of which was reported by reporter Linda Bentley last year. A Grand Jury  indicted Wilcox on 36 criminal counts over some of her recent misdoings. Gila County Attorney Daisy Flores thought Thomas’s prosecution of Wilcox had enough merit to initiate a review. Although she eventually dismissed the charges, no doubt due to political pressure, she did not initially express any problem taking over the prosecutions from Thomas, and spent 10 months going over 10,000 documents in the case. Flores concluded that Wilcox had indeed failed to properly report financial information.

Smith says that he would rather settle the lawsuits now instead of fully litigate them in order to save the county money. The truth is that these people have no valid claims, so Smith is helping them skate around the judicial process. This is not right, these claims need to be properly litigated so it can be determined whether they have any merit or not.

Have the county coffers become a revolving door now? Anyone that threatens to sue the county we just give them money? Who is next? Quick, file a claim against the county claiming that Arpaio and Thomas stressed you out, and you too can get in on the county gravy train. Hurry though, Smith is resigning this month, and Supervisors Stapley and Brock will not be running for reelection. The free taxpayer handouts will probably end come election time.

The Tea Parties have championed cleaning up the County Supervisors office, and they will continue standing up to this kind of abuse. This is outrageous that not only did defendants like Wilcox get away with crimes, but now they are profiting off the taxpayers and calling themselves victims. Get involved with your local Tea Party and let’s stop this now.

Here is an Arizona Republic article about the settlements.

Join Our Mailing List

Andrew Thomas to hold press conference tomorrow on disbarment

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
Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Tea Parties rallying around Andrew Thomas tomorrow        

Out of control activist judiciary panel reports to State Bar, so they rubberstamped disbarment of Thomas

Tea Parties and conservatives are encouraged to show their support for former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas tomorrow as he holds a press conference denouncing a panel’s decision to disbar him, another deputy attorney, and suspend a third deputy attorney. Thomas tried to root out corruption in Maricopa County and was fought every way by powerful, entrenched liberal politicians. When he tried to prosecute crooked County Supervisors like Mary Rose Wilcox and judges, they filed bar complaints against him, knowing that the liberal State Bar would pounce on them. Thomas has been an activist conservative who stood up for the rule of law, including immigration laws. The panel that made the decision to disbar him was composed of two attorneys and one member of the public. The judge on the panel had ruled against Thomas in the past when he tried to prosecute corruption, so he was already biased against him, and should have recused himself but did not. Those attorneys report to the State Bar of Arizona. The State Bar of Arizona has made it REALLY CLEAR that they will go after anyone who dares defend Thomas. Ernie Calderon, a former State Bar president and Democrat, dared to stand up and issue an ethics opinion defending Thomas. In retaliation, the State Bar removed him from his position as the State Bar’s representative to the American Bar Association.

The press conference will be held tomorrow, Wednesday, April 11, at 10:30 a.m. at the plaza between the Orpheum and the Wells Fargo Building, a public area between Second and Third Avenues on Adams Street in downtown Phoenix.  People can park in the Wells Fargo parking lot or along the streets or other parking garages.  It shouldn’t take more than half an hour.

 

People should attend if they don’t want to see our state become as corrupt as Mexico, as we already have the illegal immigration to go with it. The far left is taking down conservatives in Arizona who dare to speak up one by one. First they took out Thomas, then they went after Russell Pearce and successfully took him down. Their next target is Sheriff Arpaio. Click here for their article, “After Attorney’s Disbarment, Latino Groups Want Arpaio Brought Down Next.”

This kangaroo court ignored all the evidence that has come out about how corrupt Maricopa County government is. Here is just some of the corruption that has taken place since the trial – but the panel refused to consider it: 

March

–FDIC is suing lenders over a risky loan they gave to Supervisor Stapley. This is a loan that Thomas and Aubuchon tried to investigate Stapley for.

http://sonoranalliance.com/2012/03/28/fdic-sues-over-risky-land-loan-to-stapley/

 

–County employees including County Manager David Smith played in pricey golf foursomes with vendors, in exchange were given lucrative Court Tower contracts. Thomas tried to investigate the Supervisors over the Court Tower.

http://sonoranalliance.com/2012/03/16/new-court-tower-scandal-county-corruption-and-golf-tournament/

 

–Judge who protected the County Supervisors, ruling against Thomas’s investigations, abruptly resigns in the middle of his term with no explanation

http://sonoranalliance.com/2012/03/12/another-judge-who-protected-the-county-supervisors-abruptly-resigns/

 

–Supervisor Stapley announces he is not going to run for reelection, and won’t even run for Congress – he knows he has no chance since all his corruption has come out

http://sonoranalliance.com/2012/03/04/targeted-by-conservatives-and-tea-party-activists-stapley-elects-to-fail-upward/

 

–Arizona Project 2012 Tea Party announces victory at stopping two Supervisors from running for reelection. They had made targeting the Supervisors their #1 priority this year due to all the corruption.

http://sonoranalliance.com/2012/03/01/arizona-2012-project-rabble-busters/

 

February

–County Manager David Smith abruptly resigns. Smith had filed the bar complaints against Thomas and his deputies and was the County Supervisors’ hatchetman.

http://sonoranalliance.com/2012/02/29/corrupt-county-manager-david-smith-abruptly-resigns/

 

December

–Liberal Arizona Republic columnist Laurie Roberts admits there must have been something to Thomas’s investigation of the Court Tower

http://sonoranalliance.com/2011/12/15/republic-writer-hints-that-court-tower-investigation-was-vindicated/

 

–Engineer in charge of Court Tower project fired (he’s rumored to want to go public about it)

http://sonoranalliance.com/2011/12/14/high-level-county-employee-managing-court-tower-project-fired/

 

–Several county employees fired or suspended for accepting bribes from vendors on Court Tower

http://sonoranalliance.com/2011/12/12/county-employees-accepted-free-gifts-from-companies-awarded-court-tower-contracts/

 

November

–County Supervisors & cronies lawsuits against Thomas & Arpaio thrown out

http://www.teapartytribune.com/2011/11/01/judge-dismisses-county-officials-lawsuits-against-arpaio-and-thomas/

 

October

–Supervisors continue firing attorneys who attempt to represent Thomas

http://sonoranalliance.com/2011/10/29/supervisors-continue-to-fire-more-lawyers-from-defending-andrew-thomas/

 

–Steve Chucri files to run for County Supervisor against Don Stapley since he realizes he will easily win

http://www.icarizona.com/2011/10/steve-chucri-files-candidacy-for.html

Read the full story about this show trial and kangaroo court at Worldnetdaily.
Read a full-page ad taken out in the Arizona State Bar’s magazine denouncing the State Bar’s prosecution of Thomas signed by a former AZ Attorney General, an ethics expert, a former president of the AZ State Bar, a former Chief Justice of the AZ Supreme Court, and a former disciplinary counsel for two State Bars.
Read the Maricopa County GOP EGC resolution denouncing the State Bar.

Join Our Mailing List

Governor Brewer signs HB 2349 (medical marijuana; cardholder; campuses; prohibition)

Amanda Reeve Bill Signed by Governor Brewer – Over $660 million Protected Annually for Arizona Universities
Legislation Bans Medical Marijuana at Universities, Schools and Day Care Facilities 

STATE CAPITOL, PHOENIX (April 3, 2012) – This afternoon, Governor Jan Brewer signed vital state legislation sponsored by Representative Amanda Reeve (R-Phoenix). The bill protects federal funding for tens of thousands of students at Arizona’s public universities. The legislation received overwhelming bipartisan support in both chambers of the Arizona Legislature. Federal law requires school campuses to be drug free in order to be eligible for federal funding or student financial aid. The federal government makes no exceptions for medically prescribed usage of marijuana approved by State voters. The legislation applies the same drug-free campus protections to all community colleges, high schools, junior high schools, middle schools and preschools throughout Arizona

House Bill 2349, approved 52-2 by the House and 28-2 by the Senate, bans the possession or use of all marijuana, medically prescribed or not, at Arizona public universities and schools. This will protect hundreds of thousands of students as well as hundreds of millions dollars annually at ASU, NAU and the UofA. According to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC), Arizona appropriated $666,216,900 million in federal funds for universities in fiscal year 2012.

“Marijuana use or possession of any kind, whether illegal or approved by voters for medical uses, does not belong on our school grounds”, said Representative Reeve. “With the health and safety of Arizona’s students, as well as literally hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, this legislation is critically necessary. Our children and adult students are far too important to risk. I’m proud to say we acted swiftly and decisively when confronted by this obvious concern”.

###

Investigative Report Regarding Representative Daniel Patterson

INVESTIGATIVE REPORT REGARDING REPRESENTATIVE DANIEL PATTERSON

PREPARED FOR

THE ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ETHICS COMMITTEE

SUBMITTED MARCH 30, 2012

Preliminary Statement

Michael C. Manning, Craig A. Morgan, Sharon W. Ng, and Danelle G. Kelling of Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP have been retained to serve as Special Counsel for the House of Representatives Ethics Committee to conduct an independent investigation regarding Representative (“Rep.”) Daniel Patterson (“Patterson”). The scope of this investigation is not limited to the domestic violence allegations made in the February 27, 2012, Ethics Complaint (the “Ethics Complaint”) filed against Rep. Patterson.1 See Exhibit 1 (Ethics Complaint). The scope of this investigation, as defined by the House Ethics Committee, is much broader. Specifically, we have been asked to (i) investigate and report whether Rep. Patterson has engaged in a pattern of inappropriate, indecorous, illegal, or unethical conduct in violation of law or the House Rules, and (ii) recommend a course of disciplinary action.2

(continue reading)

Tom Horne: Facts Dealing With False Allegations Made By Don Dybus

1. Applicable Statute

The rules are set forth in the definition of “independent expenditure,” in A.R.S. § 16-901(14). The definition of “election” is that it means any “primary, general,…or runoff election.” (Emphasis added). Therefore the primary is a separate election from the general. A.R.S. § 16-901(7) also states “for purposes of § 16-903 and § 16-905, the general election includes the primary election.” Neither of those Sections is applicable to the issue presented here. This reinforces the fact that, for our purposes, the primary election is a separate election from the general election.

2. Facts

Kathleen Winn was a victim of Andrew Thomas’ unjust practices as County Attorney, and false charges against her were repeatedly dismissed by the court. Ultimately she prevailed. In December 2009, she filed an independent committee called Business Leaders for Arizona, to oppose Andrew Thomas. This was done on her own initiative, and was “without cooperation or consultation” with Tom Horne or anyone acting on his behalf, and without “any arrangement, coordination or direction” with Tom Horne or anyone acting on his behalf. She never received any compensation from Tom Horne or anyone acting on his behalf. She raised $2,480, paid almost all of it ($2,100) to a website/graphic design expert in January 2010. He took the fee, but did not do anything. The project fizzled, and she abandoned it.

Although Kathleen filed papers with the Secretary of State’s office because she thought there would be an independent campaign, in fact there was no independent campaign during the primary. The above quoted statute defines “independent expenditure” as an expenditure “that expressly advocates the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate…” There was no express advocacy, because there was no activity at all, other than a payment for which nothing was ever received.

Kathleen then volunteered in Tom Horne’s campaign in the primary election in 2010. She was not an “officer, member, employee or agent of the committee” of that campaign, but solely a volunteer.

When the primary was over, Kathleen told Mr. Horne she was withdrawing from the campaign, in order to be able to conduct an independent campaign during the general election. This was on her own initiative, and was “without cooperation or consultation” with Tom Horne or anyone acting on his behalf, and without “any arrangement, coordination or direction” with Tom Horne or anyone acting on his behalf. Those who participated in the campaign can confirm that, after the primary, Kathleen stopped coming to meetings.

3. Motive for False Charges

When Don Dybus sent his letter, he knew he was about to be fired. He sent letter to the Attorney General’s Office indicating that he could not be fired. Sharon Collins, the Manager of the Tucson Office, asked him why he sent a letter of charges, as referred to in his letter, and he responded that “I knew that Rick Bistrow [the Chief Deputy in the Attorney General’s Office] was about to fire me, and I was afraid of losing the health insurance.”

On February 9, shortly before the letter was written, Tom Horne was on the telephone with Sharon Collins, and with Rick Bistrow, the Chief Deputy Attorney General. Horne told Collins to tell Dybus that he had not been working to standard, and that if he did not start working to standard, he would have to be let go. Collins passed this message, in substance, to Dybus, shortly before he sent his letter.

4. Hiring of Kathleen Winn

There was never a promise made to hire Kathleen Winn. She was not among the new employees processed during the transition period following the election. Kathleen Winn was not the first choice for that job. The offer was first made to Kim Owens, who decided she wanted to pursue other avenues in the private sector. Only then was the offer made to Kathleen Winn, based on her qualifications, and the confidence Tom Horne had developed in her during the primary. A statement of her qualifications is attached as Exhibit A. It is common for public figures to hire people in whom they have developed confidence during the election. The point is that no promise was made, and this is obvious from the fact that she was not hired at first, and that when the job for which she was hired opened up, something else was the first choice. Winn’s salary is the same as that of her predecessor.

5. Nathan Sproul

Tom Horne has had no contact with Nathan Sproul since the before the last election. Kathleen Winn chose his consulting company for the independent campaign. Tom Horne had no participation in that decision, nor did he know of it.

6. Contribution from Richard Newman

Tom Horne did not know that Kathleen Winn was approaching his sister for a contribution to the independent campaign. His sister and Kathleen Winn had met at the primary victory party, at which time his sister gave Kathleen Winn her phone number and asked her to call if there was anything she could do to help in the general election.

Richard Newman formed Horne Consulting, L.L.C. on March 26, 2010, not in October 2010, which illustrates the falseness of the charges that have been made, by facts that can be confirmed by the public record. Richard Newman ceased to be an employee of a company called AACOM on April 1, 2010, but he remained as a non-executive chairman of the board, and a consultant. Horne Consulting was formed in connection with his becoming a consultant. It had nothing to do with this election. No money passed through Horne Consulting for political contributions. All contributions in the independent campaign were from personal funds. Tom Horne had not heard of Horne Consulting until the article published today.

7. Formal Findings Against Rotellini Independent Campaign

The democratic Attorney General’ Association is the sole source of funding of a front group called the Committee for Justice and Fairness.[ 1 ] It spent $600,000 attacking me on behalf of my opponent Felicia Rotellini. It made the willful decision not to comply with Arizona’s requirements for filing disclosures with the Secretary of State, and oral disclosures in advertising. An Administrative Law Judge made that finding, and a copy of that decision is attached as Exhibit B. By contrast, Kathleen Winn diligently complied with all filing and disclosure requirements.

In addition, in September 2010, Felicia Rotellini attended a meeting of the Democratic Attorney General’s Association, and their funding of an independent campaign on her behalf followed shortly after that.[ 2 ] I attended no meeting of the Republican Attorney General’s Association or similar organization prior to the election. The irony of the present inquiry is that I went much further than many other candidates to stay far away from the line that separates campaigns from independent campaigns.

Footnotes:

[ 1 ] http://forms.irs.gov/politicalOrgsSearch/search/gotoSearchDrillDown.action?pacId=’27494′&criteriaName=’COMMITTEE+FOR+JUSTICE+AND+FAIRNESS’

[ 2 ] 9/14/10 Tim Nelson contribution in kind for “Daga conference.” http://azsos.gov/cfs/PublicReports/2010/78E892B2-7282-4CC7-BAC5-2F1313E7B899.pdf 

Exhibits:

http://www.azag.gov/AGResponseExhibits4-2-12.pdf

###

FBI investigating Tom Horne for campaign violations

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
Monday, April 2, 2012


Arizona Capitol Times
by Jeremy Duda
April 2, 2012

Federal authorities are investigating Attorney General Tom Horne over allegations that he illegally collaborated with an independent expenditure committee that spent more than a half-million dollars on negative ads against his Democratic opponent in 2010, the Arizona Capitol Timeshas learned.

A complaint filed in February by a former political ally and prosecutor in Horne’s own office, alleges that the attorney general collaborated with an independent expenditure called Business Leaders for Arizona, which received $115,000 from Horne’s brother-in-law in California.

The complaint, filed with the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office, also alleges that Horne rewarded the chairwoman of the campaign group with a high-paying job at the Attorney General’s Office.

Business Leaders for Arizona was chaired by Kathleen Winn, a real estate agent and Republican activist who became Horne’s director of community outreach after his election. The independent expenditure ran a series of attack ads against Democrat Felecia Rotellini, Horne’s general election opponent, after a national Democratic group started running ads on her behalf.

(Read the entire article by Jeremy Duda at the Arizona Capitol Times.)

Join Our Mailing List

Rep. Daniel Patterson In His Own Words

Daniel PattersonSonoran Alliance intercepted the following email message from Arizona State Representative Daniel Patterson to his Democrat colleagues:

Colleagues — The allegations against me are lies. I have not been arrested, charged, served or invoked immunity.

It seems I am being blackmailed by a person with bad mental health problems and a violent criminal history I only recently realized the severity of. When I asked this person to please consider moving out of my house, to protect my daughter, she went in to [sic] a rage. She attacked me, but I never hit her.

The truth will come out. You should not rush to judgment, please.

Members, I ask you please to call me to discuss my side of the story, the truth.

Then there is this little tidbit from The Yellow Sheet Report:

ETHICS COMPLAINT ‘POLITICALLY MOTIVATED’

Patterson also struck back at his caucus for calling for his resignation and filing an ethics complaint – moves that Patterson said were politically motivated. “Sometimes, they have a lynch mob mentality in politics. People want to elevate themselves by throwing someone else under the bus,” he said. Although he said on multiple occasions that he doesn’t hold anything against his colleagues and that he likes and respects Campbell and Hobbs, he said that he suspects they are trying to bolster their own political image at his expense. Campbell’s call for him to step down, he said, was driven by the fact that he was “one of the more independent members of the Democratic caucus, and some of the Democratic Party bosses in Phoenix don’t like that. Maybe they’re hoping to replace me with a yes-man who will toe the party line.” Hobbs, meanwhile, was seeking a cause to build her Senate campaign around: “Katie has always been a crusader on these types of issues. Maybe this is something she thinks will help her in her Senate campaign.” But, ultimately, he said, he works for his constituents, not his party leaders. Patterson attended the floor session today, but was only present to record his attendance. During the multiple COW calendars, he was not on the floor, but he returned for the third reading of bills.

 

FDIC sues over risky land loan to Stapley

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
Tuesday, March 27, 2012

FDIC lost $5.5 million on “unsafe and unsound” loan given to Stapley        

Loan was listed on 2009 County Attorney indictment against Stapley

More corruption involving lame duck Maricopa County Supervisor Don “the Don” Stapley, this time involving a loan he was being investigated for by Sheriff Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas. Stapley lied about his assets in order to obtain this unscrupulous loan. Arpaio and Thomas tried to prosecute him for lying about his assets on financial forms. It is unfortunate Stapley was able to fend off prosecution, it ends up costing taxpayers more now that another government agency has to take up the slack and follow through.  We heard that the FBI was at county offices yesterday. No wonder Stapley has announced he is not running for reelection, nor for any other office. The Phoenix Business Journal article is below.

“Stapley was accused of inflating his assets and lying about his real income by Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office investigators to obtain loans from Silver State and Mortgages Ltd.    , including the $5.5 loan detailed in the FDIC lawsuit against the Silver State bankers.”

Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley tied to Silver State Bank loan

Phoenix Business Journal

by Jennifer Johnson

March 24, 2012

 

Earlier this week, the Phoenix Business Journal wrote about four former Silver Statebankers who were sued by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.    for making risky land loans to developers.

The lawsuit describes more than a dozen loans made to six developers that involved what regulators described as unsafe and unsound underwriting practices. In an interesting twist, one of the developers was Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley.

The $5.5 million Stapley loan described in the FDIC lawsuit was relatively small compared to borrowers such as Las Vegas developerThomas Jurbala, who told ProPublica he received about $100 million in loans from Silver State over a decade. Stapley and entities he owned also received other loans from Silver State, but only one $5.5 million loan is cited in the FDIC lawsuit against the four Silver State bankers for unsafe and unsound banking practices.

FDIC LOSSES

Stapley has not been accused of any wrongdoing, but the FDIC said it lost more than $5.2 million on the $5.5 million loan he received in September 2006.

This loan is interesting because in 2009, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office indicted Stapley on 27 separate felony counts-and one of those counts is linked to Stapley’s $5.5 million Silver State Bank    loan.

Investigators from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office accused Stapley of initiating a complex scheme to defraud banks into lending him millions of dollars so he could develop high-end residential properties.

The loan matter is just a chapter in the highly charged dispute between Stapley and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio that included the East Valley supervisor being arrested in a county parking garage and ended with two rounds of indictments and charges against him being dropped. It shows some of the complicated, convoluted and sometimes questionable lending and real estate business practices that permeated the Arizona marketplace during the last land boom and bust. Indictments brought against Stapley by Arpaio and former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas were dismissed or dropped.

In the second round of indictments, Stapley was accused of inflating his assets and lying about his real income by Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office investigators to obtain loans from Silver State and Mortgages Ltd.    , including the $5.5 loan detailed in the FDIC lawsuit against the Silver State bankers.

Stapley is an East Valley Republican who was briefly in the race for Arizona’s new 9th Congressional District but dropped out earlier this month.

STAPLEY PROJECTS

Back in 2006, Stapley and entities he owned were involved in developing two separate projects: 19 custom homes in Gilbert, known as the Sonterra development, and 17 custom homes in Queen Creek, known as the Paseo de Pecans development. To finance the projects, Stapley and companies in which he had an ownership stake, borrowed from Mortgages Ltd. to buy undeveloped land for the projects. Most of the Mortgages Ltd. loans were meant to be a short-term bridge until more conventional financing, with lower interest rates could be found.

In September 2006, Stapley’s company, Arroyo Pacific Partners LLC, along another entity, Tangelo Avenue Investments LLC, took out the $5.5 million Silver State loan to pay off a previous Mortgages Ltd. loan.

According to court documents, the Silver State loan officer who gave Stapley the loan, Tim Kirby, based the value of the loan on the estimated value of the finished development project, rather than the raw, undeveloped land.

In the boom years, bankers weren’t concerned about basing the loan values on undeveloped land because appraisals were steadily rising. The problem was that Stapley’s Sonterra project was never finished – and he ultimately walked away from the project shortly before the bank failed in July 2008.

Regulators said the lack of improvements on the Sonterra development site should have been a major red flag for the Kirby. That’s because almost all of the $5.5 million Silver State loan was being used to pay off the previous Mortgages Ltd. loan on property that already was worth much less than the appraisal value.

Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office investigators raised questions about how Stapley was able to borrow millions from Silver State and Mortgages Ltd.

On Stapley’s taxes filed for 2005, the year prior to when he received the $5.5 million loan, he reported a loss of $73,000 on his $60,000 salary.

That’s where this saga takes another bizarre twist.

WOLFSWINKEL DEAL

Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office investigators interviewed Kirby to find out why he had approved multiple loans to Stapley, despite knowing about Stapley’s 2005 tax statement. Kirby told investigators Stapley’s attorney had given him documents describing options agreements between Stapley and companies owned by Arizona land baron Conley Wolfswinkel and Wolfswinkel’s family.

Stapley agreed to plege his options income as a personal guarantee on at least one Silver State loan.

Lawrence Rollin, an attorney at Udall Law Firm LLP in Tucson, who has worked with the Wolfswinkel family, said companies owned by Wolfswinkel and Stapley brokered three deals for land options on undeveloped parcels in Pinal County.

In August 2003, Stapley’s company, Arroyo Pacific, purchased a 200-acre parcel in Pinal County from an entity owned by the Wolfswinkel family. Stapley granted the Wolfswinkel company the option to repurchase the property for the same price within the next two years. According to bank records obtained through a Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office search warrant, Arroyo Pacific Investments was paid about $180,000 in options payments from Wolfswinkel between August 2003 and May 2004.

In June 2004, Stapley’s Arroyo Pacific sold 160 acres back to Wolfswinkel for $1.5 million. Stapley earned an additional $113,387 commission on the sale. Wolfswinkel then resold the same 160-acre plot for $4.4 million. The next month, Wolfswinkel purchased the remaining 40 acres from Stapley for $1.9 million. Stapley pocketed another $5,616 in commission.

Stapley then used his profit to broker two additional options deals with Wolfswinkel on two 70 and 80 acre parcels of land in Pinal County. Stapley earned thousands of dollars on the options payments from Wolfswinkel, which he then pledged as a personal guarantee for his Silver State loans.

SILVER STATE LOSSES

According to indictment court papers, one month before Silver State was closed by the FDIC, Stapley informed the bank he was walking away from his Sonterra development project. In July 2008, the bank failed, and now more than three years later, the FDIC says it lost $5.2 million on Stapley’s loan.

Questions remain about whether regulators were able to seize that options income when the bank failed, or if Stapley got to keep that income when he walked from his Sonterra development project.

The FDIC said it does not comment on pending litigation.

Even though the FDIC says it lost $5.2 million, an independent special prosecutor found there was insufficient evidence to prove that Stapley engaged in a scheme to defraud Silver State or to prove that it had suffered direct harm as result of his actions.

That is little confusing, because Silver State bank failed when developers such as Stapley began to default on loans the bank had made. Stapley’s loan was a drop in the bucket compared to many of the much larger loans the bank had made. As large uninsured depositors found about the bank’s troubles, they began to pull funds at lightening speed.

Stapley may have had an inkling the bank was troubled, but he definitely knew his own project was troubled. In March 2008, he sold his interest in the loan to Tangelo Investments. That left Tangelo Investments, not Stapley, on the hook when he walked from his development project.

Stapley deferred comments to his attorney, Merwin Grant, who said he was confused by why I was asking about the $5.5 million Silver State loan to fund Sonterra. Grant, who incidentally also is Stapley’s attorney in his fight against Maricopa County, said he could only comment on Stapley’s lawsuit against the FDIC.

That is the final bizarre twist in this convoluted tale.

After walking way from his Sonterra development project, Stapley turned around and sued the FDIC as a receiver for Silver State bank. One would think it would be the other way around.

Stapley alleged that Kirby had made numerous mistakes when he described the property and options that were pledged as loan collateral for another separate loan he received to fund his Paseo de Pecans development. Furthermore, Stapley alleged that his other development, Paseo de Pecans, failed because that separate loan, was never fully funded. That lawsuit was ultimately dropped, and Stapley and the FDIC paid their own court costs.

It’s hard to know what really happened in all of this minutia, except that the FDIC says it lost $5.2 million as a result of a loan Stapley originally received. But this is worth writing about for one reason: the complicated back story behind the Stapley loan illustrates the challenges and the complicated web regulators are up against in trying to recoup lost money for the deposit insurance fund. The FDIC mostly targets bankers, not developers for their unsafe and unsound banking practices. But the Stapley loan and the public records available offer a peak behind the curtain into how developers were operating during the boom times. This developer just happened to be the Maricopa County Supervisor.

Join Our Mailing List

Intimidation by traffic camera profiteers won’t stop reforms

Reposted from Arizona Daily Independent

A Tucson “newspaper’s” trumped up Ticketgate won’t stop Frank Antenori from reforming traffic camera enforcement.

State Senator Frank Antenori told the Tucson listening audience of the popular Jon Justice radio show last week, that legislators are now backing away from traffic camera enforcement reforms in order to avoid being targets of smear campaigns conducted by reform opponents.

The news of Antenori’s red light ticket made headlines in a local paper, at the same time Antenori was pushing his popular legislation to reform traffic camera practices.

Antenori told Justice’s listening audience that he “screwed up” when he tried to claim legislative immunity for a red light traffic ticket he received in 2009. Antenori called the push for the news story by the profiteers of the traffic cameras, the worst form of intimidation of legislators he had seen.

Antenori said he spoke to a reporter who confirmed that the story’s timing was intentional.

Just this week, the Senate Appropriations Committee voted 8-4 on HB 2557. The law changes the broader definition of intersection to one that says the intersection starts at any painted “stop” line or at the first crosswalk line. This will most likely result in fewer tickets and less revenue for the camera operators.

HB 2557 would bring Arizona into conformance with 38 other states.

The hard hitting, investigative reporters of the Star ignored the tickets of his opponents in their CD8 Ticketgate, and focused solely on the tickets of Antenori. For the record:

Sitton
Sep-04 Tucson Local charge
May-99 Tucson Failure to produce evidence of financial resp, expired registration
Feb-04 Tucson Local charge
Dec-05 Tucson Local charge
Nov-06 Phoenix Local Charge
Oct-07 Tucson Local Charge
Aug-08 Tucson Fail to stop for red light (photo radar)
Feb-09 Tucson Local charge
May-09 Tucson Failure to stop for red light (photo radar)
Jun-09 Tucson Local charge
Jul-09 Eloy More than 65 mph in 55 mph urban area
May-10 Tucson Local charge
May-10 Tucson Local charge
Mar-11 Tucson Local charge

Kelly
Sep-05 Tucson 1) Local Charge, 2) Registration in a county other than residence, 3)Emissions violation
May-10 Marana Speed excess 15mph in a school zone
May-10 Marana Local charge
Jul-10 Marana Local Charge
Dec-10 Tucson Failure to stop for a red light (photo enforcement)

McSally
Aug-99 Santa Cruz County Sued for annulment
Apr-02 Tucson Improper light on license plate, red tail lamps required (fix-it ticket)
Jul-02 Tucson Local Charge

Barber
Sep-03 Tucson Local Charge
Oct-04 Tucson Driving without registration
Aug-10 Tucson Local Charge

Antenori
Jun-06 Tucson Local Charge
Jun-07 Tucson Local Charge
Apr-08 Tucson Local Charge
Feb-12 Scottsdale Local Charge

New court tower scandal: County corruption and golf tournament

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, March 15, 2012

Vendors paid $2,000-$25,000 for charity golf tournament in exchange for court tower contracts        

County Manager David Smith and other high-level county employees played with vendors in their sponsored foursomes

No wonder Maricopa County Manager David Smith has announced his resignation in April. The longer he is still there, the more stories of corruption emerge about the Taj Mahal court tower he insisted on having built with cash in the middle of a recession. We knew something stunk to high heaven about it, especially when he started attacking anyone who dared to investigate the court tower.

Now it’s come out that vendors with the county were coerced into buying expensive golf sponsorships in the county’s annual charity golf tournament. In exchange they received lucrative contracts on the court tower or other county contracts. 53 vendors contributed a total of $336,877 to the county’s charity campaign. Many of them had contracts up for renewal. 40 more companies, some which had contracts with the county, contributed items like weekend stays at a resort for a raffle which county employees could bid on.

Smith actually defended the practice, saying that it was ethical. The court tower’s construction manager and general contractor, Gilbane Building Company, also defended the practice. However, government ethics experts interviewed by the Arizona Republic disagree. Judy Nadler, senior fellow in government ethics at Santa Clara University’s Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, says that government risks compromising public trust if it does not draw a clear line between itself and its contracted vendors.

This news comes after 10 county employees resigned, were suspended or were fired for improperly accepting gifts from vendors, including vendors working on the court tower.

It is way overdue to clean up the County Supervisors’ office. Getting rid of corrupt Smith is a good first step at ending the culture of corruption. Supervisors Stapley and Brock have announced their greatest public service attempt, they will not be running for reelection..

The Arizona Republic article can be read here.

Join Our Mailing List

Another judge who protected the county supervisors abruptly resigns

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, March 10, 2012

Judge John Leonardo quits without finishing term        

Threw out charges against Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, refused to let Andrew Thomas hire special prosecutors to prosecute her

The dominoes are falling one by one. Another judge who protected the corrupt Maricopa County Supervisors from prosecution has abruptly resigned. There has been no explanation given as to why he didn’t want to serve out the rest of his term, but we suspect it is related to his rulings shielding the supervisors from being punished for their corrupt acts. He sees others going down now and realizes if he doesn’t get out of there fast, he’ll be next.

Supervisor Wilcox was charged with 42 counts of perjury, conflict of interest and false swearing for voting to give money to the radical left wing group Chicanos Por La Causa while obtaining favorable loans from the group for herself. She should have recused herself from any vote awarding money to the group, but she thinks she is untouchable and can do whatever she wants without worry of being prosecuted.Judge Leonardo threw out the charges, declaring that Arpaio and Thomas must be politically motivated. He said that any prosecution must be handled independently, such as by another county attorney, not by the outside counsel that Arpaio and Thomas wanted to appoint. Leonardo knew that other county attorneys would be terrified to take on the powerful supervisors so they would continue to be protected. The outside counsel Arpaio and Thomas wanted to bring in were private attorneys from Washington, D.C., who would have no fear of the supervisors.

Isn’t it great to be in the club? If you’re liberal and in power, you’re not subject to the same criminal laws as the rest of us. Leonardo must be extremely proud of himself for keeping Wilcox out of jail this long. Judges are becoming more and more activist liberals, legislating from the bench. They are inappropriately making and changes laws from the bench.Judge Leonardo has a history of bad rulings. This is posted on the Laine Lawless blog:

He was also hand-picked to torpedo the Maricopa County Attorney’s corruption cases against Supervisors Mary Rose Wilcox and Don Stapley in 2010.  Attorneys Andrew Thomas and Lisa Aubuchon are still feeling the flak from making enemies in high places as the AZ Bar attempts to disbar them.

In March of last year, Arizonans for Justice filed a judicial complaint against John Leonardo.  No official disciplinary action was taken.  Could it be, however, that due to a cumulative revelation that “the emperor has no clothes” some pressure from above was put on Leonardo to retire?  I’ve been told by those in the know that judges are never disciplined; they are merely “encouraged” to retire.

Join Our Mailing List

Arizona House Ethics Committee to take up Rep Daniel Patterson Investigation

196 days ago, Sonoran Alliance called for the Arizona State House Ethics Committee to conduct an investigation on the behavior of LD-29 State Representative Daniel Patterson. That hearing will finally take place next Tuesday – exactly 200 days from our initial call. (Read Agenda)

Not knowing who finally conceded to this request for the investigation, this blog expresses its appreciation to that person for finally allowing these hearings to take place.

Where this will lead, is still to be determined but we believe that an indictment is likely to ensue by law enforcement authorities any day.

The frustration in all of this should be obvious. Everyone was quick to jump on Republican State Senator Scott Bundgaard over an incident that took place alongside State Route 51 last February, but no one dared raise the same complaint (except this blog and The Three Sonorans) over State Representative Daniel Patterson.

There was a blatant double standard.

Next Tuesday, Daniel Patterson will finally be in the hot seat and if Republicans want to be intellectually consistent in their practice of governance, they will need to prove to Arizona that justice is not only blind but that it’s courageous.

Wendy Rogers Home Vandalized during Night of Major Congressional Announcement

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 7, 2012
CONTACT: Joe Giardiello

Giffords Assassination Attempt Weighs Heavily On Everyone’s Mind

(Tempe AZ) The home of U.S. congressional candidate Wendy Rogers was vandalized during the night of March 3, 2012, within 12 hours after the candidate had sent out her first major email announcement of her campaign.

The Tempe Police Department began an investigation into the crime. (Please see right-column photo from March 4, 2012.) Police recommended they investigate because of the coincidental timing of this attack with Rogers’ campaign announcement amid the backdrop of recent history of political violence in Arizona.

“If someone wants to attack Wendy Rogers’ views on the issues, we say bring it on,” commented campaign manager Martin Mastro. “Wendy spent 20 years active duty serving her county in the United States Air Force and I can guarantee she can take whatever someone can dish out. But coming onto her family’s property to vandalize her home to send a message is completely outrageous and unlawful.”

Recent violence against political officials in Arizona is giving many observers reason to take notice of this crime.

“I have been around campaigns for two decades,” said campaign official Joe Giardiello. “I thought I had seen it all. But attacking a candidate’s home and family is something we would expect in a third-world dictatorship.” He continued, “The hatred and anger already coming from the Left because of Wendy’s unwavering commitment is downright frightening. In light of recent events in Arizona, we can’t be too careful.”

Within hours of the Rogers Campaign announcement, the intolerant blog comments began spewing forth in full force.

DeepThought claimed Rogers was “Running as the most extreme Republican.”

Someone going by the name of “Camry” stated military pilots like Wendy Rogers “tended to be half-crazed out of the cockpit.”

Another poster called her a “token candidate”, presumably because she was one of the first 100 women pilots in the Air Force and the only woman in the CD9 race.

To someone going by the handle of AZNativeMod, Wendy Rogers is a “lunatic.”

The vitriol and invective directed at Rogers goes back to her bicycling-door-to-door campaign for State Senate in 2010.

Back then, on the blog Hip Hop Activist, her election was called “unthinkable” and it said she was “extreme.”

Blog for Arizona sneered the Rogers is the “rightest of the right.”

Another poster, fancying himself as “Deep Thinker” said Rogers had a “right wing Big Brother approach to government [sic]. Rogers should scare most folks….”

###

YouTube Preview Image

Jeff Rogers on Daniel Patterson

Here’s the text from an email that made the rounds among Democrats. Pima County Democrat Chairman Jeff Rogers authored the email which addresses the domestic violence problem with State Representative Daniel Patterson. 

From: Jeffrey Rogers [mailto:jrogers@jrogerslaw.com​]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 9:43 AM
To: -X-
Subject: Patterson

-X-, I would truly appreciate it if you would not engage in any negative statements about Daniel. We already have a “safe” Dem seat in play in LD 28 because of Ted Downing’s move. We can’t afford to have another “safe” seat in play. This is not a primary. We most hold the seats we already have – especially since we have a legitimate chanced to pick up a Senate seat in 26 & 30 and a house seat in 30.

So, even if you have strong opinions about this and a strong friendship with his soon to be ex-wife, please don’t stir this up any more than it already has been.

Thank you.

Targeted by Conservatives and Tea Party activists, Stapley Elects to Fail Upward

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, March 3, 2012

Knows he would lose running for reelection as Supervisor        

Has no chance at winning in Congressional race, this way he can say the voters didn’t vote him out

We can all breathe a sigh of relief and thank Tea Party and conservative activists for making this happen. Corrupt Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley has filed to run for Congress in Arizona’s new 9th district. He saw the writing on the wall. Although Stapley has successfully escaped prosecution so far by pretending that Sheriff Arpaio and prosecutor Andrew Thomas were wrongfully going after him, everyone knows Stapley is guilty as sin. The Arizona Project 2012 Tea Party made it a priority this year to clean up the Supervisors’ office in this year’s elections, sending Stapley a loud message that they would be running a candidate against him. Conservative Steve Chucri has launched an aggressive campaign to run for Stapley’s supervisor seat.

Arpaio and Thomas tried to prosecute Stapley for misreporting on his financial forms and spending $70,000 in campaign funds on luxury personal items for himself and his family. Stapley was running for president of the National Association of Counties and had no opponent. He went around telling people he needed contributions for that campaign, then turned around and spent the money on expensive things you and I could never afford.

Remember the “libertarians” who ran for state legislature a few years ago and got into deep trouble with Clean Elections for spending the money on lavish dinners? They had to repay it all back. Not if you’re Don “the Don” Stapley. He destroys the lives of anyone who tries to prosecute or arrest him instead.

Here is the full list of what he spent the money on.

And here are just a few the things Stapley spent campaign money on that jumped out at us. You decide whether they are campaign related. We couldn’t even begin to start counting the restaurants and department stores listed on there, there were too many. We’re sure they were all campaign related. And what is up with all the women’s clothing?

luxury vacations for himself and his family to Florida, Hawaii and Utah. $12,042 for the condo in Hawaii alone.
$1300 for hair implants
$5036 in expensive stereo equipment from Bang & Olufsen
psychological counseling
animal grooming
eyewear
massages
spas

$99 at Bath & Body Works

home furnishings
lots of groceries
movies
dermatology
ASU event tickets
Bloomingdale’s
Florists
medical bills
vitamins, minerals, herbs
$1480 on Mesa water/trash/sewer
$471 at Donna Karan for women’s clothing
fitness center
Nordstroms

$350 for an art show in Pasadena
Phoenix Zoo
$104 for women’s clothing from Rampage
$630 for Broadway tickets
$420 for concerts at America West Arena
$100 at Ulta for beauty
$428 for the Utah Shakespeare Festival
$775 for women’s clothing at Zara in New York City

You tell us, does this man belong in office, ANY elected office? NOT EVEN DOGCATCHER! We find it despicable that he can skate past the laws the rest of us are held accountable to, and spend lavish amounts of money on himself using the political system while the rest of us are losing our homes and our jobs. He is going to lose this election bigtime.

Join Our Mailing List

It’s Too Late for Representative Daniel Patterson

For months, Sonoran Alliance has demanded ethics hearings into the behavior of Southern Arizona Democrat State Representative Daniel Patterson.

For months, no one in the Legislature has had the guts to hold hearings.

Last week, Democrats finally accepted the reality that Daniel Patterson is dangerous to their party and began calling for his resignation.

This may be a first for Sonoran Alliance and Democrats to agree on.

But it may be too late for Daniel Patterson.

Insider sources have revealed that Daniel Patterson will be indicted this week (probably Thursday) on several charges including domestic violence.

So again, we DEMAND that Daniel Patterson resign from the legislature and prepare to face the impending criminal legal case building against him.

Time’s up for Daniel Patterson and perhaps the courts will finally punish him and force him to own up to his anger problem.