Dowling: Something is way out of kilter
I'm all for vigorous investigation and prosecution of wrongdoing by public officials. But the case of former Maricopa County School Superintendent Sandra Dowling seems way, way out of kilter.

In Novemeber 2006, Dowling was indicted on 25 felony charges, including bid rigging, misuse of public funds and the theft of $1.9 million in public money.

At the time, Sheriff Joseph Arpaio labelled her actions as "repulsive."

So, please tell me how we go from a repulsive public official stealing millions to one who is allowed to plead guilty to a wrist-slapping misdemeanor (giving her daughter a summer job) in full satisfaction of all the charges?

Something had to be woefully wrong somewhere along the way.

The Sheriff's Department spent 11 months investigating this case. Was the investigation badly flawed or, as Dowling charges in a lawsuit, were the two-dozen-plus charges an outrageous example of "malicious prosecution and abuse of process"?

And what about the prosecutor's role. Was County Attorney Andrew Thomas and his staff bamboozled by the charges. Couldn't they see an incredibly weak case, and shouldn't they have done some weeding in November 2006 rather than presenting the whole load -- garbage and legitimate questions about Dowling's conduct -- to a Grand Jury for indictments? Or was Thomas involved in a malicious prosecution conspiracy with Arpaio?

These questions need to be answered because they go to the heart of how justice is administered in Maricopa County. That's why I hope Dowling goes forward with her lawsuit. Unfortunately, I fear that we'll see a huge settlement, requiring county taxpayers to pay millions in exchange for no public disclosure of information.

That would be a miscarriage of justice. We need to know, one way or another, whether we can trust what goes on in the Sheriff's Department and the County Attorney's Office when it comes to investigating other public officials.

Are Arpaio and Thomas dedicated public servants going where evidence takes them or are they creeps using their elected offices to get back at political opponents -- possibly through illegal means? (I suppose there is a middle ground: They could be dedicated public servants who are just inept at building a case that could stand up at trial.)

Let's hope we find out soon.

America's Worst Sheriff
See what the New York Times Editorial Board has to say about Maricopa's burden. Also, read the Times feature, published Sunday, on Arpaio's new television show here.

How much does Fox pay Arpaio for this show? Does it go into the county treasury? Shouldn't it?

Ongoing shame of the Maricopa Supervisors
The East Valley Tribune has done an overview of the ongoing dispute between America's worst sheriff and the activist group called Maricopa Citizens for Safety Accountability (MCSA).

Even though many will find MCSA a little too aggressive for their tastes, what should be of concern to every democracy-loving citizen is the ongoing efforts of Maricopa County leaders to deny the group reasonable ways of making their case. It amounts to surpression of public debate.

MCSA leaders have repeated requested an opportunity to be on the county Board of Supervisors' agenda so they can present issues they have involving Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The board's four Republican supervisors repeatedly have blocked this basic right of access. Shame on them.

Meanwhile, Arpaio continues bathering about this as yet another conspiracy against him.

Now that the election is over, and Arpaio has another four years to hoodwink the public, the supervisors have no excuse -- not even a political one -- not to hear what these citizens have to say.

Put them on the agenda!

Sheriff, Treasurer balk on budget priorities
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Treasurer Charles Hoskins are balking at a county Board of Supervisors request for suggestions on how they could cut their departmental budgets by up to 20 percent.

Of the two, Hoskins has the flimiest reasoning. According to the Arizona Republic, he sent supervisors an brief e-mail saying "until I have a better feel for how the current investigation of the Board and its employees might go" he won't submit anything.

What's he talking about? The Stapley charges? Supervisors' alleged pushback at Arpaio and County Attorney Andrew Thomas? Hoskins' remark smacks of a political end-run in the style of Arpaio. Hoskins, who has zero public recognition, needs to seek election if he wants to continue serving as Treasurer. Aligning himself with Arpaio's bravado could be his path. But, as Treasurer, he should be in the thick of finding ways to bridge the county's budget crisis. Instead he's playing politics.

Arpaio has an easier case to make, in theory. Law enforcement and jail supervision should be among the county services cut least. Unfortunately, Arpaio has a very public record on wasting manpower and money on his publicity crusades. He's not immune to belt-tightening. A 20 percent cut would almost certainly impact public safety. But supervisors aren't asking for a 20 percent cut; they're asking for priorities with a mind toward worst case scenarios.

Every county department head should already have been doing that. If Arpaio and Hoskins can't identify ways they could cut budgets while minimizing impact, they're guilty of dereliction of duty.

New Times nails Arpaio-Stapley double standard
Thank God for the Phoenix New Times.

In this time of newspaper retrenchments and increased timidity, I knew we could count on the New Times to raise the obvious question. The sub-head in Sarah Fenske's article this week covers it completely: "Don Stapley's biggest crime? Failing to hid his real estate dealings as well as Joe Arpaio did."

Sure, the New Times hates Sheriff Arpaio and his bumbling sidekick, County Attorney Andrew Thomas. They have good reason after the draconian Thomas-Arpaio assault, led by hired gun Dennis Wilenchik, Thomas's old boss, that resulted in the arrest of New Times owners Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin. That Arpaio-Thomas witch hunt fell apart as soon as the public got a whiff of Maricopa County "justice" in action.

Read Sarah Fenske's article, "No Honor Among Thieves," and tell me where she's wrong. You may not like the New Times, for any number of reasons, but here's another example of why they're one of the very few sources of courageous journalism in the Valley today.

A sample from the lead:

The world's pettiest law enforcement duo is at it again. Sheriff Joe Arpaio and County Attorney Andrew Thomas have socked Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley with 118 felony counts for -- gasp! -- failing to fill out paperwork properly.

I'm not exaggerating. The 39-page indictment issued against Stapley last week is full of serious-sounding allegations: perjury, forgery, false swearing. But here's what it comes down to. Stapley listed his real estate investment company on financial disclosure forms with the county. But for fourteen years, he failed to list the company's holdings.

That's it.

More on the mess Arpaio has made
The Goldwater Institute's Clint Bolick followed up the Institute's damning report on Maricopa Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his department's "misguided mission," with an excellent column in Sunday's East Valley Tribune. Read it here.

He makes an important point about Arpaio's sweeps:

Public reaction to the report seems divided between people who think the immigration sweeps are a good idea and those who don't. The question is not whether to enforce immigration laws, but how to most effectively do so. The sweeps are extremely costly in terms of manpower, yet yield few arrests of illegal immigrants and do not reduce crime in the areas in which they are conducted. Other police departments focus primarily on policing violent crimes and determine illegal status during booking. So far, the sweeps have led to only about 200 arrests of illegal immigrants, compared to 16,000 through the booking process.

Maricopa County Supervisor Indicted
Veteran Supervisor Don Stapley has been indicted on more than 100 felony and misdemeanor counts largely involving failure to make required financial disclosures. He vows to fight the charges.
Read the Arizona Republic and East Valley Tribune stories here and here.

Stapley, a Republican, was easily reelected a month ago. His district includes Scottdale, Mesa, Paradise Valley, Gilbert and parts of Phoenix. He was first elected to the Board of Supervisors in 1994.

The charges are an embarrassment to the National Association of Counties. Stapley is president of the organization, which represents more than 2,000 counties.

Arizona has one of the nation's toughest financial disclosure laws for public officials and candidates. A copy of the law is here, and an example of the financial disclosure form is here.

Goldwater Institute criticizes Arpaio

First, it was the excellent, five-part East Valley Tribune series detailing serious flaws in the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department operation earlier this year. Many Arpaio apologists dismissed the series as politically-motivated.

Now, a month after Sheriff Joe Arpaio was reelected by a comfortable margin, the Goldwater Institute chimes in with a 22-page Policy Report with the devastating title: "Mission Unaccomplished: The Misplaced Priorities of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office."

From the report's Introduction:

There is no question that Sheriff Arpaio and MCSO are “tough” on people arrested for or convicted of crimes—and that a large majority of Maricopa County voters applaud that toughness as evidenced by polls and past elections. But toughness is only one ingredient for a successful sheriff ’s department, and by itself is far from sufficient. In this report, we examine MCSO’s record in light of its vision as the office itself defines it:

The Maricopa County Sheriff ’s Office is a fully integrated law enforcement agency committed to being the leader in establishing the standards for providing professional quality law enforcement, detention, and support services to the citizens of Maricopa County and to other criminal justice agencies.

We find that too often, in a variety of ways, MCSO falls short of accomplishing this vitally important mission.

As Maricopa County confronts its intense fiscal woes, it's important that Supervisors read and heed this report, as well as the East Valley Tribune's earlier findings. But since they've shown no interest in exercising their oversight responsibilities in the past, that's probably just wishful thinking.

Complainer Arpaio may have a point
It's no surprise Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is looking for special treatment. That's his style, after all. But, when it comes to budget cuts, he may have a point. Arpaio is balking at a county requirement that department heads identify "20 percent of their budgets that could be cut," according to The Arizona Republic. Reports are due Dec. 8.

Across-the-board budget cuts are inappropriate for public safety agencies. That's not to say they should have a free hand, but they fall into a category which requires protection from meat-cleaver type budget adjustments.

That said, Arpaio needs to get on board with the need for additional reductions. For the past two years, he's had deputies running around interfering with other jurisdictions. It has been an expensive, publicity-building effort to support his re-election. Now the election's over, but the budget crisis is much with us and will grow worse before it gets better.

Perhaps it's time to consider scaling back the Sheriff's Department so that it runs the jails and provides coverage only to areas not otherwise served by a police department. This is not an era where fiscal and jurisdictional overlap should go unchallenged as the county looks for ways to save money with the least impact on services.

Another defeat for Arpaio ... or is it?

The Supreme Court has refused to hear Arpaio's appeal of an abortion transportation case. Best comment I've read so far is by "CHRISin Tempe" on the azcentral.com story link:

Nickel Bag Joe made out like a political bandit on this caper. Actual requests to take female prisoners to abortion appointments were quite rare, and cost him next to nothing. It was all about publicity.

Win or lose, far right right wingers see him as their kind of guy on the abortion issue. Those are the sort of people who would force even a rape victim to carry the resulting pregnancy to term.

Fiscal conservatives too, get spoon fed the image of Nickel Bag struggling to save them money. Knowing full well that people see only what they wish to see, his spending hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to save a few hundred dollars is completely ignored by most voters.

Nickel Bag Joe is not stupid, he's a crafty politician. Yes, he's a dishonest, conniving, mean spirited low down snake in the grass politician, but he's no idiot. He couldn't be to have survived this long at his game of ripping off the taxpayers just so he can live in his own private weird little world.