Archive for November 5th, 2009

The Democrats response to the huge loss at the City of Tucson council elections:

Either way, the message Democrats should take from the vote is that they must govern more competently. Most of all, they must show more results.

We didn’t buy into many claims that Republican candidates were making prior to the election about Democratic malfeasance. Many of the city’s problems, from poor street maintenance to the loss of a minor-league baseball team and possibly spring training, were either brought on by the bad economy or by forces beyond the council’s control.

However, the fact remains that Rio Nuevo, the city’s downtown-redevelopment project, has been slow to take shape and businesses still have trouble getting required city approvals and permits.

These problems aren’t insurmountable. For instance, the city’s overly complicated land-use code can be streamlined through aggressive, persistent leadership on the part of the council.

Uhlich understands the code’s shortcomings and we expect her to lead its overhaul. Similarly, Trasoff or Kozachik should make revamping the city’s Development Services Department their priority.

Uhlich and several other council members must redouble their efforts to help small businesses thrive.

The Democratic majority, which includes Regina Romero in Ward 1, Rodney Glassman in Ward 2 and Shirley Scott in Ward 4, must lead with a sense of urgency. The time is now to get things accomplished downtown and across the city.

If the council fails to show results, some voters in 2011 may be even angrier than they are now. And with nonpartisan elections possibly coming, the Democrats’ voter-registration advantage may be of little use.

Goldwater Institute won a court case against the City of Tucson today Arizona’s Proposition 207, the Private Property Rights Protection Act passed by Arizona voters in 2006. The proposition has to do with governments ability to down-zone and or directly affect an individuals property rights through the local or state legislative process.  Court will be awarding damages to the plaintiff, Michael Goodman. Read more about Goodman’s involvement in Tucson in the Tucson Weekly - HERE.

Goldwater’s Scharf-Norton Center for litigation has successfully used the court system to keep government in check on a host of issues. They recently challenged open meeting law violations with Mayor Walkup and have ongoing litigation using the Arizona constitutions gift clause, which prohibits giving public dollars to benefit an individual or private entity.  The use of the court systems to influence and hold government in check has been successfully used by the environmental lobby for decades especially through the endangered species act. The pygmy owl court battles in northwest Pima County took years to resolve and delayed the building of Ironwood Ridge high school and large areas of the northwest side.

Tucson Court Issues First Prop 207 Victory for Home and Business Owners
Goldwater Institute wins lawsuit against City of Tucson

Tucson–A Pima County Superior Court judge has ruled in favor of Goldwater Institute client Mike Goodman, who filed suit against the City of Tucson under Arizona’s Proposition 207, the Private Property Rights Protection Act passed by Arizona voters in 2006, which requires government to compensate property owners if they pass laws or regulations that diminish property values.
The verdict clears the legal path for Goodman to be awarded the first court-mandated damages under Prop 207.
“Arizona voters overwhelmingly embraced greater protection of private property rights,” said Clint Bolick, director of the Goldwater Institute Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation, “and this ruling vindicates that intent.”
Mr. Goodman, a Tucson builder, buys run-down properties in the downtown area and near the University of Arizona, and replaces them with new housing that meets or exceeds zoning requirements and building standards. But in 2007 the City of Tucson enacted an anti-demolition ordinance that subjected property owners to a labyrinth of rules that limited property use and instantly reduced property values for thousands of homeowners and small business owners. This ordinance applied to Mr. Goodman after he had received building permits and begun the building process.
The presiding judge, Hon. Paul Tang, wrote in his decision, “The Court believes that the public’s interest in laws requiring compensation for partial regulatory takings is significant and arguably compelling.” He also wrote, “To adopt the City’s view . . . would render [Prop 207's intent] superfluous and obsolete.”
The next step in Goodman v. City of Tucson is to determine the amount of damages the City must pay. “[F]or every actionable injury there is a corresponding right to damages,” Judge Tang added. Prop 207 is “part of a greater effort and movement in favor of individual rights.”
For more information on this and other Goldwater Institute lawsuits visit www.goldwaterinstitute.org/litigation. The Goldwater Institute is an independent government watchdog supported by people who are committed to expanding free enterprise and liberty.