Maricopa County Tax Increase (Phoenix: employment, purchasing, bankrupt)

[YAZ]

Originally Posted by Zippyman

$243,000,000 in savings might help things a bit now though, wouldn't it?

Smoke & mirrors.

Bottom feeder lawyers would've easily found another axe to grind.

[Zippyman]

Originally Posted by YAZ

Smoke & mirrors.

Bottom feeder lawyers would've easily found another axe to grind.

$100 million of that was just "mis spent"...

can you name any private corporation that'll let you "mis-spend" $100,000,000 *and* keep your job?

How is it possible that *anyone* can "mis-spend" 100 MILLION DOLLARS and not end up wearing pink underpants?

smoke a doobie in AZ and you're a felon, but ... ooOOOOOoooppppSsss.. I just "MIS-SPENT" 100 million dollars.. TeeHee, what's for lunch?

This isn't a "lawyer" problem..

[Burning Madolf]

Originally Posted by eaton53

It may very well be BS but I still want to move to AZ to get your weather and taxes!!

Understood. My point is that the goal should be to keep taxes low, not just lower than the most expensive states. But pols love to use the "we're cheaper than ... " comp when raising taxes.

For me, paying 50-75% less of what I was paying back east is important. Paying 25% less? Maybe not enough of an incentive.

[eaton53]

Originally Posted by Burning Madolf

For me, paying 50-75% less of what I was paying back east is important. Paying 25% less? Maybe not enough of an incentive.

Important to me as well.
In real dollars, the difference is like getting a rec center and swimming pool maintenance for free.

[GeneR]

Originally Posted by Zippyman

You really doubt it? lol.. joke's on you...

"If you're keeping score, Arpaio's misdeeds have cost taxpayer's more than $243 million, close to a quarter-*billion dollars since he took office"

linky:>>>>

Criminal Enterprise: A Culture of Corruption Pervades Joe Arpaio's Office, Affecting Everyone in Maricopa County | Phoenix New Times

Thank you for the referral. I looked at the source (once I got past the pop-up beer commercial for the sourced New Times article) and noticed it is a commentary which is not a news report. Commentary is opinion not necessarily based on fact. But let's cede the point that the MCSO might have spent $243-million in the last 22 years. Would the cost of any legal action not taken place had there been no Sheriff Joe? Are sheriff's departments ever sued over misdeeds or does it just happen in Maricopa County? I suggest these are topics worth investigation.

Again, thank you for the referral to New Times. I hadn't read a Village Voice newspaper in decades (actually, since I stopped smoking dope). I know of the long running feud between the Sheriff and New Times. As you are aware two of the founders of this paper were arrested for revealing secret Grand Jury information in a story published in the free-weekly paper a decade ago. The angst was probably increased when this paper, and other Village Voice linked publications, published the home address of the Sheriff. I assume he may have felt as though his, and his family's, safety had been compromised. No doubt this legal action (later dropped) against the paper's local founders might have an impact on their coverage of the sheriff's office.

Incidentally, I didn't request the source as a "joke". I am truly interested in fact finding and in getting to the truth behind any story rather than scoring political points.

[tijlover]

One must also look at what other costs that Joe has heaped on the taxpayers of AZ, and then add some, accepted, prosecutorial misconduct into the picture.

Prison costs, to the tune of $40-$50k (both direct and hard-to-decipher indirect costs), for mickey mouse drug arrests, people leaving his tent cities with a record, then unable to find a job, and how many ended up homeless. On a national average, a typical homeless person costs taxpayers $42.5k a year, most of the costs attributed to repeated trips to the Emergency Room. Husbands arrested, family goes on welfare.
To survive, how many have resorted to crime, which leads to more arrests, more costs.

I'm not surprised at all, reading about AZ's $1.5 billion dollar deficit, and how much of that can be attributed to good old Joe?

[GeneR]

Just for fun, do a search of "County Sheriff Sued" and see what comes up. I did and found page after page after page of County Sheriffs sued in New Jersey, Illinois, Florida, Arkansas, Texas, Indiana, Pennsylvania....then I stopped looking at the end of the 2nd page.

The point is, it's rather routine in this country for County Sheriffs to be sued (mostly by current or former inmates) for one reason or another. I'm afraid Sheriff Joe is in very good, and crowded, company.

[Zippyman]

Originally Posted by GeneR

Just for fun, do a search of "County Sheriff Sued" and see what comes up. I did and found page after page after page of County Sheriffs sued in New Jersey, Illinois, Florida, Arkansas, Texas, Indiana, Pennsylvania....then I stopped looking at the end of the 2nd page.

The point is, it's rather routine in this country for County Sheriffs to be sued (mostly by current or former inmates) for one reason or another. I'm afraid Sheriff Joe is in very good, and crowded, company.

How many of those sheriffs were sued for arresting a sitting judge on trumped up charges? How many sheriffs across the country have been (successfully) sued for arresting board members who opposed them? These cases were so bad the prosecutors who pushed them were disbarred. How often does that happen across the country? The big-money suits are all on Joe & his gang of cohorts, and the only reason you can call the victims of those suits "former inmates" is because the sheriff abused his power & arrested them unlawfully.

It takes an amazing amount of circular logic to unlawfully arrest your opponents on trumped-up charges, then claim those that oppose you are all "former inmates"

[kell490]

Originally Posted by tijlover

One must also look at what other costs that Joe has heaped on the taxpayers of AZ, and then add some, accepted, prosecutorial misconduct into the picture.

Prison costs, to the tune of $40-$50k (both direct and hard-to-decipher indirect costs), for mickey mouse drug arrests, people leaving his tent cities with a record, then unable to find a job, and how many ended up homeless. On a national average, a typical homeless person costs taxpayers $42.5k a year, most of the costs attributed to repeated trips to the Emergency Room. Husbands arrested, family goes on welfare.
To survive, how many have resorted to crime, which leads to more arrests, more costs.

I'm not surprised at all, reading about AZ's $1.5 billion dollar deficit, and how much of that can be attributed to good old Joe?

How is the Sheriff responsible for someone committing crime or doing drugs? Unable to find a job? I see job signs everywhere. I have worked 2-3 jobs to keep my head above water. First thing is people need to stop feeling sorry for these lazy people. I can't stand someone who cries I can't find a job oh I want 15$ an hour to flip hamburgers. I made $3.35 an hour 2 jobs I was able to go to school and get to where I'm at today never did drugs. If you don't like the Sheriff vote him our of office he has nothing to do with homeless doing drugs.

[GeneR]

Originally Posted by Zippyman

... the only reason you can call the victims of those suits "former inmates" is because the sheriff abused his power & arrested them unlawfully.

It takes an amazing amount of circular logic to unlawfully arrest your opponents on trumped-up charges, then claim those that oppose you are all "former inmates"

Please reread what I posted. Such reading will show that I, at no time, indicated the suits brought in Maricopa County were brought by former inmates. Nationwide, suits are routinely brought against county sheriffs, many of which are by former inmates or, more precisely, by hungry attorneys representing former inmates. The key word here, as was intended in my previous post, is nationwide. I apologize for not stating my point in a more remedial fashion.