If you don’t know Lina Hatch, she is a strong, vocal, gracious, constitutional community leader, wife, mother, and grandmother! For years, she has been a steadfast supporter of conservative American values. We are truly blessed that she works so hard on behalf of our conservative candidates. She also holds them accountable once they are in office! No one is a "sacred cow" to Lina.
As you can see from her recommendations below, she has done her homework on the following candidates and issues.
Election 2012! by Lina Hatch
Below is my formulation of Candidates and Ballot Propositions for the November 6 General Election. In formulating these, I have sought information from several Constitutionally Principled legislators and leaders in our community and state, including Andy Biggs, Eddie Farnsworth, Warren Petersen, Steve Yarbrough, Russell Pearce, Sylvia Allen, Earl Taylor, and many others. As always, you are welcome to contact me with any feedback.
Candidates for General Election:
I will vote the Republican slate (many are unopposed).
Non-partisan positions:
Central AZ Water Conservation Dist: Janie Thom and Jean McGrath are the only two consistently approved.
Maricopa County Special Health Care Dist 1: William Bruno.
Maricopa County Community College Dist 1: No Opinion.
Gilbert Town Council: Jared Taylor
Jared’s top priority is the public safety of our families and businesses, and he emphasizes the need for good roads, clean water, and efficient public works. He will work to eliminate unnecessary and outdated regulations on small businesses. Jared believes in low taxes, free market, and limited government. He stands for Gilbert families and Gilbert businesses. Jared makes decisions based on a solid understanding of Constitutional principles.
Jared’s opponent, John Sentz, is backed by nine out-of-town unions that have each donated the maximum allowed by law. On the other hand, Gilbert associations have not donated to his campaign. John Sentz has promoted raising taxes on Gilbert residents and businesses (Proposition 406). In fact, he promised to lay off 65 police officers and fire fighters if the tax didn’t pass.
. In 2009 Gilbert had a $15 million budget deficit. Along with over 70 other citizens, Jared studied the budget and found many ways to avoid the need for a tax increase. He joined Mayor John Lewis, Councilmember Jenn Daniels, and thousands of other citizens to oppose the imprudent tax. The citizens were not fooled, and Proposition 406 was defeated.
Jared is endorsed by Mayor Lewis and a majority of the Gilbert Town Council as well as the Small Business Alliance in Gilbert. Jared will represent the citizens of Gilbert, not big unions or lobbyists.
Gilbert School Board Candidates:
I am supporting Julie Smith, Daryl Colvin, and Eric Johnson (2 yr position) for Gilbert School Board. They, along with Staci Burk, will serve our District with excellence as they insist on fiscal responsibility, transparency, clear communication with the stakeholders about programs and policies, family values, greater parental involvement, as well as academic excellence. These candidates are promising a thorough review of the district spending to ensure tax dollars truly reach the classroom and also that teachers will not fear retaliation from administration if they speak out about wasteful spending or abuse of power.
Candidates Julie Smith, Daryl Colvin , and Eric Johnson stand on the platform of more money to classrooms, cut wasteful spending, and no tax increases. All other candidates for the Gilbert School Board support the unnecessary GPS budget override.
Gilbert Unified School District 10% Maintenance and Operation Budget Override Election. Vote NO
Gilbert Public Schools tax rates have increased 40 percent from last year, the highest in at least 30 years. And they want a $17 MILLION OVERRIDE on top of the increased tax rates! This measure would authorize the sale of up to $17,000,000 in bonds to finance regular maintenance and operations. Gilbert citizens must require spending prioritization of Gilbert Public Schools. Rather than buying into the usual “it’s for the children,” we must demand fiscal responsibility and limit spending. During this economic downturn, citizens, businesses, and public education need to cut the spending and balance the budget without always asking for more funds. Gilbert should follow the example and advice of much wiser leaders who plead with us to get out of debt.
Staci Burk (current board member) stated very clearly, “We can do without the $17.9 million and maintain quality education.” Money can be found in social workers, counselors, unused or excessive real estate, non-teaching teachers, janitors, non-employee labor, etc. The Gilbert School Board must insist that administration bring forth a budget that is within their revenue level without impact to teachers.
GPS is not telling the voter in their pro-override statement that if the current one passes, administrators will receive yet another pay increase! Citizens should see through this blatant attempt to bribe employees to vote for this override. Don’t be fooled into believing that it is not a tax increase. It’s the continuation of a 10% property tax INCREASE that was approved by the voters in 2007.
Gilbert Councilmember Eddie Cook served on the Community Budget Committee and recommends that the best suggestions from the CBC should be implemented in Gilbert Public Schools. Further, GPS should follow the budgeting process that the Town of Gilbert recently implemented using “Zero Base Budgeting” strategy that is used for home, business, and corporations. This strategy reverses the traditional incremental budgeting of the past and holds organizations accountable based on need. Yes, it takes effort and collaboration. Results? No employee layoffs, no tax increases, and excellent services have been maintained. GPS must do the same.
Former school board member, Shane Stapley pointed to these wasteful spending examples: $1.7 Million on administrative software that has never worked properly, $100,000 for a strategic plan that recommends GPS engage in food-catering to bring in revenues, $50,000 annually for lobbying interests. “What does this have to do with education and teaching our children? How deep are our tax-payer’s pockets?” $195,000 per year was recently approved for the new SpringBoard curriculum, a highly controversial program that many citizens and teachers find inferior and overridden with Leftist propaganda. There has been a steady reduction in percentage of dollars going to the classroom after Prop 301 money started flowing into the District.
Cindy Biggs noted that bullying in this district is rampant. Teachers are not inclined to report these incidents out of fear of retaliation from administrators. Rather, administration’s goal to make sure the district is not embarrassed; their goal should be to educate children. “Unfortunately it has become about money & power. Few of them actually care about educating kids as much as protecting their cozy positions. From what we see out of these superintendents & board members, it is not about what’s right, it’s about what they can get away with.”
NO on all overrides that continue to raise our property tax on our homes! Stop the false claims by the tax and spenders that more money equals better education.
Vote NO on the GPS budget override and actually see our taxes DECREASE!
Vote NO on all Judges up for Retention, thus protesting the process of judge selection.
Judges should be elected and then held accountable to “We the People”. Instead, Judges are appointed by the Governor but we as citizens can decide on retention. I vote NO on all judges to indicate the need for them to be reviewed consistently. (ALL but one of the Appeals Court Justices currently up for retention were appointed by Janet Napolitano.)
(Do you wish you had more information to make your decisions on judge retention? If so, you may want to vote YES on Proposition 115.)
Propositions:
Prop114: The Crime Victims Protection Act of 2012. Protects victims from lawsuits by criminals. Vote YES
This act amends the Constitution so that crime victims and their families could not be sued by, and have to pay damages to, someone who was harmed while attempting to victimize them. This proposition will protect crime victims from being sued by felons. The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled our statutes are insufficient, therefore a constitutional amendment is needed to stop criminals from suing victims of crime.
Proponents: Majority of Republican Legislators, Russell Pearce, Earl Taylor, Arizona Citizens Defense League.
Opponents: Fairness & Accountability in Insurance Reform, Arizona Trial Lawyers.
Prop 115: A consensus measure that strengthens Arizona’s method of selecting & retaining judges. Vote YES
This proposition would reduce the influence of the State Bar in the appointment process, increase the pool of candidates presented to the Governor for appointments, extend terms for all judges to 8 years (currently 4-6 yrs), allow judges to serve to age 75 (currently age 70), and – most critically – require publication of judges’ orders so that voters can make informed decisions in retention elections.
Proponents: Wide margins of approval in the House and the Senate, Governor Brewer, Eddie Farnsworth, Russell Pearce, Warren Petersen. Center for Arizona Policy. The State Bar of Arizona, the Arizona Judicial Council, the Arizona Judges Association, and the Arizona Legislature worked together to craft Prop. 115.
Opponents: AZ Advocacy Network, League of Women Voters, Phoenix Law Enforcement Association.
Prop 116: Jobs Bill. Reduces the personal business property tax that double taxes and punishes investments in small businesses. Vote YES
The Small Business Job Creation Act would increase the tax exemption of business personal property tax starting in 2013, from $68,000 to $2.4 million. This tremendous expansion in tax exemptions will give small businesses incentive to expand, invest in new equipment, and hire more workers. This is expected to spur economic growth across the state. It’s a straight-forward proposal designed to get government out of the way by rolling back the unwise policy Arizona adopted a century ago that punishes private sector investment in the equipment and machinery essential to creating jobs. Prop 116 will be 100% financed by the private sector.
Proponents: Andy Biggs (author), full bipartisan vote of Senate and House, National Federation of Independent Business-Arizona, Goldwater Institute, Arizona Farm Bureau, Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, etc
Opponents: None found.
Prop 117: Property Tax. Vote YES
Prop 117 will keep property taxes low and simplify our state’s overly complex property tax system. It does not shift property tax burdens to homeowners. It will lower property taxes when market values exceed the 5% annual limit on assessed valuation. Local governments and taxing districts have for too long collected a windfall of property tax revenues by holding rates constant despite increases in assessed valuation. Prop 117 would limit the annual increase of real estate values for purposes of taxation to not more than 5% beginning in 2014. It prevents government from growing too fast. Under Arizona’s complicated tax system, homeowners have seen unpredictable increases of 95% in property taxes between 2004 and 2009 even during a time when the market value of homes was decreasing. Under Prop 117, tax rates will stabilize. Property tax rates for new construction will be calculated to harmonize with the rates of existing homes. Local governments will be able to reliably anticipate future tax revenue. There is no effect on state aid to schools. (Property Taxes need to be eliminated. Our Founding Fathers would never support Government control of private property especially through taxation)
Proponents: Overwhelming support of the Republican Caucuses in House and Senate, Steve Yarbrough, Andy Biggs, Eddie Farnsworth, Warren Petersen, Sylvia Allen, Lester Pearce, Earl Taylor, AZ Tax Research Association, AZ Farm Bureau, Home builders Association of AZ, AZ Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Opponents: County Treasurer, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy
Prop 118: Permanent State Land Fund. Vote YES
Prop 118 is a fair and practical way to smooth out earnings distributions from Arizona’s $3.4 billion Land Endowment. K-12 education receives 90% of the distribution with the remainder going to other public institutions such as juvenile corrections and state prisons, the state hospital and state buildings. This measure simplifies the distribution formula for education funding and ensures an annual payment from the Permanent Endowment Land Trust Fund. By avoiding the usual boom-and-bust distribution cycle, Prop 118 will help the beneficiaries of the State Land Trust Fund to achieve a more predictable income stream year after year. It is a win-win for all of the stakeholders, whether those stakeholders are government employees providing education services, or taxpayers working hard to support their families and build our economy.
Proponents: Eddie Farnsworth, Andy Biggs, Warren Petersen, Russell Pearce, Passed House and Senate with broad support, Doug Ducey, John Huppenthal, Tom Jenney, Earl Taylor.
Opponents: ?
Prop 119: State Trust land Exchanges. Undecided.
Will authorize the exchange of state trust lands if the exchange is related to either protecting military facilities or improving the management of state trust lands and preserves the process for such exchanges. This process includes two independent appraisals and analyses, public hearings, and approval by public vote. Prop 119 allows for conservation and protection of unique state lands for public enjoyment, rather than having to be sold or leased as currently required by our constitution. It would allow state trust land exchanges that would provide a buffer for military installations. It would also allow exchanges to convert the land to public use, or if the swap would improve land management, to help sell or lease trust lands. The Arizona Supreme court determined in 1990 that until the Constitution is amended, the state can no longer engage in land exchanges.
This measure has been on the ballot 8 times and failed. It passed the Senate 17 – 11 and the House 50 – 0. However, many conservatives have serious questions about its virtues and would like to see it re-formulated. It is supported by some extreme environmental groups. (When in doubt, I vote NO and hope it will be re-worked)
Prop120: State Sovereignty. Vote YES
This is a re-establishment of land rights. The US government controls 42% of Arizona’s land. Prop 120 amends the Arizona Constitution to declare that the state has complete control over its land, water, wildlife and natural resources. This excludes Indian reservations, US lands, and lands over which jurisdiction has been ceded by the state of Arizona. Prop 120 would declare that each state possesses full attributes of sovereignty on an equal footing with all other states, as provided by the United States Constitution. State sovereignty is fundamental to the security of individual rights, free government and the inherent political power of the people.
Proponents: Sylvia Allen, Russell Pearce, Andy Biggs, Eddie Farnsworth, Warren Petersen, Earl Taylor.
Opponents: Arizona Wilderness Coalition, Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection, the Wilderness Society
Prop 121: Open Elections, “Jungle Primary” or top two vote getters. Vote NO
This proposition would do away with Primary election and is intended to eliminate conservatives from the General Elections. This initiative effectively blocks candidates who are not Republican or Democrat from making it onto your General Election ballot. Smaller parties and Independent candidates will not have the votes needed to make the "top two" and will not have the opportunity to win. This initiative discriminates against smaller parties and Independents. Because most districts are very Republican or very Democrat, voters in those districts will have two candidates from the same party to choose from. This initiative will decrease voter turnout – if you offer voters fewer choices they will be less interested. Supporters of this initiative say they want to change the rules because they want to change the type of candidate who wins, but rigging the rules to ensure that only a specific type of candidate can win is un-American and very dangerous for Arizona. Candidates could claim any political label at all on the ballot, whether accurate or not, potentially confusing voters. One political party can recruit a member of candidates of the opposing party as spoilers to split the opposing party vote. A weak political party could recruit candidates to split the stronger party’s vote. The “Top Two” primary reduces voter choice and opens the doors for political schemers. It’s an ideal environment for well-funded special interest groups to hijack our elections.
Proponents: Open Government Committee, Greater Phoenix Leadership, Chambers of Commerce, Grand Canyon Institute, Alliance of Arizona Nonprofits
Opponents: Governor Brewer, Andy Biggs, Eddie Farnsworth, Warren Petersen, Russell Pearce, Sylvia Allen, Andy Tobin, Bill Montgomery, Earl Taylor, Fair Vote Arizona, TEA Party of Arizona, Goldwater Institute, Center for Arizona Policy, Americans for Responsible Leadership
Prop 204: Quality Education and Jobs Act. Vote NO
This ballot measure has been labeled as follows: "Earmarking at its worst", the "worst ballot initiative EVER!", "Job killer", "Prop 204 will strangle and tie down government", and the "worst legislation EVER in the history of Arizona". Prop 204 is one of the most complicated tax initiatives ever put before the Arizona voters (15 pages) which amounts to a $1 billion dollar blank check annually with very little accountability and no real education reform. Rarely is an initiative bad for teachers, children, schools and businesses, but Prop 204 manages to make every one worse. Prop 204 is an unnecessary new permanent sales tax which is an increase of 18% above the current base rate. This is a permanent tax increase with little accountability. It is written by and will fund special interest groups with no guarantees to the teachers and classrooms. It will freeze Arizona’s tax code and prohibit any changes, and will give us the second highest sales tax in America. Remember the “temporary” sales tax that passed in a special election in 2010? This “Quality Education and Jobs Act” makes that tax permanent. Further, this measure could actually open the door for a future governor to give taxpayer dollars to abortion providers like Planned Parenthood. Prop 204 is not an education reform bill. It’s a special interest lobbyist’s dream come true, paid for out of your pocket. Prop 204 makes it impossible for the legislature ever to reduce the tax. Prop 204 is just another job killing tax hike – one of the most egregious ever, making retail business more expensive in the state with the second highest sales tax in America. It also locks in spending limits never to be changed no matter how bad a recession gets.
Proponents: Steve Gallardo, Martin Quezada, League of Women Voters, Quality Education & Jobs Committee, Arizona Education Network, Arizona Student’s Association, Organizing For America
Opponents: Jan Brewer, Andy Biggs, Eddie Farnsworth, Warren Petersen, Steve Yarbrough, Steve Pierce, Sylvia Allen, Russell Pearce, Debbie Lesko, Arizona Tax Research Association, Center for Arizona Policy.