I Sure Hope Kris Mayes isn't Reading This.

Here's an interesting article from Forbes.

Pinnacle West Spent $1M Lobbying

(This is just federal spending.  Marty's Arizona-based efforts to raise taxes, build civic centers, champion light rail, consolidate school districts and establish all day kindergarten aren't in the total.)

Here's the article.

Utility owner Pinnacle West Capital Corp. spent more than $1 million lobbying the federal government in the first half of 2007, according to a disclosure form.

The Phoenix-based company, owner of utility Arizona Public Service as well as other real estate and energy businesses, lobbied Congress on climate change regulations, nuclear waste disposal, homeland security, energy efficiency tax incentives and railroad regulations, according to the disclosure form posted online Aug. 10 by the Senate's public records office.

Besides lawmakers, the company lobbied the Energy Department and the White House.

The company is co-owner of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station near Phoenix, the nation's largest nuclear power plant complex serving about 4 million customers in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and California.

Under a federal law enacted in 1995, lobbyists are required to disclose activities that could influence members of the executive and legislative branches. They must register with Congress within 45 days of being hired or engaging in lobbying.

Comments

[TEY]

Great. There goes my story.

[jeff]

HMMMM Why would Kris Mayes care about this issue? I dont get it. Wow, this is going to be UGLY. By the way, 1 Million dollars is pocket change compared to what Marty spends in Arizona.

[Ann]

Marty is not only spending APS/Pinnacle West dollars, he is trying to spend ours. The school consolidation issue has been proven with hard data to be not the panacea casual observation might predict. Instead it is costly, will not lower taxes, reduces delivery of services, and will put several communities in a "no growth" position as they will not be able to accommodate the building needs of the newly formed districts. Many of the districts targeted have history of spending lesson administration and more in the classroom, their student performance and classroom dollars equal to or better than comparable unified districts, and have a public that has spoken out against any movement toward unification/consolidation. The years of lawsuits to settle the discrepancies statute will surely take years and countless dollars. It is ill conceived and short sighted to continue at this point.

Even in light of this, Marty is bound and determined to call for the elections; blatantly ignoring the presentation of data choosing instead to use non-data driven anecdotal evidence as supporting the issue, and has marginalized many members of the commission who recognize this reality and offer any opposition to consolidation. The local taxpayers must pay for these elections, regardless of how vehemently the local public has spoken in opposition. Thousands and thousands of school district funds will be required to pay for the elections that have no foundational educational need in reality...but it will lower the taxes on the secondary assessed valuation of APS.

[DGN]

At the risk of hijacking this thread, I will respond to the district unification matter.

I'm not on the commission, and I'm certainly not Marty but...

The legislature created the school re-districting commission and part of their mandate is to have the idea brought to voters. Just because one person finds the process as well as the idea of unification / consolidation objectionable, does not mean we cancel elections. Absent a representative process (ie, city council or legislature), that's the best way to determine of people want their districts re-constituted.

As for the merits of consolidation, they do exist, though they are arguable, as is just about anything political.

Let's take the most notable example, the various districts in the City of Phoenix.

There are, I believe, 13 elementary districts that feed the Phoenix Union High School District. Some are very good, some are very bad. The result is that a high school teacher has to teach a few kids who learned in one good elementary district, one very bad district, and maybe another middlin' district. It's much better for a high school to accept students from a unified district where the K-12 standards are aligned and there is at least some consistency in expectation.

That's one argument.

Another argument is financial. In the PUHSD region, you have the PUHSD superintendent and the various assistant supts, test coordinator, business manager, and so forth. You have most of those jobs duplicated at all the 13 elementary districts. THAT'S administrative overkill. And when you consider the average supt. makes around $105,000, you have a cost of well over a million dollars for all those districts combined. And that's just one position.

Let's say you consolidated districts and had three unifed K-12 districts in what is now the PUHSD region. You've articulated standards K-12, which is not happening now. You have reduced administrative overheard by a significant amount, and you still have districts that serve a common community of interest.

I know the educrats are too entrenched and they are watching out for their jobs. Too many of them hate change (unless it's for a new-age curriculum, then they're all over it), so this will probably never happen.

But no one can say the current system of 226 or so districts statewide, some of which were created when people still took trains between Tempe and Phoenix, and Scottsdale was acccessed by ten miles of dirt road is the best we can do. It's time for a change.

[Ann]

DGN, I appreciate the concern and I have said the same things myself before understanding the realities. The illustrations you present are just the type of anecdotal evidence that sounds good but when it is actually quantified against true data and not perception, it doesn't hold up. The Auditor General report revealed that the Union High School/Elementary School Districts actually spent less on administration than Unified Districts. While the position may not be called the same thing, the numbers of positions per pupil tend to be consistent regardless of district make-up and often times the larger the district, the higher the salaries.

As for curriculum, an average of 30% of students entering all high schools did not attend the elementary school in the area. Arizona has a standardized curriculum, the textbooks may be different but the scope of study is the same. As for the good schools bad schools thing, that can be said of individual schools in any district and often is.

The legislature did authorize this commission. It did not obligate it to call for the election. The commission is to determine the need and then submit it to the Governor for the final determination. The process prior to that is for the public to speak and let the commission know how such an effort would affect their communities and children.

There is absolutely no data that says it will increase student achievement, save even one dollar in taxes, or improve anything. Actually, the data reveals children do better in smaller districts, while parents are more comfortable advocating and becoming involved, and some districts will see taxes go up with consolidation. Change for change sake, and at quite a cost as consolidation is a very expensive endeavor, is not an answer.

We do need reform but this is not reform, it is part of a hidden agenda.

[Al of Alnot]

I plan on going to the corporation commission about APS and the way they are forcing me to put an outside lock on my side gate so that they can attach to read my meter. (it was locked on the inside) They are opening themselves up to being sued when some child drowns in the backyard pool because they forgot to latch and lock the gate when they read the meter. The meter reader did not even bother to knock at my front door for access but just attached a threatening note and walked away. I know I watched him through the tinted window. These gestapo tactics must cease.

[JC]

Why Would Kris Mayes Care? TO answer the first post: because she's cracked the whip on APS about all of their nonsense spending. APS wants a rate hike, all the while sponsoring big sponsorships for parades, Diamondbacks, Cardinals, etc. They are spending millions and are wanting us, the consumer to pay for it.