Search: Web        
powered by
Le Templar: What I Know ~

Archive for the 'Jason Rose' Tag

Parker pushes Brewer on budget, but could hit harder (with update)

October 5th, 2009, 5:06 pm by Le Templar
Jason Rose (right) is the public relations specialist/political strategy/attack dog who is in charge in attracting public attention to the likely campaign for governor of Paradise Valley Mayor Vernon Parker (left).

Jason Rose (right) is the public relations specialist/political strategist who is in charge of attracting public attention to the likely campaign for governor of Paradise Valley Mayor Vernon Parker (left).

Now that Republican Vernon Parker is in the race for governor (almost), we in the media received today the first of what could be daily missives from his press agent, Scottsdale political provocateur Jason Rose. Typically, a candidate or business hires Rose’s PR firm to make a big public splash and then to keep the spotlight burning, as Rose and Co. specialize in attention-grabbing headlines and other tactics almost guaranteed to generate publicity — even though some of it makes the intended audience go “what the heck?” or “Ewwww!”

But what Rose is really good at is framing talking points and campaign slogans with instant emotional appeal that might, or might not, stand up to critical examination.

Today’s news release is an example of this. Parker (via Rose) wants to tap into widespread Republican opposition to Gov. Jan Brewer’s proposed temporary sales tax increase. Parker’s statement says Brewer wants to raise this tax before even reducing her own staff:

“Many Arizonans are suffering. Many state agencies are cutting. The Governor’s Office should do the same. I will,” Parker said. “Should I be fortunate enough to be elected Governor I would make these necessary cuts on Day One.”

Parker goes on to say, as Paradise Valley mayor, he has cut the town’s spending by 25 percent and the budget for mayor and Town Council by 54 percent. What Parker doesn’t mention is any reference to what those cuts were or how they might translate to the governor’s office. It’s important to note that the Paradise Valley mayor and council combined spent $83,108 last year and will spend $50,175 this year, a far cry from the $7.6 million set aside for the governor’s office this year.

Also, Parker’s math is a little fuzzy. Paradise Valley’s tax revenues are projected to be down by 25 percent from when Parker became mayor in June 2008 ($21.9 million to $16.3 million). But town operations will spend 16.4 percent less ($19.5 million to $16.3 million). The spending-to-revenue gap of nearly 9 percent will be filled with cash-on-hand saved from past tax collections. A similar savings account for the state was drained dry in January.

Parker also doesn’t mention a single position in the governor’s office that he would eliminate or any specific cost savings he would pursue.

Oddly enough, Parker (via Rose) could have made a stronger statement simply by highlighting the budget numbers for the governor’s office, which have risen by nearly $210,000 from last year as explained by the Legislature’s official budget summary. This stands in contrast with the state agencies that Brewer oversees, which have undergone at least three rounds of budget reductions and have been asked to prepare for another 15 to 20 percent in cuts mid-year. Parker’s news release includes a web link to the governor’s office budget, but fails to note the increase in spending.

UPDATE: Brewer’s press secretary, Paul Senseman, told me by email Wednesday morning that the governor’s office needed additional staffing so far this year to comply with tracking and auditing requirements for use of federal stimulus funds. But Senseman added Brewer plans to include mid-year cuts to her office when she sends new budget proposals to the Legislature in the near future.

Posted in: Arizona Legislature • Arizona government • Election issues • Governor • • • | 2 Comments »

New poll: Voters OK with sales tax but not with Brewer

August 31st, 2009, 4:54 pm by Le Templar

A statewide telephone poll of likely Arizona voters shows a temporary 1-cent sales tax to help shore up the state budget would have a good chance of passing. But those same voters wouldn’t elect Gov. Jan Brewer to a full term if the 2010 general election were held today.

The poll was commissioned by Mesa real estate magnet Wil Cardon, apparently in a bid to boost Cardon’s own potential candidacy for governor or some other statewide office. (In a news release, Scottsdale political strategist Jason Rose floats state treasurer or chairman of the Arizona Republican Party as other possibilities).

The poll surveyed 602 voters who had cast ballots in the past two statewide primary or general elections. Campaign strategists consider this type of sampling to be more reliable than other polls that sample all Arizonans or all registered voters. You can see the full results here, but I’ll pull out a few highlights:

* Voters narrowly favored passage of the temporary sales tax increase at 49 percent in favor and 43 percent against. That’s within the poll’s margin of error of 4 percent. But toss in the fact that these voters identified funding for K-12 education and resolving state budget as two of the state’s three top pressing concerns, and you can see that a sales tax definitely could pass. Only a handful of those survey were concerned about tax reductions, which has been a top priority for Republicans who control the Legislature.

* Brewer’s political fortunes would seem closely tied to that sales tax proposal. But this sampling of voters found much unhappiness with the governor’s performance. Only 18 percent said they would vote for her in 2010 and 45 percent said they are likely to vote for someone else.

* Who might that someone else be? Well, the poll also asked respondents to consider the potential challengers by job title or political experience (no names were used). “A successful businessman with a young family” got the most picks at 42 percent, which is exactly the description that Cardon would use in a statewide campaign. The next closest were “a former state senate president and secretary of state” (Ken Bennett) at 27 percent, and “an incumbent Attorney General” (Terry Goddard) at 12 percent.

* The poll also found strong support for a flat income tax (although the wording of the question appears slanted to support that proposal’s most favorable arguments) and expanding term limits to require politicians to sit out for two years before they could run for a new office. But the poll respondents were opposed to stripping lawmakers of the pay ($24,000 a year plus expenses) or to going to one legislative session every two years as the Texas Legislature does.

Coming this weekend: Read Austin Hill’s interview with Paradise Valley Mayor Vernon Parker, who is also considering a run for governor as a Republican in 2010. In the Tribune Opinion section.

Posted in: Arizona Legislature • Arizona government • Arizona secretary of state • Congress • Election issues • Governor • Presidential campaign • • • • • • | 1 Comment »

Racetracks have a point about tribal gaming

July 21st, 2009, 11:15 am by Le Templar
Photo by Capitol Media Services

Photo by Capitol Media Services

Arizona’s horse and dog tracks stepped up their latest campaign Monday to get access to slot machines and possibly other forms of gambling. Such a move would violate the 2002 gaming compact with the state’s Indian tribes that was put on the ballot by initiative and narrowly approved by voters. But the racetracks’ new strategy, crafted by Scottsdale uber-publicist Jason Rose, makes the case that the Tonoho O’odham already have broken the compact with plans to build what would be the state’s largest casino in Glendale. That site isn’t anywhere the state’s second biggest reservation, but apparently would be allowed under an obscure federal law quietly approved by Congress before the 2002 vote. The Tohono O’odham tribe has purchased the land and is waiting for the federal government to declare the location as part of its sovereign territory.

The racetracks are arguing voters had no idea in 2002 that renewing an exclusive monopoly for Indian tribes on slot machines and blackjack (and adding poker) would enable them to build new casinos in areas not part of their existing territories. Sheila Morago, executive director of the Arizona Indian Gaming Association, objects to the notion that voters might have been fooled or kept ignorant during the 2002 campaign.

“That’s your perception,” she told Capitol Media Services. “Has anybody ever asked them?”

Well, as someone who covered the 2002 campaign, I can definitely say that no one ever mentioned the possibility of one or more tribes opening casinos on land not previously recognized as eligible. In fact, there was some debate about the distinct competitive advantages that the urban tribes such as Salt River and Gila River (and the Tonoho in Tucson) had over tribes in rural areas. That was one reason why the compact (as previously negotiated by then-Gov. Jane D. Hull) allows the tribes to sell or lease their designated slot machines to another tribes. The idea was that rural tribes who would face real challenges in attracting casino customers might find it easier and more profitable to sell their share to an urban tribe.

The tribes seem to like their current monopoly. They remain opposed to allowing more gambling at the race tracks, even though that would trigger a “poison pill” in the 2002 compact that would lift most restrictions on tribal casinos. But the tribes need to prepare themselves for a potential backlash that could benefit competitors if the Tohono O’odham tribe goes through with its plans in Glendale.

Posted in: Arizona government • Congress • Election initiatives • Election issues • Governor • • • • • | 1 Comment »
ADVERTISEMENT