Page 10 - the NOISE January 2016

newSyearinreview
review by kenDall PerkinSon
aRizONa pOLiTicOS FROM LeFT: corporation commissioners Doug Little, Tom Forese,
& Bob Stump; Flagstaff Mayor Jerry Nabours; Governor
Doug Ducey.
note some downsides to pushing the developers out of the conversation. He points out that the only reason City Council had any negotiating power at all was because the trailer park area needed to be rezoned for the “high-occupancy housing” of student apartments. The developer, Landmark Properties, had offered to pay for the installation of crosswalks where they were al- ready needed and agreed to limit construction height to five stories rather than the six stories originally planned, among other concessions.
“I see a lot of the improvements that were slated, that the developer would’ve paid for, aren’t on the table now. so that’s unfortunate,” Mr. Oravits said. City Council no longer has any say in the process of The standard’s development.
But “say in the process” is exactly what Tory Syracuse wants more of. she is the new execu- tive Director of Friends of Flagstaff’s Future, which had two members on the student Hous- ing Action Plan Task Force. she says the group did good work, but there needs to be a way for the public to have a stronger say in what developments are built.
“Zoning, at its best, is discretionary,” Ms. syracuse said. “Just because something is allowed [by zoning laws] doesn’t necessarily mean that it absolutely has to be allowed. I think we need to build the tools to allow for input from neighborhoods and the city to really evaluate whether these projects are appropriate for their context. even if they’re allowed in the zoning, are they appropriate in the context? we still don’t have clear guidance, for the public or developers, about where these kinds of developments will be allowed.”
with at least four new student housing complexes in the works, this is an issue that is sure to rear its head again in the very near future.
Ducey BootS PriVate PriSon oPerator, callS for More PriVate PriSonS
Recap: In August of 2015, this writer reported on the state of the private prison industry in Arizona, spurred by the prison riot in Kingman. Inmates maintained control of the Manage- ment and Training corp facility for two days until the Department of corrections finally sent in a tactical response team. At the time, there was little information about what may have started the riot. Two inmates escaped from the same facility in 2010, killing two campers in new Mexico less than a week later. In January, an inmate serving time there for a nonviolent drug offense was beaten to death by guards.
This writer also covered the connections between the largest prison company in America, corrections corporation of america, and Arizona politicians. CCA had two former lobbyists working as advisors to then-governor Jan Brewer. The prison industry as a whole (including CCA and MTC) contributed more than $400,000 to organizations like the Republican Gover- nor’s Association, which supported current-governor Doug Ducey’s campaign directly.
By August, contract bids for a 1,000-bed expansion of private prisons were put on hold as Mr. Ducey awkwardly called for an investigation into a company that was a major financial supporter.
UpDaTe: The investigation was summarized in a scathing report by the Arizona Department of Corrections, which concluded that the facility had “a culture of disorganization, disengage- ment, and disregard”of state policies. shortly after the report was released, Mr. Ducey canceled the facility’s contract.
In the immediate aftermath, MTC claimed the riot had been sparked by a racial conflict between inmates. The report found that because prison staff and property were exclusively targeted during the incident, “that the riots were more likely precipitated by inmate dissatisfac- tion with MTC’s operation of the prison than by anger among the inmates themselves.” This was consistent with the few inmate reports that were provided to news agencies afterward.
The Kingman MTC prison once held about half (47%) of all private prison beds in the state. with the sudden lack of space in the private sector, the 1,000-bed contract that had been put on hold for the investigation suddenly turned into a 2,000-bed contract.
However, the riot — along with the history of problems in private prisons throughout the state — may be forcing a shift in the budget priorities of Arizona voters. Mr. Ducey’s 2015 state budget deducted millions of dollars from education, while promising more money in new prison contracts to the private corporations that funded his campaign. even conservative Arizona politicians expressed concern on this point.
For opponents of private prisons, there is the matter of “occupancy guarantees.” Taxpayers are forced to pay these corporations more than $60 per day, per bed, whether the bed is occu- pied or not. social liberals claim that this is creating incentive for unnecessarily harsh sentenc- ing and assembly-line justice. Fiscal conservatives, like Maricopa County sheriff Joe arpaio, claim that it is a waste of public money, since there is room for inmates in state-run jails.
with a new contract for 2,000 beds on the dossier, it is unlikely the governor has changed his mind about the efficacy of private prisons. It will be hard to tell until the next budget session whether political influences outside the governor’s office will force a political debate about the costs and benefits of private prisons in Arizona.
| There’s a good chance Kendall Perkinson is riding a WVU- PRT right now. kromaticphoto@gmail.com
arizona Solar: looking for the light through all that Dark Money
Recap: The arizona corporations commission is the regulatory board that oversees rates and policies for arizona public Service, the power company serving most of the state of Ari- zona. Last year, The Noise covered how APs spent big money to influence the outcome of the Commission elections. Though this was not technically illegal, many politicians and news organizations posed ethical questions concerning the right of a quasi-monopolistic electricity provider to financially control who would end up regulating it.
This was brought to light during the primaries for ACC commissioner seats. APs was accused by two Republican candidates of spending immense sums of money in support of their Repub- lican opponents: Tom Forese and Doug Little. Both Messrs. Forese and Little were also being sued by the Arizona Democratic Party for failure to report campaign expenditures.
This all happened during a time of rapidly evaporating financial incentives for the use of solar power in the state. APs requested that the ACC drastically lower the price that solar custom- ers were paid for all of the excess energy they provided back to the power grid, and tack on a monthly fee for what APs called “infrastructure” costs.
UpDaTe: Messrs. Forese and Little both admitted to campaign finance violations. They were each fined $2,000. Then they won the election.
APs continues to attempt to push solar rates higher through the Commission. After the election, it requested the monthly fee it successfully lobbied for in 2013 be raised from $5 to $21. By this point, the backlash from solar supporters was intense, and APs agreed to drop the request if the ACC would conduct a new study of extra costs associated with solar customers. The solar industry successfully convinced the commission to simultaneously examine the extra value associated with solar — such as how they don’t require the construction of new power plants.
In september, a new complaint was filed against Messrs. Forese and Little. It claimed that their “dark money” backing from APs (claiming $3.2 million total) should disqualify them from ruling on the solar rates they were about to be review. The complaint was supported by two former Commissioners — one from each political party — among others. By this point, all five commissioners of the ACC now faced complaints concerning ethics, bias or other alleged wrongdoing.
Around the same time, it was revealed the ACC had insufficiently responded to a public records request filed to obtain email communications between APs and former Commission Chairman, Bob stump. The legally-binding response to the public records request omitted and misidentified several mobile devices from which Mr. stump communicated during the elections. The washington, DC-based watchdog group that requested the communications then began to focus on text messages to key players in that hotly disputed Republican primary that Mr. stump sent, then deleted. After Verizon said it couldn’t restore the text messages, the group sued for Mr. stump’s iPhone5, which is still being held in custody of the Attorney General.
The saga continues, and the future of solar energy in Arizona is anything but certain.
arrowheaD Village Safe,
But StuDent houSing iSSueS reMain
Recap: Last year, this writer covered the story of a student housing project called The stan- dard, which Flagstaff Mayor Jerry Nabours and other council members called the most “con- tentious proposal” they had ever seen in the City. Opposition to The standard was so fierce that Council Chambers filled to overflowing on at least two occasions — once for more than five hours — with people speaking against its construction. By the time the developer withdrew the plans amidst community pressure, 14,000 robocalls had been made to Flagstaff residents about the issue and a lawsuit had been filed against Vice Mayor coral evans.
The opposition to the student housing complex largely centered around plans to displace about 200 residents from the Arrowhead Village trailer park, which is the most affordable hous- ing area in Flagstaff. Most of the trailers are owned by families that have lived in the park for 5-10 years. There were also concerns about traffic, parking, student parties and pedestrian safety. (The intersection of Milton and Route 66 was already the busiest in Flagstaff, rated“F”by the Department of Transportation.)
UpDaTe: The standard is still being built, but it will no longer displace residents of Arrow- head Village. Many of the people who worked against the development consider their op- position a success, if only because the trailer park community is still intact. Perhaps the most influential aspect of the debate surrounding The standard was the way it spurred the creation of the city’s student Housing Action Plan Task Force. Its primary stated goal was “hosting a community conversation that begins to address the issue of student housing in Flagstaff, con- sidering both the needs of students and the importance of maintaining the character of all neighborhoods that make Flagstaff unique.”
The task force made its final report on October 17. The final recommendations were that developers consider compatibility with surrounding properties, the character of historic neigh- borhoods, compliance with Flagstaff’s Dark Skies Ordinance and adequate parking, among other factors. nothing in the report is legally binding.
City Councilmember Jeff Oravits never took a public position on The standard, but he does 10 • january 2016 • the NOISE arts & news • thenoise.us