Page 8 - the NOISE October 2012

On September 25, the Prescott City Council unanimously voted against passing a res- olution which would put pressure on Arizona State and Congressional legislators to repeal the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission. The ruling, which took place on January 21, 2010 — and summar- ily upheld in June of this year even when the Montana Supreme Court found serious flaws in corporate financing of campaigns in American Tradition Partnership v. Bullock — states that corporations are in fact persons, entitled to the same First Amendment rights, effectively enabling them to spend limitless amounts of money toward election contributions. In sim- pler words, it allowed corporations the chance to “purchase” candidates in publicly-held elec- tions. Those in vocal condemnation of the rul- ing are many, including former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens and most notably among Arizona residents, Senator John Mc- Cain. While the Prescott City Council’s decision to vote down the resolution certainly damp- ened the moods of those who support it, the result wasn’t unexpected. However, after such a laborious road leading from the resolution’s inception up to the vote, the pride and passion to push on are as strong as ever.
The resolution was first conceived this past March by members of Occupy Prescott, the local chapter working in solidarity with the na- tionwide Occupy movement. After much dis- cussion between its members, the group de- cided to write up a resolution and present it to City Council in hopes of growing public knowl- edge, and eventually passing it. At a press con- ference on March 26, the resolution was formal- ly announced. Weeks later, it was presented to the Prescott City Council by Karen Carlisle at one of its bi-monthly meetings. Tom Atkins, an Occupy Prescott member and speaker at the initial press conference, summed up the neces- sity for such a resolution: “These politicians will be ‘in debt’ to their wealthy benefactors and their corporations! Favors, loopholes, special deals, and tax shelters will gush like water ... even more than they already do.”
On April 14, David Brill and Ines Vitols, two other members of Occupy Prescott, were inter- viewed by Tonya Mock on AZTV. Through vari- ous media outlets, the group hoped to contin- ue increasing public awareness. By this point, the national nonpartisan Move to Amend movement, currently a coalition of roughly 300 US towns, cities, and organizations stretching from coast to coast, had already started to pick up serious momentum throughout Arizona,
with local affiliations present in Tucson, Phoe- nix, and most notably, Flagstaff.
On May 1, the City of Flagstaff passed a resolution of its own, becoming the first Ari- zona city to do so successfully. The nonbinding resolution was spearheaded by Flagstaff for Democracy, an alliance of local activists and organizations rallying against and condemn- ing ‘corporate personhood.’ Sharing the same vision as Occupy Prescott, the Flagstaff alliance aims to, as their website succinctly states, “get big money out of politics.” The passing of such a resolution by neighbors up north certainly gave the Prescott activists reason to smile. However, they were keen to the fact that Flag- staff is a city more empathetic to activism, com- pared to the more institutional Prescott.
Well aware of the uphill battle that lay ahead of them, Occupy Prescott continued in their mission. Occupy members met informally with Prescott City Council members Chris Kuknyo and Charlie Arnold in an attempt to win support to place the Occupy resolution on the Council agenda. Soon after the informal meeting, the July 5 edition of The Daily Courier urged the Prescott City Council to take a stand against big money interfering with politics in a segment titled “Talk of the Town.”
A few weeks later, on July 17, Occupy Prescott took part in perhaps their most momentous and dramatic demonstration. Dick Sanders gave a presentation subtitled “Common Sense” to the City Council, followed by what the move- ment has referred to as a “Scroll Action.” At this meeting, members of the Occupy team physi- cally unrolled petitions with 1,150 Prescott- area resident signatures in support of passing the “Corporations Are Not People” resolution, stretching all the way across the City Hall audi- torium. Mr. Sanders was then interviewed on AZTV the following day.
On July 21, Councilman Kuknyo wrote a lengthy letter in which he applauded the movement’s peaceful approach and patience, explaining why, though certainly sympathetic to their cause, he could not support the Oc- cupy resolution. In his letter, Kuknyo explained he agreed, as any person with common sense would, that elections need to be kept free and fair. However, in stark contrast to Occupy Prescott’s position, he disagreed with their as- sertion that the matter belongs on a resolution by the City of Prescott, feeling a voter-led initia- tive would be best.
Dennis DuVall, a primary member of Oc- cupy Prescott and a fervent political activist, replied to Mr. Kuknyo’s letter, disagreeing with
the argument that the City Council should focus only on what it considers to be “local is- sues.” Mr. DuVall, voicing the viewpoint held by his Occupy counterparts, argued that the City Council was trying to abdicate responsibility by ignoring strong community support for such a resolution. His response also highlighted pre- vious instances that the City Council had voted on matters of national importance, namely their unanimous support in passing a resolu- tion supporting the Four Forests Restoration Initiative. He had hoped that Mr. Kuknyo’s let- ter and corresponding response would be the beginning of a mutually productive dialogue, but nothing came of it.
The battle continued. On August 7, Mike Wilkey asked Prescott Mayor Marlin Kuyken- dall to form an ad hoc committee to review the Occupy resolution and make recommen- dations to City Council, in an attempt to work together toward a solution to their disagree- ments. The request was refused. By that point, Occupy Prescott had made their presence known at over 15 City Council meetings, but to no avail.
“The biggest disappointment has been Prescott City Council’s refusal to talk with us,” Mr. DuVall explained. “Even after we collected 1,150 petition signatures, gave five presenta- tions and had a visible presence at 15 City Council meetings. We felt we had enough community support to show our resolution to be a local issue.”
After five months of the Prescott City Council remaining relatively mute on the subject, the members of Occupy Prescott decided they had no choice but to force the issue. This they did by means of a provision in the City Charter that requires the council to take action within 30 days, if presented with a Citizen’s Petition. Occupy Prescott became aware of the provi- sion early on, first brought to their attention during their informal meeting with Messrs. Kuknyo and Arnold, but were hesitant to uti- lize it. Before thinking of forcing a vote, what they needed was the opportunity to first raise awareness, in order to give their resolution a fighting chance.
A vote so early on, without the chance to get their message out, undoubtedly would have been swept aside and off the agenda. What they were hoping for all along was a continu- ing dialogue, and a forum to openly share their concerns with the public. They sought the support of Prescott City Council in bringing the issues of the Citizens United ruling to pub- lic knowledge, by holding viable forums and
debating the issue in the local political arena. It was only after months of denial, having dili- gently and tirelessly working towards exposure, that Occupy Prescott decided to take advan- tage of the City Charter provision.
On September 4, Mr. Atkins presented the group’s Citizen’s Petition. Mr. DuVall’s vocal pro- test against the City Council’s long drawn-out indifference resulted in being removed from the meeting. After the presentation, the City Council had no choice but to agree to vote on the matter during the following meeting on September 25.
Not surprisingly, the resolution was voted down. Though hopeful of its passing, Occupy Prescott and its members were well aware that its defeat would be a very real possibility. Still, what they view as a subtle victory is that the City Council, after months of remaining silent on the issue during its meetings, actually dis- cussed the matter and asked probing ques- tions.
After six months of pushing, they were both happy and relieved that they had even managed to get to that point; but for Occupy Prescott, the battle to root out corporate greed from politics, both locally and nationally, is far from over. Maybe, as members of Occupy Prescott hope, Prescott will one day join the ranks of Flagstaff and Jerome in becoming a beacon to the ‘Move to Amend’ coalition here in Arizona.
“We will keep working on public forums to educate and help citizens to understand the dangers involved when a very specific, sin- gular, very wealthy person can buy their way into political power,” Mr. Atkins determinedly explained, “Single wealthy entities cannot control the power structure. We will descend, even more, into a plutocratic system of govern- ment. It will not be a pretty sight.”
Mr. DuVall echoed this sentiment: “We’ll con- tinue to focus public attention on the injustices perpetrated by the corporate plutocracy, banks and Wall Street as we continue to build Occupy Prescott as a credible and effective voice for the 99%.”
For more information on Occupy Prescott, visit occupyprescott.org
For more information on the national move- ment, visit movetoamend.org
| Mark Szopinski knows a decent place to get a bourgeois. busyb3ingborn@gmail.com
8 • OCTOBER 2012 • the NOISE arts & news magazine • thenoise.us