 |
EMIL
FRANZI |
Goldwater Institute
official criticizes Vestar deal October 10, 2007 |
Clint Bolick quipped to
the folks assembled by Oro Valley First that this was
his first visit to Oro Valley, and that he now
understood why a community this beautiful needed to
pay businesses to relocate.
That immediately gets to the heart of the Vestar issue. Bolick, originally from New Jersey, is head of the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute’s Center for Constitutional Litigation, sort of a free market version of the ACLU. Prior to his arrival in Arizona six years ago, Bolick founded the D.C.-based Institute for Justice. He’s appeared before the U.S. Supreme Court and the high courts of three states — Ohio, Wisconsin and Arizona. His best known legal victory was Bailey’s Brake Service vs. Mesa, involving the attempt by that city to use eminent domain on one business to give it’s location to another. While the U.S. Supreme Court’s liberal wing upheld 5-4 the federal constitutionality of that power in the now infamous Kelo Case, the state of Arizona has it’s own constitutional restrictions on similar actions here, and the court ruled in Bailey’s — and Bolick’s — favor. The Goldwater Institute also believes that constitutional restrictions apply to the practice of subsidizing development and have brought suit against the City of Phoenix’s $97.4 million gift to the developer of a mall known as City North. Sound familiar? It did to the OVF, who invited Bolick to explain that suit and its impact here. They had noted Bolick’s earlier statement: “This is Robin Hood in reverse. The city is taking nearly $100 million in taxpayer money to give to a Chicago developer to build a fancy shopping mall. Corporate welfare is a blatantly improper use of government power.” Bolick explained the three provisions of the Arizona Constitution that outlaw the practice — one that prevents governments from providing “gifts by subsidy or otherwise,” another guaranteeing “equal privileges and immunities,” and a third stopping “special laws for special benefits.” Bolick expects the case to be appealed from the trial court and to wend its way up the judicial system rather quickly for a lawsuit, with 2009 as a probable completion date. In the meantime, the legislature is taking what Bolick called “baby steps” to restrict the practice. He finds their efforts encouraging as a reflection of public and media support, something never completely ignored in the judicial process. What we have is an issue that defies all the usual political boundaries. Bolick had spoken earlier that day to the Pima County Republican Club. OVF doesn’t seem to have many crossovers with the OV GOP group nor did I notice any among the 60 or so folks in attendance. Had more known about the appearance they might have showed, but many in the GOP are NOT endorsers of the GWI on this or many other matters. There’s also a pot full of “pro-business” Democrats who hardly support the efforts of OVF. OVF is shedding its monochromatic image as a “down-with-Wal-Mart,” Left/Dem front group. Two forthcoming local elections should give both the candidates and OVF the opportunity to break some new ground. Legislators in both houses were everywhere on the “baby step” bill with hard right and left folks supporting it, and the usual squishies in opposition. Our own District 26 saw Republican Pete Hershberger and Democrat Lena Saradnik voting “no” in the House with Democrat Sen. Charlene Pesquiera staying on her game by not voting at all. That aligns both house members with the big business lobby. Which gives any challenger the opportunity to work a big fat new constituency — a big fat political hint to Al Melvin, who’ll be facing Hershberger for Pesquiera’s seat, AND the gaggle of GOP and Democrat types who will seek the two House seats. The same holds for the Oro Valley Council race next year. OVF is backing Democrat Salette Latas (who introduced Bolick in a great display of political cross-pollenization) and independent Bill Garner. A Republican with imagination might consider making it a threesome.
|
BUT WATCH WHAT YOU SAY! |
|
|
|||
