No compromise! No negotiation! No discussion! No public input!

These are the rallying cries of the Tea Party in the Arizona Legislature and in the US Congress. Here is a thoughtful editorial on rigidity from the New York Times.

House Republicans have already won so much in this year’s federal budget standoff that they could easily declare victory and put an end to the maddening and dysfunctional cycle. Previous Congresses would have noticed that millions of people are still struggling in an economic downturn and tried to help, but Republicans have succeeded in shutting off that conversation.

They have won the philosophical war, compelling Democrats to agree to tens of billions in spending cuts. Yet that does not seem to be enough for the Republicans who now control the federal steering wheel.

With a hard deadline looming, talks to prevent a government shutdown have been stymied for a week because Tea Party members of the House have demanded everything: not just some of their cuts but almost all of them, and not just a reduction in spending but a reduction only in the programs they don’t like.Many are insisting Democrats also agree to nonbudgetary riders, like ending the financing of Planned Parenthood or health care reform.

They simply will not accede to anything that looks like a compromise with President Obama. Caught in this position, Speaker John Boehner knows the public is likely to blame Republicans for the pain of a shutdown, once it sees that the Democrats offered difficult compromises that his caucus rejected. That is the price he pays for riding to power on the backs of people who don’t understand that government cannot be built out of ideological rigidity.

If Mr. Boehner cannot persuade his members that the public does not want a government shutdown and will blame them, then much of the government will close its doors on April 8, when the current stopgap funding measure runs out. [Emphasis added.]

For the rest of the editorial, click on this link.

Hurray for an informed citizenry!

Rep. Steve Court (R-Mesa) has withdrawn his proposal for an Arizona flat tax, which would have raised taxes on all Arizonans making less than $100,000 and lowered taxes on everyone making more than that amount.

Court’s flat tax sailed through the Arizona House with only Democrats voting against it. It also passed a Senate panel recently– again with only Democratic opposition. I, for one, thought that Arizonans were about to be seriously screwed by the Legislature, but according to Court, he pulled the legislation because he got calls and questions from voters. Yes!

Unfortunately, Teapublicans like Court don’t give up easily. According to the Arizona Daily Star, he is going to put lipstick on that pig and come up with a spin campaign to dupe voters …er… rewrite the bill and educate the electorate about the value of taxing the working class, while letting the rich keep 40% more cash.

I agree that Arizona’s tax structure needs an overhaul, but my graduated tax plan would have added more tax brackets in the upper income levels– thus increasing taxes on the wealthy– and would have added more corporate tax brackets. (As you know, the Arizona Legislature and Governor Jan Brewer already increased corporate welfare by decreasing the corporate tax rate.)

For more details on the temporary demise of the flat tax, here’s a link to the Star article.

Tucsonans enjoyed a gorgeous day and outdoor activities like Cyclovia and Solar Rock on Sunday. (Photo Credit: Pamela Powers)

Yesterday was another glorious sunny Sunday in Tucson, but what made it extra special was a series of  sustainable living events downtown– Cyclovia, Solar Rock, and The Water Project.

Participants in Cyclovia– a five-mile car-free community bike ride– were treated with a tour of Barrio Viejo and Armory Park, without those annoying cars.

Various stops– like the free bike check-up and Paint-Your-Own-Bike-Bell tent, both sponsored by BICAS; the annual Solar Rock concert in Armory Park; and The Water Project in Armory Park Center– were along the Cyclovia route.

Bicycles and riders of all shapes, sizes, and vintages took part in Cyclovia and relaxed at Armory Park afterward.  People danced on the lawn as Spirit Familia jammed. Others lay in the grass and played with their children or chatted with friends. It was a beautiful day all around.

I applaud these groups for coordinating this marvelous community event. Check out the video for a taste of the day.

Hundreds of people of all ages, races, and ethnicities honored the memory of Cesar Chavez and the farm workers’ struggle at a march and rally in Tucson on March 26, 2011.

On the 8th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq– March 19, 2011– 200 Tucsonans joined citizen across the country to protest war.

In recent weeks, Tucsonans have joined citizens nationwide to march and demonstrate for or against multiple issues. There are three marches coming up– including two today!

Cesar Chavez March. The 11th annual march honoring labor organizer Cesar Chavez begins at 9 a.m. at Pueblo High School, 3500 S. 12th Ave. Check the Three Sonorans’ linked story for details.

Uncut protest at Bank of America. If you can’t make it to the south side, Uncut is protesting at a far east side Bank of America from 11 a.m. – 1 p.m. today (Saturday, March 26, 2011). The Tucson demonstration is part of a national effort to increase public awareness of the fact that Bank of America received $45 billion in government bailout funds while funneling its tax dollars into 115 offshore tax havens and paying NO US income taxes.

The bank is at 9015 East Tanque Verde Road in Tucson–northwest corner of Tanque Verde Rd. and Catalina  Highway. Organizers want to urge people to pull their money out of Bank of America and move it somewhere else. Preferably a credit union. For more info re signs, chants, etc. can be found at http://www.usuncut.org/actions/174.

Unions remember MLK. On April 4, 2011, the Pima Area Labor Federation will join other labor groups nationwide to honor the life and of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on the anniversary of his assassination. King was in Memphis supporting a sanitation workers’ strike when he was gunned down. Unions are remembering King’s assistance in their struggle.

Locally, supporters will rally at 4 p.m. at the statue of Pancho Villa (Broadway and Church in downtown Tucson) and then march to Armory Park (221 S. 6th Ave.) At Armory Park, there will be a BBQ. Bring Blankets or lawn chairs for the BBQ. RSVP required.

President Ronald Reagan ordering striking unionists back to work. (Photo Credit: Wikipedia.)

Earlier this week, President Ronald Reagan’s air traffic controller union busting devolved to a dangerous low point in air safety when a lone controller fell asleep at the switch at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, a bustling, major airport outside of Washington DC.

As a result, two passenger jets trying to land at Reagan National had to wing it. From the Seattle Times…

The supervisor – the only controller scheduled for duty in the tower around midnight Tuesday when incident occurred – had fallen asleep, said an aviation official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the incident…

The pilots of the two commercial planes were unable to reach the tower, but they were in communication with a regional air traffic control facility, Knudson said. That facility is in Warrenton, Va., about 40 miles from the airport…

After pilots were unable to raise the airport tower by radio, they asked controllers in Warrenton to call the tower, Knudson said. Repeated calls to the tower went unanswered, he said…

“The FAA is looking into staffing issues and whether existing procedures were followed appropriately,” agency spokeswoman Laura Brown said in an email. [Emphasis added.]

In its post-incident investigation, the National Transportation Safety Board is finding that Washington National is not the only air terminal with one person on duty over night. Aren’t there rules about this sort of thing?

Now we find that Tucson International Airport is among those airport terminals with a lone controller at night.

Anyone who has driven alone at night on a boring interstate knows that one person working alone all night is just not safe. I’m sure this is not the first time an air traffic controller has fallen asleep.

Two issues unions fight for are safety and good working conditions. Air traffic controllers haven’t been unionized since the early 1980s– thanks to Reagan.

A little history lesson… the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO) was a union that represented the nation’s air traffic controllers from 1968 to 1981 when the Reagan Administration broke a PATCO strike, fired 11,345 air traffic controllers, and banned them from federal service. Some unionists see busting the PATCO union as a turning point in the history of labor in the US.

Destroying a union that actually supported him in the election against Carter is part of Reagan’s legacy. Now we can add unsafe skies to Reagan’s legacy.

The Tucson City Council unanimously voted business friendly twice at last night’s meeting– approving a new Land Use Code requiring fewer parking spaces and approving a billboard along Tucson’s scenic corridor for the Jewish Community Center (JCC).

Parking and the Land Use Code

The Land Use Code changes to vehicle and bicycle parking were contentious at the March 8 City Council meeting. Last night’s discussion was a continuation, but in the interim, a compromise was negotiated. Cyclists and businessmen alike spoke glowingly in favor of the Land Use Code changes and the civil discourse that resulted in the compromise. In a nutshell, the new business construction will be able to provide few parking spaces for cars; in addition, there are formulas which allow for customization in vehicle and bicycle parking.

Tucson’s cycling community is trying achieve a platinum rating from the League of American Bicyclists, a distinction held by only two other American cities. Cycling enthusiasts at last night’s meeting said the new bicycle parking laws will help move Tucson forward toward a platinum rating.

Councilwoman Regina Romero praised the Land Use Code negotiations and said that requiring fewer parking spaces and good bicycle parking will allow for more infill construction, while encouraging the use of alternative transportation.

JCC Billboard and the Sign Code

Last fall, the Tucson’s Sign Code Appeals and Advisory Board (SCAAB), a citizen’s advisory board made up of local business people, denied JCC’s application for a sign code variance. Among other nuances, the current code says a business can have a 50 square-foot sign. The JCC already has one over-sized lighted monument sign with a changing text and wanted to erect a 750 square-foot, changing-text billboard on the south face of their building on River Road at Dodge, at the base of the Catalina Mountains.

The JCC lost the variance case last fall, and their last ditch effort to erect a billboard along Tucson’s scenic corridor was at last night’s Tucson City Council meeting.

Since this was an appeal, discussion was limited to the JCC and any neighbors or concerned parties directly affected by the proposed billboard. Council Members were given the SCAAB’s meeting minutes and all records in advance. The JCC’s president and another representative talked in warm and fuzzy platitudes about how a giant sign will promote the mission of the JCC. (In other words, a changing-text billboard on River Road will help sell their services to commuters whizzing by.)

At first it appeared as if no one was there to speak against the billboard, so… I raised my hand and said, “Well, I’m not exactly a neighbor, but I live directly south of the JCC and will be affected by this.”

I think the City Council hearing on a scaled-back 500-square-foot sign was supposed to be an orchestrated no-opposition, slam-dunk for the JCC, so to have some trouble-makin’ blogger raise her hand gave them all a bit of a pause. (Oh, God, what’s she going to say if we let her have the mike?)

They did let me speak– on behalf of those River Road commuters and the hundreds of Tucsonans who use the Rillito River Path and Brandi Fenton Memorial Park– across the street from the proposed billboard. I said people like me use the bike path for exercise and commuting and frequent Brandi Fenton because of the great facilities and the breath-taking view of the Catalinas– a view that would be spoiled by a billboard. I questioned the size and location of the billboard. The JCC president had said that the sign would be visible only from the Alvernon Way direction (east of the JCC), but I remain skeptical that a billboard that large will not be visible from the park and the river path.

Of course, my pitch for preserving natural beauty over commercial signage didn’t stop the process the steam-roller process. The Council approved the 500-square-foot billboard variance– 10x the sign code recommendation. I know that the JCC believes that erecting a billboard at the base of the Catalinas will help their marketing effort. I believe this marketing move could cause public relations problems and hurt the JCC’s public image– particularly with those who are concerned with environmental sensitivity. With its changing text and giant size, if the sign is too visually intrusive, those River Road commuters and park-goers aren’t going to like it, and that could backfire on them. Only time will tell.

This City Council has now voted twice to allow increased signage along Tucson’s scenic corridor; this is a dangerously slippery slope. Environmentalists– this should be a wake up call.

Is it just me or are local businesses looking more and more like uncaring, greedy bast**ds every day? The constant business friendly drumbeat is getting old.

Yesterday, local businesses were whining about Tucson’s sign code on the front page of the Arizona Daily Star. Today, they are whining about bicycle parking on the front page of the Star. A few weeks ago, they were clamoring about mini-dorms and their right to tear down historic properties to build giant boxes made of ticky-tacky.

What happened to cities and businesses that prided themselves on being people or consumer friendly?

Take today’s business issue: bicycle parking. According to the Star, the city has been working on relaxed parking regulations in an attempt to more “business friendly.” From the Star…

Bike racks now must be within 50 feet of the entrance. Advocates objected to a proposal to make it 75 feet from the entrance if extra security measures for the bikes are added.

They also objected to a new formula to determine the number of bike spaces required and provisions for employee bike parking. [Since cyclists are objecting, I guess there will be fewer spaces.]

Developers and business owners say close-up racks are not always practical or even necessary, and the debate is delaying needed changes to reduce the number of parking spaces required for businesses – rules that have been years in the making.

The issue arose when the City Council was about to give final approval to land-use-code changes that would have eased parking requirements to be more business-friendly – an key issue in the 2009 city election that is back for this year’s campaign. [Emphasis added.]

So, businesses want to “ease” parking regulations, so they can provide fewer vehicle and bicycle parking spaces. This move is considered “business friendly,” but is it “customer friendly”? Hell no! Who wants to waste time driving around trying to find street parking because a business doesn’t have adequate parking spaces? Not me. I’ll spend my money at a business that shows they want my business by giving me parking.

On the issue of reduced bicycle parking, this is seriously short-sighted. The business owners are only thinking of themselves and their profits right now; they are not thinking about the future. Gas is over $3/gallon, and the middle east is exploding in turmoil. The smart business would add MORE bicycle and motorcycle parking– not less.

Tucson is currently adding more commuter cycling boulevards (like 3rd Street). Making it easier to cycle to work while reducing the number of bicycle parking spaces is schizophrenic. Bicycle enthusiasts quoted in the paper talked about obtaining a platinum rating for Tucson as a bike-friendly city. Beyond that is the question of sustainability. Riding a bike to the store or to work is much more sustainable than driving.

In the Star, some business owners said they didn’t need bicycle parking because customers don’t come to them. What about bicycle-commuting employees? A local developer said you don’t need bicycle spaces at Home Depot. I’ve ridden my bike to Home Depot; he shouldn’t jump to conclusions.

My question for local businesses is: When are you going to stop thinking about yourselves and start thinking about your customers? Seriously,  inadequate parking will hurt your business more than a sign-code-compliant sign. It doesn’t matter how big your sign is, if your business doesn’t have adequate, well-lit, safe parking, customers will go to your competitor who does.

My question for the Tucson City Council is: When are you going to stop bending over every time a developer or a business person wants lower fees or lower taxes or city intervention to protect profits or relaxed zoning or a sweet land deal (1, 2, 3, 4)? Hasn’t the city been screwed over enough already?

Changes to the parking regulations and a sign code appeal which would allow the Jewish Community Center to put a billboard on the side of their building are both on today’s City Council agenda. Be there if you care!

Larger commercial signage will now be allowed along Tucson's scenic routes. (Photo Credit: Pamela Powers)

Business-friendly whiners made the front page of the Arizona Daily Star today– with old news. The story– Tough Times Make City’s Sign Code a Target– features three business owners who are perpetual complainers about Tucson’s sign code. (Although two of them were allowed to use the offending signs after appeal, they’re still whining about them.)

The third complainer is Thoroughbred Nisson– who bought the old Kinney Shoe Store building and its GIANT, old, ugly sign across the street. The sign code says that old, non-compliant signs are grandfathered in and can be used until the business changes hands. If the business type remains the same (ie, a restaurant opens where an old restaurant was), the non-compliant sign can be used– regardless how old, ugly, and out-of-scale it may be. If the business type changes, the signage is subject to review.

Thoroughbred Nisson tried to play the historic card with the old Kinney Shoe Store sign– erected on east Broadway Blvd. in 1960 (during the same era when Life Magazine said Speedway Blvd. was the ugliest street in America). It was 3x as tall and almost 4x as big as new signs, and there was nothing esthetically pleasing about it. I agree with the decision to tear that sign down and with the neighborhood opposition to that sign. Quoting the Star: “As Ron Spark of El Encanto Estates argued in a letter to the city, it would be a charade to classify ‘older, oversized, grotesquely ugly signage’ as historical.” What the Star article doesn’t report is that Spark was only one of many neighbors who were tired of looking at that sign.

Interestingly enough, businessman and would-be Republican mayoral candidate Shaun McClusky, who was trying to make a case for big signs, actually made a case for the effectiveness of small signs.

The Internet is great, McClusky said, “but I’m in the real estate business. We can advertise a property on 18 websites on a daily basis, but I get far more calls from dropping signs in front yards.”.

Summarily dissing Internet advertising because yard signs are effective real estate tools is silly. Receiving more calls from small real estate signs has more to do with the property the sign is in front of than the sign. If he’s not getting hits from the websites, try a different website! Also, does he know how many people looked at the house on the web before they drove by?

I think GIANT sign cheerleaders would have a more convincing case if they actually had data to show that GIANT signs bring in more business than sign-code-compliant signs. Yes, they can be seen, but does that translate to sales?

Is a sign code actually bad for business? I don’t think so.

Take Palm Springs as a good example of a thriving metropolis with strict signs and LOTS of business. On a recent trip to Palm Springs, I was impressed with the short, tasteful signs and almost complete lack of billboards. We stayed in one of the five or so hotels near their convention center and enjoyed breakfast in a quaint shopping/restaurant area nearby. We thought, “This is what downtown Tucson should look like!”

In this electronic age, giant signs and billboards are dinosaurs. A tasteful, READABLE sign that includes the business name + street number is only one component of a marketing plan. Businesses also should have a well-designed, functional, and up-to-date website, a facebook account, a Twitter account, a stylish business card, and membership in one or more networking groups. And, if you want eye-catching signage, get a car wrap.

March 22 update: The Tucson City Council will hear a sign code variance appeal at tonight’s meeting (March 22, 2011). The Jewish Community Center– a beautifully design building set into the Catalina Mountains– wants to cover the south face of their building with a billboard.  The center already has one non-compliant, over-sized sign. Now they want a billboard, which will not only destroy the architectural elegance of their building but also destroy our view of the Catalina Mountains. If they are allowed to erect this billboard, every time you sit on a bench at Brandi Fenton Park to watch the sunset over the Catalinas, you will see a billboard.