|
Source
Arizona law requires elected officials to report and document tax dollars they spend on promoting themselves. That includes any self promoting stuff that includes the elected official's photo. The Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA) is supposed to publish all these self promoting expenses that our elected officials wasted our tax dollars on. Sadly the article doesn't give the web page where that data is published. It's interesting that in this article the cops and prosecutors who are in charge of enforcing the law tell the Phoenix New Times that they are not aware of the laws existence. The law in this article is: ARS 41-4603 Reporting of public funding for public communicationsSource New Times Forces Joe Arpaio and Other Arizona Elected Officials to Follow State Law By Ray Stern Wednesday, December 23, 2015 New Times has forced two more law enforcement officials to follow a little-known state law, but it's likely that many other elected officials in Arizona still aren't following it. The statute seemed to escape most people's attention. I don't know how that happened." — Tom Weaver of the Pima County Attorney's Office. In an article last week, New Times revealed that a statute passed by the Arizona Legislature in 2010 requires local governments to report any spending of public money on non-routine items that contain the name or picture of any elected official. It's an excellent law that puts potential taxpayer-funded shenanigans under a spotlight. The expenditures must be publicized online by the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA). Just one problem: Elected officials around the state have blown off the requirement. As New Times reported, Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery has been the only elected official in Arizona to comply with the law, dutifully telling the public about public money he spent in 2013 and 2014 on things that promoted his name or image, like fitted tablecloths, DVD covers, and calendars. While some elected officials simply haven't made these type of expenditures, others certainly have — but they haven't told the public about it, like they were supposed to. After getting contacted by New Times, the Pima County Attorney's Office and Maricopa County Sheriff's Office have become the latest to reveal that they haven't complied with the law. "We do believe we may have some expenditures that fall into this statute," says Tom Weaver, chief of the civil division under five-term Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall. "The statute seemed to escape most people's attention. I don't know how that happened. It's unusual." The previous article noted that last December, Sheriff Joe Arpaio's office announced that it had decorated several vans with anti-drug messages — which, of course, included his full name. Now, that expense as well as other expenditures on trucks, photos, name plates, and even stationery are under review for compliance with the public-reporting statute. "We were unaware of the ... statute until recently," Arpaio's spokeswoman, Lisa Allen, says. "When we became aware of its existence, we began moving towards compliance." An MCSO official "is in the process of assigning monetary value to each item that names or depicts the sheriff or his image," she says. "Once done, a final tally of the [estimated] value will be provided "to the ADOA. Pinal County Sheriff Babeu Office also revealed it has made expenditures that probably fall under the statute that weren't reported, like thumb-drives and refrigerator magnets bearing the sheriff's name. Pima County's Weaver says he contacted the ADOA for advice on the law, but officials there weren't able to help him. He points out that the law doesn't give a deadline or other instructions to local governments on reporting the expenditures to the state. "Maybe they'll fix it and come out with guidance," he says. Megan Rose, spokeswoman for the ADOA, says the department hasn't issued letters to elected officials or done anything to ensure compliance with the law. The law requires the ADOA only to collect the submitted information and publish it in a publicly accessible database. Clearly, local governments around the state need to review their expenditures and determine if they should have submitted reports as required. But no one's going to make them do it, and there are no penalties for failing to comply. Still, as Montgomery has shown, the law must be followed. Weaver points out that it's not just elected county officials who should check for compliance — the law also applies to mayors, city councils, andother elected positions in local governments. New Times has a pending request with Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton's office to find out if he and other city elected officials have made non-routine, promotional expenditures, and is also inquiring with other cities and counties.
ARS 41-4603 - Reporting of public funding for public communications |