Surprise, AZ News blog

The City Council approved the appointment of Associate Judge Joseph Malka to a two-year term with the Surprise Municipal Court without waiting to weigh the findings of a committee of legal professionals.   

Malka was supposed to be the first judge whose fate would be considered by the Judicial Selection Advisory Commission (JSAC) which was created by the City Council in May. The commission’s meeting to discuss Malka, however, was canceled for December because the City Council on Nov. 29 had already approved his contract.

The Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct in December 2006 had deemed Malka responsible for abuse of authority, incompetence, appearance of bias, improper judicial demeanor and failure to exercise judicial independence in the courtroom.

 

Malka was ordered by the state in January to take a refresher course on ethics due to inappropriate behavior in the courtroom.

In May, the City Council created the commission. The commission was created to to evaluate city judges and recommend to council whether or not a judge should be given a contract with the city. In the months to follow, several practicing lawyers and retired legal professionals were appointed to the Surprise JSAC.

Because Malka had never officially been appointed to his position by council, JSAC members were told that Malka would be the first judge whose fate they would consider during a meeting in early December. However, Surprise Presiding Judge George Logan already put Malka’s contract on the Nov. 29 council agenda, and the item was approved by all council members except for Martha Bails and John Longabaugh.

The following day a letter was sent out to JSAC members informing them that the December meeting had been canceled and the issue resolved, said JSAC member and retired legal professional Barbara Schur.

Assistant City Manager Doug Sandstrom said that because Malka was a sitting judge before JSAC was formed, he was exempt from JSAC examination. Sandstrom said the exemption is based off a prior court ruling and that if the city went against the decision, it could face a possible lawsuit from Malka.

Regardless, the end result has upset a handful of people in the Valley’s legal community, who feel that Malka’s courtroom behavior has not changed in the past year, said Phoenix attorney Jeffery Mehrens. Mehrens said he believed that JSAC members would have advised council to not approve Malka’s contract. However, several JSAC members refused to comment on what their position might have been.

In March 2006 Mehrens filed a formal complaint with the Commission on Judicial Conduct after witnessing what he called Malka’s “habitual intemperance” in the courtroom. In May 2006 a separate letter was sent to Sandstrom asking that Malka be removed from his position. The letter was signed by 14 practicing attorneys and said that because of Malka’s actions, several attorneys either refused to represent clients in Surprise or raised their fees to represent clients in Surprise.

Mehrens does not sit on the Surprise JSAC.

Logan oversees all judges in the Surprise Municipal Court and contrary to Mehrens, said Malka’s behavior has changed.

“I think he’s a very good judge at this point. He’s been to the national judicial college for training and he’s attending other training sessions across the state,” Logan said.

INDIANAPOLIS - Maurice Gunyon thought he was set for his twilight years.  

He bought a deteriorating house on Indianapolis’ north side, had it torn down and a new one built. The 73-year-old retired from his government job in 2004, thinking he was financially secure. His income included his pension, personal savings, Social Security and rent from the other side of his two-family house.

Then he got his property tax bill that had nearly tripled. His bill in 2005 was about $2,900 and was $4,600 last year. This year’s bill - $7,568.

 

“I almost had a heart attack,” said Gunyon. “My reaction was one of pure anger.”

His problem is not unique. The amount paid in local and state property taxes in the country increased 50 percent from 2000 to 2006, according to Census data cited by some U.S. Congress members when discussing the topic. During that time, inflation rose 17 percent and median household income dropped 2 percent.

Analysts cite a number of reasons for the dramatic bill increases including local governments and states leaning more heavily on property taxes to meet revenue shortfalls and rising home values pushing up assessments. Now, states are looking at ways to cut property taxes or at least give homeowners some relief by capping assessments and making up the revenue shortfall by raising sales taxes.

Gerald Prante, an analyst with the Tax Foundation, said rising property taxes are largely tied to a housing boom over the past five or six years. The sellers’ market caused house values to rise, along with assessments.

The housing market has tapered off, he said. However, assessments take time, so a declining market value is not always reflected immediately.

Homeowners only know they have to find a way to pay the bills and are pressuring their legislative leaders to do something. At least five states this year cut property taxes and 21 tried to provide homeowners relief from higher bills, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

“This topic remains on the state fiscal radar nationwide,” said Bert Waisanen, a senior policy specialist with the state legislatures group.

In 2008, more legislatures are expected to try to find solutions to rising taxes. Congress has gotten involved through proposals that would allow people who don’t itemize to deduct all or portions of their local or state property tax bills from their federal income tax.

In Indiana, skyrocketing property taxes sparked protests that have included homeowners dunking their bills in rivers and lakes to mimic the Boston Tea Party. Taxes on homeowners in Indianapolis increased by an average of 34 percent, but in some cases more than doubled.

“I either have to not pay my taxes or not pay my mortgage or stop eating and turn off all the utilities in order to make it, and that would be true even if I were still working, or darn close to being true,” Gunyon said. “And I’m not the only person in this situation.”

Some states have provided at least some relief.

- In November, Washington state lawmakers reinstated a 1 percent cap on annual property tax increases that was included in a voter-approved initiative the courts had thrown out.

- New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine signed a bill this year giving most homeowners a 20 percent cut in the nation’s highest property taxes, which average about $6,333 per homeowner, and capping annual increases at 4 percent.

- Florida enacted a law in October that would implement property tax cuts if voters approve a revised, proposed state constitutional amendment that is on the Jan. 29 presidential primary ballot.

- Illinois lawmakers approved a 7 percent property tax assessment cap in the Chicago area that also provides a homestead exemption of $33,000.

In Indiana, lawmakers provided $550 million in help through rebates and homestead credits for homeowners over the next two years. But Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels and a divided General Assembly are looking to do much more in the 2008 session to reduce the state’s reliance on property taxes.

Daniels has proposed a sweeping plan that would cap tax bills for homeowners, landlords and businesses. The plan would be funded in part by raising the state sales tax from 6 percent to 7 percent - which many politicians say will be the hardest aspect to sell. The state also would help local governments with some expenses including assuming all school costs.

Georgia’s House Speaker Glenn Richardson wants to go further by eliminating most property taxes. The Republican says that could be done by imposing a 7 percent sales tax on virtually all services.

He says the property tax is antiquated and targets only a select group of society with no regard to ability to pay, with increases out of control.

“The logic of property taxes is fatally flawed,” he said. “We should be taxing consumption, not the place where someone raises their family.”

But Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue says overhauling Georgia’s tax system is unnecessary. Many school groups and local officials also oppose it.

Jim Higdon, executive director of the Georgia Municipal Association, said it would take fiscal control away from local governments and give it to the state. And he said residents would be paying sales taxes on virtually everything.

“It would be bleeding to death from a thousand paper cuts,” he said.

But Nancy Hollingshed, who lives with her 81-year-old mother in a three-bedroom, ranch-style house in Dallas, Ga., likes the plan, saying it would spread the local tax burden to more people.

The house and 50 acres of farmland it sits on is about 40 miles northwest of Atlanta, and property values in the area are rising because of suburban sprawl. The tax bill has increased from $1,000 to $2,000 over the past three years, and would be about $1,000 more without a school tax exemption for homeowners over 70.

The land has been in the family for generations, but Hollingshed said she and her siblings expect the tax bills to keep rising, especially without her mother’s tax break.

“After she dies and after the exemption is gone, we are worried about paying for what is our inheritance,” she said.

Surprise is nearing a deal with San Francisco-based Granicus Inc. to provide streaming video of meetings live on the city’s Web site, surpriseaz.com.   

This could begin in the next three to four months, city spokesman Ken Lynch said.

The upfront cost to install the necessary software is about $38,500, with an additional cost of about $1,800 a month to maintain it. Funding will come from the Communications Department, which has available money from a staff vacancy, Lynch said. The monthly maintenance cost will likely be factored into future budgets, he added.

 

Mayor-elect Lyn Truitt promoted the project to city staff, seeing a clear benefit to residents.

“Our aim is really to utilize that technology to open up government to our residents,” Truitt said.

In June, City Manager Jim Rumpeltes accused City Council members of meeting behind public view to line up votes. This claim has led to an ongoing investigation by the state Attorney General’s Office into possible violations of the Open Meeting Law.

Truitt is one of four newly elected council members stepping in Jan. 1, hoping to mend the city’s tarnished reputation.

Other Valley cities already using Granicus software include Glendale, Goodyear, Scottsdale, Tempe and Apache Junction.

Truitt said Surprise officials were pitched the idea a few years ago but did not choose to pursue the project. The idea was pitched before its time, he reasoned.

“Three years ago, there were not many people who would have understood what the words ’streaming video’ meant,” Truitt said.

Currently, council meetings air live and repeat on Surprise Channel 11, the city’s television station for residents with Cox and Qwest cable services.

In the future, Lynch said, there is likelihood that Channel 11 will also run online.

The three vacancies on the Surprise Planning and Zoning Commission have been filled with three residents new to city service.   

With a 4-2 vote Thursday, the City Council approved the appointments of Ken Chapman and Matthew Bieniek, each to terms expiring in June 2011, and Robert Rein to a term that expires in June 2008.

The appointments matched recommendations made by a selection committee that interviewed all 13 applicants. The committee consisted of the three council members who will remain in office in January, with the seating of a new council: Joe Johnson, Gwyn Foro and John Longabaugh.

 

Chapman is a retired school-district superintendent, Bieniek is a teacher in the Peoria Unified School District and Rein is a Realtor. None have served before on a city board or commission.

Outgoing Councilman Gary “Doc” Sullivan applied for one of the vacancies, but failed to gain a recommendation. While telling the three men it was “nothing personal,” he voted against their appointments.

“I know at least two or three people that were interviewed that have far, far superior qualifications,” Sullivan said.

Mayor Joan Shafer gave the second “no” vote. The lame-duck mayor said she did so because she wanted to leave the decision up to the new council.

Councilman Danny Arismendez abstained from the vote, stating he was not sure whether outgoing council members should have a say in the decision. But he also said putting the issue off was not fair to the recommended candidates who showed up and interviewed for the spots.

Foro defended the selections made by the committee and argued that postponing the appointments would achieve nothing.

“We based our decision on their answers on questions . . . I think we made a very accurate and appropriate decision,” Foro said.

After Thursday’s meeting, all three men said they were excited to help guide Surprise as it continues to expand at a rapid pace.