3-IN-1 POLITICIAN, WITH ECONOMIC CHOPS

posted by Michael Chihak

In politics, plenty of people have charisma. Plenty of people have intelligence. Plenty of people have good ideas. Unfortunately, those are all different people.

Few in politics possess all those qualities. And even those who do possess them aren’t always able to make them work -- not only for themselves, but for the constituencies they represent.

Lo and behold, the Arizona Public Media TV crew I traveled the state with earlier this month found a politician who seems to be making things happen.

She’s Flagstaff Mayor Sara Presler. Presler is energetic, well spoken, obviously intelligent and in possession of basic economic know-how and an understanding of the public sector’s part in the economy.

Consider just one comment she made in our interview, about the status of Flagstaff’s city budget: “The only reason government does better is because business does better.”

We found out that Flagstaff is all about business -- the business of tourism. And thus Presler is all about the business of tourism. She fully recognizes that business leads, government facilitates and, as she said, does better if business does better.

The proof is that Flagstaff for the last several years of recession, with Presler as mayor, has led Arizona and the Western region in tourism growth. That’s been important in Flagstaff, as Presler pointed out. Half of the city’s sales tax revenues comes from tourism, so tourism deserves fostering.

Flagstaff does just that. During the recession, the city pumped $350,000 over two years into tourism marketing. It worked. The area saw a 3 percent decline in tourism spending over two years, while the rest of the state struggled with double-digit declines.

It was evidence that Presler could pull together business and government, still letting the private sector lead.

Only 31 years old and completing what she says will be her last term as mayor next year, she is someone to watch on Arizona’s political landscape.

FLAGSTAFF LEADS THE STATE, THE REGION, MAYBE THE NATION

posted by Michael Chihak

Flagstaff and the surrounding Coconino County are tops in Arizona for tourism.

That's not to say they bring in more money or provide more jobs than other parts of the state; Phoenix is the big dog there. But northern Arizona business and political leaders leverage their natural advantages to get the most out of it.

An Arizona Office of Tourism report shows that while most of the rest of the state lagged in tourism revenue growth last year, Coconino County set a record, topping even the total it reached in 2007 before the recession took hold.

Total travel spending in Coconino County in 2010 was $948 million, 6.2 percent higher than in 2009 and 3 percent better than the previous record year of 2007.

Meantime, statewide travel spending in 2010 was $17.7 billion, which was 7.3 percent lower than the 2007 record total.

Flagstaff takes its tourism strategy seriously, and it should. Half of the city's sales tax revenues come from tourism spending, Mayor Sara Presler said.

We'll take an in-depth look at northern Arizona's tourism business success on Friday's Arizona Week.

NORTHERN ARIZONA: WHERE TOURISM MATTERS

posted by Michael Chihak

Flagstaff Mayor Sara Presler recognizes the value of travel and tourism to her city's economy -- and to city government -- so she pays a lot of attention to it.

And that attention comes as part of a Northern Arizona regional economic development strategy, Presler said.

"When one of us wins in Northern Arizona, we all win," Presler told Arizona Week in an interview for Friday's program. "There's a multiplier effect in us investing from a regional perspective in economic development rather than being so interested in what's happening in Flagstaff proper."

Indeed, the Arizona Office of Tourism, in its latest report on the tourism economy by Dean Runyan Associates, shows that rural Arizona depends much more than the metro areas on tourism.

The report shows that state sales tax revenues generated by travel spending make up 15 percent of total sales taxes in Arizona's 13 rural and lower population counties. In Maricopa and Pima counties, homes to Phoenix and Tucson, the figure is 10 percent.

In Flagstaff, the city's tourism and convention bureau is located inside City Hall, a clear sign of its importance to the local economy.

"We like to say that half of our sales tax dollars come from tourists," Mayor Presler said. "So the pants of every police officer? They're paid for by a tourist."

BIG MONEY=POLITICAL INFLUENCE? NOT NECESSARILY

posted by Michael Chihak

The U.S. Supreme Court last year declared that money is free speech, at least when it’s in the form of political contributions.

So if it is free speech, that is, if money talks, what is it saying? Just about anything the people who use it want it to say.

But wait. That might not be the key question here. Rather than what money is saying, why not look at where it’s coming from? And where is that? Not the sources you might think.

Big, monied interests aren’t the main contributors, at least for now. Instead, it’s mostly individuals making relatively small contributions.

Take the latest campaign finance reports filed last week. In the biggest race, President Obama brought in more than all eight Republican candidates combined, about $46 million in the second quarter. Just under half the total for Obama was in contributions of under $200.

For the Republicans, more than half the contributions to presidential candidates Ron Paul, Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain were under $200 dollars.

In our state, meantime, an Arizona Republic analysis of the 2010 election cycle showed the largest group of political contributors were retirees, giving $1.1 million total, or 14 percent of all campaign contributions.

The newspaper further reported that individuals made up the bulk of contributors, giving about $100 each, and many were affiliated with or influenced by organizations such as teachers’ unions, the National Rifle Association, the AARP and veterans’ groups.

One can draw any number of conclusions from the data, but certainly the notion that big money and big-shot donors dominate politics and own candidates doesn’t hold up.

So in politics, money does talk, but with many and varied voices.

JOURNALISTIC INTERN: HOW WE DO WHAT WE DO

posted by Michael Chihak

By DIANA SOKOLOVA, ARIZONA WEEK INTERN

Journalism includes a tremendous amount of background work, which often is left unnoticed. Before a journalist can report or write about something, he or she must do extensive research, both for the background of the topic and as a quest for people who suitable for interviewing.

Finding suitable people is one thing, but getting them for the interview, especially an on-camera interview, is another part of the TV journalist’s job. Luck and coincidences play a very important role in this quest along with professionalism.

Recently I was asked to get the director of Navajo Nation Economic Development Division for an interview. The crew and the host of the program, Michael Chihak, was going to travel to the Navajo Reservation for this interview.

As usual, time was tight. After getting the number and the name of the new director of the division, I started my hunt. After my numerous phone calls and messages on voice mail, I got no reply for two days.

I was getting desperate as the deadline was approaching. On my third day I was determined to get if not the director himself, then someone else from the division for the interview. This time, I wasn’t going to leave another message but decided to talk to whoever picked up, explain my situation and get advice on who would be willing to give an interview.

This time, luck was on my side. I was on the phone with someone in the division, who shared that the director received all my messages, but he wasn’t sure if he could give an interview, because by Navajo protocol, the director had to discuss the possible interview with the president of the Navajo Nation, Ben Shelly.

My goal was to get Albert Damon for the interview -- 30 minutes, no more, simple as that. I also did not understand why the director wouldn’t return my calls and tell me about the protocol procedure. I was lost. The whole travel route and a week's schedule of the crew depended on this interview.

Later that day I talked to the director of the division, who said Navajo President Shelly might give us an interview himself. Shelly hadn’t had an interview with anyone for a while. It would have been such a great asset for our program.

I got in touch with his personal assistant and after negotiation, she confirmed his availability. I was thrilled.

A journalist should always be prepared for unexpected shifts and changes in interviews and have a Plan B. Interview time, dates, people – all of it can change last minute without warning.

A journalist has to be determined and devoted to what the task. At the end of the day, if you did everything possible and have a little bit of luck, you will get a phone call confirming an interview.

(Editor's note: Navajo President Ben Shelly spent nearly 30 minutes with Arizona Week host Michael Chihak on Tuesday, July 12. The interview will air in early August.)

POLITICAL SMOKE: BLACK, WHITE, SHADES OF GRAY

posted by Michael Chihak

The late, great political cartoonist Jeff MacNelly, who drew the “Shoe” comic strip, once said of his chosen profession, quote, "when I first started out in journalism, i was going to be a one-man truth squad. But as time went on, my hair turned gray, and so did the truth."

Indeed, the truth is shades of gray rather than the black and white we would have it be. Or that our political leaders like to think it is.

Take the big wildfires that raced through nearly 1 million acres of Arizona's beauty in the last two and a half months.

Some politicians, in full throat, say it was environmentalists who torched the state, as if they had proof that a group of greens had walked through the forests flicking lit matches into the pine straw.

On the other side, another gaggle of politicians at the same decibel level blames businesses for causing it all by spewing carbon and other poisons into the atmosphere and raising temperatures.

Who's right and who's wrong? Both, as it turns out. The issues are much more complex than what they say.

Yet we're led to think in black and white, right and wrong, and little gets done to bring about consensus and make progress.

Where’s the leadership? Where are the politicians who will take charge and lead us where we ought to go rather than playing to their bases of support?

Coming to consensus is hard work, much harder than firing off a few zingers about their opponents not meeting the desires of the American people.

We’re seeing that in almost every realm of public governance, whether it’s coming to terms with the country’s fiscal complexities or seeking ways to protect people’s lives and livelihoods and at the same time preserve the environment.

Of course, in today’s media frenzy, politicians find the sound bite more easily crafted than the solution.

People protecting owls are made out to be tree-hugging hippies. People running businesses are labeled as evildoers in suits.

The truth? It’s lost in the gray clouds of mingling black and white smoke.