Mon, Jul 06, 2009
ez access
Subscriber services | Subscribe now
Custom clipper icon
Research the Nov. 7 midterm election; watch videos from Star Editorial Board meetings with candidates and supporters and opponents of ballot initiatives. Also, read past Star articles and endorsements.
Go to guide
Congressional District 8 Editorial Board
On Monday, Oct. 9, the four candidates for the U.S. Congressional District 8 seat sat down with the Arizona Daily Star Editorial Board. The following excerpts are the candidates' opening statements and their positions on the Foley scandal and the nuclear situation with North Korea.
Watch Jay Quick's introduction
Watch David Nolan's introduction
Watch Randy Graf's introduction
Watch Gabrielle Gifford's introduction
The candidates answer questions about the Mark Foley scandal and the nuclear situation with North Korea

Tucson Region

Graf ad attacks Giffords land deal

'Sweetheart,' pollution claims apparently false
By Daniel Scarpinato and Rob O'Dell
arizona daily star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.01.2006
Republican Randy Graf is accusing Democrat Gabrielle Giffords of benefiting from a "sweetheart" land deal with the city of Tucson — an accusation that appears false based on city records and interviews with city officials.
Despite the inconsistencies, the Graf campaign is standing behind an advertising campaign focusing on the transaction.
A week before the race for Congressional District 8 is to be decided by voters, the ad — both on radio and television — claims that "Gabby Giffords leased a vacant, environmentally contaminated problem to the city."
The ad also asserts Giffords is receiving about $160,000 a year plus annual increases for 55 years on the 3.3-acre site.
The property is near 22nd Street and I-10. It is an old site of El Campo Tire, the business the Giffords family owned for years. Giffords ran the company for a brief time, which has been a major theme in her bid for Congress.
Although the property is in a trust for Giffords, it was her parents and another owner who were involved in leasing it to the city back in 2000, not Giffords herself.
The Giffords family and another owner stand to collect more than $13 million on the property over the next 50 years, should the lease continue.
Giffords, and her parents, are tied to the company that leases the 3.3 acre plot of land to the city, which has sat vacant since the deal was signed in 2000.
Records from 2000 indicate the city approached the Giffordses about the sale. A report to the City Council says the owners "have no desire to sell their property at this time."
It added the city didn't have grounds to take the property through condemnation, but urged pressing for the sale because the proposed project provided a "significant public benefit" to warrant "a negotiated public transaction involving public funds."
At the time, the idea of landing a grocery store near Downtown was a high priority for city officials, who saw it as a critical component for the Rio Nuevo redevelopment effort to attract residents Downtown. Plans to develop the store fell through.
Giffords' campaign said she was not available for interviews Monday, but her chief spokesman called the Graf ad a sign of "desperation."
"My campaign is not concerned about Gabby's parents' land deal," said Rodd McLeod, Giffords' campaign manager. "These people have no shame. They are desperate and will do anything to win."
Though McLeod argued Giffords has no financial stake in the property, her parents' share is in a trust in her name. To date however, McLeod said, Giffords hasn't benefited financially from the lease.
Nevertheless, Graf's campaign manager, R.T. Gregg, stood by the claims and said he still considers the transaction a "sweetheart deal."
"People are going to have to make up their own mind," he said.
"Obviously there's a ton of money that's flowing," Gregg said. "What their internal accounting practices are, I can't speak to that. . . . But are they saying they're writing her out of their will?"
No contamination found
Though the Graf ad charges the site is contaminated, city records refute that. The city paid for an environmental assessment as part of its purchase. Two underground gasoline storage tanks were removed before the assessment.
The assessment results were sent to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, which required no further remediation.
Asbestos that the ad says taxpayers had to clean up on the site was from the demolition of an older building on the property. Asbestos is commonly found in older buildings that are torn down.
City Real Estate Special Projects Manager Lou Ginsberg said the sellers, not taxpayers, paid for the demolition — not in cash, but by signing over a piece of 22nd Street right of way to the city.
"There was no environmental contamination of the site," said City Manager Mike Hein. "This is a standard due diligence process."
Hein, who wasn't with the city in 2000, said he doesn't know why the city leased the property instead of buying it. The two officials who were primary players in the deal, Assistant City Manager Karen Thoreson and then-Real Estate Manager John Updike, are no longer with the city.
Although the original plans for the property stalled, Hein said the city is still looking to buy the site because "I still believe it's valuable and critical to Downtown redevelopment."
● Contact reporter Daniel Scarpinato at 807-7789 or dscarpinato@azstarnet.com.
Get Arizona Daily Star home delivery and SAVE BIG!
Go Back