Mayor and City or Town Council In Arizona, most cities and towns operate under a council–manager form of government. The Mayor is the city or town’s chief elected official, providing leadership and policy direction. At the same time, a City or Town Manager, appointed by the Council, oversees daily operations and municipal staff. The Mayor typically presides over Council meetings, represents the municipality publicly, and serves as a voting member of the governing body. In most Arizona municipalities, the Mayor does not have independent veto authority; decisions are made collectively by the Council as defined by state law and local charters.The City or Town Council serves as the legislative and policymaking body. Council members adopt ordinances and resolutions, approve the annual budget and capital improvement plans, set local policy priorities, and oversee city operations. They also respond to constituent concerns through public meetings, correspondence, and coordination with city staff. Most Arizona cities and towns hold nonpartisan elections for Mayor and Council, and four-year terms are typical. Why You Should CareThe Mayor and City or Town Council make decisions that directly affect daily life in Arizona communities. They set priorities and allocate spending for essential local services, including police, fire, and emergency medical services; housing and homelessness programs; streets, transportation, water, sewer, and trash services; parks and recreation; zoning and development; and long-term infrastructure planning. These officials also represent their communities in regional planning efforts related to growth, transportation, water resources, and climate resilience. Voting in these local races gives residents a direct voice in how their city or town is governed and how public resources are used.For additional information:https://www.azcleanelections.gov/how-government-works/arizona-mayorhttps://www.azcleanelections.gov/how-government-works/arizona-city-and-town-council-members
Public Policy Priorities
Very simply, to represent my constituents and the City to the best of my ability and in the best interests of the City/
Qualifications and Experience
My first job out of law school was as a City Clerk. My other municipal experience includes a stint as a City Attorney, a Zoning Attorney, an Assistant DA and an elected DA I successfully engaged in private practice, primarily as a criminal lawyer for nearly 40 years. I have won numerous local, State and National awards for my proficiency,upon all of which I would be happy to elaborate if asked I am a graduate of the Buckeye Civic Institute and served on the City GoBond Committee and chaired the City Water and Wastewater Committee.
Memberships & Affiliations
Upon retirement, I terminated most of my memberships, but remain a member of the New York State Bar Association
Community Service
I was a member of both the Kiwanis Club and Lions Club, I was a member of our local United Way, serving as its President until I moved to Buckeye. I was a member of the New York State DA;s Association, serving on its Executive Committee. I was a member of the New York State Bar Association Criminal Justice Section serving as its President for two years.. Before that, I served as President of our local Bar Association. I am serving my eighth year on the Board of Sundance Adult Village and I am in my sixth year as its President.
Education
The Pennsylvania State University, Bachelor of Arts as an American History major. University of Illinois College of Law receiving a Juris Doctor degree.
Most importantly, I would first consult with staff for whom the opportunity is assigned. I have found that Buckeye has highly qualified individuals in every phase of government and simply put, I think it would be presumptuous of me to substitute my basic knowledge on a topic for their expertise. That is not to say, however, that I won't be inquisitive nor question a recommendation if I disagree with their basic premise.
Our budget must reflect adequate funding to keep our City thriving while maintaining affordability. We know we will have infrastructure improvement/expansion and need to be mindful of when, and for how much, we can request reimbursement for improvements/additions made on behalf of private parties.
The law, particularly in light of a recent Court of Appeals decision makes transparency in government a fait accompli. We have a terrific legal staff, whom I have no doubt, will keep us on the rail with regard to that issue, Meaningful participation is a tough one. Despite City open houses, recreational and educational events and a very active parks and recreation staff, voting in local elections is low. I was recently on two City committees and despite both issues being of vital importance with fiscal considerations, public participation was negligible. I intend to hold "Town Hall" type meetings for my constituents to allow them to state their concerns/complaints or ask questions and hopefully that increases participation.
Always arrive at any meeting or discussion with an open mind. That should not be construed to mean that no opinion should be formulated prior, but to listen to other ideas/points of view. That said, the simple answer is akin to a cost/benefit analysis. If the good of the whole is enhanced more than the cost therefor, subject to potential budgetary constraints, we should proceed with obtaining the benefit.
We have burgeoning growth, which thus far has been handled well. But as one official told me, that if interest rates go down, as they likely will, we can expect even larger and faster growth. We must not sacrifice the present needs of our existing community for the benefit of some future expansion. But we must prepare for that expansion. In the response to this, I kindly refer back to my first answer. We have a fine team of dedicated, highly qualified employees and I will not hesitate to seek their guidance.
