Over the last few weeks there has been a lot of talk about endorsements for candidates aiming to take office after the Nov. 6 General Election. 

In the Primary Election, The Explorer said we would not be endorsing, but one race begs further scrutiny.

So, this is an analysis. Take it as endorsement, take it as some points in the campaign, or just toss it aside – it’s up to you.

My position remains the same on the importance of local races compared to the national races that seem to get most of the media spotlight this time of year.

Remember, those candidates you elect to offices such as the Pima County Board of Supervisors, local school boards, sheriff’s office, recorder’s office and so on, set our tax rates, they decide the course of education for our children, then basically decide a lot of our immediate day-to-day activities, voting options and so much more. These races should never be overlooked just because the national stage in the presidential election is heating up.

Let’s start with the Pima County Board of Supervisors. For the most part in the Northwest, the District 1 race is getting a lot of attention, and why shouldn’t it, given the incumbent, Ann Day, has opted to retire. The race is between Tea Party Republican Ally Miller and Democrat Nancy Young Wright.

In the Primary Election, Miller beat out her Republican opponents because she hit the streets and got her name out there. Nice signs, and door-to-door campaigning pushed her past State Rep. Vic Williams, Stuart McDaniel and Mike Hellon.

However, after listening to Miller in several debates, her behavior with the press and her attacks on her opponent, there are so many red flags going up that one might wonder what she’s going to be like as an elected official.

This “Hulk angry” attitude she campaigns with will get old real fast once she’s in office and reality sets in.

Start with her attacks on Wright, which revolve around the pygmy owl, the construction of Ironwood Ridge High School in 2001, and an assertion than Wright would take an owl’s side over students.

The fact that this is the issue Miller continues to bring up in debates, advertising and radio shows has become nothing short of annoying.

If environment is a key issue, then talk more about your differences on the Rosemont Mine, which is today’s issue. 

The news articles from the 11-year-old issue continuously brought up by Miller don’t necessarily prove the claims she’s making against Wright.

Also, Wright seems more than willing to address the accusations from Miller, which is a good sign.

Meanwhile, Miller ignores answering to accusations against her own campaign for violating election laws (she had a great opportunity to do so in the radio debate hosted by Bill Buckmaster.) Tell voters what happened here. Are charges from three separate candidates false, or is being quiet an admission of guilt? Voters don’t know one way or the other when you’re too busy talking about a pygmy owl from 2001.

Having that extra funding from independent contributors is nice for any candidate, but there are strict laws and guidelines on how the funding and products (advertising) can be used.

Tagline Media has been more than ready to claim no wrongdoing. Ms. Miller, why haven’t you?

Accountability is a two-way street, and if Miller can’t figure that out when trying to earn votes, she may struggle once the power of office sets in and it’s time for her to live up to the promise of holding all accountable.

Miller also had those problems with being proven wrong, as she was when it was proven that her assertions that the county had misspent millions were inccorrect. Many may not agree with the funding allocations, but they weren’t “misspent.”

Instead of addressing it, she called the publication that reported it a “rag.”  Your opinion of the Tucson Weekly aside, it is candidates like Miller calling for more investigative news in Tucson, but when something comes out that doesn’t go your way, it just mean it’s a bad publication. Again, a two-way street Ms. Miller.

(5) comments


Dear Thelma,
It appears you are big on spreading rumors and accusations but not forcoming with facts or details to backup your writing. Could you please print those facts or withdraw your comments in this story. For example where are your facts to support your statement that millions was not misspent? Are readers to accept that you are the authority on this issue? Have you traced the money over the last decade yourself?
If I am wrong then prove it! Your bias in this article is obvious. What about writing something that is neutral and fair to both candidates! That is what jounalism should be about.


Althea, the charge of "millions being misspent" was debunked by Jim Nintzel of the Tucson Weekly. Besides the burden of proving the allegation of misspent money should be on the person making the allegation (i.e., Ally Miller). Finally, I find it strange that you're demanding neutrality in an opinion piece. Opinion pieces are supposed to express a point of view (i.e., an opinion). That is what journalism is all about.


Ms. Grimes raises very valid concerns about Ms. Miller's credibility. Ms. Miller attacks Ms. Wright for the good work she did at Amphi to expose corruption. In previous elections supporters of Ms. Miller made similar claims which were refuted by the Explorer. In Emil Franzi's column in oct. 2010, he wrote: " a letter published in this paper last week (responded to elsewhere) insanely attacked Democrat State Rep. Nancy Young Wright and completely misrepresented her actions on the Amphi School Board. She was the main player in cleaning that corrupt board up."
Ms. Miller's attacks on Ms. Wright for exposing corruption and cleaning it up are very troubling. It seems Ms Miller really condones corruption or at a minimum has a lack of credibility. And her campaign issues under investigation by the Secrtary of State raise further questions of Ms Miller's credibility. Add to that Ms. Millers' false claims during the primary why would any one vote for Miller?

Nancy Young Wright's and others work to clean up Amphi and restore fiscal responsibility are well documented. http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tucson/clown-time-is-over/Content?oid=1066302.
Wright also been endorsed by many Republicans for working across the aisle to solve problems. We need a problem solver like her.


You guys below are in "la la" land. If Franzi and Nintzel are your sources of "truth" then you need to start working on developing an independent thinking process. Jim, Emil, want to make a few easy bucks. send these guys a letter demanding the $1,000 they owe. I'm sure they will beleive you and pay up.


Talking about attacks on your opponent, I guess Ms. Grimes did not receive Nancy Young Wright’s contrast mailer against Ally Miller that went out the week of September 24. This attack mailer went to Republican households falsely attacking Ally Miller.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.