**Note** If you are trying to find information on the run-off election between Councilman Sal Diciccio and Dana Kennedy, please click on the link at the bottom of this page.

I moved with my family to Phoenix in 1977, just three months short of my 17th birthday. My family still owns that very home that we moved into back in 1977. I am a Registered Architect in three states and a certified building code official. I am well trained and experienced on issues that concern the built environment. In 1997, some 12 years ago, I ran for the Phoenix City Council seat in District 6. I was a political outsider challenging an incumbent, Sal DiCiccio, that had an unbelievable political war chest. That election, I was outspent 73 to 1. On election night, I ended with almost 25% of the votes cast in that race. Not bad for an under funded political outsider.

The incumbent I had challenged had been under fire for the previous 4 years by the newspaper for how he politicized the City Council since his election and his very close ties to large Valley developers. In the one and only debate that was arranged between us, he even failed to commit to fulfilling his full term if he was elected. He resigned 2 years later, halfway through his elected term to run for Congress and lost by a great distance in that race. Later, he attempted to run for Secretary of State, and failed to even get on the ballot.

Earlier this year, some 9 years after Councilman DiCiccio resigned, the Phoenix City Council appointed him to fill a vacancy created by the resignation of our then current Councilman. As a resident in the District, I took offense that the Council had not heeded my concerns that reappointing this man would do nothing to help Phoenix or District 6 in this time of crisis. Just weeks after his appointment, I went to the Devonshire Senior Center to hear him speak to a neighborhood group. He was asked, by someone there, if he would commit to this District for his full term. He failed to make any such commitment; waging the same claims he made some 12 years before in our debate. However in a major debate on July 27th, between all four Candidates that are running in this election, he changed his position to commit to fulfilling his term if elected. Apparently it is still politics as usual for this man.

Why should the people of this District accept this? Do we not have enough problems in these trying times with government not being open and transparent? What our elected officials fail to say is as important or more important than what they do say! In 1997, his campaign claim was that he was single. That was correct, in a manner of speaking, so to say, yet not exactly accurate. One of my supporters had a friend that was once married to this man and had subsequently divorced. So single was correct, however it would have been more accurate to say divorced instead of single. Why the deception? Was it because "divorced" might have proven politically a problem in the election? After all when was the last time you saw someone running for office that said "divorced"?

In this race Councilman DiCiccio claims to be a developer. The hottest issues that come regularly before the Phoenix City Council are zoning cases. As an Architect, I know from experience that many developers are more concerned with profits than impacts on the local neighborhood. This is not inherently wrong, as all businesses must make a profit to survive; it is just the cold hard reality. The question that demands answering is, "Can a Developer be trusted to make an impartial decision when it comes to neighborhood issues with neighborhood opposition"? Is this not akin to the fox guarding the chicken coop? What if anyone he knows or has done business with had a case coming before the Council? How could we the public be insured that his decision would be based on what was best for the neighborhood, not his friend?

I have heard Councilman DiCiccio has claimed to help introduce a new accelerated building permit process in the City of Phoenix, after being on the Council for only a few short months. The last accelerated building permit process was introduced over 18 months ago, and I do not recall seeing his name attached to it during development. It would seem that I should have known, as I did participate in that program's development. I have seen this man make claims like this before. In 1997, while campaigning for re-election, as his opponent, I heard him claim to a group of Southwest Gas employees how many additional Firefighters and Police Officers that had been added on his watch as a Councilman. Almost all of those new Firefighters and Police Officers were added because of a proposition that the voters passed four years prior that he, as a Candidate, was on the record as opposing. Where is the truth?

This man has claimed to be endorsed by the Firefighters and Police in all his elections. Since these are City of Phoenix employees, they are prohibited, by City Charter, from being involved in a City election, except to vote. What gray area is he exploiting now to justify these claims?

My concern is that, if elected, Councilman DiCiccio will go right back to his old practices. The same partisan, special interest practice he had before he tried to go to Congress. His past shows that his interest is only in what will further him and his political career. How many neighborhoods will fall prey to his ambition? How do we, the constituents, know that he will keep his word this time? What if he serves this term, uses his incumbency to get re-elected in four years, then resigns to seek a higher office? How is that respecting the trust the people of District 6 would bestow on him in his successful election?

I cannot see only one choice for this election of the four running. A polished politician will be more concerned over forwarding a political agenda than serving the neighborhoods. Nathan Oshop is a political outsider and a self-proclaimed "centrist Democrat" failed to come across as one knowledgeable in the issues that come before a City Council. A couple of days after the debate, he and two other challengers in two other districts announced their big plan for the City of Phoenix. Free health care to all residents in the City. How in the world is that to be implemented? How does a City take this one in time of overwhelming deficits? What the hell is he thinking? How is this being a "centered" Democrat? Sounds more "left-wing" to me. Another Candidate is Dana Kennedy. She hesitated on the question of whether the City should appeal the City North case. It was almost as if she did not understand the issue off the top of her head. The final challenger is Barry Paceley. A man that has been active with neighborhood groups; he sits on the Camelback East Village Planning Committee. He has been gaining support from many of the neighborhood groups that have not supported or pulled their support of Councilman DiCiccio.

Our appointed Councilman declares himself to be a fiscal conservative. How does that add up, when he has resigned once before, costing the City thousands of dollars on a Special Election because he resigned to run unsuccessfully for higher office? Why should we allow the interim Councilman to go back to his old ways? For these reasons, I can see no one to support, but Barry Paceley alone.

Since this is the most read Hub I have written, I wanted to update everyone on the election tactics being employed by our appointed Councilman, Sal DiCiccio. Since I wrote the above article, our Councilman has raised over $225,000 according to an article published last week. I imagine knowing Councilman DiCiccio and his past campaign tactics that he needs such a large war chest to wage the type of campaign that will attempt to overshadow his past and hide his undisclosed intended goals. After talking about running a clean campaign in the first debate, Coucilman DiCiccio went out and hired Jason Rose to assist directing his campaign. Mr. Rose's reputation in local politics is tainted to say the least. Immediately after obtaining Mr. Rose's assistance, Councilman DiCiccio threw out the clean tactics he had championed, in lieu of the mudslinging approach of Mr. Rose's, calling for his chief rival's withdraw. See the following link:

After these events, Councilman DiCiccio's campaign is attempting to camouflage his real threat and rival, Barry Paceley alleging in recent campaign literature and emails that "Dana Kennedy has to be stopped" misleading potential voters of the district to believe that this candidate which is most opposite of our district's demographics is his primary rival; thus reverting back to his same campaign tactics in 1997 by misleading voters on his documented public positions and marital status.

Do the people of District 6 deserve the typical politician that represents his/her own political agenda above the needs of constituent voters? Or should we have a true neighborhood activist such as Barry Paceley? My vote will be for a true representative committed to our community over the consummate fundraising politician who currently holds that seat.