Shouldn’t Horne

step down during probe?

Re: the Oct. 25 article “Horne says prosecutor’s findings miss legal mark.”

After reading Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne’s contorted reasoning on his collusion with an “independent expenditure committee” to purchase TV time attacking his opponent in the 2010 general election, I read the opinion by Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk to which Horne objects. Polk lays out the facts of Horne’s consulting with Kathleen Winn on the content of an anti-Felecia Rotellini attack ad and his efforts a week later to find more money to run the ad.

Polk’s findings are based on facts; her order that Horne and Winn repay the illegally spent $400,000 appears justified and indeed mandated by the facts.

My conclusions: Horne doesn’t understand the law and is legally incompetent, or he intentionally misinterprets the law and is ethically unqualified. Until this issue is resolved, shouldn’t he step aside from his responsibilities to the people of Arizona?

Frank Bergen

Retired clergy, Tucson

Foley’s passing marks end of an era

Re: the Oct. 22 column “Tom Foley knew House was greater than partisanship.”

I wept while reading the column written by Robert H. Michel, former Republican leader in the House of Representatives from 1981 to 1995.

I wept because I remember the days of which Michel spoke, when the incorruptible and noble Tom Foley was speaker of the House. I wept because I remember that, as partisan as both Democrats and Republicans were in those days, the higher purpose of getting the people’s work done was uppermost in their negotiations. Because I remember when, as Michel said, they “stood side by side at the speaker’s podium on the last day of the 103rd Congress, political adversaries but personal friends, we knew that we were icons by a bygone era.”

Prophetic words indeed. Newt Gingrich and his progeny, including today’s tea partyers, have seen to it that the comity that used to reign between the two parties is a thing of the past. Our country continues to suffer as a result. What a pity.

Gladys Lujan

Retired, SaddleBrooke

Tucson needs

‘strong mayor’ system

After 40 years of living in Tucson, it is my opinion that a great error occurred when the “weak mayor” form of government was adopted.

Young adults ought to organize to revise the law and provide for a strong mayor form of government, providing the mayor with a five-year term and a two-term limit.

I believe that it would attract highly qualified executives from the private sector in the latter part of their working years. A strong executive holding department heads responsible for performance is necessary for effective and efficient operations.

A city manager beholden to the council for his job has not been working.

Billy H. Conn

Retired, Tucson

Vail would be wise

to reject incorporation

Re: the Oct. 22 guest column “Bottom line: Incorporating Vail doesn’t add up.”

Hopefully, the voters in Vail will heed the advice of guest opinion writer George Yost. A group of us in the Foothills went through the same discovery process in 1997 and convinced voters to vote “no” on incorporation. It was the right decision for the same reasons Yost foresees it would be for Vail.

Jane Doherty

Community volunteer, Tucson

Burger Madness site hard to navigate

It is easier to register on the Affordable Care Act website than it is to register and vote in the Daily Star’s Burger Madness poll. Were both sites designed by the same firm?

Jerry Sullivan

Owner, Sullivan’s Eatery & Creamery