HighGround Public Affairs Consultants

This year marks the 16th year of operation of HighGround, Inc.  Beyond that, many of our team members have been in the Arizona public policy arena for more than 20 years.  We are proud of what we have been able to accomplish working together with elected officials as well as business and community leaders.

We are proud to have been an integral part of at several significant public policy efforts in Arizona – measures that passed, others that have been defeated.  Through them all, hard work and cooperation have always been the heart of theses efforts.

Depending on the issue, there have been times when we have been given far too much credit and other times when we have received far too much blame.  However, we keep moving forward because Arizona is our home.  We got into politics to effect real change – Arizona is where we want to live.

That is why we have launched a new section of the HighGround site titled, “Leaders in Public Policy.”

We believe that people can get a better understanding about who we are and why we do what we do by learning about what we have done.  Good public policy always takes a team, and we certainly didn’t do any of these things by ourselves, but by cooperating, communicating, and compromising you get things accomplished.  Below is a sampling of some of the major policy issues:

• Disproportionate Share Funding (1995)
• Juvenile Justice Initiative (1995-1996)
• Growing Smarter Legislative Package and Preserve Arizona Ballot Initiative (1996-1998)
• Multi-use Stadium (1997-1999) • Defeated Growth Management Initiative (2000)
• Power Generation (2001) • Maricopa County Hospital District (2001-2003)
• Regional Transportation Plan (2002-2004)
• BCS National Championship Game (2005)
• Appropriation to build the ASU Polytechnic Institute (2006)
• Safe Communities Act (2008) • Privatization of SCF AZ (2010)
• Balancing Arizona’s Budget – Proposition 100 (2010)

We encourage everyone to take a larger look at what we have been able to accomplish for Arizona when we build coalitions to communicate, cooperate, and compromise.  We have spent our time, our efforts, and our political capital to build a state that we can be proud of.

Governor Jeb Bush has an excellent article in the National Review that we full heartedly agree with.  For the long term health of the Republican Party, we need to be solutions driven and push forward with the dicussion of policies that are focused more about real results over ideology.  We should indeed be the party of free thinking and free markets.

The Grand Solutions Party
By Jeb Bush

The coming election is a debate defined not only by competing ideologies and policies, but competing ways of governing. There is little doubt that President Obama favors one form of governing, and that is what I call the government of One. One Ideology, One Party, and One Man.

In his first two years in office, with the benefit of supermajorities in Congress, he was able to enact legislation of his choosing and his design. He decided what went in and what didn’t. He delegated to a handful of members of Congress the responsibility to write specific laws — and left other members out.

Now things are different. He no longer enjoys a compliant Congress. Not surprisingly, he has spoken longingly of leading a centralized, planned, command-and-control government.

It is time for the Republican party to offer an alternative. Not just an alternative to President Obama’s agenda of liberal government, which is important to do. We need to present an alternative to his approach to governance in general. An approach that applies to every elected office.

We should be the party of free thinking and free markets. We should be the party of policy experimentation and fresh approaches. We should be the party of competing ideas. We should allow our ideas to be tested and force our ideas to prove their value in practice.

We already have a model for this form of governance, and it can be found in the diversity of our Republican governors. From veterans like Mitch Daniels of Indiana and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, to newcomers like Chris Christie of New Jersey we have seen a multiplicity of policy ideas and approaches. Some mirror each other. Some contradict each other. On taxes and spending, these governors often (but not always) agree. On immigration and social policy, they frequently disagree.

The animating force of this governance is diversity and creativity of thinking. And that is how the Republican party should always be. We are broad thinkers and confident believers in America. We are serious about finding solutions for the problems we face in our communities. And we will not limit the ideas we consider in helping America reach for greatness.

This does not mean an abandonment of principle. Far from it. We will be guided meaningfully by the first principles of our party and this nation. First above all is our fundamental belief in the individual as the center of opportunity and ideological energy. We do not believe that government creates prosperity or drives it. Like the founders of our country, we know a self-regulating and responsible people is essential to limit the scope and ambition of government. We resist the urge to substitute regulations and governmental directives for entrepreneurial creativity and civic service. We believe that the best government is that which is smallest and the most just government is that which treats all citizens and entities equally, with no special favors and no special sanctions.

We believe that there is no way for leaders to direct the dreams and ambitions of 312 million Americans — and so we believe fundamentally in freedom. Let individuals direct themselves to whatever heights they aspire to reach, and let them enjoy the benefits of their success because they bear significant responsibility for the risks they take.

This is different than the approach of President Obama, as he has made clear through policies that place greater power and resources behind the government at the expense of the individual. So the distinction will be obvious.   But to make sure that we do not lose the advantage of that clear difference, we must not layer onto our fundamental beliefs thick black lines of ideology — black lines that we do not allow ourselves to cross. Those black lines can be comforting, I understand. They provide certainty and stability and ideological purity. But they also restrict the way we think about problems, and make more difficult the kind of reform-minded free thinking that has defined the conservative movement for the last 50 years.   Thick black lines of ideology are good at keeping people in, but they are also good at keeping people out. And our party can’t win if we keep people out. Our goal is not to assemble a small army of purists. We need a nation of converts. We have seen the other way of governing. It has had its day. It has made its best case. It has failed.

Let’s make our best case. And let’s not make the mistake of the other side by closing off debate and ending discussion and abiding the thick black lines of political ideology and special interests.   All of our candidates — from Mitt Romney to candidates for city council — need to have the freedom to bring forward their ideas, regardless of their diversity, provided they are consistent with our core principles: faith in freedom, the primacy of the individual, and the need for restrained government.   Let’s have a good, open debate about the way forward, the way upwards. The Republican party can afford to have these discussions. And I don’t think America can afford for us not to.

Mike Sunnucks with the Phoenix Business Journal had a great article on the leadership of Mesa Mayor Scott Smith in keeping the Cubs in Arizona.

We are grateful to have worked with Mayor Smith and appreciate the leadership he brings to Mesa and Arizona.

The past few years have been problematic for a number of Valley cities and their mayors.

Outgoing Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon had to deal with controversies involving police kidnapping statistics and difficult personal matters; and Glendale Mayor Elaine Scruggs has been fighting against a proposed casino near University of Phoenix Stadium and struggling to keep the Phoenix Coyotes in town.

And most Valley mayors have had to grapple with the real estate meltdown and the economic strain on tax revenue and budgets in their respective cities.

Mesa Mayor Scott Smith, however, is a bit of an exception. While he has faced the wobbly economy and real estate market, he also has a few big wins under his belt.

Smith helped bring a Republican presidential debate slated to be on CNN in February to the Mesa Arts Center. Traditionally, big political debates in the state have been held in downtown Phoenix or at Arizona State University in Tempe. Smith successfully impressed upon CNN executives and the Arizona Republican Party that the East Valley is a conservative bastion and the $98 million, city-owned arts center is a suitable venue. The CNN debate is set for Feb. 22 in Mesa during a key time for the GOP presidential race.

The other big feather in his cap is getting those same conservative Mesa voters to approve a $99 million city financing deal to build a new Cactus League Spring Training ballpark for the Chicago Cubs. The Cubs threatened to move to Naples, Fla., if it didn’t get a new ballpark to replace the it’s home at the older HoHoKam Stadium.

The Cubs, Mesa and Major League Baseball first tried to get the new stadium funded via a charge on other Cactus League tickets and a new surcharge on car rentals in the county. But that idea ran into opposition from other teams, including the Arizona Diamondbacks and Chicago White Sox, and was nixed in the Arizona Legislature.

Smith and the team then crafted a new plan last year that asked conservative voters to hike Mesa hotel bed taxes, sell some city-owned Pinal County land and access municipal construction funds. Voters approved the measure, which has paved the way for hotels and restaurants to sprout up around the new stadium, which is expected to open for play in 2014.

“Development will center on entertainment, restaurants and perhaps a resort hotel,” Smith said.

The Cubs stadium deal earned Smith accolades from the Cubs and from his constituents, too.

“Without Scott Smith’s leadership, the Cubs would be packing their bags for Florida and the Valley economy would be severely wounded,” said Robert Johnson, vice president of public affairs for the HighGround Inc. lobbying firm. HighGround ran the “Yes” campaign for the new Cubs stadium.

Cubs Vice President Mike Lufrano agreed. He said Smith was the key front-man in convincing Mesa voters to approve the stadium deal in a down economy.

“He’s a leader,” Lufrano said. “He knows how to make it happen.”

Johnson said he liked Smith’s involvement in the campaign and the fact that the mayor wasn’t a micro-manager — a rare trait for many city leaders.

“He met personally with every group of voters willing to debate the issue. He pitched the city’s plan everywhere he went. He also allowed the campaign to do its job, which is rare in a politician when the stakes are as high as they were for Mesa and the Valley economy,” Johnson said.

Smith, 55, was born in Tucson the youngest of three children. He grew up in Mesa and played basketball at Westwood High School before getting an accounting degree from Brigham Young University. He also has an MBA and a law degree from Arizona State University. He was elected mayor of Mesa in 2008.

The mayor’s post is Smith’s first elected office after working 30 years in the private sector for financial consulting and home building companies. Smith describes his leadership style as more private sector — aka General Electric’s Jack Welch — than politics.
“I try to put people above all, think big, defy conventional thought, avoid assumed barriers, define a clear vision or objective and then let talented people do great work,” Smith said.

Peter Sterling, president of the Mesa Chamber of Commerce, said Smith’s business background and leadership style also helped Mesa attract a First Solar Inc. production plant that eventually could employ as many as 600 workers.

“He’s turned this city into one of the most business-friendly in the state,” he said.

Not everyone liked the first Cubs stadium deal and not everyone likes the new plan for the city pay $99 million toward a new ballpark at the Loop 101 and 202 freeways.

The Goldwater Institute watchdog group is eyeing Mesa’s deal with the Cubs, arguing the team needs to provide some financial guarantees or bring more money to the table. Goldwat er attorney Carrie Ann Sitren said while Mesa is putting $99 million toward the deal, the Cubs only will pay $4 million in rent for the ballpark.

“The city must demand more from the Cubs,” she said.

Goldwater is not going to sue Mesa over the Cubs deal, but the conservative think tank is encouraging taxpayers to challenge the deal on the grounds that it might violate the Arizona Constitution’s gift clause.

Smith counters that the Cubs deal is legal under state law and is good for Mesa taxpayers. He also said sports are not the end all, be all of the East Valley economy, pointing to health care, aerospace, technology and the growth of Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport as real keys to the economic rebound and future.

“Losing the Cubs to Florida would have been a huge loss but not the end of the world,” he said.

Mike Sunnucks writes about politics, law, airlines, sports business and the economy.