I’ve worked in law enforcement in Navajo County since 1987. I served as your Sheriff for 10 years, recently retiring. During more than 30 years as a cop I’ve patrolled just about every square mile of our county. I’ve met tens of thousands of you and I’ve accepted the responsibility of being there for you whenever you need help.

Now it’s my turn to ask for your help. It’s not a request I make lightly, or without knowing full well that what I’m asking is a heavy lift.

But our community and the men and women of Navajo County public safety need your help.

We need you to VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 421. We need this YES VOTE to ensure that we can continue to keep you and your families safe in your homes and at work.

Since I took office in 2009, we have done everything possible to shave costs. Today, we answer more 911 calls than ever before – 14,864 calls a year – and we’re answering those calls with fewer deputies than we had in 2008.

We’ve not hired people. We’ve slashed training budgets. We haven’t replaced police cars and we haven’t updated equipment for years. My last official action as your Navajo County Sheriff was to cut over half a million dollars from the Sheriff’s Office budget.

Now, we face the loss of the Navajo Generating Station and another $2.5 million a year in county revenues. That’s a serious emergency. That’s why I’m asking you to vote YES ON PROPOSITION 421.

Help your officers keep Navajo County safe. Help us respond to 911 calls faster and help ensure your homes and our schools are safe. For the cost of one more cent on a $3 purchase, we can work together to solve this crisis.

Please, vote YES on Proposition 421.

Kelly “K.C.” Clark

Retired Navajo County Sheriff

(3) comments

Clown2

Thank you Mr. Clark. I hope the positive (progressive) folks who want to see communities move forward with positive change throughout their lives vote yes. There will always be the negative folks who simply vote no on everything (like the ones with the signs around town). I will gladly give a few extra dollars to the county every year - it's the least I can do as a citizen. I'm voting YES!


Marc-V-Ridenour

I don't know why we have to shut down the generating plant. We can switch from coal to biomass (pine/juniper trees' rubble and slash, ect.) and that will keep the generating plant online; God knows we need all of the electricity we can get. Jacking up taxes isn't the answer—that’s what California, New York and other states ruled by the “progressive liberal” Democrats have been doing and people are leaving California en masse, and pretty soon the only people left will be the politicians and the welfare and homeless! “Will the last person to leave California please turn out the lights?” That’s what t will be like in Arizona, eventually.


ronzim

Marc claims, "We can switch from coal to biomass (pine/juniper trees' rubble and slash, ect.) and that will keep the generating plant online." Why would we consider switching to a fuel source which emits more net carbon then even coal does? Shut down a plant fueled by coal, which is the dirtiest of all fossil fuels, and replace it with even dirtier biomass. Biomass yields 213 pounds of carbon per million BTU"s of energy; coal yields 205. Marc still believes in magic, not science.







And, "Jacking up taxes isn't the answer—that’s what California, New York and other states ruled by the “progressive liberal” Democrats have been doing and people are leaving California en masse, and pretty soon the only people left will be the politicians and the welfare and homeless!" Wrong on both counts. First, it should be obvious that progressive liberals do not jack up taxes. The rates of taxation are determined by voters at the ballot box. Second, people are not leaving California en masse. California's population has increased every year since 1980.







The net population change for any state is a complex matter requiring objective inquiry, not political invective. In California, the net annual change in population has major constituents such as domestic birth rate, death rate, international immigration, and cost of housing. Tax rates do not appear in the mix. What is really happening is that California's rate of growth has begun to slow. When the falling birth rate fails to be matched by in-migration, California's annual growth rate is projected to turn negative. Marc's falsehood remains false.







Here are the states with the greatest population losses reported by the PEW Research Center for the year ending 2017: Illinois lost the most population (33,703), followed by West Virginia (12,780), Wyoming (5,595), Louisiana (1,824), Alaska (1,727), Mississippi (1,315), Hawaii (1,145) and North Dakota (155). Yep! Guess Marc was right after all. These progressive liberal states all lost population.


Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
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.