At a recent forum, Ben Buehler-Garcia, a Republican who is seeking to unseat Tucson City Councilwoman Karin Uhlich, warned the crowd that next month’s election wasn’t going to include much in the way of fireworks.

“It’s going to be a very vanilla election,” Buehler-Garcia said.

He got that right. The two citizen initiatives that might have fired up the election season—a push to eliminate those cameras that bust speeders at red lights and a proposal to scrap Tucson’s pension program—were both disqualified because they didn’t have enough valid signatures. That leaves two procedural questions on the ballot: whether to increase the city’s spending limit so it can increase the budget to include all the dollars it has on hand and an update to the city’s general plan. Neither measure is likely to get your average citizen riled up to vote.

And only two of the three City Council races are up for grabs: Buehler-Garcia’s campaign against Uhlich in Ward 3 and Republican Mike Polak’s effort to unseat Ward 5 Councilman Richard Fimbres. Ward 6 Councilman Steve Kozachik is unopposed. (Last week, after the deadline to file as a run-in candidate passed, Kozachik announced he would return his public matching funds to the city’s treasury.)

Before you dig into our profiles of the candidates, you should know:

• The deadline to register to vote is midnight on Monday, Oct. 7.

• Tucson’s general elections are citywide, which means all registered voters can vote in both contested races.

• The city of Tucson now does an all-mail election. Ballots will be sent to all Tucson voters beginning Oct. 17. If you really want to vote in person, there will be six polling stations set up on Election Day—one in each ward. If you neglect to mail your ballot in, you can also drop it off at any of those locations.

See the Candidates!

If you’re interested in watching the candidates debate, you’ve got a few opportunities in the upcoming weeks:

Friday, Oct. 4: AZ Illustrated Politics brings you a forum with Ward 3 candidates Uhlich and Buehler-Garcia. 6:30 p.m., KUAT Channel 6.

Wednesday, Oct. 16: The League of Women Voters and the Tucson Hispanic Chamber of Commerce present a forum with Uhlich, Buehler-Garcia, Fimbres and Polak. 6:30 to 8:30 p.m., Temple Emanu-el, 225 N. Country Club Road. Free.

Thursday, Oct. 17: The Tucson Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and Tucson Weekly present a forum with all four candidates. 11:30 to 1:30 p.m., Doubletree Reid Park Tucson, 445 S. Alvernon Way. $30 for Hispanic Chamber members; $40 general public (includes lunch).

Friday, Oct. 18: AZ Illustrated Politics brings you a forum with Ward 5 candidates Fimbres and Polak. 6:30 p.m., KUAT Channel 6.

Related Stories

The Rematch

Four years ago, Ben Buehler-Garcia nearly unseated City Councilwoman Karin Uhlich. Can he get the job done this time?

This article appears in Oct 3-9, 2013.

Getting hassled by The Man Mild-mannered reporter

9 replies on “Ballot Box Basics”

  1. Two interesting campaign tactics noted: After the camera issue was closed, suddenly little signs popped up beside Ulich’s signs. They had an arrow pointing to her name and said something like “She voted for cameras.” Also, how come Buehler-Garcia’s signs have the Garcia emphasized in BOLD type but not the Buehler. I thought a hyphenated name was supposed to treat both names equally. Trying to sell something else to an unwitting public?

  2. Well the truth is that the pension initiative isn’t dead, it’s pending at the Supreme Court. The Supremes continued the pro initiative committee’s appeal while awaiting an opinion from the Court of Appeals so that the Supremes have something to review. At least that is what the Star said. Could it be that the much maligned Star got it right and the “uber accurate” Jim Nintzel made a mistake? Perish the thought….

  3. Michael, I guess we will see when ballots go out in two weeks whether you have a chance to vote on the pension initiative. My bet is that you won’t.

  4. A big question is will the ratepayers at one NorthWest Tucson Water District approve a %4 rate hike to pay for criminal defense counsel? Should the ratepayers HAVE to pay for this? Why did channel four and thirteen neglect to discuss this topic in their recent coverage?

  6. I know that Jim, my point is that it could still qualify for a future ballot once the Supreme Court rules later this year or next. The final resolution awaits their decision. Had the Supreme Court not continued the matter then you would have been right that it would never appear in its current incarnation. Until that is decided one way or another the matter remains open for a future ballot. Further the problem for the city isn’t going away, but getting worse. The City Manager projects a cumulative $250 million short fall in the city’s operating fund within five years. You might want to check that out.

  7. Mr. Foudy,
    Petitions for review to the Supreme Court are rarely granted. The proponents of the ballot proposition filed one in the Court of Appeals on 9/12/2013. There is no record on it yet at the Supreme Court. They usually rule on whether to accept briefing on a Petition for Review within about 90 days or less of filing of the petition. As of now the case is moot. Even more rarely do they accept moot cases for review. When they do, it is because the legal questions are “capable of repetition, yet evading review.” So, it would have to be an extraordinary legal issue that is very likely to arise again in the future and seriously needs to be addressed for future guidance. Like I said before, this is quite rare and highly unlikely in this circumstance. And even if they did grant review of this moot case, it would not put it back on the ballot at a future date. They would have to get signatures all over again.

  8. Michael, Jeff knows far more about the law than I do, so I’ll defer to him in the above matter.

    In any event, the point I was making in my introduction to the council races above is that the pension initiative is not going to appear on this year’s ballot, so there are no major campaigns on either side driving voters to the polls. I don’t think you can dispute that.

  9. While passing through Idaho some years back, heading for Portland, Or, I spotted a roadsign. It said, ” if voting actually changed ANYTHING, it probably would be illegal.”
    I had left Tucson 20 odd years ago with my late wife. Our town was dying, the economy was withering, and the City Council was debating whether or not to authorize styrofoam cups on city property. I think I recall an ex-Communist was a city Mayor, but I can’t be sure it was a long time ago.
    By contrast, Portland, Oregon (believe it or not, the ancestral home of the American Communist Party) was thriving.
    Is it worth voting? We need jobs, businesses, money, free enterprise. This country was founded on that idea, and it seems like most of us here in southern Arizona have forgotten that. Get in trouble? Go to the government,…”they will help us out!!”
    ” They have the MONEY.!” So, don’t get nuts when your taxes go up. Dollars and sense, it’s all accounting, folks, just like your credit card statement. Just like the hamburger workers looking for $15 an hour.
    Do you think your hamburgers are going to cost $3.15 after they get their raise?
    Well. Do you?

Comments are closed.