Last night at Mercado San Augustin, the faces of those with Yes On Pima County Bonds and others from the county were obviously forlorn, but realistic. Looking at the large screening with the election results displayed, it was obvious the seven propositions before the voters yesterday that made up the bond package were failing and no hail Mary pass was waiting around the corner.
As of late this morning:
• Proposition 425: Road and Highway Improvements: $200 million
Yes 57,567 votes
No 66,051 votes
• Proposition 426: Economic Development, Libraries and Workforce Training: $91.3 million
Yes 46,963 votes
No 77,011 votes
• Proposition 427: Tourism Promotion: $98.6 million
Yes 40,610
No 83,392
• Proposition 428: Parks and Recreation: $191.5 million
Yes 50,074
No 74,001
• Proposition 429: Public Health, Welfare, Safety, Neighborhoods and Housing: $105.3 million
Yes 50,261
No 73,968
• Proposition 430: Natural Area Conservation and Historic Preservation: $112 million
Yes 45,890
No 74,111
• Proposition 431: Flood Control and Drainage: $16.9 million
Yes 57,579
No 62,815
At the Yes On Pima County Bonds event last night, Pima County Supervisor Richard Elias said there wasn’t a doubt that the votes weren’t going to turn around by Wednesday morning.
“Well, obviously voters felt that it wasn’t a good package,” Elias said. “We’ve never had a bond package that’s lost.”
This article appears in Oct 29 – Nov 4, 2015.
Just shows how out of touch they are with the public. We don’t trust our politicians to spend the money on the projects it was voted for. To many times in the past the money was misspent and that is why our roads are terrible. Pima has the highest debt load of any county in the state so we are not willing to take on more debt to be squandered.
The bonds failed miserably. PIMA County voters are obviously not on the same page as the so-called County leadership. Perhaps a change in the leadership is needed and pronto!
You cant FOOL us anymore, you are MISMANAGING the money (our taxes) that you already get, its time to FESS UP and no more money for you… Not a Penny.
The roads around our neighborhood got patched and plugged three weeks ago and the neighbors said, “there must be a road project bond in the upcoming election.”
Transparency? We can see right through you.
Call it what it is. It’s fraud.
Not only are the Pima County Officials not trustworthy, being SPEND Democrats, they expect teh rubber stamp. Even for an issue that would add nearly $3,000 in debt per voter. We said NO, loudly and conclusively. Besides the number of Bond Issues are a shopping list with out clear justification for all of them. Say NO to Democrats’ spending and entitlement Politicians.
Thank God that the county includes places other than Tucson. Do you think that I could go home and look my child in the eyes if I voted Yes on those pork laden bonds. This county needs to stick to the basics; you should have a constant road repair program in place. You can’t deal with us honestly, and do you think anyone in their right mind is going going to hand over a couple of extra days wages to your sorry butts every year in the form of property taxes?
Very same people who voted no on bonds will be 1st to complain about condition of roads, etc & blame politicians…look in the mirror people: government is for the common good & you have to finance thru bonds or taxes or fees – you pay 1 way or another – next time your alignment gets knocked off from a pothole remember how you voted…the fall of Rome (USA) continues…..
The vote wasn’t about the dollars. Every bond issue was salted with something good in it to entice voters to say yes. However, voters were smarter than the politicians thought they were. Each good thing was surrounded by pork, and that wasn’t even the worst part. It was the open checkbook provision in each one that said, by the way, anything else we want to spend it on, we can. It speaks to a profound distrust of our elected officials.
I would love to see the Fairgrounds upgraded. I would love to see the Music Hall upgraded. I would love to see a robust job training program for those non-college bound individuals. These are all needed. But not in the way they were presented.
These looked like a slush fund. The County should’ve put up a single bond with sole focus on roads and very specific funding guidelines.
This is quite simple. People in Tucson came to the polls to vote yes for the Mayor and Council and voted for the bonds. People in the County had no candidates to vote for and stayed home – – except for the angry, old, ignorant Tea Party . . . who vote against EVERYTHING.
I live in the county, and I voted for the bonds. I want Tucson to be a better place. I heard the District 1, Supe, Ally Miller, was dancing up a storm about the defeat of the bond issues.
History proves that voting for bonds did not make Tucson a better place. It gave liars more money to waste. You need to understand the disconnect. Thank you Ally Miller. I wish Ray Carroll hadn’t supported them.
Along with Pima Mujer my wife and I live in the county and voted for the bonds. And as long as the county is unable to fund improvements — the absolutely necessary and the desirable — with income from taxes and fees, we will need to raise money by selling bonds. Keep in mind that a skeptical anti-tax, anti-Pima legislature ordered an audit of our county’s bonding in 2012 and issued a very positive report that silenced the legislature. Keep in mind that we elected a Supervisor in 2012 who will never support any realistic revenue enhancement, thus preventing the Board from raising the money to undertake the improvements that most of us would like to live to see accomplished. Keep in mind, you who vote or should vote in Supervisorial District 1, that next year you will have the opportunity to vote for a reasonable alternative to your current Supervisor.
@franklymydears – I live in District 1 and I voted against Ally Miller when she ran for the Pima County Supervisor position, and I’ll vote against her the next time she runs. Unfortunately, she represents a large number of the “Tea Party” faction voters in District 1 who have “got theirs” and are against any government programs (except those that directly benefit themselves, like Social Security).
Her opponent in 2012, Nancy Young Wright, was a very good candidate for the office of Pima County Supervisor. Unfortunately, she just isn’t competitive in that District. Now, just wait to hear Ally Miller “crow” about the results of Tuesday’s bond elections.
“We’ve Never Had a Bond Package That’s Lost”
Until Huckleberry is gone, you will not pass another bond proposition. Has anybody looked at his salary?
I do not trust that the bonds will be used appropriately by ANY politician at this point.
I will not vote for any pork-laden, pen-ended, exorbitant bond proposal from any party.
I mean, at this point, I can’t even trust something as basic as Proposition 431: Flood Control and Drainage: for $16.9 million to be applied without fraud, waste, graft and deception. The rains this year were incredible, and really took a toll.