Last week’s election was a good week for the incumbents in both the City of Tucson (where Republicans with few campaign resources were unable to dislodge any of the Democrats on the Tucson City Council) and Oro Valley, where Mayor Satish Hiremath and his fellow town council members held off a recall.
But the big stunner of the night had to be the lopsided defeat of the $815 million county bond package.
On paper, the bonds seemed a reasonable gamble. Pima County voters have almost always supported a wide variety of bond packages; just last year, they overwhelmingly agreed to borrow $21 million for a new animal-care center. Supporters included Democrats and Republicans, business leaders and environmentalists. They had far more money than the ragtag band of opponents.
But voters said no—and in many cases, it wasn’t even close. Two out of three voters rejected the idea of borrowing $99 million for tourism improvements like big improvements at places like the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum, the Reid Park Zoo and the Tucson Children’s Museum. The proposition that came closest to a win, $200 million for road repair, still lost by 8 percentage points.
There are plenty of theories about why the bond went down—and a combination of them probably explains why different people voted against them. Turnout was low at 38 percent (although that’s about in line with an off-year election). Some people thought the price tag was too big. Some people don’t have a good feeling about their job or their retirement package and worry about bigger expenses. Some thought the projects were frivolous. Some hate taxes. Some just don’t trust Pima County to deliver.
Supervisor Sharon Bronson said her “biggest disappointment” was the rejection of the $200 million road bond and in particular, the funding for the Sonoran Corridor, a new southside highway to link I-10 to I-19 and create a bypass near high-tech hubs like Raytheon and UA Tech Park.
“We need to find a way to move forward and get some of that done, particularly as it relates to D-M and Raytheon,” Bronson said. “If we don’t have a way to get that done, this community is in for really hard times.”
Bronson was already looking for a Plan B last week. She pitched the idea of asking voters to support a countywide half-cent sales tax, which is already in place in every other county in Arizona. The revenue from the sales tax would partially go to cutting property taxes and partially go to fixing roads and funding major projects like the Sonoran Corridor.
Supervisor Ray Carroll said he was “willing to entertain the idea” of asking voters to pass a half-cent sales tax if it were targeted to property-tax cuts and road repair.
Carroll said that he would prefer an increase in gas taxes at the state and federal levels to fund transportation, but until that happens, Pima County has to figure out a way to pay for street repairs.
“Let’s let the voters decide if they’re interested in fixing roads, one way or the other,” said Carroll.
Pima County Supervisor Ramon Valadez recalled he had misgivings about moving forward this year with the bond package because he feared the economy still hadn’t recovered enough for people to feel confident about increasing their taxes.
“It wasn’t really the message of the opponents as much as fear,” Valadez said. “If you talk to business leaders, they’re starting to see the economy pick up, but until our working folks see that benefit, we’re going to be in a similar place. If you go into the grocery store and your dollar doesn’t buy as much as it did five years ago and you’re not sure whether or not you’re going to pay your bills at the end of the month, even $20 a year may seem like a lot. I get it.”
The bond loss dampened the mood at the gathering of Democrats who were celebrating their reelection to the Tucson City Council at the Doubletree Hotel. While the Democrats were happy about their big wins, there was shock and concern about the defeat of the $815 million county bond package.
Rothschild, who faced no opposition, wryly declared victory before the first results were released. But he later told the Weekly that he was surprised and disappointed by the failure of the entire bond package.
“I thought the voters of this community would support roads, would support parks, support economic development,” Rothschild said.
He said that the council now needed to see if there’s a way to persuade voters to support projects in Tucson.
“We need to go back and look at why the bonds failed,” Rothschild said. “We need to take a focused look at what our needs and projects are to improve the city. We need more road money. We need money for our downtown facilities. And we need money for our parks. It’s going to require a very focused, narrow strategy so that people will support paying a little extra for what they believe is a lot more.”
The council considered asking voters to approve changes to the city charter that would have allowed the city to consider new funding streams, including higher property or sales taxes. Two other charter amendments, giving the mayor the same powers as council members and reducing civil-service protection for department heads, did pass.
Ward 1 Councilwoman Regina Romero, who captured about 57 percent of the vote in her race against Republican challenger Bill Hunt, said that she was “really happy. I’m glad the voters saw beyond the mudslinging and trying to bring Tucson down. I’m glad they want to return us to the council. We have a really good team. Just like any other family, there are disagreements, there is push and pull, but we are on the same page and we want to move Tucson forward.”
But Romero added she was “feeling sad in my heart” over the voters’ rejection of the bonds.
“All these projects that would have improved quality of life and bring jobs not just to Tucson but the region weren’t supported,” Romero said. “It’s bad news for Tucson and bad news for the community.”
This article appears in Nov 12-18, 2015.
Good for us voters!!!
Despite being out-spent better than 30 to 1; despite Yes endorsements from the media, from business groups, from labor unions, from churches, from the Democrat Party, from special interest groups who would benefit from the 99 bond projects; from all the power-wielders in our society; and despite negative attacks from those who should know better – voters exercised their free choice to say, “Not this time.”
Please don’t complain about “low voter turnout.” The facts were that nearly 39 percent of eligible voters actually voted, compared with just 20 percent in the 2004 bond election, and about half of that in the 1997 bond election. Green Valley had about a 60 percent turnout and Oro Valley nearly 70 percent – and both voted against the bonds.
It is an inconvenient truth that Tucson, for instance, is majority Democrat and reelected Democrats while turning down the bonds endorsed by the Democrat Party.
Consider the “Sonoran Corridor:” A clear priority for the County Administrator, it was added to the bond measure late, then tied in with politically-popular road repairs, then moved up in priority while those repairs were stretched out over 12 years, then sold to federal legislators for inclusion in a transportation bill. People noticed that maneuvering. People don’t like to feel manipulated.
That highway, labeled “I-11” on maps from the County Administrator’s office more than once, might have won support if it simply linked I-10 and I-19 near Raytheon, the airport and the UA Tech Park. But dropping it south to gift a Diamond Ventures proposed development, and then west to link to his proposed Interstate 11 route that would destroy the communities, wildlife and archaeological riches of the Avra Valley – that inspired hundreds to stand up and actively fight the bonds to save their homeland.
While the Sonoran Corridor was sold as being about jobs, a reading of ADOT’s I-11 “Corridor Justification Report” showed that it is more about exporting jobs. R&D in Arizona and Nevada, manufacture and assembly in Mexico, where wages are predicted to fall below China’s. I-11, the report says, can also help Mexico steal jobs from the West Coast by attracting container ships to Guaymas, now being expanded with financing from China.
There were certainly some good projects in the bond package, and maybe they will find their way to voters again without the baggage and burden of being wrapped in corporate greed or political chicanery or misleading math. The November 3 vote was, in sum, a failed Vote of Confidence. The Board of Supervisors must look at and deal with the maneuvering and manipulation by the chief architect of the measures, County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry.
It’s plain and simple. The “Keep Tucson Shitty” people came out in force again. People complain about the lack of jobs. What company in the right mind would relocate here with the crumbling infrastructure and abysmal school system we have here. But you just keep those taxes low, that’s ALL that matters and Tucson will certainly stay shitty.
RobG you have completely confused yourself with propaganda spewed by the leftinistas in Tucson. Spending without viable goals has been practiced here for 40 years. Just look at city and county budgets that have gone into the billions, and yet the basics are not provided for. Property taxes have quadrupled since the 90s and they have seen fit to RE BUY open space and remove it from the tax rolls. Salaries have exploded, pensions over promised, and who is LAST in line?
The voter. I’d say this was well deserved turnabout. It’s fair play and we are willing to suffer to try to get our financial house in order. Employers are not racing to liberally run overtaxed and over spent cities.
Ray Carroll is wrong. We have already paid to fix our roads. We are not borrowing more money to accommodate theft.
Replace Ray Carroll with a Republican. Sharon Bronson too, while you’re at it.
Ray Carroll is a Republican.
In name only. He votes with the Dems on nearly everything.
Is it even remotely possible that the ‘nearly everything’ on which Republican Supervisor Ray Carroll votes with the Democrats is composed of items that should not be considered partisan,and may even simply be good government?
Ray Carroll is a South Chicago Democrat. He didn’t change his party affiliation until just before being appointed in 1997 by Raul Grijalva, who had to appoint a Republican since that seat belonged to a Republican. Tell me that wasn’t a party switch of convenience.
Like tax increases and no accountability?
Anything coming out of the mouth of anyone on the Council is embarrassing. They have continued to have failed leadership year after year and mismanage the funds they have. Same with the County continual mismanagement of funds, anti-growth mentality, and lining the pockets of their buddies who are developers or contractors. The no vote was a resounding STOP mismanaging the tax payer dollars you’ve had over the years along with other bonds that were mismanaged….anti-growth,anti-growth,anti-growth,anti-growth,anti-growth,anti-growth,anti-growth,anti-growth,anti-growth,anti-growth, glad I’m gone and sold my home.
Dear Tucson, does anyone feel like we are getting what we paid for? $21 million for a new animal-care center? I love animals more than 90 percent of people, and I am completely disgusted with this bond.
It seemed good on paper didn’t it? It is a disaster and a complete waste of taxpayer money.
Why would ANY OF US, left,right or independent trust any of these people with more money?
Since WHEN did wanting low taxes make someone an evil villain? The elected officials need to work with what they have for the basics. No pet programs, no cronyism, no skimming and NO MORE NEEDLESS CONSULTANTS!!!!!!!!
Live within your means, and don’t spend money that isn’t there.
So let me get this straight – Tucson’s roads are in TERRIBLE shape – and this road repair bond was pretty much about building a COMPLETELY USELESS “Sonoran Corridor”??? Jesus Christ – what a boondoggle. Please tell me exactly how this would benefit the people of Tucson? Maybe it would benefit those whom live in Sahuarita and work at DM or Raytheon, but otherwise? This makes even less sense than the half-assed and underused Aviation freeway.
I lived in Tucson for 37 years before moving to Chandler last year – and you know what I get here? Better roads that are actually cared for, better infrastructure, better schools, safer neighborhoods, lower property taxes, actual police response when you need it, etc. etc. The trade off is that the water up here tastes worse, the weather in the Summer is definitely hotter, and I’m closer to the crazies in the AZ legislature. I miss friends, family, & Eeegee’s – but I don’t miss Tucson.
Elected officials were convinced by big money donors and tax and spenders in the democratic party to ignore the tax payer. And they have now done it at their own peril. I would hate to be an incumbent in the next election and have to try to explain why I had supported it. By the way which County Sups did support it?
By the way they are now cleaning and patching roads on the El Tour route which I believe is next week. Please remember that they didn’t do that for the constituents. We can not survive on tourism.
Please elect new representatives that will develop our employment opportunities and keep some of the UA graduates here to benefit our community.
The bonds failed for all sorts of good reasons, but at the end of the day it all boiled down to a vote of no confidence in county government.
I voted NO on all bonds, since our city council over the years has wasted tens of millions in bond money. They have nothing to show for close to a hundred million in bonds they got approve. Until city council is changed, no bonds should be approved.
Do you think people voted no for the fact that we get empty promises and over billed projects? My concern is that the roads can’t go unattended so how is that problem going to be cured? I can’t help to think of the whole rio nuevo issue and wonder if that is still an issue since nothing has resolved from the monies wrongfully spent and not even a rock was transformed from this project. At the same time, should we all move back wards on horses and wooden carriages for the roads were rough enough before (hence the request for the bond) and owning a nice vehicle in this town may be a bad investment? This is the basics and if we can’t face the basics being an issue, we have bigger problems coming! Hope to see a revised plan soon.