To allow candidates the right to respond to criticisms about their candidacy before Election Day, the last day Independent Newsmedia will publish new election-related letters in our weekly print editions is Oct. 21, and the last day they will publish online is Oct. 27. Candidates may submit a 150-word reply addressing criticisms only and should email them to AzOpinions@iniusa.org along with their name, address, contact number and the headline of the letter they’re addressing.
OPINION — Any reasonable person supports children, public transportation and public safety.
Supporting these goals does not mean giving City Hall a blank check. When government asks citizens to tax themselves — especially a regressive tax that places a greater burden on lower-income residents — we have a responsibility to ask hard questions.
Is City Hall fiscally responsible? Is the money needed? What guarantees do citizens have that it will be used as promised? Those questions have not been adequately answered.
Tempe Proposition 424 was rushed forward with very little citizen input and presented through an undemocratic structure. Citizens deserve the right to vote on each of these three proposals separately. Why did City Hall choose to bundle them?
There is also a history of questionable spending. Consider the $2 million Mill Avenue sign and the extravagant expenditures for the third floor of City Hall. These raise legitimate questions about the city's spending priorities.
There are serious questions about how the city is managed. Why are so many Tempe police officers suing their own department for millions of dollars?
Where is the supervision of officers on Mill Avenue? Why is a young Arizona State University student being charged after she was knocked to the ground and repeatedly punched in the face by a full-grown man — an armed officer?
Where is the accounting of all the tax money previously raised through bonds and general taxation? Where is that money going?
Most importantly, what legal guarantee do citizens have that Prop. 424 money will be spent as promised? There is no such guarantee in the proposal.
When Phoenix passed a similar tax increase, it specified in legal language that the money could only be used for the purposes promised to voters.
Tempe,
Proposition 424,
Prop. 424,
half-cent sales-tax hike,
budget challenge,
Arizona Legislature,
eliminated,
residential rental tax,
safe neighborhoods,
public safety,
law enforcement,
public transportation,
no blank check,
City Hall,
ask hard questions,
need guarantees,
used as promised,
questions not answered,
was rushed,
little citizen input,
three proposals bundled,
vote separately,
history of questionable spending,
how city managed,
accounting,
money previously raised,
through bonds and general taxation
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here