By Alexander Lomax
It’s been a rollercoaster past week or so for Proposition 490, the Protect and Preserve initiative that is designed to replace the 0.2% sales tax used for the McDowell Sonoran Preserve with a lower 0.15% sales tax with expanded park maintenance and upkeep services. The very popular initiative brought the ire of the Goldwater Institute, the lobbyist organization whose sole intention seems to be to eliminate any and all taxes, resident desires be damned.
As is often the case, extremely deep-pocketed lobbyist groups can utilize the judicial system to their favor as they only need to get one judge or set of judges to agree with them. So when a Maricopa County judge dismissed their lawsuit, they appealed to the Arizona Court of Appeals, which stated that the verbiage on the ballot about it being a reduction in taxes was misleading, because hypothetically they could let the tax expire and our parks could go into disarray with no taxes allocated towards them.
And let’s be clear: whether it’s a tax reduction or a reduction in taxes, it’s a reduction nonetheless. When you’re paying 0.2% today but will be paying 0.15% next year, you are paying less. That is a reduction.
We would be silly to point out partisan judges in Democrat states and not acknowledge the potential for partisan judges in a state where nearly all appointed judges were put there by Republicans, but regardless, between technicalities, bias, or both…the lobbyists won.
Until…they didn’t. And a last minute change in the verbiage of the initiative on the ballot seems to have saved the day, as the initiative will go on the ballot. And that’s a win for all of us; even those who will vote no against it will get the chance to vote no, the many thousands of people who signed to get on the ballot will get their chance to vote, and ultimately it will be decided by the people. Direct democracy at it’s finest, precisely how it should be.
Councilman Barry Graham, who voted against this change, said “While the rushed description might be technically legal, I remain concerned that denying residents enough time to consider the revised language of the proposition will further erode their trust in city government”. They will have 75 days or so to consider this change, and will be able to have their ballot in hand for nearly a month before voting. What else should they want? Unfortunately Graham seems to have chosen the side of the lobbyists and not common logic on this topic, which is truly disappointing.
It’s unfortunate that some people are so threatened by letting the voters have their voice that they feel the need to waste resources, time, and violate their own intellectual integrity in the process. But kudos to the city (minus a few councilmembers) for acting pragmatically and doing what they needed to do to let the people have a voice.