u/Independent_Row_8828

Prop 424 Debate, TLDR version

Opening Statements – both sides had 6 minutes to present their case. Tom Duensing spoke for the pro group, and said roughly the same things he said in an LD8 meeting last month. His major points were that Tempe suffered the biggest revenue loss after the rental tax was repealed and that this tax proposal was equitable because residents and visitors alike are paying for it. Direct quote: “So my viewpoint, simply looking at it, yes or no, is really, um, it puzzles me a little bit on, on why this is a debate. It should not be a debate. This is a strictly business decision.”

Mitzi Epstein spoke for the no side and she had a presentation with 8 slides. Her major points were that this is the wrong tax at the wrong time: it’s asking for too much and it’s a permanent increase with no plan for oversight of how it is spent.

Only one PC spoke – Alanna Billingsley spoke against. Quote: “Has accountability really been applied at every level? I want Tempe to invest in itself. I want safe neighborhoods, good infrastructure, and meaningful programs. But before I agree to a permanent tax increase, I want a realistic long-term plan, evidence they've tightened their belts, and a clear explanation of why this tax is necessary and why it has to be permanent. And until I see that, it's a no from me.”

The four questions asked and debated are as follows:

1.  We remember when a temporary sales tax increase was put in place after the 2008 recession and the subsequent revenue loss there. What additional services are we cutting since permanent funding was never established for Tempe PRE?

Epstein: we shouldn’t be asking the very people who need the help to be the ones to pay for it.

Woods: Recessions ease over time. This is a structural deficit. Tempe Pre is in its 9th year and this would provide the program permanent funding and expand the program.

Epstein: Go back to the drawing board.

Woods: a future conversation with our legislators about making tax policy more fair for working people would be needed

 

2. Why was the tax bundled instead of voted on separately, and do you think there is legitimate concern surrounding it?

Woods: Voting for just one of the propositions wouldn’t be enough o cover the entirety of the budget shortfall.

Epstein: It’s a bridge too far [to bundle them] and that’s the risk you take.

Woods: The council chose to take that risk.

3.  Given the police association's claims about staffing and response times, would you advocate for cutting police, fire, emergency services? Alternatively, how would you address public safety issues with new revenue?

Epstein: The dichotomy of ‘vote yes or else we’ll cut services’ is not something that has to happen.

Duensing: Priority two and three response times have fallen significantly, even if priority one has gotten better.

Woods: To cut 25.7 million dollars means everything, all departments, get cut. The city needs funding streams available by state law.

Epstein: 60% is going to public safety and it’s not defined well.

Woods: Having the public safety budget covered by the tax means the city has the opportunity to do a lot of things we might otherwise not be able to do.

4. How much of the revenue is estimated to come from non-residents versus Tempe households, and what's the expected annual cost for a typical family? Why should we accept a regressive tax in Tempe?

Epstein and Duensing have a drawn-out back and forth over this statement, from Duensing, “The monthly cost of Prop 424 is $13 for a median household.”

Woods: Cities have immediate needs and certain tools are currently available to them to solve budget problems. If this doesn’t pass, our working class transit users, low income school families, and seniors who might need fire/medical rescue, will have valuable services cut.

Closing statements are mostly a regurg of things said previously in the debate. 

To see the longer version of opening, questions debate, closing, visit my Substack: https://dianealleycats.substack.com/

Fritillary on passionfruit

Swallowtail on pipevine

Queen on milkweed

Summary of PSCO Subcommittee - September 28

Stakeholders present in person: Dillon Wild, Elvis Taska, Raquel Britain, Michelle Ponce, Russell Facente, Deanna Alvarez, Erica Williams

Stakeholders online (that I know of): Kema Charles, Andre Miller, Robbie Alder-Tapia, Shereen Lerner. Alana Langdon

Public comment from attorney Ben Taylor, who is advocating for Eryn Bonner, spoke to let people know that a Sergeant ??mias (??) who was involved back in 2020, suspended for the Trevonyae Cumpian case (more info: https://www.azcentral.com/videos/news/local/arizona/2020/09/04/tempe-officer-accused-use-force-against-unarmed-black-man-again/5712102002/) . He contacted Ms Bonner directly on the phone and its our understanding that he’s conducting the Internal Affairs investigation. Taylor questions whether having a person with a prior incident to contact Bonner during this incident. (more info: https://www.abc15.com/news/region-southeast-valley/tempe/attorney-calls-for-third-party-investigation-into-mill-avenue-arrest-as-community-speaks-out)

Council aide Morningstar gave a 30-minute presentation on an overview of oversight bodies – very detailed. This was at least 15 slides and lots of text, so I didn’t take pictures of all of it.

Note: Stakeholders were given information that members of the public did not receive. I suppose I could have asked for a copy but I was tired.

Stakeholder input:

• Alana Langdon: it would be helpful to have a better visual of the state statutes and which models are applicable for Tempe’s efforts

• Pastor Andre Miller: State law prohibits what we would like to see happen from a city standpoint. It was created on purpose to prevent civilians from sitting at the table looking at police matters and passing judgements. Someone basically has to be certified as a police officer which would prohibit regular citizens from expressing how they’re policed.

• Shereen Lerner: Ultimately we’ll probably be coming up with some kind of hybrid model. Mentions a Chicago audit program related to traffic stops. Audits don’t have to by systemic of the entire program, but could be more for a specific area identified as a problem.

• Dillon Wild: Inclined towards an investigative model because police need to be accountable to the communities in which they enforce the law. Given the limitations of the state statute, a hybrid model makes sense. We can find a model for accountability of police in Tempe that works for the community and helps reestablish trust between law enforcement and people they police.

• Russell Facente: We should be focusing initial energy of this subcommittee onto policies and trainings that cause or eliminate disciplinary action.

• Elvis Taska: Interested in understanding the makeup of our 15 citizen members in Tempe. It says they can be business owners or residents. Also interested in knowing more about how often the review committee agrees with the internal audits from the police force and how often there’s a differentiation between those two findings. Also how often we side with the citizen members or the police.

• Dr Robbie Alder-Tapia: psychologist, part of the original mayor’s committee. Did you consider Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell’s Prosecution Integrity Program, started in 2020? Took the 40-hour use of force certification course as a civilian to understand the science behind it, very enlightening; happy to talk to anyone about this experience. Has applied for the Citizen’s Review Board, but unwilling to sign same release of information/background check that is required for people applying to be law enforcement officers; that’s beyond what’s necessary for a citizen’s board. Let’s look at some of the issues that are a hurdle for many people applying to the board.

• Russell Facente: who pays for the training for how the review board and how muc does it cost?

• Shereen Lerner: previously served on the CRB, never felt pressure to vote one way or another. Always been afforded to ask any questions, provide comments/input, ask for more info.

• Erica Williams: are background checks required per the state statute? [Nichols said he doesn’t believe that is the case.]

• Dillon Wild: Looking at the language for the CRB in Tempe, it doesn’t seem to have a lot of independence. It seems to refer its decision to police and the city manager. ‘We urge you to reconsider’ seems to be the most powerful thing the CRB can put forward. If I were a police officer being investigated/under suspicion of misconduct, it’s hard for me to look at any of this and fear consequences for my actions. I would be very curious to see what Tempe PD’s system looks like for investigating officer misconduct and a defense of why they view that as a sufficient deterrent, especially when our ability as citizens to exercise oversight over the police department is so limited.

• Councilmember St George: Emphasize the importance of the education requirement because wouldn’t want to sit on a board I knew nothing about or had no ide of what the laws were. At the same time, do agree that it is a deterrent for any citizen who wants to participate to have to pay for it, to do 80 hours before they can even serve. And as we beg people to serve on our boards and commissions. That’s really concerning. Who do we need to talk to at the state to discuss this? To be clear: our board can either: agree with the findings, disagree with them, recommend further investigation, or decide if it was within policy. [Nichols confirms it is these four options.]

• Councilmember St George: Are the recommendations that our CRB makes to the chief of police/city manager just advisory or are they binding? Who responds to them? Are the chief/city manager required to explain publicly when a recommendation is or isn’t adopted? Where’s the public-facing transparency of the findings? [Nichols: findings are subject to public record, but exclusively advisory.]

• Councilmember St George: Is there anything prohibiting the panel from initiating reviews? Nichols says nothing prevents them from doing that under state law. The issue would be the investigation – if Internal Affairs is not investigating, the panel would not be able to direct IA to initiate an investigation.

• Pastor Andre Miller: Can this committee recommend a replacement of a police chief that seems to be an issue as far as the community? Can you make that recommendation to the council and city manager? [Nichols says that is outside the scope of the subcommittee.]

• Elvis Taska: how clearly are we achieving the strategic recommendatiosn from the 2021 task force?

• Deanna Alvarez: Can we have an overview of what the 80-hours of trainings consist of, what are the objectives of each of the modules?

• Michelle Ponce: Can we define more what we mean by ‘public safety’ and ‘community oversight’? What community, specifically? What kind of demographics? Are we only talking about a specific community that can be part of the board?

Notes from Sept 14 PSCO meeting: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1FSL8kmi12/

More info: https://www.tempe.gov/government/mayor-and-city-council/council-subcommittees/public-safety-and-community-oversight-council-subcommittee

From the Tempe This Week newsletter today

Public Safety and Community Oversight Council Subcommittee meeting tonight @ Tempe History Museum, 6pm. Virtual option available.

Info/meeting link: https://www.tempe.gov/government/mayor-and-city-council/council-subcommittees/public-safety-and-community-oversight-council-subcommittee

Text taken from Facebook post

🌵 OUR FALL SALE IS ALMOST HERE! 🍂

Mark your calendars for October 3rd–11th at Desert Survivors Inc.! 🌱

✨ Oct. 3rd: Members-Only Day — 20% OFF everything + first pick!

🌿 Oct. 4th–11th: Open to everyone — 10% OFF everything for non-members!

Swipe ➡️ to check out our 1-gallon & 5-gallon plant availability lists and start planning your haul! 👀🌵

Plant availability and quantities may change as we get closer to the sale, so come early for the best selection — once they’re gone, they’re gone!

📞 Questions about a specific plant or want to check availability? Call the Desert Survivors Inc. Nursery at 520-791-9309.

📍 1020 W Starr Pass Blvd., Tucson, AZ

🕗 Open daily during the sale, 8 AM–4 PM

#DesertSurvivors #TucsonPlants #TucsonNursery #NativePlants

Link: https://www.borderlandsplants.org

Lots of lovely options to choose from!

Tempe Councilmember Keating has been voicing his disapproval for state prop 144 for months. The website says he's a chair for this PAC must he must be a co-chair because he's not listed on the campaign finance report. Some residents have noted interest that Keating was avidly FOR lumping city ballot prop 424 provisions together while being avidly AGAINST prop 144 lumping provisions together. There are rumors Keating plans to run for higher office in 2028, perhaps even county recorder.

The website is www.protectthevoteaz.com

Agenda is up for the 9/24 Council meeting. Including an item of public interest regarding the ALPRs.

*General info/attend virtually: https://www.tempe.gov/government/city-clerk-s-office/council-meeting-information

*Agenda/agenda packets (posted on the Friday before): https://tempe.hylandcloud.com/AgendaOnline/

*Watch council meetings live: https://www.tempe.gov/government/communication-and-marketing/tempe-11

*Submit comment cards: https://www.tempe.gov/government/city-clerk-s-office/city-council-online-meeting-comment-card

As posted on her Facebook profile:

Posted on Sept 6: No on Tempe Prop 424: Concern #1 (with more to come):

Before the City of Phoenix enacted a 0.5% sales tax increase, they engaged residents across the City to identify and understand the community’s priorities. Residents didn’t simply have an opportunity to comment—they directly shaped and revised how the city allocated the additional revenue. The tax increase was democratically driven and designed to reflect priorities established through that process.

Tempe’s process has been dramatically different. The first mention of a tax increase was buried in a budget meeting. Just two meetings later—and before newly elected councilmembers had even been sworn in with a mandate to pursue different priorities—Council referred this permanent tax increase to the November ballot.

That is not meaningful community engagement. A permanent tax increase should not move forward without giving residents a genuine opportunity to understand the proposal, weigh alternatives, establish priorities, and directly influence how their tax dollars will be spent.

Tempe residents deserve the same kind of transparent, deliberate, and inclusive process that allows the community—not just City Hall—to shape its priorities before being asked to permanently increase their taxes.

---------------

Posted on Sept 8: No on Tempe Prop 424: Concern #2

Tempe voters will vote on whether to raise the city sales tax rate by 27.8%—from 1.8% to 2.3%. That means an additional half-cent per dollar on taxable purchases. If approved, Tempe's city sales tax rate would be higher than Scottsdale's, Chandler's, and Mesa's.

In 2010, during the financial pressures of the Great Recession, Tempe voters approved a much smaller 0.2 percentage-point increase, raising the rate from 1.8% to 2.0%. That increase had a four-year sunset. The tax expired in 2014, honoring the commitment made to voters.

Today, the City's own long-range financial forecast projects a $14.75 million General Fund shortfall in FY 2025/26, declining to $4.6 million by FY 2029/30.

Yet Prop 424 would impose a permanent tax increase—without a sunset—raising the city sales tax by 0.5 percentage points and generating approximately $50 million annually.

Tempe voters deserve a tax increase with a clear end date—not a permanent tax hike.

-------------

Posted on Sept 16: No on Tempe Prop 424: Concern #3

I keep returning to the decision to bundle three very different priorities into one Tempe sales-tax question.

The proposal originally had two separate tax questions—0.4% for public safety and 0.1% for transit. On April 30, the Council added 0.1% for Tempe PRE and then voted 6–1 to consolidate the three into one ballot question: 0.3% public safety, 0.1% transportation and 0.1% early childhood.

That was a departure from the past.

In the 2024 bond election, there were three separate questions: 1) public safety and roadway improvements; 2) parks, historic preservation and municipal infrastructure; and 3) affordable housing.

Prop 424 is a classic example of “logrolling”—combining different proposals so voters have to accept the whole package even if they would have voted differently on the individual pieces.

Considering Prop 424 is a permanent tax -- the largest tax rate increase in 30 years -- I think Tempe voters deserve better..

From a post he shared on his campaign Facebook: Hi Tempe, Over the last few months, I have been regularly approached with questions about Proposition 424, an upcoming municipal ballot initiative that would increase Tempe's transaction privilege tax rate by 0.5% on non-food purchases.

In my capacity as a private resident of Tempe, I would like to address the questions that I receive most frequently.

**Summary of the Sept 16 CSLW subcommittee meeting**

In-person: about 5 community members, and close to 20 staff members. Stakeholders present: Rev Trish Winters, Pastor Mo Grimm, Angie Taylor, Nick Bastian, David Sokolowski, Nichol Khan, Harvey Gibson, Jill Etienne, Shana Ellis. I don’t know the online numbers/names.

Two of the stakeholders talked about their ride-alongs with the HOPE team.

Jill Etienne: I went out with the Hope team last week, and I wanna say I'm just absolutely grateful for that opportunity. It was tremendously, um, valuable experience to meet people where they're at in our community. And, um, the resources that the Hope team are able to offer are incredible. I know, I mean, Tempe has just a wide breadth of resources, but to see those in action I think really makes it resonate more. I can read about it on the website and think, "Oh, that's great." But being out in the community and, and seeing those resources and taking action was really incredible. I, I, I truly feel like I saw hope on people's faces when they were, you know, met face-to-face with the, the lead there. And, um, yeah, I just wanna say I'm grateful for that opportunity.

David Sokolowski: so I, I scheduled it during the hottest part of the day, which might not have been safe for me 'cause I was thinking, "Let's go out and get water and let's try and help people." But a lot of people were serving inside the cooling centers, and I felt a lot of them were at a certain place where I couldn't get in. And so I would like to look at, like, possibly as a recommendation to look at trying to get the Hope team to work more closely with the nonprofits. Because if people are gonna be at that location at a time like, say, 6:00 PM, like, it's not, doesn't really make sense to have people driving around looking for people when we know where they're at. And one of the things that I've heard before is that the city is kind of reluctant to send the Hope team to these, to these locations. So it's just something that in my experience has seemed like maybe our would have a better start in working with those organizations that are already servicing the homeless people.

The first presentation was from David Bridge, with Maricopa Association of Governments, giving an overview of regional homelessness. This one lasted around 35 minutes. LOOOOTTTTSSS of information. I’m including some of the slides, but it’ll take me longer to go through all the things he said. For now, you get the visuals. Next, Dr R Nichols Staab, from Maricopa County Public Health, gave a ~15 minute presentation on public health with regards to homelessness, focusing on the Heat-related Illness and Death Dashboard (more info: https://www.maricopa.gov/1858/Heat-Surveillance). He finished by saying there is an active outbreak of tuberculosis circulating in the county; it is not new, but it’s a unique cluster because all the cases have ties to various homeless service providers.

Councilmember Garlid said the October 21st meeting would go over city and nonprofit community services. There were stickers and magnets available to the community and stakeholders for the CARE and HOPE teams, and Garlid encouraged everyone to call those numbers if they see homelessness in parks or at local business, INSTEAD OF calling 311 or the non-emergency police line. Quote: “We don’t want people to call the police on people who are unsheltered. We want them to call the Care and Hope line instead.” Sharing this number with as many people as possible means unsheltered people are seeing the people they need to see instead of a police officer.

Councilmember Nichols asked for a future presentation topic on how wages and the cost of living has impacted people experiencing homeless. Councilmember Amberg asked for a future agenda item to explore the possibility of the city finding a building in the city that can actually house everything and people can go and sign up for feedings, etc. As of right now, those options are all over the city and it would be nice to have a more centralized location for people to get the help they need.

About 20 staff in attendance, as well as about 20 community members.

Shauna Warner showed slides and read from a prepared presentation – this took 17 minutes. (More info on the presentation here: https://www.tempe.gov/government/city-clerk-s-office/election-information/nov-3-2026-sales-tax-election)

12 total questions/comments were asked by audience members. It was a lot of back-and-forth for the most part, not really question and answer, so this is my attempt at a summary, plus some actual exchanges.

City attorney Eric Anderson stated that the city’s role was to give information, not influence your vote either way. They would answer questions as best they could. Opinion-based questions can’t be answered. There are legal restrictions on what they can/can’t say.

Some points made via Q&A:

·       Home consumption means individual ingredients you buy to make a meal at home, as opposed to buying a prepared meal that you can eat anywhere.

·       Every department has general fund allocations, including all the departments that would benefit from the tax increase (and public safety is 50% on its own), but if its approved, those departments will draw less from the general fun, freeing up money for other departments to be able to draw more.

 

One resident questioned why the city staff, when presenting the tax proposal to council, used some examples that would be cut if the tax wasn’t passed, like reduced services for bulk trash or library hours. She mentioned the pro-424 campaign mentions it on their website as well, but those departments aren’t affected one way or another by the tax. The city attorney answered that the city needs to have a balanced budget every year. Solid waste is in an enterprise fund that operates on its own. If voters approve the tax, money would go into funds specific to the ballot language, but everything else is general fund, which is subject to council’s decisions.

--Question about Public Safety--

*Curly Hair: What is the breakdown in terms of percentage that would go to each of the different areas of public safety?

*Lisette Camacho, CFO: They qualify for all of those areas. There is not breakdown. The funds could be used for any of those.

*Curly Hair: I’m assuming this is an informed decision that these areas need funding and there should be some indication of how that funding is divided.

*Lisette Camacho: On an annual basis we meet with all the departments to discuss their operating and capital budget needs. We can’t include revenues that we don’t know if it will be approved or not, since we’re sending this to Tempe residents, the voters. We don’t plan that way. We only budget revenues that we’re certain of. November is when we begin planning and we’ll know the outcome of the election. That is when we’ll factor in additional revenues.

*Curly Hair: And will these three areas be funded in perpetuity since this is a permanent increase in our sales tax?

Lisette Camacho: There is not sunset provision in the ballot language.

*Eric Anderson, city attorney: If the tax is approved, the language remains in effect for as long as it exists.

--Questions about Tempe Pre--

* Ray: The founders of Arizona made a very smart move when they separated municipal and educational governments, separate tax bodies. So I’m concerned when I hear the city is offering pre K instruction.

* Eric Anderson: Sir, please, we’re not here to debate things, just ask a question.

* Ray: The document says this program is open to residents who meet your qualifications but also Tempe School District employee children and COT employees. You stated you had a wait list. How many of those on the wait list are within the city or with the school district?

* Mary Mezey, deputy director, human services: New categories would be added if this tax passed. Currently I don’t have a breakdown of residency for full pay tuition versus… And to receive a benefit for full tuition, you do currently have to be a Tempe resident.

* Ray: So you’re saying this one-tenth of a percent for Pre-K programs are to increase the services that would include school district and city employees, but you’re not currently serving those people?

* Eric Anderson: There’s a priority under this ballot question that Tempe residents would be served first. And if funds were available, it could be expanded to other priorities.

* Ray: Are you saying you’re currently not serving those people?

* Mary Mezey: If someone lived outside of Tempe and they chose to seek Tempe Pre, they would have to pay full tuition because they’re not in the school district.

* Ray: That’s not my question at all. Are you not serving Tempe school districts and Tempe city employees in this program?

* Mary Mezey: We may be.

* Ray: That’s not what I asked you. Are you currently serving those people?

* Mary Mezey: They would be eligible to apply for the program.

* Ray: That’s not the answer.

* Eric Anderson: We don’t have that information.

* Mary Mezey: I don’t have that answer.

* Ray: You mean you don’t know if you’re currently serving –

* Eric Anderson: Sir, I just said we don’t have that information available to you. If you give us your name, Mary will look it up and we will make sure you have that information.

* Ray: That’s a little messed up.

*Woman 8: Statistics [from the presentation] show that in 2026, we have a reduction in the number of children served and reduction in classrooms. What is the cause of the reduction?

*Mary Mezey: When Tempe Pre started, it was funded at $3 million as a kind of pilot project. For two years it received $3 million out of what was a one-time general fund supplemental allotment. For subsequent years, those allocations were reduced to $2 million. In 2020, it was reduced to $1.5 million in general fund budget and then supplementals. Then it became part of the ongoing general fund in 2023, 2024. Currently we receive $1.5 million and that’s half of the original allocation. Based on costs, that’s the number of children we serve today based on our budget.

*Woman 8: Is that a reflection of the need of preschool in Tempe and that’s why they receive less funds?

*Mary Mezey: No. We could serve additional children based on what the projected need and population is.

*Woman 8: Is there a wait list right now?

*Shauna Warner: Currently classrooms are not full.

*Woman 8: So we see an urgent need for more preschools or is it just in certain communities in Tempe? Is this all over?

*Eric Anderson: I don’t think we can answer the question if its urgent or not. This ist he funding the council is proposing to be spent on early childhood and preschool.

*Woman 8: So I guess what I’m asking is why we’re allocating one third of the taxes to preschool versus other budgetary items in the general fund that are also losing funding?

*Eric Anderson: The council voted to present it to the voters in this fashion.

*Woman 8: And do you think they answer that question in their previous discussions?

*Eric Anderson: I’ll let you review that for yourself.

*Lisette Camacho: There are presentations on the website and you can see the discussion by the mayor and council and how they voted on it.

--sorry for the scattered format. I had it set up differently on Facebook so tried to make adjustments for reddit without doing too much extra work--

🎉 Biodiversity! 🎉

Milkweed vine

Red bird of paradise

Praying mantids

Baja fairy duster

Passionfruit vine (volunteer)

What is this downy floof? Came off on my pants when I walked by. I think its a white plumbago (?). Jared from Spadefoot says these plants in the nursery seem to do this when under stress or getting a lot of sun but not seeing much about it in botany lit. Figured I'd post here for any more input.

Local artist JJ Horner announced on his Instagram the opening of Maybe Art Space Gallery at 809 S Farmer.

www.maybeartspace.com

Upcoming Informational Meetings hosted by City of Tempe for ballot Prop 424

** Tuesday, September 15 at 6pm at Kiwanis Rec Center (6111 S All American Way)

** Tuesday, Sept 29: 6pm, Tempe History Museum (809 E Southern Ave)

I'm curious what questions will be asked at these meetings and what the answers will be.

Acaciella angustissima -- I bought this plant because the description said it grew to about 3x3 feet but this one must be very happy because it's about 8 feet tall.