r/Tempe

Thanks to Tropical Storm Rachel, we’re seeing some active unsettled weather here in Arizona today and more tomorrow as well. We had a Dust Storm Warning ahead of an outflow boundary that moved into Tempe Arizona earlier this afternoon. This gnarly shelf cloud was the leading edge of that said boundary. Unfortunately I’m at work, but grateful to be able to capture it.

The dust storm advisory texts are urgent. An amber alert is urgent.

Political spam should not be allowed to label itself as an urgent alert.

I really don’t care which candidates or friends of candidates are using this “strategy” but it needs to stop.

While my post is unlikely to reach the people behind this, I would like them to know that any message that is falsely claiming urgency will eliminate my vote for the candidate. Even if ideologically compatible.

I encourage others to join me in this rebuke.

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 His major points were that Tempe suffered the biggest revenue loss after the rental tax was repealed and that this tax proposal was equitable because residents and visitors alike are paying for it.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/