Like they say, more than half of Arizona cities use home rule . . . ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW (and question more): which goes to a vote Nov.6 in Mesa.
"More than half of Arizona cities use home rule, which goes to a vote Nov. 6 in Mesa.
So what is home rule?
"Home rule is a provision that, essentially, allows a city to spend the money it collects from taxes and other sources. It lets the City Council, rather than a nearly 40-year-old state spending formula, decide what local services the community needs."
Partially true - but what happens when those who get elected to the Mesa City Council don't listen, represent or respond to what voters want?
Voters here in Mesa didn't let the city council decide on what services or 'pet projects' they wanted to benefit special interests and their questionable possibly corrupt close 'family-and-friends' connections. Voters REJECTED those schemes . . .
In 2018 the Mesa City Council is trying to trick taxpayers and voters all over one more time
JUST SAY NO on
Home Rule
It's like writing a blank check
Would you ever do that?
_________________________________________________________________________________
Why do we have home rule?
"The reason for home rule dates back to 1980, when Arizona voters amended the state Constitution to keep cities' spending in check. The amendment set spending limits that increase with population growth and inflation.
For a city or town to exceed the state-set spending limit, the council could send the home rule provision, formally called an Alternative Expenditure Limitation, to voters every four years. . . "
________________________________________________________________________________
More than half of Arizona's 91 cities and towns use home rule.
Data from the League of Arizona Cities and Towns show:
> 49 municipalities use home rule, including Phoenix, Mesa, Chandler, Queen Creek, Avondale and Apache Junction.
> 29 use a permanent base adjustment to the state-set limit, including Gilbert, Glendale, Goodyear, Buckeye, Fountain Hills, Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, Tempe, Peoria and Surprise.
13 municipalities go with the state-set limit. All are outside of metro Phoenix and include smaller cities such as Bullhead City, San Luis and Quartzsite.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Impact of home rule
Not a sales tax???
Correction: They say it isn't but it is . . . ?????
Home rule isn't a tax increase, but it allows a city or town to spend the tax or other revenue it has in place.
Mesa voters have agreed to home rule since 1982, although city leaders opted not to pursue it through most of the 1990s, saying they could work within the state-set spending limit.
QUESTION
Is your Quality of Life better today than before?
Then, in 1998, Mesa voters approved a "Quality of Life" sales tax to pay for an extensive civic wish list.
Without home rule, Mesa could not have spent that money because it would have been above the state-set spending limit. So the question went back on the ballot in 2000.
It won strong support ???? [NOT TRUE] and has been approved since then.
_________________________________________________________________________________
"City officials say a "no" vote would require a $200 million spending cut that would affect public safety and other departments. . . "
(Here to the right is Mesa City Manager Chris Brady, who is the high-salaried chief Executive Officer. He is not elected.)
In February, March, April, May and June of this year he managed to stage every single city budget presentation in front of the seven members of the Mesa City Council before some, not all of the expenditures, in the Final Budget FY19/20 was passed after contentious discussions.
_________________________________________________________________________
Mesa officials say the state-set spending limit doesn't work for the city because:
> The formula's population and inflation adjustments are based on national trends, which don't match the fast-growing city's needs.
> Certain voter-approved revenue sources, such as those dedicated to road improvements, are not anticipated in the state-set funding formula.
>The cost of federal regulations, from safe drinking water mandates to security needs that arose after Sept. 11, 2001, have increased faster than inflation.
___________________________________________________________________________
Blogger Note:
These are are all LAME EXCUSES
These are are all LAME EXCUSES
Just Vote NO on Question 1 Home Rule
We all really don't need to go into another Half-A-Billion Dollars
in more debt.
> To get rid of all the tricks to fool Mesa voters once again,
YOU CAN VOTE NO ON ALL SIX QUESTIONS across-the-board.
YOU CAN VOTE NO ON ALL SIX QUESTIONS across-the-board.
Don't be faithful to those who tried to fool taxpayers before.
