{"id":739,"date":"2018-10-02T16:43:02","date_gmt":"2018-10-02T16:43:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/?page_id=739"},"modified":"2018-10-02T17:56:39","modified_gmt":"2018-10-02T17:56:39","slug":"ballot-measures","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/index.php\/ballot-measures\/","title":{"rendered":"Ballot Measures"},"content":{"rendered":"<h1>How to Vote on the 2018 Ballot Measures<\/h1>\n<h4>Prop. 125: Changes to public employees retirement system. <span style=\"color: green;\">Vote YES<\/span>.<\/h4>\n<p>Proposition 125 is a ballot measure directly from the Arizona legislature, supported by all Democratic state legislators, to provide greater latitude for keeping specific public retirement pensions solvent.<\/p>\n<h4>Prop. 126: Ban future taxes on services. <span style=\"color: red;\">Vote NO.<\/span><\/h4>\n<p>This measure would prohibit the Arizona Legislature from ever adopting a sales tax on services. This measure is overkill given that it already takes a two thirds majority to adopt new taxes and there are no current proposals to have a sales tax on services.<\/p>\n<ul style=\"margin-left: 2em;\">\n<li>AZ Daily Star: <a href=\"https:\/\/tucson.com\/news\/local\/arizona-s-prop-a-ban-on-taxing-services-draws-diverse\/article_b133e82e-2887-5415-b08f-85f39ad7d657.html\">Arizona&#8217;s Prop. 126 \u2014 a ban on taxing services \u2014 draws diverse resistance<\/a><\/li>\n<li>KJZZ: <a href=\"https:\/\/kjzz.org\/content\/706659\/both-arizona-candidates-governor-oppose-proposition-126\">Both Arizona Candidates For Governor Oppose Proposition 126<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Blog for Arizona: <a href\"https:\/\/blogforarizona.net\/no-on-prop-126-the-false-and-purposefully-misleading-protect-arizona-taxpayers-act\/\">No on Prop. 126, the false and purposefully misleading Protect Arizona Taxpayers Act<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4>Prop. 127: Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona. <span style=\"color: green;\">Vote YES.<\/span><\/h4>\n<p>This measure would require electric utilities to provide at least 50% of their annual retail sales of electricity from renewable energy sources by 2030. Renewable energy is the future, and Arizona should be a leader.<\/p>\n<ul style=\"margin-left: 2em;\">\n<li>Tucson Weekly: &#8220;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.tucsonweekly.com\/tucson\/heated-struggle\/Content?oid=20749564\">Heated Struggle: Big-spending PACs fight for and against Prop 127, which would require utility companies to increase use of renewable energy<\/a>&#8220;<\/li>\n<li>Tim Steller: <a href=\"https:\/\/tucson.com\/news\/local\/steller-column-prop-arizona-s-clean-energy-initiative-could-benefit\/article_bedac5f4-a1b7-587f-ae40-6adfa9878630.html\">Prop. 127, Arizona&#8217;s clean-energy initiative, could benefit utilities<\/a><\/li>\n<li>AZcentral.com opinion: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.azcentral.com\/story\/opinion\/op-ed\/2018\/10\/01\/yes-prop-127-renewable-energy-costs-health\/1485349002\/\">Why am I voting for Prop. 127, the clean energy initiative? It&#8217;s for my kids<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Phoenix Business Journal: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bizjournals.com\/phoenix\/news\/2018\/09\/24\/arizona-renewable-initiative-could-create-15-000.html\">Arizona renewable initiative could create 15,000 solar jobs by 2030, report says<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4>Prop. 305: Private School Voucher Expansion. <span style=\"color: red;\">Vote NO.<\/span><\/h4>\n<p>This measure would expand the voucher program that takes money away from public schools to fund vouchers that subsidize sending kids to private schools.<\/p>\n<ul style=\"margin-left: 2em;\">\n<li>Tucson Weekly: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.tucsonweekly.com\/tucson\/voucher-showdown\/Content?oid=20506388\">Voucher Showdown: Approval of Prop 305 would allow more taxpayer money to go to Arizona\u2019s private schools<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Tucson.com: <a href=\"https:\/\/tucson.com\/news\/local\/arizona-schools-chief-candidates-debate-vouchers-charters-oversight-and-more\/article_214d8f96-dd73-546b-9a01-1b269b505e3e.html\">The two contenders for state schools chief found one key agreement in a debate Thursday: Both oppose Proposition 305<\/a><\/li>\n<li>TucsonLocalMedia.com: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.tucsonlocalmedia.com\/news\/article_6037f7b6-89f0-11e8-8347-d338ac450146.html\">Voters to decide on school voucher program expansion in November<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4>Prop. 306: Modify Citizens Clean Elections Commission. <span style=\"color: red;\">Vote NO.<\/span><\/h4>\n<p>This measure would undermine the independence of the citizen-created Clean Elections Commission and bar candidates funded by the commission from purchasing goods and services from their own parties.<\/p>\n<ul style=\"margin-left: 2em;\">\n<li>AZ Capitol Times: <a href=\"https:\/\/azcapitoltimes.com\/news\/2018\/09\/21\/arizona-prop-306-foe-warns-of-trojan-horse-to-undermine-clean-elections\/\">Prop 306 foe warns of \u2018Trojan horse\u2019 to undermine Clean Elections<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Tucson.com: <a href=\"https:\/\/tucson.com\/news\/local\/prop-will-allow-governor-s-review-of-bipartisan-clean-elections\/article_fa113fb4-4089-5659-8285-62d282ac87b1.html\">Prop. 306 will allow governor&#8217;s review of bipartisan clean-elections rules<\/a><\/li>\n<li>KJZZ: <a href=\"https:\/\/kjzz.org\/content\/665684\/arizona-citizens-clean-elections-commission-director-proposition-306-too-vague\">Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission Director: Proposition 306 Too Vague<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4>Prop. 407: Tucson Parks + Connections Bond. <span style=\"color: green;\">Vote YES.<\/span><\/h4>\n<p>This measure would fund numerous improvements to Tucson parks and paths without raising tax rates because new bonds would only be issued as old bonds are retired.<\/p>\n<ul style=\"margin-left: 2em;\">\n<li>City of Tucson: <a href=\"https:\/\/cotgis.maps.arcgis.com\/apps\/MapJournal\/index.html?appid=1ecc433d37e141e198ab9301bdc1a736\">Details of park and path improvements<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Tucson.com: <a href=\"https:\/\/tucson.com\/news\/local\/tucson-s-m-bond-package-for-parks-and-trails-faces\/article_7f393166-fe5c-55a9-8ed2-9cdecb8f4072.html\">Tucson&#8217;s $225M bond package for parks and trails faces no formal opposition<\/a><\/li>\n<li>KGUN 9: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.kgun9.com\/news\/local-news\/prop-407-s-225-million-bond-that-will-not-raise-taxes\">Prop 407&#8217;s $225 million bond, that will not raise taxes<\/a><\/li>\n<li>KOLD 13: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.tucsonnewsnow.com\/2018\/09\/19\/prop-neighbors-hope-support-their-local-parks-november\/\">Prop 407: Neighbors hope for support at their local parks in November<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4>Prop. 408: Even Year Elections for City of Tucson. <span style=\"color: red;\">Vote NO.<\/span><\/h4>\n<p>This measure, put on the ballot by the Republican dominated Arizona Legislature, would force the City of Tucson to hold its municipal elections on even years.<\/p>\n<h4>Prop. 463: Fix Pima County Roads Bond. <span style=\"color: green;\">Vote YES.<\/span><\/h4>\n<p>This measure would authorize the sale of bonds to fund much needed repairs to Pima County roads. This measure would not raise tax rates because bonds will only be sold as existing bonds are retired.<\/p>\n<ul style=\"margin-left: 2em;\">\n<li>Tucson Weekly: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.tucsonweekly.com\/tucson\/hell-yes-on-prop-463\/Content?oid=20506800\">Hell Yes on Prop. 463<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Tucson.com: <a href=\"https:\/\/tucson.com\/news\/local\/prop-would-put-m-into-pima-county-roads-but-wouldn\/article_0f761c6d-9f63-5687-a143-ecac3b2d845f.html\">Prop.463 would put $430M into Pima County roads, but wouldn&#8217;t fix everything<br \/>\n<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Inside Tucson Business: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.insidetucsonbusiness.com\/business_chatter\/prop-is-pima-county-s-solution-to-road-condition-woes\/article_ddec202e-b786-11e8-a1ac-efc22a9a8b2c.html\">Prop. 463 is Pima County\u2019s solution to road condition woes<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>How to Vote on the 2018 Ballot Measures Prop. 125: Changes to public employees retirement system. Vote YES. Proposition 125 is a ballot measure directly from the Arizona legislature, supported by all Democratic state legislators, to provide greater latitude for keeping specific public retirement pensions solvent. Prop. 126: Ban future taxes on services. Vote NO. &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/index.php\/ballot-measures\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Ballot Measures&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-739","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/739","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=739"}],"version-history":[{"count":23,"href":"https:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/739\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":763,"href":"https:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/739\/revisions\/763"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/tanqueverdedems.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=739"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}