Don’t buy big bags of coal
The estimated cost, including principal and interest, of all seven bond packages is over $1 billion. Also, the county voter info pamphlet states that over one-third of the 98 projects would be operated by non-governmental organizations. In other words, a large percentage of the money would be turned over to dozens of agencies, special interest groups and for-profit and non-profits groups.
The seven bond packages are huge sacks of dirty, smelly coal, each with one or two cherries buried inside. To get the cherry the taxpayers have to swallow tons of coal.
For example, the library prop (Proposition 426) totals $91 million, but only $18 million is for libraries. The rest goes to various agencies for career, regional orientation, culinary corridor, etc.
Every voter should read the list of what is really in the bond packages and realize the dozens of special interest organizations supporting the bonds are many of the same special interest groups who will receive millions of taxpayer dollars.
William Long
Foothills
Projects will make Tucson more livable
Think of your favorite city in the world. Are people walking, biking, playing and socializing in the streets? Inviting open spaces? People on foot? More people than cars?
This is not a utopian community you are imagining, these are the makings of an attractive, livable city.
As a public health graduate student at the UA, I urge Pima County voters to invest in the walkability and open spaces in our community. A walking infrastructure is a wise investment.
On Nov. 3, Pima County voters will be voting on a new set of bond projects — among them, Proposition 428, providing $191.5 million for parks and recreation. Parks increase property value and provide free or low-cost recreation for families.
Proposition 429 will provide $105.3 million for public health, safety, neighborhoods and affordable housing. Pima County’s population is expected to grow by 11 percent over the next decade. Tucson has the makings to be one of the strongest, economically vibrant and livable cities in the U.S.
Gabriela Barillas-Longoria
Downtown
Why I won’t vote for Cunningham, Romero
Re: the Oct. 9 editorial “Cunningham best choice for City Council in Ward 2.”
I consider myself a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat, but neither Paul Cunningham nor Regina Romero will receive my vote in this election.
I am a Ward 2 resident and have made two or three personal visits to Cunningham’s Ward 2 office requesting that a damaged sidewalk near the traffic signal on the south side of Speedway at Prudence Road be repaired. It is a danger to those of us who walk along that section.
Such accolades you rained on Cunningham in your editorial. He certainly does have monumental projects on his agenda. What about a three-foot square section of sidewalk within a quarter-mile of his office?
And as for Romero, she and the rest of the City Council should have allowed the Grand Canyon University project to proceed.
Robert Greene
East side
Revitalize Tucson’s tactic despicable
I just received a robo-call from Revitalize Tucson regarding Paul Cunningham, recalling past behavior and calling him a sexual predator. While some of his behavior in the past has been inappropriate, he has apologized and made amends.
To use the term “sexual predator” is inflammatory and is clearly meant to paint him in the darkest light imaginable.
As a survivor of sexual abuse, I find the intentional use of this term as a political tool to be offensive and reprehensible and it has caused me more pain than they can imagine.
Shame on Revitalize Tucson. This despicable tactic says far more about you than it does about Paul Cunningham.
Lynne Bergman
East side
Require money to be spent as promised
I am undecided on most of the November ballot proposals partly because of Arizona’s propensity for taking already allocated money and spending it on something else. A proposal banning that practice would be great. But if proposals are not binding, why bother?
Bill O’Loughlin
Marana
A vote to preserve the Sonoran Desert
Re: the Oct. 4 article “Prop. 430 would pay for open-space purchases.”
I am writing in support of Proposition 430, which would include the purchase of 20,000 acres for preservation as open space.
Pima County residents are lucky to live in a unique and beautiful natural setting: the occasional bobcat crossing my back yard, the yips of coyotes at dawn, rabbits and quail, hummingbirds and woodpeckers, magnificent wildflowers and blooming cacti, stunning sunsets. The Sonoran Desert amazes and astounds.
We have unbelievable opportunities for recreation, and tourists come here to share in our great good fortune.
But in order for the wildlife and vegetation to survive, much less thrive, open space is needed. The continual encroachment of development threats our landscape.
Let’s join together to invest in ourselves, our community and our precious quality of life. Please vote yes on Prop. 430.
Ivy Schwartz
West side
