Many voters have already mailed in their ballots, but thousands more will go to the polls on Tuesday.
To learn more about where you vote and what identification is acceptable at the polling locations, visit:
https://www.recorder.pima.gov/voter_faq_electionday
Here is a roundup of the Star’s endorsements:
Pima County Bonds: Props. 425-431: YES
Pima County voters should approve all seven bond propositions. They represent a wide range of infrastructure, safety and economic development projects.
While some of the 99 projects are more “want” than “need,” each proposition includes, on balance, improvements that are widely beneficial and should be supported. The central jobs of local government — parks, infrastructure and roads — are well represented in the bond program.
Bonding is how local governments pay for large projects, and Pima County has a good record on bond projects, according to the Arizona auditor general.
The seven propositions are not perfect. But they are the result of countless volunteer hours from the Pima County Bond Advisory Committee, whose members culled through hundreds of proposals and requests to come up with the final list.
The bonds are wisely divvied up into packages so voters can choose “yes” on some while saying “no” to others. If all pass, the owner of an owner-occupied home valued by the assessor at $120,693 — the median — would pay about $14 more per year, according to county figures. The exact amount would change in coming years, based on home values and tax rates.
Tucson Prop. 201: red-light cameras: NO
If you live in Tucson, you know our city has a problem with drivers who speed and who run red lights.
The question is what to do about them.
The city’s answer has been to hire a private company to operate red-light cameras at eight intersections and to deploy mobile radar vans. Proposition 201 would ban the cameras.
The way the system is set up is flawed and must be improved, particularly by clearly marking intersections and in reducing ticket fines.
But we believe the cameras deter reckless driving and should remain. When we see a camera or a radar van, we take a look around and at our speedometer. We think about safety. That’s why the cameras have value and why we urge you to vote “no” on Proposition 201.
Prop. 403 Tucson city charter: YES
Prop. 404 Tucson city charter: YES
Prop. 405 Tucson mayor and council pay: NO
Tucson voters will decide three important questions about city government. They sound esoteric, but they’re important.
The Tucson mayor can vote to hire key city administrators, but not to fire them. Voters can fix that by voting “yes” on Prop. 403 to amend the City Charter to give the mayor both powers.
The city’s top administrator — the manager, by title — cannot hire and fire all of the employees who directly report to him. In a convoluted chain of command, some of those decisions now fall to the City Council. You can clean up this mess by voting “yes” on Proposition 404.
The mayor and council are against Proposition 405, which would increase their pay. It would raise the mayor’s salary from $42,000 to $48,360 and council members’ salaries from $24,000 to $27,456. We agree that this is not the time to give pay raises to the bosses. Vote “no.”
TUCSON CITY COUNCIL
and MAYOR:
Mayor: Incumbent Jonathan Rothschild, a Democrat, is running unopposed.
Ward 1: The Star endorses Regina Romero, a Democrat, for a third term. Her Republican opponent, Bill Hunt, is an amiable Raytheon engineer but lacks substantive ideas. Hunt could be valuable on a civic commission or committee. We encourage him to become involved.
Over the past eight years Romero grown into an effective council member who helped do difficult work to cut the general-fund budget and expand development incentives.
Romero has demonstrated mastery of the challenges that face local government. She knows the budget and is realistic about what that means for services the public expects.
Ward 2: The Star endorses Paul Cunningham, a social studies teacher who has matured into a politician who does his homework, for a second term. He is opposed by Kelly Lawton, a Republican newcomer to city politics.
During our editorial board interview Cunningham, a Democrat, displayed an impressive grasp of the insomnia-inducing details of governance and a vision rooted in practical thinking.
There’s no dodging that Cunningham was an embarrassment to the city in the past. A report in 2012 found that he sexually harassed female employees, most publicly on a business trip to San Diego.
He sought treatment for alcoholism, and by his actions in the past three years has earned a second term. He is focused on what is best for Tucson in the long run but also pragmatic.
Ward 4: Republican Margaret Burkholder served 10 years on the Vail Unified School District board before she became a candidate for the Ward 4 City Council seat.
We believe she understands the role of an elected representative and is the best choice for the southeast side job.
Burkholder, a math teacher, spoke at the Star’s editorial board meeting about the importance of setting measurable goals for the city and then making budget and policy decisions to support those outcomes.
An example, she told us, would be to raise Tucson’s median household income to a specific level. The council would benefit from having more members whose decisions on the myriad challenges confronting the city are driven by that sort of thinking.
On the Vail board, Burkholder had a reputation for asking staff tough questions. This trait, in particular, is one that sets her apart from the Democratic incumbent, Shirley Scott.
Scott has served on the City Council for 20 years and is without question dedicated to the betterment of Tucson. We believe, however, that Burkholder will be a more effective voice for taxpayers.
