12/22/2009 9:53:00 PM 2009 IN REVIEW: #10 (tie) - Prescott voters vote firmly for Taxpayer Protection Initiative #10 (tie) STORY OF THE YEAR
Les Stukenberg/ The Daily Courier On Aug. 31, Prescott residents, Ed Nicholson among them, spoke out at a Prescott City Council special session regarding the then-proposed Taxpayer Protection Initiative City Charter Amendment.
PRESCOTT - As the expenses for the Big Chino Water Ranch project topped the $35 million mark in 2009, Prescott voters opted for a new level of oversight on it and similarly sized projects.
By an overwhelming margin in November, voters approved the Taxpayer Protection Initiative - a measure that requires most projects totaling $40 million or more to go to a public vote.
Members of the committee acknowledged early on that the Big Chino project was a major focus for the measure, even though the initiative language applies to a variety of projects.
City officials long estimated the Big Chino project at a cost of $170 million, but later reduced the total by about $35 million, because they said a related intermediate pump station was necessary regardless of whether the Big Chino pipeline became reality.
Either way, the project far exceeds the $40 million threshold in the Taxpayer Protection Initiative. So far, Prescott and its pipeline partner Prescott Valley have spent more than $35 million on the project.
As 2009 closes, however, representatives for the initiative and for the city were unable to predict how the measure would play out in the coming year.
Soon after the Nov. 3 general election, members of the Taxpayer Protection Committee met with Prescott City Attorney Gary Kidd to discuss the details of implementation of the initiative. Taxpayer Protection Committee Treasurer John Danforth said the initiative proponents were "very positive about the staff's views" at the time of the initial meeting.
Committee Chairman Brad DeVries had a similar view of the preliminary discussion. "My sense is that the Taxpayer Protection Initiative passed, and the city fully intends to abide by it," he said.
Even so, DeVries said the two sides had yet to get into a detailed discussion of "what would be covered and what wouldn't."
Then, later in November, Kidd suffered a heart attack and was out of the office for much of the past month, which put the matter temporarily on hold.
"The unfortunate illness of the city attorney slowed that process," Danforth said this week.
Although Kidd is now back at work on a limited basis, his department has not yet resumed its discussions with the Taxpayer Protection Initiative group.
City Manager Steve Norwood agreed that progress on the initiative largely has been on hold.
"With Gary out for the last month, it's been difficult," Norwood said this past week.
While noting that "We know what the intent is - I think that's pretty clear," Norwood added that the initiative "is vague in certain areas."
For instance, he said questions remain about how the initiative would affect phased projects, such as the $88 million in needs that the city has identified at its wastewater treatment plants.
Norwood said he expects Kidd to release a legal opinion in January about the city's position on the initiative implementation.
Meanwhile, the initiative already has raised questions about Big Chino-related city actions.
In November, the Prescott City Council postponed a decision on buying three new right-of-way easements for the 30-mile pipeline that Prescott and Prescott Valley plan to build from the Paulden-area Big Chino Water Ranch.
DeVries said the Big Chino question should go to the voters "before the city makes any substantial moves to put major work and money into the pipeline - certainly before the construction phase."
The Taxpayer Protection Initiative generated controversy almost from the time advocates took out petitions in April.
For instance, a question arose in June about the number of signatures the petition's circulators needed to gather to get the measure on the ballot. City Clerk Elizabeth Burke initially said the initiative would need just more than 2,000 signatures, but a later interpretation by Kidd put the figure at closer to 3,400 signatures.
While the City Council ultimately agreed that the city should stick with its initial instructions to the committee, some officials continued to have concerns through late summer about a conflict between the state statute's signature requirements, and those of the state Constitution.
Controversy came up again in August over a telephone poll that the Central Arizona Partnership conducted concerning the initiative. While initiative proponents maintained that the survey was a "push poll," which tried to influence the outcome of the vote, the Partnership said it was merely a tool to gauge the community's views.
Despite the level of controversy, neither opponents nor proponents expressed surprise on election night at the overwhelming voter approval of the initiative.
Posted: Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Article comment by:
Just sick of it
Now we begin to see how the Government (Council and its lap dog Attorney) are going to try the end run around our voting rights. The previous Mayor blatantly stated that there were ways around this initiative. So get ready folks for Kidd's interpretation to be against it and the City will spend Hugh amounts of our money and thumb their noses at us. Does anybody see the word RECALL and FIRE THE BUM'S on the horizon?
Posted: Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Article comment by:
Sam
Good work Prescott ! Any water piped in would only go for P.V. Development like the proposed 5,000 inmate prison. and other Land Baron schemes. P.V. is a solid lock step bloc behind the Cowboy Mafia.
