Local opinion: Prop. 425 – Why give Pima County a blank check?

As sure as the fall foliage on Mount Lemmon each year, Pima County property tax statements land in mailboxes and our District 4 office receives a significant number of calls from constituents expressing dismay — and that’s putting it lightly — about the bottom line, and with good reason.

This year, variables of the equation used to calculate the tax amount increased. Assessed property values rose and the primary property tax approved by the Board of Supervisors majority rose, as well.

Now bear in mind there are a number of taxing entities listed on your tax statement that affect your total tax due, but only four are directly controlled by the Board of Supervisors:

• Pima County primary

• County Bonds (debt service)

• Pima County Flood Control

• Library district

Other taxing districts often listed include local fire districts, Pima Community College, TUSD and other school districts, JTED and Central Arizona Water, and the Pima County Treasurer collects and distributes these taxes to those entities.

The impact of a rising primary property tax rate cannot be overstated. Any property value increase set by the County Assessor can be neutralized or even reduced by the Board of Supervisors by lowering the primary rate to offset the rise in value. This is known as being “revenue neutral,” which I advocate for every year, and instead my colleagues on the Board voted to raise the primary rate even higher than the year before.

Why did the primary tax rate “need” to go up? Some might call this “The Year Reality Set In.” The bulk of COVID-era federal legislation and grant funding, such as ARPA, CARES and a host of other social-services funding sent to Pima County, has expired or been expended. However, as is the case with such one-time funding, there is continued demand for those pandemic era and other social-service programs.

My colleagues voted for much of their continuance, and the funding source? Local property tax increases, for projects such as “super-charging” pre-K education and daycare with $10M, as well as almost $9M in taxpayer-funded and subsidized public housing this year.

Which leads me to urge you to vote against Proposition 425.

This proposition claims to address a highly technical and “in the weeds” challenge that dates back to 1980. Simply put, that year, voters passed an amendment to the Arizona State Constitution that installed a spending limit (which is adjusted each year for inflation and population increase) to restrict the growth of government. It was the Arizona version of California’s legendary Prop. 13.

In fact, if Prop. 425 passes, it would revise the 1980 voter-approved base limit by $70M, an addition of more than $610M in 2026 dollars, and raise the spending limit to $1.43B, an amount that then will be adjusted upward each year. To be fair, there could be positive elements in Prop. 425 if it were to pass. The problem comes down, pure and simple, to the spending history and priorities of the current Board of Supervisors.

We cannot risk this amount of taxpayer money being handed to the super-majority of this Board. If there were guardrails in the proposition language to ensure that core county functions, such as infrastructure, road improvements, and public safety needs were funded fully, then passing Prop. 425 would make some sense.

But we have seen from the current Board, time and again, that their priorities lie elsewhere. From the reimagination of the 10-year plan to repair all of our roads to good condition (spoiler alert, not happening) to buying up land and buildings, engaging in costly lawsuits, vilifying businesses and economic development, and forever social-service grants to unaccountable NGO’s. And we hear that if Prop. 425 doesn’t pass, the County won’t be able to spend all of the money it collects. Here’s a radical thought: Why don’t we lower property taxes and collect less?

When evaluating Prop. 425, it’s worthwhile to ask these questions:

– Are we as a region better off, and is our quality of life higher, with the spending priorities of the current Board of Supervisors?

– Can Pima County home and business owners afford this Board of Supervisors?

I think the reasonable answers will be that we must vote no on Proposition 425. The voters got it right in 1980!