I’m telling all my neighbors to vote NO on Props. 418 & 419. I voted NO. RTA Next is a moneymaking plan for big corporations that will build urban sprawl in remote suburbs. See below.
The PAC pushing for the Props is composed of corporate builders, construction companies, developers and engineers that will all profit from passage. The coalition members are:
- ATB — transportation builder.
- AGC — construction association
- ACEC — corporate builder and engineering firm
- SAHBA — homebuilders association
- Cottonwood Properties — real estate development company
- HDR — architects and engineers
- PSOMAS — construction and engineering company
- SUNDT — construction company
- Southern Arizona Leadership Council — led by real estate and construction companies like Holualoa Companies, Psomas, HDR, 4-D Properties, LLP, Hinderaker, Rauh & Weisman real estate law firm, Sundt Construction, Cushman & Wakefield realtors, and Tofel Dent Construction.
• The Daily Star’s extremely hesitant endorsement is actually an argument to vote NO, citing numerous problems with the Props. It said, “The Star is certainly no fan of sprawl and the continued scraping of new square miles of desert to build single-family homes far from the city center.”
• Current and past City, County and Legislative leaders urge a NO vote, including Miranda Schubert, Molly McKasson, Jerry Anderson, Bruce Wheeler, David Yetman, Albert Elias (Former Tucson Assistant City Manager) and Jim Glock (Former head of the Tucson Transportation Department). Read: Former Public Servants Urge NO Vote on RTA Next
• Among the 9 governments on RTA Next, Tucson has only one vote, but must contribute 65% of RTA’s revenue.
• The Props are a rip-off for Tucson residents. The Props won’t fix potholes in Tucson but will create massive sprawl, and not fill empty lots and businesses in the City.
My fellow citizens, don’t vote against yourself. Spread the word to vote NO on Props 418 & 419.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Excellent points, Larry. It’s frustrating to see how these “RTA Next” plans prioritize corporate sprawl over fixing the actual infrastructure in Tucson, especially when former experts like Jim Glock are sounding the alarm. Since the proponents of Props 418 & 419 keep talking about “modernizing infrastructure” as a buzzword, do you think they are ignoring how complex systems—even in digital industries—now favor modular growth over this kind of destructive physical expansion? I was recently reading about scalability and platform architecture at https://igaming-solution.com and it made me wonder if the city could apply similar sustainable “modular” principles to urban planning instead of just handing blank checks to developers for more sprawl. Would love to hear your thoughts on whether a shift in “architectural” logic could be a winning argument for the NO campaign.
What is convincing is the opposition from former City of Tucson Transportation Head Jim Glock, whom we listened to in the initial RTA meetings promoting it back in 2006. Also the fact that City of Tucson planner Albert Elias, now retired is against it too. They must have experienced RTA firsthand enough to know better than to support RTA Next. My neighborhood opposed the first RTA and was able to work diligently to lessen its impact on E. Broadway Blvd. And remember the lawsuit against the first RTA which alleged that the vote had been allegedly “flipped” by a City Dept. of Elections employee, and allegations that the entire Dept. took the 5th Amendment rather than testify to what they knew. Also why has former PAG/RTA E.D. Farhad Moghimi sued for wrongful termination after he was fired last summer?
Kudos, Larry — thanks for being of service on fighting this desert sprawl machine.