By L. Anne Newell, Tory Hernandez and Kelly Harshberger
Arizona Daily Wildcat
November 4, 1997

Vote early, vote often

Arizona Daily Wildcat

So you think elections won't affect your life?

Do you drink water, spend money or work for a living?

Today's citywide election has 11 propositions that could affect the university area. Three City Council seats are up for grabs whose boundaries touch surrounding areas.

There is no on campus voting this election day, but registered voters can make their mark at one of 175 polling stations citywide, a City Clerk's office spokesman said, adding that in order to vote:

• One must have registered in Pima County Oct. 6 or before
• Have resided in the county since Oct. 5
• Be at least 18 years old

Residents should check the back of their Voter Registration Cards to find their polling locations.

One final time, here's a quick rundown on what the propositions really say and what they mean:

Unions, Water and Wages

Proposition 200

Proposition 200, sponsored by the Tucson Police Officers Association, would allow police and other city unions to have more leeway in contract negotiations. If passed, the initiative would create a fourth union for city employees.

The proposition would also allow city employees to get involved in partisan city politics during times when they are off-duty, out-of-uniform or during working hours.

Passing Proposition 200 would also give police unions the right to put their contract issues on the ballot if no agreement can be reached with the Tucson City Council about wages, benefits or other issues.

This type of election would cost the city $500,000 to $800,000.

Proposition 201

This proposal would repeal the Water Consumer Protection Act of 1995, which was passed after substandard water was delivered to Tucsonans through the Central Arizona Project, a canal stretching across the state.

CAP water comes from the Colorado River, carrying with it more salt and dissolved solids, plant and animal residue and other contaminants than typical ground water.

The 1995 law requires CAP water to be treated to be the same quality as ground water before it can be pumped to Tucson homes and businesses. Tucson does not have the treatment facilities necessary to bring the CAP water into compliance yet.

Proposition proponents claim the 1995 law puts undue restrictions on Tucson water and is causing overuse of the city's central aquifer.

In place of the CAP/ground water standard, Proposition 201 calls on the City of Tucson to adopt drinking water quality standards equal or greater to state or federal drinking water standards. The city would also be allowed to mix treated CAP and ground water to achieve a reasonable recipe.

Proposition 202

Known as the Livable Wage Initiative, passing Proposition 202 would stipulate that all workers within city limits receive $7 per hour as minimum wage.

The current federal wage is set at $5.15 per hour.

Beginning in May 1998, the minimum wage could rise each year according to the Consumer Price Index, a broad cost-of-living indicator.

Supporters of the bill believe raising the minimum wage would boost the local economy and allow poor working-class people a chance at a better life.

Opponents contend it will drive prices sky-high and force businesses to move operations outside city limits, also effectively eliminating some jobs as employers account for the higher wage.

Charter changes and city council wages

Proposition 100 would amend the wording of the City Charter to allow Tucson to redistrict one year after any U.S. census, which occurs every 10 years. The proposal would also remove some outdated, historical references.

Proposition 101 would take the mayor out of the loop for procurement contracts, which are awarded by the director of procurement under the Tucson Procurement Code. As it stands, the mayor must approve all procurement contracts, which are then countersigned by the city clerk.

Proposition 102 would allow the mayor to vote on the removal and appointment of city managers, city clerks, city attorneys, city magistrates, chiefs of police, fire chiefs, directors of finance, directors of human resources, directors of parks and recreation and civil service commissioners.

The vote necessary for their removal would be changed from 2/3 of the council to a simple majority of the mayor and council.

The proposal would also give the mayor a vote in the declaration of emergency measures and change the required vote to declare an emergency from 5/6 of the council to 5/7 of the mayor and council.

Proposition 103 would allow the city manager to name and remove appointed officers and to fix or modify their salaries so long as the changes remain consistent with the city's compensation plans.

The proposal also calls for eliminating civil service appeal rights that protect several city officers if they are fired.

Proposition 104 approves changes in the procedures used to fill mayor and city council vacancies. It would:

• Allow the mayor to vote if there is a council vacancy.
• Stop the city magistrate from casting the tie-breaking vote if filling for mayoral or council vacancies.

If passed, the Tucson City Council would no longer be required to hold a special meeting to fill vacancies. The 30-day cap on filling a mayoral vacancy would also be lifted.

Proposition 105 would require a charter review committee to be established.

The proposed group would meet every 10th year beginning January 1998 to review the City Charter and file a written report detailing their findings and recommended amendments.

Proposition 106 changes the wording in a section of the Tucson City Charter to eliminate references to crimes based on citizens' social status, such as begging.

No police powers will change in the proposal.

Proposition 107

Here's where government officials pay themselves back for all the good things they do for the community: They give themselves a raise.

This proposal would raise the city council members' salaries to $24,000 a year, up from the current $18,000 annual rate.

The mayor would not receive the benefit of this legislation.