The Big Mo’
Momentum. That’s what we’ve got! Thanks to the overwhelming support we are receiving from you and other politically passionate Tucsonans, last week we blew past our goal of 200 contributions from City residents to officially qualify for Clean Elections matching funds. We’re now nearing 300 amounting to more than $10,000 after a hugely successful fundraiser at Hotel Congress last night. THANK YOU!!!
Back when Fred Ronstadt believed in clean elections (he’s running dirty this year!), it took him until the last week of October to get his 200 contributions!
But this is no time to rest. Now we’ve got to gather $30,000 more to reach our maximum contribution limits and give Fred a run for his money this November. While that sounds like a lot, all we really need is 100 individuals to commit to convince 10 friends to give $30 each. And we are done!
It’s just like a PBS Pledge Break–we reach our goal and I get to stop asking for money, and focus on the issues all the time. Wouldn’t that be nice for all of us?
So please download our online contribution form in JPEG or PDF format, print ten copies, and get your friends to write those checks. And let my dedicated campaign manager know you are doing this by emailing Lorena@FriendsOFarley.com
May 18th, 2005 at 8:04 pm
Steve,
What’s your take on the new ‘public information’ ads by SAHBA purporting that a new study shows that new home construction more than pays its way with new tax revenue without any new impact fees? http://www.sahba.org/Impact%20Fees.htm
May 19th, 2005 at 10:28 am
It’s the typical number juggling we’ve come to expect from an industry bent on maximizing profits for out-of-state interests. You’ll note on their own page, their “data” for the “City of Tucson” is actually data from the Tucson Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), which includes all homebuilding in the whole area, including Marana, Sahuarita, and Oro Valley, all of whom have higher impact fees, plus a construction contracting sales tax. It would be a safe bet that even with their skewed and self-serving methodology, that the City of Tucson is losing big money with each new home built within city limits, thanks to our tardy and scrawny impact fees and lack of other growth-recovery financial instruments.
Perhaps this effort is really SAHBA calling for higher taxes & fees on growth in the City of Tucson, to catch up with the other regional municipalities?
May 19th, 2005 at 6:32 pm
Will you commmit to increase Tucson city construction taxes and/or impact fees to ensure that construction in Tucson is, at minimum, revenue neutral? Second, will you work with nearby municipalities and the county to ensure that the impact of new construction in the greater tucson metro area does not result in additional tax burdens on Tucson taxpayers?
May 20th, 2005 at 8:44 am
1) yes (within legal limits–see below); 2) yes. That’s part of why I am running in the first place. The reason our budget is always in crisis is because we are not recovering the cost of growth from those who benefit from it. I will be increasing impact fees to appropriate levels, and I will be rescinding Fred’s six-year delay of commercial impact fees. Unfortunately, the City Charter requires a vote of the people to raise construction contracting sales taxes, so that is much harder. We tried that through our transit initiative that went to voters in 2003, but SAHBA and their friends wrote the big checks to knock that down. I will be working with neighboring municipalities and the county–at this point the city is the problem child, the entity that has been afraid to stand up for its own taxpayers by instituting fees where needed to get the cost of growth off our backs.