Phoenix Election Day - Propositions 1 & 2

Preparing for Phoenix Elections – Propositions 1 and 2

Phoenix Elections are  just around the corner, and we want to make sure you’re fully prepared and confident when you step into the voting booth and check those boxes, especially regarding Propositions 1 & 2.

A few changes have been made this Election. This is the first Election where voters do not have to vote at specific polling locations and can choose any of the 26 voting centers to cast their ballot. Another change worth knowing is voting is now open for three days:

Saturday, August 27, 10 a.m. – 4 p.m.
Monday, August 29, 9 a.m. – 6 p.m.
Tuesday, August 30 (Election Day), 6 a.m. – 7 p.m.

Read more about these changes:
Phoenix Election Polling Places: What You Need To Know

For those who didn’t receive their sample ballots in the mail, the following includes information about both Proposition 1 and Proposition 2 — Resolution No. 20963 and Ordinance G-5552, respectively — as well as comments by those who support and those who are against Prop 1 and 2.

Proposition No. 1: Resolution No. 20963

A resolution of the council of the City of Phoenix proposing the continuance of a locally controlled alternative expenditure limitation. This alternative expenditure limitation would set the limit equal to the budget adopted by the City Council.

If this passes:
The City of Phoenix will have a spending limit, continuing local control. The Mayor and City Council can establish a local expenditure limitation.

If it doesn’t pass:
The state-imposed expenditure limitation will go into effect.
“This will result in an estimated $870 million reduction in the fiscal year 2012-13 budgeted expenditures and reduction in or eliminations across all City services.”

Within the sample ballot, no one opposed Proposition 1. However, if you do oppose this prop, please feel free to comment below in our comments section.


“Renewing Home Rule, otherwise known as the alternative expenditure limitation, means that Phoenicians will retain control of their city’s budget, rather than handing those decisions over to the State Legislature. … Without Prop 1, the budget process would not allow for public comment.” — Kate Brophy McGee, Arizona State Representative, District 11

“Failure to pass Proposition 1 will leave us vulnerable and unable to spend our own tax money to serve the needs we experience today.” — Phil Gordon, Mayor Phil Gordon, Phoenix mayor

“Proposition 1 is not a tax increase but allows local residents to continue controlling local spending. … Our residents will be able to spend already available funds for services such as police, fire, parks, libraries, neighborhood services, recycling, potable water and a modern, convenience airport.” — Janice Washington, CPA, Chair of the 2011 Expenditure Limit Task Force

“With the passage of Prop 1, our Mayor and City Council will be required to balance the city budget each year; taxes will not be raised; and Phoenix will be allowed to spend the revenue it currently collects to provide vital city services.” — Sue Thomas, Central Phoenix homeowner

Proposition No. 2: Ordinance G-5552

In short, Prop 2 will rezone an approximately 2.6-acre property located at the southwest corner of 44th Street and Palm Lane from Multiple-Family Residence and Single-Family Residence to Neighborhood Retail. The rezoning permits neighborhood retail use on the property.

If this passes:
Rezoning will be approved, allowing for the addition of a gas station and convenience store (or other development) within the neighborhood.

If it doesn’t pass:
Ordinance No. G-5552 will be repealed.

Within the sample ballot, four people support Prop 2 and nine others are against it.


“In addition to supporting QuikTrip, a ‘yes’ vote will promote economic competition as well as promote a family owned business, which invests locally in our neighborhoods and communities.” — Troy Devos, director of real estate; Gary Mootz, division manager, QuickTrip Corp. – Arizona Division”…allowing market competition and private sector investment, while respecting private property rights, is a win-win for the neighborhood, the city and our state.” — Laura Knaperek, chairman, ORANGE Coalition
“Arizona needs to focus on economic development, small business investment and local job creation.” — Heather Carter, Arizona State Representative, District 7 Heather Carter, Arizona State Representative, District 7
“QuikTrip is a responsible, family owned business, which has been a great community partner and will continue to be an asset to Phoenix and the local community.” — Jason Hasty

Against (listed only five of nine):

“Changing the zoning to commercial violates the trust my neighbors have with the City. It also send a clear signal that if it can happen in this neighborhood, it can happen in any neighborhood.”— Patricia Garcia, neighborhood resident“We don’t need the extra traffic, and we don’t need a liquor store in a residential neighborhood.” — Antonio Garcia, neighborhood resident
“The site sits in the middle of a great neighborhood, and the people living there believe the rezoning hurts their neighborhood, particularly how ingress/egress to the commercial site will harm the neighborhood traffic flow.” — Greg Stanton, former Phoenix City Councilman
“A ‘no’ vote sends a message from all Phoenix residents that neighborhoods are worth protecting. As a shaky economy translates into uncertain property values, unexpected and undesired zoning changes make the situation worse.” — Claude Mattox
“The City of Phoenix has a general plan that sets forth a strategy for quality development that protects neighborhoods while allowing businesses to thrive. This zoning change fails to meet these standards.” — Peggy Neely, former District 2 City Councilmember Peggy Neely, Phoenix mayoral candidate

 Are you ready for the Phoenix Elections?

4 thoughts on “Preparing for Phoenix Elections – Propositions 1 and 2

  1. D. Moore

    Prop 1 “have a spending limit” + “set by city council” = fox to watch henhouse! No ‘new’ tax etc. = Remember Phoenix fairly recent food tax? Politicians always threaten ‘basic services’ and popular goodies (pork / handouts / ‘arts’) to avoid restrictions on free spending. It is not ‘their’ money, it was taken by taxing.

    Prop 2 44th st is a fairly major street, with lots of commercial development already along it, land is currently vacant. Claims about ‘more traffic’ seem weak as does ‘residential neighborhood’ and concern over ‘liquor store’. What would otherwise be built ? cheap apartments? with all their hazard attractions? would the ‘neighborhood’ organize & maintain a community garden on that land instead?

  2. M T

    Proposition 1 is a no-brainer: There is no opposition.

    Proposition 2 directly affects my neighborhood. The current zoning is outdated. 44th Street is a major traffic corridor. My neighbors knew that when they moved here. They’ve been conned by a local business into thinking that development is a bad thing. In reality, Quik Trip would be a great addition to the area.

We apologize, but comments have been closed.