By Steve Christy
The September 21st Pima County Board of Supervisors meeting had several agenda items that will have significant bearing on our Southeast Region, and all of our District 4. The results of the items voted on went from one good to one bad, and one, okay – for now.
First, the Pima County Elections Department, under the auspices of “cost savings” and to “improve the efficiency of administering the election”, recommended to the Board that the number of voter precincts be reduced from 249 to 207 (including combining four Vail voter precincts into just two). Allegedly, by doing so, the county would save some $244,000 in the next election cycle. However, many see this move as an initial attempt to reduce even further voter precincts so voting can easily transition to regional “voting centers” and away from traditional neighborhood voting precincts.
The aggravating trend that we are seeing is the frustration at the length of time it now takes to count and tabulate election results. This is in large part because of the heightened efforts to expand mail-in and early voting processes. Voters like to cast their ballots on election day. Consequently, they receive their ballots early by mail and wait until election day to fill them out and then hand deliver them to any precinct to avoid having to stand in long lines. Then, all of those ballots have to go to the County Recorder’s office for signature verification, which is not performed at the precinct, thus adding to tabulation delays. Additionally, reducing or consolidating precincts would mean more ballots coming into fewer locations, further complicating the timely processing of election results.
Fortunately, my colleagues on the Board agreed with me that the timing for such analysis and change was ill conceived. As I said during the meeting, combining and thus reducing voter precincts, “shakes the confidence of an already shaken confidence level that voters have in the system.” Accordingly, the Board voted unanimously not to approve precinct consolidation.
Second, in a negative move, the Board voted 4-1 to approve the redrawing of the Justice Precincts in Pima County Consolidated Justice Court that effectively dissolves our region’s current Justice Precinct 5, which encompasses much of Vail, Corona de Tucson, and eastern Pima County, by the end of 2022. Obviously, mine was the lone vote not to approve the measure. The reasoning for the JP5 dissolution was varied and complicated. Citing such rationale as a decline in cases and a need to adhere to a number of “redistricting principals”, in my mind did not justify dissolving our JP5, as our region is experiencing the most population growth and construction activity anywhere in Pima County. Further, our Sheriff, recognizing the need and those same growth patterns, just opened a Vail district station to respond quicker to the ever-increasing amount of service calls his department is receiving within our area.
With mid-term elections coming up, unfortunately, there seems to be a taint of politics in this Board decision. One colleague went so far as to say that even though he didn’t know what the Constables actually provide to our county, and he was in favor of eliminating all Constables entirely. And it appears that he may not be alone in his opinion. In January 2023, all matters involving Justice of the Peace and Constable services will be in the jurisdiction of the JP in Green Valley for our area’s residents.
What remains okay for now is the fact that due to the recent resignation of long-time JP5 Constable Margaret Cummings, who served our county with distinction, the Board voted 4-1 to begin the process to fill the vacancy within 60-90 days. We need this position and protection as another layer of law enforcement to remain active as the Board’s dissolution of JP5 will not take effect until December of 2022.
Another chapter in the Differential Water Rates has opened. The City of Tucson recently contracted with Raftelis Financial Consultants for the heretofore never performed “cost-of-service” study to analyze whether the City of Tucson’s imposition of higher water rates for unincorporated Tucson Water customers was justified.
A September 22nd memorandum from County Administrator Huckelberry pretty much sums up the situation succinctly in just two sentences. “A review of this study indicates that the City, through their consultant, has failed to demonstrate an increased cost to providing service in the unincorporated County since they have only selected factors in the analysis that support their case and ignored other that do not.”
Administrator Huckelberry goes on to state, “A review of these combined factors would likely demonstrate that unincorporated County water service costs less than City of Tucson and that unincorporated customers are already significantly subsidizing City residents at existing rates”.
I would encourage the City of Tucson to end this folly by admitting defeat and its making of mistakes. I encourage all unincorporated area residents who are Tucson Water customers to contact Tucson’s Mayor and Council members and let them know just what a folly, chocked full of mistakes, this endeavor has been.
