For status updates, visit lucyburns.org.
Ballotpedia's coverage of elections held on March 3, 2015, was limited. Select races were covered live, and all results will be added once the merger is complete.
Arizona Municipal Debt, Proposition 104 (2006)
|Voting on Transportation|
|Not on ballot|
|1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 6.1 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 • 11 • 12 • 13 • 14 • 15 • 16 • 17 • 18 • 19 • 20 • 21 • 22 • 25 • 26 • 27 • 28 • 29 • 30|
The proposal allowed incorporated cities and towns to include debt for the acquisition and development of public safety, law enforcement, fire and emergency facilities.
- Election results from Arizona Elections Department.
Text of measure
The language that appeared on the ballot was:
The Arizona Constitution limits the amount of debt that counties, cities, towns, school districts and other municipal corporations may incur to 6% of the value of the taxable property in the political subdivision unless qualified electors in the political subdivision approve additional indebtedness of up to 15%. In addition, the Constitution permits incorporated cities and towns, with the approval of qualified electors, to incur debt up to 20% of the value of taxable property in the city or town to supply water, light and sewers and to acquire land for parks and preserves.
Proposition 104 would amend the Arizona Constitution to allow incorporated cities and towns to include debt for the acquisition and development of public safety, law enforcement, fire and emergency facilities and streets and transportation facilities in the 20% debt limit, upon voter approval.
John Nelson, State Representative, District 12, Litchfield Park wrote the following
Before 104 was placed on the ballot, it was passed as legislation with a bi-partisan majority of the Arizona Senate and House of Representatives. I introduced this legislation in response to the growing critical needs of both rural and metropolitan communities throughout Arizona.
Public works projects fall into two distinct categories within the Arizona Constitution for purposes of bonding - 6% and a 20% category of assessed valuation of a city or town. 104 does only one thing - it shifts streets and public safety projects out of the 6% and into the existing 20% category. That is all 104 does. 104 simply recognizes that the world has changed dramatically over the last century by matching today's needs for roadways and public safety facilities with a more modern and sound fiscal approach to how we finance them.
104 does not raise taxes, nor does it change the debt limits that cities and towns are currently restricted to under the Arizona Constitution. Voter authorization is still required before bonds can be issued by a community to meet local needs. 104 merely allows for better utilization of the constitutional bonding capacity that already exists.
104 provides a no-cost, no-tax solution to modernizing our state's constitution, while preserving the fiscal limits that were put in place when our state's constitution was ratified nearly a century ago.Please join me in voting yes for more and improved streets and for giving our state's police and fire personnel the best opportunity to protect our public's safety.
The Secretary of State's office did not receive any arguments "against" Proposition 104.
- Arizona State Senate
- Arizona House of Representatives
- Arizona 2006 ballot measures
- 2006 ballot measures
- Arizona Secretary of State, 2006 Ballot Propositions & Judicial Performance Review Proposition 104
- Vote totals for Prop 104
- National Conference of State Legislatures Ballot Measures Database
- Arizona 2006 election results
- Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributed to the original source.
State of Arizona
|State executive officers||
Governor | Attorney General | Secretary of State | Treasurer | Superintendent of Public Instruction | Director of Insurance | Director of Agriculture | Commissioner of Lands | Director of Labor | Chairman of Corporation Commission | State Mine Inspector |