Arizona School District Debt Amendment, Proposition 106 (1992)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 15:47, 15 May 2013 by PhilH (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
Voting on Education
Education policy
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Arizona Constitution
Flag of Arizona.png

The Arizona School District Debt Amendment, also known as Proposition 106 and Senate Concurrent Resolution 1020, was a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment on the statewide ballot in Arizona, which was defeated in the statewide election on November 3, 1992.

  • This proposed amendment to Article IX, Section 8 raises the debt limit of school districts to 20% of district's taxable property value from 15% previously.[1]

Election results

Arizona Proposition 106 (1992)
Defeatedd No874,16364.47%
Yes 481,854 35.53%

Official results via: State of Arizona Official Canvass

Text of measure

The text of the ballot read:


Senate Concurrent Resolution 1020
A concurrent resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Arizona; amending Article IX, Section 8, Constitution of Arizona; relating to school district debt capacity.


Amending Arizona Constitution to allow common school districts to increase the amount to which they may become indebted with voter approval to a maximum limit of 20 percent from 15 percent of the district's taxable property value.[1][2]

Constitutional changes

Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring:
I. Article IX, section 8, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:
8. Local debt limits: assent of taxpayers
Section 8. (I) No county, city, town, school district, or other municipal corporation shall for any purpose become indebted in any manner to an amount exceeding six per centum of the taxable property in such county, city, town, school district, or other municipal corporation, without the assent of a majority of the property taxpayers, who must also in all respects by qualified electors, therein voting at an election provided by law to be held for that purpose, the value of the taxable property therein to be ascertained by the last assessment for state and county purposes, previous to incurring such indebtedness; except, that in incorporated cities and towns assessments shall be taken from the last assessment for city or town purposes; Provided, that under no circumstances shall any county or school district become indebted to an amount exceeding fifteen per centum of such taxable property, as shown by the last assessment roll thereof, EXCEPT THAT A COMMON SCHOOL DISTRICT MAY BECOME INDEBTED TO AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED TWENTY PER CENT OF SUCH TAXABLE PROPERTY; and provided further, that any incorporated city or town, with such assent, may be allowed to become indebted to a larger amount, but not exceeding twenty per centum additional, for supplying such city or town with water, artificial light, or sewers, when the works for supplying such water, light, or sewers are or shall be owned and controlled by the municipality, and for the acquisition and development by the incorporated city or town of land or interests therein for open space preserves, parks, playgrounds and recreational facilities.
(2) The provisions of section 18, subsections (3), (4), (5) and (6) of this article shall not apply to this section.
2. The Secretary of State shall submit this proposition to the voters at the next general election as provided by Article XXI, Constitution of Arizona.[1]

Note: Deleted language is crossed out, added language is capitalized.

Path to the ballot

Proposition 106 was placed on the ballot by SCR 1020.[1]
Senate votes:

  • Ayes - 24
  • Nays - 6
  • Not Voting - 0

House votes:

  • Ayes - 33
  • Nays - 25
  • Not Voting - 2

Senate concurs in the House amendments and final passage:

  • Ayes - 16
  • Nays - 12
  • Not Voting - 2


Arguments in favor of the amendment include:[1]

  • With an increased debt limit, the school districts can provide better facilities.


Arguments in opposition of the amendment include:[1]

  • School administrators should put existing facilities to better use instead of spending more.

See also

Suggest a link

External links


  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 State of Arizona 1992 Ballot Proposition voting guide
  2. Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributed to the original source.