Proposition 202, which seemed headed for a sure victory justthree months ago, overwhelmingly lost on Tuesday, with 70% ofvoters statewide rejecting it.

|

The measure would have set growth boundaries around virtuallyevery city in the state, based on 10-year growth projections. Itwould have also put in place a two-year moratorium on constructionwhile the boundaries were drawn. Opponents estimated that it wouldhave cost at least 200,000 jobs in the first two years, most ofthem in the construction industry.

|

"Obviously Proposition 202 is not the solution to our growthconcerns in Arizona," says Spencer Kamps, spokesperson forArizonans for Responsible Planning, which led the opposition.

|

Because the measure would have been the first proposal in theUnited States to set growth boundaries throughout an entire state,it captured the attention and financial support of developers andhome builders across the nation, worried that it would set adangerous precedent. Opponents of the measure spent more than $4million in a media campaign that effectively turned around publicopinion on the issue, which polls had indicated was favored by amajority just weeks ago.

|

A competing growth plan initiated by Gov. Jane Hull also wentdown in defeat. Proposition 100 lost in a close vote, 52% to 48%.The measure won in Maricopa County, home to Phoenix, but lost inPima County, home to Tucson, and in many other rural counties.

|

Proposition 100 would have allowed up to 3% of state trust landto be set aside annually to be protected from development.

|

The Arizona Cardinals' win over the Washington Redskins onSunday may have made the different in Proposition 302's success.The measure, which garnered at last count 51% of the votes, wouldallow a new $330-million stadium to be built for the team. Themeasure appears to have passed, but the absentee ballots have notbeen counted.

|

The Proposition would raise $1.8 billion over 30 years, fundsthat will go toward a new stadium, expanded tourism budget, CactusLeague expansion and youth sports programs. The funds would comefrom higher sales taxes on rental cars and hotel rooms, and about$95 million from the team itself and proceeds from the Fiesta Bowl.Now, backers of the proposal, if finally approved by voters, willhave to decide where to build the stadium, with competing sites inthe East and West Valley and on an Indian reservation.

|

In Coconino County, in northern Arizona, voters soundly rejectedProposition 400, which would have allowed rezoning for CanyonForest Village, a mixed-use development near the Grand Canyon'ssouth rim. The $330-million development would have included a900-room hotel, 240,000 sf of commercial space and 2,500multi-family homes. The project was backed by the National ParkService, just about every environmental group and nearby Indiannations, while business leaders in the nearby cities of Flagstaffand Tusayan fought hard to squash the initiative.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

  • Unlimited access to GlobeSt and other free ALM publications
  • Access to 15 years of GlobeSt archives
  • Your choice of GlobeSt digital newsletters and over 70 others from popular sister publications
  • 1 free article* every 30 days across the ALM subscription network
  • Exclusive discounts on ALM events and publications
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.