> Home > Election Information > 2010 Ballot Language

2010 Ballot Language

 
OFFICIAL BALLOT

 

General Provisions for all Bond Questions

 

The following provisions apply to all bonds to be voted on.  Specific information for the authorized purposes is set out in the questions.

  • In addition to each specific authorized purpose, bond proceeds may be used to pay for bond insurance or other credit support for the bonds, all legal, accounting, financial, architectural, design, engineering and construction management costs and all other costs incurred in connection with the issuance of the bonds and the purposes set forth in each question. The City may contract for letters of credit, surety bonds, lines of credit or other credit or liquidity support in connection with any one or more series of bonds.

     

  • The bonds may be issued in one or more series.

     

  •  The bonds may be issued in the denomination of $5,000 each or multiples thereof.

     

  • Interest rates may be fixed or variable but shall not exceed twelve percent(12%) per annum.  Interest may be evidenced by separate certificates and will be paid on July 1 and January 1 or more frequently.

     

  • The bonds, and any bonds issued to refund the City’s bonds, may be sold at prices that include premiums not greater than permitted by law. 

     

  • Bonds will mature over a period not to exceed forty (40) years from their date of issuance.

     

  • Bonds will mature on the days of each year determined by the Mayor and Council.

THE VOTER MAY VOTE “FOR THE BONDS” OR “AGAINST THE BONDS” ON EACH SEPARATE BOND QUESTION.

 



QUESTION 1

 

PURPOSE:  TRANSPORTATION AND DRAINAGE BONDS

AMOUNT:  $36,600,000

 

Shall the City of Scottsdale be authorized to issue and sell not exceeding $36,600,000 principal amount of its bonds to provide funds to plan, design, acquire, construct, reconstruct, improve streets, bridges, culverts, retention basins, drainage and flood improvements related to or impacting transportation corridors, transit parking improvements, multi-use path improvements and other transportation improvements and facilities of the City, including acquisitions of land and rights-of-way necessary for such purposes?

 

Payment of Bonds:  The issuance of these bonds will result in a property tax increase sufficient to pay annual debt service on the bonds. 

 

 

FOR THE BONDS              

AGAINST THE BONDS               

 


 

QUESTION 2

 

PURPOSE:  PUBLIC SAFETY REFINANCING BONDS

AMOUNT:  $27,000,000

 

Shall the City of Scottsdale be authorized to issue and sell not exceeding $27,000,000 principal amount of its bonds to provide funds to refinance, refund or liquidate existing outstanding obligations and indebtedness previously incurred by the City to finance the acquisition and construction of public safety facilities, equipment, technology and communication improvements?

 

 

Payment of Bonds:  The issuance of these bonds will result in a property tax increase sufficient to pay annual debt service on the bonds. 

 

 

FOR THE BONDS              

AGAINST THE BONDS              

 



 PROPOSITION NO. 411


OFFICIAL TITLE

 

SHALL ARTICLE 1, SECTION 3, OF THE CITY CHARTER, RELATING TO THE POWERS OF THE CITY, BE AMENDED TO LIMIT THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE CITY MAY EXERCISE CONDEMNATION?

 

Descriptive Title

 

This proposition specifies that the City may exercise condemnation only if it is authorized by the state, if it is for a public use, if all reasonable options have been exhausted to avoid the use of condemnation, and if its use is narrowly tailored to advance the public use.

 

Effect of amendment: 

 

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of specifying that the City may exercise condemnation only if it is authorized by the state, if it is for a public use, if all reasonable options have been exhausted to avoid the use of condemnation, and if its use is narrowly tailored to advance the public use.

 

A “no” vote shall have the effect of retaining the current charter language, which does not restrict the City’s condemnation power by requiring that condemnation may only be used if all reasonable options have been exhausted and if it is narrowly tailored to advance the public use.


 Yes    

 NO    

 

 

PROPOSITION NO. 412

 

 

OFFICIAL TITLE

 

SHALL ARTICLE 1, SECTION 3, OF THE CITY CHARTER, RELATING TO POWERS OF THE CITY, BE AMENDED TO LIMIT THE USE OF CITY FUNDS FOR SUBSIDIZING ANY INDIVIDUAL, ASSOCIATION, OR CORPORATION, EXCEPT WHERE THERE IS A CLEARLY IDENTIFIED PUBLIC PURPOSE AND THE CITY EITHER RECEIVES DIRECT CONSIDERATION SUBSTANTIALLY EQUAL TO ITS EXPENDITURE OR PROVIDES DIRECT ASSISTANCE TO THOSE IN NEED?

 

Descriptive Title

 

This proposition specifies that the City cannot give its credit or make any payments of any public funds to any individuals or entities unless there is a clearly identified public purpose and the City either receives direct consideration substantially equal to its expenditure or provides direct assistance to the needy.

 

Effect of amendment: 

 

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of expressly stating in the charter that the City is limited from offering subsidies to individuals or entities, except where there is a clearly identified public purpose and the City either receives direct consideration substantially equal to its expenditure or provides direct assistance to those in need.

 

A “no” vote shall have the effect of continuing to require the City to comply with state law limitations on public subsidies to individuals or entities, but will not amend the charter to expressly limit subsidies. 

 Yes    

 NO    

 

 

PROPOSITION NO. 413

 

OFFICIAL TITLE

 

SHALL ARTICLE 2, SECTION 16, OF THE CITY CHARTER, RELATING TO PETITIONS, BE AMENDED TO PROVIDE FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AT REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS; REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT THAT PETITIONS BE ACTED UPON WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS; AND ALLOW THE COUNCIL TO REQUEST STAFF TO REVIEW ANY MATTER BROUGHT TO ITS ATTENTION, ASK THAT THE MATTER BE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR A VOTE, OR TAKE NO ACTION?

 

Descriptive Title

 

This proposition provides for a public comment period at regular council meetings, removes the thirty-day requirement to act on petitions, and allows the council to request staff to review any matter brought to its attention, ask that the matter be placed on a future agenda, or take no action.

 

Effect of amendment: 

 

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of providing for a public comment period at regular council meetings, removing the thirty-day requirement to act on petitions, and allowing the council to request staff to review any matter brought to its attention, ask that the matter be placed on a future agenda, or take no action.

 

A “no” vote shall have the effect of retaining the current charter language, which provides that any citizen may appear before the council at any regular meeting and present a written petition and that such petition shall be acted upon by the council, in the regular course of business, within 30 days.


 Yes    

 NO    

 

 

PROPOSITION NO. 414

 

OFFICIAL TITLE

 

SHALL THE SCOTTSDALE CITY CHARTER, RELATING TO CHARTER OFFICER DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, BE AMENDED TO: (1) REPEAL ARTICLE 2, SECTION 20; ARTICLE 3, SECTIONS 1 THROUGH 5; AND ARTICLE 4, SECTIONS 2 THROUGH 4; DELETE REDUNDANT LANGUAGE IN ARTICLE 4, SECTION 1; AND REPLACE THE SECTIONS WITH A NEW ARTICLE 3, SECTIONS 1 THROUGH 6; (2) AMEND ARTICLE 4, SECTION 1, TO REMOVE THE COUNCIL’S EXPRESS AUTHORITY TO COMBINE, BY ORDINANCE, THE DUTIES OF TWO OR MORE CHARTER OFFICES; (3) DESIGNATE THE CITY TREASURER AS THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE CITY; AND (4) IDENTIFY THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE OFFICERS OF THE CITY AND PLACE THEM IN THE SAME ARTICLE?

 

Descriptive Title

 

This proposition places all sections related to the charter offices in one article; identifies their duties and responsibilities; requires City residency for all officers of the City; identifies the treasurer as the chief financial officer; and removes the council’s express authority to combine the duties of separate charter offices.

 

Effect of amendment: 

 

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of placing all of the sections related to the charter offices in one article; identifying the duties and responsibilities of the charter offices; requiring all officers of the City to establish City residency; designating the city treasurer as the City’s chief financial officer; and removing the council’s express authority to combine the duties of separate charter offices.

 

A “no” vote shall have the effect of retaining the current charter language, which does not place all of the sections related to the charter offices in one article; does not designate the city treasurer as the chief financial officer; does not clarify whether all officers of the City must establish City residency; and gives the council express authority to combine the duties of separate charter offices.


 Yes    

 NO    

 

 

PROPOSITION NO. 415

 

OFFICIAL TITLE

 

SHALL ARTICLE 2, SECTION 17, OF THE CITY CHARTER, RELATING TO APPOINTMENTS, REMOVALS AND INTERACTIONS WITH CITY EMPLOYEES, BE AMENDED TO CLARIFY THAT MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, OR ANY MEMBER OF AN APPOINTED PUBLIC BODY, SHALL NOT CONTROL OR DEMAND THE APPOINTMENT OR REMOVAL OF CITY EMPLOYEES SUBJECT TO THE DIRECTION AND SUPERVISION OF ANY OFFICER OF THE CITY, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CITY EMPLOYEES WHOSE PRIMARY DUTIES ARE TO DIRECTLY SERVE THE MAYOR OR MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL?

 

Descriptive Title

 

This proposition clarifies that council members and appointed public officials shall not control or demand the appointment or removal of city employees subject to the direction and supervision of any city officer, with the exception of city employees whose primary duties are to directly serve the mayor or council.

 

Effect of amendment: 

 

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of clarifying that council members and appointed public officials shall not control or demand the appointment or removal of city employees subject to the direction and supervision of any city officer, with the exception of city employees whose primary duties are to directly serve the mayor or council.

 

A “no” vote shall have the effect of retaining the current charter language, which provides that council members shall not direct or request the appointment or removal of, or give orders to, city employees, and does not include an exception for city employees whose primary duties are to directly serve the mayor or council.


 Yes    

 NO    

 

 
PROPOSITION NO. 416

 

OFFICIAL TITLE

 

SHALL ARTICLE 7, SECTIONS 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 12, AND 13, OF THE CITY CHARTER, RELATING TO ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, BE AMENDED TO: (1) CLARIFY THAT THE COUNCIL SHALL ACT BY MOTION, IN ADDITION TO RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE; (2) DESIGNATE WHICH COUNCIL ACTIONS SHALL BE BY ORDINANCE; (3) CHANGE THE WORD JOURNAL TO RECORD; (4) CLARIFY WHEN A MAJORITY OR LARGER THAN A MAJORITY VOTE IS REQUIRED; (5) REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT TO READ AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCES IN FULL AT A COUNCIL MEETING; (6) CLARIFY THAT ORDINANCES OR ANY OTHER REFERABLE ACTIONS WITHOUT THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE SHALL TAKE EFFECT AND BECOME OPERATIVE THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THEIR PASSAGE; (7) CLARIFY THAT MEASURES HAVING THE EFFECT OF LAW SHALL BE PUBLISHED AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW OR ORDINANCE; (8) CLARIFY PROCEDURES FOR ADOPTING PROVISIONS OF A CODE OR PUBLIC RECORD BY REFERENCE; (9) REDUCE, FROM THREE TO ONE, THE NUMBER OF COPIES OF THE CITY CODE THAT MUST BE KEPT ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE; (10) CLARIFY THAT CODIFIED ORDINANCES SHALL BE REPEALED AS OF THE DATE OF THE CODE AMENDMENTS; AND (11) REMOVE OBSOLETE LANGUAGE?

 

Descriptive Title

 

This proposition clarifies that the council may act by motion, in addition to resolution and ordinance; designates which actions require an ordinance; specifies when a majority vote is required; removes obsolete language; and makes various administrative changes that add clarity to existing language regarding ordinances and resolutions. 

 

Effect of amendment:

 

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of adding language to clarify that the council may act by motion, in addition to resolution and ordinance; designate which actions require an ordinance; specify when a majority vote is required; remove obsolete language; and make various administrative changes that add clarity to existing language regarding ordinances and resolutions.

 

A “no” vote shall have the effect of retaining the current charter language, which does not clarify that the council may act by motion, in addition to resolution and ordinance; designate which actions require an ordinance; specify when a majority vote is required; and retains obsolete language.


 Yes    

 NO    



 
 

PROPOSITION NO. 417

 

OFFICIAL TITLE

 

SHALL ARTICLE 11, SECTIONS 2 AND 3, OF THE CITY CHARTER, RELATING TO THE CITY COURT, BE AMENDED TO:  (1) CLARIFY THAT THE INITIAL TERM OF A PRESIDING JUDGE SHALL BE FOR TWO (2) YEARS, AND THAT  SUBSEQUENT REAPPOINTMENTS OF THE PRESIDING JUDGE SHALL BE FOR TERMS TO BE DETERMINED BY ORDINANCE, BUT IN ANY EVENT FOR NOT LESS THAN TWO YEARS; (2) SPECIFY THAT ADDITIONAL CITY JUDGES AND JUDGES PRO TEMPORE MAY BE APPOINTED TO THE CITY COURT IN A MANNER PROVIDED BY ORDINANCE; AND (3) SPECIFY THAT THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL DETERMINE THE COMPENSATION TO BE PAID TO ALL CITY JUDGES, INCLUDING THE PRESIDING JUDGE, AND MAY REMOVE THEM FOR CAUSE?

 

Descriptive Title

 

This proposition sets the initial term of the presiding judge at two years, with subsequent terms set by ordinance, but not less than two years; permits additional judges to be appointed as provided by ordinance; and designates that the council determines all judges’ compensation and may remove them for cause.

 

Effect of amendment: 

 

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of setting the initial term of the presiding judge at two years, with subsequent terms set by ordinance, but not less than two years; permitting additional judges to be appointed as provided by ordinance; and designating that the council determines all judges’ compensation and may remove them for cause.

 

A “no” vote shall have the effect of retaining the current charter language, which does not include language to allow council, by ordinance, to set subsequent term lengths of presiding judges or to appoint additional judges; and does not designate that the council determines all judges’ compensation and may remove them for cause.


 Yes    

 NO