• Argument Against Question 1
• Argument Against Question 2
• Argument Against Question 3
• Argument Against Question 4
• Argument Against Question 5

Argument Against Question 1

VOTE “NO” ON ALL BOND QUESTIONS!

The Pima County Libertarian Party urges you to vote “no” on all of these bond questions.

BONDS ARE TAXES
The geniuses in Pima County government who want you to support their political debts to various interest groups want you to think that there is some magical being called the “bond fairy” who will cover the costs of these expensive projects. Bonds are paid off through tax revenues, and therefore a new bond package is the same as a tax increase.

BONDS INDEBT OUR FUTURE GENERATIONS
Would you borrow money that you had no intention of repaying but rather willfully intended for your children and grandchildren to repay? Of course you wouldn't; doing so would be a crime against your children and grandchildren. But supporting public bonds is no different, except that Pima County will saddle future generations with an obscene debt.

QUESTION ONE IS PURPOSEFULLY WASTEFUL
Libertarians have nothing against protecting open spaces; but we ask the important question of who should be responsible for that protection. Government wants you to think that you need government to protect these lands, because it further solidifies its power over the people. But individuals working together are competent to buy undeveloped lands, hold them in trust and place conditions on the lands so that future generations will be unable to develop those lands as well. As for land around Davis-Monthan, let individuals decide whether they want to live near the base and let the market determine what the price of that land should be. The county has no legitimacy in buying up those lands.

Signed,
PIMA COUNTY LIBERTARIAN PARTY
David Euchner, Chairman
Jason Auvenshine, First Vice-Chairman
Sandra Abbey, Second Vice-Chairwoman
Sally Milo, Secretary
Rick LaPoint, Treasurer

Argument Against Question 2

VOTE “NO” ON ALL BOND QUESTIONS!

For general information regarding our opposition to bonds as a method of financing government, see our opposition argument to Question 1.

PRIVATE SECTOR SOLUTIONS ARE NEEDED
Pima citizens know that government bureaucracy is the last thing we need in our health care, artistic displays, and neighborhoods; but that is just what this debt would allow. Pima County residents need to be aware that this request reverses the direction that the Board of Supervisors has taken in the past in seeking out private enterprise partnership solutions for the county's perceived social service and recreational needs. The relaxation of zoning restrictions and other bureaucratic obstacles to opening small businesses and other enterprises within the County would do far more to serve the needs of the residents of Pima County than would an investment in a taxpayer-funded bureaucratic building spree.

POOR INVESTMENT STRATEGY
On the County's list of “needs” for its citizens are brick-and-mortar capital investments in county-owned facilities - facilities for which there are private sector solutions already in-place, or whose funding, implementation, and operation would be managed with a greater degree of efficiency outside of Pima County's bureaucratic morass.

PORK BARREL POLITICS
Undoubtedly the County will tell us we need to boost Kino; but we expect the voters will see past this façade. Note that this question is full of pork projects for the Supervisors' favorite construction contractors and is light on funding for Kino. Beware, fellow Pima County property owners, as the next homestead you vote by proxy to “acquire” or “condemn” for reasons of “recreation” or “flood-control” may be your own.

Signed,
PIMA COUNTY LIBERTARIAN PARTY
David Euchner, Chairman
Jason Auvenshine, First Vice-Chairman
Sandra Abbey, Second Vice-Chairwoman
Sally Milo, Secretary
Rick LaPoint, Treasurer

Argument Against Question 3

VOTE “NO” ON ALL BOND QUESTIONS!

For general information regarding our opposition to bonds as a method of financing government, see our opposition argument to Question 1.

QUESTION 3 BOND SUPPORTS STATISM
Question 3 goes beyond the bounds of reason; Pima County wants us to spend almost $200 million for no other reason but to fertilize the growth of government. Especially in a recession when private citizens like us must tighten our belts to make ends meet, the Pima County supervisors have the unmitigated gall to demand that the voters pass this bond package. The reality is that the Question 3 bond serves no other purpose but to grease a few more government palms.

QUESTION 3 WILL NOT SERVE THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE
The law enforcement community will no doubt call upon you to support Question 3 because “you're not against the police, are you?” However, law enforcement leaders like Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik and Tucson Police Chief Richard Miranda have all recently gone on record as supporting an overhaul of their priorities. Instead of focusing on murder, rape, child molestation and robbery, our law enforcement leaders now are looking to spend this money on illegal searches of college students hoping to bust an underage drinker, or to put non-violent marijuana smokers in jail. The county can save money on jails by releasing non-violent drug offenders and instead focusing on arresting and convicting violent felons. But as long as the law enforcement community refuses to be reasonable in its priorities, they have no reason to expect us to support an increase to their funding.

Signed,
PIMA COUNTY LIBERTARIAN PARTY
David Euchner, Chairman
Jason Auvenshine, First Vice-Chairman
Sandra Abbey, Second Vice-Chairwoman
Sally Milo, Secretary
Rick LaPoint, Treasurer

Argument Against Question 4

VOTE “NO” ON ALL BOND QUESTIONS!

For general information regarding our opposition to bonds as a method of financing government, see our opposition argument to Question 1.

QUESTION 4 IS MORE WASTEFUL SPENDING
The Pima County Board of Supervisors wants to borrow $100 million for parks, recreation and library acquisition and improvement. This plan is no less of a boondoggle than any of the other bond measures submitted by the county to the voters.

LIBRARIES SHOULD BE PRIVATIZED
The county should not be in the business of renting books and media in the first place; this is a service best performed by private enterprise such as used bookstores. Even those who do not agree with this principle, however, should recognize that the county should be tightening its belt just like the rest of us. It is a grave injustice that government continues to expand even during an anemic economy.

PARKS ALREADY GET TOO MUCH MONEY
The City of Tucson and Pima County already waste too many millions of dollars on parks and recreation services. Libertarians do not oppose parks and recreation, but we stand by the principle that if a service is demanded, then people in the private sector will step forward to meet that demand and supply that service. `Even those who do not agree with this principle, however, should recognize that Tucson and Pima County do not need over $80 million to improve the parks they currently operate. This figure is absurd and would be laughable if not on the ballot subject to majority approval.

Pima County does not need to go further into debt right now, and certainly not for this.

Signed,
PIMA COUNTY LIBERTARIAN PARTY
David Euchner, Chairman
Jason Auvenshine, First Vice-Chairman
Sandra Abbey, Second Vice-Chairwoman
Sally Milo, Secretary
Rick LaPoint, Treasurer

Argument Against Question 5

VOTE “NO” ON ALL BOND QUESTIONS!

For general information regarding our opposition to bonds as a method of financing government, see our opposition argument to Question 1.

FLOOD CONTROL SHOULD NOT BE IN BOND QUESTION
If Pima County was sincere about flood control, the Board of Supervisors would not have included other parks and recreation development in this question but rather would placed those projects within Question 4. Second, flood control apparently is quite low on the Supervisors' priority list, for they once again refused to trim the fat from the county budget and instead consider borrowing more money than they can tax (in other words, “tax me later”) to be the only option. Finally, the areas that get the most flooding seem to be left off this bond package. In particular, Catalina was devastated last year after the Aspen fire and the early rains when Canada del Oro flooded. This is the ultimate proof that this flood control bond package is more about pork barrel than about protecting people's property.

PIMA COUNTY NEEDS TO LEARN FISCAL RESTRAINT
The Pima County Libertarian Party urges you to v1ote NO on all bond questions. Our Pima County Board of Supervisors is not unlike the state legislature in Congress in that it has no concept of fiscal restraint. Now they come to us asking for $582 million (which, including interest, will come to over $2 billion) in bonds, the primary purpose of which is to consolidate and solidify their political power over the people. Send the Supervisors a message; just say no to bonds.

Signed,
PIMA COUNTY LIBERTARIAN PARTY
David Euchner, Chairman
Jason Auvenshine, First Vice-Chairman
Sandra Abbey, Second Vice-Chairwoman
Sally Milo, Secretary
Rick LaPoint, Treasurer