By admin 
Arizona voters were fed up with homeless encampments, illegal drug use and public urination. other states.
The ballot measure, Proposition 312, passed with overwhelming support: 58.4 percent to 41.6 percent, with 68 percent of the vote so far. It would allow property owners to apply for property tax refunds if a city or local government fails to enforce ordinances regarding “illegal camping, loitering, obstructing public rights of way, panhandling, public urination or defecation, public consumption of alcoholic beverages, and possession or use of illegal substances.”
The reform effort, first drafted by a public policy think tank called the Goldwater Institute, could be used as a model in the future in other states where business owners and residents have been frustrated by the damage to their property from homeless encampments and open drug use.
“The homeless problem. It’s not just in Arizona, it’s out of control in California and Washington, even Texas,” Jenna Bentley, director of government affairs at the Goldwater Institute, told the Sun. She says that while this proposal was designed as an “Arizona solution to an Arizona problem,” the institute wants to help other states adopt similar efforts. “We’re working at the national level, not just in Arizona, and if we have good ideas that work and that are supported by voters, then yes, I think you can certainly expect Goldwater to help other states pass these kinds of good reforms.” to feed. .”
Because the Arizona ballot measure passed with “overwhelming support” in a “purple state” with a Democratic governor, Ms. Bentley says that “shows that these types of measures really have bipartisan support.”
As the country faces record high homelessness rates, the topic has been a hot topic nationwide, even reaching the Supreme Court earlier this year when the justices ruled that cities can enforce public camping bans even if there are no available shelter beds.
Homelessness became a major problem in Phoenix when the city became embroiled in a months-long legal dispute over a sprawling downtown homeless encampment called “the Zone”, where more than 1,000 homeless people once lived. Last year, a court ordered the city to vacate the area, but homelessness is still a major problem in the city and the state as a whole.
The sweeping passage of Proposition 312 “shows that Arizona taxpayers have had enough of the city’s inaction,” Ms. Bentley said. “I think the homeless problem is something that is not unique to our urban areas. It is spreading to some of our more rural districts.”
To qualify for reimbursement under the measure, a property owner must submit documented mitigation costs to the state’s Department of Revenue. The refund would be limited to the amount the property owner paid in property taxes in the previous tax year.
A couple who supported the measure, Joe and Debbie Faillace, owned a sandwich shop near “the Zone” in downtown Phoenix but felt they had to sell it because of the homelessness crisis.
“We had no idea what to expect when we drove to work every morning,” the couple told Goldwater. When they arrived, they found their store “burgled and vandalized, people fainting or overdosing on our patio, urine and feces scattered across our parking lot and entryway.” The pair said they hope the new ballot measure will prevent similar situations, but that if it does happen, “the government will have to compensate small businesses like ours for not protecting our rights.”
Groups opposed to the ballot measure, such as the Arizona Housing Coalition, warned it would strain local budgets and mean less money available for public safety services.
“Cities like Phoenix are already struggling to meet the growing needs of their communities,” the group said in a statement. “Rather than focusing on ways to prevent homelessness and improve public safety, Proposition 312 would force them to spend money on refunds, eliminating efforts that could reduce the need for these cleanups in the first place. ”
That suggestion is “categorically untrue,” Ms. Bentley said in response. The state already spends an “astronomical” amount on homelessness, she said, and the property tax refunds would come from a “completely separate pot” of funding.
The Common Sense Institute estimates that statewide spending on homeless services amounts to approximately $933 million to $1.1 billion annually for the approximately 14,000 homeless people living in the state.
“This means that Arizona, through various government and nonprofit organizations, spends between 88% and 284% of the average annual rent for a home or apartment in the Greater Phoenix area on each homeless person,” the institute notes. “Despite this substantial financial commitment, the homeless population has not only not decreased over the past decade, but has actually increased in size.”
Homeless services have become a “growing industry” with 167 nonprofits and public groups working directly to combat homelessness, the institute notes, and there are up to 51,000 employees and volunteers dedicated to addressing homelessness – many more than the homeless themselves.
“I think there are a lot of questions that need to be asked,” Ms. Bentley said. “Cities have enormous amounts of money, they have enormous budgets to address this problem, and we’re not really seeing much return on that investment.”