July 11, 2019
By Jon Riches
Although Arizona state law wisely prohibits the use of
taxpayer resources for electioneering and other political activities, Valley
Metro appears to be using public resources to influence the outcome of Phoenix
Proposition 105, a voter-led ballot measure that would
prohibit the expansion of light rail and redirect revenues to other
transportation requirements.
That’s why today, the
Goldwater Institute is challenging Valley Metro’s apparent use of taxpayer
resources. In a letter sent to Valley Metro, the Institute has asked Valley
Metro to stop using its personnel and resources on influencing the outcome of
the proposition.
Valley Metro is a
regional transit system providing public transit in Phoenix and its surrounding
areas, and it also operates light rail with a companion organization called
Valley Metro Rail, Inc. Since its inception over 10 years ago, light rail in
Phoenix has been controversial, as residents and taxpayers have wondered whether
the city needs a very limited and extraordinary costly rail system at all, since Phoenix is dominated by
suburbs, sprawl, and automobile commuters. These criticisms have grown
particularly prescient as ride-sharing (and soon-to-be-common autonomous vehicles)
have grown in popularity and shrunk in cost.
Criticisms of the
light rail increased and took on heightened urgency as city leaders approved an
expansion of the light rail into south Phoenix, which would shrink Central
Avenue to two lanes, hurting businesses in the corridor and increasing traffic
congestion in an already congested area. These and other concerns led city
residents to organize an opposition group that submitted more than 40,000 signatures
to put Proposition 105 before voters in August. If approved, Prop 105 would
stop light rail expansion and redirect transportation revenues to other
areas.
Valley Metro, of course, has a vested financial interest in
the continued expansion of light rail. As such, many at Valley Metro and its member
cities would likely prefer to see Proposition 105 defeated.
Fortunately, under Arizona law, public resources can never
be used to advance whatever preferences Valley Metro or its leadership may have
on an election question before voters. Arizona’s prohibitions on using public
resources to influence an election extend to the state, counties, cities, and
school boards.
State statute also broadly prohibits money in the Public
Transportation Fund (“Fund”) from being “spent to promote or advocate a position, alternative
or outcome of an election, to influence public
opinion…with respect to an election regarding taxes or other sources of revenue
for the fund…” Valley Metro receives a major share of its budget from the Fund.
Valley Metro Rail also receives significant funding from the Fund as well as
contributions from taxpayers of member cities, including Chandler, Glendale, Mesa,
Phoenix, and Tempe.
Thus, money allocated to Valley Metro, including to pay
staff salaries and maintain Valley Metro’s website would fall within these
statutory prohibitions against electioneering.
Despite these prohibitions, it appears that Valley Metro’s Chief Executive Officer, Scott Smith, has spoken at
several public events during which he attempted to influence public opinion
regarding Proposition 105. Valley Metro’s official website also contains a
“Just the Facts” page, which characterizes Proposition 105 in a negative light
and gives editorial reasons as to why the measure should be
defeated.
It is, of
course, axiomatic that as a public policy matter, taxpayer resources should not
be spent to influence the outcome of an election. In Arizona, that also happens
to be the law. Whatever the views of Valley Metro and its employees on
Proposition 105, or any other election question, those views should not be
advanced using official resources. This is particularly true when this
particular ballot question involves sources of revenue that would impact
Valley Metro’s operations.
Arizona is a state in which publicly financed officials charged with administering the law don’t get to use taxpayer resources to impose their views on what that law should be. Any attempt by Valley Metro to use taxpayer resources to influence public opinion regarding Proposition 105 should stop immediately. Voters, not publicly financed officials with a vested financial interest, should determine the outcome of Proposition 105.
You can read the full letter to Valley Metro here.
Jon Riches
is the Director of National Litigation at the Goldwater Institute.
