The Arizona Housing Coalition stands in opposition to Proposition 312. 

We strongly believe that Proposition 312 is not the right solution to addressing homelessness and could, in fact, exacerbate the very problems it aims to address. Proponents of Proposition 312 argue that the measure will hold cities accountable and improve neighborhood safety by leveraging property tax reductions. However, this approach is fundamentally flawed for several reasons.

MISALIGNMENT OF INCENTIVES

Proposition 312 does not offer a targeted solutions to address the root causes of homelessness or improve public safety. Instead, it implements a blanket reduction in local government funding, regardless of a city's specific challenges or efforts to bolster safety or reduce homelessness. This one-size-fits-all approach is likely to reduce essential services, making it harder for cities to manage complex issues like homelessness and public safety effectively.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

Reducing local government revenue through Proposition 312 could have severe unintended consequences. Cities may be forced to cut spending for critical services, including emergency response, mental health support, and affordable housing initiatives. These cuts could lead to an increase in homelessness, crime, and public health hazards - worsening the very issues the measure claims to address.

erosion of local control

Proposition 312 undermines local governments' ability to respond to community-specific needs by imposing state-mandated funding cuts. Local leaders, those best positioned to understand and address their communities' unique challenges, would have fewer resources to do so. This could hinder efforts to develop long-term, sustainable solutions to homelessness and public safety concerns.  

SHORT-TERM VS. LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS

The measure's focus on punitive funding cuts may encourage cities to adopt short-term, reactionary measures rather than investing in long-term strategies that address the root causes of homelessness and community safety issues. Effective solutions require comprehensive approaches, including expanding affordable housing, improving mental health services, and enhancing law enforcement resources.

COMMUNITY IMPACT

Proposition 312 could effectively shift the financial burden of addressing homelessness and public safety concerns onto residents and businesses, who may then be forced to bear the costs of diminished public services while still paying taxes. The administrative burden created by determining, valuing, and processing property tax refunds would be costly and inefficient. Proposition 312 would create a situation where citizens are paying more for less, further straining community resources and eroding public trust in local government.

Proposition 312 is not the solution.

While the challenges faced by communities like Phoenix and Tucson are real, Proposition 312 is not the solution. It risks reducing essential services, exacerbating homelessness, and undermining public safety. We urge voters to reject Proposition 312 and instead support comprehensive, well-funded strategies that address these issues effectively and sustainably.