A split decision

No ban yet … Technical difficulties … And be careful with your acronyms.

It looks like the Tucson City Council isn’t going to ban sleeping in washes. For now.

The Council rejected a proposal from their own attorney to ban camping in washes on Tuesday night. However, that decision might not hold for long. Due to a technical issue at the meeting, the Council is expected to bring this item back for another vote in two weeks.

The problem was Councilman Richard Fimbres’ video feed wasn’t working during the meeting and staff couldn’t hear him when he cast his vote.

Why is that important? The Council was split 3-to-3.

After the vote, Joe noted many people leaving the meeting chambers believing the controversial ban was dead. They filed out, but it wasn’t apparent until a few minutes later that Fimbres actually had voted.

It’s still unclear whether Fimbres voted for or against the ban, although insiders at City Hall believe he supports the measure. We called his office for comment but didn’t hear back.

To make sure all the council members’ votes are counted, the Council likely will bring the measure back at their next meeting.¹

Councilman Paul Cunningham, who has been extremely active in trying to address the city’s issues with unhoused individuals, was frustrated on Tuesday night that the Council was moving toward a ban.

He said the proposed solution - not letting anyone sleep in washes - was only going to lead to more problems.

"I don't like this at all. I'm gonna tell you why. We don't have anywhere for them to go," Cunningham said. "The second we say you can't stay in the wash, then they're moving to alleys or they're moving into parks, which I don't want."

Cunningham has a dedicated staffer who works on addressing issues for unhoused individuals, his office collects supplies to give to individuals living on the street and they often participate personally in the annual regional homeless count.

Vice Mayor Lane Santa Cruz said the city is putting new restrictions on the most vulnerable in the community, while not increasing resources to unhoused individuals.

“When we were having this discussion last year, part of the reason I wasn't supportive of it is because why are we going to create prohibitions when we aren't also offering solutions,” Santa Cruz said.

Councilman Kevin Dahl was the third to vote against the measure, while Mayor Regina Romero and Councilmembers Karin Uhlich and Nikki Lee reluctantly voted for the ban.

The two-term mayor said the measures, including cracking down on loitering on medians and camping in parks, were a necessary response to Prop 312, which is forcing the Council’s hand. The new voter-approved state law allows residents to sue local governments for damages as a result of unenforced public nuisance laws.

“I have a responsibility to be able to protect the city of Tucson from lawsuits from people that I know are lining up to sue the city of Tucson on this particular issue,” Romero said.

Romero said on Tuesday night that other cities and towns were in the same position of having to make unpopular decisions to shield the city from lawsuits. She suggested that municipalities in Maricopa County were making even more draconian decisions to ward off Prop 312 lawsuits.

A second agenda item also tied to Prop 312 would effectively ban camping in the city’s parks. But it was tabled indefinitely when it was clear - at least at the time - there weren't enough votes to pass the measure.

City Attorney Mike Rankin noted the camping-in-parks measure was tied to the camping-in-washes measure, so there was less urgency to vote on it.

“In light of the fact that it's about making those definitions of camping consistent as between parks and the proposed ordinance with respect to washes, then I don't know that you need to consider it at this time,” Rankin told the Council.

The Council did vote to put new restrictions on medians, making it illegal to stand in the median unless it was in the act of physically crossing the street.

The head of the city’s transportation department, Police Chief Chad Kasmar and retiring Fire Chief Chuck Ryan all suggested on Tuesday night that people standing on medians are responsible for a number of emergency responses — primarily pedestrian accidents.

City officials have tried in the past to ban newspaper hawkers in medians, but court rulings blocked those attempts.

---

We’ll be right there when the Council revisits these bans at their next meeting. After all, there’s nothing we like more than seeing how the sausage gets made.

Balancing act: The Tucson City Council’s debate over making it illegal to sleep in washes came just hours after city staff cleared out 100-Acre Wood, one of the largest homeless encampments in Tucson, KGUN’s Tina Giuliano reports. Dozens of people were relocated to make way for city crews to install a bike park in the area. City officials said they offered temporary shelter to all of them. At the same time, the Council fast-tracked the opening of a 70-bed emergency shelter known as the Amphi Housing Resource Center, the Arizona Luminaria’s Carolina Cuellar reports. It’s a low-barrier shelter, meaning it doesn’t enforce sobriety or other restrictions.

Meanwhile, at the Legislature: State lawmakers are close to passing a bill that would block public funds from being used to pay hotels to house unsheltered people, as well as require hotels to post signs if unsheltered people are staying there, Capitol Media Services’ Howard Fischer reports. The Senate Government Committee approved House Bill 2803 on a party-line vote on Wednesday. Opponents of the bill said it would stigmatize well-meaning hotel owners and the language of the bill was so broad that it could further burden people fleeing natural disasters like the recent wildfires in California. Supporters of the bill said people have the right to know whether they should “keep hotel doors locked,” and hotels aren’t equipped to deal with unsheltered people.

Prop 414 deep dive: Tucson voters rejected Proposition 414 in every precinct, except one, the Tucson Sentinel’s Jim Nintzel and Natalie Robbins report. The only place where voters gave Prop 414 a green light was in Precinct 63 near Country Club Road and Broadway. Even then it was close, with 50.75% approving and 49.25% opposing.

Endorsements incoming: Get ready for a long stream of endorsements in the Tucson City Council races. There are three seats up for grabs and a lot of candidates. Yesterday, Pima County Supervisor Jennifer Allen, who just won her seat in November, endorsed fellow Democrat Miranda Schubert for the Ward 6 seat. Allen and Schubert both advocate for “policies that center working families,” as well as “climate justice, affordable housing, and investment in services and infrastructure,” Schubert’s campaign said in a news release.

Figuring out how it works: Researchers at the University of Arizona are constantly adding to their MAP dashboards to show how Tucson’s economy works. It’s a great resource to understand big, long-running economic trends. This week, they broke down how much of the local economy is tied to manufacturing. It accounted for about 15% of the area’s GDP, which is higher than the national rate. Manufacturing also was tied to 28,300 jobs, or about 7% of local employment, slightly less than the national rate.

There are a number of words you probably shouldn’t say inside Tucson City Hall or for that matter, anywhere else.

If you’re making a list of verbal no-nos, there is one that might not pop up in your head. And it is the most mundane, unoffensive set of words until you use the acronym.

If you refer to the city’s comprehensive annual financial report as a “CAFR” - you will have unintentionally uttered a deeply offensive racial slur that targeted black South Africans during apartheid.

And since accountants aren’t necessarily known for being the saltiest people in the office, the City of Tucson refers to these reports as annual comprehensive financial reports instead.

Other cities and towns have taken the same approach, although we noticed it is still called a CAFR in state statues.

---

Editor’s note: In yesterday’s story about the County’s FEMA grant, the county was awarded roughly $50 million, but it only had reimbursable expenses of about $13 million before closing the two shelters for asylum seekers.

1. A clause in the city’s charter requires that a subsequent vote on the same item must be held at least 24 hours later after the last formal vote.