Prop. 106 has bipartisan support
Advocates believe they’ve overcome opposition’s negative campaign
by Barry Cohen

Supporters of Proposition 106 are confident their bigger and broader coalition will help carry the land‑reform measure to victory next Tuesday.

The measure’s enormous support throughout the state should be reflected in the voter outcome, says Pat Graham, campaign manager for Prop. 106, also known as “Conserving Arizona’s Future.”

Prop. 106 has been endorsed by the mayors of every major municipality in Arizona, including Cave Creek and Scottsdale.

Carefree Vice Mayor Wayne Fulcher also endorses the measure. Other coalition members include Gov. Janet Napolitano, business groups, the Arizona Education Association, and numerous conservation and community groups, among others.

“The fact that we have bi‑partisan support speaks volumes about Prop. 106,” said Graham.

Prop. 106 is one of two competing land‑reform measures that voters will decide upon next week. Competing measure Prop. 105 is supported by developers and cattle ranchers.

Both propositions, if passed, will affect the McDowell Sonoran Preserve in Scottsdale, New River’s Daisy Mountain which borders Anthem, and several areas surrounding Cave Creek, including land near the Spur Cross Ranch Conservation Area, Continental Mountain and Maricopa County’s Cave Creek Regional Park.

Prop. 105 would preserve about 43,000 acres of state trust land. It also could provide protection for an additional 400,000 acres; but in order for that to happen, the state legislature would have to approve protection for each additional parcel.

Prop. 106, which is backed by conservationists, would prevent the State Land Department from auctioning 694,000 acres of undeveloped state trust land to developers. It would also give local authorities the power to limit and control development of undeveloped state land in their communities.

Spencer Kamps, a lobbyist for the Home Builders of Central Arizona, acknowledged that his group’s campaign efforts have been aimed at defeating Prop. 106, not passing Prop. 105.

“We’ve never shied away from the fact that our priority is to defeat Prop. 106 because of the negative consequences it creates for the education community,” said Kamps. “Sure, Prop. 106 has received a lot of endorsements, but there are many people opposed to it as well.”

Graham says Prop. 106 is the only serious land‑reform measure before voters and that Prop. 105 was put on the ballot only to create voter confusion. He points out that if both measures fail to receive more than 50 percent of the vote, residents will be left with the same ineffective laws governing the state land trust.

“Apparently, the opposition would be happy with that outcome because they would continue to profit under the current system,” stated Graham.

Mike Rigney, executive director of Carefree‑based Desert Foothills Land Trust, said he is confident that Prop. 106 will pass, even though opponents have outspent the “Conserving Arizona’s Future” coalition by a wide margin.

“I like to think we got our message out effectively and that Arizona voters are smart and make reasoned decisions,” stated Rigney.

Rigney said he believes residents want to see state land protected and Arizona schools properly funded. “Prop. 106 achieves both,” he said.

Reach the reporter at barry@thedesertadvocate.com.