State Treasurer:Prop 123 a Con Job, If it Fails, will finally pay the correct settlement in Cave Creek v. DeWitt (Phoenix: sale, 2015)

[JGMotorsport64]

"We have the money to solve the lawsuit without raiding the trust fund," DeWit said, pointing to charts showing future surpluses currently expected to top $1 billion by fiscal 2019. He said he plans to ask the judge overseeing the case against the state to adopt his plan after the May 17 vote.
Another Prop. 123 opponent, attorney Tom Ryan, said he plans to ask Attorney General Mark Brnovich to examine whether events at businesses in support of Prop. 123 run afoul of the state's rules against offering inducements to voters.

Arizona Treasurer Jeff DeWit pitches alternatives to Proposition 123

[ajonesaz]

Glad to see at least one of our politicians isn't corrupt. Arizona has the money to fund education, but it sounds like they would rather turn it into their personal slush fund.

One of the best things about the state of AZ is all the trust land. I have ATV's and love to spend time out in the desert. It would be a shame if it all became private land.

This is a money grab by the state and they are using our children and their education to entice us to give them what they want.

Because of the existing lawsuit, education WILL GET this funding even if prop 123 fails! Prop 123 does not increase funding for education at all. It's just of matter of where the money comes from. I 100% support increasing education funding, but will vote NO on 123.

[KurtAZ]

Okay...so Prop 123 wants to increase the disbursment from the State Land Trust Permanent Endowment Fund from 2.5% to 6.9% and kick in another 140,000,000.00 from the General Fund according to the wording. As of 3.31.2015, the SLTPE stood at $5,152,752,240.00 and we are set to withdraw $93,700,000.00 + 14.7% YOY($13,773,900.00) for FY 2016 or a total of $107,473,900.00. This is normal operating procedure for the State...but that $107M is only 2.5% of $4,298,956,000...of course I don't have all the up to date values nor do I want to spend that much time on this...if we went off the March balance of last year that should be $128,818,806.00

Prop 123 wants us to increase our withdrawal of the SLTPE to 6.9%...which would be somewhere between $296,627,964.00 and $355,539,904.56 BUT the State Treasurer says this will start dipping into the reserved Principle vs. just taking money out of the interest earned. Then add in money from the General Fund to make up a $350M disbursement, per year, for 10 years. The question is how much interest did this fund earn each year and how significantly are we dipping into the principle. If we can accomplish funding for schools while only taking interest earned from the Land Trust...I am okay with that. You just NEVER want to touch the principle of a Trust account.

[kell490]

Reading about Prop 123 seems like we kick the can a few years so the governor can lower tax for corporations and income tax. I'm sure most people won't bother looking into the prop and just read how it increases funding for schools now and will pass it. State trust land was always meant for schools I'm not sure how it impacts the sale of the land I know there is a lot of red tape to sell it. Some state trust property on bell road here in Phoenix was sold to home builder they put ugly 2 story homes looked like big boxes about 10 feet apart on it I would have rather it been a park.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by kell490

I'm sure most people won't bother looking into the prop and just read how it increases funding for schools now and will pass it.

This is exactly what it's going to come down to. It has a better chance of passing than failing simply because it increases education funding for "our" children ... thus, it pulls on people's heart strings. Like all other school initiatives, I'm voting against this one as well. The proponents claim it won't increase taxes, but that doesn't matter because we'll be adding yet another government revenue source to fund education, and I am strongly against the government being involved in education.

[Bondurant]

Props are generally promoted & bankrolled by special interest groups. Unless the objectives are explicitly clear, I vote against all props on principle.

In this case it sounds like education is the selling point to the public but peel back the layers and there's likely a benefactor looking to benefit that's not the general public.

[stevek64]

I'm all for Steve prop 12345.....funding for the Steve's in AZ so they can create a better future for everyone. Wrap it in pretty paper, market it, and let's sell it to the herd for the future of Steve's for the ultimate benefit of AZ of course and nothing beyond. We can also create various other props and do the same thing for different names, subgroups, etc. Think of the possibilities!

[KurtAZ]

Originally Posted by kell490

Reading about Prop 123 seems like we kick the can a few years so the governor can lower tax for corporations and income tax. I'm sure most people won't bother looking into the prop and just read how it increases funding for schools now and will pass it. State trust land was always meant for schools I'm not sure how it impacts the sale of the land I know there is a lot of red tape to sell it. Some state trust property on bell road here in Phoenix was sold to home builder they put ugly 2 story homes looked like big boxes about 10 feet apart on it I would have rather it been a park.

I didn't see anywhere where this was promoting the sale of MORE state land...I read it as taking money from the trust fund. I know the State regularly sells off parcels from time to time...but that money is supposed to be added to the Trust's principle.

[observer53]

And, if 123 passes, it will take away for future years the adjustment for inflation that voters previously passed that the courts told the state they had to pay in "the lawsuit". What will happen to the children in our schools down the road, when the principal has been reduced and the schools are back to begging on a yearly basis for whatever funding the Legislature feels like giving out? Read the columns by Roberts and Montini on azcentral about this. The legislature is in major financial cahoots with a major proponent of abolishing public education.

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by observer53

And, if 123 passes, it will take away for future years the adjustment for inflation that voters previously passed that the courts told the state they had to pay in "the lawsuit". What will happen to the children in our schools down the road, when the principal has been reduced and the schools are back to begging on a yearly basis for whatever funding the Legislature feels like giving out? Read the columns by Roberts and Montini on azcentral about this. The legislature is in major financial cahoots with a major proponent of abolishing public education.

They won't be in office, I'm sure they don't care.

Disappointing has been the "Democrat" response by former candidate Fred DuVal by making the commercial and billing this as the first step. If anything this creates a dead end with the 49% Amendment. Someone had to have paid him pretty well, along with the others.