Tucson Set to Decide on Homelessness Measures Amid Funding Rejection and Pima County’s Legal Challenges

Arizona voters recently shaped local policy with the approval of Prop. 312 in November, while Tucson residents rejected Prop. 414 in March. This mixed outcome now compels the Tucson City Council to implement restrictions on camping in parks and washes.

The forthcoming ordinances, set for a vote on Tuesday, will implement a ban on camping in specific city areas. This includes prohibiting panhandling in medians where speed limits exceed 30 miles per hour. However, the enforcement of these measures may remain inconsistent, leaving many questions unanswered.

Prop. 312 permits property owners to seek tax write-offs for investments made to deter homeless individuals, contingent upon demonstrating that the city has not taken adequate action to protect their properties. Meanwhile, the proposed camping restrictions contain curious definitions that do not outright ban sleeping in parks but do prohibit using items such as blankets or pillows that could provide additional comfort.

Critics of these measures argue that the result is a punitive approach towards the city’s most vulnerable populations. With housing shortages hitting crisis levels, Tucson needs to construct approximately 62,000 new homes by 2045, while Pima County requires 137,000. In a positive move, the City Council plans to allocate $2.1 million toward financing over 400 affordable rental units as a first step in addressing this issue.

Additionally, city officials will review a new ordinance that aims to promote denser zoning along Tucson’s primary corridors in an effort to shift from urban sprawl to vertical building. While higher density housing can lower construction costs, concerns about the affordability and living conditions of densely packed apartments remain prevalent.

On a different front, the Pima County Board of Supervisors will convene privately to engage with attorneys about a letter from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The federal agency is seeking clarification on the expenditure of grants intended to aid asylum seekers, particularly as they withhold $10 million in funding from the county.

The board will also address a state judge’s recent ruling that overturned an ordinance requiring the reporting of lost or stolen firearms. As state laws prioritize gun rights, local governments’ attempts to implement stricter regulations face significant hurdles, including the risk of losing state-shared revenue.

In Oro Valley, the Town Council is poised to vote on funding for the completion of a water storage facility, with additional financing needed totaling $6 million. The council is also considering a $500,000 marketing initiative dubbed “Explore Oro Valley,” which aims to promote local arts and culture.

In Marana, the Town Council is revising its election rules to align with state regulations. Proposed changes would require mayoral or council vacancies to be filled through a council vote or be deferred to the next election depending on timing. This adjustment comes in light of challenges faced following the unexpected passing of Mayor Ed Honea in 2024.

The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors will also vote on a fireworks display to celebrate the Rio Rico High School Senior Day Parade, set to take place on May 14.