Guests - Mike Emery, Joel Strabala, Jay Tolkoff
Arizona's Ballots Are Arriving, and the Decisions Ahead Will Shape the State's Future
A rainy Tuesday in Southern Arizona brought welcome relief from the desert heat, but Kathleen Winn had something more consequential on her mind: election ballots were finally arriving in Pima County mailboxes.
Winn and her husband had received theirs, and she was already making plans to return them. Her preferred approach was to deliver the completed ballots to an early voting location where election workers could verify their identification.
She encouraged voters to consider the Pima County Recorder's Office downtown or the election facility near Country Club Road and Valencia.
That recommendation reflected a larger message: with the election underway, voters should take responsibility for understanding their ballots, returning them promptly and participating in a process that will determine Arizona's political and economic direction.
But the day also introduced something different—a new consumer-education feature designed to help Southern Arizona drivers protect their vehicles and understand the sometimes confusing world of automotive recalls.
Mike Emery: Why Every Driver Should Take Vehicle Recalls Seriously
Mike Emery, owner of Perfection Auto Works in Tucson, joined Kathleen Winn to introduce the Perfection Auto Works Recall Report, a new feature intended to help drivers understand automotive safety notices and what to do when they receive one.
Emery has spent years helping Tucson motorists maintain their vehicles, and he sees considerable confusion surrounding recalls.
Some drivers receive a notice, put it in the glove compartment and forget about it.
Others worry that their vehicle is unsafe to operate.
Still others assume a recall means an expensive repair bill.
Emery explained that the first step is much simpler.
When a notice arrives, confirm that the vehicle identification number matches the vehicle you own.
Then find out exactly what the recall involves.
"Generally, when you get a notification in the mail, you're going to pop it open, you're going to look at the VIN and verify that it's your car," Emery said.
From there, drivers can contact their dealership or an independent repair facility capable of researching the recall.
Emery said his shop routinely helps customers understand what manufacturers have reported and whether immediate action is necessary.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Is the Place to Start
Emery recommended using the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, commonly known as NHTSA.
The federal agency maintains vehicle-safety information, including recalls associated with specific vehicle identification numbers.
Emery said the modern system dates to federal highway-safety reforms that developed during the 1960s and resulted in NHTSA's creation in 1970.
The database allows vehicle owners and repair professionals to identify recalls reported by manufacturers.
The important point, Emery emphasized, is that recalls are not limited to particular brands or lower-priced automobiles.
Every major manufacturer can encounter a design, production or safety defect.
"All manufacturers have to report stuff if there is an issue with either production or they find out later that there's something safety-related to the vehicle," Emery explained.
A driver with a Mercedes-Benz can contact the local Mercedes dealership. Someone with another brand can contact that manufacturer's authorized dealer.
But Emery said independent shops can also help customers understand what the notice means.
Perfection Auto Works Checks for Recalls During Its Routine Inspections
One of the services Emery provides is a complimentary 26-point vehicle inspection.
That inspection includes checking available recall information.
Emery said the process is automatic for vehicles brought into his shop.
"I do that automatically at our shop for every vehicle that comes to us," he said.
A customer does not need to remember to bring the recall letter.
If the vehicle's VIN indicates an outstanding recall, the shop can identify it and advise the owner about the appropriate next step.
Winn initially referred to the inspection as a 36-point service.
Emery corrected her.
It's 26 points.
Winn jokingly replied that she was adding another 10 because his shop was that good.
The exchange illustrated why she wanted to make the Recall Report a regular feature: automotive maintenance affects almost every household, but many drivers do not understand the systems designed to protect them.
Not Every Recall Means a Vehicle Is Dangerous
Emery emphasized that recalls vary enormously in severity.
Some involve relatively minor manufacturing problems.
Others can present immediate safety concerns.
"Most recalls are very, very low on the importance factor," Emery said.
A recall might involve a bolt that was not properly tempered or another relatively small production issue.
That does not make the problem irrelevant, but it means drivers should understand the specific defect before assuming the worst.
Other recalls are much more serious.
Emery pointed to the Ford Pinto controversy of the 1970s, when concerns about fuel-system design and fires following rear-end collisions became a major automotive-safety issue.
Winn remembered the controversy immediately.
The Pinto, she recalled, had become notorious for fires and explosions.
Emery argued that the case demonstrated why manufacturers cannot afford to minimize serious safety defects.
Ignoring a problem can produce far greater consequences than acknowledging it and making repairs.
The TREAD Act Holds Manufacturers Accountable
Emery also discussed the Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation Act, commonly called the TREAD Act.
The legislation strengthened federal requirements involving manufacturers' reporting of potential safety problems.
Emery described a five-day notification obligation and emphasized the substantial financial penalties manufacturers can face when they fail to comply with applicable reporting requirements.
He acknowledged that he is not generally an advocate for expanding government oversight.
But automotive safety reporting, he said, is an example of government performing a legitimate and useful function.
"I'm not a big government guy, never have been," Emery said. "But I think that one of the cool things that they've done correctly ... the government has done this correctly."
He credited the system with creating a consistent process through which problems can be reported, investigated and addressed.
Manufacturers may dislike recalls because they can damage a brand's reputation and create enormous costs.
Nevertheless, Emery argued that public safety requires a reliable reporting mechanism.
Ralph Nader and the Book That Helped Change Automotive Safety
The conversation turned into a brief history lesson.
Emery cited Ralph Nader's 1965 book, Unsafe at Any Speed, which criticized automobile safety practices and brought national attention to the Chevrolet Corvair.
He connected the book to growing public pressure for federal vehicle-safety standards.
President Lyndon Johnson signed major motor-vehicle and highway-safety legislation in 1966, helping establish the federal safety framework that eventually led to NHTSA.
Emery also reviewed the gradual development of seat-belt requirements.
He discussed early state-level efforts during the 1960s, subsequent federal vehicle-safety standards and the expansion of state seat-belt laws during the 1980s and 1990s.
Winn remembered growing up before seat belts became a routine part of everyday driving.
Today, she said, families also rely on child-restraint systems and other safety technologies that earlier generations did not have.
For Emery, those changes demonstrate how safety expectations evolve as manufacturers, regulators and drivers learn from experience.
What Drivers Should Do When a Recall Notice Arrives
Emery's recommendation was straightforward.
Verify that the notice applies to the vehicle, investigate the defect and contact an appropriate repair professional or authorized dealership.
Do not assume the problem is catastrophic.
Do not ignore it either.
Perfection Auto Works will help customers research recall information without charging for that service.
"I have never charged for traffic safety recall information, ever," Emery said.
Drivers can contact Perfection Auto Works at 520-323-8650.
The shop is located at 1046 North Beverly Avenue in Tucson, just off Speedway Boulevard, approximately two blocks west of Craycroft.
Winn said she hopes the Recall Report becomes a regular Tuesday feature because drivers deserve understandable information about the vehicles their families depend on.
Winn Says Younger Americans Are Being Denied the Opportunities Previous Generations Enjoyed
The political discussion began with an observation Winn considered especially important.
She had recently met with several young men in their twenties at Republican Party headquarters.
They told her something she believes older political activists need to understand.
Younger voters do not consume information the same way their parents and grandparents do.
Their media habits are different.
Their economic experiences are different.
And their expectations for adulthood have been shaped by a period of extraordinary disruption.
Many were still in school during COVID-19.
They lost opportunities for normal social interaction, educational experiences and personal development.
Now they are entering an economy where finding stable employment, purchasing a home and starting a family can seem increasingly difficult.
Winn said political campaigns cannot expect to reach those voters simply by repeating the messages that worked decades ago.
They need to understand what this generation is experiencing.
COVID, Employment and the Disappearing Path to Independence
Winn contrasted the opportunities available when she graduated from college in 1980 with those confronting young adults today.
In her experience, previous generations could reasonably expect to find work, establish themselves professionally and begin building families.
Today, she said, young people can accumulate degrees without finding jobs that justify the cost of their education.
Housing has become more expensive.
Everyday costs are rising.
Entry-level opportunities can be difficult to find.
And without stable employment or affordable housing, relationships and family formation become harder.
"If you can't have a home and you're struggling to make ends meet, you're probably not going to get into a relationship and start a family," Winn said.
She argued that the problem is not limited to Arizona.
Young people across the United States and Europe are struggling with similar pressures.
Some are drawn toward political demonstrations and movements because those organizations offer belonging, purpose and an explanation for their frustration.
Winn believes conservatives need to offer something more constructive.
Young Voters Want Purpose, Not Just Political Slogans
Winn said the young men she met expressed frustration with ideological movements that emphasize identity, resentment and promises of government-provided benefits.
They wanted practical opportunities.
They wanted careers.
They wanted a future.
And they wanted political leaders to take their concerns seriously.
Her conclusion was that older generations cannot dismiss younger voters as disengaged or simply assume they will eventually adopt their parents' politics.
They must be invited into the conversation.
Winn immediately connected some of the young men with a political campaign, encouraging them to become involved rather than remain spectators.
She said participation matters because younger Americans will eventually inherit the decisions being made by today's officials.
For Winn, the question is whether Arizona will provide them with a healthy economy and a realistic path toward independence.
Winn Calls for More Trades and Fewer Expensive Educational Dead Ends
Winn criticized an educational culture that encourages nearly everyone to attend college regardless of whether the degree leads to meaningful employment.
She argued that vocational training and skilled trades deserve greater recognition.
Not every young adult needs a four-year degree.
Many can develop successful careers through technical education, apprenticeships and practical work experience.
She also criticized colleges for charging substantial tuition for programs that may offer limited employment opportunities.
Her concern was not with higher education itself.
It was with treating college as the only respectable path to success.
Arizona needs skilled workers, she argued, and young people need options that do not require years of debt before they can begin earning a living.
Winn Contrasts Arizona's Economy With Other States
Winn argued that Arizona's political direction has made its economic problems worse.
She cited rankings she believes show the state's economic performance falling sharply during Gov. Katie Hobbs' administration.
She contrasted Arizona with states such as Florida and Texas, which she views as examples of more successful conservative economic policies.
California, Oregon, Colorado and New Mexico, she argued, have experienced problems associated with higher taxes, regulation and progressive government.
Winn believes Arizona should resist following that path.
"We have an opportunity right now to fight for things that we know work: less government, less taxes, more opportunities," she said.
She connected those priorities to improved infrastructure, public safety and greater transparency.
Businesses, she argued, are reluctant to invest in communities where roads are deteriorating and crime is a persistent concern.
Those problems can be solved.
But Winn believes solving them requires different governing priorities.
Winn Backs Andy Biggs and Criticizes Katie Hobbs
Winn said she wants a governor who will fight for Arizona's economic future.
She praised Andy Biggs' approach to taxation, government spending and business development while criticizing Hobbs' veto record and political alliances.
She argued that progressive leaders in Tucson and Pima County are pushing policies that expand government without providing enough opportunity for residents.
Winn named Regina Romero, Adelita Grijalva and Andres Cano among the figures she believes represent that direction.
Her criticism also extended to opposition to federal immigration enforcement.
Winn defended the planned immigration detention facility in Marana as part of enforcing federal law and argued that government cannot endlessly expand services without considering the costs.
For her, the election is ultimately about whether Arizona can restore a political environment that rewards work, business development and personal responsibility.
Joel Strabala: Early Voting Is Underway, and the Numbers Are Encouraging
Joel Strabala, LD17 Republican chairman and member of the Pima County Election Integrity Commission, joined Winn with an update on early voting.
Strabala had recently returned from a family wedding and was already back to observing election operations.
He reported that ballots had reached his household over the weekend, consistent with Winn's experience.
The larger news was that voting activity appeared stronger than during the comparable early period of the primary.
Strabala had observed operations at the early voting location near Country Club Road and Valencia.
The previous evening, he said, approximately 50 people had dropped off ballots.
Four used the identification-verification process.
Two voted in person.
Strabala described the operation as orderly and professional.
The site had a supervisor and four workers, and he said the staff appeared well trained.
"The things went well at that particular vote center," he said.
For Winn, that was encouraging evidence that voters were responding to the calls to participate early.
More Than 700 Early Votes at the Ward 2 Site
Strabala also reported hearing that more than 700 ballots or in-person votes had been recorded at the Ward 2 early voting location near Broadway and Pantano during the opening days.
That was substantially higher than the corresponding early period during the primary, according to the information he received.
Winn viewed the turnout as a positive sign.
She believes Republican voters became more engaged during the primary and are carrying that enthusiasm into the general election.
But she cautioned against assuming an early advantage guarantees success.
There is still plenty of time for the political landscape to change.
The only votes that ultimately matter are the ones cast and counted.
Voters Can Return Their Ballots and Verify Identification in Person
Strabala confirmed that voters have several options for participating early.
A voter can return a completed early ballot at an authorized location.
A voter can also cast an in-person ballot at an early voting center.
Those returning early ballots may request identification verification under the procedures discussed, allowing the ballot to move through processing without requiring the usual signature-verification step.
Winn recommended that option whenever practical.
She plans to take her own completed ballot to an early voting location and present identification.
Her reasoning is partly administrative.
If election workers can verify the voter's identity at the point of return, that can reduce the amount of work required later.
It also allows campaigns to stop directing turnout reminders toward voters who have already participated.
The Election Integrity Commission Will Meet During Early Voting
Strabala said the Pima County Election Integrity Commission had another meeting scheduled for Friday at 9 a.m. at the Abrams Health Center.
The meeting is open to the public.
Members of the public who wish to speak should arrive before the meeting begins because the public-comment portion appears near the beginning of the agenda.
Strabala said the commission would address open-meeting-law questions and proposed changes to its bylaws.
He did not expect the Recorder to attend because of the demands of early voting, but anticipated participation from election officials.
Winn welcomed the continued oversight, even while joking that bylaws were the bane of her existence.
The important point, she argued, is that citizens should be able to observe and question government procedures.
LD17 Could Help Determine Control of the Arizona Legislature
Winn and Strabala devoted considerable attention to Legislative District 17.
The district includes portions of Pima County and a small area of Pinal County.
Winn described it as Pima County's largest legislative district and one of the most important competitive areas in Arizona.
Republicans currently hold one of the district's two House seats.
Rachel Keshel is seeking reelection, while John Winchester is running for the other seat.
Winn hopes Republicans can defeat Democratic incumbent Kevin Volk and win both House positions.
She argued that the previous election demonstrated how candidate strategies and turnout can affect the result.
But voters must understand that they can select two candidates in the House race.
Strabala agreed that Republican participation throughout the district—including its Pinal County portion—is essential.
Chris King and Edgar Soto Compete for the LD17 Senate Seat
The district's Senate race is also significant.
Republican Sen. Vince Leach is retiring, leaving Chris King as the Republican candidate.
Democrat Edgar Soto is the opposing candidate discussed by Strabala and Winn.
Strabala said polling information available to him suggested King had an advantage.
He also believed Keshel and Winchester were performing well in their respective races.
But he cautioned that statewide contests remained competitive and that polling was not a substitute for actual turnout.
"It comes down to voters have to get out and vote," Strabala said.
Winn pointed out that Arizona's 2022 attorney general election was decided by approximately 280 votes out of roughly 2.5 million cast.
That margin, she argued, is smaller than the attendance at many large churches on a single Sunday.
A relatively small number of additional voters can change the result of a statewide race.
Winn Says Precinct-Level Outreach Is Working
Winn described personally sending more than 850 letters to voters in her precinct.
The goal was to encourage them to participate and provide information about the election.
She said the response from neighbors had been encouraging.
People were calling friends.
They were asking questions.
They were discussing candidates and policies.
Winn recounted one neighbor asking for information to share with a Republican friend who believed Gov. Hobbs had performed well in office.
Winn said she helped develop a list of concerns about Hobbs' record, including the governor's vetoes.
The experience reinforced her belief that voter outreach can be personal and practical rather than simply another mass campaign message.
A conversation with a neighbor can matter.
A phone call can matter.
A personal letter can matter.
And in an election decided by a few hundred votes, even a small improvement in participation can be consequential.
The Arizona Voter Guide Helps Residents Understand Their Individual Ballots
Winn encouraged voters to use the Arizona Voter Guide produced by the Center for Arizona Policy.
The guide is available at AZVoterGuide.com.
Users can enter an address and see information relevant to the races and propositions appearing on their own ballot.
Winn prefers that approach because Pima County voters do not all receive identical ballots.
Legislative districts, school districts, municipalities and special taxing districts affect what each voter sees.
A voter in one neighborhood may face a proposition that does not appear on another resident's ballot.
Winn urged residents to research their specific contests rather than relying entirely on campaign advertising.
Voting is personal, she said, but discussing the issues should not be taboo.
Neighbors, coworkers, friends and fellow church members can help one another understand the ballot.
Key Election Deadlines
Winn and Strabala reviewed the remaining election calendar.
The final day to request an early ballot by mail is October 23.
October 26 is the recommended deadline for returning a ballot through the mail, although Winn encouraged voters to act sooner.
The final day of early in-person voting is October 30.
Election Day is November 3, with polls opening at 6 a.m. and closing at 7 p.m.
Winn encouraged people to return their ballots early when possible.
That helps political organizations identify who has already voted and concentrate resources on voters who still need assistance or reminders.
She said Republican volunteers are conducting ballot-chasing and turnout operations throughout the county.
LD17, she argued, needs every available volunteer.
Election Observers Are Still Needed
Strabala issued another appeal for Republican election observers.
People who have completed the required training can participate in observing voting locations and election procedures.
The Pima County Republican Party maintains training materials and signup information at PimaGOP.org under the Elections 2026 section.
Strabala said volunteers need to sign up by Wednesday of the week before they wish to serve so that the required names and authorizations can be submitted to election officials.
Additional training sessions were scheduled in person and through Zoom.
He particularly encouraged volunteers to observe early voting sites as activity increases.
Signature verification had begun, and ballot processing and tabulation were scheduled to proceed as the election progressed.
Winn argued that anyone concerned about election integrity should consider becoming part of the observation process.
"You might be pleasantly surprised," she said.
Her message was that citizens cannot simply complain about election administration while declining opportunities to observe it firsthand.
Strabala Says Voters Should Participate Rather Than Assume Something Is Wrong
Strabala emphasized that observation is part of public accountability.
He described election workers at the site he visited as trained, organized and professional.
That matters because election integrity also involves recognizing procedures that are working correctly.
Winn agreed that transparency helps reduce suspicion.
People who observe the process can better understand why some operations take time and where the real vulnerabilities may exist.
The objective should be legitimate oversight rather than disruption.
For Strabala, the most important recommendation remained simple.
"Get out and vote. Get your family to vote. Get your neighbors to vote, and get your friends to vote."
Data Centers Remain a Divisive Pima County Issue
Winn also asked Strabala about Pima County's moratorium on data-center development.
She has repeatedly criticized the temporary prohibition and referenced the Goldwater Institute's objections to the county's legal authority.
Strabala said he had not recently followed the formal status of the moratorium.
But he had noticed strong reactions from residents concerned about data centers being proposed near their neighborhoods.
He said some residents feel that development is being forced upon them without enough consideration of local impacts.
Winn responded that she supports data centers when they can operate without placing undue burdens on water and electricity supplies.
She also believes Arizona is attractive to such facilities because of its comparatively low risk from hurricanes, major earthquakes and other natural disasters.
Strabala joked that Arizona still gets occasional haboobs.
Winn agreed that data centers are becoming essential to modern computing but argued that appropriate locations and resource planning matter.
The challenge is balancing community concerns, lawful land use and the infrastructure needed for the future.
Jay Tolkoff: Proposition 425 Is a Permanent Expansion of County Spending Power
Jay Tolkoff joined Winn for an extended examination of Proposition 425, the proposed change to Pima County's constitutional expenditure limitation.
Tolkoff has spent months campaigning against the measure.
He described it as one of the worst public-policy proposals he has encountered during his decades in Southern Arizona.
The central concern is the difference between how the measure appears on the ballot and how much additional spending authority it could ultimately provide.
The ballot language describes an adjustment to the county's historical expenditure base.
Tolkoff said the public needs to understand what that means in contemporary dollars.
His objection was not simply that county government wants to spend more.
It was that voters would be surrendering a significant degree of control over future spending decisions.
"If you give government lots and lots of room to spend money, they're going to find ways to spend it," Tolkoff said.
A $70 Million Base Adjustment Could Mean Roughly $610 Million More Spending Authority
Winn explained the mechanics of the proposal.
Proposition 425 would increase the county's 1979-80 expenditure base by approximately $70 million.
That is the figure voters encounter in the measure's description.
But Arizona's expenditure-limit formula adjusts the historical base for population changes and inflation.
Under the campaign's calculations, the change could translate into approximately $610 million in additional annual spending authority beginning in fiscal year 2027-28.
The current expenditure limit was described as roughly $817 million.
Under the proposed adjustment, that limit could rise toward $1.4 billion.
The difference is approximately 75 percent.
And unlike a temporary budget decision, the change to the base would continue into future years.
Winn repeatedly emphasized the word "permanent."
"Proposition 425 is a permanent, permanent, permanent ... blank check," she said.
The increase would expand the county's legal spending capacity. It would not, by itself, impose an equivalent tax increase or require the county to spend the entire additional amount.
Tolkoff's concern was that once the authority exists, future officials will face fewer constraints on expanding expenditures.
The Existing Limit Was Designed to Restrain Government
Tolkoff said the current expenditure limitation reflects the constitutional protections established around 1980.
Those protections were intended to restrain government spending and preserve taxpayer control.
He compared the principle to Congress' power of the purse.
Congress can limit executive activity through its authority over spending.
Likewise, constitutional expenditure limits can prevent local governments from expanding operations without first seeking additional authority.
Tolkoff said voters should think carefully before weakening that restraint.
"We, the people, control the power of the purse," he argued.
Approving Proposition 425, in his view, would surrender a protection that has existed for decades.
Winn agreed.
She argued that voters should not permanently expand government authority because current officials promise to use the money responsibly.
Those officials will not remain in office forever.
The Real Problem Is What Future Supervisors Might Do
Tolkoff made that point with a hypothetical example designed to appeal to voters across the political spectrum.
He described speaking with someone on the political left who supported Proposition 425 because the additional spending authority could help fund homelessness programs and other social services.
Tolkoff acknowledged that those priorities might be important to that voter.
Then he changed the scenario.
What if the composition of the Board of Supervisors changed dramatically eight years from now?
What if a future board had completely different priorities?
What if three supervisors wanted to spend enormous sums on aggressive immigration-enforcement activities that the current supporter strongly opposed?
The hypothetical was intentionally extreme.
Tolkoff's point was that permanent spending authority belongs to future governments as well as the present one.
"This is not about who's on the board now and their ideology," he said.
It is about who could hold those seats five or ten years later.
A voter who trusts today's board may deeply distrust tomorrow's.
The constitutional spending limit protects against both possibilities.
The Campaign Against Proposition 425 Is Crossing Party Lines
Winn welcomed a new announcement from the No on 425 campaign.
The effort had gained support from political figures across party lines, including Democratic Sen. Sally Ann Gonzales and former state Sen. Luis Gonzales.
Winn initially described the coalition as bipartisan.
Tolkoff offered a different term.
"I actually like to think of it as being nonpartisan," he said.
His point was that taxpayer protections should not belong exclusively to Republicans or Democrats.
A person can support more spending on social programs and still oppose removing constitutional limits.
A conservative can disagree with a progressive on almost every other issue and still agree that government should justify its requests for more money.
The campaign also includes business leaders who believe greater county spending could create additional financial pressure on employers, property owners and consumers.
For Tolkoff, that is why Proposition 425 should be evaluated on its financial consequences rather than through party loyalty.
Tolkoff Says the County's $17.2 Million Surplus Raises an Obvious Question
One of the most pointed moments came when Tolkoff discussed the county's remaining unrestricted general-fund balance.
He said approximately $17.2 million was available beyond what had originally been expected.
County officials were considering how to allocate that money.
For Tolkoff, the surplus raised an immediate question.
If Pima County already has more money available than expected, why should voters approve a dramatic increase in spending authority?
He said county leaders were discussing approximately $9 million in spending on employees, including compensation-related investments.
Additional proposals included approximately $2.6 million for a One Pima safety initiative and $1.9 million for expanded court operations connected to additional judges.
Winn questioned whether those allocations addressed the county's most urgent problems.
Roads remain in poor condition.
Residents continue expressing concerns about crime.
Homelessness remains visible.
And taxpayers have recently faced higher property-tax bills.
She argued that a surplus should prompt discussion about savings, tax relief and clearly defined priorities.
Some County Employees May Deserve More Money, Tolkoff Says
Tolkoff did not reject every proposed use of the surplus.
He acknowledged that some county workers are underpaid.
"I’m not necessarily against it," he said of additional employee compensation.
But he questioned whether the county's highest-paid administrators and executives should receive more compensation while residents are struggling.
He also suggested that any raises should be evaluated alongside measurable improvements in services.
Winn said she would take the public-safety allocations more seriously if they produced additional law-enforcement personnel or demonstrable improvements in safety.
Both questioned broad spending categories that do not clearly explain what taxpayers will receive.
Tolkoff's standard was simple: government should demonstrate that existing resources are being used effectively before requesting much more authority.
Property-Tax Increases Are Already Affecting Homeowners
Tolkoff said many Pima County homeowners recently received property-tax bills showing increases.
He discussed a recent county primary property-tax rate increase of approximately three cents per $100 of assessed value.
On its own, that rate adjustment may sound small.
But homeowners also face changing assessed values and taxes imposed by multiple jurisdictions.
The resulting bill can be considerably more complicated than any one rate increase suggests.
Tolkoff then offered a hypothetical calculation.
He estimated that generating an additional $610 million entirely through the county property-tax rate could require an increase of approximately $4.65 in the rate under his assumptions.
That was an illustration of the potential scale of the spending authority, not a prediction that Proposition 425 would automatically produce that tax increase.
But he wanted voters to consider how government might eventually finance expanded spending.
"We're talking about potentially doubling your property taxes," Tolkoff warned.
For families already struggling with housing costs, the possibility deserves attention.
Renters Have a Financial Stake, Too
Winn emphasized that property taxes do not affect only homeowners.
Apartment buildings, shopping centers and rental houses are also subject to property taxes.
When operating costs rise, landlords and businesses may attempt to recover those costs through rents and prices.
Tolkoff said renters who assume Proposition 425 cannot affect them are overlooking that connection.
He has been raising the issue in everyday conversations, including while shopping.
If someone tells him they rent rather than own property, he explains that property-tax increases can still affect the cost of their housing.
His larger concern is affordability.
Young adults already face significant obstacles to buying homes.
Businesses are struggling with operating expenses.
And retirees may have limited ability to absorb recurring tax increases.
Tolkoff believes the county should be reducing pressure on those groups rather than seeking opportunities to spend substantially more.
The Board's Spending Decisions Are Becoming a Political Liability
Winn and Tolkoff criticized what they view as the county government's tendency to prioritize new programs rather than solve existing problems.
Winn pointed to road conditions, homelessness, public safety and unfinished infrastructure.
She also criticized the temporary data-center moratorium, arguing that the county has acted contrary to Arizona law.
The moratorium's legality has been challenged, but Winn's assertion that supervisors are violating the law was her political and legal assessment.
She argued that the prospect of future litigation illustrates the financial risks created when government officials exceed their authority.
If the county loses a lawsuit, taxpayers may ultimately bear the cost.
For Winn, that makes greater spending authority even harder to justify.
Tolkoff Wants Results, Not Another Promise of Future Improvement
Tolkoff described a reporter asking him about residents who support Proposition 425 because they believe their neighborhoods need more public resources.
He acknowledged that those needs may be real.
But he rejected the idea that unlimited flexibility is the solution.
If a neighborhood needs a particular road improvement, public-safety initiative or other identifiable service, the county should define the project and explain its cost.
Voters can then evaluate the proposal.
"The problem that I have with this is that nothing is defined," Tolkoff said.
"It's a blank check for them to do whatever they want."
He believes that structure weakens accountability because future supervisors could redirect the additional spending authority toward entirely different priorities.
Steve Christie's Warning About a Blank Check
Winn discussed an opinion piece by Pima County Supervisor Steve Christie opposing Proposition 425.
Christie, the board's Republican member, has repeatedly expressed concerns about county finances.
Winn cited his explanation that property-tax bills include multiple taxing authorities.
The Board of Supervisors directly controls only certain county-related rates, including those associated with the county itself, bonds, flood control and the library district.
Other portions of the tax bill involve school districts, community colleges, fire districts and other entities.
That distinction matters because homeowners sometimes attribute the entire increase to one governing body.
Nevertheless, Winn and Tolkoff argued that county officials are responsible for the rates they do control.
They believe those officials should exercise restraint rather than seek a major expansion of spending authority.
District 5 Becomes Part of the Accountability Debate
Winn connected the Proposition 425 campaign to the Pima County Supervisor District 5 race.
She sharply criticized Supervisor Andres Cano, who was appointed to the seat.
Winn argued that Cano's record demonstrates insufficient financial oversight and too much loyalty to the county's existing political establishment.
She also criticized spending associated with a celebration following his appointment, with the amount discussed estimated at approximately $5,000.
Tolkoff echoed those concerns and questioned whether Cano fully understood Proposition 425 when the measure was first discussed.
Those were the speakers' criticisms of Cano, not independently established findings of misconduct.
Winn supports Republican challenger Jeff Rhodes, whom she described as an opportunity to change the board's direction.
For her, the election offers two related choices.
Voters can decide whether to increase county spending authority through Proposition 425.
And District 5 residents can decide whether they want different representation on the board.
Tolkoff Says the Bigger Issue Is Voter Control Over Major Projects
Tolkoff made another argument that he considers even more important than the immediate financial impact.
Under existing procedures, some large public projects require voters to approve bonds or other financing mechanisms.
That provides a direct opportunity to decide whether a project is worth the cost.
Tolkoff worries that a dramatically higher expenditure limit could make it easier for future county governments to pursue major projects without comparable voter oversight.
He offered a hypothetical indoor soccer stadium.
If supervisors wanted to build one under current financial constraints, they might need to seek voter approval for the necessary financing.
With substantially greater spending authority, the county could have more flexibility to finance projects through other available revenues.
"If you believe in democracy, this is anti-democracy," Tolkoff said.
His concern was that Proposition 425 would weaken an important financial check on local government.
He believes taxpayers should retain meaningful power to reject large expenditures.
Even the County's Own Projections Suggest a Smaller Increase Might Be Enough
Tolkoff said county documentation indicated that a much smaller increase—perhaps in the range of 10 to 15 percent—could address certain anticipated needs.
He questioned why officials were seeking an increase approaching 75 percent.
If the government believes it needs additional capacity for identified services, he argued, it should ask for that specific amount.
Instead, Tolkoff believes county officials are trying to obtain more authority now so they will not have to seek additional approval later.
He called that approach fundamentally inconsistent with fiscal accountability.
The $70 Million Ballot Language Is Technically Correct but Misleading, Tolkoff Argues
One of Tolkoff's strongest objections concerns presentation.
The ballot describes a $70 million adjustment to the historical expenditure base.
Tolkoff acknowledges that the figure reflects the mechanics of the formula.
But most voters do not automatically translate a 1979-80 base adjustment into its current spending-limit consequences.
"The language on the ballot shows $70 million," he said.
"And technically, it's correct. It's just majorly deceptive."
He argued that the ballot should make clear how the change translates into today's dollars.
Winn agreed and compared the issue with earlier government compensation proposals that she believes were presented without enough financial detail.
Both argued that technical accuracy is not sufficient if ordinary taxpayers are unlikely to understand the practical consequences.
Tolkoff Says Pima County's Political Machine Has Become Too Powerful
The conversation moved from Proposition 425's financial mechanics to the political culture surrounding local government.
Tolkoff described what he sees as an entrenched network of elected officials, government employees, nonprofits and politically connected organizations.
He referred to a local political structure sometimes called "La Máquina"—the machine.
His argument was that people whose livelihoods depend on government programs may have strong incentives to preserve the political establishment funding those programs.
That does not mean individual employees or nonprofit workers are acting improperly.
But Tolkoff believes the overall system can become resistant to reform.
He pointed to the thousands of people employed by the city and county, along with organizations that rely on public support.
"If we just give them even more money, well, then that machine just gets bigger and bigger," Tolkoff warned.
For him, Proposition 425 represents a major test of whether voters are willing to restrain that system.
Government Salaries and the Question of Performance
Tolkoff also criticized large salary increases for senior public administrators.
He referred to a substantial raise for Tucson's city manager and questioned whether the improvement in public services justified the expense.
His concern was not that public-sector leaders should work without competitive compensation.
It was that pay increases should be tied to performance and accountability.
Ordinary residents are struggling with utility bills, housing costs and rising prices.
Tolkoff said government should be sensitive to those conditions before awarding large increases to its highest-paid officials.
Winn agreed and argued that elected officials should understand how financial decisions affect the families paying for them.
Free Transit and Homelessness Become Examples of Unresolved Problems
Winn cited Tucson's fare-free transit system as another example of policies that may sound attractive but produce unintended consequences.
She criticized public-safety problems associated with transit and argued that local officials should be willing to acknowledge when programs require changes.
Tolkoff agreed that government often struggles to reverse decisions.
Admitting a mistake can be politically uncomfortable.
But refusing to reevaluate a policy does not make the consequences disappear.
The same principle applies to homelessness programs.
Both argued that additional spending should be tied to measurable outcomes.
If poverty and homelessness remain stubbornly high after years of expenditure, taxpayers deserve to know which programs are working and which are not.
Proposition 414 Provides a Model for Opposition
Winn recalled the earlier campaign against Proposition 414, a proposed sales-tax increase that was defeated after opposition from voters across party lines.
She sees the No on 425 campaign developing a similar coalition.
Tolkoff said people who may disagree on immigration, social policy or national politics can still agree that government should not receive unrestricted authority to spend more.
Winn characterized Proposition 425 as a much larger version of the financial concerns surrounding Proposition 414.
For her, the current campaign is another opportunity for residents to organize around an issue directly affecting their household budgets.
The County's Financial Requests Are Not Ending With Proposition 425
Tolkoff also noted that Pima County is considering future bond proposals.
That matters because Proposition 425 is not the only potential financial question confronting taxpayers.
Pima Community College is seeking significant bond authorization, with approximately $250 million discussed.
Other local jurisdictions have their own spending requests.
Property owners may face several different propositions affecting different parts of their tax bills.
Tolkoff argued that voters should examine the cumulative impact rather than evaluate each request in isolation.
One proposition may look modest.
Another may appear reasonable.
But together, they can create substantial long-term obligations.
Rio Nuevo and Government Spending History
Winn and Tolkoff revisited past controversies involving Rio Nuevo, Tucson's downtown redevelopment effort.
Tolkoff referenced early financial problems and investigations involving substantial public expenditures.
He suggested that the history should make voters skeptical of promises that additional money will automatically produce successful projects.
The discussion reflected his broader concern that public organizations sometimes spend enormous sums without producing clear or timely results.
He wants government to prove that money has been managed properly before requesting expanded authority.
Immigration Spending and Transparency
The pair also criticized past public spending associated with migrant assistance and temporary housing in Southern Arizona.
Winn referred to allegations involving significant expenditures on transportation and services for people entering the country illegally.
Tolkoff recalled large temporary facilities and described a friend who was allegedly discouraged from photographing one from a public street.
He characterized the operations as insufficiently transparent.
Those were their accounts and allegations rather than independently established findings of financial misconduct.
Nevertheless, both argued that taxpayers deserve detailed explanations of how public funds are used, particularly when substantial sums are involved.
Tolkoff said the larger issue is not simply whether a program is popular or unpopular.
It is whether officials provide the records and oversight necessary for residents to evaluate its cost.
The No on 425 Campaign Is Asking Residents to Become Advocates
Tolkoff said opposition to Proposition 425 has become a grassroots effort.
The campaign has attracted business leaders and political figures from different parties.
But he believes the outcome will depend on ordinary residents talking to one another.
He encouraged people to discuss the proposition with neighbors, family members, coworkers and even people they encounter while shopping.
The message, he said, needs to reach renters as well as homeowners.
It needs to reach Democrats as well as Republicans.
And it needs to reach voters who might normally skip local ballot questions.
Tolkoff said small donations can also help the campaign demonstrate broad public support.
Even five or ten dollars matters.
The more people who participate, he argued, the harder it becomes to portray opposition as the concern of only one political party or business interest.
Property-Tax Bills May Be Changing Voters' Minds
Tolkoff said he began warning about Proposition 425 in April but initially struggled to gain attention.
Then homeowners started receiving their new property-tax bills.
Suddenly, more people wanted to understand what the county was proposing.
Winn suggested that the timing was no coincidence.
Residents who are already confronting increases in their annual bills may be more skeptical of proposals involving additional spending authority.
Tolkoff agreed that the issue has become more personal.
The question is no longer an abstract debate over constitutional formulas.
It is about household budgets.
A Permanent Change Requires More Than a Temporary Promise
Tolkoff repeatedly returned to one distinction.
Political leaders come and go.
A permanent constitutional adjustment does not.
Future supervisors could pursue projects that today's voters strongly oppose.
And future political majorities may be very different from those currently in office.
That is why he believes the decision cannot be reduced to whether someone likes or dislikes the current Board of Supervisors.
It must be evaluated as a long-term change in the balance of power between taxpayers and county government.
Winn agreed that voters should be particularly cautious when the proposed authority is permanent.
A government can always return with a narrower request for a clearly defined need.
But restoring a constitutional restraint after eliminating it may be much more difficult.
The Election Comes Down to Participation, Accountability and What Government Delivers
The issues facing Arizona voters extend far beyond individual candidates.
Mike Emery's automotive recall discussion demonstrated the value of government performing a limited, clearly defined public-safety function.
Manufacturers must disclose defects.
Vehicle owners need information.
And a practical system helps people address problems before they cause harm.
Winn's discussion of younger voters raised a different question: whether Arizona's economy is creating enough opportunity for the next generation.
Joel Strabala focused on participation and election administration, emphasizing that voters should understand their ballots and become involved in the processes they want to trust.
Jay Tolkoff challenged residents to consider how much financial authority they are willing to surrender to their county government.
The subjects were different, but the recurring principle was accountability.
Government should be judged by what it delivers.
Citizens should understand how decisions affect them.
And voters should recognize that remaining disengaged does not prevent government from making those decisions.
With early voting underway, Winn's closing message was that Arizona residents still have an opportunity to determine what comes next.
For Strabala, that begins with returning the ballot.
For Tolkoff, it means understanding the long-term consequences of Proposition 425.
And for Winn, it means demanding a government that creates opportunity, respects legal limits and remains answerable to the people paying the bills.