Mesa voters are backing an effort to recall their council member, Julie Spilsbury, a self-identified Republican representing district two.
The recall effort focuses on several of Spilsbury’s past votes and her support for Democratic candidates last year.
JoAnne Robbins, a resident, filed the petition to recall Spilsbury. Robbins’ petition cited Spilsbury’s past votes approving a permit changing the use of a hotel into a homeless housing program, as well as increasing both city council salaries and citywide utility rates.
Other residents blame Spilsbury and the rest of council for the homelessness nuisance they endure. Earlier this month, failed Mesa mayoral candidate Scott Neely offered a first-person view of his average experience navigating the homeless while driving around the city.
“My neighborhood is a war zone in Mesa Arizona,” said Neely. “Thank you Julie Spilsbury and Mayor-Elect Mark Freeman for shoving this low income housing down our throats that our neighbors voted against.”
Spearheading the signature gathering effort is Turning Point Action (TPA). The activist arm of Turning Point USA launched a “super chase” initiative: door knocking efforts to gather enough signatures to oust Spilsbury. TPA has four different events scheduled over the coming week and some odd days.
The recall effort needs around 3,100 signatures by May 30 in order to launch a special election.
Working hard today to make sure we recall Julie Spilsbury! Thank you to all who showed up to help or those who swung by to pick up supplies. Every signature matters!@TPAction_@TPACoalitionspic.twitter.com/z5nfU79gef
Spilsbury responded to the recall with a statement on social media pledging her continued commitment to nonpartisanship. She justified her past votes over which the recall participants took offense by citing the wide margin of her reelection victory. Spilsbury also cautioned against supporting a special election due to its costliness.
“You might not agree with every decision or action I’ve made on the City Council but I have put every part of my heart into this job,” posted Spilsbury on Facebook. “I care deeply for the City of Mesa and for this community that is not only where I grew up but where Jeremy and I decided to raise our 6 kids. I love to serve our community! I care deeply about EVERY person in our city, not just the ones who look like me or think like me. I have tried to vote and make decisions on what is best for our entire city and to be true to what I feel is right in my soul.”
Beyond her voting history, it was Spilsbury’s personal political beliefs that spurred the recall effort. Spilsbury endorsed failed Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris and successful Democratic Senate candidate Ruben Gallego last year, much to the chagrin of mainstream Republican voters. Spilsbury joined groups like “Republicans for Harris” and “Republicans and Independents for Gallego.” Spilsbury and her husband were featured several times in media reports documenting the Mormon split away from Donald Trump and the Republican Party last year.
One signature gatherer, Cynthia, reported most voters she met have expressed an overall disappointment in Spilsbury’s representation.
“They feel betrayed because there was a promise to protect their kids, a promise to protect their community, and a promise to protect their money, and all three of those things she’s turned her back on,” said Cynthia.
Actions have consequences and the people of Mesa feel betrayed
Broken promises Protect the children – no Protect the city – no Protect the taxes – no
Spilsbury won reelection last summer outright in the primary after the general election was canceled.
Fellow council member Jennifer Duff also defended Spilsbury after early reports of the recall emerged.
“Julie Wold Spilsbury is an excellent council member, serving in a non partisan position,” posted Duff on Facebook. “Please don’t bring partisanship to city council. It’s actually where government works. I support Julie! Don’t sign a petition that is destructive to our city council.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
During a city council meeting this week, Mayor John Giles and the Mesa City Council voted to approve across-the-board increases in the city’s utility rates and fees covering solid waste removal, electricity, gas, water, and wastewater. Over two-dozen Mesa citizens spoke during the meeting, which stretched over two-hours. Mesa, lacking a primary property tax, derives much of its funding from utility rates and fees.
The city is facing increases in electric rates of up to 39% for Winter Tier 2 usage charges for residents and a $2.75 per month service charge increase according to the council report. Non-residential users will face increases from 2-6 percent. Solid waste residential barrel rates will increase 5.5%, with commercial roll-off rates jumping 6.5%. Gas rates are increasing 6-15% for residences and from 9-25% for non-residential users. Water rates are increasing 4-9% for residents, 5.5% for non-residential, 8.5% for commercial users, and 19.5% for large commercial or industrial users. Finally wastewater service and usage components charges will increase by 7.5% for residents and 8.5% for non-residential.
City staffers told The Mesa Tribune that the typical residential bill for water, wastewater, and solid waste will see an increase of about $5.60, from the current average of $100.21 to $105.81
As reported by the Tribune, Giles answered criticism at a meeting in late November telling the frustrated residents, “This proposed water-rate increase of less than 5% in Mesa is dramatically less than you see in every other community,” said Giles, zeroing in on the water utility increase.
“Cities around the Valley are increasing water 25%, talking about increasing wastewater charges 95%. We’re not doing anything remotely like that in the City of Mesa.“
“So if you’re upset about the increasing price of water, I’m with you. But if you want to vent those feelings, probably every other city council in the state would be a more appropriate place to do that because the increases are less than what you’re seeing in other cities.”
Kevin Medema, a Mesa resident who led the organization of a petition opposing the utility increases reportedly signed by 2,000 people, stressed, “We have citizens that are hurting financially. The city shoots for that 20% reserve (in the utility accounts). Well, you know a lot of residents won’t have that in themselves. So, please consider voting ‘no.’’’
Medema suggested that residents have offered to help the city find ways to reduce spending.
During the November 18th meeting, one Mesa resident, Lynda Patrick-Hayes poignantly called upon the council to “entertain the idea of cutting the utility rates and encourage the city manager to eliminate government waste. The City of Mesa has no revenue problems. It has a spending problem.”
Citing the city’s reliance on utility charges and sales tax due to lacking a property tax, Giles told the citizens, “There’s not an apples-to-apples comparison because the City of Mesa has a different model. We’re going to use utilities to help subsidize city services.”
Multiple attempts to reinstate a primary property tax, eliminated in 1945, have failed over the years.
“Now if you don’t like that model…the answer is not to come to the City of Mesa and say, ‘We don’t want you to raise utilities because that’s denying the reality of math.’”
Responding to calls to reduce city spending, Giles told the gathered objectors, “What your proposal is, you’re saying, ‘I want to dramatically cut spending on public safety in the City of Mesa.’ That’s what you’re asking us to do.”
Republican State Representative Barbara Parker spoke on behalf of her constituents in the area and told the council, “They call me when they lose their homes. They call the state when they can’t afford their insurance. And on behalf of them, I am telling you they are hurting and even one dollar makes a huge difference.”
Parker castigated the mayor and council for suggesting the city cut public safety spending, “The fact that we use the threat of fear and emotion that we are going to cut police and fire is so disingenuous and inappropriate. And to all the gentlemen and women in uniform tonight: I am one of you and I have trained many of the firefighters, and I want you to know we have your backs. And we need to elect people who will fund you first and then find funding for everything else. We are never going to cut funding to police and fire. That is always a tactic. It’s disingenuous, it is inappropriate, it lacks accountability, it is intellectually dishonest, and they are not pawns and you deserve better. Don’t let them use you as a pawn police and fire. It’s inappropriate to have a bond and then immediately after that election to suddenly have a tax increase or a rate payers increase.”
She concluded, “One of the things I was able to communicate to the legislature as a member of the Appropriations Committee is that: EVERY. SINGLE. DOLLAR. IS. SACRED. Every single penny is sacred. And when I’ve asked the citizens would they rather have one more penny in their pocket than have it go to waste or redundancies or excesses. Absolutely they say yes. I hope you’ll have the courage to do the right thing tonight. I can tell you on behalf of the state: we were able to cut budget, balance our budget, give money back to the taxpayers and fund every single program. And if the state of Arizona can do it, Mesa can do it better.”
The rate increases were passed by the city council unanimously with Giles stating, “I know all of that is not appreciated by this crowd to the extent that we’d like it to be, but it’s the facts. For those reasons I am compelled by math and the reality of the situation to support this increase.”
Like a lot of Arizona residents, I was drawn to the state by its natural beauty, economic opportunities, and conservative values. In the 15 years my husband Gary and I have called Mesa home, we’ve seen a lot of growth and some exciting opportunities for our community and the citizens of District 2. Unfortunately, we’ve also seen some significant erosion of Mesa’s conservative values as well as questionable zoning and purchase decisions by the Mesa City Council. I believe we can, and should, do better. That’s why I’m running for City Council!
As a city council member, I’ll work to represent my District with the values and needs of my constituents instead of personal opinions. Take, for example, the purchase last year of the Arizona Grand Hotel by the City Council which is slated to be converted to a homeless shelter. In addition to overpaying for the property by $1 million, the annual operating cost paid by the city is estimated to be $3.5 million, which will be a permanent burden to Mesa taxpayers. The city council approved the sale over strenuous objections of adjacent businesses and homeowners.
Homelessness is a serious issue in our state, but there are better alternatives for properties not located adjacent to a residential area. Unfortunately, the current District 2 councilperson chose to vote her values against the wishes of her constituents.
Over the past 15 years, we’ve had a moderate increase in economic development activity in our district, but we’ve continued to be a bedroom community. It is the “actions over words” that have me concerned. While the Council says they want to bring in more high wage jobs, they continue to approve of more and more residential and multi-family projects. We have a vibrant airport at Falcon Field, but instead of protecting this valuable asset from residential encroachment, the council has turned a blind eye and put the airport in jeopardy. The same thing has happened to Boeing and Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport. The council’s actions have not mirrored what the council has set as their Strategic Plan. We need to refocus the council and balance residential needs with economic development.
Another area that I believe we are lacking in is police and fire. Response times for our police have risen from 3.64 minutes in 2017 to 4 minutes today. That may not seem like much, but those extra seconds can mean the difference between the bad guy getting away or being caught. It can also be the difference between life and death. We need to make sure we have adequate personnel and equipment to ensure our public safety officials show up in a timelier manner.
Finally, I feel as though the city has left its lane and ventured into areas outside the City’s Charter. The city isn’t responsible for ensuring homeless people have shelter. I’m not trying to be dismissive of the need for humanity, I just feel as though the City should focus on potholes and allow the many not-for-profit entities and the religious communities across Mesa to share in the compassion. Citizens’ tax dollars should go exactly where Mesa’s founding fathers outlined in the Charter so many years ago: to ensure we have clean, potable water, a safe and reliable natural gas and electric system, clean streets that are pothole free, great outdoor parks and trails for public recreation, and public safety that continues to be one of the best in the nation.
I’ll work hard every day to represent the citizens of District 2, so that you will truly have a voice at the City. If you are tired of the status quo, let’s build our community together!
Melody Whetstone is candidate for Mesa City Council. You can find out more about her campaign at Melody4Mesa.com.
On Monday, March 1, the Mesa City Council will consider a new ordinance to add sexual orientation and gender identity to the protected classes in the city’s nondiscrimination laws. While the new rules are welcome by city leaders and residents, how they will be implemented has raised concerns.
The “nondiscrimination laws” which are meant to be a shield to protect people from unjust discrimination have raised concerns for parents of young children and individuals with closely held religious beliefs.
For young parents, the prospect of allowing children to use bathroom facilities with people who identify as sharing the same gender but are of the opposite sex has raised both safety and privacy concerns.
For religious advocates, like Cathi Herrod, Director of the Center For Arizona Policy (CAP), the concern is that the “ordinance would be used as a sword against individuals and organizations who have a historic understanding of marriage and gender.”
Supporters say the ordinance would merely replace the city’s existing fair housing code to provide a much broader set of protections, some of which already exist under state and federal law.
In contrast, Herrod’s group claims that the proposal would mean the following:
● Fitness centers, water parks, public swimming pools, and similar facilities would have to allow all men identifying as women access to women’s showers, locker rooms, and bathrooms.
● Women’s domestic violence shelters would be forced to allow a man identifying as a woman to share living quarters, showers, and bathrooms with vulnerable and abused women.
● Sex-specific jobs like an employee at a women’s shelter could not be denied to a man identifying as a woman.
● Faith-based adoption agencies would be forced to choose between placing children in same-sex households against their beliefs or closing down their adoption services.
● Wedding vendors like cake bakers and florists would be forced to choose between their livelihood and their faith.
● A religious bookstore would not be free to require all employees to adhere to their religious beliefs.
Herrod and others say the proposed “ordinance undermines constitutional freedoms of speech and religion, threatens women’s and girls’ privacy, and limits religious organizations that serve communities.”
