Topics in this issue...
- January – Hand’s Free Device Ban
- February – Human Trafficking Bill
- March – Frequent Transit Network
- April – Broadway and Project for Public Spaces
- May – Prop 101
- June – City Budget
- July – Sun Tran Settlement
- August – Honors College
- September – Concert Across America
- October – Domestic Violence Awareness
- November – Fry’s Rezoning
- December – Water Security
- Closing Comments
End of Year “Look Back”
Each year I use the final newsletter in the calendar year to look back, month by month and pick out an important issue we’ve worked on from out of the Ward 6 office. Some are citywide initiatives, others are issues we’ve led. All are important to the quality of life we experience. I hope you enjoy this trip down recent-memory lane with me.
In January I opened the section in the newsletter on distracted driving with this quote from Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. He was referring to his predecessor in that position:
Secretary LaHood was able to change public attitudes toward distracted driving through personal advocacy and the Faces of Distracted Driving Campaign in 2010. He worked to establish laws restricting the use of cell phones and other hand-held devices while driving.
We joined Oro Valley and cities around the world in passing an ordinance that bans the use of hand-held electronic devices while driving your car. There is data – no, there is intuition – that validates that driving while paying attention to your phone, tablet, GPS, or other electronic device is simply unsafe.
Ours though is a secondary offense. That means the police have to have reasons other than your use of the phone to pull you over. I do not support that level of ordinance. I believe it should be a primary offense so you can be cited for it and it alone. Police chiefs across the nation agree. So do paramedics and fire chiefs.
In passing the ordinance we agreed to bring the item back for a look at how effective it has been. I look forward to that discussion on January 9 and for advocating again that this should be a primary offense on our local streets.
Throughout the year I advocated for several other road safety policies. One we got implemented was to drop speeds on our bike boulevards by five miles per hour. I’m still pushing for protected left hand turns at our major intersections, crosswalks with added safety amenities, road diets where appropriate, reduced and consistent speed limits throughout the city, and convincing our streets engineers to look outside of the manuals they’re focused on and consider what other progressive cities around the world are doing to make their streets safer.
In 2017 we've killed 24 pedestrians on our roadways this year and as I write this, there's one more in critical condition in the hospital. We’re better than that. We have the ability to pass laws that will help us improve on that statistic in 2018 and beyond. I look forward to including in the 2018 year-end newsletter that we adopted a Complete Streets Policy. I believe we’ll get that done.
The hands-free ordinance we passed was a step. It’s not where I’d like to see us, but it was a step. A bill they passed in Phoenix related to human trafficking was a step too - also not where we need to be.
I include this as an item of note because of the significant amount of work we have done on the issue of trafficking out of the Ward 6 office. In fact, in January, right before this bill was adopted I hosted a panel discussion on this topic at The Loft. Survivors of trafficking spoke to the horrors of being caught up in the subculture and advocates from Phoenix described interventions that have been successful in changing lives. The legislature should have been in attendance.
The Phoenix bill started out well, but got caught up in the conservative politics that seem to control Arizona. HB2291 was intended to allow victims of trafficking to have their records cleared. The idea is simple. Penalizing the victim of trafficking for violations of the law committed while under the duress of a trafficker is unjust and just plain stupid. It misses the whole point of who’s the criminal and who’s the victim.
The bill achieved that to a point. In fine Phoenix form, they allowed a victim to go before a judge to have their records cleared, only after “doing their time.”
I do not believe the time restriction on filing to have your records cleared should exist. To make the bill worse, they added this carve out:
One can argue if a trafficking victim commits a dangerous offense she may be held responsible. Although, it still begs the question of who is really compelling that act. This clarifying language however makes the bill an absurdity:
All of those exemptions and further definitions simply muddy what should be clear water. Allow a trafficking victim to petition to have all of her “crimes” expunged from the record. Our state legislature still does not understand that trafficking victims are not doing what they do for “sexual gratification.” As with so many bills coming out of Phoenix, this one is offensive and ignorant. Beyond that, to require the trafficking victim to serve time for an offense committed while under duress and to have to wait five years before having the ability to go before the court simply shows a gross lack of understanding of what really is involved when a person is caught up in sex or labor trafficking.
I will continue working on the issue of trafficking, trying to get some justice for the victims. My sense is that in order to achieve that, we’ll need a change in the make-up of our state legislature.
In March we added routes to our Sun Tran Frequent Transit Network (FTN). That’s the portion of our bus network in which ridership and density along the routes justify frequencies of 15 minutes or less. Making the routes more convenient to use will attract new riders and will preserve those who already support the system by easing crowding on the buses.
This is the map of the new/current FTN routes:
The map was a tool I shared in a March newsletter and it’s an equally valuable tool for you today. You can see the network touches every ward in the city, even way out on the east side. That means our bus frequent network is being recognized and used by residents throughout the city.
We invest about $30 million annually in the fixed route Sun Tran system. The system attracts over 20 million fares each year. It’s not just students or low income riders. There is a wide demographic using our transit system. We intend on preserving it and enhancing it where ridership warrants further investments.
Check out www.suntran.com to see the entire Sun Tran route-by-route schedule. On that site you can also find information about promotional fares, multi-day passes and how to get your SunGo Card. Our goal is to make the system as financially solvent as we can. To do that we’re balancing convenience and cost with our other budget obligations. The FTN was a good addition to that balance.
Related to transit is the widening of Broadway. While I do not support the extent to which the RTA and M&C are pushing the widening, I do support involving Rio Nuevo and the Project for Public Spaces in the design of what we’re doing.
In April we moved forward with joining forces with Rio Nuevo on their participation in the Broadway project. At their end, Rio signed on the Project for Public Spaces (PPS), an internationally recognized group who works in the area of roadway design and place making. This quote from one of their founders exemplifies the approach they bring to design:
"This is like a transportation project – started as a transportation project, Broadway. We’re trying to now make it into a place-making project. But the transportation aspects are still really important because it’s still got to be walkable. It’s got to be bikeable. You need to be able to get there. You need to be able to cross it on foot. And it’s got to be connected to the neighborhoods.”
You may have seen the article in the Star over the weekend. It makes it clear we’re still wrestling with how to integrate what the taxpayers paid for with the PPS study and what’s actually happening out on Broadway.
While PPS and Rio are advocating for creating destinations and for preserving properties that could be adaptively reused by commercial tenants, the city is negotiating buy-outs and planning on demolishing the structures PPS studied. Here’s an example of an area along the corridor that has been identified for possible reuse:
By moving the structures back away from the roadway, as was done decades ago on Speedway, we can achieve what the citizens who participated in the Broadway design charettes for the past five years have been asking for. We cannot if the buildings are simply purchased by the city and demolished.
As was made clear in Joe Ferguson’s article last weekend, this is still a hot topic of conversation. Our decision in April should still be relevant today. I will continue to advocate for creating walkable, bikeable destinations along the Sunshine Mile, and in the process saving taxpayer money to be used on road projects that really need it.
Speaking of roadway projects, you voted in May overwhelmingly in favor of Proposition 101, a portion of which will go to funding pavement preservation all over the city.
The guy I was running against for re-election – along with the head of the Pima County GOP – can’t quite accept the support for this proposition. These are the data though:
It won by nearly 10 percentage points even out in the relatively conservative east side. The proposition was a half-cent sales tax increase. It’ll sunset in five years. The tax is split 60 percent for public safety needs and 40 percent for road repair. That means about $150 million for police and fire and about $100 million for roads, spread over the next five years.
The arterials included in the road portion were each identified on the ballot. That’s 60 percent of that part of the tax. The remaining 40 percent is for residential streets and will be allocated by our Bond Oversight Committee. They’ve been working on the Prop 409 street funding and will continue on with these new dollars.
The public safety equipment we’ll be buying with the Prop 101 money was also identified on the ballot material. It will include police cars, fire trucks, paramedic trucks, upgrades and consolidation of police and fire stations, and personal safety equipment for both firefighters and cops. It’s all needed and no, the need is not the result of the M&C not properly prioritizing our budget. By way of reminder to those who have forgotten, we had a recession in 2009 and 2010. Now with the influx of Prop 101 money, we’ll be able to play catch-up for the next five years and buy some much needed gear.
I would have preferred to not sunset the roads piece. The $20 million annually could be spent effectively on road maintenance for well out into the future. But politics is the art-of-compromise, so I conceded that point and joined everyone else on the M&C in support of this proposition. We’re grateful for the show of confidence expressed by the voters in our ability to manage the funds well.
We adopted a structurally balanced budget for the second straight year. We achieved that on the heels of the recession I mentioned in relation to Prop 101 and infrastructure and equipment needs. While we all understand the importance of reaching that milestone, the fact that Bond Rating Agencies did as well is of significant importance.
In June, following our adoption of the FY18 budget, the rating agencies came out with updated comments on our fiscal position. Here’s some of what they had to say:
That “stable” outlook was an improvement from last year. Here’s what it means to S&P:
And from Fitch:
Again, note the stable outlook. That gives lenders confidence in our ability to manage your money effectively.
Here’s their further commentary on our fiscal stability:
We will continue to be willing to “make appropriate financial and operational adjustments” as we move into the FY19 budget talks.
I would have preferred to see greater levels of funding for some of the outside civic events we support such as El Tour, Tucson Meet Yourself, 4th Avenue Street Fair, All Soul’s Procession, Book Festival, and many more. They’re economic drivers for the community that deserve our support. But as was the case last year, I joined M&C in supporting our structurally balanced budget and will continue to advocate for those other events as we move towards greater financial health in the future.
It’s fitting this item comes after both the FTN expansion and our budget process. Our ability to fund Sun Tran – and anything else we’re involved in – is a function of the health of the General Fund. We were well positioned to support the TransDev team this year with what the vast majority of Sun Tran workers felt was a fair settlement offer.
We as a governing body cannot directly insert ourselves into the bargaining process. Neither can any city staff. Since the system is funded with federal dollars, the workers have to retain the right to strike. City workers cannot strike, so we hire an outside management firm to run the transit operations. We do fund those operations, so our budgetary role is pivotal to the ability to put a good product out on the streets and for TransDev to put a good offer on the bargaining table.
There are about 550 Sun Tran workers. Those include drivers, mechanics, technicians and others who keep the fleet operating on schedule. This year they were offered a three-year deal, a year longer than what has been the case historically. That’s good for the stability of the system. We were able to have TransDev offer them a package of about $2.5 miller over that three year period. That’s similar to the one-time bump in pay we just gave city workers. I felt that “me too” treatment was an important way to send the message that we do not consider Sun Tran workers to be 2nd class employees, whether they work directly for us or not. They represent the city, so the settlement terms were legitimately reflective of how we treat city workers.
During the run-up to the contract expiration, we were also made aware that the TransDev contract expired with the city at the end of August. TransDev was responsible for operating all of our transit with the exception of the streetcar system. We have RDMT (Rapt Dev McDonald Transit) under contract for that part of the transit network. In order to avoid having to be negotiating the TransDev contract at the same time they were negotiating Sun Tran, we allowed their management responsibility to lapse and through our procurement process assigned the system management all to RDMT. That agreement will last until the end of 2018. Early in the year we’ll begin to solicit for a new management agreement. There are several options for that, each of which will involve community and legal input before any choice is made.
The good news is that a strike was avoided. The winner is the community. Nobody wanted to see the disruption the 2015 strike brought.
In July, the University of Arizona introduced a new president. Bobby Robbins walked into the middle of what had become a heated rezoning controversy. Welcome to Tucson.
Several years ago, American Campus Communities (ACC) brought forward a student housing proposal. It would have included about 1,500 beds in a location that required a rezoning. That spot lay outside of the university planning boundary, and adjacent to both the North University and Feldman’s neighborhood. That adjacency elicited a strong negative reaction. ACC walked away from the project until last year.
When land is privately owned, it is subject to city zoning rules. When it is owned by the state, it is not. Early last year ACC reemerged, this time with a memorandum of understanding (MOU) in hand they had crafted with the UA. The general terms of the deal involved ACC ceding ownership of the land to the state and in turn they’d build and operate the dorms. The act of turning over ownership takes the parcel out of the city rezoning process.
This map shows the location of the proposed dorms. It’s in the yellow square just north of the area labeled “Precinct 3.” The black hard line is the planning boundary identified in the campus master plan.
The rezoning process – that which ACC had begun about five years ago and walked away from – involves a very public process that ends with a vote at the M&C to either approve the zoning change, deny it, or approve it with conditions. By the terms of the MOU, ACC avoided any of that, the UA gets the dorm and doesn’t have to pay out of pocket cash or bond for it. We voted to advise the Board of Regents that we believed the arrangement was illegally creating what was still a private use of the property and that it needed to be run through the normal rezoning process.
The new facility is proposed to host an Honors Dorm with about 550 beds of honors students. It will include the residential component, labs, study halls, a rec center, eating facilities, parking and UA offices. It’s proposed to be six stories on the edge furthest from the single family residences, stepping down to four stories closest to them.
The project received ABOR approval, but still requires the Board of Regents to formally approve a land use agreement and management plan that outlines the financial terms and operational plan for the Honors Campus. Those terms will inform our decision on whether or not we continue to have legal standing to force the project back to the zoning process.
While we await those documents, we have agreed to some conditions with ACC and the University on some of the structural elements of the dorms (no balconies, no rooftop party areas, etc.), the need to include stub-outs for renewable energy components, respect of our outdoor lighting code and vacating some portions of Park to protect historic structures in the area that’d be impacted should Park eventually be widened. All of that is just planning while we wait to see if the land use agreement and management contract have cured the legal deficiencies we see in the MOU.
There are two very troubling parts to this project. One is the incremental degredation of quality of life in residential areas that surround campus. Building vertical within the campus footprint can solve that. The other is the precedent this sets for similar land swaps that could occur anyplace in the city. As soon as the state takes ownership, zoning protections property owners have made their investment decisions on disappear.
We should see the final terms early in 2018. At that time we’ll know whether or not we have legal standing to challenge the manner in which this project is moving ahead.
I begin every newsletter with a half-staff section in which I remind people that firearm deaths occur daily throughout the country. Unless the death involves somebody famous, governors don’t issue half-staff notices. My point is that all lives lost are significant to the family, friends and loved ones of those lost to us.
Throughout the year I have continued to advocate for the implementation of gun safety measures locally, as well as more broadly. On September 24 I was invited to play a 90-minute music set at the Monterey Court during the Concert Across America, a day on which gun safety advocacy took place nationwide. It was my honor to take part.
In 2017 we saw some major mass shooting incidents: he murders in Las Vegas in which over 500 people were killed or injured, the church shootings, school shootings, domestic violence related shootings, accidential deaths occurring due to children gaining access to firearms, and on and on. Congress has failed the public and has not taken any action to help slow that litany of death.
This year we saw the Arizona State Supreme Court rule that the city is no longer allowed to destroy firearms, even those turned over to us by the public with the expressed desire to have them taken out of circulation. The attorney general says more guns in circulation makes us safer. The court bought it.
The Vegas murders brought gadgets called bump stocks to the public’s attention. Those render a semi-automatic weapon into one that continues firing rounds with a single pull of the trigger. An “automatic” weapon is heavily regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. The use of a bump stock effectively makes a semi-automatic weapon function as an automatic. I wanted them banned for sale, use or possession in Tucson. The impact of the Arizona Supreme Court ruling was that we cannot pass that local ordinance.
Early in the year I began working with the family of a woman who was murdered by her boyfriend. She was 25 years old at the time. They had a three-year-old child. No charges were ever brought against the shooter. The county attorney called it all just a big accident. I am still pulling together the documents related to that incident. It has taken me six public records requests and the threat of suing the city for access to get what is still an incomplete set of documents. We aren’t going away. Based on what we have at this point I believe a case can be built. I hope to finalize that in 2018 and see justice for the family and for the woman.
During the Concert Across America I played and sang what was her favorite song, “If I Die Young.” One of the lines from the song goes “the sharp knife of a short life.” We’ll continue to fight for the records and we’ll get justice for that life cut short. I will continue to fight for gun safety laws that make these sorts of efforts less and less necessary.
On a related note, throughout the year at candidate forums, neighborhood meetings and at M&C study sessions, I have continued to advocate for Home Rule. That means getting Phoenix out of trying to manage our local affairs. Guns are one area in which they want to preempt local decision making. Each legislative session numerous bills are presented that attempt to broaden the state’s ability to control local decisions. I will continue to resist those efforts as they inevitably resume when the legislature returns in January.
In 2016, over three-quarters of domestic violence-related deaths were committed with a firearm. The rate of DV gun violence in Arizona is 45 percent higher in Arizona than it is nationwide. Given the approach to gun laws we see at the state level, that shouldn’t be surprising.
October is my time to work with Emerge! Center for Domestic Abuse and educate the public on what DV looks like. It’s of course related to gun deaths, but it’s also much more. It affects your friends and possibly your family members in insidious ways you may not recognize.
Any controlling behavior could be a sign of an abusive relationship. That can include cash management, controlling how somebody dresses, calling at all times of the day, or restricting who a partner may associate with. Behavior that places one party in a relationship under the control of the other may be a sign that the relationship either is or could develop into one in which domestic violence takes place.
Emerge! is the go-to organization in Tucson and Pima County for victims. They will also consult with friends or family members who are concerned with what they’re observing in a relationship and need some advice on where to turn. Emerge! provides housing, supplies for moms and kids who are coming out of a DV situation, counseling of all sorts, and of course the 24-hour emergency hotline at 795.4266.
You may have noticed that we shut down the Ward office meeting rooms for a week in December. During that time we turned the facility over to Emerge! for their Holiday House. They turned our meeting rooms into festive spaces in which moms and kids could come and “shop” (for free) for gifts to help make this Christmas one during which they could focus on something other than an abusive situation. I was happy to work with Emerge! staff and the many volunteers who made the event a reality for literally hundreds of DV victims living right here in Tucson.
That graphic shows another trend in DV. Since the Trump election, police are finding fewer Latinos reporting domestic abuse. If you believe these data are the result of a transormation in the Latino community such that DV is on the decline by these numbers, I wish you well on your return to reality. Political decisions have collateral impacts. This is one example.
In 2017 our DV City Court was recognized nationally for their strong work with DV victims. Our court system and processes are now working as mentor courts with other systems throughout the country. We at the Ward 6 office are proud of their work and are committed to continuing our own involvement to bring attention to the many forms of domestic abuse in our community.
The Honors College was a unique rezoning item. It’s still not fully resolved. In November, the M&C voted 6-1 to approve the Planned Area Development (PAD) rezoning for a new Fry’s store that is planned for the corner of Houghton and 22nd. In the normal course of things a new grocery store wouldn’t qualify for a year in review mention. In this case I believe it violated our own zoning rules. It’s also still not fully resolved.
Last year we were asked to amend the Houghton East Neighborhood Plan (HENP) to allow for a taller grocery store than the plan allowed. If that were all the project was proposing to change in the neighborhood plan, it wouldn’t have been an issue. In fact though, the proposed site development is out of conformance with several areas of the HENP. I voted against the approval of amending the plan back then because what was being asked did not cover all the changes being proposed. I voted against the rezoning in November because we were effectively amending the HENP, but doing it through a rezoning process. That’s not allowed by our own development codes.
This is a graphic of what’s being proposed for the site:
Here are a few of the flaws in what on its face may appear just fine in that graphic.
First, even the planned area development conditions prohibit a development of greater than 100,000 square feet. Since the gas station is operated by Fry’s, that square footage should be included in the footprint defining the 100,000 square feet. On the night of the public hearing the development team showed a graphic in which they had reduced the Fry’s component to 96,000 square feet. Nobody had seen it before. Surely nobody had seen it at the zoning examiner hearing in which the public had a chance to weigh in and comment. Our city attorney allowed it to be included in what we voted on. I believe that process was flawed.
Also not shown on the graphic is that the gas station (12 gas pumps) is being built on top of a flood zone and the perimeter landscaping is surrounded by a block wall. That wall and the gas station will require significant grading and excavation. Neither of those are allowed in an area such as this – one that contains riparian habitat as well as drainage channels – under the terms of the HENP. In approving the PAD, we amended those portions of the plan through a rezoning.
I’m not just making up the requirement that the PAD must conform with the neighborhood plan. This is a quote from our own Unified Development Code:
In order to get around that requirement, our city legal folks relied on a comment from an out-of-state zoning ruling in which the court determined a proposed rezoning to be in “basic harmony” with the terms of an area plan and so the development was allowed to move forward. In that case the height of the proposed building was 500 feet. The plan allowed 250 feet. If we’re calling a doubling of the allowable standards to be basically harmonious with the terms of a plan, then the plans have no value.
I’ve asked for a January 9th study session in order to talk about the value of neighborhood and area plans. We’ll also talk about where the public voice exists when changes in a Neighborhood Preservation Zone design manual are in conflict with staff interpretations. On January 18th we’ll follow that up with a public meeting here at the Ward 6 office in which staff will continue to develop the discussion we’ll have on the 9th. We’ll touch on areas such as how plans are amended, what “basic harmony” means in a rezoning, who makes the determination as to conformance, and more.
In the meantime, the Fry’s rezoning may still be facing some legal challenges.
In the same way we have zoning rules that guided how people living around the Honors Dorm made their investment decisions, we have neighborhood and area plans that were established jointly by the city and area residents in order to “plan” how development would take place in their neighborhoods. Based on the Fry’s vote, we need to establish – re-establish – the role and legal standing of those plans.
Maybe more to come on Fry’s.
I cannot let a year in review happen without mentioning water security. Every month during the year I have devoted some space in newsletters to that topic. I believe it’s one of the two most important issues we deal with at the M&C. In 2017 we made some important decisions, culminating is action taken in December by the working group with which I’m involved.
Early in the year a group formed with the intent of impacting water policy on a statewide basis. I’m pleased to be included as a member of that group. Called the Southwest Water Working Group (SWwG), we’re a loosely coupled set of individuals and agencies who share the common goal of framing water policy that will protect that valuable resource. We do not see that as the current guiding principle coming out of Phoenix.
You’ve seen this image of Lake Mead in newsletters before:
That “bathtub ring” shows how far the levels of Mead have fallen over time. We are taking more out of the lake to supply demands downstream than nature is putting into it. That’s called a structural deficit. We cannot ignore it.
Based on whom you ask, there’s a 50 percent chance a shortage will be declared on the Lake by 2021. That will mean reductions in CAP allocations to downstream users. Depending on how low the Mead levels go, impacts on the city could be to our agriculture community, residential and eventually to prices we pay for power (water turns the turbins at the Hoover Dam which supplies power throughout Arizona).
Tucson Water is a leader in water security policy. We store water for ourselves and for Phoenix, wheel water to surrounding jurisdictions, and we’re an active voice in state level discussions related to preventing how the drought will affect the Colorado River. Last year I was pleased to bring the initiative of expanding the use of stormwater on private property to M&C. We can measure its value and should encourage private development to retain and preserve the resource. Locally, we’re doing quite a bit with water security. But the water coalition I’m working with believes there is a need to do significantly more.
In December, the SWwG penned a letter that went to several state level water policy players and legislators. In it we expressed the need for a greater emphasis on conservation. That message has been our consistent theme. The governor’s Water Augmentation Council is focused on finding new and expensive sources of water. Ours is on conserving that which we have. One focus accepts that we’re going to continue exacerbating the structural deficit that exists on Lake Mead. The other calls on us to change direction and preserve that resource for future generations.
In 2017 I became a grandpa times two:
I want that little guy to be able to grow up and enjoy an assured supply of clean and available water. Without it, well, life isn’t possible. The politics-of-the-day cannot win out over that as a principled goal all of us must embrace. I will. We at the Ward 6 office will. We on the SWwG will. We at the M&C will. We’re hopeful Ducey and the prime water users join on board.
Here are a few closing comments. Between today and the end of the year, SunShuttle will run free shuttles from Udall Park up to Sabino Canyon. The weather is unseasonably nice. If you have friends or relatives in town who need to join you in walking off some of the holiday calories that may have crept into your waistline, consider a hike through the canyon. The first shuttle leaves Udall at 9:15 a.m. They’ll run hourly with the last one leaving Sabino at 4:55 p.m. daily.
To all of you who fail to recognize the trend-setting approach I have to my cell phone, check out this shot of Phoenix Suns owner Robert Sarver.
Between the two of us we’ll keep hope alive that the world will return to the flip phone days of yore. The guy seated next to him is Larry Fitzgerald, a Phoenix Cardinals player who clearly doesn’t understand the flip concept.
Here is a final Be Kind note for the year.
Thank you to all who brought in cookies and other goodies over the holiday season. I want to assure each of you that I did indeed “share” with my staff.
You’re welcome to continue baking throughout 2019 – and Ann, Diana, Alison, Chris, Mark and Caroline will all be included in sharing the bounty.
Thank you for an active and challenging 2017. Thank you for re-hiring us for another term of serving you. We at the Ward 6 office look forward to continuing to develop lasting and meaningful relationships throughout Tucson in the coming year.
Council Member, Ward 6