Being introduced tonight include Prop 189, Sponsored by Councillor Cardwell, which would appropriate redevelopment grant dollars to the Indiana Convention and Visitors Association. According to Maury Plambeck, Director of the Department of Metropolitan Development, it is a grant from White Foundation, which has insisted that the money flow through the City to the ICVA. But, the grant is said to have been secured by the ICVA. Prop 189 is being assigned to the Metropolitan Development Committee, which next meets on July 12, at 5:30 pm in room 260.
Prop 196, sponsored by Councillor Evans, the digest of which is as follows:
urges the State of Arizona to repeal SB 1070, that no other state enact similar law, that the U.S. Congress consinder [sic] and act expeditiously to enact comprehensive immigration reform, and that the City and County neither hold nor attend official meetings in the State of Arizona, nor enter into any new contract for goods or services with vendors situated in Arizona until the new Arizona immigration law is repealed
Prop 196 is being referred to the Rules committee which next meets on July 6, at 5:30 pm in room 260.
Prop 197 is the proposal to approve the sale of the water and sewer utilities. Unfortunately, the exhibits referred to in the proposal which are purported to contain the details of the sale, are blank in the online version. I will edit this post to include a link as soon as I have one to these all important details. Prop 197 is being assigned to the newly created 'Utility Transfer Oversight Committee'. Melissa Thompson, Clerk of the Council Office, tells me that the committee will meet on July 6, after the Rules committee meeting ends. The committee will also meet on July 19, beginning at 5:30 pm in room 260. Ms. Thompson further informs me that the committee members have not yet been assigned.
Of the Proposals set for a final vote tonight, only Prop 167 seems to have engendered any negative votes in committee. Minutes of the June 8 meeting of the Administration & Finance committee indicate that the point of contention was about the process of Council approval of leases, with Councillor Malone saying voting for the proposal is "just to vote on what has already been completed". Councillors Malone and Lewis both voted against the proposal, while Councillors Pfisterer, Cockrum, Day, and Sanders all voted for it.