The information pamphlet on Propositions 427 and 428 sent to voters made for interesting reading. A few things were notable. The first was the difference in the number of supporters for each side of the propositions. The number of writers opposed to the two propositions was greater than the number of writers who supported the propositions. I suppose that difference is not surprising given the size of the crowd opposing the development during open public hearings.

The more striking difference between the two groups, however, is their composition. The individuals who wrote in opposition to the propositions appeared to be individual citizens. I don't recall any political, economic or institutional affiliation attached to their names. They seemed to be just ordinary people of Fountain Hills.

Those who wrote in favor of the propositions were different. If I recall correctly there was one proponent who holds a political office and two or three who attached Daybreak PAC to their names. Does PAC affiliation mean they are compensated for supporting the propositions? I doubt such compensation would be unlawful or even immoral. But why did no ordinary citizens write in support of the propositions?

When the two groups are compared, what are we left with? The group opposed to the propositions is large and consists of fellow citizens. The group supporting the propositions is fewer and appear to lack a base of citizens. I suspect that some citizens support the propositions. However, it is telling that none of them saw fit to offer public support in the informational pamphlet.