💧 Tucson Water Rate Hikes Target County Residents While Arizona Vouchers Fund Luxury Items | Buckmaster Show Analysis

Discover how Tucson's proposed 16-23% water rate increase for county residents and Arizona's school voucher program allowing purchases of espresso machines and hotel stays impact resource equity.

Apr 11, 2025

😽 Keepin’ It Simple Summary for Younger Readers
👧🏾✊🏾👦🏾

🌵💧 In Tucson, important decisions are being made about water 💧 and education 📚 that affect everyone. The city wants to charge people living outside the city limits 🏙️ much more for water 💦, even though they've been customers for decades. At the same time, the state's program that gives money 💰 to families who don't use public schools 🏫 is being used to buy things like espresso machines ☕ and hotel stays 🏨 instead of just educational materials. Both situations show how public resources 🌍 that should benefit everyone are being unfairly distributed, with some people getting advantages 🏆 while others lose out 😕.

🗝️ Takeaways

💧 The City of Tucson is attempting to implement 16-23% water rate increases specifically targeting county residents after courts struck down their previous attempt as discriminatory
💼 Pima County is fast-tracking the appointment process to fill Adelita Grijalva's vacant supervisor seat to ensure District 5 has representation during critical budget development
🏞️ The county successfully acquired the Kelly Ranch property, fulfilling a commitment made to voters in the 2004 open space bond package
📚 Arizona's school voucher program currently approves questionable purchases, including espresso machines, freeze-dryers, hotel stays for "field trips," and subscription services
💸 A loophole allows families to collect approximately $4,600 per child in voucher money for summer months, then re-enroll in public schools in the fall
🗳️ There's a renewed legislative push to make school board elections partisan despite the governor's previous veto of similar legislation

Get 7 day free trial

Water Wars & Voucher Woes: The Battle for Resources in the Old Pueblo

In the unforgiving heat of an early-arriving Sonoran summer—with temperatures pushing us into what Bill Buckmaster and his co-host Tom Fairbanks described as "mid-May, kind of early June type weather"—the battle lines are being drawn. Not just on thermometers displaying unseasonably high temperatures, but in the corridors of local power where decisions about our most precious resources are being made with alarming disregard for equity and fairness.

The 4/10/25 edition of the Buckmaster Show brought these conflicts into sharp focus, revealing how the struggle for control of water and education funding continues to play out against a backdrop of increasing resource scarcity and ideological entrenchment. As we navigate this desert landscape—both literal and political—the conversations with Pima County Supervisor Rex Scott and education expert Dr. Robert Hendricks expose the arid reality of resource distribution in our community.

Rex Scott: When Water Becomes a Political Weapon

Pima County Board of Supervisors Chair Rex Scott, representing District 1 (the foothills and parts of Oro Valley), began with a sobering revelation about the City of Tucson's renewed attempt to implement differential water rates for county residents served by Tucson Water but living outside city limits.

After courts struck down their previous attempt as discriminatory, the city appears to be back with what Scott calls a carefully tailored approach designed to pass legal muster while achieving the same inequitable outcome—gouging county residents who have no electoral voice in city politics.

"It is unfair. It is discriminatory," Scott stated emphatically, his frustration evident. "This proposal...is carefully tailored to not only pass legal muster, and we'll see if it does, but it's also designed with an end in mind. And the end is to raise rates on people who live in the unincorporated county."

This move would result in staggering increases of 16-23% for those living in unincorporated areas—many of whom, like Buckmaster himself, have been loyal Tucson Water customers for 30+ years.

Ah yes, nothing says "good neighbor policy" quite like targeting people who can't vote you out of office for a cash grab. Perhaps next week they'll propose a "breathing air surcharge" for county residents who dare to inhale city oxygen while shopping at Tucson Mall.

Scott pointed out the fundamental unfairness: "When you have a conclusion or an end in mind, you're going to find any means to work towards that end." Rather than conducting a holistic cost-of-service study involving all ratepayers in the system, the city appears fixated on extracting revenue from a captive customer base lacking representation in city governance.

The proposal reflects a troubling pattern of resource inequality, where those with political power use it to shift costs onto those without electoral recourse—a dynamic that too often plays out in our region's approach to resource management. Scott promised that the county would "do everything that we can to advocate not only for the interests of the people whom we represent in the unincorporated county, but also we're going to look for any means of finding collaborative regional approaches to dealing with our water resources."

Scott also addressed the upcoming appointment to fill the District 5 supervisor seat vacated by Adelita Grijalva, who resigned to run for her late father Raúl Grijalva's congressional seat. The board has fast-tracked the process to ensure the 200,000+ residents of District 5 have representation during the critical budget season.

"We adopted this process unanimously at our last meeting," Scott explained, noting that whoever is appointed will need to run in both the 2026 and 2028 elections—first to complete Grijalva's term and then for a full term of their own. Six candidates are vying for the position, with five participating in a League of Women Voters forum the night before the interview.

When Buckmaster probed about whether former legislative aide Andrés Cano might have an inside track, Scott was diplomatic but clear: "There is no favored candidate." However, he acknowledged Cano's significant experience, including his service in the District 5 office and his three terms as a state lawmaker.

Additionally, Scott highlighted the county's acquisition of the Kelly Ranch property, which is surrounded on three sides by Catalina State Park. This fulfills a commitment made to voters in the 2004 open space bond package.

"It has both cultural significance in terms of not only the ranch house, but some of the other artifacts on the property. And it certainly has interest with regard to its wildlife and land protection components," Scott noted, adding that the purchase was supported by the town of Oro Valley and Mayor Joe Winfield.

Dr. Robert Hendricks: Public Education Funds Flow to Private Luxuries

If the water discussion left you parched, the education segment with Dr. Robert Hendricks might leave you financially dehydrated as well as morally outraged. The lifelong educator and former Flowing Wells School District superintendent painted a disturbing picture of ongoing attempts to dismantle public education through Arizona's ever-expanding school voucher program.

Hendricks revealed jaw-dropping examples of what the state's Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program—which provides around $7,000 per student—currently covers for homeschooling families. The list reads like a luxury catalog rather than educational necessities: espresso machines, freeze dryers, household cleaning services, multi-person kayaks, ready-to-eat subscription meal services, streaming subscriptions to Netflix and Disney+, passes to theme parks, training and care of service animals, and perhaps most egregiously, hotel expenses for family vacations masquerading as "field trips."

Nothing screams "educational necessity" quite like a premium espresso machine and a family hotel stay at Disneyland, does it? I'm sure public school teachers—spending hundreds from their own pockets for basic classroom supplies—would love to know they're competing with voucher-funded backyard trampolines and subscription meal services.

Even more outrageous is the summer loophole that Hendricks exposed: "If you're a parent and at the end of a school year, you apply for the voucher program. The summer goes by, and you re-enroll in a public school in the fall. That period of time in the summer is reimbursed under the voucher system,m and you basically get two-thirds of that $7,000 for a summer hiatus."

That's right—families can game the system to collect approximately $4,600 in taxpayer money for summer vacation, then return to public schools in the fall. Multiply that by several children in a family, and we're talking about a significant taxpayer-funded windfall with zero educational accountability.

When the State Board of Education proposed reasonable restrictions—like capping computer purchases at $2,000 per student every two years and musical instruments at $4,000 every three years—voucher recipients descended on the state board meeting to complain. Hendricks related that "one parent said that she felt that she was part of an artsy family and that it was important that her child be able to get expensive shoes for her ballet lessons and that she shouldn't be limited to $2,000 for a musical instrument."

The audacity is breathtaking—demanding unlimited taxpayer funding for luxury items while public schools struggle to maintain aging buildings and adequate staffing. When did "school choice" transform into "taxpayer-funded shopping spree choice"?

The proposed restrictions also included eliminating approval for the most egregious items. But after initial support for tightening regulations, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne "folded," according to Hendricks. "He basically said we need more time to review this. We need to form a committee," Hendricks explained, adding wryly, "which is what everyone says when they don't want to make a decision."

Hendricks also addressed the persistent push to make school board elections partisan, a move previously vetoed by Governor Katie Hobbs but now resurrected in the legislature. Only nine states currently have partisan school board elections, with Arizona maintaining non-partisan races for these volunteer positions.

Hendricks shared a poignant story about a highly respected community member who decided to run as a non-partisan candidate despite being courted by both parties. Because this individual refused to declare a partisan affiliation, their name appeared on neither party's voter guide, and they lost the election—a stark illustration of how partisanship can override community service and local knowledge in education governance.

The Water-Education Connection: Commodifying Our Commons

Both discussions reveal an unsettling pattern: the relentless commodification of shared resources that should be equitably distributed. Whether it's water—the literal foundation of life in our desert community—or education—the foundation of a functioning democracy—powerful interests continue working to transform public goods into profit centers or political weapons.

The city's water rate scheme targets county residents who have no voting power over city leadership. At the same time, the voucher program siphons public education dollars to fund private luxuries with minimal accountability or educational standards. Both represent a disturbing trend toward privileging certain groups at the expense of collective wellbeing and resource sustainability.

This is the end game of market fundamentalism—the transformation of every public good into a commodity that can be bought, sold, or withheld based on one's political power or purchasing ability. The invisible hand becomes a very visible fist for those without a seat at the decision-making table.

The parallel is striking: just as water is being weaponized against county residents, education funding is being diverted from the common good to individual benefit—creating a two-tier system where those with privilege can extract maximum value while those without face increasingly desiccated public resources.

These policies don't emerge in a vacuum—they reflect deeper ideological commitments to privatization and the dismantling of public systems in favor of market-based approaches that inevitably produce winners and losers based on pre-existing advantage. As our climate grows hotter and resources scarcer, these inequities will only intensify unless we reclaim our commitment to the commons.

A Wellspring of Resistance: Finding Hope in Dry Times

Despite these challenges, both Scott and Hendricks demonstrate that dedicated public servants continue fighting for equitable distribution of resources. Their willingness to name and challenge these inequities offers hope that with enough public awareness and engagement, we can preserve our commitment to the commons—those shared resources that make community possible.

Scott's determination to pursue "collaborative regional approaches" to water management points toward a more sustainable future than the current zero-sum game. Hendricks' persistent critique of educational funding inequities keeps vital information flowing to the public despite powerful interests preferring these issues remain obscured.

The path forward requires collective action—attending local government meetings where these decisions are made, supporting candidates who prioritize equitable resource distribution, and building coalitions that cross jurisdictional boundaries to address our shared challenges. The Pima County Board of Supervisors meets regularly with public comment periods, the State Board of Education makes consequential decisions about education funding, and both need to hear from community members who value our common resources.

As the summer heat intensifies prematurely, so too must our determination to protect what belongs to all of us, whether it flows from our taps or fills the minds of our children. In this parched political landscape, our engagement becomes the rare and precious rainfall that can transform seemingly barren ground into a flourishing desert ecosystem of equity and shared prosperity.

Questions to Consider:

How can county residents effectively organize to challenge the City of Tucson's water rate increases when they lack direct electoral power over city officials? What precedents exist for cross-jurisdictional cooperation rather than competition?
What accountability measures would you propose for Arizona's school voucher program to ensure that taxpayer dollars genuinely advance educational outcomes rather than funding lifestyle enhancements?

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!

Quotes:

"It is unfair. It is discriminatory. And even if the city of Tucson and Tucson Water have found some methodology that they think will legally cover them in the case that they move forward with this, which looks likely, it is unfair and it is discriminatory." — Rex Scott on the proposed water rate increases for county residents
"When you have a conclusion or an end in mind, you're going to find any means to work towards that end." — Rex Scott on Tucson's targeted approach to raising rates on unincorporated county residents
"If you're a parent and you apply for the voucher program at the end of a school year. The summer goes by, and you re-enroll in a public school in the fall. That period of time in the summer is reimbursed under the voucher system, and you basically get two-thirds of that $7,000 for a summer hiatus." — Dr. Robert Hendricks revealing a shocking loophole in the voucher program
"Some of our most critical legislators are continuing to beat the drum to try to dismantle as much as they can of the public school system." — Dr. Robert Hendricks on the legislature's apparent hostility toward public education
"I have to kind of think, did these folks have a bad experience in school?" — Dr. Robert Hendricks questioning the motivations of legislators who seem determined to undermine public education

People Mentioned & Quotes:

Rex Scott — Current Chair of the Pima County Board of Supervisors representing District 1: "We should be looking for ways to come together as a region in terms of making use of this most precious of natural resources, our water."
Adelita Grijalva — Former Pima County Supervisor who resigned to run for Congress: No direct quotes, but mentioned as having stepped down from District 5 to seek her late father's congressional seat.
Raúl Grijalva — Late Congressman, Adelita's father: No direct quotes, referred to as recently deceased.
Andrés Cano — Candidate for District 5 supervisor position: No direct quotes, but Scott acknowledged his "tremendous amount of experience having worked in the state lawmaker...having worked in the District 5 office as an intern and then as a staff member."
Dr. Robert Hendricks — Former Flowing Wells School District Superintendent: "The example of things that were listed that would no longer be approved, which currently are approved, mind you, are backpacks, lunchboxes, children's car seats, clothing other than uniforms, freeze dryers, espresso machines, greenhouses, dog training, footwear."
Tom Horne — Current Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction: No direct quotes, but described by Hendricks as having initially supported proposed voucher restrictions before changing position.
Bill Buckmaster — Host of the Buckmaster Show: "My case would be 37 years," referring to how long he's been a Tucson Water customer in the unincorporated county.
Joe Winfield — Mayor of Oro Valley: No direct quotes, mentioned as supporting the Kelly Ranch acquisition.