Failing by 65 percent, 388,362 votes were cast against Referendum A, which would have approved a $2 billion bond for water projects.
Those opposing the referendum have portrayed the amendment as dedicating money toward unknown water improvement initiatives.
“The public is not prepared to lay out large sums of money to fund water projects for development,” said David Wright of Citizen Planners. “We were told tax payers would not have to pay it, but you could quickly see that costs could fall onto the users.”
Wright said he was concerned about what the money made from the bond would be used for and private entities may end up with discretion over the money use.
“There was that word private, in there,” he said. “It could end up in the hands of private corporations.”
Wright said the referendum was pushed forward by legislation even though it amounted to little.
“In truth it didn’t amount to anything,” he said. “It was put forth by legislation to make it look like they are doing something.”