In Arizona, such a vote can only be put to a vote once a "stadium district" is created, which requires at least two communities. Such a district was created among Mesa, Gilbert and Queen Creek for the purpose of building a new football stadium for the Arizona Cardinals, the NFL team. (The three are continguous, but Mesa does not border Queen Creek.) Two votes were then put: 1) whether to allow a stadium to be built in Mesa; and 2) whether to tax Mesans to pay for it. The second vote was defeated by Mesa alone over the other two towns (who voted in favor of it, but barely); I believe the first issue was rejected, but it may have passed. In any case, there was again no money to pay for it. Some people actually said (and wrote in to the paper) that the City Council, or some other public body, should pass a tax anyway, because the people obviously don't know what's good for them. (These are the same people that don't like taxes generally, but don't seem to mind when it's being given to wealthy people. Go figure.) Of course, the memory of the Wilcox shooting over BOB (Bank One Ballpark - the Diamondbacks' stadium, so named because of Bank One's healthy contribution).
More recently, a different tax was passed. This one would place a tax only on rental cars and hotels, so the tourists (of whom there are many here) would pay for the park. Other problems have arisen, however - specifically, no one can agree on where to build the stadium. A wealthy landowner in the west part of the Phoenix metropolitan area offered to donate some land for a stadium with no strings attached, but the offer was rejected. He later sued against a particular site being used for some technical legal reason. A site in Tempe near Sky Harbor Airport (and near the ASU Sun Devil Stadium, which the Cardinals currently use) was initially approved, but overruled by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in that the stadium's existence at that particular site would pose hazards to air travel. Senator John McCain intervened with the FAA, requesting they reconsider, but he request was denied. Sites on Indian Reservations have been rejected (for both political as well as jurisdictional reasons, I believe). Other sites in the metro area have been defeated due to political infighting and scorched-earth policies.
Lately, two different groups opposing the stadium being placed in Mesa at all have each obtained sufficient signatures to place the issue on the ballot again, confident that Mesans will reject the stadium utterly. Thus Mesa has a deadline within which to pull out - removing the issue from the ballot as irrelevant - or to continue attempting to get the stadium placed here, and allow the issue to be voted on. Meanwhile, the Tourism and Sports Authority has begun searching for other sites, believing Mesa will reject the stadium.
Some have suggested the stadium would be justified if the Cardinals were any good, but I believe it is a minority that would vote differently in that case. I hold, of course, that it is irrelevant. Others argue that, since the locals are not paying for it, there should be no complaint left. You have already read my opinions on that.
Meanwhile, the battle rages on.