The Task Force recommended a funding mechanism that involved a combination of private funds and public monies paid largely by out-of-state visitors who rent hotel rooms and cars. In part due to popular advertising produced by S&H, Proposition 302 stunned the experts by passing with 52% of the vote.
The proposal was referred to the Arizona Legislature before it faced the voters. The stadium was so controversial that the bill to create Proposition 302 passed by only a single vote in the Arizona House of Representatives.
A public opinion survey taken in February 2000 showed that voters opposed construction of a new stadium by a margin of 65%-29%. There was never any polling that showed a majority of support for the stadium prior to election day.
The paid media created by Smith & Harroff emphasized the fact that Prop. 302 involved much more than a football stadium. If passed, much of the public funding would go toward tourism promotion, youth and amateur sports and renovation of Cactus League baseball facilities. The stadium could also accommodate major concerts, trade shows and conventions. The advertising also stressed the fact that the funding burden would not fall on the average citizen of Maricopa County.