Two ballot referrals from the Arizona Legislature may be on thin ice as voters prepare their decisions for November’s General Election.
A poll released this week from Noble Predictive Insights (NPI) showed that both Proposition 135 and Proposition 137 were underwater with respondents, though many voters remain undecided.
According to the Arizona Secretary of State, Prop 135 would “terminate governor’s emergency powers, except for powers relating to war, fire, or flood, 30 days after the governor’s proclamation, unless extended by the legislature; [and] requires the governor to call a special session upon presentment of a petition signed by at least one-third of the members of the legislature.”
The NPI survey shows that 29% of respondents support the measure, compared to 32% who are opposed. Thirty percent of respondents are undecided on how they would vote.
“Many conservatives haven’t forgotten COVID,” said NPI Chief of Research David Byler. “Memories of lockdowns – combined with a Democrat in the governor’s mansion – make sense of the partisan divide we see on this issue.”
The Arizona Legislature referred this proposal to the Secretary of State on June 13, 2023 (HCR 2039).
According to the Arizona Secretary of State, Prop 137 would “eliminate judicial terms and regular retention elections and nullif[y] the results of the 2024 judicial retention elections, for Arizona Supreme Court Justices, Court of Appeals Judges, and Superior Court Judges in counties with over 250,000 persons.”
For this proposition, the NPI poll shows that 31% of respondents would support the measure, compared to 38% who are opposed to it. Twenty-four percent of voters appear to be undecided.
“While about 1 in 10 voters say they wouldn’t vote on Prop 135 or 137, the large shares of voters who are still unsure how they will vote on each measure will determine whether or not these measures pass come November,” said Mike Noble, NPI Founder & CEO.
The Arizona Legislature referred this proposal to the Secretary of State on June 13, 2024 (SCR 1044).
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The Arizona Supreme Court may have rendered a significant blow to the future of a key ballot measure for the upcoming General Election.
On Friday, the Arizona Supreme Court issued an order in Smith v. Fontes, which was a challenge over the Make Elections Fair Arizona Act (Proposition 140). The court ruled that Prop 140 “will appear on the ballot, assuming ballots are indeed printed in the early morning hours of August 23.” However, the state’s high court projected that if a majority of its justices were to later “disqualif[y] the Initiative, the court should issue an injunction precluding any votes for the measure from being counted.”
The issue at hand involves a challenge to the signatures submitted to the Arizona Secretary of State by the committee supportive of the ballot measure. The parties contesting the submission have argued that there are 40,000 duplicative signatures in the batch, which, if discarded, would bring the initiative under the minimum number required for placement on the ballot.
Proposition 140 is an attempt from the Make Elections Fair PAC to remake the Arizona elections systems through this constitutional amendment on the ballot.
“I am grateful for this thoughtful decision from the Arizona Supreme Court,” said Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club. “At no time did the trial court judge or the committee in favor of the initiative provide evidence as to why these signatures were not duplicates, but instead relied on a strategy of obstruction to run out the clock. The lateness of this challenge did not have to be the case if the lower court had only adhered to the Supreme Court’s earlier directive for all duplicates to be removed from the qualifying count. For any ballot measure – but especially one that would fundamentally transform our elections systems – Arizonans deserve complete confidence that our courts are applying all laws fairly and justly.”
Mussi added, “This isn’t a debate about dubious matches or concerns of same family members with the same name being confused as a duplicate. All the duplicates submitted to be removed were exact name and address matches that aligned with what was on the voter file. Under state law, you are only allowed to sign a petition once, so they should have been removed. Instead, thousands of people were allowed to sign the initiative petition sheets multiple times, and those signatures were counted.”
In its order, the Court wrote, “There is no statutory directive that a court resolve an election challenge like this one before the ballot printing deadline. Regardless, this Court, and indeed the trial court, has consistently endeavored to resolve initiative challenges before the ballot printing deadline… But the courts’ role is to dispense justice. Courts cannot be forced to rule rashly to meet a ballot printing deadline or provide the parties with certainty.”
According to the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, this measure “is seeking to enact a California-style election scheme built around ranked choice voting and jungle primaries.” On the other hand, an advocate for the Make Elections Fair Act recently maintained that Prop 140 “represents an opportunity to improve both our elections and our state government.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Voters in Maricopa County have the opportunity to submit comments for public review on a proposition that will be on the ballot in the November General Election.
Last week week, the Maricopa County Elections Department notified “interested individuals, political committees and organizations” that the portal to submit arguments for or against Proposition 479 was now open. These comments will be collected for publication in the 2024 General Election Maricopa County Publicity Pamphlet, which will be distributed to county voters before they have the opportunity to start voting in October for the fall campaign.
Proposition 479 is a result of SB 1102, which was passed in 2023, requiring “that the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors call a countywide election for the continuation of the county transportation tax at least two years before the expiration of the tax, and shall conduct that election on a consolidated election date no less than one year before the expiration of the tax.”
The official title of the measure is the “Regional Strategic Transportation Infrastructure Investment Plan.”
If passed by Maricopa County voters, the revenues would be allocated in the following manner: “(a) 40.5 percent to freeways and other routes in the state highway system; (b) 37 percent to public transportation; and (c) 22.5 percent to arterial streets, intersection improvements and regional transportation infrastructure.”
Last month, Noble Predictive Insights published a poll, which showed that “nearly 7 in 10 Maricopa County voters (68%) support the renewal of Prop 479, with only 18% opposed; [and that] this is a notable increase in support compared to last July when 56% were in favor and 17% opposed.”
Nearly 7 in 10 Maricopa County voters (68%) support the renewal of Prop 479, with only 18% opposed. This is a notable increase in support compared to last July when 56% were in favor and 17% opposed.
— Noble Predictive Insights (@NoblePredictive) May 30, 2024
After the Arizona Legislature passed a compromise for this proposal in July 2023, Republican Senate President Warren Petersen claimed victory, calling SB 1102 “the most conservative transportation plan in our state’s history.” He added, “The guardrails, taxpayer protections and funding allocations in the text of this bill reflect the priorities of voters, to reinvest their tax dollars in the transportation modes they use most.”
Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs, who signed the compromise, was diplomatic in her statement, saying, “Today, bipartisan leaders invested in the future of Arizona families, businesses, and communities. The passage of the Prop 400 ballot measure will secure the economic future of our state and create hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs for Arizonans. I am glad we were able to put politics aside and do what is right for Arizona.”
Members of the Arizona Freedom Caucus were adamantly opposed to the bill as it was released and approved. After the Prop 400 plan passed, the Freedom Caucus tweeted, “Legislative conservatives near unanimously opposed this horrible bill. Conservative watchdog groups unanimously opposed it. The bill may have been better than the communists at @MAGregion’s horrific plan, but that’s a ludicrously low bar for success. This bill was antithetical to conservatism.”
The breakthrough on the Prop 400 compromise took place after Governor Hobbs vetoed a Republican proposal earlier that summer. At that time, Hobbs stated, “I just vetoed the partisan Prop 400 bill that fails to adequately support Arizona’s economic growth and does nothing to attract new business or create good-paying jobs.”
In May 2023, the governor had created unrest over ongoing negotiations, allegedly sending out a tweet that highlighted her fight with Republicans at the Legislature at the same time she was meeting with Senate President Warren Petersen.
Petersen stressed the importance of the agreed-upon bill, asserting that officials had “secured a good, responsible product for the citizens of Arizona to consider in 2024, giving voters the option to enhance critical infrastructure that our entire state relies upon.”
Voters will soon have that opportunity to consider this product as the November General Election quickly approaches.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Maricopa County wants to know how voters feel about this most recent general election. The survey was issued a few hours before the state certified the election results on Monday.
The Monday email from the Maricopa County Elections Department asked voters to describe their voting experience, how they voted, and if they felt informed on election procedures. The county asked voters impacted by Election Day problems the reason for their dissatisfaction, as well as where they voted. They also asked voters if vote centers rather than precinct-based locations made voting more convenient.
In some ways, this general election echoed the voter discontent and mistrust that arose following the 2020 general election. The embattled county has attempted to address the myriad claims of fraud arising from a chaotic Election Day prompted by faulty printer settings causing mass tabulator failures. The county reported last month that they’ve shared over 700 social media posts, conducted over 600 interviews, and submitted monthly newsletters to 40,000 subscribers this election.
There's been a variety of misinformation and misinterpretations of voter turn out data circulating social media. Here's a breakdown on all the data from @maricopavote's election reports:🧵
During its certification of the election results, the county specified further that faulty heat settings on retrofitted ballot-on-demand printers were to blame.
. @MaricopaVote : the faulty printer setting causing widespread tabulator issues occurred in one of two types of printers: the one retrofitted to be a ballot-on-demand printer, "Oki." County expressed confusion with its failure since stress testing went well. 71 sites impacted. pic.twitter.com/jZEmQiZXQn
The attorney general’s office questioned the county about these mass failures and reported complaints of disenfranchisement. About a week later, the day before the deadline set by Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Wright, the county answered with a report.
NEW: County responds to AG letter about Nov. election saying all laws were followed & all voters had the opportunity to legally and securely cast their ballot. Legal response: https://t.co/PItANauVz1 Details: https://t.co/07m2RlEaKH Key points: 🧵⬇️
The county’s troubles began earlier this year when doubts over the pens used for in-person voting resurfaced. The county swapped Sharpies for Pentel felt-tipped pens in July.
The changes prompted some activists to encourage rejection of the county’s protocol. Failed board of supervisors candidate Gail Golec advised voters to steal election pens in August. The county responded with a cease-and-desist letter to Golec.
More than 18K voters have successfully cast a ballot in person so far today! Minor tech issues have been resolved as well as reports of stolen pens. Please do not remove any voting materials from the polling place, including pens.https://t.co/WXsuEj0sDe
— Maricopa County Elections Department (@MaricopaVote) August 2, 2022
Election officials have reported that both the ink and felt tip pens pose problems. Occasionally, ink pen residue clogs the machines, and felt tip pen ink smears, causing ballot rejection, or the nibs break off.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
