GOP Taliban to dictate to charter city governments when they can hold elections

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Earlier this year the GOP Taliban enacted "Paton's Law" dictating to the City of Tucson that its elections must be non-partisan and ward only, legislatively overruling provisions of the City of Tucson Charter without any vote by the residents of Tucson. The legality of this questionable act is now in the Court of Appeals.

Now Arizona's largest cities may have to amend their city charters pursuant to a strike everything amendment to SB 1110 that would limit elections to even numbered years. The House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure approved the Strike Everything Amendment on Thursday:

Provisions

·   Specifies that a city or town governing body is not prohibited from allowing any person to speak before the body on any matter that is or may be the subject of an election.

·   Requires all elections provided for in A.R.S. § 16-204 to be held only in even-numbered years.

·   Specifies the act is effective January 1, 2011.

·   Makes technical and conforming changes.

The effective date provision raises an interesting point. I read this to mean that the anticipated mayor and council races in the City of Tucson presently scheduled for 2011 would not occur until 2012 if this bill becomes law. This would mean that the terms of the current mayor and council members would have to be adjusted and extended by one year as a one-time-only fix.

Adding mayor and council races to an already crowded ballot in even numbered years, i.e., federal offices, state offices, and an excessive number of initiatives and referendums, is increasing the burden upon voters. For many voters this will add to their information overload and they will simply choose not to vote.

For mayor and council candidates this also poses a problem. Interest in local elections is historically low, but local elections will all but disappear in the noise of federal and state elections which receive the bulk of media attention. It will be difficult for mayor and council candidates to compete for the attention of the public in this environment. I fail to see how this leads to a better informed electorate. There is good reason why we alternate election years.

The real problem here is the state legislature dictating to charter cities how they must conduct their elections. That is the right of the residents of charter cities to decide under their city charters and the Arizona Constitution.

For a state government that wants to sue the federal government for allegedly overstepping its bounds, the state government is itself engaged in the very same behavior of which it complains with regard to charter city governments. It's the "do as I say, not as I do" principle in action.

This bill is a bad idea. Contact your state legislators to "kill the bill" (amendment).