Gov. Napolitano Veto Threatens Chaos for Local Elections, and No Oversight of $79 Billion in Public Funds

Senate Bill 1053 provides for citizen oversight of non-partisan (lots of local and municipal
elections) and issue elections (bonds and initiatives). That’s most of
the elected officials in the State, 79 billion in public financing, and
some of the most important legislative acts in our state, including amendments
to our state constitution. Pretty important stuff.

Yet veto has been quietly threatened by Napolitano for some unknown, but likely unwholesome, reason.

We desperately
need citizen oversight of these elections, and citizens and their political parties are currently completely shut out of the counting house for these vital elections. Consider how close some races are. Sedona as recent example. This year’s Mayoral race, which is non-partisan, resulted in 1969 votes for Robert Adams, and 1697 votes for Pud Colquitt (yeah, I agree, he should have won on his name alone…), a difference of just 0.05%, mandating a statutory recount. Shouldn’t there be some citizen oversight of counting that can result in such incredibly close and important races?

But critics
charge, and apparently Gov. may accept the idea, that one of the technical corrections in SB 1053, unrelated to the oversight of non-partisan and issue races, may allow "voter suppression" of some early ballots. Some timing issues in the handling of those ballots arising from the bill might delay
the beginning of early voting from 33 days out from election day,
to a theoretical, worst-case-scenario opening a mere 28 days out from the election. That
would only happen in the most extreme of circumstances, and would be
entirely due to the discretionary actions of officials responsible –
thus they could be held responsible for their willful misbehavior if
they tried to so game the system in such a way. And really, who is going to be
disenfranchised by those circumstances? Anybody? Probably not.

But there will be a side-effect of the Gov’s veto that goes well beyond the loss of
citizen oversight of a huge chuck of our democratic process. Her veto would result in massive chaos in municipal elections and a much more blatant and wide-spread voter
suppression.

The problems would be caused by the misalignment of state and municipal elections
that would result from the veto. One of the technical corrections in SB 1053, added in conference committee, re-aligns the dates of state and municipal elections to get them back in synch after the date of state
elections was changed slightly. If the Gov vetoes SB 1053, municipal elections
across Arizona would be mandated to occur just one week after the State
elections.

Can you imagine the result? I can. Massive drop off in
participation, and massive logistical problems for local elections divisions
in every county and city as they have to deal with overlapping
elections instead of handling them as a single election. And the added cost. And the GOP isn’t
inclined to spare the Gov the trouble her veto will cause by providing a new version of the bill with only the technical corrections she would like. They plan to just point the finger and laugh as chaos unfolds. What, you expected our state GOP leadership to be more responsible? What rock have you been under?

So
why is the Gov even considering a veto? The cities and counties of Arizona are all
firmly in support of the bill. Our own recorder here in Pima, Ann
Rodriguez, is in favor, and is mystified as to why the Gov would veto.
Election integrity activists have made this a top priority and they are
very supportive of the bill exactly as written.

So why? Well, $79
billion in public funds are suddenly going to get the kind of pesky
oversight and questioning that the Regional Transportation Authority vote
got here in Pima County. That might make some folks who are dependent
on approval of those bond issues to fertilize growth and sprawl a touch nervous about the people and their parties poking their busy-body noses into the whole business.

It is a fundamental conflict of interest for the governments who will benefit from the additional revenue of these bond issues, and whose elected officials are widely acknowledged to be largely in the pockets of local developers, to conduct and count these votes without any oversight. That’s why such staunch conservatives like Arizona Senator Chuck Gray and Representative Robert Blendu are the bill’s primary sponsors.

And it’s why people like Board member of the Region
Transportation Authority of Pima County, partner in Napolitano’s old
law firm Lewis & Roca (the slogan of which should be "hand-maiden to Arizona’s real estate and building industry"), and behind the scenes personal adviser and mentor to the
Governor, Si Schorr, might not like SB 1053. Asked for comment about the bill, Si hasn’t yet responded. I’ll be sure to let you know what he thinks of the bill if he does.

Someone is dripping poison in the Governor’s ear to kill this
good and important bill on the flimsiest of pretexts. Who could have
that level of access and influence on our Governor, and the motive to
keep bond and local elections under wraps, I wonder?