State Supreme Court to hear appeal of ‘Paton’s Law’

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I posted about this last week. Jonathan 'Payday' Paton still trying to subjugate the citizens of Tucson:

"Paton's Law" attempted to dicate to the City of Tucson, a charter city, that its city elections had to be non-partisan and election by ward only. The City of Tucson challenged "Paton's Law" as violative of the Arizona Constitution, and the Court of Appeals agreed. Victory for the City of Tucson over 'Paton's Law':

The holding of the Court of Appeals:

The city argues the court erred because the Tucson city charter regarding local elections supersedes the legislature‟s 2009 amendments to A.R.S. § 9-821.01. Because the method and manner of conducting municipal elections is solely a matter of local concern, we reverse and remand.

That decision is now on appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court. The Court will decide on October 25 whether to hear the appeal.

On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal. State justices to consider nonpartisan city elections:

Without comment, the Arizona Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to consider arguments by attorneys for both the state and the Southern Arizona Leadership Council that the Legislature is legally entitled to require all cities to elect a mayor and council members without regard to party affiliation.

Tucson is the only city in Arizona that has partisan elections.

The high court also will consider whether to void Tucson's modified ward election system, in which candidates are nominated in a ward-only primary election before moving on to a citywide general election.

* * *

[T]he Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that lawmakers have no business telling Tucson it has to have nonpartisan elections. The judges said the Arizona Constitution gives charter cities like Tucson broad authority over matters that are solely of local concern, rejecting arguments that the state has a legitimate interest in the issue.

The appellate court split, however, over the question of whether Tucson had to scrap its modified ward system, with the majority siding with Tucson.

Appellate Judge Joseph Howard, writing for the court, said the state's arguments that nonpartisan elections promote "effective and efficient local government" is legally irrelevant.

"The relationship of voters to their municipality is purely a local matter," he wrote. "Tucson voters have the right to make their own choice in that regard."

"Tuesday's decision does not mean the justices intend to overturn the ruling earlier this year by the state Court of Appeals, which voided efforts by state lawmakers to force a change in Tucson's elections."

In fact, if recent decisions are any guide, the Supreme Court wants to affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals based on long-standing precedents to make clear to the Arizona Legislature that it is exceeding its authority and abusing its power when it attempts to dictate to local governments. So much for "small government" conservatives. These authoritarians believe in "big brother."

An interesting aside in Howard Fischer's report: " Paton's desire for nonpartisan elections is limited to local races. He opposes a proposed 2012 initiative that would extend that to legislative, congressional and statewide elections." Which just confirms that "Payday" is motivated by retaliation against the City of Tucson for rejecting him for Congress. I can't imagine why.