Summary
The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed a superior court judgment allowing the Quality Education and Jobs Act initiative to proceed to the ballot. The court held that submitting differing paper and electronic versions of the initiative was a clerical error and that the proponents substantially complied with constitutional and statutory requirements because the correct version was circulated with the petitions and no fraud or significant voter confusion was shown. The court declined to award attorneys’ fees because the law imposed no specific duty on the Secretary of State in these circumstances.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether submitting a complete electronic version and an incomplete paper version of an initiative, while circulating the complete version with the petition signature sheets, substantially complied with Arizona constitutional and statutory initiative requirements.
- Whether the Committee was entitled to mandatory attorneys' fees under A.R.S. § 12-2030(A) after prevailing against the Secretary of State.
Holdings
- The Committee substantially complied with A.R.S. § 19-111(A) and the Arizona Constitution because it attached the intended full and correct version to the petition sheets, the discrepancy resulted from a clerical error without fraud or deception, the complete version was also received by the Secretary of State's office, and the error could be corrected before required election materials were completed.
- The Committee was not entitled to mandatory attorneys' fees because A.R.S. § 12-2030(A) applies when a state officer is compelled to perform a legally imposed duty, and the law imposed no defined duty on the Secretary of State for the unusual circumstance of receiving two differing initiative versions.
Key quotations
“For that reason, courts liberally construe initiative requirements and do not interfere with the people’s right to initiate laws “unless the Constitution expressly and explicitly makes any departure [from initiative filing requirements] fatal.”” (¶ 7)
“We hold that the initiative substantially complied with A.R.S. § 19-111(A).” (¶ 18)
Factual background
The Committee sought to place the Quality Education and Jobs Act, which would permanently dedicate a one-cent sales tax to public education, infrastructure, and other public services, on the ballot. It inadvertently submitted a complete electronic version and a paper version omitting fifteen lines concerning transfers of remaining monies. The complete version was circulated with petition sheets, more than 290,000 voters signed petitions, and the Secretary of State later rejected the initiative because the circulated version did not match the paper copy maintained in the Secretary's office. The discrepancy was discovered more than a month before the deadline for printing the ballot-measure pamphlet, and the record showed no intent to defraud or actual voter confusion.
Procedural history
The Committee submitted two differing versions of an initiative when applying for a serial number: a complete electronic version and a paper version omitting fifteen lines. The complete version was circulated with the signature petitions, while the Secretary of State's office treated the incomplete paper version as the official filed copy and rejected the initiative. The superior court found the rejection arbitrary. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the superior court's judgment and its prior order allowing the initiative to proceed.