BY HOWARD FISCHER
CAPITOL MEDIA SERVICES

PHOENIX — Arizona voters chose their ballot propositions Tuesday, rejecting a nonpartisan primary election, refusing to limit their right to propose their own law and rejecting an Arizona restaurant offer to cut costs by paying their workers less tip.

But they agreed that property owners who absorb expenses from the homeless when cities don’t enforce nuisance laws should be entitled to tax breaks. And they decided that those who are engaged in certain types of child sex trafficking should live behind bars.

Proposition 140, defeated by a 3-2 margin, would have changed politics in Arizona forever.
The measure, called Make Elections Fair, would have canceled partisan primaries in all federal, state and local races.

Instead, all candidates from all parties – and those with no political affiliation – would run against each other. And all registered voters of any type would make their choices.

But Prop 140 had a provision that made it a bit more complicated: It would have allowed the Legislature to decide how many primary advance winners in the general election.

It was all simple if the answer was just two, with the general election serving as a run-off, even if both candidates turned out to be from the same political party. But it also allowed a decision to allow up to five to go to the general election.

This, in turn, would have required a system for voters to rank their choices.
Opponents focused on that provision, calling it complicated and confusing, to persuade Arizonans not to make that change.

However, this desire to leave the electoral process alone also led to the apparent defeat of Proposition 133 by about the same margin as Proposition 140.

This measure, put to a vote by state lawmakers, would have enshrined the existing system of partisan primaries in the Arizona Constitution. Supporters said this would ensure that general election voters have a clear choice of political philosophies.

Proposition 134 also failed by nearly the same 3-2 margin.
Voters can now put their own bills on the ballot by getting signatures equal to at least 10 percent of those who voted in the last gubernatorial election. It now stands at 255,949.

The proposed constitutional amendments require 15%, or 383,923.

Prop 134 would have required backers of the initiative to get the same margin in each of the state’s 30 legislative districts. Supporters said it would have made sure circulators didn’t gather all the signatures in just one or two counties and that there was at least buy-in from all areas.

But foes said the flip would give residents in one or two areas of the state an effective veto over whether the rest of Arizona can decide on controversial issues.

Voters also sent a clear message to the Arizona Restaurant Association, rejecting Proposition 138 by a nearly 3-1 margin.

Arizona created a minimum wage in 2006 and added to it in 2016. It currently requires employers to pay employees $14.35 an hour, rising to $14.70 in January with inflation.
The law also allows restaurants to pay tipped workers $3 an hour less, as long as those tips bring employees to the minimum.

The restaurants, noting the annual inflationary increases, wanted to insert a provision into the Arizona Constitution setting the tip credit at 25% of whatever the minimum would be.

It said the option was only available if workers brought home at least $2 an hour more than the minimum. But the real goal was to provide financial aid to the restaurant to make them responsible for less of each worker’s take-home pay.

Nearly 60 percent of voters approved Proposition 312.

It allows a property owner, residential or business, to claim a tax refund once a year for documented expenses incurred where a local government has maintained a “public nuisance” on that person’s land.

But it really addresses cities, towns and counties that adopt any kind of policy or practice of refusing to enforce a range of existing laws, including obstructing sidewalks, public drinking, illegal camping, panhandling, possession of illegal substances and public urination. or defecation.

Affected property owners can calculate the costs — likely cleanup and lost business — and submit a bill to the state Department of Revenue for payment. The state agency then reduces that community’s state revenue sharing by that amount.

By a 2-1 margin, voters also approved Proposition 313.

Current law says those convicted of certain child sex trafficking offenses can serve a sentence of a minimum of seven years in prison to a life sentence without the possibility of parole or other release. This measure automatically makes the sentence life.

Supporters say it will both deter sex traffickers and ensure criminals are kept off the street. Others question the deterrent effect and the removal of judges’ discretion to consider individual circumstances.

But about 57 percent of voters opposed Proposition 135, which would have increased the Legislature’s power to reduce or rescind an emergency declaration declared by a governor.

It was a consequence of the COVID emergency declared in 2020 by the then Government. Doug Ducey, which lasted two years. This would have stated that any emergency would cease to exist after 30 days, unless extended by state lawmakers.

Voters also rejected Proposition 136, which would have allowed enemies of the proposed initiatives to try to declare them unconstitutional before they even reached the ballot.

They agreed with Proposition 311 to add a $20 surcharge to any criminal fine, with the funds earmarked for a $250,000 death benefit for the surviving spouse or children of a first responder who is killed in the line of duty as a result of another person’s crime. act.

But they narrowly rejected Proposition 315, which would have given the Legislature more authority over rules adopted by state agencies.

On X and Threads: @azcapmedia