Initiative and referendum publicity pamphlet, pamphlets containing measures to be submitted to the electors of Arizona.

              PLEASE READ CAREFULLY
STATE OF ARIZONA
REFERENDUM AND INITIATIVE
PUBLICITY PAMPHLET
1974
Containing a Copy of the
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON SALARIES
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION
MEASURES PROPOSED BY THE LEGISLATURE
AND INITIATIVE PETITION OF THE PEOPLE
To be submitted to the Qualified Electors of the State
of Arizona for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held on
THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1974
Together with the Arguments, filed, favoring and opposing
certain of said measures
Compiled and Issued by
WESLEY BOLIN
Secretary of State
( Publication Authorized under Sections 19- 123, 19- 124
Arizona Revised Statutes)
2 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
To be submitted to the Qualified Electors of the State of Ariwna
for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held
ON NOVEMBER 5, 1974
Referred to the people by the Legislature and filed in the office of the Secretary of State, May 3, 1973,
and printed in pursuance of Sections 19- 123, 19- 124, Arizona Revised Statutes.
WESLEY BOLIN, Secretary of State
( On Official Ballot No 100)
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1020
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO THE
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT; CONFORMING THE TWO VERSIONS OF ARTICLE 5,
SECTION I, TO THE INTERPRETATION REACHED BY THE SUPREME COURT AND
REMOVING THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT; REPEALING ARTICLE 5, SECTION I,
CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, AS PROPOSED BY LAWS 1968, S. CR NO. 6, AND
ARTICLE 5, SECTION I, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, AS PROPOSED BY LAWS 1968,
HCR NO. I; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 5, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY AD­DING
A NEW SECTION I
Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring:
I The repeal of article 5, section I, Constitution of Arizona, as proposed by Laws 1968, S C R
No. 6 and proclaimed as adopted on December 4, 1968, arrd article 5, section I, Constitution of
Ariwna, as proposed by Laws 1968, H. C. R number I and proclaimed as adopted on December 4,
1968, is proposed, to become valid when approved by a majority of the qualified electors voting
thereon and upon proclamation of the governor:
Article 5, section I, Constitution of Ariwna, as proposed by Laws 1968, S. C R
No 6 and proclaimed as'adopted on December 4, 1968, and article 5, section I, Constitution
of Ariwna, as proposed by Laws 1968, HC R number I, and proclaimed as adopted on
December 4, 1968, relating to officers of the executive department, their terms of office and
their powers and duties, are repealed
2. Thefollowing amendment to the Constitution of Ariwna by adding a new article 5, section I, is
proposed to become valid when approved by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon and
upon proclamation of the governor:
I Executive department; state. officers; terms; election; office at seat of government;
duties
SECTION I THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT SHALL CONSIST OF GOV­ERNOR,
SECRETARY OF STAIE, STATE TREASURER, ATTORNEY GENERAL,
AND SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, EACH OF WHOM SHALL
HOLD HIS OFFICE FOR FOUR YEARS BEGINNING ON THE FIRST MONDAY OF
JANUARY NEXT AFTER HIS ELECTION
THE PERSONS, RESPECIIVEL Y, HAVING THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF
VOTES CAST FOR THE OFFICE VOTED FOR SHALL BE ELECTED, BUT IF TWO OR
MORE PERSONS SHALL HAVE AN EQUAL AND THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF
VOTES FOR ANY ONE OF SAID OFFICES, THE TWO HOUSES OF THE LEGISLA-TURE
AT ITS NEXT REGULAR SESSION SHALL ELECT FORTHWITH, BY JOINT I
BALLOT, ONE OF SUCH PERSONS FOR SAID OFFICE l
Submitted tp the Electors of Arizona Nov. 5, L974
THE OFFICERS OF THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT DURING THEIR
TERMS OF OFFICE SHALL KEEP THEIR OFFICES AND HIE PUBLIC RECORDS,
BOOKS AND PAPERS AT THE SEAT OF THE GOVERNMENT.. THEY SHALL PER­FORM
SUCH DUTIES AS ARE PRESCRIBED BY THE CONSTITUTION AND AS MAY
BE PROVIDED BY LAW
3
3 The proposed repeals and amendment ( approved by a majority of the members elected to each
house of the legislature, and entered upon the respective journals thereof, together with the ayes and
nays thereon) shall be by the secretary of state submitted to the qualified electors at the next regular
general election ( or at a special election called for that purpose), as provided by article 21, Constitution
of Arizona.
Passed the Senate March 21, 1973 by the following vote: 27 Ayes, 2 Nays, I Not Voting
Passed the House April 28, 1973 by the following vote: 54 Ayes, 5 Not Voting, I vacancy
Approved by the Governor - May 2, 1973
Filed in the Office of the Secretary of State - May 3, I973
ARIZONA LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
From Speaker Stan Akers, Chairman Arizona Legislative Council
To The Honorable Wesley Bolin, Secretary of State
July II, 1974
In accordance with the provisions of A R. S.. 19- 124, the Legislative Council is herewith filing an
analysis of the provisions ohach ballot proposal referred to the voters by the Legislature forthe 1974
general election, together with a list of · popular' arguments favoring and opposing each such proposal,
for inclusion in the publicity pamphlet published by your office
PROPOSlTJON NO. 100
Proposition 100, which was passed by the Arizona Legislature in the 1973 regular session,
proposes a constitutional amendment for the vote of the people which would:
I Remove from the Arizona Constitution the current requirement that the Governor, Secretary of
State, State Treasurer, Attorney General, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction must each reside
or live at the seat of government The constitutional requirement that these officers of the Executive
Department must maintain their offices and records at the seat of government would remain unchanged
2 Harmonize the two different existing versions of Article 5, Section I, of the Arizona Constitu­tion
in aC, cordance with a ruling of the Arizona Supreme Court. This proposed harmonizing is
occasioned by the fact that in the 1968 general election the voters of Arizona approved two different
amendments of the same section of the Ar izona Constitution The first 1968 amendment ( Proposition
104) provided for the election of enumerated officials of the Executive Department, including the State
Auditor, to four- year terms of office instead of two- year terms as had been previously prescribed. The
other 1968 amendment ( Proposition J08) abolished the office of State Auditor, but it did not
incorporate the change to four- year terms of office and instead stipulated the old two- yearterms for the
Governor, Secretary of State, State Treasurer, Attorney General, and Superintendent of Public
Instruction The harmonized section of the Arizqna Constitution contained in the proposed Proposition
100 is in accordance with the provisions of a 1969 ruling by the Arizona Supreme Court dealing with
issues growing out of the 1968 approvals of Proposition 104 and Proposition 108 Currently, there is no
State Auditor, and the other mentioned officers of the Executive Department serve four- year terms of
office
Pro Arguments
The enforcement of the present antiquated constitutional provision concerning the residence of
certain elected state officers at the seat of government would impose a totally unnecessary burden on
any of those officers who happen to reside outside of the City of Phoenix Given present- day
transportation and communication facilities, there is no reason why a state officer should nqt be
permitted to live outside of Phoenix if he so desires
The awkward situation caused by the existence of two inconsistent versions of the same section of
4 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
the Arizona Constitution should be remedied. The approval of Proposition 100 would remedy this
situation in accordance with acarefLI! judicial ruling dealing with the issues growing out ofthe existence
of those inconsistent versions
Con Arguments
Voters should reject Proposition 100 because, if approved, it would allow the elected state
executive officers presently required to live in Phoenix to reside anywhere in the state If this were
allowed, an officer could choose to reside at a location so remote from the State Capito! that his ready
availability in case of emergency and the normal performance of his duties would be impaired
The following is the form and number in which the question will be printed on the Official Ballot:
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
PROPOSED BY THE LEGISLATURE
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1020
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONS TI TU liON OF ARIZONA RELATING TO fHE
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT: CONFORMING THE TWO VERSIONS OF ARTICLE 5,
SECTION I, TO THE INTERPRETATION REACHED BYJHE SUPREME COURT AND
REMOVING THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT; REPEALING ARTICLE 5, SECTION I,
CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, AS PROPOSED BY LAWS 1968, S C R. NO. 6, AND
ARTICLE 5, SECTION I, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, AS PROPOSED BY LAWS 1968,
H. C R. NO. I; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 5, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY
ADDING A NEW SECTION I
( SUMMARY)
An Amendment relating to the Executive Department, repealing Article 5, Section I, Arizona
Constitution, proposed byLaws 1968, S. C R. No. 6 and Article 5, Section I, Arizona Constitution
proposed by Laws 1968 H. C R Number 1; adding a new Section 1, Article 5, establishing ~ n
Executive Department, its members, election and duties
If you favor the above law, vote YES; if opposed, vote NO
YES D
100
NO D
To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Arizona
for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held
ON NOVEMBER 5, 1974
Referred to the people by the Legislature and filed in the office of the Secretary of State, May 3, 1973,
and printed in pursuance of Section 19- 123, 19- 124, Arizona Revised Statutes
WESLEY BOLIN, Secretary of State
I
ib
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov 5, 1974
( On Official Ballot No 10 I)
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1022
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
5
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO
RECALL; PROVIDING THAT A RECALL ELECTION BE HELD AS PROVIDED BY LAW,
AND AMENDING ARTICLE 8, PART I, SECTION 3, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA
Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring:
I The following amendment of article 8, part I section 3, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed,
to become valid when approved by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon and upon
proclamation of the governor:
3. Resignation of officer; spec ial election
Section 3. If- sai4- SUCH officer shall offer his resignation it shall be accepted, and the
vacancy shall be filled as may be provided by law. If he shall not resign within five days after a
Recall Petition is filed AS PROVIDED BY LAW, a special election shall be ordered to be
held, "" I Ie.. II> a" I" e" I), "'" ",,, n Iha" Ihil~' ela). afler ." el> " relel, AS PROVIDED BY
LAW, to determine whether such officer shall be recalled. On the ballots at~ SUCH
election shall be printed the reasons as set forth in the petition for demanding his recall, and, in
not more than two hundred words, the officer's justification of his course in office. He shall
continue to perform the duties of his office until the result of~ SUCH election shall have
been officially declared
2. The proposed amendment ( approved by amajority of the members elected to each house of the
legislature, and entered upon the respectivejournals the: reof, together with the ayes and nays thereon)
shall be by the secretary of- state submitted to the qualified electors at the next regular general election
( or at a special election called for that purpose), as provided by article 21, Constitution of Arizona
Passed the Senate April 12, 1973 by the following vote: 26 Ayes, 4 Nays, 0 Not Voting
Passed the House April28, 1973 by the following vote: 54 Ayes, 0 Nays, 5 Not Voting and I vacancy
Approved by the Governor - May 2, 1973
Filed in the Office of the Secretary of State - May 3, 1973
ARIZONA LEGISLA TlVE COUNCIL
Ftom Speaker Stan Akers, Chairman Arizona Legislative Council
To The Honorable Wesley Bolin, Secretary of State
July II, 1974
In accordance with the provisions of A R S 19- 124, the Legislative Council is herewith filing an
analysis of the provisions of each ballot proposal referred to the voters by the Legislature for the 1974
general election, together with a list of popular arguments favoring and opposing each such proposal,
for inclusion in the publicity pamphlet published by your office
PROPOSITION NO. 101
Proposition 10 I, which was passed by the Arizona Legislature in the 1973 regular session,
proposes an amendment to the Arizona Constitution which would require recall elections to be held as
provided by law rather than being held not less than 20 nor more than 30 days after being ordered upon
the elapsing of a five- day recall resignation period. In this connection, the Legislature passed a law in
1973 which will take effect only if the Arizona Constitution is amended by vote of the people to provide
that recall elections be held as provided by law, as this proposed amendment would do. This
conditionally- enacted law provides that ( al special recall elections must be held not less than 100 days
nor more than 120 days after being ordered upon the elapsing of a five- day recall resignation period,
6 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
and ( b) nomination papers for candidates in recall electionsmust be filed not less than 60 days nor more
than 90 days prior to the date of the recall election
lfthc voters approve the constitutional amendment proposed by Proposition 101, these specified
time requirements relating to the holding of recall elections and the filing of nomination papers for
candidates in tecall elections would automatically become law
Pro Arguments
Vote] approval of Proposition to] would establish a realistic time · · frame for the holding of recall
elections in Arizona. The constitutionally prescribed procedure for the recall of state and local elected
officials is presently unworkable because the currcnt maximum time available of 30 days between the
ordering and the holding of the recall election is simply too shOll a period within which to complete the
mechanics of setting up the election
Under /\ rizona law. the mechanicsof setting up a recall election involve the following actions,
among others, by the county board of supervisors or other election authority: ( a) preparation, printing,
and deli very at ballots: ( b) appointment, instruction, and certification of a recall election board for each
precinct or voting distr ict: ( c) after notice to the political pallies, pre'paration and exam ination of voting
machines: ( d) instruction of election workers as to the operation of voting machines; and ( e) distribution
of sample ballots, voting instruction materials, and other election supplies to each polling place · In
addition" the count) recorder is rcquired to prepare official precinct registers for use at polling places in
ver ifying persons as qualified voters .
The rcqu irement set by Proposition to] concerning the filing of nomination papers for candidates
in recall elections insures that election officials would have adequate time to check the sufficiency of
nomination papers belore the ballots must be prepared. The nomination paper filing requirement would
provide a minimum of 40 days for the circulation of candidate nomination petitions between the day
that a rccail election is ordered to be held and the last day that nomination papers can be filed This
minimum 40- day period is especially needed in statewide recall elections for which many nomination
petition signatures must be gathered
Con Arguments
Proposition to I would repeal a elause in the Arizona Constitution which specifies a definite time
requirement for the holding of a recall election after such 1m election is ordered (' ' not less than twenty,
nor more than thirty days after such order" ), and it would replace this clause with language empower­ing
the Legislature to enact any recall election time requirements that the majority of legislators during
any session may see fit to impose (' as provided by law' ) By allowing the Legislature such latitude,
Proposition 10 I wOlrld give the Legislature too much po\\ oer to influence the outcome 01 particular
=~ l~~~ .
The appmval of Proposition 101 would leave th. e door open for legislators to pass legislation in the
future which would make Arizona's constitutionally prescribed recall mechanism either ( a) inopera­tive,
or ( b) of reduced effectiveness: ( a) Under Proposition 101, legislation could be enacted which
would establish an inappropriately short time requirement, thus making it mechanically impossible to
complete all of the necessary and legally required preparationsJor the holding of a recall election This
would obviously obstruct the implementation of the recall mechanism ( b) In the alternative, if
Proposition 101 were approved., legislation could be passed \\ ohich would establish an inappropriately
lengthy time requirement between the date that Hecall election is ordered and the earliest date upon
which it may be held. This would make the recall mechanism of reduced eftectiveness against any
elected public official not having a relatively long period remaining in his term of office
The folllm ing is the f6rm and number in which the question will be printed on the Official Ballot:
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
PROPOSED BY THE LEGISLA TURE
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1022
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov. 5, 1974 7
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO
RECALL; PROVIDING THAT A RECALL ELECTION BE HELD AS PROVIDED BY LAW,
AND AMENDING ARTICLE 8, PART 1, SECTION 3, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA
( SUMMARY)
An Amendment relating to recall; amending Article 8, Part I, Section 3, Arizona Constitution by
deleting therefrom the time limits within which a special election must be called and directing such
election be held as provided by law
If you favor the above law, vote YES; if opposed, vote NO
YES 0
101
NO 0
To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Arizona
for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held
ON NOVEMBER 5, 1974
Referred to the people by the Legislature and filed in the office of the Secretary of State, February 22,
1974, and printed in pursuance of Section 19- 123, 19- 124, Arizona Revised Statutes
WESLEY BOLIN, Secretary of State
( On Official Ballot No 102)
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1003
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO
ELECTIONS; PRESCRIBING MINIMUM NUMBER OF ELECTORS WHO MUST VOTE AT
ELECTION ON BOND ISSUES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS, AND AMENDING ARTICLE
7, SECTION 13, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA
Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring:
I The following amendment of article 7, section 13, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to
become valid when approved by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon and upon
proclamation of the governor:
13. Submission of questions upon bond issues or special assessments
Section 13 Questions upon bond issues or special assessments shall be submitted to the
vote of THE reall" r8l" el't) la)[ I" a) ers, wRe sRall abe iH all resl" eels 13e qualified electors of this
State, and of the political subdivisions thereof affected by such question THE NUMBER OF
8 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
~----------------=---:.------=------
THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS VOTING UPON SUCH QUESTION MUST BE EQUAL
TO OR MORE THAN TEN PERCENT OF THE NUMBER OF QUALIFIED ELECTORS
OF THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION AFFECTED WHO ARE REGISTERED AS OF THE
FIFTIETH DAY PRECEDING THE DATE OF THE ELECTION.
2. The proposed amendment ( approved by a majority of the members elected to each house of the
legislature, and entered upon the respective journals thereof, together with the ayes and nays thereon)
shall be by the secretary of state submitted to the qualified electors at the next regular general election
( or ata special election called for that purpose), as provided by article 21, Constitution of Arizona
Passed the Senate February 19, 1974 by the following vote' 17 Ayes, 13 Nays, 0 Not Voting
Passed the House February 19, 1974 by the following vote: 3LAyes, 27 Nays, 2 Not Voting
Approved by the Governor - February 20, 1974
Filed in the Office of the Secrerary of State - February 22, 1974
ARIZONA LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
From Speaker Stan Akers, Chairman Arizona Legislative Council July II, 1974
To The Honorable Wesley Bolin, Secretary of State
In accordance with the provisions of ARS 19- 124, the Legislative Council is herewith filing an
analysis of the provisions of each ballot proposal referred to the voters by the Legislature for the 1974
general election, together with a list of popular arguments favoring and opposing each such proposal,
for inclusion in the publicity pamphlet published by your office
PROPOSIIION NO. 102
Proposition 102 would require that if a bond or special assessmehts election is called, the vote
must equal at least ten percent of the qualified electors of the political subdivision who are registered 50
days prior tei the election. In addition, this proposition would delete a reference limiting voters at such
elections to real property taxpayers
Under existing law there is no minimum participation requirement for a bond or special assess­ments
election to be valid. Moreover, the requirement providing that only real property taxpayers may
vote in such an election was ruled unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court in Kolodziejski v. City
of Phoenix ( 1970), 399 U S 204
Pro Argument
I Bonds and special assessments are a burden to taxpayers and may represent an obligation to
taxpayers yet unborn Therefore, it is only fair to require at least ten percent ofthe eligible voters to
participate in an election which may increase the taxes of all present and future taxpayers ofthat district
2 By requiring ten percent voter participation in a bond Or special assessment election, Proposi­tion
102 would encourage greater citizen participation
3.. Proposition 102 would encourage advocates and opponents of bonds and special assessments to
educate the voters as to the merits or failings of a bond or special assessment
4. Statistics show that the high percentage of affirmative votes on a bond or special assessment
question frequently constitute only a small percentage of the total eligible voters. In fact, it is common
for such a measure to pass by a 75 percent margin witlf only one or two percent of the eligible
voting, and many times the affirmative votes represent small vested interest groups which do not
necessarily represent the desires of the district Therefore, the passage of Proposition 102 will result in
better indication of the true desires of the district as a whole
•
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov 5, 1974 9
-~----'-------------'--_""':'-
5 Proposition I02 would remove a provision from Arizona's Constitution which was invalidated
by the US Supreme Court In its decision the court ruled that to permit only real property taxpayers to
vote in a bond or special assessment election was unconstitutional, and this change was included by the
Legislature merely to conform our constitution with this ruling
6. By virtue of the action of the US; Supreme Court in removing the requirement limiting voters
in bond or special assessment elections to real property taxpayers, the proposed requirement of ten
percent voter participation is needed as an added protection for our real property taxpayers
Con Arguments
I To require a specific percentage of voters to participate in an electiort for that election to be valid
is contrary to our democratic heritage
2. Instead of encouraging i~ creased participation in an election, Proposition 102 may actually
discourage voter participation. Eligible electors may decide that it would be a waste of time to , ote in an
election which might be declared invalid
3. To declare an election invalid because a specified percentage of voters did not participate would
be an abuse to those who did vote
4. Existing law requires the publication of a notice containing the particulars of a bond or special
assessment election, and Proposition 102 in no way guarantees a more informed vote than we have
under our present system
5. Histor ically, only when bond or special assessment elections have generated controversies has a
certain percentage of them been defeated When there has been no controversy, the result has been little
disagreement, low turn- out of voters, and an exceptionally high proportion of affirmative votes
Surveys of voters who did not vote indicate that their failure to vote was as aresult of their support of the
issues Thus, typically, silence has denoted agreement or approval
STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSITION 102 ON 10% VOTING REQUIREMENT
This proposed change in the Arizona constitution would place a new restriction on voting which is
contrary to the American tradition. It allows the non- votertocancel out the wishes ofthe voter. It means
that those staying home on election day may decide the outcome of an election T~ e vo; ps of those who
care enough to cast ballots can be nullified by those who don't In a very real s< mse, apathy and
indifference would be rewarded
This is not the American way Citizens informing themselves about the issues and going to the
polls on election day are what makes democracy work in our country
Proposition 102, if adopted, also would make it extremely difficult to build necessary schools,
sewer systems, public parks, streets, etc. Bond elections, held separately from regular elections, often
draw voter turnouts smaller than 10% When, for example, the need for additional classrooms is seen
by all, there is seldom controversy, and people tend not to vote A needed and generally approved
school bonq issue might then fail for lack of a required 10% turnout
What it comes down to is this: If Proposition 102 is approved, the voter who stays at home may
well determine whether your child has a decent school to go to add whether your community will have
adequate sewers, streets, parks and other public facilities
10 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
We urge you to vote " NO" on Proposition 102
Rep. Craig E Davids
Sen. D. Delos Ellsworth
Sen Tony Gabaldon
Sen Douglas S. Holsclaw
Sen David B Kret
Sen Jones Osborn
Arizona Federation of Teachers, AFL- CIO
Charles l Iannello, President
Arizona Education Association
James A George, President
2102 W.. Indian School Road
Phoenix, Arizona 85015
Ar · izona Congress of Parents and Teachers
Mary A Murphy, Legislative Chairman
Ar'izona School Administrators, Inc.
Scott Fry, President
Jack Dent, President
Arizona School Boards Association, Inc
I. a Beach, President- Elect
Arizona School Boards Association, Inc
Mrs. Carolyn Warner, Vice President
Arizona School Boards Association
Everett B Luther, Past President
Arizona School Boards Association, Inc
The following is the form and number in which the question will be printed on the Official Ballot:
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
PROPOSED BY THE LEGISLATURE
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1003
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO
ELECTIONS; PRESCRIBING MINIMUM NUMBER OF ELECTORS WHO MUST VOTE AT
ELECTION ON BOND ISSUES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS, AND AMENDING ARTICLE
7, SECTION 13, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA
( SUMMARY)
An Amendment relating to elections; amending Article 7, Seotion 13 by deleting therefrom
requirement electors on special assessment and bond issues be real property taxpayers; adding
requirement that number of qualified electors voting must equal or exceed in number ten percent of
electors registered fifteenth day preceding election date
If you favor the above law, vote YES; if opposed, vote NO
YES 0
102
NO o
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov. 5, 1974 II ._--_._--------------,"------,-
To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Arizona
for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held
ON NOVEMBER 5. 1974
Referred to the people by rhe Legislature and filed in the office of the Secretary of State.. April26. 1974.
and printed in pursuance of Section 19 · 123, 19- 124. Arizona Revised'Statutes
WESLEY BOLIN, Secretary of State
( On Official Ballot No. 103)
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION lOW
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENITO THE CONSTITUTION RELATING TO LOCAL DEBT
LIMITS; PROVIDING FOR A DEBT LIMIT OF TWENTY PER CENT FOR UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICTS, AND AMENDING ARTICLE 9, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY
ADDING NEW SECTION 8 I
Be it resolved by the Senate of the Statc of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring:
I The following amendment to the Constitlition of Atizona, by adding a new article 9, section
8. I, is proposed, to b\( cOlne valid when approved by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon
and upon proclamation of the governor:
8 I. Unificd school district debt limit
NOTWJTHSTANDING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 8 OF THIS AR TICLE A
UNIFIED SCH09L DISTRICT MAY BECOME INDEBTED TO AN AMOUNT NOT
EXCEEDING TWENTY PER CENT OF THE VALUE OF THE TAXABLE PROPERTY
OF SCHOOL DISTRICT, AS SHOWN BY THE LAST ASSESSMENT ROLL THEREOF
FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, A UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT IS A SINGLE
SCHOOL DISTRICT WHICH PROVIDES EDUCATION TO THE AREA WITHIN THE
DISTRIC r FOR GRADES KINDERGARTEN THROUGH TWEI. VE AND WHICH AREA
IS NOT SUBJECT TO TAXATION BY ANY OTHER COMMON OR HIGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT
2 The proposed amendment ( approved by a majority of the members elected to each house of the
legislature, and entered upon the respectivejournals thereof, together with the ayes and nays thereon)
shall be by the secretary of statc submitted to the qualified electors at the next regular general election
( or at a special election called for that purpose). as provided by article 21, Constitution of Arizona
Passed the Senate March i5. 1974 by the follo" ing vote: 30 Ayes, 0 Nays. 0 Not Voting
l
Passed the House April 24, 1974 by the'following vote: 54 Ayes, 0 Nays. 6 Not Voting
Approved by the Governor -- April 26. 1974
Filed in the Office of the Secretary of State -- ApI il 26 1974
12 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
ARIZONA LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
From Speaker Stan Akers, Chairman, Arizona Legislative Council
To The Honorable Wesley Bolin, Secretary of State
July II, 1974
In accordance with the provisions of A R S 19- 124, the Legislative Council is herewith filing an
analysis of the. provisions of each ballot proposal retened to the voters by the Legislature for the 1974
general election, together with a list of popular arguments favoring and opposing each such proposal,
for inclusion in the publicity pamphlet published by your office
PROPOSITION NO. 103
Analysis
During the 1973- 74 special legislative session, the Legislature adopted laws which permit the
formation of unified school districts ( kindergarten or grade one through grade 12) These laws,
however, do not become effective until the people vote to permit a unified school district to become
indebted up to 20 percent of the value of the taxable property of the school district
Proposition 103 would allow a unified school district to become indebted up to 20 percent of the
value of the taxable property of the school district Existing constitutional provisions allow a maximum
bonded indebtedness of ten percent for a common school district and ten percent for a high school
district
Pro Arguments
I The unification of school districts can not occur until this proposition is passed to permit a
unified district to become indebted to an amount not to exceed 20 percent of its taxable property
2. This proposition will not change the tax structure in that existing constitutional provisions allow
a maximum bonded indebtedness of ten percent for a common school district and ten percent for a high
school district, or a total of 20 percent, including such districts having coterminous boundaries and the
same governing board
3 Proposition 103 would provide for better continuity of school programs as it would encourage
the unification of school districts
4. Some common and high school districts in the state already have common boundary lines with a
single board of trustees, but in order to issue bonds under a combined 20 percent bonding limitation
they operate through the fiction of maintaining two separate districts which entails maintaining separate
bookkeeping records This proposition would eliminate the need for duplicate accounting
Can Arguments
I Proposition 103 would encourage unificatiDn of school districts to replace our existing and
traditional system of separate common and high school districts
2. Unified school districts would create larger bureaucratic structures and, therefore, weaken
parental influence over the operation of Arizona's schools
The following is the form and number in which the question will be printed on the Official Ballot:
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
PROPOSED BY THE LEGISLATURE
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1010
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov, 5, 1974 13
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION RELATING TO LOCAL DEBT
LIMITS; PROVIDING FOR A DEBT LIMIT OF TWENTY PER CENT FOR UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICTS, AND AMENDING ARTICLE 9, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY
ADDING NEW SECTION 8 I
( SUMMARY)
An Amendment relating to local debt limits; providing for adebt limit of twenty percent for unified
school districts as defined therein; amending Article 9, Arizona Constitution by adding new section
81
If you favor the above law, vote YES; if opposed, vote NO
103
YES
NO
To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Arizona
for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held
ON NOVEMBER 5, 1974
D
D
Referred to the people by the Legislature and filed in the Office of the Secretary of State, April 26,
1974, and printed in pursuance of Sections 19- 123, 19- 124, Arizona Revised Statutes
WESLEY BOLIN, Secretary of State
( On Official Ballot No 104)
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 2001
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO
PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATIONS; AMENDING THE DEFINITION OF PUBLIC SER­VICE
CORPORATION TO INCLUDE CERTAIN PRIVATE SEWAGE DISPOSAL CORPO­RATIONS,
AND AMENDING ARTICLE 15, SECTION 2, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring;
1 The ' following amendment of article 15, section 2,- Constitution of Arizona, is proposed, to
become valid when approyed by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon and upon
proclamation of the governor:
2, " Public service corporations" defined
Section 2. All corporations other than municipal engaged in carrying persons or property
for hire; or in furnishing gas, oil, or electricity for light, fuel, or power; or in furnishing water
for irrigation, fire protection, or other public purposes; or in furnishing, for profit, hot or cold
air or steam for heating or cooling purposes; OR ENGAGED IN COLLECTING, TRANS­PORTING,
TREATING, PURIFYING AND DISPOSING OF SEWAGE THROUGH A
SYSTEM, FOR PROFIT; or in transmitting messages or furnishing public telegraph or
telephone service, and all corporations other than municipal, operating as common carriers,
shall be deemed public service corporations,
Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
2 The proposed amendment ( appro\ ed b~ a majorit\ of the members elected to each house of the
legislature,. and entered upon the respecti\ e journalsthereof. together with the a~ es and na~ s thereon I
shall be b~ the secretary of state submitted to the qualified electors at the next regular general election
( or at a special election called for that purpose), as prm ided b, article 21, Constitution of Arizona
Passed the House April 16,. 197+ b, the following vote: 55 Ayes, 1 Na~ s, 3 Not Voting
Passed the Senate April 25, 1974 b~ the fol!<;", ing vote: 2+ Ayes,. 5 Nays, I Not Voting
Filed in the Office of the Secretary of State - April 16,. 197- 1
ARIZONA LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
From Speaker Stan Akers, Chairman Arizona Legislative Council
To The Honorable Wesle~ Bolin,. Secretar, of State
Jul~ I L 197~
In accordance with the pro\ isions of A. R S 19- 12,+, the Legislative Council is here" ith filing an
analysis of the prm isions of each ballot proposal referred to the \ oters b~ the Legislature for the 1974
general election, together with a list of popular arguments favoring and opposing each such proposal.
for inclusion in the publicity pamphlet published by your office
PROPOSITION NO. 104
The amendment contained in Proposition No. 104 would classify private- for- profit sewage
disposal systems as public service corporations and " ould make them subject to the following types of
regulation and control by the Arizona Corporation Commission:
I Se" er corporations would be required to obtain a certificate of public comenience and
necessity from the Cor~ ration Commission before constructing sewage disposal services or systems
2. The Commission would be required to determine and prescribe just and reasonable rates, rules,
and practices for sewer corporations
.3 The Commission would be authorized to prescribe record- keeping and accounting procedures
for private sewer corporations
4. Sewer corporations would be required to supply the Commission with annual reports, financial
statements,. and other pertinent data concerning their operations
5, The Commission would be authorized to conduct. at any time. examinations of the records and
personnel of sewer corporations
6. The Commission " ould be authorized t() conduct hearings ~ ith respect to . sewer corporations in
connection with their rates. complaints on operations and overcharges, and the valuation of their
property
7. The Commission would be empo" ered to determine and prescribe the adequacy of sen ice
rendered by prjvate sewer corporations
Corporation Commission officials report that there are an estimated 100 private sewer systems
currently operating in Arizona. and these systems are primarily owned by residential subdividers and
private utility companies The Department of Health Services presently regulates the sanitary aspects of
these S1 stems
The Corporation Commission further estimates that it would take three or four additional
employees approximately one year to establish the administrative framework for regulation of these
sewer corporations. Such administrative tasks imolve hearings; the issuance of certificates of public
convenience and necessity and the examination of financial data
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov 5, 1974
Pro Arguments
15
Regulation. of private sewer corporations by the Arizona Corporation Commission would result in
rate stability for sewer services through the establIshment of fair and reasonable rates for the various
classes of sewer corporations. Since private sewer corporations are basically non- competitive opera­tions,
state regulation would guard against excessively high rates resulting in excessive profits
Regulation would also result in better sewer service since customers could register consumer
complaints with the Corporation Commission and the Commission, in turn, could require corrective
action on the part of the sewer corporation
Con Arguments
Regulation by the Corporation Commission would require the establishment of rates for all tyws
of sewer corporations .. Since many sewer corporations owned by subdividers are not presently charging
for sewer service, passage of the amendment would mean an additional cost for sewer services for many
consumers
Under the proposed constitutional amendment and the corresponding statutory law, private sewer
corporations would not be required to pay an assessment to the state to offset regulatory costs, as is
mandated for certain other public service corporations, including electrical, gas, telephone, and water
cor porations Consequently, the costs of regulating sewer corporations would be an additional financial
burden on the Arizona taxpayer
The following is the form and number in which the question will be prin, ted on the Official Ballot:
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
PROPOSED BY THE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 2001
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO
PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATIONS; AMENDING THE DEFINITION OF PUBLIC SER­VICE
CORPORATION TO INCLUDE CERTAIN PRIVATE SEWAGE DISPOSAL CORPO­RATIONS,
AND AMENDING ARTICLE 15, SECTION 2, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA
( SUMMARY)
An Amendment relating to public service corporations and amending Article 15, Section 2 by
amending the definition of public service corporations stated therein by including private, for profit,
sewage disposal corporations as corporations defined as public service corporations
If you favor the above law vote YES; if opposed, vote NO
YES 0
104
NO o
16 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Arizona
for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held
On November 5, 1974
Referred to the people by the Legislature and filed in the office ofthe Secretary of State, May 10, 1974,
and printed in pursuance of Sections 19- 123, 19- 124, Arizona Revised Statutes
WESLEY BOLIN, Secretary of State
( On Official Ballot No 105)
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1003
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUrrON OF ARIZONA RELATING TO USE
AND DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICLE, USER AND GASOLINE AND DIESEL TAX RE­CEIPTS,
AND AMENDING ARTICLE 9, SECTION 14, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA
Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring:
I The following amendment of article 9, section 14, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed, to
become valid when approved by a majority of the .. qualified electors voting thereon and upon
proclamation of the governor:
14. Use and distribution of vehicle, user, and gasoline and diesel tax receipts
Section 14. No moneys derived from fees, excises, or license taxes relating to registra­tion,
operation, or use of vehicles on the public highways or streets or to fuels or anyother
energy source used for the propulsion of vehicles on the public highways or streets, shall be
expended for other than highway and, street AND TRANSPOR TArrON purposes AS
DEFINED BY LAW including, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, the cost of administering the state
highway system and the laws creating such fees, excises, or license taxes, statutory refunds
and adju~ tments provided by law, payment of principal and interest on highway and street
bonds and obligations, expenses of state enforcement of traffic laws and state administration
of traffic safety programs, payment of costs of publication and distribution of Arizona
highways magazine, state costs of construction, reconstruction, maintenance or repair of
public highways, streets, BICYCLE PATHWAYS, FOOr PATHWAYS, EQUESTRIAN
TRAILS or bridges, costs ofrights of way acquisitions and expenses related thereto, roadside
development, and for distribution to counties, incorporated cities and towns to be used by
them solely for highway and, street AND TRANSRORTATION purposes AS DEFINED BY
LAW including, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, costs of rights of way acquisitions and expenses
related thereto, construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair, roadside development, of
county, city and town roads, streets, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, BICYCLE PATH­WAYS
AND FACILITIES, OVERPASSES, UNDERPASSES, PARKWAYS, FOOT
PATHWAYS, EQUESTRIAN TRAILS and bridges and payment of principal and interest on
highway aHa stf@@ t bonds FOR WHICH SUCH REVENUES ARE WHOLLY OR IN PART
PLEDGED As long as the total highway user revenues derived equals or exceeds the total
derived in the fiscal year ending June 30, 1970, the state and any county shall not r" eceive from
such revenues for the use of each and for distribution to cities and towns, fewer dollars than
were received and distributed in such fiscal year.. This section shall not apply to moneys
derived from the automobile license tax imposed under section 11 of article IX of the
Constitution of Arizona All moneys collected in accordance with this section shall be
distributed as provided by law
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov" 5, 1974 17
2" The pmposed amendment ( approved by a majority ofthe members elected to each house of the
legislature, and entered upon the respective journals thereof, together with the ayes and nays thereon)
shall be by the secretary of state submitted to the qualified electors at the next regular general election
( or at a special election called for that purpose), as provided by article 21, Constitution of Ariwna
Passed the Senate February 15, 1974 by the following vote: 27 Ayes, 3 Nays, 0 Not Voting,
Passed the House April 26, 1974 by the following vote: 40 Ayes, 18 Nays, 2 Not Voting,
Approved by the Governor - May 9, 1974
Filed in the Office of the Secretary of State - May 10, 1974
ARIZONA LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
From Speaker Stan Akers, Chairman, Arizona Legislative Council
To The Honorable Wesley Bolin, Secretary of State
July 11, 1974
In accordance with the provisions of ARB, 19- 124, the Legislative Council is herewith filing an
analysis of the provisions of each ballot proposal referred to the voters by the Legislature for the 1974
general ele~ tion, together with a list of popular arguments favoring and opposing each such proposal,
for inclusion in the publicity pamphlet published by your office,
PROPOSITION NO. 105
Analysis
Proposition 105 would broaden the constitutional authorization for the expenditure of revenues
derived from motor vehicle- related taxes and fees ( such as gasoline taxes and automobile license fees)
by permitting the use of such funds for additional general transportation needs, including bike and foot
pathways, horseback riding trails, alternative methods of public transportation,. underpasses and
overpasses, and parkways.. Current constitutional law stipulates that such funds may be used only for
purposes relating to highways and streets,
The amendment would specifically authorize the use of the state share of such funds for the
construction, maintenance, and repair of bicycle and foot pathways and horseback riding trails In
addition, that portion of highway- related revenue distributed to Arizona's counties and municipalities
could be used for such additional purposes as alternative modes of public transportation, overpasses,
underpasses, parkways, bicycle pathways and facilities, foot pathways, and horseback riding trails.
Chapter 108 ( SB. 1056, 1974 Regular Session), which would become effective upon passage of
this constitutional amendment, would require the Director of the Department of Transportation to lay
out, establish, and maintain a system of bicycle and foot pathways along certain state highways, In
anticipation of this duty, a comprehensive bikeways study was prepared by Bivens and Associates,
Inc, , in 1973, which contains detailed recommendations regarding the planning, design, construction,
and maintenance of a statewide network of integrated bicycle and foot pathways .. The Bivens bikeway
study further reports that at least four states currently use gasoline tax dollars for bike paths, including
Oregon, which allocates one percent of its gasoline tax for bike path construction, and Maryland, New
York, and California,
Pro Arguments
Gasoline taxes and other motor vehicle- related taxes and fees are basically transportation taxes
and should be used for all forms of transportation. Construction and use of transportation modes other
than the private automobile, such as pUblic transit systems and bikeways, will alleviate some of the
current traffic congestion, save gasoline which is in short supply, reduce air pollution, offset the need
for additional expensive automobile parking facilities, put valuable urban land to a better use. increase
the quality of urban living, and reduce the incidence of traffic accidents involving motor vehicles and
bicycle riders and pedestrians,
Moreover, the continued use of motor vehicle- related funds solely for the construction and
maintenance of an elaborate street, highway, and freeway system will only perpetuate the automobile
as Arizona's principal mode of transportation As a result, uncontrolled urban sprawl which is
encouraged by automobile use will continue to plague the state's metropolitan areas
18 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
People deserve a choice arriong the various modes of transportation available, and as long as the
gasoline tax is collected and used exclusively for motor vehicle travel, such a choice will not be
forthcoming,
Con Arguments
Monies in the Highway Fund are generated by the consumption of gasoline lIl¥ f other motor
vehicle fuels as well as by other taxes on highway users, and such monies should therefore be tapped
only to provide for streets and highways necessary for motor vehicle traveL Quite simply, if the
Highway Fund is opened for uses other than those related to the motor vehicle, it will no longer be
capable of meeting the needs of highway and street improvement
Moreover, current highway funds are inadequate even to meet present construction and mainte­nance
needs, much less to construct public transit systems, bikeways, and equestrian trails Iffunds are
needed for bike paths, for exampie, then special bicycle user taxes and registration fees should be levied
on bicycle riders,
Arguments in Favor of a Yes Vote
on Proposition 105
Ar'izona needs to modernize the financing of its transportation system The passage of Proposition 105
will allow government in our State the necessary options in transportation funding to start getting the
job done
This proposed amendment to our State Constitution recognizes our changing times and the growing
need in many areas of our State to consider alternatives to the automobile, Presently, Arizona's
Constitution provides that gasoline and diesel fuel taxes, automobile registration and truck weight fees
can only beused for the construction, reconstruction and maintenance of streets and highways" We
must provide flexibility in the use of these taxes and fees Proposition 105 will clear the way for funding
of overpasses and underpasses so desperately needed in some ar'eas of our State; for bridges and bike
paths and for public transportation including bus improvements, Times are changing and the transporta­tion
needs of Arizona's citizens are changing; the State Constitution needs to keep pace In the years
ahead, Arizona must have a varied transportation system
Proposition 105 will open up the options available to your locally- elected officials in funding
transportation projects needed in your community, It does not raise taxes; it only allows more flexibility
in the use of th- e funds aheady coming in to your State, county and city government
We urge your support of this amendment to our State Constitution
The League of Arizona Cities and Towns
President: Max Klass
Mayor of Glendale
Vice- President: Arthur M, Doan
Mayor of Nogales
Statement in Opposition to Senate Concurrent
Resolution 1003 Proposition 105
Senate Concurrent Resolution 1003 proposes to amend the state constitution to make it lawful to
divert taxes levied on gasoline diesel fuel, car registration fees and license taxes to purposes other than
the construction and repair of highways, streets and roads Specifically proposed, is the construction,
repair and maintenance of " Public Transportation, Bicycle Pathways and Facilities, Overpasses,
Underpasses, Parkways, Foot Pathways, Equestrian Trails" Almost without exception, the witnesses
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov. 5, 1974 19
who appeared before the legislature urging the passage of this proposed constitutional amendment
strongly advocated the tremendous recreational value of bike riding and hOlse back riding
There has never been, so far' as we can learn, a serious question raised about use of highway user
taxes for the construction of overpasses, underpasses, parkways or sidewalks ( foot paths adjacent to
streets and roads) 01' any other structure in connection with or incident to highways, streets and roads.
It is clear, then, that the proponents are primarily concerned with funding public transportation
and recreational facilities with the taxes now levied to build highways, streets, and roads As worded in
the proposed constitutional amendment there would be no limit to the uses to which these taxes could be
used for " public tr · ansportation .." That might be for drivers' salaries, repair and maintenance of busses,
the purchase of stations, rest stops or any other thing associated with' ' public transportation" Nor is
there any restr'ictions on where, when 01' how many " bicycle pathways and facilities" 01 " equestrian
trails" might be built and maintained
There is never a justification for the expenditure of funds for purposes oth~ r than those purposes
for which the taxes are levied There is no justification for the working man in Douglas, Yuma, or
Kingman or elsewhere paying gas taxes and license fees for the construction, repair and maintenance of
roads, streets and highways, only to have these funds used for recreational purposes somewhere else
We are far short of the complete, adequate, well- maintained and safe system of highways, streets
and roads for which the highway user taxes were levied in the first place. Until we have achieved that
goal, we earnestly solicit your vote to reject this attempt to amend our constitution to make lawful the
expenditure of highway user taxes for purposes other than those for which they were levied
Lynn Anderson
Chairman Arizona Highway Users Conference
Route 1, Box 515, Peoria, Az. 85345
The following is the form and number in which the question will be printed on the Official Ballot:
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
PROPOSED BY THE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1003
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO USE
AND DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICLE, USER AND GASOLINE AND DIESEL TAX RE­CEIPTS,
AND AMENDING ARTICLE 9, SECTION 14, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA
( SUMMARY)
An Amendment relating to the use and distribution of vehicle, user and gasoline and diesel tax
receipts; amending Article 9, Section 14, Arizona Constitution, by adding thereto authorization to use
such iax receipts for public transportation purposes as defined by law, bicycle and foot pathways,
equestrian trails, overpasses, underpasses and parkways
If you favor the above law, vote YES; if opposed, vote NO
105
YES
NO
D
D
20 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Arizona
for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held
ON NOVEMBER 5,1974
Referred to the people by the Legislature and filed in the office of the Secretary of State, May 16, 1974,
and printed in pursuance of Sections 19- 123, 19- 124, Arizona Revised Statutes
WESLEY BOLIN, Secretary of State
( On Official Ballot No. 106)
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1012
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO
PUBLIC DEBT, REVENUE ANDTAXATION; LIMITING STATE APPROPRIATIONS TO A
PERCENTAGE OF STATE PERSONAL INCOME; ESTABLISHING AN ECONOMIC ESTI­MATES
COMMISSION; PRESCRIBING POWERS AND DUTIES, AND AMENDING ARTI­CLE
9, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY ADDING SECTION 17
Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring:
1 The following amendment of article 9, Constitution of Arizona, by adding section 17, is
proposed, to become valid when approved by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon and
upon proclamation of the governor:
17 Appropriation limitation; economic estimates commission; powers and duties
SECTION 17 THE LEGISLATURE SHALL NOT, BY APPROPRIATION FOR ANY
FISCAL YEAR, CAUSE THE EXPENDITURE OF STATE TAX REVENUES FOR THAT
FISCAL YEAR TO EXCEED EIGHT AND FOUR- TENTHS PER CENT OF THE TOTAL
PERSONAL INCOME OF THE STATE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR AS DETERMINED BY
THE ECONOMIC ESTIMATES COMMISSION, EXCEPT UPON AFFIRMATIVE VOTE
ON EACH SUCH APPROPRIATION OF TWO- THIRDS OF THE MEMBERSHIP OF
EACH HOUSE OF THE LEGISLATURE
THE ECONOMIC ESTIMATES COMMISSION SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AS
PRESCRIBED BY LAW, WITH A MEMBERSHIP OF NOTTOEXCEED THREEMEM­BERS,
AND SHALL DETERMINE AND PUBLISH PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 1 OF EACH
YEAR A PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF THE TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME FOR THE
FOLLOWING FISCAL YEAR. BY APRIL 1 OF EACH YEAR THE ECONOMIC ESTI­MATES
COMMISSION SHALL DETERMINE AND PUBLISH A FINAL ESTIMATE OF
THE TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME FOR THE FOLLOWING FISCAL YEAR, WHICH
ESTIMATE SHALL BE USED IN COMPUTING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR
THE LEGISLATURE FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, " TOTAL PERSONAL
INCOME" MEANS THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT WILL BE REPORTED AS TOTAL
INCOME BY PERSONS FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA BY THE U S DEPARTMENT
OF COMMERCE OR ITS SUCCESSOR AGENCY. FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION
STATE TAX REVENUES SHALL BE DEFINED AS PROVIDED BY LAW.
IN ORDER TO PERMIT THE TRANSFERENCE OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNC­TIONS
BETWEEN THE FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS AND BETWEEN
THE STATE GOVERNMENT AND ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS WITHOUT AB­RIDGING
THE PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION TO LIMIT STATE SPENDING TO
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME, THE LEGISLATURE SHALL PRO­VIDE
FOR ADJUSTMENTS BYTHE ECONOMIC ESTIMATES COMMISSION
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov. 5, 1974
APPROPRIATION PERCENTAGE LIMITATION OF TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME
CONSISTENT WITH THE FOLLOWING PRINCIPLES:
I IF, BY ORDER OF ANY COURT, OR BY LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENT, THE
COSTS OF A PROGRAM ARE TRANSFERRED FROM A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION
OF THE STATE TO THE STATE, THE APPROPRIATION PERCENTAGE LIMITATION
MAYBE COMMENSURATELY INCREASED PROVIDED THE TAX REVENUES OF
THE AFFECTED POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS ARE COMMENSURATELY DE­CREASED
2. IF, BY ORDER OF ANY COURT, OR BY LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENT, THE
COSTS OF A PROGRAM ARE TRANSFERRED FROM THE STATE GOVERNMENT
TO A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION IN THE STATE, THE APPROPRIATION PERCEN­TAGE
LIMITATION SHALL BE COMMENSURATELY DECREASED, AND THE TAX
RATES OF THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION MAY BE COMMENSURATELY IN­CREASED
3. IF FEDERAL TAXES ARE REDUCED ON CONDITION THAT ' THE STATE
INCREASE EXPENDITURES BY AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO THE FEDERAL
REDUCTION, THE APPROPRIATION PERCENTAGE LIMITATION MAY BE IN­CREASED
BY SUCH AMOUNT
4 THE ADJUSTMENT PROVIDED FOR HEREIN SHALL BE MADE IN THE
FIRST FISCAL YEAR OF TRANSFER OR OPERATION. SUCH ADJUSTMENT SHALL
REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR EACH SUBSEQUENT FISCAL YEAR
21
2. The proposed amendment ( approved by a majority of the members elected to each house of the
legislature, and entered upon the respeciivejoumals thereof, together with the ayes and nays thereon)
shall be by the secretary of state submitted to the qualified electors at the next regular general election
( or at a special election called for that purpose), as provided by article 21, Constitution of Arizona
Passed the House May 10, 1974 by the following vote: 34 Ayes, 18 Nays, 8 Not Voting
Passed the Senate May la, 1974 by the following vote: 18 Ayes, 10 Nays, 2 Not Voting
Approved by the Governor - May 16, 1974
Filed in the Office of the Secretary of State - May 16, 1974
ARIZONA LEGISLA TIVE COUNCIL
From Speaker Stan Akers, Chairman Arizona Legislative Council
To The Honorable Wesley Bolin, Secretary of State
July II, 1974
In accordance with the provisions of A R S. 19- 124, the Legislative Council is herewith filing an
analysis of the provisions of each ballot proposal referred to the voters by the Legislature for the 1974
generai election, together with a list of popular arguments favoring and opposing each such proposal,
for inclusion in the publicity pamphlet published by your office
PROPOSITION NO. 106
Analysis
~ constitutional amendment contained in Proposition 106 would limit the total dollar amount
available for legislative appropriation from state tax revenues to a maximum eight and four- tenths
percent of Arizona's estimated total personal income during the same fiscal year.. This constitutional
state spending ceiling could be exceeded only by an affirmative vote on each appropriation of
two- thirds of the membership of each house of the Legislature .
This amendment would also constitutionally establish a three- member Economic Estimates
Commission to determine the estimated total personal income in ' the state for use in computing the
annual legislative appropriation ceiling. The commission would consist of the Director of the Depart­ment
of Revenue, who would serve as chairman, plus one person appointed by the President of the
Senate and another by the Speaker of the House The appointive members would be required to be
knowledgeable in economics and no commission member could be a member of the Legislature.
Statutory law defines state tax revenues ( the spending of which would be limited by the
amendment) as those state fees and taxes levied on property, income, transaction privilege ( sales) and
22 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
use, excise, fuel, luxury privilege, insurance premiums, estates, gifts, motor carriers, and all other
taxes levied and collected by the state for its own use. Spending limitations would not, however, apply
to revenue derived from ( I) federal, private, and other grants; ( 2) sales, dividends, interest, and
services; ( 3) trust and agency funds; ( 4) intrastate service funds, bond funds, and endowment earnings;
or ( 5) that portion of tax revenue collected by the state for distribution to counties and municipalities.
Proposition 106 would also provide for adjustments to be made in the spending limitation
percentage in the eventof a transfer of the cost of any governmental function or program between the
federal and state government or between the state and its political subdivisions Under such circum­stances,
the spending limitation percentage would be increased or decreased commensurately to reflect
the resulting change in fiscal burdens between the governmental levels involved.
Pro Arguments
Government spending must be limited to control inflation and avoid utter dependence on
government. Taxing and spending should be geared to income, not to wants. Proposition 106 would
terminate state government's blank check drawn on people's earnings .. Expected growth in total
personal income will provide adequate funding for new programs
From 1963 to 1973, Arizona state tax revenues experienced an average annual increase of 12.9
percent, whereas Arizona's total personal income during that period grew at an average annual rate of
only 10.5 percent Quite simply, growth in state taxes has outpaced growth in total personal income.
State taxes as a percentage of total personal income increased from 5. l' percent in 1963 to approxi­mately
7.. 9 percent for 1974- 75. If state tax revenues are limited to a maximum of 84 percent of total
personal income, as proposed in Proposition 106, these revenues will stabilize by 1975- 76 to an amount
that would be met annually by expected growth in total personal income. Adequate funds will still be
available for increased state programs.
The limitation can be exceeded by a two- thirds' vote of the membership of each house of the
Legislature. Lack of a formal limitation on state spending has resulted in a 30 percent state tax increase
in one of the past ten years, while personal income has not advanced more than 14 percent in anyone
year. Such an increase in spending is responsible for the ever- increasing state tax burden over the last
ten years. This burden will continue to increase if Proposition 106 fails
Proposition 106 would allow state expenditures out of state tax revenues to increase to over
$ 880,000,000 by 1975, and to $ 1 ,400,000,000 by 1980 Withoutthis limitation, these expenditures as
a percentage of personal income will probably exceed 91 percent of Arizona's personal income by
1980.
Proposition 106 suggests that the complex problems of our society and our government can
somehow be compressed within an arithmetic formula. This measure assumes that there is a precise
method by which we can control the problems of this state and correspondingly guide our state's fiscal
affairs for the years ahead, a possibility that cannot be supported
As a practical matter, a constitutional state spending limit may paradoxically serve to increase,
rather than decrease, state expenditures if the desired or needed level of funding is less than the
maximum permitted level. Under such circumstances, the Legislature may view the spending ceiling as
a target or norm, rather than a maximum level, and in so doing appropriate more than is actually needed
in order to reach that target
In addition, by constitutionally limiting the amount which the state may spend, the federal
government and political subdivisions such as cities and counties may be forced to assume greater fiscal
responsibility and accompanying control over governmental programs in this state
Proposition 106 is comparable to'one which was defeated by the voters in California, and no state
in this nation has adopted such a system that would hamstring future legislatures.
Can Arguments
The real burden on the average Arizona taxpayer results from federal taxes, not state taxes In this
connection, again paradoxically, if every state adopted a spending ceiling similar to Proposition 106,
then Congress might be forced to increase federal taxes in order to fund needed programs and services
in Arizona and in other states, thereby hurting instead of helping the taxpayers
22A Corrected Page 22 Supplement to Publicity Pamphlet 1974
use, excise, fuel, luxury privilege, insurance premiums, estates, gifts, motor carriers, and all other
taxes levied and collected by the state for its own use Spending limitations would not, however, apply
to revenue derived flom ( 1) federal, private, and other grants; ( 2) sales, dividends, interest, and
services; ( 3) trust and agency funds; ( 4) intrastate service funds, bond funds, and endowment earnings;
or ( 5) that portion of tax revenue collecte! l by the state for distribution to counties and municipalities
Proposition 106 would also provide for adjustments to be made in the spending limitation
percentage in the event of a transfer of the cost of any governmental function or program between the
federal and state government or between the state and its political subdivisions Under such circum­stances,
the spending limitation percentage would be increased or decreased commensurately to reflect
the resulting change in fiscal burdens between the governmental levels involved
Pro Arguments
Government spending must be limited to control inflation and avoid utter dependence on
government Taxing and spending should be geared to income, not to wants Proposition 106 would
terminate state government's blank check drawn - on people's earnings. Expected growth in total
personal income will provide adequate funding for new programs
From 1963 to 1973, Arizona state tax revenues experienced an average annual increase of 12 9
percent, whereas Arizona's total personal income during that period grew at an average annual rate of
only 105 percent Quite simply, growth in state taxes has outpaced growth in total personal income
State taxes as a percentage of total personal income increased from 5.1 percent in 1963 to approxi­mately
79 percent for 1974- 75 If state tax revenues are limited to a maximum of8 4 percent of total
personal income, as proposed in Proposition 106, these revenues will stabilize by 1975- 76 to an amount
that would be met annually by expected growth in total personal income Adequate funds will still be
available for increased state programs
The limitation can be exceeded by a two- thirds' vote of the membership of each house of the
Legislature. Lack of a formal lim itation on state spending has resulted in a 30 percent state tax increase
in one of the past ten years, while personal income has not advanced more than 14 percent in anyone
year' Such an increase in spending is responsible for the ever · · increasing state tax burden over the last
ten years .. This burden will continue to increase if Proposition 106 fails
Proposition 106 would allow state expenditures out of state tax revenues to increase ro over
$ 880,000,000 by 1975, and to $ 1,400,000,000 by 1980 Without this limitation, these expenditures as
a percentage of personal income will probably exceed 9 1 percent of Arizona's personal income by
1980
Con Arguments
Proposition 106 suggests thar the complex problems of our society and our government can
somehow be compressed within an arithmetic formula This measure assumes that there is a precise
method by which we can control the problems of this state and correspondingly guide our state's fiscal
affairs for the years ahead, a possibility that cannot be supported
As a practical matter, a constitutional state spending limit may paradoxically serve to increase,
rather than decrease, stare expenditures if the desired or needed level of funding is less than the
maximum permitted level Under such circumstances, the Legislature may view the spending ceiling as
a target or norm, rather than a maximum level, and in so doing appropriate more than is actually needed
in order to reach that target
In addition, by constitutionally limiting the amount which the state may spend, the federal
government and political subdivisions such as cities and counties may be forced to assume greater fiscal
responsibility and accompanying control over governmental programs in this state
Proposition 106 is comparable to one which was defeated by the voters in California, and no state
in this nation has adopted such a system that would hamstring future legislatures
The real burden on the average Arizona taxpayer results from federal taxes, not state taxes. In this
connection, again paradoxically, if every state adopted a spending ceiling similar to Proposition 106,
then Congress might be forced to increase federal taxes in order to fund needed programs and services
in Ar'izona and in other states, thereby hurting instead of helping the taxpayers
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov. 5, 1974
The following is the form and numbel'in which the question will be printed on the Official Ballot:
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
PROPOSED BY THE LEGISLATURE
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1012
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
23
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THECONSTITUTlON OF ARIZONA RELATING TO
PUBLIC DEBT, REVENUE AND TAXAfION; LIMITING STATE APPROPRIATIONS TO A
PERCENTAGE OF STATE PERSONAL INCOME; ESTABLISHING AN ECONOMIC ESTI­MATES
COMMISSION; PRESCRIBING POWERS AND DUTIES, AND AMENDING ARTI­CLE
9, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY ADDING SECTION 17
( SUMMARY)
An Amendment relating to public debt, revenue and taxation; limiting state appropriations to a
percentage of State personal income; establishing and providing the powers and duties of an Economic
Estimates Commission; and amending Article 9, Arizona Constitution, by adding Section 17
If you favor the above law, vote YES; if opposed, vote NO
YES D
106 NO
To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Ar izona
for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held
ON NOVEMBER 5, 1974
( On Official Ballot No 107)
D
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION ON SALARIES FOR ELECTED STATE OFFI­CIALS
AS TO LEGISLATIVE SALARIES HAVE BEEN CERTIFIED TO THE SECRETARY OF
STATE AND ARE HEREBY SUBMITTED TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS FOR THEIR
APPROVAL OR REJECTION
" SHALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION ON SALARIES FOR
ELECTIVE STATE OFFICERS CONCERNING LEGISLATIVE SALARIES BE AC­CEPTED?
YES 0 NO 0 " SUCH RECOMMENDAnONS IF APPROVED BY
THE ELECTORS SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE NEXT
REGULAR LEGISLATIVE SESSIONWIIHOUT ANY OTHER AUTHORIZING LEGIS-LATION
-
24 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
STATEMENT FRqM THE REPORT OF. 4' HE COMMISSION ON
SALARIES FOR ELECTED STATE OFFICIALS'
The Commission on Salaries recommends that the legislative salary be established at $ 10,000 a
year. This would represent an increase of 11 cents , per Arizona resident per year to fund legislative
salaries as of 1975.
In recent years in Arizona, as in other states of this nation, legislative membership is fast
approaching year- round service Our state legislators are being kept increasingly busy with longer
regular sessions involving highly complex issues, aqtive interim study activities, special sessions,
keeping informed about the changing issues of our time, and in maintaining communications with and
providing assistance to their local constituents.
Specifically, in 1961- 1962 the Legislature met for 164 days whereas in 1971- 72 it met for 275
days' The number of pages of proposed legislation increased from 4200 pages at the 1971 session to
5300 pages at the 1972 session Our people are faced with new pr~ blems on every front
The Commission believes that the salary level for members ofour state legislative body should be:
1 Approaching a level commensurate with. what persons of similar abilities would receive in
private business for similar types of duties and responsibilities.
2 Sufficient to afford the opportunity for all public- spirited dtizens to seek legislative office
3 Sufficient to reduce, but not eliminate entirely, the financial sacrifice ofthose serving in our
state legislature
4 Sufficient to insure a high degree of fiscal' independence on the part of the members"
We believe that our recommended salary level of$ 1O, OOO a year for state legislators represents
positive benefit for all of us, and we urge the support of our fellow citizens in its adoption,
Respectfully submitted,
Newton Rosenzweig, Chairman
John P Frank, Member
Lawson'Y. Smith, Member
Lyman A Davidson, Member
Robert o Lesher, Member
To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Arizona
for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held
ON NOYEMBER 5,
Proposed by Initiative Petition of the People and filed in the office of the Secretary of State, July
1974, and printed in pursuance of Sections 19- 123, 19- 124, Arizona Revised Statutes
WESLEY BOLIN, Secretary
24 A
PLEASE READ CAREFULLY
STATE OF ARIZONA
REFERENDUM AND INITIATIVE
SUPPLEMENT
PUBLICITY PAMPHLET
1974
To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Ariwna
for their approval or rejection at the
GENERAL ELECTION
to be held
ON NOVEMBER 5, 1974
( On Official Ballot No. 107)
RECOMMENDAnONS OF THE COMMISSION ON SALARIES FOR ELECTED SrATE OFFI­CIALS
AS TO LEGISLATlVE SALARIES HAVE BEEN CERTIFIED TO THE SECRETARY OF
STATE AND ARE HEREBY SUBMITTED TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS FOR THEIR
APPROVAL OR REJECTION
( SUMMARY)
" SHALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION ON SALARIES FOR
ELECTIVE STATE OFFICERS CONCERNING LEGISLATIVE SALARIES BE AC­CEPTED?
YES 0 NO 0 " SUCH RECOMMENDATIONS IF APPROVED BY
THE ELECTORS SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE NEXT
REGULAR LEGISLATIVE SESSION WITHOUT ANY OTHER AUTHORIZING LEGIS­LATION.
If you favor the above law, vote YES; iCopposed, vote NO
YES D
107
24A
NO D
submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov 5, 1974
( On Official Ballot No, 108)
INITIATIVE PETITION
25
AN ACT
AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO THE JUDICIAL
DEPARTMENT; PROVIDING FOR THE RETIREMENT OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF
COURTS OF RECORD; RESTRICTING THE POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF JUSTICES AND
JUDGES OF COURTS OF RECORD; PROVIDING FOR THE NONPARTISAN ELECTION AND
APPOINTMENT AND APPROVAL OR REJECTION OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF COURTS
OF RECORD; ESTABLISHING JUDICIAL NOMINATING COMMISSIONS; PROVIDING FOR
THE INVOLUNTARY RETIREMENT OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF COURTS OF RECORD;
AMENDING ARTICLE 6, SECTIONS 3, 4, 12, 20, 28, 30 AND ' 35, CONSTITUTION OF
ARIZONA, AND AMENDING ARTICLE 6, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY ADDING
SECTIONS 36 THROUGH 40 ~
Be it enacted by the people of the State of AriZona:
I That Article 6, sections 3, 4, 12,20,28,30 and 35, Constitution of Arizona be and they hereby are
amended to read as follows:
3. Supreme Courl; administratire supenision; chief justice
Section 3, The Supreme Court shall have administrative supervision over all the courts ofthe state
The chief justice shall be elected by the justices of the Supreme Court from one of their number for a
term offi~ e years, and may be reelected for like terms The vice chiefjustice shall be elected by the
justices of the Supreme Court from one of their number fora term determined by the cour! A member
of the court may resign the office ofchief justice or vice chiefjustice without resigning from the court
The chiefjustice , or in his absence or incapacity, the vice chiefjustice, shall exercise the court's
administrative supervision over all the courts of the state. He may assign judges of intermediate
appellate courts, superior courts, or courts inferior to the superior court to serve in other courts or
counties,
4, Supreme Court; term of office
Section 4, Justices ofthe Supreme Court shall hold office for a regular term of six years except as
provided by this article
12, Superior Court; term of office
Section 12 Judges of the superior court in counties having a population of less than one hundred
fifty thousand persons according to the United States census shall be elected by the qualified electors of
their counties at the general election They shall hold office for a regular term of four years except as
provided by this section from and after the first Monday in January next succeeding their election, and
until their successors ar'e elected and qualify. The names of all candidates for judge of the superior court
in such counties shall be placed on the regular ballot without partisan or other designation except the
division and title of the office
The governor shall fill any vacancy in such counties by appointing a person to serve until tlie.
election and qualification of a successor.. At the next succeeding general election following the
appointment of a person to fill a vacancy, a judge shall be elected to serve for the remainder of the
unexpired term
Judges ofthe superior court in counties having a population of one hundred fifty thousand persons
or more according to the United States census shall hold office for a regular term of four years except as
provided by this article,
20 Retirement and service of retired justices and judges
Section 20,. Th~ legislature shall prescribe by law aplan of retirement for justices and judges of
courts ofrecord, including the basis and amount of retirement pay, and requiring except as provided in
section 35 of this article, that justices and judges of courts of record be retired upon reaching the age of
seventy, Any retiredjustice orjudge of any court of record who is drawing retirement pay may serve as
26 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
ajustice orjudge of any court When serving outside his county ofresidence, any such retiredjustice or
judge shall receive his necessary traveling and subsistence expenses.. A retiredjudge who is temporarily
called back to the active duties of ajudge is' entitled to receive the same compensation and expenses as
other like active judges less any amount received for such period in retirement benefits
28 Justices and judges; dual office holding; political activity; pmetice of law
Section 28. Justices and judges of courts of record shall not be eligible for any other public office
or for any other public employment during their term of office, except that they may assume another
judicial office, and upon qualifying therefor, the office formerly held shall become vacant No justice
or judge of any court of record shall practice law during his continuance in office, nor shall he hold any
office in a political party or actively take part in ' any political campaign other than his own for his
reelection orretention in office Any justice or judge who files nomination papers for an elective office,
other than for judge of the superior court or a court of record inferior to the superior court in a cpunty
having a population of less than one hundred fifty thousand persons according to the United States
census, forfeits his judicial office
30. Courts of record
Section 30 The Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals and the superior court shall be courts o(
record Other courts of rec~ l! d may be established by law, but justice courts shall not be courts of record
All justices and judges of courts of record, except forjudges of the superior court and other courts
of record inferior to the superior court in counties having a population of less than one hundred fifty
thousand persons according to the United States census, shall be appointed in the manner provided in
section 37 of this article
35 Continuation in office; continued existence of offices; application of pr'ior statute and
rules
Section 35 All justices, judges, . iustices of the peace and officers of any court who are holding
office as such by election or appointment at the time of the adoption of this section shall serve or
continue in office for the respective terms for which they are so elected or for their respective unexpired
terms, and until their successors are elected or appointed and qualify or they are retained in office
pursuant to section 38 of this article; provided, however, that any justice or judge elected at the general
election at which this section is adopted shall serve for the term for which he is so elected. The
continued existence of any office heretofore legally established or held shall not be abolished or
repealed by the adoption of this article The statutes and rules relating to the authority, jurisdiction,
practice and procedure of courts, judicial officers and offices in force at the time of the adoption of this
article and not inconsistent herewith, shall, so far as applicable, apply to and govern such courts,
judicial officers and offices until amended or repealed
2 Article 6, Constitution of Arizona, is amended by adding sections 36 through 40, tpread as follows:
36 .. Commissions on appellate and trial court appointments and terms, appointments and
vacancies on such commissions
Section 36( A). There shall be a nonpartisan commission on appellate court appointments which
shall be composed of the chief justice of the Supreme Court, who shall be chairman, three attorney
members, who. shall be nominated by the Board of Governors of the State Bar of Arizona and appointed
by the governor with the advice and consent of the Senate, and five nonattorney members who shall be
appointed by the governor with the advice and · consent of the Senate
Attorney members of the commission shall have resided in the state and shall have been admitted to
practice before the Supreme Court for not less than five years. Not more than two attorney members
shall be members of the same political party and not more than one attorney member shall be a resident
of anyone county. Nonattomey members shall have resided in the state for not less than five years and
shall not be judges, retired judges or admitted to practice before the Supreme Court Not more than
three nonattorney members shall be members of the same political party Not more than one nonattor­ney
member shall be a resident of anyone county None of the attorney or nonattorney members ofthe
commission shall hold any governmental office, elective or appointive, for profit, and no attorney
member shall be eligible for appointment to any judicial office ofthe state until one year after he c~ as~ s
submitted to the ElectOls of Arizona Nov.. 5, 1974 27
to be a member. Attorney members of the commission shall serve staggered four- year terms, and
nonattorney members shall serve staggered four- year terms, except that initial appointments for
attorney members shall consist of one appointment for a two- year term, one appointment for a
three · · year term, and one appointment for a four- year term, and except that initial appointments for
nonattorney members shall consist of two appointments for a one- year term, one appointment for a
two- year term, one appointment for a three- year term and one appointment for a four- year term.
Vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired terms in the same manner as the original appointments.
Section 36( B). There shall be a nonpartisan commission on trial court appointments for each
county having a population of one hundred fifty thousand persons or more according to the United
States census which shall be composed of the chief justice of the Supreme Court, who shall be
chairman, three attorney members, who shall be nominated by the Board of Governors ofthe State Bar
of Arizona and appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the Senate and five
nonattorney members, who shall be appointed by the governor and with the advice and consent of the
Senate
Attorney members of such commission shall have resided in the state and shall have been admitted
to practice before the Supreme Court for not less than five years, and shall be residents of the county
trom which appointed.. Nonattorney members shall have resided in the state for not less than five years
and shall not be judges, retired judges or admitted to practice before the Supreme Court and shall be
residents of the county from which appointed. On each of such commissions not mor'e than two
attorney members and not more than three nonattorney members shall be members of the same political
party. None of the attorney or nonattorney members of any such commission shall hold any governmen­tal
office, elective or appointive, for profit, and no attorney member shall be eligible for appointment to
any judicial office of the state until one year after he ceases to be a member. Attorney members shall
serve staggered four- year terms, and nonattorney members shall serve staggered four- year terms,
except that initial appointments for attorney members shall consist of one appointment for a two- year
term, one appointment for a three- year term, and one appointment for a four- year term, and except that
initial appointments for nonattorney members shall consist of two appointments for a one- year term,
one appointment for a two- year term, one appointment fOl a three- year term and one appointment for a
four- year term Vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired terms in the same manner as the original
appointments
Section 36( C) No person other than the chief justice shall serve at the same time as a member of
more than one of such commissions
Section 36( D). The chairman of such commissions shall cast votes only in the event of ties In the
event of the absence or incapacity of any such chairman the Supreme Court shall appoint a justice
thereof to serve in his place and stead
Section 36( Ej Prior to making recommendations to the governor as hereinafter provided, the one
of such commissions having jurisdiction shall conduct such investigation and hold such hearings, either
public or executive, as it deems advisable Final decisions as to recommendations shall be made on the
basis of merit alone without regard to political affiliation Voting shall be by secret, written ballot The
expenses of meetings of such commissions and the attendance of members thereof for travel and
subsistence shall be paid from the general fund of the state as state officers are paid, upon claims
approved by the chairman
37. Judicial vacancies and appointments; initial terms; residence; age
Section 37 Within sixty days from the occurrence of a vacancy in the office ofajustice orjudge of
any court of record, except for vacancies occuning in the office of a judge of the superior court or a
judge of a court ofrecord inferior to the superiOl court in a county having a population ofless than one
hundred fifty thousand persons according to the United States census, the commission on appellate
court appointments, if the vacancy is in the Supreme Court or an intermediate appellate court of record ,
or the commission on trial court appointments for the county in which the vacancy occurs, if the
vacancy is in the superior court or a court of record inferior to the superior court, shall submit to the
governor the names of not less than three persons nominated by it to fill such vacancy, no more than two
of whom shall be members ofthe same political party unless there are more than four such nominees, in
which event not more than sixty percentum of such nominees shall be members of the same political
party
28 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
A vacancy in the office ofajustice or ajudge of such court ofrecord shall be filled by appointment
by the governor on th_ e basis of merit alone without regard to political affiliation from one of the
nominees whose names shall be submitted to him as hereinabove provided. If the governor shall not
appoint one of such nominees to fill such vacancy within sixty days after their names are submitted to
the governor by such commission, the chief justice of the Supreme Courfforthwith shall appoint on the
basis of merit alone without regard to political affiliation one of such nominees to fill such If
such commission shall not, within sixty days after such vacancy occurs, submit the names
as hereinabove provided, the governor shall have the power to appoint any qualified person to fill such
vacancy at any time thereafter prior to the time the names of three or more nominees to fill such vacancy
shall be submitted to the governor as hereinabove provided
Each justice orjudge so appointed shall initially hold office for a term ending sixty days
the next regular general election after the expiration of a term of two years in office Thereafter,
terms of justices or judges of the Supreme Court and the superior court shall be as provided by
article
A person appointed to fill a vacancy on an intermediate appellate court, a superior court, or
another court of record now existing or hereafter established by law shall have been a resident of the
counties or county in which that vacancy exists for at least one year prior to his appointment, in addition
to possessing the other required qualifications A nominee Shall be under sixty- five years of age at the
time his name is submitted to the governor
38. Declaration of candidacy; form of judicial ballot, rejection and retention; failure to file
declaration
Section 38 Ajustice orjudge ofthe Supreme Court or an intermediate appellate court shall file in
the office of the secretary of state, and a judge of the superior court or other court of record including­such
justices or judges who are holding office as such by election or appointment at the time of the
adoption of this section except forjudges ofthe superior court and other courts of record inferior to the
superior court in counties having a population of less than one hundred fifty thousand persons,
according to the United States census, shall file in the office of the clerk oUhe board of supervisors of
the county in which he regularly sits and resides, not less than sixty nor more than ninety days prior to
the regular general election next preceding the expiration of his term of office, a declaration of his
desire to be retained in office, and the secretary of state shall certify to the several boards of supervisors
the appropriate names ofthe candidate or candidates appearing on such declarations filed in his office,
The name of any justice or judge whose declaration is filed as provided in this section shall be
placed on the appropriate official ballot at the next regular general election under a nonpartisan
designation and in substantially the following form:
Shall , ( Name of Justice or Judge) of the Court
retained in Office? Yes No ( Mark X after one)
If a majority of those voting on the question vote " No," the, upon the expiration of the term for
which suchjustice orjudge was serving, a vacancy shall exist, which shall be filled as provided by this
article If a majority of those voting on the question vote " Yes," such justice or judge shall remain in
office for another term, subject to removal as provided by this Constitution
The votes shall be counted and canvassed and the result declared as in the case of state and
elections, whereupon a certificate of retention or rejection of the incumbent justice or judge shall
delivered to him by the secretary of state or the clerk of the board of supervisors, as the case may
Ifajustice orjudge shall fail to file a declaration of his desire to be retained in office, asrecluiredl by
this section, then his office shall become vacant upon expiration of the term for which such ;,,<'; rf' nr ell
judge was serving
39 Retirement of justices and judges; vacancies
Section 39 On attaining the age of seventy years a justice or judge of a court of record shall
and his judicial office shall be vacant, except as otherwise provided in section 35 of this
addition to becoming vacant as provided in this section, the office of ajustice orjudge of any COllrtof il
record becomes vacant upon his death or his voluntary retirement pursuant to statute or his v" hm, larV:::, 1lt
resignation, and also, as provided in section 38 of this article, upon the expiration of his
to the Electors of Arizona Nov. 5, 1974 29
following a general election at which a majority of those voting on the question of his retention vote in
the negative or for which general election he is required, but fails, to file a declaration of his desire to be
retained in office
This section is alternative to and cumulative with the methods of removal ofjudges and justices
provided in parts I and 2 of Article 8 and Article 6.1 of this Constitution
40. Option for' counties with less than one hundred fifty thousand persons
Section 40.. Notwiths~ anding any provision of this article to the contrary, any county having a
population of less than on€;_ hundred fifty thousand persons, according to the United States census, may
choose to select its judges of the superior court or of courts of record inferior to the superior court as if it
had a population of one hundred fifty thousand or more persons Such choice shall be determined by
vote of the qualified electors of such county voting on the question at an election called for such purpose
by resolution of the board of supervisors of such county. If such qualified electors approve, the
provisions of sections 12,28,30 and 35 through 39 shall apply as if such county had a population of one
hundred fifty thousand persons or more
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF YES VOTE ON PROPOSITION 108
Merit Selection of judges is based on the fundamental idea that any judicial system is better if
judges are selected solely on the basis of competency and capability Appointments now are strongly
influenced by party affiliation, as an examination of the record shows
Under the Merit System, nonpartisan commissions made up of five non- lawyers, three lawyers,
and the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court, will recommend three or more persons to fill any
judicial vacancy that exists, and the governor will make an appointment from the list submitted to him
The responsible commission will make thorough investigations before submitting recommendations
Merit Selection initially will apply to all appellate courts and the Superior Courts of Maricopa and
Pima counties only ",.
Ihis proposal will prohibitjudges from political activity No longer will it be necessary for them to
solicit or accept campaign contributions for their own use They will be completely free of political
influence and obligation
The Merit System requires judges to face the voters on their records at a general election after
serving a designated term - four years for trialjudges, six years forjudges of higher courts A majority
vote of disapproval will remove ajudge from office Under the existing system the electorate can vote
against a judge only if there is an opposing candidate, and most judicial elections are uncontested,
Judicial appointments are not new in Arizona. Sixty- eight per cent of all current judges were
appointed initially In Maricopa County the figure is 74 per cent Since statehood in 1912 Arizona has
had 210judges. Governors appointed 113 of them, without the assistance of nonpartisan commissions
or the requirement that merit be the sole consideration
Sponsored by: B Victor Sturdivant, Chairman
Citizens Joint Conference on Merit Selection and Election of Judges
PO Box 1871, Yuma, Arizona 85364
Endorsed by:
Citizens AssoCiation on Arizona Courts
League of Women Voters of Arizona
Arizona Jaycees
Arizona Judges Association
State Bar of Arizona
30 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSITION 108
Passage by the voters of PROPOSITION 108, could well precipitate a Constitutional crisis in
which Arizona could lose most, if not all, of its representation in the Congress of the United States
PROPOSITION 108 calls for the appointment, rather than the election, of judges. Voters are
subsequently limited to voting whether the judge previously appointed shall or shall not continue in
office.
Thus the righr of the people to freely nominate and vote for judges of their choice is severely
abridged and denied. This abridgement and denial of the right to vote for the judicial officers of the
State can, according to Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment, cause Arizona to lose most and
possibly all of its representation in Congress - returning Arizonans to the pitifulcondition suffered by
our American Founding Fathers - " taxation without representation. "
With adjustments for the changed status of Indians. the giving of the vote ro women and eighteen
year olds, and omitting surplusage, Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment in essence states:
Representatives ( Congressional) shall be apportioned among the several states according to
their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state . But when
the right to vote at any election for the choice of judicial officers of a state is denied to
any of the inhabitants of such state, being eighteen years of age and CItizens of the Untted
States. or in any way abridged the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the
proportion which the number of such citizens shall bear to the whole number of citizens
eighteen years of age in such state.
Examination of the above will show that " the right to vote" at any election for the " choice of
judicial officers of the state" is certainly " denied" or " abridged" when the Governor can appoint a
judge from the limited selection of a lawyer dominated committee
The ability to nominate judges by the people, and their right to replace them often on a local basis
is not only important to maintain liberty, but is necessary here to avoid loss of Arizona' s representation
in Congress, since those abridged of the right to vote for judicial officers of the State would be
practically all voters. ilhd their proportion to the total number of citizens over eighteen also approaches
" all", or 100(! 0
Arizona cannot afford the luxury of losing its Congressional representation to please powerful
political interests of the St< tte Bar of Arizona
Sponsored By:
CONSTITUTIONAL PATRIOTS
BY W Vaughn Ellsworth
President
1051 N Grand St , Mesa, Az 8520 I
Endorsed by
Arizona Cacus Club
114 S MacDonald, Mesa, Az
ARGUMENT AGAINST POLITICAL
APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES
I The political appointment or the so · called " merit selection of judges' , would deny to the public
the right to affirmatively select their judges by placing the selection process In the hands of special
interests
2. The so · · called " merit selection ofjudges .. would place into the hands of the governor and ofthe
chief justice of the Supreme Court the ptesent power that the public has to select and elect or reject
judges' every four years
e submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov.. 5, 1974 31
3. The so- called' ' merit selection of judges" would be dominated by the governor's appointees to
the nominating commission by a margin of five to four
4 The so- called " merit selection ofjudges" is based upon the dangerous notion that the public
cannot be trusted and should not have the right to elect their judges
5 The so- called " merit selection ot'judges" would not miraculously improve the quality of the
judges, for the only way that that can be done is by continued education, experience and attracting
better qualified lawyers to the bench
6.. Under the so- called " merit selection.. ofjudges" the public cannot pick a judge. We can only
eject him orherfrom office. We have a " no" vote but not a " yes" vote. In other words, we can flie but
not hire and would not have anyone opposing the incumbentjudge to tell us why we should fire him
7. The so- called " merit selection ofjudges" provides effective life tenure tojudges which would
result in many instances in an arbitrary and despotic judge.. Under the present system ajudge must take
his ideas and personality'before the voters for their approval instead of being selected behind closed
doors
8 The so- called' ' merit selection ofjudges' , would take from the people their right to review the
qualifications and performances of the judges periodically The free elective process is the only
practical way for the people to do this
9 The so- called' ' merit selection of judges" would not take judges out of politics but would
remove their selection from public view
Sponsored by:
Endorsed By:
Mark B. Raven
177 North Church Avenue
Tucson, Arizona 8570 I
W. Mercer Bouldin
216 North Main
Tucson, Ariwna 85701
Bill Risner
177 North Church Avenue
Tucson, Ariwna 85701
Randy Tufts
809 East University Boulevard
Tucson, Ariwna 85719
The following is the form and number in which the measure will be printed on the Official Ballot:
AN INITIATIVE PETITION
AN ACT
AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA RELATING TO THE JUDICIAL DE­PARTMENT;
PROVIDING FOR THE RETIREMENT OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF COURTS OF
REl::: 01RD; RESTRICTING THE POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF COURTS OF
RECORD; PROVIDING FOR THE NONPARTISAN ELECTION AND APPOINTMENT AND AP­PROVAL
OR REJECTION OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF COURTS OF RECORD; ESTABLISHING
! · JULJILlftL NOMINATING COMMISSIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE INVOLUNTARY RETIREMENT
OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF COURTS OF RECORD; AMENDING ARTICLE 6, SECTIONS 3, 4,12,
20,28,30 AND 35, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, AND AMENDING ARTICLE 6, CONSTITUTION
OF ARIZONA, BY ADDING SECTIONS 36 THROUGH 40.
32
( SUMMARY)
Pamphlet Containing Amendments to I
Relating to the Judicial Department, Judges and Justices, Courts of Record; providing for retiremer
voluntary and involuntary; for non- partisan election, appointment, approval or rejection of such judges III
justices; restricting their political activities; establishing judicial nominating commission; amending Article;
Arizona Constitution by amending designated Sections and adding Sections 36- 40
108
If You Favor The Above Law, Vote Yes; If Opposed, Vote No,
To be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Arizona
for their approval or rejection at the
General Election
to be held
On November 5, 1974
YES
NO
o9
Proposed by Initiative Petition of the People and filed in the office of the Secretary of State, July 5,
1974, and printed in pursuance of Sections 19- 123, 19- 124, Arizona Revised Statutes,
WESLEY BOLIN, Secretary of State
( On Official Ballot No" 2oo!
INITIATIVE PETITION
AN ACT
RELATING TO ELECTIONS AND ELECTORS; PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION OF
CAMPAIGN FINANCES; ESTABLISHING A STATE ETHICS COMMISSION AND PRESCRIB- •
ING THE POWERS AND DUTIES THEREOF; REPEALING TITLE 16, CHAPTER 4, ARIZONA
REVISED STATUTES, AND AMENDING TITLE 16, ARIZONfI\ REVISED STATUTES, BY
ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 4, RELATING TO PUBLIC OFFICERS; PROVIDING THAT CER­TAIN
MEETINGS SHALL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC; PROVIDING THAT VOTES BE RE"
CORDED; PROVIDING FOR NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETINGS; PROVIDING FOR INJUNC­TIVE
RELIEF; PRESCRIBING PENALTY; REPEALING TITLE 38, CHAPTER 3, ARTICLE 3,1,
ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, AND AMENDING TITLE 38, CHAPTER 3, ARIZONA RE­VISED
STATUTES BY ADDING A NEW ARTICLE 31 RELATING TO PUBLIC OFFICERS
AND EMPLOYEES; PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS;
AMENDING SECTION 28- 1618, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; REPEALING TITLE 38,
CHAPTER 3, ARTICLE 8, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; AMENDING TITLE 38, ARIZONA
REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING CHAPTER 8, AND REPEALING TITLE 41, CHAPTER 7,
ARTICLE 12, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES RELATING TO STATE GOVERNMENT;
PROVIDING FOR REGISTRATION AND REPORTS OF LEGISLATIVE LOBBYISTS AND
PUBLICATION THEREOF, AND AMENDING TITLE 41, CHAPTER 7, ARIZONA REVISED
STATUTES, BY ADDING ARTICLE 9
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Arizona:
Section I" Repeal
Title 16, chapter 4, Arizona Revised Statutes, is repealed
Sec, 2, Title 16, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new chapter 4, to read:
Submitted to the Electors of Ariwna Nov 5, 1974
CHAPTER 4
CAMPAIGN FINANCES
ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 16- 401 Declaration of Policy
33
IT IS HEREBY DECLARED BY THE SOVEREIGN PEOPLE TO BE THE PUBLIC POLICY
OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA: #
1 THAT POLITICAL CAMPAIGN AND LOBBYING CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDI ·
TURES BE FULLY DISCLOSED TOTHE PUBLIC ANDTHAT SECRECY IS TO BE AVOIDED
2.. THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXPECT FROM THEIR ELECTED REP­RESENTATIVES
AT ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENTTHE UTMOST OF INTEGRITY, HON­ESTY
AND FAIRNESS IN THEIR DEALINGS
3 THAT THE PEOPLE SHALL BE" ASSURED THAT THE PRIVATE FINANCIAL DEAL­INGS
OF THEIR PUBLIC OFFICIALS, AND OF CANDIDATES FOR THOSE OFFICES, PRE­SENT
NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST BETWEEN THE PUBLIC TRUST AND PRIVATE IN­TERESTS.
4.. THATOURREPRESENTATIVE FORM OFGOVERNMENTIS FOUNDED ON ABELIEF
THAT THOSE ENTRUSTED WITH THE OFFICES OF GOVERNMENT HAVE NOTHING TO
FEAR FROM FULL PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF THEIR FINANCIAL AND BUSINESS HOLD­INGS,
PROVIDEDTHOSEOFFICIALS DEALHONESTLYANDFAIRLY WITH THE PEOPLE
5 THAT PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN GOVERNMENT AT ALL LEVELS IS ESSENTIAL
AND MUST BE PROMOTED BY ALL POSSIBLE MEANS.
6.. THAT PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN GOVERNMENT AT ALL LEVELS CAN BEST BE
SUSTAINED BY ASSURING THE PEOPLE OF THE IMPARTIALITY AND HONESTY OF THE
OFFICIALS IN ALL PUBLIC TRANSACTIONS AND DECISIONS
7.. THAT SMALL CONTRIBUTIONS BY INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTORS IN POLITICAL
CAMPAIGNS ARE TO BE ENCOURAGED, AND THAT NOT REQUIRING THE REPORTING
OF SMALL CONTRIBUTIONS MAY TEND TO ENCOURAGE SUCH CONTRIBUTIONS.
8.. THAT THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO KNOW OF THE FINANCING OF POLITICAL CAM­PAIGNSAND
LOBBYING AND THE FINANCIAL AFFAIRS OF ELECTED OFFICIALS AND
CANDIDATES FAR OUTWEIGHS ANY RIGHT THAT THESE MATTERS REMAIN SECRET
AND PRIVATE.
9. THAT, MINDFUL OF THE RIGHT OF INDIVIDUALS TO PRIVACY AND OF THE
DESIRABILITY OF THE EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNMENT, FULL ACCESS
TO INFORMATION CONCERNING THE CONDUCT OF GOVERNMENT ON EVERY LEVEL
MUST BE ASSURED AS A FUNDAMENTAL AND NECESSARY PRECONDITION TO THE
SOUND GOVERNANCE OF A FREE SOCIETY.
THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT SHALL BE LIBERALLY CONSTRUED TO PROMOTE
COMPLETE DISCLOSURE OF ALL INFORMATION RESPECTING THE FINANCING OF
POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS AND LOBBYING, AND THE FINANCIAL AFFAIRS OF ELECTED
OFFICIALS AND CANDIDATES, AND FULL ACCESS TO PUBLIC RECORDS SO AS TO
ASSURE CONTINUING PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN FAIRNESS OF ELECTIONS AND GOV.
ERNMENTAL PROCESSES, AND SO AS TO ASSURE THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST WILL
BE FULLY PROTECTED
Section 16- 402 Definitions
IN THIS CHAPTER, UNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES:
1 " CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE" MEANS THE STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE, OR
STATE COMMITTEES, OF ALL POLITICAL PARTIES AND ALL COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR
PRECINCT COMMITTEES OF ALL POLITICAL PARTIES OR OFCANDIDATES AND ANY
ASSOCIATION OR COMBINATION OF PERSONS ORGANIZED, CONDUCTED OR COM­BINED
FOR THE PURPOSE OF INFLUENCING THE RESULT OF ANY ELECTION IN THE
STATE OR IN ANY COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR PRECINCT IN THE STATE
2. " CAMPAIGN TREASURER" MEANS AN INDIVIDUAL APPOINTED BY A CANDI­DATE
OR CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 16- 403.
3 " CANDIDATE" MEANS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS TAKEN AFFIRMATIVE AC­TION
TO SEEK NOMINATION OR ELECTION TO PUBLIC OFFICE
4. " COMMISSION" MEANS THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
5 " CONTRIBUTE," " CONTRIBUTION," " EXPEND" AND " EXPENDITURE" MEAN
ANY ADVANCE, CONVEYANCE, DEPOSIT, DISTRIBUTION, TRANSFER OF EUNDS,
LOAN, PAYMENT, GIFT, PLEDGE OR SUBSCRIPTION OF MONEY OR ANYTHING OF
VALUE, AND ANY CONTRACT, AGREEMENT, PROMI, SE, OR OTHER OBLIGATION,
34 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
WHETHER OR NOT LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE, TO MAKE A CONTRIBUTION OR EXPEN­DITURE,
IN SUPPORT OF OR IN OPPOSITION TO ANY CANDIDATE, POLITICAL COMMIT­TEE
OR MEASURE BUT DOES NOT INCLUDESERVICES BY SPEAKERS, WRITERS, PUB­LISHERS
OR OTHERS FOR WHICH NO COMPENSATION IS ASKED OR GIVEN
6 " ELECTION" MEANS ANY PRIMARY, GENERAL, SPECIAL, RUNOFF ORRECALL
ELECTION HELD TO NOMINATE OR ELECT A CANDIDATE AND SHALL ALSO INCLUDE
ANY ELECTION AT WHICH A MEASURE IS SUBMITTED TO THE PEOPLE
7 " ITEMIZED" MEANS THAT WHEN A CANDIDATE HAS A CLASS OF LIKE EXPEN-DITURES
THEY SHALL BE STATED UNDER ONE ITEM . ,
8 " MEASURE" MEANS ANY PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE PEOPLE FOR THEIR
APPROVAL OR REJECTION AT ANY ELECTION, INCLUDING ANY PROPOSED LAW, ACT
OR PART OF AN ACT OF THE LEGISLATURE, REVISION OF OR AMENDMENT TO THE
CONSTITUTION, LOCAL, SPECIAL OR MUNICIPAL LEGISLATION OR PROPOSITION OR
BALLOT QUESTION
9 " PERSON" MEANS AN INDIVIDUAL, CORPORATION, ASSOCIATION, FIRM,
PARTNERSHIP, COMMITTEE, CLUB OR OTHER ORGANIZATION OR GROUP OF PER­SONS
10.. " PUBLIC OFFICE" MEANS ANY NATIONAL, STATE, COUNTY, MUNICIPAL,
SCHOOL OR OTHER DISTRICT, WARD OR POSITION THAT IS FILLED BY THE VOTERS
II " SPECIAL ELECTION" INCLUDES A REFERENDUM, INITIATIVE OR RECALL
ELECTION
Section 16- 403. Officers of campaign committees; selection as prerequisite to receipts and expen­ditures
by campaign committees; duties of campaign committee treasurer
A THE CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE SHALL HAVE A CHAIRMAN AND TREASURER
B NO OFFICER OR MEMBER OF THE CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE OR OTHER PERSON
ACTING UNDER ITS AUTHORITY OR IN ITS BEHALF SHALL RECEIVE MONEY OR ITS
EQUIVALENT OR THINGS OF VALUE, OR EXPEND OR PROMISE TOEXPEND MONEY ON
BEHALF OF THE COMMITTEE, UNTIL AFTER A CHAIRMAN AND TREASURER OF THE
COMMITTEE HAVE BEEN CHOSEN
C THE CAMPAIGN TREASURER OR HIS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE SHALL
KEEP A DETAILED AND EXACT ACCOUNT OF ALL MONEY OR ITS EQUIVALENT, OR
THINGS OF VALUE, RECEIVED BY OR PROMISED TO THE CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE OR
ANY MEMBER THEREOF, OR PROMISED TO ANY PERSON ACTING UNDER ITS AUTHOR­ITY
OR IN ITS BEHALF, AND THE NAME OF EVERY PERSON FROM WHOM RECEIVED,
AND OF ALL EXPENDITURES, DISBURSEMENTS, MADE BY THE COMMITTEE, OR ANY
MEMBER THEREOF, OR BY ANY PERSON ACTING UNDER ITS AUTHORITY OR IN ITS
BEHALF, AND TO WHOM PAID, DISTRIBUTED OR DISBURSED
D.. THE CAMPAIGN TREASURER SHALL NOT ACCEPT A CONTRIBUTION OF MORE,
THAN ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS FROM A COMMITTEE LOCATED IN THE STATE OR
OUTSIDE OF THIS STATE UNLESS THE CONTRIBUTION IS ACCOMPANIED BY A WRIT­TEN
STATEMENT SETTING FORTH THE FULL NAME, COMPLETE ADDRESS, OCCUPA"
TION, AND EMPLOYER, IF ANY, OR PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS, IF HE OR SHE IS
SELF- EMPLOYED, OF EACH PERSON WHO CONTRIBUTED MORE THAN FIFTY DOLLARS
OF THE CONTRIBUTION AND CERTIFIED AS TRUE AND CORRECT BY AN OFFICER
THE CONTRIBUTING COMMITTEE
Section 16- 404 Preservation of receipts of payment and disbursements
A EVERY PAYMENT OR DISBURSEMENT BY A CAMPAIGN COMMITTE'EE~~~;~~ i~
ING FIVE DOLLARS SHALL BE MADE BY CHECK AND EVIDENCED BY A R
BILL STATING THE PARTICULARS OF EXPENSE, AND EVERY CANCELLED
RECORD, VOUCHER, RECEIPT OR ACCOUNT
COMMITTEE FOR FOUR YEARS AFTER THE ELECTION TO WHICH IT RELATES
B UPON REQUEST OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OR THE COMMISSION, A
PAIGN COMMITTEE SHALL PROVIDE AN ITEMIZED LIST OF THE DISBURSEMENTS
SUPPORT AN EXPENDITURE SHOWN IN ITS REPORTS REQUIRED TO BE FILED
THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 16- 422 AND 16- 423
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov 5, 1974 35
A NO CONTRIBUTION OF MONEY OR OTHER THING OF VALUE, NOR OBLIGATION
THEREOF, INCLUDING CONTRIBUTIONS, LOANS, OR OBLIGATIONS OF THE CANDI ·
DATE HIMSELF OR OF HIS FAMILY, SHALL BE MADE OR RECEIVED, AND NO EXPENDI ·
TURE OF MONEY OR 0 THER THING OF VALUE, NOR OBLIGATION THEREOF, INCLUD ·
ING EXPENDITURES, LOANS, OR OBLIGATIONS OF THE CANDIDATE HIMSELF OR OF
HIS FAMILY, SHALL BE MADE OR INCURRED, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, TO SUPPORT
OR DEFEATA CANDIDATE IN AN ELECTION, EXCEPT THROUGH THE DULY APPOINTED
CAMPAIGN TREASURER OR HIS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE
B NO CANDIDATE, CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE OR CAMPAIGN TREASURER OR HIS
DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE SHALL ACCEPT A CONTRIBUTION IN EXCESS OF
FIFTY DOLLARS UNLESS THE CONTRIBUTION IS ACCOMPANIED BY A CONTRIBUTION
STATEMENT CONTAINING THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:
I THE FULL NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION AND EMPLOYER, IF ANY, ORPRINCI ·
PAL PLACE OF BUSINESS, IF SELF · EMPLOYED, OF THE CONTRIBUTOR
2 THE DATE ON WHICH THE CONTRIBUTION WAS MADE
3. THE NAME OF THE PERSON WHO RECEIVED THE CONTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF
THE CANDIDATE OR CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE
4. THE EXACT AMOUNT OF THE CONTRIBUTION
IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF EACH CAMPAIGN TREASURER OR EACH CAMPAIGN COM­MITTEE
TO FURNISH IN DUPLICATE SUCH A CONTRIBUTION STATEMENT FORM. ONE
COpy SHALL BE RETAINED BY THE CONTRIBUTOR AND THE OTHER COPY SHALL BE
RETAINED BY THE CAMPAIGN TREASURER OR CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE
C. ANY CONTRIBUTION RECEIVED BY A CAMPAIGN TREASURER OR HIS DESIG­NATED
REPRESENTATIVE NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH SUBSECTION B SHALL NOT BE
USED OR EXPENDED, BUT SHALL BE RETURNED TO THE DONOR, IF HIS IDENTITY IS
KNOWN, AND IF NO DONOR IS FOUND, THE CONTRIBUTION SHALL ESCHEAT TO THE
STATE
D. A PERSON ACTING UNDER THE AUTHORITY OR IN BEHALF OF A CAMPAIGN
COMMITTEE, WHETHER AS A MEMBER THEREOF OR OTHERWISE, WHO RECEIVES
ANY CONTRIBUTION, PAYMENT, LOAN, GIFT, ADVANCE, DEPOSIT OR PROMISE OF
MONEY OR ITS EQUIVALENT, OR THINGS OF VALUE, SHALL WITHIN THREE DAYS
AFTER RECEIPT OF THE CONTRIBUTION, PAYMENT, LOAN, GIFT, ADVANCE, DEPOSIT
OR PROMISE, SURRENDER IT TO THE TREASURER OF THE CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE
ALONG WITH A DETAILED ACCOUNT THEREOF, TOGETHER WITH THE NAME, AD ·
DRESS, OCCUPATION, EMPLOYER, IF ANY, OR PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS, IF HE
OR SHE IS SELF- EMPLOYED, OF THE PERSON FROM WHOM RECEIVED, WHICH THE
TREASURER SHALL FORTHWITH ENTER IN A RECORD KEPT BY HIM FOR THAT PUR­POSE
Section 16A06 Campaign depository; deposit of contributions; statement of campaign treasurer
A A CANDIDATE MAY DESIGNAIE ANY BANK AUTHORIZED BY LAW TO TRANS­ACT
BUSINESS IN THE STATE AS HIS CAMPAIGN DEPOSITORY THE CANDIDATE SHALL
FILE THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE CAMPAIGN TREASURER AND THE CAMPAIGN
DEPOSITORY WITH THE COMMISSION
B. ALL FUNDS RECEIVED BY THE CAMPAIGN TREASURER OR HIS DESIGNATED
REPRESENTATIVE, SHALL BE DEPOSITED BY THE CAMPAIGN TREASURER OR HIS
DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE, IN A CAMPAIGN DEPOSITORY OF THE CANDIDATE IN
AN ACCOUNT DESIGNATED " CAMPAIGN FUND OF ( NAME OF CANDI­DATE)"
WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF RECEIPT.
C ALL DEPOSITS MADE BY A CAMPAIGN TREASURER OR HIS DESIGNATED REP­RESENTATIVE
SHALL BE ACCOMPANIED BY A STATEMENT CONTAINING THE NAME
AND ADDRESS OF EACH PERSON OR GROUP CONTRIBUTING OR PROVIDING THE
FUNDS SO DEPOSITED, AND THE AMOUNT CONTRIBUTED OR PROVIDED BY EACH
PERSON OR GROUP THE STATEMENT SHALL BE IN TRIPLICATE, UPON A FORM PRE ·
SCRIBED BY THE COMMISSION, ONE COPY TO BE RETAINED BY THE CAMPAIGN
DEPOSITORY FOR lIS RECORDS. ONE COPY TO BE FILED BY THE CAMPAIGN DEPOSI­TORY
WITH THE COMMISSION AND ONE COpy TO BE RETAINED BY THE CAMPAIGN
TREASURER FOR HIS RECORDS
Section 16 · 407 Incumbency
NO PERSON OR PUBLIC OFFICE HOLDER IN THE FURTHERANCE OF HIS CANDI ·
36 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
DACY FOR NOMINATION OR ELECTION FOR PUBLIC OFFICE IN ANY ELECTION SHALL
USE THE SERVICES OF ANY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE OF THE STATE DURING WORKING
HOURS
ARTICLE 2. STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
Section 16- 411 Establishment and membership; terms; vacancies; reports and compensation;
office; executive director
A. THERE IS ESTABLISHED A STATE ETHICS COMMISSION WHICH SHALL BE COM­POSED
OF FIVE MEMBERS, NOT MORE THAN THREE OF WHOM SHALL BE MEMBERS OF
THE SAME POLITICAL PARTY AND WHO SHALL BE APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR
PURSUANT TO SECTION 38- 21f TWO OF THE ORIGINAL MEMBERS SHALL BE AP­POINTED
FROM A LIST OF AT LEAS TTHREE RECOMMENDED PERSONS SUBMITTED BY
THE LEADER OF THE MAJORITY PARTY IN THE STATE SENATE AND TWO OF THE
ORIGINAL MEMBERS SHALL BE APPOINTED FROM A LIST OF AT LEAST THREE
RECOMMENDED PERSONS SUBMITTED BY THE LEADER OF THE MINORITY PARTY IN
THE STATE SENATE. THE REMAINING ORIGINAL MEMBER SHALL BE CHOSEN BY THE
GOVERNOR NO PERSON WHO HAS, WITHIN THE PREVIOUS THREE YEARS. SERVED AS
A PUBLIC OFFICIAL OR POLITICAL PARTY OFFICER IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA OTHER
THAN PRECINCT COMMITTEEMEN SHALL BE APPOINTED TO MEMBERSHIP ON THE
COMMISSION ONE OF THE ORIGINAL MEMBERS SHALL BE APPOINTED FOR ATERM OF
ONE YEAR, ONE FOR A TERM OF TWO YEARS, ONE FOR A TERM OF THREE YEARS, ONE
FOR A TERM OF FOUR YEARS, AND ONE FOR A TERM OF FIVE YEARS, BEGINNING
FROM THE DATE OF ENACTMENT OF THIS CHAPTER, BUT THEIR SUCCESSORS SHALL
BE APPOINTED FOR TERMS OF FIVE YEARS EACH, EXCEPT THAT ANY INDIVIDUAL
CHOSEN TO FILL A VACANCY SHALL BE APPOINTED FOR THE UNEXPIRED TERM OF
THE MEMBER WHOM HE SHALL SUCCEED. THE COMMISSION SHALL ELECT ONE
MEMBER to SERVE AS CHAIRMANOF THE COMMISSION AND ONE MEMBER TO SERVE
AS VICE CHAIRMAN WHO SHALL NOT BE OF THE SAME PARTY AS THE CHAIRMAN
THE CHAIRMAN'S AND VICE CHAIRMAN'S TERMS SHALL BE TWO YEARS THE VICE
CHAIRMAN SHALL ACT AS THE CHAIRMAN IN THE ABSENCE OR DISABILITY OF THE
CHAIRMAN OR IN THE EVENT OF A VACANCY IN THAT OFFICE
B. A VACANCY IN THE COMMISSION SHALL NOT IMPAIR THE RIGHT OF THE
REMAINING MEMBERS TO EXERCISE ALL THE POWERS OF THE COMMISSION, AND
THREE MEMBERS THEREOF SHALL CONSTITUTE A QUORUM
C THE COMMISSION SHALL AT THE CLOSE OF EACH FISCAL YEAR REPORTTO THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR CONCERNING THE ACTION IT HAS TAKEN, THE
NAMES, SALARIES, AND DUTIES OF ALL INDIVIDUALS IN ITS EMPLOY AND THE
MONEY IT HAS DISBURSED, AND SHALL MAKE SUCH FURTHER REPORTS ON THE
MATTERS WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION AND SUCH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER
LEGISLATION AS MAY APPEAR DESIRABLE
D. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION SHALL, WHILE SERVING ON THE BUSINESS OF
THE COMMISSION, BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE COMPENSATION AT THE RATE OF FIFTY
DOLLARS PER DAY
E THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSION SHALL BE IN OR NEAR THE STATE CAPITOL,
BUT IT MAY MEET OR EXERCISE ANY OR ALL OF ITS POWERS AT ANY OTHER PLACE IN
THE STATE
F ALL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, ATTORNEYS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE
COMMISSION SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF LAW PROHIBITING POLITI­CAL
ACTIVITY OF STATE EMPLOYEES
G THE COMMISSION SHALL APPOINT AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO SERVE AT
THE PLEASURE OF THE COMMISSION AT AN ANNUAL SALARY OF TWENTY- FIVE
THOUSAND DOLLARS. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ADMINISTRATIVE OPERATIONS OF THE COMMISSION AND SHALL PERFORM SUCH
OTHER DUTIES AS MAY BE DELEGATED OR ASSIGNED TO HIM FROM TIME TO TIME BY
REGULATIONS OR ORDERS OF THE COMMISSION HOWEVER, THE COMMISSION
SHALL NOT DELEGATE THE MAKING OF REGULATIONS TO THE EXECUTIVE DIREC­TOR
THE SUM OF THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS SHALL BE APPROPRIATED
FOR EACH YEAR OF OPERATION
Section 16- 412 Duties of commission
Submitted to the Electors of Arizona Nov. 5, 1974 37
THE COMMISSION SHALL HAVE THE DUTY:
I TO PRESCRIBE FORMS FOR STATEMENTS AND OTHER INFORMATION REQUIRED
TO BEFILED BY THIS TITLE, ANDTO FURNISH SUCH FORMS TO PERSONS REQUIRED TO
FILE SUCH STATEMENTS AND INFORMATION
2 TO PREPARE AND PUBLISH A MANUAL SETTING FORTH A PRESCRIBED UNI­FORM
SYSTEM FOR ACCOUNTS . FOR USE BY PERSONS REQUIRED TO FILE STATE­MENTS
BY THIS CHAPTER
3. TO ACCEPT AND FILE ANY INFORMATION VOLUNTARILY SUPPLIED THAT EX­CEEDS
THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CHAPTER
4. TO DEVELOP A FILING, CODING, AND CROSS- INDEXING SYSTEM CONSONANT
WITH THE PURPOSES OF THIS CHAPTER
5 TOMAKE STATEMENTS AND OTHERINFORMATION FILED WITH II AVAILABLE
FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION AND COPYING DURING REGULAR OFFICE HOURS, AND TO
MAKE COPYING FACILITIES AVAILABLE FREE OF CHARGE OR AT A CHARGE NOT TO
EXCEED ACTUAL COST
6.. TO PRESERVE SUCH STATEMENTS AND OTHER INFORMATION FOR A PERIOD
OF TEN YEARS FROM DATE OF RECEIPT
7 TO PREPARE AND PUBLISH SUMMARIES OF THE STATEMENTS RECEIVED
8. TO PREPARE AND PUBLISH OTHER REPORTS AS IT MAY DEEM APpROPRIATE
9 TO PROVIDE FOR WIDE PUBLIC DISSEMINATION OF SUMMARIES AND RE-PORTS
10 TO MAKE INVESTIGATIONS WITH RESPECT TO STATEMENTS FILED UNDER
PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER, AND WITH RESPECT TO ALLEGED FAILURES TO FILE
ANY STATEMENT REQUIRED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CBAPTER, AND, UPON
COMPLAINT BY ANY INDIVIDUAL, WITH RESPECT TO ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF ANY
PART OF THIS CHAPTER
II TO REPORT SUSPECTED VIOLATIONS OF LAW TO THE APPROPRIATE LAW
ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES
12. TO ISSUE UPON REQUEST, AND PUBLISH, ADVISORY OPINIONS UPON THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CHAPTER, BASED ON A REAL OR HYPOTHETICAL SET OF
CIRCUMSTANCES.
13. TO PRESCRIBE AND PUBLISH RULES AND REGULATIONS TO CARRY OUT THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER
Section 16- 413. Duties of executive director
A THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMISSION SHALL INSPECT EACH
STATEMENT FILED WITH THE COMMISSION UNDER THIS CHAPTER WITHIN TEN DAYS
AFTER THE DATE IT IS FILED HE SHALL NOTIFY A PERSON REQUIRED TO FILE A
STATEMENT UNDER THIS CHAPTER IMMEDIATELY IF:
I .. UPON EXAMINATION OF THE OFFICIAL BALLOT, IT APPEARS THAT THE PERSON
HAS FAILED TO FILE A STATEMENT AS REQUIRED BY LAW OR THAT A STATEMENT
FILED BY THE PERSON DOES NOT CONFORM TO LAW; OR
2 A WRITTEN COMPLAINT IS FILED WITH THE COMMISSION BY ANY REGISTERED
VOTER ALLEGING THAT A STATEMENT FILED WITH THE COMMISSION DOES NOT
CONFORM TO LAW OR TO THE TRUTH OR THAT A PERSON HAS FAILED TO FILE A
STATEMENT REQUIRED BY LAW
B. WITHIN THREE MONTHS AFTER THE DATE OF EACH ELECTION, THE EXECU­TIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE COMMISSION SHALL EXAMINE EACH STATEMENT FILED
WITH THE COMMISSION UNDER THIS CHAPTER AND, REFERRING TO THE ELECTION,
DETERMINE WHETHER THE STATEMENT CONFORMS TO LAW AND TO THE TRUTH
SUCH EXAMINATION SHALL INCLUDE ACOMPARISON OF REPORTS AND STATEMENTS
RECEIVED BY THE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 16- 422 THROUGH 16- 424
Section 16- 414 Powers of the commission
THE COMMISSION SHALL HAVE THE POWER:
I TO REQUIRE, BY SPECIAL OR GENERAL ORDERS, ANY PERSON TO SUBMIT IN
WRITING SUCH REPORTS AND ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS AS THE COMMISSION MAY
PRESCRIBE AND SUCH SUBMISSION SHALL BE MADE WITHIN SUCH REASONABLE
PERIOD AND UNDER bATH OR OTHERWISE AS THE COMMISSION MAY DETERMINE
2. TO ADMINISTER OATHS
3 TO REQUIRE BY SUBPOENA THE ATIENDANCE AND TESTIMONY bF WITNESSES
it
11 II!
. j
38 Pamphlet Containing Amendments to be
AND THE PRODUCTION OF ALL DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE RELATING TO THEEXECU­TION
OF ITS DUTIES.
4 .. IN ANY PROCEEDING OR INVESTIGATION TO ORDER TESTIMONY TO BE TAKEN
BYDEPOSITION BEFOREANYPERSON WHO IS DESIGNATED BYTHECOMMISSION AND
HAS THE POWER TO ADMINISTER OATHS AND, IN SUCH INSTANCES TO COMPEL
TESTIMONY AND THE PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE IN THE SAME MANNER AS AU­THORIZED
UNDER PARAGRAPH 3
5 TO PAY WITNESSES THE SAME FEES AND MILEAGE AS ARE PAID IN LIKE
CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE COURTS OF THIS STATE.
ARTICLE 3 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Section 16- 421 ~ eport of expenditures to campaign treasurer
DURING THE PERIOD BETWEEN THE DATE OF APPOINTMENT OF THE CAMPAIGN
TREASURER AND THE PRIMARY OR GENERAL ELECTION, EACH CANDIDATE SHALL
REPORT TO HIS CAMPAIGN TREASURER AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK, UPON A FORM
PRESCRIBED BY THE STATE ETHNICS COMMISSION, ALL EXPENDITURES MADE, IN­CURRED,
OR AUTHORIZED BY THE CANDIDATE FOR TRAVEL EXPENSES SINCE THE
LAST REPORT
Section 16- 422. Report of expenditures and contributions by campaign treasurer
A. EACH CAMPAIGN TREASURER SHALL MAKE A FULL REPORT, UPON A FORM
PRESCRIBED BY THE COMMISSION, OF ALL MONEY, LOANS, OR OTHER THINGS OF
VALUE, CONTRIBUTED BY HIM OR TO HIS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE, DURING
THE PERIOD ENDING ON THE DATE OF THE REPORT AS DESIGNATED IN SUBSECTION B,
AND BEGINNING ON THE DATE THE MOST RECENT SUCH REPORT WAS FI