Laws governing the initiative process in Arizona

Laws and procedures

Laws governing ballot measures
State
• Laws governing state initiative processes
• Laws governing state recall processes
• Changes to ballot measure law in 2024
• Difficulty analysis of changes to laws governing ballot measures
Local
• Laws governing local ballot measures
Learn about Ballotpedia's election legislation tracker.
2024 » « 2022

Citizens of Arizona may initiate legislation as either a state statute or constitutional amendment. In Arizona, citizens also have the power to repeal legislation via veto referendum. The Arizona State Legislature may place measures on the ballot as legislatively referred constitutional amendments or legislatively referred state statutes. In addition, the Arizona Commission on Salaries for Elective State Officers is one of only a few state committees that have the power to place measures on the ballot.

Crafting an initiative

Of the 24 states that allow citizens to initiate legislation through the petition process, several states have adopted restrictions and regulations that limit the allowable scope and content of initiated proposals. These regulations may include laws that mandate that initiatives address only one topic, restrict the range of acceptable topics for proposed laws, prohibit unfunded mandates and establish guidelines for adjudicating contradictory measures.

Single-subject rule

See also: Single-subject rule

The Arizona Constitution contains a single-subject rule for citizen-initiated ballot measures, which was enacted in 2022 via Proposition 129.

The Arizona Constitution also contains a separate vote requirement provision that requires that multiple amendments must be voted as separate questions.

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article 4, Part 1, Section 1 and Arizona Constitution, Article 21, Section 1

Subject restrictions

See also: Subject restrictions (ballot measures)

In Arizona, initiated measures and amendments are not governed by subject restrictions but are required to designate a funding source if they mandate state expenditures.

Referendums, however, may not repeal laws "immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or for the support and maintenance of the departments of the state government and state institutions." In 2022, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that support and maintenance included tax increases and decreases, with the exception of taxes to fund a new department.

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Part 1, Section 1, ¶ 2-3 and Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Section 23

Veto referendums on emergency legislation

In Arizona, veto referendums cannot be used on emergency legislation.

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Part 1, Section 1, ¶ 3

Competing initiatives

See also: Superseding initiative; "Poison pills"; List of Arizona ballot measures

The Arizona Constitution provides that in the event that two measures conflict, the measure with the most "yes" votes supersedes the other on any points of conflict. However, the other measure is not wholly superseded.

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article XXI, Section 1, ¶ 12

Starting a petition

Each initiative and referendum state employs a different procedure for filing petition applications. Some states require preliminary signatures while others do not. In addition, several states review each proposed statute, verifying that the law conforms to the style and conventions of state law and recommending alterations to initiative proponents. Some of these states also review the law for more substantive considerations of content and consistency. Also, many states conduct a review of the ballot title and summary, and several states employ a fiscal review process which analyzes proposed laws to determine their impact on state finances.

Applying to petition

See also: Approved for circulation

Prior to collecting signatures, initiative proponents must file an application to petition with the Arizona secretary of state. The application form, which is provided by the secretary of state, must include the name(s) addresses of the proponent(s), a summary of the measure no more than 200 words in length and the text of the measure. In addition, the proponents must file a statement of organization, registering the political committee for campaign finance purposes. This statement of organization must include the following:

1. The name, address and type of committee.

2. The name, address, relationship and type of any sponsoring organization.

3. The names, addresses, telephone numbers, occupations and employers of the chairman and treasurer of the committee.

4. In the case of a candidate's campaign committee, the name, address, office sought and party affiliation of the candidate.

5. A listing of all banks, safety deposit boxes or other depositories used by the committee.

6. A statement that the chairman and treasurer have read all of the applicable laws relating to campaign finance and reporting.

See Law: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 2, 19-111 and Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 16, Ch. 6, Art. 1, 16-902.01

Proposal review/approval

See also: Approved for circulation

Before applying to petition, proponents may submit the text of the proposed measure to the Arizona Legislative Council for review. The council will then review the legislation for errors, inconsistent provisions, confusing language, and conflicts with existing law. The recommendations of the council are optional and can be rejected or accepted at the sole discretion of the proponents.

See law: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 2, 19-111.01

Petition summary

See also: Starting a petition

Petitions must include the secretary of state's time-and-date marked copy of the measure with its full proposed text, along with the original and amended text. The valid title must also be included. The title is also determined by initiative proponents.

The petition to be circulated must be of the following form and have the following information:

(Description of law proposed by the petition no more than 200 words in length) Notice: This is only a description of the proposed measure (or constitutional amendment) prepared by the sponsor of the measure. It may not include every provision contained in the measure. Before signing, make sure the title and text of the measure are attached. You have the right to read or examine the title and text before signing. Initiative Measure to be Submitted Directly to Electors We, the undersigned, citizens and qualified electors of the state of Arizona, respectfully demand that the following proposed law (or amendment to the constitution, or other initiative measure), shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the state of Arizona (county, city or town of ____________) for their approval or rejection at the next regular general election (or county, city or town election) and each for himself says: (terminate form same as a referendum petition.)

State statutes also require that:

“

Each petition sheet shall have printed in capital letters in no less than twelve point bold-faced type in the upper right-hand corner of the face of the petition sheet the following: "___________ paid circulator" " ______________ volunteer"

”

And that

“

A circulator of an initiative petition shall state whether he is a paid circulator or volunteer by checking the appropriate line on the petition form before circulating the petition for signatures.

”

See law: Arizona Revised Statutes Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 3, 19-121 and Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 1, 19-102

Fiscal review

See also: Fiscal impact statement

After certification, the Joint Legislative Budget Committee must prepare a fiscal analysis of the proposed measure. This analysis is presented at public hearings on the measure organized by the secretary of state and included on an informational pamphlet produced by the state.

See law: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 3, 19-123

Collecting signatures

Each initiative and referendum state employs a unique method of calculating the state's signature requirements. Some states mandate a certain fraction of registered voters while others base their calculation on those who actually voted in a preceding election. In addition, many states employ a distribution requirement, dictating where in the state these signatures must be collected. Beyond these overarching requirements, many states regulate the manner in which signatures may be collected and the timeline for collecting them.

Number required

See also: Arizona signature requirements

In Arizona, the number of signatures needed to place a measure on the ballot is based on the total number of votes cast for the governor in the preceding election.

The following are the requirements for the types of citizen-initiated measures in Arizona:

• initiated constitutional amendment (ICA): 15 percent of the votes cast for governor
• initiated state statute (ISS): 10 percent of the votes cast for governor
• veto referendum (VR): 5 percent of the votes cast for governor

Below are the signature requirements that initiative proponents must meet to get their initiatives on the ballot in that year, with gubernatorial election years bolded.

Year	Amendment	Statute	Veto referendum
2024	383,923	255,949	127,975
2022	356,467	237,645	118,823
2020	356,467	237,645	118,823
2018	225,963	150,642	75,321
2016	225,963	150,642	75,321
2014	259,213	172,809	86,405
2012	259,213	172,809	86,405
2010	230,047	153,365	76,682
2008	230,047	153,365	76,682
2006	183,917	122,612	61,306
2004	183,917	122,612	61,306
2002	152,643	101,762	50,881
2000	152,643	101,762	50,881
1998	169,442	112,961	56,481
1996	169,442	112,961	56,481

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Part 1, Section 1, ¶ 2-3, 7

Distribution requirements

See also: Distribution requirements

Arizona does not have a distribution requirement. As such, any proportion of the required signatures may be collected from any county or congressional district. However, the political committee filing the petition is required to organize the signature sheets according to the county in which they were collected, by the person who collected the signatures and by the notary who notarized the circulator's signature.

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Part 1, Section 1, ¶ 2-3, 7 and Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 1, 19-103

Restrictions on circulators

Circulator requirements

See also: Petition circulator

In Arizona circulators are permitted to sign the petition that they are circulating. Each initiative petition contains a mandatory circulator affidavit. Circulators are required to sign these affidavits before a public notary and must swear to and sign a statement, under the penalty of law, that they personally witnessed every act of signing the petition. Those circulating petitions are required to be qualified to register to vote in the specific county, but residency is unnecessary. Each petition form must show whether the circulator is a volunteer or a paid circulator according to the form of the petition dictated by law. Once circulation is completed, the signatures are submitted to the secretary of state with no more than fifteen signatures per sheet.

See law: Arizona Revised Statutes - 19-112, Arizona Revised Statutes - 19-101 and Arizona Revised Statutes - 19-121

Pay-per-signature

See also: Pay-per-signature

Arizona prohibits paying signature gatherers based on the number of signatures collected.

Until 2017, Arizona did not prohibit paying circulators on a per-signature basis. In 2017, the Arizona State Legislature passed a bill to ban pay-per-signature for initiative petitions, along with several other restrictions on paid circulators. A veto referendum petition was filed targeting the pay-per-signature ban, but the petitioners failed to collect and submit enough signatures.

See law: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 2, 19-118

Out-of-state circulators

See also: Residency requirements for petition circulators

Arizona allows out-of-state residents to circulate petitions as long as they register with the secretary of state and are otherwise qualified to register to vote.

See laws: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 2, 19-114 and Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 2, 19-112

Badge requirements

See also: Badge requirements

Arizona requires that paid circulators be identified as such on petition forms. Arizona does not require badges identifying paid circulators.

See law: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 1, 19-102

Electronic signatures

See also: Electronic petition signatures

Since electronic signatures are an emerging technology, the constitutionality of bans on e-signatures and the legality of e-signatures in states without bans is largely untested. Arizona law does mandate that signatures be collected in person.

See law: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 2, 19-112

Deadlines for collection

See also: Petition drive deadlines; Initiative petition circulation periods

In Arizona, petitioners have twenty-four months to collect signatures. Signatures must be filed four months before the election in which the measure would appear on the ballot.

Signatures for veto referendums are due 90 days following the adjournment of the legislative session at which the targeted bill was approved.

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Part 1, Section 1, ¶ 2-3 and Arizona Revised Statutes Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 3, 19-121

Getting on the ballot

Once signatures have been collected, state officials must verify that requirements are met and that fraudulent signatures are excluded. States generally employ a random sample process or a full verification of signatures. After verification, the issue must be prepared for the ballot. This often involves preparing a fiscal review and ballot summary.

Signature verification

See also: Signature certification

After all signatures have been filed and the secretary of state has issued a receipt, the state has approximately 38 business days to verify the signatures. First, the secretary of state removes any signatures and petitions not in the correct form. If the remaining number of signatures are still above the required amount, the secretary selects 5 percent at random and sends them to the county recorders according to the residence of the signers. The secretary has 20 business days to complete this process. Upon receiving the signatures, the county recorders have 15 business days to verify and return the signatures.

Upon receiving the results of the county-by-county verification, the secretary of state has 72 hours (excluding non-business days) to project the number of valid signatures in the full set. If the projected total is between 95 percent and 105 percent of the value, the secretary must order a complete check of the signatures to verify sufficiency. If less, the petition is rejected. If more, the petition is accepted.

If the petition is found to be sufficient, the proposed measure will be put on the next regular general election.

See law: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 3, 19-121.01 - 19-121.04

Ballot title and summary

See also: Ballot title

After petition certification, each measure receives a number based on the order in which it was filed with the state. Along with the official title, a "descriptive title" is also included explaining the meaning of a "yes" or "no" vote. The descriptive title, or summary, is drafted by the secretary of state and approved by the attorney general.

The ballot language must also include a notice of the state's legislative alteration restrictions.

See law: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 3, 19-125

The election and beyond

Ballot measures face additional challenges beyond qualifying for the ballot and receiving a majority of the vote. Several states require ballot measures to get more than a simple majority. While some states mandate a three-fifths supermajority, other states set the margin differently. In addition, ballot measures may face legal challenges or modifications by legislators. If a ballot measure does fail, some states limit how soon that initiative can be re-attempted.

Supermajority requirements

See also: Supermajority requirements

Arizona requires a 60% vote to pass ballot measures to approve taxes. Voters approved this requirement via Proposition 132 in 2022. Arizona requires a simple majority for other ballot measures.

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article 4, Part 1, Section 1

Effective date

Once the official canvass of votes is complete, the Governor of Arizona immediately issues a proclamation declaring successful measures to be law.

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article IX, Part 1, Section 1, ¶ 13

Litigation

See also: Ballot measure lawsuit news

Any citizen who wishes to challenge the secretary of state's rejection of a signature filing, may challenge the decision in Arizona Superior Court within five calendar days. Citizens wishing to challenge the action of county recorders concerning an initiative or referendum have five and 10 days, respectively. County complaints are also filed in Superior Court.

See law: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 3, 19-122 ; Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 1, Art. 3, 19-121.03 and Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19, Ch. 2, Art. 1, 19-208.04

Legislative alteration

See also: Legislative alteration

The Arizona State Legislature may not repeal a successful initiative or referendum without voter approval. Lawmakers can amend the law, but only if the amendment "furthers the purposes" of the measure and passes with a 3/4 supermajority. The legislature can submit changes to previous initiatives to the voters through a legislatively referred state statute.

According to a bill passed in 2021, notice of these legislative alteration restrictions must be included on the official ballot for any initiative as well as on the secretary of state's website.

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Part 1, Section 1, ¶ 6 and Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Part 1, Section 1, ¶ 15

Re-attempting an initiative

Arizona does not limit how soon an initiative can be re-attempted.

See law: Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Part 1, Section 1, ¶ 2-3

Funding an initiative campaign

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Arizona ballot measures

The secretary of state is responsible for enforcing campaign finance laws for ballot measure groups. The Solicitor General Division of the Arizona attorney general's office is responsible for enforcing technical aspects of the law including the wording of the ballot question.

All campaign finance reports are viewable through the Financial Reporting Page furnished by the secretary of state.

If someone feels a person or committee violated Arizona Campaign Finance Law, the complaint must be filed with the proper authorities depending on the status of the ballot measure. If a measure is placed on the ballot, the complaint must be filed with the filing officer that approved the measure. If the complaint alleges a statewide campaign, the filing officer can refer the complaint to the attorney general. If the complaint alleges a local campaign, then it's referred to the City or County Attorney.

State initiative law

Article IX of the Arizona Constitution provides authority for the initiative and referendum process.

• Arizona Constitution, Article IV

Title 19 of the Arizona Revised Statutes governs the initiative and referendum process.

• Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 19

External links

• Arizona Secretary of State: "Initiative, Referendum and Recall"
• Arizona Secretary of State: "Initiative, Referendum and Recall Handbook"

Changes in the law

The following laws have been proposed that modify ballot measure law in Arizona. If a box is empty for any given year, it means Ballotpedia did not track any ballot measure or recall-related laws in that year.

Proposed changes by year

2022

See also: Changes in 2022 to laws governing ballot measures

House Concurrent Resolution 2015 (Proposition 132): The constitutional amendment required a 60% vote for voters to pass ballot measures to approve taxes. Voters approved the constitutional amendment at the election on November 8, 2022. Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Hobbs See also: Arizona Supreme Court, Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Hobbs, August 19, 2022 On August 19, 2022, the Arizona Supreme Court released the order for an earlier ruling, finding that veto referendums cannot repeal tax decreases or increases, except in cases when a tax would fund a new government department. As of 2022, the Arizona Constitution prohibited referendums against legislation regarding the support and maintenance of state government. Justice John Lopez IV wrote the 7-2 majority's opinion, stating that both tax increases and decreases relate to the "support and maintenance of existing departments of the state government and state institutions." Justices Bill Montgomery and James Beene dissented. In December 2021, Maricopa Superior Court Judge Katherine Cooper ruled that a veto referendum that leaves the state with additional funds, rather than less, does not hinder the support and maintenance of state government. The decision removed a veto referendum from the ballot that sought to repeal a bill to reduce the state's income tax from four brackets (ranging from 2.59% to 4.50%) to two brackets (2.55% and 2.98%) and further reduce the tax brackets to a flat rate of 2.50% when state revenue exceeds $12.976 billion.

2021

See also: Changes in 2021 to laws governing ballot measures

House Bill 2308: The legislation enacted several changes to the laws governing recall elections, including changing the recall petition format, requiring paid circulators and out-of-state circulators to register with the state, creating a misdemeanor charge for omitting or misrepresenting information on a circulator registration application, creating a felony charge for forging a signature on a recall petition, and allowing a person to withdraw their signature from a recall petition. House Bill 2364: The bill required persons or organizations submitting arguments for informational election pamphlets to include a sworn statement and identifying information, including name, telephone number, and residential address. Under HB 2364, the person's residence address or telephone number does not appear in the pamphlet, but the person's name and town do appear. House Bill 2821: HB 2821 created a process for local governments to call a ballot measure election to change the purposes of authorized bond monies until January 1, 2025. Under HB 2821, these elections must be held on the first Tuesday following the first Monday in November. House Concurrent Resolution 2001 (Proposition 129): Voters approved the constitutional amendment on November 8, 2022. The ballot measure required that citizen-initiated ballot measures embrace a single subject. Senate Bill 1105: The legislation increased the word count for initiative and referendum descriptions on petitions from 100 words to 200 words. Senate Bill 1497: The bill required that the official ballot and secretary of state's website include a notice about Proposition 105, which requires voter approval for substantive changes to voter-approved ballot initiatives. Senate Concurrent Resolution 1034 (Proposition 128): Voters rejected the constitutional amendment on November 8, 2022. The constitutional amendment would have allowed the Arizona State Legislature to amend or repeal voter-approved ballot initiatives if any portion has been declared unconstitutional or illegal by the Arizona Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court.

2020

See also: Changes in 2020 to laws governing ballot measures

2019

See also: Changes in 2019 to laws governing ballot measures

House Bill 2023: The legislation made tampering with political signs supporting or opposing a ballot measure a class 2 misdemeanor. Senate Bill 1451: The legislation changed several policies regarding initiative petitions and initiative petition circulators, including requiring non-resident circulators and paid circulators to register with the state; requiring registered circulators to submit a notarized affidavit confirming that they're eligible and knowledgeable of election laws; prohibiting people who have violated certain election laws, were convicted of felonies without restored civil rights, or convicted of fraud or forgery from registering as petition circulators; requiring that petition signature sheets be rejected for not meeting proper formatting.

2018

See also: Changes in 2018 to laws governing ballot measures

House Bill 2115: The legislation was designed to conform requirements for school bond elections with general obligation bond elections and rename the bond measure informational report to the informational pamphlet. House Bill 2121 (Vetoed): Gov. Doug Ducey (R) vetoed HB 2121 on April 20, 2018. The legislation would have changed the definition of paid circulator to include circulators who receive monetary or other compensation for obtaining signatures on an initiative or referendum petition, rather than circulators who are paid based on the number of signatures collected. House Bill 2648: The legislation changed the definition of paid circulator to include circulators who receive monetary or other compensation for obtaining signatures on an initiative or referendum petition, rather than circulators who are paid based on the number of signatures collected.

2017

See also: Changes in 2017 to laws governing ballot measures

See also: Laws governing ballot measures in Arizona a Arizona House Bill 2404 was designed to prohibit paying circulators according to the number of signatures collected; make paying circulators on a per-signature basis a class 1 misdemeanor; reinstate a law repealed by legislators in 2015 allowing individuals to file legal challenges to initiative signature petitions, and increase the number of days that legal challenges to the registration of circulators can commence from five days to ten business days after signatures are filed. A veto referendum signature petition drive targeting HB 2404 was started, but did not succeed in putting the law before voters. The introduced version of the bill was written to also require paid circulators to register with the state, make certain disclosures, complete a training program provided by the state, and pay a registration fee; require initiative proponents to post bonds for paid signature gatherers ranging from $10,000 to $50,000; and create an Initiative and Referendum Integrity Fund. These provisions were removed through amendments, however. Provisions similar to them were included in separate legislative efforts. a Arizona House Bill 2244 was designed to require strict scrutiny of initiative petitions and strict compliance with all rules surrounding to process. It was written to allow petition signatures to be rejected based on technical deficiencies. The bill was approved by the Arizona State Senate on April 12, 2017, and it was approved by the Arizona House of Representatives and transmitted to the governor on April 13, 2017. The governor signed the bill into law on April 14, 2017. d Arizona Senate Bill 1236 was designed to do the following: require paid circulators to register with the state; require committees or individual proponents sponsoring an initiative to file with the secretary of state if they use paid signature gatherers; make the supporting committees or individuals responsible for violations committed by paid signature gatherers and allow a $1,000 fine per violation; and enact other restrictions and rules on initiative petitions. This bill was approved by the state Senate and then amended and approved by the state House, which means it was sent back to the Senate for approval of the House amendments. The Senate did not give final approval of the amended version, and the bill, therefore, died when the session adjourned on May 10, 2017. Many of the provisions in SB 1236 were passed by the Arizona legislature in 2013 as HB 2305. A veto referendum effort was launched against HB 2305. When the referendum qualified for the ballot, the legislature repealed HB 2305. d Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2002 was designed to do the following: propose a constitutional amendment to remove Arizona's legislative alteration laws for initiatives and veto referendums, thereby allowing the legislature to amend or repeal citizen initiatives and referendums. Going into 2017, state law prevented the legislature from repealing citizen initiatives and referendums or amend them unless an amendment furthers the purpose of the initiative or referendum and is approved by a three-fourths supermajority. These legislative alteration laws were approved by voters in 1998 through Proposition 105. Constitutional amendments require voter approval for enactment. d Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2007 was designed to do the following: propose a constitutional amendment to remove Arizona's legislative alteration laws for veto referendums, thereby allowing the legislature to amend or repeal referendums. Going into 2017, state law prevented the legislature from repealing citizen initiatives and referendums or amend them unless the amendment furthers the purpose of the initiative or referendum and is approved by a three-fourths supermajority. These legislative alteration laws were approved by voters in 1998 through Proposition 105. This resolution is similar to HCR 2002, except HCR 2002 was written to apply to both initiatives and referendums, while HCR 2007 was written to apply only to referendums. Constitutional amendments require voter approval for enactment. d Arizona Senate Concurrent Resolution 1013 was designed to do the following: proposed a constitutional amendment to establish a distribution requirement for citizen initiatives and veto referendums. Going into 2017, state law required 15 percent of votes cast for governor for initiated constitutional amendments, 10 percent for initiated state statutes, and 5 percent for veto referendums, and the law allowed these signatures to be collected from anywhere in the state. SCR 1013 was written to require these signatures to be collected from voters distributed across all of the states legislative districts. Constitutional amendments require voter approval for enactment. d Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2029 was designed to do the following: proposed a constitutional amendment to establish a distribution requirement for citizen initiatives and veto referendums. Going into 2017, state law required 15 percent of votes cast for governor for initiated constitutional amendments, 10 percent for initiated state statutes, and 5 percent for veto referendums, and the law allowed these signatures to be collected from anywhere in the state. SCR 1013 was written to require these signatures to be collected from voters distributed across all of the states legislative districts. Constitutional amendments require voter approval for enactment. d Arizona House Bill 2255 was designed to do the following: prohibit contributions or expenditures in support of or opposition to a ballot measure from individuals that are not Arizona state residents and committees that are not registered in Arizona. d Arizona House Bill 2320 was designed to do the following: require notice of the state's laws preventing the legislature from repealing or amending initiatives and veto referendums to be included on the ballot, state voter information pamphlets, and campaign expenditure disclosures. The notice dictated by HB 2320 is as follows: "NOTICE: PURSUANT TO PROPOSITION 105 (1998), THIS MEASURE CANNOT BE CHANGED IN THE FUTURE IF APPROVED ON THE BALLOT EXCEPT BY A THREE‑FOURTHS VOTE OF THE LEGISLATURE AND IF THE CHANGE FURTHERS THE PURPOSE OF THE ORIGINAL BALLOT MEASURE, OR BY REFERRING THE CHANGE TO THE BALLOT."

2016

See also: Changes in 2016 to laws governing ballot measures

See also: Laws governing ballot measures in Arizona d Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2024: Was designed to require a 60 percent supermajority vote of the people to approve any citizen-initiated ballot measure that would legalize a drug considered a controlled substance by federal law in 2014. This proposed constitutional amendment would have required voter approval after being passed by the legislature and was designed, in part, to specifically target imminent initiative efforts to legalize marijuana. A similar law was proposed in 2015 but was not approved. d Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2047: Was designed to amend the Arizona Constitution to require 25 percent of signatures for initiative and referendum petitions to be from counties with a population of fewer than 500,000 people. To be enacted, this distribution requirement would have had to be approved by the legislature and by the voters at the next general election. d Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2043: Was designed to amend the Arizona Constitution to allow the legislature to alter laws passed through initiative and referendum by any majority vote greater than the majority of state electors that approved the relevant initiative or referendum. It was also designed to remove the requirement that all legislative changes to approved initiatives or referendums must "furthers the purposes" of the voter-approved laws, except for ballot measures approved by a two-thirds (66.67%) vote. This bill would have only applied to initiatives and referendums approved in 2016 or after. To be enacted, this law would have had to be approved by the legislature and by the voters at the next general election. d Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2023: Was designed to allow legislators to repeal initiatives or referendums through a three-fifths supermajority vote. It was also designed to allow legislators to alter initiatives and referendums through a three-fifths supermajority vote instead of a three-fourths supermajority. Moreover, the bill would have removed the requirement that legislative amendments to initiatives and referendums “further the purposes” of the original ballot measures. To be enacted, this law would have had to be approved by the legislature and by the voters at the next general election. d Arizona House Bill 2580: Was designed to require the publication of certain election information on the website of the secretary of state. It was also designed to allow the electronic submission of arguments in favor or opposing state ballot measures. a Arizona House Bill 2015: Was designed to prevent early ballots for local elections being received by voters before voter information pamphlets are received. d Arizona Senate Bill 1035: Was designed to eliminate the requirement that petition circulators sign and affirm an affidavit before a public notary and replace the words "affidavit of verification" with "statement of verification" in the law. A similar law was proposed in 2015 but was not approved. a Arizona House Bill 2428: Was designed to require the electronic submission of arguments in favor or opposing state ballot measures. d Arizona Senate Bill 1175: Was designed to prevent the original source of campaign contributions from being concealed.

2015

See also: Changes in 2015 to laws governing ballot measures

See also: Laws governing ballot measures in Arizona a House Bill 2407: In general, this bill required stricter compliance with technical signature petition rules and is more preventative of signature petitions that are not in strict compliance. It was also designed to require that any individual signatures dated after the circulator affidavit is signed must be thrown out. Arizona House Bill 2107 (2014) was relevant to and spurred this change. HB 2407 also specified that signatures collected by an out-of-state or paid circulator who was not registered with the Arizona Secretary of State at the time the signatures were signed must be invalidated. HB 2407 made other ballot law changes regarding litigation, court rulings and other issues. a House Bill 2649: This bill amended campaign finance disclosure rules and definitions. d House Concurrent Resolution 2027: Was designed to require a 75 percent supermajority vote of the people to approve any citizen-initiated ballot measure that conflicts with federal law. This proposed constitutional amendment -- which would have required voter approval after being passed by the legislature -- was introduced by Rep. Bob Thorpe (R-6) and was designed, in part, to specifically target imminent initiative efforts to legalize marijuana, which conflict with federal law. d House Concurrent Resolution 2030: This bill would have provided that "any initiative or referendum measure or proposed amendment to the constitution of this state and that provides for a new increase in state expenditures is effective only on the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the qualified electors voting on the measure or proposed amendment." d Senate Bill 1418: Would have amended campaign finance disclosure laws and definitions. d Senate Bill 1365: Was designed to remove the requirements that a circulator affidavit for an initiative or referendum petition be signed in front of an authorized notary. It would have continued to require any circulator to sign a sworn statement, including the statement that all signers signed the petition in his or her presence. Moreover, it would have changed the name of the circulator statement from "Affidavit" to "Statement of verification."

2014

See also: Changes in 2014 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the Arizona State Legislature: d SCR 1003: Requires voter re-approval every eight years for any measure that spends or collects public dollars; introduced in 2014. d HCR 2018: Requires voter re-approval every eight years for any measure that spends or collects public dollars; introduced in 2014. This resolution died in a Senate committee. a HB 2196: Repeals 2013 Arizona House Bill 2305, which contained multiple election and ballot law reform provisions; introduced in 2014. a HB 2107: Allows certain petition signatures dated by the signer after the signature petition sheet was dated by the circulator. It also reaffirms the necessity for circulators to signify if they are paid or volunteer on the petition form and the necessity for non-state-resident circulators or paid circulators to register with the Secretary of State. d SB 1436: Removes the necessity to sign the statement of verification, previously called the affidavit, before a public notary. Died in a Senate committee. d HB 2014: Requires notice of Proposition 105 restrictions on publicity pamphlets, official ballots and campaign literature for ballot measures. Proposition 105 prevents legislators from repealing or changing any law approved by the voters except through a 3/4ths majority or through referral to the ballot. d SB 1232: Changes registration and other requirements for circulators who are non-residents. Requires certain paid petition circulators to register with the Secretary of State (SOS) prior to circulating petitions. Allows any person to file a registration-based challenge against circulators in the superior court of the county in which the circulator is registered.

2013

Arizona House Bill 2305 was approved and its provisions, regarding the organization and submission of petitions, are now in effect.

See also: Changes in 2013 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the Arizona State Legislature: d HB 2007: Requires literature or advertisements for statutory initiatives and their official ballot titles to contain the following disclosure: "Notice: Pursuant to Proposition 105 (1998), this measure can never be changed in the future if approved on the ballot except by a three-fourths vote of the Legislature and the change furthers the purpose of the original ballot measure, or by referring the change to the ballot." d HB 2233: Requires the auditor general to conduct a special audit to evaluate the costs of each measure that is voter protected pursuant to article IV, part 1, section 1, Constitution of Arizona, and report the results to the governor, the president of the senate and the speaker of the house of representatives, and provide a copy of this report to the secretary of state. d HB 2282: Divides recall elections into a primary and a general election. Makes various changes to recall procedures. d HB 2290: Relates to election recall; relates to reimbursement. a HB 2305 (Repealed): Requires a political committee that files petitions with the secretary of state to organize and group the signature sheets and affords a heightened evidentiary standard for any challenger to the petition circulators if the political committee conducts an arm’s length background check on its circulators. HB 2305 was repealed in 2014 by HB 2196. d HB 2314: Includes referendums in the public hearing requirement for initiatives. d HB 2366: Requires that initiative and referendum petitions include an impartial title on the petition. d HCR 2017: Allows the state legislature to repeal voter approved ballot measures that do not specifically claim protection under the Voter Protection Act of 1998. Also provides that all voter approved initiatives have a subsequent vote eight years after the initial vote. d HCR 2033: Requires that all ballot measures relating to state expenditures be reauthorized in an election eight years after the date they were originally passed. d SB 1247: Removes the current requirement for notarization of petitioner's statement on petition. d SB 1260: Requires the secretary of state to provide the official serial number to the applicant on a stamped copy of the application along with the specific number that is the minimum number of signatures required for the initiative or referendum to appear on the ballot and the required filing date for a petition to appear on the ballot. d SB 1262: Applies existing contribution limits to contributions made toward support the effort to gather signatures on a recall petition. d SB 1263: Requires that for a statewide ballot measure or question, or a statewide or legislative recall, all persons who are paid circulators must be registered as circulators with the secretary of state before circulating petitions. Requires the secretary to establish the procedure for registering paid circulators and receiving service of process. d SB 1264: Modifies and adds requirements with regards to the initiative, referendum and recall petition process. d SB 1336: Establishes an Arizona Election Commission to act as the investigatory, compliance and enforcement officer for campaign finance laws that apply to political committees supporting or opposing the recall of a public officer officer, or supporting the circulation of petitions for ballot measures. d SB 1416: Modifies the petition signature requirements for new political parties and initiative and referendum measures. d SCR 1006: Changes from four to six months before the election the deadline to submit initiative petitions. d SCR 1019: requires initiative and referendum petition signatures to be apportioned among at least five different counties. Requires at least 40 percent of the total minimum number of required petition signatures to be collected from counties other than the two most populous counties.

2012

See also: Changes in 2012 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the Arizona State Legislature: d HB 2291: Makes minor changes to petition form, adds space for email address (optional). d HCR 2005: Proposes two constitutional amendments. Bill description/summary: "Upon voter approval, creates two ballot measures requiring the reauthorization of initiatives and referendums that create a fund for public monies, dedicate public monies to a specific purpose or otherwise affect state General Fund (GF) revenues or expenditures after six years." d HCR 2020: Proposes an amendment to the Arizona Constitution to limit those eligible to sign recall petitions to qualified electors who voted in the last election at which the targeted office was filled. Also, the amendment would impose an in-district residency requirement on recall sponsors. a Arizona Senate Bill 1210 (2012): Confers on initiative proponents or primary legislative sponsors the right to intervene in the defense of a ballot measure. d SB 1428: Allows recall elections to take place outside of consolidated election dates. d SB 1430: Replaces the circulator's affidavit with a circulator's statement. Lying on the statement would remain a class 1 misdemeanor, but the document would not need to be notarized. d SB 1449: Establishes a primary and general election process for recall. d SCR 1031: Proposes a constitutional amendment requiring any measure that dedicates public funds to reauthorized by voters every 8 years. d SCR 1037: Proposes a constitutional amendment allowing the legislature to cut funding for an approved measure if the measure's specified revenue source fails to cover the measure's costs.

2011

See also: Changes in 2011 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the Arizona State Legislature: a Arizona House Bill 2304 (2011): HB 2304 would alter the state's requirements for petition circulators, ease third-party primary access, and clarify laws regarding wearing political apparel at polling places. With respect to initiatives, the law would repeal the state's unconstitutional circulator residency requirement. However, it would replace this requirement with a requirement that out-of-state circulators register with the state. Gov. Jan Brewer signed HB 2304 into law on April 29, 2011. Citizens in Charge Foundation rating: Reduces initiative rights. d Arizona House Bill 2365: HB 2304 proposes formatting changes for petition sheets. d Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2005: HCR 2005 proposes a constitutional amendment requiring half of the signatures necessary to place a measure on the ballot to be collected by volunteers. d Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2029: HCR 2029 proposes a constitutional amendment establishing a sunset/reauthorization requirement for all initiated measures (statute or amendment) that affect state revenue or expenditures. Measures would sunset after six fiscal years and be automatically subject to a popular vote for reauthorization. It would also apply retroactively to measure passed in 1998 and following. d Arizona House Concurrent Resolution 2036: HCR 2029 proposes a constitutional amendment requiring legislatively referred measure to be placed on the primary ballot. d Arizona Senate Bill 1075: SB 1075 proposes removing restriction on when recall elections may be held. d Arizona Senate Bill 1077: SB 1077 proposes removing the requirement that circulators sign a notorized affidavit attesting to the validity of the signatures they collect. Replaces this requirement with the requirement that circulators simply sign a statement to the same effect. a Arizona Senate Bill 1167 (2011): SB 1167 sets a deadline for challenges to referendum petitions. After the referendum has been filed with the Secretary of State, opponents have 10 days in even years and 20 days in odd years to file an action challenging the sufficiency of the referendum. The bill gives the Maricopa County Superior Court jurisdiction over these challenges with appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court. The bill also gives Speaker of the House and President of the Senate the right to intervene as a party in the case. d Arizona Senate Concurrent Resolution 1027: SCR 1027 proposes a constitutional amendment establishing a sunset/reauthorization requirement for all initiated measures (statute or amendment) that affect state revenue or expenditures. Measures would sunset after 10 fiscal years and be automatically subject to a popular vote for reauthorization. It would also apply retroactively to measure passed in 1998 and following. d Arizona Senate Concurrent Resolution 1051: SCR 1051 proposes a constitutional amendment allowing lawmakers to redirect funds designated for an initiative if those funds are insufficient to fully fund the measure. Existing law only allows funding reduction for a measure if its designated funding source is insufficient.

2010

See also: Changes in 2010 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the Arizona Legislature: a Arizona House Bill 2427 (2010): House Bill 2427 would change Arizona's laws on absentee and military voting to give people more flexibility on how they receive their absentee ballot voting materials. The bill was unanimously approved by the Arizona House of Representatives on February 2, 2010, and was approved by the Arizona State Senate on February 4, 2010 by a 24-0 vote. Governor Jan Brewer signed the bill into law on February 11, 2010. a Arizona House Bill 2647 (2010): House Bill 2647 would allow for Political Action Committees (PAC's) to submit ballot initiatives to be qualified upon approval of Legislative Council. Also, the bill would grant immunity to PAC's for reporting to authorities any individual who commit signature fraud. Members of the Arizona House approved the bill by a 55-1 vote on March 17, 2010. The Senate later approved the bill on April 27, 2010, by a 29-0 vote. The bill was signed into law by the Governor of Arizona on April 13, 2010. a Arizona Senate Bill 1393 (2010): Senate Bill 1393 modified the way election records can/must be stored. In addition, the bill mandated that groups advocating for or against ballot measures must file an amended statement of organization if the organization's name, the serial number of the petition, or the organization's statement of support or opposition is modified. It also exempted individual contributions to independent expenditure committees from the $5,610 yearly contribution limit. The bill also allowed contributors to donate more than $5,610 to political committees promoting the election or defeat of a state or local candidate. The bill also changed records keeping rules as regarding donations. Concerning the initiative process, the bill instructed the Secretary of State to exclude from counting any sheets circulated by someone ineligible to do so and any signature where the accompanying information was printed by the circulator. The bill also forbids the Secretary of State from refusing an election filing and changes registration requirements for lobbyists. a Arizona Senate Bill 1422 (2010): Senate Bill 1422 allows those signing nominating petitions to use a PO box as their address. d HB 2438-House Bill 2438 would change how initiatives are numbered on the official ballot in Arizona. The bill calls for all initiatives to be numbered starting after last number used in the previous election. The numbering requirement goes up to number 100. The bill died in committee without seeing a vote in either house of the Legislature. d HB 2730-House Bill 2730 would give county recorders more resources to determine the validity of a petition signer who has a Post Office box address. The bill was defeated in committee without seeing a vote in either house of the legislature. d HCR 2018: House Concurrent Resolution 2018 was a proposal to amend the Arizona Constitution to require that petitions be submitted to the Secretary of State at least 6 months prior to the election. The vote in the Arizona State Legislature to refer HCB 2018 to the November 2, 2010 ballot was successful, but the state's voters rejected the measure, leading to its ultimate defeat. d HCR 2039: House Concurrent Resolution 2039 sought to amend the Arizona Constitution to modify the way funding sources provided in initiatives may be used by the state. It was not placed on the ballot. d HCR 2041: House Concurrent Resolution 2041 sought to amend the Arizona Constitution to require legislative reauthorization of state ballot measures after 8 years if those measures require state expenditures. The bill would have applied retroactively to past ballot measure, but was not placed on the ballot. d HCR 2055: House Concurrent Resolution 2055 sought to amend the Arizona Constitution to subject ballot initiatives, without an identified source of funding, to legislative appropriation. It was not placed on the ballot. d HCR 2063: House Concurrent Resolution 2063 sought to amend the Arizona Constitution to require voters to reauthorize state ballot measures every 10 years if those measures require state expenditures. The bill would have applied retroactively to past ballot measure, but was not placed on the ballot. d SB 1068-Senate Bill 1068 would have changed how and when election materials are sent to absentee voters. It would also have changed the deadline for ballot arguments from 53 to 48 days before the election. The billed failed to pass. d SB 1267-Senate Bill 1267 would have changed the way ballot measures, referenda and amendments are assigned numbers.