Parker, Springer Jr., Anderson v. Committee for Sustainable Retirement in Support of Initiative
233 Ariz. 422
| Ariz. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Arizona Court of Appeals expedited election appeal regarding Initiative 2013-I004 in Tucson.
- Employees allege certain petition sheets/signatures invalid due to ineligible circulators.
- Trial court voided signatures from two felon circulators; enjoined ballot placement; later certified qualified anyway.
- Court reversed on September 12, 2013 to block printing/certification pending injunction; opinion follows.
- Key issue: whether circulators’ felony status and restoration of civil rights bar circulation under §19-114(A).
- Cross-appeal contested resident/non-resident circulator determinations and signature-sheet defects.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Circulators' felony status bars circulation | Parker et al. strict restoration required to circulate | Committee argues broader civil rights restoration applies | Circulators' civil rights must be restored where convicted; not eligible |
| Burden of proof for restoration | Employees meet burden with clear/convincing evidence | Burden on Committee to prove restoration status | Employees sustained burden; restoration not shown for some circulators |
| Coombes' eligibility to circulate | Coombes unrestored civil rights; ineligible | California restoration may apply; time/scope ambiguous | Coombes not eligible; signatures invalid |
| Oberg's eligibility to circulate | Ohio restoration could qualify; time since conviction relevant | Restoration not proven; rights not fully restored | Oberg not eligible; signatures invalid |
| Non-resident circulators and residency proofs | Non-residency cannot toll eligibility without proper proof | Residency determined by residence evidence and intent | Court properly disqualified non-residents; residency findings upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Harris v. City of Bisbee, 219 Ariz. 36 (Ariz. App. 2008) (abuse of discretion standard for § 19-122 relief)
- Open Primary Elections Now v. Bayless, 193 Ariz. 43 (Ariz. 1998) (statutory interpretation; constitutional initiative framework)
- Kromko v. Superior Court, 168 Ariz. 51 (Arizona 1991) (timeliness and ballot-access election challenges)
- Ross v. Bennett, 228 Ariz. 174 (Ariz. 2011) (signature sheets; distinctions between defects and fraud)
- Brousseau v. Fitzgerald, 138 Ariz. 453 (Ariz. 1984) (false circulator affidavits render signatures void)
- Pedersen v. Bennett, 230 Ariz. 556 (Ariz. 2012) (liberal construction of initiative requirements; substantial compliance)
- Winterbottom v. Ronan, 227 Ariz. 364 (Ariz. App. 2011) (plain language governs unless absurd results)
- United States v. Horodner, 91 F.3d 1319 (9th Cir. 1996) (civil-rights restoration contexts; federal standard guidance)
- Jett v. City of Tucson, 180 Ariz. 115 (Ariz. 1994) (constitutional interpretation; initiative framework guidance)