Wed. Nov 6th, 2024

Illustration by Niyazz |
iStock / Getty Images Plus

Arizonans faced a lengthy ballot this year, in no small part due to Republican lawmakers who took nearly a dozen ideas directly to the voters in order to get around Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs’ veto pen. 

While the citizen-led abortion rights initiative captured most of the attention in the lead up to the election, there were a dozen other ballot measures for voters to consider. Here’s a roundup of the ballot measures that mostly flew under the radar.

Prop 134

Voters appear to have rejected Proposition 134, which would have amended the state’s constitution to hamper the citizen-led ballot initiative process. 

The measure would have required that, in order to get an initiative on the ballot, citizens would need to gather a number of signatures equivalent to 10% of votes cast in the most recent race for governor in each legislative district for changes to state statute and 15% from each legislative district for constitutional amendments.  

Currently law stipulates that the 10% and 15% can be gathered from voters across the state. 

Last year, Republican lawmakers voted along party lines to send the measure to voters. 

Republicans in favor of the measure say that it gives voters outside of Maricopa, the state’s largest county, a voice while Democratic opponents say that it would allow one partisan district to block popular measures. 

By early Wednesday, more than 59% of voters had voted no on the measure. 

Prop 135

Likewise, voters appear to have rejected Proposition 135, which amends the state’s constitution to restrict the governor’s ability to declare emergencies and gives state lawmakers power over those declarations. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Republican Gov. Doug Ducey used emergency powers that many Republican state lawmakers were adamantly opposed to, leading to lawmakers proposing a change to the state’s constitution on those powers. 

Lawmakers need a two-thirds majority vote to request a special session, but Prop. 135 would have required only one-third of lawmakers to request the governor call a special session during a state of emergency. It also would have limited the governor’s emergency powers to 30 days unless extended by the legislature. 

More than 58% of voters voted against the measure. 

Prop 136

Arizona voters also rejected Proposition 136, which would have amended the Arizona Constitution to allow a person to bring a lawsuit to contest the constitutionality of a ballot initiative before the election. 

If the initiative was found to be in violation of either the Arizona or United States constitutions, then it would not be printed on the ballot. 

By late Tuesday, more than 63% of voters had rejected the proposed change. 

Prop 311

Arizona voters approved Proposition 311, which would create a new state death benefit of $250,000 to the surviving spouse or children of a first responder killed in the line of duty during the commission of a crime. 

It would also create a new $20 fee for every criminal conviction to help fund the program and would be repealed on Jan. 1, 2033. 

The measure also allows the legislature to reappropriate the money to police officer training, equipment or “other benefits” for first responder families if the fund exceeds $2 million. Lastly, it would increase the criminal punishment for committing aggravated assault against a peace officer or first responder. 

By early Wednesday, more than 63% of voters had approved of the proposition. 

Prop 312

Voters appear to have approved Proposition 312, which would require municipalities to give tax breaks to property owners who spend money to mitigate problems caused by encampments of unhoused people near their property. 

Cities have previously argued that it would put them in an “impossible” legal situation when attempting to deal with the ongoing homelessness crisis. Cities could also lose revenue if the measure is passed. 

By early Wednesday, more than 57% of voters had approved of the measure. 

Prop 315

Voters appear to have rejected Proposition 315, which would prohibit any new statewide rule proposed by state agencies from becoming effective if the estimated cost associated with it is anticipated to be more than $500,000 within five years. 

It would have also given the legislature the final authority to approve any rule that meets that criteria. 

Critics saw it as a way for the legislature to interfere with state agencies that enact policies they do not politically agree with. 

By early Wednesday, more than 54% of voters rejected the proposition.

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

By