Two more ballot initiatives certified, one may be short of signaturesv

By Howard Fischer
Capitol Media Services
Published/Last Modified on Tuesday, August 12, 2008 6:47 PM MDT


 PHOENIX — Two more measures were certified Friday as being qualified for the ballot, even though a random sample suggest one does not have enough signatures.


 Figures from the Secretary of State’s Office show that a measur designed to block the state from ever taxing the sale of home and other property has fewer than 227,000 valid signatures, shor of the 230,047 legally required to put a proposed constitutiona amendment before voters in November. That is based on a check o 5 percent of the petitions submitted.

 State law spells out that there must be a full check of all names for any measure where the random sample shows the validity rat of between 95 and 105 percent.

 But Secretary of State Jan Brewer said the recorders from severa counties — the officials who keep the voter registration record — have said they do not have the time to complete such a searc before the deadline for printing ballots. And she said that  1983 court ruling spells out that when there is any doubt abou whether a measure qualifies for the ballot, election officials should err on the side of putting it before voters.

 That means Proposition 100 will be on the ballot.

 Brewer said, however, it’s not a decision she likes.

 “I have always been of the belief that a citizen initiative tha comes in below the signature requirements provided by la (should) be disqualified,’’ she said in a prepared statement. Bu Brewer said she has to comply with court precedent.

 “I guess 98 percent really means 100 percent according to ou legal system,’’ she said.

 Proposition 100 is being pushed by the Arizona Association of Realtors in an effort to constitutionally bar any future law which seek to tax the sale or transfer of property.

 There is no such levy now. But Tom Farley, lobbyist for the organization, said the idea has been discussed in the past as on way to increase state revenues — or at least lower the state’ 5.6 percent sales tax rate by taxing more transactions.

 Brewer also certified another measure for the ballot even though this one also might not have enough signatures.

 The random check of signatures for Proposition 201 showed i would have 161,004 valid signatures.

 That is more than the 153,365 necessary for petition drives tha propose to change state statutes. But it is less than the 10 percent of that figure — the point at which state law presume there are sufficient valid signatures.

 But here, too, Brewer said the inability of counties to do name by-name checks on time means the measure will be on the ballot.

 A key feature of that measure would require a 10-year warranty o all new homes.

 The measure, if approved in November, would allow homeowners t help choose the contractors hired by the builders to make the repairs, give buyers the right to cancel within 100 days and get back most of their deposit and homeowners sue without fear o having to pay a builder’s legal fees if they lose.

 It also would require that model homes be outfitted exactly the way they would look for the purchase price advertised.

 or have a

 price tag on each of the non-standard items.

 At this point six measures have been certified for the ballot and

 one has been disqualified due to lack of signatures. But the

 backers of that measure to constitutionally bar the state from

 enacting laws requiring people to enroll in health insurance

 programs, are going to court to try to prove there are sufficient

 valid names.

 Four other measures are still awaiting verification, including

 one that asks voters to hike that 5.6 percent state sales tax to

 6.6 percent to pay for new roads and other transit projects.

Comments

    Typo Cop wrote on Aug 15, 2008 6:19 AM:

    " Something is wrong either with your editors or your technique for putting this story on the web. Many many words in this article are missing the final letter. "measure" is spelled "measur" and so on. "

Write a Comment

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. They review submitted comments periodically during the day for offensive or off-topic content before posting. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The Douglas Dispatch is not liable for messages from third parties.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.
* Personal Information (phone numbers, addresses, etc.)

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in douglasdispatch.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the Douglas Dispatch. The Douglas Dispatch does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized Douglas Dispatch spokespersons.

Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

(optional)
   









Contact Us

Email the Editor
530 11th Street (85607)
P.O. Drawer H
Douglas, AZ 85608
tel: 520.364.3424
fax: 520.364.6750