Arizona Sen. Rosanna Gabaldon asked Attorney General Chris Mays whether Tucson can legally hold its scheduled sales tax election despite the “apparent conflict” with state law.

The City Council set a summer vote on passing the sales tax earlier this month, but Arizona law requires such an election to go before voters only on the November ballot.

On Feb. 6, board members unanimously approved adding an item to the summer ballot to introduce the tax increase. The measure does not yet specify the amount of the tax or how the funds raised will be used.

The move is a ploy to put pressure on the other members of the Regional Transit Authority (Pima County, area Indian tribes, and incorporated towns) and believes that if an all-Democratic council is elected, city residents will benefit. If we don't believe that, Tucson could go its own way. Fair share of taxes raised under the 20-year RTA Next plan.

Related column: Tax fraud: Tucson's illegal election is the aim of RTA extension

The City Council called the election on August 6, but the state Legislature later moved the summer voting date to July 30.

Arizona Revised Statutes 16-204 It stipulates that city elections to approve a “transaction privilege tax” (the formal name for sales tax) must be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.

Lawmakers are allowed to question the attorney general about violations of state law. Gabaldon is seeking a “prompt opinion” on the matter.

Document: Lawmakers seek input from Az AG on legality of Tucson sales tax election

Most such requests are prompted by lawmakers seeking to stop conduct they believe violates the law, but Democratic Party LD21's Feb. 23 letter to Mays said it supported Tucson's move. There are words written on it. The Gabaldon neighborhood stretches from Douglas and Nogales through Sahuarita and into parts of Tucson's Southside.

“I'm not asking for a quick opinion lightly, but time is absolutely of the essence. Tucson's authority to control the manner and manner of its own elections will be extended to the City of Tucson for a TPT election to be held on State Consolidated Election Day.” If so, Tucson City officials must be given the opportunity to amend this action to meet the applicable deadline of November 2024, no later than 30 days after this date. “I respectfully request and request that your office provide a comment within the next few days,” the state senators wrote.

From Gabaldon's letter:

“As a chartered city, Tucson has a long history of successfully challenging Arizona statutes that reduce the city’s ability to control and conduct elections on the days of its choosing. Yes, the city has demonstrated time and effort. The court again agrees that the timing of these city elections on city matters is purely a matter of city interest and not of statewide concern; Timing of a special election asking voters to approve local government The same should apply to raising the trade privilege tax to fund local investments that directly promote the quality of life for Tucson's residents and businesses. Towns should not be constrained from holding elections to ask their own voters whether additional funding is available.Towns should not be constrained from holding elections to ask their own voters whether additional funding is available. It is not in the interest of the charter city to require a wait for months, or even years, for the purpose of the cannot be suggested by the City Charter.

The Tucson City Charter (essentially the city's constitution) does not specify a date limit on which the City Council can call a sales tax election.

The city of Tucson has won a number of election court cases, with judges ruling on charter issues such as holding elections in odd-numbered years and establishing a system for the city in which city council members are nominated by ward and elected citywide. The court ruled that the provision was valid and invalidated the state law that sought to invalidate it. limit them.

Whether or not Mays agrees that the city has the authority to call a summer sales tax election, it's still possible that right-wing opponents of Tucson's Democratic leadership will sue over the issue.

“It would be beneficial to obtain the attorney general's opinion on this matter,” City Attorney Mike Rankin said. “We believe that Arizona law makes clear that a law that limits these types of elections to the dates of the statewide general election violates the Arizona Constitution and the authority of charter cities to conduct local elections. I hope the AG agrees.”

City asks RTA Next

Tucson City Manager Mike Ortega, who is scheduled to retire this summer, has joined his elected boss in exploring the city's own alternatives to improve transportation.

In a memo to Mayor Regina Romero and six City Council members days after the election, he wrote that he “may not in good conscience recommend that the City of Tucson continue to participate in RTA Next.” ing.

City officials want a higher share of taxes paid to local governments, most of the sales taxes collected come from transactions within city limits, and the city has most of the voters needed for reauthorization. It is pointed out that there are. Decades of regional planning.

RTA Executive Director Farhad Moghimi said that under the 2006 plan, approximately 73 percent of the “category projects” were located in Tucson, and in RTA Next's current draft plan, 53 percent of the projects were located in Tucson. I responded by pointing out that it would be sent to The city is home to 52 percent of the county's population.

“RTA is a local taxing district,” he told the Sentinel. “This means the Arizona Department of Revenue is collecting money from “districts” rather than from a single jurisdiction. (Point of sale reports are not provided to RTAs). Why is this important to note? Everyone pays. Wherever you are. “Everyone who shops within the district pays RTA's half-cent sales tax. As a district, we want to distribute the local money we collect fairly to everyone in the district.”

“The (RTA) board is fully committed to ensuring a balanced distribution of benefits in the region,” he said. “Otherwise, I don’t think voters would support a proposal that is not a fair distribution of benefits.”