Arizona high court to hear challenge to state budget
- Most Commented Stories Today
- Most E-mailed Stories Today
PHOENIX – The Arizona Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to take at least a preliminary look at whether it's legal for the state to require local governments to pay nearly $30 million to help keep the budget balanced.
The court said it will hear arguments on Jan. 20 on the special-action lawsuit by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns.
The league contends that a budget provision requiring municipalities and counties to pay $29.7 million violates a provision in Arizona's Constitution. The provision requires that new taxes or other steps to increase state revenue be approved by a two-thirds vote of each legislative chamber.
The budget was passed by simple majorities of the House and Senate.
The justices specified several issues they want attorneys to address. One is whether the court should even hear the suit because it wasn't filed until more than four months after the budget was passed in late June.
The lawsuit asks the justices to declare the requirement unconstitutional, to prohibit Treasurer Dean Martin from implementing the requirement and to bar Gov. Janet Napolitano from spending any money collected under the requirement.
Martin said he agrees with the league that the provision is unconstitutional, but Napolitano's lawyers defended it, saying it is merely a reduction in a previous appropriation, not a new tax or fee.
The state asked Tucson to contribute $2.1 million. The city is projected to bring in at least $40 million less than it expected earlier and to spend at least $6 million more than planned.
"I don't think it's right for the state to balance its budget on the backs of cities and towns," Tucson City Councilwoman Regina Romero said last year. Councilwoman Karin Uhlich said she hopes the state and local governments can work together.
"What we are hoping is that governments can navigate these difficult times as cooperatively as possible," she said last year.
- Read All Comments » 0 TOTAL COMMENTS
- Post a Comment »
