14 proposed laws are on the November ballot in Arizona. Here’s what they say.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 133: HCR2033
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO PRIMARY ELECTIONS.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING ARTICLE VII, SECTION 10, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
NOTWITHSTANDING ANY CONTRARY CITY LAW, THE DIRECT PRIMARY
ELECTION FOR PARTISAN OFFICES WOULD BE CONDUCTED TO ALLOW
EACH RECOGNIZED POLITICAL PARTY TO NOMINATE AS MANY CANDIDATES
FOR EACH OFFICE AS THERE ARE OPEN POSITIONS FOR THAT OFFICE IN THE
NEXT GENERAL ELECTION AND ALLOW OTHERWISE ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES
TO BE NOMINATED.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to require direct primary elections for all partisan offices to be conducted in a manner prescribed by the Legislature, notwithstanding any city law, regulation, or policy to the contrary. the primaries would be conducted in a manner so that each political party represented on the ballot may nominate for each office a number of candidates equal to the number of positions to be filled for that office in the ensuing general election, and all otherwise eligible candidates who were nominated be placed on the ballot for the next general election.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of keeping the current laws related to partisan primary elections.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 134: SCR1015
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO INITIATIVES AND REFERENDA.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING ARTICLE IV, PART I, SECTION 10, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
FOR A BALLOT MEASURE TO QUALIFY TO APPEAR ON THE BALLOT,
SIGNATURES FROM A PERCENTAGE OF THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS IN ALL
30 LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS WOULD BE REQUIRED, AS FOLLOWS: 10% FOR
STATEWIDE INITIATIVES; 15% FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS; AND 5%
FOR STATEWIDE REFERENDA.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to require an applicant wishing to place a measure on the ballot to collect a certain percentage of signatures in each of the 30 legislative districts. Signatures from 10% of the voters in each district would be required for a statewide initiative to appear on the ballot. Signatures from 15% of the voters in each district would be required for an amendment to the Arizona Constitution to appear on the ballot. Signatures from 5% of the voters in each district would be required for a statewide referendum to appear on the ballot. If a proposed measure does not obtain the minimum percentage of signatures in any one of the 30 legislative districts, it would fail to qualify for the ballot, and would not be presented to voters.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of keeping the current constitutional language requiring only the signatures of 10% of the total number of statewide voters for an initiative, 15% of statewide voters for an amendment, and 5% of statewide voters for a referendum.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 135: HCR 2039
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO THE GOVERNOR.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING ARTICLE IV, PART 2, SECTION 1, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
TERMINATES ANY EMERGENCY POWERS GRANTED TO THE GOVERNOR DURING
A STATE OF EMERGENCY 30 DAYS AFTER THE PROCLAMATION, UNLESS
EXTENDED BY THE LEGISLATURE, AND REQUIRES THE GOVERNOR TO CALL A
SPECIAL SESSION UPON THE PRESENTATION OF A PETITION BEARING
SIGNATURES OF AT LEAST ONE-THIRD OF EACH HOUSE OF THE LEGISLATURE.

A “yes” vote have shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to terminate any emergency powers granted to the Governor thirty days after the date the state of emergency was proclaimed, unless the Legislature extends the emergency powers granted to the Governor or the emergency relates to war, fire, or flood. Additionally, if requested by at least one-third of the members of each house of the Legislature, the Governor must promptly call a special session for the purposes of terminating or altering the emergency powers granted to the Governor during the state of emergency.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current emergency powers of the Governor.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 136: SCR1041
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO BALLOT MEASURES.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING ARTICLE IV, PART 1, SECTION 1, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
AUTHORIZES A PERSON TO BRING A LAWSUIT TO TRY TO STOP A VOTER-
PROPOSED INITIATIVE FROM BEING PLACED ON THE BALLOT IF THAT PERSON
SUES AT LEAST ONE HUNDRED DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION AND CLAIMS THE
PROPOSED INITIATIVE WOULD VIOLATE THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION OR
THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to allow lawsuits regarding the constitutionality of a voter-initiated ballot measure to be filed prior to the election in order to stop the measure from being placed on the ballot.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of preserving the current state of the law, which typically requires challenges to the constitutionality of a voter-initiated ballot measure to be brought only after the voters have decided to approve a ballot measure

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 137: SCR1044
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING ARTICLE VI, SECTIONS 4, 9, 12, 37, 38, 39, 41 AND 42, CONSTITUTION OF
ARIZONA.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
ELIMINATES JUDICIAL TERMS AND REGULAR RETENTION ELECTIONS AND
NULLIFIES THE RESULTS OF THE 2024 JUDICIAL RETENTION ELECTIONS, FOR
ARIZONA SUPREME COURT JUSTICES, COURT OF APPEALS JUDGES, AND
SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES IN COUNTIES WITH OVER 250,000 PERSONS. ALLOWS
SUCH JUSTICES AND JUDGES TO HOLD OFFICE DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR UNTIL
AGE 70.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to eliminate judicial terms for judges of the Arizona Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, and judges of the Superior Court in counties with more than 250,000 people. Voters will no longer have the ability to decide whether to retain those judges at the end of their judicial terms. Those judges would instead be subject to a retention election only if they were convicted of a felony or a crime involving fraud or dishonesty; were a debtor in a bankruptcy proceeding; held a mortgage under foreclosure; or did not meet performance standards according to the Commission on Judicial Performance Review. the House of Representatives and the Senate will each be able to appoint one member to the Commission. If any legislator asks the Commission to investigate whether a judge has engaged in misconduct, the Commission must investigate that allegation. If approved, these amendments will apply retroactively such that votes cast in the November 2024 election about whether to retain a judge will not be given effect.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current system of voters deciding whether to retain a judge at the end of their judicial term.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 138: SCR1040
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO WAGES.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING ARTICLE XVIII, BY ADDING SECTION 11, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
PERMITS EMPLOYERS TO PAY UP TO 25% LESS THAN THE MINIMUM HOURLY
WAGE FOR EMPLOYEES WHOSE COMPENSATION INCLUDES TIPS OR GRATUITIES
FROM PATRONS, BUT ONLY IF THE EMPLOYER CAN ESTABLISH THAT THE
EMPLOYEE ULTIMATELY RECEIVED THE MINIMUM WAGE PLUS $2 FOR EVERY
HOUR WORKED.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to allow employers to pay employees up to 25% less than the minimum hourly wage if the employer can establish that the employee’s wage plus tips or gratuities is at least $2 more than the minimum wage for every hour worked.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current laws regarding minimum wage.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 139
PROPOSED BY INITIATIVE PETITION RELATING TO THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO AN ABORTION.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING ARTICLE II, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY ADDING SECTION 8.1;
RELATING TO THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO AN ABORTION.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
CREATES A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO ABORTION. LIMITS THE STATE’S ABILITY
TO INTERFERE WITH THAT RIGHT BEFORE FETAL VIABILITY. AFTER FETAL
VIABILITY, ABORTIONS ARE ALLOWED WHEN NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE LIFE
OR HEALTH OF THE PREGNANT INDIVIDUAL. PROHIBITS LAWS PENALIZING A
PERSON FOR ASSISTING AN INDIVIDUAL OBTAINING AN ABORTION.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of creating a fundamental right to abortion under Arizona’s constitution. the State will not be able to interfere with this fundamental right before fetal viability, unless it has a compelling reason and does so in the least restrictive way possible. Fetal viability means the point in the pregnancy when, in the good-faith judgment of a treating health care professional, the fetus has a significant likelihood of survival outside the uterus. Throughout the pregnancy, both before and after fetal viability, the State will not be able to interfere with the good-faith judgment of a treating health care professional that an abortion is necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant individual. the State will not be able to penalize any person for aiding or assisting a pregnant individual in exercising the right to an abortion.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of not creating a fundamental right to have an abortion under Arizona’s constitution, will leave in place current laws that restrict abortion before fetal viability, and will allow the State to further restrict or ban abortion in the future.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 140
PROPOSED BY INITIATIVE PETITION RELATING TO ELECTIONS.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING ARTICLE VII, SECTIONS 2, 7, 10, AND 11, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA;
AMENDING ARTICLE VII, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY ADDING SECTION 19;
RELATING TO ELECTIONS.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
ALL PRIMARY ELECTION CANDIDATES FOR A GIVEN OFFICE WILL HAVE THE
SAME SIGNATURE REQUIREMENTS FOR BALLOT QUALIFICATION. ELIGIBLE
VOTERS MAY VOTE FOR CANDIDATES REGARDLESS OF PARTY AFFILIATION. THE
LEGISLATURE MAY PRESCRIBE THE NUMBER OF CANDIDATES ADVANCING TO
THE GENERAL ELECTION. PROHIBITS USING PUBLIC MONIES FOR POLITICAL
PARTY ELECTIONS.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of allowing all eligible voters to vote for any primary election candidate, regardless of party affiliation; imposing the same signature requirements on all candidates for a given office who wish to appear on the primary ballot; generally prohibiting the use of public funds for political party elections; allowing future law to determine how many candidates advance from the primary election, as well as the process by which candidates are elected at the general election; and if future law provides that three or more candidates may advance to the general election for an office to which one candidate will be elected, voter rankings shall be used.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining current requirements related to primary and general elections processes.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 311: SCR1006
REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO FIRST RESPONDERS.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE 1, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES,
BY ADDING SECTION 12-116.12; REPEALING SECTION 12-116.12, ARIZONA
REVISED STATUTES; AMENDING SECTION 13-1204, ARIZONA REVISED
STATUTES; AMENDING SECTION 13-1204; AMENDING TITLE 38, CHAPTER 8,
ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING ARTICLE 4; REPEALING TITLE 38,
CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 4, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; RELATING TO FIRST
RESPONDERS.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
REQUIRES THE STATE TO PAY $250,000 (STATE DEATH BENEFIT) TO THE
SURVIVING SPOUSE OR CHILDREN OF A FIRST RESPONDER KILLED IN THE
LINE OF DUTY. ESTABLISHES STATE SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFIT FUND, WHICH
SHALL CONTINUOUSLY BE APPROPRIATED THROUGH A PENALTY FEE ON
EVERY FINE, PENALTY AND FORFEITURE IMPOSED FOR ANY CRIMINAL
OFFENSE.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of requiring the State of Arizona to pay $250,000, which would be referred to as the State Death Benefit, to the surviving spouse or children of a first responder killed in the line of duty; creating a State Supplemental Benefit Fund to pay the State Death Benefit; broadening the definition of aggravated assault; and require a $20 penalty fee be imposed on every fine, penalty and forfeiture for any criminal offense. the State Death Benefit and the $20 penalty fee would expire on January 1, 2033.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of not requiring the State of Arizona to provide a State Death
Benefit for first responders killed in the line of duty.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 312: HCR 2023
REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO PROPERTY TAX.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING TITLE 42, CHAPTER 17, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY
ADDING ARTICLE 9; REPEALING TITLE 42, CHAPTER 17, ARTICLE 9,
ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; RELATING TO PROPERTY TAX.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
PROPERTY OWNERS MAY APPLY FOR A TAX REFUND FOR EXPENSES
INCURRED DUE TO A GOVERNING AUTHORITY’S FAILURE TO ENFORCE
CERTAIN PUBLIC NUISANCE LAWS ON OR NEAR THE OWNER’S REAL
PROPERTY. THE REFUND MAY NOT EXCEED THE AMOUNT THE PROPERTY
OWNER PAID FOR THE PRIOR TAX YEAR IN PRIMARY PROPERTY TAXES.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of establishing the right to apply for a refund from a property owner’s most recent property tax payment up to an amount that matches costs incurred by the property owner to mitigate the effects of a governing authority’s repeated failure to enforce laws and ordinances prohibiting illegal camping, loitering, obstructing public thoroughfares, panhandling, public urination or defecation, public consumption of alcoholic beverages, and possession or use of illegal substances. If the documented costs exceed the amount of the most recent property tax bill, the property owner would be permitted to apply for a refund from their next property tax payment(s) to cover the balance of the initial claim. Property owners would be eligible annually for refunds until the taxing entity begins enforcing the relevant public nuisance laws.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of retaining the current primary property tax payment laws and regulations.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 313: SCR 1021
REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING SENTENCING.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING TITLE 13, CHAPTER 7, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING
SECTION 13-720; RELATING TO SENTENCING.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
THE LAW WOULD REQUIRE THAT A PERSON CONVICTED OF CHILD SEX
TRAFFICKING (CLASS 2 FELONY) BE SENTENCED TO IMPRISONMENT IN THE
CUSTODY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS FOR NATURAL LIFE AND
WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR ANY FORM OF RELEASE.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of eliminating the current sentencing ranges for a child sex trafficking conviction. Instead, anyone convicted of a Class 2 felony for child sex trafficking would have to be sentenced to imprisonment for natural life without the possibility of release.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current statutory sentencing guidelines for those convicted of a Class 2 felony for child sex trafficking. the current sentencing ranges are as follows: a) for a defendant’s first offense, a minimum of 13 years imprisonment; b) for a defendant with one historical prior felony conviction, a minimum of 25 years imprisonment; and c) for a defendant with two or more prior felony convictions, a minimum of 30 years imprisonment.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 314: CR 2060
REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO RESPONSES TO HARMS AT THE BORDER.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING TITLE 1, CHAPTER 5, ARTICLE 1, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES,
BY ADDING SECTIONS 1-503 AND 1-504; AMENDING TITLE 13, CHAPTER 34,
ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING SECTION 13-3424; AMENDING
TITLE 13, CHAPTER 38, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING ARTICLE 35;
AMENDING TITLE 23, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 2, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES,
BY ADDING SECTION 23-215; RELATING TO RESPONSES TO HARMS RELATED
TO AN UNSECURED BORDER.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
MAKES IT A CRIME FOR PERSONS WITHOUT LAWFUL STATUS IN THE UNITED
STATES TO SUBMIT FALSE INFORMATION IN APPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC
BENEFITS AND EMPLOYMENT, AND ENTER OR REMAIN IN THE COUNTRY
UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. MAKES IT A CRIME TO SELL FENTANYL
THAT LATER CAUSES THE DEATH OF A PERSON.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of creating new crimes regarding the following conduct by any person without lawful status in the United States: (1)  applying for a public benefit by submitting a false document; (2) submitting false information to an employer regarding the person’s authorization to work in the United States; (3) entering Arizona from a foreign country at any location other than a lawful port of entry; (4) remaining in the country if the person has been convicted of certain crimes and a court has ordered them to return to their country of origin or entry. Also creates a new crime of selling fentanyl that causes the death of another person. Requires state courts to issue deportation orders against any person convicted of these crimes and authorizes state and local law enforcement to enforce the deportation orders.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current criminal laws and the federal government’s exclusive authority over deportation.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 315: SCR 1012
REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO RULEMAKING.

OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING TITLE 41, CHAPTER 6, ARTI CLE 4.1. ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY
ADDING SECTION 41-1049; RELATING TO RULEMAKING.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
ANY PROPOSED RULE ESTIMATED TO INCREASE REGULATORY COSTS BY MORE
THAN $500,000 WITHIN FIVE YEARS AFTER IMPLEMENTATION SHALL NOT
BECOME EFFECTIVE UNLESS THE LEGISLATURE ENACTS LEGISLATION
RATIFYING THE PROPOSED RULE.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of requiring state agencies to submit any proposed rule that is estimated to increase regulatory costs by more than $100,000 within five years after implementation to the Office of Economic Opportunity for review. If the Office of Economic Opportunity determines that the proposed rule is estimated to increase regulatory costs by more than $500,000 within five years after implementation, the proposed rule shall not become effective unless the legislature enacts legislation ratifying the proposed rule. the Corporation Commission and emergency rules are exempt from this act.

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current laws related to state agency rule making.

▲ RETURN TO TOP

PROPOSITION 212
PROPOSED BY INITIATIVE PETITION RELATING TO THE MINIMUM WAGE.

OFFICIAL TITLE
REPEALING SECTION 23-362; ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, AMENDING
SECTIONS 23-362 (AS ADDED BY PROPOSITION 202, NOV. 7, 2006) AND 23-363,
ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; RELATING TO THE MINIMUM WAGE AND
ASSOCIATED DEFINITIONS.

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
THIS INITIATIVE WILL RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE BY $1 OVER COST-OF-LIVING
INCREASES IN 2025 AND 2026 AND RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE ACCORDING TO
COST-OF-LIVING INCREASES ANNUALLY THEREAFTER. IT WOULD GRADUALLY
RAISE WAGES FOR TIPPED EMPLOYEES TO THE MINIMUM WAGE BY 2027 AND
EXPAND COVERAGE OF THE MINIMUM WAGE.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of removing the small business exception for minimum wage and raising the minimum wage by $1 over cost-of-living increases in 2025 and 2026. In years where the cost-of-living changes are in the negative, the minimum wage will not be raised. This law would also gradually raise the minimum wage for tipped workers in 2025 and 2026 and mandate that, beginning in 2027, tipped workers will also be paid the minimum wage. In addition, this law would establish that the minimum wage applies to workers regardless of age, status as a learner, apprentice, vocational trainee, or other status where a worker provides labor regardless of benefit to the worker.

A” no” vote shall have the effect of leaving in place current statutes and regulations governing the minimum wage.