Log in

More groups weigh in on electronic signatures in Arizona

Posted 4/27/20

One organization does not sound too concerned about whether electronic signatures are allowed for ballot initiatives during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Catherine A. Barrett, applicant and chair of YES …

You must be a member to read this story.

Join our family of readers for as little as $5 per month and support local, unbiased journalism.


Already have an account? Log in to continue.

Current print subscribers can create a free account by clicking here

Otherwise, follow the link below to join.

To Our Valued Readers –

Visitors to our website will be limited to five stories per month unless they opt to subscribe. The five stories do not include our exclusive content written by our journalists.

For $6.99, less than 20 cents a day, digital subscribers will receive unlimited access to YourValley.net, including exclusive content from our newsroom and access to our Daily Independent e-edition.

Our commitment to balanced, fair reporting and local coverage provides insight and perspective not found anywhere else.

Your financial commitment will help to preserve the kind of honest journalism produced by our reporters and editors. We trust you agree that independent journalism is an essential component of our democracy. Please click here to subscribe.

Sincerely,
Charlene Bisson, Publisher, Independent Newsmedia

Please log in to continue

Log in
I am anchor

More groups weigh in on electronic signatures in Arizona

Posted

One organization does not sound too concerned about whether electronic signatures are allowed for ballot initiatives during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Catherine A. Barrett, applicant and chair of YES for a Classroom Code of Ethics, stated in an email Monday that the group is “comfortable with the secured signatures even prior to the Arizona’s ‘stay at home” restrictions tied to the coronavirus. She stated the group is working effectively going forward to add to its base.

That ballot initiative, Arizona Classroom Code of Ethics, requires 237,645 signatures. Ms. Barrett did not present a firm personal stance on the topic, but she and her group are not among the initiative organizers clamoring for the inclusion of electronic signatures.

“At this time, I need more specific knowledge to provide a personal opinion. To elaborate somewhat I will say, I am a supporter of the law of the lands written by our elected officials,” Ms. Barrett stated.

Ms. Barrett, an Arizona Master Teacher, stated the measure would implement a code of ethics and require the state board of education to adopt rules adopting that code and enforcement procedures. The code would prohibit public school teachers from engaging in classroom political advocacy, defined as advocating for or against legislation, elected officials and candidates, political parties and judicial decisions.

If this measure makes the ballot and is passed, public school teachers would be able to discuss historical matters, defined as legislation more than fifty years old, and elected officials and candidates who serve or ran more than fifty years ago.

She said, like other petition organizers have, that the pandemic-related restrictions have slowed momentum for their efforts.

“The interest since the disclosure of the coronavirus has taken the attention from the interest and the needs of A Classroom Code of Ethics. The state and national interest should remain there and addressed accordingly. We are positive and optimistic with the results seen and when the public has less to worry about on a day to day basis we will build our signature base from there,” Ms. Barrett stated.

In the past week, more politicians and groups have joined in support of allowing electronic signatures under these circumstances.

In a story by Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services, he reported that attorney Shawn Aiken is representing Flagstaff Mayor Coral Evans, Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego and Tucson Mayor Regina Romero. In a legal filing last week, Aiken wrote to the Arizona Supreme Court that nowhere in the Arizona Constitution does it require that signatures be gathered on something people can hold in their hands.

Aiken and his mayoral clients believe that allows the court to give the go-ahead for groups seeking to put issues on the November ballot to use an electronic system for collecting signatures — which it should do in this case.

“Where, as here, different language is used in different constitutional provisions, we must infer that a different meaning was intended,’’ Aiken wrote. “Under a straightforward reading of the text ... therefore, the constitution permits initiative signatures on both electronic and paper ‘sheets.’”

That isn’t the way the state sees it.

In his own legal filing, Assistant Attorney General Drew Ensign told the justices that the Arizona Constitution means what it says: that every sheet of every petition must be verified by the person who witnesses the signature, with the circulators swearing that each name “was signed in the presence of the affiant.’’

In a separate legal filing last week, the attorney for the Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona and others is arguing that requiring petition circulators to make face-to-face contact with would be signers both endangers the firefighters and paramedics who might be called on to treat these people if the contract COVID-19. And if nothing else, Danny Adelman said if circulators decide to try to continue making personal contact they will be using up gloves and masks that are in short supply for the first responders who need them.

Editor’s note: See the full list of initiatives and referendums at YourValley.net. This is the third and final story in a three-part series by Richard Smith on the initiative topic.