Tucson's new system of nonpartisan elections, mandated by the Legislature, will usher in the biggest change to city elections since before our current politicians were born.
But the full impact of that change isn't likely to be known for years.
Most political analysts agree the most important change will be the elimination of party primaries, which force candidates to appeal strictly to their party base in order to become candidates.
The new law will also eliminate Tucson's often-debated system of nominating candidates in ward primary elections, then electing them in a citywide general election. Candidates will now need to win their wards in the general election as well.
But before the law takes effect, it will have to survive a legal challenge from the city. Four of the council's six Democrats — Regina Romero, Karin Uhlich, Nina Trasoff and Steve Leal — have supported challenging the new law.
The council will decide Aug. 5 whether to challenge the Legislature's authority to overrule the voter-approved City Charter. A prime legal defense will be a 1950s Arizona Supreme Court ruling that the state couldn't stop Phoenix from instituting nonpartisan elections because it was not "a matter of statewide concern."
State Sen. Jonathan Paton, R-Tucson, who spearheaded passage of the new law, counters that the new law affects every city in the state. Although Tucson is the only city forced to make a change, since the others already have nonpartisan elections, Paton said his law prevents the others from going back to partisan elections.
While many leading Democrats contend nonpartisan elections are a Republican scheme to benefit their own candidates, Paton said the net effect could be that "better" Democrats will be elected to the City Council.
And though many city Democrats oppose the change, some are interested to see if the new rules shake up what they consider a broken system.
"I am tired of electing people, and we get no further along," said community activist and Democratic fundraiser Joan Kaye Cauthorn. "Is this the answer? I don't know. Should it have come from Phoenix? No. It should have come from Southern Arizona. But something has to change."
Nonpartisan elections will eliminate party primaries that require candidates to win support from a small bloc of party voters in off-year elections in order to gain office citywide.
All the candidates — no matter their registration — will be listed together on the ballot.
Democrat Si Schorr, a lawyer, said Tucsonans will benefit from candidates not having to win over a small slice of the most ideological voters in a primary.
"People who would not be able to get past a Republican or Democratic primary and independents can run for office," Schorr said.
Paton said the current council has "absolutely" been governing for its base, as shown by its unwillingness to cut spending, its holding of graffiti spray-painting classes for youth and its Rio Nuevo Downtown redevelopment program.
By treating Rio Nuevo like a city-spending program rather than an economic development tool, the council tried to buy off different constituencies — which helps it win Democratic primaries and then elections, he said.
Paton, who himself has been accused of playing to his party's conservatives, said all of the Democratic council actions that have endeared them to the party faithful could now become liabilities in the 2011 races.
The requirement that City Council members be elected by the voters in their wards rather than citywide has broader support from Democrats.
But there isn't consensus on the impact of that change.
Democrats have a distinct advantage in city elections, with their huge lead in voter registrations — 46 percent to just 25 percent for Republicans.
In theory, that would seem to give Democrats a lock on winning citywide, despite losing their ward. In practice, however, since 1979, three of the seven council members elected despite losing their ward have been Republicans.
The double-switch to ward-only and nonpartisan elections may mute any Republican gains from the new system, said Colin Zimmerman, public affairs director for the Tucson Association of Realtors.
He said partisan ward-only elections would help Republicans in Ward 2 and Ward 4 on the east side, which have the most Republicans in the city. But without the party labels, it may not help Republicans so much, he said.
Democratic consultant David Steele said the Republicans' real challenge is in winning independents. He doesn't see that changing.
And Tucsonans have already shown a willingness to ignore party ID. Republican Mayor Bob Walkup is now serving his third term in office. Tucson's longest serving mayor, Lew Murphy, was also a Republican.
Removing party labels will put a premium on name identification, meaning current council members could have an advantage, Zimmerman said.
Without party labels, candidates may need to spend more money to introduce themselves to voters, he said.
Bunny Davis, who has worked on campaigns for county and statewide Democratic candidates, said the party labels are for "lazy people."
"I think this has the potential to ultimately force people to think about issues rather than labels," said Davis.
But former Democratic Councilwoman Molly McKasson, who ran unsuccessfully for mayor against Walkup in 1999, doesn't see how nonpartisan races will improve local government.
"My concern is that at least parties get people interested," she said.
How this all plays out will depend, in part, on what electoral system the city adopts.
If Tucson models its nonpartisan elections after other Arizona cities, there will be a city primary in September. Candidates garnering more than 51 percent of the vote would win outright.
If no one gets a majority, the top two would advance to a November run-off.
The city could also mandate two candidates make it to the general election no matter what the results, or change the primary election to March or May.
Some say they're not sure if the election-law changes are the answer to their dissatisfaction with local government. But they're willing to see what happens.
"You've had Rio Nuevo since 1999, and we're sitting 10 years down the road, and we're not stronger than we were then," Democratic fundraiser Cauthorn said. "Something has to be done in our city government. We can't continue to flounder like this."
what-if scenarios from past
In 1993 Tucson voters soundly rejected an initiative to switch to ward-only elections.
If that City Charter amendment had been approved, residents would have seen a very different City Council over the years.
• 1997 — Republican Fred Ronstadt was elected by voters citywide, despite losing to Democrat Allison Hughes in his own midtown Ward 6.
• 1999 — Democrat Carol West won the Ward 2 seat over Republican Rick Grinnell, even though Grinnell got more votes within the ward.
• 2001 — Republican Kathleen Dunbar won Ward 3. But Democrat Paula Aboud got more votes from Ward 3 residents.
Republican Ronstadt was returned to office even though Democrat Gayle Hartmann was favored by Ward 6 voters.
