Tucson’s unusual system of electing its City Council members has been declared unconstitutional by a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which said the ward-only primary election and at-large general election violates the principle of one person, one vote.
The city could appeal the decision. It shouldn’t.
Instead, the City Council should refer three questions to the ballot, preferably in the May special election where a statewide education funding proposition will be before voters.
The questions:
1) Should voters elect council members by ward in both the primary and general elections?
2) Should voters elect council members at-large in both the primary and general elections?
3) Should City Council and mayoral elections be nonpartisan?
The 9th Circuit opinion, signed by two of three judges, argues that Tucson’s hybrid system has the effect of treating voters differently based on geography.
Voters in each ward select candidates in their ward-only primary, but the candidates compete in an at-large general election in which voters from the entire city cast ballots in every ward race.
The problem, according to the appeals court, is that voters must decide between some general-election candidates they had no role in choosing in the first place.
The hybrid process does result in general elections where council members who lose among voters in their own wards win anyway because they have more votes citywide.
On Nov. 3, Democrats Paul Cunningham and Shirley Scott both lost in their respective wards, but won across the city.
Tucsonans have voted before to uphold our hybrid system. The Star has supported it in the past, as well, although more recently our objection to a change was prompted because the state Legislature was trying to force the city to change the process.
We have also supported moving to nonpartisan elections, and we continue to think that is the best thing for good governance. Removing party identification could allow for more focus on the nuts and bolts of operating a city and the candidates’ qualifications. All other Arizona cities and towns hold nonpartisan elections.
The city’s financial situation is tight, and spending more time and money to continue to defend the hybrid system in court isn’t a good use of limited taxpayer dollars.
The Tucson City Council should refer the matter to the May ballot and let Tucsonans decide for themselves.
