Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.

Arizona Proposition 127, Renewable Energy Standards Initiative (2018)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Arizona Proposition 127
Flag of Arizona.png
Election date
November 6, 2018
Topic
Energy
Status
Defeatedd Defeated
Type
Constitutional amendment		Origin
Citizens

Arizona Proposition 127, the Renewable Energy Standards Initiative, was on the ballot in Arizona as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018.[1] The measure was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported this constitutional amendment to require electric utilities in Arizona to acquire a certain percentage of electricity from renewable resources each year, with the percentage increasing annually from 12 percent in 2020 to 50 percent in 2030.
A "no" vote opposed this constitutional amendment to require electric utilities in Arizona to acquire a certain percentage of electricity from renewable resources, thereby leaving in place the state's existing renewable energy requirements of 15 percent by 2025.

Election results

Arizona Proposition 127

Result Votes Percentage
Yes 723,138 31.40%

Defeated No

1,580,101 68.60%
Results are officially certified.
Source

Overview

What would Proposition 127 have changed about energy policy in Arizona?

Proposition 127 would have increased the state's renewable portfolio standards (RPS). An RPS is a mandate that electric utilities acquire a minimum amount of electricity from renewable energy sources. As of 2018, Arizona's RPS was 15 percent by 2025. Proposition 127 would have increased the RPS each year until reaching 50 percent in 2030. The initiative would have defined renewable energy to include sources such as solar, wind, biomass, certain hydropower, geothermal, and landfill gas energies.[1]

How would Proposition 127 have been enforced?

Proposition 127 would have tasked the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) with enforcing the initiative’s standards.[1] As of 2018, the ACC was an elected, five-member executive commission that oversees public utilities in the state. As of 2018, Republicans had been elected to the commission's five positions. In November 2018, voters elected candidates to two positions of the ACC. Due to House Bill 2005, which the Arizona State Legislature passed in March 2018, the ACC would have been required to penalize violations of Proposition 127 as civil penalties, meaning electric utilities that violate the standard would be fined between $100 to $5,000. Prior to enacting HB 2005, statute did not set penalties for violations of energy standards by electric utilities and the ACC would have decided how to address violations.[2][3] Sandy Bahr, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, argued that the goal of HB 2005 was to make violating the initiative low-risk to electric utilities. Rod Ross, a lobbyist for the electric utility Arizona Public Service, said HB 2005 protected residents from a proposition by an out-of-state donor.[4]

Who was behind the campaigns surrounding Proposition 127?

NextGen Climate Action took actions to increase renewable portfolio standards (RPS) in both Nevada and Arizona in 2018, financing the campaigns behind Arizona Proposition 127 and Nevada Question 6. Both ballot initiatives would require utilities to generate or acquire 50 percent of their electrical power from renewable resources by 2030, thus putting them on par with neighboring California's RPS. Tom Steyer, the founder of NextGen Climate Action, said, "It turns out Nevada is the Saudi Arabia of solar energy in the United States, and Arizona is number two."[5]

In Arizona, the NextGen-backed campaign was called Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona. The campaign had raised $24.13 million, with 95 percent of funds coming from NextGen Climate Action.[6]

Pinnacle West Capital Corporation funded one of the political action committees to oppose Proposition 127, which was called Arizonans for Affordable Electricity. Pinnacle West was the parent firm of Arizona Public Service (APS), the state’s largest electric retail provider.[7] The Grand Canyon State Electric Coop Association, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, and Mohave Electric Cooperative were funding a second committee called Vote No Arizona. A third PAC–Southern Arizonans for Responsible Energy–was funded by UniSource Energy Corporation, the parent firm of Tucson Electric Power (TEP). Together, the committees had raised $41.09 million to oppose Proposition 127.[6]

Between the support and opposition campaigns, more than $65.22 million was raised surrounding Arizona Proposition 127.[6] The total contributions exceed those raised for or against Proposition 202 (2002), making Proposition 127 the most expensive in the state's history.[8][9]

What other ballot measures were related to energy policies in 2018?

In 2018, voters in Arizona, Nevada, and Washington decided ballot initiatives designed to reduce the use of fossil fuels and increase the use of renewable resources. In Arizona and Nevada, the environmental organization NextGen Climate Action was financing ballot initiatives, Arizona Proposition 127 and Nevada Question 6, to require electric utilities to acquire 50 percent of their power from renewable sources. Arizona Proposition 127 was defeated, and Nevada Question 6 was approved, which means it goes on to the 2020 ballot where it must be approved again. In Washington, electors rejected Initiative 1631, which would have enacted a fee on carbon emissions from power plants, refineries, and other specified emitters.[10]

Voters in Nevada considered a ballot initiative, Question 3, to eliminate electricity monopolies and require a competitive energy market. Question 3 was rejected. Although Question 3 would not have directly affected the use of renewable resources in Nevada, supporters and opponents of the initiative campaigned on the issue of Question 3's effect on the use of renewable resources, contending that deregulation would either increase or decrease the use of renewable resources.[11]

Below are the most notable energy-related measures of 2018. For a full list, click here.

Measure Description Status
Arizona Proposition 127 Requiring electric utilities in Arizona to acquire 50 percent of electricity from renewable resources by 2020
Defeatedd
Nevada Question 3 Requiring “an open, competitive retail electric energy market” and prohibiting state-sanctioned electrical-generation monopolies
Defeatedd
Nevada Question 6 Requiring electric utilities to acquire 50 percent of their electricity from renewable resources by 2030.
Approveda
Washington Initiative 1631 Enacting a carbon emissions fee with revenue going to fund environmental programs and projects
Defeatedd


Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:[12]

“

Amending Article XV of the Constitution of Arizona to Require Electricity Providers to Generate at Least 50% of Their Annual Sales of Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources.

The constitutional amendment would replace Arizona’s current plan for increasing renewable energy use by imposing a new mandate requiring nongovernmental electric utilities to increase the portion of their retail energy sales generated from certain types of renewable energy resources to 50% by 2030.[13]

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary was as follows:[12]

“

A “YES” vote will replace Arizona’s current plan for transitioning nongovernmental electric utilities to renewable energy with a constitutional mandate that, irrespective of cost to consumers, 50% of the retail energy sales of these utilities come from certain types of renewable energy by 2030 (neither pre-1997 hydropower nor any nuclear generation counts for this percentage); the current plan increases use of the same types of renewable energy from 8% this year to 15% in 2025. A “YES” vote also will mandate that these utilities increase their use of distributed renewable energy (energy locally generated and distributed from customers’ premises) to 10% by 2030; will require the new mandates be met by obtaining renewable energy credits, which may be created through renewable energy production or purchased from others who own existing renewable energy credits; and will require the Arizona Corporation Commission to enact implementing regulations.

A “NO” vote will preserve the existing rules that govern the required annual percentage of retail sales of renewable energy by nongovernmental electric utilities.[13]

”

Full text

The full text of the measure is available here.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2018
Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The attorney general wrote the ballot language for this measure.


The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 26, and the FRE is -18. The word count for the ballot title is 41, and the estimated reading time is 10 seconds. The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 29, and the FRE is -17. The word count for the ballot summary is 161, and the estimated reading time is 42 seconds.

In 2018, for the 167 statewide measures on the ballot, the average ballot title or question was written at a level appropriate for those with between 19 and 20 years of U.S. formal education (graduate school-level of education), according to the FKGL formula. Read Ballotpedia's entire 2018 ballot language readability report here.

Support

CleanEnergyForAHealthyArizona2018Logo.png

Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona led the campaign in support of Proposition 127.[14]

Supporters

Officials

Parties

Organizations

Individuals

  • Tom Steyer, investor and donor[17]
  • Will Humble, former director, Arizona Department of Health Services, 2009-2015[15]
  • Sue Gerard, former director, Arizona Department of Health Services, 2006-2008[15]
  • Jack Dillenberg, former director, Arizona Department of Health Services, 1993-1997[15]

Arguments

  • Tom Steyer, founder of NextGen Climcate Action, said, "It actually will lead to lower costs and save a lot of money for consumers. It leads to clean air and a lot better health outcomes for Arizonans, and it should create literally tens of thousands of jobs in the state of Arizona."[17]
  • Felecia Rotellini, chairperson of the Arizona Democratic Party, said, "The reasons the Democratic Party supports Proposition 127 are simple: (1) The price of renewable energy continues to drop every day, and is already competitive with coal and gas. (2) But unlike coal and gas, this new clean energy does not pollute our air and water. (3) Cleaner air and water means healthier families - and less respiratory illnesses like asthma. (4) Arizona is the sunniest state in the U.S. and we should be its solar capital. (5) Renewable energy jobs are growing much faster than the economy as a whole, and Arizona cannot afford to fall behind."[15]
  • Hazel Chandler, chairperson of the Candidates Climate Project for Elders Climate Action, stated, "The future belongs to the next generation of children, and as elders, we have an obligation to leave them a healthy environment including clean air and water. The opponents of this proposition are only concerned about protecting their profits — literally hundreds of millions of dollars earned off burning dirty fossil fuels. We have a simple choice. Start transitioning to the clean energy of the future, or continue to use the dirty energy of the past."[15]

Opposition

ArizonaNoOn127Logo2018.png

Arizonans for Affordable Electricity led the campaign in opposition to Proposition 127.[18]

Opponents

Officials

Parties

  • Gila County Republican Committee[19]
  • Pima County Republican Party[15]

Organizations

Utilitites

  • Pinnacle West Capital Corporation[21]
  • Tucson Electric Power Co.[22]
  • Salt River Project[23]
  • Mohave Electric Cooperative[24]
  • Grand Canyon Electric Cooperative Association[25]

Arguments

  • Matthew Benson, spokesperson for Arizonans for Affordable Electricity, said, "Everyone supports renewable energy. The question is whether we are going to have an Arizona plan that is created and implemented by Arizona leaders and officials, or whether we're going to have a plan crammed down our throats by a political activist from California."[17]
  • Rep. Cesar Chavez (D-29) stated, "It’s notable that this initiative is anything but an Arizona product. This proposal is being forced on our voters by somebody who has no one’s interests in mind but his own. He and his political strategists have created this initiative as a mirror image of a regulation already adopted in their home state. But I don’t believe a California plan is necessarily the right fit for Arizona."[15]
  • Glenn Hamer, CEO of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, stated, "If passed, the measure would dramatically harm Arizona’s competitiveness, put our utilities’ reliable delivery of power at risk, and would send the wrong message about Arizona’s economic development environment. If this mandate were to be enshrined in the state constitution, it would mean dramatically higher energy prices – estimates are that corporate and industrial rates would rise over 100 percent, and residential ratepayers would see an average annual increase of $1,250 – which would create a significant drag on the overall economy and reduce the state’s competitive standing."[15]


Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Arizona ballot measures

Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona, a political action committee, was registered to support Proposition 127. The PAC had raised $24.13 million and expended $24.16 million (expenditures exceeded contributions due to loans). NextGen Climate Action provided 95 percent of the committee's funds.

Arizonans For Affordable Electricity, Vote No Arizona, and Southern Arizonans for Responsible Energy were registered to oppose Proposition 127. The PACs raised $41.09 million, with 97 percent of total funds from Pinnacle West Capital Corporation. The PACs expended $38.95 million.[6]

Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Support $23,902,129.13 $224,210.39 $24,126,339.52 $23,931,082.65 $24,155,293.04
Oppose $40,777,763.01 $317,148.24 $41,094,911.25 $38,633,754.40 $38,950,902.64
Total $64,679,892.14 $541,358.63 $65,221,250.77 $62,564,837.05 $63,106,195.68

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the measure.[6]

Committees in support of Proposition 127
Committee Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona $23,902,129.13 $224,210.39 $24,126,339.52 $23,931,082.65 $24,155,293.04
Total $23,902,129.13 $224,210.39 $24,126,339.52 $23,931,082.65 $24,155,293.04

Donors

The following were the top donors who contributed to the support committee:[6]

Donor Cash In-kind Total
NextGen Climate Action $22,606,001.01 $207,346.67 $22,813,347.68
League of Conservation Voters $1,285,000.00 $3,748.54 $1,288,748.54
Sierra Club $0.00 $12,878.44 $12,878.44

Opposition

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in opposition to the initiative.[6]

Committees in opposition to Proposition 127
Committee Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Arizonans For Affordable Electricity $39,675,000.00 $317,148.24 $39,992,148.24 $37,533,784.70 $37,850,932.94
Vote No Arizona $917,599.44 $0.00 $917,599.44 $914,841.13 $914,841.13
Southern Arizonans for Responsible Energy $185,163.57 $0.00 $185,163.57 $185,128.57 $185,128.57
Total $40,777,763.01 $317,148.24 $41,094,911.25 $38,633,754.40 $38,950,902.64

Donors

The following were the top five donors who contributed to the opposition committees:[6]

Donor Cash In-kind Total
Pinnacle West Capital Corporation $39,675,000.00 $317,148.24 $39,992,148.24
Grand Canyon State Electric Coop Association, Inc. $729,416.00 0.00 $729,416.00
UniSource Energy Corporation $177,700.00 0.00 $177,700.00
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association $120,000.00 0.00 $120,000.00
Salt River Project $50,000.00 0.00 $50,000.00

Reporting dates

In Arizona, ballot measure committees filed a total of six campaign finance reports in 2018. The filing dates for reports were as follows:[26]

Polls

See also: 2018 ballot measure polls
Arizona Proposition 127, Renewable Energy Standards Initiative
Poll Support OpposeUndecidedMargin of errorSample size
Suffolk University
9/27/2018 - 9/30/2018		 33.6%46.6%19.8%+/-4.4500
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Background

House Bill 2005

House Bill 2005 (HB 2005) was designed to make violations of constitutional provisions related to energy standards, such as Proposition 127, a civil penalty, meaning electric utilities that violate the standard would be fined between $100 to $5,000.[2][27] Prior to enacting HB 2005, statute did not address violations of energy standards by electric utilities. On March 21, 2018, the Arizona State Senate passed the bill 16-12. On March 22, 2018, the Arizona House of Representatives approved the bill 34-24.[2] Gov. Doug Ducey (R) signed the bill on March 23, 2018.[28]

Sandy Bahr, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, argued that the goal of HB 2005 was to make violating the initiative low-risk to electric utilities. She said, "Everyone knows that if the cost of noncompliance is cheaper than the cost of compliance, entities will serve their shareholders, not consumers, and take the low road and pay the fines." Rod Ross, a lobbyist for the state's largest electric utility Arizona Public Service, said, "We feel like its important to protect the people of this state from an out-of-state initiative funded by a California billionaire that is attempting to raise our state's and our residents' energy prices, which is exactly what this initiative will do."[4]

Renewable energy standards

As of 2018, 29 states had renewable portfolio standards (RPS). An RPS is a mandate to electric utilities to generate a minimum amount of electricity from eligible renewable energy sources. California and Hawaii had the highest future requirement, as of 2018, at 100 percent by 2045. The following list provides details on the different state RPS laws:[29]

State Amount Year
Arizona 15% 2025
California 100% 2045
Colorado 30% (IOUs) or 10%-20% (municipalities and co-ops) 2020
Connecticut 27% 2020
Delaware 25% 2025-2026
Hawaii 100% 2045
Illinois 25% 2025-2026
Iowa 105 MW (IOUs) N/A
Maine 40% 2017
Maryland 20% 2022
Massachusetts 15%+1% each year thereafter (Class I) and 5.5% (Class II) 2020
Michigan 15% 2021
Minnesota 26.5% (IOUs) and 25% (other utilitites) 2025
Missouri 15% (IOUs) 2021
Montana 15% 2015
Nevada 25% 2025
New Hampshire 24.8% 2025
New Jersey 24.5% 2020
New Mexico 20% (IOUs) and 10% (co-ops) 2020
New York 50% 2030
North Carolina 12.5% (IOUs) and 10% (municipalities and co-ops) 2021 (IOUs) and 2018 (municipalities and co-ops)
Ohio 25% 2026
Oregon 50% (utilities with 3 percent or more of the state’s load) and 10% (utilities with 1.5–3 percent of the state's load) and 5% (utilities with less than 1.5% of the state’s load) 2040 (utilities with 3% or more of the state’s load) and 2025 (utilities with 3% or less of the state's load)
Texas 10,000 MW 2025
Pennsylvania 18% 2020-2021
Vermont 75% 2032
Washington 15% 2020
Wisconsin 10% 2015

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Arizona

The state process

In Arizona, the number of signatures required to qualify an initiated constitutional amendment for the ballot is equal to 15 percent of votes cast for governor in the most recent gubernatorial election. Petitions can be circulated for up to 24 months. Signature petitions must be submitted four months prior to the election at which the measure is to appear.

The requirements to get initiated constitutional amendments certified for the 2018 ballot:

If the secretary of state certifies that enough valid signatures were submitted, the initiative is put on the next general election ballot. The secretary of state verifies the signatures through a random sampling of 5 percent of submitted signatures working in collaboration with county recorders. If the random sampling indicates that valid signatures equal to between 95 percent and 105 percent of the required number were submitted, a full check of all signatures is required. If the random sampling shows fewer signatures, the petition fails. If the random sampling shows more, the initiative is certified for the ballot.

Details about the initiative

The ballot initiative was filed with the secretary of state on February 20, 2018.[1] Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona reported filing 480,464 signatures on July 5, 2018. At least 225,963 (47.03 percent) of the filed signatures needed to be valid for the initiative to make the ballot. On August 15, 2018, the secretary of state reported that enough signatures had been validated to certify this initiative for the November 2018 election.

Cost of signature collection:
Sponsors of the measure hired FieldWorks, LLC to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $5,843,652.00 was spent to collect the 225,963 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $25.86.

Leach v. Reagan

  
Lawsuit overview
Issue: Did Proposition 127 violate the state's strict compliance standard for signature gathering and petition language?
Court: Maricopa County Superior Court and Arizona Supreme Court
Ruling: Proposition 127 did not violate the state's strict compliance standard for signature gathering and petition language.
Plaintiff(s): Rep. Vince Leach (R-11), Rep. John Kavanagh (R-23), Mesa Mayor John Giles, and five other individualsDefendant(s): Secretary of State Michele Reagan (R) and local election boards
Plaintiff argument:
Petitioners failed to strictly follow state laws by not disclosing the actual financial backer of the initiative on petitions, firing signature gatherers based on quotas, submitting deficient petition sheets, providing a misleading title and summary on petitions		Defendant argument:
The petitioners sufficiently complied with state laws and petitions included enough valid signatures to qualify the initiative for the ballot

  Source: Daily Miner

On July 19, 2018, eight individuals filed litigation against Secretary of State Michele Reagan (R) and local election boards in the Maricopa County Superior Court, stating that the campaign behind the initiative—Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona—violated the state's strict compliance standard for signature gathering. Plaintiffs included Rep. Vince Leach (R-11), Rep. John Kavanagh (R-23), and Mesa Mayor John Giles. The filing said the campaign made the following violations:[30]

  • failed to disclose the actual financial backer and administrative director of the initiative on petitions;
  • terminated signature gatherers for not meeting signature quotas;
  • submitted petition sheets that included deficiencies, including 195,339 signatures of people not registered to vote;
  • gave the ballot initiative a misleading title; and
  • gave the ballot initiative a misleading summary.

Matt Benson, a spokesperson for the opposition PAC Arizonans for Affordable Energy, said, "There are a laundry list of issues. But the point is, even all of those issues aside, obvious blatant deficiencies account for more than 300,000 signatures and push them well below the minimum threshold." Rodd McLeod, a spokesperson for Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona, responded to the litigation, saying, "We are confident we have more valid signatures than the law requires and regard this lawsuit as foolish." He called the lawsuit "a desperate attempt to deny choice on what kind of energy we want to have in the future."[31]

On July 31, 2018, Judge Daniel Kiley decided that the initiative could not be removed from the ballot due to a failure to disclose financial backers on petitions.[32] On August 27, 2018, Kiley rejected the other arguments for removing Proposition 127 from the ballot. Petitioners appealed to the case to the Arizona Supreme Court, which also sided with defendants on August 29, 2018.[33]

Related measures

Energy measures on the ballot in 2018
StateMeasures
WashingtonWashington Advisory Vote 19, Non-Binding Question on Oil Spill Tax Repeal Defeatedd
NevadaNevada Question 6: Renewable Energy Standards Initiative Approveda
NevadaNevada Question 3: Changes to Energy Market and Prohibit State-Sanctioned Electric-Generation Monopolies Defeatedd
WashingtonWashington Initiative 1631, Carbon Emissions Fee Measure Defeatedd
CaliforniaCalifornia Proposition 70: Vote Requirement to Use Cap-and-Trade Revenue Amendment Defeatedd

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Arizona

Poll times

In Arizona, all polling places are open from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. local time. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.[34][35]

Registration requirements

Check your voter registration status here.

To vote in Arizona, one must be a citizen of the United States and a resident of an Arizona county. A voter must be 18 years or older on or before Election Day. Arizona also requires voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship to vote for state and local elections[36]

To be eligible to vote in an election one must register at least 29 days prior to the election. Individuals can register online, in person at the county recorder's office, or by mail.[37]

Automatic registration

Arizona does not practice automatic voter registration.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

Arizona has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

Arizona does not allow same-day voter registration.

Residency requirements

Arizona law requires 29 days of residency in the state before a person may vote.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

Arizona requires voters to submit proof of citizenship with their voter registration application to vote in state and local elections. According to the Arizona Secretary of State's website: "A registrant who attests to being a citizen but fails to provide proof of citizenship and whose citizenship is not otherwise verified will be eligible to vote only in federal elections (known as being a 'federal only' voter)."[36] Accepted proof of citizenship include:[36]

  • An Arizona Driver's License/Identification Number
  • Indian Census Number, Bureau of Indian Affairs Card Number, Tribal Treaty Card Number, or Tribal Enrollment Number
  • A photocopy of U.S. naturalization documents
  • A photocopy of a birth certificate and supporting legal documentation (i.e., marriage certificate) if the name on the birth certificate is not the same as your current legal name.
  • A photocopy of a U.S. passport.
  • A photocopy of a Tribal Certificate of Indian Blood or Bureau of Indian Affairs Affidavit of Birth.

On August 22, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an emergency order partially granting the Republican National Committee and Arizona Republicans' request to enforce a 2022 law related to proof of citizenship requirements. The court allowed the enforcement of the provision requiring the state to reject state voter registration forms submitted without proof of citizenship. Previously, a person who submitted a state voter registration form without proof of citizenship could still be a federal only voter. After the court's ruling, a person unable to provide proof of citizenship would need to submit a federal voter registration form in order to vote in federal elections.[38][39][40][41] Read more about legal challenges to this law here.

All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment.[42] Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters.

Verifying your registration

The Arizona Voter Information Portal, run by the Arizona Secretary of State's office, allows residents to check their voter registration status online.

Voter ID requirements

Arizona requires voters to present photo identification or two forms of non-photo identification while voting.[43][44]

The following were accepted forms of identification as of July 2024: Click here for the Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission's page on accepted ID to ensure you have the most current information.

Voters can present one of the following forms of ID that contain the voter’s photograph, name, and address:

  • Arizona driver’s license
  • U.S. federal, state, or local government-issued ID, issued with printed name and address
  • Arizona ID card
  • Tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal ID

If a voter does not have one of the above forms of ID, the voter can present two of the following forms of ID that contain the voter’s name and address:

  • Utility bill in the voter's name
  • Bank or credit union statement that is dated within 90 days of the date of the election
  • Valid Arizona vehicle registration
  • Arizona vehicle insurance card
  • Indian census card
  • Property tax statement
  • Recorder's certificate or voter registration card
  • Tribal enrollment card or other tribal ID
  • Valid U.S. federal, state, or local government-issued ID with a printed name and address or
  • Any mailing in the voter's name that is labeled "official election material"  

Additionally, if a voter presents photo ID that does not list an address within the precinct in which he or she wants to cast a vote, that person may present the photo ID with one non-photo identification material from the second list above. The identification material should include the voter’s address.

See also

External links

Information

Support

Opposition

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Arizona Secretary of State, "Initiative," accessed February 21, 2018
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Arizona State Legislature, "House Bill 2005," accessed March 22, 2018
  3. ↑ Tucson.com, "Ducey signs law allowing utilities to ignore Arizona's clean energy ballot plan," March 23, 2018
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Payson Roundup, "State senate moves to negate alternative energy initiative," March 15, 2018
  5. ↑ The Nevada Independent, "Megadonor Tom Steyer gets behind Nevada renewable energy ballot measure, criticizes DREAM Act negotiations," February 12, 2018
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 Arizona Secretary of State, "Campaign Finance Committee Search," accessed April 2, 2018
  7. ↑ Tennessean, "APS spends big to keep clean-energy measure off ballot – but what was paid for isn't clear," July 17, 2018
  8. ↑ Tucson.com, "Proposition 127 becomes the most expensive ballot fight in Arizona history," October 17, 2018
  9. ↑ Tucson.com, "Millions pumped into fight for, against Arizona's renewable energy proposition," October 30, 2018
  10. ↑ The Atlantic, "Will Washington State Voters Make History on Climate Change?" August 15, 2018
  11. ↑ Nevada Current, "What Question 3 and Question 6 say about renewable energy," August 23, 2018
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 Arizona Secretary of State, "Proposition 127 - Sample Ballot," accessed September 11, 2018
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  14. ↑ Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona, "Homepage," accessed February 21, 2018
  15. ↑ 15.00 15.01 15.02 15.03 15.04 15.05 15.06 15.07 15.08 15.09 15.10 15.11 15.12 15.13 15.14 15.15 15.16 15.17 15.18 15.19 15.20 15.21 15.22 15.23 15.24 15.25 15.26 15.27 15.28 15.29 15.30 15.31 15.32 15.33 15.34 15.35 15.36 15.37 15.38 15.39 15.40 15.41 15.42 15.43 15.44 15.45 Arizona Secretary of State, "2018 Voter Guide," accessed September 30, 2018
  16. ↑ The Arizona Republic, "Ballot initiative aims to increase Arizona's use of renewable energy," February 11, 2018
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 17.2 Los Angeles Times, "California billionaire roils Arizona utilities with push for renewable energy," July 4, 2018
  18. ↑ Arizonans for Affordable Electricity, "Homepage," accessed August 6, 2018
  19. ↑ Payson Roundup, "Gila County Republican Committee Opposes Four Proposed Propositions," September 12, 2018
  20. ↑ Tucson.com, "Arizona Small Business Association (ASBA) Opposes Prop 127," October 30, 2018
  21. ↑ Tucson.com, "Arizona utility puts $11M in election races, mostly to defeat renewable energy measure," July 18, 2018
  22. ↑ Tucson.com, "TEP to join opposition to Arizona clean-energy initiative," September 9, 2018
  23. ↑ The Arizona Republic, "SRP officials hotly contest clean-energy ballot measure," September 10, 2018
  24. ↑ Mohave Daily News, "MEC expresses opposition to Prop 127," September 25, 2018
  25. ↑ Mohave Daily News, "Cooperatives look to short-circuit Proposition 127," September 27, 2018
  26. ↑ Arizona Secretary of State, "Elections Calendar & Upcoming Events," accessed December 6, 2017
  27. ↑ KJZZ, "Proposed Law Could Let Arizona Utilities Easily Skirt Renewable Energy Requirements," March 21, 2018
  28. ↑ U.S. News, "The Latest: Gov. Ducey Signs Bill to Buck Clean Energy Plan," March 23, 2018
  29. ↑ NCSL, "State Renewable Portfolio Standards and Goals," July 20, 2018
  30. ↑ Maricopa County Superior Court, "Leach v. Reagan," July 19, 2018
  31. ↑ The Daily Courier, "APS parent company looking to block voters from imposing renewable energy mandates," July 24, 2018
  32. ↑ Arizona Daily Sun, "Judge declines to block renewable energy vote," July 31, 2018
  33. ↑ Daily Miner, "Court approves clean energy initiative for ballot," August 31, 2018
  34. ↑ Arizona Revised Statutes, "Title 16, Section 565," accessed July 18, 2024
  35. ↑ Arizona generally observes Mountain Standard Time; however, the Navajo Nation observes daylight saving time. Because of this, Mountain Daylight Time is sometimes observed in Arizona.
  36. ↑ 36.0 36.1 36.2 Arizona Secretary of State, "Voters," accessed July 18, 2024
  37. ↑ Arizona Secretary of State, "Arizona Voter Registration Instructions," accessed July 18, 2024
  38. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "No. 24A164," accessed August 22, 2024
  39. ↑ The Washington Post, "Supreme Court allows Arizona voter-registration law requiring proof of citizenship," August 22, 2024
  40. ↑ Bloomberg Law, "Supreme Court Partly Restores Voter Proof-of-Citizenship Law ," August 22, 2024
  41. ↑ Reuters, "US Supreme Court partly revives Arizona's proof of citizenship voter law," August 22, 2024
  42. ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
  43. ↑ ArizonaElections.gov, "What ID Do I Need to Vote Quiz," accessed March 14, 2023
  44. ↑ Arizona State Legislature, “Arizona Revised Statutes 16-579,” accessed July 19, 2024
v • e
2018 ballot measures
I&R States
 • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Florida • Idaho • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Mexico • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • South Dakota • Utah • Washington
Non I&R States
Political topics
 • Abortion‎ • Administration of government‎ • Bond issues‎ • Business regulation‎ • Campaign finance‎ • Civil and criminal trials‎ • Civil rights‎ • Civil service‎ • Constitutional conventions‎ • Constitutional language‎ • County and municipal governance‎ • Definition of a corporation‎ • Direct democracy measures‎ • Education‎ • Elections and campaigns‎ • Energy‎ • Environment‎ • Federal constitutional issues‎ • Forests and parks‎ • Gambling‎ • Government accountability‎ • Healthcare‎ • Housing‎ • Hunting and fishing‎ • Labor and unions‎ • Law enforcement‎ • LGBT issues‎ • Marijuana‎ • Natural resources‎ • Pension‎ • Property‎ • Redistricting measures‎ • State and local government budgets, spending and finance‎ • State executive official measures‎ • State judiciary‎ • State legislatures measures‎ • Statehood‎ • Suffrage‎ • Supermajority requirements‎ • Taxes‎ • Term limits‎ • Tobacco‎ • Tort law‎ • Transportation‎ • Veterans‎ • Water‎ • Welfare‎
Other
Flag of Arizona
v • e
State of Arizona
Phoenix (capital)
Elections

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy

Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Arizona_Proposition_127,_Renewable_Energy_Standards_Initiative_(2018)&oldid=10224152"