by Clint Smith with assistance from John Webster

After running for Congress as an Independent here in the East Valley, I’ve stayed involved politically by joining good causes that help Arizona. I support public servants who focus on finding solutions over those who play partisan politics. Below are recommendations that reflect that approach. Judges are skipped, as I believe they should not be politicized — see Prop 137.

For brevity, this guide omits several uncontested and essentially uncontested races. This includes congressional and legislative districts which are so unbalanced in favor of one political party that it is virtually impossible for anyone else to win a seat. This is one reason to support Prop 140 and allow Independent candidates to compete on a level playing field.

Thanks to John Webster (a “McCain Republican”) for assisting with this guide and hosting it on Medium.

Partisan Races

FEDERAL

President: Kamala Harris / Tim Walz (D). Vice President Harris has demonstrated her commitment to “preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States.” This is not true of the Republican candidate. I join principled AZ Republicans like former Senator Jeff Flake and Mesa Mayor John Giles in supporting the Harris/Walz ticket.

US Senator: Ruben Gallego (D). The choice is between a solution-seeking moderate versus Arizona’s professional election denier, Kari Lake (R). Unsurprisingly, Lake declined to defend herself against a defamation lawsuit by Republican Stephen Richer because as he noted, her “lies were just that: lies.” Simply put, Gallego is qualified for the job while Lake is not.

US Rep in Congress

• Dist. 4: Greg Stanton (D). Incumbent. A commonsense representative who works for all Arizonans regardless of party. This is one reason why Stanton was endorsed by the Chandler Chamber of Commerce over Kelly Cooper (R), whose fealty was on full display when he proclaimed: “I was a Trumper from the beginning.”

STATE

State Senator

• Dist 9: Eva Burch (D). Incumbent. She is focused on reducing medical costs, and gained national attention for sharing how the Arizona 1862 abortion ban negatively impacts women with difficult pregnancies. Her opponent, Robert Scantlebury (R), is MAGA through and through.

• Dist 13: Sharon Winters (D). Teacher, author, and small business owner who is focused on the economy. She is running against a partisan incumbent, J.D. Mesnard (R), who authored Prop 136, which weakens citizen initiatives by allowing lawsuits before the initiative goes to the ballot.

State Representative (vote for 2)

• Dist. 9: Lorena Austin (D) / Kylie Barber (R). Austin is a passionate incumbent who works hard to represent the interests of marginalized communities. Barber is a fresh rational Republican, endorsed by the Greater Phoenix Chamber.

• Dist. 13: Brandy Reese (D) / Nicolas Gonzales (D). Reese is a passionate public servant, looking for “common-sense solutions” for education and water. Gonzales is a community planner and businessman originally from Chandler. Both would carry on Jennifer Pawlik’s mantle in LD13.

Corporation Commissioner (vote for 3)

• Lea Marquez Peterson (R) / Rene Lopez (R). Peterson is the incumbent Corporation Commission chair and Lopez is a former Chandler City councilmember. Recent revelations about Lopez’ MAGA leanings are giving us second thoughts so check out Ylenia Aguilar (D) or Jonathon Hill (D) as alternatives. Here is an AZ Republic overview of the race.

• Joshua Polacheck (D). Polacheck is a good choice of the three Democratic candidates, bringing a needed fresh perspective to the commission regarding renewable energy and consumer interests.

COUNTY

County Supervisor

• Dist. 1: Joel Navarro (D). Tempe Councilmember and Deputy Chief in the Tempe Fire Department, endorsed by incumbent, Jack Sellers (R), because he is “willing to stand up against lies and misinformation in defense of Maricopa County voters” over MAGA-supported Mark Stewart (R).

• Dist. 2: Thomas Galvin (R). Incumbent. A steadfast defender of Arizona’s elections, he is endorsed by several East Valley Chambers of Commerce, fire and police PACs, and most of the local mayors. His opponent is Julie Cieniawski (D) who is on the Scottsdale Governing School Board.

County Assessor: Eddie Cook (R). Incumbent. Cook, appointed in 2020, is a former businessman who served on the Gilbert Town Council. He is an outstanding public servant who has been efficient and competent. His opponent is Gregory Freeman (D), a commercial property manager.

County Attorney: Rachel Mitchell (R). Incumbent, appointed to fill the office and then elected in 2022, is the solid choice over practicing attorney Tamika Wooten (D). For a comparison, check out the PBS debate and AZ Republic interviews.

County Recorder: Tim Stringham (D). Smart, Navy veteran, and eager to protect Arizona’s elections, Stringham is in stark contrast to Justin Heap (R) of the MAGA-fied AZ Freedom Caucus who was fired in 2010 from the County Attorney’s office for “unsatisfactory completion” of the probationary period.

County Superintendent: Laura Metcalfe (D). Highly qualified Dr. Metcalfe (Ed.D) of the EVIT Governing Board is focused on fiscal issues over MAGA foot soldier Shelli Boggs (R), who declared schools a “battleground” between parents and teachers, and claims that the “administration is the biggest problem” in our schools.

County Sheriff: Tyler Kamp (D). Tough race with two flawed candidates but Jerry Sheridan(R) is Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s former Deputy, who openly flaunts his willingness to ignore judicial rulings and laws that he doesn’t like. The county paid $273M in legal fees and settlements due to that attitude during Arpaio’s tenure.

Justice, N Mesa. Kyle Jones (R). Incumbent and highly qualified. Appointed in 2019, Judge Jones is a Mesa native, with a long career of public service. The other candidate is Kiana Sears (D), a public policy professional.

NONPARTISAN BALLOT

Mesa USD №4 Mesa School Board

• Courtney Davis / Lacy Halm Chaffee / Josh Chilton. Davis is the solid incumbent who should remain. Chaffee is a mom, Mesa native, and active community leader, while Chilton is a dad, community outreach coordinator, and project manager. All three are endorsed by the Mesa Chamber of Commerce unlike the far-right candidates, Ed Steele and Sharon Benson.

Gilbert USD №41 Gilbert School Board

• Jesse Brainard / Rose Parker / Blake Robison. Three new faces will greatly impact the board and Brainard, Parker, and Robison are the best choices. The litmus test is unqualified public support of the current GPS budget override continuation, which is Question 1 on the ballot. Consequently, both Ann Stevens and Shana Murray are disqualified as evidenced by interviews with the AZ Republic and Gilbert Chamber of Commerce. Lack of support shows a lack of understanding of the issues facing public schools.

• Gilbert School Question 1, 2: YES, YES. Not a new tax —the budget override continuation from 2019 provides $35 million in critical funds. Question 2 is the sale of unneeded property, with the funds reinvested back into the district.

Central AZ Water Conservation District

• Atkins / Fisher / Goddard / Macre / Pinger. Four incumbents with newcomer Rudy Fisher, a former Pacific Grove California Councilman, now living in Scottsdale.

City of Mesa

• Mayor: Scott Smith. A solid choice, with lots of experience and a reputation as a visionary who gets things done. Mark Freeman is endorsed by MAGA election deniers, and that’s a red flag.

• Mesa City Council District 1: Ron Williams. Exactly the kind of servant leader we need on Council.

• Mesa Questions 1, 2, 3: YES. Continuing funding for needed services without raising taxes.

• Mesa Question 4: YES. The 2050 plan is smart, visionary and required by state law.

Town of Gilbert

• Council: Kenny Buckland. Former Gilbert Police officer who is dedicated to representing all citizens while Aaron Acurso is a firm no, connected to the lawsuit trying to bully the other candidates off the ballot and the only candidate not endorsed by the Gilbert Chamber of Commerce.

• Prop 497: YES. Not a new tax but rather an adjustment to the Town’s current expenditure limit. It allows Gilbert the flexibility to spend funds without state’s limitations.

• Prop 498: YES. Not a new tax but rather an exemption to exclude capital improvement projects from the expenditure limit. It also allows town of Gilbert the flexibility needed to spend funds without state’s limitations. A no vote for 497 and 498 leaves the current limits and may result in delayed repairs or funding through bonds, which adds potential debt.

PROPOSITIONS. These recommendations reflect a view that “government of the people, by the people, for the people” should keep power in the hands of the people as much as possible. The AZ Sec of State publicity pamphlet includes the exact verbiage of all ballot measures and the arguments for and against.

Prop 133. NO. This constitutional amendment would require partisan primary elections for partisan offices. It enshrines the current partisan primary system in the Arizona Constitution.

This is a highly partisan proposal by the state legislature to permanently & constitutionally disenfranchise Independent voters, the fastest growing voter block in the state.

Prop 134. NO. Changes the signature requirements to get a citizen initiative or constitutional amendment on Arizona’s ballot. Require groups to gather signatures at least 10% of the votes cast for governor in each of the state’s 30 legislative districts for citizen initiatives and 15% for constitutional amendments.

Another partisan proposal to kill initiatives by adding complicated signature requirements for citizen ballot measures and unfairly requires a higher proportion of rural signatures.

Prop 135. NO. This constitutional amendment would give state lawmakers the authority to end a state of emergency issued by a governor and would require their approval for an emergency declaration to last longer than 30 days.

Gives the legislature more power during an emergency rather than the executive branch which will be required to deal with it. A better solution is for the legislature and governor to negotiate any needed changes through compromise, not a constitutional amendment.

Prop 136. NO. This constitutional amendment would allow courts to hear constitutional challenges to citizen initiatives or constitutional amendments at least 100 days before Election Day, but not those referred by the legislature (like this one!)

Part of the legislature’s campaign to eliminate voter-initiated ballot measures by creating loopholes to stop them. Would force citizen groups to pay for legal fees even prior to passage of a measure.

Prop 137. YES. This constitutional amendment would change the state’s retention system for Arizona Supreme Court justices, Arizona Court of Appeals judges, and Superior Court judges. Instead of going up for election after a set term, judges would only face voters for a retention election for poor performance, a felony conviction, a conviction involving fraud or dishonesty, a personal bankruptcy, or a foreclosure. It also gives the Legislature new power over judges by inserting two legislators on the Judicial Review Commission and allows any lawmaker to file a complaint of malfeasance against a judge which the commission must investigate.

This recommendation aims to reduce the impact of politics on our judges. It is a tough decision as most agree that judges should be independent yet removable. Some see this change as endangering our independent judiciary and harming the merit selection process that AZ adopted by voter initiative in 1974. Others favor a legislative check on judicial power.

Prop 138. YES. This constitutional amendment would change the tip credit to 25% of the state’s minimum wage, meaning employers could pay tipped workers 25% less than Arizona’s hourly minimum wage. Employers could pay this subminimum wage as long as workers make at least $2 more than the state’s regular hourly minimum wage once tips are added in.

Common Sense Institute AZ endorses this proposition due to analysis that this change will support a higher level of employment in these industries, reduce restaurant prices, increase the number of restaurants, and bolster the state’s GDP.

Prop 139. Complex issue as this proposition secures the right to an abortion up to the point of viability in the state constitution and set limits on government’s role regarding a woman and her pregnancy.

No recommendation on how to vote as this is a deeply personal choice.

Prop 140. YES. This constitutional amendment puts independent candidates, who under current Arizona law must gather more than five times as many petition signatures to qualify for the ballot, on equal footing with candidates who belong to political parties. It ends partisan primaries in Arizona and allows for open primary elections, where two to eight candidates to advance to the general election, with the Legislature deciding how many candidates move forward for each office.

This is an opportunity to level the playing field in primary elections in AZ. Here are the “For” arguments. I wrote one of them.

Prop 311. NO. This measure would establish a state death benefit of $250,000 for the surviving spouse or children of first responders, members of the Arizona National Guard and DOC correctional officers who are killed in the line of duty during a criminal act.

Instead of a proposition, the legislature should work with the governor to address compensation for public servants. Legislators can fund the death benefit in the state budget instead of a fee on convictions.

Prop 312. NO. This permits property owners to apply for a refund to reimburse expenses incurred to mitigate public nuisances on the property related to a city, town or county’s refusal to enforce ordinances related to homelessness populations.

This bad idea takes funds from towns and cities who already are struggling to deal with homelessness. In the end, this hurts efforts to address homelessness, while offering tax breaks to corporations and businesses.

Prop 313. NO. This would mandate a sentence of life without parole for people convicted of child sex trafficking.

Arizona already has severe sentences for sex trafficking and that judges should have discretion to determine sentences based on individual circumstances. Experts say victims of sex trafficking often find themselves charged with crimes, too, after being forced to commit them by an abuser.

Prop 314. NO. Makes crossing the border illegally a state crime, thus allowing local and state law enforcement to arrest those suspected of doing so. Would criminalize providing false documents for benefits/jobs, and require agencies to check someone’s legal status before giving them those public benefits. Also stiffen penalties for some fentanyl sales cases.

Puts AZ law enforcement on the hot seat to act as Border Patrol agents but without funding, training, and legal protection. The measure would likely lead to racial profiling, have a costly impact on local law enforcement, and harm employment.

Prop 315. NO. would require legislation to enact a proposed rule if the Office of Economic Opportunity determines it would increase regulatory costs by more than $100,000 within five years. If the Legislature does not pass legislation, the agency would be required to terminate the proposed rule.

Hinders ability of the state government to regulate spending. A better solution is for the legislature and governor to negotiate any needed changes through compromise, not a proposition proposed by the legislature.

Prop 479. YES. Continues the half-cent sales tax already in place for transportation and funds needed infrastructure improvements. There should be no opposition to this proposition.

Prop 486. YES. Provides allowance for the AZ Community College system to exceed an archaic spending cap setup 45 years ago. There is no opposition to this proposition.