The Town has filed an answering brief to the appeal. The entire brief on Transparent Payson’s appeal is below in .pdf. The Town maintains that the Voter Protection Act does not apply to general-law towns.

Based on the totality of the record and Arizona law, it is established that the VPA does not apply to general law towns.  Payson did not have authority to refer administrative matters to the voting public, and 100% of the items that could be the subject of Propositions 401 and 402 were factually found to be administrative.  As said many times, words matter, and Propositions 401 and 402, as written, are unenforceable, invalid, of no legal force and effect, and the Payson Town Council was within their legal authority to repeal them through Ordinances 953 and 954 on April 12, 2023.

The Town maintains that all potential acts under 401 and 402 are administrative, not legislative.  That same argument was used in Rose vs. Town of Payson.  Administrative vs. legislative questions were somewhat addressed during the Rose Superior Court Hearing.   In Rose, it appeared that the Chambers Court found that Resolution 3359, the bond resolution, was a legislative issue.  In doing so, many questions were resolved.  As a legislative issue, but for the contrived “emergency clause,” the matter would have been subject to a referendum.

The Court approved a Notice of Withdrawal of Cross-Appeal in Transparent Payson’s appeal.

The above-entitled cross-appeal is DISMISSED and the caption shall be amended accordingly. Judges Vásquez and Kelly concurring. DATED: November 05, 2024

In a nutshell, that means the Town’s argument on standing against Plaintiffs is withdrawn.  As you will recall, the Answer and Counterclaim from the Town maintained that Transparent Payson had no standing as the group was referenced by the Town as Transparent Payson II.  That question was never really in play as Plaintiff Jeffrey Aal has standing.

Payson’s Answer and Counterclaim in 2023 also maintained insufficient votes as an affirmative defense.  The defense was not discussed in detail.  It seems counter to the election process.  An election is certified and implemented at various levels.  The affirmative defense appeared to imply that the election was not valid.  It appears that the question will never be answered.

The next step in the Transparent Payson Appeal is a reply to the brief to be filed by Transparent Payson. 

We will keep you updated on the process.

Yesterday was election day. Congratulations to the victors in the races below.

QUESTION Payson Unified School District #10

Board Member Green Valley Water Sanitary District (Vote for three.)

Board Member Payson Unified School District #10 (Vote for three.)

Town of Payson Answering Brief