A potential recount of ballots that will give ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥â€™s mayor and council the biggest boost in pay is back on the table.
After issuing a statement last week that said a recount of the voters in Proposition 413 were not required by state law, the council on Tuesday said they will let state election officials decide whether a recount is required by law.
Proposition 413 passed by 289 votes, released Friday show.
A total of 96,799 votes were cast in the Nov. 7 election, the city said.
This falls within the margins that “trigger†recounts, as set by state statutes. The law says a recount is required for any election with a margin of less than 1/2 of 1% (or any margin less than 0.5%).
People are also reading…
An automatic recount that was seemingly triggered was originally scheduled to last a few weeks, according to city manager Michael Ortega who informed city council of the timeline at their meeting last week.
The idea was quickly scrapped. A said a recount was not needed because “the proposition is a local referred ballot measure that was called as a special election and administered as a special election.†It went on to say state statutes that trigger recounts don’t apply.
“As such, recount provisions, as codified in ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ Revised Statues 16-661 through 16-667, do not apply,†according to Friday’s release. “These recount provisions, relating to local municipal elections, only apply to elections of candidates to an elected officer rather than referred non-candidate measures,†the city said at the time.
In a meeting Tuesday, however, the council said it will let the ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ secretary of state’s office, as well as the state attorney general’s office determine if a recount is needed.
At the Pima County Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday morning, District 4 Supervisor Steve Christy chided the council for its stance that the state law on recounts did not apply. He said the council “should be ashamed of themselves†and that today is a “bad day for transparency.†He then voted to approve the canvass.
“This obviously is a bad day for transparency when it comes to some kind of a situation where the city council and mayor are deciding to, what I determine, ignore the rules that have been laid out as far as triggering a recount,†Christy said. “This is a huge jump in pay, and I don’t think it’s been successful by the populous as far as voting for a decade ... This amount they’re requesting is extraordinary.â€
Christy initially indicated he would vote no on the certification. His vote flipped, however, after it was clarified that a recount could not be triggered until the county certified its results in the first place.
District 3 Supervisor Sharon Bronson was the only opposing vote for certification.
Steve Kozachik, ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥â€™s vice mayor, said ahead of Tuesday’s online meeting that, that while he did not support rolling back the recount, proceeding with one would not change the results.
“In a time like this where scrutiny is all over the integrity of elections ... it’s probably the best look if the city at least petitions for a recount,†he said.
In other words, Kozachik said, let a judge decide. That way, he said, the council is checking all the boxes in the event a recount is in fact required.
Prop. 413 increases the mayor’s annual salary from $42,000 to $97,750 and its six council members from $24,000 per year up to $76,500, a 130% and 220% boost, respectively.
These salaries, which have been in place since 1999, lagged behind ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥â€™s median household income of $48,058 according to U.S. Census data.
Prop. 413 also ties ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥â€™s elected officials’ annual income to the earnings of the Pima County Board of Supervisors, whose salaries are set to increase by $20,000 at the start of 2025 in accordance with , meaning the mayor and council salaries also could see another bump then.