Weekly journal-miner. [volume] (Prescott, Ariz.) 1908-1929, 1914-06-10

VI 9Alu iSAuO VI bpAuS 81 a. ~
leave the remainder of said issue.
to-wit: $lS0,OOO OF bonds as the
amount which the Board OF Super
visors will be authorized to sell
The question therefore arises:
Has the Board OF Supervisors
power and authority II place such
I a rider" on the ballot::' Or would
such a rider" If placed on the bal
/ lot, by direction OF the Board OF
/ Supervisors. invalidate the election?
II this rider" were placed on the
ballot then new proposition would
be attached to the original initia
tive proposition. The purpose Of
the rider" would be to enable vot-
ers to express their preference for
S250.0O0 court house or a $780,
600 court house.
At first blush it would seem that
there could be no harm done in
placing this rider" ON the ballot,
but, upon mature reflection, am
satisfied that such would not be
the case. In such a contingency
there would be three propositions
before the voters:
First. 4 S250000 bond issue.
Second. A $4,000 bond issue.
Third. No bond issue at all
"A person voting against any
bond issue at all would only be
required to vote NO" on the first
proposition (to-wit: the $250,000
proposition) a voter desiring
$250.0CO issue of bonds would only
have to vote Yes" on the first
proposition: but a voter desiring
SlS0O00. Chat is. the elimination of
the first $4,000 of said bonds)
would. of necessity, have to vote
Yes on the first proposition (the
$250000 bond issue) and in addition
would have to vote Yes" on the
second proposition directing the
Board of Supervisors TO eliminate
and cancel the $4,000 of the bond
issue first maturing.
This situation might arise: 1000
votes might be cast in favor of a
$2500O0 bond issue and, say 900
votes against it. Then, say, 400
votes might be cast in favor of the
second proposition authorizing the
Board of Supervisors to eliminate
the first $4,000 of said bonds. You
would therefore have this situa-
ton 100 votes in favor OF a $780,
coo bond issue with 900 against it.
Standing alone, the S250000 bond
issue would have carried, but you
would have 400 votes registered in
favor of the "rider" reducing the
bond issue to $4,000. The prop
er analysis of this vote would dis
close 600 votes in favor of a $780,
600 court house, 400 votes in fav-
or of a $4,000 court house and
900 votes against any new court
house.
Furthermore. every voter who
was against a $250,0O0 court house.
but who was in favor of a $780,
900 court house, would be compell-
ed, through necessity, to vote for
the S25O,000 proposition in order to
make his vote effective for the $780,
600 proposition because. unless the
S250,O00 proposition carried his vote
for the $4,000 proposition would
be of no effect. In other words,
the voter would have to vote in
favor of something he did not
want. in order to get somthing that
he did want
81 am satisfied that placing such
a rider" on the ballot by resolu-
ton of the Board Of Supervisors
would invalidate the whole election.
After viewing the matter from ev-
cry angle, ! cannot come to any
other conclusion. Furthermore, |
am of the opinion that Boards OF
Supervisors have no right or pow
er to load down an initiative prop
Osition with any riders" of any
kind. \ proposition initiated by
the people, even in a county, it
seems to me, stands in the same
category as a proposition initiated
by the people of State. 1t must
be submitted in strict accordance
with the initiative petition and I
am certain that all courts of last
resort would so hold.
I'm this connection l do not
want 70 be understood as taking
the ground that the Board of Sup
ervisors, acting as a Board, has
no authority to submit a PROPOSE
ton of this kind 20 the people. IN
der the law, they have that power;
but | am OF the opinion that the
board has no power to encumber
81, +