State's high court keeps wage-raise measure on ballot

A proposed ballot measure to gradually raise the state's hourly minimum wage from $8.50 to $11 will remain on the Nov. 6 general election ballot, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The seven-member high court rejected a request from the Arkansans for a Strong Economy committee, led by Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce President Randy Zook, to order Republican Secretary of State Mark Martin not to count votes cast on what's called Issue 5. Early voting starts Monday. Zook challenged whether the issue had enough valid signatures to get on the ballot.

If approved by voters, the proposed initiated act would raise the state's minimum wage to $9.25 an hour on Jan. 1, 2019; to $10 an hour on Jan. 1, 2020; and then to $11 an hour on Jan. 1, 2021.

RELATED ARTICLE

https://www.arkansa…">Justices yank Issue 1, call it overly broad

Kristin Foster, campaign manager of the Arkansans for a Fair Wage committee that sponsored the proposed initiated act, said, "We are grateful that the Supreme Court has reaffirmed that it should be up to Arkansas voters, not the Chamber of Commerce, to decide on raising the wage in November.

"The Arkansas Supreme Court rightly decided to honor the will of more than 80,000 voters who petitioned to add Issue 5 to the ballot this year. Our proposal to gradually raise the minimum wage [to] $11 an hour by 2021 will benefit 1 in 4 hard-working Arkansans," Foster said in a written statement.

But Zook said, "We are disappointed with today's decision by the Arkansas Supreme Court to leave Issue 5 on the November ballot, despite proponents' sloppy petition effort.

"Our minimum wage is already higher than all of our surrounding states. If it passes, this measure will be detrimental to our state's economy, costing Arkansas jobs, increasing prices for Arkansas consumers, and ultimately hurting many Arkansas workers," Zook said in a written statement.

WAGES ELSEWHERE

Twenty-nine states and Washington, D.C., have minimum wages above the federal minimum of $7.25 an hour, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

According to the group, the hourly minimum wage in Arkansas' neighbors is $7.25 in Oklahoma and Texas and $7.85 an hour in Missouri. A proposed ballot initiative in Missouri would raise that state's minimum wage to $12 an hour in 2023.

Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee have not adopted a state minimum wage and New Hampshire repealed its state minimum wage in 2011, but adopted the federal minimum wage by reference, according to the national conference.

The highest minimum wages are: the District of Columbia, $13.25 per hour; Washington state, $11.50 per hour; and $11 an hour in Massachusetts and California, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

In 2014, Arkansas voters approved a ballot measure to raise the state's minimum wage over three years from $6.25 an hour to $8.50 per hour on Jan. 1, 2017. The Legislature hasn't raised the minimum wage in more than a decade.

COURT RULING

According to the state Supreme Court, the Arkansans for a Fair Wage committee submitted 69,413 signatures to Republican Secretary of State Mark Martin's office on July 6. As an initiated act, the proposal needed 67,887 valid signatures of registered voters to qualify for the ballot.

Martin's office performed an initial "prima facie" review and validated 68,861 of the signatures.

But on July 30, Martin notified the committee that his office found that only 52,124 of the signatures were valid, He gave the committee 30 more days to collect signatures because under Article 5, Section 1, of the Arkansas Constitution, if a petition contains 75 percent of the required signatures, the petition qualifies for a 30-day "cure" period.

On Aug. 3, the committee submitted cure signatures for a total of 113,160 signatures, and 85,826 were found to be valid. The secretary of state on Aug. 16 certified the ballot proposal.

In his challenge of Issue 5, Zook argued that the Arkansans for a Fair Wage committee failed to submit an adequate number of signatures in its initial filing to the secretary of state's office on July 6 and should not have qualified the proposal for the 30-day cure period.

Zook claimed that Martin's office improperly counted invalid petitions and signatures. Since the petitions submitted July 6 failed to meet the 75 percent threshhold, the committee was not entitled to a cure period, and thus, the signatures obtained after July 6 should not have been counted, Zook argued.

Special Master Sam Bird, who was appointed by the high court to review the signatures, determined that the Arkansans for a Fair Wage committee had sufficient signatures to qualify for the cure period and exceeded the minimum required to qualify for the ballot.

In an opinion written by Justice Karen Baker, the Supreme Court said that as a 2014 ruling makes clear, "our only concern when examining the propriety of the Secretary of State's decision to grant or not grant the cure period is whether, on the face of the petition, the signatures were of a sufficient number.

"That inquiry is a simple, and it is in keeping with the object and purpose of article 5, section 1, as amended by Amendment 7, which was to 'increase the sense of responsibility that the lawmaking power should feel to the people by establishing a power to initiate proper, and to reject improper, legislation,'" the court said.

"Here, based on the record and the requirements of article 5, section 1, including the additional language from amendment 93 of 2014, the sponsor-intervenor's petition contained the requisite signatures of a sufficient number and is therefore entitled to the thirty-day cure period," the court said. "Because we conclude that Zook's claims are without merit, we deny his petition."

Justice Rhonda Wood said in a concurring opinion signed by Justice Shawn Womack that she agreed that Zook's petition should be denied, but she disagreed with the majority's reliance on the earlier ruling.

"Nevertheless, I do not think the constitution in its current form allows us to reach the petitioner's argument and decide whether the canvassers complied with the residency requirements, notary issues and other issues beyond the validity of the voters' signatures and their numeric sufficiency, for purposes of a cure," Wood wrote in her concurring opinion.

"I am surprised," Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson said in an interview about the court's ruling.

"But the people will get to vote on that and express their view on it," he said. "I have indicated I will vote against that [ballot proposal] because we cannot set economic policy three years in advance in terms of where we are going to be in our minimum wage.

"I am just concerned about the youth unemployment and the opportunity for those entry-level jobs with the highest minimum wage in the region."

Foster said that gradually raising the wage is overwhelmingly popular across Arkansas.

"It's a common-sense solution that will put more money in the hands of hard-working families and small businesses who rely on consumer demand and boost our state's economy," she said.

A Section on 10/19/2018

Upcoming Events