Court rules Surprise overstepped by rejecting signatures opposing affordable housing

The Arizona Supreme Court determined the Surprise city clerk acted out of her authority when she rejected all signatures submitted in an effort to get a controversial affordable housing development on a future ballot.

A citizens group called Voice of Surprise sought a referendum on the City Council’s approval of an affordable apartment and townhome development planned near Cotton Lane and Waddell Road. The group submitted more than 5,400 signatures to the city in September 2022.

The proposed development, called Truman Ranch Marketplace, would include more than 600 affordable units and was planned by affordable housing developer Dominium.

After receiving the signatures, former Surprise City Clerk Sherry Aguilar notified the group that all of the signatures had been rejected because they “do not strictly comply with all requirements for referenda imposed by Arizona law.”

Aguilar has since retired as Surprise city clerk.

The rejection, based on Aguilar’s letter to Voice of Surprise, hinged on the fact that Voice of Surprise leaders failed to attach a copy of the full title and text of the measure sought to be referred when the group applied for a referendum serial number.

However, the Arizona Supreme Court said deciding whether a serial number application is legal is not within the authority of a city clerk.

“But nothing authorizes the Clerk to determine whether the application for a serial number was legally sufficient and, if not, to reject all petition sheets and signatures,” Vice Chief Justice Ann Timmer wrote in the opinion issued by the court.

Developer can still challenge the issue

The Arizona Supreme Court’s opinion does not mean that the city or Dominium cannot challenge the referendum, Timmer wrote. Dominium can challenge the issue on the same basis, meaning that it can still argue that Voice of Surprise’s failure to include the ordinance in the application could still disqualify the signatures.

Dominium can also take issue with other merits of the case, the court said.

One of those merits that has been previously mentioned could include trying to refer a non-referable administrative or executive matter, but the court did not take a position on that issue.

Dominium has filed a counterclaim against Voice of Surprise, which will be heard in Maricopa County Superior Court.

Opponents of development want the issue on the ballot

Tim La Sota, an attorney representing Voice of Surprise, said there have not been hearings scheduled yet for the claim.

“In election cases, you have to move quickly, and to say they did not move quickly (on the claim) is an understatement,” La Sota said.

La Sota said the issue will still need to be decided in court, adding that his clients maintain they have collected enough signatures to force a referendum, when it gets to that point.

“We fully expect this to be voted on by the voters of Surprise,” he said.

Other development procedures moving forward

While the case has been in court, the Surprise Planning and Zoning Commission did give approval to a site plan for the development at a meeting in May.

“Dominium cannot comment on active litigation; however, we are proceeding with development, seeking final approvals needed to finance and build the two communities,” Owen Metz, senior vice president and Mountain West development leader for Dominium, said in an email. “We are eager to resolve the outstanding procedural items and bring much-needed affordable housing to the city of Surprise.”

The Surprise City Council narrowly approved the development in a 4-3 split in August 2022. The project includes two different developments, one planned for affordable senior housing, and one planned for affordable housing for families.

The plan includes a mix of two-, three-, and four-story buildings on the site and includes a self-storage building, restaurants and small-scale retail. The southwestern corner of the site is slated for the senior living development and is planned to be the tallest building of the development, reaching four stories tall.

At the time, the council’s decision was met with much opposition, with neighbors arguing the development does not fit in with the existing neighborhood and could exacerbate traffic problems. The opposition led to the referendum effort.

Reach the reporter at cvanek@arizonarepublic.com. Follow her on X, formerly Twitter: @CorinaVanek.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Court rules Surprise overstepped by rejecting signatures in referendum