In 1998, Arizona voters approved Proposition 105 ¹, commonly referred to as Prop. 105. While Prop. 105 applies to statewide measures only, it still has indirect impacts on local governments.  

Prop. 105 makes it very difficult to amend or change a statewide ballot measure that is passed by Arizona voters, which is why Prop. 105 is commonly referred to as the Voter Protection Act, or VPA. First, Prop. 105 prohibits the Governor from vetoing voter-approved measures.

105 prohibits the Governor from vetoing voter-approved measures. Second, the Legislature can only amend a voter-approved measure if passed by a ¾ affirmative vote of each legislative chamber AND the proposed amendment furthers the purpose of the measure.² This means the Legislature can never “undo” anything that is passed by the voters; it can only augment the measure in the furtherance of its original intent. Because of the unique impacts of Prop. 105, the Arizona Legislature’s Legislative Council publishes a guide that provides an overview of Prop. 105 and a catalog of the impacted initiatives.³ 

While Prop. 105 does not apply to local initiatives and referenda, several statewide measures have been passed since the enactment of Prop. 105 that impact cities and towns, such as: 

• Prop. 207 – Private Property Rights Protection Act (2006) 
• Prop. 203 – Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (2010) 
• Prop. 206 – Fair Wages and Healthy Families Act (2016) 
• Prop. 207 – Smart and Safe Arizona Act (2020) 

Prop. 105 is a double-edged sword for local governments. Take for example the Smart and Safe Arizona Act, which generally legalizes the recreational use of marijuana. Subject to some exceptions, the Safe and Smart Act also provides that a city, town or county can “enact reasonable ordinances or rules that generally govern the time, place and manner of marijuana establishment and marijuana testing facility operations.” ⁴ The protection afforded by Prop. 105 with this Act is a good thing because it is protecting the authority of local governments to enact reasonable ordinances over marijuana establishments. Compare that to the Private Property Rights Protection Act, which severely limits the ability of governments to adopt certain land use laws or use eminent domain for specific public purposes.⁵ This Act has made redevelopment efforts and land use law far more difficult – and due to the Act’s voter-protected status, these difficulties will likely persist. 
 

Prop. 105 forever changed the landscape of Arizona law, shifting power clearly into the hands of the voters. That change can be either beneficial or detrimental depending on one’s perspective on a particular issue. Given the continually low approval ratings of state lawmakers, it appears Prop. 105 will remain in effect for the foreseeable future until the voters decide otherwise. 

---

^[1] 1998 Arizona General Election Publicity Pamphlet https://azmemory.azlibrary.gov/nodes/view/102838?keywords=&type=all

^[2] Arizona Constitution Article 4, Part 1, Section 1. https://www.azleg.gov/viewDocument/?docName=https://www.azleg.gov/const/4/1.p1.htm

^[3] Proposition 105 Requirements. Arizona Legislative Council – December 2022. https://www.azleg.gov/alisPDFs/council/Prop_105_Book_2022.pdf

^[4] Proposition 207 Analysis by Legislative Council. Arizona 202 General Election Publicity Pamphlet. https://azsos.gov/sites/default/files/2020_General_Election_Publicity_Pamphlet_English.pdf

^[5] 2006 Ballot Propositions & Judicial Performance Review. Arizona Secretary of State website. https://apps.azsos.gov/election/2006/info/PubPamphlet/english/prop207.htm