RESTORING LOCAL REPRESENTATION ACT
RESTORING LOCAL REPRESENTATION ACT
SB XXXX | Summary
---
THE PROBLEM
Arizona's legislature no longer represents Arizonans. Districts are too large, power is too concentrated, and rural, tribal, and working-class communities are systematically excluded.
Current Reality
-----------------
* Each state senator represents 254,000 people — more than many counties
* Rural districts span multiple counties and hundreds of miles
* A small clique of legislative leaders can decide what passes
* Complex Phoenix-written formulas shortchange rural communities
* Special interests capture the legislature by targeting a few swing districts
* Votes are scheduled at odd hours to exclude unwanted legislators
* Legislative pay does not replace lost income; only the wealthy can afford to serve
* Legislators maintain two residences or spend months away from family
* Taxpayers fund per diem, travel, and Capitol operations for a concentrated session
THE SOLUTION
SB XXXX restructures Arizona's governance to disperse power, increase accountability, and return decision-making to local communities.
----
SEVEN KEY PROVISIONS
1. Smaller Districts (Constitutional Amendment – Voters 2028)
Current: 254,000 per district | SB XXXX: 45,000 maximum
-Number of districts: 30 to 185
-Total legislators: 90 to 555
-Your senator and representatives live in your community, not four counties away.
2. 8.8% Population Variance (Constitutional Amendment)
- Uses the same variance approved by the U.S. Supreme Court in Harris v. AIRC (2016). Preserves Voting Rights Act compliance and protects tribal communities.
3. Voluntary Local Coalitions (Contingent on Amendment Passing)
- Counties, cities, and tribes may form coalitions to build water, broadband, roads, and energy projects together. No community pays for projects that don't serve it.
4. Per-District Resource Allocation (Contingent on Amendment Passing)
- State funds allocated directly to local governments on a per-district basis. Every community sees exactly what it receives. No more backroom deals.
5. University-Built Digital Platform (Takes Effect 2027)
- ASU, UA, and NAU jointly build an open-source platform for legislative collaboration, bill drafting, and public transparency. Arizona builds it. Arizona owns it.
6. Secure Telepresence and Remote Voting (Takes Effect 2027)
- Legislators can participate and vote remotely from anywhere in the state. No more 2 AM votes to exclude unwanted members. Votes require 24-hour notice. Full transparency.
- Working people, parents, farmers, and small business owners can now serve without sacrificing their livelihoods.
- Reduces or eliminates per diem costs, travel reimbursements, and the need for two residences.
- Reduces pressure for legislative pay increases.
7. Local Default (Takes Effect 2027)
When the legislature can't build consensus on local matters, authority defaults to counties and municipalities. The state enables local solutions rather than imposing mandates.
---
HOW IT PASSES
Component: Sections 1, 5, 6 (findings, digital platform, remote voting, local default)
Takes Effect: 2027 – upon legislative enactment
Component: Sections 3 and 4 (coalitions, per-district allocation)
Takes Effect: Only if voters approve smaller districts – implement after 2030 census
Component: Section 2 (smaller districts, 8.8% variance)
Takes Effect: 2028 – referred to voters; takes effect if approved
If voters reject the constitutional amendment:
- Sections 3 and 4 do not take effect
- Sections 5 and 6 remain in effect, improving legislative function under current district structure
---
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR ARIZONA
For Working Arizonans (2027)
-Serve without relocating to Phoenix
-Keep your job, farm, or business
-Parent while serving
-No more choosing between family and public service
For Taxpayers (2027)
-Reduced per diem and travel costs
-No need for two residences
-Lower pressure for pay increases
-Cost savings offset digital platform investment
For Rural and Tribal Communities
-Fair share of state resources
-Form coalitions with neighbors
-Dedicated representatives who live in your area (if amendment passes)
For the Legislature
-A body too large for any backroom clique to control
-Legislation advances through persuasion, not coercion
-No more 2 AM votes; 24-hour notice required
-A legislature that reflects Arizona's economic diversity
---
TIMELINE
2027: Sections 1, 5, 6 take effect upon enactment
2028: Voters decide on smaller districts (Section 2)
2030: Census
2031: Redistricting Commission draws new districts (if amendment passes)
2032: First election under new districts; Sections 3 and 4 take effect (if amendment passes)
---
THE CHOICE FOR COLLEAGUES
VOTE YES:
- Secure remote voting, 24-hour notice starting 2027
- Local default empowering counties starting 2027
- Digital transparency starting 2027
- A legislature accessible to working people
- Reduced per diem and travel costs
- If voters approve: Smaller districts, fair allocation, local coalitions
VOTE NO:
- 2 AM votes to exclude members continue
- Centralized Phoenix mandates continue
- Opaque process continues
- Only the wealthy can afford to serve
- Taxpayers continue funding two residences and months of per diem
- If voters reject: Current district structure remains
SB XXXX restores the original vision of a citizen legislature. Representatives who know your community. Resources allocated fairly. Power returned to the people. A legislature that looks like Arizona. A more cost-effective government.
RESTORING LOCAL REPRESENTATION ACT
SB XXXX
AN ACT
AMENDING TITLE 16, CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 1, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; AMENDING ARTICLE 4, PART 2, SECTION 2, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA; PROVIDING FOR THE REFERRAL OF A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO THE PEOPLE AT THE 2028 GENERAL ELECTION.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA:
---
Section 1. Findings and Declarations
The Legislature finds and declares:
1. That the current ratio of one State Senator and two State Representatives for every two hundred fifty-four thousand (254,000) residents has created legislative districts so large that many constituents, particularly in rural and tribal communities, are geographically and functionally isolated from their elected representatives.
2. That in rural regions, single legislative districts often encompass multiple counties, vast geographic expanses, and diverse communities of interest with conflicting needs, making it impossible for a single representative to adequately serve all constituents.
3. That large, low-density districts structurally favor well-funded special interests and incumbent protection over competitive, community-based representation, as the cost of campaigning across vast areas favors candidates with access to concentrated money rather than candidates with deep community roots.
4. That the small size of the current legislature—thirty members in the Senate and sixty in the House—enables a small clique of legislative leaders to organize at the beginning of each session and advance legislation that serves narrow interests without requiring broad coalition-building or compelling public justification.
5. That a larger legislature, drawn from a broader pool of life experiences, professions, and communities, would strengthen the quality of legislative deliberation by ensuring that a wider range of perspectives inform policy decisions and that no proposal can advance without convincing a diverse and dispersed body of its merits.
6. That when consensus cannot be reached at the state level on matters of local concern, the default should be to empower county and municipal governments to develop hyperlocal solutions that reflect the unique needs, resources, and values of their communities.
7. That this framework further enables voluntary coalitions of local governments to form around shared interests—such as regional water infrastructure, transportation corridors, broadband expansion, or energy projects—allowing communities that genuinely need and benefit from joint infrastructure to build it together without imposing costs or requirements on communities with different needs and priorities.
8. That under the current system, infrastructure funding is often centralized in Phoenix, resulting in communities across the state paying for projects that primarily benefit metropolitan areas while having little say in how their own tax dollars are allocated. The framework established by this act reverses that dynamic, ensuring that communities retain control over their resources and collaborate only when it serves their mutual benefit.
9. That the current system of resource allocation relies on complex formulas, political negotiations, and budget backroom deals that disadvantage rural and tribal communities, which often lack the political leverage to secure their fair share of state resources. A system in which resources are allocated on a per-district basis to the local governments within each district creates transparency, fairness, and accountability by ensuring that every community receives direct and equitable support from the state.
10. That when a legislative district contains multiple counties and municipalities, as is common under the current map, it becomes impossible to allocate resources fairly—one community within the district may receive vastly more state support than another, with no clear mechanism for accountability. By aligning the unit of representation with the unit of allocation, the state can ensure that every local government receives direct, equitable, and transparent funding.
11. That modern digital tools are necessary to facilitate effective communication, collaboration, and coalition-building among legislators, and that such tools are equally important regardless of district structure.
12. That secure telepresence and remote voting capabilities are essential to ensuring that all legislators, regardless of geographic location, can participate fully in legislative business, and that such capabilities also protect against procedural tactics that exclude members through late-night votes or scheduling gamesmanship.
13. That the current requirement for legislators to be physically present at the State Capitol in Phoenix for the duration of the legislative session, combined with legislative pay that does not replace lost income from private employment, effectively excludes working-class Arizonans, small business owners, farmers, ranchers, and others whose livelihoods cannot be set aside for months at a time, resulting in a legislature that does not reflect the economic diversity of the state.
14. That secure telepresence and remote voting capabilities would allow legislators to participate fully in legislative business without relocating to Phoenix for months, enabling working people, parents of young children, caregivers, and those with professional obligations to serve in the legislature without sacrificing their livelihoods or family responsibilities.
15. That the current requirement for physical presence in Phoenix imposes significant costs on the state through per diem payments, travel reimbursements, and the operational costs of maintaining the Capitol complex for a concentrated session schedule. It also imposes personal costs on legislators who must maintain two residences or spend months away from their families and livelihoods.
16. That secure telepresence and remote voting capabilities would substantially reduce these costs by allowing legislators to participate from their home districts, eliminating the need for per diem payments for lodging, reducing travel reimbursements, and enabling a more distributed and cost-effective legislative operation. These cost savings would offset the costs of developing and maintaining the digital platform.
17. That by making legislative service accessible without requiring legislators to abandon their livelihoods or maintain two residences, remote participation reduces the pressure for substantial legislative pay increases while ensuring that working-class Arizonans, small business owners, farmers, ranchers, and others with professional obligations can serve without financial hardship.
18. That the digital collaboration platform established by this act, including secure remote voting and participation tools, is essential not only to the functioning of a larger legislature but also to ensuring that the legislature is accessible to all Arizonans regardless of economic circumstances and to reducing the cost of legislative operations.
19. That Arizona's public universities—Arizona State University, the University of Arizona, and Northern Arizona University—possess the research capacity, technical expertise, and public mission necessary to develop these tools, ensuring that the tools of governance remain public assets rather than being outsourced to private vendors with competing interests.
20. That the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission has previously established that a population variance of up to eight point eight percent (8.8%) between the largest and smallest legislative district is both constitutionally permissible and necessary to comply with the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as affirmed by the United States Supreme Court in Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (2016).
21. That the purpose of a citizen legislature is to reflect the diversity of the state, and that this purpose is best achieved when legislative districts are small enough to ensure that every Arizonan has meaningful, in-person access to their elected representatives and when the legislature is large enough to resist capture by concentrated interests.
22. That a target of forty thousand (40,000) residents per legislative district aligns with the original vision of the Arizona Constitution, which established a citizen legislature accountable to local communities rather than distant political interests, and enables a governance structure where decisions default to the most local level practicable, where voluntary cooperation replaces centralized mandates, where communities retain control over their resources, where resource allocation is transparent, equitable, and directly accountable to the communities served, and where modern digital tools enable effective collaboration across a dispersed and representative legislature.
23. That the state of Arizona has a compelling interest in dispersing legislative power to prevent its capture by concentrated political and financial interests, in ensuring that legislation advances only when its proponents can make a compelling case to a diverse and representative body, in empowering local governments to serve as the primary problem-solvers for their communities, in fostering a culture of voluntary cooperation over centralized compulsion, in establishing a resource allocation system that is transparent, equitable, and directly accountable to the people of each community, in leveraging the research capacity of its public universities to build the digital infrastructure of democratic governance, in removing economic barriers that prevent working-class Arizonans from serving in the legislature, and in reducing the cost of legislative operations through modern technology.
---
Section 2. Constitutional Amendment
Article 4, Part 2, Section 2, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows:
§ 2. Composition of legislature; number of members; legislative districts; size limitation
A. The senate shall be composed of one member elected from each legislative district. The house of representatives shall be composed of two members elected from each legislative district.
B. The legislature shall divide the state into as many legislative districts as necessary to ensure that the population of any legislative district shall not exceed forty-five thousand (45,000) persons, based on the most recent United States decennial census.
C. The total population variance between the largest and smallest legislative district shall not exceed eight point eight percent (8.8%). This variance limitation is established to mirror the standard previously applied by the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission and upheld by the United States Supreme Court as consistent with the one-person, one-vote principle when necessary to achieve compliance with the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965.
D. Legislative districts shall be established in accordance with the provisions of Article 4, Part 2, Section 1 of this Constitution. The independent redistricting commission shall prioritize the creation of districts that:
1. Comply with the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended.
2. Preserve identifiable communities of interest, including tribal nations, rural communities, and geographically contiguous areas.
3. Are geographically compact and respect existing political boundaries, including county lines and municipal boundaries, wherever practicable.
E. The provisions of this section shall become effective beginning with the regular legislative session immediately following the 2030 decennial census and the redistricting process established pursuant to this Constitution.
---
Section 3. Voluntary Local Coalitions; Authorization and Enabling
(Contingent on voter approval of Section 2)
A. This section shall take effect only if the constitutional amendment set forth in Section 2 of this act is approved by the qualified electors of the State of Arizona at the 2028 general election.
B. The legislature finds that the most effective infrastructure and service delivery occurs when communities that share common needs voluntarily cooperate to develop solutions tailored to their specific circumstances, and that such cooperation is most effective when legislative districts are small enough to align with communities of interest.
C. Any county, municipality, special district, or tribal government may enter into intergovernmental agreements with any other such entities to form voluntary coalitions for the purpose of planning, funding, constructing, operating, or maintaining infrastructure or services of common benefit, including but not limited to:
1. Water supply, storage, and delivery systems
2. Broadband and telecommunications networks
3. Transportation corridors and transit systems
4. Energy generation and transmission
5. Health care facilities and services
6. Emergency services and mutual aid
7. Educational programs and facilities
8. Any other infrastructure or service deemed by the coalition to serve the common interest of its members
D. The state shall not mandate participation in any such coalition, nor shall the state require any local government to fund or support a coalition project from which it does not directly benefit.
E. The state shall provide enabling authority for coalitions to:
1. Establish joint powers authorities with the ability to issue revenue bonds
2. Enter into long-term contracts for project development and operation
3. Receive and administer state grants designated for regional infrastructure
4. Exercise eminent domain authority only with the unanimous consent of member governments and only within their respective jurisdictions
F. The state shall appropriate annually a Regional Infrastructure Fund to provide grants and low-interest loans to voluntary coalitions for projects that demonstrate:
1. Clear common benefit to all participating communities
2. Equitable cost-sharing among members
3. Local funding commitments
4. Environmental and economic sustainability
---
Section 4. Per-District Resource Allocation; Transparency and Accountability
(Contingent on voter approval of Section 2)
A. This section shall take effect only if the constitutional amendment set forth in Section 2 of this act is approved by the qualified electors of the State of Arizona at the 2028 general election.
B. The legislature finds that the current system of allocating state resources through complex formulas and political negotiations lacks transparency, produces inequitable outcomes, and undermines accountability, and that aligning the unit of allocation with the unit of representation is essential to achieving fair and transparent distribution.
C. Beginning with the fiscal year following the implementation of new legislative districts pursuant to the constitutional amendment set forth in Section 2, the state shall allocate core infrastructure and service funding to counties and municipalities on a per-district basis according to the following principles:
1. Highway maintenance and local roads: Funds shall be allocated to each legislative district based on the total lane miles within the district, adjusted for population density. Local governments within each district shall determine prioritization of projects.
2. Water infrastructure: Funds shall be allocated to each legislative district on a per-capita basis. Counties, municipalities, and water districts within each district shall develop and implement water infrastructure projects suited to local conditions.
3. Broadband and telecommunications: Funds shall be allocated to each legislative district on a per-capita basis, with additional weighting for rural districts to account for higher deployment costs. Local governments and private partners shall determine deployment strategies.
4. Public health and safety: Funds shall be allocated to each legislative district on a per-capita basis. Counties shall have primary authority over public health programming and resource allocation within their jurisdictions.
5. Economic development: Funds shall be allocated to each legislative district based on a formula that accounts for population, unemployment rates, and economic distress indicators. Local governments shall have discretion over incentive structures and business development strategies.
D. The state shall maintain a publicly accessible online portal showing, for each legislative district:
1. Total state funds allocated
2. Distribution of funds to local governments within the district
3. Projects funded and their status
4. Contact information for the district's senator and representatives
E. Any state agency administering funds allocated on a per-district basis shall provide quarterly reports to the affected local governments and shall make all allocation methodologies publicly available.
F. The legislature shall not reduce per-district allocations in any fiscal year below the prior year's level adjusted for inflation without a two-thirds vote of both chambers, ensuring that resource allocation remains stable and predictable for local governments.
---
Section 5. Arizona Legislative Collaboration Platform; University Research and Development
(Takes effect 2027)
A. The legislature finds that modern digital tools are necessary to facilitate effective communication, collaboration, and coalition-building among legislators, and that such tools are equally important regardless of district structure.
B. The Arizona Board of Regents shall establish a joint research initiative among Arizona State University, the University of Arizona, and Northern Arizona University to design, develop, and maintain a publicly owned digital platform to support legislative collaboration. The platform shall be known as the Arizona Legislative Collaboration Platform.
C. The Arizona Legislative Collaboration Platform shall include, at minimum, the following features:
1. Bill drafting and development tools allowing any legislator to initiate draft legislation, share drafts with other members, track revisions, and document the evolution of legislative language with a complete revision history accessible to all members and the public.
2. Coalition-building tools enabling legislators to identify other members with shared policy interests, form working groups, coordinate on legislative priorities, and track coalition membership and commitments.
3. Virtual hearing and deliberation capabilities allowing committees and working groups to conduct hearings, take testimony, and deliberate remotely, with particular attention to ensuring full participation by legislators representing rural and remote districts.
4. Secure telepresence and remote voting system allowing any legislator to participate fully in committee hearings, floor sessions, and caucus meetings from any location within the state, with:
a. Authenticated telepresence utilizing biometric or multi-factor authentication to verify the identity of the participating legislator, with real-time audio and video transmission that allows the legislator to hear and be heard, to see and be seen, and to participate in debate and questioning with the same procedural rights as members present in the chamber
b. Secure remote voting utilizing cryptographic verification to ensure that each vote is securely transmitted and recorded, with a permanent, immutable record of each vote linked to the authenticated legislator and real-time public display of votes as they are cast
c. Anti-manipulation safeguards including:
i. A requirement that any vote be held open for a minimum of twenty-four hours after formal notice to all members, except in cases of genuine emergency declared by a two-thirds vote of the chamber
ii. A requirement that the time and date of any vote be published at least twenty-four hours in advance, with remote participation available to all members
iii. A prohibition on holding votes during hours when the remote voting system is unavailable for maintenance
iv. A requirement that the platform maintain a log of all member logins, participation, and activity, which shall be publicly accessible
d. Participation parity ensuring that legislators participating remotely have the same rights to speak, offer amendments, and vote as legislators present in the chamber, and that no procedural advantage or disadvantage attaches to remote participation
e. Public access and transparency providing live streaming of all committee hearings and floor sessions, with remote participants displayed and audible, and public access to participation logs
5. Public access portal providing real-time visibility into all legislative activity, including bill text, amendments, hearing schedules, voting records, and coalition formations, with data available in open, machine-readable formats.
6. Constituent engagement tools allowing constituents to track legislation, submit testimony, schedule meetings with their legislators, and receive updates on issues they care about.
7. Resource library containing legislative research, policy analyses, fiscal impact statements, and archived materials from previous sessions, all fully searchable and accessible to legislators, staff, and the public.
8. Transparency dashboard showing, in real time, the status of all legislation, upcoming hearings, recent votes, and legislator participation metrics.
D. The platform shall be designed with the following principles:
1. Public ownership: The platform shall be owned by the state of Arizona and operated by the Arizona Legislative Council in coordination with the universities. No private entity shall have proprietary control over the platform or the data it contains.
2. Open source: The underlying software shall be developed as open-source code, available for use by other states and public institutions, positioning Arizona as a national leader in democratic technology.
3. Security and privacy: The platform shall incorporate best-in-class security measures to protect legislative deliberations while maintaining public transparency consistent with Arizona's open meeting and public records laws.
4. Accessibility: The platform shall be fully accessible to individuals with disabilities and shall be designed for use by legislators and staff with varying levels of technical expertise.
5. Interoperability: The platform shall integrate with existing legislative systems and shall be capable of sharing data with county and municipal governments, as well as with other states and institutions as appropriate.
E. The universities shall submit an initial design and implementation plan to the Legislature by December 31, 2028, with phased implementation beginning no later than January 1, 2030, ensuring the platform is operational for the regular legislative session that begins in January 2031.
F. The Legislature shall appropriate funds necessary for the development, implementation, and ongoing maintenance of the Arizona Legislative Collaboration Platform. Priority shall be given to utilizing Arizona-based talent, including graduate students, researchers, and technology professionals employed by or affiliated with the state's public universities.
G. The universities shall publish annual reports on the platform's performance, usage, and impact on legislative collaboration and transparency, including recommendations for continuous improvement.
---
Section 6. Local Default; Legislative Policy on Local Empowerment
(Takes effect 2027)
A. In any legislative session, if a bill proposing to regulate matters of local concern—including but not limited to land use, water management, education delivery, public health measures, and law enforcement priorities—cannot secure the support of a majority of members representing districts outside the metropolitan Phoenix area, the bill shall be deemed to have failed to establish sufficient consensus for statewide application.
B. In such cases, the legislature shall instead consider legislation that:
1. Removes existing state preemptions on local authority over the matter
2. Provides counties and municipalities with the enabling authority to develop their own solutions
3. Appropriates sufficient funding to ensure that local governments have the resources necessary to address the matter effectively
C. This section shall not be construed to limit the authority of the state to act on matters of statewide concern, including but not limited to matters of constitutional obligation, interstate commerce, or civil rights protections.
---
Section 7. Implementation and Transition
A. The provisions of Sections 1, 5, and 6 of this act shall take effect on the earlier of:
1. The date the Governor signs this act; or
2. The date this act becomes law without the Governor's signature pursuant to Article 5, Section 7 of the Arizona Constitution.
B. The provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of this act shall take effect only if the constitutional amendment set forth in Section 2 is approved by the qualified electors of the State of Arizona at the 2028 general election, and shall take effect beginning with the regular legislative session immediately following the 2030 decennial census and the redistricting process established pursuant to the constitutional amendment.
C. If the constitutional amendment set forth in Section 2 is not approved by the voters, Sections 3 and 4 shall not take effect and shall be void.
---
Section 8. Referral of Constitutional Amendment
Pursuant to Article 4, Part 1, Section 1 of the Arizona Constitution, the constitutional amendment set forth in Section 2 of this act shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the State of Arizona at the next regular general election, to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2028, for approval or rejection.
The remaining provisions of this act shall take effect as provided in Section 7 regardless of the outcome of the referral, except that Sections 3 and 4 are contingent upon voter approval as provided in Section 7.
---
