Term-limits battle creates tension in Carefree as vice mayor takes town to court

The Republic | azcentral.com

A Carefree official's successful challenge to a term-limit ordinance has ratcheted up tension on the council and in the town.

Vice Mayor John Crane decided to run again for the council even though, based on the town's term-limit ordinance, he no longer was eligible.

"In April, after pulling nominating petitions, the Town advised Councilman Crane that should he submit nominating petitions to run for another term, his petitions would be rejected by the Town," according to a statement on the town's website.

Crane went to court.

Although voters approved them, he contended the town's term limits violated the Arizona Constitution and law.

"The question is not if term limits are good or bad," Crane said in an interview. "It is a question of operating our election process in compliance with State law."

This move upset Councilman Mike Farrar and other town residents.

"We need a leader who will represent the residents who elected them, not a mayor and group of council members that want to remain in power indefinitely and dictate how the Town will be governed," stated Farrar, who is running for mayor.

Every member of the Carefree Town Council, including Mayor Les Peterson, is up for re-election this year.

Superior Court judge rules

Carefree residents voted for a term-limit initiative in 2011.

According to town code, an elected or appointed council member or mayor is not eligible to serve more than three consecutive two-year terms. A council member or mayor who has served for five consecutive terms is not eligible to hold either office until three years have passed.

A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled the town's term limits could not be enforced.

"Although the Town defended the ordinance, the Judge found the ordinance was in violation of State law," according to a statement from the town. "The Judge ordered that the Town must process John Crane's petitions and that the County is required to print his name on the ballot."

The town said it will rewrite the ordinance to comply with state law and the verdict and remove term limits from the town code.

Carefree's council can vote to end the term limits because it is a general-law city, said Ken Strobeck, League of Arizona Cities and Towns executive director.

"The council can change something if there is a majority vote," Strobeck said.

Crane said the town did not have the right to have an unlawful ordinance even if it was approved by the voters.

"Carefree voters will continue to have the right to re-elect or reject incumbents every two years, the right to recall, the right to lobby their state legislators to change state law, and the right to lobby their Council to become what is called a charter city, which can legally impose term limits with the law," Crane said.

The Voter Protection Act of 1998 does not apply to this case, Strobeck said. That refers to statewide initiatives that create new state statutes.

This is not the first time a general-law city has tried to enforce term limits. In 1996, the Superior Court ruled term limits couldn't be enforced in Paradise Valley when Sara D. Moya wanted her name placed on the Town Council ballot.

The right of a charter city

For term limits to become enforced, a city must become a charter city unless the state Legislature takes action.

It isn't wise for local term limits to be under the guidance of the Legislature, Strobeck said.

"Term limits for city or town council members should be a matter of local control," he said. "If general-law cities want to have mandatory term limits, they can use the process already available in the Arizona Constitution and statutes and pass a city charter. Several cities have term limits in their local charters."

The League said the Arizona Constitution allows cities with a population of more than 3,500 to become a charter.

Carefree's Town Administrator Gary Neiss has been with the city for 16 years.

"In those 16 years, I never attended a council meeting where the topic of becoming a charter city was discussed," he told The Republic.

Cities can become a charter by a petition, or the city or Town Council can bring up the charter adoption to the people. Both options lead to an election.

Once the majority of voters approve of adopting the charter, it will become the organic law until it is approved by the governor, according to the league. After the governor's approval, it becomes the "constitution" of the city.

Farrar said charter city status would not be a good fit for Carefree.

"Charter government is not for everyone, at least Arizona history would indicate this," he said. "It is very expensive and restrictive for small local governments. It can create definite constraints on small towns."

Accusation of perjury

Adding to the controversy, the town said it believes Farrar committed perjury in a motion he filed in Crane's case.

Farrar alleges the town attorney, mayor and Crane worked together to overturn Carefree's term limits and cover legal costs.

"It is alleged the attorney for the Town of Carefree, Michael Wright, Mayor Les Peterson and Plaintiff (Crane) collaborated to orchestrate litigation against the named defendants, to overturn the will of the voters with the understanding Plaintiff would repay Mr. Peterson for the attorney fees and court costs to 'be paid by the Town of Carefree' once this Court awards attorney fees to the Plaintiff," stated Farrar in his motion to Maricopa County Superior Court to reconsider its judgment.

In response, Town Attorney Michael Wright sent a letter to Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery in June, requesting a perjury investigation of Farrar.

"A number of the statements made by Mr. Farrar in his Motion are not true and constitute perjury," Wright stated in the letter.

The town said Farrar's statement about Wright, Peterson and Crane is "blatantly false."

"In April I engaged an attorney, at my sole expense, to review the legality of the town ordinance," Crane told The Republic. "As the prevailing party, the judge ordered the town to pay my attorney costs. Subsequently, I filed a Notice of Satisfaction of Judgment relieving the town of this debt."

The town asked Montgomery to expedite an investigation because of the upcoming primary election, which is Aug. 28.

Wright would not offer comment to The Republic, but he confronted Ferrar at a Town Council meeting in June.

"Mike Farrar, I say this to you: Elections have consequences and we've heard that over and over," Wright said. "But I will also submit that political campaigning with actual malice towards your opponent and others also has severe consequences. You have libeled me and my firm. You have libeled the mayor. You have libeled John Crane."

Farrar told The Republic, "I welcome an investigation, and I have asked the Arizona State Bar and the Maricopa County Attorney's Office to investigate this matter and the alleged conflict of interest between the Mayor, Vice Mayor and Town Attorney."

State Bar investigation

Rick DeBruhl, the State Bar of Arizona's spokesman, confirmed that Farrar submitted a complaint against Wright and an investigation is underway.

Farrar said he filed the complaint because he believes Wright did not immediately inform council members that they were named defendants in Crane's lawsuit.

The town attorney's actions involving the perjury accusation also were unprofessional, Farrar said.

"He violated a town ordinance and his firm's contractual agreement with the town of Carefree as an attorney that also represents me in my official capacity," Farrar said.

Wright declined to comment on the State Bar complaint.

READ MORE: