Arizona Court Upholds Scottsdale Proposition 490

The appellate court rejected a legal challenge regarding the vote threshold required for the tax measure.

Updated on Oct. 30, 2026 in Law

Bold flat-color editorial illustration of clean, geometric stone pillars with sharp shadows, evoking municipal legal stability. — The Arizona Court of Appeals upheld Scottsdale Proposition 490, confirming the tax measure's validity after plaintiffs challenged the required voter approval threshold. AI Illustration. Upload story photo >

Live Poll

Should state referendums require at least 60% voter approval to be legally enforceable?

The Arizona Court of Appeals has denied a lawsuit that challenged the enforceability of Scottsdale Proposition 490. Plaintiffs argued the tax referendum failed to meet a required 60% margin for approval.

Why it matters

The ruling settles a legal battle over whether the city's voter-approved tax measure met the state-mandated threshold for enactment. It confirms the status of the local tax policy following months of judicial review.

State law requires a 60% margin for referendums to be enforceable. The court rejected the argument that Proposition 490 failed to reach this mandate.

The players

Robert Stamper

He was a lead plaintiff in the legal challenge filed against the city's tax measure.

Gretchen Jacobs

She served as a plaintiff alongside Robert Stamper in the lawsuit concerning the referendum's validity.

Goldwater Institute

This conservative public policy organization provided legal backing for the challenge against the city tax.

The details

The lawsuit was initiated in June 2025 by plaintiffs Robert Stamper and Gretchen Jacobs, with support from the Goldwater Institute. The court's decision effectively keeps the measure's standing intact after its passage by voters in 2024.

Voters approved Proposition 490 in November 2024.
The Goldwater Institute filed the lawsuit in June 2025.
The Arizona Court of Appeals denied the lawsuit claim on October 27, 2026.

Political Context

The opposition party and interest groups often utilize the 60% supermajority rule to challenge local revenue measures. Proponents argue such thresholds are necessary to limit tax increases, while opponents suggest they undermine local democratic outcomes.

The court's decision maintains the current tax policy for local residents and taxpayers in Scottsdale. No immediate changes to tax obligations are expected as a direct result of this appellate ruling.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tension between local voter-approved initiatives and state-level legislative constraints on taxation. Residents should monitor local government filings to see how the court decision influences upcoming city budget allocations.