A court hearing has been set for next week to determine whether Scottsdale voters will be casting their ballots on anti-dust measures in September. A sufficient number of signatures were gathered by the political committee, Unjust Dust, and the Scottsdale City Council earlier this week officially called the election for Sept. 2.
However, former Councilman Kevin Osterman filed a lawsuit a week ago with hopes of keeping the issue off the ballot. In the lawsuit, Osterman’s lawyer, Tom Irvine, claimed the council’s act was administrative — not legislative — and therefore not subject to a referendum. Irvine cited other issues such as a lack of description of what voters were signing.
Osterman said he filed the lawsuit because the city is at risk of losing federal funding for not being in compliance with federal mandates.
The lawsuit brought the parties into court Thursday to establish an expedited schedule to resolve the issue before June 13, which is the county’s deadline to print the ballots.
The court hearing is Thursday.
Amy Ganley, treasurer of the Unjust Dust political committee, attended the hearing. At this time, she does not have a lawyer but said that is being discussed.
“We expect to take an active role (in the case),” Ganley said.
In March, the council approved a number of anti-dust mandates handed down by the federal government through a state law.
The judge in the case is Peter Swann, who ruled that the Height and Density political committee that gathered enough signatures to force a referendum on the Hanover apartment and retail complex was not properly formed and that the election could not move forward.
If not for a legal challenge, that issue would have been on the Sept. 2 ballot.
Still remaining on the September ballot are the mayoral and council races, along with partisan primary elections.