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 throwing 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 the 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 May 29.
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 this case is Peter Swann, who is the same judge who ruled that the Height and Density political committee that gathered sufficient signatures to force a referendum on the Hanover apartment and retail complex was not properly formed and the election could not move forward.
If not for that legal challenge, that issue would have been on the Sept. 2. ballot.
Still remaining on the September ballot is the mayor and council races, along with partisan primary elections.