Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 9
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-821.01 (2026)

Declaration of statewide concern; nonpartisan city and town elections; districts; procedure

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

9-821.01. Declaration of statewide concern; nonpartisan city and town elections; districts; procedure

A. Arizona courts have recognized that the Constitution of Arizona requires the legislature's involvement in issues relating to elections conducted by charter cities, including initiative and referendum elections, the method of elections other than by ballot, laws relating to primary elections, voter registration laws to prevent abuse and fraud and campaign finance laws. The legislature finds that the conduct of elections described in this section is a matter of statewide concern.

B. Notwithstanding any other law, a city or town shall not hold any election on candidates for which there is any indication on the ballot of the source of the candidacy or of the support of the candidate.

C. Notwithstanding any other law, for any city or town that provides for election of city or town council members by district, ward, precinct or other geographical designation, only those voters who are qualified electors of the district, ward, precinct or other geographic designation are eligible to vote for that council member candidate in the city or town's primary, general, runoff or other election.

D. Notwithstanding any other law or any charter provision, a city or town may by ordinance provide that at the primary election any candidate for the office of mayor or city council who receives a majority of all votes cast at that election for that office shall be declared elected to the office for which the person is a candidate, effective as of the date of the general election, and a further election may not be held as to such candidate, except that if the person holding the office of mayor or city council at the time of the primary election is holding that office by appointment as prescribed by section 9-235, the following apply:

1. A candidate for the remainder of that term in office who receives a majority of all votes cast at the primary election both:

(a) Shall be declared elected after the canvass and certification of the results of that primary election and on taking the oath of office.

(b) Shall be seated in accordance with subsection E of this section.

2. A candidate for a new term in that office who receives a majority of all votes cast at the primary election both:

(a) Shall be declared elected to the new term of office, effective after the canvass and certification of the results of that primary election and on taking the oath of office.

(b) May be seated to complete the remainder of existing term in accordance with subsection E of this section.

E. If more than one candidate receives a majority of all votes cast at the primary for an office that is currently being served by a person who is appointed as provided in subsection D of this section, the order of seating the candidates shall be determined by the highest number of votes.

F. For the purposes of subsection D of this section, the majority of votes cast is determined by:

1. Calculating the total number of actual votes cast for all candidates for an office whose names were lawfully on the ballot for that office.

2. Dividing the sum reached pursuant to paragraph 1 of this subsection by the number of seats to be filled for the office.

3. Dividing the number reached pursuant to paragraph 2 of this subsection by two and rounding that number to the highest whole number. 

G. If more candidates receive a majority of votes cast than there are seats to be filled for the office pursuant to subsection D of this section, from among those candidates who receive a majority of votes cast, the candidates who receive the highest number of votes equal to the number of seats to be filled for the office shall be declared elected to that office.

H. If at the primary election no candidate receives the majority of the votes cast or the number of seats to be filled for the office is more than the number of candidates who receive a majority of votes cast, of the candidates who did not receive a majority of votes cast, the number of candidates who advance to the general or runoff election shall be equal in number to twice the number of seats to be filled for the office and the candidates who received the highest number of votes for the office shall be the only candidates at the general or runoff election. If more than one candidate received an equal number of votes and that number was the highest number of votes for the office, then all candidates receiving the equal number of votes shall be candidates at the general or runoff election.  The candidates equal in number to the seats to be filled for the office who receive the highest number of votes at the general or runoff election shall be declared elected to that office.  If two or more candidates receive an equal number of votes cast for the same office, and a higher number than any other candidate, the candidate who shall be declared elected shall be determined by lot in the presence of the candidates.  A write-in candidate may not advance to the general or runoff election if the write-in candidate did not receive a number of votes equivalent to at least the same number of signatures required by section 16-322 for nominating petitions for the same office. 

I. In addition to subsection D of this section, any town with a population of five thousand persons or less may by majority vote of the qualified electors of the town voting on the question provide that at the primary election those candidates receiving the highest number of votes for the offices to be filled shall be declared elected to the office, and a further election may not be held if at least three-fifths of the seats are filled by persons receiving a majority of the votes cast as provided in subsection D of this section.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1996–2020 · leading case: City of Tucson v. State, 273 P.3d 624 (Ariz. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Tucson v. State, 273 P.3d 624 (Ariz. 2012). · cites it 29× “¶ 2 Tucson city council members are nominated in ward-based primary elections but elected in at-large (city-wide) general elections.”
City of Tucson v. State, 250 P.3d 251 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 70× “The city argues the court erred because the Tucson city charter regarding local elections supersedes the legislature's 2009 amendments to A.R.S. § 9-821.01. Because the method and manner of conducting municipal elections is solely a matter of local concern, we reverse and remand.”
Thomas P. Morrissey v. Logan Stan Garner, 461 P.3d 428 (Ariz. 2020). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 9-821.01(D). ¶17 This is precisely the system Payson adopted, providing for the primary election to serve as the general election when a majority of voters choose a candidate for mayor.”
Homebuilders Ass'n of Cent. Arizona v. City of Scottsdale, 925 P.2d 1359 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 5× “See generally A.R.S. § 9-821.01 (“a city ... may by ordinance provide that any candidate who receives a majority of all votes cast at such election shall be declared elected to the office for which he is a candidate, and no further election shall be held as to such candidate”).”
City of Tucson v. State of Arizona S. Arizona Leadership Council Senator Jonathan Paton (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 34× “The city argues the court erred because the Tucson city charter regarding local elections supersedes the legislature‟s 2009 amendments to A.R.S. § 9-821.01. Because the method and manner of conducting municipal elections is solely a matter of local concern, we reverse and remand.”
Gordon Gillespy v. Steven L Caros (Ariz. 2020). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to Prescott Valley Town Code § 2-03-010 and the enabling statute, A.R.S. § 9-821.01, a candidate who wins a majority at the primary election “is declared elected to the office for which the person is a candidate, effective as of the date of the general election.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-821.01(0) — 1 case
City of Tucson v. State, 250 P.3d 251 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). “The city argues the court erred because the Tucson city charter regarding local elections supersedes the legislature's 2009 amendments to A.R.S. § 9-821.01. Because the method and manner of conducting municipal elections is solely a matter of local concern, we reverse and remand.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-821.01(A) — 3 cases
City of Tucson v. State, 273 P.3d 624 (Ariz. 2012). “¶ 2 Tucson city council members are nominated in ward-based primary elections but elected in at-large (city-wide) general elections.”
City of Tucson v. State, 250 P.3d 251 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). “The city argues the court erred because the Tucson city charter regarding local elections supersedes the legislature's 2009 amendments to A.R.S. § 9-821.01. Because the method and manner of conducting municipal elections is solely a matter of local concern, we reverse and remand.”
City of Tucson v. State of Arizona S. Arizona Leadership Council Senator Jonathan Paton (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). “The city argues the court erred because the Tucson city charter regarding local elections supersedes the legislature‟s 2009 amendments to A.R.S. § 9-821.01. Because the method and manner of conducting municipal elections is solely a matter of local concern, we reverse and remand.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-821.01(B) — 3 cases
City of Tucson v. State, 273 P.3d 624 (Ariz. 2012). “¶ 2 Tucson city council members are nominated in ward-based primary elections but elected in at-large (city-wide) general elections.”
City of Tucson v. State, 250 P.3d 251 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). “The city argues the court erred because the Tucson city charter regarding local elections supersedes the legislature's 2009 amendments to A.R.S. § 9-821.01. Because the method and manner of conducting municipal elections is solely a matter of local concern, we reverse and remand.”
City of Tucson v. State of Arizona S. Arizona Leadership Council Senator Jonathan Paton (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). “The city argues the court erred because the Tucson city charter regarding local elections supersedes the legislature‟s 2009 amendments to A.R.S. § 9-821.01. Because the method and manner of conducting municipal elections is solely a matter of local concern, we reverse and remand.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-821.01(C) — 3 cases
City of Tucson v. State, 250 P.3d 251 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). “The city argues the court erred because the Tucson city charter regarding local elections supersedes the legislature's 2009 amendments to A.R.S. § 9-821.01. Because the method and manner of conducting municipal elections is solely a matter of local concern, we reverse and remand.”
City of Tucson v. State, 273 P.3d 624 (Ariz. 2012). “¶ 2 Tucson city council members are nominated in ward-based primary elections but elected in at-large (city-wide) general elections.”
City of Tucson v. State of Arizona S. Arizona Leadership Council Senator Jonathan Paton (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). “The city argues the court erred because the Tucson city charter regarding local elections supersedes the legislature‟s 2009 amendments to A.R.S. § 9-821.01. Because the method and manner of conducting municipal elections is solely a matter of local concern, we reverse and remand.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-821.01(D) — 1 case
Thomas P. Morrissey v. Logan Stan Garner, 461 P.3d 428 (Ariz. 2020). “A.R.S. § 9-821.01(D). ¶17 This is precisely the system Payson adopted, providing for the primary election to serve as the general election when a majority of voters choose a candidate for mayor.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-821.01(F) — 1 case
Thomas P. Morrissey v. Logan Stan Garner, 461 P.3d 428 (Ariz. 2020). “A.R.S. § 9-821.01(D). ¶17 This is precisely the system Payson adopted, providing for the primary election to serve as the general election when a majority of voters choose a candidate for mayor.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.