² The Inapt Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius Canon Cannot Show Section 2804 Allows Siting Dispensaries Next to Preschools Because “Private School, Public School, and Preschool” Is Not a Parallel Construction. ¶90 The majority’s plain meaning analysis is that Section 2804 cannot include preschools, because Section 2804 would have read “public schools, private schools, and preschools” were they meant to be included. See Paragraph 22, supra. While the majority does not call that expressio unius est exclusio alterius, the majority is using that canon by arguing the legislature excluded “preschool” from Section 2804(B) when it included “public school” and “private school” but not “preschool” there. See State v. Gonzales, 206 Ariz. 469, 472 ¶ 11 (App. 2003) (defining canon). This argument fails. ¶91 First, all age-divisions of school can fall within either the set of public schools or private schools, as the below figure illustrates. There

³ SL et al. v. STATE et al. Jacobs, J., dissenting ¶101 Second, even if construing the Act correctly here might lead to administrative burden, and all indications are it will not, that is not our cue to rewrite the statute. We are here to give effect to the people’s enactment, not to preempt that analysis by deciding it would be too hard to do what the voters enacted. CONCLUSION ¶102 For all of these reasons, I respectfully dissent and would affirm the judgment of the superior court, while remanding to determine the appropriate remedy for 3SL’s exclusion from the lottery. AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court FILED: AGFV