The Flagstaff ordinance at problem units the present minimal at $15. And it’ll rise to $15.50 in January; the state minimal, tied to inflation, will go solely to $12.80.
Earlier this 12 months, state lawmakers put a provision within the funds to impose a $1.1 million evaluation, what companies declare the upper native minimal wage will value Arizona taxpayers. Flagstaff responded by submitting swimsuit.
Legal professional Roopali Desai identified to Smith that the state statute setting out a minimal wage particularly permits cities to undertake a fair larger determine.
Extra to the purpose, Desai stated state legislation is topic to the Voter Safety Act, a constitutional provision that bars lawmakers from tinkering with what has been accepted on the poll. She contends that the greater than $1.1 million evaluation towards Flagstaff — she calls it a penalty — is an unlawful violation of the state legislation, simply the identical as if legislators have been to instantly attempt to repeal the permission for native minimal wages.
However Assistant Legal professional Normal Kara Karlson desires Smith to view the Voter Safety Act by way of a way more slim lens.
“The truth that they have been in a position to increase the minimal wage, the truth that Tucson has a vote coming as much as increase its minimal wage, reveals that it would not instantly implicate the Voter Safety Act,” she argued.
Smith, nonetheless, stated it isn’t that easy. He advised Karlson that what she is arguing is that cities can, in reality, have the next minimal wage, “however provided that you are keen to forego your share of distributed tax income.”