Anne C. Graham-Bergin, #011504
Attorney for Intervenor 
 
 

Intervenor Pinal Citizens for Sustainable Communities, Inc., through undersigned counsel, answers Plaintiffs’ Complaint as follows:

1. Upon information and belief, Intervenor admits that Plaintiff is the owner of real property located in Pinal County which was rezoned and which is the subject of the referendum petitions at issue. Intervenor lacks sufficient information as to the truth of the remaining allegations contained in the paragraph and therefore denies the allegations. 

2. Intervenor admits the allegations contained in paragraph 2, 3, 4 and 5.

3. Intervenor lacks sufficient information as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 6 and therefore denies the allegations. 

4. As to the allegations of paragraph 7, Intervenor admits that any group intending to file a referendum against a county zoning ordinance must submit to the county’s election office an "Application for Initiative or Referendum Petition Serial Number" and obtain an official number for inclusion upon petitions for circulation. Intervenor denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 7.

5. As to paragraph 8, Intervenor admits that the quoted portion of A.R.S. §19-114 is correctly stated. 

6. As to the allegations of paragraph 9, Intervenor admits it applied for a petition serial number on May 16, 2001. As to the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 9, it denies the same.

7. Intervenor denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 10 and 11.

8. Intervenor admits the allegations contained in paragraph 12 and affirmatively alleges it was under no obligation to request a copy of the enacted ordinances from any other governmental official other than Defendant Pinal County Director of Elections.

9. Intervenor lacks sufficient information as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 13 and therefore denies the allegations. Intervenor affirmatively alleges that regardless of which official maintains official records of enacted zoning ordinances in Pinal County, Defendant Director of Elections is obligated under A.R.S. §19-142 to provide petition proponents with the materials for circulation of a referendum petition.

10. Intervenor denies the allegations of paragraphs 14 and 15.

11. Intervenor lacks sufficient information as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 16 and therefore denies the allegations. 

12. Intervenor admits that the quoted portions of A.R.S. §19-114 are correctly stated in paragraph 17 and affirmatively alleges that the time for circulation did not begin until the materials for circulation were available from Defendant Director of Elections.

13. Intervenor lacks sufficient information as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraphs 18 and 19 and therefore denies the allegations.

14. Intervenor denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 20 and 21.

15. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 22, Intervenor admits that on May 31, 2001, Defendant Director of Elections provided them with the materials for circulation. The remaining allegations of paragraph 22 are denied.

16. Intervenor admits the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 23. Intervenor admits that the application form contained a blank space labeled "For Office Use Only" in bold and all capital letters. Intervenor denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 23.

17. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 24, Intervenor admits that Defendant Director of Elections did not insert a due date for the petitions when the application for petition serial number was submitted. Intervenor denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 24.

18. Intervenor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 25.

19. Intervenor admits the allegations contained in paragraph 26 and affirmatively alleges that Defendant Director of Elections’ duty was to calculate the 30 day time period pursuant to A.R.S. §19-142 which the Director of Elections fulfilled independently and without request on May 31, 2001 when the materials for circulation became available.

20. Intervenor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 27.

21. Intervenor admits the allegations contained in paragraph 28.

22. Intervenor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 29 and 30.

23. Intervenor admits the allegations contained in paragraph 31.

24. Intervenor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 32 - 38.

25. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 39, Intervenor admits that it filed its articles of incorporation on November 8, 2000 but denies any legal conclusion concerning whether it was a legal corporate entity on November 7, 2000.

26. Intervenor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 40.

27. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 41, Intervenor admits that it filed a statement of organization on November 7, 2000 and the chairman shown was Mr. Huntington. Intervenor denies any remaining allegations contained in paragraph 41.

28. Intervenor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 42.

29. Intervenor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 43.

30. Intervenor admits the allegations contained in paragraph 44.

31. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 45, Intervenor states that the Statement of Organization filed November 7, 2000 was all that was required to be on file as of May 16, 2001, the day the application for petition serial number was submitted. Intervenor denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 45.

32. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 46, Intervenor admits referendum petition number 110601-REF2 appears on the lower right hand corner of the referendum petitions. Intervenor denies any obligation to submit the petition serial number on any statement of organization and therefore denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 46.

33. Intervenor denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 47 - 51.

34. Intervenor affirmatively alleges the defenses of failure to state a claim for relief and estoppel.

Wherefore, Intervenor requests the following relief:

A. Dismissing Plaintiffs’ Complaint with prejudice; 

....

....

B. Awarding Intervenor its fees and expenses, including reasonable and necessary attorneys fees;

C. Granting Intervenor such other and further relief as is just and proper.

Dated this 16th day of August, 2001.

RAVEN & AWERKAMP, P.C. 

__________________________________ Anne C. Graham-Bergin 

Attorney for Intervenor 

Copy of the foregoing mailed this

16^th day of August, 2001 to:

Jeffrey Willis, Esq.

Snell & Wilmer

1 S. Church, Suite 1500

Tucson, AZ 85701

Attorney for Plaintiffs

William H. McLean

Pinal County Attorney’s Office

P.O. Box 887

Florence, AZ 85232

Attorney for County Defendants