Special Master in Arkansas Finds Issues with Anti-casino Ballot Signatures

Special master to the Arkansas Supreme Court Randy Wright claims close to 6,000 signatures given in support of an anti-casino ballot initiative have insufficient addresses, which is reason for them to be disqualified. 

The special master’s report will inform the highest court whether the votes cast on the constitutional amendment proposal for November should be counted or not. 

The amendment wants to revoke a Pope County casino license and see that all new casinos built in the Bear State will receive approval via special county elections prior to being issued licenses to operate.

We can expect the upcoming weeks to bring forward more briefs on the matter. According to petitioners, a ruling will be likely given in mid-October.

Previously, similar challenges to the same proposal, including potential problems with an agent who signed affidavits in place of a sponsor part of an original action petition filed in August were rejected.

Local Voters in Charge, “Pleased, But Not Surprised” by the Report

A group that has shown support for the ballot initiative, Local Voters in Charge, has used the voice of spokesperson Hans Stiritz, to express their view on the special master’s report.

“We’re pleased, but not surprised,” Stiritz said, adding they will keep “ensuring that local voters throughout Arkansas have the final say on whether a casino should be built in their communities,” encouraged by voters’ support shown when signing their petition “in unprecedented numbers across the state.”

The group submitted over 162,000 signatures on July 5, the state’s chosen deadline, going well over the necessary 90,704. 

Secretary of State John Thurston’s office gave the green light to over 116,000 signatures on the last day of the same month.

On August 1, the Arkansas Canvassing Compliance Committee (ACCC), whose declared mission is to “serve as the compliance and enforcement agency under Arkansas’ standards of conduct and disclosure laws” concerning candidates, lobbyists, committees, and individuals involved with initiatives referred to the voters, filed a petition against Thurston. 

The group wanted to see all signatures be disqualified. The following week, the Arkansas Supreme Court appointed Wright as a special master responsible for resolving “factual disputes raised in the petition.”

The special master’s report addressed a series of allegations against Local Voters in Charge, including paperwork-related technicalities, paid canvassers’ insufficient addresses, or monetary incentives for the collection of signatures.

Wright mostly found no problems in the ballot question committee’s collection. However, he discovered that nine addresses of paid canvassers were problematic. 

This, in turn, prompted him to recommend that 5,966 signatures be thrown.

At the same time, the attorney general’s office said all signatures collected by the group should be subject to disqualification because of a technicality regarding the person who signed the affidavit documents on behalf of the ballot question committee. 

The special master deemed that ACCC was not able to provide enough proof that Local Voters in Charge had either given or offered any monetary incentives to canvassers for collecting a higher number of signatures.

ACCC’s spokesperson Allison Burum explained they were “reviewing the special master’s report in detail” and looking forward to filing their opening brief with the Arkansas Supreme Court on September 16.