Litigated Cases · Local Minimum Wage
Flagstaff Minimum-Wage Litigation
A lawsuit challenged the constitutionality of a 2013 law barring local governments from exceeding the Arizona minimum wage within their jurisdictions.
April 15, 2015 · Updated July 15, 2017
Shawn Aiken joined lead counsel Mik Jordahl to successfully represent the Flagstaff Living Wage Coalition in a 2015 challenge to a 2013 law that reserved to the State the power to establish Arizona’s minimum wage.
The case was settled June 29, 2015, in favor of the plaintiffs, after Attorney General Mark Brnovich agreed to a Maricopa County Superior Court judgment confirming that the 2013 law limiting minimum-wage increases conflicted with the voter-approved Proposition 202.
As a result of the settlement, the power to set a minimum wage higher than the statewide minimum was restored to Arizona counties, cities, and towns.
On April 1, 2016, the Flagstaff Living Wage Coalition announced a voter initiative to gradually raise the city’s minimum wage to $15 per hour by 2021, with the minimum for tipped workers reaching that level by 2026. Flagstaff voters approved the measure.
Background
The power to set a minimum wage was vested in local governments after Arizona voters approved Proposition 202, the Arizona Minimum Wage Act, in 2006. The Act provided for a statewide minimum wage with automatic increases, and stated that a “county, city, or town may by ordinance regulate minimum wages and benefits within its geographic boundaries but may not provide for a minimum wage lower than that prescribed in this article.”
In 2013, the Arizona legislature passed A.R.S. § 23-204 to provide that only the State may regulate employee benefits, including compensation — terminating local governments’ power, granted by the voters in 2006, to set a higher local minimum wage.
In the lawsuit, the Coalition contended that the 2013 law violated Article 4 of the Arizona Constitution, which voters amended in 1998 through the Voter Protection Act. That Act requires a three-fourths vote of both the House and Senate to amend a voter-approved measure, and any amendment must advance or be consistent with the measure’s original purpose. The 2013 legislation fell short of the three-fourths requirement and, the plaintiffs successfully argued, undermined the voters’ intent as stated in Proposition 202.
Case Documents
In The News
Flagstaff Group Sues to Raise Minimum Wage — Arizona Republic, April 14, 2015
Court: Arizona Cities Can Raise Minimum Wage — Arizona Republic, June 30, 2015
Coalition Launches Initiative to Raise the Minimum Wage to $15 — Press Release, April 1, 2016