Opponents of a ballot initiative for a spending cap in Anchorage have filed suit to stop the measure, alleging it violates the Alaska Constitution and city charter.
Though the initiative hasn't yet gathered the 5,700-plus signatures to make the April ballot, motions filed in Anchorage Superior Court are seeking a court order to halt the process, including signature gathering.
The initial complaint, filed Jan. 4, lists Jeffrey Schmitz, Guadalupe Marroquin and Matthew Fraize as the plaintiffs, court documents show. All are Anchorage residents. Marroquin used to run city elections as a deputy city clerk and twice ran unsuccessfully for the Alaska Legislature; Fraize is an Anchorage police officer.
Stacey Stone, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said in a phone interview Friday that her clients believe the initiative will illegally "usurp" the Assembly's ability to make or repeal appropriations. She also warned of consequences for public safety.
"A lot of people are concerned with public safety right now, given the homicide rate last year, and this would really constrict the (city) to keep the current staffing levels at APD that they have right now," Stone said.
Anchorage's city code already has a spending cap. The existing ordinance, which was little known until last year, limits the Anchorage Assembly's year-to-year spending increases by population and inflation. It also allows for "additional increases necessary to provide voter and legally mandated services."
Over the years, city administrations have interpreted the spending limit in different ways, and City Attorney Bill Falsey said last month it had "never actually had a meaningful effect on a budget."
The Assembly suspended the law for two years in October amid questions about the spending limit's efficacy.
The initiative, sponsored by Bob Griffin and Terre Gales, puts a similar version of the existing law into Anchorage city charter — which acts like the city's constitution, and is far more difficult to modify than an ordinance.
Griffin's group also makes the limit less flexible by spelling out exemptions to payments on voter-approved bond debt, legal settlements and judgments, expenditures by limited service areas, emergency ordinances and grants from noncity sources.
Griffin said Friday he was surprised by the lawsuit. He said he and other supporters of the initiative are looking to hire their own attorney. If the matter gets into court, Falsey will defend the city against the suit.
"We are not making or repealing any appropriation," Griffin said. "I don't see how their complaint applies."
The Anchorage chapter of the conservative organization Americans For Prosperity sent out an email blasting the lawsuit backers as obstructionists and "big spenders."
The Schmitz, Marroquin and Fraize lawsuit cites a provision in the state Constitution that prevents initiatives from seeking to make or repeal appropriations.
The suit also cites a memo from assistant city attorney Dean Gates stating there were "grounds to doubt (the) legal sufficiency" of the initiative, but he would advise the city clerk to certify it for signature-gathering anyway.
The suit also alleges that the city clerk's office made mistakes in certifying the petition.
Falsey said Friday that in reviewing the petition, he and his deputies felt the constitutionality of the measure was a "close question."
"But we felt like Alaska Supreme Court precedent suggested to us it was something that should be allowed," Falsey said.
Falsey said he expected both parties to work to get an answer from the court system as quickly as possible.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs filed a temporary restraining order on Friday; a complaint was filed a week earlier. A court date had not yet been set, Falsey said.
Griffin said supporters are continuing to gather signatures in the meantime, and are close to having enough.