Add a “logrolling” lawsuit in Albuquerque, challenging this fall’s anticipated ballot initiative on the City’s proposed Healthy Workforce Ordinance (HWO), to the PSL litigation docket.
The complaint alleges that the HWO has 14 “non-interdependent” provisions and combining them into one voter initiative is “logrolling” in violation of the state constitution. Logrolling, also known as the “single subject” rule, is defined in the lawsuit as “the presentation of double or multiple propositions to the voters with no chance to vote on the separate questions so that unpopular, unworkable or extreme new laws will be voted on, with a potentially popular idea.” The “single subject” argument was rejected recently in Arizona and is pending in the challenge to Initiative 1433 in Washington.
The lawsuit was filed earlier this week by a host of business interests against the City of Albuquerque, the City Council and each of its members. The complaint asks that the court permanently enjoin the City and Council from placing the proposed HWO on the ballot. The lawsuit also challenges the City’s minimum wage law. The case is Association of Commerce and Industry, NAIOP & New Mexico Restaurant Ass’n v. City of Albuquerque et al (County of Bernalillo, Second Judicial District, Case No. D-202-CV-2017-02314).
In addition to the “logrolling” argument, the lawsuit alleges that the HWO is overbroad because it applies to employers outside of Albuquerque. A similar argument was upheld recently in a lawsuit challenging the Minneapolis Safe and Sick Time Ordinance. That decision has been appealed. The lawsuit also argues that HWO exceeds Albuquerque’s authority under the home rule provision of the state constitution.
This fall’s anticipated voter initiative on the HWO follows last November’s failed effort to have PSL put on the county elections ballot. As reported, the county rejected the effort to include merely a summary of the PSL bill on the ballot.