Senate committee advances measure to require citizen-only state census and set up $5 million annual fund
Summary
Senate lawmakers voted to advance SCR 10‑22, a measure that would require the Independent Redistricting Commission to use citizen-only counts for redistricting and create a state census fund funded by a $5 million annual transfer from the Citizens Clean Elections Fund.
Senate lawmakers on Tuesday voted to give Senate Concurrent Resolution 10-22 a do-pass recommendation after adopting a technical amendment, moving the constitutional-style measure closer to a public vote.
SCR 10-22 would require Arizona’s Independent Redistricting Commission to conduct a decennial state census that tabulates the number of U.S. citizens in each legislative district and to use those citizen-only counts, rather than total population, when drawing legislative districts. The measure creates a state census fund and transfers $5,000,000 per fiscal year from the Citizens Clean Elections Fund into that newly created account; money in the state census fund would be continuously appropriated and administered by the IRC or another body designated by the Legislature.
Supporters framed the proposal as a way to ensure that representation at the statehouse reflects “lawful, legal citizens” rather than all residents. A staff summary also said the commission may conduct the state census consistent with U.S. Census Bureau procedures except where federal practices conflict with the measure’s requirements. The resolution would permit any member of the Legislature to initiate enforcement actions if the IRC failed to follow the specified census procedures.
Opponents questioned the need for a duplicative statewide count, the cost to Arizona and legal risk. Committee testimony cited a fiscal estimate prepared on a related proposal that projected a startup cost as low as $25 million and ongoing extrapolated costs up to about $158 million based on prior special census efforts in Arizona. Members also warned that a separate state census could reduce participation in the federal census and jeopardize federal representation and funding.
Public commenters who spoke opposed the measure as duplicative and risky. A testifier who identified herself as Deborah Howard urged continued reliance on the U.S. Census Bureau, calling it the “gold standard” and noting past litigation defending census procedures.
After debate, the committee adopted a seven-page amendment described as technical and then moved the amended resolution. The committee recorded a do-pass-as-amended recommendation by a vote of 4 ayes and 3 nays; the measure, as an SCR, would proceed to the ballot if enacted.
What happens next: Because the measure is an SCR, committee passage advances it toward a floor vote and, if enacted, to the ballot for voter approval. The committee did not adopt a fiscal note during the hearing; multiple members and speakers requested clearer costing and implementation details before later stages.
