Vote Yes on this bill if you want to make it a misdemeanor to knowingly warn someone in real time about an imminent arrest, helping police finish arrests and reducing interference.

Organizations that support this bill may include law enforcement associations, prosecutors, and victims' rights groups that want fewer tip-offs during arrests.

Vote No on this bill if you want to avoid new limits on speech and online posts, reduce the risk of charging bystanders or activists, and prevent chilling effects on community communications.

Organizations that oppose this bill may include civil liberties groups, public defenders, and digital rights and media organizations concerned about free speech and overreach.

Vote Yes on this bill if you want higher, uniform 8% signature thresholds statewide and by district, plus an automatic vote at the next general election when lawmakers do not enact an initiative.

Organizations that support this bill may include good-government groups seeking broad consensus, election administrators favoring uniform rules, and business or taxpayer associations that prefer fewer, well-vetted initiatives.

Vote No on this bill if you want to keep lower signature requirements for submitting initiatives to the Legislature, reduce costs and barriers for grassroots campaigns, and avoid raising the hurdle to qualify measures.

Organizations that oppose this bill may include direct democracy and ballot access advocates, grassroots community and civil liberties groups, and labor or public interest coalitions that rely on citizen initiatives.

Vote Yes on this bill if you want to consolidate housing programs under a new statewide division, tighten moderate-income housing and station-area planning requirements, link transportation priorities to local compliance, and require clearer reporting on the use and outcomes of state housing funds.

Organizations that support this bill may include housing affordability advocates, homelessness service providers, transit and metropolitan planning organizations, and statewide economic development groups that favor coordinated housing policy, data reporting, and incentives tied to transportation funding.

Vote No on this bill if you want to avoid new state mandates and penalties on local governments, preserve greater local discretion over housing and station-area plans, and prevent added reporting and administrative burdens for public and private housing projects.

Organizations that oppose this bill may include municipal and county associations concerned about state preemption and penalties, property-rights or anti-growth groups wary of new planning mandates, and some developer or landlord groups opposed to additional reporting requirements.

Vote Yes on this bill if you want tighter state and local cooperation with federal immigration agencies, a ban on sanctuary-style noncooperation, required officer training, access to federal resources, and Attorney General oversight of local policies.

Organizations that support this bill may include law-and-order advocacy groups, border security organizations, county sheriffs’ associations, and conservative policy groups that favor stronger immigration enforcement and uniform cooperation with federal authorities.

Vote No on this bill if you want to maintain local control and discretion, limit local police involvement in federal immigration enforcement, avoid potential harms to community trust, and prevent state-mandated investigations of city and county policies.

Organizations that oppose this bill may include immigrant and refugee advocacy groups, civil liberties organizations, some city governments and police chiefs focused on community trust, and faith-based groups that prefer local discretion over federal immigration enforcement.

Vote Yes on this bill if you want Arizona’s primary moved to late July, more party observers at more voting locations, quicker ballot processing, and 2026 petitions with the old date to remain valid.

Organizations that support this bill may include election integrity groups, state political parties, and good-government advocates who favor more observer access, faster results, and uniform election dates.

Vote No on this bill if you want to keep the current August primary schedule, avoid expanding observer presence, maintain existing post-election timelines, and prevent abrupt changes to 2026 election plans.

Organizations that oppose this bill may include voting rights groups, civic engagement nonprofits, and local election officials concerned that a July primary and expanded observers could lower turnout and strain polling places.

Vote Yes on this bill if you want uniform eligibility and background checks for sheriffs and chiefs, a clear duty to enforce state law, removal when decertified, more public transparency, and strict limits and supervision for volunteers and youth cadets.

Organizations that support this bill may include civil rights and police accountability groups, immigrant and community safety advocates, city governments, and police chiefs associations that favor uniform hiring standards and oversight.

Vote No on this bill if you want to preserve broader local control over who can serve as sheriff, keep volunteer posses with greater authority, avoid new training and policy mandates, and limit state oversight and public posting of candidate vetting.

Organizations that oppose this bill may include some county sheriffs’ groups, law-enforcement unions, rural county associations, and volunteer posse organizations concerned about costs, staffing limits, and reduced local discretion.

Vote Yes on this bill if you want local boards to choose how to use funds without a fixed 40% training minimum or related penalties.

Local workforce development boards, one-stop operators, and social service organizations that want more flexible spending for job search help, counseling, and support services may support this bill.

Vote No on this bill if you want to keep a guaranteed 40% for training and maintain penalties for boards that miss that target.

Community colleges, apprenticeship and training providers, and labor groups that want a protected share of funds for credential-focused training may oppose this bill.

Vote Yes on this bill if you want a statewide veterans suicide prevention program that boosts screenings, funds local efforts, trains agencies, and improves data sharing and annual reporting to target help faster.

Organizations that support this bill may include veterans service organizations, military family groups, mental health and suicide prevention advocates, and public health departments seeking coordinated care and local grants.

Vote No on this bill if you want to limit government program expansion and spending, keep death and autopsy information from being shared with the veterans department, and avoid new grant and training duties.

Organizations that oppose this bill may include civil liberties and privacy advocates, budget watchdog groups, and some medical-legal stakeholders concerned about broader sharing of death and autopsy data and potential new costs.

Vote Yes on this bill if you want voters to sign nomination petitions securely online, candidates to gather signatures more easily, and equal, party‑neutral access with uniform rules for all covered candidates.

Organizations that support this bill may include voting rights and civic engagement groups, independent and minor‑party advocates, disability and rural access organizations, and technology associations that favor secure digital government services.

Vote No on this bill if you want to avoid new cybersecurity and privacy risks, prevent added state costs and mandates, reduce reliance on internet access for civic participation, and keep more discretion with election officials over petition procedures.

Organizations that oppose this bill may include election integrity and cybersecurity groups concerned about online petition fraud, major political parties wary of crowded ballots, and local election officials concerned about costs and administrative burdens.

Vote Yes on this bill if you want people incarcerated for felony convictions to retain the right to vote, expanding civic participation and ending the state’s constitutional ban on voting in prison.

Organizations that support this bill may include voting rights and civil liberties groups, criminal justice reform advocates, racial justice coalitions, some faith-based social justice organizations, and community groups focused on civic engagement.

Vote No on this bill if you want to keep the current prohibition on voting while serving a felony sentence and limit ballot access to those not incarcerated.

Organizations that oppose this bill may include victims’ rights groups, some law enforcement associations, tough-on-crime advocacy organizations, certain conservative policy institutes, and groups focused on election security concerns.

Vote Yes on this bill if you want stricter caps on campaign donations and spending, faster public disclosure of all election money before votes, and clearer authority to regulate corporate political activity to reduce unequal influence.

Good-government and transparency groups, campaign finance reform advocates, small-donor and grassroots organizations, and community coalitions seeking to curb big money in politics may support this bill.

Vote No on this bill if you want to avoid new limits on political giving and spending, keep corporate political activity less restricted, and prevent additional reporting and compliance requirements for donors and campaigns.

Some business and industry associations, large donors and independent expenditure groups, and civil liberties organizations worried about limits on political spending may oppose this bill.

Vote Yes if you want district maps drawn by an independent, diverse commission with public input, clear anti-gerrymandering rules, and only up-or-down legislative votes to produce fairer, more trusted elections.

Good-government and voting-rights organizations, nonpartisan democracy reform groups, civil rights advocates, and academic and civic groups promoting fair maps may support this bill.

Vote No if you prefer lawmakers to keep control of redistricting, allowing more partisan influence over maps and avoiding the costs and new rules of an independent commission.

State party committees, incumbent-protection groups, some legislative leadership organizations, and consultants who benefit from partisan map-drawing may oppose this bill.