Axon wins legislative battle to scrap Scottsdale vote on controversial headquarter project

With a single signature, Gov. Katie Hobbs could give law enforcement technology company Axon a carve-out in state law that would let it avoid voter review of its planned massive headquarters and housing project in north Scottsdale. 

Axon came to the Capitol aiming to bar voters in every city and town in Arizona from being able to challenge zoning and development decisions, but settled instead for merely stripping away the right of Scottsdale voters to challenge the police weapons manufacturer’s HQ project near Hayden Road and the Loop 101. 

With Axon pledging to leave the state if the election was allowed to stand — Scottsdale voters are notoriously anti-development — their bill earned support from a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers who feared the firm would depart. 

The Scottsdale City Council and every legislator from the city vociferously opposed the bill, and there are concerns the measure is unconstitutional, but the state Senate gave final approval to Senate Bill 1543 on April 15, and it now awaits a decision from Hobbs. 

The Arizona Constitution gives residents the right to refer matters to the ballot.

Local activists, backed by a signature-gathering effort linked to a California labor union, gathered more than 25,000 signatures to send the rezoning decision made by a lame-duck city council — the votes for the project came from councilors who had been voted out of office — to the ballot in a voter referendum, which must happen by November 2026. 

The measure that lawmakers advanced to Gov. Katie Hobbs’ desk would cancel that election. It says that any municipality with between 200,000 and 500,000 residents — Scottsdale had 241,000 residents in the 2020 census — must “allow hotel use and multifamily residential housing” for land zoned like the Axon parcel “without requiring any type of application that will require a public hearing” if certain criteria is met. 

Hobbs seems likely to sign the bill.

“Governor Hobbs is committed to keeping and bringing in businesses that create jobs and boost our economy,” Hobbs spokesman Christian Slater said in a statement to the Arizona Mirror. “We are closely watching SB 1543 and are actively working with stakeholders and legislators to ensure the best outcomes for all Arizonans.”

Slater did not respond to questions about whether the governor believes legislation benefiting Axon outweighs the constitutional rights of Scottsdale voters. A representative for Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes said they had “no comment” on the legislation, and responded to follow-up questions by “pointing out” recent awards the office had won for election administration. 

Scottsdale City Councilman Barry Graham said that he and other city councilors have requested meetings with Hobbs and have sent her a “veto request letter” signed by the full city council. 

“All options are on the table to protect Scottsdale residents from dangerous legislation that threatens their constitutional rights and freedom to locally zone and plan their community,” Graham said in an email to the Arizona Mirror. 

“This legislation is not just about one city. It is about preserving the rights of all Arizona communities to govern themselves in ways that reflect their unique identities and aspirations,” the letter sent to Hobbs and shared with the Mirror said. “Scottsdale’s residents deserve to have a meaningful voice in shaping the future of their city — not to have that voice silenced by sweeping state legislation.”

The city in a press release Wednesday is also urging Scottsdale residents to contact the Governor’s Office about the legislation, calling it a “serious threat to local democracy.” 

“It could be and very likely is a violation of what is called the ‘special law provision’ of the Arizona Constitution,” constitutional law attorney Paul Eckstein told the Mirror. 

The special law provision of the Arizona constitution prohibits laws from being enacted that impact certain things including “granting to any corporation, association, or individual, any special or exclusive privileges, immunities, or franchises.” 

However, Eckstein said that the bill could be “elastic” enough that it may not be in violation. Ultimately, he said, it will take a legal challenge to determine whether the legislation is constitutional. 

“It is a shame, I would say, that we would sell our souls and make a Faustian bargain with a company at the expense of probably the premiere provision in the Arizona Constitution. We wouldn’t have a constitution, we wouldn’t be a state, if the right to referendum hadn’t been included as a broad right in our state,” Eckstein said. 

In 1910, Arizona voters ratified what would become the state’s constitution, including in it the right to referendum. In 1912, the year Arizona became a state, voters used that right to approve the first ballot initiative, which gave women the right to vote. 

Senators opposing SB1543  brought up similar concerns when voting on the legislation. 

“This is voter suppression on steroids,” Sen. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, said. “This bill also appears to be special legislation, which violates the Arizona Constitution.”

Kavanagh, whose district includes much of Scottsdale, also criticized the declaration in the bill that catering to Axon is a matter of “statewide concern.” 

“Could anyone explain to me why a bill that only affects four cities is a matter of statewide concern? Is there something special I don’t see?” Kavanah said while explaining his no vote. 

For supporters of the bill, keeping Axon in Arizona was more important than disenfranchising voters in Scottsdale. 

“At the end of the day, we have a homegrown business that was established here, that became worldwide, and we have other states that are looking to take them,” said Sen. David Gowan, R-Sierra Vista, who sponsored the earlier failed Axon legislation. 

Some Democratic members said their support came down to “affordable housing” — Axon says it will build 1,900 apartments, with one-third of them reserved for company employees and law enforcement — and pushing back against “NIMBY” culture in Scottsdale. 

But that rationale fell short for Sen. Lauren Kuby, D-Tempe, who urged her colleagues that the “affordable housing” was not enough to disenfranchise voters.

“Lets make no mistake about this: This is special interest legislation that undermines the will of the voters,” Kuby said. “It’s not about apartments, it is not about how we grow our cities, it is about the will of the voters and how we can take away the express will of the voters.” 

Axon celebrated the passage of the legislation, and in a press release thanked the bill’s supporters and the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the state’s largest business advocacy group and a major contributor to political campaigns across the political spectrum. 

“It helps ensure that Arizona remains competitive for valuable economic development opportunities,” Axon’s statement read. “And this legislation brings real solutions to the state’s housing supply crisis, creating more places to live in the Valley at a time when affordability and availability are out of reach for too many Arizonans.”