According to this story in Tucson Weekly, the Tucson Democratic Party’s attempt to keep Greens out of this November’s partisan city council races is likely to backfire.

The Democratic Party challenged Dave Croteau’s petition to get on the Green Party primary ballot in the 7th district. Party primaries are on September 1, 2009. But because Croteau acknowledges that his petition probably doesn’t have enough signatures of Green registrants in the 7th district, he will bow out of the race. Instead, his campaign manager, Dave Ewoldt, will run as a write-in in the Green primary in September for the same seat. Assuming he gets at least 7 write-ins, he will be nominated and appear on the ballot in November.

Furthermore, Tucson Greens are now mulling over having candidates in the third and fifth districts as well. Arizona has a very fair law on the subject of how many write-in votes are needed in a partisan primary for a candidate to be nominated. The number is proportionate to the number of registered voters in that party. Since Greens don’t have a very large registration, their members only need a small number of write-ins to be nominated in the Green Party primary. Thanks to Gregg Jocoy and Green Party Watch for this story.

Dave Croteau can’t be a write-in in the Green Party primary, because in 2005 the legislature said that candidates who try to get on a ballot and fail cannot then qualify as write-in candidates.

On June 24, the city council of St. Paul, Minnesota, voted unanimously to put a ballot question on the November 3, 2009 ballot. The measure will ask voters if they wish to use Instant Runoff Voting. The measure is actually an initiative, and the initiative had been submitted two years ago, but the Council had refused to certify it for the ballot because opponents had said use of IRV might violate the Minnesota Constitution. But because the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that there is no conflict between the State Constitution and IRV, the St. Paul vote will now proceed.

On June 24, the 9th circuit invalidated Seattle regulations that control First Amendment activity in the Seattle Center (location of the Space Needle). One of the regulations struck down made it illegal for anyone to engage in “speech activities” within 30 feet of a “captive audience.” “Captive audience” is defined in the regulation as “any person or group of persons: (1) waiting in line to obtain tickets or food or other goods or services; (2) attending or being in an audience at any Seattle Center event; (3) seated in any seating location where foods or beverages are consumed.” Here is the opinion. The Seattle Center is an 80-acre government-owned park that attracts over ten million visitors annually.