Cited by

Plan, ¶ 17 (2014) (“The Contract Clause applies to the general contract provisions of a public retirement plan, while the Pension Clause applies only to public retirement benefits.”).

Plan, ¶ 17 (2014) (“The Contract Clause applies to the general contract provisions of a public retirement plan, while the Pension Clause applies only to public retirement benefits.”).

Plan, ¶ 31 (2014) (providing that although the right to receive a pension “vest[s] upon acceptance of employment,” the pension is “subject to conditions precedent, such as completing the term of employment”) (providing that a plan member’s right to withdraw contributions

Plan , , 220, ¶ 27, , 1166 (2014), and ultimately concluded that Phoenix could not unilaterally change the sick leave regulation.

Plan , , 218 ¶ 16, , 1164 (2014) (rejecting proposed interpretation of constitution that would render language meaningless).

See Fields v. Elected Officials’ Retirement Plan, ¶ 16, (noting that the legislature generally avoids redundancy).

Plan, , 218 ¶ 16, (noting that the Court interprets Arizona’s contract clause using an “analysis similar to that employed by the Supreme Court” when interpreting the federal contract clause); Hall v. Elected Officials’ Ret.

Plan, ¶ 16, (recognizing that courts construe statutes to avoid making parts superfluous).

6 The appeal is therefore not actually in the nature of mandamus, see Fields v. Elected Officials’ Retirement Plan, ¶ 40 , and, accordingly, § 12-2030(A) does not apply.

Plan, ¶ 19 , (quoting State ex rel.