Payday loan companies, like this one in Phoenix, are supporting Proposition 200, which would permanently let the businesses operate in Arizona and also impose reforms on the industry. (Photo by Bill Coates)

A dispute over an official description for the payday loan initiative – Prop. 200 – goes before a Maricopa County Superior court judge today, the deadline for sending it to the printer for publicity pamphlets.

“Ultimately, we do have to get our material to the printer (Tuesday),” deputy Secretary of State Kevin Tyne said. 

For the ballot wording itself, Prop. 200 and other measures are expected go to the printer Thursday. The election is Nov. 4, but early voting begins Oct. 2.

Opponents of the industry-backed initiative sued the secretary of state Friday, claiming the language describing it would mislead voters.

Judge Sam Myers agreed to hear oral arguments 3 p.m. today.

Initiative opponents – Arizonans for Responsible Lending, No on 200 – announced the suit Friday afternoon at a news conference on the Senate lawn. A four-page petition was filed with the court that morning. The suit says Secretary of State Jan Brewer failed to amend the ballot language to reflect what they claim the initiative really does.

Among other things, the ballot description says: “This measure will bring dramatic pro-consumer reform to payday lending and preserve consumer choice.” But at the news conference, Sen. Debbie McCune Davis, D-14, said, “There is no protection. This is not reform.”

In their suit, the Prop. 200 opponents argue the description fails to inform voters that a  ‘yes’ vote would permanently lock in an effective annual interest rate of 391 percent. If defeated, the cap on the interest rate would drop to 36 percent on July 1, 2010. That’s when the current  payday lending law is set to expire.

Prop. 200. would override current law and has no sunset provision. Referring to payday lenders, McCune Davis said after the news conference: “The sunset elimination is everything to them.”

If the ballot measure passes, she said, the Voter Protection Act would effectively bar the Legislature from making any changes to it. Backers of the initiative sponsors, Arizonans for Financial Reform, could not be reached for comment.

Brewer said by phone Friday it’s her job to make sure the ballot language is impartial. In addition, she said, Attorney General Terry Goddard signed off on it, as required by law.

“The bottom line is we have all done this by due process,” Brewer said. She added another bottom line: “This horse has left the barn.”

It’s just too late for any legal challenges, Brewer said.

Tyne said Monday the plaintiffs failed to file in a timely manner. The language for the publicity pamphlets and the ballot, he said, “was crafted and finalized by Aug. 6.”

“We have anticipated this litigation being in the courts on Aug. 7,” he added.