Bill Recognizes Right Of County Recorders To Have Voice In Some Elections Lawsuits

Bill Recognizes Right Of County Recorders To Have Voice In Some Elections Lawsuits

By Terri Jo Neff |

In a move strongly supported by Arizona’s 15 elected county recorders, the House Government & Elections Committee approved a bill Thursday which greatly limits the powers of the Arizona Secretary of State (SOS) when it comes to responding to and settling some election lawsuits.

HB2302 stipulates that the SOS cannot settle “or otherwise compromise” an election-related civil action without first consulting the state’s 15 county recorders if the proposed settlement materially affects a county recorder. It also gives any county recorder standing to join an election-related lawsuit and object to a settlement by putting forth evidence that the settlement is impractical or difficult to comply with.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Walt Blackman, is supported by the Arizona Association of Counties. It passed the committee on a 7 to 6 vote, and is expected to pass the House Rules Committee next week.

That, according to Cochise County Recorder David Stevens, is a good thing, as the county recorders are the people legally responsible for registering voters.

Stevens says HB2302 is “a direct result” of Secretary of State Katie Hobbs’ actions prior to the 2020 General Election when she was named in a federal lawsuit which sought to extend Arizona’s voter registration deadline past Oct. 5. Hobbs never informed the 15 recorders about the case, even as she negotiated a settlement that directly impacted the recorders and their staffs.

“The recorders who actually do voter registration were not notified of the federal court case and were not able to present a defense against the extension to Oct. 23,” Stevens told Arizona Daily Independent. “To make it worse, when the extension was later ruled ‘illegal and an abuse of discretion’ and it was thrown out, the SOS provided her opinion as to when the last day of voter registration should be.”

None of the recorders were involved in reaching that opinion, Stevens says.

Eventually the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals voided an Oct. 23 extended deadline ordered by a district judge in Phoenix. The result was a revised deadline of Oct. 15, 10 days after recorders had expected to be done with voter registration.

Stevens pointed out that because early voting began Oct. 7, the extended deadline created several problems as recorders who were facilitating actual voting were suddenly forced to handle inquiries about the ever-changed deadline and register voters for an election that was already underway.

Blackman’s bill is opposed by Secretary of State Katie Hobbs. Which disappoints Stevens.

“To be clear, NOT ONE voter has ever been registered to vote by the Secretary of State,” he said. “It is solely the function of the recorders, and not to involve the ones who actually do the work is malfeasance.”

Hobbs’ handling of the registration deadline case also got her sideways with Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, who contended the SOS has no authority to bind the state or the county recorders to a change in state election law. As a result of that split, Hobbs retained private legal counsel while Brnovich vigorously defended the Oct. 5 deadline, which is set by state law since 1990 at 29 days prior to the general election.

Arizona Small Businesses Tax Relief Passes Out Of House Ways And Means Committee

Arizona Small Businesses Tax Relief Passes Out Of House Ways And Means Committee

PHOENIX – On Wednesday, the House Ways and Means Committee approved legislation that revises Arizona tax structure for taxpayers and protects small business from over taxation by the federal government, without impacting the state general fund. The vote on HB 2838, sponsored by Rep. Joseph Chaplik, was divided along party lines.

In November 2020, the Internal Revenue Service issued guidance (Notice 2020-75) that pass-through entity businesses may claim deductions above the $10,000 State and Local Tax (SALT) cap. In response, at least seven states have imposed a new tax structure at the pass-through entity level permitting this deduction as intended by the federal government. Under HB 2838, Arizona would join those other states, providing small businesses significant potential tax savings.

“Small businesses are the backbone of the Arizona economy, and I will do everything in my power to protect them,” said Chaplik. “As Arizona businesses recover from an unprecedented economic downturn, I remain committed to providing them every opportunity to thrive in this challenging environment. HB 2838 frees up critical capital for business owners and doesn’t cost the state a dime in tax revenue.

“Republicans voted to help all businesses with tax relief without negatively impacting our state revenues. Democrats voted ‘no’ and are not willing to help their businesses in their districts,” claimed Chaplik.

All 31 members of the House Republican Caucus have signed their support for HB 2838. It will next be considered by the whole House.

ESA Bill For Children From Lower-Income Families Passes Arizona Senate

ESA Bill For Children From Lower-Income Families Passes Arizona Senate

After a heated floor discussion on Monday, the Arizona State Senate passed Senate Bill 1452, a bill which will expand educational opportunities for children from low-income homes. The bill passed long party lines.

The bill, if passed in the Arizona State House, is expected to bring educational choice options to an estimated 700,000 low income students who are currently part of the Federal free and reduced lunch program and/or are attending Title I schools.

Earlier this month, prominent leaders from the Phoenix valley’s Black community gathered at the Arizona Capitol in support of the bill and school choice for minority children.

“School Choice is an extension of the civil rights movement because it gives parents, especially low-income and minority parents, the rights and resources to choose any school their child needs. School Choice equals freedom.” – Rev. H.K. Matthews

Democrats argued that the bill would take money away from the currently mostly closed public schools. Across the state, public schools have been forced to deny educational opportunities to students due to resistance from teachers, who are refusing to return to their classrooms.

The American Federation for Children cites data showing that low-income students are anticipated to be up to 12 months behind by the end of this current school year. SB1452 will give low-income parents resources and funds to find an in-person private school, join micro-schools, hire tutors and teachers, purchase homeschooling curriculum, and pay transportation costs.

“This extension to Arizona’s ESA program is so badly needed right now due to the COVID school closures. Thank you to Senator Paul Boyer for sponsoring this crucial legislation and thank you to the Republican caucus in the Senate for passing this bill in the best interest of low-income parents and children all over the state,” said Steve Smith, Arizona State Director for the American Federation for Children, in a press release. “But most of all, thank you to civil rights icon, Rev. H.K. Matthews for his powerful words quoted today during the senate debate, as well as minority leaders across the state. Your willingness to advocate for equality and justice on behalf of minority and low-income families is nothing short of inspiring. We look forward to working with our Arizona Representatives in the House to make every education option available to the children who need the most help right now.”

Bill Would Require New Homes To Have Designated Outlet To Charge Electric Vehicles

Bill Would Require New Homes To Have Designated Outlet To Charge Electric Vehicles

Monday afternoon the Arizona Senate Committee on Government will consider a bill sponsored by Sen. Victoria Steele (D-LD9) that would prohibit a municipality or county from issuing a single-family residential building permit unless there is a special dedicated outlet for charging an electric vehicle in a garage or within 10 feet of the home’s parking area.

Under SB1102, a residential building permit could not be issued for new construction or an addition if the structure does not have a 208/240 volt, 50-ampere, NEMA 14-50 branch circuit. The required electrical work could cost up to $2,000 depending on where the home is located.

The exceptions in Steele’s bill include building permits issued for a manufactured home, a residential structure of less than 1,000 square feet, and a residential structure whose main electric service would exceed 200 ampere with the addition of a 50-ampere circuit. The bill is opposed by the Home Builders Association of Central Arizona.

SB1102 also appropriates $1,000,000 from the state’s FY22 general fund to the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA) to help support electric vehicle charging options. One-half of the funds would go to a Ready Home Pilot Program to establish guidelines and standards for the installation of a high voltage electric vehicle charging outlet.

The program would also reimburse the owner of a single-family or multifamily residential structure for the cost -up to $1,000- of installing the outlet, until the appropriated funds are exhausted.

The other $500,000 appropriated by Steele’s bill would be used by ADOA to conduct a two-year “Charging Station Pilot Program” under which state agencies could apply for funds to install electric vehicle charging stations at agency locations.
The program would also allow private entities to install and operate a retail fee-based electric vehicle charging station at various state properties, including the Legislature and property under the jurisdiction of the Arizona Board of Regents.

However, Sen. Jamescita Peshlakai (D-LD7) put forth a proposed amendment on Feb. 12 which would make the charging outlet an option, not a requirement, to obtain a building permit. The amendment also drops the provision in Steele’s bill about allowing private operation of a retail fee-based electric vehicle charging station on state-controlled property.

If SB1102 -as introduced or amended- makes it out of the Government Committee it must then get past the Appropriations and Rules Committees, neither of which are scheduled to consider the bill this week.

Pandemic Liability Bill Moves To Rules Committee

Pandemic Liability Bill Moves To Rules Committee

A state senate committee will discuss a bill Monday that protects individuals, businesses, schools, medical providers, and the government from civil liability for actions taken in response to public health pandemics unless a litigant can prove by “clear and convincing evidence” that willful misconduct or gross negligence was involved.

The bill, SB1377, sponsored by Sen. Vince Leach (R-LD11) would be retroactive to March 11, 2020, the date Gov. Doug Ducey declared a state of emergency due to COVID-19. Its passage out of the Senate Rules Committee is seen as a sure thing after the Senate Committee on Judiciary passed it last week on a 5 to 3 vote.

Leach has said he introduced the bill to ensure a presumption that any person or “provider” acted in good faith to protect a customer, student, tenant, volunteer, patient, guest or neighbor, or the public from injury or loss through reasonable attempts to comply with rely on published guidance issued by a federal or state agency in connection to a public health pandemic.

“Unfortunately, there will always be people who will try to take advantage of the situation and file reckless lawsuits,” Leach said after the judiciary committee vote. “I hope this legislation will give people the assurance that if they’re following health and safety precautions, they won’t be hit with a nuisance lawsuit.”

Under the legislation, a provider is defined as a person who furnishes consumer or business goods or services or entertainment, as well as an educational institution or district, school district or charter school, property owner, property manager or property lessor or lessee, a nonprofit organization, a religious institution, a state or a state agency or instrumentality, a local government or political subdivision (including a department, agency or commission), a service provider, a health professional, or a health care institution.

Anyone wishing to claim an “injury, death or loss to person or property” based on a failure to protect the litigant from the effects of the public health pandemic must be able to show the person or provider acted with “willful misconduct or gross negligence.” The liability protection also includes inactions which are alleged to have caused harm.