A swim coach is challenging the city of Scottsdale over its apparent favoritism in granting a private swim club exclusive access to city pools. The Goldwater Institute and American Freedom Network have joined the fight; they say the city’s actions have created a monopoly on public resources, and therefore are a violation of the Arizona Gift Clause. The coach backed by Goldwater, Joe Zemaitis, founded and oversees a K-12 swim club in the Metro Phoenix area called Swim Neptune. According to Zemaitis, their club has been attempting to gain access to Scottsdale public pools since 2007 – well over a decade.
Swim Neptune was never granted entry to the pools. However, Scottsdale always allowed entry for one private, city-sponsored team: the Scottsdale Aquatic Club. What’s more, that swim club reportedly received entry at a greater discounted rate. Despite Swim Neptune offering far greater compensation for pool access, the city would only admit the Scottsdale Aquatic Club. The Goldwater Institute claims that this violates Arizona’s Gift Clause prohibiting the government from giving gifts to private entities.
In a press release issued by the Goldwater Institute, Zemaitis summarized the city’s various methods of rejection in response to their club’s many requests for access.
“Since 2007, we’ve been aggressively pursuing space in the Scottsdale pools,” said Zemaitis. “They seem to reinterpret the rules and rewrite the rules every time we are eligible under their criteria, they change them again to try to freeze us and our residents out, and it’s simply not fair.”
In a press release, the Goldwater Institute said that families have suffered due to the city’s actions.
“Scottsdale’s unconstitutional actions against Swim Neptune are preventing the swim club’s Scottsdale families from using facilities that they’re already paying for with their taxes. That means that these families have to drive to surrounding cities to get swim lessons, eating up more time and money for something they should be able to get in the town they live in. One of those kids, 14-year-old Ethan Mindlin, was cut from the Scottsdale Aquatic Club when he was younger—and today, he’s won an Arizona state championship for swimming with Swim Neptune. But his family has to drive 45 minutes each way to take him to practice because Scottsdale has turned their back on him.”
In an interview with AZ Free News, National Litigation Director for the Goldwater Institute Jon Riches shared further insight about the relationship between the city and Scottsdale Aquatic Club.
“The team’s been there for several decades. I think part of it is sort of bureaucratic inertia. The city and this particular team always had this strange, cozy relationship,” said Riches.” The city wants to continue to pursue it at the exclusion of other groups. I don’t know exactly the ‘why.’ The most dangerous phrase in the English language is, ‘We’ve always done it this way.’”
Riches explained that Zemaitis reached out to the Goldwater Institute years ago when his issues with the city were happening initially. At the time, their team referred Zemaitis’ case to the American Freedom Network – Goldwater’s network of pro-bono attorneys. Their attorneys sent the city of Scottsdale a letter, which prompted the city to put the pools out to bid.
Zemaitis and Swim Neptune didn’t receive relief at that point, because the city quickly canceled the bid and awarded Scottsdale Aquatic Club access. That’s when their case first went to trial.
After the case was appealed, Goldwater stepped in. Their team recognized similar patterns of potential Gift Clause violations. Riches stated that this case tackled a new issue presented under the clause: public resources versus expenditures.
“The government can’t spend public expenditures on private purposes,” asserted Riches. “[This case explores] what the test [is] for public resources for the exclusive benefit for private parties.”
Riches shared that they may receive a decision by the court by the end of this year, or early next year at the latest.
“This isn’t fair for [Zemaitis] or his kids. If the city can give special interests and treatment in this case, they can give anybody special treatment,” said Riches.
Corinne Murdock is a contributing reporter for AZ Free News. In her free time, she works on her books and podcasts. Follow her on Twitter, @CorinneMurdock or email tips to corinnejournalist@gmail.com.
This past week in Kentucky, HB 574 was signed into law. Despite the Kentucky legislature consisting of Republican supermajorities in both the House and Senate, the account for Democratic Governors tweeted, “While Republicans like @BrianKempGA are implementing Jim Crow 2.0, yet another Democratic governor just expanded voting rights…”
And the corporate media picked up this talking point with headlines such as “Kentucky Gov. Beshear signs into law bipartisan elections bill expanding voting access” from CNN, “Why Kentucky Just Became the Only Red State to Expand Voting Rights” from the New York Times, and “Democratic Governor in deep-red Kentucky signs bill to expand voting, bucking national trend” from the Washington Post.
Meanwhile, here in Arizona the headlines read “Arizona Republican lawmakers join GOP efforts to target voting, with nearly two dozen restrictive voting measures” under a bold “Voting Rights Under Attack” from CNN, “The next Georgia: Texas and Arizona emerge as voting rights battlegrounds” from the Guardian, and “23 voter suppression bills in Arizona legislature” from KOLD.
Let’s take a look at what the left and liberal media consider “Jim Crow 2.0” in Arizona compared to what they applaud as “expanding voting access” in Kentucky.
Early Voting
In Arizona, early voting begins 27 days before an election.
Under the Kentucky bill, early voting is limited to a mere 3 days: Thursday, Friday, and Saturday during normal business hours (Section 11).
Ballot Harvesting
In 2016, HB2023, which prohibited ballot harvesting, was signed into Arizona law. The Democrat party sued the state over it, claiming it has a disparate impact on minority voters. The case is currently in the Supreme Court.
Under the Kentucky bill, ballot harvesting is prohibited (Section 6).
Vote By Mail/SB1485
In Arizona, no excuse is required to vote by mail and voters can register to automatically receive a ballot for every single election, without having to reapply. SB1485 would remove a voter from this list only after the voter failed to vote in four consecutive elections and fails to respond to a notice. The voter would still be registered, they would just no longer receive a ballot in the mail automatically.
Under the Kentucky bill, an excuse is required to vote absentee and voters must apply within a short window of no earlier than 45 days before an election and no later than 14 days before an election (Section 11).
SB1003
In Arizona, SB1003 clarifies that if a ballot does not have a signature, the county must attempt to contact the voter and if a signature is not obtained by 7PM on election day, it is rejected.
Under the Kentucky bill, an absentee ballot must immediately be rejected if it has no signature (Section 14).
Voter Registration/SB1106
In Arizona, SB1106 would require a county recorder to cancel a voter’s registration upon confirmation the voter has registered in another county or state.
Under the Kentucky bill, a voter’s registration must immediately be canceled upon notification the voter has registered in another county or state (Section 5).
Voter ID/SB1713
In Arizona, voters on the early voter list automatically receive a ballot by mail for every election and do not have to reapply every time. SB1713 requires voters to write their date of birth and either their Arizona driver’s license or voter registration number on their ballot affidavit.
Under the Kentucky bill, a photo ID is required for voting in person and must be provided in the application for an absentee ballot, an application that must be made before every election (Section 41).
Catching the theme? All of these provisions leave Kentucky with a more restrictive election system than Arizona. If proposals in the Arizona Legislature are “Jim Crow 2.0” in the eyes of the democrats and media, then Kentucky would surely be “Jim Crow on steroids.”
If we have learned anything from Kentucky’s passage of HB574, it is that according to the leftist media, election integrity reforms are racist and disenfranchisement when Republicans pass them, but an “expansion of voter access” when a Democrat Governor signs on.
In reality, all of the bills Arizona is considering leave intact the many accessible options available to voters with modest reforms to ensure the integrity of each. They ensure it is simple to register, easy to vote, and hard to cheat, priorities Kentucky’s new law also ensure.
A clever Beverly Hills police officer allegedly tried to thwart a police-reform activist’s attempt to post an unflattering video of the officer’s conduct by blasting Sublime’s song “Santeria” from his phone. Why would he do that? The officer apparently realized that since “Santeria” is copyrighted, Instagram’s automatic content filter would take down the video.
If true, this is troubling. Cases like this show that copyright systems in the digital age pose a unique challenge to civil liberties and the public’s right to know what their government is up to. This is not just an issue with Instagram and police: bots on many platforms can take down information that should be freely available to the public. Bad public policy is to blame.
Copyright bots are automated programs that search digital content to identify…
This week, Governor Doug Ducey signed a gun rights law, sponsored by Rep. Leo Biasiucci, that designates Arizona as a 2nd Amendment sanctuary state. Biasiucci says he modeled the law on a California sanctuary state law crafted by Governor Jerry Brown’s administration in 2017.
Biasiucci’s bill, HB211, preemptively protects gun owners in the state from any federal gun control laws that are passed by the U.S. Congress.
HB2111
“The state of Arizona and its political subdivisions are prohibited from utilizing any financial resources or state personnel to administer, cooperate with or enforce any law, act, order, rule, treaty or regulation of the federal government that is inconsistent with any law of this state regarding the regulation of firearms.”
Biasiucci believes the bill will hold up in “any court challenge like Brown’s sanctuary city bill has.”
The 2nd Amendment Freedom Act was signed a mere 48 hours before President Biden announced several executive actions, including asking the Justice Department to propose a rule to stop “ghost guns,” which are “kits” people can buy legally, then assemble to create a functioning firearm without a serial number.
Proud to announce that Arizona citizens now have an extra layer of protection regarding the 2nd amendment. My bill, HB2111, was signed by @dougducey yesterday! ????? pic.twitter.com/et87HvysaS
— Rep. Leo Biasiucci ?? (@Leo4AzHouse) April 7, 2021
Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, and Wyoming have passed similar measures.
In a recent radio interview, Ducey said, “The law is to protect the 2nd amendment, it’s a an enumerated right in our United States Constitution and it’s one that re-enforces that second amendment and your right to carry a weapon.
PHOENIX — Governor Doug Ducey signed Rep. Joseph Chaplik’s bill, HB 2770, which empowers businesses in Arizona to decide whether or not to enforce on its premises a mask mandate that is imposed by politicians from the state, county, city/town or other jurisdiction in Arizona.
Chaplik says he proposed the measure because “business owners should be allowed to decide for themselves whether to require their customers to wear masks.”
“Recent developments show that without a protection in law, businesses and their customers are subject to the decisions of local rogue politicians who want to control you indefinitely,” said Chaplik. “This bill did not receive any Democrat votes throughout the entire process.”
The Free Enterprise club called Chaplik’s bill a “a commonsense solution” because it “allows people to exercise their freedom while removing the burden from businesses to play mask police.”
The governor issued an executive order last month banning local mask mandates, however several cities run by Democrats have refused to rescind their mask mandates. The governor never issued a mandatory state-wide mask mandate, but several democrat-controlled cities did. Those cities then failed to enforce their mandates, leaving the responsibility to local businesses. The governor said in the bill’s transmittal letter to Secretary of State Katie Hobbs that the cities’ failure caused “concern and heartache for many businesses.”
The governor called Chaplik’s bill “well-intentioned,” in his letter of transmittal, but “due to an error in drafting, may have unintended consequences.”
“Some rational mass requirements are not related to the spread of COVID-19 may not be enforceable,” explained the governor. “The state needs to be able to enforce long-standing workplace safety and infection control standards unrelated to COVID-19. I am grateful to the sponsor, Rep. Joseph Chaplik, for agreeing to fix this technical oversight in a future bill this session. With his commitment to fix this oversight, I am signing this bill, ensuring that our small businesses will no longer be required to enforce mandates imposed on them by the cities who are choosing not to force it themselves.”
Fact check: True. The data is stunning: 97% mask compliance in San Francisco, NY, DC, 96% in Miami and Philly, 95% in Chicago.
