Tucson Mayor Regina Romero played host to President Joe Biden’s senior advisor last week to discuss public infrastructure.
Tom Perez, senior advisor and assistant to the President and director of the White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, visited the city of Tucson on Tuesday. Perez, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, visited as part of the Investing in America tour highlighting initiatives funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).
In a press conference, Perez said that the Biden administration prioritizes giving awards to those projects rooted in equity.
“There has never been in our lifetime a more robust investment in building America, building out our infrastructure, making sure in that process that we view everything through that equity lens, understanding that zip code will no longer determine destiny,” said Perez. “We have this opportunity folks, and we are not going to squander this opportunity to build an Arizona, and to build an America where everybody has access to good middle-class jobs, where high speed, affordable internet is a reality so that if you have a behavioral or mental health issue, you can do telemedicine.”
Among the initiatives for which Tucson received millions in federal funding under IRA and BIL was the 22nd Street Bridge revitalization, TARP Facility, Tucson Million Trees (TMT), and relinquishment of their water rights.
The Biden administration gave Tucson $25.9 million to build the 22nd Street Bridge. According to the Department of Transportation (DOT), it was the city’s focus on equity for the project that secured the funds.
Tucson also received a $5 million grant from the USDA last September for TMT. Despite the funding, TMT has fallen far short of its goal to plant one million trees by 2030. Only about 100,000 trees were planted as of last year.
However, Romero claimed in a one-on-one meeting with President Joe Biden earlier this month that TMT was on track.
Tucson also traded its water rights for $44 million in federal infrastructure funds last summer: over 110,000 acre-feet through 2025.
Perez also made a stop with another major Arizona city that has received millions in BIL and IRA funds.
Last Monday, Perez visited with Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego to discuss the availability of funds to both public and private entities for “clean” energy initiatives, such as electric buses for schools or solar panels for churches.
Our partnership with local leaders like @MayorGallego is crucial to ensuring communities take advantage of the unprecedented opportunity in the Investing in America agenda. https://t.co/3yEZbTpOMY
— White House Intergovernmental Affairs (@WhiteHouseIGA46) February 20, 2024
Earlier this month, Perez and National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard met with county elected officials through the National Association of Counties Legislative Conference to discuss Biden’s Investing in America agenda. Santa Cruz County Supervisor Manuel Ruiz was among those elected officials to attend.
Per White House data on federal awards, the Biden administration has issued over 1,800 BIL discretionary and formula grants in Arizona. USDA data reflects that Arizona has requested over $2.1 billion in clean energy funding.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ) hasn’t filed a statement of interest to run yet, which means she hasn’t started gathering the tens of thousands of signatures she will need to appear on the ballot.
The lack of action on Sinema’s part raises further doubt that she plans to seek reelection, since the deadline for signature collections is April 1. That’s about five weeks away.
State law requires candidates to file their statement of interest prior to collecting signatures for ballot qualification. As an independent, Sinema would need a minimum of 42,300 signatures to qualify for the general election ballot.
Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ-03) is seeking the Democratic nomination, while former gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake and Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb seek the Republican nomination.
Sinema’s failure to file for reelection may relate to the House GOP’s recent rejection of her $118 billion foreign aid bill. Although Sinema and others described the legislation widely as a “border bill,” it allotted a mere 17 percent of funds for border security. $60 billion of the funds were allotted for relief for Ukraine, with the remainder set aside for Israel and other foreign countries.
📍I’m in Douglas to discuss with community members how the border crisis hurts small communities like theirs.
This year, Cochise County has experienced over 1,800 migrant street releases — under my border bill, the border would be shut and there would be no catch & release. https://t.co/bPnEJm72N4
The bill was a tripartisan effort between Sinema, Republican Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford, and Democratic Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy.
In addition to border funding making up a minority of the $118 billion bill, GOP leadership contested the proposed border security provisions, such as enabling the president to override the bill’s automatic shutdown on migrant entry.
That automatic shutdown would occur should an average of 5,000 illegal crossings occur over a period of seven consecutive days. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) could also implement the shutdown with an average of 4,000 illegal crossings over a period of seven consecutive days.
The shutdown would conclude after two weeks of border crossings falling below the 4,000-5,000 threshold. This authority would also be limited to 270 days in the first year, and even less days in the following two years. However, that closure could be reversed should the president declare a “national interest” in keeping the border open.
In the 2023 fiscal year, there were over 2.5 million illegal immigrant encounters. That’s an average of over 6,800 illegal immigrant encounters a day.
Sinema insisted that her foreign aid bill would have solved the border crisis.
“My border bill would have prevented these closures and solved the crisis – but partisans decided not to secure the border,” said Sinema.
Brian Anderson, founder of the political consultant firm Saguaro Group, said that it was the foreign aid bill’s failure that confirmed this to be the end of the line for Sinema.
“The recent border bill was going to be Sinema’s last ‘hurrah.’ It was her way of proving to voters that she’s a deal-maker and the platform from which she’d launch her reelect,” said Anderson. “But everyone saw the border bill for what it was: All surface, no substance, just like Sinema — and luckily it died on the vine just like her campaign should.”
Anderson added that the Democrats were “out of their mind” for alienating Sinema in favor of Gallego: a choice he says is favorable for the GOP in the race, should they play their cards right.
“She rubber-stamped virtually every agenda item on their docket while masquerading as a moderate with the best PR game on that side of the aisle, yet they decided to replace her with a four feet, two inches-high hothead with a history of unseemly behavior,” said Anderson. “If Republicans can’t manage to win a two-way race here, we have no one to blame but ourselves.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Peoria Unified School District (PUSD) governing board silenced a grandmother’s speech for calling public schools “evil” in a public comments portion of a meeting earlier this month.
Janet Klepacz was discussing her appreciation for Department of Education Superintendent Tom Horne implementing an optional curriculum from PragerU, a conservative nonprofit that supplies free educational materials. Klepacz’s contested speech included a Bible passage referenced to compare the quality and state of public school education to the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt.
“Pray with me, believers, as I paraphrase Exodus 3:7-8 for today’s Peoria’s schools’ and board’s evil: we are awakening Lord God to our children, our grandchildren’s cries and misery of the suffering you have literally seen,” said Klepacz. “God, come down and rescue our children now from the evil government federal schools —”
It was then that board member Melissa Ewing interrupted Klepacz. Ewing raised a point of order on Klepacz’s language: specifically, the fact that Klepacz accused public schools of being evil places. Ewing didn’t specify what Klepacz said that constituted a rules violation.
“The language being used about ‘the evil,’” said Ewing.
Board President Becky Proudfit then elaborated on Ewing’s point of order. Proudfit directed Klepacz to adjust her speech to not say that public schools were evil.
“I think what she’s referring to is not what is being said, but rather how it’s being said, and the rules for public comment is to not openly attack any members of the board or the public,” said Proudfit. “Please continue with that in mind.”
Klepacz continued, only lasting a few more seconds before Proudfit called another point of order.
“Rescue our children now, God, from the federal government school, pushing documents on our children wrapped up under educational learning,” began Klepacz.
Proudfit again interrupted Klepacz. She claimed that Klepacz’s accusation of “pushing” certain documents wasn’t allowed.
“I’m sorry, the language,” said Proudfit. “How you’re speaking about, saying that ‘we are pushing.’”
Klepacz challenged Proudfit’s judgment, arguing that her speech was protected by the Constitution.
“Well, guess what: my words, I feel it, I see it. It is! That’s what free speech is, hello?” responded Klepacz.
The board’s interruptions of Klepacz didn’t go unnoticed.
Although most of the other parents that spoke after Klepacz addressed their grievances with PUSD’s decision to move public comment to the end of meetings, another parent and PUSD board candidate, Jeff Tobey, spoke against the treatment of Klepacz.
Tobey said the interruptions were a potential violation of Klepacz’s constitutional right to free speech. Tobey suggested that the board read up on free speech court cases, referencing Ninth Circuit Court decisions on criticisms of public officials.
“The encounter that I just witnessed really bothered me just now, because as a Jew, obviously I don’t necessarily believe in Jesus Christ, but I respect somebody coming up here and voicing their opposition to policies that are being presented as a district or feelings that they have on the matter or thoughts that incorporate an aspect of religion: we have to respect that, whether we believe it or not,” said Tobey. “I believe that in squelching that, you might have infringed on her rights.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
On Monday, the Arizona Senate passed legislation prohibiting the deployment of the Arizona National Guard absent a declaration of war from Congress.
The bill, “Defend the Guard Act” sponsored by State Sen. Wendy Rogers (R-LD07), passed along partisan lines. The legislation restricts the Arizona National Guard from being released into active duty combat unless Congress passes an official declaration of war or undertakes official action pursuant to Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 of the Constitution.
“Do not send our Arizona National Guard to a war zone, unless the United States Congress has declared war!” stated Rogers.
My SB 1132 “Defend the Guard” passes the Arizona Senate!
The legislation defined “armed duty combat” to not only include participation in an armed conflict, but performing a hazardous service relating to an armed conflict in a foreign state and performing a duty through an instrumentality of war.
Rogers previously carried the bill successfully through the Senate last year, but it didn’t receive a final vote in the House.
Rogers’ bill advances just weeks after the drone strike tragedy in the Middle East that injured 40 Arizona National Guardsmen and claimed the lives of three service members from Georgia.
However, the bill received opposition from Arizona National Guard leadership.
During the committee hearing of the bill last month, Brigadier General John Conley, Director of Administrative Services for the Arizona Department of Emergency and Military Affairs, expressed concern that the bill would cause the federal government to effectively end the guard by cutting off federal funding; removing their forestructure, including all their aircraft, vehicles, and equipment; and, dissolving their forces of 8,000 guardsmen.
“If this bill passes, it will be sending a signal to the active duty, and to the Department of Defense, that the Arizona National Guard is unwilling and unable to go overseas and perform overseas missions,” said Conley. “Once we say we can’t perform the mission or won’t perform the mission, then the president has no recourse but to take that forestructure away from us.”
Due to the effective end to the state’s guard, Conley said that the state itself would be less safe: there would be no helicopter assistance for law enforcement along the border, and no disaster mitigation through fire and flood assistance. Conley said that it cost $400 a day, alone, to put one guardsman on the border.
Conley further stated that the law would be unenforceable, and that it wouldn’t have prevented the Middle East drone strike tragedy.
Sen. Majority Leader Sonny Borrelli (R-LD30) responded that Conley’s warning of the federal government’s imminent response to the legislation proved the need for the legislation. Borrelli said that it was the federal government’s poor decision-making that led to their total party support of the bill: all GOP colleagues cosponsored the legislation.
“The federal government chooses to disarm the state of Arizona, that should be very telling. And that kind of tyranny should not be stood for, because that’s exactly what’s going on right now,” said Borrelli. “We’re putting our troops in harm’s way with our federal government and leadership — lack of leadership for that matter — they’re leaving our troops vulnerable. I’m sorry, I just can’t comprehend the lack of leadership and concern for our troops the last few years.”
Conley agreed that federal overreach was an issue. However, he emphasized that the Arizona National Guard was both a state and federal entity. Conley said that means that the guardsmen have no choice but to be mobilized when called upon by the federal government.
Rather than accomplishing protections for state guardsmen, Conley said that the bill would leave thousands of guardsmen out of jobs, healthcare, and pensions, and would feed into a resource-hungry Department of Defense.
“If we do that we are walking into a trap, unknowingly, that the active component is waiting, they cannot wait for it to happen, they want that forestructure,” said Conley.
Rogers countered that this bill was the difficult decision necessary to take back Arizona’s state rights. She said that Conley’s concerns further proved her point that Arizona needed to have greater control over its guard, rather than its current state of complete control under the whims of the federal government.
“What’s the difference?” asked Rogers. “This is a state’s rights situation. And we, as Arizona, need to take the first step to recovering the rights to our own National Guard.”
Conley said that the federal government had full authority over the guard because it owns the “lion’s share” of the equipment and salaries. Rogers disagreed, saying that their most dedicated guardsmen would stick with the state for the right cause.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The head of the town of Gilbert’s Office of Digital Government (ODG), Dana Berchman, resigned this week, several weeks ahead of a town council meeting to review the department’s scope and purpose.
The council’s pending review came after the publication of an AZ Free News report on ODG monitoring the online speech of employees and elected officials, and seeking action against those whose personal speech conflicted with their preferred, more progressive speech.
Town residents at subsequent council meetings either condemned or defended ODG. Those in condemnation of ODG expressed displeasure with the department’s budget and scope, disagreeing with ODG members using town time and resources to monitor the personal online speech of employees. Those in defense of ODG felt that the department was essential for delivering public communications in a timely manner.
Berchman emailed her resignation letter to the council on Tuesday. While Berchman didn’t cite the pending council review of ODG, she did include a plea for the council to support ODG’s continued existence and functions in her absence. Berchman also said that under her leadership ODG had improved the quality of Gilbert residents’ lives and delivered all necessary information “expediently, efficiently, and economically” to them.
“The Gilbert Digital Team’s unwavering dedication and rare talents are just what this community has needed over the last decade,” said Berchman. “Please do not forget the importance of the work that this team does and the incomparable impact they have on our community engagement.”
The former chief digital officer urged the council to not forget the significance and impact of ODG work. Berchman listed the remainder of the ODG team by name to thank them for their work: Jennifer Harrison, Derek Konofalski, Brenda Carrasco, Kelsey Perry, Lauren Oxford, Eva Kirschbaum, Oskar Agredano, Jordin Sanchez, Kailey Latham, Aymie Spitzer, and Debbie Dana. Berchman also thanked Town Manager Patrick Banger for creating and building up the department.
“Together we have pushed the boundaries of local government communications to new levels to set a high standard which other communities around the country, and even world, strive to replicate,” said Berchman.
ODG staff salaries amounted to over $1.15 million a year. Most ODG staff made over or close to six figures a year, per 2023 fiscal year salaries: Berchman made over $200,800, with the remainder of staff ranging from about $67,000 to $138,000.
Berchman’s resignation will take effect on March 7, two days after the scheduled council meeting to address ODG. Berchman clarified to the Gilbert Independent that she plans to launch a consulting firm upon leaving ODG.
Councilman Jim Torgeson proposed the council review of ODG. In a Facebook post announcing the council review, Torgeson urged town residents to be measured and respectful in their approach to ODG.
“I believe this to be an extremely important topic,” said Torgeson. “As a Town, we must remember that there are growing pains.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
