Tucson taxpayers are likely to be on the hook for the costs of public transit indefinitely.
The city council voted last Tuesday to make public transit free for good, according to Councilman Steve Kozachik, after three years of not charging for transportation services.
Kozachik clarified to the University of Arizona (UArizona) student newspaper that the council’s actions last week meant that they wouldn’t reinstate transit fares until the council took an affirmative vote to do so.
The council voted to extend free public transit through this December during last Tuesday’s study session at a cost of $4.6 million. According to Kozachik, this motion was within the context of the council’s true intention to keep public transit free indefinitely.
The council also moved to establish a task force of stakeholders to determine how to keep public transit free. Mayor Regina Romero expressed concern that the council was essentially kicking the can down the road.
“To be honest, we’re moving the item every six months, and so I think we really need to figure out what is the long-term solution,” said Romero. “If we don’t have long-term funding options, then we need to start talking about what’s a fair fare. We just need to make sure that we do have the possible stakeholders and investors in the system.”
Councilman Steve Kozachik cautioned that this strategy of holding out to inspire funding from stakeholders was likely to backfire. He added that it was “highly improbable” the council would actually move to reinstate fares after December.
“I don’t agree that us treading water on the decision about fares is necessary to get the other stakeholders to the table. I don’t agree with that as a negotiating strategy,” said Kozachik.
Councilman Paul Cunningham raised the concern that the task force may not actually accomplish its appointed task of sourcing adequate funding or structuring the reinstatement of fares, pointing back to a three-year trend over the COVID-19 pandemic of alleged complacency and falling behind on goals due to virtual meetings.
“As much as I wish I was Obi-Wan Kenobi who could, like, use the Force to see what’s going to unfold, I can’t,” said Cunningham.
The council opted to maintain their position of free public transit, despite not having funding secured beyond December. Current funding sources for the remainder of the year, totaling $4.1 million — a $486,000 deficit, which Tucson will cover through the public Investment Plan funds — come from hotel and motel taxes, the Tucson Medical Center partnership, SunTran efficiency expense reductions, and a Visit Tucson funding formula adjustment.
UArizona also gave about $780,000 gleaned from student fees to fund the public transit. However, the estimated annual cost of public transit reaches around $11 million.
Some council members also mentioned that they’re attempting to tap Raytheon for long-term funding.
Prior to this year, federal COVID-19 relief funds covered the transit costs. Fares were scheduled to resume on January 1 of this year, but the city opted to source funds to cover the cost.
Back in December, the council considered additional parking garage fees or property taxes to cover the transit costs.
Tucson isn’t the first city to attempt totally free transit in the state, let alone in the country. Phoenix’s Valley Metro offers free busing for its neighborhood circulators, and the first year of its streetcar services is free. The city also subsidized a limited number of free public transit passes in 2021 using $1 million of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds.
There are dozens of other cities around the country, as well as university campuses, that offer free public transit.
As AZ Free News reported just prior to the Tucson City Council’s most recent decision, community members have criticized the three-year-long trial run of free public transit as more of a burden than a help. Locals have complained to several media outlets that the free transit enables criminal behavior and public nuisances.
Unionized bus drivers have also complained, claiming that free transit has lowered the quality of passengers and required them to become the “transit police.”
Watch the Tucson City Council study session here:
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Gov. Katie Hobbs doesn’t appear to be in support of President Joe Biden seeking re-election anymore.
In a Friday interview with CBS News host Major Garrett on “The Takeout,” Hobbs shied away from answering directly whether she supported the president’s aspirations for a second term.
“How excited are you about a Biden re-election campaign?” asked Garrett.
Hobbs laughed in response initially before adding: “As the newly-elected governor of Arizona, I’m very focused on Arizona. And that’s — I haven’t weighed in on the presidential election yet.”
Biden formally announced his re-election campaign last month.
Hobbs’ hesitancy to stump for Biden represents a complete reversal of her attitude back in January, a little less than a month into her administration. Four months ago, Hobbs expressed excitement at the prospect of re-electing Biden.
“Congrats to the newly elected @azdemparty board – I look forward to partnering with them and @a_dlcc over the next 2 years to win back our US House & Senate seats, deliver our electoral votes for Pres. Biden again, and flip the legislature blue,” said Hobbs. “Time to get to work.”
Congrats to the newly elected @azdemparty board – I look forward to partnering with them and @a_dlcc over the next 2 years to win back our US House & Senate seats, deliver our electoral votes for Pres. Biden again, and flip the legislature blue.
Also in January, Hobbs praised Biden for visiting the border.
“I am encouraged by the White House’s recent actions to finally visit the border and to start proposing real steps to begin addressing the problems of the current system,” said Hobbs. “And while optimistic, I will also continue to push Congress to do its job and pass comprehensive immigration reform.”
Hobbs then listed off several initiatives launched under Biden that she says she’s grateful for, such as the CHIPS Act and Inflation Reduction Act. The governor didn’t linger too long on the subject of Biden’s re-election campaign.
Hobbs appeared to flip back and forth on her perspective of Biden. She said that Biden was delivering positive results for Americans. She also claimed that he had better stamina than she does.
“Biden and Harris are an administration and right now they’re delivering for the people of America,” said Hobbs.
Yet, the governor also indicated that the Biden administration’s handling of the economy was causing the country to head into a recession. She said she sides with average Americans’ sense of the economy over purported experts.
“I think that the economists are more optimistic than folks on the ground,” said Hobbs. “A recession is more likely than the economists are projecting.”
Concerning a potential adversary for Biden, Hobbs said that current polling she’s witnessed has placed former President Donald Trump ahead of rumored challenger, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Hobbs also answered on several other topics, including her Republican gubernatorial opponent Kari Lake and her controversial veto of a bill allowing homemade food sales (mainly impacting tamales and other street vendor foods).
Concerning the homelessness crisis, Hobbs said that California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s more recent requirement that cities submit their homeless mitigation plans to him for approval was the role model for handling homelessness.
“I think Governor Newsom’s done great things around homelessness, and certainly there are some pages we can take out of his playbook,” said Hobbs.
According to a US News analysis of the Annual Homelessness Assessment Report, Arizona has two out of the top 25 cities for largest homeless populations in the country. California has eight, with Los Angeles holding the number-one spot for the most homeless in the nation.
Tucson was listed as having the 25th-largest homeless population, with just over 2,200 homeless individuals reflecting a 68 percent increase from 2020 to last year. Phoenix had the seventh-largest homeless population of just over 9,000, with a 22 percent increase from 2020 to last year.
On the water crisis, Hobbs said that cotton and alfalfa growers should expect “difficult conversations” around the future of their business.
“If you’re a farmer that grows alfalfa, do you want to be told you can’t keep growing that? No,” said Hobbs.
Garrett pointed out that 60 percent of farmers today are Native American, and that they had thousands of years of their ancestral history rooted in agriculture. Hobbs said she wasn’t aware of that fact. However, the governor said that the Native American communities could adjust.
“I think that our Native American communities are some of the most adaptable anywhere, and I think they could shift their agriculture if they needed to,” said Hobbs.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Abe Hamadeh argued for a new trial on Tuesday before the Mohave County Superior Court.
The judge, Lee Jantzen, seemed interested in sampling the evidence presented by Hamadeh’s team in the case, Boyd v. Mayes, despite multiple objections from opposition. Arguments presented by the opposition — the attorney general, secretary of state, and Maricopa and Pima counties — mainly focused on the amount of time that’s transpired since the election and Hamadeh’s December trial. Arguments presented by Hamadeh’s team focused on evidence of allegedly disenfranchised voters, claiming that hundreds of “lost” (uncounted) votes from undervotes and provisional ballots proved that Hamadeh won the race.
Lawyers present for the oral arguments included former assistant attorney general Jen Wright, State Rep. Alex Kolodin (R-LD03), and James Sabalos for Hamadeh; Alexis Danneman and Paul Eckstein for Attorney General Kris Mayes; Craig Morgan for Secretary of State Adrian Fontes; Daniel Jurkowitz for Pima County; and Joseph La Rue for Maricopa County.
Sabalos opened up the oral arguments, quoting Thomas Jefferson and summarizing general discoveries in the course of their months-long review of voter data as a precursor to Wright’s arguments.
“We do not have a government by the majority; we have a government by the majority who vote,” quoted Sabalos.
Sabalos insisted their case wasn’t about fraud, but about the evidence and facts supporting the reality of Hamadeh as the winner of last November’s election contest. He claimed that Gov. Katie Hobbs, in her former capacity as secretary of state, was aware of and neglected to immediately publicize 63 Pinal County undervotes that lent to Hamadeh’s claims last December of lost votes.
Sabalos said this intentional concealment of facts served to handicap their team’s due diligence of reviewing election data for the courts. Sabalos further claimed that there were 76,339 votes counted as undervotes in the attorney general’s contest. Of the approximately 2,000 ballots they inspected, 14 were misread (.61 percent). With that percentage applied to the larger total of undervotes statewide, Sabalos said that amounted to 466 or more votes — more than the 288-vote lead Mayes holds over Hamadeh.
Sabalos then claimed that there were uncounted provisional ballots that constituted legal votes, and that the majority of those would’ve turned in favor of Hamadeh.
“We don’t come today with hyperbole or speculation. We come with some reasonably solid evidence, and we need a heck of a lot more for this judge and this court to get its hands around,” said Sabalos.
Wright followed up Sabalos’ arguments by first focusing on Hobbs. She said that Hobbs didn’t fulfill her duty of being a neutral, nominal party, since Hobbs argued heavily that Hamadeh had no evidence to support his claims, while allegedly knowing of the dozens of undervotes recovered during the recount, and pushed for his case to be dismissed. Wright further noted that Maricopa County Elections Director Scott Jarrett admitted during the December trial that he wasn’t sure why certain votes weren’t counted, and instead counted as undervotes.
Wright expanded on Sabalos’ claim of the 63 undervotes, noting that they were counted as valid during the recount. Wright asserted that Hobbs knew of this fact, which she said rendered Hamadeh’s claims during the December trial valid. Wright also dismissed Hobbs’ claim that she was under an order preventing her from disclosing the undervotes, since the order only applied to counties discussing the recount results from vote totals. Wright claimed that the judge would’ve permitted Hamadeh a review of the evidence had Hobbs been forthright all those months ago.
“I find it questionable that a government agent would take support of or opposition to a candidate in an election contest,” said Wright.
Wright further noted that Hamadeh was unable to obtain the provisional ballot data from Maricopa County until days after the trial occurred, further hindering his ability to meet statutory deadlines.
When Wright attempted to discuss the evidentiary numbers on undervotes, both Mayes and Fontes’ legal teams raised objections. The judge overruled their objections, however.
Wright claimed that their team interviewed hundreds of high-propensity voters affected by statewide computer system changes, which allegedly altered their registration address without their consent and therefore deprived them of the right to vote. She claimed that over 1,100 Election Day provisional voters were disenfranchised.
Election Day votes went overwhelmingly for Hamadeh: over 69 percent to nearly 29 percent for Mayes. Wright said that this would mean about 760 of provisional ballots would be for Hamadeh, and 316 for Mayes. By Wright’s math, Hamadeh would prevail on the provisional ballot issue alone by 165 votes.
Wright further noted that their team had collected sworn affidavits of hundreds of voters claiming disenfranchisement due to bureaucratic failures. When she attempted to read the account of one allegedly disenfranchised voter, Mayes’ team raised an objection. The judge promptly overruled.
The allegedly disenfranchised Maricopa County voter, Marlena, attempted to vote on Election Day but was denied. Marlena had reportedly experienced issues with the county’s registration system for months: earlier that year, she discovered that her registration had changed without her knowledge and consent. Wright presented evidence that on October 10, 2022, Marlena attempted to correct her voter registration before the deadline. Wright also presented evidence from Maricopa County confirming Marlena’s registration. Yet, she was denied on Election Day.
Danneman, Mayes’ lawyer, said Hamadeh’s claims were speculative and based on unsworn opinions. She emphasized repeatedly the timeliness of his contest, noting that it has been over five months since the December trial and that their team could only present an argument that they needed more time to look for votes.
Danneman further rejected the argument that Hamadeh should be granted a new trial to undertake further investigation. She said that evidence must be material, in existence at the time of trial, and not be discovered with reasonable diligence.
She added that Hamadeh’s request for a more complete ballot inspection proved there wasn’t any newly-discovered evidence warranting a new trial.
The provisional voters list didn’t hold much weight in Danneman’s view. She claimed Hamadeh was undertaking a “fishing expedition” for evidence, which she pointed out was prohibited by court precedent.
“This list of names proves nothing,” said Danneman. “The plaintiffs had their day in court.”
Morgan, with Fontes, added that it was “long past time” for this election contest to end. He said that Hamadeh’s challenge impugns the validity of election processes as well as the integrity of election officials.
La Rue with Maricopa County concurred. Jurkowitz with Pima County argued further that statute time bars any further contest.
Following the hearing, Hamadeh expressed optimism that the oral arguments ultimately were in his favor.
On Monday, the Biden administration announced that Mohave Valley Elementary School District received over $586,000 for mental health program funding. The funds will pay for up to 22 new positions.
This latest round of funding was part of over $95 million issued across 35 states. In total, the Department of Education (ED) has awarded $286 million to 264 grantees in 48 states for mental health programs.
The funding originated from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) enacted last June as part of the Biden administration’s National Mental Health Strategy. The BSCA’s primary initial purpose was to reduce gun violence in schools and surrounding communities.
Last September, the Biden administration issued nearly $1 billion through BSCA for more mental health program funding. Arizona received an allocation of over $20.8 million.
The Biden administration also issued $122 billion in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding to hire more school psychologists, counselors, and mental health professionals in K-12 schools. ED reported that, compared to pre-pandemic staffing numbers, school social workers have increased by 48 percent, school counselors have increased by 10 percent, school nurses have increased 42 percent, and school psychologists have increased 10 percent.
The Biden administration earmarked these funds for “high-need” local education agencies (LEAs), such as those with high rates of poverty as well as high student-to-mental health professional ratio, high rates of chronic absenteeism, exclusionary discipline (e.g. suspension, expulsion, seclusion, or restraint), referrals to the juvenile justice system, bullying or harassment, community and school violence, or substance use. High-need could also include those who experienced a natural or man-made disaster, or a traumatic event.
Buried within the ED guidance on usage of these funds, the agency encouraged a total overhaul of traditional disciplinary practices.
“Rather than focusing on changing behavior through punishment or removal from the learning environment, school leaders should consider adopting practices that will help educators support students by identifying the root cause of the behavior and developing effective strategies to eliminate or mitigate it,” stated ED. “Building a school culture of curiosity and growth mindset that prioritizes solution-based thinking may encourage pro-social behavior.”
Some of the punishment alternatives included “art program, mindfulness, and body movement activities.” ED also suggested that non-violent behavior be met with conflict resolution training and programs rather than exclusionary discipline.
The Biden administration left it up to each state’s education authority to determine what constituted “high need.” However, the administration noted that the state may require LEAs to describe how they promote meaningful cultural and linguistic engagement. ED further noted that school-based violence prevention programs must be “culturally affirming” in addition to supporting positive relationships, resilience, self-control, empathy, and persistence.
“SEAs may also require LEAs to describe their process for meaningful culturally and linguistically centered student, parent, family, educator, staff, and community engagement and evidence of how that engagement informed their school safety and climate plans, related policies, and strategies,” stated ED.
The ED noted that the permitted use of funds wasn’t limited to improving students’ mental health. ED noted that permitted fund usage included educator and school staff surveys, convenings, and educator outreach efforts.
ED also encouraged funds to be used to prevent and address identity-based bullying. The Biden administration now recognizes sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes under anti-discrimination law.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The city of Tucson is looking into potential funding options to cover the $11 million it would take to keep public transit free every year from here on out.
Prior to this year, the city used federal COVID-19 relief funds to keep public transit fare-free. When the city first announced free busing back in March 2020, the city claimed that the purpose was to avoid crowding at the farebox in addition to providing fiscal relief to riders.
Bus fares were scheduled to resume on January 1 of this year; however, the city managed to source funding for these past six months.
City officials have also sourced enough funding for the next six months. For this upcoming round of subsidies, $2 million came from new hotel and motel taxes, $790,000 came from Tucson Medical Center revenue, and $600,000 came from Visit Tucson revenue. That totals just under $3.4 million.
However, community members are saying the three-year experiment in free public transit has proven much more of a burden than a help. Many have complained that the free transit essentially aids criminal behavior and facilitates public nuisances.
Bus driver union leaders expressed concern about quality control with fully-subsidized bus fare, particularly pointing out the homeless that ride the bus nonstop during the summers to avoid the heat. Teamsters Union 104 Business Manager Kevin Hampton told13 News that free busing threatened passenger and public safety.
“We don’t want our drivers to become the transit police,” said Hampton. “We’re more interested in finding long-term solutions to combat the reasons why people want to ride the bus all day.”
Passengers have complained to local outlets that the free busing allows “too many troublemakers” to board the buses.
Public safety activists like Josh Jacobsen with Tucson Crime Free Coalition allege that free busing has facilitated drug sales, trafficking, and even usage. Jacobsen also toldKVOA that the buses also serve as convenient getaways for robbers and thieves.
“The free buses are contributing to a lot of the movement of narcotics, specifically fentanyl around our community,” said Jacobsen. “There are a lot of reports of individuals using drugs on the free buses. And the free buses also play a large role in the organized retail theft of businesses around our community.”
In December, AZ Free News reported that the council felt they would have to shift the cost burden to taxpayers to cover bus fare. At the time, Mayor Regina Romero suggested additional parking garage fees, Councilwoman Lane Santa Cruz proposed an additional property tax.
The city also secured a financial partner for bus subsidization: defense manufacturing giant Raytheon. The city council noted that they were attempting to convince the University of Arizona and Tucson Unified School District to also join as funding partners.
Cost estimates for taxpayers to subsidize busing permanently ranged around $1 million a month.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
