Arizona law enforcement officials are warning against a federal consent decree for the City of Phoenix Police Department.
Earlier this month, the Arizona Sheriffs’ Association sent a letter to Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego, highlighting their members’ “complete opposition to any additional federal oversight of local law enforcement in the state of Arizona.”
The letter, sent by Yavapai County Sheriff David Rhodes and Navajo County Sheriff David Clouse, wrote that “the unintended but far-reaching consequences of federal oversight in Phoenix are of great concern to all law enforcement agencies in Arizona.” They noted the exorbitant costs of such decrees – most recently in Arizona’s backyard with Maricopa County, which has shelled out “$250 million of taxpayer funds in the last 16 years including on court monitors who have a disconnect between their mandate and experience, and their investment in the community.”
Sheriffs Rhodes and Clouse pointed out “the failure of the DOJ to help Arizona secure its borders” as another strike against the federal government’s ability to effectively commandeer a local police department, let alone to maintain its constitutionally tasks. They stated, “The DOJ has the authority and powers to also initiate a civil rights investigation into the Department of Homeland Security and as of yet has not. One does not need to look far to see the extraordinary constitutional violations occurring at our southwest border at the hands of the DHS. We find this inequity hypocritical considering the serious public safety implications manifesting from this failure.”
The association promised its complete support to Phoenix “in rejecting an offer of negotiation or consent decree by the DOJ,” adding the sheriffs would “stand behind you in forcing litigation to shine the light for all your citizens onto the allegations.” They asserted that “the necessary oversight of your police force can be done internally, with confidence from your constituents and other law enforcement agencies.”
Just days after the sheriffs transmitted this letter, the City of Phoenix sent one of its own to the DOJ, requesting “that the Department of Justice commit to negotiating in good faith a technical assistance letter with the City of Phoenix and the Phoenix Police Department, with assurances sufficient to reassure the DOJ that the City and PPD will continue with the reforms they are in the process of implementing.” The City’s letter accused the DOJ of operating its investigation with “a lack of transparency,” alleging the federal team “has declined to meaningfully share its observations, impressions, concerns, or tentative conclusions with the City of Phoenix, PPD, or their counsel despite numerous requests, and has rejected a specific request for a mid-investigation briefing.”
According to the City of Phoenix, “a technical assistance letter would allow the DOJ to provide Phoenix remedial recommendations and mechanisms to ensure proper implementation without the presence of a court enforced consent decree and monitor.”
The city argued that its Interim Chief, Michael G. Sullivan, has helped to enact meaningful reforms over “virtually every aspect of the operations implicated by the DOJ investigation.” City officials made the case that Sullivan’s changes “demonstrate a powerful commitment to reform, a commitment that warrants a different approach from the DOJ than has been the case over the past dozen years.”
Late last year, Arizona State Representative David Marshall and 20 of his colleagues in the chamber sent a letter to City of Phoenix officials, asking them to “swiftly reject any consent decree proposed by the DOJ and challenge the findings in the forthcoming DOJ report.”
🚨FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE🚨 Arizona House Republicans Urge Phoenix Mayor to Reject Federal Control of Police Department
“To preserve Arizona’s sovereignty consistent with our state constitution, you must reject the DOJ’s coercive consent decree.”
The request from these representatives followed other petitions from Arizona officials who oppose the imposition of a consent decree upon the city’s police department. Earlier last fall, Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell posted her displeasure with the principle of federal monitoring of law enforcement departments, writing, “Look no further than MCSO to see what ‘federal monitoring’ does to agencies. Monitors (people paid to determine whether an agency is in compliance) have ZERO incentive to find compliance. It will cost the taxpayers MILLIONS and crime will increase.”
Look no further than MCSO to see what "federal monitoring" does to agencies. Monitors (people paid to determine whether an agency is in compliance) have ZERO incentive to find compliance. It will cost the taxpayers MILLIONS and crime will increase.@MCSOAZ@andybiggs4az… https://t.co/InGA5Vs3lc
— Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell (@Rachel1Mitchell) November 4, 2023
City of Phoenix Councilmember Ann O’Brien also wrote an op-ed for the Arizona Republic, voicing her sentiments regarding any arrangement handed down from the DOJ. In her piece, O’Brien wrote, “I have no intention of signing anything given to us by the Department of Justice without getting to read their findings first. That’s the thing: the DOJ gets agencies to sign an agreement in principle before ever releasing their findings, which essentially means that agency will negotiate a consent decree in good faith. Not Phoenix.”
Per the City of Phoenix’s information, the DOJ’s Civil Pattern or Practice investigation into the Phoenix Police Department “is the 71st investigation of its kind since the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 was signed into law by President Bill Clinton.” If DOJ finds “patterns or practices of misconduct,” then Phoenix will likely find itself with a federal monitor.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Arizona’s Republican Senate President is standing with families over a recent decision from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
Late last week, the Arizona State Senate Republican Caucus announced that President Warren Petersen “is working diligently to come to a resolution that will protect the more than 700,000 recipients from having to give the federal government a portion of [the 2023 Arizona Families Tax Rebate] this tax season.”
🚨 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Senate President @votewarren Works to Prevent Biden's IRS from Taking Advantage of "Arizona Families Tax Rebate" Recipients ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/Y2B2JisOvy
According to the Senate Republicans, the IRS recently made the decision to collect federal income taxes on the rebate, which was passed in the 2023 Arizona budget compromise between legislative Republicans and Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs. The caucus noted that “more than a dozen other states have passed similar legislation, in which the IRS concluded those funds were not considered taxable income.”
On February 10, 2023, the IRS released a determination that taxpayers in many of the states that issued special payments in 2022 would “not need to report these payments on their 2022 tax returns.”
In a statement that accompanied his news release, Petersen said, “It makes zero sense that the IRS is choosing to hurt Arizona families by taxing a tax rebate. I’m thankful for the help from Senator Sinema’s office in working to get this matter front and center with the IRS and U.S. Treasury. With tax season less than two weeks away, time is of the essence. While litigation likely isn’t the best approach, I appreciate the Attorney General’s office reaching out to us on this matter.”
The Senate President was critical of Governor Hobbs’ perceived inaction to protect families in this matter, saying, “I am, however, incredibly disappointed our Governor is again nowhere to be found on an issue that could ultimately cost our citizens tens of millions of dollars. I’m calling on her to not turn a blind eye on this issue, as she did with gas prices last spring, and to work with us on solving this problem for Arizona families.”
Petersen’s sharp rebuke follows a back-and-forth between the Governor’s Office and legislative Republicans this past fall, after Hobbs championed “the deployment of the Arizona Families Tax Rebate.” Hobbs said, “I made a promise that when I took office, I would take every opportunity I had to make it easier for Arizonans to provide for their families and lower the cost of living.”
Hobbs’ actions surrounding the issuance of rebates to Arizona families earned a Cease and Desist letter from attorneys for Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma. The letter highlighted an agreement in the FY 2024 budget that “[n]o letter relating to the Arizona families tax rebate issued under this section shall…reference the governor’s office.” According to the letter, the Arizona Department of Revenue had “distributed, apparently to all individuals who are eligible for the Families Tax Rebate, a letter that advises them to ‘visit the Arizona Department of Revenue’s online claim portal….’ The advertised URL, however, not only explicitly references the Governor but directs users to the Governor’s own website. Further, clicking the designated link on the homepage brings the user not to the Department’s portal, but rather to another webpage in the azgovernor.gov domain that features a video of self-congratulatory bloviations form the Governor.”
Republican Senator Jake Hoffman shredded the action from the Governor’s Office, stating, “The sad reality exposed by this situation is that Katie Hobbs doesn’t care about anyone other than herself. She tried to play fast and loose with the law, as she so often does, and forced Director Woods to violate it.”
Yesterday the legislature sent @KatieHobbs’ Director of the Dept. of Revenue a Cease & Desist Letter due to ADOR illegally spending millions at the direction of Hobbs.
Under state law, the Director of ADOR is personally liable for the illegally spent public funds, estimated to… pic.twitter.com/lenpnMauv4
Another Senate Republican, T.J. Shope, said, “I know the Governor wanted no part of this tax rebate but thankfully, the Arizona Senate and House caucuses, led by the Arizona Freedom Caucus, stood strong and demanded it be part of the State Budget. When we stick together, we can provide positive things for Arizona’s families.”
I know the Governor wanted no part of this tax rebate but thankfully, the @AZSenateGOP & @AZHouseGOP caucuses, led by the @AZFreedomCaucus, stood strong and demanded it be part of the State Budget. When we stick together, we can provide positive things for Arizona’s families.… https://t.co/JP2VndTeKU
President Petersen will try to make contact with liaisons from the IRS and U.S. Treasury Department in an attempt to reverse the decision from the federal government in the days before the new tax season commences.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The Grand Canyon State is one of the best in the country for starting a business.
According to a recently released report from WalletHub, Arizona ranked sixth in the nation for entrepreneurs looking to start a business. The 2024 Best & Worst States to Start a Business report had Utah as the number-one ranked state in the country and Rhode Island as the last-ranked. Two of Arizona’s other neighbors, Nevada and Colorado, came in at fifth and seventh, respectively.
Cassandra Happe, a WalletHub Analyst, said, “Starting a business is a difficult and risky process, but where you live can highly influence your chances of success. Before establishing a business in any location, make sure to do research to ensure it’s an ideal place for your customer base, has enough labor and supplier availability, and suits your needs when it comes to financing.”
Happe pointed to Utah’s great “access to loans” and “largest annual employment growth in the country” as two major indicators for its first place showing in the report.
The report factored average growth in number of small businesses, labor costs, availability of human capital, average length of work week (in hours), and cost of living. Arizona ranked sixth and seventh in small business growth and human capital, respectively; yet fell to twenty-fifth in both labor costs and work week hours, and twenty-seventh in cost of living.
In a separate WalletHub study, Best Large Cities to Start a Business, Scottsdale and Phoenix appeared in the top-30, at twenty-seventh and twenty-eighth, respectively. Three east valley cities, Gilbert, Chandler, and Mesa, clocked in at thirty-first, thirty-fifth, and thirty-eighth, respectively. Glendale and Tucson were noted at forty-sixth and fifty-first, respectively.
WalletHub gave several tips to men and women contemplating a business start-up. Those suggestions were as follows:
Thoroughly Research Your Market
Create a Solid Business Plan
Focus on a Unique Value Proposition
Choose a City that Fits Your Needs Well
Manage Finances Wisely
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Arizona Republican legislators continue to work alongside state attorneys general in significant legal fights in federal court.
On Friday, the Arizona State Senate Republican Caucus announced it had joined an amicus brief to the Supreme Court of the United States in Trump v. Anderson, defending the former president’s right to remain on the ballot in Colorado – and every other state – for the upcoming election. This action follows a similar effort, where legislators, led by Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma, signed their names to a brief that successfully petitioned the nation’s high court to hear the case.
DEFENDING DEMOCRACY: The Arizona Legislature is proud to join more than two dozen states to ensure President Trump isn’t removed from the Colorado ballot, or any other state’s ballot. Read more: https://t.co/xWdEQZFYhUpic.twitter.com/XSR4G9WHnA
This latest amicus was led by the States of Indiana and West Virginia and co-signed by twenty-three additional states. Notably, the legislative leadership of North Carolina also joined the coalition of attorneys general and the Arizona Legislature in the filing. As with Arizona, North Carolina has a Democrat attorney general and a Republican-led legislature.
Senator Jake Hoffman championed the newest sign-on from the state legislature, writing, “With a Leftist AG in Arizona who refuses to stand up for the rule of law, the conservative-led Legislature has stepped up to defend not only the laws of our state, but the very fabric of our republic. Proud to stand with Warren Petersen and the Arizona Senate Republicans on these legal battles.”
With a Leftist AG in Arizona who refuses to stand up for the rule of law, the conservative-led Legislature has stepped up to defend not only the laws of our state, but the very fabric of our republic.
Representative Alexander Kolodin added, “Democrats are trying for a Chinese style election where only their presidential candidate appears on the ballot. The Arizona House and Senate Republicans are stepping up to defend democracy against this threat!”
Democrats are trying for a Chinese style election where only their presidential candidate appears on the ballot. The @AZHouseGOP and @AZSenateGOP are stepping up to defend democracy against this threat! https://t.co/d3jEIPHSZ0
In their brief, the attorneys general and legislators warn that “if the Court endorses what happened in Colorado, then the chaos can only be expected to worsen. No doubt a political tit-for-tat will ensue, in which competing parties will find new avenues to disqualify their opponents. And elections could then come down to small variations among state elections laws and the political composition of state administrations. In short, indulging challenges of this sort and in this posture will ‘sacrifice the political stability of the system’ of the Nation ‘with profound consequences for the entire citizenry.’ At a minimum, it will ‘expose the political life of the country to months, or perhaps years, of chaos.’”
The legislators’ sign-on to this brief marks yet another time they have joined Republican attorneys general on their legal filings over the past couple months. At the start of the year, the Arizona Legislature joined an amicus brief in federal court to help challenge California’s Assault Weapon Control Act. That brief was led by the attorneys general of Idaho, Iowa, and Montana, and co-signed by almost two dozen additional states.
In December, Petersen and Toma joined a public comment letter to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to address its newly proposed rule, Definition of “Engaged in the Business as a Dealer in Firearms.” That letter was led by the States of Kansas, Iowa, and Montana, and co-signed by 22 other attorneys general.
Over the past month, the two Republican legislative leaders have signaled a more aggressive shift in taking the reins from Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes to defend the law and Constitution. Attorneys general are not usually joined by outside parties on their amicus briefs, yet multiple coalitions of Republican state prosecutors have included Petersen and Toma on these major filings. In previews for the 2024 legislative session, both the House and Senate Majority Caucuses indicated more of these efforts are to be expected throughout this year.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
A surprisingly controversial bill from 2023 cleared its first hurdle this week at the Arizona Legislature.
On Wednesday, HB 2042 (“The Tamale Bill”), sponsored by Representative Travis Grantham, passed the House Regulatory Affairs Committee with a 6-0 vote. According to the overview from the Arizona House, this bill would “expand the foods that meet the exemption for cottage food products if requirements are met, and establish program guidelines and requirements.”
The Arizona Department of Health Services (AZDHS) oversees the cottage food program. Its website states this program “allows individuals to make homemade products that are neither potentially hazardous nor Time or Temperature Control for Safety Foods, and offer them for commercial sale.” According to AZDHS, the law was amended twice – once in 2011 and another in 2018. The 2011 change “allow[ed] residents to produce non-potentially hazardous baked and confectionery products in their homes and offer them for commercial sale within the state.”
In a statement to AZ Free News, Grantham said, “I’m glad it passed committee unanimously and I hope the governor will sign it into law this time.”
Grantham’s reference to the governor’s future action harkens back to the 2023 legislative session, when Katie Hobbs vetoed the bill after overwhelmingly bipartisan support in both the House and Senate. In her April 18th veto letter to Speaker Ben Toma, Hobbs gave several reasons for her decision, including that the proposal “would significantly increase the risk of food-borne illness by expanding the ability of cottage food vendors to sell high-risk goods.” After the governor’s veto, the Arizona State Legislature attempted to override the action, but fell five votes short in the House of Representatives.
The President of the National Hispanic Caucus of State Legislators (NHCSL), Nellie Pou, wrote a letter to Senate President Warren Petersen and Speaker Toma after Hobbs’ decision last year, supporting the “efforts to override the Governor’s veto.” Pou expressed disappointment in Hobbs’ veto, writing, “By signing this bill, the Governor had an opportunity to support the Hispanic community and personal freedom that should be accessible to everyone. Our community should not fear legal repercussions for selling their homemade foods.”
Democrat State Representative Alma Hernandez also made clear her disappointment over the spring 2023 veto. Hernandez said, “As a public health professional, I am VERY disappointed to see that a bipartisan bill allowing Arizonans to make an honest living by selling things like tamales, tortillas, and sweets legally was vetoed by Gov. Katie Hobbs. It makes no sense.”
As a public health professional, I am VERY disappointed to see that a bipartisan bill allowing Arizonans to make an honest living by selling things like tamales, tortillas, and sweets legally was vetoed by Gov. @katiehobbs. It makes no sense. People are NOT dying from street food…
— (((Rep.Alma Hernandez))) (@almaforarizona) April 19, 2023
After Senate Democrats released a statement to announce that they would not provide “the required votes needed to override” the governor’s veto of the bill, Arizona Republic columnist Laurie Roberts took the legislators to task, saying, “Senate Democrats’ change of heart on the tamale bill isn’t about protecting the people from imagined illness. It is all about protecting a governor from embarrassment.”
Hobbs may now get a second chance at “redemption” if the bill were to clear both chambers for the second year in a row. The 2024 version does include some changes in hopes that the Governor’s Office will be more receptive this time around.
The tamale bill is up now in the House Regulatory Affairs Committee. It's virtually identical to the bipartisan bill that @GovernorHobbs vetoed last year. #FreeTheTamales
Representatives from the Institute for Justice – AZ Chapter, Barry Goldwater Institute for Public Policy Research, Arizona Free Enterprise Club, Arizona Craft Producers, North Phoenix Chamber of Commerce, and Americans for Prosperity – AZ, indicated their organizations’ support for The Tamale Bill as it commences another legislative journey. The Arizona Restaurant Association remains neutral on the proposal.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
