Legislators Trade Barbs Over Bill That Would Protect Businesses From Federal Overreach

Legislators Trade Barbs Over Bill That Would Protect Businesses From Federal Overreach

By Daniel Stefanski |

Arizona Republicans and Democrats are warring over an amended bill in the state legislature that would serve to protect businesses against overreaching government bureaucrats.

On Friday, State Representative Matt Gress sent a letter to Governor Katie Hobbs over her “recent press release voicing opposition to [his] Floor amendment to H.B. 2209.” The bill, which was sponsored by Representative David Livingston, would “add certain responsibilities to the Industrial Commission of Arizona (ICA) relating to violations and inspections [and] continue the ICA for three years.”

The proposal passed out of the Arizona House Committee on Commerce with a 10-0 vote before meeting resistance from the chamber’s Democrats after an amendment from Gress. The Republican lawmaker’s amendment did the following:

  • Includes a requirement for the determinations, penalties, and fines for labor violations to be considered, authorized, and determined by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of commissioners present and voting.
  • Instructs the commissioners to consider whether a violation continues after the employer’s course of conduct has ceased.
  • Prohibits the Director from allowing any individual to accompany an inspector when conducting inspections for the ICA unless the individual meets specified criteria as outlined.

House Democrats attacked the amendment, insinuating that it would “make Arizona workplaces a far more dangerous place to be.” The Caucus’ “X” account posted that Gress’ “meddling could result in federal OSHA taking over Arizona’s state workplace oversight responsibilities.”

The amended legislation narrowly passed the chamber with a 31-28 vote (with one seat vacant).

Gress’s amendment earned a response from the Area Director of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, T. Zachary Barnett, who wrote to the ICA Director, saying, “the impact of House Bill 2209 on the State Plan’s enforcement program would result in the Arizona State Plan not being ALAE [“as least as effective] with respect to who is permitted to participate in an Arizona Division of Occupational Safety and Health (ADOSH) inspection.” Barnett requested “that these changes be omitted from Arizona’s legislation to avoid OSHA reaching an adverse ALAE determination with respect to the Arizona State Plan.”

In his letter to Hobbs, Gress pushed back on OSHA’s assertions, stating that the letter from the federal bureaucrat “does not provide any legitimate reason for opposing H.B. 2209.” Gress said that the amended bill “will prevent potential safety and financial liability from union organizers, outside agitators, and other third parties who may enter Arizona workplaces with accompanying state OSHA inspectors.” He added, “H.B. 2209 maintains the rights of workers to decide for themselves about union representation, protects Arizona businesses from excessive costs and injury claims and infringement upon their property rights, and promotes safety during worksite inspections.”

Gress then made eight arguments to support his amendment against the claims of OSHA and other detractors. Those were that “H.B. 2209 is consistent with 40 years of interpretation of federal law and seeks only to mitigate the harm from a union-backed expansion of OSHA practices proposed by the Biden Administration,” that “Mr. Barnett’s criticism of H.B. 2209’s definition of ‘authorized employee representative’ is baseless because H.B. 2209 mirrors federal law,” that “H.B. 2209 would enable businesses to protect their trade secrets if outsiders are allowed to accompany Arizona OSHA inspectors,” that “H.B. 2209 would enable businesses to preserve safety during inspections that include outsiders in the workplace,” that “H.B. 2209 will reduce abuses from unions, outsiders, and third parties using OSHA as a tactic in ‘corporate campaigns’ to punish businesses whose workers choose not to be represented by a union,” that “Mr. Barnett’s letter neglects to mention the process entailed for federal recognition of Arizona’s State OSHA plan,” that “it is inappropriate for Mr. Barnett to comment on the amendments to ARS 23-108.03 and ARS 23-408(M),” and that “Mr. Barnett’s letter is simply the latest attempt of OSHA’s repeated pattern of bureaucratic rivalry with the Arizona State OSHA plan.”

Gress ended his letter to the governor by urging her “not to be distracted, deterred, or intimidated by the unfounded opinions expressed in Mr. Barnett’s letter,” but “instead [to] stand with Arizona businesses in support of H.B. 2209 and encourage all legislators to vote in favor of H.B. 2209.”

H.B. 2209 now resides in the Arizona Senate for consideration.

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

Lawmakers Clash With Cities And Towns Over Arizona Starter Homes Act

Lawmakers Clash With Cities And Towns Over Arizona Starter Homes Act

By Daniel Stefanski |

A political battle is underway over a bill that could help more Arizonans afford and own homes.

Earlier this week, a bipartisan coalition of Arizona lawmakers clashed with the Arizona League of Cities and Towns over the fate of the Arizona Starter Homes Act, which currently resides in the Governor’s Office.

Both chambers of the legislature cleared the bill with bipartisan votes. The proposal would “create municipal prohibitions relating to home designs and single-family home lot sizes” – according to the overview provided by the chamber.

In a press release from the Arizona State Senate Republican Caucus, Republican and Democrat lawmakers highlighted a statement from the Executive Director of the Arizona League of Cities and Towns, where he said, “Zoning is something that we cannot support. And we told them from the beginning.”

Director Belshe responded to the charge on “X,” writing, “I would like to address a quote attributed to me in the local media yesterday. My wording may have been a bit clunky with the reporter which led to some confusion. Generally, the League and our cities view by-right zoning from a state mandate as nonnegotiable as it tends to be anti-democratic and fails to consider the nuances of development and will lead to considerable unintended consequences.”

Belshe added, “That said, we are actively working on bills that will streamline and allow ADU’s, middle housing options, and adaptive reuse of commercial buildings. We’re additionally working on legislation that would make rezoning processes more efficient. With regards to HB 2570 the League was never given an opportunity to negotiate on the bill. Amendments were crafted by the homebuilders to secure votes of individual legislators.”

Senate President Warren Petersen took issue with the League’s ardent opposition to this bipartisan solution, saying, “The Governor is out of excuses to not sign this bill. The League just made their intentions clear. The Governor needs to do the right thing here to make housing more affordable and stand up to the League lobbyists whose only objective is to ensure nothing gets done at the legislature.”

Democrat Senator Theresa Hatathlie also weighed in to support the bill. She said, “Your home is your sacred place. It’s where you raise your family and care for your elders. I’m tired of the League and their lobbyists who come here, year after year, to deny these opportunities for the people that I represent. Enough is enough. Please sign the Arizona Starter Homes Act, Governor.”

Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego urged the governor to veto the bill, stating. “We need more affordable housing in Arizona, but HB 2570 misses the mark. It doesn’t guarantee that starter homes would be affordable – and instead, increases profits for homebuilders and overlooks critical infrastructure and water needs. It’s curious the prime sponsors of the bill excluded their own communities from the new rules, choosing to disproportionately impact cities like Phoenix that have planned for growth and high-density development. I urge Governor Hobbs to veto this bill.”

House and Senate legislators had recently held a press conference outside of the state capitol building to champion their efforts and to lobby the governor to sign their legislation.

After the presser, Senator Wendy Rogers posted, “Property rights are a fundamental freedom in our constitutional republic. It is up to us legislators to enable that right in every way possible… especially in our rural areas where the American dream of homeownership is becoming less attainable for hard-working Arizonans. This bill is a step in the right direction to help bring prices down!”

HB 2570 was transmitted to Governor Katie Hobbs on March 12.

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

Senate Passes Ballot Referral To Ban Preferential Treatment In Hiring Based On Race

Senate Passes Ballot Referral To Ban Preferential Treatment In Hiring Based On Race

By Daniel Stefanski |

Another ballot referral is one step closer to Arizona voters.

Earlier this week, the Arizona Senate passed SCR 1019, which would “constitutionally prohibit the state from compelling an individual to endorse giving preferential treatment to or discriminating against any individual or individuals on the basis of race or ethnicity as a condition of any hiring, promoting or contracting decision” – according to the purpose from the chamber.

The ballot referral was approved by the state Senate with a 16-12 vote. Two members did not vote.

The Arizona Senate Republicans Caucus “X” account posted, “JUST IN – Senate Democrats voted ‘NO’ on a ballot referral that would ask voters in November to consider a state ban on hiring, promoting, or providing preferential treatment to employees based on their race or ethnicity. Senate Republicans believe qualifications, performance, experience, and character should be the deciding factors, not skin color.”

Senator Anthony Kern sponsored the proposal. He was joined by Senators Wendy Rogers, Justine Wadsack; and Representatives Justin Heap, Rachel Jones, Alex Kolodin, and Austin Smith as cosponsors.

Last month, the measure cleared the Senate Government Committee with a 4-3 vote (with one member not voting). After the positive result, the committee chairman, Senator Jake Hoffman, issued the following statement: “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, also known as DEI, is racism by another name. These policies and programs promote preferential treatment, or discrimination, based on the color of one’s skin, their race, or ethnicity. An example of this is when an employer has two resumes in front of them, one candidate is clearly more qualified than the other because of their skills and experience, but the less qualified candidate is chosen for the job because their race is instead prioritized. This is happening right now in our universities, it’s happened in our state agencies, and it’s unequivocally wrong.”

Hoffman added, “As Chairman of the Senate Committee on Government, I was happy to advance SCR 1019, a ballot measure sponsored by Senator Kern, to reaffirm the state’s protections against racial discrimination or racial ideologies like DEI. I’m incredibly concerned with Democrats describing this racist practice as ‘progress.’ All Democrats in committee voted in support of racism.”

On the Arizona Legislature’s Request to Speak system, representatives from the Barry Goldwater Institute for Public Policy Research, and Heritage Action for America, supported the ballot referral. Representatives from the Arizona Board of Regents, Arizona Education Association, City of Phoenix, Save Our Schools Arizona, Arizona National Organization for Women, State Conference NAACP, and Rural Arizona Action, signed in to oppose the proposal.

The referral will now be considered by the Arizona House of Representatives. If passed by the state House, SCR 1019 will head to the November General Election ballot for an up-or-down vote from Arizona voters.

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

Child Sex Traffickers Could Face Life In Prison

Child Sex Traffickers Could Face Life In Prison

By Daniel Stefanski |

A measure to strengthen protections for Arizona children is one step closer to state voters.

On Monday, the Arizona State Senate passed SCR 1021, which “statutorily requires an adult who is convicted of a class 2 felony for any child sex trafficking offense to be sentenced to natural life imprisonment” – according to the purpose from the chamber. If approved by both the Arizona House and Senate, the proposal would be decided by state voters in the November General Election.

The ballot referral received bipartisan support with a 20-8 vote (with two members not voting).

Senator Shawnna Bolick, the sponsor of the referral, issued the following statement after her chamber’s positive action: “I am a mother, wife, and protector of our children. Today, my fellow Republican senators and I took a stand to stop child sex trafficking across Arizona. Human trafficking is not specific to any age, race, or gender, and it occurs throughout rural, suburban, and urban areas across our Grand Canyon State. With a wide-open southern border and derelict government agencies, cases of human trafficking are on the rise.”

The Senate Republican Caucus’ press release shared information from the Arizona Attorney General’s Office that “the average age of entry into sex trafficking in Arizona is 14 years old, but there have been numerous cases of children being victimized at a much younger age.”

Back in February, SCR 1021 was given a green light by the Senate Judiciary Committee with a 5-2 vote. Democrat Senator Mitzi Epstein joined all Republicans in sending the referral to the full chamber.

On the Arizona Legislature’s Request to Speak system, representatives from Common Sense Action for America and Center for Arizona Policy indicated their support for the legislation. Representatives from the Arizona Coalition to End Sexual and Domestic Violence, Middle Ground Prison Reform, and Arizona National Organization for Women signed in to oppose the proposal.

Bolick added, “Republican state lawmakers stand united to send a message to those disgusting animals responsible for stealing our children’s innocence – Arizona’s children are our most valuable resource. We would like everyone to know, our children are not for sale. One Arizona child who is victimized is one too many.”

SCR 1021 will now be considered by the Arizona House of Representatives.

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

Ballot Measure Would Help Property Owners Affected By Non-Enforcement Of Public Nuisance Laws

Ballot Measure Would Help Property Owners Affected By Non-Enforcement Of Public Nuisance Laws

By Daniel Stefanski |

A ballot referral to help protect Arizona business owners from degrading landscapes outside their front doors will be considered by state voters thanks to the efforts of legislators.

The Arizona Senate President, Warren Petersen, and Speaker of the House Ben Toma introduced HCR 2023 / SCR 1006, which would “allow a property owner to apply for a primary property tax refund if the owner documents expenses caused by a city, town or county adopting a policy, pattern or practice which declines to enforce existing laws or the maintaining of a public nuisance” – according to the overview provided by the state House.

In a statement after the successful passage of the bill out of his chamber, Petersen said, “There are instances where local governments routinely and repeatedly fail their citizens by not enforcing laws. An example of this would be the City of Phoenix’s handling of the former homeless encampment known as ‘The Zone.’ This area was not only a public safety and public health disaster for those who camped there, but it was also a detriment to the livelihoods of small business owners who set up their shops in the area.”

President Petersen added, “Money talks, and as a way to encourage municipalities to enforce the law, Speaker Toma and I teamed up to sponsor HCR 2023/SCR 1006. This measure is a ballot referral that would protect law-abiding citizens. If approved by voters, property owners would be allowed to request a refund for expenses incurred to mitigate the problem, up to the amount of their property tax liability. The funds would be deducted from the local government’s state shared revenue.”

The chamber’s president also noted that “all Senate Democrats voted ‘no’” on the referral.

At the end of February, the Arizona House approved the referral with a 31-28 vote (with one vacant seat). The Arizona Senate then passed the measure with a 16-12 vote (with two members not voting). The referral was then transmitted to the Arizona Secretary of State to be placed on the November General Election ballot.

Representatives from Barry Goldwater Institute for Public Policy Research, QuikTrip, Arizona Free Enterprise Club, Arizona Chamber of Commerce, Arizona Food Marketing Alliance, and the National Federation of Independent Business, indicated their support for the proposal on the Arizona Legislature’s Request to Speak system. Representatives from the League of Arizona Cities & Towns, Living United for Change in Arizona, Arizona Coalition to End Sexual and Domestic Violence, Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona, Arizona Association of Counties, County Supervisors Association of Arizona, Arizona Housing Coalition, and several state cities and towns, signed in to oppose the measure.

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.