by Matthew Holloway | Nov 19, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona political figures gathered under the canopy of two Apache helicopters on display Thursday at Boeing’s manufacturing complex in northeast Mesa, near Falcon Field Airport. The event commemorated the 50th anniversary of the attack helicopter’s first flight, which occurred on September 30, 1975.
It drew current and former Boeing employees in matching beige t-shirts emblazoned with the Apache hovering and key statistics on the back—an homage to what Boeing employees and leaders described as the “best damn attack helicopter in the world,” according to Cronkite News.
In a statement issued by the Arizona Senate Republican Caucus, Senate Majority Whip Frank Carroll marked the anniversary by praising the program and its workforce.
“It’s an honor to stand with the dedicated Arizonans and military personnel who have helped make the Apache a global symbol of excellence,” Carroll remarked. “For 50 years, this aircraft has protected American lives and advanced our national security, and I’m proud to support the men and women who ensure it remains the best in the world.”
Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs addressed the gathering as well, saying: “The fact that there are so many elected officials here from both sides of the aisle demonstrates our commitment to the future of the Apache program here in Arizona.”
Among the public figures present were Congressmen Greg Stanton (D-AZ-04) and Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05), as well as Mesa Mayor Mark Freeman. Stanton told the gathered crowd, “The Apache didn’t just fly, it soared and it took Mesa with it. The city is a hub for aerospace and defense manufacturing, anchored by great companies like Boeing,” per Chamber Business News.
Boeing Attack Helicopter Programs Vice President and Mesa Site Executive Christina Upah reported that nearly 3,000 Apache aircraft have been produced in Mesa, with more than 1,300 in operation around the world. Over the past five years, Hobbs noted, more than 60 expansions in Arizona’s aerospace and defense sector have generated more than $2.8 billion in investment and more than 12,000 jobs.
US Army Lt. Col. John Holcomb, commander at the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) Vertical Lift Mesa, who manages production of the Apache alongside the AH-6i Light Attack and Reconnaissance Helicopter, and the MD-530 Cayuse Warrior helicopter, said: “Looking around this facility, I’m reminded that while the name on the buildings may have changed, the mission has remained constant. To deliver the best damn attack helicopter in the world.”
While the event was celebratory, it came against a backdrop of broader pressures facing Arizona’s aerospace and manufacturing sectors—and renewed bipartisan interest in preserving the state’s five-decade role in Apache production. The helicopter’s global impact also loomed large, with its widespread adoption by the U.S. Army and by 16 allied nations, including the U.K., Israel, Japan, and South Korea, per KJZZ.
During the event, Stanton even threw a proverbial nod to Biggs, quipping: “We don’t always agree, Andy, but on this one, we’re together,” citing the Congressmen’s past cooperation on legislation to support Apache production.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Nov 18, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The Arizona Department of Homeland Security (AZDHS) has joined a lawsuit brought by 12 states that challenges the terms set by the Trump administration and FEMA for two federal grants that impact the prevention and response to terrorist attacks, securing the southern border, and bolstering emergency management capabilities.
The lawsuit, filed on November 4th was touted by Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes as “the 30th lawsuit the Attorney General of Arizona has joined to stop the Trump administration’s federal overreach.” It argues that the grant terms in the Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) and Homeland Security Grant Program (HSPG) depart from past practices, essentially making it more difficult for state, local, and Tribal partners to obtain and use the federal grant funds.
Mayes complained at the time, “The Trump administration is trying to claw back money we use to protect the border, including for protective equipment and vehicles for law enforcement on the ground, and to support emergency preparedness and terrorism response preparation. They are also trying to withhold 50% of the funds we use to respond to emergencies in Arizona.”
“Local, state, and Tribal public safety agencies rely on funding from the Homeland Security Grant Program to effectively protect Arizonans from vulnerabilities bad actors may wish to exploit,” AZDHS Director, Dr. Kim O’Connor said in a statement. “This funding is absolutely essential in keeping our citizens and communities safe.”
The lawsuit points to two of the imposed terms as “at issue”:
- “A hold on EMPG funding until the State provides FEMA with ‘a certification of the recipient state’s population as of September 30, 2025,’ including an explanation of ‘the methodology it used to determine its population and certify that its reported population does not include individuals that have been removed from the State pursuant to the immigration laws of the United States.’”
- “A reduction of the period of performance, i.e., the period in which grant recipients must complete all activities to be reimbursed, from three years to one year.”
The state attorney’s general argue that the accurate determination of a state’s population of lawful inhabitants “exceeds” the federal government’s “statutory authority, as no statute permits Defendants to impose such a hold,” “is contrary to law because 13 U.S.C. § 183 requires federal agencies to use U.S. Census Bureau data to allocate federal grant funding,” and “is arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) because it is unexplained, does not reflect reasoned decision making, and ignores the States’ reliance interests on receipt of the EMPG funds unimpeded.” Finally, they argue that the action was issued without following procedural requirements.
Reasoning for these requirements is, however, provided in the FY 2025 DHS Standard Terms and Conditions, which states “compliance with this term is material to the Government’s decision to make or continue with this award and that the Department of Homeland Security may terminate this grant, or take any other allowable enforcement action.”
Mayes also appears aware of another facet of the administration’s reasoning, as stated in her November 4th statement: “the Trump administration has attempted to reduce FEMA’s role and shift the burden of emergency management to the States.”
President Trump noted during a June announcement in the Oval Office that his administration “want(s) to wean off of FEMA and we want to bring it down to the state level.” He added that states should be equipped to handle disasters directly, noting that he wants to “give out less money,” and to “give it out directly,” according to the Associated Press. He further placed the onus for disaster response onto state governors saying, “The governor should be able to handle it and frankly if they can’t handle the aftermath, then maybe they shouldn’t be governor.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Nov 16, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona’s House GOP members presented a unified front Wednesday as Congress ended the weeks-long federal government shutdown, criticizing Democrats for prioritizing politics over the disruptions it caused Arizonans. Rep. Abe Hamadeh (R-AZ08) delivered one of the sharpest rebukes, claiming Democrats triggered the shutdown by refusing to back a Continuing Resolution similar to extensions they supported under the Biden administration.
“Make no mistake about it; the Democrats’ disgusting shutdown was only about attacking President Trump. They didn’t care if Americans were collateral damage,” Hamadeh said.
He described spending Veterans Day with families and servicemembers in his district who faced suspended federal services, adding that many urged him to “hold the line” until a deal was reached.
Hamadeh described his team as “energized” as the government reopens, saying, “We know we have our work cut out for us as the nation recovers from the Democrats’ misguided shutdown. While my team has been staying on top of casework and legislation, the shutdown prevented us from having full access to the personnel and services taxpayers pay for. As a result, we are going to be working overtime to ensure that we minimize the damage the Democrats created. I encourage my constituents to reach out to my office for any assistance with federal agencies they might have.”
Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ02) echoed the criticism, describing the lapse in funding as “the longest federal government shutdown in U.S. history.” Crane said the shutdown strained food banks, caused travel delays, and left rural families unsure whether they could access key services.
“Last night, I once again voted to fund the federal government. The American people should never be used as leverage to advance a political agenda,” said Rep. Crane. “To those who dealt with missed paychecks, worked without pay, and lived with great uncertainty, your determination and resolve are admirable. To the amazing people of rural Arizona who stood by one another during this challenge, I’m grateful for your strength and dedication to each other.”
In a post to X he wrote, “The American people should never be used as leverage to advance a political agenda.”
Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-AZ06) faulted Democrats for rejecting what he called a “clean CR,” arguing that their last-minute demands forced the shutdown.
“Every single Democrat who voted against this clean CR voted for a government shutdown,” Ciscomani said in a statement. He told local reporters the standoff was driven by a “long wishlist of policy items” that Democratic leaders attempted to insert at the eleventh hour, “using our government as hostage to push their policy agenda through.”
Ciscomani visited with families in his district whose services were interrupted during the shutdown, including parents of disabled children and veterans dependent on federal support. He said he intends to monitor agency performance closely as operations resume.
The Tucson Republican soundly condemned Arizona Democrats in a post to X, “This shutdown was completely unnecessary and overdue to end. It’s disappointing to still see so many democrats, especially Arizonans, voting to remain shut down. “
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ05) issued his own statement praising the House’s vote to reopen the government, thanking conservatives who pressured leadership to reject Democratic terms and focus on fiscal restraint. Biggs applauded colleagues for what he called a “moment to permanently shrink the federal bureaucracy, restore constitutional limits, and return power to the states.”
The shutdown ended Wednesday after the House approved the Senate-passed funding package, and President Trump signed the bill into law, restoring government operations while avoiding the policy disputes that sank earlier versions. Democrats contend they rejected the previous CR because of Trump-aligned provisions and budget riders they argued would worsen long-term fiscal conditions.
Rep. Hamadeh framed the episode as senseless and revealing of Democrats’ priorities.
“The Democrats accomplished nothing with their senseless shutdown,” Hamadeh said, concluding, “except to show – without a doubt – that they do not put Americans first.”
As agencies reopen, GOP congressional offices across the state say they are preparing for an increase in casework as constituents attempt to navigate backlogged systems. Crane and Hamadeh both urged constituents to reach out as services begin returning to normal.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Nov 14, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona’s top elected leaders — Democrats and Republicans alike — have joined forces to demand federal action after the seven Colorado River Basin states missed a critical deadline to finalize post-2026 water-sharing rules. In a letter to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, they warned that refusal by upper basin states to commit to verifiable conservation has pushed the negotiations to a breaking point.
The letter, dated November 11, 2025, highlights Arizona’s role as a leader in water conservation and criticizes upper basin states for refusing to commit to verifiable reductions, which the signatories say have stalled a seven-state agreement needed to sustain the river amid ongoing droughts.
The seven Colorado River Basin states—four in the upper basin (Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico) and three in the lower basin (Arizona, California, Nevada)—missed a federal deadline on November 11th to submit a consensus plan for sharing water shortages after 2026, when current operating guidelines expire. Federal officials, including the Bureau of Reclamation, have urged the states to reach an accord to avoid potential court intervention or unilateral action by the Trump administration.
In the letter, the Arizona leaders commended Burgum’s efforts over the past year to develop a framework preserving the century-old 1922 Colorado River Compact, which allocates water among the states. They emphasized the river’s critical role in fueling Arizona’s advanced technology ecosystem, world-class agriculture, military bases, and communities home to millions, including 22 of the basin’s 30 Native American tribes.
“Arizona’s cutting-edge semiconductor industries and IT infrastructure are making it possible for the onshoring of manufacturing operations that are critical for maintaining American technological leadership,” the letter states. It notes that Yuma County, one of the world’s most sophisticated agricultural regions, produces over 90% of the winter leafy greens supplied to the United States and Canada each year.
The signatories stressed that Arizona’s allocation is vital not only to the state’s citizens but to national economic growth and independence. They warned that the upper basin states’ refusal to offer “meaningful, verifiable conservation commitments” over the last two years risks these foundations of growth.
Arizona has positioned itself as a basin-wide leader in water efficiency, the letter asserts, partnering with California and Nevada to propose creative and significant post-2026 operating criteria. Under most scenarios, Arizona’s plans would conserve 1.5 million acre-feet of water per year, representing more than 27% of the state’s entitlement in most years. This follows more than 3 million acre-feet in efficiencies already offered by the lower basin states since 2023 to stabilize Lakes Mead and Powell.
In contrast, the letter points out that upper basin states have repeatedly refused to implement any volume of binding, verifiable upper basin reductions. “This extreme negotiating posture—four of the seven Basin States refusing to participate in any sharing of water shortages—has led to a fundamental impasse that is preventing successful development of a 7-State consensus plan for management of the Colorado River,” it reads.
The group urged Burgum to use his authority to ensure that any alternative considered by the Department of the Interior “contains measurable and enforceable conservation requirements” for the upper basin, guaranteeing the resource remains available for Arizona’s contributions to the economy and national security.
Signatories to the letter include Governor Katie Hobbs (D), Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14), House Speaker Steve Montenegro (R-LD29), Senate Democratic Leader Priya Sundareshan (D-LD18), and House Democratic Leader Oscar De Los Santos (D-LD11).
A joint statement from the seven states and federal officials acknowledged the missed deadline. Still, it affirmed a shared recognition of the basin’s challenges, with negotiators committing to continuing talks despite the setback. Lake Mead’s surface elevation stood at 1,057 feet as of recent measurements, with commenters noting that’s just 37 feet above levels that could trigger a “devastating” crisis for Arizona, including potential mandatory cuts to urban and agricultural users.
The full text of the letter is available here.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Nov 14, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The Arizona Supreme Court recently declined to review an Appeals Court ruling holding the City of Tucson liable for a public nuisance caused by homeless encampments, siding with three property owners who suffered property damage and financial losses. The Goldwater Institute highlighted this case as “welcome news for all Arizonans,” following the adoption of voter-approved Proposition 312.
The case, Bradford v. City of Tucson, comes on the heels of a similar court ruling against the City of Phoenix over its “Zone” encampment and is now being highlighted by the Goldwater Institute alongside voter-approved Proposition 312—a 2024 measure that lets property owners seek refunds when cities decline to enforce basic public nuisance laws.
Filed on behalf of three Tucson residents, the lawsuit sought injunctive relief against the City of Tucson, after homeless encampments near their homes and businesses in the Navajo Wash developed with makeshift toilets, dangerous fires, and individuals engaging in violent and criminal behavior.
The appellate court, reversing a trial court ruling against the residents, found that the “record is replete with testimony of specific incidents which proved that camping in the Navajo Wash has caused unsanitary and indecent conditions that invade the rights of the neighboring residents and business owners,” and demonstrated that Tucson was not shielded from liability “because the City knew the activity of homeless camping in this location was being carried on and that it repeatedly and continually caused a nuisance, yet consented to it anyway.”
Prop 312 now gives property owners a reimbursement tool in situations like those described in Bradford v. Tucson, allowing Arizonans to seek relief when a municipality “follows a policy, pattern, or practice of declining to enforce existing nuisance laws prohibiting illegal camping, obstructing public thoroughfares, loitering, panhandling, public urination or defecation, public consumption of alcoholic beverages, or possession or use of illegal substances, or maintains a public nuisance,” according to the Goldwater Institute’s explanation of Prop 312 claims.
Reimbursements are capped at the amount of property taxes paid the prior year, with any excess eligible for reapplication later.
Goldwater explained the law’s necessity on its website:
“Rampant homelessness is overtaking Arizona’s cities, as municipalities refuse to enforce laws against public camping, loitering, intoxication, and other nuisances. The result has been a rise in violent crime, biohazardous pollution, property destruction, and even death. Residents and business owners have had to take matters into their own hands, installing fences, hiring security, and cleaning up garbage, human waste, and other hazardous materials themselves—services the city is supposed to provide with the tax money these residents pay every year.”
Under Prop 312, once the Department of Revenue notifies a municipality of a claim, the city has 30 days to accept or reject it. If rejected, property owners may challenge the decision in superior court; if the city does not respond in time, the refund is deemed approved. Goldwater has offered to assist residents, saying, “If you believe your claim was improperly denied and you would like legal assistance, please contact us! Our lawyers may be able to help you.”
Claims are filed through the Department of Revenue’s online portal at prop312reimbursement.aztaxes.gov, which requires proof of property ownership, tax payment, and mitigation costs. The department notifies cities and issues approved reimbursements by check.
The decision represents a major blow to a large Arizona city’s assertion of immunity and underscores growing frustration with Tucson’s approach to homelessness amid public safety concerns.
In an op-ed Monday, Timothy Sandefur, Goldwater’s vice president for legal affairs, urged city leaders to act:
“Homelessness is a tragic and frustrating issue. But policies that leave people living on the streets aren’t the answer. Instead, they only create a new set of victims: the innocent taxpayers who must pay for police protection that they don’t receive. The time has come for city officials to shoulder their responsibilities—instead of forcing homeowners to shoulder the costs.”
Sandefur also warned that property owners in other states lack similar protections, citing Utah, and encouraged lawmakers elsewhere to “follow Arizona’s lead” by adopting Goldwater’s proposed Safe Neighborhoods Act.
Correction Notice: A previous version of this story incorrectly linked the Bradford v. Tucson case to the Goldwater Institute and cited an unrelated ruling.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
