As Sunshine Residential Homes remains at the center of an ongoing investigation into alleged “pay-to-play” conduct involving Gov. Katie Hobbs, public records link founder and CEO Simon Kottoor to a Paradise Valley residence that Zillow estimates is worth nearly $10 million. The property has drawn renewed attention amid scrutiny of Sunshine’s political donations and subsequent state-approved rate increases.
Arizona campaign finance records reviewed by AZ Free News show that Gov. Katie Hobbs was the only Arizona candidate to receive contributions from Simon and Elizabeth Kottoor during the 2022 and 2024 election cycles. Simon Kottoor’s only other recorded contribution to a political candidate was a 2023 donation to New York Democratic congressional candidate Kevin Thomas.
Simon Kottoor founded Sunshine Residential Homes (formerly Sunshine Group Homes) in 1996, according to the company’s website. Sunshine says it provides congregate foster placements for Arizona children, has served more than 25,000 children since its founding, and currently has more than 300 children in care with approximately 200 employees.
Maricopa County property records reviewed by AZ Free News list the residence under the Kottoor Family Trust, with Simon M. Kottoor and Elizabeth Kottoor named as trustees. AZ Free News has withheld the street address from publication.
Zillow describes the property as a 7,719-square-foot, five-bedroom, six-bathroom home on 1.08 acres and estimates its value at approximately $9.53 million. Realtor.com estimates the property’s value at about $8.71 million and reports it last sold for $1.55 million in 2020.
Sunshine Residential Homes and Kottoor have faced scrutiny over political donations connected to Hobbs and subsequent state-approved rate increases. The Arizona Republic reported in June 2024 that Sunshine Residential Homes received a large rate hike from the Arizona Department of Child Safety (DCS) after making six-figure contributions to Hobbs’ inauguration fund and the Arizona Democratic Party. The outlet reported that Sunshine applied for a rate increase in December 2022, was denied in February 2023, then applied again in May 2023 and was approved, citing DCS records.
The Republicreported in July 2024 that both the Kottoors’ and Sunshine Residential Homes’ donations to Hobbs and the Arizona Democratic Party amounted to approximately $420,000 from 2022-2024.
According to the Arizona Capitol Times, Sunshine Residential Homes gave $100,000 to Hobbs’ inaugural fund and separately gave $300,000 to the Arizona Democratic Party. The outlet also reported that the Arizona Republic found Hobbs personally called Kottoor shortly after winning the 2022 election and asked him to serve as a gold-level sponsor of her inauguration. The same report said the Department of Child Safety later increased payments to Sunshine in 2023 to nearly 40 percent above the average for other group homes.
Kottoor was also on Hobbs’ inaugural committee, and he and his wife made maximum contributions to Hobbs’ campaign, according to reporting cited by Governing. That report also noted that Hobbs attended a private event at the Kottoor’s Paradise Valley residence.
Calls for investigation from Arizona lawmakers followed within days of the initial reporting.
From @GovernorHobbs spokesperson: "Like every other 'investigation' launched by this chaotic and radical legislature, this is another desperate, partisan stunt. It will do nothing but show the administration put the best interest of Arizona first." https://t.co/taQAZTmb52
The Arizona Attorney General’s Office opened an investigation into the Sunshine Residential matter in June 2024. The office’s public records archive lists communications and records related to the Sunshine Residential Homes investigation, including correspondence with Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell and Auditor General Lindsey Perry, as well as a criminal referral.
I requested an investigation by the Maricopa County Attorney into Governor Hobbs' alleged "pay to play" scheme. Arizona taxpayers deserve financial accountability. Giving state dollars to political donors is a grave misuse of public funds.
— Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee (@AZTreasurerYee) June 10, 2024
Hobbs’ office has denied wrongdoing. Axios reported that Hobbs spokesman Christian Slater said the administration would be “cleared of wrongdoing” and called the allegations partisan. Slater and DCS spokesman Darren DaRonco told Axios that Hobbs and her office had no involvement in agency decisions regarding Sunshine Residential Homes. Sunshine told the Arizona Republic that it remained committed to cooperating with any inquiry, Axios reported.
The investigation remains a prominent political issue in Arizona well into 2026. In April, KJZZ reported that Mayes’ team had asked Hobbs for an interview as part of the investigation and that Hobbs would not publicly commit to sitting for one. KJZZ reported that Hobbs continued to deny wrongdoing.
Republican lawmakers have cited the Sunshine controversy as they advance legislation requiring more disclosure from companies seeking state contracts. The Arizona Senate Republican Caucus announced last week that SB 1186, sponsored by Arizona Senate President Pro-Tempore T.J. Shope (R-LD16), had been sent to Hobbs’ desk. The bill would require companies seeking taxpayer-funded contracts and grants to disclose political donations, gifts, and other things of value connected to the governor and affiliated political organizations. A House summary of SB 1186 states that the measure establishes disclosure requirements for the request-for-proposal and grant-application processes.
Hobbs announced her own ethics reform proposal in February, calling it a sweeping transparency package intended to strengthen public trust in government. According to the Governor’s Office, the proposal includes a public transparency and disclosure database, contracting reforms, and a lobbyist gift ban.
The Sunshine Residential Homes matter remains under investigation, and no public finding of wrongdoing by Hobbs, Kottoor, or Sunshine Residential Homes has been announced.
A Goldwater Institute-backed measure to constitutionally protect Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) funds for children of military families will go before Arizona voters in November after receiving legislative approval.
House Concurrent Resolution 2048, sponsored by Rep. Michael Way (R-LD15), asks voters to amend Article XI of the Arizona Constitution by adding a new section prohibiting the state from confiscating money from certain scholarship accounts of students who are children of military families.
Under the resolution text, the prohibition would apply if the scholarship account is established and maintained by the state under a program that designates children of military families as eligible to receive scholarship money, and if the student may use the money for tuition or fees at eligible postsecondary educational institutions. The resolution states that the provision is not limited to scholarship account programs established and maintained by the state only for children of military families.
The measure defines a “child of a military family” as a student whose parent is serving on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces, was serving on active duty when the student’s eligibility was initially determined, or was killed in the line of duty. The measure defines “confiscate” as seizing, transferring, or otherwise taking money from a scholarship account.
The resolution includes exceptions for closures of accounts tied to individualized findings of illegal activity or wrongdoing after due process. It also accounts for routine account closures, including voluntary closure or failure to renew an account, graduation from an eligible postsecondary institution, or loss of eligibility after a student fails to enroll in an eligible postsecondary institution for at least four consecutive years after graduating from high school.
HCR 2048 also states that if a bill enacted into law or a voter-approved measure on or after Nov. 1, 2026, violates the proposed constitutional provision, the entire bill or measure is void and a court may not sever any portion of it. The resolution directs the Secretary of State to submit the proposition to voters at the next general election.
The measure passed the Senate on June 12 by a 16-13-1 vote and passed the House on final reading June 13 by a 31-22-7 vote.
The Goldwater Institute described the measure as its “Military Family Protection Act” and said it is intended to protect military families participating in Arizona’s ESA program from future efforts to redirect or reclaim scholarship funds.
The Arizona Department of Education (AZED) currently lists 100,713 students enrolled in the ESA program this school year. The department’s Fiscal Year 2026 Quarter 1 report, covering July 1 through Sept. 30, 2025, counted 93,993 ESA students, including 975 students in the category for students whose parent is active-duty military or was killed in the line of duty.
Goldwater’s Director of Education Policy, Matt Beienburg, told lawmakers that military families should not lose scholarship funds through a separate ballot proposal aimed at the ESA program.
“There is a current ballot measure being proposed to attack the scholarship funds and confiscate the scholarship funds of children, including military families,” Beienburg said. “These families should not be treated as a piggy bank to raid. These are families who have protected this nation.”
Rep. Way said the measure is intended to prevent Arizona from reclaiming scholarship money after families were promised access to the program.
“This measure asks a very simple question: should Arizona be allowed to take scholarship money from military families after we promised them? My answer is no,” Way said.
The referral comes as opponents of the ESA program are circulating the Protect Education Act, a proposed ballot initiative that would impose new restrictions on the ESA program. The campaign says the measure would require background checks and safety standards for voucher-funded schools, add spending transparency rules, prohibit non-educational and luxury purchases, cap family income for ESA eligibility at $150,000 with annual inflation adjustments, require unused ESA funds to be returned, and require voucher-funded schools to be accredited or administer approved assessments. The campaign says students with disabilities would be exempt from the income cap and assessment provisions.
In an op-ed for AZ Free News, Matthew Ladner and Jason Bedrick of the Heritage Foundation wrote that AZED published the results of a random audit of the ESA program in March 2026, “finding very low rates of misspending relative to other publicly funded programs and even lower rates of fraud. Less than 2% of ESA funds were spent on unallowed items, and 0.3% of the funds were spent on items considered ‘egregious’ or fraudulent.”
AZED disputed claims that the ESA program had a 20% fraud rate in a March release, saying about 2.0% of dollars spent by ESA account holders were for items deemed unallowable under program rules and that actual fraud or egregious purchases accounted for 0.3%.
“The submission of a purchase that is deemed unallowable does not constitute fraud,” AZED said. “Most are innocent mistakes, such as an error in a form that must be resubmitted, or educational items that are not on the allowable list but that the user could have in good faith believed were permitted. Some examples would be backpacks, lunch boxes and water bottles.”
AZED said the 20% figure represented program participants selected for risk-based auditing and “had nothing to do with fraud.” The department said action is taken to recover or collect funds or refer matters to law enforcement when necessary, and that more than $1.2 million had been recovered through that process.
Opponents of HCR 2048 have argued that its voidability provision could invalidate ESA reform proposals if voters approve conflicting measures. ABC15 reported that critics said the measure is aimed at blocking the Protect Education Act, while supporters said it is intended to protect scholarship funds promised to military families.
HCR 2048 was one of three education-related ballot referrals approved before the Legislature adjourned. Senate Republicans said the measures were intended to protect military families, direct more education dollars into classrooms, and restrict the use of taxpayer-funded school resources for labor organization activities.
“These scholarship funds were created for helping the children of military families pursue higher education,” Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman David Farnsworth said. “When government faces budget pressures, dedicated funds can become tempting targets. Arizona should never balance its books on the backs of military families or treat money set aside for their children’s futures as a piggy bank.
“This referral permanently protects those funds and ensures they remain available for the students they were intended to serve.”
Legislation sent to Gov. Katie Hobbs last week would add an additional layer of legislative oversight before the Arizona Department of Revenue could adopt certain new legal interpretations that increase tax liability.
SB 1221, sponsored by Sen. J.D. Mesnard (R-LD13), would require the Arizona Department of Revenue to notify the chairmen of the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee before adopting a proposed new interpretation or application of state tax law that would adversely affect taxpayers prospectively. An affected taxpayer would also be permitted to notify the committee chairmen of the proposed change.
🚨FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Senator Mesnard Bill Protecting Taxpayers from Surprise Tax Hikes Heads to Governor
If the committee chairmen hold a hearing on the proposed interpretation or application, the Department of Revenue would be required to provide testimony explaining why the change is necessary.
The Arizona Senate Republican Caucus announced that the measure had passed the Legislature and was being transmitted to Hobbs for consideration. The caucus said the bill is intended to protect taxpayers from unexpected tax burdens and provide public scrutiny before agency interpretations take effect.
“Taxpayers should not wake up one day and discover a state agency has quietly changed the rules in a way that costs them money,” Mesnard said in a statement. “If the Department of Revenue wants to adopt a new interpretation of tax law that negatively impacts Arizona families, job creators, or small businesses, there ought to be transparency, public scrutiny, and accountability first.”
The measure would amend A.R.S. § 42-2078, which governs the Department of Revenue’s new interpretations or applications of tax law. Current law generally bars the department from applying newly enacted law retroactively or penalizing a taxpayer for complying with prior law unless expressly authorized by law.
Current law also provides that when the department adopts a new interpretation or determines that a tax law applies to a new or additional category of taxpayer, the change applies prospectively unless it is favorable to taxpayers. The department may not assess tax, penalties, or interest retroactively based on that change, and the change may be used as an affirmative defense in an administrative or judicial action involving retroactive assessments.
SB 1221 would add a step before that kind of adverse interpretation is adopted. The notice requirement would apply to proposed interpretations or applications of provisions under Title 42 or Title 43 of Arizona law, which govern taxation and income tax.
The bill specifies that a “new interpretation or application” includes policies and procedures adopted by administrative rule, tax ruling, tax procedure, or instructions to a tax return.
The proposal moved through the Legislature largely along party lines.
Mesnard, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, said the legislation is aimed at giving taxpayers more certainty before state tax administration changes affect families, businesses, and employers.
“SB 1221 helps ensure taxpayers have a voice before government expands its reach, while providing the certainty and predictability people deserve when planning their finances and investments,” Mesnard concluded.
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ5) has introduced legislation that would establish a federal pathway for patients with life-threatening or severely debilitating diseases to access individualized investigational treatments when no approved treatment options remain.
According to a press release from Biggs’ office, the Right to Try for Individualized Treatments Act was introduced this week by Biggs and Rep. Diana Harshbarger (R-TN), with companion legislation introduced in the U.S. Senate by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI).
The legislation builds on the original federal Right to Try Act, which was signed into law by President Donald Trump and provides terminally ill patients access to certain investigational treatments that had not yet received full approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
“One of my first efforts upon taking office in January 2017 was to partner with Senator Ron Johnson to champion Right to Try, which we passed through both the U.S. House and Senate,” Biggs said. “Many of us know people who are terminally ill and desperately seeking to extend their lives. Right to Try gives these individuals hope, freedom, and power to try potentially life-saving drug therapies.”
Biggs said supporters of the original legislation sought to provide patients with additional treatment options when facing terminal illnesses and that the new proposal would build upon that framework.
“Our coalition was unwilling to let one more American die without this chance, and we are motivated to build on this original bill with the Right to Try for Individualized Treatments Act,” Biggs said. “I am honored to again help lead this bill in the U.S. House, and I pray we can quickly send it to President Trump’s desk to be enacted into law.”
According to the bill sponsors, the legislation is intended to address advances in precision medicine and genomics that have enabled treatments tailored to individual patients. The lawmakers argue that existing regulatory pathways were designed for therapies intended for broader patient populations and do not adequately accommodate patient-specific treatments.
“We are entering a new era of medicine where breakthroughs in genomics and precision therapies can create treatments designed specifically for an individual patient, but our regulatory system was built for a different time and simply hasn’t kept up,” Harshbarger said. “This legislation makes sure patients have a clear, durable path to pursue individualized treatments when all other options have failed.”
Under the proposal, patients diagnosed with life-threatening or severely debilitating diseases could access investigational individualized therapies under physician supervision when no approved treatment options remain. Patients would need a physician’s recommendation before receiving treatment, which would be administered in qualified healthcare facilities that meet federal safety and quality standards and are subject to Institutional Review Board oversight and informed consent requirements.
Johnson said the measure would expand upon the original Right to Try framework by addressing therapies developed for individual patients and rare diseases.
“Right to Try 2.0 builds on that success and would provide access to individualized, rare disease and one-patient therapies that the current regulatory environment has yet to accommodate,” Johnson said. “This is about medical freedom and putting doctors and patients at the top of the treatment pyramid.”
The legislation would also establish a statutory framework for individualized treatments rather than relying solely on administrative guidance. According to Biggs’ office, the FDA released draft guidance in February outlining a framework to support the development of individualized therapies, but the sponsors argue congressional action is needed to create durable patient protections and access pathways.
The Goldwater Institute, which helped pioneer the original Right to Try movement that was enacted into federal law in 2018, also advocated for the introduction of the Right to Try for Individualized Treatments Act.
In a statement, Goldwater Institute President and CEO Victor Riches said, “No American should be forced to beg the government for permission to try to save their own life, and no bureaucrat should prevent a patient from accessing cutting-edge therapies. The Right to Try for Individualized Treatments opens the door to the latest advances in medical treatment and brings the federal government into the 21st century.”
While medical technology has evolved at a breathtaking pace, regulatory systems remain stuck in an era of mass-produced drugs.
The Right to Try for Individualized Treatments Act will ensure that our laws keep pace with modern innovation, removing the bureaucratic barriers that…
— Goldwater Institute (@GoldwaterInst) June 9, 2026
The proposal also has roots in Arizona. According to the release, Right to Try legislation received nearly 80 percent support in the Arizona Legislature in 2014 during Biggs’ tenure as a state lawmaker. The release states that Right to Try policies have since been adopted in 41 states, while “Right to Try 2.0” laws addressing individualized treatments have been enacted in 17 states, including Arizona.
A bipartisan bill aimed at reducing overlapping health care regulations and establishing statewide standards for behavioral health technicians is headed to Gov. Katie Hobbs after clearing the Arizona Legislature with broad support.
SB 1162, sponsored by Sen. Hildy Angius (R-LD30), would require the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) and the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) to review duplicative licensing, compliance, inspection, auditing, and reporting requirements affecting health care institutions.
SB 1162 passed the Senate on final reading Tuesday in a 28-1 vote after previously passing the House in April by a 49-8 vote. The bill was transmitted to the governor on Wednesday.
🚨FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Senator Angius Advances Bipartisan Health Care Reform Legislation to the Governor
Angius said the measure is intended to reduce duplicative regulation while maintaining oversight and patient safety.
“Government works best when it focuses on protecting people, not creating layers of unnecessary bureaucracy,” Angius said in a statement. “SB 1162 takes a commonsense approach by identifying regulatory overlap between state agencies and reducing administrative burdens that pull health care providers away from patient care.”
Under the bill, ADHS and AHCCCS would be required to review areas of overlap involving licensing, certification, enrollment requirements, on-site surveys, inspections, audits, compliance activities, data collection, reporting requirements, corrective action processes, and enforcement procedures applicable to health care institutions.
The legislation directs the two agencies to identify opportunities to eliminate or reduce duplicative, redundant, or inconsistent requirements while maintaining patient safety and regulatory oversight. It also requires the agencies to coordinate or align policies, procedures, and operational practices to minimize administrative burdens on health care institutions.
The bill states that nothing in the measure requires action inconsistent with federal Medicaid conditions of participation, conditions of payment, or other applicable federal requirements.
SB 1162 would also require ADHS to submit a written report to the House and Senate Health and Human Services committees by Dec. 31, 2026, and every four years thereafter. The report must summarize the review’s findings, identify any duplication or overlap, and include recommendations for statutory, regulatory, or administrative changes.
The measure also adds a new article to state law governing behavioral health technicians. Under the bill, a behavioral health technician must be at least 18 years old, possess a high school diploma or equivalent, and successfully complete required background checks before serving in the role.
Before providing supervised direct services, behavioral health technicians would be required to complete training covering behavioral health system orientation, confidentiality and compliance, professional boundaries and ethics, crisis response and de-escalation, and trauma-informed and recovery-oriented care.
The bill defines a behavioral health technician as a person employed by a behavioral health facility or a hospital authorized to provide psychiatric services who provides behavioral health services under the supervision or clinical oversight of a licensed behavioral health professional or a registered nurse working within the nurse’s scope of practice.
The legislation also limits behavioral health technicians to delegated clinical and support functions consistent with their demonstrated training and competence, as well as the policies and procedures of the employing behavioral health facility or hospital.
The House summary of the bill states that a behavioral health technician would not be authorized to diagnose medical or behavioral health conditions, prescribe medications, or provide services beyond those delegated and supervised by a licensed behavioral health professional or licensed registered nurse.
“At the same time, this legislation strengthens standards for behavioral health technicians who play a critical role in serving some of Arizona’s most vulnerable individuals,” Angius said. “Patients deserve qualified professionals, clear accountability, and a behavioral health system that puts care first.”
SB 1162 was first introduced in January and received unanimous support in the Senate Health and Human Services Committee. It passed the Senate in March on a 29-0 vote before being amended in the House. After the House approved the amended bill, the Senate concurred with the changes on Tuesday.
Sen. Angius’ bill now awaits action from Gov. Hobbs.
