by Matthew Holloway | Oct 2, 2026 | News
Matthew Holloway |
Arizona’s Republican candidate for treasurer Elijah Norton and the Arizona Republican Party are criticizing Democratic nominee Nick Mansour’s business record, pointing to nursing school disciplinary proceedings, student lawsuits, and a federal settlement involving a company where he previously worked.
In a post to X, Norton argued that Mansour’s record should disqualify him from overseeing Arizona’s investments. The Arizona Republican Party amplified the criticism, accusing Democrats of nominating someone who took advantage of nursing students.
An accompanying campaign advertisement calls Mansour a “con man,” accuses his nursing school of pocketing money intended for students, and invokes an $11 million Medicare case.
Public records document disciplinary action against Arizona College’s Tempe nursing program and an $11.4 million settlement involving Pacific Pulmonary Services. The nursing board terminated the program’s probation in February 2025, and the Justice Department described the company’s settlement as resolving allegations without a determination of liability.
Mansour’s campaign biography identifies him as a former chairman and CEO of Arizona College of Nursing. His campaign credits him with expanding the institution from one campus to 24 across 14 states.
The Arizona State Board of Nursing’s May 2022 consent agreement placed the Tempe bachelor’s degree nursing program on probation. It prescribed a minimum of 36 months, with eligibility for early termination after 30 months upon satisfying the requirements.
The board found that the program administrator lacked adequate control over decisions made by corporate officials. It documented the dismissal of 32 clinical faculty members approximately two weeks before the fall 2021 semester, despite concerns from the nursing program’s dean and faculty about replacing them.
The order also identified an incident in which 10 students were at a clinical site without clinical faculty supervision for approximately four hours. The assigned instructor had reported to the wrong building, and the error was not promptly corrected. Arizona College self-reported the incident to the board.
The agreement required outside evaluation, corrective measures and quarterly reporting.
In a Feb. 24, 2025, termination order, the board said it had reviewed the program’s compliance and determined that probation was completed. Its current program listing identifies the Tempe program as having full approval.
Addressing the nursing program’s probation and operational problems, Mansour said that the school made corrections and kept students informed.
“We were transparent with the students about it,” he said.
Student litigation has also become part of Norton’s criticism. In Caine v. Eduvision, students pursued claims against the operator of Arizona College of Nursing’s Dallas campus. The federal docket records the school’s motion to compel arbitration.
Students alleged overcharging, changes intended to cause program failures, and failure to distribute COVID-19 relief money. The report said the case was stayed and closed pending arbitration and that attempts to reopen it had been denied.
The Medicare allegation concerns a separate business. In an April 25, 2017, announcement, the Department of Justice (DOJ) said Braden Partners, doing business as Pacific Pulmonary Services, agreed to pay $11.4 million to resolve False Claims Act allegations against the company and its general partner, Teijin Pharma USA.
Federal authorities alleged that Pacific Pulmonary submitted claims for home oxygen equipment without required physician authorization beginning around 2004. They also alleged that certain patient care coordinators participated in a cross-referral arrangement with sleep clinics beginning in 2006.
The DOJ described an $11.4 million corporate settlement resolving allegations without a determination of liability. Its announcement does not name Mansour or identify any penalty imposed on him personally.
Mansour joined Pacific Pulmonary in late 2007 as vice president of business development. Mansour said he worked there for less than a year and that his role “never had anything to do with Medicare.”
Norton’s campaign has also launched a “Nurses Against Nick” website highlighting the school’s probation and litigation and urging voters to support Norton. The site identifies itself as paid for by Friends of Elijah Norton and authorized by the candidate.
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 | Oct 1, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The Goldwater Institute is demanding that Pima County rescind its 120-day moratorium on new data center development, arguing that the county has failed to meet Arizona’s legal requirements for suspending otherwise lawful development and could face property rights claims.
Goldwater announced the demand earlier this week, following a letter sent to county leaders. Its challenge focuses on the evidence supporting the moratorium and whether existing regulations could address the county’s concerns.
The Pima County Board of Supervisors approved Resolution 2026-56 on Sept. 22, imposing the pause while officials develop new zoning requirements for data centers.
The measure passed 3-2, with Supervisors Steve Christy and Rex Scott opposed. Before approval, supervisors amended the measure to apply to development for which permit applications had not yet been submitted.
“Arizona law only allows moratoria if there’s strong evidence of an imminent risk to the public,” Goldwater Institute Vice President for Litigation Jon Riches said. “It does not allow the county to freeze otherwise lawful property uses just because county leaders want more time to consider new rules.”
Under A.R.S. § 11-833, counties must provide public notice, hold a hearing, and make written findings before imposing a development moratorium. Goldwater’s challenge centers on the statute’s compelling-need standard, defined as “a clear and imminent danger to the health and safety of the public,” and additional requirements governing rural land, which the statute defines to include unincorporated county property.
In its letter to the board, Goldwater argues that the county has not demonstrated an essential public facilities shortage and cannot establish the compelling need required under the alternative provision.
Goldwater also contends that the county has failed to show why existing regulations cannot prevent irrevocable public harm, why alternative approaches would be inadequate, or why the moratorium is sufficiently limited geographically.
Much of the dispute centers on the county’s August public health review. The review identifies potential effects involving air quality, water use, noise, heat, and other conditions, while acknowledging a lack of direct empirical evidence measuring health effects in communities near data centers.
The review stated, “Overall, this report emphasizes the need for site-specific data, fenceline monitoring, and equity-centered impact assessments on any proposed data center projects. It also highlights a critical limitation due to an evidence gap: current literature provides modeled environmental exposures but highlights the lack of direct empirical evidence on health impact in communities near data centers, underscoring the importance of proactive monitoring and mitigation if development proceeds.”
In an accompanying Aug. 26 memorandum, County Administrator Jan Lesher cautioned that the review should not be read as a prediction that data center development would produce specific adverse health outcomes. The memorandum calls for additional project-specific information and describes the framework as a tool for monitoring, evaluation, and potential mitigation.
Goldwater argues those limitations undermine the county’s justification for suspending development.
County Board Chair Jennifer Allen disputed that interpretation. Allen said Goldwater was misconstruing the health framework’s role and maintained that the county had evidence supporting a moratorium consistent with state law.
The county’s agenda materials cite concerns about emissions, water scarcity, energy reliability, noise, and heat. They describe the pause as time for an accelerated zoning code amendment process.
Goldwater also raised potential compensation claims under Arizona’s Private Property Rights Protection Act. A.R.S. § 12-1134 provides for compensation when a land use law enacted after an owner acquired property reduces existing property use rights and the property’s fair market value, subject to statutory exemptions. The statute includes exemptions, including for health and safety protections, and places the burden of establishing an exemption on the government.
Riches said that Goldwater would consider representing an affected property owner but did not yet have a case.
Goldwater argues the county cannot establish that exemption here and warns that affected property owners could challenge the moratorium and seek compensation.
“There may be legitimate concerns about infrastructure and resources from the construction of data centers—as with any other development—but these can be addressed through clear, generally applicable rules that apply consistently to similar land uses,” Riches said. “What Pima County cannot do is arbitrarily ignore, pause, or trample on property rights.”
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 | Oct 1, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Rep. Abe Hamadeh (R-AZ-08) received the 2026 Hero Defender Award from the John P. Mayhugh Foundation during an event in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday.
Hamadeh’s office announced the award on X, saying the foundation presents the honor to members of Congress for their work on veterans’ health care.
“Congressman Hamadeh is honored to receive the 2026 Hero Defender Award from the John P. Mayhugh Foundation today in Washington, D.C.,” his office wrote. “An Army veteran himself, the Congressman will keep fighting for veterans in Arizona’s 8th District.”
The award coincided with the foundation’s ninth annual Hero’s Journey Symposium, held Tuesday at the American Psychiatric Association Foundation Conference Center. This year’s theme, “Bridging the Gap — From Trauma to Transformation,” focused on the effects of trauma and potential paths from what the foundation calls “wounds to wellness.”
The symposium brought together researchers, physicians, military leaders, public policy specialists, and community advocates for discussions involving family mental health, emerging science and technology, patient-centered care, healing arts, and trauma-informed treatment.
The John P. Mayhugh Foundation was established as a nonprofit organization in 2017 in memory of John Powell Mayhugh, who died at age 27 from an opioid overdose after experiencing addiction connected to secondary post-traumatic stress. His parents, retired Army Col. Mary Lowe Mayhugh and Kevin Mayhugh, established the organization with John’s friends and colleagues to address systemic barriers to recovery.
The foundation works to raise awareness of post-traumatic stress, traumatic brain injury, addiction, and other behavioral health conditions affecting service members, veterans, and their families.
Hamadeh has served in the Army Reserve since 2016 as an intelligence officer and deployed to Saudi Arabia in 2020. He also serves on the House Armed Services Committee and the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee. His Veterans’ Affairs assignments include the Subcommittee on Health and the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity.
Hamadeh’s veterans-related legislative work includes the Health Professionals Scholarship Program Improvement Act of 2025, or H.R. 3767, introduced with Rep. Nikki Budzinski (D-IL-13). Among other provisions, the measure would require the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to provide employment contracts to qualifying graduates of its Health Professionals Scholarship Program within 90 days of completing their training and licensing requirements. The House-passed version would also prohibit smoking on the premises of Veterans Health Administration facilities.
The House passed the measure by voice vote in September 2025. It was subsequently referred to the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee.
Hamadeh also introduced the CARING for Our Veterans Health Act, H.R. 6522, with Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-AZ-06) as a cosponsor. The legislation would require the VA to establish guidelines for tracking medical records following treatment by community health care providers and measuring the department’s performance in obtaining those records.
In June, Hamadeh and Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-OR-03) introduced the MEDIC Careers Act, H.R. 9140. The proposal would examine barriers preventing military medical personnel from applying their training toward civilian licenses and establish a Department of Defense grant program to help health care providers hire and train service members transitioning into civilian employment.
Hamadeh later introduced the Veterans and Servicemembers PTSD Emerging Treatment Review Act, H.R. 9547. The bill would direct the Department of Defense to report to Congress on emerging investigational treatments for veterans, active-duty personnel, and transitioning service members experiencing treatment-resistant post-traumatic stress disorder.
In July, Hamadeh also joined Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ-09) in calling on Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins to implement recommendations from an inspector general audit of the Veterans Community Care Program.
Hamadeh’s office said Tuesday that he intends to continue pursuing veterans-related legislation on behalf of his district.
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 | Sep 30, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14) criticized Attorney General Kris Mayes last week following reports that representatives of Living United for Change in Arizona, known as LUCHA, contacted her office seeking opposition to the Secure the Border Act in 2024.
Petersen, the Republican nominee challenging Mayes for attorney general, alleged that the communications showed activists influencing the office’s position on the measure.
“When Arizona was facing a historic border crisis, Kris Mayes’ office was coordinated with a left-wing organization to defeat the Secure the Border Act and keep our border open,” Petersen said. “These records raise serious questions about who is driving policy in the Attorney General’s office.”
He continued, “Mayes opposed a measure designed to give Arizona additional tools to confront illegal immigration, drug trafficking, and secure the border at the behest of activists.”
According to the Washington Free Beacon, a lobbyist representing LUCHA emailed Mayes’ office on May 6, 2024, asking whether she would oppose the proposal and issue a public statement. Mayes announced her opposition three days later.
In a statement on May 9, 2024, Mayes cited funding and staffing shortages at law enforcement agencies, concerns about racial profiling, and potential economic consequences. She also criticized the federal government’s handling of border security.
“This referral is a political distraction that will sow seeds of bias and fear without fixing the issues it claims to address,” Mayes said.
Mayes said she would continue pursuing federal border security funding, targeting drug cartels, and working with other law enforcement agencies to stop fentanyl trafficking.
The Free Beacon also reported that LUCHA’s then-political director, Chris Gilfillan, contacted Mayes’ communications director, Richie Taylor, in June 2024 to request a discussion about her approach to the proposal, including its prosecutorial implications. Taylor agreed to speak and provided his phone number.
The Secure the Border Act advanced as House Concurrent Resolution 2060 and appeared on the November 2024 ballot as Proposition 314. Arizona voters approved it with approximately 62.6% of the vote.
The law, which took effect in July, creates offenses involving false documents or information submitted by people unlawfully present in the country when applying for public benefits or employment. It also addresses entry into Arizona outside lawful ports of entry, refusal to comply with return orders, and the sale of fentanyl that causes another person’s death.
In a post to X, Petersen described Mayes as a “public safety disaster.”
“As Attorney General, I will continue to make public safety and enforcement of the law a priority,” Petersen said.
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 | Sep 30, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
This November, Arizona voters will decide whether to amend the state Constitution to prohibit taxes on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and restrict government monitoring of or limits on how much people drive through Proposition 141.
The proposal would bar the state, counties, cities, towns, and other political subdivisions from imposing a tax or fee based on the miles a person travels in a motor vehicle. It would also prohibit those governments from enacting mileage-monitoring or mileage-limiting laws or rules unless they require the person’s voluntary consent.
The measure reached the ballot through SCR 1004, which passed the Senate on Feb. 20, 2025, and the House on June 13, 2025. The resolution was filed with the Secretary of State on June 16, 2025.
The Legislature advanced the proposal amid debate over mileage-based charges as a source of transportation funding. Such charges assess motorists based on distance traveled.
Supporters describe Proposition 141 as the Freedom to Move Act. In a published ballot argument, Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AZFEC) President Scot Mussi urged approval for the sake of privacy, affordability, and freedom of travel.
“From wide-open highways cutting through desert landscapes, lanes carving through mountains, bridges traversing valleys and open water, the Freedom to Move is engrained in the American spirit,” Mussi wrote. “Vote YES to preserve your privacy. Vote YES to keep Arizona affordable. Vote YES to preserve your freedom to move,”
In an August interview with Mussi, AZFEC Vice President Aimee Yentes noted that Arizona’s transportation dollars already come from several taxes, such as the tax on fuel and sales taxes. She added, “…this would prohibit the government from tapping into a new way to tax your driving by taxing every mile that you drive…”
Arizona Trucking Association President and CEO Tony Bradley also submitted an argument supporting the measure, citing reporting, auditing, and administrative costs associated with mileage-based taxation.
“Unlike fuel taxes, which are collected efficiently at the point of sale, mileage-based taxes require ongoing reporting, oversight, and enforcement,” he wrote. “Government agencies must devote resources to audits and compliance, while taxpayers and businesses bear additional recordkeeping and reporting costs. Those dollars are spent operating the tax system instead of improving roads and bridges.”
Under the official ballot explanation, a “yes” vote would amend the Arizona Constitution to prohibit: (1) taxes or fees based on motor vehicle miles traveled; and (2) laws or rules that monitor or limit motor vehicle miles traveled without consent.
A “no” vote would retain the current constitutional language on taxation.
If Proposition 141 is approved by voters, Arizona would become the first state to embed a ban on VMT taxes and mileage limits into its constitution.
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.
