by Matthew Holloway | Feb 9, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The Arizona House of Representatives nearly unanimously approved legislation on Tuesday to increase funding for the state’s legal defense fund related to Colorado River water rights, advancing the measure to the Arizona Senate. The bill passed the House with 56 votes in favor and 4 members not voting.
The measure, known as House Bill 2116, sponsored by Rep. Gail Griffin (R-LD14), and supported by fellow Republican Reps. Pamela Carter and Matt Gress of Legislative District 4, would appropriate $1 million from the state’s general fund to the Colorado River Litigation Fund for fiscal year 2026-27.
“Waiting until a lawsuit is filed to start planning would be reckless,” Griffin told AZ Family. “HB 2116 puts Arizona on offense, not defense.”
The Colorado River Litigation Fund was created during the 2025 legislative session to ensure that Arizona could pursue or defend legal action if disputes arise over its legally entitled share of Colorado River water.
In a joint news release, Carter said the additional funding would help protect Arizonans’ water supply by preparing the state for litigation if interstate negotiations fail. She noted that cities, including Phoenix and Scottsdale, remain dependent on water delivered through the Central Arizona Project (CAP).
“We must ensure a safe and reliable water supply for our residents,” Carter said in a statement. “If other states refuse to honor the Compact, we have to be ready to defend our rights in court. HB 2116 ensures Arizona is not caught flat-footed if negotiations fail and litigation becomes unavoidable. I voted yes to protect our water supply, families, jobs, and future.”
Gress emphasized that proactive funding was necessary in case the governor could not secure a satisfactory agreement in ongoing multistate negotiations over river water allocation, saying, “No one wants to go to court over water, but ignoring the risk of litigation would be irresponsible. This funding gives Arizona the ability to defend itself and its rights if the Governor fails to reach a fair agreement. When the water supply of millions of Arizonans and our state’s economy are on the line, every step we take in preparation matters.”
Griffin, chair of the House Natural Resources, Energy and Water Committee, also issued a statement highlighting the importance of readiness. “Other states have been positioning themselves for court long before this fund was created. Hopefully the fund will not be needed, but if it is — this bill makes sure that Arizona is ready to defend the water that millions of people and billions of dollars of economic activity depend on,” she said.
The House approved HB 2116, following bipartisan support in the House Natural Resources, Energy and Water Committee and the Appropriations Committee, and with unanimous approval from the House Rules Committee.
About 36 percent of Arizona’s water supply is drawn from the Colorado River, a resource shared by seven Western states that are currently negotiating a post-2026 operating agreement. If states fail to reach a new deal by the federal government’s deadline of Feb. 14, 2026, federal authorities could impose their own rules on water cuts.
Arizona’s top elected officials, both Republican and Democrat, penned a joint letter in November 2025, urging federal action in the absence of an agreement between the seven Colorado River Basin states. The letter cited the upper basin states’ refusal to commit to verifiable conservation.
In the news release from House GOP Leaders, they note, “Officials from Upper Basin states have openly stated they want to see [Central Arizona Project] CAP deliveries cut before accepting reductions themselves, despite their legal obligation under the 1922 Colorado River Compact to deliver minimum flows to Lower Basin states like Arizona.”
State leaders and stakeholders have increasingly framed the funding boost as a precautionary legal strategy amid complex negotiations and possible delivery shortfalls, as reported by KJZZ. Some water policy analysts say litigation may be difficult to avoid given entrenched positions among basin states; others urge continued negotiation to reach a sustainable agreement without court involvement.
The bill now moves to the Arizona Senate for further consideration.
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 | Feb 7, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
A slate of bills designed to strengthen oversight of Arizona’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) advanced Monday as House Republicans moved to implement federal reforms enacted under H.R. 1. The bills include new work requirements, stricter eligibility verification, and measures to reduce payment error rates
The actions follow a separate advancement of Medicaid and health-related bills tied to federal H.R. 1 reforms by the Arizona House Health and Human Services Committee, part of a broader state response to changes enacted under the federal budget reconciliation act.
House leaders said the measures correspond to provisions in the federal law signed into effect on July 4, 2025, which included updates to SNAP work requirements, eligibility criteria, and administrative rules.
“H.R. 1 made it clear that work expectations and eligibility rules matter again,” Committee Chairman Rep. Selina Bliss (R-LD1) said. “Our SNAP reforms reinforce responsibility while protecting parents, seniors, and the disabled. This package keeps the program strong so it can continue serving families who qualify and rely on it.”
Key bills advanced under the SNAP reform package include measures to tighten employment and training provisions for SNAP participants, adjust work requirement waivers, and increase data verification for eligibility determinations. The bills advanced with a ‘Do Pass’ recommendation 7-4.
One bill, HB 2206, would require the Arizona Department of Economic Security to reduce the SNAP payment error rate to 3 percent — a target state lawmakers say could reduce improper payments and lower the risk of federal cost-sharing penalties tied to high error rates under H.R. 1.
Failure to act, Republican lawmakers said, could expose Arizona to federal penalties related to improper payments and high error rates, effectively shifting more program costs onto state taxpayers. According to legislative budget estimates, the reduction would save taxpayers tens of millions of dollars annually.
“SNAP should be a hand up, not a blank check,” House Majority Leader Michael Carbone (R-LD25) said. “When benefits flow to people who no longer qualify or who do not even live here, the program is weakened for families who truly need help. These bills tighten eligibility, reinforce work expectations, and protect taxpayers while keeping SNAP available for the vulnerable.”
Mandatory employment and training requirements for certain SNAP recipients are addressed in HB 2442, which would align Arizona law with updated federal work provisions enacted under H.R. 1. The bill requires eligible participants to engage in job readiness, employment, or training activities as a condition of receiving benefits, reflecting federal standards adopted through the reconciliation package.
HB 2448 focuses on waivers and exemptions for work requirements, narrowing the circumstances under which SNAP recipients may be exempted from employment obligations. The legislation responds to federal changes limiting broad waiver authority and seeks to ensure exemptions are applied more narrowly and in accordance with updated eligibility rules.
Expanded eligibility verification requirements for SNAP and other public assistance programs are proposed under HB 2797, which applies additional data checks to confirm income, employment status, residency, and overall eligibility. The bill also directs suspected fraud cases to be referred for further review, including potential federal prosecution.
The committee’s agenda also included adjustments to employment reporting requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents and limits on backdoor waivers unless approved by the Legislature.
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 | Feb 6, 2026 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona State University (ASU) professor Dr. Owen Anderson has asked the Arizona Supreme Court to hear his case challenging mandatory diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training after a lower court dismissed his lawsuit, according to a petition filed this week by the Goldwater Institute.
Anderson, a philosophy and religious studies professor at ASU, originally filed the lawsuit in 2024 against the Arizona Board of Regents. He argued that the university’s required “Inclusive Communities” DEI training violated an Arizona statute that prohibits public agencies from making employees participate in training that “presents any form of blame or judgment on the basis of race, ethnicity, or sex.” Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14) and then-House Speaker Ben Toma (R-LD27) filed an amicus brief in support of Dr. Anderson’s lawsuit.
According to the Goldwater Institute’s petition, Anderson objects to the DEI training materials, saying they include concepts about race and identity that he believes are unlawful under state statute.
“No one should be forced to participate in divisive DEI training or endorse race-based ideology as a condition for holding a government job. That’s exactly why Arizona lawmakers banned mandatory trainings that teach discriminatory ideas about race, ethnicity, or sex. But a law without enforcement is no law at all,” Goldwater attorney Stacy Skankey explained. “We’re asking the Arizona Supreme Court to correct the lower court’s error and restore Arizonans’ right to hold government agencies accountable when they violate the law.”
Goldwater stated in a press release, “There’s no way around it—a law is meaningless if it can’t be enforced. If allowed to stand, the error by the Arizona Court of Appeals would eliminate an essential civil-rights safeguard for public employees and taxpayers. The ruling changes how Arizona laws are enforced by removing the ability of an ordinary Arizonan to ensure government officials obey the law.”
In its February filing, Goldwater said the Arizona Court of Appeals ruled that Anderson could not sue because it concluded the relevant law does not expressly provide an avenue for individuals to challenge such training in court.
The petition filed by the Goldwater Institute argues that allowing the Court of Appeals’ decision to stand would leave public employees without a means to enforce the statute and hold government employers accountable. It asks the Arizona Supreme Court to recognize an implied private right of action under the law, allowing employees to challenge alleged unlawful training mandates.
The case highlights a broader debate over DEI programs at public institutions. The previous lawsuit filed by the Goldwater Institute in March 2024 similarly challenged ASU’s DEI training and sought a court order preventing the Board of Regents from imposing or using public funds for the training, citing the same Arizona statute.
ASU has previously contested the Goldwater Institute’s claims, with university officials stating that its training reflects its commitment to inclusiveness and does not violate state law. However, as AZ Free News has previously covered, ASU lost 27 grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF) in 2025, worth approximately $28.5 million, in line with the NSF policy that ensures grants don’t prioritize certain groups or individuals.
Speaking of the ongoing lawsuit, Professor Anderson said in a statement, “Arizona State leaders broke the law when they forced me and every other employee to take part in an ideological training that taught that it’s okay to judge people on their race, ethnicity, religion, and sex. I simply refuse to do that. Ultimately, the question before the Arizona Supreme Court isn’t a left or right issue—it’s about whether a state employee has the right to hold their employer accountable when it violates the law.”
There is currently no set timeline for the Arizona Supreme Court to decide whether it will grant review of Anderson’s petition.
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 | Feb 5, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The Arizona House of Representatives approved bipartisan election integrity legislation on Monday intended to enhance voting oversight and protect the rights of military and overseas voters.
The measure, House Bill 2022, sponsored by State Representative Alexander Kolodin (R-LD3), cleared the full House after receiving bipartisan support. The bill’s passage comes amid ongoing discussions nationwide about election security and voter access.
According to the AZ House GOP, the legislation aims to protect Arizona’s military voters by ensuring election procedures account for service members and other Arizonans living or serving outside the state. Specific provisions in the bill address the handling and timely delivery of ballots for individuals covered under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), a federal law that safeguards absentee voting rights for military and overseas voters.
Specifically, the bill moves the Arizona primary election date to the second-to-last Tuesday in July, to better align with the federal election timeline adopted by the U.S. Congress and prevent military UOCAVA ballots from going uncounted.
In a statement announcing the bill’s passage, Representative Kolodin said, “This bill exists for one reason: to make sure Arizona voters, especially our men and women serving overseas in uniform, are not disenfranchised because Congress changed the rules and failed to check the calendar. HB 2022 locks in the fix that worked in 2024. Military ballots went out on time, and our men and women serving in uniform were able to exercise their right to vote as citizens of the United States. There is no excuse to walk away from something we know works.”
HB 2022 also includes a series of measures intended to strengthen election oversight and transparency, including requirements for updated reporting and procedural reviews by election officials, according to the bill summary.
The following changes will also be made:
- Modifying the deadline for ballot curing in elections that include a federal office to five calendar days, from the previous five business days.
- Broadening the type of locations that may be observed or challenged by party representatives, including ballot replacement locations, voting centers, in-person early voting locations, and emergency voting locations.
- And allowing permitting nomination and local initiative petition forms circulated under the previous law to be considered valid for the July 2026 primary.
State Representative Kolodin chairs the House Ad Hoc Committee on Election Integrity and Florida-style Voting Systems with Co-Chair Rep. John Gillette (R-LD30). The panel was formed to study election procedures and propose electoral reforms. This committee has previously advanced legislation to improve voter identification requirements, tighten security around mail-in and absentee ballots, and restrict certain external influences on Arizona elections.
HB 2022 will now move to the Arizona Senate for further consideration.
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 | Feb 4, 2026 | Economy, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona’s growing role as a national hub for data centers could be undermined by municipal regulations driven by concerns over water use, electricity demand, and land use, according to a new policy report released by the Goldwater Institute. The report, Data Centers: A Free Market Model for the Digital Future, argues that Arizona’s success in attracting data center investment stems from long-standing policy choices that favor predictable regulation, private property rights, and a stable legal environment.
The authors note that “artificial intelligence has dramatically accelerated these trends. Demand for data has increased exponentially. How communities, businesses, and policymakers respond to this transformation will shape economic competitiveness for decades to come.”
The report also cautions that a rise in local-level restrictions could threaten the state’s competitive position in the digital infrastructure sector.
William Beard, municipal affairs liaison at the Goldwater Institute and a co-author of the report, explained, “Data centers are the physical backbone of cloud computing, artificial intelligence, digital commerce, and national security. They are core infrastructure, no different in principle from transportation networks, energy production, or large-scale agriculture built to meet the demands of a particular era.”
Beard added that Arizona’s emergence as a leader in data center development has already produced economic benefits for the state. “Arizona is thriving as a leader in data centers, the state is reaping the economic benefits, and policymakers must take steps to ensure that continues,” he said.
According to the report, the Greater Phoenix region has become one of the top data center markets in the United States, with capacity projected to exceed 5,000 megawatts—an expansion of more than 500 percent. Goldwater attributes the dramatic growth to regulatory predictability and policies that encourage investment rather than discourage it, as well as “affordable land; reliable energy; and a legal environment anchored in strong private property rights.”
However, the report also warns, “Continued growth is no guarantee, especially as local governments threaten data centers with restrictive policies.”
Data center developments, such as the 290-acre data center Project Blue in Pima County and Project Baccara in Surprise, have sparked heated controversy at the municipal and county levels.
Citing growing municipal resistance to data center projects, Jen Springman, coalitions manager at the Goldwater Institute and a co-author of the report, said opposition is often rooted in misunderstandings about the impacts of infrastructure.
“Arizona’s advantage is increasingly threatened by a growing municipal-level regulatory backlash, often driven by misconceptions about water use and electricity demand,” Springman said.
Regarding water consumption, Springman said, “Modern data centers are among the most water-efficient industrial facilities ever built.”
The report further challenges claims that data center development is responsible for rising electricity prices. “Electricity prices, meanwhile, are not a data center problem; they are a policy outcome,” Springman said.
She added that misdirecting blame can lead to ineffective policy responses. “Blaming infrastructure for political energy choices obscures the real cause—and produces the wrong solutions,” Springman said.
Goldwater’s report argues that local restrictions do not reduce demand for digital services, but instead risk shifting investment to other states while increasing costs for consumers and businesses.
In a summary of the report’s conclusions posted to X, Goldwater stated, “The question is not whether data centers will exist, but whether Arizona will continue to lead—or retreat in the face of the future.”
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.
