A ballot initiative to end the state’s universal school choice program is facing a new challenge to the validity of its signatures.
The Goldwater Institute filed the challenge in court on Monday.
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AZFEC) also announced that it joined Goldwater’s legal challenge, with AZFEC Vice President of Policy Greg Blackie serving as a plaintiff in the case. According to AZFEC, it worked alongside Goldwater and other school choice advocates to review petition sheets, identify alleged irregularities, and help ensure Arizona’s ballot qualification laws are enforced.
The Goldwater Institute said “a large amount” of the more than 415,000 signatures submitted appeared to be “fallacious.” The initiative needs about 256,000 signatures to qualify for the November ballot. The complaint raised more than 73,300 objections; the complaint asserted that, with all signatures removed as a result of the objections, the ballot initiative would be left with fewer than 256,000 valid signatures.
The 900-page complaint filed in the Maricopa County Superior Court stated that the signatures weren’t properly registered with the secretary of state’s office as required by law.
Specifically, the complaint raised objections including paid but unregistered circulators, signatures gathered prior to circulator registration, false residential addresses, permanent address contradictions, bad telephone numbers or email addresses, false identities, bad service addresses, and ineligible, missing, or mismatched IDs.
Additionally, the Goldwater Institute claimed that certain circulators were ineligible to collect signatures because they had been convicted of a criminal offense involving fraud, forgery, or identity theft; convicted of another felony offense in which their civil rights haven’t been restored; or adjudicated an incapacitated person.
Individuals named as ineligible circulators were convicted of felonies and other crimes related to drugs, human trafficking, manslaughter, sexual abuse of a minor, assault, kidnapping, weapons misconduct, forgery, false reporting, and credit card forgery.
Finally, the complaint claimed that certain circulators failed to write their full and correct assigned circulator identification number on multiple petition sheets.
Arizona Free Enterprise Club President Scot Mussi said the allegations raised questions about the campaign’s vetting and oversight of paid petition circulators.
“Save Our Schools and the teachers unions have spent years accusing ESA families of fraud and demanding greater scrutiny of parents. Now, their own campaign is facing serious questions about the people they hired to gather signatures,” said Mussi. “Arizona’s election laws must be fully enforced. If this campaign failed to collect enough lawful and valid signatures, it must not qualify for the ballot.”
Goldwater Institute CEO and President Victor Riches criticized the initiative for its heavy sourcing of out-of-state special interest funding.
“This is a shameless attack on Arizona’s parents, funded by an out-of-state union,” said Riches. “They’re trying to game the system by turning in tens of thousands of invalid signatures in an effort to destroy the most successful school choice program in the country. This won’t happen on our watch.”
The Goldwater Institute also stated in a press release that the original title of the initiative was misleading.
If enough signatures are validated and voters approve the measure, the Protect Education Act would impose an income eligibility cap on the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program.
Doug Ducey, former Arizona governor, was quoted in the Goldwater Institute press release saying the entire effort to dismantle the ESA program proved the true intentions of teachers’ unions. Ducey signed the bill into law that made the ESA program open to all students.
“Once again, we are reminded how little these out of state unions care about Arizona students and their parents,” said Ducey. “This measure would strip tens of thousands of Arizona families of educational choices they have made for their children, forcing students out of the schools that are serving them well and back into schools they chose to leave. That is unacceptable, and we will vigorously challenge this measure at every possible step.”
In response to the submission of the ballot initiative signatures earlier this month, Ducey launched a political action committee to secure school choice accessibility for military families.
Protect Education, Accountability Now (PEAN), the organization behind the ballot initiative, filed a challenge last week to the competing legislature-referred ballot initiative that would negate their proposed ballot initiative.
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that the city of Phoenix must release records of their closed-door labor union negotiations.
The ruling came from a challenge initiated in 2022 by the Goldwater Institute regarding the refusal of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association’s (PLEA), the police union, to publicize its draft contract proposals for public comment prior to negotiations with the city.
The PLEA proposal concerned its 2023-2024 memorandum of understanding (MOU) which contained expenditure terms for tens of millions of taxpayer dollars as well as the employment terms for law enforcement.
Rather than submitting drafts of the MOU for public review and comment by early December as required by city code, PLEA submitted letters of intent mentioning its aim to negotiate wages and benefits. The Phoenix City Council chose to accept those letters of intent as sufficient for the public to comment on without seeing draft MOUs.
Goldwater Institute requested those draft MOUs. The city refused, claiming these documents were exempt from public records requests under state law allowing exemptions based on the “best interests of the state” because disclosure “could create a chilling effect” on negotiations.
Only after the city and PLEA reached a final agreement did they publicize a draft MOU for public comment in April 2023. The city ratified the MOU about two weeks later, in early May 2023.
That MOU has since expired, having lasted only through June 2024.
The trial court had ruled that the city had sufficiently established “potential material harm” that could occur from disclosing draft MOU materials.
“While significant, the general concerns about transparency, advocacy, and accountability identified by [Goldwater] are different, however, from the particularized interest in preserving the ability to negotiate labor agreements free of political pressure, collusion, and unnecessary delay due to impasse,” said the trial court. “The City provided testimony from individuals directly involved in the collective bargaining process and with experience in labor negotiations with and for the City of Phoenix.”
However, the Arizona Supreme Court in its ruling said that speculative claims of harm were insufficient alone.
The court determined that the city would have to release some or all of the MOU records that it had withheld. In order to determine the nature of such a release, the court ordered the lower court to review the withheld documents.
The court ruled that it was the city’s burden to prove the likelihood of specific, material harm that would occur from the disclosure of contested public records, as well as the causal connection between the disclosure and that harm that could occur.
The Goldwater Institute said in a press release that the high court ruling affirmed citizens’ rights of public disclosure and an ability to provide input.
“City residents and taxpayers deserve to know what the union was demanding and what city leaders were offering during that process. But all of that was kept hidden from the public,” stated the Goldwater Institute. “Citizens have a right to know what their government is up to and should have an opportunity to provide feedback about labor negotiations and other public activities. As today’s decision affirms, that’s the whole point of our public records laws.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Arizona State University (ASU) has ceased its effort to take the home of an 89-year-old Phoenix man via eminent domain.
ASU sought to acquire the historic Louis Emerson House owned for more than 50 years by Robert Young. The university had intended to acquire the property as part of its new headquarters for ASU Health and its planned AI-driven medical school.
ASU dropped its eminent domain case on Friday.
The Louis Emerson House predates Arizona’s statehood by a decade. As AZ Free Newsreported last month, the property was developed in 1888 by the former adjutant general and attorney general, Clark Churchill, and its namesake came later in memory of a former owner who was a butcher with the Palace Meat Market in the early 20th century. It was Young who recovered these facts about the property and its history.
ASU had initially offered Young about $800,000 to sell, but Young declined the offer since it wouldn’t cover the cost to move the house. According to Young, accepting the offer would have meant the house’s demolition — an outcome he couldn’t accept given his desire to keep a piece of Phoenix history alive.
The Arizona Board of Regents then filed an eminent domain lawsuit to force the sale of the house with the Maricopa County Superior Court.
The ASU Health campus is projected to span 200,000 square feet, with a planned opening date scheduled for the fall of 2028.
Nearly 12,000 people signed a petition to save the historic Louis Emerson House from demolition.
ASU said in a statement that it would no longer seek eminent domain and instead allow the house to remain. ASU noted that it would adjust its construction plans to work around the home.
“ASU has been working toward a resolution with the Emerson House in downtown Phoenix, a house that sits next to land being developed for the headquarters of ASU Health,” said the spokesperson. “To honor the homeowner’s desires, the university has agreed to withdraw its court proceedings and allow the house to remain. The plans for the ASU Health site will be revised accordingly.”
Young credited John Rich, a country music singer and political pundit, for securing this victory. Rich was sworn in earlier this month by the Trump administration to serve as special envoy for American landowners.
Rich issued a statement to social media on Saturday explaining that ASU decided to drop the eminent domain case after he engaged in conversations with ASU President Michael Crow. Rich said Crow had promised to “take a look at” covering the court costs Young has undertaken to keep his home.
“Mr. Young, we took care of you, sir,” said Rich. “Big shout of to Dr. Crow, the president of Arizona State University, for having a heart and a soul and seeing this from Mr. Young’s perspective. I couldn’t ask for more. Big win for American landowners today.”
Rich also credited Turning Point Action for making him aware of Young’s plight.
Shout out to @FaithFamilyLiz from Arizona who initially helped me connect with Mr Young and his attorney. Without her help, it would have taken me much longer to win this battle. I've never met her in person, only here on X, but she was a HUGE help!🇺🇸 https://t.co/cnvBoHkJm5
Rich encouraged Americans to report unfair land grabs to USDA.gov/lawfare, the new reporting portal by the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to address lawfare waged against farmers, ranchers, agricultural producers, and other USDA customers.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A recent campaign ad from the Democrat incumbent governor cost her millions, but critics and past reporting indicate the ad is misleading and takes credit for work done by Republicans.
Gov. Katie Hobbs’ 30-second “Work” ad released last month claimed that she reduced electricity bills, cut red tape to build more affordable housing, and balanced the budget. Critics across the political spectrum assessed these claims as misleading.
Utility rates have increased by more than 25% under the Hobbs administration.
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club calculated based on Energy Information Administration data that utility rates in Arizona have increased by an average of 27% under Hobbs’ tenure. The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) sets rates.
The largest donor to Hobbs’ controversial inaugural fund, Arizona Public Service, also wants to increase the utility rates by 14%. That ratemaking case is ongoing with the ACC.
The Hobbs administration imposed more red tape on housing construction that had the effect of imposing a housing moratorium. A court struck down that red tape earlier this year as an unlawful overreach in agency rulemaking, a ruling which has the potential to put Arizona taxpayers on the hook for over $1 billion in compensation claims.
One developer duo, Buckeye Tartesso I and II, already filed such a claim last September with the help of the Goldwater Institute. The duo is seeking over $320 million in compensation for lost value, an amount their demand letter claimed was a compilation of conservative, not maximum, estimates.
Budget talks were repeatedly called off and subjected to a bill moratorium by Hobbs as she tried to impose what Republican lawmakers characterized as unrealistic revenue assumptions, hidden tax increases, and cost-raising policies.
In the thick of budget talks earlier this year, House Speaker Steve Montenegro (R-LD29) commented that Hobbs’ budgeting style was reminiscent of the more liberal-style budgets coming out of California: fiscal approaches which increase government size and create inconsistencies within the tax system. Hobbs held out on securing tax conformity for months to align the Arizona tax code with many of the congressional changes passed under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act
Hobbs has been accused by bipartisan critics of turning her inheritance of a $2.5 billion surplus from former governor Doug Ducey into a $1.6 billion shortfall.
Last summer, a report by the Common Sense Institute Arizona found that state spending outpaced the $3.3 billion in revenues that emerged following the passage of the flat tax in 2023.
Per the Hobbs campaign, the ad buys required millions from her campaign coffers.
Additionally, the Hobbs campaign press release implied that the Spanish-speaking version of her “Work” ad, “No Se Rinde” (“Doesn’t Give Up”), was uniform in its messaging. However, the ads contained key differences that indicated an awareness of Arizona’s split demographics.
Both opened with a characterization of Hobbs’ background as a mother who worked multiple jobs and as a social worker, but differed distinctly in their portrayals of Hobbs’ approach to governance.
The English-speaking ad, “Work,” depicted Hobbs as a budget and policy expert with key wins in electricity bill and red tape cuts, and school lunch and community college scholarship expansions.
The English ad described Hobbs as working fast food and Uber jobs to make ends meet. It included the misleading claims that Hobbs was responsible for balancing the budget without raising taxes, reducing electricity bills, and cutting affordable housing red tape, along with the valid claims that she expanded school lunches and community college scholarships.
The Spanish version of the ad, “No Se Rinde,” depicted Hobbs as a social worker with key wins in medical debt forgiveness, medical cost cuts, and salary boosts. Hobbs forgave $30 million in medical debts early on in her administration.
The Spanish-speaking ad similarly characterized Hobbs as having a background as a working mother, but only highlighted her past Uber driving work and expanded on her time as a social worker as mainly aiding female domestic violence victims. The ad further diverged in describing Hobbs as responsible for canceling tens of millions in medical debt, reducing medical costs with discounts up to 80 percent, and raising salaries.
A Centers for Disease Control report published in 2024 suggested that Latino and Hispanic women have a disproportionately higher risk of experiencing domestic violence: one in three, indicating an occurrence average up to three times higher than white women.
Close to a quarter of all Latinos in Arizona are uninsured, as are nearly half of all illegal aliens, according to a 2022 research analysis from the Latino Policy & Politics Institute. Approximately 80% of Latino families in Arizona reported financial trouble according to recent polling by UnidosUS; nearly half of Latinos across Arizona, California, and Texas reported medical debt in a 2024 UnidosUS poll.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Supportive leadership, collaborative freedom, and safe campuses are the leading reasons why thousands of Arizona educators say they don’t quit education.
A new survey from the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) polled more than 9,300 current Arizona teachers during the 2025-2026 school year on their reasons for staying in the profession.
More than 2,000 teachers (22%) completed the survey. ADE disclosed that it excluded the responses of approximately 170 teachers that were ultimately deemed ineligible upon further screening.
According to ADE interpretation of the data, a majority of these educators cited strong leadership support, the ability to collaborate with other educators, and safe campuses as among their highest priorities. Districts who meet these criteria for their teachers have better chances at higher rates of K-12 educator retention, they say.
Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne said the results of the survey confirmed his sentiments on the matter, which he has vocalized in interviews with the media and implemented through ADE policy. Horne said tapping into available state funds would alleviate one key issue raised by educators in the survey: teacher pay.
“This survey confirms what I have consistently said about educators needing support from their school leadership, a collaborative and safe workplace environment, and higher pay,” said Horne. “Arizona is facing a catastrophic teacher shortage, but this survey shows there are some answers that can be implemented immediately, although more effort needs to be made to raise teacher pay. That is something I have consistently fought for and can be done without raising taxes because there is money available in the state land trust.”
93% of responding teachers said they planned to return to a teaching position for the 2026-2027 school year. 7% said they did not.
Nearly 77% of respondent teachers collectively said they felt safe and supported at their school site. Nearly 75% said they felt their school fostered a positive and collaborative environment. Nearly 74% said they felt they had autonomy to make instructional decisions for their students. Nearly 71% said they felt valued and respected by school leaders. About 70% said they felt they had access to the instructional resources and materials they needed to be successful.
Class sizes at their school were manageable according to most (nearly 700 agreed), followed by a close-second majority who said they disagreed (nearly 400), and those who strongly agreed or were neutral were close in numbers (more than 300 respectively). Those who strongly disagreed with the sentiment totaled 160.
A strong sense of belonging in the school community was present for most (more than 700 who strongly agreed), followed by a close-second majority who said they agreed (nearly 700), then those who said they were neutral (nearly 300), then those who said they disagreed (about 150), and those who said they strongly disagreed (about 60).
However, teachers indicated that they had insufficient time during their work days to complete non-instruction tasks. Close to 600 teachers said they disagreed that they had sufficient time, followed by more than 500 who strongly disagreed. 360 teachers said they agreed they had sufficient time, nearly 300 were neutral on the matter, and 150 strongly agreed.
Teacher pay came a close second for highest levels of dissatisfaction among respondent teachers. Only 38% overall said they felt their salary was competitive with similar positions in the state.
More than 500 teachers said they agreed that their salary was competitive with similar positions in the state, and 190 said they strongly agreed. More than 400 were neutral or in disagreement, respectively. More than 300 said they strongly disagreed.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
