Should Arizona’s largest public transportation entity be allowed to use taxpayer funds to pay lobbyists to obtain even more taxpayer funds? And if so, can Maricopa County taxpayers be assured their money isn’t used to influence a possible vote to extend a transportation tax set to expire in 2025?
On Thursday, the joint board of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) and Valley Metro Rail will meet in Phoenix to vote on several matters, including two agenda items involving “legislative consulting services” which includes lobbying of federal and state lawmakers.
The meeting starts at 11:15 a.m. at the Valley Metro boardroom at 101 North 1st Avenue on the 10th Floor.
However, there will be no discussion of either item, as they are listed under the meeting’s Consent Agenda instead of the Regular Agenda. That is of concern due to the fact one of the agenda descriptions refers to Prop 400, a half-cent tax many state lawmakers want voters to extend for yet another 20 years
The prospect of Valley Metro using taxpayer dollars to lobby for more money from taxpayers -whether via Congress, the Legislature, or with Prop 400 voters- has raised the question of why the joint board meeting has the two lobbying items on the Consent Agenda where there can be no discussion and where individual board members do not have to publicly state their position.
According to the June 16 agenda, Item 4G is listed as “Authorization to Issue a Request for Proposals for Federal Legislative Consulting Services” for a two-year period with three one-year options. The estimated cost is listed as between $180,000 and $240,000 per year.
Valley Metro is currently contracted with Cardinal Infrastructure for federal lobbying activities through Dec. 31. Staff recommends continuing with some sort of contract to assist Valley Metro in achieving “specific federal legislative, lobbying and funding objectives” with Congress, the Executive Branch, and various federal agencies.
This is especially timely, according to the agenda item, in light of “opportunities in the federal passage of the infrastructure bill.” Those opportunities include federal taxpayer funds which Valley Metro staff wants to ensure the region “is not missing out on.”
Meanwhile, Item 4H on the agenda seeks authorization for Valley Metro’s CEO to issue an RFP for state consultant services in dealing with the Arizona State Legislature, the Governor’s Office, and other state agencies. The cost would likely run $60,000 to $90,000 per year.
The current contract issued in 2018 is a joint venture between Highground Public Affairs Consultants and The Kruse Group, described in the agenda as “a well-known Republican and Democrat lobbyist to access bipartisan relationships.”
Among the services the contract would cover is Governmental Relations -monitoring and lobbying public transit issues- at the state level along with Strategic Planning.
“Due to the ongoing dialogue with respect to the possible extension of Proposition 400, staff supports this request,” the agenda states.
The Prop 400 extension is a longshot to get on the ballot this year given that the tax does not expire until 2025. However, many voters are wary of the prospect that public entities such as Valley Metro and the Maricopa Association of Governments will use taxpayer funds behind the scenes to sway voters to approve the extension when it does get on the ballot.
Whether any of Valley Metro’s board members will acknowledge those concerns and remove the two items from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda remains to be seen.
Valley Metro RPTA’s board members are:
Veronica Malone, Avondale Vice Mayor;
Clay Goodman, City of Buckeye;
Kevin Hartke, Chandler Mayor;
Monica Dorcey , Vice Mayor of El Mirage;
Mike Scharnow, Fountain Hills Town Council,
Brigette Peterson, Gilbert Mayor;
Lauren Tolmachoff, City of Glendale;
Bill Stipp, Goodyear City Council;
Francisco Heredia (Chair), Mesa City Council;
Jon Edwards, Peoria Councilman;
Laura Pastor (Vice Chair), Vice Mayor for City of Phoenix;
Leah Martineau, Town of Queen Creek;
Betty Janik, Scottsdale Councilwoman;
Chris Judd, City of Surprise;
Robin Arredondo-Savage, Tempe Councilmember;
Adolfo Gamez, City of Tolleson;
Rui Pereira, Wickenburg Mayor; and
Michael LeVault, Youngstown Mayor.
Four of Valley Metro RPTA’s board members also serve as the board of Valley Metro Rail: Arrendondo-Savage (Tempe), Hartke (Chandler), Heredia (Mesa), and Pastor (Phoenix).
The State of Arizona and all public entities within the state will be prohibited from contracting with any company which does not provide a written certification that the company does not, and will not, use or rely on the forced labor of ethnic Uyghurs in China.
Gov. Doug Ducey signed House Bill 2488 on Monday to help combat the forced labor practices of the People’s Republic of China.
Uyghurs are a Turkic ethnic group originating from and culturally affiliated with the general region of Central and East Asia. The people, the majority of whom are Muslims, are recognized as native to the Xinjiang region in northwest China, but for the past several years the Chinese government has come under criticism for placing tens of thousands of Uyghers at a time into detention or “reeducation” camps.
A Congressional report published earlier this year states that the Chinese government has compelled as many of 1 million of the 12 million Uyghurs in the region to work in textile, apparel, agricultural, consumer electronics, and other labor-intensive industries. Refusal to comply with such government orders can result in surveillance, political indoctrination, even further restrictive detention.
According to a recent BBC report, the Uyghurs speak their own language which is similar to Turkish. They make up less than half of the Xinjiang population, and have been the target in recent years of mass migration by Han Chinese, the nation’s ethnic majority. The intent appears to be an orchestrated effort by the government to further dilute the minority population there.
Two election integrity bills sponsored by Sen. JD Mesnard were signed into law by Gov. Doug Ducey this week in an effort to ensure consistency among the state’s 15 counties and more quickly remove ineligible voters from the rolls.
Senate Bill 1260 amends Arizona’s election law to require the state’s 15 county recorders to cancel someone’s voter registration upon confirmation that the person has registered to vote in another county. This will include removing the voter from the Active Early Voting used to mail ballots to voters signed up to received them in advance of election day.
SB1260 also makes it a Class 6 felony for any person to “knowingly” assist someone to vote in Arizona if the voter is registered in another state. This allows criminal charges to be filed is if someone forwards an Arizona early ballot to a voter at an address other than what is listed on the early ballot packet.
The legislation takes effect 90 days after the Legislature adjourns for the session, so the provisions could be in place before the 2022 General Election.
Meanwhile, Senate Bill 1362 adds a new statute describing the process for on-site tabulation of early ballots brought by voters to a polling place on Election Day. Currently, those in-person “drop offs” might not be tabulated until the next day, a practice each county recorder or election director will now have the authority to set.
SB1362 also tweaks the criteria for when a county’s board of supervisors may reduce the number of polling places during an election. And it better defines the methods which election officials can use to reduce voter wait times at in-person polling places.
It too takes effect 90 days after the Legislature adjourns for the session.
According to Mesnard (R-Chandler), the bills will help improve voter confidence in our elections.
“Democratic systems only work if our elections are secure and their integrity unmatched,” he said after the signing. “That means ensuring that each person has one vote and that their vote is properly counted.”
Cochise County Recorder David Stevens is one of the election officials across Arizona who closely followed Mesnard’s bills. He told Arizona Daily Independent his county already has a procedure for when a voter reportedly moves away, but there is a delay in dropping the voter until a notice to be mailed and a response received.
Under SB1260, the process will be sped up by not having to wait to hear back from the voter. This allows county recorders to cancel the voter’s registration upon official confirmation of new registration in another county.
As to the section of SB1260 making it a crime to forward someone’s early ballot to another address, Stevens noted he is waiting to hear what the consequences will be, and whether the statute applies to U.S. Postal Service personnel involved in the forwarding process.
Stevens explained that some counties already offer election day tabulation of early ballots as described in SB1362. On-site tabulation provides a “a more complete election total” which Stevens calls “a good thing.”
He added that while the provisions of SB1362 will entail more work, it will be minimal.
“In the long run, any attempt to have clean rolls is worth the work,” Stevens said.
The number of new bankruptcy filings across Arizona as of May 31 is down compared to the same time last year, and the numbers suggest a continuing falloff compared to 2019’s pre-pandemic bankruptcy activity.
That data comes from a report issued last week by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona. It shows 3,498 new bankruptcy filings so far this year, down 17.5 percent from the first five months of 2021.
By comparison, there were nearly 6,800 filings for the same period of 2019, with more than 16,200 being recorded by the end of that year. If the current 2022 rate holds to the end of the year, it would mean a nearly 50 percent decrease from 2019’s numbers.
The most prevalent type of bankruptcy filings so far this year are under Chapter 7, which accounts for 2,901 cases. This is followed by 574 Chapter 13 filings, 22 Chapter 11 filings, and a lone Chapter 12 filing.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court’s Yuma Office serving La Paz, Mohave, and Yuma counties saw the biggest decline, falling nearly 31 percent from 232 filings in the first five months of 2021 to 161 in January to May of this year. Meanwhile, the filing rates for the Court’s Phoenix Office fell 16.2 percent, while the Tucson Office fell 12.4 percent.
The counties of Apache, Coconino, Gila, Maricopa, Navajo, and Yavapai are served by the court’s Phoenix Office, while Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, Pinal and Santa Cruz fall under the Tucson Office.
Court records also show 413 of the new cases this year were filed Pro Se, meaning the parties initiated the bankruptcy process without an attorney. Although Pro Se filings represent only 12 percent of the new cases, that rate is significantly lower than 2019 when more than 18 percent of all filings were made Pro Se.
The most filings this year have come out of Maricopa County (513) and Pima County (122) with Pinal County (54) in a distant third place. By comparison, Graham County had only one bankruptcy filing reported in 2019, one in 2020, and none in 2021.
However, court records show there have already been six filed so far this year out of Graham County.
While denying any wrongdoing, Ford Motor Company recently offered up more than $19 million to settle allegations brought by several states including Arizona that the company made false advertising claims about its C-MAX vehicles, model years 2011 to 2015.
But Ford Motor consumers who may have been misled by the advertising will not share in the payout. Instead, the money will be split among the attorney generals of 39 states and the District of Columbia.
Court documents filed in Maricopa County Superior Court show the portion allocated to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office is $884,364.40, of which $200,000 will be used for attorneys’ fees and costs. The other $684,364.40 will be deposited into Arizona’s Consumer Protection – Consumer Fraud Revolving Fund for use at the discretion of Attorney General Mark Brnovich as provided by law.
The Consent Judgment notes Ford specifically denies it has violated any federal or state laws. And nothing in the agreement precludes consumers from pursing claims against Ford on an individual or class action basis. However, such legal efforts would not be taken up by the State, according to the May 18 agreement approved by Brnovich.
“Only the Attorney General may seek enforcement of this Consent Judgment,” the document states. “Nothing herein is intended to create a private right of action by other parties; however, this Consent Judgment does not limit the rights of any private party to pursue any remedies allowed by law.”
In addition to the monetary payout, Ford agreed to be “enjoined, restrained, and prohibited” from making false or misleading advertising claims concerning the estimated Fuel Economy and Payload Capacity of any new motor vehicles.
The attorney generals of six states—Arizona, Illinois, Maryland, Oregon, Texas, and Vermont—were part of the executive committee which led the investigative action against Ford Motor Company’s C-MAX advertising.
The other attorney generals who will benefit are Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
