by Staff Reporter | Jul 31, 2024 | Education, News
By Staff Reporter |
The state’s Democratic leaders, Governor Katie Hobbs and Attorney General Kris Mayes, have been taking aggressive action to undo school choice in Arizona, even as the Auditor General has exposed another public school district for poor finances.
Earlier this month, Mayes launched an investigation into the usage of school choice funds to purchase supplementary materials. Mayes also submitted a letter to the Department of Education ordering parents to submit a curriculum for all requests for supplemental materials.
Meanwhile, over 40 school districts were determined to not be in compliance with audit reporting requirements for the 2023 fiscal year. The latest public school district to be reported on by the auditor general, Baboquivari Unified School District (BUSD), not only spent nearly $500,000 on out-of-state travel for trainings and conferences found to be “unnecessary and potentially wasteful” in under two years — it spent over $8,400 for its board to hold board meetings and retreats out of town at a casino.
The BUSD Board traveled to Desert Diamond Casino in Tucson — over 115 miles round trip — where they addressed agenda items that the auditor general determined weren’t preclusive to public attendance. The board held three special meetings and five weekend board retreats at this casino.
The auditor general noted that these meetings were potentially in violation of the state’s open meeting laws.
In its response to the audit, BUSD said that if it were to have meetings out of town again, such as in a casino, it would ensure the public could watch via livestream or other methods.
The auditor general also noted that BUSD potentially violated the state constitution’s gift clause requirement with its $500,000 travel expenses. The report cited a specific instance of several thousand spent on an individual involved with overseeing education on behalf of the tribal government, not employed by the district, to travel and attend an educator training course in Georgia: an expense the district couldn’t show it approved in advance.
A majority of the objectionable travel expenses, over $340,000, occurred when BUSD sent staff to an out-of-state professional development conference. That mass expense included the attendance of a “substantial” number of non-educators — including a custodian, IT staff, business office staff, and Board members — and a repeat trip for seven staff members.
The auditor general found that if BUSD had excluded non-educators from the conference, the district would have nearly halved its costs. Further, if BUSD had chosen to only send a handful of “key employees” capable of training the other staff members, the district could have saved 97 percent of its costs. What’s more, the conference had a virtual training option, which would have eliminated the large expense of travel costs to the district entirely.
During the audit, BUSD indicated to the auditor general that they wanted to send nearly all of its staff to the conference to “energize and motivate teachers and staff” in order to improve student attendance and achievement.
In the last reporting year (2022-23), BUSD had “significantly lower” student achievement than its peer districts and the statewide average. Only two percent of students passed state assessments in math (compared to 27 percent), six percent in English (compared to 33 percent), and three percent in science (compared to 23 percent).
In its response to the auditor general, BUSD said that its business office was aware and had questioned the excessive travel and training costs, but the superintendent at the time had dismissed their concerns.
According to the auditor general, there were other, more critical needs in which the district could have instead applied that excessive spending.
“[T]ravel expenditures did not always comply with State requirements and may not have provided intended benefits,” read the report. “In addition to travel costs exceeding State travel policies and spending limits, the District could have saved at least $389,000 that it could have used for other District priorities, such as increasing teacher pay, by limiting the number of District staff and Board members attending conferences.”
BUSD was found to have ignored spending limits for lodging, overpaid staff and Board members for meals, failed to document its record of payments to staff members for travel expenses, and failed to ensure preapproval of travel expenditures.
The excessive spending resulted in BUSD spending over double per student on administration than its peer districts on average. The auditor general also found BUSD had operated schools below capacity, which also contributed to the higher spending.
Since BUSD failed to maintain transportation records, per the report, the auditor general was unable to have a complete scope of review of the district’s school bus and fleet vehicle maintenance, inspection, and mileage documentation and procedures.
BUSD didn’t have documentation to support that it performed the required school bus preventive maintenance. The district also didn’t maintain the required records for fleet vehicles, nor could it show that it safeguarded and monitored fleet vehicles to prevent unauthorized use, theft, or damage.
Finally, the auditor general found that BUSD failed to comply with requirements to protect students and safeguard public monies and sensitive computerized data. BUSD lacked internal controls for conflicts of interest, payroll, and credit cards. This resulted in an increased risk for unauthorized purchases and fraud with public monies. BUSD also assigned too much access to its accounting system and failed to secure its IT equipment.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Jul 29, 2024 | Education, News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A powerful Arizona organization is attempting to coax the state’s once-invincible champion for school choice into fighting back against one of its most fierce opponents.
Last week, John Thorpe, a Staff Attorney with the Goldwater Institute, sent a letter to Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, over his office’s continued capitulation to Attorney General Kris Mayes over the interpretation of certain laws pertaining to the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program.
The letter from the Goldwater Institute sought “to bring some clarity to the issues of (1) whether the use of ESA funds for ‘supplementary expenses’ requires an explicitly documented ‘nexus’ to a curriculum approved by the Department of Education, and (2) whether ESA funds are subject to the AG’s authority under [state statutes].”
This communication addressed an earlier email from Arizona Department of Education ESA Executive Director, John Ward, to parents within the program, informing them about a letter he had received from Mayes’ Solicitor General. According to Ward, that letter “stated that some ESA program practices are inconsistent with State law and result in payment of ESA funds without authorization of law, [and that] the Solicitor General’s Office has directed the ESA program to address the issues it identified.”
The Attorney General’s Office cited two Arizona statutes to bolster its argument that “the Arizona Department of Education has approved certain supplemental items and textbooks without requiring curricula, which may result in ‘illegal payment of public monies.’” Ward told parents that “ADE has no choice but to comply with the Solicitor General’s determination,” forcing families to “submit a curriculum with all supplemental materials requested or purchased” – something that he even noted was a practice “in place since before the current ADE administration.”
Horne’s acceptance of Mayes’ interpretation of the law was surprising to many members of the public, being that his office has been at odds with the Attorney General’s Office on almost every issue related to this program. Previously, Horne issued several statements expressing his unabashed opposition to the Democrat Attorney General’s persistent attacks on the ESA program and vowing to match her office step for step in defense of parents.
In Thorpe’s letter, he argues that “the law does not condition families’ rights to buy supplemental materials on an explicitly documented ‘curriculum nexus,’” and that “Arizona families’ ESA dollars are not ‘public monies.’”
Thorpe concluded his letter to the state’s schools chief, writing, “The AG’s power to investigate misuse of public monies does not give her the authority to prevent your office from allowing Arizona families to use their ESA funds for statutorily permitted uses. Nor does the law require you, or those families, to justify every textbook or ‘supplementary expenditure’ with a Department-approved curriculum nexus or documentation from a private school.”
On the same day of the Goldwater letter, Ward sent another email to ESA families in response to questions of his department “to provide additional guidance on what is required to use Empowerment Scholarships to purchase supplemental materials” – perhaps signaling that Horne and the Arizona Department of Education would not be backing down from its surrender to Mayes. Ward stated that “ADE would like to provide you with an updated template of Parent-Prepared Curriculum that you can use to submit with your requests for supplemental materials.”
One of the state’s most ardent and effective advocates of the ESA program, Christine Accurso, linked to the Goldwater letter on her social media platform, adding her own commentary about how parents should react to the decision from the Arizona Department of Education on these supplemental materials for their ESA accounts. She said, “ESA parents should have absolutely no fear with submitting orders (for direct purchase or for reimbursement) that includes items that are obvious supplemental educational materials. If an order gets rejected, then email asking them to approve it. If you get an email or communication about your order that says it is the ‘department’s final administrative decision’ then you can go to the State Board of Education and file an appeal. However, you must have proof that the department has given its ‘final administrative decision’ before submitting an appeal to the SBE.”
The Goldwater Institute’s public foray into this controversial action from the Republican Superintendent’s Office follows a letter that was previously sent to Horne from Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma, a fellow Republican. In his letter, Toma wrote, “I understand that you may have no choice but to cooperate with the Attorney General’s politically-motivated investigation. However, ADE is best situated to determine how to implement its policies in a way that fulfills legislative intent but does not burden parents with unnecessary bureaucratic requirements.”
Toma added, “As you implement your Department’s policies, I urge you to scrutinize Attorney General Mayes’ unsolicited legal advice expressed in her July 1, 2024, letter, consider how her interpretation of Arizona statutes would impact parents throughout the state, and reject her interpretation of the law that would lead to absurd results.”
In a blog post for the Goldwater Institute, Matt Beienburg referenced Toma’s letter, stating, “As noted by Arizona Speaker of the House Ben Toma, the unprecedented intrusion and second-guessing by the AG’s office into ADE’s administration of the ESA program is just the office’s latest attempt to advance a novel legal theory in order to hijack the legislative deliberations and decisions of state lawmakers. Indeed, just days before firing off its attack against ADE for its application of state statute, the AG’s office was forced to concede and drop its efforts to override the provisions of the recent bipartisan state budget agreement. The AG’s demands against the ESA program should similarly be rejected by the state department of education, the state board of education, and the judicial system of Arizona.”
A few days removed from the Goldwater Institute letter, the Arizona Department of Education sent another email to ESA parents, informing them of a virtual meeting with Horne, Ward, and others from the department to “provide account holders with an opportunity to have their questions answered regarding the new curricula requirements for supplemental materials.” However, families will not be able to ask their questions live and unfiltered. Instead, as per the electronic notice, “the format for the virtual meeting will be the Department of Education reading and answering questions that have been submitted to it by ESA Holders.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Jul 24, 2024 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
On Thursday, the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT), a non-partisan ethics watchdog group filed a complaint with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel under The Hatch Act of 1939 against Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona. FACT has alleged that Cardona violated the Act by sending out a political email to federal student loan borrowers in his official capacity. The HATCH Act of 1939 limits certain political activities of federal employees to protect federal employees from political coercion in the workplace.
According to a press release from FACT, an email sent in July 2024 to an estimated 43 million “citizens who are federal student loan borrowers,” originated from an official government email address, was written on an official Department of Education letterhead, and was signed by Cardona with his official title. The foundation noted, “This type of political advocacy from the government targeting citizens who interact with an agency is exactly the type of politicization the Hatch Act is designed to prevent.”
Kendra Arnold, Executive Director of FACT, said in a statement, “Secretary Cardona appears to have been caught making an overtly political pitch to student loan borrowers in an election year. The uniqueness and magnitude also need to be noted, as this case goes far beyond a standard Hatch Act violation of making a political remark while appearing in an official capacity.
What looks to have happened here is an extremely partisan message was widely distributed using data the federal government had compiled on citizens who have student loans—a universe that could be 43 million people. We urge the Office of Special Counsel to immediately act and investigate whether Secretary Cardona violated the Hatch Act and, if so, the true scope of it.”
In the text of the email from Cardona, revealed by FACT, several statements from Cardona are explicitly political in nature, addressing Republicans as adversaries to the department. For example:
- “Republican elected officials who are siding with special interests and trying to block Americans from accessing all the benefits of the most affordable student loan repayment plan in history . . .”
- “President Biden and I are determined to lower costs for student loan borrowers, to make repaying student debt affordable and realistic, and to build on our separate efforts that have already provided relief to 4.75 million Americans – no matter how many times Republican elected officials try to stop us.”
- “While we disagree with the Republican elected officials’ efforts here to side with special interests and block borrowers from getting breathing room on their student loans . . .”
The complaint submitted by FACT lays out the HATCH Act case against Cardona clearly and in simple terms: “(1) the email was a blatant political communication and (2) it was sent in Cardona’s official capacity using taxpayer funded resources.” In campaign or marketing terms, the email list owned and maintained by the Department of Education is a resource that is potentially worth billions of dollars and is off-limits for anything but official government use. As Arnold noted, “the email sent by Cardona was a blatant political communication. When read in its entirety it is clear the only purpose for sending the letter was a political one and its content was primarily political. The email made political arguments and numerous times specifically identified the political party by name that Cardona opposes in a disparaging manner to generate opposition to the political candidates and party.”
As reported by The Daily Mail, the modern interpretation of the HATCH Act prohibits the sending or forwarding of partisan political emails while an official is on duty or in the workplace or even engaging in political activity like attending a meeting while in uniform or driving a government vehicle.
Arnold writing on behalf of FACT concluded, “While this is an obvious case simply based upon the facts above, it goes far beyond the standard violation of just making a political remark while appearing in an official capacity. While he certainly did make a political remark in his official capacity, he also proactively used data the government had on student loan borrowers for political purposes. Quite clearly this is a severe breach of the citizens’ trust and is inexcusable.
The government endorsement of a political position and use of taxpayer funded resources to do so is the exact political behavior that is forbidden by the Hatch Act.”
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 Staff Reporter | Jul 24, 2024 | Education, News
By Staff Reporter |
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne is advising Arizona’s school districts and charter schools to consult legal counsel regarding implementation of the controversial Title IX changes.
The changes to Title IX center on the redefining of the term “sex” to include “gender identity.” In effect, schools would be required to permit access to gendered programs, activities, or spaces on the basis of gender identity rather than biological sex, such as sports teams, locker rooms, and bathrooms. The U.S. Department of Education (ED) released the final Title IX rules outlining this change in April.
In ED’s justification for expanding the concept of “sex” to include “gender identity,” the agency declared that basing exclusion on biological sex amounted to sex discrimination.
“For more than 50 years, Title IX has promised an equal opportunity to learn and thrive in our nation’s schools free from sex discrimination,” said U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona. “These final regulations build on the legacy of Title IX by clarifying that all our nation’s students can access schools that are safe, welcoming, and respect their rights.”
These new rules take effect on Aug. 1.
In a press release on Monday, Horne announced that he’d advised legal counsel to educational institutions through letters disseminated to all districts and charters. Horne emphasized that, though all schools had the choice to implement the updated Title IX regulations, there were pending legal challenges that may result in students suffering damages.
“This is your choice, but you may wish to delay implementing the new regulations until the legal situation is clarified. If the regulations are implemented and then later overruled by the courts, students may suffer damages in the meantime,” said Horne. “This is not legal advice. The Arizona Attorney General may disagree […] We are a local control state, and it will be up to districts and charters to determine how to proceed in this situation. You need to consult with your lawyer. I am only providing information I think might be useful.”
Indeed, a federal court in Louisiana ruled against the new regulations last month. The judge determined that the new federal rules amounted to federal overreach, calling ED’s rulemaking “arbitrary and capricious,” and signaling concern for the rules’ threat to protected constitutional speech.
Some districts have already opposed the changes.
Dysart Unified School District’s governing board voted to reject the new Title IX rules earlier this month. The district declared that ED’s changes to Title IX were contradictory to the existing, plain language of the rules.
Horne noted in Monday’s press release that the new Title IX rules could “significantly injure public education” by prompting parents to flee the system.
“In the past I’ve been asked by districts, as a policy matter, about their consideration of rules, permitting biological boys who have male genitalia being allowed in girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers,” said Horne. “My response was that there should be unisex bathrooms available, and if there was no room for them, the faculty bathroom should be used for that purpose. That would preserve the dignity of biological boys who identify as girls. But if they were allowed in girls’ facilities, I thought parents might well remove the girls from the school and send them to another district, Charter School, or private school. So, this rule could significantly injure public education.”
26 states have put forth legal challenges to the Title IX changes, with some awarded injunctions: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Jul 22, 2024 | Education, News
By Staff Reporter |
Another one of Arizona’s middle-of-the-road legislative districts may be represented by a liberal after November’s General Election if enough Democrats and left-leaning independents have their say.
Judy Schwiebert, a Democrat, is running for the Arizona State Senate in Legislative District 2. Schwiebert currently serves as a State Representative for the district. She announced for the seat in June 2023, saying that “we need people who will work together to focus on the toughest challenges facing Arizonans including our teacher, affordable housing, and water shortage crises.”
Schwiebert posted more than 1,600 signatures at the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office earlier this spring to qualify for the ballot.
The Democrat legislator has been endorsed by several left-leaning organizations, including National Organization for Women Arizona PAC, Arizona Education Association, Moms Demand Action, Save Our Schools Arizona, Arizona List, Jane Fonda Climate PAC, the Grand Canyon Chapter of the Sierra Club, Emily’s List, Moms Fed Up, and Human Rights Campaign PAC.
If voters were to select Schwiebert over the Republican favorite in the district’s primary, Shawnna Bolick, they would be sacrificing one of the state’s strongest school choice proponents for one of the top opponents of educational opportunities and freedom for students and families. In a recent interview with a local outlet, Schwiebert set her sights on the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program, which has given tens of thousands of Arizona families the opportunity to choose the education that best suits their children, saying, “What we cannot afford is to create an entirely separate private school system – funded by taxpayer money – that siphons almost a billion dollars a year out of the state budget. That’s what the universal ESA voucher program is doing. It is creating huge deficits. It is preventing us from investing in all kinds of things that Arizonans urgently need.”
In June 2022, Representative Schwiebert voted against the bill that expanded the ESA program in the state (HB 2853), which was the first of its kind in the country.
Schwiebert’s endorsements from Arizona Education Association and Save Our Schools Arizona also speak volumes about what she would continue to do in the state senate to undermine school choice opportunities for her constituents. In its 2023 Legislative Policy Priorities, Save Our Schools Arizona wrote that “Diverting public funds away from public schools toward private schools through ESAs and STOs only exacerbates the crisis – especially with universal ESA vouchers directing state tax dollars overwhelmingly to families who never sent their children to public schools in the first place. This negatively affects Arizona students and families, leaving the next generation unprepared for success and risking our state’s future.”
On her “X” account, Schwiebert has posted her participation with Save Our Schools Arizona at different events.
The Arizona Education Association is also an ardent opponent of the state’s many educational freedom opportunities. After Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs signed the state’s budget in 2023, which she negotiated with Republican legislative leadership, the Association wrote, “It’s extremely frustrating that this budget does not address the growth of the state’s out-of-control voucher program. The extremist majority in our state legislature has ignored the will of Arizona voters and pushed through policies that bankroll private schools for the wealthy at the cost of the public schools attended by 90% of Arizona kids…This unchecked spending is completely irresponsible and is on track to bankrupt our state. The fight to repeal vouchers during next year’s legislative session starts today.”
Earlier this year, Schwiebert bemoaned the resistance of Arizona Republican legislators in the House majority “to even consider sensible legislation to raise educator pay…”
However, during the 2023 Arizona Legislative Session, Schwiebert voted against HB 2800 in committee, which would have “mandate[d] each school district and charter school increase the base salary of all eligible teachers” – according to the overview provided by the state House of Representatives. That bill, which was sponsored by Republican State Representative Matt Gress, received a green light from the House Appropriations Committee, but failed to make it out of the full chamber for the Senate’s consideration.
Schwiebert explained her vote at the time, saying, “The bottom line for me is well, this bill is really, I think, well-intentioned, and it’s good that, I’m glad to hear that Mr. Gress is acknowledging that teachers deserve higher pay, they absolutely do. But unfortunately, there are some serious flaws in this bill that I’m concerned could leave public schools in a worse financial position than they are in now.”
Representatives from both the Arizona Education Association and Save Our Schools Arizona registered opposition to the legislation on the Arizona Legislature’s Request to Speak system.
Arizona Legislative District 2 is one of the most competitive in the state, with a 3.8% vote spread in the past nine statewide elections. It is very winnable for Republicans, however, as the party has emerged victorious in six out of those nine elections. The district covers a large portion of northcentral Phoenix.
Schwiebert is running unopposed in the July primary election for Democrats. She will face off against the winner of the district’s Republican primary contest for state senator, which features incumbent, Shawnna Bolick, and Josh Barnett.
Bolick told AZ Free News that her “general election opponent was voted in shortly after she helped collect signatures for a ballot initiative that would have levied a billion dollar tax on small businesses not only hurting these business owners, but our state’s economy.” She added, “[Schwiebert] cares more about protecting special interests than voting for common sense education policies that gives every kid a chance to thrive in the school of their choice.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Jul 21, 2024 | Education, News
By Staff Reporter |
A politically middle-of-the-road legislative district may be home to one of the state’s most liberal elected officials if voters turn to Democrat representation in the November General Election.
Karen Gresham, a Democrat, is campaigning for the Arizona House of Representatives in Legislative District 4, which covers an area of northcentral Phoenix. She currently serves as a Governing Board President for the Madison Elementary School District. In addition to her run for state house, Gresham is running for re-election to this Governing Board, where she hopes to sit for another four-year term.
On March 29, Gresham announced that she and her Legislative District 4 running mates had filed their signatures to qualify for the ballot.
Gresham appears to be an unashamed liberal Democrat, who has a lengthy record of supporting Democrat organizations, causes, and candidates. On OpenSecrets.org, a Karen Gresham from Phoenix is reported to have contributed to the Democratic Party of Arizona, Save Our Schools, Planned Parenthood of Arizona, Arizona List, Hillary Clinton, Katie Hobbs, David Garcia, Fred Duval, Ruben Gallego, Adrian Fontes, Kris Mayes, Ann Kirkpatrick, Greg Stanton, LD4 Democrats, and several other Democrat interest groups, and legislative candidates and incumbents.
The Democrat candidate is endorsed by a plethora of liberal special interest and advocacy groups, including Arizona List, Moms Demand Action, Human Rights Campaign of Arizona PAC, Sierra Club, Save Our Schools Arizona, Emily’s List, and National Organization for Women Arizona PAC.
Gresham would undoubtedly give Democrats another ardent pro-abortion vote in the legislature. On June 24, she posted to her “X” account that “in the two years since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, Arizonans reproductive freedom has been in a state of uncertainty. We MUST pass the Arizonans for Abortion Access initiative and flip the legislature to protect reproductive freedoms.”
When Gresham was endorsed by Emily’s List in May, she boasted that she has “been a champion for reproductive freedom for years and will continue to advocate for policies that ensure our rights.”
On her campaign website, Gresham portrays herself as a reasonable education advocate with her experience on the Madison Elementary School District board, writing, “I know what Arizona schools, teachers, and students need,” and that “I am deeply passionate about education and improving our schools.”
However, the truth appears to be far different. At a campaign event this summer, Gresham, when speaking about her views on education, said, “We’re funding three systems right now: charter schools, public schools and the ESA system. So, we need to consolidate those and bring the funding back under the public school umbrella because it all falls into place after that.”
In 2020, Gresham expressed her displeasure over “public charter schools receiving small business PPP,” adding that “this is not ok!”
Gresham is also supported by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), which is raising political funds for her race to “help Dems pick up the ONE SEAT they need to flip the Arizona State Legislature from red to blue.” PCCC advocates for liberal policies such as the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and Debt-Free College. The organization also touts its partnership with Senator Elizabeth Warren on federal legislation, and its appreciation of net neutrality, which PCCC highlights was “celebrated by the Obama administration.”
She is also endorsed by Sister District Project South Bay, which posted its support of “candidates in key state legislative races where we can build momentum at the bottom of the ticket to benefit the strategic higher-ticket Democratic opportunities in states like Pennsylvania, Arizona, North Carolina, and Nevada.” The organization states that “by helping progressive candidates win elections, we aim to …enact climate actions and environmental justice now, racial and gender equity, protect reproductive rights, and so much more.”
Legislative District 4 is one of the most competitive in the state with a 3.4% vote spread between Republicans and Democrats in the past nine statewide elections, according to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission. Republicans have won five of those contests, compared to four for Democrats.
Gresham is running alongside former State Representative Kelli Butler in the Democrat Primary. The two will face off in November’s General Election against incumbent State Representative Matt Gress and Pamela Carter, who will both emerge from the Republican Primary.
Currently, there is only one legislator representing Legislative 4 (Gress) due to a Democrat’s resignation last month. Earlier this month, Gresham was one of three Democrats nominated to the seat (with Kelli Butler and Eric Meyer) to be considered by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. One of those individuals will be selected by the Board to serve for the duration of the term (until early January 2025).
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
