Arizona voters will decide this November whether to require the diversity of geographic distribution for ballot initiative signature gathering.
The legislature passed this proposal last year along partisan lines (Senate Concurrent Resolution 1015), now on the ballot as Proposition 134. Per the proposal, signature gatherers would have to gain support across all 15 counties for ballot initiatives, rather than focusing on the most populated ones.
The law currently allows signatures to be gathered from any area within the state. Proponents of Proposition 134 hope to ensure representation from the more rural areas of the state.
Proposition 134 would require 10 percent of registered voters from each of the state’s 30 legislative districts for statewide initiatives, 15 percent from each legislative district for constitutional changes, and five percent from each legislative district for referendums.
Current law only requires 10 percent of registered voters for any statewide initiative, 15 percent of registered voters for any constitutional changes, and five percent of registered voters for any referendums.
Per the secretary of state’s latest voter registration data, there are over 4.1 million voters in the state. Nearly 60 percent of voters live in Maricopa County (over 2.4 million voters).
Under current requirements, signature gatherers only have to obtain about 411,000 voter signatures for statewide initiatives, 616,400 voter signatures for constitutional changes, and 205,500 voter signatures for referendums.
The Goldwater Institute operates the organization AZ Ballot Fairness in support of Proposition 134.
In a press release, AFB said that allowing “one big county” to pass initiatives without input from rural residents was unfair and could impose unintended consequences.
“Right now, rural Arizonans are completely ignored in the process. It is easier to sit on college campuses and densely populated areas like downtown Phoenix to collect all the requisite signatures than to get the buy-in from the diverse interests of Arizonans in other parts of the state,” said the Farm Bureau. “These diverse interests have a right to a voice in determining whether an issue will appear on the ballot.”
AFP argued that the burden for signature gathering would be too great, citing the hypothetical of initiatives dying for a shortage of signatures in even one district.
“If only one district fails to collect enough signatures, the referendum, initiative, or amendment will fail to appear on the ballot no matter how popular or relative it is to the rest of the state,” said AFP.
APHA argued that the proposed signature gathering requirements would hinder and delay health campaigns as well as critical interventions.
“Public health advocacy often relies on the ability to mobilize quickly and effectively to address emerging issues,” said ADH.
Opponents argue that the measure would actually decrease representation by requiring its diversification.
Not every state has a citizen initiative process, but for those that do, around half have a signature distribution requirement.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A Republican embedded in a Democrat-leaning legislative district is key to her party’s chances of retaining control of the Arizona House of Representatives.
Michele Peña is running for re-election for the state House of Representatives in Arizona Legislative District 23. Though the district leans to the left, Peña surprised many in the state by winning a spot in the chamber during the November 2022 General Election. She will attempt to recreate the same strategy and momentum that previously propelled her campaign to victory.
As a member of the Arizona House, Peña serves as the Vice Chairman of the Land, Agriculture & Rural Affairs Committee, and on the Education and Regulatory Affairs Committees.
In the primary election on July 30, Peña was the only Republican in the race for state House and finished with more votes than her two eventual Democrat opponents (9,597). After her strong finish, she posted, “Dear friends and supporters, I am incredibly grateful for your overwhelming support and for making me the top primary vote-getter in my race. This accomplishment is a testament to the trust and confidence you have placed in me, and I am deeply honored. A special thank you goes out to everyone in Legislative District 23, in Yuma, Maricopa, Pima and the 2 from Pinal. Your unwavering support has been instrumental in our success.”
🧵Dear friends and supporters, I am incredibly grateful for your overwhelming support and for making me the top primary vote-getter in my race. This accomplishment is a testament to the trust and confidence you have placed in me, and I am deeply honored.
— Representative Michele Peña (@michelepenaaz) August 10, 2024
The election result wasn’t solely for her benefit as Peña makes clear in her continuing statement: “If this trend continues, we will help maintain our majority, ensuring that our values and priorities are well represented. With your continued support, I am committed to serving you with dedication and integrity, just as I have over the past two years. Together, we can achieve even greater things for our community. Thank you once again for your faith in me.”
If this trend continues, we will help maintain our majority, ensuring that our values and priorities are well represented. With your continued support, I am committed to serving you with dedication and integrity, just as I have over the past two years.
— Representative Michele Peña (@michelepenaaz) August 10, 2024
Peña has a heart for service to her community, which drove her desire to represent the men, women, and children of her district at the Arizona Legislature. On her website, she shares the reason for her motivation to serve, writing, “As the daughter of an immigrant and a resident raised in Yuma with experience in Pima County, love anchors my family in this district. Our priorities are rooted in God, Country, Family, and Community. I’m committed to addressing economic concerns, safeguarding our children, and meeting the unique needs of rural communities.”
The first-term lawmaker adds, “In my role as a representative, I’ve championed these values, winning a write-in race in 2022. I believe in policies that benefit all Arizonans while preserving our freedom and way of life. Your trust and vote for re-election in 2024 would be an honor. God bless Arizona.”
Representative Peña has a heart for the veterans’ community in her district and around the state. Earlier this month, she revealed a meeting with a veteran while campaigning. She said, “As I went door knocking this evening, I met a wonderful veteran who gave me great support. When re-elected, I will continue to work hard for our veterans in the AZ State House.”
— Representative Michele Peña (@michelepenaaz) August 27, 2024
She also recently promised to continue to “keep AZ safe & grow our economy” should voters return her to the state legislature, highlighting, “As your State Rep, I’m fighting for a balanced state budget, secure border, resources for law enforcement, & our local businesses.”
— Arizona Police Association (@AZPoliceAssc) June 19, 2024
On Peña’s campaign website, she lists several priorities for her current and future terms in office. The first is education, where she writes that “Your zip code shouldn’t dictate your future, and I will always advocate for choice and access in education.” The second is agriculture, where she writes that “my family’s long-standing connections to southern Arizona and the agricultural industry have provided me with firsthand insight into these issues.” The third is fiscal responsibility, where she writes that “our children’s future shouldn’t be jeopardized for immediate gains.” The fourth is water, where she writes that “water is the lifeblood of our communities, and I will resist any efforts to diminish or restrict water access for the people of Arizona – especially our farmers.” The fifth is health care, where she writes that “Accessible healthcare is crucial, and individuals should not face exploitation by insurance companies or hospitals.” The final issue Peña addresses is opposing corruption, where she writes that “I stand unabashedly opposed to all forms of corruption in our government.”
According to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, Legislative District 23 has a competitive vote spread of 16.9% between Democrats and Republicans over the past nine state elections. Out of those elections, Democrats have won all nine contests.
Peña will run in November’s General Election against Democrats Mariana Sandoval and Matias Rosales, who both emerged from the July 30 Primary Election for the Democrat Party. In July, Sandoval obtained 9,194 votes, and Rosales acquired 6,811 votes. James Holmes finished third in the primary, garnering 2,919 votes.
Both Sandoval and Rosales will face off against Peña, who will again employ the “single shot” strategy on behalf of her party in an attempt to keep the Democrat-leaning seat in Republican hands. In November 2022, Peña had more votes than either of her Democrat opponents with 12,850, compared to 10,101 for Sandoval and 8,030 for Jesus Lugo Jr.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
The Scottsdale-based national homebuilder, Taylor Morrison, is accused of attempting to silence a home inspector over his viral videos exposing what he says are poor and even dangerous workmanship.
The inspector, Cyril (Cy) Porter, has accrued nearly 1.2 million followers collectively across Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, and YouTube for his informational videos. Porter operates independently through his company, CyFy Home Inspections. A number of the homes he finds fault with were approved by city or county inspectors.
A Taylor Morrison representative, “Jennifer,” filed a complaint with the State Board of Technical Registration (SBTR) against Porter in April according to public records. Taylor Morrison sought disciplinary action against Porter, as well as a requirement that he delete past videos and cease posting his exposés in the future.
During its hearing on Tuesday, SBTR voted against taking disciplinary action against Porter, however they also voted against dismissing the claim. SBTR issued a nondisciplinary letter of concern against Porter.
Taylor Morrison accused Porter of three violations: fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, or concealment of material facts in advertising, or soliciting; use of derogatory sexualized terms for female professionals; and endorsing products for profit.
“Taylor Morrison would like Cyril Porter, on behalf of himself and his companies, to stop posting any videos to social media about Taylor Morrison. This request includes using, showing, typing, or tagging them by name, logo, signage, and/or image for any purpose, intended to or reasonably expected to identify the builder, including but not limited to, using their tag lines or wearing t-shirts in social media postings with a version of their name. This conduct is unrelated to actual home inspecting and is actually advertising that violates BTR standards. Taylor Morrison also requests that past videos be removed. In addition, Taylor Morrison would like Registrant disciplined for his harassing, falsified, and bullying advertising/social media posting that does not serve his clients or the public, his taking payment in product endorsements, and his use of repeated sexually suggestive references to female professionals in his videos. Finally, Taylor Morrison would like it made clear that retaliation for bringing this complaint will not be tolerated by the BTR.”
Porter’s work, showcased by his viral videos, has resulted in his being booked out through most of 2026.
A number of commenters have asked Porter if he had any builders that he recommended. Porter said no, that “all [builders are] the same,” referring to poor and even dangerous workmanship.
In a statement provided to 12 News earlier this summer, Taylor Morrison called Porter’s social media posts “sensationalist” and unprofessional.
“While we have no issue with the home inspections Cy Porter conducts, we do believe his advertising through sensationalist social media postings violates the professional conduct standards set forth by the Board of Technical Registration, which licenses and regulates home inspectors, and we trust the board to review and make an assessment,” said the company.
Even in million-dollar new homes, Porter documents often finding and struggling to have builders resolve: improperly installed, inadequate, or damaged A/C units, ducts, stucco, counters, trusses, electrical, cabinets, doors, showers, tubs, toilets, sinks, roofing, flooring, furnaces, water heaters, walls, plumbing, rain caps, and windows; and trash and debris inside the build or left around the property.
Many of the issues Porter finds are more than just cosmetic issues: they pose major health and safety hazards. At times, builders have attempted to prevent Porter from accessing certain areas of the home for inspection, namely roofs and attics.
In addition to Taylor Morrison, Porter has documented the poor practices and/or workmanship of Alamar, Brightland Homes (Gehand), D.R. Horton, Express Homes, Fulton Homes, Homes by Towne, KB Home, Landsea Homes, Lennar, Meritage Homes, Richmond American Homes, Shea Homes, and Starlight Homes.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Democrats are trying to win a Republican-leaning legislative seat in the southern Arizona area with a candidate who has been endorsed by several progressive organizations.
Kevin Volk is running for the Arizona House of Representatives in Arizona Legislative District 17. Volk was the only Democrat running in the primary for the chamber as his party attempts a ‘single-shot’ strategy to win enough votes for a first or second-place finish in November’s General Election. He obtained 26,330 votes in the July 30 Primary Election.
While my primary was uncontested, it is humbling to have received over 26,000 votes, and to become the Democratic nominee to represent Legislative District 17 in the Arizona State House.
On his campaign website, Volk lists several endorsements from left-leaning organizations for his bid to ascend to the state House, including the National Organization for Women Arizona Political Action Committee, the Arizona Education Association, the Sister District Project, Moms Demand Action, Human Rights Campaign PAC, Climate Cabinet, and the Sierra Club.
Should Volk manage to win a seat in the Arizona House, his endorsement from the Arizona Education Association (AEA) shows that he would likely join with this organization and his fellow Democrat colleagues to undermine – and even dismantle – the state’s historic opportunities for school choice and educational freedom. The AEA has been a staunch opponent of the Arizona Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESA) program, which has unlocked a chance for tens of thousands of students around the state to receive the education that best unleashes their learning abilities.
On June 18, the AEA posted, “Happy to be endorsing John McLean and Kevin Volk in LD 17. This is a vital district to win to achieve a pro-education majority in the state legislature, and we’re so glad to have two strong advocates for public education and for Arizona working families in the race!
Happy to be endorsing @JohnMcLean4AZ@KevinVolkAZ in LD17. This is a vital district to win to achieve a pro-education majority in the state legislature, and we're so glad to have two strong advocates for public education and for Arizona working families in the race! pic.twitter.com/jzNe826ayd
The Pima County Democratic Party cheered on the endorsement of Volk from the AEA in a post on X, writing, “This is simple. Kevin Volk and John McLean are champions for the public schools in Marana, SaddleBrooke, Picture Rocks, Tanque Verde, Rita Ranch, East Side, Tucson, and Oro Valley. Good public schools benefit all of us, and all of our community.”
— Pima County Democratic Party (@PimaDems) June 18, 2024
While not on his website, on May 7, Volk also acknowledged an endorsement of his campaign from Save Our Schools Arizona, another organization committed to the end of ESAs and other mediums of school choice in the state. He wrote, “Thank you, Save Our Schools Arizona for your endorsement! As a former public school teacher, I believe that all children in Arizona – more than 90% of whom attend public schools – deserve an excellent education, and that means making sure that our schools are fully funded and fully staffed.”
Thank you @arizona_sos for your endorsement! As a former public school teacher, I believe that all children in Arizona – more than 90% of whom attend public schools – deserve an excellent education, and that means making sure that our schools are fully funded and fully staffed. https://t.co/7jQfAY9eSF
Earlier this year, in April, Volk announced that he had obtained the endorsement of Sister District Project, which has targeted Arizona to help Democrats win competitive races around the state. The organization states that it “prioritize[s] endorsing where we can build momentum at the bottom of the ticket to decrease roll-off in naturally higher turnout environments with strategic higher-ticket Democratic opportunities.”
I am proud to have received the endorsement of @Sister_District, a national organization that is dedicated to helping state legislative candidates in the most critical battleground districts in the country. #LD17
To receive an endorsement from Sister District Project, Volk, like all other candidates who have been endorsed by the organization, had to agree to a six-prong policy plank, including more gun control policies and protection against climate change.
Volk’s support from Sister District Project and its devotion to the radical beliefs around the issue of climate change closely mirrors an endorsement of the LD 17 Democrat candidate from another climate-oriented organization, Climate Cabinet. This organization thanks a number of other likeminded partners – one of which is the Sierra Club Grand Canyon Chapter.
Voters might find it hard to decipher what Volk believes (or does not believe) thanks to his nonexistent record, but as with the endorsements he has received and announced, there are concerning signs that he would be an unwavering vote for the Democrat Party in the Arizona Legislature. In an opinion piece for the Tucson Daily Star on March 6, Volk wrote against an election integrity proposal from Republican Representative Rachel Jones, stating that her legislation would mean that “politicians in our state could potentially choose the winner of the presidential election – regardless of your vote.” He added, “Bypassing Arizonans’ votes for president does not secure elections, it silences voters. I believe that Arizonans, not politicians, should help decide who the next president is.”
However, Volk’s sentiments appear to be hypocritical when it comes to recent actions from his own party at the top of the ticket, where President Joe Biden stepped aside from the votes of millions of Democrats around the country, including Arizonans, after an overwhelming crescendo of voices from his party’s elite forced his hand. What Volk raged against in the southern Arizona publication became reality, not with a Republican policy, but actually with his party’s presumed and eventual nominee who was elected by the votes of political delegates in Chicago, Illinois – not the votes of Arizonans and other men and women from states around the United States.
According to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, Legislative District 17 has an 8.34% vote spread between Republicans and Democrats in the last nine state elections. In those nine elections, Republicans have won all nine contests.
Volk will face off in the November General Election against Republicans Cory McGarr and Jones, who are both incumbent State Representatives. McGarr and Jones emerged over Anna Orth in the July Primary Election.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma filed an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit against Arizona State University and the Arizona Board of Regents for “unlawfully mandating racist DEI training for faculty.” The lawsuit was brought by Dr. Owen Anderson and the Goldwater Institute. The Arizona Board of Regents brought a motion to dismiss the case, which Petersen and Toma are urging the court to reject.
In the text of the brief, Petersen and Toma establish first and foremost that the case brought by Goldwater and Dr. Anderson “is a civil rights case,” citing Arizona Revised Statutes “enacted in part to prohibit discriminatory state and local government practices, including conduct that could qualify as, or lead to, a discriminatory work environment and even liability for the State.”
Sharing the brief, the Arizona Republican Party wrote in a post to X, “We refuse to normalize discrimination in higher education, or anywhere in the state of Arizona.”
🚨ICYMI: DEI or "Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion" is simply discrimination under another name, and we won't tolerate your tax dollars supporting radical left ideology that provides preferential treatment for individuals based on race, skin color, or sex.
As reported by Goldwater, the crux of the complaint by Dr. Anderson is that Arizona State University is using taxpayer funds to mandate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion training among the university’s faculty. And that Dr. Anderson’s refusal to participate in the inherently discriminatory training has left him open to discipline from his superiors.
“I shouldn’t be forced to take training and affirm ideas with which I disagree as a condition of employment,’” Dr. Anderson said. “This ‘training’ is simply racism under the guise of DEI. It goes against my conscience, and I want no part of it.”
Goldwater Staff Attorney Stacy Skankey noted, “Arizona state law prohibits mandatory training for state employees and use of taxpayer resources to teach doctrines that discriminate based on race, ethnicity, sex, and other characteristics.”
“But the ‘ASU Inclusive Communities’ training teaches discriminatory DEI concepts, including things like ‘how…white supremacy [is] normalized in society,’ how to ‘critique whiteness’; ‘white privilege’; ‘white fragility’; and the need for ‘transformative justice.’ Even ‘seemingly innocuous questions and comments’—like asking people where they’re from or commenting on their hair—can be deemed ‘racist.’”
Skankey and co-counsel Parker Jackson, representing Dr. Anderson, alleged in the complaint that the Arizona Board of Regents and ASU are “using public money to prepare and disseminate mandatory faculty and staff training for its employees that presents forms of blame or judgment on the basis of race, ethnicity or sex, in violation of state law.” They add that the University is “compelling the speech of public employees by requiring faculty and staff to take an examination following a training that presents forms of blame or judgment on the basis of race, ethnicity or sex, and answer with Arizona State University’s ‘correct’ answers, in violation of the Arizona Constitution.”
The training included slides containing these objectively racial and gender discriminatory statements and concepts:
“[A]cknowledging the history of white supremacy and the social conditions for it to exist as a structural phenomenon.”
“How is white supremacy normalized in society.”
“[G]iven the socio-historical legacy of racism, sexism, homophobia and other forms of structural inequality, perceptions of authority and control are not always granted to minoritized [sic] faculty.”
“White Fragility.”
“What is White Privilege, Really.”
“Explaining White privilege to a broke white person… .”
“7 Ways White People Can Combat Their Privilege.”
“Racism … can take the form of … and include seemingly innocuous questions or comments, such as asking people of color where they are from … .”
“Sexual identities are linked to power, and heterosexuality, the dominant sexual identity in American culture, is privileged by going largely unquestioned.”
A video segment of the training includes the statements via transcript:
“[I]t scares people to talk about white supremacy or to be called a white supremacist. But if we start thinking about it in terms of whiteness as something that is culturally neutral and we’re moving it from that neutral space into a critical space.”
“[W]e also have to open the space to critique whiteness.”
“[W]hite supremacy … referring to here is the period between the 1500’s and the 1800’s that encompasses both Spanish colonization and Euro American colonization. And what colonization did, was it really created this system of binary thinking. There were folks that were inherently good and folks that were inherently bad, and that led to the systems of superiority that were then written into the foundation documents of our nation.”
The original complaint summarizes: “The Inclusive Communities training provides discriminatory concepts including, but not limited to: white people are inherently racist and oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; heterosexuals are inherently sexist and oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; white people should receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of their race or ethnicity; white people bear responsibility for actions committed by other white people; land acknowledgement statements are a way of holding one race or ethnicity responsible for the actions committed by other members of the same race or ethnicity; transformative justice calls for an individual to bear responsibility for actions committed by other members of the same race, ethnic group or sex; and dominant identities (whites or heterosexuals) are treated morally or intellectually superior to other races, ethnic groups or sexes.”
Skankey explained, “ASU is essentially forcing its employees to agree to a certain type of speech, which violates the Arizona Constitution’s broad protections for free speech.”
Speaking with Fox & Friends in March, Dr. Anderson explained, “I was told I need to ‘decolonize my classroom.’”
In a statement responding to the lawsuit, an ASU spokesman told Fox producers, “The Goldwater Institute suit misleads the court and misrepresents both the content and requirements of this training to make an argument the represents a political perspective but is not based on the law. ASU’s commitment to providing a support and welcoming educational environment for students of all backgrounds will continue and the university will respond appropriately to the Institute’s tactic.”
The case is currently awaiting a response from the Arizona Board of Regents.
The town of Gilbert has named a new Chief Digital Officer to oversee the Office of Digital Government (ODG), mired in controversy earlier this year over its speech-monitoring practices.
According to public records shared with AZ Free News, the town selected Kandice Kwan to take over for Dana Berchman, who resigned in February in relation to ODG’s monitoring and occasional punishment of employees’ online speech.
Under Berchman, ODG would contact various departmental leadership about employees’ online speech if it ran counter to progressive ideals (namely support for Black Lives Matter or LGBTQ ideology) or was critical of their department. Internal messaging from Berchman alluded that she maintained a dossier of town employees’ social media activity.
As reported, Berchman would post publicly and often her support of Democratic candidates and progressive issues such as abortion, gun control, and same-sex marriage.
In response to the reporting on ODG’s practice, the town issued a statement (likely from ODG) defending the speech monitoring and restrictions.
“The town has been clear that we will not tolerate divisive, offensive, or culturally insensitive posts from employees purporting to represent the town,” said the public statement. “There is not further need to address the false claims from anyone, including disgruntled former employees.”
For nearly a decade, Kwan has worked for R&R Partners, an advertising, marketing, and public affairs firm. Among their clients are Avnet, Anheuser-Busch, Boeing, Ford, Facebook, Honeywell, Los Vegas Convention and Visitors Association, and Signature Aviation. Prior to that, Kwan worked as the digital marketing director for the Valley’s popular Fox Restaurant Concepts.
Based on her limited online footprint, it appears that Kwan’s political ideologies, like her predecessor, are left-leaning.
In the wake of the racial upheaval prompted by George Floyd’s death in 2020 and both physical and social attacks on Asians early on in the pandemic, Kwan implied in a 2021 article that white individuals needed to become better allies to minorities, such as acknowledging and becoming educated on biases.
“We’re asking to stand together to #stopasianhate. We’re asking you to stand #insolidarity with the AAPI community, the Black community and all other marginalized communities,” said Kwan.
Kwan supported prolonged shutdowns of businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to her social media activity.
“[Governor Doug Ducey] is part of the reason of [sic] why we are having the ‘second wave’ due to opening businesses too early,” commented Kwan on a June 2020 news article. “Now, businesses are having to close proactively due to the spike in cases. Shame on you Governor Doug Ducey.”
Kwan will take over ODG on September 16, according to a letter from the town sent earlier this month.
Per that letter, Kwan’s starting salary will be $170,000, a decrease from Berchman’s $200,800. Under Berchman, ODG staff salaries amounted to over $1.15 million a year.
After resigning from ODG, Berchman launched her own marketing firm, Oh, hi! Communications. Berchman’s firm received endorsements from Arizona League of City and Towns deputy director Rene Guillen and former Gilbert Mayor Jenn Daniels.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
