by Daniel Stefanski | Sep 3, 2023 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Days after an Arizona Republican Senator noted the increasing return of COVID-19 restrictions, another state legislator is doing the same for his constituents.
On Wednesday, Republican Representative Joseph Chaplik released an in-depth statement about the perceived rise in COVID-19 fears and restrictions as the fall season approaches. Chaplik attributed this to “recent media headlines panicking over the latest COVID variant, case numbers, and calls by some for the return of mask mandates.”
Chaplik assured constituents that Arizona laws afforded them more freedom than other states that might be on the verge of bringing back COVID-19 restrictions, writing, “While some states may go in that direction, the good news is that mandates won’t be happening here in Arizona. That’s due in large part to our state adopting common-sense laws to protect against government-imposed mask mandates on private businesses and requirements that children wear masks in public schools.”
The lawmaker pointed to two bills that he previously sponsored – both of which were signed into law by former Governor Doug Ducey over the past couple of years. The first was HB 2770, which empowered “businesses with the freedom to decide whether or not to observe and enforce any mask mandate imposed by government politicians from the state, county, city/town or other jurisdiction in Arizona.” The second was HB 2616, which prohibited “school districts and local governments from requiring minors to wear a mask or face covering without parental consent.” Chaplik called this enacted policy “a victory for parents’ rights and our children’s health.”
HB 2770 was signed into law in April 2021, while HB 2616 received Governor Ducey’s signature in April 2022.
In December 2021, Governor Ducey pointed to HB 2770 to counter reports that the Pima County Board of Supervisors were considering an implementation of a county-wide indoor mask mandate. Ducey tweeted, “Arizona law clearly states businesses are NOT REQUIRED to enforce mask mandates that any city, town, county or other jurisdiction in this state established. Rest assured, this law will not change. It took effect in September, following the signing of House Bill 2770 which echoed an Executive Order.”
Representative Chaplik ended his statement, adding, “Masking mandates imposed on the public didn’t work and certainly weren’t effective at preventing the spread of COVID. Mandates were especially unnecessary for children, the least at-risk population. If an individual chooses to wear a mask, that remains their personal choice, but it should never be mandated by the government. And, thankfully, the public won’t need to contend with new mandates in Arizona because of the action we’ve taken at the state capitol.”
Last week, freshman Senator Janae Shamp sent out a press release, “reminding Arizonans of the safeguards put in place by Republicans at the Legislature to protect against future outrageous overreach and scientifically baseless restrictions.” Shamp referenced both of Chaplik’s aforementioned bills – in addition to two other laws enacted in 2022: A.R.S. 36-681 and A.R.S. 26-303.
Reports have surged about an increase in COVID-19 cases with the spread of the EG.5 (“Eris”), FL.1.5.1 (“Fornax”), and BA.2.86 (“Pirola”). These developments have led to the return of some masking requirements around the nation. In Atlanta, Morris Brown College sent an email to its faculty, staff, and students, announcing the reinstatement of its COVID-19 mask mandate because of “reports of positive cases among students in the Atlanta University Center.” The college also reimposed physical distancing and gathering restrictions on campus.
The movie studio Lionsgate in Los Angeles also brought back its mask mandate for the office, as did Kaiser Permanente for its Santa Rosa (California) hospital and medical offices.
Author and one-time New York Times reporter, Alex Berenson, has also noted the increased attention for the newest wave of COVID-19 cases across the country, pointing to a headline in his former paper about the predictions for rising hospitalizations. Berenson said, “OMG this is the lead headline on the NYT right now. They really are not going to let it go ever ever EVER. I do not understand the game here, truly.”
Another Republican freshman representative at the Legislature, Austin Smith, has also been focused on the potential return of COVID-19 restrictions. Earlier this week, Smith tweeted, “We are not doing the mask thing again. Refuse.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Corinne Murdock | Sep 3, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
A survey conducted in part by Arizona State University (ASU) researchers revealed that a majority of Arizonans, Californians, and Texans oppose “trans rights.”
The survey is the latest from a joint polling project among researchers from ASU, Stanford University, and the University of Houston.
According to the survey, a majority of Arizonans opposed the idea of gender identity dictating bathroom usage by 54 percent, women’s sports participation by 63 percent, and minors receiving gender transition surgery and drugs by 51 percent.
The researchers remarked that this pattern of majority opposition to gender ideology dictating bathroom usage, sports participation, and medical procedures existed from the blue state of California, the purple state of Arizona, to the red state of Texas.
Independents in Arizona — now the largest voting population — opposed gender ideology dictating bathroom usage by 48 percent, women’s sports participation by 65 percent, and minors receiving gender transition surgery and drugs by 46 percent.
Most Democrats in Arizona, as well as Texas and California, believed gender ideology should dictate bathroom usage, but were more evenly divided when it came to participation in women’s sports. Most Democrats opposed bans on gender transition procedures for minors, though there were a higher percentage of those unsure on the issue than their Republican counterparts.
The study also reflected that women were more likely than men to support gender ideology determining bathroom usage, women’s sports participation, and minors receiving gender transition procedures across all three states.
Additionally, those with higher levels of education were more likely to support gender ideology determining bathroom usage across all three states: those with high school degrees were less supportive than those with some college education, and those with some college education were less supportive than those with four years of college education or a postgraduate degree. However, for women’s sports and minors receiving gender transition procedures, no significant differences were noted.
The researchers also reported that the presence or absence of religious beliefs served as a strong indicator whether an individual supported or opposed gender ideology.
“Across the red, purple and blue states of Texas, Arizona and California, residents who regularly attend religious services are significantly more likely than those residents who never attend religious services to support policies that restrict the ability of transgender people to choose which bathroom to use, participate in women’s sporting events, and (for children) receive gender-affirming medical treatment,” stated the survey report.
Over 1,000 Arizonans participated in the survey: the second in a series of five surveys, the first of which was on abortion. There, a majority across all three states expressed support for abortion with little or no restrictions (62 percent of Arizonans, 69 percent of Californians, and 54 percent of Texans).
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Sep 2, 2023 | Education, News
By Corinne Murdock |
Northern Arizona University (NAU) is crediting their largest first-year undergraduate class ever to its equitable tuition program favoring Native American students. NAU reported a 47 percent increase in new Native American undergraduate students, its largest ever.
As AZ Free News reported in February, the tuition program provides free tuition regardless of family income to Native Americans from Arizona’s 22 federally-recognized tribes but requires students of all other races to fall below a certain financial threshold to qualify.
In a press release issued on Monday, NAU President José Luis Cruz Rivera said the admissions boost afforded by the tuition program reflected the university’s ability to spur economic and social mobility.
“The accomplishments and backgrounds of our fall 2023 entering class demonstrates the life-changing opportunity for upward economic and social mobility that NAU’s exceptional academic programs offer, and I am pleased to see so many Arizonans from all walks of life entrust their educational futures to this great university,” said Cruz Rivera.
The program falls under the university’s financial aid program, Access2Excellence (A2E), which launched last April and initially was designed to only provide free tuition for Arizona residents with a household income below $65,000. It wasn’t until last November that the special exception for Native Americans from Arizona tribes came, at the behest of NAU’s Native American Advisory Board.
Cruz Rivera announced the special exception to the program during Native American Heritage Month.
At the time, the university explained the program’s special attention to Native American students was part of a “strategic priority” for serving Indigenous people nationwide. The vice president of the Office for Native American Initiatives, Ann Marie Chischilly, confirmed this equity focus for the free tuition program.
“We are dedicated to being the nation’s leading institution serving the indigenous peoples and providing a clear and affordable pathway to an exceptional education,” said Chischilly.
This fall’s undergraduate class also represented NAU’s largest number of Arizona resident students and Hispanic or Latino students.
The Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR) praised the success of NAU’s free tuition program.
ABOR also highlighted the program in their latest annual report, released last week, as well as NAU’s $5 million pledge to prioritize indigenous people in curriculum and recruitment. The university’s pledge matches the $5 million from the Mellon Foundation.
According to NAU’s fall 2022 enrollment data, there were approximately 1,500 students identifying as American Indian or Alaskan Native.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Sep 2, 2023 | Education, News
By Corinne Murdock |
State Senate President Pro Tempore T.J. Shope (R-LD16) requested an investigation into the Arizona State University (ASU) athletic department.
In a letter to Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR) Chairman Fred DuVal on Wednesday, Shope said that an investigation is warranted into ASU Vice President for University Athletics and Athletics Director Ray Anderson due to years of improprieties and embarrassments.
“Whether looking at the questionable hiring of Mr. Anderson’s friend and former client Herm Edwards as the head football coach, to the multimillion-dollar buyout of Mr. Edwards, to the now self-imposed bowl ban, the raft of improprieties and frankly embarrassing issues that have occurred during Mr. Anderson’s tenure lead one to wonder just what is next and whether anyone is holding anyone accountable,” wrote Shope.
Shope said that student-athletes and coaches have suffered greatly under Anderson’s administration.
“These series of events have become insults to the hardworking student-athletes who are desperate to prove themselves this season, as well as the new coaching staff who are trying to resurrect the program, and ultimately, the Arizonans who wish to take pride in their local universities,” said Shope.
Anderson denied that his office controlled the timing of the Sun Devils’ Sunday announcement of their self-imposed ban over the upcoming bowl, issued five days before the season opener. The ban followed an investigation into allegations that former football coach Herm Edwards had committed multiple recruiting violations.
Back in 2021, The Athletic issued a breaking report that the NCAA was investigating ASU’s football program for hosting high school prospects during the COVID-19 dead period, which lasted from March 2020 to June 2021. That investigation remains ongoing. In a press release announcing the self-imposed bowl ban, Anderson cited the investigation as the reason for their preemptive action.
“In light of the ongoing investigation and our membership obligation to maintain the confidentiality of the matter, we will not be commenting further at this time,” said Anderson.
Shope asked ABOR to look into why ASU paid Edwards $4.4 million in a buyout agreement rather than firing him, and why that buyout, if justified, prompted ASU to wait until this week to impose the bowl ban. Shope also asked ABOR to determine whether ASU intentionally announced the bowl ban after the April 2023 undergraduate transfer portal deadline in order to prevent players from leaving the university.
After Edwards got his ASU buyout, he rejoined ESPN as an NFL and college football analyst.
As noted by Sports Illustrated, ASU issued its self-imposed ban about six weeks after the NCAA Committee on Infractions indicated it would avoid revoking postseason competition for any colleges or universities that break their rules.
The ban also comes several weeks after ASU announced its move to the Big 12 Conference next year, along with University of Arizona and University of Utah. ASU has been part of the Pac-12 Conference since 1978.
Initial celebration over ASU’s move to the Big 12 was promptly clouded by a remark from Anderson that left a bad taste in fellow conferees’ mouths. Anderson said he had no desire to travel to Morgantown, West Virginia for competitions; he later apologized for the remark.
ASU fans and students have also called for Anderson’s firing.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Daniel Stefanski | Sep 1, 2023 | Economy, News
By Daniel Stefanski |
The leader of one of Arizona’s influential organizations for small businesses is breathing a sigh of relief after navigating the first year of a divided government.
Last week, the Arizona State Director for the National Federation of Independent Business, Chad Heinrich, wrote an op-ed for the Arizona Daily Star, looking at the aftermath of the 56th Legislature in relation to how small business owners faired during the extended session.
Heinrich noted that “while several of the bills introduced this past session would have impacted small businesses – some good, some bad – a few did not make it across the finish line in the Legislature, and others fell victim to Governor Katie Hobbs’ veto.”
One of Henrich’s “good” bills was HB 2019, which was sponsored by Representative Travis Grantham. The NFIB-AZ Director stated that “small-business owners who are subject to licensing and permitting regulations at the local government level will benefit from the passage” of this legislation, which was given the nickname of “The Permit Freedom Act.” Henrich explained that “this bill puts in place three safeguards for permit applicants by requiring the local government to provide: 1. Clear criteria for whether a permit will be granted or denied, 2. An explicit deadline for when the government will decide whether to grant or deny the permit, and 3. A meaningful day in court for cases where the applicant thinks the government wrongly denied the permit.”
HB 2019 was signed by Hobbs on April 18, after passing out of the state house with significant bipartisan support.
The report card from Heinrich was not all favorable, however. He praised the “support from our member small-business owners” in helping to “quash several bills that would have been detrimental to small-business owners and their operations.” The two bills Henrich used to illustrate his point were HB 2290 and HB 2555.
According to Heinrich, HB 2290 “sought to impose additional healthcare mandates and thereby would have made healthcare coverage further out of reach for many small-business owners.” Henrich wrote that “small business owners owe a debt of thanks to leaders in the Senate for stepping up and holding firm against this detrimental legislation.”
The other bill on Henrich’s “bad” bills list, HB 2555, “would have mandated that businesses accept cash as form of payment.” Henrich opined that this policy would have “put many different types of businesses at risk – especially those that are located in areas of greater crime risk and those that do business through transactions of larger dollar amounts.” He again thanked the Senate for serving “as the final arbiter,” ensuring that this bill “did not receive a vote of the full Senate.”
In his op-ed, Heinrich also addressed tax increases on small business, highlighting “a few legal guardrails in place in Arizona” that make these actions challenging. He listed two of those guardrails – Prop 108 (passed in 1992) and Prop 132 (passed in 2022) – that give pause to tax increases, whether by the state legislature or the ballot box.
As he closed his op-ed, Henrich encouraged NFIB members to “continue to focus on supporting those who vote with small business on issues that matter within the legislative branch while also keeping close watch on the regulatory environment which is largely governed through the executive branch.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Corinne Murdock | Sep 1, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Republican attorney general candidate Abe Hamadeh may now file his appeal, after months of waiting for a superior court judge to sign his orders.
On Thursday morning, the district court informed AZ Free News that Superior Court Judge Lee Jantzen signed the orders in the case, Kentch v. Mayes (CV-2022-01468). The notification followed the Arizona Court of Appeals’ denial of Hamadeh’s appeal on Wednesday due to lack of timeliness. Vice Chief Judge Randall Howe issued the order.
“The notice of appeal is premature and a nullity because it was filed while the motion for attorney fees was pending and before a final judgment was entered,” stated Howe.
Hamadeh claimed on X that the government has withheld evidence and therefore a new trial is warranted.
“The government’s withholding of evidence in our December trial is unacceptable and warrants a new trial where we will offer evidence showing that Abe Hamadeh, not Kris Mayes received the most votes for the office of Attorney General,” stated Hamadeh.
Earlier this month, Hamadeh petitioned the Arizona Supreme Court for special action. In an order dismissing Hamadeh’s petition, the Arizona Supreme Court directed Jantzen to sign his orders from July and last December. Chief Justice Robert Brutinel issued the order.
“[A]t this point there is no apparent impediment to entering a final judgment, and the trial court should enter a final appealable judgment forthwith,” stated Brutinel.
Brutinel also criticized Hamadeh’s counsel for misrepresenting their efforts made to obtain final judgment; Hamadeh’s counsel has contested that the misrepresentation was unintentional. For that reason, Brutinel wrote that Jantzen couldn’t be fully culpable for failing to exercise discretion in his duty to carry out his responsibilities, and Hamadeh’s team was to cover the attorney fees incurred by the respondents, Attorney General Kris Mayes and Secretary of State Adrian Fontes.
In closing, Brutinel advised the parties on both sides of the case to avoid engaging in emotional language and verbal attacks of the opposition. Brutinel suggested a review of the conduct book, “A Lawyer’s and Legal Paraprofessional’s Creed of Professionalism of the State Bar of Arizona,” specifically the section on treatment of opposing parties and counsel.
“[T]he Court is mindful of the difficulties presented in this extraordinarily close election,” said Brutinel. “Notwithstanding these difficulties, the Court advises both sides to focus on the important legal and factual issues presented here and refrain from disparaging their opponents.”
Yet, after the Arizona Supreme Court advisement, Fontes accused Hamadeh and his team of conducting a misinformation campaign and intending to deceive the public in an interview with The Arizona Republic.
“This decision is a rejection of a misinformation campaign designed to deceive the public and sow distrust in our election officials,” stated Fontes.
One of Jantzen’s unsigned orders was his mid-July ruling denying Hamadeh’s motion for a new trial. The other was his December order putting the ballot exhibits under seal, admitting several exhibits into evidence, and denying any recount of ballots.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
