The Maricopa County Elections Department spent $10,000 on two of the same custom ballot mascots last February, according to records. That price is within the normal range of costs associated with custom mascots – they typically cost several thousands of dollars. In a statement to AZ Free News, Maricopa County Elections Department spokeswoman Megan Gilbertson explained that the mascot was necessary to mitigate updates to the elections equipment and the fresh outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
With a new ballot style, new equipment and a global pandemic, Maricopa County wanted a way to ensure voters had the information they needed to successfully and safely participate in elections in 2020. Voter education can help keep polling place lines shorter by providing voters with critical details about election deadlines and important election information. The Elections Department and Recorder’s Office created BeBallotReady. Vote, a customized dashboard where voters can find election information and deadlines, sample ballots, voting locations, information about the new ballot and equipment, and more. Along with the dashboard, the County launched a coordinated campaign to inform voters about the new ballot and equipment as well as direct information about the 2020 elections. The spokesperson of the campaign was Phil the Ballot. The mascot costume was used in all of our videos and graphics during the election and has become a beloved and well liked figure of Maricopa County elections.
The department’s invoice was dated February 27, 2020. At that point, only one case of COVID-19 was discovered in Maricopa County at the end of January: an Arizona State University (ASU) student who’d traveled to Wuhan, China. Additional cases weren’t reported on widely until March, and the first known community spread case wouldn’t occur for over another week.
The county also told AZ Free News that they weren’t going to use the mascot, named “Phil the Ballot,” at any of their polling locations because photography isn’t allowed within 75 feet of any polling location.
Behind the scenes at the Election Department. We're preparing all ballot envelopes dropped off today for signature verification. Thank you to all of our election workers who helped to #BeBallotReady. pic.twitter.com/KZ75ayuf6r
— Maricopa County Elections Department (@MaricopaVote) November 3, 2021
According to the invoice, each mascot cost $4,450. The carrying bag set to hold both Phil the Ballot mascots cost $300, and the cooling system and fan for the costume cost $530 altogether. Shipping totaled nearly $464.
However, the elections department did get a discount of $200 for purchasing two of the same costume. The mascots came from Ohio-based Promo Costumes.
Phil the Ballot appears in instructional or informational videos posted by the department on YouTube. These videos cover various topics, such as how to request a one-time ballot or how to locate a voting center. One of Phil the Ballot’s videos published several weeks before the 2020 presidential election even discussed how Sharpies could be used to mark ballots.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Arizona Democratic Party paid Colleen Wachenfeld – a Delta Gamma sorority girl and Virginia Democratic Party staffer who posed as a white supremacist at a recent campaign event for Republican gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin, dubbed “Tikigate” – nearly $19,700 to campaign for Mark Kelly over the course of four months last year.
According to the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Wachenfeld was on the Arizona Democratic Party’s payroll from mid-July to the end of November. Though Wachenfeld’s resident city and state for payments were listed as Basking Ridge, New Jersey, social media pictures confirmed she was in Arizona during the months that the Arizona Democratic Party paid her.
The Arizona Democratic Party didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment. As for Wachenfeld: she has not denied or affirmed her involvement in the stunt, though immediately after social media users identified her as a participant she attempted to disguise her identity on Twitter multiple times, rebranding her handle into names such as “rachelanne1776” and adopting random pictures for her profile and header before deleting the account, then reinstating it and ultimately making all of her social media pages private. She appears to live in Arizona currently, as indicated by her updated Twitter bio.
Wachenfeld was admitted into the competitive School of Public Affairs (SPA) leadership program at her alma mater, the D.C.-based American University. In addition to that program, Wachenfeld was an active member of the Beta Epsilon chapter of Delta Gamma, a national sorority.
Students involved in American University like Wachenfeld could expect to pay around $4,000 or more for four years of sorority membership, not including expenses like uniforms, Big-Little gifts, and philanthropies. (The Beta Epsilon chapter claimed their dues were on par with other sororities on campus, and Phi Mu’s dues totaled around $4,000.)
We inquired with Delta Gamma and the Beta Epsilon chapter whether Wachenfeld’s actions were consistent with their goal and motto to “do good,” and what their standards were for admitting women because, as sororities and fraternities often say, membership lasts for a lifetime. Neither responded by press time.
Wachenfeld’s chapter expressed a steadfast commitment to anti-racism following George Floyd’s death last year. They partnered with the Kentucky-based Muhammed Ali Center to reform their chapter based on diversity, equity, social justice, and the like, applying some of funds from those $4,000-odd memberships to pay for the program.
“With the help of the Ali Center in Louisville, Kentucky, we are developing a program that focuses on racial justice, identities of privilege and oppression, positive social change, and building inclusive and equitable communities. Through workshops, active dialogue, and policy creation, we are working to become actively anti-racist. We have allocated a portion of our chapter operating budget to implement this program, and look forward to finding more meaningful ways to support the Muhammad Ali Center and utilize them as a resource throughout the course of our partnership and beyond.”
During the spring of her senior year, Wachenfeld served a short stint as an intern for Democratic New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, who endorsed Terry McAuliffe as Youngkin’s Democratic opponent. Several months later, Wachenfeld graduated magna cum laude from American University with a B.A. in public relations and strategic communication.
One faculty member at American University’s Washington College of Law shares the same surname as Wachenfeld: adjunct professor Margaret Wachenfeld. She didn’t respond to AZ Free News multiple requests for comment, either.
Democratic Party of Virginia Executive Director Andrew Whitley claimed that none of their staff members were involved in the stunt. Whitley appeared to be rebuking those who claimed Wachenfeld’s involvement.
“The Democratic Party of Virginia, along with its coordinated partners and affiliates, did not have any role today in the events that happened outside of the Youngkin campaign bus stop today. What happened in Charlottesville four years ago was a tragedy and one of the darkest moments in our state’s recent memories and is an event not to be taken lightly. For anyone to accuse our staff to have a role in this event is shameful and wrong.” (emphasis added)
Charlie Olaf, Terry McAuliffe’s social media manager, retweeted images of the purported “white supremacists” at the Youngkin event with heavy criticism. As of press time, Olaf’s Twitter profile was set to private. Olaf also updated his bio to read: “I’m sorry,” with his location also set to read, “I’m sorry.”
“Wow. At a campaign stop for Glenn Youngkin this morning, people were holding tiki torches and chanting ‘we’re all in for Glenn,’” tweeted Olaf. “Disgusting reference to the 2017 Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville.”
Several other McAuliffe staffers tweeted similar condemnations that they later deleted: spokeswoman Christina Freundlich, and communications aide Jen Goodman.
“The Unite the Right rally was one of the darkest days in the Commonwealth’s history,” wrote Freundlich. “This is who Glenn Youngkin’s supporters are.”
“This is disgusting and disqualifying,” wrote Goodman.
The Lincoln Project, a Never-Trump group, claimed responsibility for the stunt. They didn’t name the operatives involved. The FEC didn’t show any payments from the Lincoln Project to Wachenfeld.
“Today’s demonstration was our way of reminding Virginians what happened in Charlottesville four years ago, the Republican Party’s embrace of those values, and Glenn Youngkin’s failure to condemn it,” wrote the organization. “The Youngkin campaign is enraged by our reminder of Charlottesville for one simple reason: Glenn Youngkin wants Virginians to forget that he is Donald Trump’s candidate. We will continue to hold Glenn Youngkin accountable. If he will denounce Trump’s assertion that the Charlottesville rioters possessed ‘very fine’ qualities, we’ll withdraw the tiki torches. Until then, we’ll be back.”
One social media user noted that while both Wachenfeld and another accused of participating in the Tikigate stunt, Camden Layton, were following the Virginia Democrats on Instagram, neither were following the Lincoln Project.
Camden Layton and Colleen Wachenfeld both follow Virginia Democrats on Instagram. Neither follow The Lincoln Project ? pic.twitter.com/sH6JAYx997
According to the Peace Corps, the University of Arizona (UArizona) ranked sixth in the top ten for institutions offering graduate degree financial aid for returned volunteers. UArizona had a total of 48 students enrolled.
UArizona’s ranking was determined by enrollment in the Paul D. Coverdell Fellows Program: an opportunity for Peace Corps volunteers to receive financial aid for a graduate degree, becoming Coverdell Fellows. Another perk includes the potential to obtain up to three years of an extended noncompetitive eligibility (NCE) status for federal employment, which Peace Corps volunteers normally enjoy for 12 months. NCE status ensures that returned Peace Corps volunteers are given an edge in the hiring process.
Eligible Peace Corps volunteers are those who complete a full two years of service, are given “completion of service” or “interrupted service” status, medically separated, or Response or Global Health Services Partnership Volunteers that complete 12 months of service in a 24-month period.
The other universities ranked in the top ten were as follows, in order: American University, University of Denver, Brandeis University, Middlebury Institute of International Studies, Emory University, John Hopkins University, Carnegie Mellon University, Duke University, and the Teachers College of Columbia University.
In a press release, Peace Corps Acting Director Carol Spahn explained that these universities put Coverdell Fellows on track to continue their volunteer service while obtaining higher education.
“We are grateful to partner with these universities to support our returned volunteers as they work toward their academic goals and continue their commitment to lifelong service,” said Spahn. “A graduate degree, in combination with the perspective and skills gained through Peace Corps service, enables returned volunteers to become and inspire our next generation of global leaders.”
UArizona also achieved a similar distinction last February at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, ranking 17 out of the top 20. Over 120 universities and colleges across 38 states accommodate Coverdell Fellows, totaling over 200 programs amounting to over 300 graduate and postgraduate degrees.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled against the state’s mask mandate ban challenged by the Arizona School Boards Association (ASBA). The court noted that while it didn’t agree with the lower court’s reasoning completely, it did concur with the judgment. An opinion will be issued in the near future. Justice Kathryn King recused herself; Court of Appeals Judge Randall Howe took her place. Roopali Desai argued on behalf of the plaintiffs, ASBA, while Attorney General Mark Brnovich’s Solicitor General Beau Roysden argued on behalf of the defense, the State of Arizona.
In September, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Katherin Cooper ruled that ASBA had standing to challenge the mask mandate ban of SB 1819. The court also ruled that the SB 1819 was entirely unconstitutional and therefore invalid because it contained more than a single subject. In addition to SB 1819, the court also invalidated certain provisions in HB 2898, SB 1824, and SB 1825 on the grounds that they violated the Arizona Constitution’s title requirement: the titles of those bills didn’t accurately reflect the content of the legislation. As a result, 58 provisions of state law were invalidated prior to their start date on September 29.
During the hearing, the judges went back and forth with Roysden over whether the challenged laws truly did violate the single subject and title requirements. Their questions to Desali largely indicated a concern with how they were going to uphold Cooper’s prior ruling without overstepping into their bounds as the judiciary.
Roysden argued that plaintiffs weren’t showing a concrete and particularized injury from SB 1819. Vice Chief Justice Ann Timmer challenged that repeatedly, saying plaintiffs merely had to show they were affected by the issue at hand.
Roysden then argued that the court’s ruling on SB 1819 would be historic because no other laws in state history were struck down based on an interpretation of single subject and title requirements like the superior court gave.
“I think this is a watershed moment in Arizona Constitutional law because I’ve surveyed the case law […] – there is no case in Arizona law where this court has struck down a provision because the substantive provisions were not sufficiently interrelated. This would be uncharted territory by the court,” said Roysden. “What the court has enforced uniformly – going back to 1916 all the way up through the late 1970s cases – is the title requirement, and that is what the court must consider and limit its judicial review. The purpose of the title requirement is a procedural rule to put the public on notice of the potential contents of an act may be.”
Roysden also argued that the questions decided on by the superior court weren’t within the court’s function anyway. He said that the courts could decide whether legislation abided by the single subject and title rules – but not whether the provisions within the legislation were interrelated enough to qualify within those single subject and title rules. Roysden cited the intent of the constitutional convention delegates.
Desai argued that the legislature didn’t offer adequate notice or proper information on legislative content to the public. She characterized the state’s argument as requesting sole discretion on deciding what abides by the title and single subject rule.
“That could lead to some very problematic results. What’s to say the legislature doesn’t say that about every act that they pass?” asked Desai.
Timmer asked how the court could rule on this issue without overstepping their constitutionally-drawn bounds as the judicial branch. Justice William Montgomery echoed that question.
“Just how strict do you expect us to be in this regard? Because this does affect the legislature going forward?” asked Montgomery.
Desai responded that the term “budget reconciliation” was a “term of art” – a narrow, concrete definition – and that the legislature shouldn’t get to decide the standards for satisfying title requirements and the single subject rule. She said that the legislature was “throwing the Constitution out the window.”
“The test is not whether it relates to the budget. The test is whether it’s a budget reconciliation provision,” said Desai. “[B]udget reconciliation is a provision that is necessary to carry out and effectuate the budget.”
Montgomery challenged Desai on this point, asking whether that was what the state legislature did when issuing limitations for use of the budget funds. Desai responded that it wasn’t a budget reconciliation provision.
“In this case, the legislature chose a very narrow title,” asserted Desai. “We have to decide what these things mean. The court doesn’t have to come up with its own definition or adopt the stretch of an argument the state is advocating for because budget reconciliation is a term of art that is clearly understood.”
Desai then further argued that the court shouldn’t attempt to salvage certain provisions of SB 1819 because there was no way of knowing if the legislature would’ve passed them on their own, sans the logrolling. This is something that Chief Justice Robert Brutinel vocalized as Desai was making the argument; her agreement prompted a pleased look and chuckle from Brutinel.
In closing arguments, Roysden clarified that the original purpose and intention of the title requirement was to notify and not intentionally mislead the public. Howe challenged him several times on this argument, stating that Roysden’s position was that it was only for the state legislature to decide what constituted compliance with the constitutional rules on single subject and title requirements for bills.
Roysden urged the judges to not apply their ruling retroactively, but rather to allow the legislature to adjust accordingly in the future.
“The history here is that the legislature in good faith has followed what the court has suggested, and that should continue,” said Roysden.
In a statement after the hearing, Governor Doug Ducey expressed that he was “extremely disappointed” with the ruling.
“There are three separate co-equal branches of government and we respect the role of the judiciary, but the court should give the same respect to the separate authority of the legislature,” stated Ducey.
Nearly $75 billion in federal COVID-19 funds was allocated to the State of Arizona, its local governments, businesses, and individuals between March 2020 and October 2021. Of that, more than $4.4 billion went to improper unemployment insurance claims because anti-fraud measures were not utilized by a state agency, according to a special report issued by the Arizona Auditor General.
The questionable payments by the Arizona Department of Economic Security were from federal funds provided through the CARES Act, one of six Congressional acts and one Presidential memorandum that resulted in $74.9 billion being allocated within Arizona for response and recovery efforts stemming from the pandemic.
For purposes of the special report, the term allocated refers only to funds set aside, not necessarily spent.
The payment of fraudulent claims from the federal COVID-19 funding is not the only concern raised by the Auditor General. Another is the potential future adverse impact caused by the fact the Arizona Department of Administration was 29 days late in submitting a required audit report to a federal audit clearinghouse.
“The late report submission was primarily because State agencies experienced personnel and resource challenges throughout the year responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, including administering the COVID-19 federal program monies and navigating their new requirements,” the report noted.
Federal agencies, the report notes, could “potentially” take action against the State and its three universities due to the late reporting.
The Auditor General’s report also highlights how the overall $74.9 million is split between $43.8 billion available directly to individuals, businesses, local governments, and other non-State programs while $31.1 billion in funds is allocated to the State of Arizona and its agencies.
Of the $43.8 billion in federal COVID-19 funding available directly to individuals, businesses, and local governments, a huge hunk ($18.3 billion) was allocated for individual and family assistance. Almost 95 percent of that has already been distributed in the form of various stimulus payments to individuals.
Another $18 billion is earmarked for business aid, most of which was paid out through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and Economic Injury Disaster loans. The remaining $7.5 billion that was already allocated went to things like public health, transportation, and education (for a combined $4.3 billion) and $3.2 billion to local governments for varied purposes, including COVID-19 mitigation efforts.
The Auditor General’s report also took a close look at $6.3 billion spent or distributed from the State’s allocation between March 1, 2020 and June 30, 2020, the end of Fiscal Year 2020.
“We audited these monies as part of the annual compliance audit of federal monies the State spent and distributed, which we performed in accordance with State law and federal regulations, and in conjunction with our audit of the State’s financial statements,” according to the report, which noted the $6.3 billion was a small part of the overall $26.4 billion of various federal funds spent or distributed by the State of Arizona in FY2020.
Of the $6.3 billion, more than 84 percent ($5.3 billion) was for individual and family assistance, while $352 million was allocated for public health programs. There was also $32 million earmarked for education and another $643 million categorized in the Auditor General’s report as for “miscellaneous” usage.
The report also breaks down how the other $24.8 billion allocated to the State of Arizona and its agencies from July 2020 through October 2021 is designated, with the majority $13.1 billion (about 53 percent) again earmarked for individual and family assistance, including $7.1 billion for unemployment insurance benefits.
While most of the unemployment funding had to be spent by Sept. 6, some allocated funds can be spent as late of Sept. 30, 2025, according to the report.
The next largest chunk of COVID-19 funds to the Arizona state government is $5.7 billion for education, including $643.6 million of a direct allocation for the state’s three universities. Again, some of the fundings can be spent through September 2025.
Another $2.8 billion is categorized as “to be determined use” through Dec. 31, 2024. Examples of how those funds can be spent include COVID-19 mitigation efforts and infrastructure.
As to public health, there was $1.9 billion allocated to Arizona from July 2020 through October of this year. The main area of expenditure for these funds is for various COVID-19 “response.” The majority of that allocation does not have to be spent until July 31, 2024.
That leaves roughly $1.3 billion in miscellaneous funding to be spent on things such as transportation, community services, and business assistance. Much of that allocation can be spent as late as Dec. 31, 2024, according to the report.
Not included in the Auditor General’s report is an estimated $4.8 billion of federal COVID-19 related funding which the Arizona Joint Legislative Budget Committee believes was allocated to tribal governments located wholly or partially within Arizona’s geographical boundaries
This week, Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego and Councilwoman Yassamin Ansari are attending the United Nation’s (UN) COP26 Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, Scotland. The conference began Sunday and will last until next Friday. The attendees are meeting with the objective of realizing the Paris Agreement through finalization of the Paris Rulebook and acting on the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Gallego’s spokespersons informed AZ Free News that the city didn’t pay for Gallego’s trip – the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group paid, a global network of nearly 100 mayors that collaborate on climate solutions. In May, Gallego was elected the vice chair for C40’s steering committee.
Ansari’s spokespersons didn’t respond by press time.
Gallego told Business Journal that she would be networking with companies who may potentially invest in the city. In a statement posted to Twitter, Gallego explained that this conference would bring fresh ideas on climate change initiatives to Phoenix, as well as serve as an opportunity to share some of Phoenix’s initiatives, like their cool pavement installations. “Excited to be attending the UN #COP26 Climate Summit. Phoenix is an innovative leader on climate solutions,” wrote Gallego. “We’ll share our success, and learn about successes from cities around the globe. #TogetherForOurPlanet”
Excited to be attending the UN #COP26 Climate Summit. Phoenix is an innovative leader on climate solutions. We’ll share our success, and learn about successes from cities around the globe.#TogetherForOurPlanetpic.twitter.com/q5GkipooHL
Ansari’s message concerning her attendance reflected more urgency, claiming that lives were at stake. “After spending years working to get elected officials to commit to bold climate solutions, I’m heading to Glasgow for #COP26 proud to represent District 7 in Phoenix,” wrote Ansari. “We just passed our #climateaction plan. Lives are at stake— it’s time to implement.”
After spending years working to get elected officials to commit to bold climate solutions, I’m heading to Glasgow for #COP26 proud to represent District 7 in Phoenix.
Prior to her election to city council, Ansari served as a climate advisor for the UN. She attributed her work as crucial to delivering the Paris Agreement in 2015.
6 yrs ago, I helped deliver the #ParisAgreement. Today, I arrived at the @UN#COP26 summit as an elected official from Phoenix, AZ— once dubbed “the world’s least sustainable city.”
Excited to showcase the work we’re leading now & to bring back lessons from cities everywhere. pic.twitter.com/1goMHS4DJx
The pair will discuss Phoenix’s climate initiatives, including their $2.8 million Heat Response and Mitigation Office. The purpose of the office is to reduce the effects of urban heat, a phenomenon in which urbanization causes higher temperatures. Phoenix is the only city that has an office dedicated to these efforts.
Phoenix’s latest climate action plan was approved last month. The city pledged to certain goals, such as becoming 100 percent carbon-neutral by 2050, eliminating all food deserts, and establishing 100 years of clean and reliable water supplies.
The COP26 conference claims that climate change is the greatest threat facing the world. Two of the goals listed were reaching net zero for emissions and limiting global warming by 1.5 degrees. The UN claimed in their promotional video for COP26 that “Earth is sending a message that we must not ignore.” They showed pictures of various natural disasters, mixed with happy scenes from nature.
“What is COP? The potential threat to the surrounding natural environment, what the UN is calling the world’s first climate change famine,” said the conference promotional video. “Even on our warming planet there are reasons for hope. We need to have the courage to try. There are going to be a lot more jobs created in the economy. Climate change is not the problem, climate change is the expression of the problem.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
