Just days after a powerful Arizona government watchdog group threatened possible legal action, the City of Phoenix repealed a controversial ordinance that had passed the previous month.
On Wednesday, the Phoenix City Council voted to repeal the prevailing wage ordinance, 6-3, after a change of two councilmembers. Councilmembers Kesha Hodge Washington, Jim Waring, Ann O’Brien, Kevin Robinson, Debra Stark, and Mayor Kate Gallego voted for the repeal; while Councilmembers Yassamin Ansari, Laura Pastor, and Betty Guardado voted to maintain the ordinance.
After the vote, Mayor Gallego took to Twitter to explain her decision, writing, “Workers deserve a living wage – and we can deliver that through a robust, public process that doesn’t put the city in legal and financial jeopardy. That’s why I voted with a majority of Council to direct city staff to find legally viable ways to increase wages on city projects. I believe in doing things the right way, not the fast way, and that’s what we decided to do today. I am optimistic that we will find a path forward for better pay for construction workers while, at the same time, put sound policy on the books that survives legal challenges.”
Workers deserve a living wage—and we can deliver that through a robust, public process that doesn’t put the city in legal and financial jeopardy. That’s why I voted with a majority of Council to direct city staff to find legally viable ways to increase wages on city projects.
The Goldwater Institute, which had sent a letter to the Council earlier in the month, championed the news out of Phoenix. John Thorpe, a staff attorney with Goldwater, stated, “Yesterday’s repeal is good news for businesses, their employees, and all taxpayers – and it’s a reminder that Goldwater will never stop fighting to hold government accountable and to defend Americans’ economic freedom from burdensome, counterproductive regulations.”
It's a VICTORY for small businesses, minorities, younger workers, and taxpayers! 🎉
The Phoenix City Council repealed its illegal “prevailing wage” ordinance—a mandate that restricts small businesses and imposes burdensome requirements: https://t.co/47D3oNbsI8
Thorpe wrote that the ‘Prevailing Wage Ordinance for City Projects’ law, “introduced on short notice with almost no chance for public scrutiny from anyone it would impact, required businesses that contract with the city for construction projects costing more than $250,000 to follow a slew of new requirements: they would have had to provide their employees with wages and benefits based on complicated formulas produced by the federal government, keep painstaking records, and comply with a host of other rules and regulations. Worse still, all these regulations came with the risk of heavy fines and potentially crippling lawsuits, even for minor infractions.”
On March 21, three Phoenix City Councilmembers – Carlos Garcia, Betty Guardado, and Laura Pastor, sent a letter to City Manager Jeff Barton, requesting a Special Meeting the following day to consider the Prevailing Wage Ordinance for City Projects. The three councilmembers wrote, “We believe it is time for leadership to address the lack of skilled construction workers needed to fill the rising demand for labor in Phoenix. We know that areas of the country with prevailing wages for city projects have a greater supply of apprentices and pathways for young people to find and join a skilled trade. A prevailing wage ordinance for city projects will ensure that our development growth is matched with the skilled labor we urgently need when we invest in the growth of our communities.”
The next day, the Ordinance was approved by a vote of 5-4. Councilmembers Garcia, Guardado, Pastor, Sal DiCiccio, and Yassamin Ansari voted in favor of the Ordinance. Garcia and DiCiccio have since left the Phoenix City Council, being replaced by Kevin Robinson and Kesha Hodge Washington.
On April 13, the Goldwater Institute, representing the Arizona Builders Alliance and the Associated Minority Contractors of Arizona, sent a letter to the Phoenix City Council to “express serious concerns” about the Ordinance passed on March 22. Thorpe, writing again for Goldwater, informed the City that if “the enacted version of the ordinance regulates matters that are expressly pre-empted by state law, it exposes the City to a high risk of litigation.” Thorpe outlined that “when the Legislature enacts a law on a matter of statewide concern, that law pre-empts and overrides any conflicting municipal provision. In this instance, voter-approved state law dating back to 1984 expressly provides that ‘prevailing wage’ requirements for public works contractors are a matter of statewide concern and may not be imposed by municipalities.”
Thorpe also found “it troubling that this ordinance was enacted after providing the public barely twenty-four hours’ notice and without any meaningful input from the many stakeholders it will affect.” He also pointed out that “the final version (of the ordinance) enacted by the Council has not yet been made publicly available,” which he questioned the existence of “any legal authority the City possesses to withhold a duly enacted ordinance from public inspection.”
Democrat Senator Catherine Miranda also waded into the discussion on the City of Phoenix’s action in March, submitting a 1487 request to Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes on April 17, to “clarify the apparent conflict between two statutes and consequently determine whether Phoenix has the authority to enact prevailing wage at the municipal level.”
Before the new coalition voted to repeal the Prevailing Wage Ordinance, another Democrat Senator, Anna Hernandez, voiced her disapproval with Mayor Gallego’s pending action, tweeting, “(Mayor Gallego) is once again turning her back on our union brothers and sisters.” Hernandez also shared an excerpt from a questionnaire that Gallego filled out during her mayoral run, where she wrote, “At the end of the day, prevailing wage laws are good for working families in the city of Phoenix and I will do what I can to support the enforcement of federal prevailing wage law, and advocate for a reintroduction of Arizona’s state or city prevailing wage law.”
As expected, the agenda for today’s Phx City Council mtg added on the Repeal to Prevailing Wage. @MayorGallego opposes this ordinance and has now ensured that it will be repealed with her new council.
Leftist activists beat an effigy of Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego during her annual address last week. The effigy was a piñata filled with candy; on the front was the mayor’s name, and on the back was written “Kate (Sinema) Gallego,” referencing controversial Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ).
The activists situated themselves outside of the venue for her State of the City address, the Sheraton Phoenix Downtown Hotel. They protested the evictions of the residents of several mobile home parks — Periwinkle, Las Casitas, and Weldon Court — as well as their general discontent with Gallego’s administration.
Fueling the activists’ discontent with Gallego was the city’s rejection of a proposal to rezone the contested properties last month. Instead, the city approved $2.5 million to help the displaced residents find new homes.
Two of the principal organizers behind the protest and the effigy beating were residents impacted by the evictions, Alondra Patricia Ruiz Vazquez and Salvador Reza. The protestors livestreamed the beating of Gallego’s likeness to Facebook. The protesters spoke and chanted mainly in Spanish.
“¡Pégale, pégale por la lucha, pégale!” chanted the protestors, which translates roughly to, “Hit it, hit it, for the fight, hit it!”
Members of Maricopa County Young Democrats were also present at the protest.
In a post following the protest, Reza responded to an alleged offense that Gallego took to the destruction of the effigy in her likeness. Reza said that the effigy was symbolic, and that she shouldn’t take offense to it.
“Breaking a piñata with the image of Kate Gallego is not only against her character flaws, but against the greed of large corporations and large universities that [are] not satisfied with what they have, lash out against vulnerable families who only ask for a home to live,” stated Reza. “Breaking a piñata is symbolic. However, losing a home is catastrophic and traumatic for the families who are living it firsthand. Neither the state’s $5,000 nor a handful of piñata candy will be able to compensate them. So, looking at things clearly, who has the most to lose? A politician offended by a piñata, or 150 families thrown with their belongings into the street.”
Symbolic violence against effigies of contested public figures has been a popular move for leftist activists over the past several weeks.
On Tuesday, rioters protesting an event featuring Daily Wire pundit Michael Knowles burned an effigy of him at the University of Pittsburgh.
A body dummy with a picture of Michael Knowles’ face on it has been lit on fire, about a half hour before Knowles is set to participate in an event on Pitt’s campus. Knowles said earlier this year that he believes “transgenderism” should be “eradicated.” @WTAEpic.twitter.com/l1k3TrEkDN
The Maricopa County Public Library is stocking up on controversial LGBTQ+ and anti-racist children’s books.
Children’s books put on display at the libraries included those that teach that systemic racism is real, and that LGBTQ+ lifestyles and ideologies are healthy and cause for celebration.
Several of the LGBTQ+ and anti-racist books offered were board books: thick, durable picture books intended for infants through children up to four years old.
The controversial children’s books included the “Pronoun Book,” “My Two Dads,” “I’m Not a Girl,” “Antiracist Baby,” “Me & My Dysphoria Monster,” “My Maddy, “Call Me Max,” “Sparkle Boy,” “Jacob’s School Play: Starring He, She, and They” “10,000 Dresses,” “Jacob’s Room to Choose,” “Stella Brings the Family,” “Love Makes a Family,” “Lovely,” “Grandad’s Camper,” “What Riley Wore,” “My Rainbow,” “Prince & Knight,” “And Tango Makes Three,” “Mommy, Mama, and Me,” “Julian is a Mermaid,” “King & King,” “One Family,” “In Our Mothers’ House,” “Happy in Our Skin,” “Morris Micklewhite and the Tangerine Dress,” “Jacob’s New Dress,” “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” “Home at Last,” “This Day in June,” “Fred Gets Dressed,” “When Aidan Became a Brother,” “My Shape is Sam,” “Adventures With My Daddies,” “Papa, Daddy, 7 Riley,” “Except When They Don’t,” “Jack (Not Jackie),” “Mr. Watson’s Chickens,” “Old MacDonald Had a Baby,” “Rainbow: a First Book of Pride,” “One of a Kind, Like Me,” “Sam is My Sister,” “A Plan For Pops,” “From Archie to Zack,” “Bye Bye, Binary,” “My Shadow is Pink,” “It Feels Good to Be Yourself,” “The Truly Brave Princesses,” “The Bread Pet,” “Peanut Goes For the Gold,” and “Patrick’s Polka Dot Tights.”
LGBTQ and anti-racist children’s board books featured in a Maricopa County Public Library.
In “Call Me Max,” a little girl dressed like a boy scares another little girl as she enters the bathroom; her peer believes the little girl is actually a boy.
“When I went to the girls’ bathroom, a girl ran out,” read the book. “She thought I was a boy. I didn’t mean to scare her. But I liked that she thought I was a boy.”
In “Me & My Dysphoria Monster,” the protagonist grapples with his gender identity.
“Sometimes people are told they are a boy when actually that person knows they are a girl,” stated the book. “Or sometimes people are told they are a girl when they know they are a boy.”
The book then advises the reader that a “gender dysphoria monster” may visit, and warns that it “doesn’t like to be ignored.” The book teaches the reader that children who ignore this gender dysphoria monster will only result in it growing bigger, and that the only remedy for it is to identify as the opposite gender. The moment of triumph between the little boy and the “gender dysphoria monster” was when he was allowed to join the girls’ soccer team.
In “Antiracist Baby,” children are taught that they must see other people’s races rather than be “color-blind,” that not every race is treated equally in society, and that they should always be watching out for instances of racism. It also included depictions of same-sex couples, teaching that no lifestyles are better or worse.
Some of these controversial books were declared “award-winning” works at one point by the American Library Association’s (ALA) Stonewall Book Awards. The award-granting organization has issued awards for LGBTQ+ works since 1971, but only began issuing awards to children’s and young adult books since 2010.
Awards were granted to: “10,000 Dresses” (2010), “Mommy, Mama, and Me” (2010), “Morris Micklewhite and the Tangerine Dress” (2014), “This Day in June” (2014), “Julian Is a Mermaid” (2019), “When Aidan Became a Brother” (2020), and “Grandad’s Camper” (2022).
Some of the younger children’s books were given special recognition with their inclusion on the 2023 Rainbow Book List, organized by the ALA’s Rainbow Round Table. The list includes nearly 200 books discussing LGBTQ+ ideology published between 2021 to present.
“The importance of this list (and others like it) cannot be understated, especially in a time when we are seeing a record number of efforts to ban both materials and support for LGBTQIA+ young people and their families,” stated the ALA. “The suppression of these books is a detriment to all youth, and we cannot ignore the damage these challenges are having on the young people in our society.”
In addition to the ALA’s Stonewall Book Awards and Rainbow Book List, there’s the Walter Dean Myers Award and the Lambda Literary Award.
Click an image in the gallery below for more images:
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Phoenix City Council declared Indigenous Peoples’ Day an official city holiday, replacing the traditional Columbus Day commemoration.
The holiday, which will take place annually on the second Monday in October, was approved by the council during Wednesday’s meeting.
“Phoenix is proud to recognize the roots on which our city was founded,” stated Mayor Kate Gallego.
Yesterday, the City Council voted to make Indigenous Peoples' Day an official city holiday! Phoenix is proud to recognize the roots on which our city was founded.
The city’s resolution falls in line with the recent precedent set by President Joe Biden. The president first declared the replacement of Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples’ Day in 2021.
Biden’s resolution followed up on a memorandum honoring Native Americans that he issued within the first week of his inauguration. The 2021 resolution declared that Indigenous communities had contributed greatly to American history and culture, and had been disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Biden’s resolution also commended Native Americans for having some of the highest rates of COVID-19 vaccinations.
“History demonstrates that Native American people — and our Nation as a whole — are best served when Tribal governments are empowered to lead their communities and when Federal officials listen to and work together with Tribal leaders when formulating Federal policy that affects Tribal nations,” wrote Biden. “The Federal Government has a solemn obligation to lift up and invest in the future of Indigenous people and empower Tribal Nations to govern their own communities and make their own decisions.”
Biden’s presidential proclamation exists without holiday privileges like bank closures, however. Only a congressional act could establish Columbus Day as an official federal holiday.
Former President Franklin D. Roosevelt announced Columbus Day a national holiday in 1937 to commemorate Italian explorer Christopher Columbus’ landing in the Americas on October 12, 1492, attributed as the discovery of the “New World,” as the Americas were then known.
Christopher Columbus garnered controversy in recent decades for enslaving some of the Native Americans he encountered, as well as the perspective that he encroached and overtook land that wasn’t rightfully his. Efforts to replace Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples’ Day trace back to post-Sexual Revolution movements. In 1977, a United Nations-sponsored conference combating discrimination against Native Americans discussed replacing the holiday.
It wasn’t until the 1990s that cities and states began to recognize Indigenous Peoples’ Day over Columbus Day.
While former Gov. Doug Ducey signed a proclamation in 2020 announcing Columbus Day as Indigenous Peoples’ Day, Phoenix is the first Arizona city to celebrate Indigenous Peoples’ Day. However, Ducey didn’t renew the proclamation by signing another in 2021 or last year.
I’m beyond excited that Gov. Doug Ducey has signed a proclamation declaring October 12th as #IndigenousPeoplesDay in Arizona! I fully support this at the local, state, and federal level, and I’m happy to share we will also recognize Indigenous People’s Day in #Tempe this year! pic.twitter.com/OtCpUrs10B
Some local leaders across the state, such as Pima County Recorder Gabriella Cázares-Kelly, have wished to see greater local support for the holiday. The recorder toldKOLD in 2021 that only her husband, who isn’t Native American, was able to take the day off.
“They had school, I had work, the only person in our household who had today off for Indigenous Peoples’ Day, is my husband, who is not Indigenous,” said Cázares-Kelly.
My husband has Indigenous Peoples' Day off. I'll be working and our kids have class. Our kid,"Wait…So the only non-Indigenous person in this household has Indigenous Peoples' Day off?!" Lol Smh. Next year, I'm taking it off. #IndigenousPeoplesDay#NotAFederalHolidayYet
Tucson voters will be receiving their ballots in the coming days for an upcoming special election, and the single proposition for their consideration is drawing passionate arguments from both supporters and opponents.
Proposition 412 would grant “a franchise to Tucson Electric Power (TEP) Company for the purpose of providing electric transmission and distribution services within the City of Tucson for which the City of Tucson will receive a franchise fee and other consideration.” The “other consideration” comes, in part, in the form of a “Community Resilience Fee” that will fund Tucson’s Climate Action and Adaption Plan, which is an effort to achieve “carbon neutrality for City operations by 2030.” If Tucson voters were to approve the proposition, the agreement would continue until June 1, 2048. (The current agreement ends April 2026.)
Tucson’s Democrat Mayor, Regina Romero, has endorsed Proposition 412, stating, “Please join me in voting YES on Prop 412. Tucson Electric Power is a valued partner in our community’s efforts to fight climate change, and Prop 412 will provide critical support for the City of Tucson’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. Prop 412 extends TEP’s service agreement for another 25 years with citizen oversight and opportunities to revise. Cleaner, greener and more resilient power for Tucson is important to all of us. Prop 412 is a smart investment in creating resiliency for Tucson.”
Joining Mayor Romero in support of Proposition 412 are Senator Rosanna Gabaldón and Representatives Andres Cano, Stephanie Stahl Hamilton, Consuelo Hernandez, and Chris Mathis – among others.
One of the main issues causing contention over this proposal is the insertion of a community resilience fee of 0.75% of all applicable revenues of TEP – in addition to the 2.25% Franchise Fee. This new fee would be collected and disbursed for “funding costs associated with the underground installation of new TEP Facilities or conversion to underground of existing TEP facilities currently installed overhead; and projects that support the City’s implementation of the City’s approved Climate Action and Adaption Plan.” Surprisingly, the fee has picked up opposition from both sides of the political aisle.
Steve Kozachik, a Democrat Tucson Councilman, recently wrote an opinion piece for the Arizona Daily Star, arguing that “we can do better than Prop 412.” He states that “TEP is not coming out of pocket with a single penny to support renewables in Prop 412. You are, in the form of a 0.75% resiliency fee. Let’s be clear. They’re collecting those new dollars from customers, not dipping into their own revenues in support of investing more heavily in climate mitigation and decarbonizing efforts.”
Councilman Kozachik argued that “for the first 10 years the new fee is being collected, 90% of it is earmarked for undergrounding utilities….And yet our climate reality demands much more than the aesthetic of undergrounding new utility lines. A financial commitment from TEP to partner in that larger renewable energy conversation is what’s lacking in the extension of their franchise agreement.” Kozachik suggested that it may not be such a bad thing for this extension to fall short of voter approval in the upcoming election as “it can be placed back on the ballot in either August or November.” He writes that “either date would give the city and the community time to meet and identify ways the utility can demonstrate a larger commitment to addressing extreme heat and how we safely provide electricity using renewable energy sources.”
On the other end of the political spectrum, the Pima County Republican Party urged voters to reject Proposition 412, stating, “There will be a special election May 16, 2023, where the voters will decide if they want to raise their Tucson Electric Power rates to remove some poles and somehow reduce climate change by throwing money at Tucson’s Climate Action Plan.”
Kevin Thompson, a Republican member of the Arizona Corporation Commission, weighed in on the community resilience fee, telling AZ Free News: “Franchise Fees are a routine component of a utility providing service to a municipality, but what isn’t typical is the coupling of a taxpayer supported slush fund to prop up pet projects for the city in the name of fighting climate change.”
The community resilience charge isn’t the only fee that TEP is attempting to pass along to its Southern Arizona consumers. Earlier last year, TEP submitted an application to the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC), proposing a rate increase of 11.8% to take effect no later than September 1, 2023. TEP informed the Commission that “the new rates are intended to result in an increase in retail revenues of approximately $136 million.” According to reports, TEP customers’ bills would increase more than $14 each month should the ACC sign off on the request.
The rate increase before the ACC has earned fierce opposition from the Sierra Club, which recently took a position against TEP’s attempted action. In a March 29th release, the Sierra Club warned “the rate hike would be catastrophic for low-income families who are already hard struck by inflation, and would hurt disadvantaged and frontline communities that often bear a disproportionate air pollution burden.”
Commissioner Thompson is closely watching as both the Special Election and ACC”s decision play out before him. When asked by AZ Free News for his thoughts on these unfolding issues affecting southern Arizona, he said, “Utilities should be approaching state regulators, not courting local governments, when promoting initiatives that may have an impact on the overall reliability and integrity of our power grid.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
A little drama between a member of the Arizona press corps and a state senator marked this week at the Arizona Legislature.
On Thursday, the Arizona State Senate Republican Caucus issued a press release, revealing that “a Coconino County Judge granted Senator Wendy Rogers an Injunction Against Harassment, which was served to a reporter.” That reporter was Camryn Sanchez from the Arizona Capitol Times.
Senator Rogers outlined the reasons for the court order, writing: “Earlier in this legislative session, after the reporter repeatedly invaded my personal space at my desk in the Senate Chamber, I requested that the Senate Sergeant at Arms and staff convey to the reporter that I did not want her to approach me. I didn’t have any further issues with this reporter until this week, when she showed up at two of my Valley homes, multiple times. The latest attempted contact at one of my residences happened Wednesday night. I don’t know this reporter personally, I don’t know what she is capable of, and I don’t believe anyone in their right mind would show up uninvited to my home at night. Therefore, I don’t trust that this person wouldn’t lash out and try to physically harm me in some fashion.”
Earlier Thursday, Rogers tweeted out pictures of a woman standing at what appeared to be multiple homes, stating, “Creepy @azcapitoltimes reporter @CamrynSanchezAZ has been stalking me and my neighbors at my private residences with no explanation. A judge just issued a restraining order against her for her bizarre behavior. See photos.”
Creepy @azcapitoltimes reporter @CamrynSanchezAZ has been stalking me and my neighbors at my private residences with no explanation. A judge just issued a restraining order against her for her bizarre behavior. See photos. pic.twitter.com/ItrWNkxU6t
In a perceived sign of solidarity with Rogers, Senate President Warren Petersen included his own statement in the Republican Caucus’ release, saying, “Our members know that the media will frequently engage with us in order to document the happenings at the Legislature, but everyone deserves privacy in their personal residences without worrying about reporters repeatedly showing up unannounced. A judge, who is a disinterested, non-biased, third-party heard Senator Rogers’ complaint and agreed with her position.”
Rogers opined on her decision to seek the court-issued injunction: “After seeking guidance from my legal counsel, family, and neighbors who are also quite bothered by the attempted contacts, we decided the Injunction Against Harassment would be the best approach. My neighbors should not have had to put up with this harassment either. When I signed up to be a public servant, I understood what the job entailed, including unwarranted harassment. I’m thankful to the judge who recognized the need to issue the restraining order, and I’m hopeful this reporter will heed the warning and stop showing up at my homes or face the full force and effect of law.”
The reporter, Sanchez, was defended by many of her colleagues from around Arizona. Brahm Resnik, a longtime anchor for 12News Phoenix, tweeted, “Sen. Wendy Rogers is playing a very dangerous game in order to stifle a legitimate investigation of her acceptance of taxpayer dollars. Her irresponsible speculation about a reporter’s behavior creates a predicate for Rogers or others to take action against the media.”
Sen. Wendy Rogers is playing a very dangerous game in order to stifle a legitimate investigation of her acceptance of taxpayer dollars. Her irresponsible speculation about a reporter's behavior creates a predicate for Rogers or others to take action against the media. (1/4) https://t.co/WNY5JMqsrq
Jerod MacDonald-Evoy, a reporter with the Arizona Mirror, wrote, “Camryn Sanchez is nothing but professional. Knocking on doors is the most basic J-School 101 reporting technique. Reporters have been doing it forever. If a politician is afraid of a reporter knocking on their door it says more about them than the reporter.”
And Hank Stephenson, a writer for the Arizona Agenda, chimed in with his thoughts: “So I’m thinking press corps caravan to all of Wendy’s houses….How’s Saturday for y’all?”
So I’m thinking press corps caravan to all of Wendy’s houses…
