by Terri Jo Neff | Sep 5, 2022 | Economy, News
By Terri Jo Neff |
Financial eyes are focused on data recently released by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona showing August had the highest number of new filings this year, while also being the first month of 2022 to have more new filings than the same month in 2021.
Bankruptcy filings are considered a lagging indicators of financial stress and economic health, and the number of new filings goes up and down from month to month. However, billions of dollars from various federal stimulus programs have ebbed in 2022, meaning no more Paycheck Protection Program, no CARES stimulus checks to individuals, and the end of the federal foreclosure moratorium.
Some Arizona families and businesses may no longer have a lifeboat, according to commercial debt collection company ABC/Aemga.
“Companies that have struggled throughout the pandemic, but were kept afloat by stimulus money and generous lenders, may face trouble during the rest of 2022 and into 2023 once those funds run out, as the Fed continues to tighten its ultra-loose monetary policy by reducing asset holdings and raising the Fed Funds Rate target, and credit conditions start to tighten,” the company warns.
Sectors such as retail, construction, health care, and certain manufacturers adversely affected by higher raw material and labor costs remain particularly vulnerable, while travel, hospitality, commercial real estate, consumer goods, entertainment, midstream oil and gas, and power and other energy infrastructure also face pressure and uncertainty, according to ABC/Amega.
For the first eight months this year, there were 5,879 new filings statewide, down from 6,765 for the same period in 2021. Slightly more than 12 percent of this year’s new cases were filed pro se, or without legal representation.
If the August pace continues for the rest of 2022 the total filings for the year in Arizona will come close to last year’s total of 9,353. By comparison, there were 12,903 filings in Arizona in 2020 and 16,237 in 2019.
The majority of new cases filed in the state as of Aug. 31 this year were under Chapter 7 (4,803) followed distantly by Chapter 13 (1,029) and Chapter 11 (46). There has also been a lone Chapter 12 filing.
While households and businesses in Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal counties lead in filings of as Aug. 31 at 3,887, 896, 439 respectively, Yavapai and Mohave counties have similar totals at 151 and 146 respectively.
The three border counties of Cochise, Santa Cruz, and Yuma have 80, 42, and 106, respectively. Meanwhile, Apache (4), Coconino (29), Gila (28), Graham (17), Greenlee (3), LaPaz (7), and Navajo (44) represent less than 2.3 percent of all filings in the state as of Aug. 31.
by Terri Jo Neff | Sep 4, 2022 | Education, News
By Terri Jo Neff |
The Arizona Attorney General’s Office has been called on to take immediate action to prevent public school districts from using taxpayer funds in an effort to reduce how many of the state’s K-12 students are eligible for up to $7,000 for educational expenses.
The Goldwater Institute worked earlier this year to expand eligibility for Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program from roughly 11,000 K-12 students to all of the estimated 1.1 million students. Gov. Doug Ducey signed the legislation in July and it takes effect later this month.
However, Democrats and special interest groups, including union organizations, have pledged to stop universal ESAs from becoming a reality. And Arizona’s public school districts appear poised to violate state law to do so, according to Scott Day Freeman, a Senior Attorney for the Goldwater Institute’s Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation.
“Arizonans would rightly be appalled to learn that school districts will be using taxpayer resources to have district employees participate in an event clearly geared toward a political objective: undoing Arizona’s innovative, new universal school-choice program,” Freeman wrote on Aug. 31 to Michael S. Catlett, the Chief Counsel of Special Litigation for Attorney General Mark Brnovich.
In the letter, Freeman outlines the Goldwater Institute’s concern that many of the state’s school districts are poised to use taxpayer dollars to send representatives to a politically motivated meeting later this week at which attendees will be encouraged to help overturn Arizona’s new ESA opportunity.
“Arizona Revised Statute Section 15-511 prohibits school districts from spending or using district school resources to influence the outcomes of elections, including the support or opposition of ballot measures,” Freeman wrote. “But school districts are doing precisely that, and the Attorney General is statutorily empowered to stop it.”
Freeman notes numerous public school district employees plan to attend a “Law Conference” presented by the Arizona School Boards Association at the J.W. Marriott Camelback Inn in Paradise Valley on Sept. 7 through 9 that will include programming by Friends of the ASBA, a 501(c)(4) organization opposed to school choice.
Friends of the ASBA, Freeman wrote Catlett, “will be working at the conference to gather signatures on a petition to overturn the universal school choice reform via ballot referendum.” He added that the ASBA “has brought its political advocacy to a fine point in its upcoming Law Conference.”
The Goldwater Institute is asking the Arizona Attorney General’s Office (AGO) to immediately investigate and “take all appropriate legal action to enforce Arizona’s law prohibiting school districts from using public recourses to support a ballot measure seeking to invalidate Arizona’s universal ESA program,” Freeman wrote.
The authority of the AGO to act is provided in ARS 15-511 “but only if your office acts promptly,” he added.
In a follow-up public statement, Freeman said the Goldwater Institute is dedicated to exposing the plans of entrenched interests in education to use hard-earned taxpayer dollars to deprive parents of the educational freedom provided by ESAs.
“All Arizona families should be free to make educational choices for their children without having the government work against them by rigidly defending a status quo that protects bureaucrats and government unions,” he stated.
by Corinne Murdock | Sep 4, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
The most recent advertisements in Phoenix highways and newspapers employ satire as commentary on leftist policies. They’re commissioned by a nonprofit group called Citizens For Sanity (CFS), which has flooded similar messaging throughout the Valley and the nation.
“Waiting in the [emergency room] for 10 hours is a small price to pay for the gift of open borders,” reads their latest billboard.
Additionally, the latest CFS newspaper ad appeared in Ahwatukee Foothills News this week, claiming that Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ) supports drug cartels.
“Drug cartels are trying to run an honest business,” read the ad. “Help them stay profitable by supporting Mark Kelly and keeping our borders wide open.”
Another ad, also targeting Kelly, appeared in the Arizona Daily Sun.
“Thank you Mark Kelly, for voting to protect pregnant men, to keep our borders open, and to safeguard violent criminals,” wrote CFS. “Woke values are Arizona values.”
According to the CFS website, their mission is to replace “wokeism” and other mindsets it describes as “anti-critical thinking” with common sense, logic, and reason. Their satirical language resembles that of classic 18th-century satirist Jonathan Swift (“Gulliver’s Travels,” “A Modest Proposal”). A more modern comparison may be drawn to The Babylon Bee, a satire news website.
Their other billboards in Phoenix poked fun at criminal justice reform.
“Don’t let the radical right put our neighborhood street gangs behind bars,” read one sign. “Support Joe Biden and progressive candidates.”
“Real progressives support violent criminals in their hour of need,” read another.
One of the key figures behind CFS is Ian Prior, who apprised Fox News of his role with CFS as a strategic consultant. Prior played a central role in the parent mobilization that led to the historic election of a Republican governor in deep-blue Virginia, Glenn Youngkin. He’s also the executive director of Fight For Schools and a senior advisor at America First Legal.
“We cannot stand by as radical woke biology-deniers use young children as guinea pigs for their ideological experiments. Using experimental drugs to stop puberty, injecting opposite-sex hormones, and surgically removing breasts and genitals of young children is insane,” stated Prior.
Prior also shared that CFS targets its messaging toward those most likely to be receptive, such as exposing gender ideology-related messages to the Latino communities rather than to “sheltered rich white coastal leftist elites.” That’s why some of their ads are in Spanish.
“Progressives support pregnant Latinx men,” reads one of their translated newspaper ads.
In addition to billboards, the group puts out video and radio advertisements. Those aren’t satirical: rather, they’re structured as campaign advertisements.
The group’s efforts nationwide caught the attention of mainstream media shortly after launching their first video about midway last month. Politico reported that the nonprofit relied on “prominent” and “veteran” Republican strategists.
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 4, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
On Tuesday, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich filed a civil rights lawsuit against Tucson over its COVID-19 vaccine mandate for employees.
In a press release, Brnovich argued that the mandate was a violation of personal liberty and an exemplar of government overreach.
“Tucson dictated a widespread vaccine mandate without regard to its impact on the liberties and civil rights of its employees,” said Brnovich. “Many of those affected are first responders, and it’s our turn to be there for them. The city’s misguided vaccine mandate is an ugly example of government overreach that we must vigorously oppose.”
Brnovich accused Tucson of punishing unvaccinated employees with unpaid suspension regardless of whether their exemption or accommodation requests were pending or approved. A majority of the city employees affected by the slim deadline were first responders.
According to the lawsuit, at least 377 city employees requested a medical exemption, and 352 employees requested a religious exemption.
READ THE CIVIL RIGHTS LAWSUIT HERE
The lawsuit further criticized the city’s blanket policy approach for requiring the vaccine, noting that some unvaccinated employees were or could work remotely. It alleged that the city made employment “more onerous” for unvaccinated employees.
Among those alleged more onerous requirements: the city gave vaccinated employees additional leave to recover from COVID-19 infection or to quarantine if a family member became infected with COVID-19 but denied that benefit to unvaccinated employees. Additionally, the city gave only vaccinated employees an 8-hour “floating holiday,” as well as the ability to travel outside of Pima County for job-related career enhancement opportunities. Furthermore, certain unvaccinated employees were required to undergo regular COVID-19 testing at their own expense.
In doing so, Tucson claimed its denial of equal treatment to unvaccinated employees was a means to incentivize vaccination.
“[The city of Tucson’s] purported ‘incentives’ were, severally and collectively, coercive actions that punished employees who could not comply with Defendant’s vaccine directives because of a sincerely-held religious belief and/or disability,” stated the lawsuit.
The city did put their vaccine mandate on hold last September, after Brnovich warned the city that its original five-day unpaid suspension of unvaccinated employees was unlawful. At the time, Brnovich said he would direct Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee to withhold the city’s state shared revenues, totaling over $175 million.
However, the city kept up its vaccine mandate. The next month, a divided city council voted to terminate the unvaccinated by December 1. Tucson’s action prompted Governor Doug Ducey to intervene. Ducey informed the city that their mandate conflicted with Arizona law.
However, the next month the Arizona Supreme Court overturned Arizona’s new law banning any level of government from requiring COVID-19 vaccine mandates.
Mayor Regina Romero and other city leaders have insisted in public messaging that their workforce was mostly compliant with their vaccine mandate, which Romero called a “vaccine policy.”
Several weeks after Tucson’s deadline passed, Ducey issued an executive order banning local or state governments from issuing COVID-19 vaccine mandates. In a response statement, Tucson Mayor Regina Romero alluded to Brnovich’s legal opinion that employers could institute their own vaccine mandates as a defense of Tucson’s mandate.
“Arizona Attorney General Brnovich already told the governor what he doesn’t want to hear. He has no authority to preempt local actions through executive orders,” stated Romero.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Terri Jo Neff | Sep 3, 2022 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
What happens when retaining an attorney is not an option during a divorce, bankruptcy, or other non-criminal type of legal matter? In Arizona, one option is to work with a legal document preparer who is certified under rules adopted by the Arizona Supreme Court.
Legal document preparers may provide general legal information—such as what form is needed and which deadlines apply—but may not give legal advice. All individuals and businesses offering such a service without the supervision of an attorney in good standing with the State Bar of Arizona must satisfactorily pass a Legal Document Preparer Program.
Several attorneys told AZ Free News they regularly refer people to a legal document preparer for matters that don’t necessarily need an attorney, such as an uncontested divorce without children. A legal document preparer is also much better than going it alone when affording an attorney is not an option, they say.
“It’s certainly something attorneys don’t want to publicize, but we would certainly rather see someone have the professional services of a document preparer than try to go it alone in court,” one attorney explained.
There are now dozens of legal document preparers throughout Arizona, all of whom must be certified under rules set forth by the Arizona Supreme Court. Some preparers work for themselves but most are employed by a business which also must be approved by the Court.
One of those is AZ Legal Documents by JoJo, owned and operated by Georgiana “JoJo” Aguilar, who began working in Cochise County as a paralegal in 2004. She later opened her own company and is certified as the company’s designated principal. This means she is responsible for every document that leaves the office even if one of her employees prepares it.
AZ Legal Documents by JoJo specializes in family law matters, including divorce and legal separation, child custody and child support, guardianships, and wills. Aguilar also offers services for bankruptcy, real estate, and several other non-criminal matters. Those areas of law have frequent rules changes, requiring Aguilar and her staff like all certified legal document preparers to undergo continuing education each year.
“We are able to ensure our customers have the correct form or forms needed for their situation,” she said. “We also have the experience to know what the Court needs to have with the form, which can save customers time and money.”
Another legal document preparer business is East Valley Legal which is owned by Chelsea Woodworth, who is a member of the Board of Nonlawyer Legal Service Providers.
Woodworth, who also owns a legal paraprofessional firm called Chelsea Legal PLC. in Mesa, worked as a Crime Victim Advocate, an Undercover Private Investigator, and for the Department of Homeland Security prior to entering the legal field in 2013. She is a Legal Paraprofessional with endorsements in Limited Jurisdiction Civil and Family Law, a Certified Legal Document Preparer, and an Advanced Certified Paralegal.
The experience Woodworth brings to the field is one reason she is a member of the Board of Nonlawyer Legal Service Providers.
The Board of Nonlawyer Legal Service Providers next meets Sept. 26 at the Arizona Supreme Court at 1501 W. Washington Street in Phoenix. The public may join the virtual meeting or attend in person.
by Corinne Murdock | Sep 3, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
On Tuesday, the Arizona Treasurer prohibited the use of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) scoring when determining investments. ESG scoring is comparable to a social justice scoring, sometimes dubbed a “social credit score.”
Revisions to the Arizona Treasurer’s Investment Policy Statement (IPS) declared that ESG factors were non-pecuniary and therefore had no material effect on the financial risk or return of an investment.
The IPS further clarified that board shares couldn’t be voted to further “environmental, social, political, ideological, or other benefits or goals.”
READ THE FULL INVESTMENT POLICY STATEMENT HERE
Treasurer Kimberly Yee declared that ESG scoring enables malicious government manipulation of the private sector.
“Biden’s Administration uses big government overreach to manipulate the private sector in picking winners and losers based on radical ESG policies,” wrote Yee. “We must protect American free market principles and not allow environmental or social goals to dictate how taxpayer monies are managed.”
This wasn’t the first time this month that Yee took action to counter the effects of ESG scoring. Last week, the treasurer gave a major global financial firm, Morningstar, 30 days to prove that they weren’t complicit in its subsidiary company’s alleged boycott of Israel due to ESG policies. Without sufficient proof, Yee will place Morningstar on the state’s list of prohibited investments.
Yee’s opponent in the upcoming November election, Arizona State Senate Minority Whip Martín Quezada (D-Glendale), responded that he supports ESG scoring.
The Arizona state legislature attempted to outlaw ESG scoring discrimination through HB2656 during this past legislative session. However, State Representatives Joel John (R-Buckeye) and Michelle Udall killed the bill. John declared that he voted against the bill in accordance with his belief that such discriminations don’t exist.
However, firearms industry business owners testified earlier in the legislative session about the need for another bill, HB2473, because banks refused to do business with them because they deal with firearms. One testimony came from Ruger Firearms VPO Tim Powney, who shared that Bank of America cut short their decades-long relationship due to his being in the firearms industry. That decision was likely based on ESG criteria.
The concept of ESG dates back to 2004 when former United Nations (UN) Secretary General Kofi Annan gathered just over 50 of the world’s top financial institution CEOs to discuss influencing markets via ideological criteria. Early prototypes of ESG scoring occurred through the New York Stock Exchange’s Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) in 2006, then the Sustainable Stock Exchange Initiative (SSEI) in 2007.
Almost all major companies rely on ESG criteria. Many model their ESG scoring systems after the Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics developed by the World Economic Forum (WEF), a globalist lobbying organization. “Stakeholder capitalism” is the attempt to modify corporations’ behaviors to benefit stakeholders instead of shareholders, necessitating corporate cooperation with government: something Yee claimed allows government overreach and free market subversion.
The WEF claims that ESG criteria are financially material. They argue that poor ESG scoring played a role in 15 out of 17 S&P 500 bankruptcies that occurred between 2005 and 2015.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
