by Corinne Murdock | Mar 8, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that Pinal County’s transportation excise tax was unlawful. The ruling affects two 2017 voter-approved measures from the Pinal County Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) Pinal County Board of Supervisors. The two measures instituted a tax on purchases under $10,000, constituting a two-tiered retail transaction privilege tax (TPT) that would pay for infrastructure.
The Arizona Supreme Court disagreed with the county’s assertion that the tax afforded a modified and variable rate in accordance with state law.
“We therefore conclude that the two-tiered retail TPT structure in Proposition 417 is neither a ‘modified rate’ nor a ‘variable rate’ under § 42-6106(C). In this case, until the legislature ‘expressly delegates’ to counties the authority to implement this tiered-rate tax on specified businesses—an authority that is ‘strictly construed’ — Pinal County’s two tiered retail TPT structure as part of a transportation excise tax is unlawful and invalid,” wrote the court.
The ruling marked the Goldwater Institute’s seventh Arizona Supreme Court ruling in their favor. The institute’s vice president of litigation, Timothy Sandefur, asserted that the ruling ensured clarity, ease, and lowered costs for businesses.
“The legislature intended state taxes to be uniform — not to allow each of the state’s 15 counties to set their own rules. To allow that would make Arizona inhospitable for business, because it would transform the state into a crazy quilt of different tax rules in each locality,” wrote Sandefur. “[I]t marks a victory for taxpayers not just in Pinal County but throughout Arizona. In tough economic times—with inflation and fuel costs rising—the last thing Arizona needs is for public officials to create more and more complicated tax rules that take more of people’s earnings away and drive away job-creating industry.”
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 | Mar 8, 2022 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
An internal conflict appears to be brewing over state legislation which passed through the House and the Senate on March 3 on combined votes of 85 to 0 and was immediately signed into law the same day.
House Bill 2839 was intended to address concerns with statutory deadlines for candidates to qualify to run in Arizona’s 2022 primary elections, the first based on the state’s recently redrawn 30 legislative and 9 congressional districts.
HB2839 was written as an emergency law to provide new rules for this year’s primary election nominating petitions. Passage required a bipartisan, supermajority margin of at least two-thirds of both the 60-member House and 30-member Senate to be become immediately effective once Gov. Doug Ducey affixed his signature.
Yet within 48 hours of the emergency law taking affect, questions began to be asked about one of the four sections of the new law. By Monday morning, the majority of legislators who voted for HB2839 conceded they either misunderstood Section 4 or had not read the bill before casting a vote.
Section 4 contains a new, this-year-only nominating petition requirement which allows candidates for political party precinct committeemen (PCs) to skip signature gathering. But it also gives a political party’s local county committee sole authority to decide which one candidate must be appointed by the county board of supervisors to every PC position for that party.
In Arizona, a PC’s minimum duties under state law involve assisting their political party in voter registration and also providing voter assistance during an election. But a key PC duty involves a vacancy in a county or state office. In most instances, it is a county’s PCs of the party of the prior officeholder who nominate the candidate(s) to fill the vacancy.
The new law also contains other provisions in Section 4 which are confusing, such as providing for only one PC for each precinct, when some precincts currently have several PCs.
Senate President Karen Fann admitted on Sunday that Section 4 resulted in an unintended change in state law. She spent the weekend and Monday working with members to design a plan to repeal Section 4 while also ensuring the thousands of Arizonans interested in serving as a two-year terms as party precinct committeemen will be able to get their names on August’s primary election ballot.
Myriad reasons have been put forth by legislators for why they voted in support of HB2839 without questioning the drastic changes to PCs. Some privately admitted they did not read the bill’s language due to its support by legislative leaders. Others say the text of Section 4 was not capitalized, leading them to believe there was nothing being changed to PC-related laws.
Still others say they read the bill but believed Section 4’s reference to selection of PCs by the local party committee applied only to new precincts recently created under the once-a-decade statewide redistricting process.
New bills were introduced Monday in both chambers – HB2840 and SB1720 – to fully repeal Section 4. However, there are not enough votes yet to pass either bill by the necessary supermajority margin to take affect immediately.
In addition, many lawmakers say they will not vote to repeal Section 4 unless there is new legislation to properly address the PC nomination petition deadline.
“I’ve been pushing for a full repeal of this language all weekend,” Rep. Jake Hoffman said Monday. “The section dealing with PC elections that was snuck into the emergency bill last week will be removed.”
Hoffman (R-LD12) also called on Monday for a thorough review of how the PC language was added to the bill without a full disclosure to legislators.
“In my meeting with leadership today I also made it exceedingly clear that there must be accountability for this abhorrent breach of trust and legislative process,” he said.
by Corinne Murdock | Mar 7, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
The Arizona Senate kicked off their Monday with a show of bipartisanship. Four Senate Republicans joined their Democratic colleagues in voting against a bill to prohibit local governments from using lobbyists: State Senators Paul Boyer (R-Glendale), Tyler Pace (R-Mesa), T.J. Shope (R-Phoenix), and Senate President Karen Fann (R-Prescott). The bill from State Senator Warren Petersen (R-Gilbert), SB1198, failed 12-17.
The four senators didn’t explain their “no” vote; neither did the Democrats. The bill would’ve prevented counties, cities, towns, school districts, and any other political subdivisions from contracting with or spending money on lobbying services, with exemptions for employees of that local government entity, cities or towns with less than 75,000 citizens, or counties with less than 250,000 citizens.
Peterson explained during the Senate Government Committee that the end of lobbying at the state level several years ago allowed for a “greater balance” between citizens and the state government.
A spokesman for Apache County, Greenlee County, Scottsdale, and Prescott said that the bill was a good idea philosophically but would result in higher costs for the cities and counties. He said that the local governments would have to hire full-time employees to fulfill duties normally filled by lobbyists contracted at lower costs.
The League of Arizona Cities and Towns also opposed the bill. Their spokesman explained that their lobbyists alleviated the burdens of keeping up with the legislature for elected officials.
The Goldwater Institute National Litigation Director Jon Riches said the bill prevented taxpayer dollars from being spent on services that further government interests while ignoring the taxpayer.
“Tax dollars should not go to support status quo special interests at the expense of taxpayers, small businesses, and citizens who might not be able to afford a team of well-funded lobbyists, including lobbyists who often advocate against those taxpayers’ interests,” said Riches.
Arizona Free Enterprise Club Vice President Aimee Yentes concurred with Riches’ statement, insisting that it’s elected officials’ duty to take on the responsibilities that they pass on to lobbyists. Yentes is also a member of the Gilbert Town Council.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Mar 7, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Marco Lopez has ties to a massive foreign corruption scandal involving a global construction conglomerate Odebrecht and its bribes to politicians globally. According to an investigative report from Arizona Agenda relying on case information from anti-corruption news organization Mexicanos Contra la Corrupción y la Impunidad, Lopez’s company, Intermestic Partners/International Strategic Solutions, received $35,000 from Odebrecht for his several months of work on former Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto’s 2012 campaign. Ultimately, Odebrecht shelled out $800 million through its secretive business department tasked with bribing all levels of government officials across the world, the “Division of Structured Operations,” earning a minimum criminal fine of $4.5 billion in 2016.
Peña Nieto’s former campaign lieutenant, Emilio Lozoya, connected Lopez’s $35,000 to a $3 million bribe from an Odebrecht shell company: campaign money for public works contracts. Lozoya’s shell business, Latin American Asia Capital Holdings, received the $3 million from Odebrecht before redistributing tens of thousands to Lopez.
According to Lozoya, the invoices that Lopez and others submitted were bogus. Lopez claimed to have worked on something called the “Colombia Project.” Lopez refused to speak with the Arizona Agenda about his ties with Odebrecht and the Peña Nieto corruption.
By all accounts, Lopez would qualify as a career politician. As a teen, Lopez served as a congressional page for former Arizona Congressman Ed Pastor. In his early 20s, Lopez worked on Al Gore’s presidential campaign. In 2001, Lopez was elected mayor of his hometown, Nogales, Arizona, becoming one of the youngest mayors in American history at the time.
Another two years after his election, former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano appointed Lopez to be the executive director of the Arizona-Mexico Commission. Lopez took on a Latin American policy advisory position within Napolitano’s cabinet. After three years, Napolitano promoted Lopez to serve as her senior advisor on foreign affairs and trade. Napolitano again promoted Lopez in 2008 to direct the Arizona Department of Commerce.
It appears Napolitano didn’t forget Lopez when the White House came to bring her into the Obama Administration in 2008. Not long after Napolitano’s appointment as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Lopez was appointed chief of staff for Customs and Border Protection (CBP). He remained in that position until 2011, before focusing his attention on business ventures of his own. That year, Lopez established the Phoenix-based business and investment advisory group linked to the Odebrecht scandal, Intermestic Partners. Additionally, Lopez began to serve as senior advisor to Forbes’ 2010-2013 richest person in the world: Carlos Slim Helu.
For a decade, Lopez abstained from taking on a political office. Then in March of last year, Lopez announced his candidacy for Arizona governor — the first to do so.
After the report broke, Lopez denied his involvement. He claimed the report was inaccurate because it was heavy with “innuendo, racial stereotypes and falsehoods.”
Indicating any knowledge of Odebrecht’s bribing operations could be a deadly maneuver. Odebrecht’s former vice president, Henrique Valladares, was found dead in his Rio de Janeiro apartment in September 2019, shortly after entering a plea bargain with state prosecutors to reveal who was in on the company’s bribing system. Valladares was one of the key informants in the case. According to state police, the cause of his death was “undetermined.”
Odebrecht was implicated following a smaller Brazilian anti-bribery investigation codenamed “Lava Jato,” or “Car Wash,” that began with the arrest of Brazil’s former national oil company executive, Nestor Cerveró.
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 | Mar 6, 2022 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
Both chambers of the Arizona Legislature have been busy this week considering bills which originated in the other chamber, and one that is garnering a lot of attention would clarify and curtail the emergency powers of the governor.
Senate Bill 1009 was introduced in January by Sen. Michele Ugenti-Rita to ensure state lawmakers have a voice in how the state responds to public health emergencies. The bill easily cleared the Senate and was transmitted to the House on Feb. 2.
On Thursday, SB1009 cleared the House Government & Elections Committee and is awaiting a Third Reading.
Supporters of SB1009 note Arizona has been under a COVID-19 public health state of emergency since March 2020. During time, Gov. Doug Ducey has issued nearly two dozen executive orders but the Arizona Legislature has been essentially kept on the sidelines throughout.
The bill by Ugenti-Rita (R-LD23) would establish a 30-day cap on a Governor’s initial proclamation with respect to a public health emergency. A Governor could extend the state of emergency in 30-day increments for up to 120 days total.
After that point, a public health emergency proclamation would terminate unless extended by the Arizona Legislature through passage of a concurrent resolution. Any legislative extension would also be effective for 30 days but could be approved “as many times as necessary.”
SB1009 also prohibits a Governor from proclaiming a new state of emergency based on the same conditions unless the Legislature consents via a concurrent resolution. Another provision of the bill would kick in if a Governor extends the public health emergency beyond the first 30 days.
It requires a written report be submitted to a joint committee of the Senate and House health committees. The joint committee would then be responsible for providing “a favorable or unfavorable review” of the extension after being briefed by the Governor’s Office and the director of the Arizona Department of Health Services.
The review by the joint committee would have to be shared with the Governor and all state lawmakers. In addition, the review would have to be posted in a conspicuous manner on both the Governor’s and the ADHS’s websites.
SB1009 is similar to a provision Ugenti-Rita introduced last year into one of the annual budget bills. The bill was later voided by the Arizona Supreme Court for technical reasons.
If signed into law, the change in a Governor’s powers would take effect in January 2023.
by Terri Jo Neff | Mar 5, 2022 | Economy, News
By Terri Jo Neff |
Arizona State Treasurer Kimberly Yee wants to ensure all State vendors understand their obligations in light of economic sanctions put on the Russian Federation by the U.S. and E.U. following Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine.
On Tuesday, Yee issued a Notice of Compliance about her expectation that State contractors, vendors, and other third-parties pay attention to the situation involving Russia and have all “necessary consents, approvals, and authorizations of all governmental authorities in connection with any transaction” dealing with the State.
“As you are aware, the State of Arizona and the Arizona State Treasurer’s Office (ASTO) are subject to U.S. laws, regulations, and orders applicable to its business activities and financial transactions, including those related to the international trade controls and economic sanctions,” Yee wrote. “As a vendor of the State of Arizona, you have separate and independent obligations under these same laws.”
Yee added that the State of Arizona has no investments in Russia, and while economic sanctions are subject to change, she expects all contractors and third parties “acting as intermediaries for the State of Arizona” to be knowledgeable about and remain in compliance with export and import laws, regulations, sanctions, embargoes, and policies.
That includes, but is not limited to, securing all clearances, export and import licenses, or exemptions therefrom, and making all required filings with appropriate governmental bodies, she noted.
“If you or your agents are unable to comply with the above foreign transaction requirements – including compliance with the United States trade sanctions related to Russia– in regard to your independent relationship with State of Arizona, you are required to notify the Arizona State Treasurer’s Office in writing immediately,” Yee wrote.
Yee also used the notice to suggest State contractors and vendors not be associated with financing any oil or other energy trades with Russia.
“Instead, we respectfully request you consider financing and investing in energy production in the United States, so we can be energy independent,” she wrote. “This is not only beneficial from a foreign policy perspective, but it is also a safer domestic investment.”
Yee’s suggestion, she noted, goes against the wishes of the Biden Administration but she pointed out there is no law against financing U.S. energy production.
“Doing so is a sound investment that does not carry the risk of foreign investment in that sector,” Yee wrote.
