by Terri Jo Neff | Jul 13, 2021 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
When Gov. Doug Ducey signed Senate Bill 1820 last month, general contractors, construction companies, and construction-industry support businesses had a lot to be happy about given the more than $80 million appropriated for capital projects by several state agencies.
Among the most expensive projects funded by SB1820 are $5 million to Yuma County for military installation preservation and enhancement by relocating the Yuma Fairgrounds, nearly $12 million to restore and renovate the historical capitol building, and $25 million for the Arizona Department of Veterans’ Services to construction a veterans’ home in northwest Arizona.
Other capital project appropriations are $4 million for maintenance to the Attorney General building on 15th Avenue, $3.5 million for repairs to the House of Representatives and Senate buildings, $3.1 million for construction of a new Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) maintenance facility in Wickenburg, $3 million for construction of a wellness and training center for the Arizona Department of Public Safety, and $2.8 million for demolition or conversion of state-owned buildings on West Jefferson Street.
There is also $2.5 million allotted for a nonprofit organization to construct an international dark sky discovery center, $2.5 million for new doors at the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections’ Adobe Mountain School Facility, and $2 million to demolish unused buildings on the Arizona State Hospital campus.
Many smaller capital projects are included, such as improvements at the Town of Taylor rodeo arena, replacement of the fire alarm system in the Arizona Veterans Memorial Coliseum, construction of brine tanks for ADOT in Globe, Keams Canyon, Prescott Valley, and Show Low, and replacement of ADOT vehicle fueling facilities in Flagstaff, Holbrook, and Kingman.
The appropriations also included money to fund several projects for the Arizona State Parks Board, including construction of an amphitheater building at Dead Horse Ranch State Park in Cottonwood, replacement of discovery center roof at Kartchner Caverns State Park in Benson, replacement of the fire suppression system and a maintenance building at Red Rock State Park in Sedona, as well as construction of a new park at the Rockin’ River Ranch Park in Camp Verde.
Funding for a major fire safety upgrades at the Arizona State Prison Complex – Eyman in Florence was also included in the new budget. The more than $25.5 million project will receive monies from the state’s General Fund, the Arizona Correctional Industries Revolving Fund, the Special Services Fund, the Inmate Store Proceeds Fund, and the Prison Construction and Operations Fund.
The FY 2022 budget also includes appropriations for several building renewal projects, including more than $22 million from the state’s General Fund for the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADC), which is on top of nearly $6 million from ADC’s own Building Renewal Fund.
Another $6.2 million of state General Fund monies was appropriated for the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA) to be spent on major maintenance and repair activities for state buildings. That will be added to $18 million from the Capital Outlay Stabilization Fund.
Among other building renewal appropriation include $1.2 million to Arizona Game and Fish Department and $15.4 million from the State Highway Fund for use by ADOT.
In most instances, the monies come with restrictions or requirements. ADOA is required to provide two reports -in November 2021 and May 2022- to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) on the status of all capital projects and expenditures. The same requirement applies to ADC, AZGFD, and ADOT.
And in a use it or lose it provision, any unexpended building renewal appropriations as of June 30, 2023 revert back to the fund from which they were appropriated.
by AZ Free News | Jul 13, 2021 | News
On Monday, Reps. Andy Biggs and Barbara Lee, sent a letter to President Biden questioning the administration’s decision to conduct offensive airstrikes on the Iraq-Syria border. The two Representatives raised questions as to the constitutionality and necessity of the strikes.
As noted in their letter, “on June 27, 2021, the Department of Defense (DOD) announced that the U.S. had conducted a military operation against operational and weapons storage facilities in Iraq and Syria. The DOD’s announcement stated, “[a]t President Biden’s direction, U.S. military forces earlier this evening conducted defensive precision airstrikes against facilities used by Iran-backed militia groups in the Iraq-Syria border region.”
The Representatives claim that the DOD announcement “contained little specific information about what threat precipitated this strike.”
According to Biggs and Lee, Congress “remains underinformed” about said threat.
“Our Constitution gives the authority to declare war only to Congress. It is implied that the President has limited authority to act to defend our national interests in exigent circumstances. The Executive Branch has no authority conducting offensive strikes without Congressional approval. The Biden Administration has taken offensive action in the recent airstrike on the Iraq-Syria border without bringing this to Congress for approval. Without appropriate justification of an imminent threat to the United States, it is clear that President Biden exceeded his constitutional authority,” said Biggs in his announcement.
Full letter below:
July 12, 2021
President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear President Biden,
The recent U.S. airstrikes on the Iraq-Syria border raise major constitutional concerns. We request that you brief Members of Congress on the threats faced by our troops overseas and the specific imminent threat that precipitated this use of military force.
On June 27, 2021, the Department of Defense (DOD) announced that the U.S. had conducted a military operation against operational and weapons storage facilities in Iraq and Syria. The DOD’s announcement stated, “[a]t President Biden’s direction, U.S. military forces earlier this evening conducted defensive precision airstrikes against facilities used by Iran-backed militia groups in the Iraq-Syria border region.” The DOD announcement contained little specific information about what threat precipitated this strike. In the weeks since the attack, Congress remains underinformed about said threat.
When President Trump conducted the airstrike that killed Qasem Soleimani in January 2020, you said that his administration’s assertion that the strike was conducted in self-defense was not adequate because his administration did not supply “the necessary evidence to support that conclusion”. Your administration’s claim that this recent action was necessary to defend our troops likewise must be accompanied by evidence necessary to support the conclusion that our troops were in danger in this instance.
In your notification to Congress, you said, “I directed this discrete military action consistent with my responsibility to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad and in furtherance of United States national security and foreign policy interests, pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct United States foreign relations and as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive.” The Constitution of the United States gives Congress the power to declare war, and the president the power to prosecute the war. The Constitution does not give the president, as “Commander in Chief,” unlimited power to make war. As President Washington put so eloquently, “The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore, no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.” Article II of the Constitution only gives the President the power to repel immediate or imminent threats, it does not give the Executive Branch the power to conduct a war without congressional approval.
We would appreciate a written reply to the following questions:
- What notification did the administration provide to Members of Congress before launching this airstrike?
- What immediate threat did our troops face that drove the conclusion that immediate military action was the necessary and appropriate response?
- How does your administration define “immediate” or “imminent” when assessing threats?
- Do you believe that Article II gives the Executive Branch unlimited power to decide when to engage in military strikes in foreign nations? Why?
If these questions cannot be provided in written form due to national security concerns, we request a classified briefing in which the information can be shared. We look forward to hearing from you ahead of August 1. Thank you for your prompt response, and your willingness to work with us to restore Congress’ preeminent Constitutional role over decisions of war and peace.
Sincerely,
Andy Biggs
Member of Congress
Barbara Lee
Member of Congress
by AZ Free News | Jul 13, 2021 | News
A State Grand Jury has indicted Tracey Kay McKee, of Scottsdale, with one count of Illegal Voting and one count of Perjury, for allegedly casting a vote in the name of a deceased person through an early ballot in the 2020 General Election.
The indictment alleges that McKee signed the name of a deceased individual to an early ballot envelope. McKee is the daughter of the deceased individual, who died on October 5, 2020. McKee is accused of signing her deceased mother’s name to a declaration made under penalty of perjury on an early ballot envelope on or between October 7, 2020, and November 3, 2020.
McKee’s next court appearance is set for August 11, 2021, in Maricopa County Superior Court.
by Terri Jo Neff | Jul 12, 2021 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
Questions have been raised about a private law firm’s handling of a campaign finance violation investigation involving the Town of Gilbert’s recent mayoral race, while others are asking why the law firm was involved in the first place.
Last week an attorney with Fitzgibbons Law Offices reported to Gilbert Town Attorney Chris Payne that legal sufficiency does not exist to establish a violation of state election law with respect to dozens of campaign-related signs, despite a finding by the Phoenix City Clerk earlier this year of “reasonable cause” to believe a campaign finance violation occurred.
The law firm’s decision appears to have been made without reviewing bank records of the parties involved nor speaking to additional witnesses, a fact not sitting well with many in Gilbert and Maricopa County who support election integrity.
On Nov. 11, 2020, the Town of Gilbert received a complaint related to dozens of signs put up around town that were critical of Matt Nielsen, who lost to former city councilwoman Brigette Peterson in a mayoral runoff race.
Based on citizens’ statements and a private investigator’s report, none of the signs included “paid for by” or “authorized by” verbiage. Nielsen filed a campaign violation complaint alleging the Public Integrity Alliance Committee, headed by Tyler Montague, was involved with the anti-Nielsen signs. Public records show the committee was actively involved in supporting Peterson’s campaign.
The City of Phoenix handled the initial phase of the violation review to avoid the conflict of interest of having Gilbert town staff involved. In February, the Phoenix City Clerk announced there was “reasonable cause” to believe a campaign finance violation was committed in connection to the signs that Montague admitted paying for in cash and picking up at a print shop.
The second phase of the campaign finance complaint would normally have involved Town Attorney Chris Payne reviewing the reasonable cause report from the City of Phoenix in order to determine which state law had been violated.
However, town officials once again declared a conflict because Payne and his staff work at the pleasure of the town’s mayor and council. Instead of asking the Phoenix City Attorney or the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office to handle the second part of the investigation, town officials hired a private law firm to do the work; a law firm which needs to rely on Peterson’s approval for future business with the town.
During its investigation, attorneys for Fitzgibbons had access to a statement Montague provided the City of Phoenix in which he described seeing several of signs laying on the ground while driving by a polling place at the Gilbert Recreation Center on Nov. 3, Election Day.
According to Montague’s statement, he replaced four or five of the signs even though he did not originally place those signs. He also said he saw a woman remove the same signs he had just replaced and told her it was illegal to take down political signs without authorization.
The woman previously told a private investigator that the man told her she was committing a misdemeanor and she should not touch” his” signs. The man was identified as Montague through his license plate. He told the Phoenix clerk that his activities were not an operation of the Public Integrity Alliance Committee.
Once retained, a Fitzgibbons attorney issued a subpoena in March to the print shop where the anti-Nielsen signs were printed. In response, an invoice in Montague’s name was provided by the printer, who said Montague ordered and paid for the signs with $500 cash.
A subpoena was also issued to Montague seeking “all information related to the purchase of any signs pertaining to the 2020 election for the Mayor of the Town of Gilbert that reference Matt Nielsen. Such information shall include, but not be limited to, the name and contact information for any vendor that made such signs, purchase orders, receipts, wording included on the signs and any images of the signs.”
Montague replied again that the anti-Nielsen signs were not funded by himself or the Committee. He explained that the printer’s invoice ended up in Montague’s name only because he “volunteered to pick up those up for a friend who funded them. Public Integrity Alliance was not involved in any way.”
It should be noted that the invoice numbers for both Public Integrity Alliance’s sign purchases, as well as the order numbers for both purchases are sequential, indicating that the signs had been ordered at the same time and paid for at the same time.
In a July 6 report to Payne, Fitzgibbons attorney Tina Vannucci noted that ARS 16-925(A) states a “person that makes an expenditure for an advertisement or fund-raising solicitation, other than an individual, shall include [certain] disclosures in the advertisement or solicitation…”
Vannucci noted “there is not legal sufficiency” to establish that Montague acted in his capacity as President of the Committee, or on behalf of the Committee, or that the Committee purchased the signs at issue in the Complaint which were not properly labeled.” And because the statute specifically exempts individuals from the “paid for by” or “authorized by” language, if Montague was responsible for the signs at his own volition then he cannot be charged with the violation.
What is not mentioned in the Fitzgibbons report is whether Montague was asked who the “friend” was in the event that person was acting on behalf of a committee or other organization. In addition, there was no subpoena issued for bank records belonging to Montague and the Public Integrity Alliance Committee which may have revealed whether Montague received or requested reimbursement or petty cash for the anti-Nielsen signs.
The next meeting of the Gilbert town council has not been confirmed. It is unclear whether any formal action on the campaign complaint is necessary by the council, although the town will have to approve a bill at some point from Fitzgibbons for legal services.
by azfreenews1 | Jul 12, 2021 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
Criticism continues to mount in response to comments by President Joe Biden earlier this month about public health professionals possibly going door-to-door across the country to encourage people to receive one of the COVID-19 vaccinations.
Arizona Congressman Andy Biggs joined with 31 other lawmakers who comprise the House Freedom Caucus in sending a letter to Biden last week, calling it “deeply disturbing” that the federal government may be in the process of tracking the private health information of millions of Americans. Other Arizonans in the House Freedom Caucus who signed the letter were Rep. Paul Gosar, Rep. Debbie Lesko, and Rep. David Schweikert.
“There is no scenario where the federal government should be actively entering communities and traveling door-to-door to pressure Americans to receive a vaccine,” the July 9 letter states. “COVID-19 vaccine information is widely available throughout the country, and Americans have every ability to decide for themselves whether or not they should receive a vaccine.”
The letter was prompted by the President’s July 6 comments about the possibility of members of the U.S. COVID-19 Response Team going ““community by community, neighborhood by neighborhood and oftentimes door-to-door, literally knocking on doors, to get help to the remaining people.”
The letter asks for a response by July 23 to a series of questions related to what activities the Biden Administration has undertaken, or plans to undertake, connected to vaccination databases.
Biggs, who chairs the House Freedom Caucus, made additional comments after the letter was sent.
“Instead of meddling in private medical decisions, the Biden administration should focus on addressing the border crisis, the rampant rise in inflation, and the crime wave that is plaguing American cities – all crises it created,” Biggs said. “The door-to-door spying on Americans is one more example of the burgeoning surveillance state by the national government.”
The House Freedom Caucus letter is just the latest criticism directed at Biden’s comments. Two more governors spoke out late last week about the suggestion of personal reach-out to unvaccinated Americans.
“The prospect of government vaccination teams showing up unannounced or unrequested at the door of ‘targeted’ homeowners or on their property will further deteriorate the public’s trust,” South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster said in a statement.
In Missouri, Gov. Mike Parson tweeted that “sending government employees or agents door-to-door to compel vaccination” would not be an effective nor welcome strategy in his state.
But despite the criticism, the prospect of a “who has been vaccinated” database may not be difficult to create. The Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) have been behind a COVID-19 tracking smartphone app that was been promoted by tens of thousands of doctors and nurses.
Called v-safe, the app is described as an after-vaccination “health checker” which users register with to answer surveys about side effects and to report dates of vaccinations. Parents can also register dependents under their v-safe account.
“Your healthcare provider will give you an information sheet on v-safe that explains how to register and get started,” according to the CDC website. “Through v-safe, you can quickly tell CDC if you have any side effects after getting a COVID-19 vaccine. Depending on your answers to the web surveys, someone from CDC may call to check on you and get more information.”
As to the confidentiality of a v-safe user’s information, the CDC website notes that “to the extent v–safe uses existing information systems managed by CDC, FDA, and other federal agencies, the systems employ strict security measures appropriate for the data’s level of sensitivity.”
by Terri Jo Neff | Jul 11, 2021 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
A state senator who also serves as treasurer for Secretary of State Katie Hobbs’ gubernatorial campaign remains under fire for a tweet he wrote Friday which many perceive as an insult of a foreign-born state lawmaker.
Sen. Martin Quezada (D-LD29) tweeted “This is what #WhiteNationalism looks like” with a finger pointing downward toward Rep. Quang Nguyen’s supportive retweet of Gov. Doug Ducey’s announced signing of legislation banning government-sponsored or funded Critical Race Theory instruction.
Among those who came to Nguyen’s defense was Rep. Justin Wilmeth (R-LD15) who called Nguyen “one of the most kind, funny and caring people in this country,” along with Rep. Shawnna Bolick (R-LD20) who reminded Quezada of their colleague’s history.
Nguyen (R-LD1) was born in Vietnam where several of his family members were killed by Communists. He fled to America as a child asylum applicant, later becoming a U.S. citizen and a successful businessman before his election to the Arizona House of Representatives in November 2020.
Known as a quiet and respectful lawmaker, Nguyen was vice-chair of the House Committee on Military Affairs & Public Safety. He was most animated during the session when talking about his daughter’s various experiences and achievements in the U.S. Navy.
But Nguyen garnered national headlines last month when he pushed back on a suggestion by Rep. Daniel Hernandez (D-LD2) that Communism is not as big of a threat to Americans as White Nationalism. After Hernandez finished, Nguyen spoke up and spoke out.
“So, let me tell you something about White Nationalism,” Nguyen said while looking over at Hernandez. “White Nationalism didn’t drown 250,000 Vietnamese in the South China sea. The Communists did. White Nationalism did not execute 86,000 South Vietnamese at the Fall of Saigon. Communists did. White Nationalism did not put me here. Communism did. So don’t take it lightly. Don’t mock me. Don’t mock what I go through in life.”
As of Saturday night, neither Hobbs nor Quezada had commented on the furor over the tweet.
Nguyen was the prime sponsor of HB2575 which mandates that hospitals offering in-person visitation must include clergy as approved visitors. If a hospital does not offer in-person visitation then hospital staff must facilitate virtual clergy visits. HB2575 cleared both chambers with bipartisan support and was signed by the governor in May.
